I guess I don't really put a lot of thought into why I am a huge fan of the Creator 3 in 1 sets. It really does just boil down to economics, seems to be one of the cheapest ways to get some great bricks, one of the reasons I am buying less and less Star Wars stuff, which I really like, it just seems like you are getting so few bricks for even more money, with each passing year. This year seem worse than ever with the 20th anniversary and battle sets. 

So even though I am a fan of 3 in 1, it's mostly just for cheap parts packs. Except for a few that I like to keep intact, like the Turbo Track Racer and the Sunshine Surfer Van. 

What is wrong with the brick built dog? It shows kids how to build animals at a small scale from a few parts. Surely the point of the 3-in-1 sets is building. There are plenty of molded animals in other themes, so why not keep the theme where the key aspects are building and multiple builds, focussed on building and multiple uses for parts.

What happens in the alternative builds? The dog disappears and the parts get used elsewhere. In that set, another one appears:

 

Similarly in 31065, there is this one:

 

The parts get reused in the alternate builds to make something else. Can you do that with a molded dog?

 

 

9 hours ago, MAB said:

What is wrong with the brick built dog? 

The parts get reused in the alternate builds to make something else. Can you do that with a molded dog?

I do have all those dogs in the forementioned sets and I think they are still funny builds appropriate to the theme, just as the birds and seagulls and parrots of recent year's 3-in-1.

For the 3-in-1 theme, nothing wrong with brick built animals if they contribute to the alternate builds well.

Edited April 10, 20195 yr by TeriXeri

On 4/7/2019 at 3:52 PM, Digger of Bricks said:

Is it something else altogether entirely?

Yes, though it ties into your "use of preexisting parts" argument: Many 3in1 sets only contain a very limited number of parts that I would find useful for later custom builds. To me it's that old gag of potentially ending up with a larger pile of ball joints and weirdly shaped wedge plates than actual conventional bricks and straight plates. That ratio gets even worse when you buy a set more than once to do all alternate builds at the same time, assuming they are even worthwhile enough. That's one of those other things - the secondary builds often feel inferior and thus diminish the original intent and merit of the 3in1 line, very much like the B models in the Technic series these days degrade and devalue the sets because they are so lackluster or even downright terrible. Don't get me wrong - I really like some of the 3in1 sets and I'll definitely buy e.gf. this year's new house boat, but there's not much incentive to buy it twice or three times for the aforementioned reasons, which I guess is what LEGO would like us all to do and what may have been the original thought behind the series to some extent.

Mylenium

37 minutes ago, Mylenium said:

That's one of those other things - the secondary builds often feel inferior and thus diminish the original intent and merit of the 3in1 line.

I gotta say that the alternate builds on the larger sets are a lot better most of the time.

Especially ones that completely change their style.

Favorite examples being :

Vacation Getaways : Mobile RV + Boattrailer / Jeep + House / Motorboat

Cruising Adventures : Motoryacht + Jetski   / Helicopter+Tower / Beachhouse + Sailboat

 

Some sets simply don't make me care for their alternate builds however, like the 2018 Mobile Stunt Show, certainly played a role in skipping that set.

I am looking forward to see good pictures of the 2019 Pet Shop/Townhouse set. At least the "Tram+Street" and "Bank" might be okay. (I have no problem with the 16x8 sized open backed 3-in-1 modular system)

 

I know LEGO Movie 1 sets had alternate builds and seeing that return in LEGO movie 2 was pretty cool, reason I got Emmet's house set was it felt very close to a Creator set in style/concept.

Edited April 10, 20195 yr by TeriXeri

28 minutes ago, TeriXeri said:

I gotta say that the alternate builds on the larger sets are a lot better most of the time.

I wouldn't put it that way. To me it's usually more a case of where I can get behind the idea and concept of a secondary build, but the possible execution still tees me off. It's often that I don't like the color then, with odd stuff peeking out that would have required elements to be colored differently or that I think a different color scheme alltogether would be better. Similarly I often feel that LEGO did not even consider including some more extra parts for the alternate builds. Or to put it differently: The 3in1 sets perhaps should be more based on a healthy average of the models included in terms of parts and sophistication instead of how it is now where all of the alternate models kinda feel forcibly derived from the main build in a "you have to make do with the parts you have" manner. A good example for this is for instance the latest Deep Sea Creatures set where a few more slopes to add yet another segment to the squid model would have made a noticeable difference even if those extra bits were never used on the main shark model...

