Technic General Discussion

[Toastie]

I also totally agree on what @allanp has said.

33 minutes ago, 1gor said:

instead of making more and more PU sets

What I'd say may become a disaster though (for many using it now) is when PUp is phased out. PUp has become an integral part of (premium) Technic sets, as far as I see it (I am much more inclined to a mix of Technic and studded LEGO, leaning towards the latter. I am closely following discussions in the Technic forum, simply because Mindstorms and programmable stuff is here as well.)

As I said, in my opinion, TLG should in principle stay with PUp and integrate some sort of smart brick that allows you to easily sign up diverse remotes and hubs. As far as I understood, this is what @allanp has proposed before - which was heavily discussed here. I may be wrong. OK, would be another PUp device, but this is how it is in the real world as well: Every smart home-automation system has a) clients (dedicated remotes, smart devices running apps, lamps, etc. pp.) and b) some sort of server (which may or may not provide wifi or web-services, not the point). In PUp world, the server is the smart device, which is at the same time the "remote" - which is - a bit bizarre, to say the least. When you run Legoino on an ESP32, hubs and remotes are clients, which are signed up to the server (the ESP). It makes so much more sense as it is so much more flexible.

Almost all complaints about PUp seem to (rightfully) focus on the smart device (phone), which I totally agree on, as said. But that is just a short-cut TLG took, to save money, as they always do - and then royally screw up. There should be a dedicated PUp "server" in PUp world, which then can be scaled to any needs. And should have a firmware that does not need to be updated every other day because of bugs. Which in turn is expensive. We seem to have accepted that "updates" and new "firmware available" are good things. Well, they underline that the product was flawed in the first place. OK, I know, new features need new software. But LEGO is a toy, and should not be a virus-vulnerable, software dependent internet client needing firewalls and what not (which a smartphone does).

BTW, the RCX had three official updates of its firmware, the SCOUT, Cybermaster, and Spybots had >none<, over the entire lifetime of the product. Because people figured it out before others were cranking it out. It appears as if today it is more like: Crank it out, then we'll fix all the crap later.   

Just my 2 cents.

Best,
Thorsten

[Toastie]

As we are at it:

Out of curiosity: Did TLG update their PoweredUp app with regard to "app crashing, when medium linear motor is operated with SetSpeed command"?

I deleted the app from my phone (^^) and don't want to reinstall it for that test.

Best,
Thorsten 

[1gor]

@Toastie younger generations have developed kind of addiction to smart devices allready and my point was that TLC (which is also for kids) should try (as an kind of influencer) to make their childhood less dependent on digital technology. Perhaps sets should be malual but at the same time upgradable to PU...

Edited December 3, 2023 by 1gor

[Maaboo the Witch]

Wonder how I would have reacted if somebody told me earlier in the year that this would be the last ever Technic B-model.

[Ngoc Nguyen]

2 minutes ago, Maaboo the Witch said:

Wonder how I would have reacted if somebody told me earlier in the year that this would be the last ever Technic B-model.

As a saying goes, we'll never know that the last time would be the last time.

[Jay Psi]

The lack of B-models, is on its own concerning, but possibly not the key issue.

I'm paraphrasing from @kbalage's video on the subject, but what could happen to the AFOL-made alternates hosted (almost exclusively) on Rebrickable if TLG make a move for the website? I think it's only a matter of time before Rebrickable is purchased. I'm not a regular Bricklink user, so if anyone else can speak to any changes post-TLG takeover that may give hints as to what a TLG-owned Rebrickable could look like, please share them.

Hopefully this could lead to something along the lines of greater promotion of AFOLs with respect to alternate models, as while Rebrickable is the go-to resource amongst AFOLs, is still effectively invisible to the buying public.

On the other side, there could be a mandated fee for any alternates...

Edited December 3, 2023 by Jay Psi

[gyenesvi]

16 minutes ago, Jay Psi said:

I'm paraphrasing from @kbalage's video on the subject, but what could happen to the AFOL-made alternates hosted (almost exclusively) on Rebrickable if TLG make a move for the website? I think it's only a matter of time before Rebrickable is purchased. I'm not a regular Bricklink user, so if anyone else can speak to any changes post-TLG takeover that may give hints as to what a TLG-owned Rebrickable could look like, please share them.

