← Back to context

Comment by scatbot

2 months ago

Lego is one of those companies that is simultaneously amazing and kind of sucks. On one hand the core product is incredible. The tolerances on the bricks are micrometer-level precision and the fact that pieces from the 70s snap perfectly into ones made today is mind blowing.

On the other hand, a lot what the company does today just sucks. Set prices are outrageous. Printed bricks get replaced with stickers and many sets feel like display models than something you can play with. The Mindstorms/NXT line had huge potential but then just sort of fizzled out. And the push towards smartphone-dependent toys feels weird. Who actually wants their kids staring at a phone to play Lego?

It's so sad, because the core product is basically perfect.

Lego was always expensive, you can compare prices adjusted for inflation. For example, the 1979 Galaxy Explorer <https://brickset.com/sets/497-1> was around $32, that's $144 today. The reimagined set from 2023 <https://brickset.com/sets/10497-1> was sold at $99, $106 today. Not only it is cheaper, but much larger and with many more pieces.

  • Yes, they have kept up with inflation, and that is the problem. Manufactured goods like Lego bricks should fall in price through innovation in processes, scale, etc. What does raise higher than the average inflation should be be labor-intensive products/services. In other words, it feels much stranger today how expensive Legos are compared to 47 years ago.

    • Lego is branding, curation and quality bar, though. They're the Apple of bricks (weird sentence).

      There's tons of lego-knockoffs and of not even such lesser quality that the difference can be perceived by casual inspection. The set-to-set quality bar is really where it is, especially among their set lines not targeted at children or low-end of market.

      But none of those sets have any kind of staying power. There's Expert/Creator/Modular sets from 20 years ago that sell for $500-1000 _opened and pre-built/re-disassembled_. That's all brand power.

      So they're less about $/brick (though i know people scrutinize it) and more about price point and brand. Phrased differently, having your brick company race to the bottom sounds like a losing strategy.

      6 replies →

    • Prices are constrained by demand moreso than by cost of production. Lego pieces are expensive because they can be, they still sell, and this is largely due to the quality. As long as the quality moat persists, they can charge as much as people will pay, and--good for them!

      That you personally would prefer lower prices does not mean they "should" be lower. Those lower costs of production, to Lego company, "should" mean higher profits, not lower prices, and again--good for them!

      12 replies →

    • Anything that has only kept up with inflation over the last 50 years is cheaper today than it was 50 years ago relative to people's incomes, which is the relevant definition of "cheaper".

      Not sure exactly how Lego prices have evolved but, as others have said, Lego is a brand and is unique. Their sale prices have little to do with their costs.

      11 replies →

  • It has almost 4 times the number of pieces, but is only about 50% longer and wider - there's just way more smaller pieces. Price per piece is very misleading when comparing older and newer sets. The newer ones have more details, look slicker, but have a lot less "meat". Which is not that great for creative play.

    • I bought a set recently which was definitely padding its piece counts. The interior structure of a solid shape was constructed out of dozens of small 1x2s and could easily have been a handful of much larger pieces with no downside. I didn't consider the "more pieces = more perceived value" logic until this comment.

      9 replies →

    • Definitely agree on the reduced usefulness for creative play. My kids got a lot of Lego sets as gifts when they were younger. Which is great, I love them playing with Legos. But once they're done with the instructions that's just kinda it. A Star Wars or Frozen or Minecraft themed kit ends up being all weird one-off specialty pieces. They are necessary to make an extremely detailed replica of the Millenium Falcon. But they have no place if you just want to grab a handful of bricks and start building whatever your imagination comes up with. We have a tub full of thousands of pieces and it never gets used. I think it's a bummer that they've pivoted to pushing these intricate $120 kits to adults rather than designs featuring more reusable components. You need to go out of your way to buy tranches of generic bricks if you want to have free play.

      1 reply →

    • A 50% increase in dimensions doesn't directly transform in a 50% increase in volume.

      >The newer ones have more details, look slicker, but have a lot less "meat"

      I presume that the 2022 model has as target audience nostalgic adults, but otherwise I agree, the new sets seem far more fragile then the ones released a decade ago. I think this is due to a recent focus towards adults from LEGO.

    • It's the other way around - because pieces cost roughly based on their size (amount of material) modern Lego sets are "denser" and heavier on average than similar sized sets of the past, because as piece count (and detail) goes up, piece size has been going down.

