2001 = The best Bionicle year?

[Visorak-kal]

I'm low on time, so I can't comment on too much right now, but:

Adding onto Ikki's notes, let's not forget how EVERY box, canister and instruction booklet was printed with a link to Bionicle.com for more stories and games. Also, it's ignorant to say "I find flaws in 2001 because I didn't have internet access back then". I'll admit, you probably have some massive gaps in your knowledge and therefore, cannot relate to the initial awe that Bionicle in 2002 gave us all. I'll be honest, I too didn't have internet access, as my connection was FAR too slow to view the animations. But after getting broadband in 2003, I did some MAJOR catching up while watching new animations to do with the Bohrok sacking Ga-Koro.

Similarily, critisizing 2001's use of the internet as a source of disatisfaction wouldn't be fair in some respects. Otherwise, you'd see me going on HUGE tirades on how both the Metru sagas ended with no ending either. Yeah, there were movies, but did I buy them? Nope. And I had no more choice than you had when trying to find a decent internet connection. And as for books? There's another barrier. MONEY. Not all kids or students such as myself have the time or money to purchase and read a book that's almost certainly not quite worth the price. (I'm in the former catagory, as I'm currently swamped in schoolwork. In fact, I'm being buried under Math assignments as I type)

I am not referring to 2004 and 2005; I have always advocated that 2004 and 2005 were lacking because their stories were never finished. I am talking about 2006 and later 2007.

What I am saying is that 2001's ending was in MNOLG, which at that time was not the best medium; the best medium at that time and at this time was/is the comics. They are free, they require no interent connection, etc. The books add more to the story, they do not replace the comics.

The point is that the comics in 2001 did not tell the ending of the story. The comics in 2003, 2004, and 2005 did not tell the ending of the story. I disapprove of that, I think that the story should be told in the main medium. I could buy the books, but not everyone can.

In 2006 we got the ending in the comics, and it appears that this year in 2007 we will also have the story ending in the comics. Now the 1.5 million people who get the comics for free can enjoy the end of the story without having to purchase something or get a internet connection. (Today, the latter is easy, but in 2001 I know for me it was not so easy to get on the internet, as there was no cheap Comcast.)

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.

I agree with you, Clonie. If you look at how much excellent story there is compared to 2001, you can see that 2001 cannot be claimed BETTER objectively. Subjectively, I could say that 2003 was the best and prove a million reasons why. I'm not saying 2007 is better by fact, I'm just saying 2001 is not better by fact either.

2007 is perfect; no year in BIONICLE is perfect. As GregF said recently in a topic about wasted characters on BZP, "That is the problem with a storyling that supports sets." He explained that if he is called to promote Vezon and Fenrakk, then Vezon and Fenrakk will have the most screen time in the comic. Storyline promotes sets, not the other around. If it was the other way around, you end up with Toa Hordika.

And lastly:

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 <insert that tiresome argument> 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

But I like the new sets better than the old ones. Many people on BZP (a fanbase known throughout LEGO for its harsh criticisms. Yes, it's nothing compared to yours, but still) like the newer style of sets. Sales have increased.

Typically, people do not buy low-quality things. If there is a coffee cup company and their coffee cups always break, they could be considered low-quality. And people will not buy them.

Now, while little kids like <insert that tiresome argument> pieces, LEGO's sales have increased over the last few years ever since they moved AWAY from juniorization. That tells you something. The years you refer to were pre-2005, years when LEGO was losing money. Maybe juniorization had something to do with that.

All I know is that 10% sales increase, combined with general approval by BZP (who typically have a lot of nostalgia) and my own approval (and I am NOT for juniorization, I love the old Bahrag and all that) seem to point to this being the right direction, not the wrong one.

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...

Magic and unknown feelings, gods and demons, swords and unknown island do not make a good story. I've read plenty of great books and stories that do not have the above mentioned. Furthermore, as Clonie stated, you are vastly exxagerating 2007 to make your own point. I could do the same to 2001 or even the famous Harry Potter.

And why should they cater to the adults? Adults don't buy the sets, the kids do. 8-10 year-olds do. Spending a bunch of money to revert to the Technic style of 2001 that didn't sell just to please people like you and me is just plain stupid. I'm sorry to have to say it, but it is. The story now is FAR deeper than it was in 2001; it deals with many issues, like whether a Toa should kill or not, how Matoran can try and deal with villains themselves, it still deals with brave Matoran like 2001, Matoran like Gar, Idris, Sarda, etc. Greg Farshtey himself IS taking steps to create a story that will appeal to older fans, but he cannot abandon the main buyers entirely and cater only to us. It has to be a mix, or nothing at all. And you CANNOT relate the tastes between what an adult wants and what a child wants to quality.

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...

LEGO is making money; why should they end BIONICLE? Because YOU think its quality is failing? I don't think it is, many on BZP and here dont' think it is, and enough fans to account for a 10% sales increase don't think it is.

And don't wish for the death of BIONICLE in front of me! Don't kill my story! j/k. :-D

VK

And yeah, I know, I just can't get over that 10% sales increase. ;-)

EDIT: Gee, did I just say I couldn't comment much? See what the interent does to us!

