Bionicle 2016 Sets Discussion

[Logan McOwen]

I thought Mata green (I still call it that) was discontinued?

[Mandate]

I thought Mata green (I still call it that) was discontinued?

Far from it. There have been more individual pieces using dark green over bright green since the inception of bright green, though I'm not accounting for the frequency of said pieces (check Brickset if you want though). It's still the predominant color of Lloyd from NINJAGO, it's only been discontinued in constraction.

[Logan McOwen]

Huh, TIL.

[Lyichir]

Far from it. There have been more individual pieces using dark green over bright green since the inception of bright green, though I'm not accounting for the frequency of said pieces (check Brickset if you want though). It's still the predominant color of Lloyd from NINJAGO, it's only been discontinued in constraction.

Even "discontinued in constraction" is a bit of an overstatement—it just hasn't been used recently in Constraction, that's all. Colors phasing in and out of popularity for such a comparably small product category is far from out of the ordinary, and in fact Bionicle's return last year brought with it several colors that hadn't been seen in constraction in some time—namely Dark Orange (absent since 2003), Bright Green (absent since 2012), and Earth Blue (absent since 2010). Dark Green (Mata Green) last appeared in constraction in 2011 (in both versions of Nex from that year), and has continued to see use in System and Technic since then as well. In fact, it's arguably appeared in constraction every year since 2014 as well—provided you count Mixels as constraction.

Edited March 25, 2016 by Lyichir

[Ikaatril]

Considering that it's recently been confirmed that BIONICLE's ending in 2017 with only one wave, I hope we don't get a repeat of the Stars, though it's possible.

But I'm not too surprised. The bionicle fan communities elsewhere are really, really unpleasant towards the designers.

[Kalhiki]

Considering that it's recently been confirmed that BIONICLE's ending in 2017 with only one wave, I hope we don't get a repeat of the Stars, though it's possible.

But I'm not too surprised. The bionicle fan communities elsewhere are really, really unpleasant towards the designers.

Let me stop you right there. Nowhere was it confirmed that it'll only have one wave next year. That was all speculation over in the story topic.

Edited March 27, 2016 by Kalhiki

[Takanuinuva]

I don't buy the fact that were only getting one wave in 2017.

But on the off chance that we are. They'd better give us a physical version of the MOUP and maybe even the Mask of Time.

[Mesonak]

Yeah, I certainly wouldn't place any bets one way or another as to the number of waves we'll be getting in 2017. Nothing can be guaranteed for sure at this time, which was kind of the whole point of my post that was the subject of the discussion in the story topic, lol. I'd certainly like for there to be two waves, so here's hoping.

I think it's a pretty safe bet to assume we'll get the MOUP next year. Mask of Time? Not so certain. I'd like to hope so, obviously, but I'm not really sure where it would fit into the storyline.

Edited March 27, 2016 by Mesonak

[CabooseBM]

What evidence is there for Bonkles G2 ending next year? I didn't see any announcements on BZPower or anything like that.

[TwistLaw]

>mfw in two years the general consensus will finally accept the Skull squad as one of the worst things that ever happened to BIONICLE

[Quisoves Pugnat]

What evidence is there for Bonkles G2 ending next year? I didn't see any announcements on BZPower or anything like that.

I believe it was stated at the big ComicCon premier that LEGO's initial scheme for Gen2 lasts three years. If the line is deemed sufficiently profitable, it will of course continue past that point. But in lieu of the requisite financial data, we can't count on getting anything past 2017.

[CabooseBM]

I believe it was stated at the big ComicCon premier that LEGO's initial scheme for Gen2 lasts three years. If the line is deemed sufficiently profitable, it will of course continue past that point. But in lieu of the requisite financial data, we can't count on getting anything past 2017.

Ah, right, that makes sense then. I guess it's all speculation and waiting at this point to find out the actual truth then, but at least if it does it'll have a planned arc.

I just hope Constraction moves away from technic again.

