Over the years I've been collecting Lego, I've noticed how much LARGER pieces and sets have grown.

As I've done so, I can't help to think, does BIGGER mean BETTER?

Take for example a few of these newer sets:

- City Passenger Plane 7893

- City Heavy Hauler 7998

- Mars Mission Armored Drilling Unit 7699

Not to say that these sets are bad, but compare the size of classic Lego airplanes, trucks, and space sets with these models. Sets and pieces have grown ENORMOUS.

One might debate that Lego is merely trying to build larger models for play value, but I can't help to think that by using larger and lesser quality pieces, Lego reduces manufacturing costs which results in higher profit.

In comparing many of todays' sets with older/classic Lego, I really think that pieces have grown larger as well as model design.

What are your thoughts on this subject.

Do you think that pieces and sets have grown?

And if so, doed BIGGER mean BETTER?

I think TLC made 7699 alittle small and chunky, but It has some great MOCing pieces. I already posted mine in a different topic but theres so much you can do with that set.

I for one do not like all of the large pieces. It takes away the beauty of some mocs. Although, it does depend on which piece. I'd be interesting to see some of the other members responses.

Edited November 27, 200717 yr by Exo-builder59

My opinion is that some supersized pieces are good and usefull (such as the Slave 1 cockpit canopy *wub* ), while others are almost useless (such as the City airplane nose :-| ).

My opinion is that some supersized pieces are good and usefull (such as the Slave 1 cockpit canopy *wub* ), while others are almost useless (such as the City airplane nose :-| ).

I recall seeing the airplane nose as the front of a train. It actually looked pretty good, but I for one, would almost prefer a brick-built nose with pieces that could be used for any model.

I recall seeing the airplane nose as the front of a train. It actually looked pretty good, but I for one, would almost prefer a brick-built nose with pieces that you could use for any model.

You wouldn't happen to have a link to that train now would you?

You wouldn't happen to have a link to that train now would you?

Here you go on Brickshelf. I think this was it:

Gallery

Thank you Brickster!

Edited November 27, 200717 yr by Exo-builder59

Here you go on Brickshelf. I think this was it:

Gallery

That's one awesome train! *wub* Good find! *y*

To answer your question, I think sets like the Heavy Hauler and the Passenger Plane have a limited future, especially with AFOLs. I bought both, but I can't justify buying many others (if any) like them. (Making the Heavy Hauler in green sold it for me, so depending on price I could be just as won over with next years plane. :-$ )

However, I don't think that Lego have made many pieces bigger than they used to, just the scale has changed. Aside from the trays, the Heavy Hauler has great and useful pieces, and with the plane it's just the nose, tail and wings. I do however think that Lego are more happy now to include bigger limited production pieces that make a set look more impressive at less cost. Aside from your examples, the bridge piece in 7900 and Sentai is a good example. Overall I don't think bigger is always better, and I think Lego is just trying to make sets more appealing to children and parents. I have no problem with Lego continuing down this path... but I hope it doesn't go much further.

While I agree with your first two examples, I think you are off base with the Armored Drilling Unit (7699). The 1990...

...version was much the same, and space generally did have big pieces in it.

Quite frankly im not one to go after large peices which are specialized for that one purpose int he set only, and are almost impossible to use elsewhere. I much prefer the old brickbuilt sets, where it was only common peices formed into something fantastic.

This is also still how I build my models, I use the good ole bricking, while the large useless peices just gather more and more dust *wacko*

Did you have 6989? I left you a question in the 7699 mod topic.

I think as long as they don't make full bodies for vehicles in one piece, then it's okay.

Good points Sinner.

While I agree with your first two examples, I think you are off base with the Armored Drilling Unit (7699). The 1990...

...version was much the same, and space generally did have big pieces in it.

I was not a big Space fan, aside from Classic Space (Blue/Yellow sets), so I sometimes compare sets to the classics. I suppose some of the space sets did use large wheels and other pieces.

Did you have 6989? I left you a question in the 7699 mod topic.

No, but a friend of mine does and I am hoping to buy it off him...

I remember getting this Castle, which I had so much fun building! A wonderful set, hours of fun. A few years later I got this Castle, which was a fun build, but no where near as good as the previous one. The first one had more parts, more details, more features, it was great! The latter had single gate arch piece, as opposed to a brick built one, and a lot of burps and empty room. I'd much prefer sets like the old ones.

That had something relevant to the topic... 8-|

~Peace

I remember getting this Castle, which I had so much fun building! A wonderful set, hours of fun. A few years later I got this Castle, which was a fun build, but no where near as good as the previous one.

Yes. I felt the same way, even with the new 2007 Castle. I understand exactly what you mean. I kept looking at it thinking, I just think Lego could have done better. But when I build older Castle sets like the Black Falcon Fortress, I feel that much smaller pieces and more detail makes the set a much higher quality (even if it is half the size).

I think set design really suffers when detail is replaced with size.

i think the problem is more the size than the large parts. I can live with large parts if they're good. The city planes all have large parts, but they're not bad designs because of it.

However, they've been adding so many large parts in one set that many models have become very big in size. They become the big sets: sets with only 400 pieces or so, but large in size and with lots of big parts, and very often hardly with few small parts.

Why do they do it?