Edited November 7, 2007 by Visorak-kal

[Zarkan]

I'm noticing a disturbing trend in this topic: All the current bionicle haters here applaud any member who says something that supposedly proves how 2001 is the best, and criticize any members opinions when they are against that notion. And I think I know why.

For some reason, many people here seem to think that there is a distinct good way and a bad way of doing Bionicle. Of course, the good way is considered 2001, and the bad way is 2006 and 2007. Fact of the matter is though, that they are wrong. Also, if I said that 2006 was the best year of bionicle, no questions asked, I would be wrong too. Visorak Kal, I also disagree with you when you say that 2007 is the best year of bionicle, and so on and so forth. Why?

Well, because, you can't say that one year is the best, no questions asked. Because no matter what you say, someone will have a different perspective, and often it is just as good as the former. Maybe I made a mistake when I wrote the title; maybe I should have said this was MY opinion, but all the people here who are making rock hard claims like "2001 is the best, end of story," "Piraka Bodies stink, no questions asked," etc, are also taking it too far.

Fact is, you can simply not claim something like that without conceeding that it's your opinion. There is no UNQUESTIONABLY right way or wrong way of doing bionicle, as long as it makes money, because there are bound to be people that love the way its being done, and some that hate it. I love 2007. KMOI dislikes it. Visorak Kal loves it. Ravensburg hates it. But no one in their right mind can say "So and so year is the best year, without question" without making it an opinion, and far from a fact. So often we all slip on that and get carried away with our arguments, but in the end it's all our different perspectives on how we think Bionicle should be done.

Phew, glad that's over with. Maybe I shouldn't have started this topic in the first place... 8-|

[Ikki o' Moopyville]

What I am saying is that 2001's ending was in MNOLG, which at that time was not the best medium; the best medium at that time and at this time was/is the comics. They are free, they require no interent connection, etc. The books add more to the story, they do not replace the comics.

You STILL ignore the fact that so few people are able to get the comic. Since 2001, the internet has been the most accessible medium since it wasn't limited to any country; just because a few people here and there didn't have it (and my deepest sympathies to those, really) doesn't make it any less usable. I still stand by the notion that if LEGO wants the story to reach as many people as possible, online material is the most ideal solution.

I agree with you, Clonie. If you look at how much excellent story there is compared to 2001, you can see that 2001 cannot be claimed BETTER objectively. Subjectively, I could say that 2003 was the best and prove a million reasons why. I'm not saying 2007 is better by fact, I'm just saying 2001 is not better by fact either.

Some people will find 2007 disgusting, some people will find it fabulous. Same with 2001. Objectively, no year is good or bad unless you talk about sales. There is no set answer as to what's a better story or set line -- we are all different. ;-)

(I'm not X-D )

-Ikk

Edited November 7, 2007 by Ikki o' Moopyville

[zero1312]

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.

I totally agree!! There was nothing on the sets to complain! *y*

[Starwars4J]

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.

In your opinion. I just see it degrading more and more.

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.

Funny enough, you're the uneducated one here (which I DO mind). I haven't watched a single one of those movies, rather I know what I know from the sets themselves. What did I say to indicate anything about the movies? Nothing, you just pulled that out of nowhere. The sub? breathers? Chain guns? That's all in the sets. And it moves entirely away from the magic of the start.

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 didn't know there was such a thing as a "generic underwater scuba story", but I'll go with that. It's moving away from what made bionicle special at the start. It's becoming more scientific, it's becoming more high-tech, and that never should have been.

But this here post is just unintelligently exaggerated to make 2007 look like a freaking... bad story. :-P

Well, it is. And if you continue throwing insults at people rather than at points, as a good debater should, you won't be around here much longer. Got it?

But I like the new sets better than the old ones. Many people on BZP (a fanbase known throughout LEGO for its harsh criticisms. Yes, it's nothing compared to yours, but still) like the newer style of sets. Sales have increased.

Harsh criticisms? From what I've seen of it anything that comes out of Greg's mouth is pretty much god's word, and every new set is almost worshiped...

Magic and unknown feelings, gods and demons, swords and unknown island do not make a good story. I've read plenty of great books and stories that do not have the above mentioned. Furthermore, as Clonie stated, you are vastly exxagerating 2007 to make your own point. I could do the same to 2001 or even the famous Harry Potter.

I didn't say it was bad in and of itself, I said it's bad in the context of how drastically it deviates from what it began with. It's more or less an entirely different setting now than it was. The only reason they switched over to more guns and less myth and lore is because little kids can't shoot things from myth and lore...

And why should they cater to the adults? Adults don't buy the sets, the kids do.

I'll leave this comment to the bionicle AFOL...

LEGO is making money; why should they end BIONICLE? Because YOU think its quality is failing? I don't think it is, many on BZP and here dont' think it is, and enough fans to account for a 10% sales increase don't think it is.

And yet many others here have agreed with me, isn't that funny...well, the fans who have been in it since the beginning at least, and hated seeing what their favorite theme got turned into :-P

[Visorak-kal]

I didn't know there was such a thing as a "generic underwater scuba story", but I'll go with that. It's moving away from what made bionicle special at the start. It's becoming more scientific, it's becoming more high-tech, and that never should have been.

