Aanchir

Pretty much every constraction set since the start of 2011 uses the same building system, so all those sets will all be fully compatible. Pre-2011 BIONICLE and Hero Factory sets don't use quite the same building system, so they are slightly less compatible. Knights' Kingdom II and Galidor sets are not very compatible with these themes at all. Knights Kingdom II sets are generally compatible with regular LEGO System and LEGO Technic bricks, though, and their joint pieces are used extensively in other themes.

A general explanation of basic CCBS building can be found here. Its overall purpose was to make constraction building more "LEGO-like" and intuitive by giving it a foundation of basic parts in modular sizes, instead of so many parts having highly specialized sizes, shapes, and textures. Aesthetically, CCBS parts generally have smooth, solid surfaces, kind of like regular System or Technic parts, while older BIONICLE parts are more heavily textured. Compare this and this (classic BIONICLE shells and beams) to this and this (CCBS shells and beams). Classic BIONICLE armor shells usually attach to beams by Technic pins or cross axles. CCBS armor shells usually attach to beams by a ball snap. CCBS also has add-ons that can attach to the basic shells by a pair of 3.2mm bars (the kind of bar that a minifigure hand can clip to). CCBS arm and leg beams generally come in a wider range of sizes than BIONICLE arm and leg beams. So for instance, later BIONICLE sets mostly just had lower limb beams in 7M and 8M lengths and upper limb beams in 5M and 7M lengths. CCBS has limb beams in 3M, 4M, 5M, 6M, 7M, and 9M lengths, and even more sizes of shells. The ball cups of classic BIONICLE parts (especially from 2007–2010) tend to be more brittle than CCBS ball cups. This is because the circular parts that wrap around the ball itself were thinner, so that you could stick a Technic cross axle or pin through them. On CCBS ball cups this part is thicker, so a cross axle will no longer fit through that way. The parts of different eras can definitely still connect together, since they're all based on more or less the same connection points: Technic pin holes, Technic axle holes, and Technic ball joints. However, they use these connection points in different ways. You can't just swap the leg armor of this set with the leg armor of this set, because one set's leg armor connects with a Technic pin and the other connects with a ball snap. There are plenty of MOCs that use the parts together, though.

I think that had less to do with the building systems than with the sets' proportions. The 2.0 Hero Factory heroes had some slight variations in the width of their shoulders, the length of their arms, and the length of their legs, but nothing as extreme as Pohatu and Onua's build differences which made their heights substantially different than any of the others. But if you compare the 2.0 or 3.0 heroes to some other G1 series like the Toa Metru or Toa Inika, the CCBS builds seem considerably more diverse — despite those BIONICLE series having substantially more pieces, and thus ostensibly more potential for variation.

