Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Matt5327

  • Rank
  • Birthday 11/07/1993

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
  1. Hello everyone, After ten weeks of world building, the Bionicle Story Group has built a working premise and a solid base from which we can begin generating content. In the weeks to come, we will start work on the next phase of our project, which will be to write, in detail, the narrative of the story. Coming along this far would not have been possible without the dedication of the group's members, volunteers who have dedicated a great portion of their own time to the project, as with it a willingness to work together to create the best story possible - even if it sometimes meant sacrificing an idea that they were attached too. We are very proud of our work thus far, and look forward to sharing it with the Bionicle community when it is ready.
  2. I agree entirely. I look forward to seeing your story, should you decide to publicize it! If we should decide to expand in the future, we'll be sure to keep you in mind!
  3. Seems to me like you have some good ideas! Just so that there's no confusion, our plan isn't to continue G2 where Bionicle left off. Of course that doesn't mean we can't use your ideas (if you approve - we would, of course, attribute them to you). Thank you for your advice. We have actually just stopped recruiting for that exact reason. We recognize the possibility for growth in the future, but only if things are compartmentalized (with each compartment being small) and growth is gradual.
  4. Nostalgia is a powerful beast, so 2001. I've always preferred the more technical sets, which 2001 wins with the Rahi. It was also the year of MNOG, which pretty much defined Bionicle and its universe for me.
  5. I have to agree with you on this. I have my own ideas for future stories, but the thought of a group of fans creating a "canon story" could go against anything I could ever do. For example I want to someday make a few Okoto-Metru MOCs as I have called them, with Technic remote controlled vehicles for the six Toa in new G2 forms (that's my idea to do someday). But what if this story group takes a different direction, dare I say for example a G2 take on the Ignition saga? Will my fanon have to compete against the fanon/canon from another group? If a story group is made, let's please treat it as fanon. If it is considered canon it will conflict with other fan ideas in the community. If I gave the impression that anything we would do was official in the sense that LEGO's is, then that was my error. Even if we were to somehow get LEGO's blessing (we wouldn't), it would still be a group independent from the official source. The vulgarism "fanon" could be appropriate for those who might prefer it (realize that "fanon" is just "fan canon" - it's still a kind of canon). For those concerned that this would disallow anything they'd do themselves, it would do so no more than if LEGO were to reboot again or a short story written by a single fan. Everyone has their own head canon - mine frequently diverges from even the official canons. So if anyone has felt threatened by this group's existence - please don't - there's no power we have that could prevent you from creating your own content - in whatever form it might take - nor could we take away its value. There are two other fan groups besides this of which I am aware, and both are seeking to continue G2. This is unlikely to be the route we take (in fact, every member of our group so far has been against it). As for the age limit - we use conferencing as one of our communication methods, as it can be far more efficient than text in certain contexts. Unlike text, however, it is not easy for members to consider every word they say beforehand, which could turn into a major problem with younger participants. We figured that someone with at least some high school would likely be of sufficient maturity for this not to cause any problems.
  6. That's actually kind of what I was thinking - the key is to make sure that those involved all okay that. I don't want to make executive decisions when there is no real reason why I should be executive. You're being honest and courteous, so no need to be apologetic! I definitely understand your concern - I myself have also been in a number of projects that were doomed to fail from the beginning. There are two main aspects about this that I'm hoping will make it different: 1 - scale - Oftentimes projects shoot for the moon, but don't even include a rocket scientist. Whatever content is created in this group will be chosen by the content creators, and only according to their current skill levels and ability to commit time to the project. 2 - organization - Online groups are very difficult to manage, and oftentimes fall prey to "everyone just do everything you can! It'll work out!" and of course, it doesn't. The only reason this has no organizational structure at this time is because it needs to be developed by the team - but this is already a priority issue that we're discussing. By breaking things into smaller chunks and smaller dedicated teams, things can get done. It very well may be that this will die - I am no fortune teller. But with the experience that I've had both with groups online and in real life, I am confident about our chances.
