What should or should not be on Lego Ideas?

[anothergol]

The only problem I see with that is that some people post their MOCs on here, but have a "Please support on Ideas" as an afterthought.

Yeah, for me, "should I put it on Lego Ideas?" comes once the MOC is done, it's just like putting it on Flickr, MOC-pages or whatever. As much as some seem to hate it, Lego Ideas is one of those places to be seen, and I find it crazy to put something for the sole reason of getting it voted for, because the chances that it will be are very thin, and even thinner are the chances to be selected & produced.

I mean, let's assume that Lego Ideas is NOT a gallery, that would mean that 99.999% of the people who have spent time on the entries, did it for NOTHING. That would make no sense, that wouldn't even be fair, it would pretty much sum up as Lego telling people "make us MOCs, we'll select 2 each year, the rest goes to the trash bin".

No, people put stuff on Lego Ideas to be seen, being voted for is the same as "likes" in other galleries, and getting the MOC produced (in an altered way) is just an unreachable bonus that no one should sanely be aiming at.

Edited March 13, 2016 by anothergol

[Blondie-Wan]

Yeah, for me, "should I put it on Lego Ideas?" comes once the MOC is done, it's just like putting it on Flickr, MOC-pages or whatever. As much as some seem to hate it, Lego Ideas is one of those places to be seen, and I find it crazy to put something for the sole reason of getting it voted for, because the chances that it will be are very thin, and even thinner are the chances to be selected & produced.

I mean, let's assume that Lego Ideas is NOT a gallery, that would mean that 99.999% of the people who have spent time on the entries, did it for NOTHING. That would make no sense, that wouldn't even be fair, it would pretty much sum up as Lego telling people "make us MOCs, we'll select 2 each year, the rest goes to the trash bin".

No, people put stuff on Lego Ideas to be seen, being voted for is the same as "likes" in other galleries, and getting the MOC produced (in an altered way) is just an unreachable bonus that no one should sanely be aiming at.

By that logic, no one should ever audition for movie roles or try out for the Olympics or conduct research on cures for cancer, since the odds are so small.

People do submit projects with the intention of soliciting votes and maybe, just maybe, getting them approved to become official sets. Oh, perhaps some don't, but many surely do - and after all, a few do in fact make it all the way through.

Right now, there are a little over 16,000 projects on Ideas - that's all the ones ever submitted, from the CUUSOO days to the present, including everything currently gathering support, expired, support achieved, etc... including fifteen projects (so far) that have been approved to become official sets, plus several more that have achieved support and are either currently under review or awaiting review. In other words, currently the odds of a project becoming a set are a little worse than one in a thousand. Those are pretty long odds, true, but actually a bit better than a lot of people seem to think.

[x105Black]

Yeah, for me, "should I put it on Lego Ideas?" comes once the MOC is done, it's just like putting it on Flickr, MOC-pages or whatever. As much as some seem to hate it, Lego Ideas is one of those places to be seen, and I find it crazy to put something for the sole reason of getting it voted for, because the chances that it will be are very thin, and even thinner are the chances to be selected & produced.

I mean, let's assume that Lego Ideas is NOT a gallery, that would mean that 99.999% of the people who have spent time on the entries, did it for NOTHING. That would make no sense, that wouldn't even be fair, it would pretty much sum up as Lego telling people "make us MOCs, we'll select 2 each year, the rest goes to the trash bin".

No, people put stuff on Lego Ideas to be seen, being voted for is the same as "likes" in other galleries, and getting the MOC produced (in an altered way) is just an unreachable bonus that no one should sanely be aiming at.

We don't need to assume that LEGO Ideas is not a gallery. It's a fact that it is not a gallery.

Those people did not post to Ideas for nothing, they posted for the chance of having their project become a set. That's what Ideas is about. That's why it was created.

If you are putting MOCs on Ideas just to be seen, and using it as a gallery, then sorry but you are part of the problem with Ideas.

[anothergol]

By that logic, no one should ever audition for movie roles or try out for the Olympics or conduct research on cures for cancer, since the odds are so small.

hum.. athletes don't do the Olympics just to win. First, participating the Olympics is itself a prize, you're already winning if you reached that.

