I wouldn't want to place either, given the quality of the other MOCs that did.

I think I'm beginning to understand why the sets suck so much.

I think I'm beginning to understand why the sets suck so much.

I wish chain-quoting and multiple-posting weren't against the rules, so that I could copy this and post it a few hundred times in a row.

I think I'm beginning to understand why the sets suck so much.

I think I'm beginning to understand why the sets suck so much.

Do you not look at the "cool creations" section of the magizine, then?

 

BtB

This one.

Hey, I said in B6's blog I didn't trust LEGO's judgment, and look at the results!

 

-CF

I think I'm beginning to understand why the sets suck so much.

Do you not look at the "cool creations" section of the magizine, then?

 

BtB

No one who's half-decent submits anything there. And no, I haven't in quite some time. Generally, I just toss the whole thing in a big box full of them. I get three of every issue.

I know. They weren't all that great. Titanus's should have won.

 

~U_K~

I liked Titanus. However, I can't say I dislike any of the winning MOCs, save for perhaps the third-place one. All, however, were innovative and deviated from a traditional humanoid-mech look, which might possibly be part of why they won.

 

Besides, it's a bit unfair to judge LEGO for their decisions before we know what their intent is for these MOCs. It's also nothing short of ridiculous to claim LEGO's supposed failure to produce good sets has anything to do with their job judging these MOCs-- none of these look remotely like a set that LEGO would put out or one I would buy. And if LEGO really has such poor taste in regard to art, then it's pathetic that people bother to use an art medium they produce-- for the medium can't be any less tasteless than the sets, if one assumes tastelessness to be an irredeemable flaw of the designers.