Jump to content

The difference between OLD and NEW Bionicle


Gipsy Danger

Recommended Posts

Hello!!!  Today, I saw a bit of confusion about Bionicle being for older or little kids so I thought I would explain it further more.  So old Bio, it was for older people because it was made by TECHNIC.  TECHNIC was for older basically due to the power functions.  That is what I meant for Old Bio being for Older.  Now the NEW Bio, they used ccbs parts which Lego used for hf(hero factory), it was meant for little kids.  Lego has certain audiences for products and now their bringing in little kids so when those little kids grow up, they should still like the new bio and that new bio will be for teens possibly.  So which parts do you think is better?  ccbs or bbs?  CCBS is hf parts basically, and BBS is the detailed kind of parts which are TECHNIC.  I could do a poll for this, but I don't want to risk losing this paragraph.

Edited by Gipsy Danger

A signature is supposed to be this:

 

Jaeger_Gipsy_Danger_Decal_02.png

 

and BTW https://screen.yahoo.com/star-trek-convention-000000768.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CCBS is a simple way to make a complex design, which is why I like it. Sure, you can use the standard parts in the standard places, but if you change it  up, it can look like something epic!

 

Also, I think that lego always aims for the 6-14 age group, not really singling teens out of the picture completely.

  • Upvote 2

:smiletakua: :m_o: :w: :l: :e: :x: :a: :n: :m_d: :e: :r: :smiletol:

76561198067723583.pngAddFriend.png

|

"We are the Turaga of the new generation." ~Owlexander

YouTube - Imgur - Flickr - Bionicle RPG Chat

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally, I prefer CCBS over the BIONICLE Build System. Parts from BBS were often one trick ponies, being used only in certain ways. The overly-detailed parts also alienated them from the rest of LEGO, not to mention the thin plastic caused them to break. CCBS has very sleek, simply designed shells and bones, similar to LEGO System bricks. The fact that they all use the same connection points allows for the ability to mix and match parts more comfortably and easily, allowing more potential. Also, the inclusion of the gearbox in the new Master sets, it being a Mata or Metru torso boiled down to it's most basic elements, allows for more potential and possibilities of use.

  • Upvote 6

"The Kingslayer"

z2r5DTz.png

Complete Okoto Alphabet + Okotoan Symbols | Infrared's Okoto Font | SDCC Semi-Live Coverage


—————————BZPGOT S1 KILLS—————————

Gi9juq3.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, the fact that Bionicle 2015's age group says 8-14, means that they're still keeping the teens in G2, so it's not entirely for kids, they recognize that there's still a slightly older audience, so G2 might not be entirely aimed at kids.

  • Upvote 2

:smiletakua: :m_o: :w: :l: :e: :x: :a: :n: :m_d: :e: :r: :smiletol:

76561198067723583.pngAddFriend.png

|

"We are the Turaga of the new generation." ~Owlexander

YouTube - Imgur - Flickr - Bionicle RPG Chat

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now the NEW Bio, they used ccbs parts which Lego used for hf(hero factory), it was meant for little kids

 

The original 2001 Toa had a recommended age of 7+. The first sets of Hero Factory using the CCB system sported a recommendation of 6-16. The current Bionicle sets are recommended from 6-12 to 8-14, depending on the set.

 

Sorry, you are factually wrong in your statement.

 

 

So which parts do you think is better?  ccbs or bbs?  CCBS is hf parts basically, and BBS is the detailed kind of parts which are TECHNIC.

 

Bionicle never had a unified building system, which is precisely why CCBS was introduced. CCBS still stands in the TECHNIC lineage. It is a distinction without a difference.

 

But for what it is worth, from my (admittedly adult and thus far removed from the target audience) perspective, CCBS as an expandable building system is leaps and bounds ahead of anything the old Bionicle did. The uniform pieces are quintessential Lego.

Edited by WorkbenchManiac
  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the uniform building system only has critics because of the rich and detailed building system that came before it. It's like the rich and detailed and personable wooden ducks that came before the uniform and generic plastic lego bricks.

 

But that's a general rule of most of life. Cell phones used to come in a variety of shapes and sizes - now most of them have touch screens and look like iPhones. Houses used to have tons of variety in construction and appearance - now we have tract-home plots where the houses are identical. Things we can't innovate much better become more uniform so we can move on to innovate something else.

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As others have stated, CCBS wasn't really designed for audiences any younger than the audience for the classic sets.

