LEGO Star Wars: No Longer For Kids?

[lowlead]

Being a 'vehicle-centric' LEGO SW enthusiast makes me 100% certain that kid-me would be going nuts over the more recent sets.  The build techniques and new elements make even the non-UCS sets look great.  Case in point - 7144 vs 75312 or 7166 vs 75094. 

Had I been a kid when first seeing 10212, 75313 or 75252 I probably would have lost my sh*t.  Absolute brain explosion.  I would have made my parents a pair of basket cases from all the begging and pleading.

Edited September 22, 2024 by lowlead
how could I forget the UCS AT-AT??

[Horation]

[Redacted disrespect of pointers]

Edited September 30, 2024 by Horation
pointer based redaction

[Nevermorethan12]

Latest rumor has it that Hasbro is losing so much money on Star Wars that they want out of their contract and will stop producing the toys.

I wonder what BS reason Lego will now have for not doing a CMF series?

[timemail]

21 hours ago, Horation said:

Yes it does, you didn't read his comment did you? Here's a refresher : 

Notice how he isn't talking about the 27$ as a tax, he's basically saying that lego is pricing the set for more in australia because it thinks the market will pay more for it, I explained that this wasn't the case and he went silent.

 

I read it as the Dark Falcon is too expensive regardless of where it was. That $180 was too expensive in the US, and $270 or $300 is too expensive in Australia. There is a bit of punctuation missing which is hard to translate - especially when on the internet and you can't hear inflections on certain words. The 'what the market would bear' approach to me sounded like the set, and not just AU prices - that could have just been my take given I think it is overpriced. Either way - in my opinion the set is overpriced for what it is and certainly out of reach of most children, and beyond what I would think it would be worth - YMMV.

That said AU prices do differ significantly at times vs the bigger markets, and I believe it happens in some other small markets as well, so it does feel like it is a marketing/economics test case at times - no proof of this just how it feels to me. Not so much with the Dark Falcon, but certainly with other sets. I pay more attention to Star Wars prices so only really notice it there, but it may be the case in other themes as well.

To me Star Wars does seem overpriced for what you get and feels less present in smaller sets that are suitable for kids, but that can be subjective, and the increased pricing is to be expected where licenses are involved.

Regarding not-for-kids. My kid (4) likes the new mechs. I feel like they are a good and new kid-friendly addition. His biggest issue with Star Wars is nothing has wheels (understandable given everything flies/hovers) and therefore they are out of his interest. The mechs are the first thing he has shown an interest in, but he doesn't really play with them. I'm sure as he gets older that will change.

[Tariq j]

It does feel as though in the last few years there has been a big push to appeal to the non AFOL market (those who are fans of Star Wars/Marvel/Harry Potter/Batman etc. but not fans of Lego). And it does feel as though it has come at the cost of changing the line quite significantly. 

I made a post on the main discussion thread about it but I do think we’re missing that range of good < $50 sets. Looking back (only 5-6 years ago) at some of the sets coming out, you had things like Duel on Naboo, Duel on Mustafar, Yoda’s hut, the Hoth Medical Bay, the Ach To set, the landspeeders from the Solo film, I think you even had a small Mos Eisley Cantina set. There was a healthy balance of expensive and affordable sets.

Going back even further, you had the Jedi Interceptors, the droid escape pod, the carbonate freezing chamber, the Vader/Anakin transformation set, the hover tank, the homing spider droid. Where are those types of sets now? 

[Horation]

[Redacted disrespect of pointers]

Edited September 30, 2024 by Horation
pointer based redaction

[Daiman]

Please allow me to put a clearer picture on this and put an end to these toxic economics lessons. My point is not to complain how or why the prices are such here and there.

What i neglected to clarify in a casual comment I made was this...

If you went to a store and said item was gonna cost you 180 bucks of your pay you'd think about it hard for sure, but if it was going to cost you 300 dollars from your pay  in any ones currency you would be thinking about it a lot harder and for me that's a no.

Back on the original topic it makes sense that most are for collectors as ANH at this stage are 'ahem' a little older and possible have sentimental money to burn. The prequel generation are happy to have a chance to continue the fantasy scale army purchase while the tots are getting a kiddy jedi version to introduce them to the Star Wars concept which hopefully drags them into the larger universe and films later on. I'd say this is just a stage in a bigger picture, I mean I think the Mandalorian sets fed everyone's interest and budget and I'm sure they are planning many a drop on future series however big or small they may be.

[Horation]

[Redacted disrespect of pointers].

