Hello lads and Lasses. I had a bit of a search utilising catch words etc and went through general discussion up to 2016,....way before the release of the 75192 - UCS Millennium Falcon. So if the subject has come up before, I do apologize.

So,..the Millennium Falcon and all its 7541 pieces has been released and my version is currently on display,....I am guessing like pretty much everyone else here. But what can top it? What would you lads like to see top it with the number of pieces and general size?

I personally love the larger kits and I am trying to enforce a rule of 3000 pieces or more (with some failures) to justify the purchase.

What do guys think of the larger kits? Is bigger better? Do we want to see another epic kit like 75192??

My choice thus far would be another Ninjago City module. But I also love to see a huge moon/mars base?

What about you? Once again, if the subject has come up, I apologise.

Brickheadz 

No seriously, I would say Technic but honestly I am not really a fan of the obscenely large sets of any theme. For me 2 or 3 thousand pieces is about my limit, especially when you factor in price. Which is why it's going to be hard for me to buy 42100 this August, I have actually started a savings fund for it, crazy huh. I certainly see the attraction of such large sets, I have a friend who only buys really big sets but it's just not my cup of tea. I think such monstrosities are better off constructed by the end user as a moc, after collecting many sets and or pieces. The funny thing is, what qualifies as a giant set has gone up in piece count with each passing year, 45 years ago a giant set to me would have 3 or 4 hundred parts, nowadays I consider that to be a smallish set. I just finished 10265 Ford Mustang and I think that was an absolute perfect set in every respect. Oh how the times a change. 

Edit;  Just to clarify I think humongous builds are kickass, I just think they are better off being someone's own personal creation. 

Edited March 4, 20195 yr by Johnny1360

Star Wars. The ships justify the scale and the number of adult fans justify the price.

3 hours ago, Johnny1360 said:

Brickheadz 

No seriously, I would say Technic but honestly I am not really a fan of the obscenely large sets of any theme. For me 2 or 3 thousand pieces is about my limit, especially when you factor in price. Which is why it's going to be hard for me to buy 42100 this August, I have actually started a savings fund for it, crazy huh. I certainly see the attraction of such large sets, I have a friend who only buys really big sets but it's just not my cup of tea. I think such monstrosities are better off constructed by the end user as a moc, after collecting many sets and or pieces. The funny thing is, what qualifies as a giant set has gone up in piece count with each passing year, 45 years ago a giant set to me would have 3 or 4 hundred parts, nowadays I consider that to be a smallish set. I just finished 10265 Ford Mustang and I think that was an absolute perfect set in every respect. Oh how the times a change. 

Edit;  Just to clarify I think humongous builds are kickass, I just think they are better off being someone's own personal creation. 

For my first few years back in the hobby all I did were huge projects.  Loved 'em.  Thought they were tons of fun.  IMO, however, for just one person, once you have built up a good collection the large sets just become too unwieldy.   Take up too much space, take forever to take apart, then forever to store, etc.  Personally, it got to the point for me that I spent as much time taking apart, finding space, and organizing than designing and building.  I had a huge problem with that. 

Work has taken me away from home for over a year now, but when I really re-engage the hobby I will make some big changes.  And I am beginning to much more appreciate smaller builds. Builds that are designed well, aesthetic, all while maintaining their complexity.  As with @Johnny1360, I also think that large builds are kickass, but I don't hold them on the pedestal I once did.  Additionally, though they kickass I really only think there is room for a few of them even in really good, complete collections. 

Of extant themes? Maybe a really big City set (or anything City-adjacent, like the Creator Expert modular buildings or trains). And even speaking as someone who loves the current Star Wars UCS Millennium Falcon and hopes to get it, I’d dearly love to see one more, truly ultimate version done in 2027 for the saga’s 50th anniversary, one with 10k+ pieces and every feature imaginable - full interior, working lights inside and out, retractable landing gear, buildable in multiple configurations representing every major appearance in the internal chronology from Solo to Episode IX or whatever follows, and dozens of minifigures representing basically everybody ever seen aboard her (and perhaps near her, in all the dramatic confrontations that take place in proximity to her when she’s landed) in that entire timeframe.

A truly awesome Castle set would be, well, awesome (just imagine an 8,000+ piece Castle official set!).