Interesting line of thought, though I am not sure that would happen. First, RB is not only B models, many models are not alternates. Second, but most importantly, the quality of builds. Currently, there is no quality check of builds and instructions, and I guess many of them are not up to TLG's standards. If they were to promote alternate models, they'd probably want to check their quality first, and that would put quite some amount of burden on them, which they might not want to afford. Also, alternate models are coming out continuously for a set, so they could not just pick 1-2 good ones for each set that easily, as there is no set development window for them, and continuously monitoring them would be quite a burden I guess.

Quote

Hopefully this could lead to something along the lines of greater promotion of AFOLs with respect to alternate models, as while Rebrickable is the go-to resource amongst AFOLs, is still effectively invisible to the buying public.

I totally agree that most of these are not really visible to the bigger public, which is a pity.

Edited December 3, 2023 by gyenesvi

[kbalage]

58 minutes ago, Jay Psi said:

I'm paraphrasing from @kbalage's video on the subject, but what could happen to the AFOL-made alternates hosted (almost exclusively) on Rebrickable if TLG make a move for the website? I think it's only a matter of time before Rebrickable is purchased. I'm not a regular Bricklink user, so if anyone else can speak to any changes post-TLG takeover that may give hints as to what a TLG-owned Rebrickable could look like, please share them.

I don't think TLG wants to buy Rebrickable because it wouldn't offer them similar value to Bricklink. Not much has changed there since the acquisition btw, actually less than I'd like - for example, it still takes forever for the inventory of a new set to be uploaded, even though they have the option to provide it "in house".

[Akbalder]

Rebrickable doesn't replace B models:

- The quality of models don't always match the Lego standards.

- They are often paying models whereas B models were included (and once upon a time had paper instructions)

Buying something on rebrickable is a gambit.

[Maaboo the Witch]

10 minutes ago, Akbalder said:

Rebrickable doesn't replace B models:

- The quality of models don't always match the Lego standards.

- They are often paying models whereas B models were included (and once upon a time had paper instructions)

Buying something on rebrickable is a gambit.

Couldn't agree more. I don't mean to trash anyone who takes the time to devise modes and post instructions on Rebrickable - I love Philofred's 42004 alternates - but fan-created alternate builds just don't have the same feel as an official B-model. They compliment them nicely, but I don't see them as a viable replacement.

[kbalage]

21 minutes ago, Akbalder said:

Rebrickable doesn't replace B models:

- The quality of models don't always match the Lego standards.

To be honest, LEGO's own B models didn't always meet their standards. There were some great models, without a doubt, but some really felt forced and boring. Rebrickable offers something more - you don't have a single B model, you can choose from a wide selection. If you are not a rookie then you can find designers you know and trust, so I totally see the site as something to rely on. 

[gyenesvi]

1 hour ago, Jay Psi said:

The lack of B-models, is on its own concerning, but possibly not the key issue.

One more note, I agree it's not a major issue, but I do see one kind of a concerning philosophical shift related to this in the past decades. I think B models incorporated / encouraged a core idea of Lego that you can rebuild it to something else, and that's shifted a lot with the appearance of collectible shelf queen series, not emphasizing the reusability of the bricks. Though the loads of people who nowadays buy lego and never build on their own, just collect them, probably also contributes to the phenomenon. I don't know if that was significantly different in the past though, I'd tend to think so, as when I was a child collecting lego for the shelves was not a trend around us.

[Jay Psi]

10 minutes ago, gyenesvi said:

One more note, I agree it's not a major issue, but I do see one kind of a concerning philosophical shift related to this in the past decades. I think B models incorporated / encouraged a core idea of Lego that you can rebuild it to something else, and that's shifted a lot with the appearance of collectible shelf queen series, not emphasizing the reusability of the bricks. Though the loads of people who nowadays buy lego and never build on their own, just collect them, probably also contributes to the phenomenon. I don't know if that was significantly different in the past though, I'd tend to think so, as when I was a child collecting lego for the shelves was not a trend around us.

