Bionicle 2015 vs Bionicle 2001?

[Ashnazg]

Bionicle 2015 and Bionicle 2001 are very similar and very different from each other in a number of different ways like the animation styles and the story. I know that it is a little early for this, what with other games coming, but another example would be the MNOG and the new Bionicle App. I was wondering what everyone else's opinions were on this topic.

[believe victims]

Bionicle 2015 has a clear, consistent media presence, as opposed to Bionicle 2015, which spread itself a little thin across numerous different things, and as a result ended up cluttered with media as time dragged on. On the other hand, as far as media goes, MNOG is the best piece of LEGO media ever produced, so 2001 is still pretty solid in that regard. Still, I'm gonna have to hand that to 2015.

 

For story, they're pretty evenly matched, provided you look at Bionicle 2001-2003 as a truncated segment. They both have much the same core concept, which is why Bionicle 2015 feels like Bionicle, but there are also enough differences that Bionicle 2015 feels fresh. They're both thoroughly intriguing stories.

 

Setwise, 2015 obviously wins, but that's solely by virtue of the fact that if constraction sets were somehow worse now than they were fifteen years ago, that would be a tremendous failing from LEGO as a toy company. I mean, subjectively, there are ways to prefer the old sets (I highly prefer the original set's more vibrant color schemes to the 2015 color schemes washed out by an overabundance of metallic colors, especially Silver), but from objective points, such as articulation, the sets had to improve. That said, there's an iconic nature to the 2001 Toa sets, so don't take this as me saying they're terrible. They're just outdated in terms of what TLG can achieve with constraction sets.

 

Bionicle 2015 is everything Bionicle 2001 was, with the addition of advancements in LEGO's ability to make a story-driven toyline and constraction toyline. In a face-value comparison, Bionicle 2015 is better, but a face-value comparison isn't really fair, because of those 15 years of improvement. Accounting for obligatory change, then, I'd say that Bionicle 2015 is what Bionicle 2001 would have been if released in 2015; in other words, they're equal, if different.

 

This is all kinda jumbled but I hope I got my thoughts across.

[Ashnazg]

Bionicle 2015 has a clear, consistent media presence, as opposed to Bionicle 2015, which spread itself a little thin across numerous different things, and as a result ended up cluttered with media as time dragged on. On the other hand, as far as media goes, MNOG is the best piece of LEGO media ever produced, so 2001 is still pretty solid in that regard. Still, I'm gonna have to hand that to 2015.

 

For story, they're pretty evenly matched, provided you look at Bionicle 2001-2003 as a truncated segment. They both have much the same core concept, which is why Bionicle 2015 feels like Bionicle, but there are also enough differences that Bionicle 2015 feels fresh. They're both thoroughly intriguing stories.

 

Setwise, 2015 obviously wins, but that's solely by virtue of the fact that if constraction sets were somehow worse now than they were fifteen years ago, that would be a tremendous failing from LEGO as a toy company. I mean, subjectively, there are ways to prefer the old sets (I highly prefer the original set's more vibrant color schemes to the 2015 color schemes washed out by an overabundance of metallic colors, especially Silver), but from objective points, such as articulation, the sets had to improve. That said, there's an iconic nature to the 2001 Toa sets, so don't take this as me saying they're terrible. They're just outdated in terms of what TLG can achieve with constraction sets.

 

Bionicle 2015 is everything Bionicle 2001 was, with the addition of advancements in LEGO's ability to make a story-driven toyline and constraction toyline. In a face-value comparison, Bionicle 2015 is better, but a face-value comparison isn't really fair, because of those 15 years of improvement. Accounting for obligatory change, then, I'd say that Bionicle 2015 is what Bionicle 2001 would have been if released in 2015; in other words, they're equal, if different.

 

This is all kinda jumbled but I hope I got my thoughts across.

Update: After thinking about a bit... I'll stick with 2001. The Toa are just... meh. The protectors are cool though.