Mylenium

 

Edited April 10, 20195 yr by Mylenium

20 minutes ago, Mylenium said:

 Or to put it differently: The 3in1 sets perhaps should be more based on a healthy average of the models included in terms of parts and sophistication instead of how it is now where all of the alternate models kinda feel forcibly derived from the main build in a "you have to make do with the parts you have" manner.

They did add an extra windscreen in the Cruising Adventures set to make the helicopter possible, so there are exceptions.

Not that the helicopter is like super good, but still fairly unique to see a Huey style build in what was originally a Yacht. 

There are sets where all 3 builds are too similar or 1 build is super dumbed down to 1/3 of the original size, but there are exceptions like Sunshine Surfer Van that show a smaller set can still prove the 3-in-1 concept well.

 

Rebrickable also shows nice things , even outside of the 3-in-1 theme, that sometimes completely surprises me, even on the smaller/medium sets it amazes me what people come up with. Often better then LEGO's own "3rd" builds.

Edited April 10, 20195 yr by TeriXeri

24 minutes ago, Mylenium said:

.... The 3in1 sets perhaps should be more based on a healthy average of the models included in terms of parts and sophistication instead of how it is now where all of the alternate models kinda feel forcibly derived from the main build in a "you have to make do with the parts you have" manner. ....

That was the approach of the sets labeled "Designer" and "Creator" roughly between 2004-2011 before the Creator 3-in-1 theme really came into its own.  I must admit I was never very interested in those, because the A model usually looked pretty bad.  On the other hand, they were good parts packs.  I remember building a pretty decent propeller plane out of a kit whose inspiration builds were all microscale construction equipment.  My interest in Creator 3-in-1 since about 2015 has been almost entirely driven by the minifig-scale A models.  That more or less defeats the purpose of a theme that seems to be more explicitly intended at encouraging creativity and imaginative rebuilding than most other themes, but it has resulted in a dramatic increase in my purchases of Creator sets.  Presumably there are enough people like me that this focus on impressive A models with lesser B and C models has improved the theme's sales across the board.

I generally only buy one or two Creator 3-in-1 sets per year, and yet, when I'm asked what my favorite theme is, that's always the one I name. It represents a sort of Platonic ideal of the LEGO System in my eyes, and I wouldn't change a thing about it - except maybe bringing back the parts inventory on the tops of the boxes.

11 hours ago, icm said:

My interest in Creator 3-in-1 since about 2015 has been almost entirely driven by the minifig-scale A models.

Yeah, sure. I'm not going to pretend it would be much different - if the A-model isn't an eyecatcher, it's usually difficult to get behind a set until you see how someone else has built something nice from it. Just saying that the situation with the B and C models could be a bit better on a generic level.

5 hours ago, tafkatb said:

It represents a sort of Platonic ideal of the LEGO System

Actually I felt that Building Bigger thinking was much closer to that. I even wrote that in my dirty little blog (https://myleniumsbrickcorner.wordpress.com/category/lego-sets/building-bigger-thinking/). The sets were more versatile and the parts supply in them felt generous and useful because unlike the 3in1 sets they also included more unusual parts. I really wish they had pursued that line more and merged it with the Classic and 3in1 for some sort of better "Basics" line that would appeal to children with its many options, but also give older, experienced people something by offering good parts and allowing to build more complex stuff as well.

Mylenium

The Creator 3-in-1 sets used to be REALLY good.

Sets like the Model Town House, Beach House, Family Home, Hillside House, Log Cabin, Seaside House, Family House and Bike Shop & Cafe were amazing. Great designs and architecture and great sources of parts.

