PlaymoFriends
General => Brainstorming For Playmobil => Topic started by: Richard on March 14, 2008, 20:29:51
-
What's wrong with Playmobil ... ???
Now that Hans Beck has retired, does Playmobil have any design leadership?
As we all know, Playmobil is a TOY for children. We also know that Playmobil must make money for Geobra, or they will NOT stay in business !!!
I'm sure that most of us would agree that it makes GOOD SENSE for any company to have products that result in related sales. Playmobil's castles and "add-on" sections are a good example of how Playmobil has taken advantage of related sales.
So ... WHAT'S WRONG WITH PLAYMOBIL ?
Two fairly new sets are currently available from Playmobil.
One set seems to make very good "marketing sense" with an eye to "related sales."
The other set seems to have been designed by some very narrow-minded isolationists without any regard at all for the rest of Playmobil's product line.
The first new set, 4133 see attachment, is a set that can be added to, or expanded with any Steck System castle (too bad Steck System castles are no longer in production).
The second new set, 4294 see attachment, is a set that can't be added to, or expanded with either Steck System or System-X! (Actually, when you look at it, it could have easily been designed with existing Steck System pieces and a few (what could have been) very nice additions to Steck System.
So, what we have now is mostly a frustrating mish-mash of incompatible pieces that is actually losing money for Geobra from the children, parents and collectors who would like to buy more Playmobil to add to and expand their Playmobil "construction" sets.
So ... WHAT'S WRONG WITH PLAYMOBIL ?
The design and marketing departments seem to be suffering from a lack of direction, vision, management and leadership!
PLAYMOBIL WAKE UP ... YOU'RE LOSING BUSINESS (MONEY) !!!
-
Two fairly new sets are currently available from Playmobil.
One set seems to make very good "marketing sense" with an eye to "related sales."
The other set seems to have been designed by some very narrow-minded isolationists without any regard at all for the rest of Playmobil's product line.
The first new set, 4133 see attachment, is a set that can be added to, or expanded with any Steck System castle (too bad Steck System castles are no longer in production).
4133 is a Superset and I think it is not so much a base to be built on by creating a new larger structure through adding more Steck parts to it as an introduction or addition to Playmobil which can be added to by buying related sets or other Playmobil products. I think this is the philosophy behind all the Supersets.
The second new set, 4294 see attachment, is a set that can't be added to, or expanded with either Steck System or System-X! (Actually, when you look at it, it could have easily been designed with existing Steck System pieces and a few (what could have been) very nice additions to Steck System.
I think here the design brief has been to design a lighthouse and that's largely the end result, and a pretty good result I think. And lighthouses are usually stand alone buildings.
-
To play a little Devil's >:D advocate, Richard, I chose not to buy the 4113 Castle Super Set when I saw it on the shelves, but plan to buy the 4294 Spanish Lighthouse when it's available in the UK.
The Castle Starter set gives me 4 figures I already have, a Big Bertha mortar which I really don't like (I'd far rather have a normal cannon) and which is an anachronism in the Knights theme, and another bit of small castle I can't connect to anything because I don't have Steck. I already have enough system-x castle pieces to create 5 or 6 decent sized castles in System X, plus a couple of take-away castles. The last thing I need is yet another castle.
The Spanish Lighthouse gives me a base for the new Conquistadores to garrison, and one thing the pirate theme has been sadly lacking is a proper shore facility for the pirates to sail to and attack. The 3112 Naval Stronghold, 3288 Prison and the like are just too small and OK, so it doesn't expand. How big does a lighthouse need to be? I haven't got my hands on one yet, but I don't think the lack of expandability will be a problem for me.
With a Spanish ship and the new 4-man rowing boats to carry the Incan gold to and from the Lighthouse/castle, I've got a story. I've only got so much table or floorspace to play on - even my parents' garden would be small in terms of a real naval battle, so I don't really want to expand the lighthouse.
With the lighthouse as it is, I could have one either side of a bay defending a Spanish town, with the pirate ship, or a Royal Navy ship, attacking.
I agree that with the Hans Beck's retirement some design aspects seem to be slipping, but I wouldn't have chosen these sets as the examples. I'm more concerned by the Fisher Price colours of the new pirate ship, and the fantasy direction the knights have taken.
I think Beck's great success was because he watched children at play, and then designed true-to-life models of real worlds for their imaginations to roam free with.
-
Hello, Gordon and Martin ...
4133 is a Superset and I think it is not so much a base to be built on by creating a new larger structure through adding more Steck parts to it as an introduction or addition to Playmobil which can be added to by buying related sets or other Playmobil products.
I think here the design brief has been to design a lighthouse (4294) and that's largely the end result, and a pretty good result I think. And lighthouses are usually stand alone buildings.
To play a little Devil's >:D advocate, Richard, I chose not to buy the 4113 Castle Super Set when I saw it on the shelves, but plan to buy the 4294 Spanish Lighthouse when it's available in the UK.
The Spanish Lighthouse gives me a base for the new Conquistadores to garrison ... OK, so it doesn't expand. How big does a lighthouse need to be? I haven't got my hands on one yet, but I don't think the lack of expandability will be a problem for me.
Your comments will no doubt be music to the ears of those who reside in the Klicky Towers of Zirndorf!
And, if everyone feels the same way ... then that might possibly be the beginning of the end of Playmobil as a construction toy.
But, was Playmobil really ever designed to be a construction toy?
The little Klickys were never designed to easily come apart for customizing. The original western houses were totally incompatible with Steck. And, Steck is totally incompatible with System-X. And, the new sets seem to be more and more just stand alone and completely incompatible with everything.
So, maybe it was just me who enjoyed hours upon hours of building village upon village and castle upon castle with my beloved Steck System ... ;)
All the best,
Richard
-
Well, it depends what you mean by "incompatible", Richard. Items may be incompatible in that they cannot be physically joined with another item, e.g. Steck and System-X, but they may be compatible in that they can be used with each other. Taking 4133 as an example, I have it on my "possibly to buy list", even though my theme is fire and rescue. Get rid of the mortar and the figures, add a tall flagpole and one or two of the DS cannon, or even the old cannon from the 3750 ship, and you have the perfect centre piece for a park in a modern town. In addition, the opportunity for an unusual emergency for the rescue services - a small child with its head stuck in a canon muzzle.
And see what Little Jo did with the same set:
http://www.playmofriends.com/forum/index.php?topic=975.15
-
lego is (or was) a construction toy.
meccano is also (or was also) a construction toy.
the way i see it, both these companies started up with an "abstract" aproach to construction.
this enabled anyone who had parts to assemble them in multiple ways.
they have now turned to a more "figurative" concept.
kids (and adults) can no longer build schematic constructions and are forced to accept the "look-a-like" look available.
profits are not what they used to be... :'(
playmobil started from the begining with a "figurative" design in their toys.
as years go by, the figures got a lot of different colors and shapes, improving their "figurativeness".
the same, in a way, happened to the buildings.
keeping this design concept clear enabled geobra to continue to make money. :)
if you look at the 7718 ds se, you can see that it has an unfinished side that seems to need an attachment (we can almost see it in the picture below, on the left).
but this seem to be an exception in the pirate world (the only one i really know).
most of the other constructions stand completed by themselves.
i agree with richard, that some sort of "multiple-joining" could add an extra value to some sets.
but if you do this without a state of the art design, there is a big risk that playmo-personality could be lost.
i think it can be done, tipically on beaches, if their contours can be made with peripherical detachable pieces that allow to add (when removed) another beach from another set.
letting ds parts do the business is not something the all world can do (i can't in portugal) and is probably not a good idea.
copying playmobil "figurative" qualities and meccano "spacial-structureness" made lego loose its personality.
to achieve full add-another-set-add-a-thousand-more concept, playmobil would have to turn fully modular.
are we ready for it? ???
-
Hello, Gordon and Cachalote ...
Well, it depends what you mean by "incompatible", Richard. Items may be incompatible in that they cannot be physically joined with another item, e.g. Steck and System-X, but they may be compatible in that they can be used with each other.
... to achieve full add-another-set-add-a-thousand-more concept, playmobil would have to turn fully modular.
are we ready for it? ???
From what everyone has written thus far, it would appear that Playmobil might really understand their customers!
It seems that Playmobil customers may be more interested in simply accepting a "finished" product rather than "creating" their own.
Of course there are those wonderful exceptions, as Gordon reminded us about Little Jo, who placed disparate parts together to produce his beautiful lighthouse!
So, exceptions aside, is it true then that most of us are really happy with Playmobil's current trend of producing many stand alone products that once snapped together ... stay together?
And, will Playmobil eventually abandon their System-X and any future attempt at becoming a construction toy? Or, as Cachalote asked, "Are any of us really ready for Playmobil to turn to fully modular?"
Maybe another question might be, "Do any of us (including Geobra) ever want Playmobil to become a fully modular construction toy?"
All the best,
Richard
-
Chachalote made the very good point that Lego and Meccano are construction toys from the initial concept, but Playmobil was designed to be focussed on the figures from the very outset.
Adult collectors round the world, with the luxury of large disposable income, have created wonderful massive constructions with Playmobil - the River Steamboat, the train station, and any number of customised castles all come to mind - but are most children interested in using Playmobil in this fashion?