 

I definitely prefer the CCBS, for one main reason—there never really was a "Bionicle Building System". That is to say, Bionicle parts didn't really comprise any sort of well-ordered and organized "system". Parts were introduced willy-nilly, often replacing other, similar parts instead of supplementing them. The CCBS was introduced largely to bring order to that chaos. It debuted with a wide range of bones and shells in modular sizes—3M, 4M, 5M, 6M, 7M, 9M. Compared to the classic Bionicle, that alone was a huge asset—the classic theme really only had two sizes of "upper leg" and two sizes of "lower leg." And when the CCBS expanded, it did so responsibly, without replacing those classic parts but rather supplementing them with new bones, new shells, and other new parts to help integrate the ball joint-based CCBS with classic Technic.

  • Upvote 5

Formerly Lyichir: Rachira of Influence

Aanchir's and Meiko's brother

Link to comment
Share on other sites

G1 never had power functions, except for a brief dalliance in the form of the Manas models. All the functions were either gears, elastic band, or projectile, which incidentally G2 has as well. Correct me if I'm wrong, but that hamstrings your argument that g1 was 'older'.

  • Upvote 2

:r: :e: :g: :i: :t: :n: :u: :i:

Elemental Rahi in Gen2, anyone? A write-up for an initial video for a G2 plot

 

I really wish everyone would stop trying to play join the dots with Gen 1 and Gen 2 though,it seems there's a couple new threads everyday and often they're duplicates of already existing conversations! Or simply parallel them with a slightly new 'twist'! Gen 2 is NEW, it is NOT Gen 1 and it is NOT a continuation. Outside of the characters we already have I personally don't want to see ANY old characters return. I think it will cheapen the whole experience to those of us familiar with the original line...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BIONICLE is still about as Technic-based as it's always been. The CCBS is a Technic-based building system, after all — most of its connections are based on Technic axle holes, Technic pin holes, and Technic ball joints, and the sets include plenty of Technic functions. The new BIONICLE sets aren't branded as Technic, but neither were any BIONICLE sets after 2003, because that's when the designers decided that BIONICLE was different enough to qualify as its own theme instead of just a Technic sub-theme.

What's more, not all Technic sets are geared towards the same age range. According to Brick by Brick, BIONICLE and its predecessors Slizer and Roboriders were created to solve a problem: "how to keep kids who had outgrown LEGO System sets (such as City) form abandoning the LEGO brand before they were old enough and skilled enough to take on the more challenging LEGO Technic line of products." (pg158) In other words, they were all designed as intermediate themes between System and Technic, the same way Fabuland, Jack Stone, and Juniors were all designed as intermediate themes between Duplo and System.

 

More specifically, when LEGO created Slizer, Roboriders, and BIONICLE, they came up with some archetypes for their desired customers. The most important potential customer for these themes was the loud and easily distracted "Bully Bob", whose identity eventually evolved into "BIONICLE Boy": "a dynamic trendsetter with a short attention span, a kid who likes to multitask and desires instant gratification." (pg166). This was an audience they had never really tried to pursue before, but it was that audience that made BIONICLE so incredibly successful — not the more technically-minded and systematic kids and teenagers who make up the audience for LEGO Technic.

Edited by Aanchir
  • Upvote 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

G1 never had power functions, except for a brief dalliance in the form of the Manas models. All the functions were either gears, elastic band, or projectile, which incidentally G2 has as well. Correct me if I'm wrong, but that hamstrings your argument that g1 was 'older'.

Power functions really don't make a huge difference as far as target age range is concerned. A geared function and a geared function with a motor are generally identical as far as complexity is concerned, considering that a Lego motor and battery box are not really hard to hook up at all. The complexity of the build itself is largely a more important factor. Bionicle vehicle sets (and the early Rahi) were generally the most complex, with integrated functions and building at lots of complex angles. But while more complex than your average Creator sets (which are generally built from the ground up, for the most part), even those never really reached the level of complexity of larger Technic models, due to the lack of realistic mechanics like suspension, crankshafts, steering, or the ability to shift gears between multiple functions.

  • Upvote 4

Formerly Lyichir: Rachira of Influence

Aanchir's and Meiko's brother

Link to comment
Share on other sites

More specifically, when LEGO created Slizer, Roboriders, and BIONICLE, they came up with some archetypes for their desired customers. The most important potential customer for these themes was the loud and easily distracted "Bully Bob", whose identity eventually evolved into "BIONICLE Boy": "a dynamic trendsetter with a short attention span, a kid who likes to multitask and desires instant gratification." (pg166). This was an audience they had never really tried to pursue before, but it was that audience that made BIONICLE so incredibly successful — not the more technically-minded and systematic kids and teenagers who make up the audience for LEGO Technic.

