LEGO Ideas: Original Projects vs. Final Sets

Good article! Despite the hyperventilating over changes to the Blacksmith Shop, those changes are more the norm than the exception.

One thing is for sure: I'm super happy that we got Black Seas Barracuda, which was not the first intent of the original IDEAS submission.

Brilliant article! I was surprised people were upset over the Blacksmith shop being different, and this is a great illustration on how almost all Ideas sets are modified from submission to release. Kudos to the Lego designers for knowing how to improve stability and accessibility for official sets.

The Tree House, Barracuda Bay and Blacksmith sets all have the same problem: Brighter colors. The Old Fishing Store proves that it's not impossible to retain a more desaturated and realistic color scheme, which makes it one of the best sets ever for me.

While I loved the original Barracuda Bay submission, the adaptation by the designers to incorporate the transformation function and the tribute to the legacy of the Pirates theme were absolutely brilliant and, in my mind, the greatest improvement made in any of the Ideas set’s evolutions.

@Graupensuppe said:
"The Tree House, Barracuda Bay and Blacksmith sets all have the same problem: Brighter colors. The Old Fishing Store proves that it's not impossible to retain a more desaturated and realistic color scheme, which makes it one of the best sets ever for me."

Different strokes for different folks. I absolutely dislike the slumlike fishing store, and I love the splashes of colour in the tree house and the Black Seas Barracuda.

I also think the new blacksmith is pretty faithful to the colourscheme, it's just that the shiny render makes it seem brighter. I'd have to see an actual photo to really know what it looks like.

Spot on coverage as usual, thank you Cap'n for your keen insight.

I guess I'm a diehard fan of Ideas, since what I've been seeing throughout your analysis is that each single modification from Lego has undoubtedly improved the original submission by strengthening its structure and/or improving its aesthetics. The incredible success of Barracuda Bay is a perfect example of this, imo.

As far as the Blacksmith set goes, even though I really enjoy the Lego "overhaul", a stronger effort to keep the original set's Medieval identity would have been appreciated; that's the only aspect I think has been somewhat lost in the transition.

Nonetheless, I very much enjoyed the outcome, as for just about all Ideas sets.

Great article. People really need to learn to reign in their expectations. Also this conflation of dull and drab colors with realism is quite bothersome considering the medieval world was full of colors. If you don't like colorful things that's fine, but don't justify your opinion with the false notion that brown = more realistic.

There’s always going to be necessary modifications to make something viable as a mass-produced product.

This list is also a great reminder of how many awesome creations have come from Lego Ideas!

The DeLorean still bugs me, but that’s the set that made it ok in my mind to alter display pieces from the original build.

Still sad I missed the birds.

@Bion said:
"Also this conflation of dull and drab colors with realism is quite bothersome considering the medieval world was full of colors. If you don't like colorful things that's fine, but don't justify your opinion with the false notion that brown = more realistic. "

And in medieval times they were able to put their shingles on straight and even, and stonemasons knew how to build things smooth and square, so it's good to see that in the final product.

@Koentinius said:
"Different strokes for different folks. I absolutely dislike the slumlike fishing store, and I love the splashes of colour in the tree house and the Black Seas Barracuda."

I like brighter colors as well. But it’s still all graded on a curve for me. Looking at my Old Fishing Store, I still find it to be really fun colors.

@Bion said:
"Also this conflation of dull and drab colors with realism is quite bothersome considering the medieval world was full of colors."

I don't think trees and grass in the autumn were any more colorful in the middle ages than they are now. Roofs rarely have vibrant colors. And timber frame houses often use very dark, almost black wood. The original model doesn't seem unrealistic at all to me.

This is an article I have want for along time. Thank you.

My personal biggest disappointment with Lego Ideas was the ship in the bottle. It went from, I love this idea, I would buy two; to what is this garbage?