That never should have been? Says you. Do you realize how many Technic fans, in 2001, were saying "Technic HUMANOIDS with MASKS and SWORDS? That never should have been!" There is no founding to say that those things never should have been.

Harsh criticisms? From what I've seen of it anything that comes out of Greg's mouth is pretty much god's word, and every new set is almost worshiped...

There are those like that. And there are others who aren't. I've seen loads of Bionicle Going Downhill, and I hate the new sets topics. About half of BZP was negative. Many of them hated the Bohrok-Kal in 2003, and now love them in 2006. It's nostalgia. But, recently, most of BZP is approving the 2007 and 2008 sets, which creates the impression that quality is not an issue here.

I didn't say it was bad in and of itself, I said it's bad in the context of how drastically it deviates from what it began with. It's more or less an entirely different setting now than it was. The only reason they switched over to more guns and less myth and lore is because little kids can't shoot things from myth and lore...

Tell me where it said in 2001, "This is BIONICLE. Anything that drastically deviates from this year is bad."

Settings and stories change. BIONICLE has always been high-tech. Robots? That in itself is high-tech. What I want to know is how robots are less high-tech than zamor launchers or air-compressed blasters. And, yeah, the only reaso they switched to more guns is because little kids can't shoot myth and lore. But why does BIONICLE have to remain myth and lore? Can't it become a deep adventure saga, founded on myth and lore? Can't it have moved on to different things? Must it always remain in the past?

And yet many others here have agreed with me, isn't that funny...well, the fans who have been in it since the beginning at least, and hated seeing what their favorite theme got turned into

The fan who were in it at the beginning are not buying sets anymore. Why should they be catered to? Besides, I don't think those who are complaining here are more numerous than enough fans to create a 10% sales increase. Eurobricks itself doesn't have nearly as many people as BZP (over 30,000 members), and BZP itself is only a mere fraction of the entire fanbase that spurred BIONICLE to LEGO's number one line in 2006.

And I was there in 2001. I'm here now. And I love what my favorite theme turned into! ;-)

Ikki:

You STILL ignore the fact that so few people are able to get the comic. Since 2001, the internet has been the most accessible medium since it wasn't limited to any country; just because a few people here and there didn't have it (and my deepest sympathies to those, really) doesn't make it any less usable. I still stand by the notion that if LEGO wants the story to reach as many people as possible, online material is the most ideal solution.

The comics reach 1.5 million people in the U.S., last I heard (Granted the U.S., but still 1.5 million) ; that is a lot of people. As far as I know, comics must be the best medium because LEGOs marketing agency is no doubt smart enough to realize their best medium.

Some people will find 2007 disgusting, some people will find it fabulous. Same with 2001. Objectively, no year is good or bad unless you talk about sales. There is no set answer as to what's a better story or set line -- we are all different

10% increase from 2005 to 2006. Top line in 2006. Those are sales, which equates to current BIONICLE being the right direction, not the wrong one. :-D

VK

Edited November 7, 2007 by Visorak-kal

[Ikki o' Moopyville]

Ikki:

The comics reach 1.5 million people in the U.S., last I heard (Granted the U.S., but still 1.5 million) ; that is a lot of people. As far as I know, comics must be the best medium because LEGOs marketing agency is no doubt smart enough to realize their best medium.

I think there is a bigger market in the US than in any other country, but IMO Lego does far from enough for the rest of the world. They need to open their eyes a bit more to other potential big markets. Over one billion people in the world have internet access.

10% increase from 2005 to 2006. Top line in 2006. Those are sales, which equates to current BIONICLE being the right direction, not the wrong one. :-D

Doesn't make it better for everybody, though. This is bones' taste versus opinion, though -- I've had my share of that. :-P

-Ikk

Edited November 7, 2007 by Ikki o' Moopyville

[Starwars4J]

Tell me where it said in 2001, "This is BIONICLE. Anything that drastically deviates from this year is bad."

It's just generally considered a bad move for your fanbase, if you take almost everything your story is built around, and switch it into an entirely new and different direction with little transition.

Settings and stories change. BIONICLE has always been high-tech. Robots? That in itself is high-tech. What I want to know is how robots are less high-tech than zamor launchers or air-compressed blasters.

From what I understand, when it first came out, people had no idea what they were. I guess they officially changed the story now?

And, yeah, the only reaso they switched to more guns is because little kids can't shoot myth and lore. But why does BIONICLE have to remain myth and lore? Can't it become a deep adventure saga, founded on myth and lore? Can't it have moved on to different things? Must it always remain in the past?

But here's the thing. If they're stuck in the jungle in tribes using spears and swords, they shouldn't within a very short period of time, switch to blasters and submarines. It's just not believable at all. Most people paying attention would go "wait...what?"

The fan who were in it at the beginning are not buying sets anymore.

They probably would have been if the story wasn't altered so radically for no real reason. Why must a "deep story" need guns and blasters? Was there any reason to switch to those gimmicks for the story, or did it just sell better when they play-tested it to 8-year-olds? That's the reason for the grey/brown switches, afterall. They care about, primarily, selling as many sets as they can to their target: the 8-10-year-olds. Which is fine, since they are a business, but then they shouldn't go around trying to pretend there's some good reason for this "story" to have such a radical and unwarranted switch, because it's sort of an insult to the people paying attention...

