Marvel Superheroes 2022 - Rumors & Discussion

[Moon_Knight]

Yeah, all the early reviews online have said the Hulkbuster is not worth it. $550.00 for 4049 pieces really is a bad price per piece ratio and it's pretty sucky the minifigure doesn't have arm printing or even leg printing. Hope the fans that want it enjoy it but I'm gonna save my money and hope that a UCS Avengers tower comes out next year.

[hachiroku]

On 10/18/2022 at 6:20 PM, upliftingbricks said:

Are you planning to get this (or through LAN) and making a similar mod on your channel? Photoshop does look better but there still something not quite right. It'll be interesting to see what MODs people do to this set.

I got the set today (but I haven't even opened the box yet). I will try to do it, but I'm not planning to mod the legs or the arms yet. Especially when I saw that it's possible to move the shoulderpads. I can't understand why they decided to show the shoulderpads up in the box and in every promo pic, it looks better with the shoulder pads down (not great, but not that bad).

7 minutes ago, Scarilian said:

I feel like its a combination, here is generally how I see it:
Dome Head: Lego, ensuring that the buildable Iron Man figure can be accessed easily
Stretched Torso: Lego, requiring it to fit the buildable Iron Man Figure
Flat Back/Cockpit piece: Lego, easy access to the figure if it's stuck or jammed in order to take it out if you could'nt get it from the top/front
Pricing: Lego, they originally aimed for $500 and we know it was increased by them directly to $550
Piece count: Lego, we know Lego decides upon piece counts so 4000 was probably the stated goal
Stickers: Lego, they tend to default to stickers now rather than prints
Detailing on Torso: Designer, all the elements are included but the spacing is wrong due to the stretching
Thinner legs at the joint: Designer, probably a stylistic choice but this is also present in his previous D2C Hulkbuster
Shoulder pads: Designer, a lot of the aspects are there but it has similar problems to the previous Hulkbuster in that it does not cover the joint enough (The shoulders can bend, just nobody seems to display them bent in official photos)

I'm sure the designer will eventually do a Q&A about all this, but in general I would attribute most the problems to the requirement to fit the buildable Iron Man figure which is almost certainly entirely on Lego. Similarly the pricing as mentioned is on Lego. It's why as i mentioned before, I'd have liked to see what this would have looked like if the buildable figure concept was not a focus and I would not be too surprised if it looked like the right image.

I think both detailing and thinner legs are because of the need to fit the full Iron Man. Even the legs wouldn't look so thinner if the crotch wasn't so big.

16 minutes ago, Scarilian said:

 

I have more to say, but this is almost certainly entirely on Lego. I feel there would be much more backlash if this was a fully unique Iron Man figure or if this figure was more desirable because then people would be angry its locked behind a $550 Hulkbuster that they may already have critiques of due to the design. Having it be a variant of the one included in the smaller Avengers Tower Promo set (40334) while also having it be based on a specific moment that was on-screen for perhaps less than 5 seconds are elements done to prevent people being angry about an exclusive figure while still providing an exclusive figure.

I know the designer has disclosed interest in this figure and why it was selected, I feel they were advised to pick something unique yet not something fans massively desired as the focal point of this set is the Hulkbuster and the Buildable Iron Man feature, honestly it could have wound up being a re-release of the 40334 version if they wanted.

 

IMO, the 40334 version looks way better than the Hulkbuster one. The Hulkbuster one looks just like a Mk 43 print on a grey torso instead of an actual new design like the 40334. It doesn't look so unique like the 40334 Tony Stark.

But I don't see the point of releasing the Hulkbuster with this minifigure. By the time Tony Stark appears like this, the Hulkbuster is long gone. Well, I just don't see the point of releasing a minifigure with this set.

The other Hulkbuster was more like a "celebration of Tony Stark" with a lot of stuff from different movies in different scales, so it made sense to include a minifigure. But this is just a big sculpture of the Hulkbuster. I don't think these sets need minifigures to be appealing.

