LEGO Nexo Knights 2018

[Aanchir]

3 minutes ago, firefox said:

 Castle 2013 was not a failure, it had the bad luck of comming after kingdoms, one of the best castle themes ever.

Okay, but taking the argument further, wouldn't Kingdoms also qualify as a failure? Nexo Knights lasted two and a half years with five consecutive waves and around 56 sets (not counting polybags and extended line products). Kingdoms lasted about two years (first wave in second half 2010, final set in first half 2012), with two non-consecutive waves and only twelve sets. That's not to say that these themes were ACTUALLY failures, but they would not qualify as successes according to the absurd standard people are holding Nexo Knights to.

Also, things like AFOL appeal and aftermarket value usually aren't a good reflection of whether a kid-targeted theme is successful or not. The Avatar: The Last Airbender sets were decidedly unsuccessful but on BrickLink they currently cost three times their original RRP used or six times their original RRP new. Also, like almost all themes in 2003, the Orient Expedition sets were not successful, but the aftermarket prices are quite high, especially for complete sets.

In many cases, a MORE successful theme will actually have LOWER aftermarket prices and vice-versa, just because with successful themes, so many kids will have bought sets in the first place and then flooded the market with their used sets once they got older and moved on to other interests. Bionicle is a key example — it was one of the LEGO Group's biggest successes in the early 2000s and one of their ONLY successes in 2003, but today there are way more people selling old Bionicle sets and parts than there are buying them.

[MAB]

46 minutes ago, firefox said:

As for nexo knights, the problems were always too much techo too little castle and the best designers were on ninjago.

3

https://brickset.com/sets/list-5289/page-3

Mark Stafford designed a fair few of them.

[Falconfan1414]

Nexo Knights wasn’t a failure by any means. Just because it didn’t become a evergreen theme like ninjago did doesn’t mean it’s a failure. Lego had a plan for this theme including a starting and ending point. The big problem in my opinion is a problem that face Chima I think as well. That problem is over production for the first wave or two. Lego ends up mass producing these themes with a ton of first wave sets. The result is a lot of left overs and with all the gimmicks (speedors or Nexo powers) that lego says you have to have results in the theme getting boring for a lot of people. So a change I would make if I were Lego would be don’t shove the theme down people’s throats and don’t have that big of a gimmick where we have to collect them all like the powers or speedors

[MAB]

48 minutes ago, firefox said:

As an aftermarket theme it's a success, you should look at the prices for 2013's , they are quite high.

 

2

They probably wouldn't be as high if there were current traditional castle sets.

[x105Black]

5 hours ago, Orange Leader said:

*LEGO theme carries on for two and a half years.*

"It's a failure."

You know what a failure by that definition is?

"Castle 2013"

2013 was a failure to most people.  I enjoyed the theme, but I was returning from my Dark Ages at the time and it was a Castle theme.

But the short-lived 2013 wave was uninspired and offered little that was of interest to most Castle fans.  It was repeating everything every other Castle theme had done.

1 hour ago, Aanchir said:

Okay, but taking the argument further, wouldn't Kingdoms also qualify as a failure? Nexo Knights lasted two and a half years with five consecutive waves and around 56 sets (not counting polybags and extended line products). Kingdoms lasted about two years (first wave in second half 2010, final set in first half 2012), with two non-consecutive waves and only twelve sets. That's not to say that these themes were ACTUALLY failures, but they would not qualify as successes according to the absurd standard people are holding Nexo Knights to.

Also, things like AFOL appeal and aftermarket value usually aren't a good reflection of whether a kid-targeted theme is successful or not. The Avatar: The Last Airbender sets were decidedly unsuccessful but on BrickLink they currently cost three times their original RRP used or six times their original RRP new. Also, like almost all themes in 2003, the Orient Expedition sets were not successful, but the aftermarket prices are quite high, especially for complete sets.

In many cases, a MORE successful theme will actually have LOWER aftermarket prices and vice-versa, just because with successful themes, so many kids will have bought sets in the first place and then flooded the market with their used sets once they got older and moved on to other interests. Bionicle is a key example — it was one of the LEGO Group's biggest successes in the early 2000s and one of their ONLY successes in 2003, but today there are way more people selling old Bionicle sets and parts than there are buying them.

The duration or number of waves should not be the indicator of success or failure.  It is indicative only of how much LEGO wanted to release.  Nexo Knights ended before the planned end of the theme.  It was cut short by half a year.  That indicated that it failed to perform on some level.  It was, therefore, a failure.  I'm not trying to say that all of my favorite themes and sub-themes were huge successes, I'm merely pointing out the above fact.