Why should they be catered to? Besides, I don't think those who are complaining here are more numerous than enough fans to create a 10% sales increase.

They should be catered to because, as I said above, it's insulting to their integrity to do this radical, unexplained switch, and still try to sell this as one cohesive story. It isn't about the story, it's about the sales to little kids. They story is just there, unfortunately, to humor people who want an action figure.

Eurobricks itself doesn't have nearly as many people as BZP (over 30,000 members), and BZP itself is only a mere fraction of the entire fanbase that spurred BIONICLE to LEGO's number one line in 2006.

You keep saying that (and you may be right, I'm not calling you a liar), but could you give me figures for sales of Bionicle compared to, say, Star Wars? And even if that's the case, you need to take into consideration the makeup of that population. EB is an inherently different type site than BZP, with as expected, a largely different userbase. BZP has many more members who are in exactly TLG's target age bracket, which explains a lot of support. But didn't you just say that you've seen a lot of negative topics springing up lately?

And I was there in 2001. I'm here now. And I love what my favorite theme turned into! ;-)

Well good, their marketing worked on someone :-P ;-)

[Clonie]

Funny enough, you're the uneducated one here (which I DO mind). I haven't watched a single one of those movies, rather I know what I know from the sets themselves. What did I say to indicate anything about the movies? Nothing, you just pulled that out of nowhere. The sub? breathers? Chain guns? That's all in the sets. And it moves entirely away from the magic of the start.

Sorry about the harshness of that post, I didn't have much time to write. Anyway, my point remains that you're exaggerating.

1) The Terrain Crawler is a modified Rahi. Talk about high-tech.

2) A chain gun compared to a cordak blaster. Wow, they're the same!

3) The breathers are part of their bodies. No tech there. They can be compared to gills, thought that's not what they are, or course. They are non-detachable tubes enabling them to breathe water. So they can't breathe air. Savvy? ;-)

I didn't know there was such a thing as a "generic underwater scuba story", but I'll go with that. It's moving away from what made bionicle special at the start. It's becoming more scientific, it's becoming more high-tech, and that never should have been.

Just one question -- do you know what Xia is?

But here's the thing. If they're stuck in the jungle in tribes using spears and swords, they shouldn't within a very short period of time, switch to blasters and submarines. It's just not believable at all. Most people paying attention would go "wait...what?"

Because 2007 happened directly after 2001.

Edited November 8, 2007 by Clonie

[Starwars4J]

2) A chain gun compared to a cordak blaster. Wow, they're the same!

Funny, from this angle they look remarkably similar...

3) The breathers are part of their bodies. No tech there. They can be compared to gills, thought that's not what they are, or course. They are non-detachable tubes enabling them to breathe water. So they can't breathe air. Savvy? ;-)

Well they're robots, more or less, right? So it pretty much is a built-in breather. It doesn't look like gills, and the hoses give it a distinctive technological edge. Not only the sets, but even the commercials are trying to send out the "high-tech modern attack force" vibe, rather than a group of heroes...

Just one question -- do you know what Xia is?

Nope

Because 2007 happened directly after 2001.

Did you hear me say that I only dislike 2007?

[Clonie]

Funny, from this angle they look remarkably similar...

Do chain guns rely on air pressure? Or water pressure, as the case may be.

Well they're robots, more or less, right? So it pretty much is a built-in breather. It doesn't look like gills, and the hoses give it a distinctive technological edge. Not only the sets, but even the commercials are trying to send out the "high-tech modern attack force" vibe, rather than a group of heroes...

The tubes aren't built-in tech, they're tubes. There's a difference. They act the same as gills, they're just fancier. Are gills high-tech?

So basically, the commercials are what count, not the books and actual storyline? Like I said, you seem to judge it by the commercials. Last I checked, the Piraka aren't rappers, and the Inika don't live in a basketball staduim.

Oh by the way, what's wrong with moderate amounts of tech in Bionicle, that is if you call tubes tech? Like V-K said, Toa in themselves are high-tech.

Just one question -- do you know what Xia is?

Nope

So you're qualified to assess whether cordak blasters are believable in Bionicle if you don't know what backstory they have?

Did you hear me say that I only dislike 2007?

Nope, but three to five years isn't what I'd call a very short period of time.

I apologize if I sound rude and all. ;-)

Edited November 8, 2007 by Clonie

[Starwars4J]

Do chain guns rely on air pressure? Or water pressure, as the case may be.

Why, are there supposedly large people pushing on the backs of their guns to fire the missiles? Besides, why does the air/water pressure matter? They look the same, don't they? That's what matters to the kids.

The tubes aren't built-in tech, they're tubes. There's a difference. They act the same as gills, they're just fancier. Are gills high-tech?

Except these are machines

So basically, the commercials are what count, not the books and actual storyline? Like I said, you seem to judge it by the commercials. Last I checked, the Piraka aren't rappers, and the Inika don't live in a basketball staduim.

Could you please stop putting words in my mouth? :-| I just mentioned that the commercials and the sets indicate something specific. Is the left hand not talking to the right hand, or are the submarines etc. entirely a construct of the commercials and not at all what the atmosphere of the story is about? Oh wait, there are entire sets dedicated to the sub...