I find the construction part of a set tedious. It's worse with system-x than with steck, because even before clipping the parts together you've got to clip the clips into the parts for 30 minutes or more, and with many sets I've grabbed out the klickies and dressed them up, and left the building construction till later, if at all.
When I had Playmobil as a child, and I played actively with Playmobil for 5-6 years, I never had any buildings or vehicles. Just figures, horses, and lots of accessories. My castles were stacks of books, the space under the bed a pirate's treasure cave, cardboard boxes were western buildings. There's a couple of young guys over on Playmoboard, Pedroskivich, and his friend Nate, who aged 13 are still doing just this, and having great medieval battles.
Even now when I have the luxury of money to buy the big expensive building sets and vehicles, I still get more pleasure from setting up the figures than creating a custom building. I think most parents don't buy endless add-on sets for their children to construct ever larger buildings. One or two buildings as a centrepiece and a few figures to play out a story, and that's your lot, son.
The desire to construct custom buildings, and thus the need for a modular building system into which everything must fit, is not something I think children want from Playmobil. They could get that from Lego (and don't forget, children are quite happy to mix and match toy brands far more then we blinkered adults).
I would be happy to see an truly modular building system as part of the current range, preferably in steck, with parts available as add-ons to expand. I'd like to see castle parts made in the same pale limestone colour as the lighthouse, so we coud have some Caribbean forts, and new pieces like a pepperpot sentry box, so we can make those forts more realistically represent to the originals; not just in the Caribbean as we've seen, but around the Mediterranean and the Holy Land limestone would be better than the light and dark greys of the current castles. Let's also red brick so we can build Chinese castles.
While all this would be wonderful, and the adult market might snap these ideas up, I don't think the vast majority of the Playmobil using public - the under 13s, would be bothered with such things. The ranges are designed with one large central set (if you're the lucky child of rich parents), and various smaller sets at a range of prices to round out the theme.
So to return to the Lighthouse set, this is the initial centre piece of a currently small sub-theme to the pirate world. If it sells, then maybe there'll be a bigger fort for the Conquistadores to defend - or maybe we'll have the Conquistadores set out into the South American jungles and discover the Incan and Aztec temples..
-
I support you, Richard.
I think Playmobil at two periods in its existence (steck and System X) had conceived an interchangeable construction environment to go with the interchangeability of its klicky accessories.
I argue that modularity was a feather in its cap.
If you wanted a finished product, you had it.
But if you wanted to mix and match, you had that too.
Steck and System X were working, so I don't see how PM can lightly abandon a design concept (modularity) that most toy systems recognize as beneficial. Possibly the fact parents were complaining about how easily System X fell apart was a problem. I think System X was too complex--whereas lego blocks are intuitive and steck pieces had clear connection points, System X requires more foresight (and work) to engineer new things from old things (granted, any six year old can handle it if they don't mind that funky screwdriver tool).
Stand by your guns, Richard! (I'll stand by them too). If Playmobil scraps its modularity in favor of Hasbro-style Star Wars buildings it will be losing a piece of its pie. Again, the possibility that not every child cares about modularity isn't grounds to get rid of it. Refer to Playmoboard for the endless topics on kids and parents designing elaborate steck castles. When PM starts trimming the "value-added" features for cold, fast minimums, the trimming won't stop there (already it over-does it with the paint; I should have the option to remove a legionnaire's breast plate; formerly removable breastplates was the norm).
Speaking of PM failings, check out the post on Playmoboard about the fiasco involving our swap of Roman's with painted shoulders.
I'll detail in a separate thread here.
-Tim
-
Maybe, though, we already have a suggestion of where Playmobil might be heading, at least in the modern themes:
http://www.playmofriends.com/forum/index.php?topic=1933.0
As for the fiasco over the exchange of the Romans, that's hardly Playmobil Germany's fault. rather Playmobil USA.
-
Hello, Timmy ...
If Playmobil scraps its modularity in favor of Hasbro-style Star Wars buildings it will be losing a piece of its pie.
AMEN, BROTHER !!!
-
Hello again, Gordon ...
Maybe, though, we already have a suggestion of where Playmobil might be heading, at least in the modern themes:
http://www.playmofriends.com/forum/index.php?topic=1933.0
I think that I referred to you on that thread as our "resident optimist," Gordon ... ;)
As for the fiasco over the exchange of the Romans, that's hardly Playmobil Germany's fault. rather Playmobil USA.
THEM'S FIGHTIN' WORDS, GORDON !!!
Hate to burst your bubble of "knowledge" about Playmobil USA, Gordon. It is an absolute fact that Playmobil USA is nothing more than a puppet satellite of Zirndorf. Playmobil USA doesn't even dare sneeze without first asking Father Geobra for permission. Playmobil USA has zero autonomy! I repeat ... ZERO AUTONOMY !!!
All the best,
Richard
-
THEM'S FIGHTIN' WORDS, GORDON !!!
Hate to burst your bubble of "knowledge" about Playmobil USA, Gordon. It is an absolute fact that Playmobil USA is nothing more than a puppet satellite of Zirndorf. Playmobil USA doesn't even dare sneeze without first asking Father Geobra for permission. Playmobil USA has zero autonomy! I repeat ... ZERO AUTONOMY !!!
All the best,
Richard
So they get permission from Zirndorf to make mistakes and send the wrong figures? And suggesting that a customer ORDERS replacements for faulty parts hardly reflects Playmobil's policy I hope; if it does, then Lego here come!
-
Hello, Gordon ...
So they get permission from Zirndorf to make mistakes and send the wrong figures? And suggesting that a customer ORDERS replacements for faulty parts hardly reflects Playmobil's policy I hope; if it does, then Lego here come!
Reads like you're getting your knickers in a twist, my friend (not good at our age) ... :lol:
BTW ... rather than "merging" two different topics, I answered your question on the ROMAN ARM SWAP (http://www.playmofriends.com/forum/index.php?topic=2116.msg22964#msg22964) topic ... ;)
All the best,
Richard
-
Hello, Gordon ...
Reads like you're getting your knickers in a twist, my friend (not good at our age) ... :lol:
BTW ... rather than "merging" two different topics, I answered your question on the ROMAN ARM SWAP (http://www.playmofriends.com/forum/index.php?topic=2116.msg22964#msg22964) topic ... ;)
All the best,
Richard
Well, this gets more worrying. Playmobil Germany tell their US branch to send an entirely inappropriate figure (or at least, supply them with it), and the US branch sends it! 8}
-
My 2 cents about what's wrong with Playmobil:
I believe that Geobra desperately wants to crack the US market. They are already very successful in Europe where Playmobil seems to be available in a wide variety of stores at (mostly) reasonable prices. They look at the US toy market and see several trends:
- lots of money spent on toys
- among toy buyers for mid-age kids, say 6 to 10 years, less interest (seemingly) in traditional toys and more interest in electronic gadgets
- among toy buyers for younger kids, toys like Fisher Price Imaginext and Lego Duplo are big sellers
I use the term "toy buyers" because I think that a lot of toy purchases are made by people who don't really know/care about the toy itself. Often these are parents and other relatives who are trying to buy what they think the child will want without thinking about long-term play value. Kids ask for what they see on TV ads and they like the idea of toys that are based on the movies and TV shows that they watch. Some of these toys can be great (my daughter had a Sesame Street playset that she loved, my son loved it and now my little 3 year old niece loves it too) but so terribly many of these toys are pure crap that often barely get used because they have so little real play value. But with the combination of relentless advertising and conspicuous consumption here in the US, these are the toys that sell. The small percentage of parents who buy high quality toys with lasting play value are probably already buying Playmobil but Geobra is trying to reach all those other people who buy the crap toys and, IMHO, that is their mistake! In order to appeal to the crappy toy buyers, Geobra is making its own version of its competitors' crappy toys (the take-long castle and take-along houses and the various supersets - some of which admitedly do have actual uses for the serious Playmobil enthusiast, as Little Jo's fabulous lighthouse proves.)
My feeling is that these types of sets do not encourage people to buy more Playmobil. If these sets are the only ones that some people see, they will not be impressed with the high quality and wonderful detail that make the true Playmobil product line so appealing to both children and adults. My advice to Geobra is to stick with the high quality and modularity of the traditional line and stop making these icky self-contained sets for quick sale at Target and Toysrus and find better ways to educate more consumers (and children) about their products with the understanding that their target consumer group is probably rather small but will buy lots and lots of stuff (Lego seems to have already reached this conclusion.) They could do better in the US if they did a better job of supporting the small independent toy stores who take the time to show people how great Playmobil is by setting up displays and play areas. They could also advertise more. And they could use their own online capacity to generate interest in their products with stuff like birthday clubs (which they used to have,) more and better add-on sets, fan clubs, etc.
Basically, if they just copied Lego's new USA playbook, they would probably do very well! ;D
-
Hello, Gordon ...
... if it does, then Lego here (I) come!
I still have ALL my old Lego, as well as ALL the Lego that I've added to it over the years. One must always leave one's options open ... ;)
All the best, my friend,
Richard
-
Hello, Anne ...
