The Decline of Lego Castle?

[KarenJ]

This has been an interesting read, makes for a good castle primer. You guys are funny, and you all know so much. The last time I played with Lego (as a kid) was 555 Hospital (1976) and 493 Space Command Center (1978). The best castle I could build back then was with 2 x 4 bricks, all red, and about 8" tall. Never had enough bricks to make anything decent. I think I had about 16 2 x 2 old grey tiles... from the hospital I guess. My "knights" were doctors and nurses in straitjackets. The yellow castle didn't come out until 1981- never knew it.

When I rediscovered this hobby in 2007 it was overwhelming. I'm still learning about all that I missed (goblets? pizza? arched windows?!) in the 30 year absence. I've been purchasing from ebay and garage sales and have obtained many castle type sets (7097 Trolls mountain fortress, 6075 castle, 8877 Vladek's dark fortress, 6076 dark dragons den, 7419 dragon fortress, 6082 fire breathing fortress, 4709 Hogwarts, 6098/6091 King Leo's castle, 3052 Ninja's fire fortress, 7094 King's castle siege. As well as a garage sale boatload of Harry Potter stuff, some Amazon sets, little sets like catapults etc, and some pirate stuff like 6276 Eldorado fortress and some ships). But I have a hard time building things unless it's from instructions. The huge variety of elements has made it very daunting.

Now that I've learned some things I know a little more about it, but I think it's all pretty amazing.

Would somebody please tell me what a "crownie" is? Is this term restricted to figs who actually wear crowns (like a king) or is it a term from a particular line?

[Blueandwhite]

Now that I've learned some things I know a little more about it, but I think it's all pretty amazing.

Would somebody please tell me what a "crownie" is? Is this term restricted to figs who actually wear crowns (like a king) or is it a term from a particular line?

Where to begin ...

Honestly, so many of the figures and elements LEGO has produced over the past 30 years have been given various nicknames by folks within the community that it really is a challenge to keep up with the various AFOL naming conventions. "Crownie" is a name that popped up to describe the various figures from the fantasy Castle line with a Crown on their torso. It's not an offical name; rather it's a nickname developed and used by AFOLs to describ a particular subset of figures. Other naming conventions are even more confusing. As a fan I wouldn't give them too much thought.

[veevers24]

I am of the opinion that the cream of the crop came out in the 80's but that was my generation of lego castle as toys

The only mistake lego ever made throughout the ages was KKII - those multicoloured knights just wouldn't have been taken seriously and were probably aimed at young children. Can you imagine what an army of these clowns would have looked like!! The theme had little to no interest for AFOLs. Didn't stop me from buying the entire range for parts though!!


The Kingdoms stuff is pretty cool so I say its not in decline, but as with lots of things it just isn't as good as 'the golden age' sets that started it all.

[jgrahl]

I still prefer the 80's and early 90's sets. Medieval Market Village amazed me when it came out. I got one for me and my younger sister. It doesn't even seem to fit with the trolls 'n dwarves fantasy era.

I think the action figure type toys aren't in line with the building aspect of other lego sets. This being the ill-fated Knights kingdom II theme. I'll probably never own any of the action figure size people like Vladek and Jayko.

The current theme is back to more human-like characters but still has a bit of fantasy in it with the wizards and dragons. I would like to see more sets similar to medieval market village.

However, there is a marketing and combined set aspect that lego is chained down by. It seems that they are limited to creating themes from now on. They also seem to release sets from a target market price as sets in themes almost always have a $5 set, $10, $20, $50, and one big one at $70-100+. I cringe at the thought of shareholders making decisions for companies.

Occasionally they re-release an old set, but it's just not good enough for fans of old.

[friskywhiskers]

Lego Castle has had It's ups and downs. Although I wasn't around for the true classic castle lego I think that Lego Castle started to decline with KK2. KK1 was still semi realistic and the bull knights were great. KK2 was just.....bleh. All of the non-castly colors and big cheesy helmets (although the shadow knights were cool) .... The second stream was so bad that Many people I know dubbed it as the C.C. theme ( No, not Classic Castle, Castle Catastrophe! ). The fantasy theme started to bring it back but with kingdoms.........The whole Castle, Tower, Prison, duel thing was getting old. They also incorperated many new pieces that were meant to improve but you just don't get the same feel anymore.

[Armored Archer]

I really became interested in Castle when KK1 came out, I got the King Leo set for my sixth birthday. I lost a bit of interest when KK2 came out, although I did like Rascus' green armor, but anyway, I agree with the majority that things got better around 2007.