The practicality of the pistons in BIONICLE varied. Oh man, now you've gotten me started on the practicality of pistons... one of my favorite topics to ramble about back in the day! I'll try to keep things short though. There were a lot of parts in the early years that had very practical implied pistons. Most pistons on Toa Mata parts were designed to appear practical in some way. The pistons on the leg beam controlled leg movement. The ones on the torso block controlled waist movement. The ones on Gali's hooks opened and closed them. The ones on Kopaka's sword even helped the blade pivot, compensating for his lack of a wrist. And the ones on the foot controlled toe movement. This is not to say the pistons on all classic parts performed a practical function — the ones on the Slizer wing beam appeared purely decorative, for instance. But the majority appeared to perform a practical purpose. Pistons weren't the only aspects of these classic sets designed to appear practical, either. Both Vakama's firestaff and Tahu's fire sword had tubes that fed directly into the base of the flame patterns, almost like little fuel hoses. The decrease in these kinds of practical pistons corresponded directly to the increase in actual articulation. Toa Metru shin beams and thigh shells had pistons, but there was no real way these pistons could possibly do anything — there was no hinge point between the top of the piston and the bottom. Still, even many later parts had pistons designed to look practical on some level or another. The pistons on the Piraka torso are a good example. Like the Toa Mata, the Piraka had implied accordion-joint waists. It and the Toa Inika torso also both had pistons that allowed for implied shoulder movement. Nowadays, in the 2015 sets, the practicality of the pistons on the new elements still varies. It's hard to say how the pistons on Onua's hammer would perform any practical function. The pistons on Kopaka and Tahu's tools or Gali's and Lewa's seem a bit superficial as well — it's easy to see how there could be implied movement, but harder to see how this would actually impact the tool function. Pohatu's, at least, correspond to an obvious hinge, though small as they are it's hard to see how practical they would be for actually controlling the angle of his Stormerangs/Jeterangs. But the pistons on the new add-on element DO often provide an implied function, since they have a built-in accordion joint. On the torsos of the Protectors, for instance, they offer implied waist movement, just as the pistons on the Toa Mata torso did back in the day. And on the knee joints and shoulder joints of many of the Toa and Protectors, they can potentially imply that the curved surface at the bottom of the shell bends with the knee or shoulder. I'd almost go so far as to say the 2015 sets have helped redeem the piston as an actual practical detail rather than just a meaningless aesthetic detail, like they sometimes started to become in the later years of BIONICLE. And this is something I like about the CCBS in general. Instead of being forced to use more intricate detail indiscriminately for all parts of a model, it can be used selectively and purposefully, whether that purpose is practical or just to draw visual emphasis to certain parts of a model. In G1 BIONICLE, smoothness or lack of detail was more likely to command attention than texture or detail. Just look at how the Toa Nuva's look was defined by their smooth, clean torso, shoulder, and leg armor. But in G2, the foundation elements are what are smooth and clean, and it's the detail parts that command attention. I think this is a much smarter way of doing things from a building standpoint. After all, no matter what building system you prefer, it is always easier to add detail to a model than to subtract it. So why use high-detail elements as a model's foundation?

It puzzles me how many people can't understand the idea behind this contest. Personally, I think it's brilliant, and I've been quite impressed with the entries so far. Certainly I think it's nicer than a sweepstakes/raffle that doesn't actually require any sort of creative thinking. Being a winner in this contest means opening your mind and looking at the world around you through a different lens. But unlike a building contest or art contest, the kind of creativity it demands is completely independent of your level of skill or experience. A particularly open-minded and creative kid can win this contest just as easily as a 22-year-old fan with a design degree who's been following BIONICLE since the beginning.

Short legs would definitely be important to mini-doll children, but I think you might want other changes too, like shorter arms. Mini-dolls are more lifelike than minifigures by default, after all, and that might mean that proportional inconsistencies between the legs and the rest of the body could be more jarring than they are with minifigures (and even minifigures are helped by the curved implied joint portion of the short legs being recessed into the torso, so the overall length of the body from neck to crotch is shorter than on a regular-size fig). On the other hand, I do think that child characters could share the same torso regardless of sex, which would help keep the cost of new molds down. And dwarf characters could perhaps afford to be a little bit more oddly-proportioned than child characters, so arm length might not be so big an issue for them as for actual human children. I should try drawing some child/dwarf mini-doll designs, actually... I certainly know my way around a pencil and a pad of graph paper.

I think we'll see more fantasy creatures as the theme goes on. That's already becoming apparent, in fact — the animals from the first wave of sets are mostly just uniquely colored and patterned Earth creatures, while the second wave introduces three pegasi and a dragon! As for other fantasy races of characters, hmm, hard to say. Mermaids are probably a pretty safe bet. More diminutive races like pixies or dwarves would be hard without introducing a whole new mini-doll torso and legs, though that might be a worthwhile thing to do eventually anyway just so girls' themes can include child characters. So I wouldn't rule them out. And while I don't expect to see "ugly" creatures like orcs, ogres, or trolls (no offense to any trolls reading this), the possibility of malicious races like "dark elves" in the future can't be ruled out. There's no reason girls can't appreciate dark and eerie characters as much as bright and cheery ones, and even marketers who have traditionally been behind the curve are finally starting to pick up on that. Just look at Mattel's "Monster High" dolls. Even if they're still fairly prissy (they ARE fashion dolls), their dark and supernatural theme would be more than enough to send the kind of conservative parents who raised a stink about Harry Potter running for the hills.