My 2 cents about what's wrong with Playmobil:
My advice to Geobra is to stick with the high quality and modularity of the traditional line and stop making these icky self-contained sets for quick sale at Target and Toysrus and find better ways to educate more consumers (and children) about their products with the understanding that their target consumer group is probably rather small but will buy lots and lots of stuff ...
They could do better in the US if they did a better job of supporting the small independent toy stores who take the time to show people how great Playmobil is by setting up displays and play areas.
They could also advertise more.
And they could use their own online capacity to generate interest in their products with stuff like birthday clubs (which they used to have,) more and better add-on sets, fan clubs, etc.
HERE ... HERE ... :clap:
After Schaper and Mattel failed miserably to promote Playmobil successfully in the United States, the franchise returned to Geobra. Playmobil Deutschland created Playmobil USA and hired the well known toy business expert Alan Hess as the president of Playmobil USA.
Alan was a toy marketing genius. He did exactly what you suggested, Anne!
For almost seven years, Playmobil was an exclusive product sold only by small independent toy stores in the United States. The name Playmobil became synonymous with the word quality. Playmobil slowly built a fine reputation and continued to grow an expanding and loyal customer base.
Unfortunately, Zirndorf seemed to want a faster growth cycle as well as more control over their US retailers.
Two disastrous events occurred. The McDonald's debacle and the US Federal Government's charge of price fixing ... :(
There is a possibility that had Playmobil USA been able to grow slowly (like Germany) that neither of these events might have taken place. Regardless, they did. Alan Hess left Playmobil and Playmobil USA has "enjoyed" all the "benefits" of absentee management ever since ... 8}
BTW ... For all you Brits ... The Norman Brown story is somewhat similar to the Alan Hess story ... :'(
All the best,
Richard
Edit: Misspelled Schaper ...
-
Regarding the lighthouse, I agree that it's a shame it's not System X, as it could be part of a pretty neat "Lighthouse Fortress" if the same off-white walls were available from Direct Service. That said, I will probably buy it and use it as an independent structure for both the Pirate and Roman themes.
Regarding the Roman arms, it was Zirndorf's fault for even producing the cheap, lousy printed arms in the first place! The moulded Roman arms should NEVER have been permitted into the $2.99 pirate and medieval blister packs if Playmobil couldn't keep up with demand for klickies for their brand new theme and the theme for which the arms were originally designed.
-
I have to jump in here and say that if Playmobil wanted in the American market so bad then why did they pull one of their large retail stores out of Orlando?? You can't tell me that the one in North Miami did more business than the one here. I wondered if the mall rent got to be to much but even if it was they surley would have looked around and found another site first rather than just loose so much business. It has been over a year and absolutely not a peep about a replacment store. I asked Playmobil USA direct sales if they knew if there would be another store and they said no-sure of it.
Janice
-
i see official box and catalogue dioramas as playmobil's suggestions of what to do with their products.
not that i follow them (i find it difficult to mix knights and pirates) but they help me to understand how the company's design "brain" works.
coreographing imaginary situations (contemporary, historical or fictional) seems to be the main purpose of playmobil toys.
i guess buildings (or ships, or cars, or planes) are seen as parts of a possible scenario - they can complete the action but they are not in the center of the action.
this being the case, the figures are the main elements of any action.
almost every kid can buy one and take it to school.
you can play with a knight imagining a chair as a fortress.
it's more difficult to play with a castle imagining some other object as a knight and it´s more difficult to insert a castle inside a pocket (the take-a-long sets are maybe a way to try go around this difficulty).
most of american toys (like barbie dolls) are very "figurative" in their design. they are also bigger in size (like american cars).
playmobil will always have both this problems: their figures are too small and too abstract (they have no noses, they have no real fingers, they have no visible muscles).
maybe north america is not an easy market for playmobil, despite being lead-free.
from what i understand, the invention of playmobil came as a result of the oil crisis in the 70's.
i bet the rising in oil prices won't help to change the small-figure-oriented philosofy of playmobil.
if you look at the new sets, boxes are getting larger and sets are getting "smaller" in the number of pieces they include.
-
Hi Playmofriends,
im a big fan from stecksystem but at the beginning from systemx i thought ok new system i must like it , its playmobil.
But after a long time testing, i think that was not realy a great system like stecksystem.
- no realy stabel enough
- to many systemX connectors this cost many time to build a house........
I think this was a point for playmobil to make compact buildings.
Open the box and play fast, i think no parenst had enough time to build with there childs a complex systemX house and young childs had some problems to build alone a systemX building.
The lighthouse looks very nice and you can play great with it, but there some
drawbacks.
- you cant use 3 cannons useful a little small......
- it was very hard to fix the trapdoor after use.
- not systemX compatible
I thought playmobil brings a systemX lighthouse and later some new spanish conquistadors
with a fort to combinate............
But i think this time the playmobil themes are very short-lived only to look how can sell more.
Look at the Future the compact buildings coming.........
(http://demandware.edgesuite.net/aabe_prd/on/demandware.static/Sites-DE-Site/Sites-Catalog/de_DE/v1205551049175/imagesOnline/products/4246.jpg)
- 4243 Pharaotemple
- 4343 Animal Clinic
But i think to make new moulds for compact buildings cost many money, but its not cheaper to use some older systemX or Stecksystem buidlings ?
The other way are playmobil brings some new SystemX buildings , church , livinghouse , police station ...........
Very complex to understand this all........
But its great to see the STECKSYSTEM pavilion:
(http://demandware.edgesuite.net/aabe_prd/on/demandware.static/Sites-DE-Site/Sites-Catalog/de_DE/v1205551049175/imagesOnline/content/4297.jpg)
Stecksystem not realy DIE this time !
Ok another Story:
Today i buy the new 4443 german version from treasure island !
The surprise are "MADE IN CHINA" I thought whats up ??
After i opend i was shocked about some part quality !
Looks realy china like........... ::)
I dont understand the advert at playmobil.com about german/europe quality after the Mattel china disaster.
"98% of Playmobil Toys are manufactured at Europe"
Are the 4443 the rest 2% ?? I cant believe it !
Dont angry about my words, im a big playmobil lover (for the future) but i cant understand some facts from zirndorf !
world greets
Andi
-
all very very interesting reading
and could write a long reply too
if you look at the whole world around us
life has become very expensive
It all comes back to one thing MONEY
and trying to survive as a factory with a product that is luxury
they need to feed 700 families zindorf only
let's not forget we collectors are a small part on their sales
and if I see wot they developping the last years
most of the themes are stuff that we collectors on all forums ask for not ?
it's struggelling and trying to survive
My two cents
-
Actually - they more then "struggling" and surviving ...
They've actually achieved another year of growth in turnover even though the market is shrinking. In other words - it seems to me they are doing something right. Even though we might not like it. After all - it's a toy first and a collector's item for a fanbase secondly.
I'm afraid that Playmobil is getting more and more like the community in general. I remember only a few years ago that Phil Collins complained (*) that the instructions of toys were too complicated for adults. It took him over three (!!!) hours to put up the large king's castle from Playmobil. It seems to me that to general public wants a complete and ready set. Ready to be played with straight out of the box. And Geobra is providing. Earning a buck in the process too.
It would be nice if they stuck to the great ideas of the past and keep on producing all those wonderfull sets we love to own or would love to own. But then again ... how many years would they be able to avoid bankruptcy?
Just my own 0.02 worth ...
Bogro
(*) that was in a episode of room 101 ...
-
I originally bought Playmobil sets that were big, and noticeably time consuming to build. It was a way for my son and I to spend time together, and for me to help him be creative. A bigger building challenge = more fun for us. The new sets have been easier to build, less parts, no Steck! Now we spend time building with what we have or we go to our LEGO collection (which I started in 1979 and have added to ever since).
I think Playmobil is making a mistake if they move away from modular building / complicated sets. If I wanted Fisher-Price, I would have bought it in the first place...anyways, just my two cents worth. I still love Playmobil, I'll give them the benfit of the doubt to see what they come up with next. Hopefully it will be more trains...
-
I originally bought Playmobil sets that were big, and noticeably time consuming to build. It was a way for my son and I to spend time together, and for me to help him be creative. A bigger building challenge = more fun for us.
YES!!
This is how we got started on playmobil. My niece gave my daughter an ambulance set and we added some simple stuff to it. We discovered how much fun it was building the sets together with me helping interpret the instuctions and she being the builder, so next year we got the big doll house and so it started...
Being able to take multiple sets and combine them makes the playing much more fun.
-
Yeah, I think PM is making a mistake if it changes design theory to suit Phil Collins!!!* We bought a couple of lego sets for my daughter that took a few hours to build. It was a mild hassle, but I'd hate to think that "as a race" we're being shoehorned down the path of insta-toy for insta-parents!
A: MY HOURLY RATE AT WORK IS $XXX. ASSEMBLING THIS TOY COST ME 2 * $XXX!!!!!!!**
* Joke: RE: Bogro's earlier Phil Collins quote
** Based on a true story. Presumably the character, who actually kept to 40 hour weeks, would somehow have been able to charge the client for that lost time.
I originally bought Playmobil sets that were big, and noticeably time consuming to build. It was a way for my son and I to spend time together, and for me to help him be creative. A bigger building challenge = more fun for us. The new sets have been easier to build, less parts, no Steck! Now we spend time building with what we have or we go to our LEGO collection (which I started in 1979 and have added to ever since).