Edited March 28, 2016 by CabooseBM

[MrHerofan]

At least at the end of all of this, Bionicle will have the ending that it needed. Not ending in a mess like G1 did, but nice and simple. It'll be something that I will look fondly upon remembering the initial black and white photo leak, and the initial rush of Bionicle being back. It is still sad to see the theme not reaching its potential, but at least it got something.

[Ikaatril]

The popular opinion among the people that grew up with BIONICLE outside of the BIONICLE fansites is that G2 is 'awful' and 'too bright and cheerful', along with being 'rebranded hero-factory trash'. Which is also a reflection of what the public thinks, since BIONICLE fansites are in the tiny, tiny minority.

It's clear that CCBS is not very popular and a major reason why constraction has been failing - it's ultimately nowhere near as versatile as a technic-based building system. You can't create titans as complex as Kardas with CCBS, you can create an incredibly awkward but siple looking titan that's equally tool but has none of the things that made a set like Kardas distinctive. Because no matter how much you try, CCBS becomes incredibly awkward to fiddle around with at large scales - it relies entirely too much on ball joints.

Because there's nothing distinctive about CCBS. The vast majority of sets are flat, and that's very uninteresting to the eye. Call the old BIONICLE or the 2016 pieces overdetailed all you want, that doesn't change the fact that they're so much more distinctive and less generic than most of Hero Factory and 2015's sets. And when it comes to getting sales, being distinctive is much better than being generic.

BIONICLE's failure is guaranteed at this point. It's too late to change anything since they start designed two years before the sets release. The signs are there and ignoring them won't go away - BIONICLE sets are common shelf warmers. Kids are not interested. And going with a Netflix show without advertisement was a colossally stupid idea - it'll barely be watched.

>mfw in two years the general consensus will finally accept the Skull squad as one of the worst things that ever happened to BIONICLE

>yfw when you realise that your opinion is not the one true opinion that defines how everything must go. I'm really sick of your passive-aggressive attitude and remarks to others.

[TwistLaw]

>yfw when you realise that your opinion is not the one true opinion that defines how everything must go. I'm really sick of your passive-aggressive attitude and remarks to others.

Neither I implied that my opinion is true and sacred, but actually that this is one of the few places of the internet where the skull squad was strongly praised. I browse regularly /toy/ and opinions have been mixed to negative, in general, since last summer. And remarks to others... I had an argument with another user in the story topic literally yesterday, but I don't think I ever put myself in such a position before that time.

[Lyichir]

The popular opinion among the people that grew up with BIONICLE outside of the BIONICLE fansites is that G2 is 'awful' and 'too bright and cheerful', along with being 'rebranded hero-factory trash'. Which is also a reflection of what the public thinks, since BIONICLE fansites are in the tiny, tiny minority.

It's clear that CCBS is not very popular and a major reason why constraction has been failing - it's ultimately nowhere near as versatile as a technic-based building system. You can't create titans as complex as Kardas with CCBS, you can create an incredibly awkward but siple looking titan that's equally tool but has none of the things that made a set like Kardas distinctive. Because no matter how much you try, CCBS becomes incredibly awkward to fiddle around with at large scales - it relies entirely too much on ball joints.

Because there's nothing distinctive about CCBS. The vast majority of sets are flat, and that's very uninteresting to the eye. Call the old BIONICLE or the 2016 pieces overdetailed all you want, that doesn't change the fact that they're so much more distinctive and less generic than most of Hero Factory and 2015's sets. And when it comes to getting sales, being distinctive is much better than being generic.

BIONICLE's failure is guaranteed at this point. It's too late to change anything since they start designed two years before the sets release. The signs are there and ignoring them won't go away - BIONICLE sets are common shelf warmers. Kids are not interested. And going with a Netflix show without advertisement was a colossally stupid idea - it'll barely be watched.

>yfw when you realise that your opinion is not the one true opinion that defines how everything must go. I'm really sick of your passive-aggressive attitude and remarks to others.

Wow, lots of statements with no basis in fact. Guess what? The opinions of people who grew up with Bionicle OUTSIDE of the organized fan community are NOT the same as what the public thinks—not by a long shot. You are talking about people who are far removed from Bionicle's target audience, many of whom "grew out of" Bionicle a long time ago. Their opinions are probably LESS similar to what modern kids think of Bionicle than the organized fandom, not more, for the simple reason that most of them have little awareness of the modern state of Lego and constraction themes in general.

