Technic is no longer what it once was

[Lipko]

I don't know... As an adult, I don't see that significant set quality decrease, sets were never that awesome, the awesomeness simply comes from nostalgia. Sure, there could be some non-vehicle sets, but too much of them would also be boring ("Okay, some complocated sh*t again"). Those are suitable for Meccano. Just go through all the models and try to be objektíve.

One true problem I see is the part quality. I bought some parts recently after 4 years and I was shocked. Clutch power is so inconsistent that I have to sort parts for "important connections" and "not relevant connections". This is totally against the Lego principle of having compatible and interchangable parts no matter the year/decade they were made.

Edited October 28, 2023 by Lipko

[Maaboo the Witch]

2 hours ago, Jay Psi said:

8455 says hi.

Japes aside, the comments about TLG departments lacking agility/flexibility are on the money. With the current directive, the designers - who are clearly talented enough to produce high-quality sets - will hardly ever be given the chance, given the restrictions and targets imposed on them.

I'd just like to take this opportunity to reiterate my position. I DO NOT blame the designers; all responsibility for TLG's shit decisions lies entirely with the suits who rule over them.

[Alex Ilea]

1 hour ago, Lipko said:

One true problem I see is the part quality. I bought some parts recently after 4 years and I was shocked. Clutch power is so inconsistent that I have to sort parts for "important connections" and "not relevant connections". This is totally against the Lego principle of having compatible and interchangable parts no matter the year/decade they were made.

I have noticed that too, and I am also using a sorting method like yours. But Rather than separating them like that, I have my good old pins in my main sorting trays, and all the cheap new pins in a separate box, all mixed up and I use them for shelf MOCs,  turntables and such.

[Brickthus]

I agree that Technic has changed but it depends what structure we assume for the range of sets.  If supercars and big Control+ models are each their own series then Technic sets up to £200 still include good flagship-worthy sets that have at most 1 or 2 motors with a simpler battery unit.  42145 helicopter and 42128 tow truck are two of the best.  Plenty of play value.  42144 is similar to 8851 of old as a multi-pneumatic set and 42157 has more pneumatic parts for a similar number of functions.

I do agree that the occasional clutch-power issues are a disappointment.  I had 42158 Mars Rover corner-wheel bogies fall off because the clutch power of the 4M axles with end stop was insufficient in the black lobed gears.  I substituted 5M axles with end stop and added half-bushes on top, which TLG should have don themselves.  If that had given us another 4 white half bushes in the set then that would have been most welcome.  TLG ought to know the value of reliability because to cost of unreliability is high.

The change to studless was a big change.  I miss the beam-and-plate chassises for vehicles because they were sturdier than studless ones are; the recent 3x19 frame helps but it took TLG a while to develop one!  I would be happy with a studded chassis and studless additions but those years were brief.  We do get occasional studded beams but more in other ranges of sets like the Batman Tumbler; the supply of those pieces is rather inconsistent.

I may bemoan the reduction in basic instructions that used to be in the front section of the 3-digit Technic set booklets, as well as the lack of ideas books.  Those were most informative but I suppose one has only to look them up on Peeron in the modern age.  Kids need those pointers to learn the basics well; there is a trade between basic information that all should learn and the mass self-specialisation of filter-feeding that we all do on social media and search engines.  I don't think AFOLs can completely fill in the gaps left by the end of ideas books; we try our best but we don't have the same "lead you through" objectives.

The phone-dependency is the thing I dislike the most.  Yes, it fits with the "every kid has a phone" trend and may help LEGO to stay ahead of the competition but it doesn't reach older fans quite so well.  Then there is the cost of the parts; I simply won't pay RRP for any Control+ set because I won't get the value out of the hubs.  However, if I see one at 33% off (after waiting a while) then I may be tempted.  The bespokeness of the app for each set model is a bugbear because it takes a lot of dedication to bother getting MOC controls up to the same standard.  I had in mind that the template of the Bulldozer 42131 (2 tracks, 1 power motor and 1 selection motor) might be good for other models too but it all depends on calibration.  So when it comes to the new crane I would wait and see if 33% off ever happens.  The GBP price would have to start with a '3'.  Otherwise it'll be a parts order if I ever feel the need for some girder frames.