As to the sets where the color scheme was brightened (21318, 21322, 21325), the perceived color changes are further heightened by the slightly muted color rending in the digital photos, which are also often against a darker background. The official LEGO sets, by contrast, are always against a plain white background and likely shot in lighting that emphasizes the colors to make an eye-catching image. A few sets (most notably 21325) are also viewed from different angles than the original submission image, which further emphasizes perceived differences.

Not to go on another rant here, but brighter color scheme does NOT equal "less realistic" historically! Throughout history, people have generally painted things in bright, bold primary colors (just look at the colorful buildings of certain restored medieval town centers throughout Europe or reconstructions of paint flecks found on Greek and Roman statues) and did not necessarily have access to the vast nuanced shades of color we use today. These colors did fade with time/exposure, and a more muted color scheme is thus appropriate in evoking an aged/worn appearance (which is what most people are used to seeing when viewing historical buildings today and thus base their expectations on); however, I believe LEGO prefers to sell us more "newly constructed" sets rather than "old" ones (with the notably exception of 21310), which has the added benefit of making a more eye-catching set image.

I think the take-home from this is that AFOLs like really drab colour palettes.

I don't mind the overall design change except for the tree. It looks so out of place in a medieval setting. The only other minor issue I'd have would be the color palette. I wish the brown wood coloring of the beams were slightly darker.

My most anticipated set in the past year has become a joke. I was one of the original voter on the design, and with the significantly simplified model to be released, I will not buy this set.

Lego needs to know we didn’t vote for this. If we don’t let them know we did not ask for this, they will continue making these significant changes to other Ideas designs down the road.

I honestly think LEGO did a great job adapting the Blacksmith's shop. The scale is less excessive, and the use of the shield pieces for the roof looks gorgeous, as does the shaping of the wooden framework.

I think many MOCs go overboard in using jagged, mismatched details to convey aging/texture. LEGO's version gets the same idea across without becoming an eyesore.

My only hope is that LEGO didn't get rid of the animals from the original submission, particularly the goat.

I really hope we get more Doctor Who at some point. I really want a Tennant figure

@morvit said:
"My most anticipated set in the past year has become a joke. I was one of the original voter on the design, and with the significantly simplified model to be released, I will not buy this set.

Lego needs to know we didn’t vote for this. If we don’t let them know we did not ask for this, they will continue making these significant changes to other Ideas designs down the road."

Not to be cynical but I think the market of buyers that will purchase a less expensive, more simplified set (that would otherwise have not purchased the unaltered set) greatly outweighs that of disappointed voters of the original submission who refuse to purchase the official set out of protest. I can understand some of the disappointment but LEGO is after all a company that wants to maximize its profits according to their analyses (even if some fans don't always agree with their decisions).

It must be exhausting to be so angry all the time about so little

Personally I really dislike the darker colours on the original tree house and pirate bay. It’s not because I’m against darker muddier colours but because they lack good contrast. The original pirates bay is probably the worst example imo. Dark brown woodwork, dark green leaves and dark blue water, the most contrasting colour is the sand. I’m not always fan of the colour scheme that Lego uses but it almost always an improvement.

When the Pirate Bay got the go ahead, I was like, "Cool, A pirate Ideas set." When images of barracuda bay got released, I was like "OMG MUST HAVE!!!" Lego did a wonderful thing with updating that Ideas submission.

4/10 for Barracuda Bay? Agree to really, really disagree.
Don't get me wrong, I absolutely love the set (Greatest of the year in my opinion), but it is NOTHING like the original project. Adapting the project to pay tribute to the Pirates theme was probably a genius idea, but it meant thoroughly digressing from the original concept, in shape, in design, in color. Basically, the only things left are Old Redbeard and a stranded ship turned into an island.
In that sense, I think 4 is a stretch, especially when considering lower scores have been given to products that are more similar to their original counterpart.

What a useful article! Thanks for taking the time to compose it, Cap'n.

