Jump to content

Toy Fair 2015: Minecraft & Jurassic World


Recommended Posts

The "ghosts" are Ghasts, and it looks like the function in the. Dungeon is to spin the little zombert inside the spawner.

 

Also I like the shooter integration in the Ghast's mouth and the Snow Golem's arms.

 

Too bad the sets are so pricey and I plan to buy other things already.

OpAXNpl.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alright, Minecraft coverage!

 

Most of these sets are okay, the more expensive ones are very pretty but I think I'll just buy one or two $20 ones.  I was excited for Snow Hideout, but it seems somewhat mediocre. The Snow Golemn's stud-launcher arms are fantastic, however, since in the game they toss snowballs. A lot of these are only worthwhile as additions to other sets, for instance I'd only buy Dungeon or The Cave if I already had a couple nicer ones.

 

Anyways I'm excited to own these since so far I only own the original Cuusoo set which is rather boring.

Edited by Nescent

IetTsFQ.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know it was just setting myself up for disappointment, but I was hoping the Dilophosaurus would at least not feature the erroneous frill. I guess it was to be expected, though.

 

Again with the complaining about the accuracy of dinosaurs, eh? As a dino enthusiast, I have a lot to complain about, but something to take into consideration is that paleontologists are constantly making new discoveries and revising the current models for dinosaurs all the time; I think the fact that some model of any dinosaur, regardless of how outdated it is, is something to be excited about. That having been said, I'm hoping we get a Diplodocus Hallorum (Seismosaurus), which was one of my favorite dinosaurs growing up, and I don't really care how accurately they portray it at all. I'll just be glad it's there.

 

I don't plan on buying any of the Jurassic World sets at the moment, but I think the Indominus Rex looks pretty "sick." (as the kids say)

 

As for the Minecraft sets, I'm super pumped for the Nether as well as the Ender Dragon; I almost bought a MC set the other day. As a player of Minecraft, I largely prefer the game to any merch they release, but it's exciting all the same.

 

 

:n: :i: :c: :e:    :s: :e: :t: :s:     :m_o: :v: :e: :r: :a: :l: :l:

MetaKnight.gif  Stay vigilant, my friends. MetaKnight.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Jurassic Park sets look really cool. I'm especially interested in the T-Rex transport set. I wonder if that will be something we will see in the new movie. And if it is, how they got the T-Rex in said transport. :P

Everyone is one choice away from being the bad guy in another person's story.


 


pc0lX6T.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I know it was just setting myself up for disappointment, but I was hoping the Dilophosaurus would at least not feature the erroneous frill. I guess it was to be expected, though.

 

Again with the complaining about the accuracy of dinosaurs, eh? As a dino enthusiast, I have a lot to complain about, but something to take into consideration is that paleontologists are constantly making new discoveries and revising the current models for dinosaurs all the time; I think the fact that some model of any dinosaur, regardless of how outdated it is, is something to be excited about. That having been said, I'm hoping we get a Diplodocus Hallorum (Seismosaurus), which was one of my favorite dinosaurs growing up, and I don't really care how accurately they portray it at all. I'll just be glad it's there.

 

I understand how other people can settle for inferior, inaccurate, and/or outdated depictions of dinosaurs. I've just never found it a particularly compelling case for me to do the same.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

I know it was just setting myself up for disappointment, but I was hoping the Dilophosaurus would at least not feature the erroneous frill. I guess it was to be expected, though.

 

Again with the complaining about the accuracy of dinosaurs, eh? As a dino enthusiast, I have a lot to complain about, but something to take into consideration is that paleontologists are constantly making new discoveries and revising the current models for dinosaurs all the time; I think the fact that some model of any dinosaur, regardless of how outdated it is, is something to be excited about. That having been said, I'm hoping we get a Diplodocus Hallorum (Seismosaurus), which was one of my favorite dinosaurs growing up, and I don't really care how accurately they portray it at all. I'll just be glad it's there.

 

I understand how other people can settle for inferior, inaccurate, and/or outdated depictions of dinosaurs. I've just never found it a particularly compelling case for me to do the same.

 

 

You missed the point of what I was saying. Let's say TLG releases a perfectly scientifically accurate velociraptor. And then suddenly paleontologists discover evidence suggesting that the velociraptor had wings. And so TLG has to recall all the sets containing the inferior scientifically inaccurate version of the velociraptor, losing money in the process. Then they have to create an entirely new mold to compensate the new velociraptor build containing the newly discovered wings. But then paleontologists discover that they were not wings, but in fact, they were large or enlongated single spurs protruding from they're claws. And now TLG has to recall all sets containing the "inferior" build and revise the build yet again losing a lot more money in the process. But then paleontologists conclude that these newly discovered spurs are actually unique to a particular strain of velociraptor that has evolved into an entirely new species. By this time, Lego has lost so much money on Lego Jurassic World/Lego Dinosaur that they have to cancel the line altogether. 