      1 reply →

    • It is a set for nostalgic adults. In fact, it is 50% larger so a grown up can hold it in their hands and feel it massive, like kids did in the 80s.

  • I have the re-release secondhand unopened and I think I paid about that much, so even in a collector's market, not terrible at all. An expensive toy to be sure but a deeply satisfying experience if you like that kind of thing.

    • Buying buckets of used bricks is pretty cheap, too. I bought an adult's old lifetime collection for $30 CAD. My 2 year old son and I are still sorting them.

      7 replies →

  • I remember the Lego 404 set being $40 in 1980. I actually can’t believe my Mom bought it for me.

  • There are so many better alternatives these days it’s mostly fanboys and people who don’t care who are still buying original Lego.

    • I feel like I’ve seen essentially this same comment every time a Lego thread comes up but there doesn’t seem to be unanimous agreement on which brick toys are better. Sure, some people have good experiences with brand X but others will say they’ve had bad luck with the construction. Someone else will talk up Brand Y and someone else will point out how terrible the instructions are. Are there any brands that actually do consistently deliver a Lego-quality experience without the Lego price?

      3 replies →

    • Lego is some kind of cultural icon now, and many people want to participate. That's why they have tons of sets aimed at adults over many themes, like plastic flowers, formula 1 helmets, old video game consoles.

      Many of them are a really bad and expensive purchase if you only care about the theme itself, like the latest Death Star (or almost any Lego Star Wars set). You can usually buy a similar and cheaper non-lego model. Or the Titanic set too.

Nostalgia... Lego was amazing decades ago so we want it to remain so. It's not anymore though. The whole raison d'etre, namely infinitely recomposable bricks to be creative, was lost the moment they realized they were a LOT more money in custom sets. Sets become collectible, perishable, trends can form, secondary markets exists, etc. It's simply about the baseline, not the principle. Sorry.

  • The existence of specialty sets doesn’t subtract from creating building.

    My kids get some of the specialty sets, build them, then hours later they’re either taken apart or heavily modified.

    The specialty sets can provide some interesting unique pieces too. My kids have a photographic memory of each of those special pieces and which set they came from. They’ll remember them and search until they find that exact piece.

    > Sets become collectible, perishable, trends can form, secondary markets exists, etc. It's simply about the baseline, not the principle. Sorry.

    I don’t know what this is supposed to mean, but you can completely ignore secondary markets and collector sets if you want.

    There are more sets and pieces than ever. You don’t have to collect anything.

    • > My kids have a photographic memory of each of those special pieces and which set they came from. They’ll remember them and search until they find that exact piece

      I had the same skill (still do). Imagine following the instructions the first time. A part you're encountering for the first time stimulates the memory. I knew my collection like a dragon's hoard. For instance, I owned twelve white 1x2 tiles, all from Coast Guard Station, so that was the limiting piece when building tiny space-fighters...

    • Off-topic, but:

      > My kids have a photographic memory

      How do you know it is photographic memory? More than one of your kids have it? Do you know why or what may have contributed to its development?

      3 replies →

  • You can still buy basic brick sets. With lot of nice color nowadays. Like the CLassics or Creator lines: https://www.lego.com/en-us/themes/classic

    And for $100 you get a lot of bricks to play with and let your imagination go wild. Just don't buy sets aimed at adults and IP fansumers.

    • The point is: when I was a kid, all Lego sets consisted almost completely of general bricks. You could, and would, start building different things from the moment you got your first set, and the possibilities would increase exponentially once you got a few more sets. Any set contributed to your collection of building blocks to create new things.

      5 replies →

  • Lego sets aimed at children are still good! They work as standalone toys, and can also be reassembled, modified and combined. Very few toys are like this.

    Adults collect them, true, but there are whole lines dedicated to them.

    • The "Creator" sets in particular I feel harken the most to the company's roots. They usually have a few different builds per set and include all sorts of unique pieces for making your own creations. They also usually have very fun designs.

    • I recently built the NES and Game Boy sets and thought both of those were really great. The NES is probably not priced for most people (we try to stay under 10¢ a brick), but the level of detail, whimsy, and mechanics are all really well done. There are hidden scenes and Easter eggs built into the system that are revealed as you build rather than highlighted as features on the box. I was genuinely surprised and had a lot of fun sharing that with my family as we realized what was coming together.