@morvit said:
"(...) I was one of the original voter on the design, and with the significantly simplified model to be released, I will not buy this set. (...)"
Now, that's interesting because I didn't vote for, and wouldn't have bought, the messy, morbid (though impressive!) original, but will likely buy the official release at some point. I'm sure LEGO have done the sales potential maths.

Either way, it's all LEGO, so we can always build whatever the heck we want, whenever we want.

Unpopular opinion here - I love the changes that were made to Steamboat Willie. The original MOC was too simple to pay full tribute to the cartoon. The final product looks like a full ship, adds the rotating wheels and bouncing smokestacks, and provides room for other really nice details. I know a lot of people didn’t want to pay $90 for a tribute to a 1920s (?) cartoon, but it’s one of the most underrated sets imo.

@Graupensuppe said:

I don't think trees and grass in the autumn were any more colorful in the middle ages than they are now. Roofs rarely have vibrant colors. And timber frame houses often use very dark, almost black wood. The original model doesn't seem unrealistic at all to me."

Well considering the Little Ice Age and cutting down of most ancient forests (often replaced by evergreen monocultures), autumn may have actually been more colorful in some areas in the middle ages than today! While I can't comment too strongly on roofing colors in European medieval buildings (my impressions are mostly red-orange, brown, or grey, with blue also being found in some areas), I will point out that roofs in some Eastern Asian buildings (see the CTF sets) often are vibrantly colored (I realize this is a different culture and possibly time period). As to the color of the timbers of timber-framed buildings (which I understand Germany has one of the largest concentrations of in the world), are these timbers mostly dark because the wood color is inherently dark (and thus would have looked dark when newly built), the wood has aged to a darker color over time (which one sees today), or were the timbers painted a dark color (I have sometimes also seen these timbers painted bright colors on other buildings)?

I don't really think any IDEAS submission has been better than the finished product. I love seeing how the LEGO designers scale way too big models down to sensible sizes, and slick them up and improve them. The biggest improvement to me is the «Friends» set, which went from kind of ugly to desirable even for a non «Friends» fan. I look forwards to seeing the «Seinfeld» model, which I'm sure will be (real and) spectacular!

How about adding an "Improvement" score to the article. Scoring on well Lego improved upon (or made worse) the original idea.

Some sets, Lego did the right thing, and made excellent improvements to the original idea.

This is why you should vote on the "idea" of the submitted models and not on how good or bad the actual model is.

I think once again this helps to remind all of us that LEGO Ideas is about the idea and proof of concept of a model. The proof of concept is something we shouldn't be so attached to because we know changes have to happen to make the model better in other aspects we don't usually think of.

If you want LEGO to make as few changed to your original design as possible, then you need to build your model to the LEGO design standards, as well as think about the models in all aspects and angles such as build-ability by younger builders, marketability, and appeal beyond the 10,000 supporters. Everyone on LEGO Ideas is a fantastic builder, but everyone is also learning product design at the same time.

For me, as long as the original fan designers are satisfied with the final product, then I will be as well.

@morvit said:
"My most anticipated set in the past year has become a joke. I was one of the original voter on the design, and with the significantly simplified model to be released, I will not buy this set.

Lego needs to know we didn’t vote for this. If we don’t let them know we did not ask for this, they will continue making these significant changes to other Ideas designs down the road."

Sorry but this sounds extremely entitled. Voting on an Ideas set doesn’t give you the right to get exactly what you voted for.

Theres no Point in boycotting to Make “Lego know we didn’t vote for this”, as many people will like the changes (and even more wont even have seen the original model), and shouldn’t not buy a set because you don’t like it.

If you don’t like what came of it, save your money and make a MOC. It’s clear now that many Ideas sets undergo significant changes, even the amazing Barracuda Bay and Treehouse which had similarly drab colours in the original. Perhaps you just don’t like the theme?