Of note is that they reached a whole lot more people than those that fit under that archetype - everyone from old-fashioned System and Technic lovers to story nerds to roleplayers to artists of various stripes. 

 

Even off of BZPower, where this variety is hugely apparent, I've seen people of the quieter engineer and artist types who recognize and have fond memories of Bionicle. 

 

I'm not sure that G2 has really narrowed the focus. The short animations and the social media contests might suggest a short attention span, but the sets themselves appeal more to an engineering focus/longer span with the gears, and the art for the new theme is outstanding. And there are books coming. 

  • Upvote 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guys, this topic was just  so some of you guys realize that they are two different things(BBS and CCBS).  Why am I saying this?  Because I saw all of your posts saying I like ccbs better than bbs.  Its not one of those topics.   

A signature is supposed to be this:

 

Jaeger_Gipsy_Danger_Decal_02.png

 

and BTW https://screen.yahoo.com/star-trek-convention-000000768.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally, I prefer CCBS over the BIONICLE Build System. Parts from BBS were often one trick ponies, being used only in certain ways. The overly-detailed parts also alienated them from the rest of LEGO, not to mention the thin plastic caused them to break. CCBS has very sleek, simply designed shells and bones, similar to LEGO System bricks. The fact that they all use the same connection points allows for the ability to mix and match parts more comfortably and easily, allowing more potential. Also, the inclusion of the gearbox in the new Master sets, it being a Mata or Metru torso boiled down to it's most basic elements, allows for more potential and possibilities of use.

 

But that "overly detailed" stuff makes the OLD Bio different that the rest.

A signature is supposed to be this:

 

Jaeger_Gipsy_Danger_Decal_02.png

 

and BTW https://screen.yahoo.com/star-trek-convention-000000768.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Personally, I prefer CCBS over the BIONICLE Build System. Parts from BBS were often one trick ponies, being used only in certain ways. The overly-detailed parts also alienated them from the rest of LEGO, not to mention the thin plastic caused them to break. CCBS has very sleek, simply designed shells and bones, similar to LEGO System bricks. The fact that they all use the same connection points allows for the ability to mix and match parts more comfortably and easily, allowing more potential. Also, the inclusion of the gearbox in the new Master sets, it being a Mata or Metru torso boiled down to it's most basic elements, allows for more potential and possibilities of use.

But that "overly detailed" stuff makes the OLD Bio different that the rest.

But BIONICLE shouldn't have to be different from the rest. Yes, it is clearly not classic System, but the fact that the majority of many of the parts made for BIONICLE could only be used in BIONICLE betrays one of the core ideas of every LEGO sets: interchangeability. Because they looked like no other TECHNIC, or even LEGO, line, they could not be used for anything but BIONICLE. However, once in a blue moon, a good, generic part was made (the Bohrok eye, or the Hordika neck) which could be used interchangeably between themes, giving them more of a longevity. So, when BIONICLE ended, it shouldn't be that big of a surprise that those parts are pretty much the only BIONICLE parts still produced. So yes, although BIONICLE is different than other LEGO lines, it is still primarily LEGO, and shouldn't be treated differently than the rest.

 

(Also, intricate detailing in a small space can lead to thin plastic, causing eventual breaking in small, isolated areas, like the sides of the "jaw" on the '01 Miru.)

  • Upvote 2

"The Kingslayer"

z2r5DTz.png

Complete Okoto Alphabet + Okotoan Symbols | Infrared's Okoto Font | SDCC Semi-Live Coverage


—————————BZPGOT S1 KILLS—————————

Gi9juq3.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

So which parts do you think is better?  ccbs or bbs?

 

You asked, we told.

 

Oh, my bad.  That was on my end.

 

 

Personally, I prefer CCBS over the BIONICLE Build System. Parts from BBS were often one trick ponies, being used only in certain ways. The overly-detailed parts also alienated them from the rest of LEGO, not to mention the thin plastic caused them to break. CCBS has very sleek, simply designed shells and bones, similar to LEGO System bricks. The fact that they all use the same connection points allows for the ability to mix and match parts more comfortably and easily, allowing more potential. Also, the inclusion of the gearbox in the new Master sets, it being a Mata or Metru torso boiled down to it's most basic elements, allows for more potential and possibilities of use.

But that "overly detailed" stuff makes the OLD Bio different that the rest.