Edited January 7, 2015 by Ashnazg

[Toa Alvarno]

 

Bionicle 2015 has a clear, consistent media presence, as opposed to Bionicle 2015, which spread itself a little thin across numerous different things, and as a result ended up cluttered with media as time dragged on. On the other hand, as far as media goes, MNOG is the best piece of LEGO media ever produced, so 2001 is still pretty solid in that regard. Still, I'm gonna have to hand that to 2015.

 

For story, they're pretty evenly matched, provided you look at Bionicle 2001-2003 as a truncated segment. They both have much the same core concept, which is why Bionicle 2015 feels like Bionicle, but there are also enough differences that Bionicle 2015 feels fresh. They're both thoroughly intriguing stories.

 

Setwise, 2015 obviously wins, but that's solely by virtue of the fact that if constraction sets were somehow worse now than they were fifteen years ago, that would be a tremendous failing from LEGO as a toy company. I mean, subjectively, there are ways to prefer the old sets (I highly prefer the original set's more vibrant color schemes to the 2015 color schemes washed out by an overabundance of metallic colors, especially Silver), but from objective points, such as articulation, the sets had to improve. That said, there's an iconic nature to the 2001 Toa sets, so don't take this as me saying they're terrible. They're just outdated in terms of what TLG can achieve with constraction sets.

 

Bionicle 2015 is everything Bionicle 2001 was, with the addition of advancements in LEGO's ability to make a story-driven toyline and constraction toyline. In a face-value comparison, Bionicle 2015 is better, but a face-value comparison isn't really fair, because of those 15 years of improvement. Accounting for obligatory change, then, I'd say that Bionicle 2015 is what Bionicle 2001 would have been if released in 2015; in other words, they're equal, if different.

 

This is all kinda jumbled but I hope I got my thoughts across.

I liked the sets from 2001 equally to the sets from 2015. I guess that I'm not all that picky :3 But, in terms of media, 2001 (as you said) was clearly superior. I mean, what could possibly top MNOG? 

 

WIth all due respect, I feel like that there is more to it than just MNOG. I honestly wasn't too big of a fan of that game, so it might be my personal bias speaking. However, when you compare media, you must take into account more than just one game. Clearly, MNOG is a better production than Mask of Creation, but you also need to consider the animations and videos as well as music. 2015 seems to tell more of a story than 2001 because the videos have a clear linear narrative, whereas the CGI animations that came out of 2001 only showcased the different characters in their environments. I think 2015 wins in that regard, but that doesn't mean one is better than the other. 

[LegoSWfan]

2001, period.

[Irrie]

2001, period.

Ah yes. The good 'ol days when there was no poseability, no articulation, no consistent storyline, and eyepieces that didn't detach. 

Honestly, could you at least give a little information supporting that claim? 

[Spiffy247]

 

2001, period.

Ah yes. The good 'ol days when there was no poseability, no articulation, no consistent storyline, and eyepieces that didn't detach. 

Honestly, could you at least give a little information supporting that claim? 

 

You beat me to it. But that's because I was writing.

[LegoSWfan]

Hey, it sure beats 2015s rehashed hero factory.

[Spiffy247]

Hey, it sure beats 2015s rehashed hero factory.

And Bionicle 2001 had aspects similar to Throwbots.

[Irrie]

Hey, it sure beats 2015s rehashed hero factory.

LOSS has plenty of technic pieces in him, as do many of the sets, that's statement is invalid

[LegoSWfan]

At least throw bots had a plot!

[Irrie]

At least throw bots had a plot!

Are you suggesting that Bionicle 2015 has no plot?

You are wrong on so many levels...

[Jobber]

At least throw bots had a plot!

Quit trolling, please.

[LegoSWfan]

I was referring to hero factorys lack of a plot....

[Spiffy247]

I was referring to hero factorys lack of a plot....

Hero factory had movies.