@Graupensuppe said:
" [...]Roofs rarely have vibrant colors. [...] "

Well, there are amazing examples of polychrome roofs dating from the late Middle Ages in eastern France. For example, the town hall in Meursault, the castle of Corton André, or most bell towers in Franche-Comté ("clocher comtois").
Granted, they are still quite uncommon, more elaborate than the Ideas Blacksmith's roof, and often found on buildings of significant importance, but they are the first thing I thought of when I saw the set!

I don't think a brightly coloured roof would be any less realistic than a ramshackled, decaying roof like the one the original concept...

My favorite article of the year so far ;-)
Ideas has brought a few gems, but always delivers a different type of set than their usual line up.
I don't like all of them, but appreciate the concept and what LEGO develops.
What I vote for is actually quite irrelevant in regards to the final product, for me :)

Fantastic article, Its clear lego have to meet certain demands, whether that's marketability, sturdiness, piece count, price point, etc. I think for the most part Lego do a great job in bringing these fan made models to everyone. It's in the name "Ideas" fans create an idea that lego then work with to bring to the wider audience, also people need to remember it's a kids toy first and foremost

@morvit said:
"My most anticipated set in the past year has become a joke. I was one of the original voter on the design, and with the significantly simplified model to be released, I will not buy this set.

Lego needs to know we didn’t vote for this. If we don’t let them know we did not ask for this, they will continue making these significant changes to other Ideas designs down the road."

I voted for the original as well but will be happily letting LEGO know that I love the altered final model. Will look fantastic with my Medieval Market and Kingdoms sets.

@LordDunsany said:
" @Graupensuppe said:

I don't think trees and grass in the autumn were any more colorful in the middle ages than they are now. Roofs rarely have vibrant colors. And timber frame houses often use very dark, almost black wood. The original model doesn't seem unrealistic at all to me."

Well considering the Little Ice Age and cutting down of most ancient forests (often replaced by evergreen monocultures), autumn may have actually been more colorful in some areas in the middle ages than today! While I can't comment too strongly on roofing colors in European medieval buildings (my impressions are mostly red-orange, brown, or grey, with blue also being found in some areas), I will point out that roofs in some Eastern Asian buildings (see the CTF sets) often are vibrantly colored (I realize this is a different culture and possibly time period). As to the color of the timbers of timber-framed buildings (which I understand Germany has one of the largest concentrations of in the world), are these timbers mostly dark because the wood color is inherently dark (and thus would have looked dark when newly built), the wood has aged to a darker color over time (which one sees today), or were the timbers painted a dark color (I have sometimes also seen these timbers painted bright colors on other buildings)?"

Wood gets darker with age. The medieval wood that is black today has been oxidising away for hundreds of years. When originally hewn it would be straw yellow or red dependent upon tree type. Oak the wood of choice for European dwellings starts out a lovely honey colour, mellows through brown and after a few hundred years goes black. Western Red Cedar starts out pinkish red and goes grey with exposure to oxygen. Inherently dark woods such as Ebony and Walnut tended not to be used for construction.

Another factor that nobody seems to have mentioned is that whilst designers do have some budget (frames I believe their called) for colour changes they're going to have to work with the bricks that are currently in production. There is always a greater palette of Reddish-Brown in production than there is Dark Brown and it may not have been economically feasible to produce all the needed parts in the Dark Brown colour.

@J0rgen said:
"I don't really think any IDEAS submission has been better than the finished product. I love seeing how the LEGO designers scale way too big models down to sensible sizes, and slick them up and improve them. The biggest improvement to me is the «Friends» set, which went from kind of ugly to desirable even for a non «Friends» fan. I look forwards to seeing the «Seinfeld» model, which I'm sure will be (real and) spectacular!"

I'm afraid it will be a 100% plastic fantastic this time around. But maybe Elaine wants to investigate again. ;-)

Thank you for all the research on the long article, I learnt a bit about the early ideas models that passed me by at the time. At the end of the day I think we would all rather TLG simplify the ideas than reject them.

