Images from the Comicon Exclusive LEGO Comic Book

Are we supposed to be amused by the image on this page - https://www.flickr.com/photos/artpoly/14498264067/in/photostream/

Darn! I sure wish a real Lego Solomon Grundy was on the way!

@peterjohn0: Depends. If you identify with Robin in that picture, probably not. But it might provide some useful perspective for those collectors.

I love Paul Lee's LEGO comics. I wish they could be compiled in a book some day — multiple books, if licensing issues demanded it, though I'm not sure whether they'd present any more problem for a book like this than any other book like "Standing Small" that has sections for different licensed themes. He had a LEGO Cuusoo proposal for such a thing back in the day, but sadly there are several reasons that would not work as a LEGO Ideas proposal today.

@peterjohn0
It's opposed to "My parents' torsos craaaaaaaaaaaaaacked!"

@peterjohn0

Wow... Just wow.

Stay classy, Lego. Nothing says "customers first" like trolling your fans.

@peterjohn0

Your amusement is not the point. I only mean to poke fun at people who take the fact that they can't get what they want as some sort of personal insult or attack. It is a childish overreaction to what amounts to a disappointment.

@ DanRSL

You make the false assumption that I am speaking for LEGO. I am not. That image reflects my personal views, as a member of the AFOL community.

It is entirely amusing to ME, how many wrong assumptions and false conclusions people are so quick to leap to. But if facts and truth aren't your thing, I get it.

@polywen
Who are you? I came to a news article with a link to what appears to be an image sanctioned and published by Lego. I have no reason not to believe this.

But if keeping strangers in the dark about your inside jokes is your thing, I get it.

You sound fun at parties.

I think that these SDCC exclusives risk breaking the spirit of collectors. And if it does, they will lose interest in buying more LEGO. Not all sets are targeted for kids. After all, how many could purchase a $200 UCS Tumbler. I think fans and collectors want LEGO to know what how they feel.

I don't know Paul Lee or his working relationship with LEGO. From the article, I would assume he was at least a contract employee. I know that the corporations that I worked for had very strict rules would saying things online that could be construed as speaking for the company. Artwork done in the style as the ones done for work... post on the same account as the purchased work is enough for most people to assume a linkage.

That would be enough to risk termination for the corporations that I worked for. Doubly so if the post in question appeared to mock the customers.

Oh it isn't an inside joke. I'm pretty vocal about my stance, regardless of my relationship with LEGO. I get that people are disappointed with not being able to get something cool. Life is full of disappointments, we deal with it. It's part of being a grown up. But to equate disappointment with a personal attack or insult is just over reactive rhetoric. I would like to point out how truly silly that position is.

LEGO is engaging in exactly the same practices every other company at Comic-con and similar conventions does. Only when a comic publisher releases a special variant comic cover, comic fans don't take it as a personal slap in the face if they can't make it to that convention. They accept that it is how things work.

But for some reason, certain AFOLs are so possessed with an unwarranted sense of entitlement and greed, they can't see this simple fact. Let's put the Adult back in AFOL. We can do better.

I think a comparison to an alternate comic book cover is a bad comparison for most of these exclusive minifigs though. That is a kin to exclusive packaging which I think would be most welcome by the community altogether.

What I see is fans wishing to buy what they think are minifigs that are only available here. It does not appear to be a desire for LEGO to give every fan in the world a minifig for free.

The Azog promotion last year initially caused a lot of stress for fans as many considered him an essential character to the Hobbit films. Once the same figure was included in Wave 2, the fans were quite happy. We gladly bought the figure in a regular set.

Another good example was the Bagend SDCC exclusive last year. The packaging and actual model are exclusive to Comic Con, but the minifig was the same as in regular sets.