48 minutes ago, MAB said:

https://brickset.com/sets/list-5289/page-3

Mark Stafford designed a fair few of them.

You reinforced their point.  The fact that he also designed the 2 largest and best sets of the theme notwithstanding, LEGO put what is essentially a very talented mech and vehicle designer in charge of what was ostensibly a Castle theme.

Edited February 2, 2018 by x105Black

[Lyichir]

Just now, x105Black said:

You reinforced their point.  The fact that he also designed the 2 largest and best sets of the theme notwithstanding, LEGO put what is essentially a very talented mech and vehicle designer in charge of what was ostensibly a Castle theme.

Yup. Hope they continue to mix things up with great ideas like that even after Nexo Knights! It's clear evidence of the kind of originality and unique design that results from giving designers a chance to venture out of their comfort zone and experiment with other sorts of subjects and themes.

[Falctron]

1 hour ago, Aanchir said:

Okay, but taking the argument further, wouldn't Kingdoms also qualify as a failure?

Using that criteria every Castle set of the last 20 years is a failure. We also have no idea when LEGO intended for any of those earlier lines to end, but it's safe to say they wouldn't have ended them if they hadn't thought a new line would sell better.

[Aanchir]

24 minutes ago, x105Black said:

The duration or number of waves should not be the indicator of success or failure.  It is indicative only of how much LEGO wanted to release.  Nexo Knights ended before the planned end of the theme.  It was cut short by half a year.  That indicated that it failed to perform on some level.  It was, therefore, a failure.  I'm not trying to say that all of my favorite themes and sub-themes were huge successes, I'm merely pointing out the above fact.

I agree that a theme doesn't have to last or be planned for a long time to be a success. However, I also don't think it makes any sense to suggest a theme that starts with high expectations and falls slightly short of them is inherently less successful than a theme that starts with low expectations and meets them.

Furthermore, we also have no idea whether themes like Kingdoms had planned sets or waves cut. All we know is what we actually ended up getting.

And "what LEGO wanted to release" tells us a lot about how the theme did in its early waves. LEGO doesn't keep giving a theme large numbers of sets, wave after wave, if the first wave performs abysmally. We've seen other "big bang" themes like Atlantis and Power Miners where the number of new sets has been reduced much more sharply from one wave to the next than with Nexo Knights, so it's not as though by starting with a large initial wave LEGO is locked into keeping the theme that size for as long as they did in this case.

4 minutes ago, Falctron said:

Using that criteria every Castle set of the last 20 years is a failure. We also have no idea when LEGO intended for any of those earlier lines to end, but it's safe to say they wouldn't have ended them if they hadn't thought a new line would sell better.

That was entirely my point — that calling a theme a failure for not lasting longer than five waves/two and a half years, or arguing that a Castle theme would have maintained stronger, more consistent sales over the same span, contradicts any sort of evidence or precedent.

[Orange Leader]

2 hours ago, Aanchir said:

In fairness, I don't think there are a lot of Castle fans who believe Castle 2013 was a rousing success…

It was more of addressing a reminder (however, a snide one now that I read it back. Sorry.) from my perspective to a small group of Castle fans that still despise NK after years of release for being a Castle placeholder, by finally after two and a half years calling it a failure. Well guess which of both themes lasted longer to consider it a failure by that definition? That was the context.

If people would say the second year was a failure, I could have understand that. But saying that about the theme as a whole, is just plain bitterniss.

Quote

That said, in the grand scheme of things, it's very rare for ANY Castle, Space, or Pirates series to last more than five consecutive waves.

You mean those themes in recent times or back in the 80's and 90's, right?

1 hour ago, firefox said:

Lego just made basicly  the same sets in blue instead of red, just as they did with pirates 2015. It was a filler set, never intended to grow. 

I do not believe in filler sets. If it could have sold more, it would continue. The timing of Castle 2013 was unfortunately not the best with the LotR and The Hobbit theme around.

Quote

Nexo knights was always marketed towards a younger audiance then ninjago i had the feeling and the sets were to lego technic and rushed.

My impression was that both Ninjago and NK had the same LEGO age demographic, kind of cannibalizing though. I don't understand people's complaining about NK being aimed at younger builders opposed to Ninjago. It is something I read a lot on AFOL fora. As if Ninjago is such a maturely sophisticated LEGO theme.