@MartyMcFly said:
"How about adding an "Improvement" score to the article. Scoring on well Lego improved upon (or made worse) the original idea.

Some sets, Lego did the right thing, and made excellent improvements to the original idea."

I think adding an improvement score is a great idea! Changes can be bad or good

Pirate Bay is the most changed Ideas set in my eyes since it doesn’t resemble the original submission at all. However, I don’t think that’s a bad thing at all when the designers created something so incredible with Pirates of Barracuda Bay. I liked the original design enough to know I would buy it, but the fact that the final set can transform into an actual ship sealed the deal for me.

This article really highlighted why I struggle with CapnRex's articles: we really aren't looking at the same things... I strongly disagree with so many of those scores! It's like he's comparing piece per piece or detail per detail, instead of seeing the overall inspiration!

For Ideas, and especially for Ideas, I think people should focus on the fact that it's the idea that got submitted that made it, not the details themselves. The very fact that we got Saturn V, Barracuda Bay, Tree House, and so many other great sets is because the idea was enticing, not just the specific build, and Lego never would have gone in those directions by themselves. And most of those are better in their official release format than in their original submission, if you ask me. And then if you look carefully, some key features of each build are kept in all cases, where a number of other techniques could have been used but instead they kept the original. Look at the Ecto-1 for example. Same for the Delorean; you simply don't see car chassis built like that in any other official Lego product. And to me that warrants really high similarity scores, even if they changed some other parts to solidify or make the build more legit.

@aztecwarrior said:
"Okay, maybe no one has realized this (but maybe you have), but in the third 2020 review phase there are 2 sets that will not be made. Why? Because lego has stolen the ideas! There is a downtown style police station in the third review. What does lego do? Steal the idea and make the Creator Expert Police Station modular for 2021 without giving any credit to the ideas designer. There is a Bonsai tree in a black tray in the third review. What does lego do? Steal the idea and make the Creator Expert Botanical Collection Bonsai Tree fir 2021 without giving any credit to the ideas designer. So those two ideas we can know for sure will not be approved."

You are aware many of these sets, modulars especially, are in the design process for years before they are released? It's not Lego's fault someone else had the same idea that they were already planning to release.

@Phoenixio said:
"This article really highlighted why I struggle with CapnRex's articles: we really aren't looking at the same things... I strongly disagree with so many of those scores! It's like he's comparing piece per piece or detail per detail, instead of seeing the overall inspiration!

For Ideas, and especially for Ideas, I think people should focus on the fact that it's the idea that got submitted that made it, not the details themselves. The very fact that we got Saturn V, Barracuda Bay, Tree House, and so many other great sets is because the idea was enticing, not just the specific build, and Lego never would have gone in those directions by themselves. And most of those are better in their official release format than in their original submission, if you ask me. And then if you look carefully, some key features of each build are kept in all cases, where a number of other techniques could have been used but instead they kept the original. Look at the Ecto-1 for example. Same for the Delorean; you simply don't see car chassis built like that in any other official Lego product. And to me that warrants really high similarity scores, even if they changed some other parts to solidify or make the build more legit."

I'm not sure @CapnRex101 would disagree with you, this seems to be very close to the entire point of the article.

I don’t want to rehash any old arguments but Lego sets have lead times of years. The police station and bonsai tree were probably already in full production ready to ship out to stores in December so they could be on shelves on Jan 1 by the time these projects hit the Q3 3020 review. People have asked for a police station modular for years and it was obvious not a “new” IDEA when it passed review. If sets were developed that fast Lego would not have released a police station (George Floyd etc) but developed something else.

In my personal opinion, it’s not that the blacksmith has been changed that’s the problem. It’s the fact that it’s been arguably changed too much. The changes don’t necessarily make the product bad, but it doesn’t capture the same spirit as what was submitted.

Take a look at the original pitch. The colors are more muted. The place looks old, run-down, but still lived in. It’s probably what would happen if a building was sitting in the middle of the dark ages for a long period of time. The released product in comparison is far too... clean. Not bad, but it looks overly polished compared to the second design.