[LegoSWfan]

Bionicle had games, books, comics and movies. And just because a movie is made, it doesn't mean it has a story. As TLM showed.

[Ashnazg]

 

2001, period.

Ah yes. The good 'ol days when there was no poseability, no articulation, no consistent storyline, and eyepieces that didn't detach. 

Honestly, could you at least give a little information supporting that claim? 

 

What are you talking about? Bionicle 2001 had the best story of any year since, in my opinion, but even if you disagree with that, how can you say that it had 'no consistent storyline'? 

[Art Vandelay]

You wonder why people were attacking you in the other topic, and yet you go and make these sorts of statements here. You're certainly entitled to your own opinion, but I think you understand that you aren't really backing any of your statements up, and that you're presenting them in a confrontational manner. 

 

Here's a suggestion. Put more thought into your posts, first off, and if you really want people to take you seriously, buy one new set and see how you like it before making final judgment. Then you can actually make a much more valid argument if you still dislike the new sets. 

[Ashnazg]

I don't see any reason to hate the new sets anyway. It's fun seeing Lego giving throwbacks to the original sets in the new ones.

[LegoSWfan]

I'll say it again, I hate skeleball, why should I have to go and buy skeleball to prove myself to you? I am NOT trying to be confrontational, I like 01, I said that, but then you all tear my post to shreads, can I not simply say an opinion? Must it be analyzed?

[Ashnazg]

Hey, it sure beats 2015s rehashed hero factory.

Um... do you own a 2015 set? If you did, then you would know that it certainly isn't 'rehashed hero factory.'

[Fry]

At least throw bots had a plot!

That made me laugh. It's true (to an extent) though, Throwbots plot was literally a paragraph on the website. Hero Factory, while I didn't like it, had a more complex story.

[Irrie]

 

 

2001, period.

Ah yes. The good 'ol days when there was no poseability, no articulation, no consistent storyline, and eyepieces that didn't detach. 

Honestly, could you at least give a little information supporting that claim? 

 

What are you talking about? Bionicle 2001 had the best story of any year since, in my opinion, but even if you disagree with that, how can you say that it had 'no consistent storyline'? 

 

I was referencing how there were so many different interpretations of how the Shadow Toa died, when the Toa got their gold masks, ect. 

That was probably my weakest of the four arguments I presented, so meh. :/

[believe victims]

Bionicle had games, books, comics and movies.

 

And none of them could tell a clear story because they were spread too thin, with the different forms of media even contradicting each other several times.

 

And just because a movie is made, it doesn't mean it has a story. As TLM showed.

Regardless of your opinion on the quality of the movie, to say The LEGO Movie had no story is completely factually incorrect.

 

I liked the sets from 2001 equally to the sets from 2015. I guess that I'm not all that picky :3 But, in terms of media, 2001 (as you said) was clearly superior. I mean, what could possibly top MNOG? 

 

I'm surprised you got "2001 media was clearly superior to 2015 media" from "Still, I'm gonna have to hand that to 2015." As great as MNOG was, it was the only media in 2001 that managed to reach that level of quality in clear, consistent storytelling. 2015, meanwhile, by putting its story-telling focus into one main form, has made the story very easy to get into and understand.

[LegoSWfan]

Well TLM felt like it was made by a kid, oh wait...

[Ashnazg]

 

Bionicle had games, books, comics and movies.

 

And none of them could tell a clear story because they were spread too thin, with the different forms of media even contradicting each other several times.

 

And just because a movie is made, it doesn't mean it has a story. As TLM showed.

Regardless of your opinion on the quality of the movie, to say The LEGO Movie had no story is completely factually incorrect.

 

I liked the sets from 2001 equally to the sets from 2015. I guess that I'm not all that picky :3 But, in terms of media, 2001 (as you said) was clearly superior. I mean, what could possibly top MNOG? 