I think Playmobil is making a mistake if they move away from modular building / complicated sets. If I wanted Fisher-Price, I would have bought it in the first place...anyways, just my two cents worth. I still love Playmobil, I'll give them the benfit of the doubt to see what they come up with next. Hopefully it will be more trains...
-
Hello, Timmy ...
A: MY HOURLY RATE AT WORK IS $XXX. ASSEMBLING THIS TOY COST ME 2 * $XXX!!!!!!!**
* Joke: RE: Bogro's earlier Phil Collins quote
** Based on a true story. Presumably the character, who actually kept to 40 hour weeks, would somehow have been able to charge the client for that lost time.
Playmobil Steck System Dollhouse (or Pavillion) - $125.95 (or $57.95)
Reading glasses to read Playmobil plans and directions - $14.95
Time spent with daughter - Priceless
And for everything else, there's - Playmofriends ... ;)
-
Very funny Richard.
But seriously. It seems to me that if you want to build with Playmobil, then you're in the wrong toy. Originally, Lego and Mechano were there to build and Playmobil was there for role-playing (and I am not refering to D&D). There were only a couple of figures with some accesories and that's it. Buildings and such only came much later.
I agree; the building is a lot of fun - but that's not the essence of the toy. And since society seems to go more and more for the "here and now" approach, most of the interest will go in the "here and now" sets. Which is a great pity. But understandable :'(
Bogro
-
Hello, Bogro ...
It seems to me that if you want to build with Playmobil, then you're in the wrong toy. Originally, Lego and Mechano were there to build and Playmobil was there for role-playing (and I am not refering to D&D). There were only a couple of figures with some accesories and that's it. Buildings and such only came much later.
I respectfully disagree with the idea that Playmobil is not a construction toy !
Playmobil IS a construction toy! It has always been a construction toy!
In 1974 Playmobil was introduced as a "KLICKY" ... Parts were "klicked" on the basic figure to change it from a Construction Worker to an Indian to a Knight. This is figure construction!
And, a mere two years later, buildings were introduced! This was the beginning of structure construction. These first Western buildings, to assemble, were later followed with the Steck System and then with SystemX.
Playmobil has ALWAYS been a construction "SYSTEM" ... The early boxes even "shouted" the word system all over them!
IMHO ... PLAYMOBIL IS A CONSTRUCTION SYSTEM!
(Even Playmobil stated in their 1974 flyer, "Das neu variable System für mobiles Spielen.")
All the best,
Richard
-
This is a great discussion which, I think, highlights one of the best and most important features of Playmobil: it appeals to different people for different reasons. Some people may like the klickys and don't care so much for the buildings, and vice versa. Some are attracted to the animals or the trains :heart: or the ships or the level of detail or the high quality or the opportunity to spend time playing with their kids. Or collecting all the sets of a theme MISB. Or the extreme coolness of a particular theme. Or any combination of these or additional reasons. Or all of them.
When a person discovers that aspect of Playmobil that particularly appeals to him or her, he or she is hooked for life and will probably go on to broaden his or her interest throughout the product line as time passes. I believe, however, that some of the newer products, such as the take-along houses and castle and the supersets are not as likely to make new customers fall in love with the toy the way that we all have done, so they are less likely to buy more Playmobil in the future.
- Anne
-
Hello, Bogro ...
I respectfully disagree with the idea that Playmobil is not a construction toy !
Playmobil IS a construction toy! It has always been a construction toy!
In 1974 Playmobil was introduced as a "KLICKY" ... Parts were "klicked" on the basic figure to change it from a Construction Worker to an Indian to a Knight. This is figure construction!
And, a mere two years later, buildings were introduced! This was the beginning of structure construction. These first Western buildings, to assemble, were later followed with the Steck System and then with SystemX.
Playmobil has ALWAYS been a construction "SYSTEM" ... The early boxes even "shouted" the word system all over them!
IMHO ... PLAYMOBIL IS A CONSTRUCTION SYSTEM!
(Even Playmobil stated in their 1974 flyer, "Das neu variable System für mobiles Spielen.")
All the best,
Richard
Lol rofl
I like the red you use , it's like steam , this is sooo much fun ;)
I bet Bogro now is looking up something to prove that System is not the same as Building ;D
But am sorry Dear Richard , I have to stick with my ex-brother in law
Playmobil never came on the market as a construction toy like Lego meccano or fischer thechnic
they never promoted it that way eighter as far as I know
It is us , the crazy collectors who started buying several castles and trying to combine them
Lego adds in there construction plans several possibilities on wot to build with wot's inside the box
I dunnot recall Playmobil doing this
@ Anne , yes indeed this is a great discussion ;) loved reading your contributions
the most important line I read in this whole discussion
TIME SPEND WITH DAUGHTER , PRICELESS
really made me feel good
all the best
Michael
-
. . . . the most important line I read in this whole discussion
TIME SPEND WITH DAUGHTER , PRICELESS
I totally agree with you there, Michael!
But I have to DIS-agree with you here:
. . . Playmobil never came on the market as a construction toy like Lego meccano or fischer thechnic
they never promoted it that way either as far as I know
It is us , the crazy collectors who started buying several castles and trying to combine them
Lego adds in there construction plans several possibilities on wot to build with wot's inside the box
I dunnot recall Playmobil doing this
What about all those dioramas in catalogs and mini-catalogs and on box-backs (such as all the great ones recently posted by LHAAP) that showed whole towns full of timber-frame houses and all those castle walls used not only in castle-like buildings, but in roadways, railways, harbors, etc? Doesn't this wonderful timbered town picture (http://www.playmofriends.com/forum/index.php?topic=2049.msg22944#msg22944) make you want to buy the 20 or so house sets you would need to create a village like this?
-
In 1974 Playmobil was introduced as a "KLICKY" ... Parts were "klicked" on the basic figure to change it from a Construction Worker to an Indian to a Knight. This is figure construction!
Reach...
ROFL! I don't put on clothes in the morning, I construct myself.
Come on Richard, it isn't figure construction, it's dressing up.
My first klickies, which I owned at the tender age of 8, had no buildings to hang out with, but I still had many wonderful adventurers with them.
Playmobil has ALWAYS been a construction "SYSTEM" ... The early boxes even "shouted" the word system all over them!
Stretch...
No, I still don't see that the word System automatically means constructing buildings, sorry!
OTOH, there were construction workers in the originl mix of three themes, and they're still there now - so Playmobil MUST be a construction system! 8-)
-
I bet Bogro now is looking up something to prove that System is not the same as Building ;D
Bugger ... am I that transparant :-[
OTOH, there were construction workers in the originl mix of three themes, and they're still there now - so Playmobil MUST be a construction system! 8-)
mmm - does that mean that it's a medicine as well since it's got a hospital theme as well ???
Anyway - I still don't see it as a construction toy. The mere fact that you can construct things with it doesn't mean it is a construction toy. It isn't it's primairy function. It's the same with with a deck of cards. I wouldn't call that a construction toy - yet you can build wonderfull towers and palaces with them.
Sorry, I'm still not convinced.
But then again; there's one side that I find more important: in the end, it all doesn't matter. It isn't what it is - it is what you want it to be ;). But that's just my idea :lol:
Bogro
-
Hello again, Bogro ... :wave:
But then again; there's one side that I find more important: in the end, it all doesn't matter. It isn't what it is - it is what you want it to be ;).
Well said, my friend, "... it is what you want it to be."
And as Anne said, "... it (Playmobil) appeals to different people for different reasons."
... it appeals to different people for different reasons.
Thanks, Michael, for the following: ... ;)
I bet Bogro now is looking up something to prove that System is not the same as Building ;D
Bugger ... am I that transparant :-[
And, to answer your question in one word, Bogro ... YES ! ... :lol:
Reach...
Stretch...
Reach and stretch?
Thank you very much for thinking that I'm still that limber, Martin ... ;)
All the best my friends,
Richard
-
But I have to DIS-agree with you here:
What about all those dioramas in catalogs and mini-catalogs and on box-backs (such as all the great ones recently posted by LHAAP) that showed whole towns full of timber-frame houses and all those castle walls used not only in castle-like buildings, but in roadways, railways, harbors, etc? Doesn't this wonderful timbered town picture (http://www.playmofriends.com/forum/index.php?topic=2049.msg22944#msg22944) make you want to buy the 20 or so house sets you would need to create a village like this?
errrr allways loved those pics as a kid
and I did :blush: http://www.macgayverplaymobil.be/First%20gallery%20pages/macgayverplaymobil%20%20Stad.htm (http://www.macgayverplaymobil.be/First%20gallery%20pages/macgayverplaymobil%20%20Stad.htm)
I know ,I am a very derranged man ;)
but isn't it beatifull
-
I've always assumed that "System" referred to the fact that the different parts were interchangeable one with another. Thus, the knight's sword would also fit in the construction worker's hand, and the cowboy would sit in the fire engine just as well as the fireman, - i.e. "system" refers to compatibility, something that's still there today with 1974 and 2008 klickies and accessories being compatible with each other.
-
But, to defend Richard's claim further, if Steck wasn't intended as a construction toy, why is it built in such a modular fashion? Wouldn't it have been easier for Playmobil to make customized sheets (like it does now)?