But BIONICLE shouldn't have to be different from the rest. Yes, it is clearly not classic System, but the fact that the majority of many of the parts made for BIONICLE could only be used in BIONICLE betrays one of the core ideas of every LEGO sets: interchangeability. Because they looked like no other TECHNIC, or even LEGO, line, they could not be used for anything but BIONICLE. However, once in a blue moon, a good, generic part was made (the Bohrok eye, or the Hordika neck) which could be used interchangeably between themes, giving them more of a longevity. So, when BIONICLE ended, it shouldn't be that big of a surprise that those parts are pretty much the only BIONICLE parts still produced. So yes, although BIONICLE is different than other LEGO lines, it is still primarily LEGO, and shouldn't be treated differently than the rest.

 

(Also, intricate detailing in a small space can lead to thin plastic, causing eventual breaking in small, isolated areas, like the sides of the "jaw" on the '01 Miru.)

 

Old Bionicle is basically techinc in a sense since they made it.

A signature is supposed to be this:

 

Jaeger_Gipsy_Danger_Decal_02.png

 

and BTW https://screen.yahoo.com/star-trek-convention-000000768.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CCBS isn't as much a kid's thing as it is a simplified version of BBS (which is perfectly okay). It's pretty much a refined version of the old system that emphasizes sleek, snap-on design that is easy for younger builders to get a hold of, but a complexity that is extremely malleable and in-depth. Both systems were aimed at the same audience.

 

-NotS

  • Upvote 6

tahubanner.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

So which parts do you think is better? ccbs or bbs?

You asked, we told.

Oh, my bad. That was on my end.

 

 

Personally, I prefer CCBS over the BIONICLE Build System. Parts from BBS were often one trick ponies, being used only in certain ways. The overly-detailed parts also alienated them from the rest of LEGO, not to mention the thin plastic caused them to break. CCBS has very sleek, simply designed shells and bones, similar to LEGO System bricks. The fact that they all use the same connection points allows for the ability to mix and match parts more comfortably and easily, allowing more potential. Also, the inclusion of the gearbox in the new Master sets, it being a Mata or Metru torso boiled down to it's most basic elements, allows for more potential and possibilities of use.

But that "overly detailed" stuff makes the OLD Bio different that the rest.
But BIONICLE shouldn't have to be different from the rest. Yes, it is clearly not classic System, but the fact that the majority of many of the parts made for BIONICLE could only be used in BIONICLE betrays one of the core ideas of every LEGO sets: interchangeability. Because they looked like no other TECHNIC, or even LEGO, line, they could not be used for anything but BIONICLE. However, once in a blue moon, a good, generic part was made (the Bohrok eye, or the Hordika neck) which could be used interchangeably between themes, giving them more of a longevity. So, when BIONICLE ended, it shouldn't be that big of a surprise that those parts are pretty much the only BIONICLE parts still produced. So yes, although BIONICLE is different than other LEGO lines, it is still primarily LEGO, and shouldn't be treated differently than the rest.

 

(Also, intricate detailing in a small space can lead to thin plastic, causing eventual breaking in small, isolated areas, like the sides of the "jaw" on the '01 Miru.)

Old Bionicle is basically techinc in a sense since they made it.

What do you mean, "they" made it? Both systems are Technic-based and the parts for both were designed predominantly by Lego designers who specialize in Technic parts. The only difference is that CCBS sets don't include the Technic branding—but neither did the vast majority of Bionicle sets.

  • Upvote 4

Formerly Lyichir: Rachira of Influence

Aanchir's and Meiko's brother

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If CCBS is so versitile, why are all the Toas, Protectors, Heroes, and 80% of the villains all bipedal humanoids? >.< They could seriously have a lot of fun making creative designs, but they keep sticking to the same design. Literally, almost all of the recents sets consist of a torso piece, a clip on chest, limbs are two bone pieces with two shells. It's the same thing over and over again. Why can't we have Toa with tentacles and stuff?

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If CCBS is so versitile, why are all the Toas, Protectors, Heroes, and 80% of the villains all bipedal humanoids? >.< They could seriously have a lot of fun making creative designs, but they keep sticking to the same design. Literally, almost all of the recents sets consist of a torso piece, a clip on chest, limbs are two bone pieces with two shells. It's the same thing over and over again. Why can't we have Toa with tentacles and stuff?

It's probably because the are re-releasing Bionicle right now, so they want to appeal to nostalgia by re-releasing standard Toa. Once Bionicle has got going for awhile, they will bring out the weird stuff.  