 

I'm surprised you got "2001 media was clearly superior to 2015 media" from "Still, I'm gonna have to hand that to 2015." As great as MNOG was, it was the only media in 2001 that managed to reach that level of quality in clear, consistent storytelling. 2015, meanwhile, by putting its story-telling focus into one main form, has made the story very easy to get into and understand.

 

I'm sorry, you said 2015 twice, so I was confused as to which you were referring to. I rushed through the text, as the ending of that paragraph gave away the error. 

Edited January 4, 2015 by Ashnazg

[believe victims]

Well TLM felt like it was made by a kid, oh wait...

 

What does that have to do with whether or not the movie had a story? Whether or not the story felt like it was made by a kid (which if it did, it means they succeeded, considering that was the point) has no impact on whether or not it's a story. It is completely ludicrous to say "The LEGO Movie had no story".

[Ashnazg]

Bionicle 2015's story is a little... iffy... if you ask me.

Edited January 4, 2015 by Ashnazg

[believe victims]

Well, I suppose that comes down to taste, in the end. To me, it's an absolutely wonderful revisit of the original 2001 story, with new twists and a new island. We even have a mask quest again! There's even the same element of mystery: ancient ruins guarded by a powerful creature? Who knows what's in there?

 

Not to mention it's presented in the nice animated episodes, the style of which continues to remind me of Genndy Tartakovsky's works like Samurai Jack and Star Wars:Clone Wars. Sometimes, it relies a little too much on tweening, but overall, it's beautiful.

[Aanchir]

I was referring to hero factorys lack of a plot....

Do you even realize how ridiculous you sound right now? Hero Factory had waaaaay more plot than Throwbots ever did. Doesn't matter which theme you liked better. Throwbots had just the barest fragments of a story, whereas Hero Factory's storyline, whether good or bad, was VERY clearly defined.

 

Not to mention that the presence or absence of a plot has diddly-squat to do with the merits of the building system or design language.

[Toa Smoke Monster]

Set-wise: I like the sets from both 2001 and 2015. I think they both have their ups and downs. For example, the 2015 sets are overall build better than the 2001 sets, though that a given since Lego sets have improved as the years have gone on. On the other hand, I like the Kanohi Masks of 2001 a little more than the 2015 masks. Not that I don't like the new masks, because I do think they are cool. I just like the originals more. Probably do to nostalgia.  

 

Bottom line, I like the sets from both years.

 

Storywise, I cannot say just yet. I would like to see how the 2015 story plays out before comparing it to 2001. So I will answer this a year from now.

[Xarok]

Well TLM felt like it was made by a kid, oh wait...

Well, that's what they were going for. I personally liked it a lot.

 

As for 2001 vs 2015? That's a very hard decision to make even though I actually love the new one a lot so far. This is kind of like asking me to pick between A Link to the Past and A Link Between Worlds. So far it's basically a retread of the classic with some aesthetic differences and a shift in the tone, since this new Bionicle seems to be more lighthearted and cartoonish, but it still had that cool tribal feel we got from 2001 Bionicle. I personally would say objectively speaking, these new Toa are more interesting, more well put together, and have more playability. Lego seems to have found a nice compromise giving us the points of articulation we had in the Inika and onward sets from G1 while bringing back the gears we all love from the olden days. It's hard to say, I have a lot of nostalgia from the 2001 arc but just comparing the original Toa Mata to the 2015 Toa, I think 2015 has the upper hand at least in design and playability. As for the story, we'll have to wait and see.

Also I think it's kind of unfair to compare Mata Nui online to the android/IOS game. MNOG was a massive adventure, while Mask of Creation is basically just run around tap the bad guys to win. It's not good, but I didn't expect anything from it anyways. I'd love to see another MNOG style game on smartphones or browsers, heck I'd even be willing to put out some cash for a good Bionicle game.

