Review: 72159 Jigglypuff Concert
Posted by SetToBuild,
In the Pokémon franchise, Jigglypuff is known for being able to sing both people and other Pokémon to sleep, usually against their will. Its soporific serenade is sadly missing from this LEGO version, but it’s still a pretty cute addition to the LEGO Pokémon SMART Play line.
Please note, this set does not contain a SMART Brick.
Summary
72159 Jigglypuff Concert, 88 pieces.
£12.99 / $14.99 / €14.99 | 14.8p, 17.0c, 17.0c per piece.
Buy at LEGO.com »
Jigglypuff suits the cuboid design language, but this one lacks talent
- Cute as a button
- Doesn't sing
- Pricey
The set was provided for review by LEGO. All opinions expressed are those of the author.
Box & Contents
The box continues the typical SMART Play branding, spending significant surface area promoting the possible integrations—especially for such a small box.
The back of the box shows an ethereal hand performing the dash action, but this was surprisingly difficult to purposely replicate. I found it to happen a lot more by accident.
Inside are two small unnumbered paper bags, an instruction booklet and an electronic waste leaflet. There is no sticker sheet.
This is the massive multi-language electronic waste leaflet that comes in every set where SMART Tags are present. Its only purpose is to inform customers not to dispose of SMART Tags in the bin. This might be obvious to Brickset readers, but you'd be surprised: a friend of mine used to put his spare parts in the bin! (Now he gives them to me...)
Completed Model
Most of the set’s pieces go to Jigglypuff, but a couple of speakers and a microphone are also included. The microphone’s end is pointed, just like in the anime, where it is used to draw on the faces of unsuspecting victims of Jigglypuff’s hypnotic singing.
As Jigglypuff is a ‘balloon Pokémon’, basically a floating bubble, the rounded cube design aesthetic actually fits really well in this case. In most Pokémon media, Jigglypuff is usually presented as almost weightless and able to float, but in LEGO form, feels like quite a solid mass. The nubbly little arms are poseable with rotation in one axis, as they are formed with 1x2 rounded plates.
Two plain and two decorated versions of the new leaf-shaped plates form the ears, and the large slopes for the eyes are decorated too. They are accompanied by the forehead swirl and mouth prints, making for quite an impressive ratio of printed to unprinted parts in this small model.
One pearl gold 1x1 round plate and one teal 1x1 round plate were included as extras.
Play Experience
A new 2x2 plate with cutouts allows a tool to get under the SMART Brick or the filler section to be easily removed. The hollow creatures are the stuff of nightmares!
On most of the other SMART Brick Pokémon, the blank tile covering the SMART Brick goes over the middle of the brick, but in this case the tile is offset upwards to maintain the correct position for its printed mouth.
When activated, Jigglypuff’s announcement sounds very sing-songy, but it doesn’t actually sing at any moment during play. I thought it would be clever if placing Jigglypuff near another Pokémon would make it sing instead of chat, and send the other Pokémon off to dreamland. This sadly did not happen—what a missed opportunity!
The solo functions are the same as the other SMART Play Pokémon: walk, dash, tickle, sleep and attack. Other actions require a SMART Tag or another Pokémon to interact with.
Conclusion
As chosen by not only Terry Crews but also Lady Gaga, Jigglypuff is a formidable opponent, and this cute rendition of the well-known Pokémon is a must-have for completionists. It’s a little worse value for money than the other smaller sets. This is probably largely due to economies of scale acting against the solo creature set, and also maybe because of the proportion of large curved printed pieces. It’s a shame that this set didn’t include a hidden singing ability, but the recognisable nature of this iconic Generation I Pokémon is sure to be a success.
51 likes
42 comments on this article
Need a Scream Tail.
if you ask me... the whole pokemon theme and all the other licenced stuff lego is pushing, is unnecessary to put is nicely. it looks like as lego is just a service to other brands to monetize their products instead servicing the brand of it's own. i also predict that lego will perish with the sunset of the generation-x.
@Luka_Lobe said:
"if you ask me... the whole pokemon theme and all the other licenced stuff lego is pushing, is unnecessary to put is nicely. it looks like as lego is just a service to other brands to monetize their products instead servicing the brand of it's own. i also predict that lego will perish with the sunset of the generation-x."