Then you moved to sets like the Mountain Hut, Changing Seasons, Beach Hut, Corner Deli and Lakeside Lodge. Smaller with more parts allocated to things like flowers and other little bits rather than great buildings. The houses also (in quite a few cases) stopped being the biggest and best Creator 3-in-1 set of the year.

Then in 2017 LEGO started making their Creator Houses even worse with the "modular" idea and they kept getting smaller with less of the great useful bits the old sets had (larger size windows and doors, decent quantity of basic bricks in useful colors, things like that)

If LEGO brought back more sets similar in size/parts count/parts selection/price point to the Family House (the last of the truly great Creator houses IMO) I would buy it no question. And I am sure I am not alone...

 

1 hour ago, jonwil said:

Then you moved to sets like the Mountain Hut, Changing Seasons, Beach Hut, Corner Deli and Lakeside Lodge. Smaller with more parts allocated to things like flowers and other little bits rather than great buildings. The houses also (in quite a few cases) stopped being the biggest and best Creator 3-in-1 set of the year.

They were still pretty good, though, IMO. I still regret not having snatched up the Corner Deli when I had a last second chance for a good bargain because back then I was too obsessed about Technic only. If they could at least bring back those little city houses, I'd be a much happier AFOL. If they bring back the bigger, fully formed buildings then even better. I consider the latter unlikely, though, as it would make too much of a dent in the Modular Buildings series' sales, especially in a year like this with the not-so-well received Corner Garage. Would be a nightmare for LEGO if people passed on the expensive models in favor of rather buying multiple smaller houses.

Mylenium

On 4/9/2019 at 6:16 PM, Aanchir said:

You realize the only reason most Creator sets are non-violent is that they're roughly based on realistic, modern day subjects — the very thing you want them to branch out from? After all, that's the characteristic shared by most of LEGO's least violent themes, whether they're current ones like City, Friends, and Speed Champions or past ones like Sports, Jack Stone, or  LEGO Island Xtreme Stunts.

In fact, many of the Creator theme's futuristic, fantastical, or historical based sets have been just as "violent" as their equivalents in themes like Castle, Space, Bionicle, or Ninjago:

• The Power Mech's description encourages kids to "Suit up for futuristic battle with strong green armor, powerful arms, grabbing claws and leg-mounted boosters".
• The Rescue Robot's description encourages kids to "Blast the enemy with the laserbot’s arm-mounted laser beam!"
• Mighty Dinosaurs "Also includes the dinosaur’s prey in the form of a buildable rib cage".
• One of Fiery Legend's alternate builds is "a powerful ogre warrior with a massive hammer and shield!"
• The alternate builds of Mythical Creatures (2018) include a "menacing troll with an axe that doubles as a heavy metal guitar", while those of Mythical Creatures (2006) include a troll and a lizard creature, each armed with both a hammer and a flail
• Several of the robots from sets like Robo Platoon, Robo Pod, Robobots, Mini Robots, and Titan XP are about as heavily armed as any Exo-Force, Ninjago, or Nexo Knights robot/mech!

 

I think it's pretty obvious what I meant, and you've really gone off the rails here into pseudo-intellectual territory.

A dinosaur set with a blurb about a rib cage is proof that the Creator line is inherently violent? Are you for real? The fact that you have to go into the blurbs from some advertisement is proof enough of how right I am. 

ZERO Creator sets have had armed minifigures from different warring factions shown fighting on the box cover. Creator sets are about the build and the model, and generally have a couple minifigs if any to drive the vehicle or live in the house but not to fight. No action gimmick shooters or anything.

That's what I meant, that's what everyone including you knows I meant, and the fact that you dredged up a Robo Pod with a laser gun from 2006 shows that you don't really care about having an honest discussion but are desperate to prove some point, I don't know what. A robot with a laser gun isn't at all what I'm complaining about. 

On 4/9/2019 at 6:16 PM, Aanchir said:

I simply can't fathom any kind of licensing clause that would allow LEGO to release so many different space-related products, and yet somehow still have any power to categorically exclude a line of space-related toys no matter what their designs or premise happened to be like.