      The Game Boy was much more affordable. Less whimsical, but brought back memories of taking apart electronics and marveling at what these circuit boards and components could possibly be doing.

      2 replies →

    • My kids got a Minecraft set and just use the Warden as a toy and build with all the other bricks and a mat to put the poor lego characters in bad situations where they’ve woken the Warden up (he’s a strong enemy in Minecraft)

  • It was kinda funny to see the Lego Movie, which puts a bunch of emphasis on breaking the rules and mixing and matching everything, and then seeing them release the sets for the movie. I mean, it makes perfect sense. But it was still kinda lowkey humorous. But imo they're still a great toy; very fun to go to conventions and the like, where people just have giant piles of loose pieces you can buy by weight.

  • Lego is still amazing and you don't have to buy expensive sets for your kids to enjoy them. My son loves Legos and if he gets a set for his birthday it doesn't last long before he takes it apart and starts building other stuff with it.

    This is one of those instances where it feels like people are terminally online. Or like the meme of the guy standing in the corner while everyone else is having fun at the party. You can find Legos being given away in a local buy-nothing group. It's still just as magical for kids as it ever was. These complaints are only from an adult who doesn't play with Legos. Who cares if sets become collectibles? Get other sets and have fun with Legos. These are toys that are meant to be played with. Play with them.

  • They still sell the sets of generic bricks. At that point it is up to the individual customer to buy them if he prefers that. I could see your point if they stopped selling the more free form product, but they haven't.

  • These collectible (read: branded) sets are what saved them from bankruptcy, though.

    • Harry Potter did. Lego didn't anticipate that they would ship ONE MILLION copies of the first large Hogwart's school-castle set.

    • How can you go bankrupt with Lego? That's almost like going bankrupt with Coca Cola. It's probably one of the most if not the most recognizable toy brand there is. I'll have to read up on this, sounds like a fantastic voyage of mismanagement, if true.

      4 replies →

  • Look at it from the corporation's viewpoint:

    - they have a finite production capacity

    - they have a finite warehousing capacity

    - there is a certain number of sets which will be bought

    - crates of bricks without an established design have a limited appeal and while a consistent SKU, don't have the baked in demand a new set will have

  • There's nothing stopping you from buying the basic sets and only the basic sets. They didn't stop making basic sets, unless you're objecting to the new colors that go beyond blue red yellow and black?

  • You can still buy “generic” lego sets if you want. Look for “Lego Classic” sets.

    • They're a bit too simplistic though.

      Some of the classic 80s themes, like Space and Castle, primarily used regular bricks of reasonable sizes in a very limited palette of colours, with a few special parts unique to the theme. They were much more suited to taking apart and building your own creations.

      These days, there's just too many specialised and small parts, and too many colours. Even if you buy a big grey Star Wars set, you'll find that the internal structure is often brightly coloured to make the instructions clearer - but this isn't ideal if you want to take it apart and build something else.

      1 reply →

  • You can also only get so creative with lego. At the end of the day roblox/minecraft and video games trains kids to build more "relevant" things. Apart from tactility, I don't see what technic/mindstorm offers over digital.

    • You use your imagination. I had a tub of random parts from a bunch of old 80s and 90s sets that were since put into the blender that is a family of small children. I would build space craft. Big freighters with internal bays to hold smaller ships. Huge bases and compounds for my other toys. Various other vehicles and structures. I was basically constantly building for 10 straight years of my life. No sets. No plans. No eye strain from screens. Just pure creativity and imagination.

      6 replies →

Agree. They seem to have a “price per piece” equation. Perhaps as a result, the 5+ sets are made of hundreds of small pieces.

Older sets had larger foundational and platform pieces which gave a good starting place for new creative builds.

Today, airplanes fuselages, wings, and car chassis are instead built up piece by piece.

It’s hard for my 6 year old to start creative builds that are stable when he hardly has any pieces larger than 2x6 across dozens of sets.

My wife found a huge mixed bin from the 80s and 90s at an estate sale. It really helped.

  • > Today, airplanes fuselages, wings, and car chassis are instead built up piece by piece.

    Well, people did complain about the whole 'special pieces' trend that you praise.

    • As a kid I loved the giant boat hull piece because it was sealed and actually floated. This in combination with some larger pylon-type pieces from the Star Wars set meant you could build floating cities and vehicles and such and mess with them in the kitchen sink.

