MakutaOfWar

Original Bionicle vs CCBS discussion

Recommended Posts

50 minutes ago, ZORK64 said:

Also, pretty much every creature, humanoid or not, boils down to "torso + limbs". That's basic anatomy. Not to mention, G1 wasn't much better in that regard, as pretty much everything back then also was torso + limbs, and more often than not humanoid to boot.

I don't think TwistLaw is trying to argue that G1 Bionicle was any less "torso+limbs" than Hero Factory, but rather that those sorts of builds are inherent to the constraction category and that the variety of new pieces G1 introduced each year helped to compensate for those inherent structural similarities.

Truth be told, I'm not sure how big an impact that sort of repetition really has — people who like constraction probably expect it to an extent, and also I feel like a lot of Hero Factory and Bionicle G2 sets did a good job mixing their builds up in ways besides new molds (recolors, different color blocking, different use of basic Technic, etc). I have to admit, though, that it's a criticism I've heard numerous times from AFOLs who never liked constraction in the first place — new parts or no new parts, it's all just more of the same "limby action figures" to them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Part of it all I think is the strange insistence on humanoid builds - look at the Beasts for example. That would have been a great opportunity for some non-humanoid builds, but instead we got humanoid 'beasts', which honestly doesn't help with the 'beast' vibe they were supposed to give - instead they look rather... odd for things supposed to be beasts. It definitely didn't help they had the 'crystal shell' thing with no attachment points besides the ball socket - why not use the one the Toa already introduced and save some money. as well as making the beasts look a bit more armored? 

Even when there were humanoids in G1, it mixed them up a lot more - there was a variety of torsos, and by 2009 you saw some more creative uses of the Inika Torso to compensate, while I would no equivalent of the Skrall's horizontal inika torso has been made yet in CCBS.

But it's starting to hit me, my problem with CCBS isn't because it doesn't use much technic, it's because I overuse technic. I've seen sets like Grievous and Furno Jet Machine and Stormer XL that use the bones to create things like wider, slightly articulated shoulders and that would be impeded if technic was overused - and I'm realising that arrangements of bones could probably be made to create waist articulation, something that technic couldn't really do without a lot of support. 

Edited by Ikaatril
epiphany

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, ZORK64 said:

*thornaxx* *skorpio*

Actually Skorpio does use a torso+limbs build, in that regard being like the vast majority of constraction sets.

9 hours ago, Aanchir said:

I don't think TwistLaw is trying to argue that G1 Bionicle was any less "torso+limbs" than Hero Factory, but rather that those sorts of builds are inherent to the constraction category and that the variety of new pieces G1 introduced each year helped to compensate for those inherent structural similarities.

That's exactly what I meant, thank you Aanchir.

 

 

Also I'd like to note that until action figures (and constraction) will exist, most of the times they're gonna have a humanoid shape. It's not rocket science we're talking about, but just that human beings have a... humanoid shape (duh) and they'll always prefer that one over any other. Just like Magic the Gathering has almost exclusively humanoid Planeswalkers, because players want to see themselves in what they play, kids are no different in that aspect. Once you know you'll always have (basically) just one shape to work with, you have to take countermeasures to keep the whole thing fresh.

And while especially G2 did an amazing job in reinventing CCBS (2015 structurally, 2016 aesthetically and structurally again), until two years ago the exterior aspect of the figures was still strongly similar to earlier HF sets. We all remember the response when G2 was launched, with fans saying all over Facebook "this is so wrong, they look like Hero Factory": that was a key aspect in the warm reaction at G2, a red flag that should have said something important to LEGO. If AFOLs are a minority, people like us who loved G2 since day 1 are a minority of a minority, and 2016 was a clear proof that LEGO was aware of all this with aesthetics much closer to classic BIONICLE.

God knows what we would have seen in 2017, and it embitters me once again to be reminded what we lost for reasons we may never truly know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@TwistLaw

My bad. In that case apologies for misunderstanding your point.

I appreciated G2 Bionicle for merging the aesthetics of G1 with Hero Factory/CCBS, though it probably went over my head that a lot of fans weren't that big on CCBS.

