msk6003 Posted July 21, 2020 Posted July 21, 2020 1 minute ago, efferman said: Not yet would be incorrect. Even the shop i have ordered has skipped the pre-order sign on the 42113. But the set is still visible. THANKS. Now I will trying find 42113 in korea. Quote
login Posted July 21, 2020 Posted July 21, 2020 (edited) Looking at the statement, the set seems to have been cancelled. I'd rather they'd cancelled the Charger, which is made after a car from a not very intellectual movie that glorifies crime, violence, and dangerous driving. Well, at least my wallet isn't going to complain now (even though the cost of that loss to TLG will likely be shared by the customers in the end). Edited July 21, 2020 by login grammar Quote
icm Posted July 21, 2020 Posted July 21, 2020 17 minutes ago, schraubedrin said: In the end, we all (LEGO and FOLs) want this set on the shelves. Maybe it would be an idea to look at how to "unboingify" the set based on the provided parts list and instruction from @Ngoc Nguyen If we find a solution that doesn't look like an Osprey, LEGO could drop the name and repackage the existing parts with new instructions. Billy and the Boingers Bootleg! Cover it with faux-rock-band stickers and you're good to go.... Quote
nhk Posted July 21, 2020 Posted July 21, 2020 A sad day for lego and fans everywhere. Personally this makes me view Lego in a much more negative light. I'm not interested in the pseudo-political messages they're trying to convey, I'm just here for the creative toys. I'll definitely be thinking twice before I buy a set from now on. Quote
Vectormatic Posted July 21, 2020 Posted July 21, 2020 (edited) 14 minutes ago, login said: Looking at the statement, the set seems to have been cancelled. I'd rather they'd cancelled the Charger, which is made after a car from a not very intellectual movie that glorifies crime, violence, and dangerous driving. Well, at least my wallet isn't going to complain now (even though the cost of that loss to TLG will likely be shared by the customers in the end). How about we dont cancel any sets? (although i wouldnt have minded a non licensed charger, ill probably start out by deleting the wheelie bar and supercharger, then do some more realism inspired mods) @nhk Yup, The lime green problems already put me into serious doubts about the Sian, and i was kinda getting past that and gearing up for buying and modding the charger, this move really puts another dent into my enthusiasm for lego, the level of cool technic stuff in the Osprey made it the first non-bike/car set i was interested in in ages. Ah well, more time for other hobbies then Edited July 21, 2020 by vectormatic Quote
Lipko Posted July 21, 2020 Posted July 21, 2020 (edited) 41 minutes ago, Robo-Knight said: I keep seeing NGO. Is this the group that got the set canceled? Geee, NGO means Non-governmental organization. I have no idea why many members are deliberately adding "NGO" to their post. Okay, we get it, NGO = evil liberal LMBTQGTHS-transformator Soros György Edited July 21, 2020 by Lipko Quote
Gimmick Posted July 21, 2020 Posted July 21, 2020 5 minutes ago, nhk said: A sad day for lego and fans everywhere. Personally this makes me view Lego in a much more negative light. I'm not interested in the pseudo-political messages they're trying to convey, I'm just here for the creative toys. I'll definitely be thinking twice before I buy a set from now on. A company admits mistake and adheres to its principles --> sad day for fans. xD It's sad, that they were stupid enough to make the model with a licence in the first place. Quote
nhk Posted July 21, 2020 Posted July 21, 2020 (edited) 15 minutes ago, Gimmick said: A company admits mistake and adheres to its principles --> sad day for fans. xD It's sad, that they were stupid enough to make the model with a licence in the first place. There are no principles being adhered to here. Otherwise we wouldn't have models like: 4953 Fast Flyers 5892 Sonic Boom 31039 Blue Power Jet 42066 Air Race Jet All of these planes in particular are modelled specifically after military aircraft, but were just given a makeover to hide that fact. What other use is there for a single/double seat jet ? And let's think about all the Marvel/DC sets which have modern military vehicles like Humvees, Jeeps and the like, only not labeling them, plus those same sets include things that are supposed to represent modern weapons. You might argue that it's just play, but it's much more violent in it's message than a rescue labelled twinprop, which kids will have 0 idea that it's military related and adults can make the distinction between a set and reality. But yeah, props to Lego for adhering to their "principles" when convenient. P.S. Targeting products like this just undermines the message that this group is trying to convey. I for one cannot take them seriously when they're doing such a campaign against a simple toy. If they were really interested in changing something, how about starting a protest in front of the US embassy - the country with largest military spending in the world. But instead their attempt to drum up controversy over a Lego set just makes them seem laughably ineffective. Edited July 21, 2020 by nhk Quote