I'll largely agree with you on the first part, but strongly disagree on the last part. A lot of the licensed lines, specifically Pokemon, does feel like "How can we cram this into Lego?" rather than "How can Lego accommodate this?" Which often leads to products that are too far from what Lego is while simultaneously being too far from the franchise being licensed; Sets aren't "Lego enough".
A lot of the Pokemon sets feel that way to me.
As for the last bit, about Lego perishing in a generation or two... No way. The brand as a whole is simply too evergreen. It is riding a wave that started during the COVID lockdowns, where a lot of new AFOLs were born, but it's six years later and that wave hasn't broken yet. The AFOL craze may die down, leaving a lot of Icons/Editions sets sitting on the shelf at Target, but Botanicals is here to stay, and kids will always love Lego. That won't change. Lego won't be setting new profitability records each year forever, but they certainly won't be going out of business anytime soon.
I am suprised so many people buy this while you can get 2 pokemon builds for almost same price
This should have come at least with SING tag.
I'm surprised that the offset eyes weren't mentioned, it causes it to look derpy in the wrong sort of way.
@Luka_Lobe said:
"if you ask me... the whole pokemon theme and all the other licenced stuff lego is pushing, is unnecessary to put is nicely. it looks like as lego is just a service to other brands to monetize their products instead servicing the brand of it's own. i also predict that lego will perish with the sunset of the generation-x."
I feel that the internet is just generally contrarian nowadays.
Comments on a new 18+ set. "Why the display sets, we want playable sets."
Comments on a Smartbrick set. "Why the playable sets, we want display sets."
Comments on licenced sets. "We want non-licenced."
Comments on non-licenced sets. "What is this theme? We want licenced".
Etc.
@Luka_Lobe said:
"if you ask me... the whole pokemon theme and all the other licenced stuff lego is pushing, is unnecessary to put is nicely. it looks like as lego is just a service to other brands to monetize their products instead servicing the brand of it's own. i also predict that lego will perish with the sunset of the generation-x."
Do you have anything to say about the actual set, or just the general concept of licenses?
@Kre_O said:
"I feel that the internet is just generally contrarian nowadays.
Comments on a new 18+ set. "Why the display sets, we want playable sets."
Comments on a Smartbrick set. "Why the playable sets, we want display sets."
Comments on licenced sets. "We want non-licenced."
Comments on non-licenced sets. "What is this theme? We want licenced".
Etc."
That's the Goomba Fallacy in action. Seems like it's a really easy trap to fall into, speaking from both personal experience and observation, here.
To quote Wiktionary...
"A logical fallacy that occurs when someone sees contradictory opinions expressed by members of a group and mistakenly believes that those people are being hypocritical, when in reality those contradictory opinions were expressed by separate individuals."
@lordofdragonss said:
"I am suprised so many people buy this while you can get 2 pokemon builds for almost same price
This should have come at least with SING tag."
I'm sure plenty of people are going to buy it simply because it's the cheapest(even if another set is barely more expensive) and because it's their favorite Pokemon. I'm not a fan of Pokemon, but I do have a couple of friends who are, and they go rabid for anything to do with their favorite.
A younger member (finished her first year of college this year) of my LUG asked me what I used to design the sphere shape for my Beholders. I showed her how to work Bram’s Sphere Generator, and she used it to produce a 10” diameter Lowell Sphere that formed the basis for this character. Her microphone head comes off to reveal a chisel-tip marker underneath.
Jigglypuff has seen some horrible things.... it's got the saucer-eyed, 1,000 yard stare going on for sure.
That looks pretty cute.....until you put the Smart Brick in.....
While the whole concept seems to make a lot more sense here than in the first SW wave, it still feels like a half-baked system. Now I'm not a Pokemon fan to begin with so probably would at best buy these as a gift, but it still is kinda sad that just because of that system, most of the world won't get this sets. Without the Smart Tag and with all Smart Play references removed, this could have been a pretty perfect €10 set.
@Luka_Lobe said:
"if you ask me... the whole pokemon theme and all the other licenced stuff lego is pushing, is unnecessary to put is nicely. it looks like as lego is just a service to other brands to monetize their products instead servicing the brand of it's own. i also predict that lego will perish with the sunset of the generation-x."
It's almost as if those Danish scallywags are trying to make money with things that people actually want to buy! How dare they! Booooh! We need more Paradisa and M-Tron!
Also: we need a singing Jigglypuff.
I can’t tell if it’s the photography, but is the white printing not the best? Looks a little pink to me.
