Bionicle 2016 Story Discussion & Rumors

[Jetrax99]

So, guess that means Makuta won't be black and red, but his normal Purple and Gold, with a printed chest plate no less.

[Kalhiki]

Breez, what happened?!

Kidding aside, that's... Terrifying. Probably the scariest mask I've seen in Bionicle. Like, ever. I'm inclined to believe this is the final version. While it has some similarities to Witch Doctor and Breez, I find it's different enough to be a final design.

Too bad it's probably impossible to get the smoking effect on the set. I really like that aspect of it.

[Iben]

Aw heck, I knew it looked familiar. I'm pretty sure that's exactly what's going on - the crest is from this Mask of Creation prototype, which is like the only other part of the mask.

So I guess they just mixed up a couple of masks for it, which says to me that it is almost certainly a placeholder they made up to fill the masks's space in the series before it is properly finished/revealed for next year. Kind of like the lower Vahi in the graphic novel, I guess.

I don't really think the crest is from the MoC prototype. You're confusing the line that's running down the middle with the line that split up the MoC prototype. This mask clearly goes towards a single point and doesn't split up. At least not as the prototype you showed.

Honestly, this isn't a mixup of a few masks, I find it quite clear that this is an uniquely designed mask. It would be a bit weird to assume that it was just a "mixed up placeholder", I mean come on, these three masks were planned from the start, it would be really weird if they wouldn't have had a design for it yet :P I think this is quite obviously a more finalized version of the MoUP, but it might be changed a little bit when it's eventually released. I'd look at it more like the leaked MoC than seeing it as a placeholder like the lower Vahi. The design did change a bit, but in no way was it a mixed up version.

-Iben

[Bbrink1996]

Oh dear, the MoUP looks terrifying and awesome. And it looks like we will see the Battle of the Mask Makers in JtO as well which I am very much okay with.

[ToaDraco]

Dang that MOUP looks awesome, though I would have liked Makuta to be black and red in that scene like he's supposed to be. Maybe that means we're getting normal Makuta in a set with that chest print? I was really hoping for a massive black and red titan. Who knows, maybe we'll get 2 Makuta in 2017, Mask Maker Makuta in the winter wave and Ultimate Makuta. Dang, I'm gonna have to get that hawk now. I wish we had an easy way to get it in the states... sigh.

[Shakar]

I think Makuta's transformation is going to be more gradual than what the 2015 version of the flashback led us to believe (early plans that got changed?). Makuta is keeping his original colour scheme intact, sure, but he clearly looks mutated and enlarged compared to his base Mask Maker form.

I think Makuta never tapped into the full extent of the MoUP's power, and that Ekimu managed to knock the Mask off while he was mid-transformation.

Still, I'm not sure if we're ever going to get this specific form as a set, due to a number of set and story related reasons:

1) The Superhero chest is too big for a Protector sized set, and I doubt they'd actually release a Mask Maker Makuta

2) Makuta has lost his old body so he has to come back with a new one, which means his new physical form could divert from his original appearence

3) I don't know if they would release the main villain looking so ambiguous. Compare this guy to monsters like Kulta or Umarak- remove the MoUP and he could easily pass for a Toa. Villains that look like good guys (or the opposite) just doesn't fit with Lego's (or most toy companies') way of doing things. It just ain't 2006 anymore. Either he loses the gold or he gets a more vicious looking armour in the final set.

I still think we're getting two forms for Makuta like it happened with Umarak, and that the first one is going to use that chest print (because that definitely looks like it was taken directly from a set). I just don't think he's going to look like this.

Oh and well, is it ok that we discuss this stuff here? It feels more of a set related conversation, but I suppose it's way too early for a 2017 sets topic. So I dunno what we should do.

[Takanuinuva]

Is it just me or does the MOUP look a little derpy? I think its cause the eyes are so far apart.

[Tazakk]

1) The Superhero chest is too big for a Protector sized set, and I doubt they'd actually release a Mask Maker Makuta

I don't particularly think it's gonna be a set either, but for what it's worth the chest does actually fit if you shift the connection point for the shell down a notch.