It seems there was an earlier vision. The parts are just too interchangeable to have been an unintended consequence of an economic design decision.
I mean, otherwise, System X is a complete fop-up. Why provide us those annoying stubs if the parts are intended to be melded in place and not rearranged?
-Tim
-
Steck was meant to provide buildings for the little klickies. But to say they were meant as a construction toy still seems far fetched to me. It was just a easy way to cast new elements which could make up buildings. If it really was meant as a construction toy, why didn't they sell sets with just wall elements, as Lego did and does - that would have been much easier.
It seems there was an earlier vision. The parts are just too interchangeable to have been an unintended consequence of an economic design decision.
What do you mean, Timotheos? Do you mean a earlier version of steck?
Bogro
-
. . . . If it really was meant as a construction toy, why didn't they sell sets with just wall elements, as Lego did and does - that would have been much easier. . . .
Sets like these? ;D (From a 1990 Direct Service catalog in LHAAP's recent postings)
-
I know ,I am a very derranged man ;)
No! Well maybe a little bit . . . :lol:
but isn't it beatiful
Yes, indeed! :)
-
Sets like these? ;D (From a 1990 Direct Service catalog in LHAAP's recent postings)
LOL - you got me there. But then again; those were special sets, only available through special orders and not readily from a shop. So, it's not a "normal" set ;)
Bogro
-
Hello again and again, Bogro ... :wave: :wave:
Steck was meant to provide buildings for the little klickies. But to say they were meant as a construction toy still seems far fetched to me.
Far fetched? Do you suppose that someone might just possibly think that Playmobil could be a Construction Toy from this illustration in Playmobil's 1978 Catalogue? ... ;)
please see attachment
What do you mean, Timotheos? Do you mean a earlier version of steck?
Timmy was probably referring to the early Western Building Construction Sets ... :)
please see attachment
-
Hello again and again, Bogro ... :wave: :wave:
Far fetched? Do you suppose that someone might just possibly think that Playmobil could be a Construction Toy from this illustration in Playmobil's 1978 Catalogue? ... ;)
please see attachment
The fact that a toy has to be put together so it can be played with doesn't necessarily make it a construction toy. I think the picture of the child building the house is probably there to show that it does not come ready built.
A rough definition of a construction toy is a toy consisting of a number of loose but related parts which can be assembled in one or more ways the main purpose of play use being the assembling of the loose parts together in order to produce a finished article. I know when I played with Meccano once the model was built that was it - it would be displayed for a time and then taken apart.
A search on Google for Meccano brings up at the top of the page a sponsored link from Hamleys with the following description "Meccano Construction Toys - Free Delivery Available".
-
The fact that a toy has to be put together so it can be played with doesn't necessarily make it a construction toy. I think the picture of the child building the house is probably there to show that it does not come ready built.
Quite. By Richard's definition, Sylvanian Families is a construction toy, because there are buildings in the range and they have to be assembled before use.
(http://i221.photobucket.com/albums/dd97/Martin_Milner/FL4947L.jpg)
-
Thanks, Gordon ...
A rough definition of a construction toy is a toy consisting of a number of loose but related parts which can be assembled in one or more ways the main purpose of play use being the assembling of the loose parts together in order to produce a finished article.
Great definition !!!
Your definotion, Gordon, absolutely proves that PLAYMOBIL is a CONSTRUCTION TOY !!!
If any of you still doubt this, get your hands on one of the inserts that Playmobil included with ALL of their early Steck System castles and houses.
These inserts showed how various sets could be combined in different ways to produce new structures. THEY EVEN INCLUDED THE SET NUMBERS OF THE SETS USED IN THE PHOTOGRAPHS !!!
It is obvious that Hans Beck always saw Playmobil as a Construction Toy!
After Mr. Beck retired, the original vision of Playmobil seemed to have become a bit blurred. And, unfortunately, Mr. Beck's vision of Playmobil seems to fade more and more with each passing year.
So ... what's wrong with Playmobil? In my humble opinion, there has not yet been anyone to replace Hans Beck !!!
All the best,
Richard
And, Martin ... If the Sylvanian Families buildings pieces can be COMBINED to create NEW and DIFFERENT buildings, then it is also a Construction Toy !!!
-
lollol
this is soo much fun
I anybody keeping scores on this ? 8}
Pro and contra
This is the most funny and healthy discussion read in years
according to wikkipedia playmobil isnot a construction toy ;D
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_toys#Construction_Toys (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_toys#Construction_Toys)
but called action figures
do I get points for looking this up ? ;) :lol:
-
If any of you still doubt this, get your hands on one of the inserts that Playmobil included with ALL of their early Steck System castles and houses.
All the best,
Richard
errr I did and could not find anything
and speaking of the houses ...............
four walls and a roof ???? not much to combine there ;)
:-* ;D
the only plan I know that has multiple versions for building is the big fairytalecasle
wich gives two possibilities
-
Thanks, Gordon ...
Great definition !!!
Your definotion, Gordon, absolutely proves that PLAYMOBIL is a CONSTRUCTION TOY !!!
All the best,
Richard
I must disagree, Richard. My definition defines a construction toy as one where "the main purpose of play use [is] the assembling of the loose parts together in order to produce a finished article", and I don't think this is the play use for the very great majority of Playmobil users. I'm sure that in general when children and adult users of Playmobil combine different sets to produce new structures it is done not with a view to creating new structures per se but with a view to creating variations designed to enhance play value with the main core of Playmobil, the klickies themselves. The fact that a minority (a small minority?) may use Playmobil solely or largely with a view to creating new structures for their own sake doesn't in itself make Playmobil a construction toy.
-
Hello, Michael ... :wave:
do I get points for looking this up ? ;) :lol:
Of course you get points for looking this up ... :confetti:
However, you lose points for not finding the "correct" information on the early inserts ... :P
All the best my friend,
Richard
Edit: misspelled "finding" ...
-
Hello, Gordon ... :wave:
I must disagree, Richard. My definition defines a construction toy as one where "the main purpose of play use [is] the assembling of the loose parts together in order to produce a finished article", and I don't think this is the play use for the very great majority of Playmobil users.
Gordon, how do we know whether or not CONSTRUCTION, "is the play use for the very great majority of Playmobil users?"
Is there any valid research evidence that proves this theory (one way or the other)?
Do we even know, for sure, what the "great majority" of Playmofriends do with their Playmobil?
All the best my friend,
Richard
-
Hello, Gordon ... :wave:
Gordon, how do we know whether or not CONSTRUCTION, "is the play use for the very great majority of Playmobil users?"
Is there any valid research evidence that proves this theory (one way or the other)?
Do we even know, for sure, what the "great majority" of Playmofriends do with their Playmobil?
All the best my friend,
Richard
Are you suggesting that we agree to differ then?
-
Hello again, Gordon ... :wave:
Are you suggesting that we agree to differ then?
We could ... But, where's the "fun" in that ... ;)
(And, I'm afraid we'd disappoint Mr. Michael MacGayver.) ... :lol:
All the best old friend,
Richard
-
And, Martin ... If the Sylvanian Families buildings pieces can be COMBINED to create NEW and DIFFERENT buildings, then it is also a Construction Toy !!!
Your definition and my definition of what makes a construction toy don't match, Richard, and I don't think they ever will.
You can stack pennies into walls and make new and different buildings, but that doesn't make them a construction toy.
If you had enough Scalextric track you could combine it into different circuits from that provided in the original box, but that doesn't make it a construction toy.
With Hornby railways people build all manner of different layouts, but that doesn't make it a construction toy.
Ther is a difference between a construction toy (Lego, Duplo, Meccano), and a toy that has elements of construction in it.
Taking that one element and ignoring all other parts of the range doesn't make the whole system a construction toy.
The scores so far:
For "Construction Toy " - Richard, Timotheos, Indianna
For "Figure-based Play System" - Playmofire, Cachalote, Macgayer, Count Bogro, Martin
-
Thanks for the "score tally," Martin ...
The scores so far:
For "Construction Toy " - Richard, Timotheos, Indianna
For "Figure-based Play System" - Playmofire, Cachalote, Macgayer, Count Bogro, Martin
Stand proud, Anne and Timmy ... It looks like we're winning ... :lol:
Thanks again, Martin.
And, all the best,
Richard
-
Following Mr. MacGayver's example, I decided to do a little research of my own on the internet.
This topic did NOT begin as a discussion about whether or not Playmobil is a Construction Toy. However, since this has developed into a very interesting discussion, I wondered if it was just Anne, Timmy and me who thought that Playmobil is a Construction Toy.
Well, my research suggests that there are a lot of folks out there who view Playmobil as a Building and Construction Toy!
Click HERE (http://www.constructokids.com/) for a quickie, and then go to Google and enter ... Building and construction toys. Playmobil? (http://www.google.co.vi/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&channel=s&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&q=Building+and+construction+toys.+Playmobil%3F&b) ... Very, very interesting ... ;)
All the best my friends,
Richard
-
Wow, It's been quite a discussion! I think it's safe to say that you CAN do alot of different things with Playmobil. People that want to build are able to and people that don't, don't have to :-)
I have continued with Playmobil because of it's building aspect, realizing that others use it for strictly imaginary play...I'd love to see the company continue with it all, best of both worlds so to speak.