      I wish I had hobbies as cheap as LEGO now...

      1 reply →

    • Lego suffers from a fandom problem among adults: They have strong nostalgia for how it was when they were kids and they think everything since then is against the natural order of Lego.

      The best way to enjoy Lego is to give it to some kids and watch them get creative with it. Unlike all of the Internet complaints, kids have no problem having fun with Lego and being creative in their own ways.

      3 replies →

  • 5yo sets have smaller pieces but also use big foundational pieces. Also the builds are simpler and better explained. Sets for 8yo are more complex.

  • > Older sets had larger foundational and platform pieces which gave a good starting place for new creative builds.

    They stopped doing the many unique parts because it was bankrupting them.

The decline of technic sets is such a shame. There's so little support for anything but representative models of specific cars, despite the platform being able to support a ton of mechanical creativity.

  • The disappearance of real metal Meccano is really crazy. I know metal is expensive, but also bulk processing of it has never been cheaper or faster.

    It's also a shame because it's really good for mechanical rapid prototyping and you can bend and cut it in a pinch and it stays put. But buying vintage Meccano to abuse like that is expensive and feels like a war crime.

  • My son inherited (well, we're co-owning it I guess) my Lego, and that includes two sets of Technic aimed at educational use (1030 and 1032) which come with a stack of instructions for fairly simple mechanical models to build — each demonstrating basic mechanical principles like gear reduction and pulleys. Those sets used the 4.5V motors which have all broken down, but we also have the 1990 Technic Control Centre fully working and use those instead. That Control Centre is a simple controller used with 9V motors. It is brilliant for explaining the basic principles of computerised automation.

    No app. No Bluetooth. Just wires and a simple controller built to be used and understood by children.

    https://rebrickable.com/sets/8094-1/technic-control-centre

Historically Lego was a construction toy. This is what it was in my youth. These days Lego sell model construction kits - most are constructed once and then the owner plays with the model. This represents a radical and fundamental change. I’m not sure when it happened or how suddenly it happened as there is a large (decades) gap in time since I played with Lego as a kid and my current exposure to Lego via my own kids. Our home is full of Lego models but I don’t recall seeing my kid using his vast amount (compared to the shoe box I used to store my Lego as a kid) of Lego to actually construct something. The “studless” change - with its inside-out building technique makes it virtually impossible to alter a model once built - unlike the old bottom-up approach where it’s trivial to alter. It makes me sad because I remember with nostalgia the hours I spent building all sorts of fanciful constructions with my box of generic Lego pieces but I also acknowledge that model building — which I do with my kids - is also fun. But it’s just not the same play/toy as it was years ago.

Call me names, but I'll go to bat for stickers.

Even when I was a kid, I wasn't keen on graphic designs on the pieces. I liked the uniformity of consistently-colored pieces. Most graphics only make sense in the context of the set they were packaged in. Stickers give the customer flexibility. Use them when you build the set, and remove them later if you take the set apart and don't want them anymore.

Killing Mindstorms was a head-scratcher to me. Hell, there was an entire international tournament built around Mindstorms. I know FLL still exists, but why kill that darling specifically?

NXT still kicks ass by the way. I have a backup of the NXT programming environment somewhere, it can be coaxed into running on Windows 11.

  • You can argue this for their sets targeting children and I don't think anyone minds stickers on those.

    On display sets for multiple hundred Euros however it just looks cheap due to different surfaces and colors - especially as no one is ever going to disassemble these sets.

    • I think that's fair, though I'm sure we would disagree on plenty of edge cases in the definition of a "display-oriented" set.

      It just feels to me like AFOLs poopoo on any set for having stickers, without considering the advantages stickers have from the POV from the POV of a child with few LEGOs and fewer dollars.

      3 replies →

    • stickers > just looks cheap due to different surfaces and colors

      They are cheap!

      To print on a piece you must run the inkjet assembly line, do QC on it.. With early Collectable Minifig series, I heard they outsourced that. I imagine inkjet lines that run all day for one piece type (maybe having changeable jigs.)

      It's cheap to print a whole sheet of stickers!

      Another approach that isn't so cheap is: in-mold transfer printing sheets. I learned about this at plastics shows around 2000; Apple used it on the all-in-one spotted iMac in 2001-ish.