Edited September 30, 2024 by Horation
pointer-based redaction

[PreVizsla]

On 9/20/2024 at 8:06 PM, jjr_2009 said:

I was recently at Walmart and (of course) decided to take a trip down the LEGO aisle. It's always fun to spot new sets or to snag a good clearance deal. But sometimes I like to try to think about how "kid-me" would have viewed the current offerings. I know I would have LOVED the newest LEGO City sets--especially the Jungle and Space subthemes. Harry Potter would have had my attention, with all of the detailed minifigures and buildable structures. I would have been all about the fanciful creatures and colorful builds of Dreamzzz and Ninjago--and the builds of Animal Crossing and Friends would have appealed to me as well (the figures a bit less so).

But I know that "kid-me"--a massive Star Wars fan--would have been really disappointed with the Star Wars offerings. So many of the sets I saw at Walmart would have been either well out of my price range (like the Dark Falcon or the The Onyx Cinder) or just wouldn't have appealed to a kid who liked to tell stories with his LEGOs (buildable helmets, mid-scale ships with no minifigures, smaller sets with zero named characters and only nameless troops). It just seems like the theme isn't really trying to appeal to kids anymore.

I know my thoughts and experiences are subjective, so I'd be curious to hear how others on this forum feel. Would the current Lego Star Wars offerings appealed to you as a child? Or if you currently have children, do the current sets appeal to them? Do you think LEGO is focusing too much on adult Star Wars fans? Or is this just me allowing my personal preferences to cloud my judgment?

Current sets would have definitely not appeal to me as a child and most of them don't even appeal to me as an adult. I would personally never EVER buy a helmet, brickhead, brickbuilt character or any of the midi scale sets as those type of things don't appeal to me. As a teen midi scale Falcon and Star Destroyer were the two worst LEGO Star Wars sets ever.
As an adult fan, I love collecting sets that remind me of the fun I had as a child, especially playsets and vehicles with cool minifigs. I couldn’t afford all the sets I wanted back then, so now I am going for either things I always wanted but updated, things they never made or things I loved modernized. I am crazy about minifigures, army building, having minifigs of characters I love and my taste for what I like has not really changed.  The main focus were always minifigs and close to minifigure scale builds.

Nowadays it looks like LEGO is moving away from hardcore fans and focusing on casual fans and it's sadly working and being profitable which leaves fans like me behind, with not much that I can buy even though I love LEGO and Star Wars. It's a bit frustrating that it feels like they are prioritizing those new sets over the ones that originally drew many of us in, but you can still find some good stuff especially when it comes to the Mandalorian.

For me the worst thing LEGO is currently doing that would decimate me as a kid (and that I hate now) is matching two factions into one set or having two vehicles in one set where you really just want one of them, but you are forced to pay double for it or even worse the thing that you actually wanted was poorly made because there is another build in the set (like it happened with the Durmstrang ship in HP). 

[timemail]

23 hours ago, Horation said:

Here's what he actually said 

You either didn't read his comment or you missed the part where he's clearly complaining about the price being higher in Australia than in the US, at no point does he indicate a disappointment with the US price, you are projecting your opinion rather than actually reading what is clearly written in plain English in the comment.

Yep. Based on what he said later I misread his comment.

23 hours ago, Horation said:

As for the set itself, as I've explained before, the price adjusted for inflation is the same as the one from 2000, yet no one here is saying prices were too high back then, why the change in opinion? 

I mentioned in my comment that Lego was too expensive when I was a child. That was before 2000. If by here you mean the forum then threads here don't go back to 2000 so I can't really check on what people were saying about one particular set back then, but certainly in 2004 people were complaining that sets were too expensive (you can check yourself by looking in the oldest Star Wars sets thread discussion). Lego is a luxury item. It is too expensive for many people - it always has been, it always will be. People have complained about it being too expensive the entire time I have collected Lego (which is only about 10 years). I don't think there has been a change in opinion for a lot people - it has always been expensive for them. Likely it is more related to cost of living pressures which are increasing (in Australia at least) leading to people having less disposable income for these luxuries therefore they feel more expensive.

I must say that personally it does feel like Lego Star Wars is getting more expensive for me, but when I look at it that is mainly because I have bought all the small Star Wars sets I need (e.g. a collection of the main ships and characters from the original trilogy) and now the only things I am interested in are the UCS type sets - mainly those with decent mini-figures. So every time I see a Star Wars set I want it is way more expensive than what it would be worth to me. A good example of this is the Sail Barge I want the mini-figures from this set (mainly Jabba, Salacious Crumb, Slave Leia, Bib Fortuna, Max Rebo), yet I am not really interested in the Sail Barge itself. If those characters were in a US$150 set I would likely think it was good value - as they are in a US$500 I feel it is extremely overpriced. That is a result of perceived value rather than just looking at the raw numbers. That is one thing which you need to consider when people are stating their opinions - it is not always based on fact, it is often based on feeling.