 

First up, TLG doesn't pay that much attention to paleontology to even know or care if the current model for the velociraptor has been revised. They just go with what the vast majority of people consider to be the "official" portayal of dinosaurs. Nobody's going to think of a velociraptor as having wings.

 

Second, the models for practically every dinosaur is changing SO often, you might as well just give up on caring. Only people who have dedicated their lives to such things need to care. And all this stuff is based mostly on theory anyway. The only way we'll know what a dinosaur ate, how it lived, how it's posture looked, or even what it looked like at all is if we go back in time and see a live one. Or if we manage to clone one. And although scientists are working on that as we speak, I think it's still safe to say it'll be a while before any of that happens.

 

My point is, you should be happy Lego is making dinos at all. Sure it's not scientifically accurate, but at least it's there. Hope that helped.

 

:m_d: :i: :n: :m_o: :s:       :a: :r: :e:       :m_d: :i: :n: :m_o: :s:

Edited by The Meta Knight

MetaKnight.gif  Stay vigilant, my friends. MetaKnight.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your faith in modern palaeontology is astonishingly low, especially considering you seem to think all the errors that plague dinosaurs in current media are based on recent discoveries when dinosaur reconstructions in the media have been frozen in a standstill for over twenty years now. Dinosaur models don't change nearly as often as you seem to think; we've had a fairly consistent idea of what Velociraptor was like for at least a decade now, maybe longer. It's not the super volatile idea you seem to have.

 

Of course, I don't see what any of this has to do with my complaint about Dilophosaurus; the frill has never been present on any reconstruction of Dilophosaurus based on actual science. It's simply erroneous.

  • Upvote 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder why there's no $10-$15 Jurassic World sets? It seems there's a Dino fig in every set , and you seem to pay about $5 for the smallest ones, so maybe the couldn't also fit an actual set in that price range. I don't know man, I'm just a little rustled by this.

Self MOC: Fren

                           How lewd

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your faith in modern palaeontology is astonishingly low, especially considering you seem to think all the errors that plague dinosaurs in current media are based on recent discoveries when dinosaur reconstructions in the media have been frozen in a standstill for over twenty years now. Dinosaur models don't change nearly as often as you seem to think; we've had a fairly consistent idea of what Velociraptor was like for at least a decade now, maybe longer. It's not the super volatile idea you seem to have.

 

Of course, I don't see what any of this has to do with my complaint about Dilophosaurus; the frill has never been present on any reconstruction of Dilophosaurus based on actual science. It's simply erroneous.

 

Your are right in saying that my faith in modern paleontology is low; that's something I'm willing to admit. And the velociraptor was just a fictional example; I'm aware that many dinosaur models, including the velociraptor's, have been relatively unchanged for quite some time. It's mainly the (relatively) recent reclassing of certain sauropods (the giraffatitan and seismosaurus in particular) that's shaken my faith in paleontology. It's not that I think those reclasses are unnecessary or irritating, it just made me come to the conclusion that we as human beings really don't know what we're talking about half the time. And everything surrounding those dinosaurs are just theories, and, as such, aren't confirmed for certain at all. Take the Amphicoelias for example. We base everything we know about it on a few bones we think are specific bones in it's body. We don't have a clue what it really looked like.

 

But if you really can't get over such things, think of it this way: the dinosaurs portrayed aren't so much their respective species as they are inspired recreations of their respective species, any differentiation being mere creative liberties. That accounts pretty well for the frills on Dilophosaurus, I think.

I wonder why there's no $10-$15 Jurassic World sets? It seems there's a Dino fig in every set , and you seem to pay about $5 for the smallest ones, so maybe the couldn't also fit an actual set in that price range. I don't know man, I'm just a little rustled by this.

 

I found that curious as well... perhaps they should just release the dinosaurs by their lonesome save for a few decorative pieces, such as a bush or a rock, and then maybe a small motorized vehicle, such as a motorcycle and rider. I would totally buy that. But that's just me.

Edited by The Meta Knight

MetaKnight.gif  Stay vigilant, my friends. MetaKnight.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Eh...I'm even more disappointed with these Jurassic World sets than I was with the Avengers Tower that was covered yesterday. Nothing really jumps out to me as cool and unique--might as well be just be another generic, Dinosaur theme.