Gray Gear Posted July 21, 2020 Posted July 21, 2020 13 minutes ago, Gimmick said: A company admits mistake and adheres to its principles --> sad day for fans. xD It's sad, that they were stupid enough to make the model with a licence in the first place. It is not admiting a mistake and adhering to their own principles, its having no backbone. Otherwhise this model wouldn' have made it into development and production in the first place. Quote
Sven J Posted July 21, 2020 Posted July 21, 2020 25 minutes ago, Lipko said: Okay, we get it, NGO = evil liberal LMBTQGTHS-transformator Soros György I won't say anything about that Osprey affair, as everything has already been said and I don't care much about the set. But please don't call minorities who want to enforce their world view upon everyone else "liberal". It's just the opposite of that. Says someone who considers himself a Liberal in the true sense. Quote
Ngoc Nguyen Posted July 21, 2020 Author Posted July 21, 2020 Having finished the set, I can testify that this thing certainly deserves a spot on you guys' shelves. Quote
andythenorth Posted July 21, 2020 Posted July 21, 2020 2 hours ago, hjxbf said: Thing is, this is not an enforceable limit, as it cannot be defined unambiguously, but rather twisted to suit anybody's agenda. Yeah, sorry if it's lost in translation. Looks like you're confused between "opinions of random people on the internet", and "what Lego said about this in 2010" https://www.zmescience.com/other/did-you-know/lego-military-toys/ The report is here, you'll want page 26. https://www.lego.com/cdn/cs/aboutus/assets/blt84b740e1347b33e0/Progress_report2010.pdf Quote We also acknowledge children’s well-proven ability to tell play from reality. However, to make sure to maintain the right balance between play and conflict, we have adhered to a set of unwritten rules for several years. In 2010, we have formalized these rules in a guideline for the use of conflict and weapons in LEGO products. The basic aim is to avoid realistic weapons and military equipment that children may recognize from hot spots around the world and to refrain from showing violent or frightening situations when communicating about LEGO products. At the same time, the purpose is for the LEGO brand not to be associated with issues that glorify conflicts and unethical or harmful behavior. Good luck Quote
Kaanere Posted July 21, 2020 Posted July 21, 2020 1 hour ago, msk6003 said: I...I can't understand now... 42113 is 100% cancelld? PLEASE SAY NOT YET Well, they just said that they will "review" its release, not outright cancel it. I think it's still possible that they will back down from this once the dust settles and release the set, even if they only give it a limited release. Quote
Jim Posted July 21, 2020 Posted July 21, 2020 38 minutes ago, Gimmick said: It's sad, that they were stupid enough to make the model with a licence in the first place. That's my main gripe... First of all, don't use a license and we are all cool. Why does every set need a license. Second, if you use a license, think of it before you make the decision to make this set. I simply can't wrap my head around it. Just now, Kaanere said: Well, they just said that they will "review" its release, not outright cancel it. As a matter of fact, they did....today. The LEGO Technic Bell Boeing V-22 Osprey was designed to highlight the important role the aircraft plays in search and rescue efforts. While the set clearly depicts how a rescue version of the plane might look, the aircraft is only used by the military. We have a long-standing policy not to create sets which feature real military vehicles, so it has been decided not to proceed with the launch of this product. We appreciate that some fans who were looking forward to this set may be disappointed, but we believe it’s important to ensure that we uphold our brand values. Quote