With the advent of phone-dependency, what Technic lacked was the simple motor-and-battery setup, particularly when the Osprey 42113 was such as disaster, that being the only set with the simple battery unit at the time.  The motor-and-battery setup is the essential step up from pull-back motors before anyone thinks about programmability.  There is an abundance of pull-back motor sets but surely kids can't use more than 2 in a model?  The sets with 2 (like the Mustang) are quite impressive but the pull-back motor torque tails off so quickly.  TLG really missed a trick with the Top Gear car 42009; it should have had a city hub and train handset to be at least £10 cheaper.  The tactile feedback of the handset is better than a phone screen.  I would like it very much if TLG put the 2-port SPIKE Essentials hub and the 3x3x5 motor into Technic sets and allowed that hub to use the handset with the official firmware (not needing Pybricks or other hacks).

I do like some of the new pieces but it's obvious which ones are versatile and which ones are not.  The #17 and #18 panels have been the most aerodynamic, bettered only by the propeller blades from Education set 45400 (I cannot recommend that set too highly as an addition to your Technic hobby).  It is the oblong panels and curved edge ones that I have found most useful in larger numbers, especially for making Technic-enhanced Space-themed models.  The new 3x19 frame is great; I have already raided several sets for them, including the second copies of sets I liked enough to buy two.  The girder frames are interesting but more dedicated to cranes.  There are still some possible small pieces missing, such as a cross block with an additional 1M axle extension, either on one end or the side.  We also need a new 2/6 pneumatic cylinder to complement the others, as well as brackets to assist in overlapping 2 or more to improve reach and the length/displacement ratio.  More thin liftarms would be good, including an "O+O" to save using weapon-barrels; also a "minim" as a round hole with thin cross hole at right angles i.e. half the current 2-round-hole and single cross-hole cross-block pieces and able to make either of them with two.  Thin liftarms with a cross hole on one end and a round hole on the other end would be good too.

As I build frequently with Technic, I semi-sort for quick parts finding, using large freezer bags in small plastic crates.  Bags of 2M pegs, 3M pegs and axles in one box, bags of smaller pieces 1x2, 1x3, 2x2, 2x3+, cross-blocks, thin liftarms and cogs in a second box, beams per length in a third box and right-angles, other angles, panels and frames in a fourth box.  Those four boxes live on shelves and are easy enough to carry to where I'm sitting when I watch TV.  I usually have a medium set box, opened as a tray, for sub-assemblies and project-specific parts in other bags.

Overall I'm glad to still find a significant number of Technic sets to buy, build, enjoy, learn from and turn into MOCs.  I buy approximately the number of sets that come out each year but, across the range, it will be two of one and none of another according to taste and usefulness of pieces, focusing on their destinations in MOCs.

Mark

[valenciaeric]

4 hours ago, Lipko said:

I don't know... As an adult, I don't see that significant set quality decrease, sets were never that awesome, the awesomeness simply comes from nostalgia. Sure, there could be some non-vehicle sets, but too much of them would also be boring ("Okay, some complocated sh*t again"). Those are suitable for Meccano. Just go through all the models and try to be objektíve.

One true problem I see is the part quality. I bought some parts recently after 4 years and I was shocked. Clutch power is so inconsistent that I have to sort parts for "important connections" and "not relevant connections". This is totally against the Lego principle of having compatible and interchangable parts no matter the year/decade they were made.

They did locking diffs, they did automatic gearboxes and they have done the full cyclic on a helicopter - 3 things people had on their wishlists for years but unfortunately the sets they implemented them on were not that good (I won´t comment on the Airbus since I don´t own it).

 

The licensing obsession probably stems from the last successful new own brand line being Friends. Nexo, Dots, Monkey, Hidden and a few others I have forgotten all tanked, whereas 2nd generation Harry Potter and Indiana Jones became instant best sellers so why risk losing when there are sure fire ways to be a hit. With Playmobil it is the same, I only see branded stuff on the shelves nowadays.

[Danke]

55 minutes ago, valenciaeric said:

They did locking diffs, they did automatic gearboxes and they have done the full cyclic on a helicopter - 3 things people had on their wishlists for years but unfortunately the sets they implemented them on were not that good (I won´t comment on the Airbus since I don´t own it).

The airbus is alright, just not very sturdy - it's as compact as it could possibly be with as many functions as they could fit, so it's kind of bendy.

Mine has an issue with it's motor - either the motor is too weak to drive the rotor assembly by itself, or it's a dud. It only lasts one minute at full speed, and performs considerably worse as it heats up, until it completely stalls at around 5 minutes. Smells of heated plastic.

The build is more difficult than other technic sets currently on the market, debugging / backtracking requires taking apart a significant portion of the craft.