Oh by the way, what's wrong with moderate amounts of tech in Bionicle, that is if you call tubes tech? Like V-K said, Toa in themselves are high-tech.

Moderate? They're like swat teams at this point.

So you're qualified to assess whether cordak blasters are believable in Bionicle if you don't know what backstory they have?

I'm as qualified as anyone else to assess the realism of a toy, yes. It's a giant chain gun, that deviates so far from the originals it's not even recognizable. That's all I need to know.

Nope, but three to five years isn't what I'd call a very short period of time.

What does "short time" have to do with anything? They've been going down hill IMO, I didn't say this was very recent.

I apologize if I sound rude and all. ;-)

And that wink definitely helps me believe you ;-)

[dviddy]

So you're qualified to assess whether cordak blasters are believable in Bionicle if you don't know what backstory they have?

Congratulations, you've made his point! Xia, the technological base and weapons factory that it is shouldn't exist. They should never have allowed such tech into the story. Yes, the line should've stayed primitive and mythical. It was far more interesting. With far more directions it could be taken. Now it's all sci-fi and high-tech.

Oh, what fun.

Yawn.

Do chain guns rely on air pressure? Or water pressure, as the case may be.

Oh come off it. Just admit that they look the same, and move on. Making a case on silly little nuances is tedious and unnecessary.

Nope, but three to five years isn't what I'd call a very short period of time.

Of course it's not a long time, on a planet billions of years old...

;)

1) The Terrain Crawler is a modified Rahi. Talk about high-tech.

Call me rude, but I still hold that this is perhaps one of the dumbest ideas of all time. "Look, we took a living being and transformed the inside of it into a high-tech underwater submarine/ocean-floor-crawling vehicle!"

Ridiculous.

If you're going to try and argue something, at least try to come across as reasonable.

<<DV>>

[Clonie]

Okay, they look like chain guns. That means they are.

The Terrain Crawler is stupid. It has tech. Tech in a world of biomechanical beings is stupid. Bionicle should be confined to a primitive island cut off from everywhere else. So much potential for future story.

Of course it's not a long time, on a planet billions of years old...

;)

And a world 100,000 + years old shouldn't have tech of any kind.

Is the left hand not talking to the right hand, or are the submarines etc. entirely a construct of the commercials and not at all what the atmosphere of the story is about? Oh wait, there are entire sets dedicated to the sub...

You knowing what the sets look like = You knowing how they're portrayed in the story?

Blah. Look at me. No wonder you guys hate me. :-D

[Lord Admiral Helden Ravensdorn]

Face it; high-tech beings in a primitive setting with a mixture of tribal and ancient high-tech technology was far more interesting then the high-tech shooting blaster-mayhem it is today, and was far more original for a toy line story.

As I've said before; Bionicle has become generic.

[Starwars4J]

Okay, they look like chain guns. That means they are.

They look like chain guns, they act like chain guns...so yeah, they are chain guns.

You knowing what the sets look like = You knowing how they're portrayed in the story?

Um...actually yeah

[Tohst]

I love this topic. Such good flame war material. Especially starting out with the word 'best' which is sooo sooo subjective.

I see a lot of the criticism of the ongoing direction of Bionicle as the 'thats not how I would do it variety.'

And you know what. Thats perfectly valid! And to a point, I'm right there with them. 2001 introduced us to a world filled with mystery, mysticism, and Bio-Mechanical (non-robot) beings. Yes, there is a lot of nostalgia towards that but hey, it was good and interesting.

Since that time there have been a lot of twists and turns and the focus seems to have changed from these heroes mystical elemental powers to the 'weapon of the week' (well, weapon of the year). which personally I find less interesting. Would I have done it different? Yes.

The whole discovering the greater world and backstory around them angle was great. But, I would've made the Matoran heroes in their own right. As the larger story opened up the Toa are outclassed. Big fish in the small Mata Nui pond. But Matoran, being the chosen creatures in this universe, are blessed with imagination and the ability to reverse engineer things. Instead of the power ups of each set of toa being fairly random, they are a result of Matoran ingenuity. The Toa find a vat of energized protodermis. The Matoran realize they can use it to enhance the Toa. But at what cost. You don't need to come up with a new team or a convoluted upgrade path. Its built into a story and emphasizes Lego values of creativity and engineering. As well as making Matoran heroes in their own right. And adding a greater degree of peril if these ad-hoc upgrades go wrong (Hordika anyone?). Ravi could be modified (like the current Crawler) but more so because they were originally created with the interfaces needed rather than anyone having tech advanced to that level.

In my scenarios the tubes wouldn't be hi-tech gills, they would be ad-hoc gills because the Toa know they need to go underwater. And really, gills are pretty fascinating structures. There isn't anything simple about them. Real life biodiversity blows away anything in Bionicle.

Now, the nice thing is, these are toys with a storyline that continues to come up with twists and turns. I can take the toys I want and the story elements I want and run my own way. And if you see how my posts turn out, you know tangents are my friends. Does that mean I wouldn't rather have the official story be different than what it turned out to be? No, I would enjoy one with the flavor of 2001 better. Just as I would enjoy the new Toa to have more call-backs to the originals.