 

Albeit, the Indominus Rex Breakout set looks alright. Might pick it up if the movie's any good.

   te0FrhT.jpg                                                                                                                            

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@The Meta Knight

 

...wait, your faith in palaeontology is low because they change names around? Classification is entirely a human concept. There are even those within palaeontology who can't agree where a genus ends and begins. That's all terminology and names and, on the individual genus level, usually has no impact on our understanding of that particular specimen. (In fact, like many things in palaeontology, it's cleaning up past mistakes; Iguanodon was such a dump before they went through and split things up.) As for the "one bone" thing, palaeontologists usually know better than to attribute femurs to human anatomy these days, and things like vertebrae shape can actually go a long way towards discerning an animal's relationship to other animals, but even if not, fortunately, to my knowledge pretty much none of the dinosaurs in Jurassic World are known from such incomplete remains! In fact, several (off the top of my head, definitely Tyrannosaurus and Velociraptor) of them are completely known. Our knowledge of their skeletons is never going to change. (With Velociraptor, our knowledge of its integument is probably equally unlikely to change, as it was fossil evidence that led it to that.)

 

This is all getting a little off-topic (and I really didn't want this to happen; people on this site already think I'm a freak for caring about this, and I didn't want to fuel it any further, hence the brevity of my original post) but I really wanted to address this flawed concept that palaeontology is somehow so volatile and ever-changing that no media should ever bother coming any closer to our current understanding than what was shown in a movie released over twenty years ago. If LEGO released properly-feathered Velociraptors, I find it highly unlikely they would need to replace the molds within the next century at minimum, which is already longer than between the last few times they changed their dinosaur molds.

 

I realize this is all very strongly worded, but there are all sorts of misconceptions surrounding palaeontology and our current understanding of dinosaurs (people still treat feathers as some kind of harebrained hypothesis instead of something we have a lot of physical evidence for) and it honestly makes these kinds of discussions very tiring and repetitive for me, as a very passionate and well-researched fan of palaeontology.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@The Meta Knight

 

...wait, your faith in palaeontology is low because they change names around? Classification is entirely a human concept. There are even those within palaeontology who can't agree where a genus ends and begins. That's all terminology and names and, on the individual genus level, usually has no impact on our understanding of that particular specimen. (In fact, like many things in palaeontology, it's cleaning up past mistakes; Iguanodon was such a dump before they went through and split things up.) As for the "one bone" thing, palaeontologists usually know better than to attribute femurs to human anatomy these days, and things like vertebrae shape can actually go a long way towards discerning an animal's relationship to other animals, but even if not, fortunately, to my knowledge pretty much none of the dinosaurs in Jurassic World are known from such incomplete remains! In fact, several (off the top of my head, definitely Tyrannosaurus and Velociraptor) of them are completely known. Our knowledge of their skeletons is never going to change. (With Velociraptor, our knowledge of its integument is probably equally unlikely to change, as it was fossil evidence that led it to that.)

 

This is all getting a little off-topic (and I really didn't want this to happen; people on this site already think I'm a freak for caring about this, and I didn't want to fuel it any further, hence the brevity of my original post) but I really wanted to address this flawed concept that palaeontology is somehow so volatile and ever-changing that no media should ever bother coming any closer to our current understanding than what was shown in a movie released over twenty years ago. If LEGO released properly-feathered Velociraptors, I find it highly unlikely they would need to replace the molds within the next century at minimum, which is already longer than between the last few times they changed their dinosaur molds.

 

I realize this is all very strongly worded, but there are all sorts of misconceptions surrounding palaeontology and our current understanding of dinosaurs (people still treat feathers as some kind of harebrained hypothesis instead of something we have a lot of physical evidence for) and it honestly makes these kinds of discussions very tiring and repetitive for me, as a very passionate and well-researched fan of palaeontology.

 

Forgive me for asserting myself; I had no intention of offending you. Those were merely my views on paleontology. And I don't think you're a freak for showing legitimate scientific concerns. It occurs to me that my reasoning behind my lack of trust in paleontology, at least the reasoning I stated anyway, isn't all that convincing. Although I do believe many things can be discerned from a bone, I don't think there's enough fossil evidence to assume what we have regarding dinosaurs such as amphicoelias, but once again, those are just my views regarding that particular scenario. 

 

My intention of posting things with regard to this discussion have been entirely innocent; my views regarding such things allow me to disregard scientific accuracy in favor of not taking enjoyment out of the media, and I wanted you to experience such media free of such concerns.

 

I actually looked up the Dilophosaurus and got on Wikipedia's reference board to see if there was anything with regard to the frills, and like I said, any scientific inaccuracies present in Jurassic World (and Park) were merely creative liberties taken by Spielberg; the size change came about because he didn't want them to be confused with velociraptors, and the venom spit/frills were added for creative purposes/to make it comparable to modern reptiles.

 

You can't take away creative liberty in favor of scientific accuracy; that kinda ruins the point of this form of media.

 

Again though, I'm sorry for making such a big deal out of this. For your own well-being, this is the last post I will make with regards to this particular topic. (not the site topic, but the actual topic.)