Your assumption that CCBS is a major reason constraction is allegedly failing is also flawed. Firstly, because CCBS is MORE versatile, modular, and Technic-compatible than most of G1 Bionicle's overly specialized parts (which were exceptionally limited when it came to their proportions). Secondly, because it assumes that creating a large titan with CCBS is impossible just because it hasn't been done in sets before, when in fact MOCists including actual Lego designers have done just that (and if you don't have Kardas on hand, do yourself a favor and rebuild him—his design has not aged well and could be achieved just as well if not better with modern parts). Your complaints about CCBS sets being "flat and uninteresting to the eye" are not universal and apply just as much if not more to G1 Bionicle sets (especially compared against modern Bionicle and Star Wars sets). And your assumption that CCBS itself is unpopular ignores the fact that by all indications, the Star Wars constraction sets have been a massive success.

[Ikaatril]

Wow, lots of statements with no basis in fact. Guess what? The opinions of people who grew up with Bionicle OUTSIDE of the organized fan community are NOT the same as what the public thinks—not by a long shot. You are talking about people who are far removed from Bionicle's target audience, many of whom "grew out of" Bionicle a long time ago. Their opinions are probably LESS similar to what modern kids think of Bionicle than the organized fandom, not more, for the simple reason that most of them have little awareness of the modern state of Lego and constraction themes in general.

And the same thing doesn't apply to you or me or everyone else here? Your opinions are also not what kids think. We are different in that we are biased to like BIONICLE rather than be indifferent to it, unlike people outside the fan communities. We are not a good metric to assume success on, we are the minority in a much bigger sea of kids and people who used to like BIONICLE.

Your assumption that CCBS is a major reason constraction is allegedly failing is also flawed. Firstly, because CCBS is MORE versatile, modular, and Technic-compatible than most of G1 Bionicle's overly specialized parts (which were exceptionally limited when it came to their proportions).

Calling it more versatile doesn't make it true. Also, calling it more technic-compatible is a flat-out lie - how many CCBS shells have technic connections? Very little, if not none. Whereas every single G1 piece had at least one technic connection - CCBS doesn't have that luxury or that flexibility.

when in fact MOCists including actual Lego designers have done just that

But are they compex or engaging builds? I'd wager no. And LEGO is a building toy, is it not? Complexity is good. And most CCBS sets are anything but complex. People expect complexity from building toys. Including kids. Don't simplify it just to coddle kids who can't do it, then they'll never advance.

Your complaints about CCBS sets being "flat and uninteresting to the eye" are not universal and apply just as much if not more to G1 Bionicle sets (especially compared against modern Bionicle and Star Wars sets)

How in the world do they apply more to G1 sets? Toa Mata, Toa Nuva, Rahi, Bohrok, Rahkshi, Toa Metru, Vahki, Visorak, Toa Hordika, Piraka, Barraki, Phantoka, Mistika, even most of the Glatorian - those are the bulk of G1 sets, and most if not all of those have distinct 'character' to them, far more interesting to the eye than the smooth and wholly uninteresting looking Protectors or 2015 Toa. Saying that applies to more G1 Bionicle sets more than G2 bionicle sets is laughable considering how much character and personality G1 sets had compared to G2 sets.

And your assumption that CCBS itself is unpopular ignores the fact that by all indications, the Star Wars constraction sets have been a massive success.

They are successful because they are Star Wars merchandise, not because they are CCBS. Everything with Star Wars on it is massively popular.

[TwistLaw]

The Star Wars CCBS sets are actually far better designed than most G2 sets, I'd go as far as saying they're the best you could ask from the system.

While it's true that we've seen almost no titan sets since CCBS was introduced (bar Witch Doctor, Black Phantom, Grevious and not much else after 5 whole years), they were engaging and looked actually pretty good.

