2001 = The best Bionicle year?

[Zarkan]

Okay, by now I kind of have a general grasp on how a lot of the Bionicle fans here think. Generally, this forum has a mixed view on how good the current years are, but the majority of people here seem to believe that 2001 was the best year of Bionicle, hands down. While I agree that it was a great year and a landmark achievement for lego, calling it the best year ever just doesn

[gylman]

So, you want a war, huh!

I still say 2001 or 2002 were the best. It's not even close.

The story was fresh. Lots of mystery.

The Templar animations were hilarious (never topped to this day).

Although I agree that the big Rahi sets did suffer from unnecessary duplication, anyone who says that they were still not the best build of any of the Bionicle series clearly has not built them. But if you played in pairs, like my kids, have a pair of sets, with separate instructions, was absolutely perfect. They still play with the Bohrok Queens now.

The best build of any medium Bionicle set = Boxor

Best build of any large Bionicle set = Exo Toa or the Bahrag

And I, personally, thought that the Bohrok were the best cannister sets ever made, hero or villain.

Sorry, 2001 was the best year, 2002 second or the other way around.

More recent years don't rate.

How's THAT for a rant!

[Starwars4J]

There's also the point of the newer years deviating from the whole mystical thing for bazookas and other crap :-X Not a direction they should have gone in...

[gylman]

Oh, and by the way. The reason people remember the 2001 year as having better "character development", is pretty much exclusively because of the Templar animations, which gave the personalities, especially to the Matoran.

[Lt. Col. Thok]

I agree. The animations, as well as the freshness of the storyline, made bionicle a mega-hit. Now...its kinda lame.

[Batbrick]

I think 2001 was the best. I own all the original toa (though I lost Pohatu and Kopaka's masks :'-( ) as well as 3 of the elders, all of the Matoran Mcdonald's releases, and the three smallest Rahi. I also own the six Bohrok.

They are excellent builds, and very original too, rather than the crappy "six goodies, six baddies" we get now! |-/

I just rebuilt my Tarakava today in fact, and they have great playability.

I understand that some recent years have also been good, but they didn't expand the world that these characters live in as much as just make badguys then goodguys and excetera.

This marketing turned me off Bionicle, but I still cherish the original line, as it was fresh and saved me from my dark ages. :'-)

Batbrick Away! >:-)

[dviddy]

First, you can't base a 'the personalities were stereotypes!' for the first year. The first year was the base, and anything else was built upon. You can't retroactively claim stereotypes. The first is the original, and it's BECAUSE of the first year that the rest aren't.

Secondly- using the Piraka bodies as, oh man, bodies in Titans is not creative. It is not 'ohmylookattheawesomeusefulness!' It's lame, it's stupid, and it proves the exact opposite of your point.

Also, I loved the gears. Don't be hatin' because you're one of those 'the new style is cooler, and gears were hard!' kids. ;)

These were still awesome promos, but from a MOCer

[Vader]

Wait...This theme actully had a good year??..........

Sorry guys i couldn't resist that one :-P X-D

[jifel]

Wait...This theme actully had a good year??..........

Sorry guys i couldn't resist that one :-P X-D

please try to resist more next time, and 2004 was excellent!

jifel

[Lord Of Pies]

The only Bionicle sets I have are from 2001, so I can not really give an un-baised opinion....

[Visorak-kal]

*Slaps Hands* Here goes:

Grievous, is that a question?

2007 is the best BIONICLE year ever! How could you even consider 2001?

Let us not compare, but observe...

2001 marked the beginning of BIONICLE, and the beginning of something amazing, innovative, and new. Since 2001 was the first year, all of us (myself included) feel nostalgia towards it and are drawn towards thinking it the best year. I feel the same way about Harry Potter and The Lord of the Rings. Harry Potter 4 I think was the best book, but I cannot help but consider Harry Potter 1 as the best because it was the first. I think the Return of the King was the best movie, but I cannot help but consider Fellowship as the best because it was the first! Nostalgia affects us, whether we like it or not.