[MAB]

48 minutes ago, x105Black said:

2013 was a failure to most people.  I enjoyed the theme, but I was returning from my Dark Ages at the time and it was a Castle theme.

But the short-lived 2013 wave was uninspired and offered little that was of interest to most Castle fans.  It was repeating everything every other Castle theme had done.

 

 

So people don't want them to go where old Castle themes went? If sets like King's Castle and Dragon Mountain are uninspiring and offer little of interest to most Castle fans, then clearly there is little reason for LEGO doing more traditional style castle sets every three years and they should intersperse traditional castle with something else. Which is probably why LEGO made Nexo Knights.

[x105Black]

54 minutes ago, Lyichir said:

Yup. Hope they continue to mix things up with great ideas like that even after Nexo Knights! It's clear evidence of the kind of originality and unique design that results from giving designers a chance to venture out of their comfort zone and experiment with other sorts of subjects and themes.

It's evidence to the contrary, in my opinion at least.

6 minutes ago, Orange Leader said:

The timing of Castle 2013 was unfortunately not the best with the LotR and The Hobbit theme around.

I think that this was an important factor as well.  The Castle 2013 sets were also not as well designed as those of the Tolkien themes, thereby making them perform poorly in comparison.

2 minutes ago, MAB said:

So people don't want them to go where old Castle themes went? If sets like King's Castle and Dragon Mountain are uninspiring and offer little of interest to most Castle fans, then clearly there is little reason for LEGO doing more traditional style castle sets every three years and they should intersperse traditional castle with something else. Which is probably why LEGO made Nexo Knights.

No.  It means that they should work on doing a medieval Castle theme in a way that is inspired and satisfying.  There are ways to make Castle feel fresh without making the knights fly in jets.  It felt like the 2013 line was not intended to do well.  It almost felt like it was designed for failure.

That said, I enjoyed much of the line.  The carriage had a really good design.  Of course, people complained that it was the millionth carriage and that they always do a carriage.  So maybe the next Castle theme can skip the carriage, or find a way to make the concept of a carriage more appealing (without making it a tank).

[MAB]

39 minutes ago, x105Black said:

No.  It means that they should work on doing a medieval Castle theme in a way that is inspired and satisfying.  There are ways to make Castle feel fresh without making the knights fly in jets.  It felt like the 2013 line was not intended to do well.  It almost felt like it was designed for failure.

That said, I enjoyed much of the line.  The carriage had a really good design.  Of course, people complained that it was the millionth carriage and that they always do a carriage.  So maybe the next Castle theme can skip the carriage, or find a way to make the concept of a carriage more appealing (without making it a tank).

 

Why do they need to make it fresh? It is already fresh to anyone that didn't have the previous range. This sales model works very well for City, catering for the majority of the children (boys) very well year after year after year. They do a fire-engine, they do a helicopter, they do a ship, etc and they repeat. As soon as one goes, another comes. Castle 2013 was fresh to anyone that hadn't got the sets from three years before and considering the age range of about 6-7 to about 10-11, kids into the theme will come and go on a similar time cycle. If the theme skips a carriage, what are minifigures going to travel in? King's Castle was similar to the previous one, but again it is a necessary part of the theme. And if it is similar, then the parts are similar (in style and colour), so castle builders should have enjoyed it as it gave them parts in the colours they want. We've already seen all the problems people complain about for changing the parts to space-like parts and non-traditional castle colours, yet if 2013 was a failure for AFOLs then it is an indication that AFOLs don't want parts packs in traditional colours. They put a dragon in the theme, and it had been what about 5-6 years since the previous one. So people didn't want new dragons but do want the theme to continue in a similar way.

It's got to be the same, but it's got to be different. It's got to assume that everyone has everything already done, but has to be consistent with everything that has come before.

Nexo Knights was very fresh - they tried something that hadn't been done before in LEGO. But it was too fresh for the adults wanting the same as before but different.

Edited February 2, 2018 by MAB

[MAB]

1 hour ago, x105Black said:

 

I think that this was an important factor as well.  The Castle 2013 sets were also not as well designed as those of the Tolkien themes, thereby making them perform poorly in comparison.