The real problem of the system is that it does not innovate much in the way of looks, because of the way it relies on shells. Since 2011 we've seen always the same shells with some variation of size and few decorations introduced here and there (most of them arrived with BIONICLE, e.g. the piston, the skull armour, the crystal piece). A set like Umarak the Hunter could have been built easily five years ago, if you don't count small details like the torso (that can't be seen anyway) or the shooter.

In short, CCBS aesthetic changed much less between 2011-2016 than it did the BIONICLE one between 2001-2006. If you put side by side Umarak the Hunter and Fire Lord you'll actually realise that the latter uses a wider array of pieces. But if you compare Toa Jaller to 2001 Tahu, well, that's just another story. And the costumer sees it, sees and understands how the visuals of a product don't change much bewteen years.

Constraction is sadly a system not versatile as bricks are. If you can build many different things using the same bricks and it's easy to understand for your customer that you're selling something new, it's just not the same when you're working with limbs and sockets. After all you can build everything with bricks, but 99% of the times you're building using BIONICLE pieces... you're just gonna build another BIONICLE. This is a limitation, a limitation G1 somehow overcame by introducing many new pieces each year. A limitation CCBS tried to overcome by pretending it could behave like a brick-based theme.

And, well, we're gonna see pretty soon if that really worked out.

[Dr_Chronos]

Calling it more versatile doesn't make it true. Also, calling it more technic-compatible is a flat-out lie - how many CCBS shells have technic connections? Very little, if not none. Whereas every single G1 piece had at least one technic connection - CCBS doesn't have that luxury or that flexibility. [/font][/color]

But are they compex or engaging builds? I'd wager no. And LEGO is a building toy, is it not? Complexity is good. And most CCBS sets are anything but complex. People expect complexity from building toys. Including kids. Don't simplify it just to coddle kids who can't do it, then they'll never advance.

While connectivity is a little more challenging, mixing CCBS with Technic or System works miles better aesthetically. The majority off old Boincle parts were either clunky (this is especially true with prefab limbs) or looking extremely out of place on a non-Bionicle set. The only exceptions I can think of are the parts that weren't so detailed, like the Bohrok eye which has lasted more than a decade.

And while Lego's Titans are more or less satisfactory the community has produced many, many, many fantastic Titan MOCs. It would take too much time to link all my favorites so here is just a gathering.

Constraction is sadly a system not versatile as bricks are. If you can build many different things using the same bricks and it's easy to understand for your customer that you're selling something new, it's just not the same when you're working with limbs and sockets. After all you can build everything with bricks, but 99% of the times you're building using BIONICLE pieces... you're just gonna build another BIONICLE. This is a limitation, a limitation G1 somehow overcame by introducing many new pieces each year. A limitation CCBS tried to overcome by pretending it could behave like a brick-based theme.

And, well, we're gonna see pretty soon if that really worked out.

I wouldn't say G1 ever overcame that limitation. Constant new pieces yes, but the vast majority of those stayed within the theme and most designs were too radical for use anywhere else. CCBS's I feel has been more successful in branching out to the more creature or mech type system sets.

Seeing as this so far is only indirectly connected to 2016, shouldn't we move further discussion into CCBS vs. Technic System topic?

Edited March 28, 2016 by Dr_Chronos

[TwistLaw]

I wouldn't say G1 ever overcame that limitation. Constant new pieces yes, but the vast majority of those stayed within the theme and most designs were too radical for use anywhere else. CCBS's I feel has been more successful in branching out to the more creature or mech type system sets.

Aside beast feet and smaller bones I don't see much CCBS in other themes. In 2005 the Viking theme did an awesome job in reusing BIONICLE pieces, on the other hand.

While it managed without a shade of doubt to blend much better in other themes like it did with the Super Heroes Ultrabuild and the recent Star Wars sets, I think CCBS did this at a great cost: personality. It's generic enough to be used in many ways, but needs a lot of support to give a theme his unique feel. And humans made with shells and bones are just awkard looking, no matter how you put it.

But yeah, this is becoming off topic, so I'll stop right here.

