The LEGO Group has rolled out the Star Wars design team to explain why the $1,000 Death Star cuts corners on its minifigures, but the reasons given aren’t resonating with the community.
Much of the criticism of 75419 Death Star so far has been levelled at the 38-strong minifigure line-up, which – while setting a new record for the most minifigures in a single set – compromises on details like dual-moulded legs and printing. C-3PO is missing the dual-moulded leg that’s currently available in 75398 C-3PO (a £125 set) and even a £5 keychain, for example, while the Imperial officers are absent dual-moulded legs.
The LEGO Group has attempted to get ahead of these concerns by wheeling out the design team behind the set to explain the reasons for these compromises. Speaking to Brick Fanatics and other LEGO fan media in a roundtable interview, graphic designer Madison O’Neil offered an explanation that probably makes sense internally, but won’t necessarily resonate with fans facing a £900 price tag for the new Death Star.
“This set is the same as every other set we make, in the way that we get a certain number of frames for changes that we can make to the characters or the bricks in that set,” he explained. “For instance, you can only have so many new decorations or new elements or new colour changes on elements, so we have to look at the whole set holistically and see where we can get the most novelty. In this case, we went for a lot of new characters.”
There are seven brand new and exclusive characters in 75419 Death Star, along with plenty of familiar faces who Madison says had to be resurrected with fresh prints and pieces – including Han Solo and Luke Skywalker – which all contributed to the set’s budget.
“Every printed element, every brick, has a shelf life where once we use it, it exists for a certain amount of time, but then we have to spend these frames again to bring it back once it exits,” he added. “So even if something was available in the past, it doesn't necessarily mean it would be available for the entire future. That would be awesome, but that's not the way the system works. So in this instance, those frames went to other places that we thought were better.”
Madison further explained to Brick Fanatics that the same logic applies to pieces that are currently in production for older sets that may not have the same shelf life as the Death Star. At the moment, 75419 is scheduled to retire by the end of 2028, but 75398 C-3PO is due to leave shelves in 2026. Including the minifigure’s dual-moulded legs in the Death Star would have meant extending the production cycle of that piece beyond 75398 – requiring use of one of the model’s precious few ‘frames’.
“Within the system, we have all these codes that go in different elements that determine how they can be used, if they can be used in future products, or if they have completely exited,” he elaborated. “So you basically have to pay these frames to bring them back. If something is in production now, there is still a chance that it can't be used in future products because of how they control the portfolio.
“It affects warehouse space, and how much production capacity we actually have to mould and decorate elements in production. So that is ultimately what kind of limits the amount of stuff that we can make.”
So, that’s an answer that highlights the constraints the design team faces with any given LEGO Star Wars set. The problem with it is that the community doesn’t see this as ‘any given LEGO Star Wars set’, namely because it costs $1,000. And that means the internal logic for compromising on minifigures in this most ultimate of LEGO Star Wars models just isn’t cutting it.
Brickset also interviewed Madison and received a slightly different answer regarding C-3PO. “There are different factors with every set, but the same actually happened with C-3PO and R2-D2 after 75339 Death Star Trash Compactor Diorama,” Madison said. “We added printed arms to C-3PO and decoration on Artoo’s back for the diorama, which became the norm going forward and still is today.
“Dual-moulding is a bit different though. Adding that cost to a figure that might need to appear in a much smaller and cheaper set, like C-3PO, is not necessarily an option, so in his case, we could not commit to the dual-moulded leg becoming the standard design. Having said that, we are aware it is something fans are passionate about and we try to include that minifigure whenever we can, but we have to prioritise.”
The comments section on Brickset suggests both explanations are ringing hollow. “Sorry (not sorry), but the ‘limited number of frames’ constraint needs to be relaxed or eliminated at or above certain price thresholds,” speedorz4ever wrote. “The expectations of a $20 or $50 hobby purchase are FAR different than a $200, $500 or $1,000 purchase. LEGO has outgrown their playbook here and they are doing real damage to their reputation and harming their most loyal customers.”
Another user, Fire, added: “For $1,000, the fact that they aren't putting the highest quality minifigures they possibly can is inexcusable. His answers to questions about dual-moulded legs are ridiculous. Sure, it costs more to produce those. But you're charging consumers $1,000 for this thing. If there's any set that should have the highest quality available, it's LEGO's first $1,000 set.”
There’s clearly a gulf here between what the LEGO Group considers acceptable compromises for 75419 Death Star (and is happy to impose on the design team) and what the community sees as indefensible, and it’s mostly attributable to that record-breaking price tag – and billing this 9,023-piece model as ‘the same as any other set we make’. The consensus across comment sections, reddit, YouTube and social media is that this isn’t just ‘any other set’.
“For $1k US, it should have all printed pieces, dual-moulded legs, and maybe even a few more minifigures,” ZeroDaySubber wrote on reddit. “You’d think they’d say to themselves: ‘We’re creating and selling the MOST EXPENSIVE LEGO SET EVER, so let’s go all out and show what we can do. No stickers, peak minifigures, etc.’”
Back on Brickset, Brick_Master said: “I think a contrast should be drawn here with how [the LEGO Group] launched the Chinese New Year range of sets - each one was pretty much no-expenses-spared blow-the-budget on new designs. This is definitely one instance where I feel Star Wars fans are justified in feeling like they're being taken for granted.”
The other point to bear in mind here is that very few people are taking the designers in particular to task over the Death Star. “[There’s] so much genuine potential and enthusiasm from the team that’s absolutely quashed by the insane and unreasonable limitations that this multi-billion dollar (profit earning) company puts in place,” redditor MaximumTitle1838 said, echoing a sentiment also seen across the web.
Indeed, it’s worth noting that the designers in this context are mostly spokespeople for the product: they’re not the decision makers, but do have to skilfully navigate being the public face of 75419 Death Star while following rules that are not their own.
The onus comes back to those responsible for setting the budget in the first place, and their apparent lack of consideration for the perceptions, as much as anything, of applying the same restrictions and limitations to the first $1,000 set as any other LEGO Star Wars set. And that's what is in part driving such fierce criticism of the latest UCS set before it's even hit shelves.
75419 Death Star launches for LEGO Insiders on October 1 for £899.99 / $999.99 / €999.99.
You can support the work that Brick Fanatics does by purchasing your LEGO sets using our affiliate links – thank you.
Comments
Be the first to comment!