VBBN

Bionicle 2016 Sets Discussion

Recommended Posts

Also, not all of the people talking the most are the same people. I still feel pretty much the same about most of the 2016 sets. I think the Toa are all, without a single exception, a step backward in design and personality from the 2015 sets. I like Tahu's and Lewa's new masks better than their 2015 ones. I feel like these 2016 Toa look like the over-complex "every hole needs to be filled with as much technic as possible" MOCs that are unfortunately still littering so many BIONICLE MOCing communities. I think it looks almost universally awful. I like some of the beasts, I like Umarak more than I thought I would, though I still can't stand the lower legs. I'm just not posting about it every day because that gets tiring, but I don't have much else to contribute at the moment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I feel like these 2016 Toa look like the over-complex "every hole needs to be filled with as much technic as possible" MOCs that are unfortunately still littering so many BIONICLE MOCing communities. I think it looks almost universally awful.

I'm confused by this statement. "Overly-complex", the larger the set the more complex it should be, no? I'm not going to pay $25 for something that is made with a parts budget of $15, nor would I want a design to be as simple as possible. Although you were referencing MoCs in particular in your comment, I have seen you state the sets were "Overly-complex" standalone in the past.

Edited by MakutaOfWar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Frankly, I don't see how even half of last year's sets have more 'personality' than this year's sets. What do people mean when they say that? I don't particularly see how 2015 Tahu, perhaps one of the more boring Masters, has more personality than Uniter Tahu, who at least looks a lot more fire-based - unlike Master Tahu, who only had his weapons to signify that.

To me, it's just people getting nostalgic, except for 2015 instead of 2001. and being contrarian for the sake of being contrarian. Things are different, the sets aren't exactly the same as they were in 2015, so it's bad, obviously. Just like how anything that deviated from 2001 BIONICLE in G1 was bad. You ask me, the Uniters have far more 'personality' than the Masters ever did. That's not say some are better designed, it's just that half the Masters didn't do a very good job of looking like they were the masters of elements.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>BIONICLE fandom in december 2015:

"bwaaaah those overtextured-gappy-nonsense-gimmicky sets are horrible, this kills the CCBS"

>BIONICLE fandom in february 2016

"well you know what, these sets aren't half bad, they're fun and creative!"

Always. The same. Sheet. Every freaking year.

(but that's secretely one of the reasons I missed BIONICLE the most)

(and I was myself skeptical about 2016, especially with my new lover named Umarak)

Well part of it is acceptance of what we're getting, another part is you can't really judge a set until you have it in hand as there is always something about the build or design that you didn't expect that might pleasantly surprise you or a gimmick that might actually be fun. You can only get so much from cgi that highlights every detail of a piece that doesn't necessarily translate properly to the real-world model. Sure there are some fickle fans but I think for the most part its a matter of pics versus in-hand experience that makes people change their minds. I imediately took to the 2016 sets for the most part and my opinion on them hasn't really changed much. I think some are fantastic(Onua, Umarak) and some are downright awful(Pohatu, Ketar). The rest fall somewhere in between, I for one welcome more technic in the builds as long as it isn't technic for the sake of technic. It needs to work with the design and contribute to the build and overall aesthetic. So far I've found the builds of this years sets to be far more enjoyable than that of last years for that reason. I like more complexity and creative design choices.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, not all of the people talking the most are the same people. I still feel pretty much the same about most of the 2016 sets. I think the Toa are all, without a single exception, a step backward in design and personality from the 2015 sets. I like Tahu's and Lewa's new masks better than their 2015 ones. I feel like these 2016 Toa look like the over-complex "every hole needs to be filled with as much technic as possible" MOCs that are unfortunately still littering so many BIONICLE MOCing communities. I think it looks almost universally awful. I like some of the beasts, I like Umarak more than I thought I would, though I still can't stand the lower legs. I'm just not posting about it every day because that gets tiring, but I don't have much else to contribute at the moment.

Just curious to see your perspective on the Uniters individually compared to the Masters. I personally think it's mixed, some are improved and some leave something to be desired. Pohatu for instance is my favourite due to the addition of dark tan giving him a less bland colour scheme, whereas Gali comes off as boring and sloppy.

As many have said earlier, great ideas, mixed execution.

Edited by MakutaDreadscythe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I'm still of the opinion that the Uniters look horrible. In Onua and Terak's case I feel their faults are forgivable, as the cluttered look is kept to the minimum possible given the standard uniter build, the colorschemes are good and they include plenty rare parts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Frankly, I don't see how even half of last year's sets have more 'personality' than this year's sets. What do people mean when they say that?

The designs of the Masters led to more unique looking body shapes- a feminine Gali, a wide brute Onua, uh short Pohatu, "hunchback" Lewa, well armored "snowsuit" Kopaka, and well Tahu was more generic, which still set him apart from everyone else. Due to the gimmick this year, there is hardly any variation to the overall sharpe of the sets. The only noticeable difference is that Tahu is slightly taller, and Onua is more heavily armored. (Onua I haven't had a problem with, I do prefer him to 2015's) you can slap as many elemental themed crystals you want on a Toa, that doesn't change their stature.

