>>8583641Soul means a lot of things to a lot of people. I would say "soul" died when the mentality of the people designing the sets drifted far enough from the concept of "toy trying to emulate the world in a cute and clunky way" and became more of "3D printer bits that we are using to build realistic models of real things with".
Lego always had a certain charm to me when I was little and that charm came from the fact that it was a "simulation" of something that existed but in Lego/toy form.
A Lego car didn't look too similar to the real counterpart. It had some features that certainly made it clear which real world car it was built off, but it was never a scale model. When that went away, the idea of "soul" went away, at least for me.
Another component of Lego's charm and "soul" was the fact that builds were not highly specialized and didn't require a lot of very highly specialized parts. The problem with this is that shifting the focus to builds that are hyper-realistic and that use very specialized parts is that rarely can you use those parts to make anything else of note.
More generalized parts lead to a "less accurate" base model but allow for more utility overall.
Ultimately one other aspect (as far as I'm concerned) is the inclusion of too much lore, too much media and too many types of faces. The classic smiley face was good because it allowed your character to be anyone - it was a stand in and you could make your own story/character. Some specialized faces are good, but I feel that today's heads use faces/prints that are too expressive. Perhaps I'm wrong, but I preferred the old, more static faces better.
>>8584496Has a good perspective. The overall tone of the community has shifted too much - both the designers and the children consuming the product. Simple is no longer enough, and ultimately Lego's soul came from it being - simple, cute, a toy with a lot of options and customization.
