Curiosity is the next Cuusoo set, Portals is still a possibility

Posted by ,

Full article is here.

56 comments on this article

Gravatar
By in United States,

About the UCS Sandcrawler: "Unfortunately we can’t approve this project in the LEGO Review based on our ongoing relationship and collaboration with Lucasfilm on LEGO Star Wars." This supports what I've always thought and said: Cuusoo should NOT allow projects based on current IPs. They would never produce Star Wars, Batman, Lord of the Rings, Spiderman, Iron Man, etc through Cuusoo. They have these IPs firmly in hand. Why would they make a limited run of Star Wars models when they can mass produce them? Submissions based on current IPs just clogs up Cuusoo.

Gravatar
By in United Kingdom,

Glad it won, and I'm sure the actual model will be way more interesting.

Gravatar
By in United States,

Meh. Another Cuusoo that I won't be buying.

Gravatar
By in United States,

How boring....

Gravatar
By in United States,

I think this is a must buy for me.

Gravatar
By in Taiwan,

Happy to see one more set. Hope Portol becomes the candidate too.

I feel sad for mb_bricks, but not too much. We still have a chance if TLC one day consider to remake the Sandcrawler.

Gravatar
By in Australia,

This is so cool. I can't wait to get me one of these little beauties!

If anyone really wanted to, they could get on Rebrickable and download the instructions for the proposed MSL right now.

Gravatar
By in United States,

Wow LEGO! Really acting in a timely manner! NINE MONTHS! IT TOOK YOU 9 MONTHS!!!

Gravatar
By in United States,

While I will not have the chance to buy Curiosity, I am glad it won. It reminds me of my old Lego Discovery Kids sets, I miss that theme. ;-) I am not sad to see the Sandcrawler go, it was a great model but it size prohibited any chance of production. While I don't care much for Portal, I know the Portal fans will be excited there is still a possibility for a Portal set.

Now here is hoping Space Troopers (I still know it as Space Marines, curse you Warhammer trademarks!) beats Purdue Pete in the next review!

Gravatar
By in United States,

@Green Brick Giant, Coincidentally, that is almost how long it took for the Curiosity rover to get from Earth to Mars (November 26, 2011 - August 5, 2012). If the set comes out in January, the real rover will be about 70% of the way through its primary 2-year mission, which could be extended for much, much longer.

I think your typical LEGO set can easily take this long or longer to develop, so it doesn't seem too unusual.

In any case, I'm so happy my Curiosity rover model passed the review! I had read in the forums a while ago that a new set would be revealed at Brickworld and was hoping it would be the DeLorean Time Machine. I was wrong, but certainly can't complain.

Gravatar
By in United States,

I'm sad about the Sandcrawler, but at least Portal wasn't entirely eliminated.

Gravatar
By in United States,

I understand that the set takes awhile to get developed, but that's what they are doing now. The set won't be out for several more months, and in that time they can design the set. I'm just upset at the uselessness of the last several months. They couldn't announce this months ago?

And what the hell happened to BttF set? Are we ever going to see that get released? If LEGO is only going to release one Cuusoo set a month than why bother the the quarterly reviews?

Gravatar
By in United States,

I believe the BTTF DeLorean will come out early this August.

Gravatar
By in United Kingdom,

I will not be buying either of these sets (assuming the Portals set gets through). I was rooting for the Sandcrawler, although I am not at all surprised by the result. Hopefully though, the fact that the UCS Sandcrawler earned 10,000 supporters in the first place might spur LEGO into designing their own UCS Sandcrawler.

Gravatar
By in Croatia,

Where is BTTF set where LEGO

Gravatar
By in United States,

I am guessing they will hold onto Portal and give it the slot over Space Troopers and the college mascot set in the next review.

Gravatar
By in United States,

I voted for all 3 projects. Curiosity because I am a fan of space exploration, UCS Sandcrawler because I love Star Wars, and Portals because I have a funny portal t-shirt... ok actually i'll vote for anything that is getting close to 10k because I want to see TLG review them. I've never played Portals, or most of the video game IPs but I like the fresh ideas and interesting sets they could lead to. I feel like supporting Cuusoo means showing TLG that as an AFOL I'm interested in new ideas, not just things I want.

Gravatar
By in Italy,

They are really trying hard to disappoint us. Shut'em down!