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
@mikesray said:
" @Luka_Lobe said:
"if you ask me... the whole pokemon theme and all the other licenced stuff lego is pushing, is unnecessary to put is nicely. it looks like as lego is just a service to other brands to monetize their products instead servicing the brand of it's own. i also predict that lego will perish with the sunset of the generation-x."
I'll largely agree with you on the first part, but strongly disagree on the last part. A lot of the licensed lines, specifically Pokemon, does feel like "How can we cram this into Lego?" rather than "How can Lego accommodate this?" Which often leads to products that are too far from what Lego is while simultaneously being too far from the franchise being licensed; Sets aren't "Lego enough".
A lot of the Pokemon sets feel that way to me.
As for the last bit, about Lego perishing in a generation or two... No way. The brand as a whole is simply too evergreen. It is riding a wave that started during the COVID lockdowns, where a lot of new AFOLs were born, but it's six years later and that wave hasn't broken yet. The AFOL craze may die down, leaving a lot of Icons/Editions sets sitting on the shelf at Target, but Botanicals is here to stay, and kids will always love Lego. That won't change. Lego won't be setting new profitability records each year forever, but they certainly won't be going out of business anytime soon. "
Ok... but still. Lego shifted from being a childrens creative toy to being overpriced highly specialized 3d puzzle for adults. Children simply are no longer interested in Lego enough (at least from my perspective and from experience and observation i have with the new generations). The main difference between Lego from my time of being a kid and today is... lego had much less differentiated pieces and creations were trully not as beautiful as today with all the specialized parts, but the imagination of the children compensates that. Today's sets practically do not allow to build stuff from imagination unless one has many many sets to combine. I am an adult fan of lego for 50 years. I have forgotten Lego when I grew up for some time as many of us when I discovered life is not just play and when I discovered there are also girls... But later in life after finishing school I got back to Lego as a hobby, completed back my old childhood sets with the help of Bricklink and started buying again... until everything changed and there are more than 50% of all sets licensed. Now my relationship with Lego is more or less a love-hate relationship and unfortunately it leans more and more to the latter.
Also the Lego Technic used to be really educational. My early sets taught me the basics of engineering. Now all mechanism are hidden deep behind all the panels and the instructions are so SO complicated that even as an experienced engineer with lots of Lego Techinc building experience I often could not recognise what I am building until the most of the model is already built and hidden behind layers of panelings. All the kids love to play with and explore my early Lego Technic sets, because they can understand them at once and are much more intuitive. This is why I think Lego will be gone when the last of us GEN-X will disappear.
Lego is making record sales year after year just because they completely changed the target customer base. Adults became practically the only target audience. Sets for children are worse every year and are repetitive. There are less and less different sets. I don't think that Lego can count that children of today will become AFOL users when they grow up. It is understandable that nostalgia and purchasing power of an adult who played with limited sets as a child is the driving force of AFOL users of today but I doubt that children of today will become AFOL users in the future in large numbers since they do not appreciate Lego as THE TOY of their dreams.
Epic fail. How in the world did they not inlude any singing, its like the entire reason for this one to be built. Is the technology here that limited.
As for throwing spare parts in the bin, that is insane but it must happen more often than one would imagine.
@ToysFromTheAttic
I think we need both (licensed and not), but having been a kid in the 90s, I feel like kids now are potentially missing out due to the lowered emphasis on the latter.
LEGO's in-house themes are much less set in stone, and barring a few exceptions, even the more fleshed out themes don't have the same scale of multimedia franchises as licensed ones to passively reinforce their rules and canon and such.
So kids can get a framework to play with, if they need it, but one that's a lot more naturally conducive to the whole "make it your own" thing.
I don't necessarily think originality is "better," but it's still worthwhile.
Man, I really struggled to articulate this one. Hopefully it made sense.
Almost reasonably priced
But again why a smart brick if the sound isn't the sound we know?
@Kre_O said:
"Comments on non-licenced sets. "What is this theme? We want licenced"."
I have never seen a comment even remotely like that except possibly among Speed Champions fans for licensed cars. Not even from Star Wars fans.
@Luka_Lobe said:
"Ok... but still. Lego shifted from being a childrens creative toy to being overpriced highly specialized 3d puzzle for adults. Children simply are no longer interested in Lego enough (at least from my perspective and from experience and observation i have with the new generations). The main difference between Lego from my time of being a kid and today is... lego had much less differentiated pieces and creations were trully not as beautiful as today with all the specialized parts, but the imagination of the children compensates that. Today's sets practically do not allow to build stuff from imagination unless one has many many sets to combine."