      Now since Lego ships perpetually ships 1x4s and 1x2s with black smileys or such, I guess carbon black in-mold transfer must be cost-effective. (That's a guess)

      I know we're gonna be arguing taste in stickers forever.

    • I have some of those display sets and I think the stickers look fine. Yeah it's less convenient than printed pieces, but I think the complaints are significantly overblown.

      1 reply →

  • Silverlight. 3.0 was built on Silverlight. And I guess other 3rd party proprietary stuff.

    I coached FLL 9+ and Junior FLL 6-8. FLL moved on to Boost and Java programming. These days I only do high-school FIRST.

    • Another detail: National Instruments declined to update the Mindstorms software. Just wasn't a profitable business case. (The LabView vi libraries, I dunno if they worked past 2015.. I stopped upgrading.)

    • I finally had the time to get back into FRC mentoring last year, for just one season. I changed jobs and had to move across the country before this season started. I miss it dearly.

> the push towards smartphone-dependent toys feels weird

I haven't seen this push? The new Lego Smart stuff is explicitly "screen free play". There is an app but it's just for firmware update and configuration and you can't even connect it unless the brick is on the charger.

  • Lego has been testing modern sets without instructions and instead tell you to download an app for your phone.

    The ones I know of are the Mario ones, but they apparently need a phone anyway to setup the little characters.

    • Which Mario ones are you thinking of? Because for the only ones I know of with electronic character, you just place them over special tiles they can read to select how they will react.

    • All normal sets still come with a booklet don't they? They offer the option sometimes though.

      Plastic parts bags are getting replaced by paper ones, but the booklets aren't going anywhere.

  • Hmm, the comment I was replying to was deleted.

    I hate app obsolescence, and licenses that expire on your old hardware (Microsoft Word..) I exhibit 1980s video games. The hardware just continues to work. It's a disgrace what happens to mobile games, they just disappear. (Whattaya do, save all your old phones? I'm hating on you, Atari Classics app on iPad 2; revoked my paid license to use it.)

    But to be fair, Lego has gone to great lengths to keep their companion software alive. Still, the nature of mobile: apps require constant updates to stay listed for new OS versions.

    For one, Lego Commander existed uselessly on my phone long after it ceased to work... until one iOS it wouldn't install anymore.

    Lego giving you a CD with software and instruction was a comfort (challenge: find a CD drive!) but only Mindstorms really.

    For desktop apps in the 2010s, Lego relied on Silverlight to get Mac and PC compatibility. So what happens when you rely on a Microsoft framework... still as late as 2015 I was still able to download Mindstorms 2.0 (introduced 2002??) from Lego.

    With instructions pdfs, Lego has been ok to let hobbyists reproduce the downloads (last I saw.)

    Another thing Lego did was to provide SDKs for Mindstorms (a while after the community reverse-engineered a lot of it...). Opening it up that way was encouraging. (Lego even started distributing HiTechnic's 3rd party sensors, the folks that reverse-engineered the Mindstorms 1.0 RCX.)

    I was part of the fan movement from 1998-2001 that hammered on the message for Lego to open things up. What happened is that they hired several of us :)

Oddly enough I found the Duplo line much more fun to play with as our kid went through the blocks years. You could build something substantial with fewer block clicks, there were fewer different types of blocks, they were less fiddly and prone to vanishing into rugs/carpets, etc. Also the proper Legos tended to be sets which makes it very stressful to mix them into a misc bag.

If you want advancements in engineering and plastics for much better prices, see the wonders that Bandai has made with modern Gundam models. A Gundam Aerial HG is under $20, and you end up with a large multicolor model that assembles easily, has minimal mold lines, and needs no glue. And that's one of the intro models

  • Yeah, that's some brilliant mold engineering!

    >minimal mold lines

    I think this comes from higher tonnage (clamp force) molding machines. Injected plastic exerts force at the mold seam. Pressing the mold open by even a teeny tiny amount is unpalatable. Mold lines also can result where a mold has insertable parts, like sliding rods to form inner holes.

  • Of the biggest difference is that model makes /only/ a Gundam. Legos don’t have that limitation.

    But those models do look rad!

They suck because instead of buying the rights to the bricks they outright stole the design, the packaging and the marketing materials from the original inventor.

And then they sued the pants of everybody that tried to do the same thing to them.