-
I should probably split this topic, as we have gone a little off the original subject...
Playmobil added construction elements and buildings to a figure system, in the same way that Lego added figures to a construction system, so there are elements of figures and construction in each.
For my money the Playmobil figures beat the Lego figures all ends up, and I didn't really enjoy the building part of Lego much to begin with, so my money has stayed with Playmobil. Meccano has also added figures, and I only saw a Meccano figure a few weeks ago for the first time, though they may have been around for years.
Any play system which has been around as long as Playmobil, Meccano or Lego, has naturally broadened its horizons enough to encompass many different styles of play.
In Playmobil's case the Steck and System X pieces allow and encourage adaption, extension, and modification, but there are still many sets that have no building parts at all, but still provide good play potential. I don't see these as an optional add-on to a building system, rather the buildings are an optional add-on to a figure system.
I came to the Playmobil world (or rather it came to me) in the ear before buildings, and have collected occasional sets over the ears, but not until last year did I possess a single set with a building piece. That was a small pirates dungeon, and not enough to build more than a tiny tower - though it certinly made the set more expensive.
Since then I've added a LOT of castle sets, which by their modular design can be used to construct different castles, and a few Western and Medieval buildings which are stand-alone structures with no obvious "construction" options.
There's a difference between construction and assembly.
btw, now I've seen those Sylvanian family buildings, I'm goig to check out the scale, if it's close enough they might be useful. There's a great windmill, and I don't think PM have done a full windmill in the European style that you can live inside. Now see what you've done! You have spawned a monster!
-
... But Richard, I tried your links and came out with the top construction toy: Playmobil Soccer Match !!! I could hardly call that a construction set. And the second link is to a story that gives the Construction theme of PLaymobil a rating as "Construction toy" none of the other themes there ;)
But I couldn't find one that said that Playmobil is a construction toy. I've tried to find a description from Geobra of what their vision is. But couldn't find it :(
Perhaps we should just ask...
Bogro
-
Hello, Martin, Bogro and Steve ... :wave:
Playmobil added construction elements and buildings to a figure system, in the same way that Lego added figures to a construction system, so there are elements of figures and construction in each.
Absolutely true! Chronologically, Lego was figures second and Playmobil was figures first!
btw, now I've seen those Sylvanian family buildings, I'm goig to check out the scale, if it's close enough they might be useful. There's a great windmill, and I don't think PM have done a full windmill in the European style that you can live inside.
Martin, if you haven't seen the website by Robert Packeiser, click HERE (http://www.playpackeis.de/flash/welt2/welt2.htm) and look at how he has used the Sylvanian buildings in his Playmobil Western town!
Now see what you've done! You have spawned a monster!
I hope that you're not referring to one of our Playmofriends ... :lol:
... But Richard, I tried your links ...
But I couldn't find one that said that Playmobil is a construction toy.
OK, Bogro ... I'll make it easy for you. Here's the headline from the first topic,
"Playmobil is world famous for their wonderful construction and building toy sets."
I should probably split this topic, as we have gone a little off the original subject...
MARTIN, PLEASE DON'T SPLIT THIS TOPIC. BOGRO HAS BROUGHT US BACK TO THE ORIGINAL SUBJECT !!!
Please read Bogro's following statement:
I've tried to find a description from Geobra of what their vision is. But couldn't find it :(
Of course you couldn't find a description of what Geobra's vision is. Hans Beck took it with him when he retired ... :lol:
Perhaps we should just ask...
Bogro
Bogro, why would you want to embarrass the "powers" in Zirndorf's Klicky Towers? ... :lol:
Wow, It's been quite a discussion! I think it's safe to say that you CAN do alot of different things with Playmobil. People that want to build are able to and people that don't, don't have to :-)
I have continued with Playmobil because of it's building aspect, realizing that others use it for strictly imaginary play...I'd love to see the company continue with it all, best of both worlds so to speak.
Steve, I think that you have written an excellent summation!
All the best my friends,
Richard
BTW, Martin ... It would appear that the "tally" is now five to five ... ;)
-
This is a fun discussion!
By all means keep me in the "Construction Toy" camp, but let me add that Playmobil is not just a construction toy. As has been said before, the beauty of Playmobil is that it provides so many different yet complementary opportunities for play.
Is there any useful information in "The Story of a Smile" about the evolution of the Playmobil product line? (I don't have a copy yet.)
-
Is there any useful information in "The Story of a Smile" about the evolution of the Playmobil product line? (I don't have a copy yet.)
I have it, but couldn't find any suggestion that any part of the range was intended as a construction toy, though lots of examples of people (frequently adults with big budgets) using the modular castles to build bigger castles and cities.
-
Martin - thanks for checking. :)
-
If any of you still doubt this, get your hands on one of the inserts that Playmobil included with ALL of their early Steck System castles and houses.
These inserts showed how various sets could be combined in different ways to produce new structures. THEY EVEN INCLUDED THE SET NUMBERS OF THE SETS USED IN THE PHOTOGRAPHS !!!
I don't know if it's the same one that you mentioned, Richard, but I have an 8 page instruction booklet dated 12/97 that came with our 3666 Large Castle set (http://www.collectobil.com/images/items/3666.jpg). It shows how to combine 3666 with set 3888 (http://www.collectobil.com/images/items/3888.jpg) and also how to combine 3888 with the Small Castle set 3667 (http://www.collectobil.com/images/items/3667.jpg). (Pix courtesy of collectobil.com)
For the purists, the booklet is part # 30 89 045 - I did not see it in Heather's Playmodb, but I will try to scan it and send it to her soon.
-
Hello, Anne ... :wave:
I don't know if it's the same one that you mentioned, Richard, but I have an 8 page instruction booklet dated 12/97 that came with our 3666 Large Castle set (http://www.collectobil.com/images/items/3666.jpg). It shows how to combine 3666 with set 3888 (http://www.collectobil.com/images/items/3888.jpg) and also how to combine 3888 with the Small Castle set 3667 (http://www.collectobil.com/images/items/3667.jpg). (Pix courtesy of collectobil.com)
That sounds like a good one from 1997! Also, it certainly helps prove our case!
Because the insert that I was referring to was included with sets in 1977!
So, for at least twenty years, it appears that Playmobil was presenting themselves as a company that produced building and construction sets!
I have included a page from the "Playmobil Collector" that clearly shows how the Steck System can be combined to make new and different structures.
I have also attached a photo of Set 3444 which has the insert sitting on the lower right hand corner of the open box.
please see attachments
Thanks, Anne, and all the best,
Richard
-
Are there any non-castle sets that are depicted to be combined?
I have still only seen castles and sections of castles being combined to produce bigger castles - which is what I've done myself by buying more than one castle, or add-on DS parts, but that doesn't make the whole Playmobil system a construction system to my way of thinking.
So, for at least twenty years, it appears that Playmobil was presenting themselves as a company that produced building and construction sets!
Richard, you're still focussing on a tiny part of the Playmobil range, and then applying what you see to the entire range for the last 20 years.
Just because one style of building was created to be flexible and extendable doesn't make the whole Playmobil output a construction system.
There are thousands of sets which have NO buildings in them whatsoever. Are these construction sets? And no, putting a hat on a figure does not count as construction.
btw, my wife spotted a product today you might like - a box of tiny clay bricks, which you mortar together to create a building. The istructions included five diffent buildings you could make. When you're bored of the building, you dunk it in water, and the mortar dissolves releasing the bricks for re-use.
We didn't buy one because it was £30 and very heavy!
-
Hello, Martin ... :wave:
Are there any non-castle sets that are depicted to be combined?
I have still only seen castles and sections of castles being combined to produce bigger castles - which is what I've done myself by buying more than one castle, or add-on DS parts, but that doesn't make the whole Playmobil system a construction system to my way of thinking.
Richard, you're still focussing on a tiny part of the Playmobil range, and then applying your blinkered view to the whole range.
Just because one style of building was created to be flexible and extendable doesn't make the whole Playmobil output for 35 years a construction system.
How about Western buildings? ... ;)
I just happened to have my "Playmobil Collector" open when I saw your reply (and question).
Prior to Steck, Playmobil had a Western Construction set. All the of the building sets were single storey. However, as you can see from the attached scan. Playmobil encouraged their customers to create two storey Western buildings by combining more than one set.
please see attachment
All the best,
Richard
-
I notice that the examples Richard gives are ones of combining different sets which isn't construction in the Lego/Meccano/Bayko sense, these being three toys everyone recognises as construction toys.
-
Hello, Gordon ... :wave:
I notice that the examples Richard gives are ones of combining different sets which isn't construction in the Lego/Meccano/Bayko sense, these being three toys everyone recognises as construction toys.
OK ... No combining of different sets ... :lol:
Playmobil presented set 3446 both as the "City Walls" and a "Small Castle."
Same set ... TWO different ways of building this castle construction set ... ;)
please see attachments
Next question, old friend? ... :lol:
All the best,
Richard
-
Very interesting discussion!
I'm undecided as to whether Playmobil should be classed as a construction toy, although I can see very valid points for both sides of the debate. :yup:
What's wrong with Playmobil? As someone who is very penny-conscious and on a tight budget, my main gripe concerns the cost of some sets. We seem to pay much higher prices in the UK than the rest of the European countries.