Personally, I feel like more often than not, G1 parts made sets look 100% mechanical. The only parts that tended to look remotely organic were ones that were specially designed to look that way, like the Barraki heads and armor. And I can think of a lot of parts with incompatible textures. For instance, Toa Nuva armor looks completely different from Vahki shins. Rahkshi back plates look completely different from Piraka torsos. Bohrok faceplates look completely different from Toa Inika feet. Most masks look completely different from Toa Metru thigh shells. Even many basic Technic parts looked uncharacteristically smooth next to specialized BIONICLE parts — just compare the Turaga, whose bodies were fairly clean and smooth, to the Toa, whose bodies had hardly any large smooth surfaces apart from their masks. You could use inconsistent parts like these together in a MOC, certainly, but spreading the textures out so that they don't seem completely haphazard was an unnecessary hassle. I say "unnecessary" because you don't really encounter such a significant hassle in other LEGO themes. You have a foundation of basic parts to work from — I can't think of any time I've felt forced to use a System or Technic part with an extremely detailed and specific texture just because it was the only piece that gave me the size and shape I wanted. But many a BIONICLE MOC of mine has been stymied by wildly clashing textures. And what's more, the CCBS is about as well-suited to mechanical creations as it is to organic ones. There's no reason a machine has to be covered in greebles to look mechanical. C-3PO is just as clearly mechanical in the original trilogy with his shiny metal cladding as in Episode 1 where he looks ramshackle and unfinished. Optimus Prime from the G1 Transformers cartoon looks just as mechanical as the more greebled Optimus Prime from the more recent movies. They're just different kinds of mechanical. I have easily heard just as many criticisms of CCBS looking "too mechanical" as "not mechanical enough", and I think that's a pretty good sign that it manages the balance of mechanical and organic a lot better than many G1 BIONICLE parts.

All six are supposed to be coming out in September. Judging from past LEGO releases, they might start showing up in occasional stores up to a month in advance, but September is the official release date. EDIT: FBTB has official pics of Cody and Jango! http://www.fbtb.net/2015/04/30/official-cody-and-jango-buildable-figure-images/

Same here, honestly. Though I also appreciate the Sir Fangar minifigure, it doesn't have the same significance for me as it would have to a more dedicated Legends of Chima collector. And I'd happily trade away Lightning Lad to help make up for the cost of the cube (which I imagine will be $15, same as last year's cube).

As I understand it, it works both ways. Red sets tend to sell well automatically, and so they are given increased story prominence to reflect that. And in turn that boosts their popularity even further. Even if this sort of poll had been conducted in 2001, when the story media focused much less on Tahu, I think you'd have seen somewhat similar results.

And again, it uses it as an individual descriptor, not as a team name, group name, or species name. When referring to the Toa as a group, it still calls them Toa, just like every other story resource I've seen. You can keep calling them Masters as a group name as long as you like, but unless BIONICLE media actually starts using it that way, it will still be wrong. And there's no point using a completely unsubstantiated team name when there's a perfectly serviceable name that's been used consistently to refer to the characters as a group (Toa). It isn't like you're having to invent a term because an official one doesn't exist. You're just refusing to use the official name for the team because it's already being used for the characters as a class of beings. 'Cuz it's not like a BIONICLE name has ever referred to both a class of beings and a team before...