[upliftingbricks]

2 hours ago, THELEGOBATMAN said:

A single boring minifigure is not enough for a 550€ set.

Im glad its a single boring figure. If it was an amazing figure in an awful set that makes it horrible for minifigure collectors/fans as 550 def isnt worth it for the minifigure alone no matter how good the figure is and after market prices will likely be expensive (even for this figure they'll be high). 

I wish they didnt release minifigures with these type of D2C sets at all. If we complain too hard they'll start putting brilliant figures in D2Cs that dont require them and when theyre bad like the hulkbuster it'll put it out of majority of peoples reach not far off from comic con exclusive.

[Mandalorianknight]

1 hour ago, upliftingbricks said:

 and when theyre bad like the hulkbuster it'll put it out of majority of peoples reach not far off from comic con exclusive.

Look, I agree with some of your general points, but the idea that it's harder for people to obtain a figure if the set they come from is bad is laughable. If anything, it's easier, since it's more likely to go on sale.

Personally I think the type of figure they have there is alright...I see what they were going for. A figure that's a new outfit or variant, but not essential or highly fan-requested. You don't want a figure nobody cares about, but you don't want to stick Deadpool in a $550 set only. I think for UCS type stuff like this the best things to do are a hyper-detailed version of the pilot (so, like, a mk43 with arm printing), or a somewhat obscure figure that can be tied to the set (an obscure iron man armor like Midas or Southpaw). 

[GoldenNinja3000]

39 minutes ago, Mandalorianknight said:

Look, I agree with some of your general points, but the idea that it's harder for people to obtain a figure if the set they come from is bad is laughable. If anything, it's easier, since it's more likely to go on sale.

Personally I think the type of figure they have there is alright...I see what they were going for. A figure that's a new outfit or variant, but not essential or highly fan-requested. You don't want a figure nobody cares about, but you don't want to stick Deadpool in a $550 set only. I think for UCS type stuff like this the best things to do are a hyper-detailed version of the pilot (so, like, a mk43 with arm printing), or a somewhat obscure figure that can be tied to the set (an obscure iron man armor like Midas or Southpaw). 

I definitely would have preferred a super detailed Mark 43. I don't love the new helmet but they could have used that mold to make a pretty decent new minifigure with arm and side leg printing. I also would've liked a Bruce Banner figure in his lab coat or even a new AoU-based Hulk bigfig. 

[mrcngrck]

I think I'm gonna get the dome piece from bricklink and make superdetailed bust with partial iron man inside like hot toys 

[TheJackBricks]

On 10/20/2022 at 11:36 AM, Scarilian said:

I've seen a few people claiming this Hulkbuster 'does not need to exist' and 'who asked for this' well, honestly, neither of those statement really work and seem a bit petty. A market exists for Hulkbusters that has been proven as people keep financially supporting the Hulkbuster sets when they are made/released, a market exists for UCS adult focused Marvel sets this has been proven by prior UCS Marvel sets, a market exists for Iron Man associated aspects. People were asking for a better version after the 2015 version and I've seen several people offer the counter arguement that they wanted a Hulkbuster MKII and that would have made them more likely to buy at this price. The demand was there, people were asking for it and in terms of 'does not need to exist' that could be said more so for sets like 'Attack On New Asgard' compared to a fairly unique, largest mech set Lego has ever produced.

 

I'm gonna have to disagree on this one. I think a lot of people would have preferred them split this set up into 2 large UCS sets. If they were going to do another UCS Hulkbuster, I'd have preferred them to do a basically rerelease of the 2018 one similar to the 2014 / 2021 Tumbler. I think the fact that this is the most expensive Marvel set, and it's not absolutely perfect and there really isn't any exclusivity with it is massively disappointing.