  • That's a simplification of the Kiddicraft story.

    Yes, it was a shame. After Lego lost in court (to Hilary Page's heirs I think by then) I believe they finally atoned for that.

    Still, Lego didn't just sell the Kiddicraft brick unmodified. Lego patented the tubes inside, which gave it superior clutch power. (I have a lot of 2x4 bricks with "Pat Pend" molded on them!)

    As I've heard it, Ole Kirk Christiansen had seen Hilary Page's brick as a sample from a molding machine vendor. Lego previously made wooden toys (until his son Godtfred allegedly set the factory on fire) and was casting about for what production to invest in for the future.

    The Kiddicraft brick was a little rectangular box, no tubes inside. A lot of brick toys came out in the 60s that were little shells with varying clutch power.

    For a museum of the many brick toys, go to https://www.architoys.net

    In particular, Betta Bilda, Block City, American Bricks.

> the fact that pieces from the 70s snap perfectly into ones made today is mind blowing

Is it? It's not like it's hard to keep producing the pieces to the same original specifications. If they snapped then they snap now.

  • I think it's more the consistency of product design than the manufacturing process. Everything around me, especially in the software world, seems to change for no good reason on a frequent basis. Companies change products all the time for reasons other than utility/functionality. A consistent specification over 50+ years is an outlier.

  • > It's not like it's hard to keep producing the pieces to the same original specifications.

    It’s extremely hard to build consistent products to the spec.

    There are a lot of knock-off LEGO on the market now. We get them as gifts. Some of them stack okay, some are too tight, some are too loose.

    It’s hard to manufacture at scale at these tolerances and keep it that way for decades.

  • Did you even read the article? No, even just the Title? Nothing is ever impressive I guess. Certainly not a 60 years running manufacturing process where your childhood pieces can be passed down and combined seamlessly with a set you just bought for your kid. So trivial and easy to do guys.

    • The precision in tolerance over the years is truly breathtaking.

      It speaks to Ole Kirk Christiansen's impossible standards: "Even the best is not good enough" (Det Bedste Er Ikke For Godt.) (usually translated "Only the best is good enough.")

      Much more strenuous in Danish than the usual quoted translation! but I know some Danish, and most of all that's how Kjeld Kirk Christiansen explained it to an American audience at Brickfest 2003 (IIRC the year).

      As I commented elsewhere, it's not 60 years. Sure, the outer dimensions have not changed and are very strict metric Lego Units. [1] But there have been continual improvement that render old and new less than wonderful to use together. You don't really want to mix 70s-early 80s bricks.

      Conversely, if you're reselling those old sets, you need to find vintage pieces (though also Lego would use up older pieces and begin to use newer ones in that set)

      But bricks from the mature design of the 80s even didn't age so well (clutch too hard, walls can warp), and there have been many improvements to the interior of a brick. All for sound engineering reasons. Thinner walls and internal voids to prevent warp, subtle changes to fine-tune clutch power.

      It's a story of continual improvement, but it makes the old bricks seem less wonderful.

      Weird thing Lego started to advertise in the 2000s: Lego bricks reach the proper clutch power after 7 insertions! I guess you have to stress-work the new plastic...

      [1] I've used a micrometer on pieces of various age and can't get a difference from the outside. Doesn't help that they compress under measuring.

I feel the same... I remember as a kid, being able to get kits of hundreds of just random blocks and variations and just being able to build/play... all the sets today are all custom blocks that just constrain you and often aren't significantly reusable while I'm not sure that I've even seen basic block kits anywhere in decades now.

edit: I know you can get thousands piece brick sets from third parties or random bulk set sales on Amazon... the issue is the random bits are from the current sets mostly with little reuse value, and the bricks sets are from third parties of questionable tolerance compared to real lego. I just want to be able to get a classic 1000-3000 piece set of classic bricks/pieces from Lego proper, even if it's $100-200 total, still way more than 3rd party but maybe not the same margins for Lego as the bespoke sets.

edit2: there are some "Lego Classic" sets that are closer to what I would like to see, this is probably the closest.

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0B5FMF8BF/

But even then, maybe need that many more bricks that are just bricks... again, there are third party sets that are all block variants that are much bigger/cheaper... would just be nice to be able to get more of those without paying an arm and a leg.