So now you're arguing with yourself? You previously said this:

On 4/8/2019 at 2:41 PM, Aanchir said:

And even if you do believe that there is some reason LEGO can't or won't return to making these themes in a form you can accept, I can't fathom why releasing the exact same type of product and figure designs but with different branding would be a viable loophole... Do you think any of LEGO's licensing partners are out there writing non-compete clauses that can be subverted with that little effort?

You're losing it man. I don't know what your deal is. I just want Creator style Space and Castle sets. I have no idea why that offends you so much. You don't have to reply to everything I post to tell me I'm wrong, but when your reasons contradict each other, that reeks of bad faith.

2 hours ago, Mylenium said:

They were still pretty good, though, IMO. I still regret not having snatched up the Corner Deli when I had a last second chance for a good bargain because back then I was too obsessed about Technic only. If they could at least bring back those little city houses, I'd be a much happier AFOL. If they bring back the bigger, fully formed buildings then even better. I consider the latter unlikely, though, as it would make too much of a dent in the Modular Buildings series' sales, especially in a year like this with the not-so-well received Corner Garage. Would be a nightmare for LEGO if people passed on the expensive models in favor of rather buying multiple smaller houses.

Mylenium

Yeah, I thought Corner Deli and the Bike Shop / Cafe were quite good introductions to modular buildings for kids.  Relatively straightforward to build, but get them thinking about size, shape, form and connection of one building to another. They are clearly not Modular grade, but never intended to be.  It wouldn't surprise me if older kids that got those sets are now into the Modulars.

9 hours ago, danth said:

I think it's pretty obvious what I meant, and you've really gone off the rails here into pseudo-intellectual territory.

A dinosaur set with a blurb about a rib cage is proof that the Creator line is inherently violent? Are you for real? The fact that you have to go into the blurbs from some advertisement is proof enough of how right I am.

The only reason I shared the blurbs is because I was pretty sure if I just pointed out "this robot has a massive gun…" and "this T-Rex has obviously flayed the flesh from another creature's bones…" you would have just dismissed it as "well what if kids just want to pretend those bones were already there?" or "what if that's a radar gun or sensor?" or some other nonsense argument.

I guess I underestimated your knack for coming up with excuses to dismiss any factual evidence you don't like, no matter how clearly spelled out it is. I mean, "describing the contents of the sets in LEGO's own words just proves I'm right!" isn't a very compelling comeback…

9 hours ago, danth said:

ZERO Creator sets have had armed minifigures from different warring factions shown fighting on the box cover. Creator sets are about the build and the model, and generally have a couple minifigs if any to drive the vehicle or live in the house but not to fight. No action gimmick shooters or anything.

Oh, I see… Because you don't want to admit to being wrong about Creator having plenty of obvious examples of violence, you're just gonna move the goalposts and say that a robot with a huge, long-bore gun or a picture of a pile of bones next to the dinosaur that tore the flesh from them aren't "violence" unless it meets a lot of insanely specific characteristics. Reminds me of all the hoops people jumped through to say that basically any space theme of the past two decades wasn't "real" LEGO Space because LEGO Space has to be X, Y, and Z.

I mean, the first part of your argument could just as easily describe Dino Attack, one of the most military-looking themes LEGO has ever created, because it "never had armed minifigures from different warring factions shown fighting on the box cover". Along with sets like Muaka & Kane-Ra, which literally had a function with which by pulling off the masks of the opposing creature, you could make its arms fall off. Totally non-violent!

Oh, and about Creator having "no action gimmick shooters"… want to rethink that one? And if that's too long ago here's one from last year. Clearly LEGO has no problem putting that stuff in sets if they feel it enhances the play experience and sense of authenticity.

10 hours ago, danth said:

So now you're arguing with yourself? You previously said this:

"And even if you do believe that there is some reason LEGO can't or won't return to making these themes in a form you can accept, I can't fathom why releasing the exact same type of product and figure designs but with different branding would be a viable loophole... Do you think any of LEGO's licensing partners are out there writing non-compete clauses that can be subverted with that little effort?"

Uhh, lemme just bold an important part of that comment you seem to have missed.