The mercedes truck tempts me but even at a highly discounted price of ~170 euro it is hard to justify buying such a lackluster set,

Edited October 28, 2023 by Danke

[howitzer]

2 hours ago, Brickthus said:

...also a "minim" as a round hole with thin cross hole at right angles i.e. half the current 2-round-hole and single cross-hole cross-block pieces and able to make either of them with two.  Thin liftarms with a cross hole on one end and a round hole on the other end would be good too.

That looks like a really great part, there's a severe shortage of parts for half stud offsets which this would help a lot. It also looks like it could fill the place of O+O-crossblock in some places, which would be great.

[Bensch55]

I already gave my view about the licenses in my first comment in this thread.

Regarding the Technic lineup itself, for me the biggest difference to the sets from the 80's and 90's is how exposed the technic was during these times. You could visibly see the mechanisms, how they work and what effect is gained by different motions. New Technic sets are really polished, the gaps are getting smaller and the technic is hidden more and more. 

This is maybe the thing I most despise about the Technic flagship cars - the gearbox has nothing to do with the real thing, it is hidden way inside the model. It's not even its own submodel, which means there is no easy way to actually figure out what is going on inside. Someone without any experience will not gain any knowledge about the technic inside from simply following the instructions. For me this is kinda contradicting the spirit of what the Technic lineup once was.

[Lipko]

25 minutes ago, Bensch55 said:

I already gave my view about the licenses in my first comment in this thread.

Regarding the Technic lineup itself, for me the biggest difference to the sets from the 80's and 90's is how exposed the technic was during these times. You could visibly see the mechanisms, how they work and what effect is gained by different motions. New Technic sets are really polished, the gaps are getting smaller and the technic is hidden more and more. 

This is maybe the thing I most despise about the Technic flagship cars - the gearbox has nothing to do with the real thing, it is hidden way inside the model. It's not even its own submodel, which means there is no easy way to actually figure out what is going on inside. Someone without any experience will not gain any knowledge about the technic inside from simply following the instructions. For me this is kinda contradicting the spirit of what the Technic lineup once was.

Technic gearboxes were never realistic... The fuctions usually didn't have their submodels.

What is this EB Nelson Mandela effect? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_memory#Mandela_effect

[Bensch55]

I'm not saying that old models had their dedicated submodels or were more realistic (while, atleast the H pattern boxes were a bit closer at least).

The point I was trying to make, you could understand the gearboxes by turning the car upside down and looking at it. Some models even allowed you to view it from more sides, because as I said, there were a lot of gaps that allowed you to watch the parts moving. This is not the case with the current techinc cars.

Sidenote about the "realism" part: As I mentioned in my first comment, I have no problem with TLG neglecting realism on a generic technic car - but once the badge of a real car is put onto it (together with a higher pricetag!) I expect a higher grade of realism and detail in the model. 

[Maaboo the Witch]

1 hour ago, Bensch55 said:

Regarding the Technic lineup itself, for me the biggest difference to the sets from the 80's and 90's is how exposed the technic was during these times. You could visibly see the mechanisms, how they work and what effect is gained by different motions. New Technic sets are really polished, the gaps are getting smaller and the technic is hidden more and more.

Same deal with 8459/64/39. That model perfectly demonstrates the essential workings of a wheel loader. What really blows my mind, though, is that the engine counterbalances the loader as the real version would.

[allanp]

I have had the feeling for a few years that the technic team want to give us cool stuff, with the pneumatic tow truck, John Deere skidder, Airbus helicopter and the great new parts like the planetary reduction hubs, Yamaha gearbox parts, new stronger diffs, larger CV joints etc. When they say that the issues (such as CONtrol minus and colour vomit) are coming from higher up the chain, I tend to believe them. 

I really do, more than ever, find the whole powered up/CONtrol minus thing to be the biggest problem. Yes, there are too many cars, but we are still getting some of the cool sets as well so what's a few extra sets that don't interest me? But with all these sets that require a smart phone, it's starting to really piss me off if I allow myself to actually think about it.

Firstly, Lego charges a premium for their products but leaving out AT MINIMUM the physical controller, but preferably one that you can program the set on the device itself, and expecting you to add to the already expensive but incomplete set with your own smart device to just to make it a complete product is cheap and nasty. The original control center sets and the code pilot came with everything you needed out of the box. They might have needed batteries, but control center 2 even came with a wall plug so you didn't even need batteries with that set. Everything you needed to play with and program your models was in the box, and Technic isn't meant to be mindstorms. I believe it is absolutely possible to do that with control+, which I have detailed in my "lets fix powered up" thread and even gave an example of how you could program the CAT bulldozer from scratch on the large remote itself without a smart phone. 