There's definitely a wider trend around collecting but that would be too far off topic for this thread.

But yes, the attitude shift that no B-models imply isn't a good look. All Lego, but especially Technic, should have playability as a core focus. Official B-models offer that to the consumer at no cost; I don't know exactly how much designer time B-models took, but I can see it impacting the ability to design (and then sell) an increasing number of sets per year. With accusations that TLG are moving away from quality and more towards quantity, no B-models only drives that reasoning further forward.

 

Edited December 3, 2023 by Jay Psi

[R0Sch]

Maybe the B-models had to be scraped because Dreamzzz sets are 2-in-1 now lol. There is only room for a certain amount of B-models each year (*extrapolation from part availability philosophy, the root square of nr. of LEGO Designers and shrinkflation effect).

[Maaboo the Witch]

The alternates for 42139 especially are a mixed bag, and to be honest it feels like that set was not designed to have an alternate build at all - it can only be an ATV. Designers on Rebrickable have clearly made a supreme effort in some cases, but I just can't shake that feeling.

[Toastie]

21 hours ago, 1gor said:

should try (as an kind of influencer) to make their childhood less dependent on digital technology

I believe having understood your point. What I meant to say is that PUp should not at all rely on "smart" (i.e. internet dependent) devices, but rely on dedicated (sort of closed) BLE servers. I also believe that abandoning "digital" is not the way to go. Going "smart" may very well be; as this implies that a "smart" fridge orders the food Amazon believes you like or need, according to your roaming data, Google collected for you.

A BLE connection is as secure as an infrared beam pointed at a PowerFunction receiver, when taking care. There is no necessity at all to go "internet". Zero.

All the best,
Thorsten

[Ngoc Nguyen]

Hi everyone, this is something that will take up Space (get it?) from RacingBrick 

 

[Erik Leppen]

20 hours ago, gyenesvi said:

I totally agree that most of these are not really visible to the bigger public, which is a pity.

This is my main concern about the lack of official B models.

At least official B models had the abilty to inspire all buyers of a set. It promoted the concept of rebuildability and build-what-you-like to all buyers of a set. With rebrickable, people have to think for themselves first that "rebuilding a set into something else" is even a thing that can exist, and only then, some of them may find Rebrickable.

Of course, all of this is easily explained by the fact that TLC don't want people to re-use their Lego bricks. They want people to buy sets and then spend as little time as possible on actually building them. So TLC actually have an incentive against having alternates.

Edit: the concept of rebuilding may be obvious to us, but I don't believe it's evident by itself. It has to be taught.

Edited December 4, 2023 by Erik Leppen

[Gumalca]

Lego had an alternate initiative with several MOC designers a while ago: the remake project. I don't think the website is online still, but some of the designers uploaded theirs to rebrickable eventually, for example these:

• https://rebrickable.com/mocs/MOC-5310/NKubate/60092-deep-sea-research-mech/#details
• https://rebrickable.com/mocs/MOC-5533/PeterSzabo/60092-submarine-mech/#details

The project was about City sets mostly though, which are not such a good base for alternates, because of many specialised parts. As far as I know the models were somehow checked for their stability and such. But like with most things Lego does, they just let these things vanish from the web eventually.

Then there was an alternate contest for small Creator sets once, and part of the price for the winners was to have instructions for their alternates published in the Lego instructions archive website. I think the files have been pulled down also now, but brickset still lists the dead links: https://brickset.com/sets/31058-1/Mighty-Dinosaurs

Now bricklink has started to sell digital instructions together with bricks, and if you remove the bricks from the cart you can buy the digital instructions only, though it's not clear why they made that so complicated. Not sure they will open it up for alternate models later.

Also it's strange that when Lego hired grohl he was already a well known alternate designer, but at the same time the decline of official Technic B-models had already started so they never fully used his alternate designing abilities.

[Ngoc Nguyen]

19 minutes ago, Gumalca said:

when Lego hired grohl he was already a well known alternate designer,

Grohl joined TLG in 2013, and B model was still a thing back then.