But 2001 was seriously not that great! For one, the year has no apparent ending other than MNOLG. What about the people that don't have internet? (I didn't!) Or those who can't access Bionicle.com? They are completely lost in story, and let's face it, the comics were and always have been paper thin. They're a mere twelve pages, but what do you want? They're free. It is impossible to say that the comic story in 2001 was any better than it is now. In reality, 2006 and 2007 have better comic stories, because they actually tell the end of the story. The last comic in 2006 told us how the INika got the Ignika, and then how they lost it beneath the sea. 2001? "Let Makuta tremble this day, the Toa stand together!" Then the next year, they've already defeated Makuta. For me, who had no internet access, I was standing there, saying, "what happened? We don't actually see them face the bad guy?" (Yeah, I was 9 then.)

MNOLG was great. Who can deny that? It had good story, good character, and some neat flash battles. But, like the books, it was only there for those who could access it. Furthermore, if we look, it focuses on the Matoran, who do not sell as well as the Toa. Therefore, we can't really expect something like MNOLG; it wouldn't get LEGO profit, so it wouldn't be done.

I disagree with you, Grievous, in that the personalities were stereotypical. Pohatu was always the friendliest of Toa, and stone to me does not signify friendliness. While Kopaka was cold, Tahu was heated, etc. those personalities were, as Darth Vader says, new for the beginning of the franchise. I think that is why LEGO has recently shied away from them. Nuparu is more outgoing than Onua, Jaller is less heated than Tahu, Matoro is not as cold as Kopaka, etc. As Matoran, they were never like their Toa counterparts, and as Toa Inika, they have been kept different than their Toa counterparts. Only Kongu has changed somewhat, and that was already explained in Bionicle Legends #7.

Continuing, we go to sets. The bodies of the Toa were just as one-piece as the Piraka bodies. The gear thing comes down to taste entirely. I like gears and functions, but I also like poseability. I wish LEGO could find a way to incorporate the two. They seem to be heading that direction with the trap that came with Karzahni and Lesovikk's sea sled, so hopefully they can continue the recent trend. But let's face it; the gears severely limited poseability. To say that the original Toa even COMPARE with recent Toa is a fallacy. The only thing the original Toa have that is remotely as good as recent years is their masks. (Not including gears.) They have no poseable heads. They have only two points of leg articulation, and some of their hands have only one point of shoulder articulation and the gear. Sets nowadays have over thirteen points of articulation. While the style of Tahu and Co. is a good style, it can only be considered better in terms of taste. Do you prefer the ancient warrior-style of the Mata, or the more sleek, streamlined style of the Inika? One cannot rightly say that the Inika STYLE is better than the Mata STYLE. But one CAN rightly say that the Inika are better than the Mata. You can argue against rubber masks, and I would agree that I prefer original-style masks, but LEGO has gone back to that in 2007.

I disagree wholehartedly with you, Darth Vader, when you say that the expansion of the universe was a bad thing. For three years BIONICLE was on the island of Mata Nui, and many people on BZP were furious at the way the story was beginning to repeat itself. They wanted answers to mysteries. You cannot have a story full of mysteries and then not answer any of them. It becomes boring after too long. Metru Nui was a change, but the story was still not expanded. We had a new location, new Matoran and a new world, but we still knew next-to-nothing. And surely enough, BIONICLE's sales were still going downhill. The trend started in 2003 I believe.

Then came 2005 and the expansion you speak so horribly of. Brotherhood of Makuta, Keetongu, Rahaga, other islands, Roodaka, Sidorak, Voporak, Dark Hunters, Visorak, etc. Guess what? Sales went UP. The trend continued in 2006, and sales rose 10%, boosting BIONICLE back to its number one status of all LEGO's themes. And you say this was a bad thing? An expanded media is not bad. The books are excellent series books, and the story is thick and exciting. There are interesting characters, and many of them are far more diverse than the characters in 2001. You argue that the books reduced the comics; not so, the comics are the same size and tell the same amount of story that they always did. MNOLG served the same purpose as the books, except it focused on Matoran that did not sell.

And how does more mystery mean greater story arcs? You have to reveal mysteries, otherwise you end up with LOST: too many mysteries with too little answers. (I do not watch the show, but those are the main complaints I have heard about it.) Mysteries have to be answered, and there are still many unanswered mysteries. The media expansions now coverse online, books, and comcis, all of which tell tales. There is so much more story info out there now than there was in 2001. In 2001, the only story was three comics and MNOLG. Now we have web serials, books, and comics. Comics tell the main story for free, and actually finish the story (This has only happened in 2002, 2006, and 2007.) And the books tell additional story and can bring back old characters and tie up loose ends.

