Developing System X - or "Don't bring back Steck..."

[Sir Pleamo]

Hi! I confess I haven't read EVERY post, so here's my comment and my question, excuse me if this already have been said.

To me both systems are great but Steck has the aesthetic advantage of being nicer looking. What bothers me about system x is the horrible holes, it is the closest PM have been to looking like L360  (and lets face it... to place every little connector, whatever the color is, is unberable!!)
Beside the introduction of new pieces, btw your desings are amazing!!!!, is there any idea to cover the holes? beside the obvious that would be a piece, very much like a conector, but with the external face flat and the color of each element or wall? 

Nice to have you here! ...but, yes, I guess you should read the rest... because all your points were already mentioned (mentioned but not solved... so yes we have do discuss them soon!).
It is really hard for me, because all of you are so FAST! I have made some reasoning about (I guess) every aspect concerning SysX so yes I want and will offer my solutions to all the mentioned topics, but to make it serious, we need some time for each of those issues. I want to suggest to hold in for a minute and "solve" all problems step by step. Because of already have started the topic of "Curves and squares" with some ideas and examples maybe we should stay here for a while until we feel we are through. After that we can go forward to the very next issues. My suggestion would be:

1. Curves and squares – How to swing SysX
2. Hole or not hole - that's the question
3. Aesthetics – Colours, textures, appearance
4. Framework, roofs, gables, Windows, etc. – What kind of parts are missing?
5. Non-genuine or rule breaking SysX parts

After that we can do some brainstorming about how to support Geobra with their set designs by having their politics in mind.
An important topic also is the mentioned international DS problems. I would like to discuss this too, but it is in some aspect off-topic, so I would prefer to keep this point for the farer future.

Please object or if you prefer other ways, also add if there is something missing…
If there is no objection to this roadmap, I would like to continue with the “Curves and Squares” topic because here we can also get a deep insight about how to understand the “standards” how I called them, in other words “the SysX Theory” (Sorry for my technical kind of writing, maybe some of you don’t like this style but to excuse me, in real life I am a scientist with focus on theoretical philosophy and logics… ).
But even if I have suggested this roadmap, let me say just one word to the hole-issue:
I totally second playmogal:

For some reason the Sys X holes don't bother me at all. I think we need to get beyond the "hole" problem and see what new pieces would make Sys X take off even more.

But for those who are bothered by the holes, the Grande Mansion 5302 has gorgeous trim pieces that cover both vertical and horizontal holes. If these were available in various lengths, this should not be much of a problem any more. And with a couple more horizontal vine extension pieces that could attach to existing vertical vine structures, one could cover many of the holes.

Yes, the holes are a problem, but it is only in very few situations a real or serious problem, I have never understood, why people come to that topic so often again… I mean there are so less situation, where you are not able to cover them… Just one quick example (this construction I had already published in an earlier version at cachalote’s thread). Please count all holes and tell me if they bother you!? (some of them are hidden too, when the building is integrated in my Port, but I have not made too much pics of it until know.)

Yes, I am with you! But let us come to the details in some time… First you are right by saying:

The curved and round pieces are where the some of biggest problems seem to lie, and SP has come up with some wonderful solutions in both solid and glassed versions. These pieces in a rock finish could also be huge winners.
[...]
This is a great discussion of Sys X, and we are ready for more! Pgal

Okay, let’s do it!

[PrimusPilus]

Honestly, the only issue with System X that I can see are the holes - though they don't bother me, I understand why some people will frown about them. And of course, the assembly is a bit more troublesome, because of the attaching structures (X pegs), but that's it. Texture, appearance, colors, type of parts, etc, are all about what Geobra wants the system to be or not to be.

[bonniebeth]

or what the customers want the system to be or not be.

[PrimusPilus]

I don't know about that, since Steck is very popular but Geobra basically axed it.

[playmo1989]

Honestly, the only issue with System X that I can see are the holes -

 
 

[Birdie]

Yes, but if they just made the new snap-together pieces more compatible with sysx, everyone would be happy. Rather than have a building where it is part of a baseplate, make it where it could stand on its own and become a part of a system x building, with places for sysx plugs to hook to it.

I'm fairly new to the system X buildings (I've only bought a few small houses recently). So could someone explain the difference between system X and the snap-together pieces mentioned earlier? 

I've seen some huge and marvellous system-X buildings on the LuxPlaymoDays exhibition yesterday. And although they looked amazing, just like the designs I saw in this thread, I wouldn't give an arm and a leg to own one of them. Which I would do for some of the custom steck buildings I saw.

I agree it's because of number 3: Aesthetics. Steck is over all more detailed and 'richer' I think. So if Playmobil is looking to improve system X, I guess they would have to invest in richer system-X pieces to make all of us steck-lovers happy    And I don't think they'll do that, because it's more expensive to produce.

[socrates]

Thank you so very much, SirPleamo for promoting this topic so impressively!   
You buildings are just beautiful and it is amazing to see them not only in CAD but also in reality! 

My impression is that right now the people in charge at Playmobil are not convinced that they can reach the kids with Playmobil as a construction toy. Maybe they are right, tendencies might go that way.
But, to be fair, that is their job! 