It’s not that changes in pitches to release are necessarily a bad thing, but there are times where we liked something because it wasn’t like what LEGO usually puts out. I mean... that’s the point of Ideas, right? To get sets we otherwise wouldn’t have under LEGO’s normal way of doing things?

Had absolutely no interest in the original versions of the Treehouse, Barracuda Bay or Blacksmith and the mass of drab colours they were, but when they had an official touch up courtesy of Lego, they were instantly in my collection or on my wish list.

Steamboat Willie had such a glow up, it’s remarkable to compare the two.

The only product I’ve been disappointed in with the finished product is the Flintsrones, with the lack of the sign and Dino.

@ra226 said:
"I think the key is pretty simple--if the changes are an improvement, they're fine. Hence you don't really get complaints about the DeLorean, or ExoSuit. Even Barracuda Bay was a big change and arguably not an improvement, but the giant nostalgia boost I think most would agree made up for it.

It's when the changes are marketing-driven that the complaints rightfully roll in. When a large, beautiful set is reduced to a small, just fine set, that's when people are unhappy."

Both the Exo-Suit and DeLorean got TONS of complaints. You need to have been there to really grasp the extent of the complaining that has accompanied almost every one of these sets for not matching the original submissions.

What you seem to actually be observing is the tendency for complaints about a lot of these to go away once the sets have been actually released and people who were initially shocked by the changes largely come around to them, or at least get overwhelmed by the much larger number of people who do like the final sets and didn't care one way or the other whether they match the "first drafts" they were based on.

This is a really insightful post! Something I think people are overlooking is how it's literally called LEGO "IDEAS".

Obviously, beautiful creations are submitted for consideration, but I don't think that LEGO gets enough credit for the work they do to translate the concepts and IDEAS into viable products that suit their strategy (particularly when IP stakeholders are involved) and meet their quality standards for set design.

It's simply not feasible to make most Ideas sets into $400 intricate display pieces with flimsy (if not impossible when CAD is involved) building techniques.

I certainly wish other choices were made in some sets, but I love the IDEAS line for bringing us fresh and exciting sets we likely wouldn't get outside of it.

Really nice article, it's fascinating to see the original and released models side by side.

I think I've said this before, but the main problem with Lego Ideas is people's perception of what the platform is about. Everyone seems to think that they are voting for the fan's design, and that the model submitted will be the set released. This is incorrect! Lego Ideas is about the *concept*, the three or four basic words that describe the model. You are voting for the concept, not the fan model, and the fan model is only really there to help drum up votes to show that the concept has enough interest to make a set that would sell.

Basically, I think Lego designers are free to make whatever model they like, so long as they stay true to the original concept, and keep a vague resemblance of the fan model so people can see that they are kind of getting what they voted for.

A lot of people think the original blacksmith design was better because it looked more weathered, but I feel like the amount of greebling combined with the muted color scheme was a detriment; the roof looks like an amorphous scattered blob of one tone if you don't look closely. Lego's version maintains some amount of wear and tear with the sand green at the top, but with there still being a degree of order to the tiles, and some contrast to bring it to life.

The change in scale also makes sense. One thing I always keep in mind when Lego changes the scale of an Ideas submission is that, when you support a set, they ask you what you are willing to pay for it. Chances are, the price people were willing to pay for the blacksmith's shop nowhere near matched its massive scale, and Lego stopped making sets where they lose money selling about two decades ago.

One thing I will grant is that the tree feels like a bit of a downgrade; its tiny, bowed form is the place where the change in scale sticks out most, obviously clinging for dear life on what remains of the base.

@Graupensuppe said:
"All I want is some minifigure-scale buildings with muted colors. (...)"
It's tricky to say this without sounding condescending, but are you aware of what the concept of LEGO allows you to do...?