Lt. Col. Thok:

Animations made BIONICLE good? Animations are neat, yes, but I think the books, great story and plot, and expanded universe make BIONICLE far better now than it ever was in 2001. Lame? How does more story and better sets equal lame? Because there is no MNOLG? Lately, on here and BZP, people keep talking about that game as if it was the only thing that made BIONICLE good. I'm getting tired of it. Seriously, it was good, but it was not THAT great that BIONICLE without it becomes lame.

StarWars4J

There's also the point of the newer years deviating from the whole mystical thing for bazookas and other crap Not a direction they should have gone in...

I like swords and shields better than Zamors and Cordak Blasters, but I still like Zamors and Cordak blasters. Furthermore, characters still have swords. BIONICLE has always been biomechanical; it isn't a Castle theme. It IS modern. Furthermore, I have no idea what mystical has to do with modern weapons. They have absolutely no connection. You can have mystery and still be modern. Look at StarWars. BIONICLE still has mystery, and now it has more modern projectiles, since that is what its target audience seems to want.

Most importantly, this is not a direction they should have gone in? So, a 10% sales increase from 2005 is not a direction they should have gone in. Keeping BIONICLE number one and outdoing 2001 in sets and story is not a direction they should have gone in. Expanding into a universe that was planned SINCE 2001 is not a direction they should have gone in. They should have abandoned the entire 7 books of BIONICLE and stuck only with Mata Nui. They should have ignored all focus groups and sales studies, and kept old-fashioned weapons despite the fact that most of their audience wanted modern projectiles. They should have not made books and stuck with MNOLG after MNOLG after MNOLG, and kept hte story focused on Matoran even though Matoran do not sell half as well as Toa. If they did not go in this direction, BIONICLE would be DEAD. Stone, cold DEAD.

Gylman:

The story was fresh. Lots of mystery.

The story was fresh not because it was a good story, but because the concept of BIONICLE as a whole was fresh. The story today is still fresh, it just isn't the first year so it doesn't seem as new. And there are still lots of mysteries. They just didn't keep us in the dark on an island knowing nothing about what in the world was going on. They just didn't abandon the rest of the story planned prior to 2001.

The Bahrag did have the best build of any BIONICLE, but that does not mean they are better sets. I like build as much as the next guy, but poseability is important here too. The Bahrag were $60. They didn't sell. You can't release a 20 dollar Titan with the same poseability as a 60 dollar Bahrag. You have to abandon the hundreds of small pieces and technic style and go with what works.

Let's face it; the Rahi didn't sell because Technic fans felt the same way about BIONICLE as you all feel now about 2007 compared to 2001.

And come on. The Bohrok, the best canister sets ever? Maybe in the style you like, but if LEGO released a Bohrok wave now they would be out of business. BIONICLE has far improved over the low poseability and low stature of the Bohrok. I like the Bohrok, yes; I still use them. But to say that they are the best and say it as a fact does not hold with me, nor with business.

And more recent years do rate. 2006 for sure rates BETTER. 10% sales increase, people! 10%. I don't think 2001 had a 10% sales increase over Technic.

My final Conclusion:

2001 was a great year because it introduced classic Toa Mata and Makuta and because it was the first year. It had a lot of great stuff, none of which can be denied. Comics and MNOLG had a great, mysterious feel. The sets were something new and amazing.

But it was not the best year. 2006 is better. 2007 is a lot better. 2007 even tops 2006 in my book, but that remains to be seen with sales.

Sets now are better.

Story now is better.

Multiple media platforms is a good thing.

LEGO has gone in the right direction.

All that you see now was already prepared in 2001; there were seven books of BIONICLE, and this current story arc was planned for. We are seeing what was devised prior to BIONICLE's first year. This is not something completely new. What is new is the expanded universe, which is a good thing.

Good sales means good direction. In 2005 and 2006 we had good sales. That means BIONICLE has gone in the right direction. The BIONICLE team has studied their market business. They determined that Rahi and large technic sets did not sell. So they ditched them. I liked their build, I like big builds. But I also like the new direction. For me, it isn't one or the other. For many BIONICLE fans, it isn't one or the other.