Oddly, I only have a few small castle sets, two KK1, two Fright Knights, one KK2, one LK, and a few partial sets that I found in bulk bricks from garage sales. Thank God for part vendors though, I have a a decent amount custom knight minifig and MOCs.

I think I'm too young to have seen most of the up-swings and declines, but KK2 was certainly a decline.

[theboywarrior]

In my opinion, LEGO Castle declined with the Fright Knights, was 'meh' for a while, fell short with KK1, was a joke with KK2, and recovered quite a bit with the Fantasy Era, although it'll take a lot of work to bring it back up that ladder that fell over on top of it.

[eNiGMa]

although it'll take a lot of work to bring it back up that ladder that fell over on top of it.

I can see where you're coming from with that statement, but I think it really depends on what we want to see improve. For instance, with the rise of online community activity, LEGO has been very good about communicating with their fan base to get a better idea of what we want, and even though we still don't always get it, recent sets have included beautiful new pieces and concepts for which many fans spent years begging (farm animals come first to my mind). And while some may disagree, I personally feel a sense of greater freedom with the more vast abundance of unique elements we have now compared to what we had back then. Of course there will always be a soft spot in my heart for the classic factions, but I also find myself favoring the beautifully created minifigs of today's themes (though I will also admit that I have more spending money to amass an army now than I did as a kid when the older sets were available, and that can also influence my choice).

But then there's the other side of the coin. To me, sets like 6059 Knight's Stronghold and 6067 Guarded Inn are true works of art, with a certain charm newer sets in general can't quite replicate exactly (and I'm sure each of us could pick more favorites from the archives). From a nostalgic (and in some ways practical) point of view, today's set designs could use some work to catch up. But for a lot of us, perhaps that could mostly just be nostalgia.

To be honest, I feel like comparing today's designs to those of two decades ago would be a lot like comparing apples to oranges. Both are delicious and healthy, but I wouldn't tell the orange to be more like the apple, simply because, well, it's an orange. There are still ways LEGO can improve their sets, but I don't think it requires going back in time. I think what we have now is of very high quality (the best in years), and I'm excited to see what LEGO rolls out next.

[theboywarrior]

excellent point, I probably should just look at the old sets and say, "Boy, LEGO did a great job on this armor shop in '86, the guardhouse tower set (not a real set, just to clarify) is almost just this one." instead of "wow it would be nice to see a set just like this one, LEGO's really declining." hey, you just changed my entire outlook! I always knew Kingdoms was great, but what you wrote made me look at it in a whole new light.

Thanks for correcting me and making me look like a bigger newbie! i needed it!


and also switch the apples and oranges in that little example, oranges taste better

[davee123]

To me, sets like 6059 Knight's Stronghold and 6067 Guarded Inn are true works of art, with a certain charm newer sets in general can't quite replicate exactly (and I'm sure each of us could pick more favorites from the archives). From a nostalgic (and in some ways practical) point of view, today's set designs could use some work to catch up. But for a lot of us, perhaps that could mostly just be nostalgia.

Personally, I find that my attachment to the old minifigs is nostalgic, but my attachment to the structures is more for the system they were working with rather than the actual design elements of the particular set. I like the design of 6062's castle wall, but it's nothing tremendously amazing in and of itself. What's MOST amazing to me is the interchangeability of the castle wall system. Good-guy castles and bad-guy castles were identical in style, and small wall sections could be added and removed to create wonderfully large custom setups.

The castle designs in themselves were rather bland, really. Like 6062, 6080 King's Castle was just about as standard of an iconic castle as you can get, without any real flare. Today's castles by comparison have styles all their own-- particularly the "evil" castles, since they're custom-tailored to the subtheme that they house. Today's castles are great for detail work and style-- but then again it's that same style that makes them less timeless to me. More modern castles have heroic flare, are dark and imposing, or are primitive-yet-sturdy. They tell a bit more of a story. But older castles like King's Castle, while not overly INTERESTING as a castle, is-- and will forever be-- timeless.

Anyway, for me, I'd love to see a return to that level of generic. I can't say I RECOMMEND that course of action for LEGO, because today's kids may not find it appealing-- but that's what I find appealing. And I don't really think that part has to do with nostalgia. I sometimes see other toy castles in stores. And instantly, if they're large and iconic, I feel that little voice inside wanting them. But if the castle is "Character X's castle" or something, it's like my eyes don't even see it-- I just don't care.