The greebly look of G1 BIONICLE parts could look nice aesthetically when used in particular ways, but it presented some major problems for me as a MOCist and artist due to the many disparate textures it included. It could often be hard to build an original character or even draw an official character without the textures of their parts clashing. I greatly prefer building CCBS MOCs to building classic BIONICLE MOCs. I don't have to be nearly so persnickety about what parts I use just to ensure a model has the bare minimum of stylistic consistency, and I have considerably more control over my models' proportions. Additionally, I have much more fun drawing CCBS characters in a set-accurate or near-set-accurate style than G1 BIONICLE characters, since there isn't so much tedious and extraneous clutter to deal with. The smooth, clean look of CCBS feels more refined and less ramshackle than the high-detail look of G1 BIONICLE parts, and is more consistent with the smooth, clean simplicity of LEGO System and LEGO Technic bricks. What's more, the CCBS is simply more of an actual building system than G1 parts were. Shells and beams are basic, interchangeable, and come in a modular system of lengths, just like basic LEGO System bricks and plates or LEGO Technic beams and axles. Any shell can be used on any beam in any orientation. And just like G1 BIONICLE, there is plenty of potential for more advanced customization with other System and Technic parts. It is, after all, still a Technic-based building system. The fact that CCBS even has basic parts is a godsend for building, since you can build in an orderly fashion — starting with a basic foundation and then adding detail. The only G1 parts I'd consider "basic BIONICLE parts" are things like Toa Hordika and Glatorian neck joints or the simple ball cups and double ball cups used in sets like the Toa Metru and Toa Inika. And those were a lot more limited than CCBS beams and shells — there were simply not enough of them to form the entire foundation of an original character design. Only by mixing in lots of other basic Technic parts could you even dream of creating a character's skeleton and body volumes before adding detail. Neither system is flawless, of course, and in fact the greatest drawbacks for me are characteristics they have in common. Although CCBS is a lot better for creating non-mechanical characters than older BIONICLE parts, both systems will pretty much invariably result in more of a rugged "action figure" look than a more delicate "doll" look, which sometimes frustrates me as a MOCist. How I would love to create full-size LEGO Elves dolls! But even if I created custom head sculpts, I can't picture any way CCBS dolls could reflect the soft, organic contours that make a doll "doll-like". However, perhaps somebody else might one day make an extraordinary BIONICLE or CCBS doll that can prove me wrong. For the time being, though, even the shapely female characters of MOCists like Pate-Keetongu often feel more like action figures than dolls.

Speaking of books, there are two Ninjago graphic novels coming out this year, along with some LEGO Bionicle and LEGO Friends graphic novels. Papercutz's license for Ninjago graphic novels expired this year, so these new graphic novels will be published by Little, Brown Books for Young Readers. Little, Brown is a really excellent publisher (I've been a big fan of the My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic guide books and the All the Wrong Questions series by Lemony Snicket, both of which they publish), so I think these graphic novels will be in good hands.

According to Google Trends, Ninjago's popularity (at least in terms of search interest) is rising, not falling. I think it will easily be able to maintain interest until 2017 if it continues on this track, especially since to some extent, the movie itself will help to generate interest. My only concern can be summed up in this question: was the decision to delay the movie made soon enough that the sets and story will be able to continue without any bumps in 2016? After all, if it turns out that they were all geared up to have sets tying in with the movie in 2016, then a change this late in the game could mean having to completely rethink their toy and media strategy for next year. I'm sure that Ninjago could survive another hiatus/downtime like it had in 2013, but it would not be ideal. Hopefully, even though we're only now getting confirmation of the new release date, the decision to delay the movie was made some time ago, giving the LEGO Group plenty of time to adjust their strategy.

Oh dear. I hope that wasn't an abrupt decision, because if it were it could have a negative impact on the LEGO Group's brand strategy for Ninjago. Hopefully, though, they have had time to adjust their plans for what sets they will release next year and how they plan to market them.

