StoutFiles has committed the unforgivable: He has designed a UCS version of the now-famous Flick-fire missiles. He presents his MOC on Eurobricks , and beyond the obvious tongue-in-cheek nature of this creation, I take this opportunity to ask this existential question: Why does LEGO persist in offering these missiles on almost all of its vehicles and buildings?
LEGO has always defended the playability of its products with great reinforcements of hatches that open, things that spin, gadgets that close and missiles that can be fired at the touch of a button. These missiles have become ubiquitous: They are found in many sets and not always wisely ... A ship with these missiles, still passes, a land vehicle, come on we want to believe it ... But a tree or a roof of a building, one should not exaggerate either ....
Even the 9516 Jabba's Palace will be equipped with missile ramps as evidenced by the description of the set:
... Can she get past the roof-mounted missiles, defense guns and surveillance equipment to reach them? ...
Especially since if you have tried, you already know that it is almost impossible to aim correctly while trying to send one of these missiles towards its target. I did the test with my 7 year old son. And his answer is final, these missiles are null. They do not go very far, are not very powerful, and over time, they only drop when you manipulate the device carrying them.
But why is LEGO insisting with these rockets? To justify an additional functionality? To attract the youngest who like everything that pulls, launches, pushes ...?
Personally, I have nothing against these missiles, except in the case where they disfigure a machine when they have nothing to do there ... And you, what do you think?