@polywen
Unless you're under the assumption that everyone who is a fan of Lego follows your every online move and knows your thought processes, that comic is very much an inside joke. Without providing context for anyone who doesn't know you (I'd venture most people who will see this news story, and I can only assume "polywen" on Brickset is Paul Lee), why do you expect them to "get it"? Again, this looks like it's from the comic they're giving away at SDCC. Is it? We still don't even have that context.

You're also projecting a LOT onto a group of people who don't all feel the same way. I personally have never tried to collect any Con exclusives (not into the themes/figures released) but I feel that Lego is making a bad move in both the short and long term by going down this road. I've gone into it at length before but in short - above all, I feel it violates their mission statement and spirit as a kid's toy, something they've strongly defended in the past. I feel it will have negative effects for the brand that are already occurring.

Frankly, I expect more from Lego than other companies displaying at SDCC. According to you, maybe I shouldn't. But for the time being I still think objections to their current practices in this regard are valid, despite how quietly they may not even reach Lego.

It's still common practice to offer event exclusives. Why do AFOLs not understand this and take it as a slight? If LEGO did not offer exclusives, they would get complaints for not offering anything. Damend if you do, damned if you don't.

No one bothers to understand the real world limitations and practical problems that come with these figs or sets or whatever. LEGO does not have a magic wand that produces infinite quantities of what ever people want. There is a very real limit to production capacity that can not be overcome. And there is a very real cost. What I would like to see is that people make an effort to understand how things work before they leap to the incredibly wrong conclusion that it was all a calculated effort to upset AFOLs.

@polywen I feel like you're looking at it from a very narrow perspective. Consider this - I would consider the perfect giveaway for SDCC would be Benny from The Lego Movie. It is a figure that both bridges older fans of Lego and young fans familiar with the movie. It is also a figure that can currently only be purchased through $100 and $250 sets, so it's fairly uncommon being in the $100+ price range. Since it is not actually an exclusive, it's secondary market value is marginal, making it far more likely that it will be opened, played with, and given to children. Exactly in line with Lego's marketing philosophy.

Why not that? It'd make adults happy, kids happy and doesn't warp Lego even further into the secondary market cash-grab that it sadly has been for several years. No, it doesn't tie in with the film release of Guardians of the Galaxy, but why does the figure have to be exclusive in the first place?

Fair enough, but the argument always seems to me, to boil down to "because, I want it." And that premise doesn't seem good enough. Secondly, there is no point to armchair quarterback their marketing decisions when one doesn't actually understand the inner workings of the company, and understand the factors at play. It is never as simple as it seems from the outside.

Again, their practice is totally in line with every other company there. That some hold LEGO to some unwarranted higher standard is in fact the problem. There is no basis for that expectation. And it results in negativity and recriminations, all of which is completely not productive.

Oh, and I understand the confusion. That Batslap Meme thing is not part of the comic. It was created a year ago, the last time fans spun out about exclusives. It is an unfortunate coincidence of sorts that I posted the comic exclusive stuff after I had reposted that Batslap image some days ago. I have been sitting on these images for the comic exclusive for some time and when I got the permission, I was excited to share them, not realizing the unfortunate proximity they had to that Batslap post.

So I hope that is at least clarified.

I recall NY Toy Fair exclusives that were Yoda wearing an NY I (Heart). It was something that attendees really enjoyed but it did not make others feel like they were missing an important piece of the puzzle.

In contrast, fans of Green Lantern either have to pay scalpers prices for him or just not have one. It is not like it is an alternative print that they can easily substitute another figure for. It literally is the one way he is available for years. Perhaps fans can get one next year.

If there was a regular Green Lantern that fans can buy from LEGO and an exclusive at SDCC that had an alternate print such as battle damage, not as many people would be upset.

I don't collect Superheroes. I only get an occasional set. But I collect LotR and Hobbit. This years Bard does not bother me too much since we already have one version. The exclusive looks better and I hope LEGO includes one in Wave 3, but I won't be heart broken over it.

Well, that definitely does explain the context of the comic, maybe next time approach reactions to it differently.