I was pointing out that if YOU believe there's a non-compete clause that would rule out a space theme of any kind, it would also rule out the same sets with Creator branding. If I wasn't clear enough, I DON'T believe the Star Wars license includes any non-compete clause that broad. After all, the numerous other space-related products I brought up in an earlier post proves that non-Disney-owned sci-fi robots, spaceships, astronauts, aliens, etc. have still been allowed even while the sequel trilogy has been ongoing.

Therefore, while I'm sure there are some kind of non-compete clauses in the Star Wars licensing agreement, they are obviously much narrower restrictions than "you can't make any space-related sci-fi toys besides ours". LEGO could make Space-related theme if they wanted to.

Rather, I suspect they've chosen not to because they realize that launching a new space toy when the airwaves are going to be flooded with Star Wars hype by the time the Christmas season approaches would be a great way to sabotage their new product line before it even gets off the ground.

11 hours ago, danth said:

You're losing it man. I don't know what your deal is. I just want Creator style Space and Castle sets. I have no idea why that offends you so much. You don't have to reply to everything I post to tell me I'm wrong, but when your reasons contradict each other, that reeks of bad faith.

I would love to see more Space and Castle themed Creator sets. After all, fantasy and sci-fi stuff is my jam! I don't think it's a bad thing for you to want them, either. I'm sure they'd deliver some AMAZING building experiences. After all, the dragons and robots we've seen are already not too shabby.

But I also think you're setting unrealistic expectations for them by imagining Creator as being somehow immune to all the forces that drive LEGO's decision making in their other themes — including the extent of their "conflict and weapons" policy (which specifically prohibits violence and weapons in realistic, modern-day contexts — not fantasy or sci-fi ones) and concerns about what products might get overshadowed by more established product lines (whether their own or their competitors').

It's not out of the question that Creator could include peaceful fantasy or sci-fi sets. After all, even Ninjago has occasional sets that aren't based around violent conflict. But the designers can't be expected to outright exclude stuff like swords or lasers or catapults or shooters in any set that happens to have a Creator logo on the box.

(also I'm not a man, thanks)

On 4/10/2019 at 5:03 AM, MAB said:

What is wrong with the brick built dog? It shows kids how to build animals at a small scale from a few parts. Surely the point of the 3-in-1 sets is building. There are plenty of molded animals in other themes, so why not keep the theme where the key aspects are building and multiple builds, focussed on building and multiple uses for parts.

What happens in the alternative builds? The dog disappears and the parts get used elsewhere...

The parts get reused in the alternate builds to make something else. Can you do that with a molded dog?

That's neat and all, but those animals still look like crap.

On 4/10/2019 at 12:47 PM, TeriXeri said:

I do have all those dogs in the forementioned sets and I think they are still funny builds appropriate to the theme, just as the birds and seagulls and parrots of recent year's 3-in-1.

For the 3-in-1 theme, nothing wrong with brick built animals if they contribute to the alternate builds well.

At minifigure scale, I just don't think they look good.  That's the primary gripe.  And if they had replaced the birds and seagulls and parrots with molded animals I may have ended up purchasing more of those sets.  I wonder how many people would have seen molded animals as a discouragement from the purchase.

The main point of all LEGO is building.  I don't see how adding in a dog mold will ruin building.  But if that's the case, I'm surprised they even include minifigures.  Why not build those too?

I guess my main issue with the Creator 3-in-1 theme is that the point is too heavily on building to the exclusion of interesting molded parts.

1 hour ago, x105Black said:

That's neat and all, but those animals still look like crap.

At minifigure scale, I just don't think they look good.  That's the primary gripe.  And if they had replaced the birds and seagulls and parrots with molded animals I may have ended up purchasing more of those sets.  I wonder how many people would have seen molded animals as a discouragement from the purchase.

 

4

I doubt there are that many put off buying LEGO because of it as there are plenty of other similar themed LEGO sets, such as in City and Friends,  where molded animals like dogs are included. Isn't the point of 3-in-1s to cater primarily for the build experience? Therefore to show that parts can be used to build some detail in a house or alternatively to build a small animal is a good design feature. Of course they might be put off buying the Creator set, but if they are then it probably wasn't for them in the first place.