Second, participating the Olympics is TOO a massive exposure.

Research on cure for diseases, that's also a good example of something that no one sane would spend all his own money on. That's something you finance carefully, no lab ends up losing money because they balance everything well.

Trust me that if Lego Ideas was a black box, that you were just suggesting ideas to Lego only and only the ones that Lego picked were to be seen, NO ONE would bother. NO ONE is gonna make a great MOC for the sole purpose of showing it to Lego. That would make them.. Lego designers, and it's a paid job.

People do submit projects with the intention of soliciting votes and maybe, just maybe, getting them approved to become official sets. Oh, perhaps some don't, but many surely do - and after all, a few do in fact make it all the way through.

So tell me how a vote is different from a "like" in other galleries?

Right now, there are a little over 16,000 projects on Ideas - that's all the ones ever submitted, from the CUUSOO days to the present, including everything currently gathering support, expired, support achieved, etc... including fifteen projects (so far) that have been approved to become official sets, plus several more that have achieved support and are either currently under review or awaiting review. In other words, currently the odds of a project becoming a set are a little worse than one in a thousand. Those are pretty long odds, true, but actually a bit better than a lot of people seem to think.

Yeah, 0.1% chances.. how does that sound like any chance?

That's my tip to those making Lego Ideas entries, don't do it to get your set released, because it's not gonna happen. And if you're really, really lucky, Lego is gonna redesign it anyway. And even though you won't get picked, it's still useful for Lego to know what people want/don't want.

Btw I even hate how some people suggest ideas DESIGNED to get votes. I'm talking about those bloodsuckers who check what's popular/what already got votes, and quickly design similar MOCs. Which are generally worse than the original, because designed too quickly, thus pointless.

And again, what's really polluting Lego Ideas is 80% of the entries by 6 year-olds (yeah of course, added by their dad). A kid being naive, you can be sure that he IS expecting his idea to be picked. Thus by your definition of what Lego Ideas is for, all those kids entries are legit, and 5000+ parts MOCs designed by adults are not - I just can't agree with that.

Here are 2 examples:

This one was (I hope) made by a kid, and that kid really added this entry hoping it's gonna get produced:

https://ideas.lego.com/projects/134868

This nice one was most likely designed by an adult, who most likely knows that he has nearly no chance to get 10.000 votes, as it's around some old obscure english show:

https://ideas.lego.com/projects/134865

None of these 2 are gonna pass -anyway-, but guess which one I enjoyed looking at?

Edited March 14, 2016 by anothergol

[x105Black]

And again, what's really polluting Lego Ideas is 80% of the entries by 6 year-olds (yeah of course, added by their dad). A kid being naive, you can be sure that he IS expecting his idea to be picked. Thus by your definition of what Lego Ideas is for, all those kids entries are legit, and 5000+ parts MOCs designed by adults are not - I just can't agree with that.

Here are 2 examples:

This one was (I hope) made by a kid, and that kid really added this entry hoping it's gonna get produced:

https://ideas.lego.com/projects/134868

This nice one was most likely designed by an adult, who most likely knows that he has nearly no chance to get 10.000 votes, as it's around some old obscure english show:

https://ideas.lego.com/projects/134865

None of these 2 are gonna pass -anyway-, but guess which one I enjoyed looking at?

Both types of project are polluting Ideas. You might enjoy looking at larger sets, but they are still something to pass over on the way to projects that can actually be approved. And projects by children shouldn't be on the site. There is an age limit. Neither is legit.

I personally found both of the posted sets to be boring. That said, I think the second one at least belongs on the site. It's not too big, it's a decent build, and even though it's based on an obscure license, just about any license has its fan base.

My advice to people posting on Ideas is to make something you think LEGO would actually produce (again, that's what the site is for). Anything else is a waste of time.