2001 was a great year, but it was not the best. BIONICLE has lasted 7 years. If it had gone in the wrong direction, or if it was not as good as 2001 or better, then it would not have lasted 7 years. It would not be making profit. But it is. And that is how I will end my argument.

VK

P.S. I hope I do not sound inconsiderate of your opinions. You can hold whatever opinions you like, and I'm not bashing you for it. I am just trying to sway your opinions. :-)

Gee, long post!

[Ikki o' Moopyville]

:-D

Sorry, but it just seems a bit hilarious to see you guys go all the way and create long, almost defensive posts about which year of Bionicle was the best. They are well argued points, sure, but you write like you need to convince each other that either 2001 or 2007 was the greatest year, all while being oblivious to the truth: That it is all a matter of preference which year was best or worst!

Some like one thing, some like other stuff. Call me bonesiii, but that's how it works, and there is no need for ridiculous remarks like "2007 is the best BIONICLE year ever! How could you even consider 2001?" No one takes that stuff serious. :-P

So just enjoy whatever year you liked best, and don't spend as much energy as I once did ranting about bad years. X-D That said, it's great points that's been brought up, but they just aren't universal.

EDIT: "One cannot rightly say that the Inika STYLE is better than the Mata STYLE. But one CAN rightly say that the Inika are better than the Mata." <----- Just another example of what I'm talking about. Sorry, but those lines just cracked me up. You're saying it like one is factually better than the other. :-D

-Ikk

Edited November 2, 2007 by Ikki o' Moopyville

[Zarkan]

Secondly- using the Piraka bodies as, oh man, bodies in Titans is not creative. It is not 'ohmylookattheawesomeusefulness!' It's lame, it's stupid, and it proves the exact opposite of your point.

Also, I loved the gears. Don't be hatin' because you're one of those 'the new style is cooler, and gears were hard!' kids. ;)

False. The arms are useful, the feet are useful, the heads are useful, and the masks are awesome. You lose.

Okay, no offense, but I said these were my OPINIONS. So, please tell me, why are you saying bold statements and acting like you are right just because you're older than me? Look, just because I didn't say "I think that Tohunga parts aren't useful" doesn't mean it's not my opinion and is FACT.

No offense, but I think a lot of people read me wrong. Everyone seems to think that this was just a "this is the way it is post, and this is how things work post" when all I was trying to do is share my opinion about things. This was not a rant, this was not a factual thing, this was my OPINION, so please just don't assume the opposite. *wacko*

As for 'what can they do with an island for so many years...', let's just look at television and other media. The island motif has been done several times, and it works out great. Just ask LOST. Plus, with the smaller amount of media the first year had, the web animations, and the comics, there was more freedom to leave greater mystery, and to pursue greater story arcs.

Oh, LOST. That show that is going to go through 3 more short seasons and will be boring everyone to death by the time its over. X-D Seriously, that is the reason why I hate LOST so much. LOST is one of those shows that makes much more mysteries than solves them each episode. My mom used to be a fan, but now that the seasons keep making more and more mysteries she completely "lost" interest (pun intended). Besides, you can't even compare Bionicle to Lost (IMO). Aside from the island thing, nothing really is similar - I mean, even the island makeup is totally different! LOST island is far simpler in terain than Mata Nui - have you ever seen Ice villages and active volcanoes on it? :-/

Secondly- using the Piraka bodies as, oh man, bodies in Titans is not creative. It is not 'ohmylookattheawesomeusefulness!' It's lame, it's stupid, and it proves the exact opposite of your point.

Also, I loved the gears. Don't be hatin' because you're one of those 'the new style is cooler, and gears were hard!'

One question: Why? Why is it any worse than using Toa Olda Bodies for, say, a neck? Fact is, with MOCing, there is no stupid way to do something, as long as it works. You can't go around saying that making bigger bodies out of smaller bodies is bad just because it's far easier to do. Not everybody wants to spend time making bodies out of small technic beams, like Jinzo does (which is fine as well).

Also, yes, you loved the gears. I don't like them, but I didn't say that either opinion is right or wrong. Also, what's wrong with liking the new style because I think it's cooler? That is totally biased, IMO, because although you didn't say it, you yourself like the gears better because you like the old style better. Can you say, contradiction? :-/

Okay, better prepare for the next wave of comments.... :-P

[gylman]

Actually, I was just rantin' for the fun of it.