You gotta think about this like the BP Bust too. Sure, there may be an audience / market for it, but the fact that you could have made an even better version that's smaller is a disappointment. I think we would have been fine with a smaller wave. Get a $200/$250 Hulkbuster, a $70 Bust alongside the BP WF sets, and then you have the budget and room for a few sets over the summer. Fact of the matter is that a lot of that target market is ostracized for both of the major Marvel UCS sets this year because 99% of the fanbase would have been fine with a smaller, more accurate model. I admit the 99% isn't probably the target market, but if simply lowering the scale & price of the model would make that target market bigger and happier with the set not being 100% perfect because you aren't paying half a grand for a wonky build. I don't think anyone cares to put the poorly designed Iron Man figure inside and on top of that the minifigure, while sure it's behind a paywall, is massively disappointing for a set that could have included a highly detailed figure.

Edit 1: Underlined part in paragraph 2

Edited October 22, 2022 by TheJackBricks

[upliftingbricks]

17 hours ago, Mandalorianknight said:

Look, I agree with some of your general points, but the idea that it's harder for people to obtain a figure if the set they come from is bad is laughable. If anything, it's easier, since it's more likely to go on sale.

I was talking more about financially out of reach than supply out of reach. A figure in a 550 set will be expensive on the after market as most of the time thats where cost of set is recovered by sellers. I don't know about everyone else but I have a max limit on what I'd spend on one minifigure regardless of quality/rarity of the figure because I have to justify that spend to myself (which already has a heavy lego bias ). A massively expensive bad set with a sought after figure means the set isn't worth buying and price on after market for the figure is high which puts it out of reach of fiscally responsible people 

[Mandalorianknight]

1 hour ago, upliftingbricks said:

I was talking more about financially out of reach than supply out of reach. A figure in a 550 set will be expensive on the after market as most of the time thats where cost of set is recovered by sellers. I don't know about everyone else but I have a max limit on what I'd spend on one minifigure regardless of quality/rarity of the figure because I have to justify that spend to myself (which already has a heavy lego bias ). A massively expensive bad set with a sought after figure means the set isn't worth buying and price on after market for the figure is high which puts it out of reach of fiscally responsible people 

Overall, figure prices for a set that sells poorly (and henceforth is more likely to go on sale) are lower than if that same figure was in a more desirable set of the same cost. Therefore, a figure is likely going to cheaper and easier to get if he's from a bad set that sells poorly, as opposed to being more expensive if he's from a bestselling set.

[upliftingbricks]

4 minutes ago, Mandalorianknight said:

1) Overall, figure prices for a set that sells poorly (and henceforth is more likely to go on sale) are lower than if that same figure was in a more desirable set of the same cost.

2) Therefore, a figure is likely going to cheaper and easier to get if he's from a bad set that sells poorly, as opposed to being more expensive if he's from a bestselling set.

1) Agree but if the set is expensive like 550 even a lower sale price will still likely be an expensive figure on after market. Regardless the figure will be expensive. Im glad I dont want it or the set.

2) Agree. My original point was dont include or ask for inclusion of minifigures (especially good quality ones) in sets that dont require a minifigure. E.g. Hulkbuster is an oversized display model. It doesnt need a minifigure (except to make it sell better). From a consumer POV instead of business POV I dont want sets like 550 display models to include figures.

[empiresperish]

44 minutes ago, upliftingbricks said:

From a consumer POV instead of business POV I dont want sets like 550 display models to include figures.

Yeah the complaint that the figure in a nearly universally unliked set isn't a desirable must-have is baffling to me. This lackluster one is the perfect solution to me, a variant of an already existing and relatively unexciting figure from a single scene. That it was from a promotional set four years ago is fine, that they apparently had a burning desire to change his torso color beneath the print is fine. The vast majority of fans are not going to be to get this set, and the rest don't want to pay $550 for it, nor should they honestly. That leaves resellers, reviewers getting a free set, instagram cloutchasers with too much money, and rich consumers who don't possess a critical eye for detail, basically the 1-10% who will get a figure in a $550 (not to mention the upcharge in other countries) set. Please continue to leave the good figures for sub-100 dollar fare, leave the unique characters to actually be realistically buyable.