[Lyichir]

And the same thing doesn't apply to you or me or everyone else here? Your opinions are also not what kids think. We are different in that we are biased to like BIONICLE rather than be indifferent to it, unlike people outside the fan communities. We are not a good metric to assume success on, we are the minority in a much bigger sea of kids and people who used to like BIONICLE.

We may be the minority among people who used to like Bionicle, but we're also the minority among people who STILL like Bionicle. Older Bionicle fans who grew out of the theme have basically nothing in common with Bionicle's current target audience, whereas older Bionicle fans who have continued to observe and follow the growth and evolution of constraction have a much better insight into what current kids could see in the theme. And by the way, the theme's target audience certainly aren't going to complain about the theme being "rebranded Hero Factory", because if they know about Hero Factory at all then it'll be what they grew up with, and they won't have an illegitimate hatred of it like older Bionicle fans tend to. So if that's what you see older fans complaining about, you can pretty much rest assured that their opinion has virtually no bearing on what the theme's actual target audience thinks.

Calling it more versatile doesn't make it true. Also, calling it more technic-compatible is a flat-out lie - how many CCBS shells have technic connections? Very little, if not none. Whereas every single G1 piece had at least one technic connection - CCBS doesn't have that luxury or that flexibility.

It's more versatile because you're not limited to clunky pre-built torsos and limbs that come in an absolutely pathetic range of sizes. Your point about Technic compatibility is fair, but do keep in mind that today's Bionicle sets feature substantially more Technic-based construction than any older Bionicle canister sets (including a greater percentage of basic Technic parts by piece count than any of those older sets) and that's WITHOUT the superficial and frankly unnecessary use of Technic to attach shells. You can do a lot more with a Hero Factory leg beam than you could with older parts like Piraka or Toa Metru legs, in part due to the wide range of leg beams and in part because the parts integrate two types of connection points rather than one. And that's not even getting into the new Bionicle's preference for custom torso constructions over repetitive uses of pre-made torso pieces.

But are they compex or engaging builds? I'd wager no. And LEGO is a building toy, is it not? Complexity is good. And most CCBS sets are anything but complex. People expect complexity from building toys. Including kids. Don't simplify it just to coddle kids who can't do it, then they'll never advance.

You'd wager wrong. There have been all sorts of amazingly complex and titanic builds done with CCBS. As for simplicity, the nice thing about CCBS is that it provides a dynamic range of possibilities. A beginning builder can start with easy-to-snap-together skeletons and graduate to larger, more complex custom builds. In that sense, it's very similar to G1's sets, save for the fact that more diversity is possible in builds even without having to resort to totally custom solutions, thanks to the modular system of shells and beams offering a wide range of possibilities.

How in the world do they apply more to G1 sets? Toa Mata, Toa Nuva, Rahi, Bohrok, Rahkshi, Toa Metru, Vahki, Visorak, Toa Hordika, Piraka, Barraki, Phantoka, Mistika, even most of the Glatorian - those are the bulk of G1 sets, and most if not all of those have distinct 'character' to them, far more interesting to the eye than the smooth and wholly uninteresting looking Protectors or 2015 Toa. Saying that applies to more G1 Bionicle sets more than G2 bionicle sets is laughable considering how much character and personality G1 sets had compared to G2 sets.

I personally think that a distinctive silhouette and a diverse range of physiques imbue a heck of a lot more personality than excessive and often incoherent detail on every single part of a figure. You might disagree there, but I think most people in the field of dynamic character design would side with me on that. Similarly, I assumed that by "flat" you were referring to the set builds, rather than to the simpler textures—and by that measure, 2015's sets are significantly less "flat" than most of the sets from Bionicle G1.

They are successful because they are Star Wars merchandise, not because they are CCBS. Everything with Star Wars on it is massively popular.

That would not explain why they're substantially more successful than Lego's old Technic-based Star Wars figures, or why they're also more successful than the less impressive Super Heroes figures released in the CCBS's infancy. They may not be successful just because they're CCBS, but the fact that they're CCBS doesn't seem to be hurting them, may actually be contributing to their success, and that success might in turn contribute to CCBS itself becoming more popular.