Finally, do higher sales mean a 'better' story? No. Return of the Jedi did better at the box office than Empire Strikes Back. Or for you youngins 'Episode 1' blew the original trilogy away. But higher sales does mean a continuation of the story and toys, which I think we all agree is a good thing.

I can't wait until the end of this 'book' and the restart that is being talked about. I think this current incarnation may have hit a rut based on early decisions and would love to see them take this same universe down a different path. In the meantime, I will continue to enjoy and complain in roughtly equal parts.

-Tohst -who was way too lazy to include all the quotes he wanted to.

[Zarkan]

Congratulations, you've made his point! Xia, the technological base and weapons factory that it is shouldn't exist. They should never have allowed such tech into the story. Yes, the line should've stayed primitive and mythical. It was far more interesting. With far more directions it could be taken. Now it's all sci-fi and high-tech.

Oh, what fun.

Yawn.

Face it; high-tech beings in a primitive setting with a mixture of tribal and ancient high-tech technology was far more interesting then the high-tech shooting blaster-mayhem it is today, and was far more original for a toy line story.

As I've said before; Bionicle has become generic.

I disagree, since I think having high tech stuff in bionicle spiced it up. That is my opinion, and your posts are too. I really am getting annoyed as to how some members here state things like their OPINION is fact and all other opinions are fiction. Call me rude, but that just isn't fair to those who like the current years and actually still enjoy Bionicle. >:-(

Call me rude, but I still hold that this is perhaps one of the dumbest ideas of all time. "Look, we took a living being and transformed the inside of it into a high-tech underwater submarine/ocean-floor-crawling vehicle!"

Ridiculous.

If you're going to try and argue something, at least try to come across as reasonable.

Some members here don't seem to understand that the set version and the one pictued in the music videos is far different than how the terain crawler is in the storyline. In the storyline, the toa are able to ride it by going inside the armor plates, and there are no airlock hatches or other junk. I mean, even in the comic they removed everything unrealistic except the Cordak, and no, the toa are not riding on top of it like some high tech blaster weapon. :-|

I'm as qualified as anyone else to assess the realism of a toy, yes. It's a giant chain gun, that deviates so far from the originals it's not even recognizable. That's all I need to know.

You guys are forgetting something. Does the words "Exo toa Missile" ring a bell? That giant piece of machinery built into a giant machine suit was no less technological than the Cordak or the Zamor launchers. I really struggle to see why people here haven't made that conection, although it again is just my opinion. 8-|

[Starwars4J]

You guys are forgetting something. Does the words "Exo toa Missile" ring a bell? That giant piece of machinery built into a giant machine suit was no less technological than the Cordak or the Zamor launchers. I really struggle to see why people here haven't made that conection, although it again is just my opinion. 8-|

From what I understood, that was some sort of lost technology, wasn't it? That's different than everyone running around like a SWAT member...and it was just one small instance, it didn't permeate the story, nor was it a critical part in that year's theme.

However, I wasn't a fan of that either ;-) It was clearly, though, sales from that set that pushed the release of more shooting weapons and the like.

[Visorak-kal]

StarWars4J:

It's just generally considered a bad move for your fanbase, if you take almost everything your story is built around, and switch it into an entirely new and different direction with little transition.

Seems to have worked, as sales after 2003 began to improve. 2005, which is basicaly when this started, was the first year in a long while that LEGO actually MADE money.

From what I understand, when it first came out, people had no idea what they were. I guess they officially changed the story now

I think the word "BIONICLE" spoke for itself; I knew what they were.

But here's the thing. If they're stuck in the jungle in tribes using spears and swords, they shouldn't within a very short period of time, switch to blasters and submarines. It's just not believable at all. Most people paying attention would go "wait...what?"

Ah, but let me refer to the Greg Farshtey "island analogy." From a storyline standpoint, it makes perfect sense. The Matoran do have high-tech factories, etc. However, they were taken from that high-tech world, stuck on a primitive island, and stripped of their memories. Thus they learn to live without high-tech. Besides, the original 2001 BIONICLE plan accounted for all this, so it's not like they decided in 2003, "Let's make the whole thing high-tech!"

They probably would have been if the story wasn't altered so radically for no real reason. Why must a "deep story" need guns and blasters? Was there any reason to switch to those gimmicks for the story, or did it just sell better when they play-tested it to 8-year-olds? That's the reason for the grey/brown switches, afterall. They care about, primarily, selling as many sets as they can to their target: the 8-10-year-olds. Which is fine, since they are a business, but then they shouldn't go around trying to pretend there's some good reason for this "story" to have such a radical and unwarranted switch, because it's sort of an insult to the people paying attention...

You were referring to old fans. The old fans are gone because they grew up and stopped buying. LEGO realized in 2001 and 2002 that they were targeting the WRONG PEOPLE. There were not enough Rahi or Bahrag fans; most buyers preferred the canister sets. So LEGO adjusted, which was the smart thing to do. And my point is that "deep story' doesn't need guns and blasters, nor does it need swords and shields. A good story is a good story because of the story itself, not what technology it pertains to.

What you have is the curse of sets before story. Studies showed that launching weapons such as Kanoka, Rhotuka, Zamors, and Cordaks, were more approved of than collectibles such as masks. Therefore, sets came to possess those weapons instead. And because of that, story needed to follow. You can't just ignore the sets and keep everything low-tech. Besides, I don't find anything wrong with the world being high-tech, because the story is just as good as ever. High-tech or low-tech have nothing to do with good story, unless you are talking about personal taste.