Another mk43 with more detail or prints would have also felt alright with me just because we've had so many affordable versions that the nth variant doesn't seem cruel. And I think it's possible one is coming in 2023, I forgot if we knew the fig lineup for the upcoming retail Hulkbuster. 

The aftermarket price shouldn't factor in here, the original 2019 fig averages $20 for one containing solely a unique torso. This will be a special case and no one should be paying near that for completionism or even desirability.

[Scarilian]

I'm still holding hope that the Quinjet in January is part of a delayed 10th anniversary wave and is a re-do of the original Avengers Quinjet. I'm starting to lose interest in the newer MCU stuff so I'd be more interested in legacy sets and remakes.

[Legocentrico]

24 minuti fa, Scarilian ha detto:

Ho ancora la speranza che il Quinjet di gennaio faccia parte di un'ondata ritardata del 10° anniversario ed è un re-do dell'originale Avengers Quinjet. Sto iniziando a perdere interesse per le nuove cose MCU, quindi sarei più interessato ai set legacy e ai remake.

I'd love to see the anniversary celebrated, but just one set wouldn't do it justice.  A 100 euro set wouldn't even contain all the original Avengers… with these assumptions I'd prefer the Infinity War quinjet.  We didn't have a quinjet for that movie, and together with the Hulkbuster it could provide a good selection of updated minifigures: Falcon with new wings, War Machine with camouflage armor, a new Bucky ...

[Ghostcat]

1 hour ago, Scarilian said:

I'm still holding hope that the Quinjet in January is part of a delayed 10th anniversary wave and is a re-do of the original Avengers Quinjet. I'm starting to lose interest in the newer MCU stuff so I'd be more interested in legacy sets and remakes.

See Id prefer the 2nd Quinjet It had a much longer lifespan being from AOU to the current day. I feel it seems more likely seeing as it was in way more films than the first version(only in Avengers,Winter Soldier and Agents of Shield I guess).
With the 2nd one Theres so many films it could be from, Even Endgame.
 

[Mandalorianknight]

1 hour ago, Scarilian said:

I'm still holding hope that the Quinjet in January is part of a delayed 10th anniversary wave and is a re-do of the original Avengers Quinjet. I'm starting to lose interest in the newer MCU stuff so I'd be more interested in legacy sets and remakes.

Same. There are still bits I like (Spider-Man, Moon Knight, Daredevil, Shang-Chi, and the sort of midnight sons portion of the universe), but most of the recent stuff just doesn't interest me. I'd definately be more interested in legacy stuff. 

Oh, and another thing I've started doing is just making sets for the properties I like that I know we won't get sets of. I've done 2/3 floors of a Daredevil modular building so far.

1 hour ago, Legocentrico said:

A 100 euro set wouldn't even contain all the original Avengers…

$100 sets regularly have 6 or more figures. A quinjet with the OG 6, Loki, and a chitauri doesn't seem unrealistic.

Edited October 23, 2022 by Mandalorianknight

[GoldenNinja3000]

4 hours ago, Mandalorianknight said:

$100 sets regularly have 6 or more figures. A quinjet with the OG 6, Loki, and a chitauri doesn't seem unrealistic.

The thing is we'd need so many new prints for the original 6 + Loki that I really can't see LEGO doing that. They're getting so cheap nowadays there's no way we get 7 good minifigures in a $100 set unless the build is absolute trash. Look at how good the figures are in the smaller, decently priced Wakanda Forever sets vs. how half-finished they are in War on the Water, or even at the Iron Man Armory set. That one had great figures but was terrible value for money. We already know the Quinjet has 800 pieces for $100 so I'm expecting a build worth the money instead of 7 good minifigures, since if there were that many new prints I'd expect more like 600 pieces.