11 hours ago, Horation said:

What we need is to compare it to local income : the median weekly income in Australia is 1300 AUD as of 2023 (source : https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/labour/earnings-and-working-conditions/employee-earnings/latest-release )

Now, for the USA, the median weekly income is 810 USD as of 2022 (I was unable to find 2023 data, I doubt it has increased by that much, source : https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEPAINUSA672N) 

........

Again, you are arguing in bad faith, or could use a math class or two, or both those things.

I agree with the start of your post. But talking about arguing in bad faith or needing a math class - you might want to look at yourself. The comparison of employee earnings (in AU) vs median personal income (in US) is ridiculous. They are two very different things and are not comparable. I would suggest you read up on what the statistics you quote are actually representing before you try to mash them together.

 

On the topic - in my first post I didn't really look at what "kid" me would have liked back in the day. I never had Lego as a kid, but I likely would have wanted the playsets that included a building or scenery. With that I mean things like Paz Vizsla and Moff Gideon Battle, Tenoo Jedi Temple, Ahsoka Tano's Duel on Peridea. Those three would all be in the range of what I would expect as a "big" present as a kid.

To be honest I would have likely been disappointed (with current or former sets) if I was given Lego as my big present as you get so little for your money. Probably the main reason I didn't have Lego as a kid is because my parents knew that and instead bought me more substantial items.

Edited September 24, 2024 by timemail

[jjr_2009]

I didn't check this forum for a couple of days, so I missed a lot of really fascinating responses!

I do think it's important to remember that each of our experiences is subjective--so the fact that I didn't enjoy battle packs or midi scale ships when I was a kid, doesn't mean other kids didn't. I actually think it's pretty cool that--even at a young age--everyone has a unique perspective and experience.

A lot of people have pointed out the fact of inflation--which is a valid point. It's a bit depressing, but it's basically inescapable in our current world. I think what really grinds my gears is that the Star Wars theme's sets seem to have increased in price more than sets from other comparable themes. But then, we don't exactly know what LEGO's licensing agreements actually look like, so it's hard to say what's really going on there. 

Others have pointed out the apparent decline in popularity of Star Wars. Unfortunately, I think there's something to that argument as well--at least for the adult market. While I have (mostly) enjoyed the films and shows Lucasfilm has made since the Disney acquisition, I know that not everybody has--and toy companies (including Hasbro and LEGO) seem to have noticed. It will be really interesting to see how the perception of Disney-era Star Wars changes as people who were young kids when the sequel trilogy came out start to grow up and have more disposable income. I could be completely wrong, but I predict we're going to see a rise in nostalgia for the more recent films, and the market will race to catch up.

Lastly, a quick anecdote: I have three daughters, ages 10, 8 and 6. We watched the original trilogy together 2 years ago, the prequel trilogy last year, and this year we have been watching the sequel trilogy (we're watching The Rise of Skywalker this weekend). While they've liked all of the films (although not as much as they like animated Disney classics and the Harry Potter series), the sequel trilogy has held their interest a bit more than the previous films; they particularly like Rey, BB-8, and Rose Tico. Just this past weekend, my roommate (an adult collector of LEGO) let them play with his new Dark Falcon, and they had a blast. It did my nerdy Star Wars loving heart a lot of good to watch them sit there and play with a bunch of the Star Wars sets I have collected over the years. No matter what happens with the Star Wars franchise or the LEGO theme in the future, these stories will live on with future generations--and I think that's pretty cool.

[Horation]

[Redacted disrespect of pointers]

Edited September 30, 2024 by Horation
pointer-based redaction

[Kaijumeister]

9 hours ago, PreVizsla said:

Current sets would have definitely not appeal to me as a child and most of them don't even appeal to me as an adult. I would personally never EVER buy a helmet, brickhead, brickbuilt character or any of the midi scale sets as those type of things don't appeal to me. As a teen midi scale Falcon and Star Destroyer were the two worst LEGO Star Wars sets ever.
As an adult fan, I love collecting sets that remind me of the fun I had as a child, especially playsets and vehicles with cool minifigs. I couldn’t afford all the sets I wanted back then, so now I am going for either things I always wanted but updated, things they never made or things I loved modernized. I am crazy about minifigures, army building, having minifigs of characters I love and my taste for what I like has not really changed.  The main focus were always minifigs and close to minifigure scale builds.