[Junior Shark]

If any Martian project were to be approved, I think it would be this one: https://ideas.lego.com/projects/122291

[Brickadier General]

Yes, there are a lot of projects that don't seem like they should be on LEGO Ideas but does that mean we should limit the site even further? I don't think so. Let the public decide what they want. That's the way it works. Back in the CUUSOO days when Minecraft projects were being posted I thought it would never happen. "A building system set representing a video game with its own building system?" Back then, the idea felt a bit insane. However, tons of people went for it in a relatively short period, enough to make a strong business case. As a content creator, sometimes you risk making something people won't jump on. In my opinion, that's fine. It's a part of the process. You learn more about the system, what people like/don't like, etc.

In crowdfunding, it's also important to build a strong following to be successful. Posting ideas on a regular basis is one way to remain relevant (not saying you have to put something on for the sake of putting something on). When you post future projects, you will have a built-in fan base. In fact, if you want to do LEGO Ideas I strongly suggest creating multiple projects over a period of time.

Let the projects speak for themselves, and the public will decide what they want to see. It has produced some decent sets so far.

Edited March 24, 2016 by Brickadier General

[MAB]

This nice one was most likely designed by an adult, who most likely knows that he has nearly no chance to get 10.000 votes, as it's around some old obscure english show:

https://ideas.lego.com/projects/134865

Obscure? It ran for 10 years solid then just as Christmas specials after that and for one episode over one third of the population of the UK watched it. It was sold to many countries (but not the US). Although Steve Carell did want to do a remake for the US market ... http://www.telegraph...made-in-US.html

Although the model itself is awful. Terrible design, nothing like it should be.

Edited March 24, 2016 by MAB

[nine09nueve]

My special annoyance is the posting of 16 stud wide modular MOCs that are three stories, white 1 x 1 windows, flat fronts, and no texture. They're even selling plans for these things on eBay.

This is against LegoIDEAS ToS too BTW

I'll admit ignorance on this... since automatically rejected sets don't get shown, how do we know what sets they are automatically rejecting? Do we have any examples? Anybody here have a set rejected?

Yeah - for very weird reasons in the past (although mine are getting through now so I'm not complaining) even though one of my more recent submissions I thought would never be approved in a million years - especially comparing it to one I did get rejected. (But I'm totally still not complaining! :D )

As far as structure goes, maybe they should categorize things - sci-fi, modern, city, video games, fantasy, and then sub-categorize (trains, building, ships or vehicles). Normally once a week or so I go there and just browse the things in order until I see the ones I've seen before. There are categories that are just right out for me, it would help me focus on the things I'm interested in.

I believe this is coming up in the next 6 months or so...

I also don't think people vote in the actual spirit of the site. I would argue again that this site is for possible ideas, not MOCs, yet many people support a project simply because they think it's a good MOC... if I wouldn't truly buy it, I wouldn't vote for it. It asks how many you think people would buy - you can't put "zero." And, of course, I think they ask these questions for a reason, and it may be part of what helps them decide which ones they will choose given that a number of sets hit 10k each period.

This could well be true - I will only support a set that I would buy... despite that I know if I support someone else's project I'd probably get a support and comment in turn.

I think there should be *some* guidelines added such as:

- 800 pieces or less

- no LDD, must be built in person (I just hate looking at digital Lego)

Too many MOCs with 1000+ brick counts that would never be made

I definitely prefer non LDD builds... because I know from experience something built on LDD will not always "work" or be strong enough IRL... but stopping LDD is bad as there are plenty of people who wouldn't be able to build without it... for example they might not be able to afford to build sets IRL because of funds (even for small projects - not the 5k+ piece builds!) or because BL won't deliver to their country etc... or any other host of reasons.

LDD is very useful and I hop back and forth from LDD to real bricks and back again repeatedly until I get something "right" --- or even a small part of the model that I want to play with and try with weird and wonderful elements to see if something works that I don't have access to in my stock. TLG themselves use "Super-LDD" (for want of a better name) to build and design stuff too no? I know we've just had the first update in a couple of years but I think LDD is going to get more regular revamps in the future.

And I totally agree with LDD sets that look like they've been built by a 6 year old... it IS meant to be a 13+ site after all. But even if a genuine project (by that I mean one that isn't cashing in on the success of a previous high supported set say) isn't "good" by whatever standard it is judged... so what? Maybe that will inspire someone else on Ideas to build something else... and then in turn it will inspire someone else etc.