I like this topic... if people can worked up about Bionicle like this, it shows there's life in the old lady yet.

[Visorak-kal]

Sorry, but it just seems a bit hilarious to see you guys go all the way and create long, almost defensive posts about which year of Bionicle was the best. They are well argued points, sure, but you write like you need to convince each other that either 2001 or 2007 was the greatest year, all while being oblivious to the truth: That it is all a matter of preference which year was best or worst!

Some like one thing, some like other stuff. Call me bonesiii, but that's how it works, and there is no need for ridiculous remarks like "2007 is the best BIONICLE year ever! How could you even consider 2001?" No one takes that stuff serious.

My saying that 2007 was the best was purely opinion and joke; I merely forgot the laugh out loud icon. My argument that 2001 was not the best is less based on my opinion. I myself still like 2001 as one of the tops. I am not arguing that it is the worst, simply that it is impossible to call it the best.

EDIT: "One cannot rightly say that the Inika STYLE is better than the Mata STYLE. But one CAN rightly say that the Inika are better than the Mata." <----- Just another example of what I'm talking about. Sorry, but those lines just cracked me up. You're saying it like one is factually better than the other.

It is factually true. Let's say I make a ceramic pot line. My first ceramic pot is disfigured and it doesn't work; it blows up on the stove. Still, it looks old-fashioned. Then, a few years later, I make a new ceramic pot. It is not disfigured and it works better, but its style is more modern.

You can't say that the modern style is better than the old-fashioned style. You can say that the new pot is better than the old one. (Yeah, exagerated analogy, but you see my point.)

The Inika have way more poseability than the old Mata, and they still have functions. Therefore, there is only improvement there. Style is opinion; functionality is fact.

What I'm basically trying to say is that you can't say that BIONICLE has gone in the wrong direction or that 2001 was the best. I'm not bashing 2001, but you can't seriously say it was the best.

I'm not seriously that heated about this stuff; I simply like making my arguments and trying to be persuasive. Additionally, experience is always a plus in composition class when you're asked to write a persuasive essay or argument. :-D

Actually, I was just rantin' for the fun of it.

Don't we all, really? It's not like BIONICLE affects our life tremendously; it's a toy line. If we rant and argue about it, then we'd better like doing so, or we're simply wasting our time. What really bugs me is all the complaint topics on BZP. Aye aye aye.

I like this topic... if people can worked up about Bionicle like this, it shows there's life in the old lady yet.

Sure is! :-)

VK

Edited November 2, 2007 by Visorak-kal

[Ikki o' Moopyville]

My saying that 2007 was the best was purely opinion and joke; I merely forgot the laugh out loud icon. My argument that 2001 was not the best is less based on my opinion. I myself still like 2001 as one of the tops. I am not arguing that it is the worst, simply that it is impossible to call it the best.

Wrong, sorry. ;-) To me, 2001 IS the best year, because it appeals the most to my tastes. No way to get around that.

It is factually true. Let's say I make a ceramic pot line. My first ceramic pot is disfigured and it doesn't work; it blows up on the stove. Still, it looks old-fashioned. Then, a few years later, I make a new ceramic pot. It is not disfigured and it works better, but its style is more modern.

You can't say that the modern style is better than the old-fashioned style. You can say that the new pot is better than the old one. (Yeah, exagerated analogy, but you see my point.)

Why can't you say the new style is better than the old one? I know tons of fans who think the actual Inika style is better than the Mata one, and they're fully entitled to those preferences. Again, there is no universal answer.

The Inika have way more poseability than the old Mata, and they still have functions. Therefore, there is only improvement there. Style is opinion; functionality is fact.

But importance of those things are taste-based. Guess what? I prefer gears to posability! Call it strange, but I do. Preference's at it again, y'see. :-)

What I'm basically trying to say is that you can't say that BIONICLE has gone in the wrong direction or that 2001 was the best. I'm not bashing 2001, but you can't seriously say it was the best.