Hold up one darn second. I’ve got over 200 public displays under my belt, in the past 23 years. Kids are never not excited to see our displays. When we put playbrick out for them to build with, that’s about the only time they voluntarily stop looking at our layout. They build whatever they want, with whatever parts are available. Occasionally we get one kid who needs a very specific part, but otherwise they typically just run with whatever’s there. I’ve seen kids sit down and build when it’s all just 2x4 bricks in a single color, I’ve seen them do it when it’s a tub full of parts from a single line of sets (specifically the Designer series), and I’ve seen them do it when it’s a random assortment of parts that someone bought off a random stranger. But kids are always going to figure out something they can build with whatever parts you put in front of them.
If you look at the full spread of sets on the market and say you can’t build anything with them, that’s a _you_ problem. And by “you”, I mean any AFOL who doesn’t believe enough in kids’ imagination to give them the benefit of the doubt. Rebrickable is dedicated to proof to the contrary. Go look up a random assortment of sets from this year and see how many of them already have alt-build instructions posted. And the brutally ironic thing is, most of the people I see complaining that you can’t build anything with today’s expanded part palette are frequently the same people who only like to buy sets from their own childhood, and only build those stock.
"Lego is making record sales year after year just because they completely changed the target customer base. Adults became practically the only target audience. Sets for children are worse every year and are repetitive. There are less and less different sets. I don't think that Lego can count that children of today will become AFOL users when they grow up. It is understandable that nostalgia and purchasing power of an adult who played with limited sets as a child is the driving force of AFOL users of today but I doubt that children of today will become AFOL users in the future in large numbers since they do not appreciate Lego as THE TOY of their dreams."
They’ve supplemented their market, not supplanted it. Yes, more adults than ever are buying sets, but they still sell a metric crapton of sets to, or for, kids. Kids have a higher turnover as a market share, though. Most of them grow out of playing with toys, and won’t see building a LEGO set as anything but that for much of their early adulthood. However, this means there’s always a fresh set of eyes looking at that set that’s based on oft-repeated subject matter. If the subject matter didn’t sell, they wouldn’t repeat it.
Those eyes-on-cylinder-surfaces really reminds me of the windows on a submarine or an airship gondola. At least the combination of R2 corners and 2-stud straights looks a little better than the usual R1 corners and 2-stud straights. I guess 1-stud straights would've looked even better, but of course they need to have room for that stupid smartbrick. Why didn't they at least include a 2x2x2/3 bow to cover it better? Leaving it half-exposed like this looks really bad. Guess the cost of that part went into that massive E-waste boilerplate sheet, complete with meaningless symbols like the "Do Not Recycle" wheelie bin, a Triforce (wrong franchise) and the "Seed The Earth With Your Waste" icon.
@SetToBuild said: "This might be obvious to Brickset readers, but you'd be surprised: a friend of mine used to put his spare parts in the bin!"
For a similar horror story, look up the lego.com reviews on 10281 Bonsai, where @DrUmbongo ("Annoying, fiddly and missing pieces") has a picture of the entire set (including several unopened bags) thrown into the trash (together with a beer can that probably should've gone to deposit or recycling) - that is AFTER having kragled it (the set, not the beer can).
@Spritetoggle said: ""A logical fallacy that occurs when someone sees contradictory opinions expressed by members of a group and mistakenly believes that those people are being hypocritical..."
A sure indicator of this is when they respond using "buzzword of the week", like in 2020: "Everyone who disagrees with me are entitled" and 2026: "Everyone who disagrees with me are a contrarian".
"LEGO's in-house themes are much less set in stone, and barring a few exceptions, even the more fleshed out themes don't have the same scale of multimedia franchises as licensed ones to passively reinforce their rules and canon and such"
Yes, I always felt these in-house "Totally not a rip-off of well-known franchise X" themes had a particular charm to them, and one of their major strengths (both for kids and set designers) was that they weren't limited to "canon" stories from movies etc.