I know that there are a LOT of business workings behind the scenes and customer reaction doesn't necessarily have an impact, but I will disagree with:
"That some hold LEGO to some unwarranted higher standard is in fact the problem. There is no basis for that expectation."

Lego has gone out of their way to set themselves apart, both vocally and through action. So much so that they kicked a poor old man with cancer who was a diehard Lego fan out of a Toronto Legoland when he went with his grown daughter because they didn't have a child with them. If THAT doesn't say "higher standard", I don't know what does.

Paul Lee.... I see on your Flickr comment that you will be signing Saturday? Do you have any details on how attendees can obtain these books? Obviously we are all nuts when it comes to SDCC Exclusives.

See, your example proves my point. That Toronto Discovery Center is not, in fact, owned by LEGO. LEGOLAND and the Discovery Centers are owned by Merlin, a separate company. To lump them in all together, shows a lack of understanding of how things work. It would be like someone who calls Megabloks, LEGO and sees no difference. LEGO customer service gets calls about MEGABLOKs products all the time.

So how does the actions of Merlin's management justify your conclusion about LEGO? And my point is that we ought to hold them to a reasonable standard. The unwarranted higher standard is unreasonable. To have unrealistic expectations is to set oneself up for perpetual disappointment and unhappiness. It results in the inability to appreciate what you have because you can only see what you don't. Oh wait, that describes the AFOL fan community.

I say, adjust your expectations. You'll be much happier.

LEGO is not the Borg. They are not a hive mind with a singular intent. They are a large corporation with many regional divisions, sections, parts, factions, layers etc. that often are at odds with one another as much as they might be unified. To speak of LEGO in terms of doing anything with a singular intent is way off base. LEGO has not gone out of its way to do anything like that.

Try understanding how things actually work instead relying baseless assumptions. That is how one can truly affect things for the better.

I can't keep going with this today, but suffice it to say Lego would not franchise out their brand with companies that don't follow their company philosophy. Additionally, Lego has been very vocal on many occasions about how they push a kids first mentality. I absolutely acknowledge that I don't know all the inter workings of the company and its many divisions, but as a BRAND, I hear what they profess.

For someone so concerned with the complex truths of the matter, you paint a very one-dimensional picture of AFOLS.

I agree, if Lego understood (or cared) about how things like the secondary market really worked, then they could truly affect things for the better.

@DanRSL: I don't think Paul is under any impression that all AFOLs are whiny, or trying to paint such a picture (he is himself an AFOL, and I imagine most people who follow him on Flickr are as well — he didn't post the pic just to insult his followers). What he said was that at least somebody will whine about the exclusives being a "slap in the face" every year. Which is true.

Thanks @polywen for clearing up that it won't be part of any TLG issued SDCC Lego Comic book.

While I do NOT identify with Robin in the picture, I wouldn't like to think that TLG would take pleasure in the angst that exclusives cause certain collectors/AFOLS.

Would LOVE to see these released. That looks like Killer Frost on the villians' side, and you can't have Killer Frost without my personal favorite, Firestorm! Please LEGO...

@polywen

Most of the people arguing against SDCC exclusives have put forward some cogent arguments why they are bad - and some reasonable alternatives for what TLG could do instead to retain the 'specialness' of what's given out at the convention but without alienating collectors.

Your point about Lego doing what all other companies do at SDCC is factually false by the way.

Rather than ad hominem attacks and false characterisations of everyone with tan opposing view as entitled or whiny, why not engage with the actual discussion?

More than happy to engage. Support your point that LEGO is not doing what other companies are doing.

These "cogent" arguments against exclusives and their "reasonable alternatives" are not informed opinions. They don't take into account how things work in real life.

Ultimately, the "against" argument always boils down to the simple point "because I want it." And unwarranted sense of entitlement is not a cogent argument. These arguments are rationalizations for "because I want it."