Great article, it's really interesting to see the original/released differences. I'd wrongly assumed it was only recent Ideas sets that were radically changed.

I think that the original Blacksmith, Barracuda Bay and Tree House submissions all suffered from dreary colours, so much so, that I didn't vote for any of them, but I do own both Barracuda and Treehouse because they were great models made vibrant by better use of colour schemes.

The originals might be more realistic sure, but I find no joy in looking at a set full of miserable colours twinned more beiges and lifeless tones.

I also found the original Blacksmith a bit repetitive which the new one certainly is not.

Great article, very insightfull, however if I were you, I have left off the blacksmith as we've only got one image of it, whereas the others are all released sets that are fully known. That said. I personally really like what we can see of the blacksmith, and can't wait to see more of it.

@CCC said:
" @Phoenixio said:
"This article really highlighted why I struggle with CapnRex's articles: we really aren't looking at the same things... I strongly disagree with so many of those scores! It's like he's comparing piece per piece or detail per detail, instead of seeing the overall inspiration!

For Ideas, and especially for Ideas, I think people should focus on the fact that it's the idea that got submitted that made it, not the details themselves. The very fact that we got Saturn V, Barracuda Bay, Tree House, and so many other great sets is because the idea was enticing, not just the specific build, and Lego never would have gone in those directions by themselves. And most of those are better in their official release format than in their original submission, if you ask me. And then if you look carefully, some key features of each build are kept in all cases, where a number of other techniques could have been used but instead they kept the original. Look at the Ecto-1 for example. Same for the Delorean; you simply don't see car chassis built like that in any other official Lego product. And to me that warrants really high similarity scores, even if they changed some other parts to solidify or make the build more legit."
I agree, the scoring is completely arbitrary. When I see the pop up book, the insides are completely different even if the mechanism and shell are the same and same scale. That one scores very highly as the changes are deemed to be cosmetic. Whereas keep the same size and similar frame for the delorean and it gets a low score."

This was a great article. I just want to point out that the designers of the pop up book are incredibly happy with the changes, and the mechanism and scale are probably considered more important than the possible scenes.

I prefer Lego’s redesign to the original submission nearly every time. And if given the choice to purchase Lego’s $120 Sesame Street or the original version for $200 or $250, I’ll take Lego’s version.

Back to the Future is one of my favorite films, and I own models of the Delorean, but honestly neither of those minifig-scale Deloreans appeal to me at all. It really needs the UCS treatment (like Ecto-1) to do it Justice.

Mostly I’d just like to thank Lego & the fan designers for so many great sets, and CapnRex101 for a great article!

LordDunsany - While it may be true that people in old times had less nuances to choose from and often used bright colors, many of the pigments used back then were also less stable. They tended to fade rather quickly (long before the paint itself became worn), so many buildings probably had such somewhat-faded colors most of the time. Timber buildings were often painted with tar to prevent rot, which gave a dark brown/black color even when the wood itself was much lighter.

I've heard it's also an issue of scale, if you make a miniature of for instance a building the model will tend to look brighter than the original, even if they actually are the exact same color.

When it comes to Lego I believe it's an issue with a "hole" in the palette - on one side you have the dark/earth/"sand" colors with very low saturation, on the other you have the bright/primary/"girly" colors with near-100% saturation, but there's very little in-between these extremes. Given the choice between "too bright" and "too drab" many will prefer the latter to get a more realistic look.

Regarding excessively reworked Ideas projects I think the designers would benefit from paying more attention to what makes a good set and not just a good MOC, and especially Lego being more open about the design process (they've improved on this over time, but it's been a painfully slow process and they still are a bit too secretive). Too many contributors uses Ideas as a MOC gallery to show off their creations without regard to if it will work as a set, and other concepts are just too vague (like the Minecraft one), needing lots of reworking to make a sellable product.