Three weeks? More like fourteen years! XD

Not quite the same as the one from the original NRG Kai, but yes, the Airjitzu ninja figures seem in many ways like they're intended to be a new take on the NRG figures (as in, Ninja literally made of their elements).

I'm not sure what it is about Luke's design that people think needs to be "more solid"? I mean, his back armor isn't the absolute best, but at least it's less gappy than the back armor on Cody and Jango. And his legs are more filled out than either of those sets as well. All things considered, despite being a bit mundane on account of his monochrome costume and lack of decorative armor, Luke strikes me as the most solid of the $20 builds. In general, I've seen a lot of hate for the "human" characters, but they're actually some of my favorites and I hope there are more in future waves. Having fairly generic human heads in CCBS is something I greatly appreciate, and Luke and Obi-Wan both have nice proportions and fairly solid builds. Granted, I appreciate Vader and Grievous in terms of sheer creativity, and Cody and Jango have some great pieces, but they don't interest me quite so much, in part because their heads are unmistakeably Star Wars character heads. Anyway, wonder if we'll get a turnaround of Obi-Wan today, or if they simply didn't bother to do one for him on account of his cape. I agree, more droids would be great! I'm not so interested in MagnaGuards, but all the other examples you listed could be quite cool sets. I'd also love a generic Imperial Stormtrooper, some female characters like Leia and Padme, and some alien characters like Chewbacca (though I'm now wondering how well he could be pulled off — the Chima fur detail element might be a bit too cartoony compared to the other characters in this range). Not to mention other major characters like Han. Overall, I see a lot of potential for future sets in this range, provided it sells well.

You guys DO know that printing can be removed, right? I mean, I probably wouldn't do that, but if you're THAT bothered by it it's pure simplicity. It kind of astonishes me how polarizing the print vs. sticker issue has been within the constraction community this year.

This is incredible! I love it!

Some of those prototype masks are genuinely pretty cool (and normally I'm not one to go ga-ga over prototypes). I sort of wish it had ended up with slightly longer eyeholes, though what I love most about the prototype masks are the traits that were maintained with the final mask — the angular jaw, the dome-like forehead, and the trademark "grin". The final mask definitely ends up looking more cheerful than some of the prototypes with narrower eyeholes, which end up feeling rather aggressive. I also wish that the videos were longer and more in-depth, but let's be honest here — they're still a real treat, and they give us a lot more "behind the scenes" info than many designer videos for other themes which mostly consist of the designer demonstrating the play features you'll get in the final set. In G1 BIONICLE we didn't get any designer videos at all, so this is certainly a step up in that respect.

My brother and I have all of them except the playmat, the diary, and the Azari polybag. We're reviewing the sets for The New Elementary! I want to put together an Elves MOC for Brickfair Virginia this year. Not sure what I'd build, though. At Brick Universe in Raleigh last month, I was struck by how many girls were visiting with their families during the public days. I made a point of asking any kids that came by what themes were their favorites, and so many of the girls said LEGO Friends. And while that makes me extremely proud of LEGO for doing so much to bring girls into the hobby, it also makes me a bit worried that those girls might feel a little bit marginalized at AFOL events like this, at which so few of the models on display are focused on those kinds of "girly" themes. Unfortunately, I'm not very good at building big, impressive scenes from LEGO. So far the only two MOC awards I've won at LEGO conventions both had "small" in the name (Best Small Space Craft at Brickfair Virginia for the Blacktron Vivisector and Best Small Creation at Brick Universe for Delwyn Buckler). So creating something that can really draw the public's eye, not to mention make up for the dearth of other Friends and Elves creations, will be a considerable challenge for me.

Very cool! But LEGO has been uploading the first episode broken up into six sections on their YouTube in some languages, so I'm a bit worried that "eleven clips" might just mean the episode we've seen plus the five character videos. Either way, I have my fingers crossed for brand-new videos to start showing up soon!

We don't have white 8M shells yet, do we? At least, not counting 8x5 torso shells.