See, this is what I mean. Sorry, I am not LEGO. So what I do is not an example of LEGO doing anything. I would more than likely get in trouble by LEGO for doing the batslap image than their condoning it. You see, I'm a freelancer. I don't even get a discount.

The obscene prices in the secondary market are not LEGOs choice or interest, and they have no stake in that. Those things are being done by "fans" and other individuals who exploiting demand. The LEGO Movie was not written by LEGO. It was created by the creative team behind "Cloudy With a Chance of Meatballs" and "21 Jump Street." While LEGO provided support in terms of product design and such, they did not have a direct hand in the story.

This continues the mindset that doesn't bother to understand the realities of how things work, and that lazily lumps everything together in what amounts to group think.

Back to the larger point, the reason why I rally against the out of control sense of entitlement I see in the fan community is that I am doing so for the interest of the fan community, whether or not the whiny ones realize it. The constant, pointless, non productive complaining is detrimental to our collective interests. The complaining NEVER results in getting what we want, but can only result in us losing opportunities, often ones we don't even realize we are losing.

My interest is to focus on productive actions that can achieve positive results. But so long as fans engage in myopic, self centered complaining, they are cutting off their noses to spite their faces. I'm just trying to spare your noses. Not to mention, those who can not recognize their unwarranted sense of entitlement, are only making themselves unhappy. Consider managing your expectations.

I'm sorry I didn't realise this was the arguement room. I was looking for the room for "how could one get one's hands on the Justice League Lego Comics without having a ticket for SDCC".
P.S. That poster is lovely really really nice.

Thanks.

@polywen

If 'obscene prices in the secondary market are not Lego's choice or interest' don't you think it shows a lack of joined up thinking to then take actions which act against those interests?

Secondly, you've stated that your 'interest is to focus on productive actions that can achieve positive results' but I don't think you've actually said what they are yet. I'm genuinely interested as it may be that, given your position, you've thought of ways of influencing change that could be effective.

Finally, you've returned to the position that all those you believe Lego shouldn't continue producing exclusives are doing so out of a sense of entitlement. I don't think that's the case at all. Yes, reduced to absolute basics you can probably see many of the comments as "I want it", but that would be the case for any comment about product availability beyond a mud hut and a bowl of gruel. In reality, most of the comments about the exclusives have been much more nuanced than you give them credit for. You also state that as fans, we should accept decisions as we don't have access to the information that TLG has. Granted, we don't have the information that informs their corporate decisions. But arguably, they don't have all of the information that informs our decisions as customers. And for a company that has prided itself on customer engagement, why doesn't TLG actually try to discuss this with the community or at least explain their thinking?

First, the mistake fans make is to make assumptions as to what the intent, or reasons or motives the company has. More often, it is an erroneous projection. And, it is not useful in the conversation as the speculation is more what is the fans heart than in fact.

LEGO does not discuss their internal business decisions because it is not in their business interest to do so. To do so would give an advantage to competitors. And, frankly they don't owe us an explanation.

I don't say that we, as fans have to accept their decisions. What I say is that constant complaining based on ignorance of the facts is non productive and possibly (or likely) detrimental to our collective interests. I say that the best way to affect change in our own interests is to first understand the true, relevant factors that are at play in why decisions are made the way they are made. When we understand these factors, we can better create a strategy to influence or put pressure on the these factors to attempt to change things. I'm not against complaining, if that complaining accomplished a goal, if it had a point.

I've seen time and again, fans spinning out over small things, and all it resulted in was losing the the thing all together. Complaining fans, selfish fans have cost me, have cost YOU opportunities and experiences you don't even realize you lost.

The process of trying to understand how things truly work starts with accepting that you don't know how things work, and that it is useful to know. Then, patience is required, because gathering information takes time and takes a nuanced approach.