But of other themes? Ermmm... I have a few ideas, but I’m quixotically hoping I can get certain new themes going first via new Ideas sets, which could then yield bigger sets than could ever happen through Ideas, and while it’s unlikely to happen, why reveal those hopes now?

4 hours ago, Johnny1360 said:

Brickheadz 

No seriously, I would say Technic but honestly I am not really a fan of the obscenely large sets of any theme. For me 2 or 3 thousand pieces is about my limit, especially when you factor in price. Which is why it's going to be hard for me to buy 42100 this August, I have actually started a savings fund for it, crazy huh. I certainly see the attraction of such large sets, I have a friend who only buys really big sets but it's just not my cup of tea. I think such monstrosities are better off constructed by the end user as a moc, after collecting many sets and or pieces. The funny thing is, what qualifies as a giant set has gone up in piece count with each passing year, 45 years ago a giant set to me would have 3 or 4 hundred parts, nowadays I consider that to be a smallish set. I just finished 10265 Ford Mustang and I think that was an absolute perfect set in every respect. Oh how the times a change. 

Edit;  Just to clarify I think humongous builds are kickass, I just think they are better off being someone's own personal creation. 

I kinda agree here.

I don't see the point of making a huge set if it's standard size fits perfectly enough. 

Does Disneyland/Walt Disney World count as a theme? We've got the Cinderella Castle set and the CMFs...

For a truly giant set, comparable to the MF, I would say: Main Street Train Station. The station house itself, a train on the tracks, the slope with the flower picture of Mickey Mouse, and maybe the tunnels under the tracks to either side, would easily run 5,000+ parts. It's attractive, iconic, and they could justify including minifigs of any popular Disney character they could get permission for, since the characters often greet arriving guests in the area below the flowers.

If anything, I think people should try to design smaller sets for IDEAS instead of all the 2000-3000 parts sets.

Edited March 4, 20195 yr by TeriXeri

Mega-sets such as the last UCS Millennium Falcon from 2017 are like LegoLand sculptures to me. They're just novelties based pretty much on their size and part count alone. BUT, as to answer the question, I would like to see the title given to a set belonging to an in-house theme of Lego's, rather than to another's licensed property.

8 hours ago, MAB said:

Star Wars. The ships justify the scale and the number of adult fans justify the price.

^ is the realistic answer.

But since the question is about what I'D want to see:
Something either with City, Castle, or Space.

1) A huge 8,000-10,000 brick downtown.  A real downtown...or at least as real as 8,000-10,000 bricks allow...something more than just one city block...
2) A huge 8,000-10,000 brick castle.  Give it a ton of play features and offer a variety of printed faction flags and shields so the owner can make it Black Falcon, or Lion Knights, or Wolfpack Renegades, or whatever.
3) A huge 8,000-10,000 brick Classic Space base.  With full facilities and a multiple landing pads for more spaceships, Spaceships, SPACESHIPS!

I know...pie in the sky.  But this is just another wishlist.

45 minutes ago, pombe said:

2) A huge 8,000-10,000 brick castle.  Give it a ton of play features and offer a variety of printed faction flags and shields so the owner can make it Black Falcon, or Lion Knights, or Wolfpack Renegades, or whatever.
3) A huge 8,000-10,000 brick Classic Space base.  With full facilities and a multiple landing pads for more spaceships, Spaceships, SPACESHIPS!

This! 

3 hours ago, pombe said:

^ is the realistic answer.

But since the question is about what I'D want to see:
Something either with City, Castle, or Space.

3) A huge 8,000-10,000 brick Classic Space base.  With full facilities and a multiple landing pads for more spaceships, Spaceships, SPACESHIPS!

I know...pie in the sky.  But this is just another wishlist.

Yeah,...….that would be cool indeed. Add a couple of Rocket launch pads. 

4 hours ago, pombe said:

I know...pie in the sky.  But this is just another wishlist.

OK then, throwing my own coin into the well, I'd like to see something like this translated into a Ninjago City type of set... 

