For children, Age 21+ ;)

LORD DOOM · Post by **LORD DOOM** » Tue Oct 02, 2007 8:33 am

My question is this, Is there some ALL IMPOSING rule that TLG feels is necessary to follow that says LEGO© has to be designed for children?

I don't see how it could be financially unprofitable to market to older teens and even adults considering just how many of us AFOLS worldwide there appears to be.

I'm not saying Lego shouldn't market to kids, that would just be sad. I'm just saying why can't it focus a little more of it's aim on us too? Our money's just as good as anybody else's.

There's plenty of successful toy companies that make things that appeal to people of every age group.

(EDIT - I guess I'm speaking especially with regards to us Castlers as I know there are many LEGO© products designed for older age groups. Just none in our general genre' region of interest.)

Paradosis · Post by **Paradosis** » Tue Oct 02, 2007 9:59 am

I definitely agree. Thankfully, I think they are moving in that direction. We're now seeing some awesome sets like the 10182 Cafe Corner and 10179 Millenium Falcon, which are listed as 16+. I've even seen some Lego products that included adults in it's recommended age range (though saying 4-99 as an age range is a bit much, as the 4026 Create Your Dreams does).

Sir Kohran · Post by **Sir Kohran** » Tue Oct 02, 2007 3:24 pm

There might seem to be a lot of us...but I wouldn't say much more than ten thousand. Lego has to appeal to millions to make a genuine profit. TAFOLS (hey, a new acronym) are in the end a tiny community by business standards. We simply do not have the population or the reliability for Lego to market towards us.

I don't disagree with you and indeed it might work - like Paradosis said there are sets produced with an older audience in mind and I'd love to see the Castle side of things get more attention.

- Matt

Aliencat · Post by **Aliencat** » Tue Oct 02, 2007 5:39 pm

Sir Kohran wrote:There might seem to be a lot of us...but I wouldn't say much more than ten thousand. Lego has to appeal to millions to make a genuine profit. TAFOLS (hey, a new acronym) are in the end a tiny community by business standards. We simply do not have the population or the reliability for Lego to market towards us.

True on one side, but of course I can't speak for all of us but in my case at least, I spend an infinite amount of more money on Lego now than my parents ever did for me as a kid. As a kid I'd get some Lego for my birthday and/or christmas, and that was it. Now I buy Lego every month, in much larger quantities than I ever got as a kid (think at least $100 a month, but most of the time more

) I just can't help myself now that I earn more money lol, and seeing the collection of some fellow AFOLs I'm sure that goes for plenty others.

timber_wolf899 · Post by **timber_wolf899** » Tue Oct 02, 2007 9:30 pm

dang alien.........i'm in the wrong line of work!

point well taken though.

And as i said in the UCS castle thread, producing some sets for us would not be hard or costly. Just have a designer come visit the forums. : )

Use us for a focus group
etc

CastleMann · Post by **CastleMann** » Tue Oct 02, 2007 9:55 pm

As a TFOL here, I agree. I also think LEGO should take off the age limit tags such as 6-12 or whatever, just make it 6+.

Aliencat · Post by **Aliencat** » Tue Oct 02, 2007 10:08 pm

CastleMann wrote:As a TFOL here, I agree. I also think LEGO should take off the age limit tags such as 6-12 or whatever, just make it 6+.

Yeah I've always wondered about that, why put a minimum AND a maximum age? Why not just a minimum age. I understand that this is a target group and not a strict restriction, but it still looks a bit odd.

However I think Lord Doom's point is more about marketing than the age tags, and I definitely see Lego focus more and more on AFOLs, look at sets like Market Corner and UCS series, and even the Castle 07 series, although a bit juniorized it was made with the influence of AFOLs and the results stand far above lines like KK2 in my opinion (I know there's people who disagree), but what I mean to say is Lego has already made the move to focus on TAFOLs as well as kids. Even in the castle line

I also think the legendary sets, which had a re-release of 6074 was also aimed towards people who still remember the original 6074.