[Legocentrico]

6 completely new minifigures + 1 new big figure + a Quinjet for 100?  I really don't think that's going to happen.  If we have 3/4 new really cool minifigures we can be happy.  (But I hope I'm wrong)

[Hoth Rebel]

Plus if there's a OG Quinjet then the Avengers will be spread out over the amount of sets coming out. If we get 6-7 figures then at least 2 of them will be generic villain (Chitauri). 

[BusterNut31]

This is a long shot but could the 100 dollar price be part of the old pricing and that its actually 120 dollars? The Quinjet, like the 2012 version could just feature the characters that were in the scene like cap, black widow, Hawkeye, and then iron man. Loki and chitauri.

the quinjet in infinity war wasn't in any battle scenes but LEGO could just add it to fill the quota of a super hero jet for 2023. Also if it is based on infinity war...what background would be used for the artwork? Edinburgh, wakanda or avengers compound.

[TakeaBrick]

On 10/22/2022 at 4:53 AM, hachiroku said:

I got the set today (but I haven't even opened the box yet). I will try to do it, but I'm not planning to mod the legs or the arms yet. Especially when I saw that it's possible to move the shoulderpads. I can't understand why they decided to show the shoulderpads up in the box and in every promo pic, it looks better with the shoulder pads down (not great, but not that bad).

I think both detailing and thinner legs are because of the need to fit the full Iron Man. Even the legs wouldn't look so thinner if the crotch wasn't so big.

 

IMO, the 40334 version looks way better than the Hulkbuster one. The Hulkbuster one looks just like a Mk 43 print on a grey torso instead of an actual new design like the 40334. It doesn't look so unique like the 40334 Tony Stark.

But I don't see the point of releasing the Hulkbuster with this minifigure. By the time Tony Stark appears like this, the Hulkbuster is long gone. Well, I just don't see the point of releasing a minifigure with this set.

The other Hulkbuster was more like a "celebration of Tony Stark" with a lot of stuff from different movies in different scales, so it made sense to include a minifigure. But this is just a big sculpture of the Hulkbuster. I don't think these sets need minifigures to be appealing.

I wonder if you can add articulation to the legs (hip, knee and ankle). Or is it an impossible mission because the mech is just way too heavy?

[Mandalorianknight]

10 hours ago, GoldenNinja3000 said:

The thing is we'd need so many new prints for the original 6 + Loki that I really can't see LEGO doing that. They're getting so cheap nowadays there's no way we get 7 good minifigures in a $100 set unless the build is absolute trash. Look at how good the figures are in the smaller, decently priced Wakanda Forever sets vs. how half-finished they are in War on the Water, or even at the Iron Man Armory set. That one had great figures but was terrible value for money. We already know the Quinjet has 800 pieces for $100 so I'm expecting a build worth the money instead of 7 good minifigures, since if there were that many new prints I'd expect more like 600 pieces.

I dunno. The iron man armory was $90 and had 8 figures with at least 11 new figure prints (Maybe 15, I didn't check to see if the mk3 and mk85 had new torso and leg prints). Say we needed new torso prints for everyone, that's 6. Give a couple of them leg printing and helmet printing for iron man, we're still under 11.

Granted, that set was pretty overpriced. How about avengers tower, with 8 new figure prints for $90? Or the AOU quinjet, which had 10 new printed figure parts for $80? (Now granted, that'd be $100 today). Or the original Sanctum Sanctorum, which had 8 new figure prints and a new bigfig for $100? Super Hero Airport Battle had 8 new figure prints for $80 (again, about $100 now due to inflation). War on the Water has at least 8 new figure prints for $90. The newer compound had 7 new figure prints and a bigfig for $80. The original Hall of Armor had 9 new figure prints for $60.

(Edit: And for all of those I'm only counting figure parts that were only in that set at the time. So Namor's parts don't count towards War on the Water, for instance.)

I'm not saying it's definately going to happen, especially considering the Hulk bigfig, but it's definately not unprecedented.