 

 

What do you mean by not as well designed? For example, these two are pretty comparable. £25 vs £30 (UK RRPs), 247 vs 257 parts. They are both essentially a wall, a horse and a siege machine. The difference is one is aimed at 6-12 year olds, the other 8-14. The first is necessarily simpler, quicker to build and bigger with a simpler siege engine. It is aimed at a younger market. Does that mean it is not as well designed and thus necessarily perform poorly? Maybe in adult eyes the design is more simple, but that is the point, it should be as it is aimed at younger kids than the equivalent LOTR set. It is designed to be simpler to build, that doesn't mean the design is worse. And I see to remember all the complaints about LOTR at the time too. Too junior, just walls, the siege engine unnecessary, need more walls in the Mines of Moria, too small Weathertop, Gollum's cave not detailed enough, Rivendell too small, Black Gate only half as big as it should be, ...

 

Edited February 2, 2018 by MAB

[Falctron]

I'm bummed that Nexo Knights is ending prematurely. I actually hated the line when it came out because I had just gotten out of my dark ages, and it was taking up the space of the Castle theme I wanted. I eventually came around though, and feverishly picked up every set I could get my hands on, but I still haven't grabbed some of my favorites. Hopefully there is still time.

My favorite thing about Nexo Knights is that, in many ways, the theme wasn't created two and a half years ago, or by the LEGO Group at all for that matter, but rather two decades ago in the bedrooms and living rooms of kids like my 8-year-old self. Kids have been combining their space, castle, and in my case, pirates LEGO into a single story for decades. So the bright side is that as long as LEGO produces Space or Castle sets, Nexo Knights will never die.

Now if you'll excuse me, I feel the urge to rebuild the Caribbean Mission Commander and Black Falcons Eldorado Fortress of my youth.

[x105Black]

17 minutes ago, MAB said:

Why do they need to make it fresh? It is already fresh to anyone that didn't have the previous range. This sales model works very well for City, catering for the majority of the children (boys) very well year after year after year. They do a fire-engine, they do a helicopter, they do a ship, etc and they repeat. As soon as one goes, another comes. Castle 2013 was fresh to anyone that hadn't got the sets from three years before and considering the age range of about 6-7 to about 10-11, kids into the theme will come and go on a similar time cycle. If the theme skips a carriage, what are minifigures going to travel in? King's Castle was similar to the previous one, but again it is a necessary part of the theme. And if it is similar, then the parts are similar (in style and colour), so castle builders should have enjoyed it as it gave them parts in the colours they want. We've already seen all the problems people complain about for changing the parts to space-like parts and non-traditional castle colours, yet if 2013 was a failure for AFOLs then it is an indication that AFOLs don't want parts packs in traditional colours. They put a dragon in the theme, and it had been what about 5-6 years since the previous one. So people didn't want new dragons but do want the theme to continue in a similar way.

It's got to be the same, but it's got to be different. It's got to assume that everyone has everything already done, but has to be consistent with everything that has come before.

Nexo Knights was very fresh - they tried something that hadn't been done before in LEGO. But it was too fresh for the adults wanting the same as before but different.

Look, I enjoyed the 2013 line.  I bought the Dragon Mountain set (even though I considered it one of the worst sets of the line).  I love those dragons.  I have 3 out of the 4 color variations.  I also bought the carriage set (Gold Getaway), the Forest Ambush, The Gatehouse Raid, and the Battlepacks.  The only set I didn't get was the Castle, it was expensive and offered nothing too great to me (lots of wall panels and a throne room big enough to hold only the throne).  I'm also a bigger fan of the Dragon faction than the Lions / Crowns.  But there were still a lot of complaints from other people about the repetition of sets, and those seem to be the biggest reasons that people disliked Castle 2013.

1 minute ago, MAB said:

What do you mean by not as well designed? For example, these two are pretty comparable. £25 vs £30 (UK RRPs), 247 vs 257 parts. They are both essentially a wall, a horse and a siege machine. The difference is one is aimed at 6-12 year olds, the other 8-14. The first is necessarily simpler, quicker to build and bigger with a simpler siege engine. It is aimed at a younger market. Does that mean it is not as well designed and thus necessarily perform poorly? Maybe in adult eyes the design is more simple, but that is the point, it should be as it is aimed at younger kids than the equivalent LOTR set. It is designed to be simpler to build, that doesn't mean the design is worse. And I see to remember all the complaints about LOTR at the time too. Too <insert that tiresome argument>, just walls, the siege engine unnecessary, need more walls in the Mines of Moria, too small Weathertop, Gollum's cave not detailed enough, Rivendell too small, Black Gate only half as big as it should be, ...