 

Also, marketing. Tentacles are totally possible (clip them limb parts together). But they probably don't sell as good as "cool action figures". That's why you won't see a majority of tentacled monsters. But I wouldn't rule them out appearing again, seeing as they appeared before (see: Kalmah.). It's also probably because of the "human-shaped beings are the good guys" design language trope, which all deviations need an explanation from, and the theme hasn't been around long enough to provide its own internal explanation.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If CCBS is so versitile, why are all the Toas, Protectors, Heroes, and 80% of the villains all bipedal humanoids? >.< They could seriously have a lot of fun making creative designs, but they keep sticking to the same design. Literally, almost all of the recents sets consist of a torso piece, a clip on chest, limbs are two bone pieces with two shells. It's the same thing over and over again. Why can't we have Toa with tentacles and stuff?

 

Toa with tentacles would probably playtest poorly, for the same reason why the racist Space Police only hire humans and hunt down aliens. Children want the protagonists to be like them, and in Bionicle's case, that means humanoid.

 

And, I mean, it's hardly exclusive to CCBS sets; Bionicle G1 protagonists were even more blandly humanoid. Up until 2007, they were pretty much complete clones, and even after 2007 you could usually count on the good guys being humanoid. The most they broke away was, say, hunchbacks and wings, neither of which is groundbreaking in terms of protagonists.

 

It's not a flaw of CCBS, it's the result of the rigorous play testing and how it affects the designs.

  • Upvote 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If CCBS is so versitile, why are all the Toas, Protectors, Heroes, and 80% of the villains all bipedal humanoids? >.< They could seriously have a lot of fun making creative designs, but they keep sticking to the same design. Literally, almost all of the recents sets consist of a torso piece, a clip on chest, limbs are two bone pieces with two shells. It's the same thing over and over again. Why can't we have Toa with tentacles and stuff?

It isn't "BIONICLE uses CCBS -> all sets are humanoid", it's "BIONICLE sets are meant to be primarily humanoid -> CCBS design".  With the exception of the Lord of Skull Spiders, all this year's characters are meant to be humanoid, and not because they're limited by CCBS; many Hero Factory sets had non-humanoid builds.

 

I really like CCBS, because what people seem to think of as "simplicity" or "juniorization" I see as versatility and consistency.

 

I roll my eyes every time people complain about the legs being "just a bone with a shell on it" because for most BIONICLE sets the lower leg/lower arms was made of a single piece.

  • Upvote 6

OpAXNpl.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If CCBS is so versitile, why are all the Toas, Protectors, Heroes, and 80% of the villains all bipedal humanoids? >.< They could seriously have a lot of fun making creative designs, but they keep sticking to the same design. Literally, almost all of the recents sets consist of a torso piece, a clip on chest, limbs are two bone pieces with two shells. It's the same thing over and over again. Why can't we have Toa with tentacles and stuff?

I'm sorry, but I fail to see how G1 was any better. In fact, Bionicle 2015 is more diverse compared to Gen 1, since nearly every Gen 1 set was a clone set. Also, how many kids do you know want a good guy with tentacles? And "same design" is a term I would use to describe every Toa Team pre-2007. At least with these Toa, it's not "Buy one, you buy them all."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

If CCBS is so versitile, why are all the Toas, Protectors, Heroes, and 80% of the villains all bipedal humanoids? >.< They could seriously have a lot of fun making creative designs, but they keep sticking to the same design. Literally, almost all of the recents sets consist of a torso piece, a clip on chest, limbs are two bone pieces with two shells. It's the same thing over and over again. Why can't we have Toa with tentacles and stuff?

I'm sorry, but I fail to see how G1 was any better. In fact, Bionicle 2015 is more diverse compared to Gen 1, since nearly every Gen 1 set was a clone set. Also, how many kids do you know want a good guy with tentacles? And "same design" is a term I would use to describe every Toa Team pre-2007. At least with these Toa, it's not "Buy one, you buy them all."

 

I don't think with generation 1 it was "you buy one you buy them all" since the Bionicle media presented each "clone" as a different character. I know a few kids who would love to have a good guy with tentacles, but I think bioniclepluslotr meant to say about the Toa with detail and cool parts.

 

P.S. I am glad you like Bionicle 2015 :) ; it has its quirks but it's just not for me. :dontgetit:

  • Upvote 1

If you don't like people that use their head and stand up to bullies, then you may not like me because I deal with bullies head on!  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

If CCBS is so versitile, why are all the Toas, Protectors, Heroes, and 80% of the villains all bipedal humanoids? >.< They could seriously have a lot of fun making creative designs, but they keep sticking to the same design. Literally, almost all of the recents sets consist of a torso piece, a clip on chest, limbs are two bone pieces with two shells. It's the same thing over and over again. Why can't we have Toa with tentacles and stuff?