[Shakar]

Is it just me or does the MOUP look a little derpy? I think its cause the eyes are so far apart.

Keep in mind that Makuta isn't looking straight at the camera, his head is slightly lifted and tilted to the right, since he's looking at Ekimu. So the MoUP actually comes off as slightly distorted.

I like how the Mask looks for the most part, but I think the lower section (basically the whole jaw+chin) is too thin compared to the top section. It should've been a bit wider. But it's easily one of the most evil looking Masks I've ever seen.

I don't particularly think it's gonna be a set either, but for what it's worth the chest does actually fit if you shift the connection point for the shell down a notch.

You're right. Even worse, I once built a MOC that combined a XT4 torso and a Superhero chest and it actually worked. Clearly my memory was bluerry when I wrote that.

[Leewan]

Oh and well, is it ok that we discuss this stuff here? It feels more of a set related conversation, but I suppose it's way too early for a 2017 sets topic. So I dunno what we should do.

Use this topic, maybe ?

[TwistLaw]

Villains that look like good guys (or the opposite) just doesn't fit with Lego's (or most toy companies') way of doing things. It just ain't 2006 anymore.

This is sooooo boring. G2 villains are ok, some of them are GREAT (Umarak the Hunter), but they make it far too easy to spot the bad guy. Brutaka, Roodaka, the Inika, the Vahki... G1 had some good examples of bad/good guys that didn't look like that at first sight. Even the Bohrok didn't have a particularly "evil" look, at least not as stereotypical as Kulta or Lava Beast. The "that's blatantly a bad guy" look arrived only pretty late, in 2007, with the oversemplification of green eyes=good guys VS red eyes= bad guys (poor Matau...). While that may be a wise market choice, it makes characters flatter.

And whenever I try to MOC a bad guy "in disguise", the only alternatives existing to the skull masks are Umarak's and the Toa's, along with the Protector mask. That's another limitation of G2, in my opinion.

[xboxtravis7992]

And whenever I try to MOC a bad guy "in disguise", the only alternatives existing to the skull masks are Umarak's and the Toa's, along with the Protector mask. That's another limitation of G2, in my opinion.

I keep looking at how to integrate the G1 masks with G2 figures, but most G2 masks look smaller than a G1 mask; so G1 masks look a bit HUGE on a G2 figure.

[GK733]

Just saying but they aren't likely to make a figure that has a mask that doesn't fit at all with the rest of the figures colors.

So gunmetal + tr. purple Ultimate Makuta it is.

Does anyone really hate how they made the new Ekimu so skinny and disproportionated of his original form? It's even worse on the animations.

[Dorek]

This is sooooo boring. G2 villains are ok, some of them are GREAT (Umarak the Hunter), but they make it far too easy to spot the bad guy. Brutaka, Roodaka, the Inika, the Vahki... G1 had some good examples of bad/good guys that didn't look like that at first sight. Even the Bohrok didn't have a particularly "evil" look, at least not as stereotypical as Kulta or Lava Beast. The "that's blatantly a bad guy" look arrived only pretty late, in 2007, with the oversemplification of green eyes=good guys VS red eyes= bad guys (poor Matau...). While that may be a wise market choice, it makes characters flatter.

And whenever I try to MOC a bad guy "in disguise", the only alternatives existing to the skull masks are Umarak's and the Toa's, along with the Protector mask. That's another limitation of G2, in my opinion.

#ekimubigbad2018

[Onepu the Protector]

This is sooooo boring. G2 villains are ok, some of them are GREAT (Umarak the Hunter), but they make it far too easy to spot the bad guy. Brutaka, Roodaka, the Inika, the Vahki... G1 had some good examples of bad/good guys that didn't look like that at first sight. Even the Bohrok didn't have a particularly "evil" look, at least not as stereotypical as Kulta or Lava Beast. The "that's blatantly a bad guy" look arrived only pretty late, in 2007, with the oversemplification of green eyes=good guys VS red eyes= bad guys (poor Matau...). While that may be a wise market choice, it makes characters flatter.