A small example: Specials cost 2.19 Euro on the official German website and £2.00 (GBP) on the UK one and in most toyshops. This is quite a considerable mark-up since the converted cost should only be around £1.75. It might not seem like a lot to most people, but the larger the set, the larger the difference in the cost.
I understand that transportation and the differences in currency probably contribute to the higher costs, but that doesn't make it any easier to accept or afford.
While I'm on the topic of the official websites, I find the £6.00 flat rate P&P fee very harsh. If I wanted to purchase a £4.00 set, it would end up costing me £10.00 once the postage is added! :o This is one reason why I rarely buy anything from the DS catalogue. :(
I would prefer to see free postage offered for small orders (instead of forcing buyers to spend over £50.00 ::)) or at least some kind of reduced rate.
-
Playmobil presented set 3446 both as the "City Walls" and a "Small Castle."
Same set ... TWO different ways of building this castle construction set ... ;)
please see attachments
Next question, old friend? ... :lol:
All the best,
Richard
I don't think renaming and repackaging an item and presenting the contents ordered in a different way makes Playmobil a construction toy. Purpose and intent is what decides the nature of something, not how people may use that something or how it may be presented. This is something I tried to bring out in my definition of a construction toy, which you felt was a good one - "A rough definition of a construction toy is a toy consisting of a number of loose but related parts which can be assembled in one or more ways the main purpose of play use being the assembling of the loose parts together in order to produce a finished article." An example from real life will illustrate what I mean about purpose and intent.
My first job after university was on the legal and admin side with a company which at the time was the largest food manufacturing and catering business in the UK. About the time I started working for them, a new line in dried, ground coffee had just been introduced. This was sold in tins and opening these required the removal of the whole top of the tin, and in order that the tin could be resealed and the unused coffee kept fresh a plastic lid came with each tin. At that time there was no VAT which applied to everything bought and sold but a tax called Purchase Tax which was applied selectively to different products. Items which were classed as commercial packaging and came under the Tin Cans, Pails and Packaging Orders carried no Purchase Tax because they were used by manufacturing for packing goods (pails doesn't mean buckets by the way) as part of the process of production and selling. However, containers for other purposes which were used by consumers for storage, e.g. in the kitchen, did carry Purchase Tax. H.M. Customs argued that because once the coffee tins were empty they could be used as containers to store kitchen goods such as flour or another maker's coffee, they should carry purchase tax. I was sent along to counsel for a legal opinion and he said that it was the intent behind the production of the container which mattered, not how people might use it at a later date. (His actual words were, "Abuse does not constitute use," the words stuck in my mind even after 43 years.) This view prevailed in court.
How does that story apply to Playmobil? Well, I remembered today that I have some material from Geobra dating back to PM's 25th anniversary so I read through it again and I think the following is worth quoting from an article "Hans Beck, the "Father" of the Playmobil figures"
"The company was blessed with a magical combination: The idea of Hans Beck, the production capacity required, the uncompromising readiness to take risks on the part of the company owner, and the need of the young consumers for a system toy which, for the first time ever, focuses not on a technical building element but on figures."
So people may use Playmobil as a construction toy, but that doesn't make it a construction toy.
-
Hi all,
What an interesting thread this is.
I consider certain systems within the Playmobil system as a construction toy which are System X, Rockies, Steck and Western forts and buildings.
These systems allow you lots of alternative buildings and structures from the original plan by using parts in a constructive way. We all only have to look at the many custom built projects using and mixing parts form these systems to produce, Paddle steamers, Roman towns, Towers of might, Huge palaces and of course many large medieval towns and Castles.
The first Playmobil fort "Fort Union" was a construction set you didn't get any plan with this you just assembled it how you liked or copied the assembled fort on the box.
-
Hello, Gordon ... :wave:
I don't think renaming and repackaging an item and presenting the contents ordered in a different way makes Playmobil a construction toy.
Showing the different building possibilties of set 3446 was in response to this statement from Michael MacGayver:
Lego adds in there construction plans several possibilities on wot to build with wot's inside the box
I dunnot recall Playmobil doing this
And, in response to your coffee tin example:
So people may use Playmobil as a construction toy, but that doesn't make it a construction toy.
Even though motor vehicles kill people, a motor vehicle is not necessarily a weapon. However, if the motor vehicle happens to be a Churchill tank, it is a weapon! ... ;)
All the best,
Richard
-
Hello, Garry ... :wave:
Hi all,
What an interesting thread this is.
I consider certain systems within the Playmobil system as a construction toy which are System X, Rockies, Steck and Western forts and buildings.
These systems allow you lots of alternative buildings and structures from the original plan by using parts in a constructive way. We all only have to look at the many custom built projects using and mixing parts form these systems to produce, Paddle steamers, Roman towns, Towers of might, Huge palaces and of course many large medieval towns and Castles.
The first Playmobil fort "Fort Union" was a construction set you didn't get any plan with this you just assembled it how you liked or copied the assembled fort on the box.
EXCELLENT POINTS !!!
Thank you for your "spot on" comments, Garry ... :)
All the best,
Richard
-
Hello, Gordon
And, in response to your coffee tin example:
Even though motor vehicles kill people, a motor vehicle is not necessarily a weapon. However, if the motor vehicle happens to be a Churchill tank, it is a weapon! ... ;)
All the best,
Richard
You miss the point, Richard, but I'll just repeat the views of Playmobil on their product:
"The company was blessed with a magical combination: The idea of Hans Beck, the production capacity required, the uncompromising readiness to take risks on the part of the company owner, and the need of the young consumers for a system toy which, for the first time ever, focuses not on a technical building element but on figures."
-
Sorry but i feel i must stick my oar in here Richard, because i have quite a strong opinion on this matter and it seems as though this thread is going around in circles 8}. I had considered coming back into the fold recently but overly dramatised nonsense like this makes me reconsider my decisions ???.
I agree with what Gordon has written, not because he is my friend but because what he is says makes sense. Its just ashame that what he has written falls mostly on deaf ears. For me Playmobil has never been a construction toy. When i was a child i had Lego if i wanted to build something and Playmobil if i wanted to play out any story i wished. All i knew was that some where in Germany there was and still is a wonderfull company that produced these fantastic 'toys' in little blue boxes. They came with anything and everything i needed to act out stories using my own imagination. I didn't need pieces of plastic wall or bricks to 'construct' my first fire station. Making buildings was not my main concern, racing my fire engine and ambulance through the house and into the back garden to reach some distant accident was and those are the things Playmobil provided me with. A small table in the living room was more than up to the fire station job, all it needed was an old brass bell on a piece of string to sound the alarm.
I am going to be brutally honest here but i think this 'is Playmobil a construction toy or not' debate is pointless and full of sour grapes. The only people i see who are going to be affected by the changes trotted out in this thread are the adult collectors. The same adult collectors who like to collect Castles, who horde hundreds of pieces of wall so they can build vast expanses of medieval village. The very same people who were up in arms when SystemX came on the scene to replace Steck. The same people who moan endlessly to this very day about Steck being better than SystemX. I wonder how many children will be bothered by these changes ? how many children will even notice ? how many will care ? Playmobil is after all a children's toy made for children. The fact that Playmobil is still alive and well is something to celebrate, because its the best toy out there to help children develop their imaginations however they choose too. Or prehaps we should hound Geobra to their death because some people think they have lost their way and have the void thats left filled with violent computer games full of murder and crime.
No offense Richard but if you are that disillusioned with Geobra and the path they are following now Hans Beck has retired perhaps you should move on as well ? I mean its better than forcing your negative views on the rest of us who are happy with Playmobil. I can see your not going to accept anyone elses opinions on the matter from what i have read so far (unless they agree with you) but i felt it only fair i hand my crack of the whip. I think most people are pleased with Playmobil and i certainly dont think we should feel ashamed of that.
Tim
-
Hello, Martin and Tim_W ... :wave: :wave:
For anyone who may have taken this friendly banter as a serious and/or hostile discussion ... I APOLOGIZE! ... :-[
As several have already stated ... THIS IS FUN !!! ... :love:
We are simply "picking away" at insignificant things that are of little or no importance.
Both Gordon and I both agree that Playmobil is an Action Figure toy that offers a building element for those who want it ... :**:
Playmobil is fun. This discussion is fun and hopefully has NOT be taken seriously by anyone here at Playmofriends.
All the best my friends,
Richard
-
Hello yet again, Gordon ... :wave:
You miss the point, Richard, but I'll just repeat the views of Playmobil on their product:
"The company was blessed with a magical combination: The idea of Hans Beck, the production capacity required, the uncompromising readiness to take risks on the part of the company owner, and the need of the young consumers for a system toy which, for the first time ever, focuses not on a technical building element but on figures."
The point that I was addressing was your "coffee tin" example ... :)
However, if you would like to discuss a statement made by some unknown author, translated from the German into English by some unknown translator, then lets look at (and understand) WHAT they were saying and WHY!