  7. What sort of details are you looking for? Some things, such as the kind of content we will create will be decided by the group only after it's formed, in order to ensure that our goals are not so lofty that they might not be accomplished. As for joining, those who've checked out Slack so far generally seem to like it so it seems like we'll be sticking with that. I'd have to send you an email invite, so if you're okay with that just PM the email address you'd like to use. If you're uncomfortable using an email address that might identify you, you can also make a throwaway gmail or something (but you'd have to remember the throwaway in order to use Slack).
  8. That's the one problem with slack - you need to receive an email invite from the person who created the group (me). I can do that if you PM the email address you'd prefer to be linked with slack - though I can understand why you and others might be hesitant to share that with a random stranger over the internet. If that ends up being case, then we can probably figure out an alternative medium that would suit the group better better.
  9. Why do you think past attempts didn't work out? Were they too ambitious? If so, how? Did they lack the technology to effectively collaborate? If so, what was the technology lacking? This important in determining whether or not this is comparable. No one could agree on anything, there were too many cooks in the kitchen, people were unreliable, and in some cases management was poor and inefficient. That sounds like a path for what to do differently, then: keep the group size reasonable, seek ways to encourage work, and implement a management strategy. That sounds awesome! What is your opinion on using Slack as a means to organize and communicate? Now that people have begun to show interest, I feel like finding an effective medium for collaboration is the next step.
  10. Why do you think past attempts didn't work out? Were they too ambitious? If so, how? Did they lack the technology to effectively collaborate? If so, what was the technology lacking? This important in determining whether or not this is comparable.
  11. I've generally found that, so long as communication is clear, people tend to be more cooperative than otherwise. I know that, if this happens, most of the ideas I have probably won't be popular and will likely be left in the dust. My goal, however, isn't to get others to see and like my ideas - it's to help provide content that others will enjoy, even if that content originates from others. It could be that I'm naïve, but I'm inclined to think that I'm not unique in this. It's true that not everyone would be happy with the finished result, but there's really nothing wrong with that. Some people absolutely love G2, and others hate it. But we're all fans of Bionicle, otherwise we wouldn't be here. I don't have much to say most of the time.
  12. Very cool! Good on you to do research, as well; too often people go in not entirely knowing what they're getting into (I'm definitely guilty of this) and get discouraged as a result. I do want to provide caution to you and anybody else interested not to assume any direct path, however; there will likely be a multitude of ideas of not only how to go forward, but on where to begin as well. We might start where Bionicle left off, start from 2001, or both! Or maybe something else! The trick is getting people together first. What are your thoughts using Slack? The best way I can describe it is IRC on steroids (saved messages/conversations, file sharing, video conferencing, etc.). I have found it to be a very useful collaboration tool myself, but could also see why people on the internet would be hesitant (giving out emails to strangers and all).
  13. EDIT: We're using Slack to organize and communicate. Anyone interested will need to PM me their email address in order for me to get them in. This can be a throwaway if that makes you more comfortable, but keep in mind that you'll be using that whenever you log in. Once you've received your invite, you can join at bioniclestory.slack.com. We've also added an age limit - currently 15 - for entry. EDIT2: We've now reached capacity for the time being, and are no longer excepting people. We may reconsider in the future. _______________________________________________________________________ Ever since G2's cancelation, I've noticed that several fans have displayed interest in continuing Bionicle in our own way. Some of this has been relatively small scale: "We will continue without them. Get your MOCs and storyboards ready." - this is just one comment I've seen among many, encouraging fans to continue what we have always loved doing. I've also come across more ambitious suggestions, such as the creation of a group to finish LEGO's G2 story. The thing is, there are a ton of really creative people within our fandom. The most common that we see come in the form of MOCs, but we've also seen people create 3D printable masks, small games, a matron language, and some really beautiful artwork (I'm a big fan of IRON6DUCK's "Mata Nui Sights" series myself). This is only the tip of the iceberg pertaining to what Bionicle fans have made, but I think you can see what I'm getting at here. We have a lot of really great content, but all of it exists in its own little corner. Many of us limit our creations to our own head-canons, many of which might take place in a universe entirely distinct from those created by LEGO. What I'm proposing is that we bring together a group of fans to build an unofficial Bionicle "canon" until such a time that Lego decides to pick it up again. The function of this group would be twofold: to organize the existing official content into our new canon, and to direct the creation of new content in order to continue the story. This could be small scale (i.e., just mocs and short stories), large scale (3-d printable sets, comics, novels) or somewhere in-between, depending on what the members involved are able/have time to do.
