Strawpoll - What are your thoughts on G2 Bionicle?

[Logan McOwen]

Hey guys! The overall opinion of G2 Bionicle across the fanbase is rather divided, so I thought it'd be interesting to make a Strawpoll to try and gauge what people from multiple communities (Facebook, Eurobricks, BZPower, The TTV Forums, Flickr) feel about the line. The poll is as displayed;

To submit your answer, click here. If you don't wish to answer (or already have) and wish to view the results, click here.

Once you've answered, please feel free to share the poll elsewhere to help get a larger sample size. Thanks!

[FordianL]

I chose option 1.

From the responses I've seen in this thread, I'd like to bring up something I've seen not only here, but in other parts of the community as well.

When I say I love G2 as a whole, I mean as a whole. This includes the sets, animations, artwork, and the most underrated materials, the chapter books and graphic novels. I constantly tell people to who say the story is too simple based on the animations to read these materials, as they give them a little bit of what they want: world building, characters that feel real and believable, suspense, etc. At the very least, I get those from the books, but the feelings may vary from one person to another.

I just wish that I could talk more about the story itself. I constantly see people complain that "there isn't enough material" or "this/that one-second thing in the animation is stupid in my eyes" rather than actually talking about the story and its events. The books give a proper wrap to the 2015 story with Revenge of the Skull Spiders and explore past stories in further detail in Battle of the Mask Makers. It really stinks that no one talks about any of the story material from the books and instead choose to focus only on the downsides of the theme as a whole, as the books are G2's best hope at roping people into its world.

Tl;dr: I love G2 and think that people should read all of the books before complaining about how a simplistic story is, supposedly, a bad thing.

Edited June 18, 2016 by FordianL

[TwistLaw]

Except we already know that three will be the total number of books we'll be getting for G2...

Books don't say much after all and the interesting bits are discussed in a couple of pages at the story thread.

G2 had great sets but mediocre story because that's the policy of today's LEGO. I'm not okay with it but who am I to discuss the decisions of a multi billionaire company?

By the way I'm sick tired of people talking sheet about G1's sets because "you must be blinded by nostalgia to like them more than today's sets". That's ridiculous and has a subtle fascist smell. From a playing prospective sets from 2004 onwards offer something not much different from today, and that's not even a proper comparison since posability is not everything. The Mata are great sets, still today, and I don't think they have much to be jealous of toys costing up to three times their original price.

"Fun" can't be quantified objectively, no matter how hard people here try to do it. And I think you can have as much fun from a Toa Metru as much as from a Toa Master. It's pretty worrisome to see users admitting they're "blinded by nostalgia" because they prefer older sets or the Miramax movies, just for fear of being demolished by "objective opinions".

My god, I finally said it.

[MakutaDreadscythe]

We're not blinded by nostalgia as a whole and we understand that neither gen is perfect. G1 was still amazing pre-2004 and certainly had it's moments, that's why it stuck around so long in the first place. Both the Mata and Masters are great in their own right but if I had to pick between them, I'd probably choose a Master as there's more you can do with the parts due to the building system being an actual system. There's just more options now.

One last point regarding parts is the quality is just better in G2. Disregarding part design entirely I can put together and take apart the sets knowing full well they won't warp, snap or break. I can't say the same for G1, not even the earlier parts, though they have been aged for a good few years so time will tell the durability of CCBS long term.

[MrHerofan]

Yeah G2 just to me has better sets on average. Like a few months ago I had decided to rebuild some of my G1 sets and had completely forgotten about how they had gorilla arms. The proportions in the new line are better to me and the color variations in the sets have been really good. Tahu actually looks like he is made out of fire now, like his element is fire, while G1 Tahu didn't really look like fire. The amount of translucent parts has made me really enjoy the toa because they look like they are the element that they should be controlling.

As for story the original had plenty of problems looking back on it, even as a kid I realized it, but at least G2 can only fill in its own holes. In the new chapter book it looks like we will finally get to see some backstory for the Kulta. So overall G2 when its over I will see what holes are left and if there are any contradictions. The only problem I have with it is how there are not more episodes of Journey to One.

[Aanchir]

G2 had great sets but mediocre story because that's the policy of today's LEGO. I'm not okay with it but who am I to discuss the decisions of a multi billionaire company?

It almost sounds as if you're trying to say all modern LEGO themes have mediocre stories, which baffles me a bit because LEGO Ninjago and The LEGO Movie both easily rank among the finest stories of any LEGO themes, past or present. For that matter, LEGO Elves has a far more engaging story than any previous girl-oriented theme, and LEGO Nexo Knights is off to a strong start in its own right (seriously, The Book of Monsters is possibly the most laugh-out-loud hilarious LEGO book I've ever read).