IMO helmets / dioramas / buildable characters / midi-scale ships etc. were fine when they occupied a few slots at most (like earlier this decade). They were a nice and novel departure from the usual system sets precisely because Lego didn’t push them down our throats en masse. Now that they take more and more precedence year after year, I completely agree that they’re a complete turnoff, personally.

For me, system sets that have some cool minifigures will always trump buidables. It’s not even the presence of buildables that’s the issue, but the sheer volume. Especially as I get the sinking feeling these are indeed eating up slots that would have normally gone towards normal playsets.

For what it’s worth, I think the continuing popularity of Lego Star Wars will rest with getting sets that are colourful and offer interesting builds, and being able to balance these with the more ‘iconic’ and evergreen vehicles that frankly aren’t the most visually interesting anymore.

Edited September 24, 2024 by Kaijumeister

[MAB]

European kids in a number of countries do very well for SW minifigures by buying comics for £4 or similar in Euros. The last couple of years there have been Sabine Wren, Emperor Palpatine, Coruscant guard, Chewie, 501st, Vader, Clone trooper, Tie fighter, Bo-Katan, 212th, Obi-Wan, scout trooper, stormtrooper, ...

[Flawless Cowboy]

I admit that Lego’s approach to the adult market for Star Wars has worked on me like a charm, there isn’t a single subtheme that I dislike, although I’m indifferent to brickheadz. 

But where LSW disappoints me is the playset offerings. When I was a kid, my most-desired set was the 2002 Gunship. It was massive, glorious, it came packed with figures, it boasted a crazy design where the nose would split open to reveal a command center, and it even came with alternate builds. In short, everything a creative kid would love. But looking at most playsets nowadays, and using the Coruscant Gunship as a point of comparison, it seems to me that the playsets have become more like dumbed-down models than toys. I find the designs to be more accurate than ever, at the expense of classic play features that, even as an adult, would make me go “wow”. With my OG TIE Bomber, I had a massive spring shooter in the left pod that could darn near take your eye out, and a neat, retractable bomb-drop mechanism in the right pod. Fast forward to the modern bomber. Does it look better and is it more stable? Absolutely. Is it adult collector quality? Not even close. Do four flickfire missiles pointed at the ground, activated by jamming your finger into a hole even compare to the fun the original model offered? Nah.

 

[jjr_2009]

18 hours ago, Flawless Cowboy said:

I admit that Lego’s approach to the adult market for Star Wars has worked on me like a charm, there isn’t a single subtheme that I dislike, although I’m indifferent to brickheadz. 

But where LSW disappoints me is the playset offerings. When I was a kid, my most-desired set was the 2002 Gunship. It was massive, glorious, it came packed with figures, it boasted a crazy design where the nose would split open to reveal a command center, and it even came with alternate builds. In short, everything a creative kid would love. But looking at most playsets nowadays, and using the Coruscant Gunship as a point of comparison, it seems to me that the playsets have become more like dumbed-down models than toys. I find the designs to be more accurate than ever, at the expense of classic play features that, even as an adult, would make me go “wow”. With my OG TIE Bomber, I had a massive spring shooter in the left pod that could darn near take your eye out, and a neat, retractable bomb-drop mechanism in the right pod. Fast forward to the modern bomber. Does it look better and is it more stable? Absolutely. Is it adult collector quality? Not even close. Do four flickfire missiles pointed at the ground, activated by jamming your finger into a hole even compare to the fun the original model offered? Nah.

 

Play features in licensed themes are tricky to pull off, because it's hard to include them while remaining (at least somewhat) accurate to the source material.

But personally, I'm not a huge stickler for accuracy when it comes to Star Wars sets. It's LEGO! They have their own unique aesthetic! There are other companies I can go to if I want exact replicas of what we see onscreen.

But again, I think this just comes down to personal preference.

[CloneCommando99]

With the current information for next year’s summer wave being predominantly Clone-based, a waning interest from kids for the vast majority of the franchise has become apparent. Either that, or even more unlikely, kids have not been buying playsets as much as they used to, leaving clone loving AFOLs to take up a large percentage of the consumer-base.

[Renny The Spaceman]

2 hours ago, CloneCommando99 said:

With the current information for next year’s summer wave being predominantly Clone-based, a waning interest from kids for the vast majority of the franchise has become apparent. Either that, or even more unlikely, kids have not been buying playsets as much as they used to, leaving clone loving AFOLs to take up a large percentage of the consumer-base.

TBF most kids who like Star Wars LEGO probably are mainly clone nuts given how they're the target demo for all those Clone bro channels