[Gumalca]

3 minutes ago, Ngoc Nguyen said:

Grohl joined TLG in 2013, and B model was still a thing back then.

You're probably right. I felt cheated first when 8110 had no complete B-model, and 42023 also had no complete B-model.

[Jockos]

59 minutes ago, Gumalca said:

You're probably right. I felt cheated first when 8110 had no complete B-model, and 42023 also had no complete B-model.

The same can be said for 8436, but at least it had 3 different attachments.

[1gor]

58 minutes ago, Jockos said:

The same can be said for 8436, but at least it had 3 different attachments.

It look like it started from this set (8436) quietly like from back door. I remember that when I first saw 2003 catalog and pneumatic backhoe (8455), I got impressiin like WOW what is that kind of front end loader (I totaly neglected that it was actually 8455 B model). So there are defenetly sets with B models that are (as @Erik Leppen mentioned) inspiring people to buy specific set when they are in doubt concerning A model...

[howitzer]

3 hours ago, Erik Leppen said:

This is my main concern about the lack of official B models.

At least official B models had the abilty to inspire all buyers of a set. It promoted the concept of rebuildability and build-what-you-like to all buyers of a set. With rebrickable, people have to think for themselves first that "rebuilding a set into something else" is even a thing that can exist, and only then, some of them may find Rebrickable.

Of course, all of this is easily explained by the fact that TLC don't want people to re-use their Lego bricks. They want people to buy sets and then spend as little time as possible on actually building them. So TLC actually have an incentive against having alternates.

Edit: the concept of rebuilding may be obvious to us, but I don't believe it's evident by itself. It has to be taught.

I'm sure absolutely everyone with even vaguest familiarity of Lego knows about the rebuildability, but of course B-models give ideas and showcase the possibilities in a way that's hard to do otherwise. But I think this relates to the discontinuation of printed instructions for B-models, rather than discontinuation of B-models themselves. The extra hassle of acquiring the digital instructions and then reading those must have reduced B-model building by a significant amount. Of course the B-models were usually hinted at the A-model instructions (or in the box) but still, I'm sure TLG has run the numbers on downloaded B-model instructions compared to sold sets and drawn conclusions.

Of course TLG wants people to buy as much as possible, but the beauty of Lego (as business model) is that while the possibilities are vast and you can do a lot of things even with small amount, you'll end up wanting more. I believe it would be counterproductive for TLG to nudge people to not dismantle and rebuild, because that would lessen their desire to get more to build with - most of the parts end up stored in bins with only a little bit on display at any given time. Having the sets built takes up a lot of space and most people run out of display space much sooner than they run our of storage space.

[Toastie]

23 minutes ago, howitzer said:

I believe it would be counterproductive for TLG to nudge people to not dismantle and rebuild, because that would lessen their desire to get more to build with - most of the parts end up stored in bins with only a little bit on display at any given time.

Yes, this would be the case, when "people"  want to do that. I have a different take on how TLG operates - in recent times, that is, but what do I know.

I am coming from the "bare-bone Technic" and "yes, this could be a robot arm ^^" community and find it cool to automate stuff. And thus believe in Technic Control (1986), RCX/Cybermaster Mindstorms as LEGO Technic heaven.

Seeing all these black (also Technic) boxes filled with Liebherrs, super cars, licensed stuff, you name it, makes me feel, TLG is more or less aiming at one-time or a couple-of-time customers, who easily shell out 500++ $/€ if the set appeals. When I look at these nice photographs, where a person is sitting somewhere in a rather expensive looking home - along with this rather minimalistic, but again very expensive furniture (call it Danish or whatever), that LEGO set displayed creates a cool contrast. To me, it appears as if this is on purpose: Exclusive, luxurious. The instructions, now of the layout and page count of an expensive bible edition, tell a similar story, to me. So the storage bins may not be an issue at all.

B-models thus become completely obsolete in this world.

But again: Just my view. Nothing of importance. I just ordered a couple of Cybermaster antennas and two 4.5V motors.

Best regards,
Thorsten