OTOH, licensed themes forced the designers to at least put an effort into making the model look like the real thing. One major reason I lost interest in Space was how the models far too often were a heap of semi-specialized parts just thrown together to look like something vaguely futuristic. For example 6982 Explorien Starship made little sense to me (were those odd cockpit frames ever used anywhere else?), the ten year older 6985 Cosmic Fleet Voyager was way superior as it at least had a substantial pressurized cabin (I always pitied those astronauts for having to wear their suits for months at a time, the theme sorely missed bases similar to 6441 Deep Reef Refuge).
@Luka_Lobe
Can we be friends? You exacly have same thoughts like me.
They are selling MODELS more and more. Not toys. Just look at todays Creator. 90% SETS ARE DISPLAY SETS. Where are houses? Where is variety? Who needs CREATOR HANDBAG????
Models prioritize realism, detail, and display value.
Toys focus on durability, continuous interaction, and versatility.
Which one fits the most Lego now?
@Robot99 said:
"I'm surprised that the offset eyes weren't mentioned, it causes it to look derpy in the wrong sort of way."
This is 100% my take on this set, the way the face is structured really ruins the whole aesthetic. I don't know how they'd fix that though without redesigning the whole model to accommodate different printing.
Still waiting for Larvesta and/or Volcarona. I'd settle for Aggron or Primarina too if they were done well.
@lordofdragonss said:
" @Luka_Lobe
Can we be friends? You exacly have same thoughts like me.
They are selling MODELS more and more. Not toys. Just look at todays Creator. 90% SETS ARE DISPLAY SETS. Where are houses? Where is variety? Who needs CREATOR HANDBAG????
Models prioritize realism, detail, and display value.
Toys focus on durability, continuous interaction, and versatility.
Which one fits the most Lego now?"
Lego is not a toy any more.
Y'all have a lot to say about a pink orb.
@SetToBuild said:
"Y'all have a lot to say about a pink orb."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZfbBqBOSXlU
@Spritetoggle said:
" @ToysFromTheAttic
I think we need both (licensed and not), but having been a kid in the 90s, I feel like kids now are potentially missing out due to the lowered emphasis on the latter.
LEGO's in-house themes are much less set in stone, and barring a few exceptions, even the more fleshed out themes don't have the same scale of multimedia franchises as licensed ones to passively reinforce their rules and canon and such.
So kids can get a framework to play with, if they need it, but one that's a lot more naturally conducive to the whole "make it your own" thing.
I don't necessarily think originality is "better," but it's still worthwhile.
Man, I really struggled to articulate this one. Hopefully it made sense."
I understand what you're trying to say, and I think many people here, who likely also grew up in the 90s and prior, can relate to that sentiment. However, the 90s ended a quarter century ago, and LEGO almost went bankrupt during that time, so it's safe to assume they're not going back to that well. A healthy balance between licensed and non-licensed would be ideal, but if licensed sets are bringing in more money, then it's understandable that a company will prefer that. You can't blame them for that, because companies exist to make profits.
However, people here seem to keep blaming LEGO for wanting to keep making huge profits instead of giving them the supposedly 'creative' stuff of their childhoods. That's very naive, isn't it? Also, how original were these themes really? I love the old Castle, Pirates, and Space stuff, but those are also very generic themes for toys. Nothing wrong with that, but it's not like they invented something whole cloth. And I don't think kids play any differently with a Star Wars spaceship than with a Classic Space vessel, because I don't expect a 7-year old to know or care about 50 years of Star Wars continuity. ;-)
Kids (and parents alike) are naturally drawn to what they know, so licensed sets make perfect sense in that regard. I liked LEGO Castle sets so much because I saw knights fighting in TV shows, movies, and cartoons. Especially if you grew up during the 80s and 90s, you probably had a good amount of licensed toys or toys that were reminiscent of licensed properties. If I didn't know something, I could still think it was cool, but I'd still rather have the toy from the thing I recognized from TV. Even if it was a 'random' castle or carriage that looked akin to what I saw in media related to Robin Hood or William Tell.
Also, kids aren't missing out on anything, because they don't have nostalgia for the things you have. They don't care for any of that. Maybe later in life, when coming back to LEGO as an adult and revisiting themes of the past they might develop some sympathy for LEGO sets from long before they were born and think they're quirky or charming, but there's a good likelihood they will still prefer the thing they grew up with -- as do we. Whenever I see a LEGO set from the 70s or before, I think: "Those don't look like a lot of fun without minifigs." I'm sure many 50- or 60-year olds think that was 'peak LEGO', though. It's a matter of perspective, and I feel many adults here keep trying to project their perspective on kids toys today, because they can't seem to let go of nostalgia, while at the same time expressing negative thoughts about things younger people than them might have nostalgia for.