  14. I suppose that could have been how they did it, but we can't know that. As a writer myself I find that the story as originally developed tends to feel far more real; it doesn't feel like you're developing it but actually discovering it. Once something is discovered it can't just be arbitrarily changed. Of course just because I and the other writers I know do it this way doesn't mean Greg and the team did, so it's a fair argument to make. In my opinion, however, I have found that stories that stick to the original bible tend to be far more coherent. Take Myst: despite changing hands several times, the original story bible was always followed as canon, despite only the devs having access. Now look at Assassin's Creed: the original bible was pretty much replaced after ACII/Brotherhood, which ended up causing a lot of problems. Now for me, when I get lost in a fantastic universe (be it from a book, tv show, or toy line like Bionicle), I think of it as real. I know it isn't, of course, but that's what suspension of disbelief is all about: getting lost (more about suspension of disbelief later). And if this universe is real, then it exists independently of LEGO; they're just telling the story of this universe. Now, they have direct access to it - meaning we who seek to understand this universe must get all of our information from them - but that doesn't mean they have control. So that's why I tend to think of the story bible as canon, even if I can't put my hands on it. I can't get lost in a fictional universe if it refuses to act like a universe. Basically, remember not to confuse "I" (you) with "everybody". That's actually, if you think about it, the same mistake people were making when they said your headcanon was "wrong." In both cases, people naturally assume (understandably, but as it happens, inaccurately, and that's a good thing!) that how they feel is a good guide for how others feel; that their tastes are good predictors of others' tastes, when it isn't always so. This is a very valid point. I can only speak to myself, and those who I spoke with. But I can say that I, my friends, and those I was chatting with online back then certainly weren't asking much about the mechanical nature of the beings on Mata Nui. Since it was never addressed as a mystery, but merely accepted in-universe, it became accepted by us (again "us" being limited to those I had contact with). And in my mind, that's completely logical - sure that doesn't happen in the real world, but neither does Hogwarts (and I don't remember "why is there magic" being addressed in Harry Potter). Crowds burst out into song in musicals, but nobody thinks that's strange. And that's what suspension of disbelief is. Not everything needs an explanation. And in my mind, the existence of mata nui, makuta et al certainly didn't either. Certainly not for the giant robot. But then that was kind of the big reveal from the beginning, wasn't it? That was completely consistent with the story bible, we know that much. Makuta taking over and Mata Nui dying weren't so much revelations of mysteries as plot points. Turaga being from Toa, and Takua becoming a Toa also came much earlier, when we can assume the bible was followed much more closely. The Goa'uld were cool. But such a change would complete delegitimize the evil that came before. I'm trying not to, but I'm doing a poor job. I do want to say that I found the Order to be a bit of a deus ex machina, though. More poor wording on my part. I wasn't trying to say that fiction wasn't important; rather, I was trying to say that no specific fiction is so important that an alternative version must be decried as heresy. Basically, everything you said was awesome and is my line of thinking exactly. But unlike me, you said it very well.