Gravatar
By in Australia,

What happened to the second Legend of Zelda project? It seems like it's been entirely swept under the rug, with not even a passing mention of the fact that two Zelda projects have managed to make it to review... Oh well. If the list of series 11 minifigures is accurate, we'll probably be able to make a half-decent Link MOC out of the 'Christmas Elf' fig.

Gravatar
By in Norway,

Omg, how boring and how ugly! A no-buy for me. They picked the easiest and lamest choice of them all. Shame on you.

Gravatar
By in Denmark,

A NASA tie-in model is not exactly uncharted territory for LEGO. There have been previous tie-ins. But if TLG's marketing people were on top of this, they should have released the Curiousity model when the craft was launched. Too little, too late.

Gravatar
By in United States,

Well I knew it would be that space shuttle i don't really like it but oh well...

Gravatar
By in Australia,

What a joke!!!!!!!!!!

Gravatar
By in Ukraine,

^^^^^^^^I think Bumblepants' prediction is right on... They won't have any winners from the next batch of two, simply because Perdue Pete is just too regionally limited, and Space Troopers has essentially been pre-empted by Galaxy Squad... So yes, they will most likely announce Portal as the "hold-over winner" in three months time. I think that is for the best, because it means that a good set can't be ousted just because another one from the same quarter was also good, and it means that a bad set can't sneak through just because there were no other real contenders that passed during that particular quarter! At this point they have a nice pool of about 10 potential "hold-over winners" they can easily pick from if there is ever a weak line-up in the quarterly review!

And let's be honest here... For starters, the UCS Sandcrawler was just waaaaaay too big! But I am sure they did not necessarily want to impose any implied max size limits in the wording of their official decision. No surprises here.

Gravatar
By in New Zealand,

Going from what they've released in the past, I'm not surprised by the decision. But I am a little surprised by the fact that the Portal project is still under consideration, considering it would require at least one custom-designed piece.

"Go team!"

Gravatar
By in United States,

I saw that coming... I was of course rooting for the sand crawler, even though I knew it was a long shot. It will be interesting to see how portal turns out.

Gravatar
By in Sweden,

Don't get why LEGO can't just reject a project like the Sandcrawler straight away instead of mulling on an inevitable outcome for months and months. We all knew it wouldn't make it, and so did they, so why not be merciful about it?

Anyway, happy to see the Curiosity rover go forward. It's certainly an ideal kind of project for CUUSOO (as has already been proven by the first two Japanese sets). A no-brainer, and I hope it sells well! Bet a lot of science/space geeks will love having one on their desk at the office or in the bookshelf at home.

Gravatar
By in United States,

Hmm. I would've preferred Portal, but I'm not thrilled with the idea of Portal being a competitor for Space Troopers. (Because, let's be honest, Purdue Pete really isn't.)

Gravatar
By in United States,

Can't watch the video, what on earth is Curiosity???

Gravatar
By in United States,

@behemothjosh couldn't disagree with you more regarding current IP submissions clogging up cuusoo. The fact that UCS Sandcrawler got 10,000+ votes tells LEGO what their fans really want. Lets hope they use the voting on things like this as customer feedback and for future set ideas.

Gravatar
By in United Kingdom,

I can't watch the video (on my phone), so I don't know if it's mentioned there, but can somebody tell me what happened with Pete Reid's awesome Exo-Suit? Was that reviewed yet? I've not been keeping up with Cuusoo for a while...

Gravatar
By in United States,

@The_Creator: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curiosity_rover

@tevans333: Lego spends millions on research outside of Cuusoo and has sets planned years in advance. While its a nice thought, its highly unlikely they are going to take voting on Cuusoo seriously based on one set getting 10k votes. Ultimately letting DOA projects continue so long just wastes everyones time.

Gravatar
By in United States,

@LostInTranslation: Exo-Suit hasn't been reviewed yet. According to the site it is "Next Review" aka: 2 reviews away

Gravatar
By in United States,

@ zionesify - The earlier sets were of the Spirit and Opportunity rovers,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opportunity_(rover)
two probes that landed on Mars in 2004. This set is of Curiosity,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curiosity_(rover)
that landed on Mars last fall.

I do agree that LEGO should say up front that they won't accept sets from current licenses, or ones that come too close to current licences (those are the lessons of the Sandcrawler and the Western Town submissions), and just remove those from the voting. Like, for instance, they've done with other things. For instance, they've said they won't do religion. Now, I think a set of Notre Dame, for instance, might look good along with the Architecture line, but if I submitted a model they would just remove it from the queue. They should do the same with these others, as it just wastes peoples time and hopes, for instance, to pay attention to the Tumbler proposal.