Here is a story of how this started for me. The LBR stores have a thing called the dump box. It is a box in the back room that the stores dump the retired out set displays, damaged or opened boxes, and other extra bits and pieces that accumulate. They used to periodically make grab bags that were then sold.

After years of developing a close relationship with a store, I was there when they happened to be making grab bags out of the dump box. They were kind enough to let me go through the box and make my own grab bag. So I got to pick and choose the parts I found interesting. It was the coolest thing ever. Now, it was a kindness on the store's part, and they did not owe me this. Nor do I ever expect that they continue to owe me having done it once. my mistake was to post a picture of my grab bag score on my Flickr.

Some years later, an AHOL on the East Coast walked into his LBR store and demanded access to the dump box. When he was denied, he wrote a complaining email to corporate, with a link to my photo, demanding access. The result was that corporate launched an investigation and it potentially could have gotten employees in trouble. Thankfully, it had been enough time that the employees who showed me that kindness were no longer working there, so it was all moot. But I got called in by the store as part of the investigation. Then, corporate issued a company wide policy banning the practice of allowing ANYONE access to the dump box.

So this complaining AHOL wrote to corporate, feeling entitled, expecting that his actions would get him what he wanted. But instead, it guaranteed that no one would ever have access again. This is the real consequence of entitled behavior and pointless complaining. All AFOLs no longer have a chance to experience the coolest thing. Most will never know what they lost, but I am well aware that there is a real cost to uncontrolled, unfocused complaining.

This story is one example. I've got many of them. What I would rather the community do, is be smart about it. Identify what they want, set a goal. See if it is realistic or worthy. Take time to learn the factors at play. Figure out which factors we can influence, and then make an organized effort to influence it. More often than not, it would be attempting positive influences, like giving great surveys for stores and singling out employees for recognition.

We need to learn what the decision makers care about. What they see as a success, what they want. What they look at to determine if they have done a good job. If we can help them achieve that (not that we always can) than we can have true influence over the process.

But this internet echo chamber whining based on rampant speculation and assumptions and ignorance is ultimately pointless at best, harmful at worst.

But can't you see the inconsistency there? You've stated "I don't say that we, as fans have to accept their decisions" and you're right that Lego doesn't HAVE to explain anything to us (although my argument would be that I can't see how it's not better for Lego to provide some information). You then go on to say that we as fans need to understand relevant factors to attempt to change things - but without the engagement from TLG we simply can't do that and the whole thing becomes circular which just encourages fans to feel disengaged.

As I said previously, you're closer to this than many of us and while I appreciate that you don't represent Lego you seem to be more aware of why certain decisions are taken. So, if, as you say, you want any comments or attempts to influence TLG to be based on fact, how do we as fans get those facts? And you seem to have ideas for how to influence change, so what do you believe those strategies should be? I really am genuinely interested as at the moment, like most people, I haven't got a clue - hence turning to community discussions like this.

Ah, you posted your second post when I was writing mine. I totally agree with you in the dump box instance. I'm finding it more difficult to see how to be smarter about an issue like SDCC exclusives though. It isn't as if many fans haven't sent suggestions, in a positive productive way, on how to fulfil the same outcomes at conventions (unique packaging; preview figures; costume variants etc) without creating dissatisfaction amongst other fans.

To what extent do you think the Ambassador programme could influence?

@jondesouza

I totally understand how counter intuitive my point may seem, even, on the surface, contradictory. But it is not in this way. They do not owe us an explanation when we demand it. This is impatience. But, over time, through relationships and proper channels, the facts come out. Sometimes with someone in the know over drinks at a brick convention, sometimes casually chatting with a friendly manager. We only have this kind of access when we maintain positive relationships. When we act like AHOLs, we lose that access. So, while we may not know the reason today, it is my experience that the truth comes out over a couple of months. But only through trust.

These facts are knowable, but through diplomacy and nuance. Not from swinging a big stick and making threats.

