Why don't battle packs come with film-accurate weapons?

[Daedalus304]

I think it's a bit more complicated an expectation.

Say that LEGO did go and make a new mold of a very faithful, film-accurate storm trooper rifle and put it in a storm trooper battle pack. Then next wave, here's the new battle pack for Battle Droids. If LEGO puts the storm trooper rifles in for the B1s, it would probably be received worse by the hardcore Star Wars fans than if they just had generic rifles. Down that route, LEGO would have to make a new weapon mold for every unique troop type. The costs of the tooling, the logistics involved in making sure all the troops have the "accurate" weapons, all of that becomes expensive and time consuming.

Then there's the other thing - yes, hardcore adult Star Wars fans are a lot more likely to be both interested and able to spend a large amount of money buying tens of dozens of battle packs to army build, but at the end of the day those fans are neither the target audience nor the group that overall brings in the most profit for the line. The kids and the general LEGO Star Wars fans vastly outnumber the true hard-core guys, and for them film-accurate weapons for every fig in a battle pack are, well, not really features that add value. The generic guns work for everyone and are easily interchangeable, and beyond that - from what I remember as a kid and from talking to kids who are really into LEGO Star Wars now - the generic guns are just fine, as far as actual play is concerned just having a gun is as much as they need. Having "generic pistol" and "generic rifle" with the option to add technic half-pins to customize things is fine.

That equation will probably never change for LEGO. They're very focused on the play experience, and the ability for parts to have a good amount of re-usability. For 99% of their customers, film-accurate Star Wars guns don't enhance the play experience - so I think they've got little incentive to spend such a large amount of money making minifig-scale scale models of Star Wars guns.

That's why 3rd party guys like Brickarms are great. They don't have the same target audience as LEGO and they can offer the more niche items that AFOLs want - yes, they're more expensive, but that's the way supply and demand works. This is the sort of thing I've had to come to terms with as a LEGO train builder. LEGO doesn't make train wheels in all the sizes I need, nor the many different track radii. And they probably won't - for the target audience, the 2 wheel sizes and 1 track radius are more than enough. Big Ben Bricks and ME Models solve both of those problems very well. More expensive, yes - but I realize I'm in a niche and I'm okay to pay that difference.

[Japanbuilder]

On 12/1/2016 at 2:49 AM, broomhandle said:

Ha ha, I have only got into LEGO again this past year after a very very long dark age and never owned any of the early SW sets. 

But seeing this just adds the whole LEGO vibe to it. I am sure folks don't like those megaphones as guns but that is hilarious. I am sure over time as those who are kids now grow up they will look back at the stud blasters with fond memories of lost studs and great laughs blasting things off the shelf with them. Probably also pain of stepping on the odd one or two of these late at night along with w/e figure is holding them/ 

In that sense they are priceless in much the same sense these megaphones probably are to a few folks. We should probably look at it that way, since again, we have the option of buying moulded blasters in bulk and most kids do not. 

[Aanchir]

Regardless of how many sets adult "army builders" buy, it's safe to say the overwhelming majority of sets (including Star Wars battle packs) go to children. Also, I think a big purpose of the working blasters in recent battle packs is to make up for the relative lack of excitement in the rest of the set. Bigger sets have more room to work play features into the actual builds, tend to include more exciting and beloved characters, and also will already be attractive to kids simply by virtue of being bigger. Working stud-shooters for the minifigures in the battle packs give them a little something for kids that the bigger sets don't already have.

There was something similar in the launch wave for Bionicle generation 2 in 2015. The big $15 and $20 figures, the Toa, had play features like gears to swing their arms, weapons that could transform into things like fins and skis and surfboards, and golden masks to seek out. The smaller $10 Protector sets, on the other hand, had no gear functions but had custom weapons using the new rotating six-stud shooters. That way, the bigger Toa and the smaller Protectors each offered something that the other group did not. If you already had a Protector, you still had an incentive to go back and get a Toa, and if you already had a Toa, you still had an incentive to go back and get a Protector.

Another potential factor: in general, smaller sets tend to be simple and aimed at younger kids, while bigger sets from the same themes tend to be more complex and aimed at older kids. That extra play value from the handheld stud shooters might be more enticing for younger kids, while more realistic weapons might be more enticing for older kids. In that sense the differing weapons boost their appeal with the audiences most likely to enjoy them, and might even help steer those kids towards the sorts of sets they'll be most likely to enjoy.

I quite like the stud shooters myself, especially as somebody who loved the old megaphone-style blasters. But then, I don't really collect Star Wars sets these days anyhow. Most of the LEGO themes I collect are original IPs like Ninjago, Elves, and Nexo Knights where authenticity is less of a factor (since the story material is based on the sets, not the other way around). So I'm not really in any position to weigh in on which type of weapon I'd rather see in battle packs or larger Star Wars sets. But I think the fact that LEGO has kept going with stud shooters in battle packs suggests that it has improved the sales of battle packs for them

[VaderFan2187]

On 12/2/2016 at 2:06 PM, Japanbuilder said:

But seeing this just adds the whole LEGO vibe to it. I am sure folks don't like those megaphones as guns but that is hilarious. I am sure over time as those who are kids now grow up they will look back at the stud blasters with fond memories of lost studs and great laughs blasting things off the shelf with them. Probably also pain of stepping on the odd one or two of these late at night along with w/e figure is holding them/ 

In that sense they are priceless in much the same sense these megaphones probably are to a few folks. We should probably look at it that way, since again, we have the option of buying moulded blasters in bulk and most kids do not. 

 I love good memories... those megaphones are cute but I don't have the old sets... so I made my own  They are quite easy to make

They look bad on droids but ok on figures (to me), except they are a little too short.

 

About stud shooters, I am conflicted about them. I like stud shooters as cannons, in fact (like on Clone Turbo Tank) but put them in a figure's hand... nope. Chewie's stud bowcaster does look better than the usual fat stud shooters to me, however. 

[VaderFan2187]

Don't like stud shooters?

Then sign the petition to LEGO here! 

https://www.change.org/p/lego-stop-putting-stud-shooters-as-guns-in-lego-star-wars