To me, it's just people getting nostalgic, except for 2015 instead of 2001. and being contrarian for the sake of being contrarian. Things are different, the sets aren't exactly the same as they were in 2015, so it's bad, obviously. Just like how anything that deviated from 2001 BIONICLE in G1 was bad. You ask me, the Uniters have far more 'personality' than the Masters ever did. That's not say some are better designed, it's just that half the Masters didn't do a very good job of looking like they were the masters of elements.

Don't assume you know anyone's reason for having an opinion. I don't like 2016 nearly as much as 2015 but it's not because I'm nostalgic, it's because I saw the potential that Lego had for this new series, and I had all of these ideas for how the second year could go, and it ended up the exact opposite of what I wanted. I'm not a 2015 elitist, there's many things about 2015 I didn't like either, but I flat out do not like the Toa. Even had we not gotten 2015's sets, and had gone straight from Hero Favtory to 2016, I would be disappointed in these sets.

But yeah, to echo others, my distaste for these hasn't changed, but that was already said in reviews. I don't see the point in these arguments because it always goes around in a circle, if you like the sets and I don't or vice versa, that's the way it's going to go. Telling people to change their opinion won't do a damn thing, it is their own judgement of the sets once they have them in hand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Due to the gimmick this year, there is hardly any variation to the overall shape of the sets.

What about the lithe limbs and shoulders of Lewa? The broad shoulders of Pohatu, who is still among the shortest? The tall, but thin Kopaka?

To me, there is a clear variation to the overall shape of the Uniters. Only the torso is shared between them, and that was the same case for the Masters. I hardly see how the Uniters have less variation than the Masters. Each has a different silhouette, just as the Masters did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What about the lithe limbs and shoulders of Lewa? The broad shoulders of Pohatu, who is still among the shortest? The tall, but thin Kopaka?

To me, there is a clear variation to the overall shape of the Uniters. Only the torso is shared between them, and that was the same case for the Masters. I hardly see how the Uniters have less variation than the Masters. Each has a different silhouette, just as the Masters did.

True, but not. Onua had different shape of torso from the others :grin: He had this: http://brickset.com/parts/4593571, And the rest had this: http://brickset.com/parts/4589953

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Last night I worked my first shift at a new job. 2 hours in I smiled because I finaly had earned enough money to purchase Umarak the Hunter :)

I will be trying to get Umarak once my paycheck comes in; but I can't find him for sale at any of the stores I check. It's weird. He better show up soon or I'll divert the funds to other purposes. :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Last night I worked my first shift at a new job. 2 hours in I smiled because I finaly had earned enough money to purchase Umarak the Hunter :)

I will be trying to get Umarak once my paycheck comes in; but I can't find him for sale at any of the stores I check. It's weird. He better show up soon or I'll divert the funds to other purposes. :(

Why not order it? I usually never buy the figures in stores anymore, too convenient sitting down, getting fatter, and not being social for me(AndIKnowThatCashierIsJudgingMeForBuyingActionFiguresStill), plus I enjoy getting packages, ever since ordering Jaller in 07', *sigh*. But that's just me though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I might order it. I could use the VIP points I guess. If I had the time though I'd rather make the 2 hour drive to the nearest Lego Store.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will be trying to get Umarak once my paycheck comes in; but I can't find him for sale at any of the stores I check. It's weird. He better show up soon or I'll divert the funds to other purposes. :(

Maybe it's because he's so popular? I got mine the first day it came to Toys R Us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm confused by this statement. "Overly-complex", the larger the set the more complex it should be, no? I'm not going to pay $25 for something that is made with a parts budget of $15, nor would I want a design to be as simple as possible. Although you were referencing MoCs in particular in your comment, I have seen you state the sets were "Overly-complex" standalone in the past.

Complexity on larger models is expected, but how you use it is still important. Ideally, you should be using complex building techniques to do things you couldn't do as well with simpler techniques, not just to make the model less straightforward.

Also, there's a difference between something that's visually complex and something that's functionally complex. The new Toa's torso shells are visually complex, but functionally they're single-piece torso armor with just one measly connection point. By contrast, last year's gearbox piece was functionally complex (lots of connection points at different angles to allow you to construct a variety of gear functions), but visually very simple, without a whole lot of textures or decorations besides those which were absolutely essential. The Unity Piece from this year's sets is complex both visually AND functionally, while the new leg shell from the Star Wars buildable figures isn't especially complex visually OR functionally.

A set could have "too much" functional complexity if its functions come at the expense of the visuals or playability, drive up the age range past the target age, or are just plain inefficient (i.e. using way more gears than necessary for a simple function). A set could have "too much" visual complexity if it has so many colors, textures, and motifs that it feels chaotic, cluttered, or busy rather than purposeful. Adding more and more complexity of either sort is usually not desirable.