I personally think that a set that could top the Millennium Falcon is highly unlikely, but there is a slim chance. After all we got the Harry Potter Hogwarts Castle (71043) which almost beat the Falcon in 2018. It would definitely have to be a licensed set to be as popular as the Millennium Falcon, so Star Wars, Harry Potter, LEGO Movie 2, Ninjago, DC, Marvel, and Overwatch could all be contending themes. I honestly would like the set not to be Star Wars for we already have lots of big sets from Star Wars. But Star Wars is the theme with the most items to make into a big set. I think that a Triwizard Tournament set for Harry Potter could be a giant set that could top the Falcon. It could include many of the different tasks of the tournament, but I think the most likely would be the maze. The set could include the maze itself, all of the monsters that the contestants have to face, minifigures of Harry Potter, Cedrid Digory, Victor Krum, and Fleur Delacour, and the portly that brings Harry and Cedrid to the graveyard where they confront Lord Voldemort. I think this could be a massive set if thought through well.

I know getting that big of a set for a retired theme is a far way dream, but I would love for a huge Minas Tirith. I would also love a couple of the Indiana Jones places to be made into giant sets, specifically the Kingdom Of The Crystal Skull, and the Temple Of The Holy Grail. For more current themes. I think a large Jedi Temple would be great, and I think a big Batcave set is long overdue.

On 3/4/2019 at 6:50 AM, PBRStreetgang said:

Is bigger better?

Nope - on so many accounts. People can't always buy them, if you can buy them, you run into storage issues, big doesn't always mean "good" in terms of thematic choices and construction techniques and so on. And then the economics from LEGO's view - your Millenium Falcon sold 9700 something copies in the D/A/CH region so far (Germany/ Austria/ Switzerland) and accounted for only 3% of 2018's revenue in that region. Not a bad number, but here's the thing: Had there been another such set, it would still only be 3% overall. People only can spend so much money and sales cannibalize each other. Half of those sales are speculative purchases, anyway, with people hoping the collector's value will increase. So there you have it - it's likely not a viable longterm business model to bring out more humungously large sets. I'm pretty sure you could rinse-repeat the same for other large-ish sets like the Hogwarts Castle, Ninjago City, the Bugatti or what have you. They are important as prestige models, but clearly only make up a fraction of LEGO's overall business. Stuffing up and oversaturating the market therefore likely doesn't make much sense, especially when you consider that even some "regular" sets are already quite large these days. Having sets with 1000 pieces and more has become quite normal, when only a few years ago it was the exception...

Mylenium

Edited March 5, 20195 yr by Mylenium
Typos

15 hours ago, pombe said:

^ is the realistic answer.

...

I know...pie in the sky.  But this is just another wishlist.

 

Yes. My answer was based on what must happen - it must sell. It would be awful if LEGO released a large set aimed at an adult budget in space or castle and it didn't sell. It would probably kill off any dream of getting anything aimed at an older age group in those themes again.

4 hours ago, MAB said:

It would be awful if LEGO released a large set aimed at an adult budget in space or castle and it didn't sell.

It definitely wouldn't sell. Without an established user base that has been accustomed to the themes by ways of smaller sets, this shall forever be a pipedream...

Mylenium

I think something to keep in mind is that with stuff not based on a specific subject from real life or a licensed brand, there usually isn't as much incentive to make a set as massive, pricy, and parts-intensive as the UCS Millennium Falcon, Hogwarts Castle, or Taj Mahal, because there's no obligation to match specific predefined shapes, details, and proportions. With a set like Assembly Square or Ninjago City, the designers have much more freedom to omit details that real-life equivalents of those same subjects would probably have, but that might feel superfluous, inefficient, or redundant in a LEGO model.

Consider the Saturn V Rocket set, for example. It has to use many extremely elaborate and parts-intensive techniques to match the subject it's based on. But a LEGO Space or LEGO City rocket that doesn't have to specifically match one particular real-life or fictional equivalent could very easily opt for parts like curved panels that might not have suited the proportions of the Saturn V in particular, but authentically convey the FEEL of a multi-stage rocket at a much more modest cost and piece count.

The same can be said for a LEGO City car like 60239 vs. a Speed Champions car like 75890 or 75891. They're all close to the same size, but the City set has a considerably lower piece count, price, and target age. Because the LEGO City set is not based on one particular real-life car, the shape can be defined according to what makes the most efficient use of the existing parts palette, rather than having to reverse-engineer a more specific car shape from existing parts not necessarily designed with that particular car model in mind.