I don't think the G2 story is nearly as weak as you make it out to be, either, even if it's not as dense as some parts of the G1 Bionicle story were. It does a good job recreating the fundamentals of what made the early years of Bionicle appealing, with a real sense of myth and mystery but without a lot of the cruft the G1 story accumulated over the years.

Could it be better? Absolutely! No story is without flaws or weaknesses. That said, I think it's making the most of the budget it has to work with, and I don't know if constraction in this day and age can really justify a larger media budget, when many kids today just aren't as interested in action figures as kids from the late 90s and early naughts. G1 Bionicle didn't become great by throwing money at the marketing department indiscriminately. Its media presence expanded and declined in response to the theme's actual toy and media sales. Even recently, we've seen with LEGO Legends of Chima that even a huge investment in innovation in sets and media can't guarantee the long-term success of a theme if kids just aren't interested in the concept.

As for sets, the Toa Mata and Toa Metru might have been decent sets for their time, but I still find them utterly mediocre compared to many of today's sets. "Posability isn't everything", sure, but it isn't NOTHING either. And as others have pointed out, there are also plenty of other differences that set the new Toa apart from their predecessors — more dynamic color schemes, more play features, higher piece counts, a more modular building system, etc. Of course it's subjective whether these things make them better or worse. But if a person says that their love for the old sets is informed by nostalgia, what gives you the right to assume that they're just trying to avert criticism instead of honestly admitting their own biases?

I loved the Aquazone sets as a kid. I still sometimes use an Aquazone pillowcase on my bed. To this day, nobody's ever tried to tell me that I was objectively wrong for liking them. But I'm not afraid to admit they were packed with chunky, highly specialized parts that drove up their prices and reduced their building value. Nor that if they came out today, they'd be mediocre compared to today's sets and I wouldn't be inclined to buy them — especially at inflation-adjusted prices, because your comment about the new Bionicle sets being "three times as expensive" as the Toa Mata seems to ignore that crucial detail. If I say that my love for those sets is rooted in nostalgia, I'm just being every bit as honest with you as I am with myself.

Edited June 19, 2016 by Aanchir

[Dorek]

I love it as a whole. Obviously not perfect, but I'm pleased with what we've gotten so far.

I guess my biggest complaint would not be with the amount of media, but the timing of it; e.g. mid-2016 we're getting a chapter book featuring the one-and-done villains from the previous year. It's not that it's a bad thing (and sounds like an interesting book, frankly) but it's a bit left-field considering where we are in the story right now.

[Nick Wolfe]

I like bits and pieces, chose story over sets. I like elements of the story but much prefer gen 1, even as it got into the later years (2007 is my fav). I like the sets too, the first six toa sets, new Ekimu and antler Umark, but then so many others are so subpar, like the skeletons last year and the beasts this year, and I think the new toa are bulky and ugly. Maybe I just like the style of old Bionicle better, despite the gorilla arms and inika builds. And I still think the story is far superior, I may be one of the few people who really like the slow shift from tribal island to full blown sci fi.

[TwistLaw]

It almost sounds as if you're trying to say all modern LEGO themes have mediocre stories

...but that's not what I was trying to say, at all. Like I wrote many times in the Story and Sets discussions, LEGO is handling the constraction area in a way that for sure has its reason to be, but that I don't like. This strategy creates consequences that really don't surprise me, at least as far as the success of the constraction themes is concerned. And speaking about the Story Discussion, I read with great interest your words about the general decline of the action figure market in the United States, but I don't think you should focus on it too much when explaining the reasons BIONICLE G2 didn't succeed.

BIONICLE is not a traditional action figure theme but rather a buildable action figure theme (there are not many on the market indeed, and LBX don't really count as "action" figures), and pretending it's on the same boat as a Spider Man or Transformer figure sounds a little bit misleading, if I may say. BIONICLE has always had a different approach than anything else on the market, wheter the story or the marketing itself you get the idea. Saying "nothing is perfect in this world" when talking about the story of this second generation is as vague as the story itself. If we compare the early years of G1 and G2 (and not the "convulted" story later years seem to be plagued with) something's pretty clear: while the island of Mata Nui was a mythical place full of mystery presented with an almost tolkienesque vibe, Okoto is substancially "TNMT take a trip to Polynesia". Nothing wrong with that, Ninja Turtles are awesome, but we're talking about biomechanical robots here, and LEGO already has its own version of TMNT. Kids have a choice they didn't have even eight years ago when buying LEGO sets, and BIONICLE didn't do much this time around to distinguish himself.