Realistically no one will retire off a successful submission (1% royalties will put pay to that very quickly - considering how much self promotion work is needed for reaching 10K let alone it being picked) so IDEAS needs to be for something else too...

...exactly what will purely depend on the community at large (ie: us) choosing how to access it, use it and ultimately shape it in the future.

Much love

D

[Mesabi]

I think anything that doesn't have much thought put into it shouldn't go on Lego Ideas. Its the same principle as bad kickstarters. Is this a good idea that has thought put into it? http://kickfailure.com/2016/03/03/roto-phone-mount/ Its the same principle as this https://ideas.lego.com/projects/74919 , it's not thought out. Bill Watterson HATED merchandizing with a vengence. Even if this project had a ton of effort put into it, which it doesn't, Bill Watterson would never agree to the licensing, Lego almost certainly wouldn't okay a set based off of 20 year old media (Golden Girls kitchen, for example https://ideas.lego.com/projects/98263) There is literally no way this idea would ever be approved. I think Lego Ideas needs some kind of filter to keep projects like this off the site.

[Blondie-Wan]

Lego almost certainly wouldn't okay a set based off of 20 year old media (Golden Girls kitchen, for example https://ideas.lego.com/projects/98263) There is literally no way this idea would ever be approved. I think Lego Ideas needs some kind of filter to keep projects like this off the site.

LEGO has made sets based off media that old via the Ideas program before.

While I agree about the quality of those projects, the whole site is a filter - it's our voting (and not voting) that determines what falls away into obscurity.

[nine09nueve]

the whole site is a filter - it's our voting (and not voting) that determines what falls away into obscurity.

True - but certain projects get better starts than others... On a day when 20 projects get approved - the last ones to get approved get seen a whole lot more than the first one.... because they will sit at the top of the splash page when you click on "discover" or when you have supported ANY project, you get to see those top ones again - doesn't mean people will take a closer look but it is a whole lot more visible over the 12-24 hour period in between submission approval updates. Those same ones at the bottom of that list of 20 may not even be on the same initial viewing run - so mobile or desktop/laptop users will have to load more projects just to see it for the first time... This does make a difference.

Also there were no submission updates for a good 36 hours just recently - for those at the top of the splash page that's ages compared to maybe a 12 hour gap or perhaps 24 max that most get... Assuming as I've said before you're not at the bottom of that list! :D

It's the inconsistency/seemingly randomness of submission approvals / quality of submissions / time of initial presentation that I think is most disconcerting.

[Elysiumfountain]

And then there are the occasional people who follow and comment on every project regardless of quality just because they want to boost their member rating. (Although I am guilty of some of this, I'll admit, but not for the member rating!). It seems to me that the number of votes to views on a project hovers around 1 to 10. And of course it may be that half of the people viewing the project don't have a LEGO ID and/or don't want to make one, or just aren't interested so they don't vote. This is true for some of the exceptionally built, moderate, and above average projects. I do think it is sad though when perfectly decent projects that have a viable chance of making it get passed over. 

Edited January 2, 2017 by Elysiumfountain

[BrandCamacho]

I know it has been a while since the last reply But I thought I'd add my 2 cents as this thread is what finally got me to join.

As far as what is wrong with Ideas and how it can be addressed.... I really don't understand why some of you have a problem with LDD or any other form of virtual Lego.

The way I see it is Ideas is a place to not only submit ideas but also specific projects that often include what I consider "solved puzzles" as to me Lego is a puzzle as much as it is simply a building medium. Lego more often than not IMO releases models that while abide by their strick criteria could have been done FAR better.

Many of us Lego fans display hundreds of ideas and examples of exactly this, better ways of building*

Lego ideas DOES suffer from far too many simply wanting to display their mocs among other obvious problems and to late the minimum support in what is it 80 days(?) is doing a great job. A suggestion I have is that they limit virtual builds to quality renders and images that way it would naturally filter those without the capacity to accomplish such a task as easy as it is.

