Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
1 hour ago, mikeyreliable said:

Disappointed by this... Will need about 100 of them to do it justice! Have seen some much better micro scale ones with better parts usage for greenery and vegetation... Serious missed opportunity for TLG. 

Smart marketing by LEGO IMO.  People will buy multiples to make a larger wall.

  • Like 2
Posted
2 hours ago, mikeyreliable said:

Disappointed by this... Will need about 100 of them to do it justice! Have seen some much better micro scale ones with better parts usage for greenery and vegetation... Serious missed opportunity for TLG. 

This is a silly criticism.  How many people are going to want a minifig or even Architecture scale replication of the Great Wall of China which spans over 13,000 miles (or 21,196 km)?!?!  This is for the casual Architecture fan who wants a fair representation for a fair price.  It looks good to me.

  • Thanks 1
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, mikeyreliable said:

I bow to your superior opinion Mathew. I shall refrain from expressing my silly criticisms. I thought I was a casual architecture fan wanting a fair representation for a fair price but apparently not. 

It's not an opinion.  It's a fact.  You want a set that is massive with a high piece count for a low price.  Not gonna happen.  That would be a bad business move on Lego's part.  I googled "Lego Great Wall of China MOC" and found some nice models but again, high piece count and not feasible from a business perspective.  The smaller MOCs look amateurish compared to what the Lego designers have done here.  I don't plan on purchasing this set and I seriously doubt you would  purchase a 4300 piece $400 Wall of China either.

Edited by Mathew
Posted

You maintain mine was a silly criticism? The least I expect from a set based on the great wall... is a set that looks like a wall. The connecting sections of this have whopping great big holes in them ... the continuity of the upper wall looks like an afterthought... it literally does not connect. And at no point did I say I wanted a massive set with huge brick count... I merely thought the overuse of dark green slopes and bricks combined with the bare minimum effort in making any sort of foliage look detailed was a missed opportunity. But if TLG are aiming sets at masters of factual opinions who have no intention of purchasing sets anyway, I'm sure they have nothing to worry about.

  • Like 1
Posted
56 minutes ago, mikeyreliable said:

You maintain mine was a silly criticism? The least I expect from a set based on the great wall... is a set that looks like a wall. The connecting sections of this have whopping great big holes in them ... the continuity of the upper wall looks like an afterthought... it literally does not connect.

Architecture sets have never been 100% accurate representations of the actual thing. They're more or less artistic interpretations of it using Lego bricks.  Lego designers must work with limited piece counts to meet certain price points.  To make realistic twists and turns of the wall without the gaps they would need specialized curved pieces.  The only thing that comes to mind is the classic macaroni part.  But that would look kind of crappy at this small of scale.

 

Posted

Granted, a tad more work or a new element might have been needed. But architecture sets at least aimed to represent a good likeness in the one set... Eiffel tower didn't need you to buy 2 sets to get another chunk of its frame... Trevi F had a decent enough showing without needing to buy the water for the fountain in another set...  on the one hand, they will likely sell more as you need more to actually make it look like the thing it's trying to be as has been noted... but rather than need 2 or 3 sets, just do the one properly. And the more I think about it, the way sets are increasing in price and size, why not do a mega set, minifig size, with guards, emperor etc, a gatehouse with kitchen, whatever... this set is based in a huge growing Lego market so to make it a flagship set would have made more of a statement... admitting to the failings of the set by saying you need more than 1 from the get go seems like a missed opportunity... That's all I was getting at. 

Posted
14 minutes ago, iahawks550 said:

Four year olds have been building this for decades. 

Yes, Duplo are great for making accurate renditions of architecture landmarks.

Posted (edited)
16 minutes ago, mikeyreliable said:

... this set is based in a huge growing Lego market so to make it a flagship set would have made more of a statement... admitting to the failings of the set by saying you need more than 1 from the get go seems like a missed opportunity... That's all I was getting at. 

Sure and if it sells well then Lego may consider doing it justice with a large scale Creator set like they did with the Sydney Opera House or London Bridge.  Otherwise I like what they were able to achieve at this scale.  The scaling of the wall up the hill is something that required some skill to pull off.  You can't achieve this look by simply stacking bricks.  