By the way, higher piece counts mean higher prices. Tahu in 2001 and 2002 cost 9.59$, counting inflation, while in 2015 and 2016 it costs 19.99$. Considering the market buildable action figures are designed for, it is a detail not to be ignored. More dynamic colour schemes and a more modular building system are cool stuff for me and you, but how many times did people in this forum (and even outside of it) complain about Uniter Tahu's colour scheme? About Umarak the Hunter's lower legs? About Master Onua's colours? And this modularity is actually noticeable in bigger sets, and guess what, BIONICLE sets that cost 15$+ were pretty modular since 2002 (Boxor, anyone?).

But if a person says that their love for the old sets is informed by nostalgia, what gives you the right to assume that they're just trying to avert criticism instead of honestly admitting their own biases?

Because everytime anybody on Eurobricks says "I prefer the older sets" the CCBS defence squad shows up and meticulously reminds us of all the advantages CCBS brought to human civilitation. Every. Time.

It's only natural people want to avoid that by saying in the first place they're blinded by nostalgia.

Edited June 19, 2016 by TwistLaw

[The Outsider]

I chose sets over story.

I think the sets are the best executed part of G2. Everyone has already mentioned the aesthetics and color schemes, but to me the top-selling point is how they managed to add functions without sacrificing posability (well, except one or two arachnids ): this way, people like me who like to move their toys around without restriction can enjoy them, but it can also please the kids and G1 fans who like to have gears and knobs to tinker with.

The story, however, is a bit too generic for my taste. Or at least, the most accessible mediums are (I haven't found the books or graphic novels on stores in my country, and I doubt a newcoming kid would be able or willing to buy them online), which is pretty much the same thing. I don't mean they should have the overly-complicated plots of G1, but at least fill out the world of Okoto a bit better. And with so many new characters and concepts compared to old ones, this feels to me as less of a BIONICLE reboot and more of a BIONICLE-inpired line.

[Hisstori]

I love the G2 sets, but I sorta feel 'meh' on the storyline. Of course I don't expect anything spectacular from a children's toyline, but compared to comics like Marvel or DC, Bionicle seems really mediocre in comparison (even G1 did as well). I could put the blame on Lego, but like mentioned above,Constraction seems barely profitable these days so they can't put a lot funds in building an amazing story.

[Im a brickmaster.]

As a kid (well more of a kid then I am now ) I liked the story/lore/mythos whatever you might call it, and I liked the sets. Now that I look back as an older person I love the story, it's such an epic tale with some greats themes and characters. Now I myself have read all of VBBN's excellent reviews and a friend of mine has all 6 Toa from the first G2 wave and I can say, in my humble opinion, that they are okay. There not bad I guess, just not somthing I feel like getting into. I can however get behind the designers for trying different color schemes and builds, in that respect G2 isn't doing bad. But on the other hand a part of me is kinda like "Why? All the past years of Bionicle were really great and diverse Why take this beloved theme and reboot it?!" The answer is money obviously and there's nothing wrong with that. I should add I am not at all opposed to all the new parts and such that have been implemented, I think it's great. It stands on its own and the community has made some incredibly creative things out of them, so for that I am grateful.

ANYHOO. Back to the question the poll is actually about (sorry) no, I don't like it as a whole because to me it feels a little like a watered down cash in. Please don't tear me apart Internet!

[Lord-Vorahk]

I didn't know what to pick, in all honesty. THere wasn't an option for "Love 2015 sets pretty much unconditionally, dislike almost everything in 2016".

Also, again, long arms were a feature of Matoran biology from the series' inception. In fact, the Matoran consistently had longer arms than legs. Toa were the same species as Matoran, so "Gorilla arms" is a rather baseless nitpick, because it's not like a character who doesn't have human proportions could ever work.

As far as plastic quality goes, I have pieces from 2002 that are still sturdy, and pieces from 2015 that have lost all grip. G1's infamous plastic quality problems were only really a thing in its last few years.

Story-wise, G1 has some of my favourite characters ever created. Teridax is still my favourite villain ever. The story arc and the mythos were amazing. There was this sense of mystery with everything that was introduced in the early years, and that continued into the later years with the searches and reveals and twists. G2 hasn't provided that. THe characters haven't been compelling in the least, but we're expected to just say "Okay, that's how it is, because it's for kids and kids are dumb". It wasn't the comics that made 2001 amazing, it was the MNOG, which G2 doesn't have.

Aesthetically, G2 still hasn't trumped Breakout. It was on to a good start with 2015, but instead of going for "More main colours, less trans and metallics", it went the complete opposite direction and we got the ugly mess that is Tahu.

Also, stealing "The CCBS Defence Squad", that needs to be a thing.