LEGO Star Wars 2012 Pictures and Rumors

[White Cat]

And preliminary photos or not. Bane's Flickr has been taken down by our Lego's SHIELD Agent .

[lightningtiger]

And preliminary photos or not. Bane's Flickr has been taken down by our Lego's SHIELD Agent .

Did everyone save the pictures eh ? (a tiger might have )

Perhaps these planet sets are second half release or maybe not at all ?

[Piranha]

Did everyone save the pictures eh ? (a tiger might have )

Perhaps these planet sets are second half release or maybe not at all ?

Aw man they are gone, but I already had seen them, I forgot the first rule when seeing prelims is to save them before they are gone

[Aanchir]

Some things I observed about these pictures when they were up:

• Yes, many of the figs were obvious prelims, which unfortunately made it hard to judge what would be different and what would be the same in the final versions. Notably, the Geonosians seemed to just use Twitch's wings from the Toy Story sets, doubled up with one pair hanging to the left and one pair hanging to the right. Not sure how I feel about this, although Twitch's wings were one of my own first impulses when people complained about the new Geonosian lacking wings.
  
• The Geonosians have amazing brickbuilt guns which I guess are supposed to resemble these. They don't have much of a resemblance, but I love them anyway. Specifically, they use the collectible minifigure ray gun (87993), a Technic pulley (42610), and a transparent 1x1 round plate (6141).
  
• Anakin's Jedi Interceptor also includes a small Mustafar scene. A picture in the corner shows Anakin fighting Obi-Wan there, so I'm pretty sure Obi-Wan is included deliberately rather than as a placeholder for a different character. Although, needless to say, it probably is a stand in for a non-CW version of the character.

[Fallenangel]

So Anio saved the pictures...

Was anyone else reminded of 8128 when they saw the new escape pod? They both have that elongated look to them.

[willybob]

So Anio saved the pictures...

Was anyone else reminded of 8128 when they saw the new escape pod? They both have that elongated look to them.

I got them also on hoth bricks, and i saved them if someone need them, just ask me

Edited September 24, 2011 by willybob

[K-Nut]

I like the Jedi Interceptor. The other ones seem to blurry for me to judge. But I need some new RotS figs. No more crappy clone wars faces!

[Orukaia]

Why is it that Lego is absolutely incapable of making a decent x-wing? I had high hopes for a design overhaul but I'm tragically underwhelmed. It just.... isn't good. None of the sets look very good actually, save for the escape pod.

[Brickdoctor]

Why is it that Lego is absolutely incapable of making a decent x-wing? I had high hopes for a design overhaul but I'm tragically underwhelmed. It just.... isn't good. None of the sets look very good actually, save for the escape pod.

I'm an MOCer, I love the OT, and I'm a fanatic when it comes to accuracy and aesthetics of a LEGO model. I feel your pain. But there are a number of factors to consider. Is the set strong enough to swooshed by an average eight-year-old? Is the build simple enough to avoid frustration yet complex enough to avoid boredom? Are there enough play features for the target audience to enjoy? Are there appealing minifigs? Is the set recognizable to the target audience?

(bit of self-promotion here ) I did do a review of set 6212, and in it, I had to come to the conclusion that all elements considered, as far as the target audience was concerned, it really was quite a good set.

[Fallenangel]

Why is it that Lego is absolutely incapable of making a decent x-wing?

As far as The LEGO Group is concerned, 6212 is a decent X-wing. That's why the darn thing was available in stores for as long as it was.

[wokajablocka]

I'm an MOCer, I love the OT, and I'm a fanatic when it comes to accuracy and aesthetics of a LEGO model. I feel your pain. But there are a number of factors to consider. Is the set strong enough to swooshed by an average eight-year-old? Is the build simple enough to avoid frustration yet complex enough to avoid boredom? Are there enough play features for the target audience to enjoy? Are there appealing minifigs? Is the set recognizable to the target audience?

(bit of self-promotion here ) I did do a review of set 6212, and in it, I had to come to the conclusion that all elements considered, as far as the target audience was concerned, it really was quite a good set.

I'll agree with the doctor, I want accuracy when it comes to Lego modles but there are a lot of thing to consider. I have said befor in posts I thinks it comes down alot to target audiance. Ive been slamed for saying Lego is a kids toy marketed for kids because I know that most SW lego collectors are adults but I still think it made for kids. The UCS sets are more technical and are for ages 14 and up. Just look at the age range on 6212 8-12. This set was targeted for kids ages 8-12, sure adults like Lego but still its made for 8-12 year old kids. If you want accuracy buy kits that at least 12 and over age range. Sorry to rant so long on the wrong topic but I wanted my say.

Still think the Droid Escape is the best so far in next years line up. The pod does look very long but from the pelimenary pics it has more detiling than it predosessor.

[Brickdoctor]

If you want accuracy buy kits that at least 12 and over age range. Sorry to rant so long on the wrong topic but I wanted my say.

Before you go to far, UCS sets and 12+ age sets aren't necessarily accurate. And with the new T-65 coming out, this probably isn't a bad topic to discuss this. (though I can't speak for the staff on that matter)

Honestly, I don't expect the sets to be accurate. That's what modding and MOCing is for. I'm okay with the T-65. I can't deny that there are other factors TLG has to work into the model, so I might as well accept that and enjoy the good things the set has to offer. But I do expect TLG to get reasonably close. The T-47 is plain ugly. Echo Base is unacceptable where accuracy is concerned. Those are the sets that bug me, and I really can't say 6212 is one of those sets.