Lego models can often be placed on a "play-to-display" scale - on one end you have extremely play-focused models like "4+" and basic City sets, with simple building so young kids can get along to play quickly. Somewhere in the middle you have stuff like the Expert sets with larger size and more advanced building, but still intended to be somewhat play-friendly. Then you have the "look, but don't touch" exhibit-quality MOCs, with like 10k+ parts and lots of fiddly details which'll fall off or became misaligned if you just look too hard at them. At the extreme end you have the photo-focused models that are intended to look good on pictures but not necessarily in real life, these usually features partial builds (just enough to fill the frame) and using tricks like forced perspective.

When building a MOC this factor boils down to your personal preferences, but for an official set it's usually expected that it's at least somewhat play-friendly (at least for a minfig-scale model) and can easily be handled without requiring special instructions or constant realignments - anything else will easily lead to a flood of complaints.

@ra226 said:
"It's when the changes are marketing-driven that the complaints rightfully roll in. When a large, beautiful set is reduced to a small, just fine set, that's when people are unhappy."

But the submission itself is not a set, it's a gauge of interest that the LEGO group will use to determine which IDEAS will move forwards and become a set. If a "Large Beautiful Set" is what you want you may have to resort to some MOC-ing.

People complaining about alterations to the proposed ideas need to realize that fan designers have to go thru the same round of reviews and approvals process as any regular set designer at LEGO once their project has garnered 10k votes and gotten the go ahead after surviving TLG's initial review phase. It's rare that the initial design will make it to production without several modifications along the way, this is evident from what CapnRex101 has outlined in this article with the majority of final set designs having significant changes over the original submissions.

I think if you were to ask any LEGO designer about iterating their normal set proposals they would all say it took more than one review to make final approval for production.

And it's probably premature to have included 21325 Medieval Blacksmith in this rating since we really don't have enough images and description about the final product yet to make an accurately weighted assessment.

@ALEGOMan:
10k isn't anything to them. You're talking about Forma and the Bricklink sets when you get down to numbers that low, which don't really pay for the development of larger sets, or sets that have to be distributed through the normal supply chain. If they're not doing direct sales at that point, they'd need to release them through a single geographic location, like they do with convention exclusives.

Of the examples listed, at least one of these appears to have been a flop. I don't recall any excitement over the Adventure Time set (though the Dimensions packs that came about as a result were popular), nor was it ever hard to find until they retired it and cleared out the leftover stock. The danger in overestimating the market demand for one of these projects is that it could turn out like AT did. The worst situation that they want to avoid is if they tank the sales on a set by doing so, when tightening up the design could have resulted in something much more marketable that would have sold like hotcakes. Since the designers get paid a percentage, it may hurt to think about your project being mini-sized when you're thinking about how much you'll earn per copy, but smaller sets can move more product just by being affordable enough that people will grab a copy instead of passing on it because they can't afford it.

@rvnlord said:
"Is there an instruction or a detailed gallery of the original Ship in a Bottle?"

I commented on the other thread, the original design is available from the Chinese fake Lego companies. Ditto with the original Pirate Bay design. I would normally avoid anything suggesting purchase of fake brands but in this case it is extremely relevant to the discussion.

(Not just to the poster above, to everyone generally:)

If anyone doubts the rework, I suggest they chase down the original design, build both, and compare. Throw away all the fake Lego pieces and use authentic ones, if you like. I was one of the people disappointed by the Ship in a Bottle changes, so I did this. The original design looks nice, but is oversized, difficult and not much fun to build, and incredibly fragile. Putting the two side by side made me really appreciate how much effort went into to re-working the Idea whilst retaining the core elements.

The original designers create amazing concepts, much better than I could ever do. But they are not Lego designers, there is much more to a successful set than just the original concept. That's why Ideas is my favourite line, even when I have no interest in the subject matter I love seeing how the set evolved over the design process.

The original blacksmith design looks wonderful and I'd love to see it on display. There may even be some details (chimney) better than the official design. But taken as a set, I guarantee you the official set will be a better building experience and a better all round product.