Yes, out of the 2 sets you pictured, I bought the Castle set (Gatehouse Raid).  It was one of 2 out of 3 gate sets I purchased (the other was actually a LEGO Movie product, and the one I didn't purchase was a Juniors set).  Mostly, this was because I could only afford smaller sets at the time, and those gate sets were less expensive.  But there were probably more gates than necessary, even if they were spread across a couple of interrelated themes.  I'd also like to point out that the Gatehouse Raid set is the only set from Castle 2013 to feature the Dragon faction horse barding, making that set in particular more desirable.  But I believe that the Tolkien set itself is a better one.  I like the design of the structural piece much more than that of the Castle set.  That said, I am turned off by the size of the siege machine, and I'm not really into the villains in the Tolkien set.

And I will say that you make a great point about the target audience.  Tolkien and Nexo Knights sets were aimed at the 8-14 year old audience.  Castle targeted the 6-12 year old audience.  Perhaps Castle could target the same 8-14 year old audience that is targeted by these other media driven themes.  If you need to, include media to help drive it along.  But to answer your question, yes, themes designed for younger audiences tend to have weaker / simpler designs than those designed for older audiences.  And this is by design, I understand that.  That's why I'd love to see Castle target an audience only a couple of years older, the same audience they target with other great sets and themes.

And there will always be complaints, but I think you'll find that the Tolkien sets were much better received than the 2013 Castle line despite any complaints.  However, I'll say that there are consistent complaints about siege engines.  People either don't like them much to begin with, or they don't like the fact that they take pieces away from the main build of the set.  Those are complaints that should be considered.

I'm sorry if I'm derailing this thread with all of this discussion, but I find it to be a very interesting topic that relates to how Nexo Knights and other actual Castle themes are produced and perceived.

[skippyfontainne]

For me his is good news. I liked the parts, but not the theme.

PLEASE LEGO - Now, now NOW NOW NOW is the time for a NEW IN-HOUSE SPACE THEME! Please. Thanks.

[MAB]

1 hour ago, x105Black said:

Look, I enjoyed the 2013 line.  ...  But there were still a lot of complaints from other people about the repetition of sets, and those seem to be the biggest reasons that people disliked Castle 2013.

 

 

That's the problem though. Adults want continuation of a theme but they want it to be different to what has gone before. It's got to be the same but different. That is unrealistic for a toy aimed at kids that are going to come into the theme at different times. A castle is pretty much a necessary requirement, and yet adults complain and won't buy it if one looks the same as a previous one. Yet they'll also complain if the colour is changed and is "wrong" or the parts used are too different. They'll complain that they bought a carriage a few years before and now there is another carriage and it is a waste of a set, yet the kid cannot buy that old set at retail any more yet they need a carriage. If a theme is to continue, repetition is necessary. AFOLs can always MOC using the parts. It is a bit hypocritical for AFOLs to complain about too much similarity in a theme they want to continue in the same style, then complain when LEGO decides to have a complete refresh (whether this is based on AFOL comments or not, and it is probably not).

 

[Falctron]

I think many AFOLs want a return to a time when sets were on the shelf more than a year or two. In "the good old days" you could buy the original King's Castle and the Forestmen's River Crossing at the same time, despite them being released years apart. That way there wouldn't need to be a new carriage every year or so, because the old one would still be available.

There's nothing wrong with that per se from a customer's perspective, but obviously if that was a lucrative way to sell sets, LEGO wouldn't have changed their retail strategy. Which means a new King's Castle, Prison Carriage, and Gatehouse Raid, every few years.

[x105Black]

17 minutes ago, MAB said:

That's the problem though. Adults want continuation of a theme but they want it to be different to what has gone before. It's got to be the same but different. That is unrealistic for a toy aimed at kids that are going to come into the theme at different times. A castle is pretty much a necessary requirement, and yet adults complain and won't buy it if one looks the same as a previous one. Yet they'll also complain if the colour is changed and is "wrong" or the parts used are too different. They'll complain that they bought a carriage a few years before and now there is another carriage and it is a waste of a set, yet the kid cannot buy that old set at retail any more yet they need a carriage. If a theme is to continue, repetition is necessary. AFOLs can always MOC using the parts. It is a bit hypocritical for AFOLs to complain about too much similarity in a theme they want to continue in the same style, then complain when LEGO decides to have a complete refresh (whether this is based on AFOL comments or not, and it is probably not).

I agree completely.  It can be hypocritical at times, and I can find myself on both sides of an argument depending on which aspect is being discussed at a given time.

