I just saw and read this article in the news feed.

Has LEGO sold out? - The NY Times

In a nutshell, the article talks about how (supposedly) some parents and researchers are saying that LEGO sets now are less open-ended and imaginative. That most are tied to one licence or another. (Lord of the Rings, Marvel, etc.) A mother, Tracy Bagatelle-Black, said and I qoute

A fluff article....full of fluff and no concrete evidence. LEGO always had themed sets with instructions when I was a kid almost 40 years ago. Space...Castle...Technic...and so on. Maybe the author should have shown links to the MOC pages.

yeah i skimmed the article and realized it was not worth my time reading rubbish. If anything people today are even more creative than they were in the past. i mean just look at some of the MOCs people have created. simply mind blowing and amazing creativity.

A fluff article....full of fluff and no concrete evidence. LEGO always had themed sets with instructions when I was a kid almost 40 years ago. Space...Castle...Technic...and so on. Maybe the author should have shown links to the MOC pages.

Exactly. There were 'brick buckets' but even most of those had some kind of an idea book I thought.

yeah i skimmed the article and realized it was not worth my time reading rubbish. If anything people today are even more creative than they were in the past. i mean just look at some of the MOCs people have created. simply mind blowing and amazing creativity.

T-H-A-N-K Y-O-U!

This is just another piece of garbage to go with the rest of the pile of literary crap that aggravates me to no end. Just more time and money wasted on pointless 'research' like that study I heard about way back where they wanted to understand (I kid you not) "why prisoners would want to escape from prison?" Are you friggin' kidding me?

Oh whatever. We know better, so who cares what people that just don't get it thinks.

It's like that old addage, "If I had to explain it, you would not understand."

On the whole I agree that the main theme of the article where there is less creativity in Legos is crazy. But you need to realize that necessity is the mother of invention and I have taught Lego classes and I still haven't found anyone in my classes (typically elementary school kids) that can solve my challenge of how to make a working door (hinge) using only 2x2 and 2x4 bricks. This is something I solved in 1964 as an 8 year old. That is a little disappointing, but then I have no memory of how long it took me to solve it. However, I am almost certain that if Lego had not advanced during those years they would not now be in business. I love the many new bricks, colors and options that have been introduced. There are still many building challenges that confront anyone building their own creations and the instructions are only a beginning point in sets, they sometimes teach you building methods and that is great, but they can't teach you everything, nor should they try. In the article they should have pointed out that there are still basic block sets with no instructions and only some pictures on the box to help guide you. The article talks about open-ended toys and I would also like to point out that teaching "open ended" classes requires a much higher level of sophistication on the part of the teacher to guide the class where structured classes are much easier to teach. There is a lot of research that shows elementary school age children don't learn much with "open ended" toys when they are left on their own. That doesn't mean free play is bad, just that it is generally not an efficient way to learn. Good thing scientists and engineers are not required to "rediscover" everything but can build on past discoveries.

Well there is a mistake in the first sentence; the plural of Lego is Lego, not Legos That woman they use as an example; did she miss all the sets they had for sale? It looks like that she bought everything except bricks. But one thing I do not like about some of the newer sets is that they have pieces that are moulded for a single use; For example: 7734 & 7983 are aircraft sets released in the past 6 years or so. The noses of the aircraft consist of a single moulded piece which can only be used for a single purpose. Compare that to the plane within 10159, the nose consists of 3 main parts or older sets like 6368 from 1985. Now the newer sets 'look' more realistic as they have moulded curves but they look less Lego like. I am still mentally trying to workout how to create a door using just 2x2 & 2x4 bricks - without offsetting them

Well there is a mistake in the first sentence; the plural of Lego is Lego, not Legos

this has ways made me chuckle because even though everyone knows this to be true, especially on this site, it is common practice to use the term LEGOS.

Hehe, that term has always grated ever since I heard on a podcast reviewing the Harry potter lego about 5 years ago. And that was before I had heard of AFOLs and this site was yet a gleam in Jeff and Ed's eye. Besides, if you must use it, surely it should be spelt Legoes ? :)

Do those NY Times authors know the source of hundreds of Lego's patents? From the kids who create projects as part of the national robotics competitions that they sponsor, using Lego Mindstorms technology as the base. Maybe they are looking to monetize more with product line extensions that are in a more ready-to-use format, and maybe that doesn't push kids to think as hard, but Lego hasn't forgotten that you also profit by letting kids expand their brains by playing the "hard way" using their own creativity. I know a number of these kids - the last generation of such nerds already have disproportionately made their mark on the 21st century business world. They should do a follow-up piece on that part of the Lego puzzle.

This article is just another proof that everything that's wrong on this planet can be blamed on the news media. If they really wanted to help kids and criticize something legitimate, they'd criticize the News Media for not covering the damage done by things such as TV, government spending their future incomes, and the destruction of education by the teacher's union. (I say this as a teacher, helpless to fight my own union.)

Just to be correct according to The Lego Group, Lego is not a noun, it is an adjective. Therefore there is no plural for the word Lego. The correct term is 'Lego bricks' for those flat objects that have studs on top and 'Lego plates' for those flat objects that do not have studs on top. (Curved object are beyond my knowledge, each probably has its own name). Also to be Legolly incorrect, I will continue to use Lego as a noun and its plural is Legos which is what I and all of my friends said while I was a child and I still prefer. (I think Legolly is a new word based on the word 'politically'?) LOL

It's the NY Times, what did you expect