Edited by The Meta Knight

MetaKnight.gif  Stay vigilant, my friends. MetaKnight.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love how quick everyone is to criticize the Dilophosaurus (for good reason), but no one seems to notice that the so called Velociraptors are actually another species entirely.

 

I was keeping my post brief to keep things from getting out of hand (to no avail); if I were pulling out all the stops, my post would have been in several long paragraphs.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looking back about how many Jurassic World sets we're getting, is it safe to assume that there's going to be a second wave after/when the movie drops?

If that's the case than I have at least a shimmer of hope for these. 

   te0FrhT.jpg                                                                                                                            

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looking back about how many Jurassic World sets we're getting, is it safe to assume that there's going to be a second wave after/when the movie drops?

 

If that's the case than I have at least a shimmer of hope for these. 

I rather doubt it. Most Lego themes based on movies don't really last beyond a single wave, which corresponds with when it's released. They usually try to rely on being topical to sell. These already will be released around the time the movie comes out, and I doubt they have plans for any more beyond that. (I mean, there wasn't anything else at Toy Fair, which means nothing else for the rest of this year, and the movie comes out in June...) Maybe if they sell really well they might do more sets based on the whole franchise later? Maybe. Wouldn't really count on it though.

AXKP5KC.png


 


 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Looking back about how many Jurassic World sets we're getting, is it safe to assume that there's going to be a second wave after/when the movie drops?

 

If that's the case than I have at least a shimmer of hope for these.

I rather doubt it. Most Lego themes based on movies don't really last beyond a single wave, which corresponds with when it's released. They usually try to rely on being topical to sell. These already will be released around the time the movie comes out, and I doubt they have plans for any more beyond that. (I mean, there wasn't anything else at Toy Fair, which means nothing else for the rest of this year, and the movie comes out in June...) Maybe if they sell really well they might do more sets based on the whole franchise later? Maybe. Wouldn't really count on it though.

 

Correct. There was nothing else in the press guide, so I don't believe they have any other Jurassic World sets planned for this year, apart from perhaps some polybags or a retailer exclusive.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Looking back about how many Jurassic World sets we're getting, is it safe to assume that there's going to be a second wave after/when the movie drops?

 

If that's the case than I have at least a shimmer of hope for these.

I rather doubt it. Most Lego themes based on movies don't really last beyond a single wave, which corresponds with when it's released. They usually try to rely on being topical to sell. These already will be released around the time the movie comes out, and I doubt they have plans for any more beyond that. (I mean, there wasn't anything else at Toy Fair, which means nothing else for the rest of this year, and the movie comes out in June...) Maybe if they sell really well they might do more sets based on the whole franchise later? Maybe. Wouldn't really count on it though.

 

Correct. There was nothing else in the press guide, so I don't believe they have any other Jurassic World sets planned for this year, apart from perhaps some polybags or a retailer exclusive.

 

Hm, 'tis truly a shame. After checking out the Age of Ultron sets, I'll probably pick up a couple of the smaller sets for collection purposes if I have any green backs left.

   te0FrhT.jpg                                                                                                                            

Link to comment
Share on other sites

These sets don't interest me that much... not that I have anything about stock movie dinos, but frankly I feel like the unlicensed Dino theme from 2012 did it better, and with more interesting color schemes to boot (why oh why does the new movie trade the corny tropical camo of the original Jurassic Park for clean-but-dull blues and whites?).

 

The main exception are those neat little bubble pods, which have a great design and seem quite versatile to boot. I'll have to pick up some of those somehow, whether in the moderately-sized Dilophosaurus set or just from Bricklink. Between those and the "Airjitzu" spinners from Ninjago, this looks like it'll be an interesting year for minifigs in pods. :P

  • Upvote 1

Formerly Lyichir: Rachira of Influence

Aanchir's and Meiko's brother

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To the people complaining about the dinosaurs not being accurate: The dinosaur figures are based on how they looked in Jurassic World. It's not Lego's fault that there are some inaccuracies in the oh-so-scientifically-accurate Hollywood movie about creatures that haven't existed in living form for eons.

 

Also, the dinos in those movies were genetically-altered mutants based on frog DNA, anyway. Think of it like that.

 

On the subject of the sets, I don't really care that much either way for the Jurassic World sets (they look fine, though). I'm honestly more interested in the Minecraft sets, mostly because I could use them to make little environments for my Lego minifigures. I will admit, though, that stuff like the Ghast's size and the Enderdragon's wings are setting off my nitpick senses. =p

Statements (Mouseover to view): <1> <2> <3> <4> <5> <6> <7><8> <9>
 
My MOCs:
Characters- Makuta Dys Makuta Kamazotz Lord Vladek The Helmsmith Protector OCs Skull Whaler Skull Warden
 
Creatures- Verdelisk Lord of Skull Spiders BBC Contest #69: Kahu Oko Taku
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...