Edited March 5, 20195 yr by Aanchir

1 hour ago, Aanchir said:

there's no obligation to match specific predefined shapes, details, and proportions. With a set like Assembly Square or Ninjago City, the designers have much more freedom to omit details that real-life equivalents of those same subjects would probably have, but that might feel superfluous, inefficient, or redundant in a LEGO model.

You could argue this both ways, though. Replicating "real life" exactly could be just as attractive even in a City set IMO. Then the real questions are whether you can do it within a specific budget and in a way that goes down well with your target demographic, i.e. whether it's safe for kids and they can build it easily enough. Similarly, downsizing and reducing the parts count all too obviously e.g. in Ninjago Legacy may not always be necessary and have adverse effects. We can agree that it depends very specifically on the subject and situation, though. I, too, see no reason to forcibly inflate sets just to get a certain parts count nor does it make much sense engineering/ building technique wise. The Saturn V is in fact an excellent example for this - with some parts released in the last two years, its construction could be done different in some areas today, possibly even reducing the number of pieces while still being just as efficient and realistic as well as giving the same robustness of the model.

Mylenium

Edited March 5, 20195 yr by Mylenium

I think Aanchir has a very good point, most themes, licensed or in-house, don't really _demand_ a large, high fidelity set.  _Could_ they do more with more parts? Of course, but in many cases I think you run up against diminishing returns.  If I build Superman's Fortress of Solitude and get the point across with 1500 bricks, it there real value in building a 5000 block crystal cave instead or have I just added tedium for the sake of scale.  The UCS Star Destroyer 10030 suffered from this; sure it was big and impressive to look at, but truth be told it was pretty tedious to build, ridiculously fragile and sagged under its own weight.  By volume, the Super Star Destroyer 10221, is smaller even though it's modeling a much bigger ship, its about the same part count and was both more enjoyable to build and more stable to 'swoosh'. The 75190 First Order Star Destroyer is tiny by comparison, half the parts, quick to build and something a kids can play with afterwards.  Don't get me wrong, I like when themes have big flagship models, like Orthanc for the LOTR or Ninjago City, but when themes are predominately aimed at kids, I think you can reach a point where a kit stops being fun and starts being big for big's sake.  Something aimed at AFOLs and adult collectors in the first place seem like the easier sell. 

Now what should they sell next?

Personally, after the re-release of the Taj Mahal and the revamp of the UCS MF I feel a bit cheated on the high end (already owning the originals).  Something in landmark architecture would go well with my existing collection (The Taj, Sydney Opera House, Eiffel Tower,  Statute of Liberty (3450) sculpture on MOC base, etc)  

I want something fresh, challenging and done on a scale we've not seen before outside of a theme park or convention.  

Neuschwanstein Castle would be cool.

Edinburgh Castle is another that leaps to mind.

Abu Simbel would combine sculpture and architecture, but does an ancient Egyptian temple violate TLG ban on religious kits?

I'd also be open to mixing Archtecture with other themes, like Lord of the Rings and the Hobbit: Minas Tirith? Golden Hall of Edoras? Barad Dur? Erebor?

If we're thinking of a vehicle instead, it's the 50th anniversary of the moon landing, how 'bout a 5000+ piece lunar lander with brick-built astronaut taking "one giant leap"

As I said in my opening, most of the subject matter from the current themes don't _need_ to be big so it's hard to think of large scale model that isn't contrived, but maybe Asgard and the Rainbow Bridge from the Thor movies?

I know one thing I would rather see, instead of giant one and done sets, I would like to see more sets that can be combined to make a huge set. Something you could endlessly add onto without it looking incomplete if you were lacking a few of the sets would be great. I know it is wishful thinking none the less I would love it. I guess City is kind of like that now but I would like actual connection points to add to the set making them seamlessly fit together. 

Edited March 6, 20195 yr by Johnny1360

1 hour ago, ShaydDeGrai said:

I think Aanchir has a very good point, most themes, licensed or in-house, don't really _demand_ a large, high fidelity set.  _Could_ they do more with more parts? Of course, but in many cases I think you run up against diminishing returns. 