I, for one, am quite excited about this set. I think it perfectly fits the spirit of the Shinkai and Hayabusa sets that started the whole Cuusoo experiment. Congratulations, Stephen!

Gravatar
By in United Kingdom,

@behemothjosh - You're spot on about why projects like the Sandcrawler can't get through Cuusoo, but as @tevans333 said, the fact that a set of that size based on that ship gets to review shows the team that control the SW license what people want to see.
Hopefully this will have pushed a redesign of the old Sandcrawler, and that's exactly why I supported the excellent Nebulon B Frigate by LDiEgo - I'd love to see a set LIKE that. (Well, I'd love to see that exact set, but I won't, and I'd be happy with one like it!!)

Gravatar
By in United Kingdom,

Fairly predictable result. Can't wait to see if space troopers becomes reality though.

Gravatar
By in United States,

Oh come on. The Curiosity Rover was the most boring of the three, and now it's the most OUT OF DATE of the three. Nine months of review and Lego picks the model I could throw together willy-nilly with the pieces I have in five minutes (I also love how they changed the colors so it sure as heck isn't on Mars anymore, which is ridiculous considering it's a MARS ROVER).

Cuusoo was a great concept, but boy has Lego lazed out on it. No sign of Back to the Future in EONS, and now we went 3/4 of a year only to find that a slapped together model of a robot people lost interest in ten months ago won the review because Star Wars got bought out in that time and Lego doesn't want to make new pieces.

Gravatar
By in United States,

@Kalking, I would say the rover is the least out of date of the three. Portal 2 was released sixteen months before the Curiosity rover even landed and the Sandcrawler has been around since 1977. The Curiosity rover is exploring Mars right now and it is not even half-way through its primary two year mission. Even then, it is likely that it will continue exploring for many years after that.

Gravatar
By in United States,

I must admit that I was rooting for this one.

The Curioaity rover is also one of the most advanced pieces of technology in the world, and will likely go down in history as a milestone in extra-terrestrial exploration.

In this case, I love the educational outreach angle behind the set: anything that helps encourage a better science education is fine with me! The model is also quite good, though I do think Lego sholpuld do somthing with the wheels to make them look more authentic - the standard wheels just don't do the rover justice.
The other projects were great, though I do th
ink the UCS Sandcrawler was unfeasibly large to turn into a set. I would love to see one on display though. I will definately get this when it c...omes out.

Gravatar
By in United States,

I am quite excited for the rover, yet I really hope Lego doesn't ignore the Portal project. It seems most other brick companies are getting huge sales from video game themed products. Sure, you would need to make more molds, but it would provide a great profit for Lego.

Gravatar
By in Australia,

seems like a fantastic idea for a CUUSOO project. Its not a commercial licence (I think), and to a degree is educational and inspirational. Go for it! Glad this one passed. As for any licenced IP I'm never going to be keen on it. More projects like this!

Gravatar
By in United States,

^I agree. The Curiosity Rover was definitely the best representation of what Cuusoo is about: Having lego fans submit original ideas that will both educate and inspire future builders. So a definite congrats is in order to Perijove!

Gravatar
By in United States,

I do find it interesting (amusing maybe?) that so many fans of Cuusoo think that their voting for projects based on current licensed themes is going to push TLG to make sets just like them. It doesn't. Not even one little bit. Why? Because Cuusoo is a completely separate entity from those that control what sets from what licensed themes get made. Cuusoo is for original fan ideas, not for themes that TLG have paid top dollar and have done a ton of research and planning for. Their goals are completely different.

And let's be honest, if your company invested millions into licences like Star Wars, LOTR, DC and Marvel comics, and you had a system of research and development in place that was making you a good return on your investment, why would you change your plans based on a few fan votes on a website? With a voting system that has proven to be quite frivolous at that?

Would I have loved to have seen the UCS Sandcrawler get made? Absolutely! And TLG may even have one already in the works in the coming years. But they're not going to make any current IP ideas from Cuusoo, and they're not using Cuusoo as research on current IP's in any way, shape or form.

Conclusion? Cuusoo getting everyone's hopes up by keeping all these projects based on current IPs until they hit review is silly.

Gravatar
By in United States,

Regardless of whether the UCS Sandcrawler ever had a realistic shot at being selected, I feel really badly for MB Bricks. That's the *second* project of his that's gotten to 10,000 without being produced.