27 Creator sets this year. Of those, 20 are easy to play with after they’re built, and 7 are tilted towards display (although several of them would still be pretty easy to play with — handbags, telescopes and perfume bottles aren’t even slightly difficult to incorporate into imaginative play, and the easel is basically an infinite canvas to make your own art). Even ignoring, temporarily, all of the alt builds and that of course building a Lego set is itself playing with it, that seems pretty far from 90% to me. Is that number just based on the idea that kids can’t play with the animals sets? I don’t think that’s a realistic assessment.
I dislike Jigglypuff’s expression but I don’t think every review of the Pokemon Smart Brick sets needs a comment from me saying that I’m not super happy with the aesthetic. Bit repetitive. I wouldn’t have commented at all if it wasn’t for the odd Creator thing, which is even more odd as a comment on something that’s so clearly a playset. We know what Lego Pokemon display sets look like and it isn’t anything like this.
@ToysFromTheAttic said:
" And I don't think kids play any differently with a Star Wars spaceship than with a Classic Space vessel, because I don't expect a 7-year old to know or care about 50 years of Star Wars continuity. ;-)"
I can’t tell you how offended I get when I see my kids battling Thrawn, Padme, and Spider-Man action figures or LEGO Darth Vader visiting Hogwarts Lol
@ToysFromTheAttic said:
"I understand what you're trying to say, and I think many people here, who likely also grew up in the 90s and prior, can relate to that sentiment. However, the 90s ended a quarter century ago, and LEGO almost went bankrupt during that time, so it's safe to assume they're not going back to that well."
You’re off by about half a decade. The 90’s weren’t nearly as profitable as what followed, but they also weren’t capable of overextending themselves in the same way they would shortly after. 1999 was when they really got into licensing IP instead of just brand logos like Shell and McDonald’s. It’s also when the NA market exploded. 2001 followed that up with a smash success called Bionicle. 2001-2002 saw two massive waves of Harry Potter sets, and 2002 had SW Ep2, so those two years kinda set them up for failure. The final SW film wouldn’t release until 2005, so there was nothing really driving the sales of those sets in 2003-2004, while HP started to taper off to the point they only made one set for the fifth film. It was 2003-2004 when they posted their two biggest losses.
The drop in sales was even noticed by George Lucas, which is why the Clone Wars animated series was created. Sales were strong in 1999, 2002, and 2005, but weak in 2000-2001, 2003-2004, and 2006-2007, before a string of multi-year TV shows were able to able to push sales from 2008 on (I even have a coworker who only watched the Clone Wars show and never saw any of the films).
"And I don't think kids play any differently with a Star Wars spaceship than with a Classic Space vessel, because I don't expect a 7-year old to know or care about 50 years of Star Wars continuity. ;-)"
Arguably, they might, just because they’ll recognize some of the SW vessels and be more likely to play with them instead of just tearing them apart and building something new.
@Hiratha said:
"27 Creator sets this year. Of those, 20 are easy to play with after they’re built, and 7 are tilted towards display (although several of them would still be pretty easy to play with — handbags, telescopes and perfume bottles aren’t even slightly difficult to incorporate into imaginative play, and the easel is basically an infinite canvas to make your own art). Even ignoring, temporarily, all of the alt builds and that of course building a Lego set is itself playing with it, that seems pretty far from 90% to me. Is that number just based on the idea that kids can’t play with the animals sets? I don’t think that’s a realistic assessment."
When I made my “It’s a _you_ problem” comment, it was specifically because I’ve noticed that the people who complain the most about the direction the parts palette has gone in recent years, and how you can’t do anything with those parts, are the same people who keep suggesting that all they do is buy older sets and build them stock. So they aren’t doing anything with the parts regardless, if all they’re doing is building stock sets. And yeah, that means the only gripe they have boils down to, “This isn’t what I remember LEGO sets looking like, and I can’t accept it.”
"We know what Lego Pokemon display sets look like and it isn’t anything like this."
Especially because this is currently the only version of this character, and it’s the least expensive set that actually allows you to build an actual Pokémon, I expect a lot of copies will end up being just that. People will build her and set her on their desk at work, or a shelf at home. Kids might still play with her, but I’d be curious to know how frequently it happens without the SmartBrick vs with one installed (and in the latter case, how often people try to replace her missing chin).