Ideas to me is a place to submit what is either not such an easy task for anyone to assemble OR build a model in colours that are as yet not available. Almost all of my MOCS require settling on colors that I believe detract from the original concept if brick built with such things as black curved bricks for windows and solid coloured wing pieces that could have otherwise made a great trans red tail lights.

My only other concern is inconsistent administration allowing rules to be broken for some submission yet declining others. At one stage EVERY SINGLE submission I made came with a rejection and note from admin explaining in further detail why it didn't pass( I'm unsure if the notes are common so I do admire them for taking the time)But I would be pointed to a list of rules that didn't seem to apply to countless others and often could argue the interpretation on some every strong grounds.

But anyway I just wanted a rant lol and see a digital build holding just as much merit as brick built as they both represent possibilities AND impossibilities just as well as each other

 

[Artanis I]

By building with real physical bricks you demonstrate a few things:

1 YOU are willing to spend money on Lego, in order to have some to build with. You expect people to buy your set? But won't buy any yourself?

2 Structural integrity of the build. A good (or bad) looking model is going to break really easily unless you re-design it again and again to make sure it is solid and meets TLGs standards there. You can't tell that if it's just a picture on your computer.

3 The parts are available. Ideas sets don't get new moulds, and if at all, they don't get many existing parts in new colours. By using real physical parts you limit yourself to what is actually available for TLG to use. (Except if you use discontinued parts, of course)

4 You're willing to invest your time & resources into your proposal, and therefore care about it, ie it isn't just throwaway. You may be delayed by months to get all of the parts you want. It requires more of an effort to build something substantial with physical parts than just jumping on LDD for a while. This blog https://worstoflegoideas.tumblr.com/ is chock full of bad LDD submissions with very little time/effort put into them. And it's hard to get a digital submission to look professional, so many don't bother trying, and end up with something that looks substandard. (Yes, that can be true of real brick submissions, but the digital ones seem to offend more)

That's all I can think of at the moment, perhaps others would have something else to add.

I don't mean to invalidate digital building, just pointing out some reasons why physical submissions send a better message to the Ideas team.

[BrandCamacho]

3 hours ago, Artanis I said:

By building with real physical bricks you demonstrate a few things:

1 YOU are willing to spend money on Lego, in order to have some to build with. You expect people to buy your set? But won't buy any yourself?

The Budget of the person with the idea has NOTHING to do with the merit of said idea

2 Structural integrity of the build. A good (or bad) looking model is going to break really easily unless you re-design it again and again to make sure it is solid and meets TLGs standards there. You can't tell that if it's just a picture on your computer.

how can this be judged by photo's of a build? you would simply rely on the honesty or understanding of the person sharing the idea no different than a digital build

3 The parts are available. Ideas sets don't get new moulds, and if at all, they don't get many existing parts in new colours. By using real physical parts you limit yourself to what is actually available for TLG to use. (Except if you use discontinued parts, of course)

Lego can and often releases bricks in new colours so again another moot point , using existing bricks leaves the whole process to bunching parts together and selling instructions alone without offering anything new

4 You're willing to invest your time & resources into your proposal, and therefore care about it, ie it isn't just throwaway. You may be delayed by months to get all of the parts you want. It requires more of an effort to build something substantial with physical parts than just jumping on LDD for a while. This blog https://worstoflegoideas.tumblr.com/ is chock full of bad LDD submissions with very little time/effort put into them. And it's hard to get a digital submission to look professional, so many don't bother trying, and end up with something that looks substandard. (Yes, that can be true of real brick submissions, but the digital ones seem to offend more)

So anyone with a casual interest no matter the hours put into the design shouldn't be considered simply because they haven't put the money into buying bricks? I post on ideas because the colours I need aren't available so how could I brick build without a compromise? The whole idea is to create products and ideas not test weather or not people belong to your special club. and I disagree that it is hard to make a digital build look good with programs like Bluerender BUT the whole point is that unless you are willing to put in that minimum level of effort to understand you shouldn't be able to post as it would be highly likely that those without the capacity would likely be posting a model that is a little questionable at best

 

3 hours ago, Artanis I said:

That's all I can think of at the moment, perhaps others would have something else to add.