Ironically, the 2016 Bionicle sets weren't that appealling to me. The overabundance of gold and the the large single-molded torso armor were huge turn-offs for me.

Edited by ZORK64

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Mechbuilds said:

Original bionicle had cool bikes though. 

RIP ccbs it had no cool bikes.

 

9 hours ago, TwistLaw said:

Also I'd like to note that until action figures (and constraction) will exist, most of the times they're gonna have a humanoid shape. It's not rocket science we're talking about, but just that human beings have a... humanoid shape (duh) and they'll always prefer that one over any other. Just like Magic the Gathering has almost exclusively humanoid Planeswalkers, because players want to see themselves in what they play, kids are no different in that aspect. Once you know you'll always have (basically) just one shape to work with, you have to take countermeasures to keep the whole thing fresh.

 

 

14 hours ago, Ikaatril said:

Part of it all I think is the strange insistence on humanoid builds - look at the Beasts for example. That would have been a great opportunity for some non-humanoid builds, but instead we got humanoid 'beasts', which honestly doesn't help with the 'beast' vibe they were supposed to give - instead they look rather... odd for things supposed to be beasts. It definitely didn't help they had the 'crystal shell' thing with no attachment points besides the ball socket - why not use the one the Toa already introduced and save some money. as well as making the beasts look a bit more armored? 

Even when there were humanoids in G1, it mixed them up a lot more - there was a variety of torsos, and by 2009 you saw some more creative uses of the Inika Torso to compensate, while I would no equivalent of the Skrall's horizontal inika torso has been made yet in CCBS.

 

But it's starting to hit me, my problem with CCBS isn't because it doesn't use much technic, it's because I overuse technic. I've seen sets like Grievous and Furno Jet Machine and Stormer XL that use the bones to create things like wider, slightly articulated shoulders and that would be impeded if technic was overused - and I'm realising that arrangements of bones could probably be made to create waist articulation, something that technic couldn't really do without a lot of support. 

2

I have to agree here, CCBS has almost always made humanoid builds with little variety. hf and 2016 bionicle mixed it up but not to a crazy extent. I'd argue that g2 bionicle didn't mix up designs quite like g1 bionicle, but hf certainly did with its villains.

Despite all that I don't think it makes ccbs > technic. At the end of the day, it always comes down to personal preference and the kind of moc you intend to make.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like them both, but I love not having joints break left an d right with ccbs. ccbs is a little more user friendly, but doesn't look as unique. I hope future lines use a blend of ccbs' versatility with bionicle's personality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/23/2017 at 11:24 AM, TwistLaw said:

It literally had one ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I mean, unless you count flying speeders like the Ussanui, it took Bionicle eight years to get any bikes. I feel like maybe the designers are afraid of stepping on the toes of the vehicle-heavy Technic theme. Plus, the bigger vehicle and creature sets usually don’t sell as well as the smaller figures, so how many there are can depend on how many sets a theme can support at those higher price points, and whether the designers think vehicles are the best use of those price points. When customers balk at the price of a $20 set, $35 and higher sets become something of a risk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hero Factory had two bikes, Furno Bike and Speeda Demon. 

 

I will also disagree that while CCBS does break less, certain CCBS pieces still break very easily - the shortest bone, for example, has its socket break very easily. Friction Extenders also cannot handle the friction forced upon them after a while and will inevitably develop a hairline crack, making them both sound squeaky and add less friction than if a normal bone had been used. 

Additionally, it is not just the old ball joints that broke frequently. Even today, pieces like the following: 65364200332184320396553, 32054 are all prone to breaking if too much pressure is forced upon them - unfortunately, a lot of this is done with the 2016 BIONICLE sets. For example, on Kopaka and Onua, the only thing holding up their shoulders/arms is 32184, which, while a legal connection, is not very safe for the structure of the piece and may result in it cracking - on Onua, this can be rectified by making use of the piece of unity and the pin holes in 32184 to help anchor the arms and shoulders. On Kopaka, the side 32184 is on will need to be switched to the front rather than the back so that such modifications can be made.

