5 ms·
This is an often stated criticism of modern Lego designs, but I wonder if anyone has tried to test this empirically? E.g. if you gave a group of kids a "classi
by replicatorblog 7y ago
This is an often stated criticism of modern Lego designs, but I wonder if anyone has tried to test this empirically?
E.g. if you gave a group of kids a "classic" set and another a themed set, with no further instructions, would the first group produce more "creative" designs?
I think the critics of the branded sets undervalue the Piagetian concept of scaffolding, basically that having the Harry Potter superstructure allows kids to riff on a variety of concepts that actually may be more "creative" than the random geometric blocks.
E.g. "What if we built a jail around Voldermort instead of killing him" seems like an equally valuable expression of creativity as "I made a vaguely car-shaped thing, but it has six wheels instead of four and has those little lever bricks instead of a steering wheel."
- bluetomcat 7y agoLet's do a direct comparison of [1] "70412-1: Soldiers Fort" (2015) to [2] "6263-1: Imperial Outpost" (1995): - Older set has a big baseplate which enables a child to start building a new structure easily - Older set has well-pronounced architectural elements like arcs and slopes and feels like a solid structure, newer set feels airy and ad-hoc - Older set has minifigs with a simple paint, newer set has cartoon-like characters - Older set has a more realistic colour scheme, newer set again feels cartoonish - Older set has a specially designed backside for playing and putting minifigs [1] https://brickset.com/sets/70412-1/Soldiers-Fort https://brickset.com/sets/70412-1/Soldiers-Fort [2] https://brickset.com/sets/6263-1/Imperial-Outpost https://brickset.com/sets/6263-1/Imperial-Outpost
- rdtwo 7y agoThey look like different tiers of sets the first one is like a 20$ set while the second is a 10$ one