My basic philosophy is that it is better to be seen as a solution to problems, rather be seen as the problem. Complainers and whiners are only a problem. And, because they aren't open to understanding, do not offer viable solutions. Hence, I think this behavior is not productive. I've been watching the fan community for so long, I've seen the patterns. The drama repeats, endlessly. I see where all the complaining leads to, and it NEVER results in a positive conclusion.

More examples. The Valentines Keychains that LEGO sent out to random VIPs. Naturally, LEGO has no obligation to give anyone anything for free. They attempted to do a nice gesture, but it would be impractical to send every VIP a free keychain. So, they came up with some way to randomly pick some. The AFOLs who didn't get one got mad, felt slapped in the face, demanded to know how people were chosen.

The simple fact is that they tried to do something nice. As a community, we gained something. But all the complaining only sent them the message that it wasn't worth doing again. So I believe we lost something. An AFOL who didn't get one one year, may have randomly gotten one the next, except the complaining guaranteed there would be no next time.

Then, LBR did the Black Friday special invitation event for Christmas. I know an AFOL who felt he was entitled to an invitation. When he didn't get one, (again, we don't know what the metric for choosing was) he wrote an angry letter to corporate. When I told him it might result in LBR not doing it again, his response was, "Fine. If I don't get to do it, no one should." So he was happy to screw over every other AFOL who got to do a nice thing, because he didn't get his way. It's childish and self centered.

Thankfully, LBR has not cancelled that program, and lo and behold, he got an invite the next year. (Didn't bother to go to the event, just wanted to be asked.) It's ridiculous. We should be happy for the opportunities our fellow AFOLs lucky enough to get, and come away with the hope that next time, it might be us. We should come away, recognizing the generous act that it was.

You talk about the high standard we expect from LEGO. What standard should LEGO expect from AFOLs who profess to be the biggest fans of their product. Are we, collectively acting like we love LEGO or we hate LEGO? Are WE conducting ourselves as adults and professionals? Much of this behavior is what I would expect from a petulant 4 year old.

We have no direct control over what LEGO does or doesn't do. But we at least ought to have some control over our own actions and choices. Constantly blaming LEGO for all the problems guarantees that nothing will get better. Being willing to fix and improve our end of the relationship will result in a better relationship.

I'll just add, that my interest in how things work started because I heard and even believed the LEGO/ Fan relationship was somehow getting worse. I wanted to understand LEGO's side of it. So over the years, I've been gleaning information, and developing relationships with people who would know. It's taken time and effort and patience.

After learning more, and seeing the repeating patterns, I realized the problem was mostly within the fan community. The point is the information is out there. We can learn if we are open.

@polywen

I respect your view Paul but is it not influenced by your closeness to TLG anyway, which gives you access that many of us don't have and would struggle to get?

Secondly, your view seems to suggest that we as fans should make the running to engage the company rather than it being a two way street. History is littered with companies that struggled because they didn't listen to their fans (ironically, in discussing Comic Con, Marvel and DC are two of them. Lego itself went through a sticky patch a few years ago for the same reason). The reason so many people are passaionate about this issue is because we as fans are passionate about the brand and want to collaboratively engage with the company. I don't see many people making threats.

By the way, I haven't, and should have, said that your art is fantastic. I hope we see as many as possible of those characters made into real-life minifigs (although maybe not at SDCC!). :-)

The Ambassador program provides a degree of access, and if anything, an opportunity to develop the relationship. But many Ambassadors, as a microcosm of the larger fan community, also engage in the complaining non productive behavior.

As to the issue of exclusives, the point is to figure out who (or what division) is in charge of deciding the implementation of SDCC exclusives. We need to understand when they make their decisions and why they think they do these exclusives, what's in it for them. We need to understand their goals, so then we can suggest solutions to help them better achieve what their goal is. We be the solution. If the solution also dovetails with our interests, all the better.