And whenever I try to MOC a bad guy "in disguise", the only alternatives existing to the skull masks are Umarak's and the Toa's, along with the Protector mask. That's another limitation of G2, in my opinion.

I don't know, Brutaka looked pretty obviously evil to me. Sure, his blue and gold color scheme isn't stereotypically associated with villains, but he does have red eyes, a lot of spikes and sharp, pointy shapes, as well as clawed hands and a fanged mask. It becomes more apparent when you contrast him with his rival, Axonn, who's got more rounded contours instead.

Roodaka wasn't that subtle either. Her seductive lizard-faced queen shtick and dark color scheme both make it pretty obvious that she's a villain. Sure, you can argue that the Hordika and the Rahaga, who were the good guys, looked monstrous as well but it was because they were mutated and they have been turned back into their humanoid forms since then.

Vahki had fangs, bladed hands, Kanoka launchers that looked like the insect's mandibles and arachnoid alternate stance. That's evil enough for me, especially when you contrast them with the heroic and regal design of the Toa Metru.

Sure, some of the Toa Inika look creepy (Kongu's Suletu is arguably one of the weirdest and creepiest Kanohi in the theme's history) but they were clearly intented to be more humanoid and relatable than the Piraka.

I don't think there's anything wrong with incorporating traits stereotypically associated with evil into the villainous sets' looks. We have to remember that Bionicle is a toyline for children after all and children tend to be somewhat simple minded (and I don't mean it as an insult). Being counterintuitive doesn't make for a good character design, especially when you're dealing with children's action figures.

Personally, I don't have anything against villains looking monstrous as long as they're good sets. What annoys me, though, is when people use the figure's monstrosity to excuse its poor design.

However, I do agree with you on one thing - heroes having lime eyes and villains having red/orange eyes was stupid. A character's eye color should be chosen based on their overall color scheme, not their affiliation.

Edited July 12, 2016 by Onepu the Protector

[MrHerofan]

Well I just watched the new Ekimu trailer and wow! Makuta in the flashback looked pretty cool and I can't wait to see how he will look like now. The mask of ultimate power looks really nice. I feel indifferent about how Ekimu looks though. It seems to bright although I understand what they were going for. I seriously can't wait for the rest of Journey to One to come out.

[PrimoUltimo]

Now I think that gold piece hold by Umarak, can be part of MoUP.

[TwistLaw]

I don't know, Brutaka looked pretty obviously evil to me. Sure, his blue and gold color scheme isn't stereotypically associated with villains, but he does have red eyes, a lot of spikes and sharp, pointy shapes, as well as clawed hands and a fanged mask. It becomes more apparent when you contrast him with his rival, Axonn, who's got more rounded contours instead.

Roodaka wasn't that subtle either. Her seductive lizard-faced queen shtick and dark color scheme both make it pretty obvious that she's a villain. Sure, you can argue that the Hordika and the Rahaga, who were the good guys, looked monstrous as well but it was because they were mutated and they have been turned back into their humanoid forms since then.

Vahki had fangs, bladed hands, Kanoka launchers that looked like the insect's mandibles and arachnoid alternate stance. That's evil enough for me, especially when you contrast them with the heroic and regal design of the Toa Metru.

Sure, some of the Toa Inika look creepy (Kongu's Suletu is arguably one of the weirdest and creepiest Kanohi in the theme's history) but they were clearly intented to be more humanoid and relatable than the Piraka.

I don't think there's anything wrong with incorporating traits stereotypically associated with evil into the villainous sets' looks. We have to remember that Bionicle is a toyline for children after all and children tend to be somewhat simple minded (and I don't mean it as an insult). Being counterintuitive doesn't make for a good character design, especially when you're dealing with children's action figures.

Personally, I don't have anything against villains looking monstrous as long as they're good sets. What annoys me, though, is when people use the figure's monstrosity to excuse its poor design.