It isn't "BIONICLE uses CCBS -> all sets are humanoid", it's "BIONICLE sets are meant to be primarily humanoid -> CCBS design".  With the exception of the Lord of Skull Spiders, all this year's characters are meant to be humanoid, and not because they're limited by CCBS; many Hero Factory sets had non-humanoid builds.

 

I really like CCBS, because what people seem to think of as "simplicity" or "juniorization" I see as versatility and consistency.

 

I roll my eyes every time people complain about the legs being "just a bone with a shell on it" because for most BIONICLE sets the lower leg/lower arms was made of a single piece.

 

Yeah, but the singe pieces of legs looked different on every figure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

If CCBS is so versitile, why are all the Toas, Protectors, Heroes, and 80% of the villains all bipedal humanoids? >.< They could seriously have a lot of fun making creative designs, but they keep sticking to the same design. Literally, almost all of the recents sets consist of a torso piece, a clip on chest, limbs are two bone pieces with two shells. It's the same thing over and over again. Why can't we have Toa with tentacles and stuff?

It isn't "BIONICLE uses CCBS -> all sets are humanoid", it's "BIONICLE sets are meant to be primarily humanoid -> CCBS design".  With the exception of the Lord of Skull Spiders, all this year's characters are meant to be humanoid, and not because they're limited by CCBS; many Hero Factory sets had non-humanoid builds.

 

I really like CCBS, because what people seem to think of as "simplicity" or "juniorization" I see as versatility and consistency.

 

I roll my eyes every time people complain about the legs being "just a bone with a shell on it" because for most BIONICLE sets the lower leg/lower arms was made of a single piece.

 

Yeah, but the singe pieces of legs looked different on every figure.

 

 

To be fair, so do bones and shells. None of the Toa of Okoto share lower leg builds. In fact they're arguably far more varied than Gen1 lower legs, which for years gave each line the exact same lower leg pieces, just recolored. Even when they got rid of clone sets and started switching it up a bit in 2007, Hahli, Jaller, and Matoro Mahri still all had the same lower leg pieces, to give one of many possible examples.

  • Upvote 2

00_gaeas_reaper.jpgjrfightmeditatesmaller.gif00_shadowboxer.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

If CCBS is so versitile, why are all the Toas, Protectors, Heroes, and 80% of the villains all bipedal humanoids? >.< They could seriously have a lot of fun making creative designs, but they keep sticking to the same design. Literally, almost all of the recents sets consist of a torso piece, a clip on chest, limbs are two bone pieces with two shells. It's the same thing over and over again. Why can't we have Toa with tentacles and stuff?

It isn't "BIONICLE uses CCBS -> all sets are humanoid", it's "BIONICLE sets are meant to be primarily humanoid -> CCBS design".  With the exception of the Lord of Skull Spiders, all this year's characters are meant to be humanoid, and not because they're limited by CCBS; many Hero Factory sets had non-humanoid builds.

 

I really like CCBS, because what people seem to think of as "simplicity" or "juniorization" I see as versatility and consistency.

 

I roll my eyes every time people complain about the legs being "just a bone with a shell on it" because for most BIONICLE sets the lower leg/lower arms was made of a single piece.

Yeah, but the singe pieces of legs looked different on every figure.

Except for all the figures that ended up using the same single-piece lower leg.  The five limb pieces that received wide use after their initial appearance (Rahkshi leg, Metru leg, Vahki leg, Piraka leg, and Inika leg) aren't even enough to give a single wave of sets unique shins.  And the fact that they were also used as forearm pieces, sometimes within the same set, didn't help.

  • Upvote 3

OpAXNpl.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

If CCBS is so versitile, why are all the Toas, Protectors, Heroes, and 80% of the villains all bipedal humanoids? >.< They could seriously have a lot of fun making creative designs, but they keep sticking to the same design. Literally, almost all of the recents sets consist of a torso piece, a clip on chest, limbs are two bone pieces with two shells. It's the same thing over and over again. Why can't we have Toa with tentacles and stuff?

I'm sorry, but I fail to see how G1 was any better. In fact, Bionicle 2015 is more diverse compared to Gen 1, since nearly every Gen 1 set was a clone set. Also, how many kids do you know want a good guy with tentacles? And "same design" is a term I would use to describe every Toa Team pre-2007. At least with these Toa, it's not "Buy one, you buy them all."