On the other hand, we have our own interest. And if we succeed to convince them that they could make both, a construction approach and a mass market compatible system, we are fine off.

After all, Lego also did collectors editions that are not going into mass market but are designed especially for fans and collectors. So, this is the edge we have to head for.

I still believe there would be the chance that Playmobil one day IS becoming a construction toy, though!
 

So let us continue working on this mission!

best,
socrates

[cachalote]

THE HOLES
2 solutions for the "holes" that came up on may 25 - http://www.playmofriends.com/forum/index.php?topic=4623.15.
  martin millner's simply and cleverly suggested that the holes could be used to add some "decoration" to the buildings: thin texturized covers with 2/3/4 hole spans, greenery, carpets.
  indianna geniously suggested plugs for the holes in a soft plastic.

THE LOOKS
  system-x can be made much better.
but even in the past playmobil was able to produce very good system-x buildings that don't have that mix of failing figurative-abstract image that everyone hates.
consider the 2nd big pirate island 3938 - http://www.playmofriends.com/forum/index.php?topic=4690.0 - not to mention the beautiful harbour buildings 3112 and 5827.

TIME CONSUMING
  if geobra really feels speed is od the essence they can start to sell complete mounted sets as an alternative.
maybe by direct comparison they could have a true vision of what people prefer.
it's that easy.
but what i see all around is a different trend - "slow" is having a huge come-back.
the success of "slow" food, "meditation" exercises  and even golf (that is sometimes called the "biggest" sport in the world) practices are only 3 examples.
maybe the problem is on how you want to sell things.
  there is a portuguese saying that goes more or less like this - all donkeys can be made to eat straw, it's just a question of knowing how you can give it to them.

[tahra]

FINALLY read this... I love Sir Pleamo's buildings

Everyone probably knows I LOVE assembly system (ok, you call it Steck..), and mostly hate System X. Except for the dark invaders  .

At the time we bought ALL the sets, our first reaction to that first System X castle was to go to ebay and buy a few assembly castles.

However, I find myself changing my opinion on System X, mostly thanks to Sir Pleamo.

System X has, IMO, 4 + 1 major problems.

First, the holes. Both me and my sister find them ugly and unnatural (an opinion NOT shared by all the docs in our playkingdoms, who see they'll never be out of a job!). They make the buildings look unfinished.

The second problem is the cheap look the thing has. The System X castle looks (and feels) like a cheap plastic toy. Not playmobil. However, that is probably a matter of color, and quite easily fixed.

The third is a matter of design - most sets have half a house. No roof, no walls... makes it look kinda stupid. But if we had the parts available, it could also be fixed.

Finally, there's the JOY of putting HUNDREDS of those stupid little things in the holes. It is NOT fun, it's time consuming and boring. A side effect of this is when taking the building down to put it away, those stupid little pieces have a mind of their own, regarding on which "wall" (or whatever) they remain with, making it harder to box everything. This I see no way around. BUT... it does allow a versatility not found anywhere near assembly system. So, it can easily be seen as a trade off. After all, on the other side of this we have those clip ons. And NOBODY wants that, right?

The +1 problem is this...

what I want to say is, I have realized that nearly all categories that w know from Steck are no longer true in SysX! There is no top side, no bottom, no left no right... there are only size, number of conecting holes and colour, the rest is imagination!

But that is MY problem, and not the system's, me thinks. AGES ago, I discussed the System X vs Assembly System, and Richard told me (and I agreed!) the major point I saw for system X (how versatile it is) was really not an advantage, since we can't make head or tails of it!

Now I think that WE need to adjust our perception of it... May not be easy... but if this old dog can learn that new trick... who knows..

I guess Sir Pleamo is correct in thinking we're not gonna get Assembly back. And it's stupid to have a bunch of incompatible systems anyways. And those clip ons are ridiculous. They really don't seem to like money. By making it impossible to expand those awesome looking tower/castle, they limit their own sales... is that reasonable?!

So I think our best bet is indeed to turn to System X (AGH). With different colors and new parts, it could probably be a great system. Ok, we'd still have to put hundreds of little pieces in place. We'd still have to adjust our thinking to be able to actually build anything with it, but after we did, the possibilities are virtually endless, something that is not true with Assembly.

IMO, the holes need fixing though. I don't know how, but (at least for me) it is a must to make acceptable buildings.

[playmogal]

Tahra,
Well written!

Problem of the holes in SysX:
This has been addressed many times and can be viewed as an opportunity as well....it allows one to add all kinds of trim to SysX buildings. Just look closely at the new mansion 5302 trim...lovely? Now if it just came in many sizes and colors, many of us would be happy campers.

Adding horizontal vines that attach to vertical vines also livens up the place as does an arbor like that found in the Summer House.

And with a little imagination, PM could produce all kinds of trim pieces that could totally change the look of SysX...small circles or squares in various lengths, cool sconce light fixtures,  brick or tile-looking pieces in different lengths, etc. Also signs of all kinds fit those holes, which is great for commercial buildings.

Glad to see you consider SysX; it is an additional building set. This thread is not designed to discuss Steck; merely a place to come up with ideas about SysX, which SP has done so marvelously.

Cheers, Pgal