Edited March 28, 2016 by Lyichir

[Aanchir]

>mfw in two years the general consensus will finally accept the Skull squad as one of the worst things that ever happened to BIONICLE

Worse than the Bohrok-Kal? Worse than the 2008 Matoran? Worse than the Stars? You've GOT to be joking.

Calling it more versatile doesn't make it true. Also, calling it more technic-compatible is a flat-out lie - how many CCBS shells have technic connections? Very little, if not none. Whereas every single G1 piece had at least one technic connection - CCBS doesn't have that luxury or that flexibility.

Ball snaps and ball cups ARE Technic connections. And in my opinion, a number of the connections used in CCBS are more versatile than the ones on G1 Bionicle shells, not less. I can do way more things with a 3M CCBS shell than with a Toa Metru thigh shell, or with a 7M CCBS beam than with a Toa Metru shin beam.

But are they compex or engaging builds? I'd wager no.

You'd wager wrong. This MOC by Christoffer Raundahl (who designed various G1 Bionicle sets including Cahdok & Gahdok, and was one of the inventors of the CCBS) is without a doubt a complex and engaging build, arguably more so than ANY Bionicle titan set, and I say that having gone to great lengths to reverse-engineer it. There's nothing remotely "dumbed down" about it. It's not just LEGO designers who can make amazing CCBS creations, either — another of my favorite MOCs is IGU's Scorpion King. But nobody can make MOCs this impressive with any building system if they're not imaginative enough to recognize the possibilities it offers.

How in the world do they apply more to G1 sets? Toa Mata, Toa Nuva, Rahi, Bohrok, Rahkshi, Toa Metru, Vahki, Visorak, Toa Hordika, Piraka, Barraki, Phantoka, Mistika, even most of the Glatorian - those are the bulk of G1 sets, and most if not all of those have distinct 'character' to them, far more interesting to the eye than the smooth and wholly uninteresting looking Protectors or 2015 Toa. Saying that applies to more G1 Bionicle sets more than G2 bionicle sets is laughable considering how much character and personality G1 sets had compared to G2 sets.

I disagree wholeheartedly. Most of those examples you listed from before 2007 are rather repetitive clone builds. The Protectors manage to have more personality than many of those examples in spite of having identical masks, thanks to their much more varied physiques, color schemes, and equipment. The 2015 Toa likewise have more personality than many of those examples due to their diverse proportions and silhouettes, creative dual-function weapons, and vibrant color schemes that don't follow a repetitive formula. If you genuinely think the Toa Metru, Toa Hordika, or Vahki (all of which had formulaic color schemes and identical or near-identical builds) have more personality than the 2015 Toa, frankly, you've lost touch with reality.

EDIT: Whoops, my brother beat me to the punch. Sorry if some of the points I made sound like a repeat of what he said.

Edited March 28, 2016 by Aanchir

[TwistLaw]

Worse than the Bohrok-Kal? Worse than the 2008 Matoran? Worse than the Stars? You've GOT to be joking.

In fact I wrote "one of", which in the english language is used to express syntactic constructions known as nominal partitives.Those constructions convey a message of "part of a whole", and not of "part over a whole"; thus what I wrote didn't define the Skull Squad the worst thing to have ever happened to the BIONICLE franchise, but actually one of the things that are part of the list of the lower points of this LEGO theme. The Bohrok-Kal and other sets were very well implied by my wording.

(don't hate me, you know I agree on many things you say)

(but don't you dare ever agin to talk sheet about my beloved Toa Metru )

[MrHerofan]

Yeah to agree with points made above, G1 sets aren't that great in retrospective. They are fragile, and had "monkey" proportions. They were also filled with a lot of gaps, which for building introduces a whole wave of ideas, but in the individual sets they just are not that great. The love for G1 seems to come from nostalgia, because when you look at the original theme in retrospect there were plenty of problems. G2 while not being nearly as fleshed out, does not have many holes in its story. The sets also have a nicer look to them. While they don't seem to robotic, they are much more nice to look at then the G1 sets, which after the ignika build started to look very similar to each other.

[Kalhiki]

... *sigh*

I don't know why I come in this topic anymore. All I ever see is people arguing...