Of all pieces though, 32039 is the one that seems to break the most - the ones used in Skull Grinder's weapon, for example, do not seem to be able to take the weight of axe pieces that well and will eventually break. Part of the issue, I believe, is because none of these pieces are intended to hold something up alone, but in tandem with other technic pieces. Relying on a single technic piece to hold such things up seems to fast-track them to their literal breaking points.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 27.10.2017 at 4:05 PM, Aanchir said:

I mean, unless you count flying speeders like the Ussanui, it took Bionicle eight years to get any bikes. I feel like maybe the designers are afraid of stepping on the toes of the vehicle-heavy Technic theme. Plus, the bigger vehicle and creature sets usually don’t sell as well as the smaller figures, so how many there are can depend on how many sets a theme can support at those higher price points, and whether the designers think vehicles are the best use of those price points. When customers balk at the price of a $20 set, $35 and higher sets become something of a risk.

That reminds me of how the vehicle sets of the Phantoka/Mistika line warmed shelves here in Germany. I only got my hands on a few of them thanks to some hefty price cuts on them.

 

On 28.10.2017 at 4:53 AM, Ikaatril said:

Hero Factory had two bikes, Furno Bike and Speeda Demon.

Furno Bike isn't CCBS though.

 

Quote

I will also disagree that while CCBS does break less, certain CCBS pieces still break very easily - the shortest bone, for example, has its socket break very easily. Friction Extenders also cannot handle the friction forced upon them after a while and will inevitably develop a hairline crack, making them both sound squeaky and add less friction than if a normal bone had been used. 

Additionally, it is not just the old ball joints that broke frequently. Even today, pieces like the following: 65364200332184320396553, 32054 are all prone to breaking if too much pressure is forced upon them - unfortunately, a lot of this is done with the 2016 BIONICLE sets. For example, on Kopaka and Onua, the only thing holding up their shoulders/arms is 32184, which, while a legal connection, is not very safe for the structure of the piece and may result in it cracking - on Onua, this can be rectified by making use of the piece of unity and the pin holes in 32184 to help anchor the arms and shoulders. On Kopaka, the side 32184 is on will need to be switched to the front rather than the back so that such modifications can be made.

Of all pieces though, 32039 is the one that seems to break the most - the ones used in Skull Grinder's weapon, for example, do not seem to be able to take the weight of axe pieces that well and will eventually break. Part of the issue, I believe, is because none of these pieces are intended to hold something up alone, but in tandem with other technic pieces. Relying on a single technic piece to hold such things up seems to fast-track them to their literal breaking points.

So far, I had none of my CCBS specific pieces break, and while I do know Technic pieces that develop hairline cracks (I notice that often on 6536 - meanwhile, 32039 seems fine to me more often than not), the point here is that many of the later G1 Bionicle ball cups break as soon as you took the sets apart - it was not the result of mishandling the parts or applying too much pressure on the pieces, it was a design flaw of the pieces themselves.

Plastic is a material that can become brittle with time. That's a sad reality of toy collecting. But the desaster of the late G1-Bonkle joints is plain inexcusable, and in no way comparable to any other Constraction Joints created by Lego.

Edited by ZORK64

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only ccbs I've ever had break was a joint that was strained from being stored badly, and I have every Hero factory and G2 bionicle set. But late Bionicle G1 sets snapped as you put them together... The joints were too thin on the sides and the material was too brittle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've had one friction exstension break on me. I got some red shadow matoran claw feet at bfva and both cracked as soon I put a balljoint in the sockets.

10/10 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jeez, those kinds of stories make me anxious about my old MOCs. They're doomed to remain in their not-so-well-designed form for the rest of their existence, as I would probably break their sockets by now...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, ZORK64 said:

Jeez, those kinds of stories make me anxious about my old MOCs. They're doomed to remain in their not-so-well-designed form for the rest of their existence, as I would probably break their sockets by now...