TeriXeri Posted July 21, 2020 Posted July 21, 2020 (edited) 24 minutes ago, Jim said: That's my main gripe... First of all, don't use a license and we are all cool. Why does every set need a license. Second, if you use a license, think of it before you make the decision to make this set. I simply can't wrap my head around it. Absolutely, The License is the main cause of this whole subject, as it connects the model to a real world manufacturer or user of said vehicle. I won't deny LEGO made dozens of military looking vehicles , but never called them by their real-world models. And I know this has been said before, I don't think anyone had an issue with this under City : And even a 2020 set like this , LEGO just calls it "Taskmaster's awesome armed Helicopter" , and not "Boeing CH-47 Chinook" And just to put it there, here's another 2018 Chinook lookalike in City , it's simply called "Police Helicopter" Personally I still have no issue with set 42113, but LEGO did overstep it's own 2010 rule : The basic aim is to avoid realistic weapons and military equipment that children may recognize from hot spots around the world Licensing the vehicle is as realistic as it gets, as it directly 100% confirms it's that particular vehicle. As for the Red Baron Triplane (2002) or Sopwith Camel (2001 and 2012), sure they are based on their real world counterparts, but on the other hand not exactly licensed, as the manufacturers were defunct by the time the sets came out. Edited July 21, 2020 by TeriXeri Quote
Ngoc Nguyen Posted July 21, 2020 Author Posted July 21, 2020 How to hype a product: - Step 1: Publicly declare you will not produce X - Step 2: Make a plan to release X and ship X to vendors - Step 3: Walk back on releasing X and tease posible cancellation, thus freaking fans out - Step 4: Create artificial shortage to drive price - Step 5: Profit Quote
andythenorth Posted July 21, 2020 Posted July 21, 2020 7 minutes ago, Jim said: Second, if you use a license, think of it before you make the decision to make this set. Pandemic brains making poor choices? Nah, surely it was earlier than that? But lol, doing a licensed model for a weapons system that has ongoing (or very recent) active combat duty and is in front-line readiness? How did they think was going to go? Quote
rener Posted July 21, 2020 Posted July 21, 2020 I assume you considered the costs of development, production and callbacks should be all subtracted from that mighty profit... Quote
Polarlicht Posted July 21, 2020 Posted July 21, 2020 I think this would have been a nice set without a license! Why does TLG need to license everything? If it would just be a Heli we wouldn't had this problem. The Top Gear rally car license was utterly pointless, but this sets a new milestone! Quote
AVCampos Posted July 21, 2020 Posted July 21, 2020 24 minutes ago, Jim said: First of all, don't use a license and we are all cool. Why does every set need a license. ⬆ This. The only real distinction between the 42113 (unlucky set number indeed) and the other LEGO tiltrotors is that this one can be unequivocally linked to something some people only associate with warfare. If this were a generic SAR tiltrotor, everything would be fine and we could get those DBG panels and black propeller blades (at least for non-unicorn-poop prices). Quote
Polarlicht Posted July 21, 2020 Posted July 21, 2020 What will happen to the already produced sets and set specific parts? Quote
R0Sch Posted July 21, 2020 Posted July 21, 2020 21 minutes ago, Ngoc Nguyen said: How to hype a product: - Step 1: Publicly declare you will not produce X - Step 2: Make a plan to release X and ship X to vendors - Step 3: Walk back on releasing X and tease posible cancellation, thus freaking fans out - Step 4: Create artificial shortage to drive price - Step 5: Profit How about instead of trolling you share the scanned instructions with the community, as promised. No need for the cover or Osprey reference, only the building steps are fine. I will gladly build it in Studio. Quote
nhk Posted July 21, 2020 Posted July 21, 2020 It's fair to say that since Lego started their licensing deals things have gone downhill in a few areas. First it was the removal of B-models, now they're limited by their own "guidelines", which they don't event follow as long as the set is unlicensed. I'm guessing they figure that licenses will draw more AFOLs in, which they might, but the the downsides are getting to be pretty sizable. What irks me most is that the passage quoted by @andythenorth actually applies stronger to other sets, than to this harmless rescue variant of the Osprey. Meanwhile we have multiple sets with 'battle' and 'attack' in the title, not to mention that the entire Star Wars range is based around conflict and war. I wonder how they justify putting out a set called the "Death Star", I guess destroying a whole planet full of people just isn't that big of a deal. Quote
Polarlicht Posted July 21, 2020 Posted July 21, 2020 Thing is Star Wars and Indiana Jones and others are fictional... Real war with Ospreys aren't... Quote
andythenorth Posted July 21, 2020 Posted July 21, 2020 1 hour ago, nhk said: I'll definitely be thinking twice before I buy a set from now on. Oh Please tell me that was an intentional reference to this? https://www.lugnet.com/general/~1285/traumaticevents Also someone ^ should update that for 2020 :P It's a community classic. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.