I'm not seriously that heated about this stuff; I simply like making my arguments and trying to be persuasive. Additionally, experience is always a plus in composition class when you're asked to write a persuasive essay or argument. :-D

To me, Bionicle has gone in the 'wrong' direction (subjectively, not objectively), and I found 2001 by far the best year ever. 's simple as that, really!

*sweet*

-Ikk

Edited November 3, 2007 by Ikki o' Moopyville

[Ecto]

Let's say I make a ceramic pot line. My first ceramic pot is disfigured and it doesn't work; it blows up on the stove. Still, it looks old-fashioned. Then, a few years later, I make a new ceramic pot. It is not disfigured and it works better, but its style is more modern.

You can't say that the modern style is better than the old-fashioned style. You can say that the new pot is better than the old one. (Yeah, exagerated analogy, but you see my point.)

So who says the 2001 sets "didn't work"? How is comparing them to a blown-up piece of pottery any good? They were disfigured? No, the paper thin, lanky, lumpy, broad shouldered, hunchbacked 2007 sets are disfigured.

[JINZONINGEN73]

Sorry, but it just seems a bit hilarious to see you guys go all the way and create long, almost defensive posts about which year of Bionicle was the best. They are well argued points, sure, but you write like you need to convince each other that either 2001 or 2007 was the greatest year, all while being oblivious to the truth: That it is all a matter of preference which year was best or worst!

That's not how it works lol.

You can definitely have a product be good one time, then entirely blow in a sequel.

Like... like Ghostbusters 1 versus Ghostbusters 2. :-P

See, 2001 was original because it was the first.

But I'm telling you, that simply because the direction and approach to the line changed greatly in some areas does NOT mean that something clever or good has taken place.

In fact, that's the problem with ALOT of franchises... clueless booberheads taking over, not "getting" the source material they're supposed to be referencing, then just choosing a scorched-earth method, whizzing on all of it and going off to do something completely different. It doesn't take skill or care to do this, it takes laziness and disrespect.

Anyway,

Toa figures - a little rough around the edges, but full of future potential... unfortunately the Nuva updates dropped the ball on that potential (poseable waists would've been nice).

All they needed to do was make the body 2 pieces, add some elbows and take weaponry more seriously than kiddy.

But no, we then got legs that were a step backwards, masks that were a step backwards, etc etc...

Besides, you can't even compare Bionicle to Lost (IMO). Aside from the island thing, nothing really is similar - I mean, even the island makeup is totally different! LOST island is far simpler in terain than Mata Nui -

Agreed, but then there's shows that kicked butt like Beast Wars... whose entire terrain seemed to be not too much more than lots of CGI rocks and desert.

Truth be told, when I speak fondly of the MataNui Online game, I'm not even talking about the GAME!

See, some kid in France made a Bionicle fansite, where he ripped and then hosted ALL the animation episodes from inside the game. I'll be the first to say gameplay was a bit repetitive and boring, but the flash animations were damn entertaining.

And really, none of the movies or cheeseball CGI web content since has had any positive emotions to take from them.

They might as well be advertisements for any old action figure line.

Of course, that's the intention, sadly proving profitable.

The arms are useful, the feet are useful, the heads are useful, and the masks are awesome.

Indeed. Aside from one asymmetrical arm and a questionably useless throwing disc, I'd take THOSE HAPPY MEAL toys over a complete Piraka any day.

[Starwars4J]

StarWars4J

I like swords and shields better than Zamors and Cordak Blasters, but I still like Zamors and Cordak blasters. Furthermore, characters still have swords. BIONICLE has always been biomechanical; it isn't a Castle theme. It IS modern. Furthermore, I have no idea what mystical has to do with modern weapons. They have absolutely no connection. You can have mystery and still be modern. Look at StarWars. BIONICLE still has mystery, and now it has more modern projectiles, since that is what its target audience seems to want.

Most importantly, this is not a direction they should have gone in? So, a 10% sales increase from 2005 is not a direction they should have gone in. Keeping BIONICLE number one and outdoing 2001 in sets and story is not a direction they should have gone in. Expanding into a universe that was planned SINCE 2001 is not a direction they should have gone in. They should have abandoned the entire 7 books of BIONICLE and stuck only with Mata Nui. They should have ignored all focus groups and sales studies, and kept old-fashioned weapons despite the fact that most of their audience wanted modern projectiles. They should have not made books and stuck with MNOLG after MNOLG after MNOLG, and kept hte story focused on Matoran even though Matoran do not sell half as well as Toa. If they did not go in this direction, BIONICLE would be DEAD. Stone, cold DEAD.