[willybob]

As far as The LEGO Group is concerned, 6212 is a decent X-wing. That's why the darn thing was available in stores for as long as it was.

Agree with that, but just disappointed, maybe I was expecting something else, some different colors, some less blocky cockpit, some different mecanism for the wings....

In the end I suppose there are not so many ways to produce a decent X-Wing taking in consideration technical issues, pieces limitations, and price/pieces ratio

[lightningtiger]

Hmm, accuracy and Lego.....sometimes they don't mix !

I guess it's a compromise and as long as a 10 year old is happy....well then....!

[Destroydacre]

As far as The LEGO Group is concerned, 6212 is a decent X-wing. That's why the darn thing was available in stores for as long as it was.

I'd argue that it was the consumers that thought it was a decent X-wing, which is what allowed TLC to sell it for so long.

[Fallenangel]

Before you go to far, UCS sets and 12+ age sets aren't necessarily accurate. And with the new T-65 coming out, this probably isn't a bad topic to discuss this. (though I can't speak for the staff on that matter)

Honestly, I don't expect the sets to be accurate. That's what modding and MOCing is for. I'm okay with the T-65. I can't deny that there are other factors TLG has to work into the model, so I might as well accept that and enjoy the good things the set has to offer. But I do expect TLG to get reasonably close. The T-47 is plain ugly. Echo Base is unacceptable where accuracy is concerned. Those are the sets that bug me, and I really can't say 6212 is one of those sets.

I definitely agree with Brickdoctor here. 12+ sets are impressive but are hardly any more accurate than their 8-12 counterparts and should not be mistakenly thought of as such. I mean:

In the end the limitations that The LEGO Group places on their designers seem to hit the sets hard as far as aesthetics go. Obviously if someone with the same level of skill went all out and weren't trying to sell a toy the result would be much more like this.

Someone who wants a truly accurate X-wing need not settle for anything less than this:

By the way, none of the X-wings in this post are actual studio models.

[Brickadeer]

I'm an MOCer, I love the OT, and I'm a fanatic when it comes to accuracy and aesthetics of a LEGO model. I feel your pain. But there are a number of factors to consider. Is the set strong enough to swooshed by an average eight-year-old? Is the build simple enough to avoid frustration yet complex enough to avoid boredom? Are there enough play features for the target audience to enjoy? Are there appealing minifigs? Is the set recognizable to the target audience?

(bit of self-promotion here ) I did do a review of set 6212, and in it, I had to come to the conclusion that all elements considered, as far as the target audience was concerned, it really was quite a good set.

I generally agree. In my judgement, the major flaws of 6212 were (1) the somewhat awkward cockpit and (2) the (too) short laser cannons. I find it disappointing that no new transpartent tile for the cockpit was introduced and that the cannons are still (too) short.

Edited September 9, 2011 by Brickadeer

[Algernon]

I don't get it. What's wrong with 6212? It's no more or less accurate than just about ever other minifig-scale LEGO set out there. And besides the accuracy, it's a very decent model; highly swooshable and sturdy.

[StoutFiles]

So Anio saved the pictures...

Was anyone else reminded of 8128 when they saw the new escape pod? They both have that elongated look to them.

Is it elongated? At first glance I thought it was a much improved Class-6 escape pod, it's supposed to be bigger than the one used in the last set.

[nrg]

You can watch the pics in better quality in my brickshelf folder - http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=403259

[Mikeosaurus]

I don't get it. What's wrong with 6212? It's no more or less accurate than just about ever other minifig-scale LEGO set out there. And besides the accuracy, it's a very decent model; highly swooshable and sturdy.

Well, I've always thought that both TLC's Y-wing and A-wing surpassed 6212 in accuracy. There's no denying its a decent model, it just leaves something to be desired and I think many people were hoping the new X-wing would be completely redesigned like the TIE.

Edited September 9, 2011 by Mikeosaurus

[uboat77]

Well, I've always thought that both TLC's Y-wing and A-wing surpassed 6212 in accuracy. There's no denying its a decent model, it just leaves something to be desired and I think many people were hoping the new X-wing would be completely redesigned like the TIE.

Exactly! i really like my 6212, but the overhaul on the Tie got me hoping that the new X-wing would be a big plus over the older model! But, for me, it still is a great set, but not worthy enough to replace my 6212

...and i would love an A, B and Y-Wing, because i don't have none

Edited September 9, 2011 by uboat77

[simonjedi]

Wow look at all these posts! Something interesting must hav-

Oh wait no. It's just the usual suspects bitching about 6212 again.

[Brickdoctor]

I'd argue that it was the consumers that thought it was a decent X-wing, which is what allowed TLC to sell it for so long.

Indeed.

I don't get it. What's wrong with 6212? It's no more or less accurate than just about ever other minifig-scale LEGO set out there. And besides the accuracy, it's a very decent model; highly swooshable and sturdy.

IMO, nothing is majorly wrong with it. It's just the set we always end up coming back to when we discuss accuracy.

Is it elongated? At first glance I thought it was a much improved Class-6 escape pod, it's supposed to be bigger than the one used in the last set.

Looks that way. I see 8-wide cone halves on top of the cylinder. It looks at least 15-20 studs long, from what I can see.

[Fallenangel]

Is it elongated? At first glance I thought it was a much improved Class-6 escape pod, it's supposed to be bigger than the one used in the last set.

I do like that this new set makes a better effort to capture the shape, but the area around the boosters looks to be far too scrawny. That, combined with the fact that the thrusters look to be grossly oversized, makes this look too aerodynamic for the bucket-like Class-6.