 

I don't think with generation 1 it was "you buy one you buy them all" since the Bionicle media presented each "clone" as a different character. I know a few kids who would love to have a good guy with tentacles, but I think bioniclepluslotr meant to say about the Toa with detail and cool parts.

 

P.S. I am glad you like Bionicle 2015 :) ; it has its quirks but it's just not for me. :dontgetit:

 

You could use Reidak's instructions to build Zaktan. Quite clone if you ask me. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

So which parts do you think is better? ccbs or bbs?

You asked, we told.

Oh, my bad. That was on my end.

 

 

Personally, I prefer CCBS over the BIONICLE Build System. Parts from BBS were often one trick ponies, being used only in certain ways. The overly-detailed parts also alienated them from the rest of LEGO, not to mention the thin plastic caused them to break. CCBS has very sleek, simply designed shells and bones, similar to LEGO System bricks. The fact that they all use the same connection points allows for the ability to mix and match parts more comfortably and easily, allowing more potential. Also, the inclusion of the gearbox in the new Master sets, it being a Mata or Metru torso boiled down to it's most basic elements, allows for more potential and possibilities of use.

But that "overly detailed" stuff makes the OLD Bio different that the rest.
But BIONICLE shouldn't have to be different from the rest. Yes, it is clearly not classic System, but the fact that the majority of many of the parts made for BIONICLE could only be used in BIONICLE betrays one of the core ideas of every LEGO sets: interchangeability. Because they looked like no other TECHNIC, or even LEGO, line, they could not be used for anything but BIONICLE. However, once in a blue moon, a good, generic part was made (the Bohrok eye, or the Hordika neck) which could be used interchangeably between themes, giving them more of a longevity. So, when BIONICLE ended, it shouldn't be that big of a surprise that those parts are pretty much the only BIONICLE parts still produced. So yes, although BIONICLE is different than other LEGO lines, it is still primarily LEGO, and shouldn't be treated differently than the rest.

 

(Also, intricate detailing in a small space can lead to thin plastic, causing eventual breaking in small, isolated areas, like the sides of the "jaw" on the '01 Miru.)

Old Bionicle is basically techinc in a sense since they made it.

What do you mean, "they" made it? Both systems are Technic-based and the parts for both were designed predominantly by Lego designers who specialize in Technic parts. The only difference is that CCBS sets don't include the Technic branding—but neither did the vast majority of Bionicle sets.

 

Both?  No, you understand HALF of it.  OLD Bio had DETAIL, ccbs parts don't have any detail.  ccbs have 50% "Technic-based" for the system because they don't have any detail.

I loved the overly detailed look.

So do I.

Edited by Gipsy Danger

A signature is supposed to be this:

 

Jaeger_Gipsy_Danger_Decal_02.png

 

and BTW https://screen.yahoo.com/star-trek-convention-000000768.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

So which parts do you think is better? ccbs or bbs?

You asked, we told.
Oh, my bad. That was on my end.

 

 

Personally, I prefer CCBS over the BIONICLE Build System. Parts from BBS were often one trick ponies, being used only in certain ways. The overly-detailed parts also alienated them from the rest of LEGO, not to mention the thin plastic caused them to break. CCBS has very sleek, simply designed shells and bones, similar to LEGO System bricks. The fact that they all use the same connection points allows for the ability to mix and match parts more comfortably and easily, allowing more potential. Also, the inclusion of the gearbox in the new Master sets, it being a Mata or Metru torso boiled down to it's most basic elements, allows for more potential and possibilities of use.

But that "overly detailed" stuff makes the OLD Bio different that the rest.
But BIONICLE shouldn't have to be different from the rest. Yes, it is clearly not classic System, but the fact that the majority of many of the parts made for BIONICLE could only be used in BIONICLE betrays one of the core ideas of every LEGO sets: interchangeability. Because they looked like no other TECHNIC, or even LEGO, line, they could not be used for anything but BIONICLE. However, once in a blue moon, a good, generic part was made (the Bohrok eye, or the Hordika neck) which could be used interchangeably between themes, giving them more of a longevity. So, when BIONICLE ended, it shouldn't be that big of a surprise that those parts are pretty much the only BIONICLE parts still produced. So yes, although BIONICLE is different than other LEGO lines, it is still primarily LEGO, and shouldn't be treated differently than the rest.

 

(Also, intricate detailing in a small space can lead to thin plastic, causing eventual breaking in small, isolated areas, like the sides of the "jaw" on the '01 Miru.)