It also means everyone should forget about trying to create a Cuusoo project for an existing licensed theme. TLG should just archive the Invisible Hand already and not get anyone's hopes up. I'm just really hoping that toomuchcaffe's Micro Star Wars Scenes will be an exception given their unique nature.

Gravatar
By in Poland,

What with Back to the Future DeLorean set??????????... :(

Gravatar
By in United Kingdom,

Ughh. Don't fancy the Curiosity Rover at all. How much space lego do we need. I honestly can't see this selling well.

Gravatar
By in Poland,

I think this is a great decision - like the Hayabusa satellite, I like the exploration, science, and technology themes of Curiosity and will definitely be picking it up when it's released.

Gravatar
By in Ukraine,

Yep, the order of preference for Cuusoo winners is definitely going to be...

1) unlicensed ideas in brand-new themes and genres,
2) unlicensed ideas in familiar existing themes,
3) licences that are potentially new,
4) licences that exist...

And that shouldn't come as any surprise to anyone, since they have been saying that pretty clearly in the Official Cuusoo Blog since the start! In fact, I think that every time they have another hold-up in licensing negotiations, and fans are starting to get antsy for an answer, they are just going to do the easy thing and green-light one of the unlicensed "hold-over winners" from a previous quarter... To me, that just seems like the obvious solution from their point of view! =)

Gravatar
By in Ukraine,

^ They really have been saying right from the start that "Cuusoo is for NEW IDEAS..." Although they've rearranged all their Blog pages recently, and I am not sure where they put the FAQ now, so I am sorry if I don't have any immediate quotes or references to back that up. Does anyone know where they put the Official Cuusoo FAQ now?! =)

And sure, the cute little opening video on their home page shows them looking through magnifying glasses at a familiar line of trucks and cars and spaceships, but those cartoon models are just generic stand-in examples, and in real life, they want innovative ideas that their internal masterminds (or George Lucas or Ralph McQuarrie) did not think of!

Plus it is just better for the publicity, image and awareness of the Cuusoo Project if they do brand new things!

Seeing it from Lego's POV, does anyone honestly disagree? I would be glad to hear counter-arguments! =)

Gravatar
By in United States,

Really stink about SandCrawler I was looking forward to it. If CUUSO is not primarily for existing licensed product than they should just say so and not waste time. I hope that we can get the SC in one way shape or form it is incredible.

Gravatar
By in United States,

Any Sandcrawler that LEGO produces as a production set is going to be a LOT closer to #10144 than the fantastic MOC MB Bricks made - that's just the economic reality of the situation. Why would anyone be surprised at the obviousness of this? LEGO production sets have serious design and budgetary constraints that Moccers do not.

But the good news is - this is LEGO, so you can absolutely get the Sandcrawler of your dreams - get the instructions (or make your own), source the bricks, then build it. You don't need LEGO to officially endorse it as a production set. If you want it that bad, just do it!

Gravatar
By in Australia,

The problem is that of getting people's hopes up when they know all along they won't go with a licensed product. They do this on purpose in order to attract some interest in Cuuso, which is very misleading.

They could state from the outset that licensed themes will not be considered, then no one who votes will ever expect anything. That would lose a lot of popularity for Cuuso, so they would much rather be misleading and gain popularity that way. Shame on them for doing that.

Gravatar
By in Ukraine,

^They certainly will *CONSIDER* ideas in existing licenses, like SW, but it has to be something genuinely *NEW*...!

Gravatar
By in Ukraine,

WOW, or more likely, considering the fact that the ATLAS/CERN SuperCollider project just skyrocketed up to 6,000+ in a few days, and that Alatariel's females in science project did the same just two weeks ago, I think it's pretty clear that they will just continually pass over all of the Star Wars projects and all of the other fictitious IPs that get to 10,000, if they have the opportunity to earn great publicity points and good PR vibes by choosing realistic educational science sets, especially ones by people who are affiliated with the experiments in some way, instead of just more fantasy...! =)

Gravatar
By in United States,

I've been saying since day 1 that Cuusoo should come out and clearly say they aren't going to pass any submissions for licenses they currently have (SW, Disney, DC/Marvel, LotR, etc). I still say that.

That said, anyone who had their hopes up that the Sandcrawler was going to made is delusional. That set had 0.00000% chance of being made from the day it was posted, and anyone with any amount of common sense would have already known that.

Commenting has ended on this article.

Return to home page »