Neuschwanstein Castle would be cool.

I'd also be open to mixing Archtecture with other themes, like Lord of the Rings and the Hobbit: Minas Tirith? Golden Hall of Edoras? Barad Dur? Erebor?

The new Slave 1 looks almost as good as the UCS one and is going to be much smaller and cheaper. I hope they can do something like this with the Millenium Falcon; scale it down from the UCS version without losing much aesthetically. The normal scale Falcons look really bad with the forward prongs way too close together. 

Neuschwanstein Castle is a great idea! The coolest place I've ever been to in the world. I'm also on board with LotR Architecture sets!

4 hours ago, ShaydDeGrai said:

I think Aanchir has a very good point, most themes, licensed or in-house, don't really _demand_ a large, high fidelity set.  _Could_ they do more with more parts? Of course, but in many cases I think you run up against diminishing returns.  If I build Superman's Fortress of Solitude and get the point across with 1500 bricks, it there real value in building a 5000 block crystal cave instead or have I just added tedium for the sake of scale.  The UCS Star Destroyer 10030 suffered from this; sure it was big and impressive to look at, but truth be told it was pretty tedious to build, ridiculously fragile and sagged under its own weight.  By volume, the Super Star Destroyer 10221, is smaller even though it's modeling a much bigger ship, its about the same part count and was both more enjoyable to build and more stable to 'swoosh'. The 75190 First Order Star Destroyer is tiny by comparison, half the parts, quick to build and something a kids can play with afterwards.  Don't get me wrong, I like when themes have big flagship models, like Orthanc for the LOTR or Ninjago City, but when themes are predominately aimed at kids, I think you can reach a point where a kit stops being fun and starts being big for big's sake.  Something aimed at AFOLs and adult collectors in the first place seem like the easier sell.

You put this really well, probably better than I did. Another thing is that a lot of the stuff that stands out as extraordinarily big in real life is also very repetitive in terms of contents. Jumbo jets have lots and lots of identical rows of seats, cruise ships have lots and lots of identical cabins, hotels and hospitals have lots and lots of identical rooms, skyscrapers have lots and lots of identical offices, parking decks have lots and lots of identical parking spaces, forests have lots and lots of more or less identical trees, etc.

Even in licensed themes like Star Wars, Harry Potter, and The Lord of the Rings, many of the BIGGEST sets are scaled down considerably from the subjects they're based on, because there's simply not nearly enough interior contents established in those films to fill all of what shows up in the exterior shots. The recent Darth Vader's Castle set is a pretty good example. The design in the movies is bigger, but like Orthanc, The Death Star, or Avengers Tower, relatively little of its interior is ever actually shown in the movies or any supporting media. And just making up stuff to fill space in the name of realism/accuracy can potentially risk diluting the emphasis on parts of the interior that are genuinely iconic or recognizable and will be among the set's key selling points.

So to keep sets from becoming boring, it often makes sense to shrink them down. After all, it's usually much easier to buy and combine multiple smaller sets than to buy only half of a bigger one!

10 hours ago, ShaydDeGrai said:

it's hard to think of large scale model that isn't contrived

I could easily think of large sets in terms of what would interest me and when you see stuff like Ninjago City, it isn't much of a stretch to envision a 10000 pieces version. Interestingly it probably wouldn't be that much bigger, just have more structure and details. At the same time, though, of course I'm criticizing outrageous prices all the time, so there you go. An unresolvable paradox. I agree, though, that for many sets there wouldn't be any advantage in making them unnecessarily big. At the same time I also consider working with the limitations of what you can express using a bunch of bricks also part of the appeal. It's an art form and a challenge in itself. So in the end it's probably just right the way it is.

Mylenium

6 hours ago, Aanchir said:

relatively little of its interior is ever actually shown in the movies or any supporting media

Ah, that old gag of "how films are made". Very little of the "interior" would actually ever fit into some exteriors. Looking for a consistent spatial logic in movies is going to drive you crazy. Locations magically shift places and change sizes all the time. And of course a lot of stuff isn't fully designed in the first place. I doubt there is a single sketch out there that even remotely shows a complete interior of Vader's castle...

Mylenium