  • > all the sets today are all custom blocks that just constrain you and often aren't significantly reusable

    Given the crazy assembly that is happening in the adjacent room, my kid would vehemently disagree.

    • Having the same experience. My kids enjoy getting new sets, but most of them are quickly customized or just destroyed to build something completely new. Terrible take in the parent.

Quality is expensive.

Lego’s net profit margin is only about 19%.

They couldn’t lower prices much even if they wanted to.

I heard your same rant in the 1980s - only small details have changed (not mindstorms then ...) But kids who want to build have always been able to, and most sets mix and match for those kids.

  • > I heard your same rant in the 1980s

    The two options would be that either the perception is unsubstantiated but persists, or there has been a continuous decline for the last 40 years. I'm strongly leaning towards the latter. I also having the same issues in the 00s looking at old sets from the 80s, and looking back now the 00s look much better than what we have today. Obviously not in every way, and not all recent sets were bad. But overall I have the feeling that there's been a steady trend that the bricks got better but the sets got worse

In terms of creativity of model options, the Chinese compatibles are stomping them.

You can even get a model of post-explosion Chernobyl. Not to mention all the sci-fi tie in from Star Trek to Warhammer that real Lego hasn't signed contracts for. But if you want an 60cm Gloriana class, there it is.

Plus Technics-ish sets and bulk boxes that aren't 75% special body panels that only fit that specific model, since Technics itself mostly seems to have been downgraded to the automotive brands advertising department.

  • When you build a knock off set, though, you can tell that the Lego versions have so much more thought put into the actual build process and the stability and functionality of the finished product.

I got my first Lego set in the early 70’s through a Velveeta cheese mail in promotion. The company almost went out of business in the early 90’s before they discovered movie tie-ins. I believe the quality of play was lost in this transition because the sets became more literal and less open ended. My first big set was a fire station which certainly literal but somehow seems more open ended then the movie tie/in sets.

I'm not a Lego nerd, but I recently saw a really sweet Lego DeLorean in Walmart priced at almost $200. Now that I have disposable income, I would have impulse-purchased that thing so hard if it would have been closer to $100. But I can't quite bring myself to part with a pair of benji's for a plastic toy, no matter how thoroughly it triggers my nostalgia.

Lego was always expensive.

> many sets feel like display models than something you can play with.

That's because they are. There probably never been this many adults building lego than today.

> The Mindstorms/NXT line had huge potential but then just sort of fizzled out.

That's a small niche in today's world, a child is too young for arduino/feather/cyberbrick/whatever.

> many sets feel like display models than something you can play with

That’s what I thought when comparing to my childhood sets, but it doesn’t stop my kids from loving them and playing with them.

My kids are learning a lot of cool building tricks from the advanced sets that I never thought of as a kid. Lots of angle pieces, hinges, and creative building.

  • That's probably the biggest change in the last few decades, they went from never doing anything out of the ordinary to SNOT (studs not on top) for "adult model" sets only (first in the trains I believe), to now where advanced techniques are used even it children's toys that aren't models.

The expensive sets ARE display models. They still have the older style generic sets for significantly cheaper.

Lego were always expensive toys.

Yes they are aggressively targeting "grown ups" with many sets, but they also have very playable sets. I don't see any problem with having different offerings.

There are enough sets for everyone to find something interesting if they are into Lego.

Basic Lego is actually decently affordable. It's the collector's sets that adults would buy whose prices are jacked sky high, based on demand it seems.

I've bought a decent amount of Duplo and Lego kits for my son (currently 3 years old) and it's great value.

  • The fact that "10$ a pound for used, 10¢ a piece for new" has remained true as a good rule of thumb for 20+ years tells you something.

They’ve basically adopted the Nintendo model. People have strong emotional connections for both, which can then be exploited for money.

It has momentum because they haven’t let quality and innovation slide. They know customers will be out with pitchforks if quality drops.

If you're not interested in the new sets, the core product is readily available. Moreover, enjoy the fact that you can get that bucket of bricks for cheap partly because the expensive shiny high-margin SKUs provide a subsidy.

Not just NX but technics basically was a build things that do stuff mechanically and now isn't that seemingly at all. Most kits I had came with one or more alternative models you could build with the primary kit as well.