Secondly, smart devices go out of date and become obsolete very quickly, with support being stopped and so on. Will the very expensive control+ sets be like the old dacta sets and mindstorms sets, which, for someone who doesn't have massive computer knowledge, are now a right pain in the megablocks to get working now without (or even with) third party fan community support and virtual machines and so on. Will expensive control+ sets become useless landfill in 10 or 15 years due to their cheap and nasty strategy while my old control center sets are still going strong?

And finally, Lego as a brand is always going on and on about quality, "only the best is good enough" and child safety. While taking the cheap and nasty approach of not having everything come in the box and being reliant on a device that will be obsolete in a few short years definitely does not meet the standard of "only the best is good enough" heirloom quality that they were known for (and still charge for), child safety is also out the window as far as I'm concerned. 

Children are already under immense mental stress and social pressure from being hooked to their smart devices which they really don't need. "Oh you don't have a smart phone, you must be poor!". Then when they do force their parents to get them one, they are bombarded with edited highlights the lives of everyone else on the planet, making their own lives and outward appearance and wealth feel inadequate in comparison. Not to mention the online dangers they can be exposed to, dangers that make me sick to think about. As adults we can mostly see it for what it is but children are not mentally mature enough to cope. With all the mental health issues, and WORSE that this causes among children, what should Lego do? You know, that well loved childrens brand that stood for heirloom quality and child safety? Ah yes, lets release a bunch of products that they can only have and play with if they have a bloody smart device, as if all children have one and if they don't have one, they should and are missing out. What a joke.

It is truly disgusting. But it's okay because that's just the way of the world right? Who cares if we just add to the misery instead of actually trying to make it better. And the higher ups are making their money and fattening their bonuses for making ever more profits so we should all just be happy little sheep about it right? Bollocks!

 

[Jay Psi]

54 minutes ago, allanp said:

Firstly, Lego charges a premium for their products but leaving out AT MINIMUM the physical controller, but preferably one that you can program the set on the device itself, and expecting you to add to the already expensive but incomplete set with your own smart device to just to make it a complete product is cheap and nasty. The original control center sets and the code pilot came with everything you needed out of the box. They might have needed batteries, but control center 2 even came with a wall plug so you didn't even need batteries with that set. Everything you needed to play with and program your models was in the box, and Technic isn't meant to be mindstorms. I believe it is absolutely possible to do that with control+, which I have detailed in my "lets fix powered up" thread and even gave an example of how you could program the CAT bulldozer from scratch on the large remote itself without a smart phone. 

Secondly, smart devices go out of date and become obsolete very quickly, with support being stopped and so on. Will the very expensive control+ sets be like the old dacta sets and mindstorms sets, which, for someone who doesn't have massive computer knowledge, are now a right pain in the megablocks to get working now without (or even with) third party fan community support and virtual machines and so on. Will expensive control+ sets become useless landfill in 10 or 15 years due to their cheap and nasty strategy while my old control center sets are still going strong?

I strongly suspect someone influential at TLG thinks otherwise, with Mindstorms on ice and programming haphazardly being bundled with Technic as Control+. Even then, as you have said many times, it would not be an exorbitant cost to include a physical remote control. Smartphone functionality could still be offered as additional play value. Let's be honest, the lack of a physical remote is a cost-saving measure, partially disguised as resource management/customer concern.

The point about obsolescence should be a big concern to TLG, but perhaps the relative market share of Control+ sets means TLG are fine with dumping it in time, as they have done with Dacta and Mindstorms previously. Or their current structure means it makes more financial sense to come up with a brand new system when the time is right.

[Maaboo the Witch]

2 hours ago, allanp said:

Bollocks!

Bollocks indeed! All very, very well said. 

[Mikdun]

On 10/27/2023 at 8:25 PM, kbalage said:

One of TLG's biggest challenge seems to be segmentation at the moment.

This.

I'm disappointed that there is no single project leader (sort of) assigned to each model, that will coordinate it from start to finish, keeping the knowledge, requirements and agreements in one place. And taking care all is done and not left behind.

[amorti]

Ok boomer ;)

But seriously, nothing is what it once was, otherwise we'd all be playing with spinning tops.

The question is only whether the progress is going in a good direction. I'm not sure it is with a heavy reliance on licensed sets and mobile phone control of motorised models, but that's just my opinion.

[Maaboo the Witch]

3 hours ago, amorti said:

The question is only whether the progress is going in a good direction. I'm not sure it is with a heavy reliance on licensed sets and mobile phone control of motorised models, but that's just my opinion.

Your opinion is shared.