some break, some don't, most g1 joints were fine up until they introduced the longer double socket with the visorak. My 2008 takanuva's joints are still undamaged, my toa Ignika went through 3 sets of joints before I gave up and gave him the older style. 2007-2009 was the worst of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, I know which one are the faulty ones, the problem is, many of my MOCs use these, as many of my MOCs used Inika Builds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am a little bit surprised to see this debate is still going strong over a year since Bionicle has gone dead. I don't know if I have much to ad to this since I have been buying almost exclusively System sets since Bionicle went under. But I have bought one sole constraction figure since then; Star War's K2SO. K2 was a very very nice blend of Technic and new CCBS pieces, that not only was fun to build but looks pretty screen accurate too. At the end of the day, which system is better? I can't say... but seeing old Bionicle and CCBS are both part of the larger Lego building system I gotta say, I like it when MOC builders and official Lego sets manage to blend the old with the new.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually moved over to more brick-built sets even before Bionicle G2 ended, as I got more interested in Mixels.

Since Bionicle ended, I bought 3 of the SW Constraction sets, though two of  them will be taken apart for MOCing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm pretty much neck deep invested in technic (With a little tiny splash of CCBS/bionicle..). But the mixel thing is starting to look very tempting.. Only thing holding me back from doing mixels is money. 
What i would make with the mixel joint system would be tiny mechs. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you pass on the Mixels themselves? Because they were a pretty inexpensive way of getting those sweet Mixel Joints.

The most I did with them was building Transformer OCs, though I'm still in the process of revamping some them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/11/2017 at 10:47 PM, xboxtravis7992 said:

I am a little bit surprised to see this debate is still going strong over a year since Bionicle has gone dead.

It's the same people saying the same things with the same outcomes. At least I managed to reach a better understanding of the whole "constraction is building the same shape over and over again" thing.

Btw bricks stink, I can accept them only in very small quantities on works made by the few people that know how to mix them with constraction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, TwistLaw said:

Btw bricks stink, I can accept them only in very small quantities on works made by the few people that know how to mix them with constraction.

That's an… unusual perspective. Are you talking about just for constraction/buildable figure MOCs, or do MOCs built with bricks in general fail to appeal to you?

The biggest disadvantage System-based buildable figures have compared to Technic-based constraction is in terms of stability. Technic-based constraction in sets is geared towards rugged action play, and between classic Bionicle and CCBS's many single-piece limb beams and Technic's usefulness for locking parts together, it is also easier to make jointed limbs that won't break apart. This is why in sets it's so much rarer to see knee joints in System-based mecha than in Technic-based constraction sets. Even in Exo-Force, the main reason why figures with knee joints were more common than in sets today was primarily because so many of the mechs used the single-piece arm and leg segment bricks from the Knights' Kingdom sets.

That said, I have seen a few primarily System-based buildable figures that stand out as exceptional. And I'm increasingly drawn to building them myself in part due to most digital building software being a lot more conducive to brainstorming System builds than constraction ones (and more new System sets coming out each year to inspire new ways of building). System parts are also great for creating more precise shapes at a smaller scale than is often possible with Technic-based constraction, especially in recent years due to the large number of great curve elements now in use. I don't see nearly as many System-based buildable figure MOCs as Technic-based ones ones outside of the mecha genre, but I don't think that's because brick-based buildable figures don't look good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 16/11/2017 at 6:30 PM, Aanchir said:

That's an… unusual perspective. Are you talking about just for constraction/buildable figure MOCs, or do MOCs built with bricks in general fail to appeal to you?

Since I was a kid I've never been particularly fascinated by bricks. When I was 5 I got my first LEGO set, the cars were cool, but it didn't strike me enough to ask my mother to buy other LEGO sets. Until of course I (belatedly) enterd the world of Bionicle, but that's another story. In short I know that you can build everything with bricks, but to me biomechanical warriors with mythical powers have always been way, way cooler than your average police station.

And that leads to my conclusion, that is I only like System in a Bionicle moc when the moccer is particularly talented and the percentage of bricks is kept low.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Huh, this topic is still a thing.

I can corroborate the fragility of G2 pieces. I've got some friction extenders that no longer make any difference, just from being part of the set they came in, some bones are loose and floppy too, and some of both are actually broken.

My G2 parts are mostly supplementary in G1-style builds now. The Bionicle MOCs I have on display still look good to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.