Mmmh while they sure had hints to their affiliation they never were that explicit in their appearance until at least the Barraki. Those were the first sets which made me think, as a kid, "zOMG that's the bad guy!!". The aforementioned Brutaka did something that no other set did before: he had gold in its colour scheme, a shade that until then was associated exclusively with good guys and has been since. Him having pointy shapes isn't an indication either, since Hydraxon from 2007 was pretty pointy himself. All of this may be excused since Brutaka wasn't actually a bad guy, but in 2006 he was sold as such.

Roodaka may be the least compelling example, but as you said the year she was released wasn't exactly the clearest as far as recognizing good guys from bad guys is concerned. And fangs and pointy weapons aren't a great indication either, Lewa Nuva just called.

But all in all I agree with you, "incorporating traits stereotypically associated with evil into the villainous sets' looks" is something I'm ok with myself. Until, of course, it's not a trait used to excuse poor design choices (if I had a penny for every time the gappy and colorwise dull Skellies were excused because they were monsters....)

[Quisoves Pugnat]

Mmmh while they sure had hints to their affiliation they never were that explicit in their appearance until at least the Barraki.

What of the Piraka? They look pretty monstrous to me.

[Onepu the Protector]

Him having pointy shapes isn't an indication either, since Hydraxon from 2007 was pretty pointy himself.

Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't Hydraxon an anti-villain of sorts? Sure, he was a former member of the Hand of Artakha and he was bent on capturing the Pit escapees but he was advertised as an enemy of the Toa Mahri, right?

Oh, I forgot about one thing about Brutaka that's obviously evil - his name.

And fangs and pointy weapons aren't a great indication either, Lewa Nuva just called.

Hey, it's ironic that you mention this, because, as a kid, I always considered the teeth-like structures on Lewa Nuva's mask peculiar... They looked more derpy (in a good way, fitting Lewa's lovable klutz persona) than monstrous to me, though.

Anyway, the Toa Nuva are similar to the Toa Inika in this regard - some of their mask designs might be a bit weird and ugly but it's still pretty clear that they were intented to be the good, relatable heroes.

And people generally excuse Skull Creature's gappy design by pointing out that they were supposed to be undead and the gaps probably had been filled by organic tissue that has since rotten away... Yeah, that makes some sense but I just don't buy it.

[JekPorkchops]

Well the Skullies weren't all that gappy but the huge cavity behind Kulta's chest was inexcusable from a design perspective.

[TwistLaw]

What of the Piraka? They look pretty monstrous to me.

True!

Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't Hydraxon an anti-villain of sorts? Sure, he was a former member of the Hand of Artakha and he was bent on capturing the Pit escapees but he was advertised as an enemy of the Toa Mahri, right?

Sadly back in 2007 I had a limited amount of time to spend on the internet so I don't exactly remember how Hydraxon was advertised, but in the Toa Mahri mini movie he's seen fighting with Maxilos. And Maxilos was literally Makuta. But if you have any piece of advertisement stating otherwise I'd love to have a look!

Anyway, the Toa Nuva are similar to the Toa Inika in this regard - some of their mask designs might be a bit weird and ugly but it's still pretty clear that they were intented to be the good, relatable heroes.

This is also true. While their "faces" weren't exactly your average winner from a beauty contest, their overall appearance suggested with ease that they were the good guys. The only exception to this are the Hordika, but that was literally their job.

[Dragon_Master_48]

Maybe I'm picky, maybe I'm still bitter about the change to the Mask of Control, maybe the purple smoke effects don't work too well, or maybe I just need to see the physical mask, but I'm not really a fan of the Mask of Ultimate Power's design. It kind of looks generic and even somewhat derpy/cheesy, and not just because of the eyes (on the poster, they appear to be pretty widely spaced as well, so I assume it's not just a product of the angle used in the trailer)- the thing sticking out of the top looks very out of place and quite strange overall.

[MrHerofan]

Well I watched the next trailer for Journey to One and the stakes really are raising. I'm really excited to see where the show goes, and possibly how it will tie into next year. "End game" is a pretty generic term , for the last arc of a show, but I really hope that we get a glimpse/tease for next year.

[Takanuinuva]

Another trailer dropped. Looks like Umarak is living up to his new Destroyer persona