  • Classic Technic was brilliant, but when they switched to 'studless Technic' it became far more difficult to build creatively with it (even if it enabled far more intricate builds with complex mechanisms, like the gearboxes in the supercar sets) - there was no natural 'up' direction any more, and building anything became more of a 3D logic puzzle than just building with bricks.

    Real shame that they discontinued Mindstorms, though.

    • I recall but can't find that there was a red technic car built with studs before the panels/studless took over - that thing didn't look terribly realistic but it DID look like lego.

      1 reply →

Set prices are a lot more reasonable if you stay away from the branded options, Disney and Star Wars sets, especially have a intense premium associated with them.

Maybe one last thing that sucks is that it’s all plastic.

  • At least LEGO is probably the toy that gets "passed down" the most, my own LEGO parts who I got from an older cousin, is now on its 4th generation (first my sisters children, then some family-friend to theirs), and I'm sure the pile(s) will get further passed down as time goes on.

  • True, but at least it's not single use. Is there a viable alternative? A non-petrochemical plastic that has the same qualities? It's not like they can whittle them out of wood or cast them with metal so it'll always be some form of polymer, and I'm sure they would jump at a more ecologically sound option.

The smartphone dependent is a line to not cross. Anytime we get the phone dependent sets they are returned and analog toys are chosen instead.

Other manufacturers give LEGO a run for their money nowadays. Look at the CaDA Mercedes-AMG One for example.

> a lot what the company does today just sucks. Set prices are outrageou

This was all done planned and implemented by this one consulting guy (MCK?), who became CEO after delivering his report from his consulting company, Lego was near bankrupt back then - he started with all this subbranding shitty stuff and the "colorful" bricks and introduced all these many many "single-use-case-bricks" for more and more sets.

  • I was just about to reply about their financial woes over the years too [0][1][2]

    Being a collector of stuff ever since I was a kid (toys, comics, cards, physical media, printed collateral, etc), and being in my 40's (target market / demographic for expensive nostalgia) living in 2026 (the world is a casino! everything's a collector's item!), it is a little annoying to see LEGO appear to turn into something that it wasn't .. but objectively that doesn't eradicate the fundamentals of LEGO, and I'd rather see them be a healthy company with longevity (via current product strategy) than wither and die on the vine out of stubbornness.

    That said, aside from leaning on the AAA IP that drives prices through the roof in some lines, I do wish they'd stop with the tech gimmicks (Hidden Side, Smart Bricks), renew one of their focuses on real tech/engineering-adjacent platforms (Mindstorms / NXT / a modern version of these), and acknowledge that wealthy adults aren't the only customers. It really prices out young, fertile minds who a lot of their product and ethos should be directed towards.

    Of course, that's a huge problem right now with anything that can command aftermarket prices as collectibles! [3]

    [0] - https://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article/innovation-almos...

    [1] - https://blog.firestartoys.com/how-the-lego-company-almost-we...

    [2] - https://www.toypro.com/us/news/710/learn-the-story-behind-le...

    [3] - https://www.youtube.com/shorts/7FZWovUTmL0

I mean it is a business after all, trying to make money..

I must say, the new smart bricks with all sorts of sensors(color, gyro, distance etc) triggers the inner child in me. I can’t wait to get them for my kiddo and teach him how that magic actually works beneath.

The regular LEGO at this points feels “just plastic” and I won’t feel bad offloading that purchase to AliExpress.

If you're complaining about the prices, remember how capitalism works. The price is set by buyers, not sellers. That's the invisible hand, the seller will set the price to what buyers show they will pay. If you're unhappy about $500 for a Millennium Falcon or whatever, your beef is not with the company for accepting that when people choose to pay it, it's with those other buyers for paying that much.

As the other replies are saying, it's mostly brand power. If your complaint is that $500 for a Falcon is monopolistic because there's no competition because nobody else can legally sell Falcons, the monopoly is really with Star Wars not Lego, they're just delegating it to Lego. You're always free to find your cheapest source of bricks perhaps from other manufacturers and build your own equivalent.

As for stickers and apps and the other stuff... yeah that's the enshittification that also always accompanies capitalism. It's lamentable but it only changes if enough customers vote no with their wallets.

  • >If you're complaining about the prices, remember how capitalism works.

    Why get up at all, when gravity always just pulls me back down?

Isn't that just capitalism? The rule is for companies to keep pushing for higher margins and profit, so given enough time any company will default to shady tactics and product enshitification.