Jump to content

UCS Sandcrawler hits 10k


Recommended Posts

What do you mean, we forgot to report a project receiving ten thousand votes on Cuusoo? Did we just Portal to Mars without taking the time to admire the martian life in between? Well, let it not be said that BZPower's news team is biased, the UCS Sandcrawler also reached the limit, and it's certainly well-deserved! Check out this magnificent re-imagining of a classic Star Wars vehicle on the project page above, and give the creator a figurative pat on the back!View the full article

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Man, if this becomes an official set at it's current scale, then it'll be totally awesome, but most-certainly out of my price range. Still a great model nonetheless, and I hope the best for it in the review stage.

--

Meiko - @georgebarnick

LUG Ambassador and administrator at Brickipedia

News reporter and database administrator at Brickset

Administrator at BIONICLEsector01

 

DISCLAIMER: All opinions and contributions made under this account are based solely on my own personal thoughts and opinions, and in no way represent any of the above groups/entities. If you have any concerns or inquiries about the contributions made under this account, please contact me individually and I will address them with you to the best of my ability.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can see this becoming an official set - more so than anything else that's reached 10,000 on Cuusoo. I'm actually surprised LEGO hasn't come out with a UCS Sandcrawler on their own, as it seems so ripe for UCSifying. (Is that even a word?)

avatar by Lady Kopaka


tumblr_ng1pw4xLEM1tryxewo1_1280.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure it's awesome, but as a set, I'm worried it would fail.It's sheer size would render it un-buyable to most people.That thing is HUGE, no one would be able to afford it!I hope it doesn't become a set.Not because I don't like it, but because TLG would lose money when no one pays for it.Still a fantastic idea.

LlqByyh.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can see this becoming an official set - more so than anything else that's reached 10,000 on Cuusoo. I'm actually surprised LEGO hasn't come out with a UCS Sandcrawler on their own, as it seems so ripe for UCSifying. (Is that even a word?)
Actually, they have. While not officially labeled as a UCS model, the set number (10144-1) is used to denote sets in the UCS series. And since Lego has stated that a set being admitted into the exclusive line is a one-time deal, it's unlikely that it will make it as such. Maybe we'll get another, smaller version regardless. :? Edited by Kakaru

tumblr_inline_n50tp1mirL1r0vgjj.gif
「どこに行けばいいんだ・・・」「タ・コロ村はもうおしまいだ・・・」タ・コロ村の村人達
hey it's Studio Comic

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can see this becoming an official set - more so than anything else that's reached 10,000 on Cuusoo. I'm actually surprised LEGO hasn't come out with a UCS Sandcrawler on their own, as it seems so ripe for UCSifying. (Is that even a word?)
Actually, they have. While not officially labeled as a UCS model, the set number (10144-1) is used to denote sets in the UCS series. And since Lego has stated that a set being admitted into the exclusive line is a one-time deal, it's unlikely that it will make it as such. Maybe we'll get another, smaller version regardless. :?
Well, not quite. Five-digit set numbers like that generally denote a Direct-to-Consumer set (i.e. a set normally only available through LEGO stores, catalogs, and the LEGO shop website), not a UCS set in particular. Most D2C Star Wars sets do happen to be Ultimate Collector's Series sets as well, but there are several exceptions like 10144 Sandcrawler, 10123 Cloud City, 10131 TIE Collection, 10178 Motorized Walking AT-AT, 10188 Death Star, 10195 Republic Dropship and AT-OT Walker, and 10198 Tantive IV.Given the diversity of Ultimate Collectors' Series sets, even AFOLs are often divided regarding what qualifies. These days such sets are almost always identified in the set name and given an information plate, but in the past some lacked this like 7194 Yoda, which was identified as Ultimate Collectors' Series on the box but lacked both a name plate and a D2C-indicative set number. In any event, it's impossible to classify all 1XXXX set numbers as UCS when certain examples like the TIE Collection have nothing at all distinguishing them from normal-release sets in terms of detail or presentation.Also it's hard to imagine that being admitted to the exclusive line is a one-time deal. There have been two Death Star models (although if you want to get nitpicky, the first was explicitly stated to be the Death Star II and the second is a conglomeration of scenes from both Death Stars reenacted with minifigures), and likewise there have been two Tantive IV models in the exclusive range (one UCS, one a standard minifigure set). Given that justification, it's easy to imagine a UCS Sandcrawler being admitted even with a previous non-UCS Sandcrawler set in the same exclusive range. The only obstacle it faces-- and it's a BIG obstacle-- is its tremendous price (at least, compared to other Cuusoo proposals).As for this proposal, I have a hard time thinking it has a snowball's chance in the Mangai Volcano, since anything loyal to the spirit of the proposal would be prohibitively expensive. If it does get accepted, it will be groundbreaking as far as Cuusoo projects are concerned. But at the same time, it's a wonderful model that fully deserved the support it got, and it's nice to see more proposals that don't have to worry about acquiring a license (since TLG already has the Star Wars building toy license for the next ten years). Edited by Aanchir: Rachira of Time
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really don't think this has any chance of going through. The sheer size would likely make it cost far more than would be practical. I really like the model and hope it does go through, but it just doesn't seem likely.

"I pitea the fool!"


(quote by Chro)


98.7% OF BZPOWER MEMBERS HAVEN'T SEEN MY BUCKET 


IF YOU ARE ONE OF THE 1.3% THAT HAS SEEN MY BUCKET, COPY THIS AND PASTE IT INTO YOUR SIGNATURE


I MISS MY BUCKET 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really don't think this has any chance of going through. The sheer size would likely make it cost far more than would be practical. I really like the model and hope it does go through, but it just doesn't seem likely.
Why doesn't it seem likely? It doesn't have to come out the exact same way the picture is, right? I'm sure they could tone it down some.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
I really don't think this has any chance of going through. The sheer size would likely make it cost far more than would be practical. I really like the model and hope it does go through, but it just doesn't seem likely.
Why doesn't it seem likely? It doesn't have to come out the exact same way the picture is, right? I'm sure they could tone it down some.
The risk, as always, is that every change they make takes it a bit farther from what the supporters voted on. If the end result is too vastly different to the concept that earned those votes, then not only might it drive away some of those supporters, but there's also no way of knowing whether the final product's concept could have earned that much support in and of itself.A while back there was a project for a LEGO Mindstorms Tachikoma (robot thingy from the anime Ghost in the Shell) that was getting a lot of support. At one point the Cuusoo staff pointed out that the source material was inappropriate for LEGO's core audience, and that the project would have to be re-imagined as a non-licensed project.Several palette swaps and an edited description later, and the builder did just that. Once again, the project seemed on the verge of success. But eventually (I can't remember if it reached 10,000 supporters by this time) the Cuusoo staff rejected it, pointing out that while it was a brilliant project and had been re-imagined well, they weren't sure if a non-licensed version of the project could justifiably be approved, since so many people had supported it when it was a licensed proposal and thus the end product would no longer be the same thing those people gave their support to.So there you can see the risk with making a proposal that will have to be changed significantly to become a set. I'm not saying for sure whether or not that applies to this proposal, since it's possible that anything sufficiently large and detailed will be deemed close enough to the original project's concept to be created. But it's just an example of how after a certain point any large changes run the risk of betraying those people who supported what was once a different project.
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...