[Killer Toa03]

The 2015 story will become more coherent as time goes on. I don't remember the Toa Mata having such a great story when they first launched, the story developed over time. The Toa Mata are iconic, there's no doubt about that, but the 2015 Toa have much more playability and much better construction techniques. I have never bought a Hero Factory set so the parts were all new to me, and I am only impressed.

 

Oh and the Throbots did not have a story, but they did pave the way for Bionicle.

[bioniclepluslotr]

You wonder why people were attacking you in the other topic, and yet you go and make these sorts of statements here. You're certainly entitled to your own opinion, but I think you understand that you aren't really backing any of your statements up, and that you're presenting them in a confrontational manner. 

 

Here's a suggestion. Put more thought into your posts, first off, and if you really want people to take you seriously, buy one new set and see how you like it before making final judgment. Then you can actually make a much more valid argument if you still dislike the new sets. 

Maybe if anyone on this site had respect for someone who disagrees.

[LegoSWfan]

 

 

You wonder why people were attacking you in the other topic, and yet you go and make these sorts of statements here. You're certainly entitled to your own opinion, but I think you understand that you aren't really backing any of your statements up, and that you're presenting them in a confrontational manner.

 

Here's a suggestion. Put more thought into your posts, first off, and if you really want people to take you seriously, buy one new set and see how you like it before making final judgment. Then you can actually make a much more valid argument if you still dislike the new sets.

Maybe if anyone on this site had respect for someone who disagrees.

Thank you!

 

I disagree with several of you, but I still respect your opinions. Can you say the same?

[Latrodectus]

MNOG was really an amazing piece of story-telling, so I think 2001 wins in the story department just for that. I'm liking 2015's story so far, but Okoto has nowhere near the detail of Mata Nui, and most of that detail was provided in MNOG.

 

For sets, eh. Prices are higher, but there's more articulation. We don't have super-complicated Technic Rahi (LoSS aside), but the Protectors are definitely an upgrade over the Turaga. Honestly, they're both very good years and I'm really glad that 2015 is providing the creativity that Bionicle was missing in its later years.

[Owlexander]

Ok, so actually having my hands on the sets, here's my take on it:

 

The gear box, while a nice splash of nostalgia, didn't work out very well (at least for me). I mean, I like the gears they used and find it pretty cool that they used those as actual gears. I like the 2001 versions a bit more than the 2015 versions, just a tiny bit more though.

[fishers64]

I like both. 

 

Bionicle 2015 has a clear, consistent media presence, as opposed to Bionicle 2001, which spread itself a little thin across numerous different things, and as a result ended up cluttered with media as time dragged on. On the other hand, as far as media goes, MNOG is the best piece of LEGO media ever produced, so 2001 is still pretty solid in that regard. Still, I'm gonna have to hand that to 2015.

I'm just going to correct that typo and assume that we're not predicting the future. 

 

FTR, 2001 really only had two forms of media in the end - online stuff, including MNOG, and the comics. The books were introduced later. I would advise against allocating later years' complexity into the figure - after all, we don't know how complicated this new line is going to get. They did tell us of at least two media sources - online animations and books - so we are up to two already, not including a TV show or anything else they might decide to introduce. 

 

However, if they do introduce a ridiculous amount of complexity and ad infinitum story mediums, you have my permission to smack them.

[Blueblur21]

I vastly prefer 2015. 2001 was more of a planning stage for Bionicle. Names were still getting thrown around and the lore was still being discussed. The line really didn't start picking up steam until 2003. Now that Bionicle has a decade of success behind it they can pick and choose from those ten years what worked and what didn't. As far as sets go, the 2015 versions clearly draw heavily from their original forms as both a throwback and as tribute. I've never owned an original Toa Mata but I am looking forward to these sets and can say that 2015 is shaping up to be bigger than 2001 ever was. The MNOG was honestly pretty boring to me so I don't count it as part of the comparison.

Edited January 5, 2015 by Blueblur21

[Toa TAK]

I think we should wait for 2015 to be over before we make judgement. We're only in January, people.

 

TAK