They should be catered to because, as I said above, it's insulting to their integrity to do this radical, unexplained switch, and still try to sell this as one cohesive story. It isn't about the story, it's about the sales to little kids. They story is just there, unfortunately, to humor people who want an action figure.

I already detailed how the switch was NOT unexplained. But to tell the truth, I don't see your reasoning. LEGO should cater to old fans for integrity? I understand integrity in terms of keeping BIONICLE a building toy, which is what LEGO's whole purpose is built around, but you just don't like certain aspects of what is still a building toy. It is stupid to cater to an audience that is not buying with enough magnitude to keep the line alive. And, yes, it's not about the story; the only thing that matters is selling sets, so if Cordaks and Zamors sell better, then that is what should be done. Furthermore, I fail to see your foundings on why the story is suffering at all. This story is cohesive.

You keep saying that (and you may be right, I'm not calling you a liar), but could you give me figures for sales of Bionicle compared to, say, Star Wars? And even if that's the case, you need to take into consideration the makeup of that population. EB is an inherently different type site than BZP, with as expected, a largely different userbase. BZP has many more members who are in exactly TLG's target age bracket, which explains a lot of support. But didn't you just say that you've seen a lot of negative topics springing up lately?

I don't know the exact figures; it was in a press release earlier this year. The order was #1 BIONICLE, #2 Star Wars, and #3 Exo-Force. And I know that EB is different from BZP. EB is a more adult audience than BZP. My point is that Greg Farshtey has explained that LEGO does consider BZP (a high majority of which want mask packs back), but that BZP itself is not the majority of their buyers. BZP itself composes of older fans. I have seen a lot of negative topics on BZP, some of which were back in 2003, screaming for a change of location from the island of Mata Nui.

So if BZP, which largely does not like a lot of things that sell well, likes the new Toa Nuva for 2008, and the focus groups liked the Nuva for 2008, I think that is a plain sign that maybe LEGO is headed an even better direction, since they are pleasing a largely negative site, while retaining high ratings among focus groups.

Well good, their marketing worked on someone

Nope, I'm immune to commercialism. ;-)

Well they're robots, more or less, right? So it pretty much is a built-in breather. It doesn't look like gills, and the hoses give it a distinctive technological edge. Not only the sets, but even the commercials are trying to send out the "high-tech modern attack force" vibe, rather than a group of heroes...

"Undersea Heroes," is the ploy for the Toa Mahri, so they are still marketing Toa as heroes, just more high-tech than they used to be.

Darth Vader:

Congratulations, you've made his point! Xia, the technological base and weapons factory that it is shouldn't exist. They should never have allowed such tech into the story. Yes, the line should've stayed primitive and mythical. It was far more interesting. With far more directions it could be taken. Now it's all sci-fi and high-tech.

Oh, what fun.

Yawn.

Prove to me that low-tech makes for a more interseting story than high-tech. It is not like the heroes have gained technology and the villains have lost it. The battles are still tough, the heroes are still challenged. Just like today, I think there are high-tech, modern movies that are just as good, if not better, than low-tech adventures like Lord of the Rings, which is sort of the epitomy of low-tech adventure.

Yes there were many direction BIONICLE could have taken at the end of 2003; they took the one that they intended SINCE 2001. The story book accounted for Metru Nui, which introduced the high-tech portion of the BIONICLE world. There is nothing wrong with sci-fi and high-tech. And your "Oh, what fun. Yawn," makes it seem as if your only dislike of sci-fi and high-tech is personal.

Call me rude, but I still hold that this is perhaps one of the dumbest ideas of all time. "Look, we took a living being and transformed the inside of it into a high-tech underwater submarine/ocean-floor-crawling vehicle!"

It isn't my favorite idea of all time, but I don't find it difficult for a biomechanical creature to be altered in some way; the original Rahi were biomechanical and coudl be fitted with infected masks. There had to be some alteration in the figure there, because it would be just as stupid if the Rahi "just happened" to have slots for Makuta to put his infected masks.

EDIT: Find continuation on next page. This should get my quotes visible!

Edited November 9, 2007 by Visorak-kal

[Zaktan of the Shadows]

I agree that 2007 is the best year. From 2006 it was awesome-ness, with a good story, a good plot, good sets, all that stuff.

And don't try to argue with me, I haven't beem on eurobricks too long because of a few er, negotiations, and I havn't followed this topic.

-ZotS

[Clonie]

Ah, but let me refer to the Greg Farshtey "island analogy." From a storyline standpoint, it makes perfect sense. The Matoran do have high-tech factories, etc. However, they were taken from that high-tech world, stuck on a primitive island, and stripped of their memories. Thus they learn to live without high-tech. Besides, the original 2001 BIONICLE plan accounted for all this, so it's not like they decided in 2003, "Let's make the whole thing high-tech!"