  15. My mysticism I am referring to the mythos of the universe. Mata Nui was a spirit, Makuta a spirit, Akamai, Wairuha, etc. There were temples in each koro, and a great temple at the island's center. Point being, a lot of these were non-issues. Nobody asked who Mata Nui or Makuta was, because knew. Of course, we didn't know what they looked like, but it wasn't exactly a pressing issue. Just a "that'd be nice to know." And we got that with Makuta during the Mask of Light saga, so, neat. However, the "big reveals" that came later were unintriguing and really just upset the revelations that came beforehand. Not in a "guess what, you thought Makuta was dead, surprise!" sort of way, but in a "Guess what, you thought we the established universe was the real one, but it's not!" sort of way. It could be that they just failed to present it well, but that sort of presentation leaves a bad taste in my mouth. The biggest example I can think of was that Makuta wasn't a name, but a species, his real name is Teridax, and he's only special because he has the Kraahkan on his face. Oh, and he's not Mata Nui's brother. So basically we took a villain, the main villain of the the universe, and made him into a nobody. It'd be kind of be the equivalent of the Master in Doctor Who turning out to be a human-affecting parasite with a vendetta against Time Lords (not the best argument, perhaps, but my original one was a religious one and I figured it best not to use that). There was, of course, real mystery. And I agree that it was to be solved (though for the fans, as it really wasn't something that was pursued in-universe). Like the "ancient civilization" on mata nui (which was changed to be metru-nui, which is fine IMO though I think the original idea had more promise). Who placed the masks on the island? The rooms beneath Kina Nui? Why did the Bohrok exist in the first place? These were the big questions, and they were answered with a big fat "because the order of Mata Nui put them there, because it was a part of the big plan." Oh, how revealing. So I get what you're saying, but it would seem that the story team did a very poor job at following up on their own foreshadowing. What I mean by "we don't have the story bible" is that we don't have it now. The reason why I said above "it would seem that..." was for that reason. I don't actually know how closely they followed the bible's original plan, or how much ended up being "hey guys, let's do this instead!" None of us do. If we think of the story bible as the canon, and what the story team created as an interpretation of it, then we can't really say we know the most correct version. We can have faith that the story team kept to it closely, but we really can't judge that accurately for ourselves. And so we start with the assumption that the earliest stuff was definitely more true, as it was created around the same time, and diverge from there. What I reject in my head-canon is mostly a consequence of later things contradicting earlier things (or at least my interpretation of them; doubtlessly we each had our own). What I create is largely a consequences of rebuilding bridges that were originally destroyed by contradictions so as to tie together otherwise non-contradicting things. But this is my head-canon, and I will present it as such, rather than "the real truth," which I will contend doesn't really exist, anyway. This is the real issue. There is an "official" canon, yes. And I love that people follow it, and their own head-canons, and then I have my head-canon so we can all discuss how things fit together and why we think the way we do. These differing ideas don't split the community, as some here would suggest, but hold it together. If we all agreed what was "correct" we wouldn't be having this thought-provoking discussion, would we? Instead we'd just be sharing the occasional moc or fanfiction, which really don't matter because they're not canon anyway. That doesn't breed discourse or facilitate discussion: disagreement does. And yet, there is a significant portion of the community does not only adhere to the main canon (again, not a huge issue in my eyes), but are downright hostile to other interpretations or head-canons. On more than one occasion I've experienced this hostility directly for saying a statement as simple as "I felt the later years were particularly lackluster and inconsistent with the early ones, so I've kind of created on own head-canon diverging from the official." (example - I don't have the post in front of me and it wasn't made on bzpower.) It's fine that someone challenge me on that, and even try to convince me that the later years actually make the first years more relevant and exciting. But instead I get a "You're wrong, because LEGO controls what's real. There's nothing else worth discussing, and you're just humiliating yourself by thinking otherwise." So back to OP's question - Why is there such an emphasis on the official canon among the BIONICLE community? What's so important about it that it's wrong to imagine anything else? I don't know, because I don't think any fiction is that important. But this line of thinking is present and quite common.
  • Create New...