11 hours ago, Aanchir said:

I guess I underestimated your knack for coming up with excuses to dismiss any factual evidence you don't like, no matter how clearly spelled out it is. I mean, "describing the contents of the sets in LEGO's own words just proves I'm right!" isn't a very compelling comeback…

I'll just keep judging sets on their own merits and you can go ahead and judge them based on some text you found somewhere.

Anyone can see the difference between the above and the below:

There is an important difference between a dinosaur standing next to his last meal in a series with no story, and war machines literally shooting gatling guns at battle bugs in a theme about war. You can write 15 paragraphs to muddy the waters, but I don't think you're convincing anyone.

11 hours ago, Aanchir said:

Oh, and about Creator having "no action gimmick shooters"… want to rethink that one? And if that's too long ago here's one from last year. Clearly LEGO has no problem putting that stuff in sets if they feel it enhances the play experience and sense of authenticity.

Oh no, a creator set of a pirate themed roller coaster included a boat cannon. The walls are caving in on me! You've totally proven how the Creator theme is totally violent!

Here's a question. Does the box show it shooting anything? Does it even come with projectiles?

11 hours ago, Aanchir said:

 (also I'm not a man, thanks)

I know, it was a figure of speech, but I'm sorry anyway. 

1 hour ago, danth said:

Oh no, a creator set of a pirate themed roller coaster included a boat cannon. The walls are caving in on me! You've totally proven how the Creator theme is totally violent!

Yes, it has projectiles (1x1 transparent light blue cylinders, since as in the City firefighting sets it's used as a water cannon). And yes, they appear on the box art. You could have found either of those things out yourself in one click.

And the fact that they included a weapon/shooter piece to match subject matter is exactly the point I've been making! If they'd put a "pretend" cannon in a Creator set of a "pretend" pirate scene, why assume that they wouldn't put a "real" cannon in a Creator set of a "real" pirate scene? Let alone catapults and other weapons in a medieval scene, or ray guns in a space scene, or revolvers in a Western scene? As long as they can do those things without reducing the set's rebuilding potential, it seems like an intuitive choice for them, given how many people even here on Eurobricks frequently expect those things to appear in sets based on those genres/settings.

You may think it's silly that I refer to set descriptions to identify which sets are being advertised for violent conflict play. I don't see how that's any sillier than acting as if the violence in a set boils down to whether the front of the box has people pointing weapons at each other. This Mega Bloks set doesn't any actual fighting happening between two factions, and I don't think either of us would consider it "non-violent" on those grounds.

As such, how much sense is there in treating Siege Cart as "non-violent" just because the figures are cartoonish and the weapons are pre-modern? And if we've decided that the blurbs/advertisements are unreliable evidence, then why should we assume that the forward-facing antenna piece on Gamma V Laser Craft is anything OTHER than a laser gun, as the set name implies and a designer from that time says was his team's intent?

 

I apologize for how rude and snarky my previous post probably sounded, by the way… I tried to clean it up a bit before posting it to make it less confrontational, but I was also trying to sound breezier and less "pseudo-intellectual" than usual.

I tend to be wordy by default, and I know it's annoying and I need to get better at it. Lately I've been trying to at least make my paragraphs shorter and use bullet points to break any lists of facts or opinions up into smaller chunks, though one-line responses still feels "snippy" in a way I'm not so comfortable with.

So yeah… sorry for my part in driving a wedge between us in this discussion. I really DO like talking about what could be cool in future sets, and especially about ways LEGO could depict more of the types of stuff they've often missed out on.

One of the things that always frustrated me about the Castle theme compared to the appeal of LEGO Elves WAS that Elves focused on the more appealing parts of medieval life, whereas Castle sets even before my time often felt like "all fighting, all the time" and focused on castles as a stronghold against attacks rather than a place for people to live full, enjoyable lives.

And it frustrates me when conflict-driven play is implied to be some recent and worrying trend, rather than something LEGO has been catering to since the 70s, and just used to be deeply in denial about. I think there's a lot more to delivering on currently under-emphasized subjects and play scenarios than just going back to a status quo when LEGO purposely designed sets knowing many kids would act out scary or violent scenarios with them, while also outwardly treating those common forms of children's play and storytelling as unwholesome or shameful.