But yeah, this is clearly designed to be a toy when you compare it with that monster set they debuted the theme with.
@PurpleDave
I suppose on that basis I could start being deeply obnoxious and claiming all 4+ sets are display sets just because I, personally, have more than one on a shelf, but we’ve probably got enough problems with people sincerely saying silly things about 4+ sets and style without me committing to a 4+ bit.
@Hiratha said:
" @PurpleDave
I suppose on that basis I could start being deeply obnoxious and claiming all 4+ sets are display sets just because I, personally, have more than one on a shelf, but we’ve probably got enough problems with people sincerely saying silly things about 4+ sets and style without me committing to a 4+ bit."
Clearly you haven’t been paying attention to how things work around here.
The SmartBrick seems like such an expensive, roundabout way of telling your children you hate them.
@Crux said:
"The SmartBrick seems like such an expensive, roundabout way of telling your children you hate them."
You've never given kids toys that make noise, have you?
@yellowcastle said:
" @ToysFromTheAttic said:
" And I don't think kids play any differently with a Star Wars spaceship than with a Classic Space vessel, because I don't expect a 7-year old to know or care about 50 years of Star Wars continuity. ;-)"
I can’t tell you how offended I get when I see my kids battling Thrawn, Padme, and Spider-Man action figures or LEGO Darth Vader visiting Hogwarts Lol"
This is how kids should play. My Ninja Turtles also battled Skeletor -- although that did recently become an official crossover.
@PurpleDave said:
" @ToysFromTheAttic said:
"And I don't think kids play any differently with a Star Wars spaceship than with a Classic Space vessel, because I don't expect a 7-year old to know or care about 50 years of Star Wars continuity. ;-)"
Arguably, they might, just because they’ll recognize some of the SW vessels and be more likely to play with them instead of just tearing them apart and building something new."
Admittedly, I don't know a lot of 7-year olds, but looking at friends' kids, they have no clue about Star Wars. It's Fortnite and Pokémon. Even Marvel stuff feels 'old' to them. But for the most part, they make up their own narratives with whatever toys they have lying around.
@ToysFromTheAttic said:
" @yellowcastle said:
" @ToysFromTheAttic said:
" And I don't think kids play any differently with a Star Wars spaceship than with a Classic Space vessel, because I don't expect a 7-year old to know or care about 50 years of Star Wars continuity. ;-)"
I can’t tell you how offended I get when I see my kids battling Thrawn, Padme, and Spider-Man action figures or LEGO Darth Vader visiting Hogwarts Lol"
This is how kids should play. My Ninja Turtles also battled Skeletor -- although that did recently become an official crossover.
@PurpleDave said:
" @ToysFromTheAttic said:
"And I don't think kids play any differently with a Star Wars spaceship than with a Classic Space vessel, because I don't expect a 7-year old to know or care about 50 years of Star Wars continuity. ;-)"
Arguably, they might, just because they’ll recognize some of the SW vessels and be more likely to play with them instead of just tearing them apart and building something new."
Admittedly, I don't know a lot of 7-year olds, but looking at friends' kids, they have no clue about Star Wars. It's Fortnite and Pokémon. Even Marvel stuff feels 'old' to them. But for the most part, they make up their own narratives with whatever toys they have lying around."
Your friends' kids might know Marvel -from- Fortnite cross-overs, and Pokémon crosses over into most everything - including Nintendo's "Smash Bros."-franchise. Of which the narrative in the first game was... some random kid in their bedroom, making up the narrative of a fighting-game tournament with whatever toys they had lying around. The giant hands you fight at the end, are presumably the kid's hands.
Yeah. I know. Sometimes it's not about family-therapy through volcanoes and karate. Sometimes the ruthless dictator didn't murder your father and/or teacher. Sometimes it's not about redemption-arcs and finding your own place in the world as a misunderstood kleptomaniac who communicates exclusively through giant swords and impractical hairstyles. Sometimes it's just a little guy in his room, playing with his toys, and that's fine.
@Crux said:
" @ToysFromTheAttic said:
" @yellowcastle said:
" @ToysFromTheAttic said:
" And I don't think kids play any differently with a Star Wars spaceship than with a Classic Space vessel, because I don't expect a 7-year old to know or care about 50 years of Star Wars continuity. ;-)"
I can’t tell you how offended I get when I see my kids battling Thrawn, Padme, and Spider-Man action figures or LEGO Darth Vader visiting Hogwarts Lol"
This is how kids should play. My Ninja Turtles also battled Skeletor -- although that did recently become an official crossover.