Even many of the largest MOCs and sets use complex detail selectively and strategically. Take the Super Star Destroyer, for example. It uses chaotic "greebles" on the top, but the surfaces around that are a simple, smooth repeated pattern, and even the textures on its edges are simple and subtle. If it had the kind of greebles from the top all over it, or used lots of different types of textures on every available surface, it would just be one huge mess.

Frankly, I don't see how even half of last year's sets have more 'personality' than this year's sets. What do people mean when they say that? I don't particularly see how 2015 Tahu, perhaps one of the more boring Masters, has more personality than Uniter Tahu, who at least looks a lot more fire-based - unlike Master Tahu, who only had his weapons to signify that.

2015 Tahu may not have had a lot of fire motifs, but he had a much more interesting silhouette than the 2016 version in my opinion. I also don't really see how the Uniter version feels that much more fire-based. It has the elemental crystal motifs that all the 2016 Toa have, but other than that all it does is swap a lot of the original set's bright red for transparent fluorescent reddish orange and warm gold. I guess it also adds the Dark Azur accents, which I'll admit are nice.

Personality isn't just about how much a design has going on. In fact, if you have a lot of details competing for attention, they might make less of a statement altogether than if you have a few more unifying, defining characteristics. For instance, I feel like the 2016 Tahu might've been better if instead of using the "cracked" add-on from the Skull Villains AND the new crystal add-on AND the piston add-on from last year's Toa, he could have chosen just two out of three of those motifs and spread them out a bit more throughout his design. By contrast, I feel like the new Lewa has a lot more personality due to using the Vorox shell as a defining trait throughout his design.

Overall, I feel like the 2015 Toa in general are more aligned with their elements than any Toa before them. And I don't for a minute think the elemental crystal motif that the 2016 Toa use throughout their designs hurts them. In fact, it's one of the best things they have going for them, IMO. It's a new (and IMO, brilliant) defining motif to show that the characters have been upgraded. But it doesn't necessarily make up for the ways I feel like some of the sets (namely Onua and Tahu) have less personality than the previous versions, or the way Pohatu and Kopaka's color schemes have become more jumbled (and Pohatu in particular has so little of his actual primary color)

I think Gali and Lewa handled the upgrade best, but Lewa's the only one whose design I'd say possibly improved overall in my eyes. As nice as 2016 Gali's asymmetry and color scheme are, I don't like how bony her upper legs are compared to the more streamlined design she had in 2011, her eyes don't show all that well through her mask, and I can't shake the feeling her shoulders are raised a bit higher than they really need to be. The reason I say "possibly" improved even for Lewa is because I miss the dual-function weapons, though I recognize that it would've been difficult to pull off that gimmick for a second year in a row. And I feel the turning waist function in general is less exciting than the battle arm function of the previous sets. This isn't me just being contrarian — it's me actually thinking hard about what I like about the new sets and what I don't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why do I suddenly want to see Malum on Kopaka's back...

Kopaka: "Get of my back you fire brute!"

Malum: "But you must learn Unity!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why do I suddenly want to see Malum on Kopaka's back...

I may need to draw a picture of this. Kopaka giving Malum a piggy-back ride is just too tempting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just remembered there was a Glatorian named Malum. Malum, Melum. :laugh: Lego needs to be more creative with the names.

"Malum" is the Nominative Neuter form of the Latin adjective for "evil." Seeing as the character was released in the year which introduced the desert planet of Bara Magna, which was home to Metus (or "fear,") the Village of Vulcanus, and a number of characters with Latinate (but, as far as I can tell, meaningless) names, I'd say this was no accident.

2016 has its own Latin-derived name, in the form of "Terak," a pun on "Terra," the Latin word for "Earth."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Last night I worked my first shift at a new job. 2 hours in I smiled because I finaly had earned enough money to purchase Umarak the Hunter :)

I will be trying to get Umarak once my paycheck comes in; but I can't find him for sale at any of the stores I check. It's weird. He better show up soon or I'll divert the funds to other purposes. :(

The most glorious thing is stepping into a store, buying LEGO with hard earned money. That's awesome man. We're all rootin' here for you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i went to a barns and noble last week and they had no trace of bionicle at all with the only constraction being star wars. and this barns and noble had nearly half a floor dedicated to toys both collectibles and kid's playthings. so does barns and noble not carry bionicle anymore?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i went to a barns and noble last week and they had no trace of bionicle at all with the only constraction being star wars. and this barns and noble had nearly half a floor dedicated to toys both collectibles and kid's playthings. so does barns and noble not carry bionicle anymore?

Definitely not. They were one of the FIRST stores in my area to have the 2016 Bionicle sets in stock. It's possible that it's just your store that no longer carries them... but even then, it might just be a case where they sold out of their current stock and will be getting more in eventually.

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.