Actually, it was Brotherhood of Makuta technology. And the Toa Mahri are not advertised as SWAT team or any attack team; they are still advertised as "heroes." And Cordak blasters are not permeating the story any more than the Exo-Toa did. The Exo-Toa "blasters" helped the Toa survive the Bahrag long enough for them to shed the armor and entrap the beasts. The Cordak blasters this year will help the Toa destroy a hollow stone cord. Neither was used to kill enemies, and that will not happen in the future either.

Two excellent points. :-)

I'm no good at wording arguments, V-K is doing a good job. I should just become a spectator. X-D

Anyway, one can't really say Bionicle should have died instead of "sucking," because all that means is you think it's fact that current Bionicle is crap, and that anyone who likes it is a shallow and immature kid. Basically.

EDIT: What I should do is quote every instance in the 2007 books where a cordak blaster is used. We'll see how much the story relies on smash 'em up, blow 'em up storylines.

Edited November 9, 2007 by Clonie

[Starwars4J]

Visorak-kal, you put too many quotes in that post, you need to break that up, I can't even tell what's you, what's me, and what's someone else.

I do see at the start something I said awhile ago that you didn't respond to. And I do see something where you keep talking about increased sales meaning it's a good idea, which is just ridiculous :-P

Sadly they're trying to twist the story to fit the sets, it seems. That tends to stretch things to the unbelievable, rather than making a story, which should be more important, and making sets about that. However they're more worried about sales, which is great by a business standpoint, but not a good idea if you want a deep, cohesive, believable story.

[Zaktan of the Shadows]

Sadly they're trying to twist the story to fit the sets, it seems. That tends to stretch things to the unbelievable, rather than making a story, which should be more important, and making sets about that. However they're more worried about sales, which is great by a business standpoint, but not a good idea if you want a deep, cohesive, believable story.

Wha? Isn't what they always do?

And also, the only major one I saw was the going underwater thing... which was pretty unnesscasery but I guess they came up with a reason for it.

I mean, when I read comic 6, I was like "WTF what's the masks's problem?" Then I read Inferno and I'm like "Okie, thats what happens." However, the mask still screwed over the universe.

-ZotS

[Tohst]

Tohst:

--------ad hoc quotes for VK!

Furthermore, the Matoran are not the main heroes because they don't sell. Making them the main heroes would end BIONICLE fast. Also, people always complain about constant transformation; there was just a topic on BZP saying that there are too many transformations. Now you say you would prefer that the originals be constantly transformed? You know how many fans that agree with a lot of what you say would hate you for that?

-------------

Or is it Matoran don't sell because they aren't the heroes? The entire structure is currently set up to push Toa. Thats also why in a Spider man line, there will be 37 versions of SpiderMan to each Mary Jane figure. And I didn't say Matoran would be the only heroes. Its the difference between the Lone Ranger (or 3 amigos) showing a town how to fight back and Superman flying in and saving the day.

And there is a difference between 'constant transformations' and upgrading based on need and ability. Its the difference between a dues es machina (or course, is it really this if the story structure is consistantly dependant on it?) transforming our heroes to be able to function underwater and them making modifications to go underwater because thats where there journey leads.

====ad hoc quotes of a different type

You seem to think that the Empire Strikes Back had better story than Episode I and Return of the Jedi. Personally, Return of the Jedi remains my favorite STAR WARS. Also, you are referring to movies. You have to remember that box office sellings are sold to people who have not yet seen the movie. Therefore, it is not an accurate judgement of story equating to sales.

=======

Heck yeah, Empire Strikes Back was a better tory than RotJ. And blew away Episode 1. In terms of story structure, the freedom of knowing there was a third movie coming as well as not having to introduce every character (not to mention dialogue not written by Lucas) lent to a script that actually had depth. Plus AT-ATs for the win!

And you kid yourself if you think selling a movie is different than selling toys. In movies, you have trailers that give away big plot points, you have reviews, and you have word of mouth which is what drives blockbusters that actually survive past the first week. You show me a movie that loses 75% of its audience between weeks 1 and 2 and I'll show you a bad movie. And thats not even getting into sequels where people go to see the movie precisely because they have seen it before. Toys are the same. Sure you see the pictures on the box (the preview) but you only get to open it up and play with it after buying it (your ticket) and you only buy the rest of the series after you're done with that one (repeat viewers and DVD buys).

Maybe the difference in how we view the story/sets is reflected in our favorite star wars movie. There are those that recognize the greatness of Empire and those that love ewoks >:-)

Sadly they're trying to twist the story to fit the sets, it seems. That tends to stretch things to the unbelievable, rather than making a story, which should be more important, and making sets about that. However they're more worried about sales, which is great by a business standpoint, but not a good idea if you want a deep, cohesive, believable story.

Well, they always have to twist the story to fit the sets as the sets are the drivers. However, I still believe that decisions were made early on, especially in terms of transformations, that hamper Greg F.'s ability to deviate from the little rut he has carved out for himself. The next question becomes could he bust out of the rut or are story constraints coming from corporate as well telling him to be risk adverse? If he even wanted to could he expand on the definition of 'Toa' to include other champions outside of the mask-wearing elemental power using ex-Matoran? Or is it, hey, This concept of Toa has worked so far and when we tried changing them a bit more (Hordika Hordika Hordika) sales dropped and people complained so stick with the tried and true toa template (say that ten times fast).

-Toa Tohst of Toledo. Toa of Tomatoes