I don't mean to invalidate digital building, just pointing out some reasons why physical submissions send a better message to the Ideas team.

 

[Elysiumfountain]

That is a valid point, a lot of digital models get passed over because of those very reasons. Although there are some people who gain massive followers with clearly digital rendered projects. (I think these people must either have used a popular IP, their project is a MOC with tons of detail, or they just have a large Twitter following ;) ) But I've definitely noticed that all my brick-built projects have a lot more supporters than the digital ones, so there's that. 

I meant to say mega-MOC, not just a regular MOC lol

 

[Faefrost]

I don't have an issue with Digital models so long as they are well thought out, give some basic respect for gravity and physics and are well rendered and presented using a rendering tool and not simply the horrid LDD export functions. Digital presentation in the hands of a skilled user can be fantastic and reflect a compelling project. Of course digital in the hands of a crude or inexperienced user who is just working in the virtual and not designing for the real creates impossible clutter on the site. But so does every six year olds bad phone picture of a "house" made from rainbow colored bricks. Look for the quality of the project, not the medium it's presented in. 

Actually I find one advantage of digital designs for projects is while they lack gravity, the programs limit some of the advanced MOC'ers more exotic and unproducable tricks. No half connections. No Minifigure hands as structural elements etc. so it's a trade off either way. 

[BrandCamacho]

I often wonder within the massive amount of market research we volunteer for Lego if they ONLY rely on Numbers of support or do they themselves realize that that alone is the largest problem with the whole process, A projects popularity depending on how much promotion you yourself do.

Of course this might not mean just anything can get large amounts of support alone regardless of the projects quality but rather leaving out many potential ideas that could otherwise be great sellers.

IF however Lego themselves draw on the site for ideas then maybe this is not such a problem THO I would suggest that is not the case sadly and to myself Lego and what they choose to produce gets a little puzzling

[Elysiumfountain]

That is true! I've often wondered that about the process as well, and especially when I see some of the things that LEGO produces, even outside the Ideas line. There are some things that LEGO produces by themselves that I personally think would never have made it through the Ideas process. I recall a couple of months ago there was a project submitted that shot up to the 10,000 in less than a couple weeks. When I mentioned it on another forum, someone told me that they probably had a fantastically design thing and that mine should look more like that. Except for the fact that the project in question, although really nicely designed, was based on a popular IP and gained almost all its support from Facebook and a couple of Reddit threads. So I've always wondered how well Ideas works for people who don't have large social media presences...

[BrandCamacho]

49 minutes ago, Faefrost said:

I don't have an issue with Digital models so long as they are well thought out, give some basic respect for gravity and physics and are well rendered and presented using a rendering tool and not simply the horrid LDD export functions. Digital presentation in the hands of a skilled user can be fantastic and reflect a compelling project. Of course digital in the hands of a crude or inexperienced user who is just working in the virtual and not designing for the real creates impossible clutter on the site. But so does every six year olds bad phone picture of a "house" made from rainbow colored bricks. Look for the quality of the project, not the medium it's presented in. 

Actually I find one advantage of digital designs for projects is while they lack gravity, the programs limit some of the advanced MOC'ers more exotic and unproducable tricks. No half connections. No Minifigure hands as structural elements etc. so it's a trade off either way. 

 

Exactly, Lego themselves have that list of what they call "illegal" methods and LDD doesn't seem to allow any of this so there is an added benefit, as far as the presentation goes simply being brick build doesn't guarantee a quality product or presentation ,A Screen shot of your LDD project should not meet minimum quality standards. As far as real world physics well I myself always take into account structural integrity tho the issue wouldn't come up until the unlikely occurrence of a review  , of course I need to mention that I of late have exclusively dealt in automobiles making things far more simple.These things come down to experience and honesty and the same can be said for any submission.A brick built model that includes critical designs based on illegal construction methods hold no more likelihood of meeting final requirements as an idea with a license Lego will be unable to obtain.

 

Edited March 28, 2017 by BrandCamacho

[Artanis I]

You misread my post entirely.

