The theory is wrong.

Wait...

They don't care about the products at all. They just say, "New toy! It's awesome! It's perfect! Make more like it!". That's why we have had Inika and Piraka torsos for three years now, I'm guessing.

Now, if LEGO had some people from BZP in that group, they'd get real criticisms, and they'd be able to improve. But no, they have kids who don't even know what they're talking about.

Also, to avoid flame, none of this is proven, and it's just what I'm guessing it's like. Though it probably is.

*Waits to be proven wrong*

Also, also, you, along with some others, would be very good in a flocus group. But no, LEGO wouldn't have anyone over 13 in a focus group - They're too old to know about toys, amirite?

Lego should choose some of us from BZP to be the focus groups--that way the kids would be happy, and so would we.

I'm beginning to think they let those focus groups make the sets. They probaly shove a bin of parts, old and new ones, in front of them and let those kids build most of it. Then they might, just might, change some minor things. Like if it only had 1 arm. But things like Kopaka's eye-laser, they leave that in. Nothing wrong with selling toys that have something sticking out of their eyes to small children, right?

Cue bones.

*bones comes, attempts to chrush everyone with his logic*

Cue bones.

 

*bones comes, attempts to chrush everyone with his logic*

Bones has MCD, methinks.

McDonalds?

McDonalds?

No. Read carefully through the entry.

I think you're right and I think you're wrong.

It's too late at night for me to think of a very good rebutle or agreeing statement.

But I did have some thoughts.

If you are trying to be serious about the focus groups and Lego, I think Lego tries hard to please more than just the focus groups. Look at Takanuva Mistika, he has a ton of technic things to him.

Or you might be right about the kids being excited about new sets, and don't care that the shoulders are 11 studs wide, there is only one main color (bley and silver are the other two, not to mention red and blue pins and rods, plus black and light bley here and there), the Toa Mistika have no weapons, or---

I don't want to be arguing my opinion of the 08 sets just yet....

I hope you get something out of my post here. If this entry was purely serious, I think you have some thinking to do and giving Lego some credit, but if you were exaggerating then you're right.

-CF

Alright, Ca'gerrin, lemme see what I can do here. And no, I won't take this time to argue against your personal preference, since that's reserved for replying to entries or posts about such. (Speaking of which, nice term. Bones-ites.)

First, your understanding of the focus groups is wrong. You say it as if it works in this way-- LEGO offers a set to the focus groups. Focus groups decide whether anything should be changed, the answer to which is according to you almost invariably no due to the kids' enthrallment over the opportunity to see new sets. If this process were how the sets were proposed to the focus groups, I will admit that such a thing would more than likely happen, and we'd be stuck with what LEGO, not the general audience, felt was best.

Nevertheless, the above process does not take place at all. Focus groups are presented with a variety of versions of each set, from which they choose the best. What stage of development these are in is anyone's guess; I am unaware how much LEGO refines the model after it is chosen. I know this because Greg described it when people were complaining about Kongu Mahri's lack of a melee weapon, explaining that some of the models proposed to the focus groups did feature melee weapons and were turned down.

In this more accurate version of the process your main argument falls to pieces. Regardless of what the focus groups are offered, they will choose what they feel is best and will not just pick whatever LEGO throws at them. To an extent they still do, but such is necessary if LEGO intends to release affordable sets that are not all three feet high featuring a nuke on each finger, which is what many of these kids might ask for based on the grotesque MOCs and descriptions I see on the BIONICLE.com gallery.

As for your "consumers are cattle" argument, that offends me as a consumer greatly. You act as if I will accept any set without argument and will see no fault in a set. Such is not the case; I buy most sets so I have them for pieces and drawing reference. It is true that my family will as a whole typically get every set, but while I try to appreciate them in spite of some people's griping I see many flaws in them (I must say I do indeed hate Kalmah's simplicity compared to his fellow Barraki, as well as Nuparu's compared to his fellow Mahri). As an artist I am given the option to exaggerate the "good" (which with me tends to mean "expressing continuity") aspects of a set (or mask, as the case more often is), and I am glad to do so, but rarely do I take liberties with a set outside of focusing on the aspects which I prefer.

Also, Lluvio, you complain about the Piraka and Inika torsos. Here I will have to preach my own opinion, as I see no reason LEGO would change now the system of "one or two Toa torsos per story book" which has been in place since BIONICLE debuted. On that note, they did with the introduction of Kongu Mahri's torso, so scratch that. I believe we've all been spoiled by the fact that LEGO released them in the first place, as previously Toa torsos had never been featured on BIONICLE sets besides Toa and had scarcely any room for creativity in canister sets (there are other flaws, of course, but the presence of gear functions made up for many of these, IMO). 2007 was the first year we don't have at least one line of complete clones, and I'm ashamed that people continue to argue for a new torso every year, which would certainly turn me off after LEGO's expressed their ability to do creative stuff with the torsos they've already released.

Of course, if LEGO doesn't make any new torsos for 2009, I'll probably be disappointed, but that may be lessened depending on the quality of the sets.

Your theory, btw, typically seems to be true. I note that this entry has fewer comments than even some less controversial entries, however. Unless this is due to the length of the entry I find myself ashamed of how many people may have declined to post (whether in favor of the entry's contents or not) just to avoid proving the theory true.

Aanchir: I never said (here) that I disliked the Torsos. In fact, I'm going to relate it to one of my favorite things: the Zelda series. As one important executive member (Miyamoto, I believe) said, they have reached a golden way [to do things] and they plan to keep it that way. Of course, they're talking about the way the games play, but I believe it also works well here.

Actually I was replying to Lluvio's comment when I mentioned the torsos.

Sadly (and totally off-topic), I still haven't played any Zelda games. Well, except Link to the Past at a hotel once, but I never figured out exactly how to do anything. Of course, that was back in the day when I almost invariably didn't play one-player video games. (I should write a blog entry about the regrettable sorts of things I did do to involve myself while Lyi was playing).