Edited by Mathew
Posted
18 hours ago, mikeyreliable said:

Granted, a tad more work or a new element might have been needed. But architecture sets at least aimed to represent a good likeness in the one set... Eiffel tower didn't need you to buy 2 sets to get another chunk of its frame... Trevi F had a decent enough showing without needing to buy the water for the fountain in another set...  on the one hand, they will likely sell more as you need more to actually make it look like the thing it's trying to be as has been noted... but rather than need 2 or 3 sets, just do the one properly. And the more I think about it, the way sets are increasing in price and size, why not do a mega set, minifig size, with guards, emperor etc, a gatehouse with kitchen, whatever... this set is based in a huge growing Lego market so to make it a flagship set would have made more of a statement... admitting to the failings of the set by saying you need more than 1 from the get go seems like a missed opportunity... That's all I was getting at. 

How much is enough to represent this wall?  I'd like to think Lego has a handle on what price ranges sell well and built something like this to suit that.  All your examples are stand alone and it wouldn't make sense to break those into multiple sets, a better example might have be The Louvre, since you only get one building, but if you want to build the whole thing, you'll need a couple more.

This being a repetitive build, I think it makes sense to "test the waters" so to speak.  If this sells well it's possible they do a larger version down the road, but there are many other landmarks I'd rather see before this.

Posted
20 hours ago, mikeyreliable said:

Granted, a tad more work or a new element might have been needed. But architecture sets at least aimed to represent a good likeness in the one set... Eiffel tower didn't need you to buy 2 sets to get another chunk of its frame... Trevi F had a decent enough showing without needing to buy the water for the fountain in another set...  on the one hand, they will likely sell more as you need more to actually make it look like the thing it's trying to be as has been noted... but rather than need 2 or 3 sets, just do the one properly. And the more I think about it, the way sets are increasing in price and size, why not do a mega set, minifig size, with guards, emperor etc, a gatehouse with kitchen, whatever... this set is based in a huge growing Lego market so to make it a flagship set would have made more of a statement... admitting to the failings of the set by saying you need more than 1 from the get go seems like a missed opportunity... That's all I was getting at. 

You do realize that the Great Wall of China is thousands of miles long? Here are the basic facts from Wikipedia: "The Great Wall stretches from Dandong in the east to Lop Lake in the west, along an arc that roughly delineates the southern edge of Inner Mongolia. A comprehensive archaeological survey, using advanced technologies, has concluded that the Ming walls measure 8,850 km (5,500 mi).[4] This is made up of 6,259 km (3,889 mi) sections of actual wall, 359 km (223 mi) of trenches and 2,232 km (1,387 mi) of natural defensive barriers such as hills and rivers.[4] Another archaeological survey found that the entire wall with all of its branches measures out to be 21,196 km (13,171 mi).[5] Today, the Great Wall is generally recognized as one of the most impressive architectural feats in history."

Posted

I am fully aware of these facts, have been there twice, and am perfectly capable of googling details too... not sure why I'm getting my head bitten off for expecting more from this set... the name is the GREAT WALL OF CHINA. it even has a printed plate on the set, stating that this is the GREAT WALL OF CHINA. In my opinion, this set is not a great wall... in size, design techniques or detail... Thanks for the Wiki copy and paste though... kind of feel it backs up my assertion that this set is half-baked and could have offered more... 

Posted
20 hours ago, mikeyreliable said:

I am fully aware of these facts, have been there twice, and am perfectly capable of googling details too... not sure why I'm getting my head bitten off for expecting more from this set... the name is the GREAT WALL OF CHINA. it even has a printed plate on the set, stating that this is the GREAT WALL OF CHINA. In my opinion, this set is not a great wall... in size, design techniques or detail... Thanks for the Wiki copy and paste though... kind of feel it backs up my assertion that this set is half-baked and could have offered more... 

I think every Architecture set could be improved if you think about it.  Every one could be bigger and more detailed, but as we all know LEGO like to keep these sets small.

  • 1 month later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...