@PurpleDave said:
" @ToysFromTheAttic said:
"And I don't think kids play any differently with a Star Wars spaceship than with a Classic Space vessel, because I don't expect a 7-year old to know or care about 50 years of Star Wars continuity. ;-)"
Arguably, they might, just because they’ll recognize some of the SW vessels and be more likely to play with them instead of just tearing them apart and building something new."
Admittedly, I don't know a lot of 7-year olds, but looking at friends' kids, they have no clue about Star Wars. It's Fortnite and Pokémon. Even Marvel stuff feels 'old' to them. But for the most part, they make up their own narratives with whatever toys they have lying around."
Your friends' kids might know Marvel -from- Fortnite cross-overs, and Pokémon crosses over into most everything - including Nintendo's "Smash Bros."-franchise. Of which the narrative in the first game was... some random kid in their bedroom, making up the narrative of a fighting-game tournament with whatever toys they had lying around. The giant hands you fight at the end, are presumably the kid's hands.
Yeah. I know. Sometimes it's not about family-therapy through volcanoes and karate. Sometimes the ruthless dictator didn't murder your father and/or teacher. Sometimes it's not about redemption-arcs and finding your own place in the world as a misunderstood kleptomaniac who communicates exclusively through giant swords and impractical hairstyles. Sometimes it's just a little guy in his room, playing with his toys, and that's fine."
Actually, my friends' kids know Marvel characters either from the animated series Spidey and His Amazing Friends (which I saw a few episodes of, and it's the most watered down incarnation of superheroes you can imagine) or from all of the merch companies crank out. It's like how I was very much aware of Snoopy and Charlie Brown as a kid, but I don't remember ever seeing any Peanuts-related media -- not even the famous Christmas special (I made up for that later in life, though).
A friends' kid (now 6) used to dress up like Spider-Man all the time, but never saw any MCU movie, never played a Marvel videogame, and certainly never picked up a comic book. Last time I mentioned Spidey, the kid in question told me Spider-Man is 'too childish'. Oofff!
Now it's all about collecting Pokémon cards, without ever having seen the animated series or having played any of the Nintendo games. They just invent stuff on the spot, without having any connection to the franchise besides thinking the little monsters look cute. And that's cool.
@lordofdragonss said:
" @Luka_Lobe
Can we be friends? You exacly have same thoughts like me.
They are selling MODELS more and more. Not toys. Just look at todays Creator. 90% SETS ARE DISPLAY SETS. Where are houses? Where is variety? Who needs CREATOR HANDBAG????
Models prioritize realism, detail, and display value.
Toys focus on durability, continuous interaction, and versatility.
Which one fits the most Lego now?"
We can of course be friends! Great minds think alike. :D
@Crux said: "The SmartBrick seems like such an expensive, roundabout way of telling your children you hate them"
I'd be tempted to say the smartbricks are an expensive, roundabout way of telling your children you hate *yourself*.
@PurpleDave said: "You've never given kids toys that make noise, have you?"
Isn't that something most parents try to avoid? I have an impression noisy toys mostly are given by mothers-in-law and childless uncles out of spite or simple cluelessness. It's not that such toys necessarily are that *loud*, but that the electronic variety often has a very limited number of samples - hearing the same half-a-dozen sounds over and over and over again will either slowly drive you insane or lead to you "accidently" losing the batteries or ripping out the speaker.
Even with today's low flash ram prices allowing a cheap toy to contain hours of unique, high-quality samples or even the full audiobook or choose-your-own-adventure of the story it's licensed from, manufacturers insists on giving them the same limited repertoire as they had in the early 80s. As I've said earlier Lego is especially bad at this, giving you yesterday's technology at tomorrow's prices.
@axeleng said:
" @PurpleDave said: "You've never given kids toys that make noise, have you?"
Isn't that something most parents try to avoid?"
Pretty much. Their only saving grace is when they use batteries and the kid can’t obtain replacement batteries on their own. Or better, when the batteries can’t be accessed for replacement. Otherwise, there’s a good chance it will “accidentally” end up in the trash. Buried in the middle of the bag, so even if the kid gets told to take the trash out, they won’t notice what’s hidden inside.