But I believe future Castle and Space sets, regardless of their target audience or how they were branded, could ideally do both. Some Elves and Nexo Knights sets were clearly able to include both intense action related features like weapons, traps, monsters/dragons, or dangerous environments, AND more everyday "creature comforts" like bedrooms, kitchens, dining rooms, bathrooms, libraries, and shops. I see no reason a more "traditional" Castle set or theme couldn't manage the same.

On 4/11/2019 at 9:25 AM, jonwil said:

The Creator 3-in-1 sets used to be REALLY good.

Sets like the Model Town House, Beach House, Family Home, Hillside House, Log Cabin, Seaside House, Family House and Bike Shop & Cafe were amazing. Great designs and architecture and great sources of parts.

Then you moved to sets like the Mountain Hut, Changing Seasons, Beach Hut, Corner Deli and Lakeside Lodge. Smaller with more parts allocated to things like flowers and other little bits rather than great buildings. The houses also (in quite a few cases) stopped being the biggest and best Creator 3-in-1 set of the year.

On some levels, I can certainly understand this perspective. But on others, I think you are selling more play-focused or aesthetic details like many of the newer buildings have featured a little short. Back in the day I built a lot of the older Creator 3-in-1 houses on LDD, and there were definitely some neat things going on with them in terms of architecture, but part of why I never felt drawn to buy any is that they didn't have any kind of scenario to turn them into a more complete play experience.

I suppose the idea, as with the older Modular Buildings, was that builders would fill in the vacant interiors themselves using parts and figures from other themes. But I found that rather alienating, part of why I didn't get any Modular Buildings either until the Pet Shop (thankfully, my dad had already purchased some of the other Modular Building sets unopened and later brought them out of storage and invited us to build them).

In some ways, I think this parallels some of the things LEGO found when they were researching girls' play patterns at the start of LEGO Friends' four-year development process. For boys, it was often not so important whether a building had a lot of interior detail or furnishing to make it feel livable, because its value in display terms was as an architectural achievement, and its value in play terms was as a stage or backdrop. Girls, on the other hand, tended to be more concerned with what scenic, aesthetic, and practical features it had to make it feel like a place they would personally like to live or even just visit.

I wouldn't be surprised if the shift in Creator 3-in-1 and the Modular Buildings in the years before and after the launch of LEGO Friends was meant to more effectively balance what boys and girls enjoyed about these sets in what was already among the less overtly masculine-coded themes of its time.

Similarly, shortly after the launch of LEGO Friends, Creator animal sets stopped focusing as narrowly on cool or powerful looking creatures like dinosaurs, dragons, sharks, lions, and crocodiles (although these still continued to show up) and started to also introduce cuter and less dangerous creatures like cats, dogs, frogs, ducks, and parrots.

Even more recently, we've started to see more playset-style Creator vehicle sets like Vacation Getaways, Island Adventures, Cruising Adventures, and Outback Adventures that don't just treat vehicles as cool, fast, or powerful machines (a very masculine-coded selling point), but also as a fun way of traveling the world and seeing new places.

I definitely think it'd be nice to see another BIG house like the Family House from 2013, much like how cool it would be to continue seeing occasional larger-scale, highly functional vehicle sets like https://brickset.com/sets/5893-1/Off-Road-Power or https://brickset.com/sets/5767-1/Cool-Cruiser that in some respects almost resemble the old Model Team theme. But I do appreciate the Creator buildings' shift towards increased variety, the less sterile-looking landscapes, and the less vacant-looking interiors.

10 hours ago, MAB said:

I doubt there are that many put off buying LEGO because of it as there are plenty of other similar themed LEGO sets, such as in City and Friends,  where molded animals like dogs are included. Isn't the point of 3-in-1s to cater primarily for the build experience? Therefore to show that parts can be used to build some detail in a house or alternatively to build a small animal is a good design feature. Of course they might be put off buying the Creator set, but if they are then it probably wasn't for them in the first place.

