Arguing dense LEGO builds made of smaller parts are a rip-off is hilarious. Large elements have less reuse versatility & cost LEGO more to make. Larger parts mean less parts in a set, making a less exciting build. Price wouldn’t change, you’d just pay more for less value.

Nov 7, 2025 · 5:38 PM UTC

17
27
2
480
You would require a massive-sized build to give larger parts an interesting build process The 2007 MTT proves this, but don’t act like LEGO wouldn’t be charging you $200+ for it if it released today Yes, the 2025 MTT’s price is disgusting, but you can use its parts for anything
2
48
At its root, this is an issue LEGO themselves have caused. By offering so many sets where build & part value are there, but price is not, the general public is wired to call even the best values overpriced out of habit. Doesn’t matter if saying so is verifiably illogical
49
Replying to @PenPlays_
I do really like the Blacksmith Shop but I think it's also completely fair to say the perceived value is not readily apparent (and LEGO agrees, this is $10 cheaper than the leaks said). Casuals don't know how to phrase it properly, but I think that's what's tripping them up.
1
6
Important to note that leakers have been consistently wrong with pricing since well before price changes became a thing It’s not a metric we can trust
5
Replying to @PenPlays_
I don’t care if sets are dense and detailed so long they have useable space.
1
1
I can get behind this for builds where it makes sense to have it
11
Replying to @PenPlays_
But why is that? Why do we need to take all of this? Especially with quality (prints, colour accuracy etc.) decreasing? Licensed sets were always pricey - but that was okay-ish. Sure, they gotta pay for the license. But the way they're completely butchering City and Ninjago...
1
Replying to @PenPlays_
This was one of the most fun Lego sets I've ever owned in my life. 711 pcs and $80 USD
1
4
Replying to @PenPlays_
i think a good balance is needed, im more likely to get the train set over the others, tho its also 200$
Replying to @PenPlays_
I honestly have a hard time reusing a decent amount of small pieces.
1
Replying to @PenPlays_
MTT sneak tho that thing is just ass value lmao But I do agree, Lego is a BUILDING toy so more stuff to build with IS good
Replying to @PenPlays_
Or maybe at some point i just want the price per part to get lower
Replying to @PenPlays_
That's not even true, no kid is going to be able to build something new out of a collection of plates and tiles. Larger bricks allow for larger builds with reduced piece count and more room for play. Lego has been finding new ways to piece farm since 2020
11
Replying to @PenPlays_
Defending LEGO pricing when other brands offer similar production quality and better designs for less than half the price is peak consoomer behavior. I have spoken.
3
Replying to @PenPlays_
I don't think Legos should be hundreds of dollars
13
This tweet is unavailable
Replying to @PenPlays_
Finally someone said it
Replying to @PenPlays_
A 100 dollars for a set of that size are you fucking insane ????
1