First of all, to mention Hans Beck by name as the "idea" person and not identify Horst Brandstätter as the "owner" and the one who provided the "production capacity required" and having "the uncompromising readiness to take risks," might suggest that this translation was NOT the "end result" of a Geobra statement ... :hmm:
However, if we were to accept that this was an extremely magnanimous and very generous tribute to Hans Beck by Horst Brandstätter, then let's ask WHY such a statement would have ever been made in the first place.
Most of would agree that LEGO is Playmobil's number one European competitor. It is LEGO (and pretty much LEGO alone) from which Playmobil continues to hide its future releases.
This "competition" between LEGO and Playmobil is probably good for the customer. And, most customers see LEGO as a Building and Construction Toy that also has Action Figures. Playmobil, in a brilliant effort to differentiate themselves from LEGO, continues to market themselves as an Action Figure toy that is also a Building and Construction Toy.
("a system toy which, for the first time ever, focuses not on a technical building element but on figures")
The danger is, that with Hans Beck's vision lost through his retirement, that Playmobil will become only an Action Figure toy and lose its wonderful Building and Construction capability! This would be, in my humble opinion, a real tragedy.
All the best,
Richard
-
For anyone who may have taken this friendly banter as a serious and/or hostile discussion ... I APOLOGIZE! ... :-[
Apology accepted, Richard. I'd assumed that we were having a serious discussion on the nature of Playmobil along the lines of is it a construction toy or not?
Both Gordon and I both agree that Playmobil is an Action Figure toy that offers a building element for those who want it ... :**:
The agreement bit had passed me by. Words such as "obtuse" and "obdurate" were some of the more polite words that kept passing through my mind.
Playmobil is fun. This discussion is fun and hopefully has NOT be taken seriously by anyone here at Playmofriends.
Well, for three people at least you're only 50% right.
-
Hello yet again, Gordon ... :wave:
The point that I was addressing was your "coffee tin" example ... :)
And you were addressing it in such a way as to ignore the whole point of my post, i.e the fact that someone may use an item for a purpose different from that intended by the item's producer does not alter the purpose of the item. Moreover, your argument about motor vehicles and tanks is flawed and seems to me more a points scoring effort than any thing else.
However, if you would like to discuss a statement made by some unknown author, translated from the German into English by some unknown translator, then lets look at (and understand) WHAT they were saying and WHY!
First of all, to mention Hans Beck by name as the "idea" person and not identify Horst Brandstätter as the "owner" and the one who provided the "production capacity required" and having "the uncompromising readiness to take risks," might suggest that this translation was NOT the "end result" of a Geobra statement ... :hmm:
Clearly, provenance is all, so I attach a scan of the original document and the covering letter.
-
Hello, Martin and Tim_W ... :wave: :wave:
For anyone who may have taken this friendly banter as a serious and/or hostile discussion ... I APOLOGIZE! ... :-[
As several have already stated ... THIS IS FUN !!! ... :love:
I have changed the red to green in the quote, its a more neutral colour than red.
You will have to forgive me but i don't really see this as fun and it appeared from the outset to be a serious discussion :hmm:. Simply picking away at insignificant things of little or no importance just for the sake of it is such a shame ? It baffles me why on earth this has managed to go on for 6 pages if is of no importance to you Richard ? Its sad to see that this is what passes as fun on Playmofriends these days.
When i come here for fun its to look at the work people do with their Playmobil, the story's they create and the customs they make. Will we ever see the day when people go on for 6 pages discussing what some of our members have created with their Playmobil ? I very much doubt it, but i guess i can dream...
Tim
-
ENOUGH !!!
And, yes ... It's in RED !!!
Playmobil is a toy! We are adults who still play with toys! If we are also adults who take our playing with toys so seriously that we can't have fun with ourselves, with each other and with our toys, then perhaps we need to ask ourselves some serious questions about who we really are.
Look at those smiling Klicky faces!
Is there ANYONE who can look at those little smiling Klicky faces and not feel good?
Is there ANYONE who can look at those little smiling Klicky faces and not think of fun?
Is there ANYONE who can look at those little smiling Klicky faces and be serious?
My friends, I am surprised and also a bit disheartened by the direction that this thread has taken.
Perhaps, Martin should lock this topic (or maybe even delete it)! And, maybe I should, as Tim_W has suggested, "move on" ...
Good bye ... :wave:
-
ENOUGH !!!
And, yes ... It's in RED !!!
Playmobil is a toy! We are adults who still play with toys! If we are also adults who take our playing with toys so seriously that we can't have fun with ourselves, with each other and with our toys, then perhaps we need to ask ourselves some serious questions about who we really are.
Look at those smiling Klicky faces!
Is there ANYONE who can look at those little smiling Klicky faces and not feel good?
Is there ANYONE who can look at those little smiling Klicky faces and not think of fun?
Is there ANYONE who can look at those little smiling Klicky faces and be serious?
My friends, I am surprised and also a bit disheartened by the direction that this thread has taken.
Perhaps, Martin should lock this topic (or maybe even delete it)! And, maybe I should, as Tim_W has suggested, "move on" ...
Good bye ... :wave:
It seems that the fault lies with everyone other than Richard. However, if things are going to be "fun", then everyone taking part needs to know that. I understood I was taking part in a serious discussion on Playmobil, although that doesn't mean that there isn't room for levity in the course of it. Certainly the thread started off seriously enough and never at any time has a sign gone up saying, "It's just for fun now!", or some such.
-
My friends, I am surprised and also a bit disheartened by the direction that this thread has taken.
Perhaps, Martin should lock this topic (or maybe even delete it)! And, maybe I should, as Tim_W has suggested, "move on" ...
Good bye ... :wave:
been away for the weekend and also supprised on wot happening here
I share your feelings Richard
dunnot believe locking or removing is the answer , it's the easy way
yet dunnot have much time to reply decently
but will tonight
this still is a serious and funny discussion
learned and learning a lot
-
ps : share your feelings too Gordon ;)
-
Hello all, I hope there are no permanent bad feelings over this thread and its discussion? This has been the friendliest board I've ever been on...we really don't have to agree about Playmobil's building aspect. We just need to enjoy the toys and play as we see fit (and hopefully share good pics as we take them).
Best wishes to everyone here!
-
I have always felt that LEGO is more consentrating on the construction aspects for their sets and minifigs are really along for the ride. Getting LEGO to release minifig sets is like pulling teeth. When Pirates, Space and Castle were the main themes, LEGO issued sets with just minifigs and extras.
Playmobil is just the opposite, their sets are based around their klickies. A wonderful difference. And maybe just enought difference to keep them both at the top of the toy market. Also the extent they go to ensure quality.
My 2¢ worth.
Donmobil
(edited for spelling - Martin)
-
Well, quite off this old topic :-[, but here is my complaint:
why so many gold swords in the Playmobil sets, including a gold katana??? :hissyfit: :hissyfit: :hissyfit: :hissyfit: :hissyfit: :hissyfit:
All swords should be silver, the Bronze age passed long before the most ancient time represented by the clikies!!! :hissyfit: :hissyfit: :hissyfit: :hissyfit: :hissyfit: :hissyfit:
Well, that's my complaint, will try to keep the calm now 8-) 8-)
No trouble with the armor, helmets, or shields, they were sometimes made of bronze even after iron and later steel replaced bronze as the material for offensive weapons.
-
Oops, there are clickies which belong to the Bronze ages: I was forgetting the Egyptians!!! :-[
Being somewhat ocious tonight, I read this discussion and think that this discussion on construction toys is mostly on definitions.
I suppose a construction toy is one in which you construct a building (or ships). We certainly contruct buildings with Playmobil, so it would be a construction toy.
On the other side, we have that there are many sets with no construction at all. Those cannot be construction toys (except we acept dressing as construction... but this is a seoparate matter of definition... let's by the moment say that dressing is not the same of construction, just by noting there are different words for each action).
It comes the question of degrees. Yeah, it seems that a product with individual bricks leaves you more possibilities of construction than a product with four walls, a floor and a roof (of course it is an oversimplification). Indeed you have to construct more in the former than in the later. Thus, the toy with individual bricks should be more "of construction" than that with the four walls. Even then, we construct with Playmobil.
I am only using the dictionary to state what Playmobil is. You can construct with Playmobil sometimes but not always, Playmobil is a construction toy, but not just this. Can at the same time Playmobil be a construction toy and not being? Well, if one considers the Playmobil line as all its products, we must say it is partly a construction toy (for sets with construction) and partly not. We can also measure "how of construction" Playmobil is when compared with other toys by taking into account the number of originally disassembled parts that constitute each building.
Language is problematic, sometimes can make us fight defending extremes because there is no word to define intermediate "greys", or things that have one part of a way and the other of other way. As the now defunct great evolutionary biologist Stephen Jay Gould said: "it was both things and none at the same time" (when discussing if corals were a single individual or a colony, given that a discussion raised supporting each hypothesis: corals were made of individual parts each comparable to a complete medusa -their relatives- but at the same time, anatomically and physiologically united by a common and continuous "gut"; as shown by Gould, all this problem vanishes if we do not to force reality into names, but names into reality). 8}
-
Well, this issue of construction toys remind me of something I would like Playmobil to do: fortresses made of a greater number of small pieces that can fall as we shoot them with the Playmobil cannons. That would make siege playing funnier and more realistic.
For the sakes of being vulnerable to artillery, the union between parts should not be as strong as with the current building systems.