-kids love big sets

-kids want to play more than build, so they want bigger parts

-big sets are more attractive, the help profiling a theme in the catalogue

-big sets are commercially more interesting

-big sets with big parts are safer for small kids

-big sets are waaaay more attractive in a shop. Seen the boxes of other toys lately? they're big too!

I agree with you, TheBrickster: Lego sets have actually got bigger.

I don't think that the new bigger parts and sets are of lower quality - but bigger really doesn't mean better!

Most of all the new big cars annoy me because they only look bigger but not nicer!

Look at the new next year's Truck With Fork Lift: It's very similar to http://www.peeron.com/inv/sets/6367-1?showpic=1218 but the fact that next year's set is bigger is - in my opinion - not a criterion for that this new set is better than its old version - far from it! I like the old truck (though I don't own it) much more than the new one because it looks much lovelier because it isn't as big as the new one and because it has doors.

Of course I like the new truck, too, but the old one was nicer, I'd say.

The reason for sets getting bigger and bigger is in my opinion that the most sets which are available in "normal" toy stores aren't created for us AFOLs but mainly for kids. And the age of kids playing with Lego is getting lower and lower. Responsible for this develpoment are all the new and very realistic video and computer games and all these movies on TV which go gaga the kis and take away their fantasy. The consequence for TLC due to this bad development is that they have to - or at least mean to have to - create bigger sets because the kids wich play with them are younger and they want to play with bigger sets. And I think that TLC thinks that if the sets are bigger they look like if they were of better quality and playability - a wrong conclusion but some people might be taken in by that.

My opinion is that bigger sets aren't better than smallish sets.

I wish that TLC brings back sets in the old sets style which include cars and trucks which are only four stuck wide and include doors!

in general i don't really like large old pieces, i find them to directed to a single purpose, they limit creativity. lego should go back to the days when things were actually built with bricks and plates instead of all these huge things. mind you some are good for certain things, its generally hard to make things look round with out using large molded pieces but people seem to find a way of doing it anyways. look at this moc that i found on mocpages boba fett slave 1 who ever did this made a very nice looking slave 1 with well rounded edges without the use of any of the rounded slope bricks. TLC should go back to the days of building things in this style. i figure it would cost less to produce lots of idividual bricks that can be used for anything instead of a few huge speciality pieces

BJ

I think it's all a matter of personal taste really.

I mean, personally, I like some of the larger sets we've had as much as some of the smaller sets. Similarly, I've not disliked sets because they were necessarily small or big.

Really, both have their plus points. The small sets are cheap(er), and are great for little parts packs, or presents, or impulse buys. But larger sets are an opportunity to include more figures, or more unique pieces/colours that smaller sets may not have. I mean, look at sets like the UCS ISD/MF or CC or castles or pirate ships, and say that you don't like big sets.

That's not to say we should only have large sets though. They're good but in moderation. In fact, thats why they're good- because many people can't afford to buy a large set every week. That's what makes them special, it feels good to be able to reach up to that big set you've been saving up for, and take it down, knowing that you've had to work towards getting it. Rather than just going into a shop with

@ The space talk earlier - Large wheels and large windscreens, like in 6989, I dont mind atall - infact I love them, they are large but highly useable, and the wheels I always use in my mocs *wub*

Its more like the new city plane sets - so few uses for the plane parts, or even that huge-gantic dumptruck, theres onle one use for that large bucket ive seen. A dumper bucket. Given theres always acceptions, those are just two off the top of my mind. Large doesnt always mean bad, but lately it seems thats how it is.

The beauty of LEGO is that pretty much any part can be useful if you try hard enough. :-)

As others have said, I think the main motivation behind the increase in model size is to drive sales. Personally, I think the number of large parts in the palette is not so overwhelming...I think it's simply a matter of getting a return on investment on a part you made the mold for, so you might see a lot of it during any one production run.

Parents are looking for more bang for their buck. Just looking at some Amazon reviews of LEGO sets makes me cringe. Some parents can't justify the price of a new LEGO castle and are perfectly happy to sacrifice creativity and instead spend their $90 on some single purpose, non-building toy. I've also seen comments about the "sturdiness" of LEGO toys...so I guess some parents are raising their kids to be ham-fisted destructo bots who don't have the motor skills to play with a LEGO set without demolishing it. Anyway, the number of pieces in sets these days don't seem to me to be too different from older ones in comparable ranges, but the set designs are often more spread out and less detailed to convince those parents that it's worth the high price tag.

Edited November 27, 200717 yr by Draykov

Generally I'm not a fan of bigger pieces. I'm sure there are some that I like -maybe BURPs, LURPs and the concept of the onion dome (why couldn't it be made symetrical?)- but for the most part -and the particular examples you've used, I don't like them at all.

Steve

Like most of you, I'm not particularly fond of large elements replacing brick built structures. However, when looking at the examples provided by TheBrickster, I do like the larger scale of the models. Compared to minifigs, the new 8 stud wide trucks for example look far more realistic in size than the old classic 4 stud wide ones.

In short:

Bigger bricks *n*

Bigger models *y*

Can't forget 7344. :-X

Check out this recent find on Flickr. It's a ship that uses two airplane tail sections. I'd say this is an excellent use of a large specialized piece:

Flickr Find