These are the things to remember. LEGO is not the Borg Collective. They do not have a hive mind with a singular purpose or intent. I would bet that 80% of the company has no idea what Comic-con is or that there even are exclusives. So, all these motives and blame is pointless to be flung at the whole company.

Somewhere, there is a guy in charge of this stuff and he has a boss. At the end of the day, he's been given a goal to achieve, and his job will be measured on his success. He wants to look good to his boss. We need to understand this guy. Understand what matters to him. Understand the real world obstacles and limitations he has to contend with in his job. If we understand that guy, then we understand the process, then we have the capacity to do something about it. Otherwise, how are we to convince that guy to see our way when most of the ignorant complaining doesn't address the realities he has to deal with?

I often get the accusation that my views are somehow skewed by my relationship. But it isn't. I have always been wired this way. I won't bore you with the examples of such that predate my involvement with LEGO. While one may seek reasons to discount my point of view, that is more "internet echo chamber effect where I will only believe those who already think like me" mentality. It isn't productive. I am an AFOL at heart. If you dismiss me as biased, then you are turning away from access and information. (Dismiss me if you want, it is your loss... essentially) You challenged me to engage. Obviously, I am more than happy to ramble on. Most of the complainers are the ones who don't want to engage.

Fans also keep making the mistake of overestimating their worth. And you don't understand a key point. LEGO has CEE. The Community Events and Engagment division. That whole division is tasked with one mission, to engage with us. They have many, many employees. Think of the relative budget of this division, factoring the salaries of those we know like Kevin Hinkle, and the support staff they must have, secretaries, assistants etc, plus operating budget, and the budget for sending out support sets and the like. We're talking millions easily. And given this fact, you conclude that it is a one way street and that LEGO is ignoring us? Name another company that has devoted so much resources towards just talking to fans. But you see, you discount it. Take it for granted.

But CEE is not all powerful. They have to fight for resources and budgets within the company too. They have to keep establishing their value to LEGO in order to continue. And they are advocating for our interests too. But fans tend to attack CEE and its employees, because they are the face of the company to fans. It is foolish and shortsighted. We should, as a community, do whatever we can to help CEE succeed at their mission. It is in our interests to do so.

If there is a one way street, it's been LEGO trying to engage us, and us being ignorant assholes.

I have seen many, many threats. Like, we won't volunteer anymore. We won't buy LEGO anymore. Look at the Brick Queen fiasco. She's the poster child for AFOL bad behavior.

If you seek engagement, then our side has to be professional, polite, and open. How can they engage us, when the most vocal of our community is angry and complaining. I actually believe the vast majority of AFOLs are content and appreciative of their relationship with LEGO. Happy people do not tend to go on message boards to rant about their happiness. It's usually the disgruntled and the angry who shout the loudest. It creates a real distorted view of the fan community, and it is not a flattering one.

Paul - the comment on your relationship with Lego wasn't an accusation. It was a reasonable enough question and the answer to which is certainly not one which could be used to dismiss your view. If anything, a closer relationship would add more weight to your views. Apologies if you inferred incorrectly from my comment - absolutely not meant.

I didn't say that the engagement is all one way. I was responding to your comment which made it sound as if the engagement should be fan driven. I realise the CEE exists, recognise the investment and agree that we should be working collaboratively. However, at the same time I do think the level of online engagement with fans has changed in the last 3-4 years. I say this as an AFOL who has actively participated in online forums for a number of years and has attended a small number of events. Maybe others have a different experience and I'd be glad to have that discussion.

And I just don't recognise the way you characterise the fan community. For every Brick Queen there are hundreds of other fans who spend 99.9% of their time absolutely ranting in happiness, be it in showing off MOCs, buidling relationships with fellow AFOLs or positively gushing about Lego products. Any constantly negative minority is generally drowned out in a sea of positivity. The only time there are vocal complaints are when there are particular issues - SDCC is one of those times.