1 Who said anything about the merit of the Idea? I'm not talking about that at all. Also, if budget is an issue for building your Ideas set, then either the model is too big for Ideas, or you are in the wrong hobby.

2 The submitting designer is the one who learns about the structural integrity of the build by physically making it (something you can't do with a digital only design). If you design something flimsy but think it looks wonderful, it may get votes but will either very possibly be rejected, or the final release won't look as good. (End result, lots of disappointment for many.) You do yourself a service by being more consciencious. Maybe it isn't worth it? Many say "better to be safe than sorry".

3 A benefit of using real bricks is that you don't go using ones that don't exist, thus reducing your chance of failure. Simple. TLG don't go throwing heaps of new parts, prints and colours at everything. And Ideas is near the bottom of the pecking order.

4 Who said it shouldn't be considered? You are reading words that are not there. (I can't make sense of your last sentence with its lack of punctuation.) Anyway, by putting in the extra time, money, space etc required to build your model with real bricks and taking quality photos of it you SHOW that you are not taking the easy way out, you are going right through with it. If you reach the review, the Ideas team will have to build it with real bricks anyway, they can't just slap it up in LDD. You can make a "you-beaut" digital design that is perfect in every way and rendered wonderfully, and there is nothing at all wrong with that. But there is more that you can do, so why not? Too lazy? True or not, that is the impression that many people will get. Again, better safe than sorry.

[BrandCamacho]

2 hours ago, Artanis I said:

You misread my post entirely.

1 Who said anything about the merit of the Idea? I'm not talking about that at all. Also, if budget is an issue for building your Ideas set, then either the model is too big for Ideas, or you are in the wrong hobby.

You did claiming that brick build submissions and the submitter buying bricks to make a submission should hold more merit than someone that submits a digital design

2 The submitting designer is the one who learns about the structural integrity of the build by physically making it (something you can't do with a digital only design). If you design something flimsy but think it looks wonderful, it may get votes but will either very possibly be rejected, or the final release won't look as good. (End result, lots of disappointment for many.) You do yourself a service by being more consciencious. Maybe it isn't worth it? Many say "better to be safe than sorry".

But the exact same thing can be said about a brick built project, structural integrity can not be assessed by photos alone independent of the medium of the project

3 A benefit of using real bricks is that you don't go using ones that don't exist, thus reducing your chance of failure. Simple. TLG don't go throwing heaps of new parts, prints and colours at everything. And Ideas is near the bottom of the pecking order.

But the point many times IS Lego releasing bricks that don't as yet exist be it simple a colour

4 Who said it shouldn't be considered? You are reading words that are not there. (I can't make sense of your last sentence with its lack of punctuation.) Anyway, by putting in the extra time, money, space etc required to build your model with real bricks and taking quality photos of it you SHOW that you are not taking the easy way out, you are going right through with it. If you reach the review, the Ideas team will have to build it with real bricks anyway, they can't just slap it up in LDD. You can make a "you-beaut" digital design that is perfect in every way and rendered wonderfully, and there is nothing at all wrong with that. But there is more that you can do, so why not? Too lazy? True or not, that is the impression that many people will get. Again, better safe than sorry.

Can't make sense of my last sentence? how do I make it more clear? those without the ability to render their digital creations would likely be creating very poor models to begin with

Again you seem to make special consideration for brick built projects based on the idea coming from someone whom has spent the money , I'm almost 40 and have hobbies far more demanding than Lego and have no interest in buying anything other than my projects in the state I wish them to be which says nothing to detract from how much I want them IF produced how I wish them to be.

Many times these states are not available simply because of colours. Submitting these projects and this request to release the bricks it is made out of in the necessary colours is a simple request that has arguably more merit than wanting Lego to sell an already build-able project considering that we have web sites that specialize in gathering the bricks you need and mailing them to you

 

Edited March 28, 2017 by BrandCamacho

[Elysiumfountain]

In my defense I will say that my digital projects were only created when I was lazy, at school away from my brick collection ;) But at least the others are brick built! I really think for me it's about quality. If it looks substantial or that the creator put some effort into it, I'll support it!