Edited October 23, 2022 by Mandalorianknight

[Scarilian]

I'd play it safe honestly with my expectations:

• Remake of Hulk's Helicarrier Breakout, $79.99, featuring four figures (One big fig): Loki, Hulk, Hawkeye, Captain America
• Remake of Quinjet Aerial Battle, $99.99, featuring five figures: Loki, Thor, Black Widow, Iron Man MK7, Chitauri (Repeat)
• Polybag release in Febuary featuring the Iron Man MK6

Total new figures: 8
Total price for wave: $180

That would then be every character who had a figure in the original wave, replicated here in two sets and a polybag.

Lego could top the wave/anniversary off with a D2C remake of the Helicarrier to give us Nick Fury, Agent Coulson and Maria Hill. Granted a lot of us would prefer Stark/Avengers Tower, but I don't think we'd get that in 2023.

Edited October 23, 2022 by Scarilian

[hachiroku]

2 hours ago, TakeaBrick said:

I wonder if you can add articulation to the legs (hip, knee and ankle). Or is it an impossible mission because the mech is just way too heavy?

100% impossible. Not only because of the weight, adding articulations to the legs implies rebuilding them completely (including the lower part of the torso) with a lot of pieces not included in the set.

 

[GoldenNinja3000]

4 hours ago, Mandalorianknight said:

I dunno. The iron man armory was $90 and had 8 figures with at least 11 new figure prints (Maybe 15, I didn't check to see if the mk3 and mk85 had new torso and leg prints). Say we needed new torso prints for everyone, that's 6. Give a couple of them leg printing and helmet printing for iron man, we're still under 11.

Granted, that set was pretty overpriced. How about avengers tower, with 8 new figure prints for $90? Or the AOU quinjet, which had 10 new printed figure parts for $80? (Now granted, that'd be $100 today). Or the original Sanctum Sanctorum, which had 8 new figure prints and a new bigfig for $100? Super Hero Airport Battle had 8 new figure prints for $80 (again, about $100 now due to inflation). War on the Water has at least 8 new figure prints for $90. The newer compound had 7 new figure prints and a bigfig for $80. The original Hall of Armor had 9 new figure prints for $60.

(Edit: And for all of those I'm only counting figure parts that were only in that set at the time. So Namor's parts don't count towards War on the Water, for instance.)

I'm not saying it's definately going to happen, especially considering the Hulk bigfig, but it's definately not unprecedented.

I'm not considering sets before 2021 when thinking about what's coming up next year because LEGO's behavior has changed a lot. The new compound is an outlier to me because it's crazy good value for money compared to a lot of sets in the last two years. War on the Water does have 9 new prints, but it also has under 600 pieces.

The Quinjet has almost 800 pieces so I don't expect 9 new prints, especially with a new Hulk bigfig that would drive up the price. We would need new torso prints for all 5 Avengers minifigs, leg and helmet printing for Iron Man, a torso print for Loki, and a brand-new bigfig. There's no way we get all that in a $100 set with 800 pieces in today's landscape. If the set was $120 I could see it happening, but at this price I'm expecting 5-6 minifigures with new torso prints, reused faces, and no leg printing (unless Iron Man is included). 

As for the rest of the set, I really hope the build is based on the post-AoU Quinjet. I love the sleeker new design and that 2015 set is one of my favorite Marvel sets ever. A remake of the 2012 version would be cool but I'd prefer the 2015 one. 

[Mandalorianknight]

2 hours ago, GoldenNinja3000 said:

I'm not considering sets before 2021 when thinking about what's coming up next year because LEGO's behavior has changed a lot. The new compound is an outlier to me because it's crazy good value for money compared to a lot of sets in the last two years. War on the Water does have 9 new prints, but it also has under 600 pieces.

Wait, hold on. So the upcoming set can't be compared to any set that didn't release last year, or one of the closest-in-price sets that did? You have to understand how that sounds. Also, war on the water is also $10 cheaper than the quinjet, and has a good number of large pieces (not that it's at all worth $90).

Look, I'm not saying it's 100% going to happen, but you can't act like there isn't precedent.