The minifigs, on the other hand, are definitely nostalgia-triggers for me. Today's minifigs are really nice-- they're probably much better than the older designs. They've got more detail, more realism, and and more diversity. But I can't really say what it is about the older styles that I like so much, apart from perhaps the more realistic-looking heraldry. Hence, I think I have to chalk that preference up to nostalgia.

DaveE

[eNiGMa]

Personally, I find that my attachment to the old minifigs is nostalgic, but my attachment to the structures is more for the system they were working with rather than the actual design elements of the particular set. I like the design of 6062's castle wall, but it's nothing tremendously amazing in and of itself. What's MOST amazing to me is the interchangeability of the castle wall system. Good-guy castles and bad-guy castles were identical in style, and small wall sections could be added and removed to create wonderfully large custom setups.

I can definitely agree with your thoughts about the system; that's something I would like to see again. I can imagine what future sets might look like if the classic wall system was integrated with today's style and details.

Hmm.... Well there's a MOC idea! I'll have to play around with that one.

[Rogue Shadow]

I surprised that some people are lumping Knight's Kingdom I and II together. I have always liked KKI and it is really good compared to KKII. The Bulls are actually one of my favorite 'evil' factions. At the time, Knight's Kingdom was considered a step in the right direction after Fright Knights, though it did take some flak for the set designs.

Josh

I agree with you completely! I have thoroughly enjoyed the Bulls as the "bad guys". I think that KKII wasn't necessarily a decline, but a shift targeting younger aged people. The named heros (take Jayko for example. For those of you who don't know who he is, he's the light blue knight here.) These main heros are what the kids would spend their time imagining about. While I would take a guess and say that we as TFOL's and AFOL's would like larger armies of unnamed people (save our sigfigs), some people managed to do some pretty awesome things with it, like this. It's just a matter of personal opinion. One of my favorite factions is the Crownies, but some people have a distaste for them. Again, another matter of opinion.

Unfortunately for Lego, KKII didn't really hit their intended audience like they hoped (the people who like things such as Spiderman, Pokemon, etc where there is a set number of named heros), so they reverted back to a general style of castle that most people (like me!) enjoy.
I hope that helps!
In Christ,

[DaleDVM]

Josh[/quote]
While I would take a guess and say that we as TFOL's and AFOL's would like larger armies of unnamed people (save our sigfigs), some people managed to do some pretty awesome things with it, like this. [/quote]

Oh my... I just threw up in my mouth...

I have followed the thread with interest. Now to weigh in.

I agree with many who have posted that the sets began their juniorization with the dragon masters. I was willing to overlook that because I hoped it was a temporary thing. I also generally loved the faction and the dragons and Majisto. My dark ages began with the fright knights because the juniorization trend was only worsening and Willa was so ugly! It is pretty easy to see where I stand on the decline of castle. Funny thing was I kept buying the castle sets up through the KK1 and the running of the Bulls! My fright knight sets sat unopened for 10 years until I came out of my dark age in 2007 with the release of the Fantasy Era sets.

I know this is a classic castle site. However, I now feel that castle is truly back and actually better than ever! With the exception of a few sets, the last four years have had great set design. Some I consider the best sets ever made for castle. The Dwarf Mine, MMV, the ultimate castle chess set, and the new King's Castle are great. The sets along with the fantastic minifig, civilian, and faction designs really make me believe this is a new golden age for castle.

[davee123]

I agree with many who have posted that the sets began their juniorization with the dragon masters.

This got me thinking... A while back we had some discussion about trying to ~somewhat~ figure out the amount of juniorization existed within a set: viewtopic.php?f=2&t=19039

I was able to put together that same data for sets from 1978-2009, and see how things compared. Here's a rough result, showing Juniorization as it increased from year to year:
http://www.suave.net/~dave/images/juniorized_castle.gif

Obviously, Juniorization is pretty subjective, but it does show some interesting trends!

DaveE

[Rogue Shadow]

Oh my... I just threw up in my mouth...

I was worried someone might do that...

I know this is a classic castle site. However, I now feel that castle is truly back and actually better than ever! With the exception of a few sets, the last four years have had great set design. Some I consider the best sets ever made for castle. The Dwarf Mine, MMV, the ultimate castle chess set, and the new King's Castle are great. The sets along with the fantastic minifig, civilian, and faction designs really make me believe this is a new golden age for castle.

[/quote]
I agree with you! (I guess I forgot to mention that in my first post...) I love the new Dragon knights, and I did mention that the Crownies were also a fav of mine. I also agree that Lego has really honed their skills with civilian sets/accessories that makes cities possible. Thank you Lego!
In Christ,