Though I really see Lord Doom's point that the marketing and presentation is aimed mostly on kids. Though we (TAFOLS) and our opinions are definitely heard, so perhaps the future will have sets like the Café Corner and UCS series in castle themed scenes, perhaps an accurate recreation of a historical building? Or a UCS castle set as suggested elsewhere in this forum?

arc · Post by **arc** » Wed Oct 03, 2007 12:22 am

I always thought the only reason for the age ranges on the boxes had something to do with liability concerns, so some moron parents couldn't sue Lego when they bought a set with lots of tiny parts for their four year old, and of course the 4 year old then put it in their mouth and then choked to death on it.

But the max age... yeah don't get that either. Never really paid attention to it though, honestly.

JPinoy · Post by **JPinoy** » Wed Oct 03, 2007 5:13 pm

They should definitely market to the AFOLs and adults. Call it "LEGO Hobbyist" line or something like that. Then again, the UCS as well as those huge sets can be considered "adult targeted".

Blueandwhite · Post by **Blueandwhite** » Wed Oct 03, 2007 9:33 pm

I'm man enough to buy something that says ages 6-12 without being bothered by it

!

DARKspawn · Post by **DARKspawn** » Wed Oct 03, 2007 10:20 pm

Blueandwhite wrote:I'm man enough to buy something that says ages 6-12 without being bothered by it !

Heck yeah! Preech it.

...Although noone seems to look at me funny anymore since I am usually accompanied by my daughter...

LORD DOOM · Post by **LORD DOOM** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 12:11 am

You're all kinda missing my point. K, lemme think of an example to better illustrate what I mean.

Not that I don't appreciate everybodies perspective.

DARKspawn · Post by **DARKspawn** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 12:38 am

I think I know what your getting at - why is LEGO bound to catering to a child audience when they could release products that were intended for adults on the side? Is that it?

arc · Post by **arc** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 4:58 am

Well that and a more complicated (not necessarily large) series of sets clearly intended for more careful, meticulous, and mature builders would be nice too.

Then again most children who play with Legos at least seem mature for their age when bricks are in hand. It's not a good hobby for the screaming little kids with no patience.

LORD DOOM · Post by **LORD DOOM** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 7:18 am

arc wrote: It's not a good hobby for the screaming little kids with no patience.

I disagree Arc, respectfully of course. I was one of those screaming little kids with no patience. Lego was a great learning device for me as a child because it's very tactile and colorful and an infinitely versatile tool for self-expression. Which is what those screaming little kids need, freedom to grow at their own pace and teach themselves in a way that fills the void where standardized learning methods may be ineffective. Lego SHOULD absolutely be for children, and it absolutely is. It's just not restricted to children because of the versatility.

I guess the point I'm trying to make is that there's a lot of subject matter that Lego could utilize as content if they used a rating (or something similar) system instead of an age guide. Take for instance the movie 300, now I'm not really AS excited as a lot of people would be to see sets derived from that movie but as far as a financially lucrative endeavor is concerned Lego would stand to profit greatly. The spartains were cool enough by themselves without that movie to glamorize them but that movie did create a level of buzz for that whole scenario. Another example might be police dramas or a good vampiric theme even bastardized to the point of being like Van Helsing or something, ( KUDOS TO LEGOFREAK

)or countless options that Lego could tool around with. It's like with the StarWars line, I recall reading an article that talked about a debate that ensued over weather or not to obtain a license for the StarWars theme over the word "War" being included in a Lego product.

Star Wars was the first movie I ever saw gore in. The Catina scene where the alien gets his arm sliced off by Obi-Wan.

Not that I'm a fan of violence OR gore, because I'm not, I'm a very peace embracing individual. I'm just saying that by adapting to today's changing world and opening up to more options Lego would have greater creative freedom. Which above all else, save good values...I support.

I know I know. That was a bit long winded, and I mean no offense to anybody who doesn't agree with me, I'm just curious as to the reasoning behind this whole process.

Well, any insight anybody has is always appreciated.

EDIT - More complicated models is another subject entirely which I fully promote but I think that's being touched on in another thread.