I think the exclusive DC minifigure will be Scarface and the Ventriloquist, or they will be in the set revealed for next year. They've been in a comic in Lego Club, and he is in the Comic Con comic, so I'm taking an educated guess to say he'll be at Comic Con as a minifigure somehow.

Well then, I think that if by influenced you mean informed, than yes. I think there is value to being informed.

I am glad that you see the fan community differently. Though I did say I believe that vast majority are happy and content, just not a visible or vocal. But let me put it another way. How many of these happy fans have flooded LEGO or CEE with emails approving of policies or products compared to how many angry emails they receive? My impression and your impression are really irrelevant. What matters is the face we present to LEGO. If the main feedback they get from us is complaining, then, that is the impression that sticks. This truth still stands. Happy people don't feel the need to rant. Angry people do.

That the engagement experience changes is not a bad thing. Change is a constant. To expect it to remain static is not realistic. Sometimes it gets better, sometimes it gets worse. But I could make a case that the engagement has been at an all time high, if you factor in the fan created sets coming out of CUUSOO/ Ideas. There are now more opportunities for fans to participate than ever.

Frankly, it is not an AFOL community only thing. Human nature as it is, people tend not to appreciate things. They tend to take things for granted. I believe in adjusting expectations. If you accept the premise that LEGO does not owe you anything, then, every gesture they do is great. But if you have the hubris to believe you deserve special treatment, or freebies, or your opinion holds more value than the 8 year old target demo, then you're doomed to always feel slighted.

We have a choice in how we interpret the facts. Complainers tend to interpret them as bad. But it does not mean they are bad. So this Comic-con exclusive thing? Don't worry about it. They've already made efforts to improve the experience. You can even win some online. See, they do care!

@polywen

Yes, they've taken steps forward with the SDCC experience this year.

Got to say, I've enjoyed the discussion although I think we may just fundamentally disagree about things like customer engagement and the Lego community. I wish you all the best.

Likewise.

As somebody perhaps not too into Superhero lines, I only really look to buy these sets for parts. However, having looked through the flickr stream at all the excellent comic artwork, I am extremely impressed and I would really love to see the Ventriloquist's dummy exactly like in the picture. I have been waiting for that exact minifig-compatible Panama Hat for ages and so hope this is a sort of 'concept art' and the real thing is made and released quickly!

I would love the opportunity to get to have input on some fig designs, of course. But they have people for that. FYI, the Ventriloquist and Scarface are my designs, and have nothing to do with SDCC exclusive figs or future sets, as far as I know. The Scarface dummy is based on a game fig of course. It would be unlikely for them to use this design as I cheated in its placement. There are no attachment points at the right position for a minifig to hols a game fig like that. And the game fig can't hold a Tommy gun. It's sort of just magically floating there.

Polywen, awesome work. Do you know if the detective comics cover will be available as a poster?

I am one who would love to have all the sdcc exclusives but I thought the comic was funny.
I think the point is that many people feel the need to blame others (lego) because their hobby has become an obsession and they feel entitled to all the figures they want. There seems to be a growing sense of entitlement in society in general and the feelings expressed by some of the afols is a reflection of that.
At the end of the day, lego is a company and their main purpose is profit. They provide a certain level of customer service because it is profitable in the long run. If making exclusive sdcc figs makes business sense to them, so be it.

Alternate costumes would be a good compromise.

Reeses;

There was some talk of possibly making prints or posters out of these. But I don't really know what they plan to do with them.

I totally get being disappointed. Like they say, life is full of disappointments. I'm cool with expressions of disappointment. But when it crosses over to anger, or to imply it is somehow a personal insult, that's a little bit overreacting.... don't you think?

Polywen,
I definitely agree. If not being able to get a lego figure is worth getting so upset about,, they must live a wonderful, worry-free fairy tale life.
The funny thing is how upset some people are in response to the comic. Kind of ironic because that is the whole point of the comic, getting so worked up about something so trivial.