I honestly base my LEGO purchases off of roughly 3 main criteria.  Do I want the minifigures?  Will the parts be useful to me in terms of MOC?  Do I like the final set?  I have been enjoying my Old Fishing Store as a complete set, and the same is true of many Ideas sets that I own.  It also strikes a great balance between being a great set, having a phenomenal parts list, and having decent or relatively useful minifigures and accessories.  But for the most part I buy a set if it fits the other 2 criteria.  If it only hits the first criteria, I buy the minifigures on BrickLink or Bricks & Pieces.  If it only fits the second criteria, I do the same and but the pieces I like most from another source.

I don't think there's anything wrong with a little repetition, but there should be a bit of a balance.  Don't repeat the set concepts too soon, and try something a bit different from the last time, or include a cool unique minifigure or two the next time.

5 minutes ago, Falctron said:

I think many AFOLs want a return to a time when sets were on the shelf more than a year or two. In "the good old days" you could buy the original King's Castle and the Forestmen's River Crossing at the same time, despite them being released years apart. That way there wouldn't need to be a new carriage every year or so, because the old one would still be available.

I think this is true as well.  Unlikely to see it today, but true.

[Aanchir]

1 hour ago, Falctron said:

I think many AFOLs want a return to a time when sets were on the shelf more than a year or two. In "the good old days" you could buy the original King's Castle and the Forestmen's River Crossing at the same time, despite them being released years apart. That way there wouldn't need to be a new carriage every year or so, because the old one would still be available.

There's nothing wrong with that per se from a customer's perspective, but obviously if that was a lucrative way to sell sets, LEGO wouldn't have changed their retail strategy. Which means a new King's Castle, Prison Carriage, and Gatehouse Raid, every few years.

Unfortunately, I think that change is more due to factors the LEGO Group has limited control over like production capacity and pressure from retailers than any discarded policies they could return to on a whim. Considering LEGO still has trouble meeting demand on certain products and product lines over the holidays, it’s unlikely that they could keep older sets in production very long without struggling to keep retailers supplied with the new stuff — the stuff buyers are inevitably most excited for.

[Falctron]

3 minutes ago, Aanchir said:

Unfortunately, I think that change is more due to factors the LEGO Group has limited control over like production capacity and pressure from retailers than any discarded policies they could return to on a whim. Considering LEGO still has trouble meeting demand on certain products and product lines over the holidays, it’s unlikely that they could keep older sets in production very long without struggling to keep retailers supplied with the new stuff — the stuff buyers are inevitably most excited for.

You are probably correct, since the sets that do tend to linger the longest, do so at the actual LEGO brand stores.

Regardless, we are unlikely to see any set, particularly the smaller ones see the shelf life of say, Treasure Cart from the old days.

[Digger of Bricks]

2 hours ago, skippyfontainne said:

For me his is good news. I liked the parts, but not the theme.

I liked the theme to a degree myself, but like you, it was its new class of angular parts that I cared about the most. It's my hope that we will continue to see more parts of that style and class introduced long after this theme has passed.

2 hours ago, skippyfontainne said:

PLEASE LEGO - Now, now NOW NOW NOW is the time for a NEW IN-HOUSE SPACE THEME! Please. Thanks

Sorry, but Disney's big fat rump has completely engulfed that seat for who knows how long. 

[deneweth]

I was thinking about how sad it is that year 2 probably 'killed' it and most people are saying this small part of what would be year 3 was the best so far.  Obviously they probably took the best sets/ideas for this partial wave, but it did just happen to give us all the knights.  I would have loved to see what else was planned, but I've realized that even if they had the other sets ready to go they couldn't release any information without bootleggers making and selling the sets. 

[Nexogeek]

1 hour ago, Digger of Bricks said:

Sorry, but Disney's big fat rump has completely engulfed that seat for who knows how long. 

With Disney putting out new star wars every single year for probably longer then anyone wants (Is a Han Solo, solo movie even a thing people wanted?) Hopefully one day in the near future we will see one, or a case like Nexo Knights that gives us great space parts. 

[Fenghuang0296]

8 minutes ago, deneweth said:

I would have loved to see what else was planned, but I've realized that even if they had the other sets ready to go they couldn't release any information without bootleggers making and selling the sets. 

That. A good point . . but really, in this case would that be such a bad thing? If Lego themselves won't make the sets, is there really any harm in allowing bootleggers to fill the blanks? I mean, I wouldn't buy it anyway, except maybe from Enlighten, but how could it hurt? At least we'd get to see what they were planning. Maybe even MOC up our own versions of the would-have-been sets.