You're making the mistake of assuming that higher sales means it's a better quality product! ;-) Lego sales have increased when they've included those blasted shooting mechanisms, but does that make it better? Lego sales increased when they used more &lt;insert that tiresome argument&gt; parts so that little children can build it faster, is that higher quality? The answer is of course not! These sets with their shooting mechanisms appeal more to the little kids who just want an action figure they can shoot at things with, that doesn't mean they're BETTER. Hell, those squid launcher things sold better than the first wave of bionicle, but does that mean it was a better idea? Of course not, just a silly gimmick. And sadly that's the direction they're headed :-/

As for Bionicle outdoing 2001 story, I don't think anything they've had recently comes anywhere close to the magic, the unknown feeling of the first wave. When things were all about gods and demons, swords and an unknown island. Now they're in a freaking submarine with breathers and bazookas and chain guns :-| clearly appealing to the action-hungry little kids, not to the adult who wants a higher quality product he can MOC with and a deep story that can affect an adult, rather than the shallow crap that's being handed out now...

And if bionicle keeps doing into this direction, perhaps it should have died. Things should leave on a high note, not when you can't push the product any longer...

[JINZONINGEN73]

Fact is, I

[Ikki o' Moopyville]

Keep it up guys. :-D Just missed this one point I had to address...

But 2001 was seriously not that great! For one, the year has no apparent ending other than MNOLG. What about the people that don't have internet? (I didn't!) Or those who can't access Bionicle.com? They are completely lost in story, and let's face it, the comics were and always have been paper thin. They're a mere twelve pages, but what do you want? They're free. It is impossible to say that the comic story in 2001 was any better than it is now. In reality, 2006 and 2007 have better comic stories, because they actually tell the end of the story. The last comic in 2006 told us how the INika got the Ignika, and then how they lost it beneath the sea. 2001? "Let Makuta tremble this day, the Toa stand together!" Then the next year, they've already defeated Makuta. For me, who had no internet access, I was standing there, saying, "what happened? We don't actually see them face the bad guy?" (Yeah, I was 9 then.)

That's a pretty amusing quote, too, because you've left out one tiny li'l thing... what about the people who can't get the comics?

Only the US, Canada, UK, and a few other European countries regularly receive the comic, and it's certainly not free everywhere. Furthermore, some countries stopped receiving them in '05. The internet, however, is universal and largely free, and independant of any country. Given that, it seems rather ignorant to say comics are the most ideal way to go -- in fact, if Lego wanted the story to get out to as many people as possible, online stuff would be the best method. ;-)

-Ikk

Edited November 3, 2007 by Ikki o' Moopyville

[Zarkan]

And really, none of the movies or cheeseball CGI web content since has had any positive emotions to take from them.

They might as well be advertisements for any old action figure line.

Of course, that's the intention, sadly proving profitable.

I wasn't talking just about the animations, which I agree are pretty lame. I also am talking about other web content we have been getting. Especially this year: Bionicle Story.com has to be about the best Bionicle related thing in years, and I really cant get enough of it. Also, remember the Vahki animations from 2004? They may have not been long, but they really were cannon in the fact that they brought along the idea of heartless, emotionless law enforcers in Metru-Nui, and a Communist like regime that Makuta had created in the city. That was to me just as good as the old templar animations, and I'm really glad we still have acess to those as well. :-)

To anyone observing the Bionicle mocing scene since the beginning, silver weapons have MURDERED innovation.

Far fewer think outside the box these days, using silver blades as teeth, swords, wings and spines... because that color is most confining.

And is that wrong? Seriously, I get upset when people act like an MOC is only good if it is totally-out of the box original. You don't have to use something in a totally unique way each time to MOC, and you seriously can't say that an MOC is bad unless it truly looks bad. Lessovik's sled may be filled with silver, but I happen to like the design, and may get Lessovikk if he is still availble next year. To me, pieces don't have to be useful in 1000 thousand ways to be GOOD pieces. Look at the lego motorcycles we've had for years. All of the designs, from the dinky classic ones to the modern, sleek ones have used big pieces, but not many people have complained, because they do what they are supposed to do. I dislike the term Junorized when talking about things like that, because TRUE junorization is things like Jack Stone, where the sets both are made of big pieces and look AWFUL. Just because something is made of fewer pieces doesn't mean it's any more stupid: what matters is whether it does it's job well. In the case of Piraka bodies, I think they succeed, but in the case of 4+ Pirates, they totally fail. :-X

Actually, I was just rantin' for the fun of it.