Personally, I think the problem with Creator 3-in-1 as a theme is that it caters primarily to the build experience, and isn't really for me.  With that in mind, I hope they don't make sets that have features that I find appealing, since there will inevitably be something about the set that is disappointing (from the piece selection, prints, and minifigures, to the brick-built animals).

I suppose Aanchir is right, and I should just wait for Castle and Space to return on their own, because Creator 3-in-1 versions of them would not offer me what I am really interested in seeing.

9 hours ago, Aanchir said:

Yes, it has projectiles (1x1 transparent light blue cylinders, since as in the City firefighting sets it's used as a water cannon). And yes, they appear on the box art. You could have found either of those things out yourself in one click.

Oh man that is hilarious. It's a water cannon blasting water at the roller coaster riders! I actually don't mind that at all.

I'll have to be honest, I'm just not going to read your whole response. Brevity is the soul of wit. There's a lot to talk about with a lot of people and I don't really think one person should dominate every thread. 

I will just say you have derailed this conversation so successfully that I don't even know what my original point was. I guess it was that I really like Creator 3-in-1 sets, and I want Space and Castle themed ones. No conflict, no stickers, no specific characters, no set story, great builds, multiple builds, etc. This is not hard to understand, so if you don't get it, you never will. 

8 hours ago, x105Black said:

Personally, I think the problem with Creator 3-in-1 as a theme is that it caters primarily to the build experience, and isn't really for me.  With that in mind, I hope they don't make sets that have features that I find appealing, since there will inevitably be something about the set that is disappointing (from the piece selection, prints, and minifigures, to the brick-built animals).

Man, this is a really good argument AGAINST Creator Castle sets, unfortunately. They would most likely have brick-built horses, which would probably go over very poorly with Classic Castle fans. I can understand feeling like brick built horses are a step backwards towards the original Yellow Castle or Knights Joust. 

I really do like brick built animals when they're (IMO) good, like Lion Legend Beast. I could probably deal with a well executed brick built horse. But it would feel weird in Castle. 

Or maybe themed 3-in-1 Creators sets would just have to allow horses and other small animals that aren't brick built. 

Edited April 13, 20195 yr by danth

On 4/13/2019 at 5:14 AM, danth said:

Man, this is a really good argument AGAINST Creator Castle sets, unfortunately. They would most likely have brick-built horses, which would probably go over very poorly with Classic Castle fans. I can understand feeling like brick built horses are a step backwards towards the original Yellow Castle or Knights Joust. 

I hope they'd bring horses back in smaller sets, Xtra could work but likely not more then 1 horse/saddle in a set so they'd still be the same color.

All in all , beside Friends, Harry Potter or Minecraft using different horse molds, we haven't seen a regular horse used for a few years now.  

 

Creator has had horses actually , in  2013 10235: Winter Village Market. 

Before I had seen a picture of the 2019 3-in-1 carousel set, I imagined it could've been a similar ride with horses. But the 2017 set Creator Expert Carousel is still being sold.

 

Besides that, the last big year with multiple regular horses was 2013 (Castle, Lone Ranger), also the last year of Black horses.

2014 had a Juniors castle set with a white horse.

Last set with a white horse was a 2015 Scooby Doo "headless horseman"

2019 has 3 new horses (white/grey/brown) but all 3 are Friends style 

Edited April 14, 20195 yr by TeriXeri

I have to say that Creator 3 in 1 is my favorite theme together with Technic. It was also theme that brought me back from my dark age, particularly set 4884. I appreciate its focus on building and rebuilding. I am not person who likes to put models on shelf or play with them. I prefer building and finding new things that could be built out of bricks from one set like I did for example with 31056:

But I have to admit that resent sets are getting worse. I think it is caused by adding minifigures (they don't add any interesting building experience and steal money from budged that could be used for some bricks and plates) and by making models compactible with minifigures (they limit scale).

Edited April 14, 20195 yr by Tomik

That’s pretty awesome @Tomik!

My answer to Digger’s question is this:

Is everything under appreciated by AFOLs? Yes, yes it is.