I like this topic... if people can worked up about Bionicle like this, it shows there's life in the old lady yet.

I like this topic too: it's entertaining to see how worked up everyone (including mysef) can get about a stupid toy. (J/K) :-P

[KMOI]

I'll be dreadfully honest. I've written so many essays here explaining how simplicity equates to beauty, articulation doesn't automatically make things better, Rahi = brilliant use of technic rods, connectors and NO NEW PREMOLDED ELEMENTS to make an actual beast and so on and so on. Since I'm almost sure if I make a long winded argument, I'm sure to be ignored, I'll keep it short and simple.

So, you want a war, huh!

I still say 2001 or 2002 were the best. It's not even close.

The story was fresh. Lots of mystery.

The Templar animations were hilarious (never topped to this day).

Although I agree that the big Rahi sets did suffer from unnecessary duplication, anyone who says that they were still not the best build of any of the Bionicle series clearly has not built them. But if you played in pairs, like my kids, have a pair of sets, with separate instructions, was absolutely perfect. They still play with the Bohrok Queens now.

The best build of any medium Bionicle set = Boxor

Best build of any large Bionicle set = Exo Toa or the Bahrag

And I, personally, thought that the Bohrok were the best cannister sets ever made, hero or villain.

Sorry, 2001 was the best year, 2002 second or the other way around.

More recent years don't rate.

How's THAT for a rant!

Oh, and by the way. The reason people remember the 2001 year as having better "character development", is pretty much exclusively because of the Templar animations, which gave the personalities, especially to the Matoran.

First, you can't base a 'the personalities were stereotypes!' for the first year. The first year was the base, and anything else was built upon. You can't retroactively claim stereotypes. The first is the original, and it's BECAUSE of the first year that the rest aren't.

Secondly- using the Piraka bodies as, oh man, bodies in Titans is not creative. It is not 'ohmylookattheawesomeusefulness!' It's lame, it's stupid, and it proves the exact opposite of your point.

Also, I loved the gears. Don't be hatin' because you're one of those 'the new style is cooler, and gears were hard!' kids. ;)

These were still awesome promos, but from a MOCer

Edited November 6, 2007 by KMOI

[Clonie]

I do wish people would stop refering to 2007 as if it's as bad as 2006. I know 2006 was bad. 2007 is way better.

When things were all about gods and demons, swords and an unknown island. Now they're in a freaking submarine with breathers and bazookas and chain guns.

Wtf.

Judge 2007 based on that movie. How wise.

When you've read the books, bought a few sets (not too many) and read the online serials, you can then complain about the story. In fact, I no longer mind people complaining, but posts like this are completely uneducated.

See, most judge 2001 because they know everything about it, the online game, the comics. You know what you're talking about when it comes to 2001, and that's great. I have nothing against 2001. But you speak of 2007 as if it's a generic underwater scuba story.

I like most of the arguments against Bionicle here frankly, they're quite reasonable, although I don't necessarily agree with them. But this here post is just unintelligently exaggerated to make 2007 look like a freaking... bad story. :-P

I'll respond to a few other interesting posts later on, if I have time. But there's this one I'll just quickly comment on;

(If a cord of earth is strong enough to hold up an island, it shouldn't be able to be severed by shots from 6 chain-guns. Mind you, these are the same chain-guns that did NOTHING to numerous villians).

Let's see. Kongu has 16 rockets with him, and Hewkii has 10. The rest have 9. So about 62 shots. They need to break the cord in the right spot, and it being hollow should help them. Let's say they're weakish grenades. 60+ grenades would do quite a bit to a section of a stone cord, even if they're weaker than real ones and developed in a world without whatever things they put in grenades. I assume. :-P

I are a nerd. :-D

[Lord Admiral Helden Ravensdorn]

KMOI, you win an internet.