Old Bionicle is basically techinc in a sense since they made it.
What do you mean, "they" made it? Both systems are Technic-based and the parts for both were designed predominantly by Lego designers who specialize in Technic parts. The only difference is that CCBS sets don't include the Technic branding—but neither did the vast majority of Bionicle sets.

Both? No, you understand HALF of it. OLD Bio had DETAIL, ccbs parts don't have any detail. ccbs have 50% "Technic-based" for the system because they don't have any detail.

I loved the overly detailed look.

So do I.

No, I think it's you who doesn't understand. The high detail of Bionicle was barely an aspect of Technic. Technic was, and still is, mostly defined by low-detail axles, connectors, beams, and functional elements. Things like fake pistons and joints were not an aspect of Technic at all.

 

In fact, modern Technic parts are much like the CCBS, with large, smooth panels and mechanical details limited largely to parts that are actually functional.

  • Upvote 6

Formerly Lyichir: Rachira of Influence

Aanchir's and Meiko's brother

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

If CCBS is so versitile, why are all the Toas, Protectors, Heroes, and 80% of the villains all bipedal humanoids? >.< They could seriously have a lot of fun making creative designs, but they keep sticking to the same design. Literally, almost all of the recents sets consist of a torso piece, a clip on chest, limbs are two bone pieces with two shells. It's the same thing over and over again. Why can't we have Toa with tentacles and stuff?

I'm sorry, but I fail to see how G1 was any better. In fact, Bionicle 2015 is more diverse compared to Gen 1, since nearly every Gen 1 set was a clone set. Also, how many kids do you know want a good guy with tentacles? And "same design" is a term I would use to describe every Toa Team pre-2007. At least with these Toa, it's not "Buy one, you buy them all."

 

I don't think with generation 1 it was "you buy one you buy them all" since the Bionicle media presented each "clone" as a different character. I know a few kids who would love to have a good guy with tentacles, but I think bioniclepluslotr meant to say about the Toa with detail and cool parts.

 

P.S. I am glad you like Bionicle 2015 :) ; it has its quirks but it's just not for me. :dontgetit:

 

You could use Reidak's instructions to build Zaktan. Quite clone if you ask me. 

 

True.  And that sill didn't stop 4 or 5 more years of Bionicle.  At least the titan sets weren't clones.  ^_^

  • Upvote 2

If you don't like people that use their head and stand up to bullies, then you may not like me because I deal with bullies head on!  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

So which parts do you think is better? ccbs or bbs?

You asked, we told.
Oh, my bad. That was on my end.

 

 

Personally, I prefer CCBS over the BIONICLE Build System. Parts from BBS were often one trick ponies, being used only in certain ways. The overly-detailed parts also alienated them from the rest of LEGO, not to mention the thin plastic caused them to break. CCBS has very sleek, simply designed shells and bones, similar to LEGO System bricks. The fact that they all use the same connection points allows for the ability to mix and match parts more comfortably and easily, allowing more potential. Also, the inclusion of the gearbox in the new Master sets, it being a Mata or Metru torso boiled down to it's most basic elements, allows for more potential and possibilities of use.

But that "overly detailed" stuff makes the OLD Bio different that the rest.
But BIONICLE shouldn't have to be different from the rest. Yes, it is clearly not classic System, but the fact that the majority of many of the parts made for BIONICLE could only be used in BIONICLE betrays one of the core ideas of every LEGO sets: interchangeability. Because they looked like no other TECHNIC, or even LEGO, line, they could not be used for anything but BIONICLE. However, once in a blue moon, a good, generic part was made (the Bohrok eye, or the Hordika neck) which could be used interchangeably between themes, giving them more of a longevity. So, when BIONICLE ended, it shouldn't be that big of a surprise that those parts are pretty much the only BIONICLE parts still produced. So yes, although BIONICLE is different than other LEGO lines, it is still primarily LEGO, and shouldn't be treated differently than the rest.

 

(Also, intricate detailing in a small space can lead to thin plastic, causing eventual breaking in small, isolated areas, like the sides of the "jaw" on the '01 Miru.)

Old Bionicle is basically techinc in a sense since they made it.
What do you mean, "they" made it? Both systems are Technic-based and the parts for both were designed predominantly by Lego designers who specialize in Technic parts. The only difference is that CCBS sets don't include the Technic branding—but neither did the vast majority of Bionicle sets.
Both? No, you understand HALF of it. OLD Bio had DETAIL, ccbs parts don't have any detail. ccbs have 50% "Technic-based" for the system because they don't have any detail.

I loved the overly detailed look.

So do I.

No, I think it's you who doesn't understand. The high detail of Bionicle was barely an aspect of Technic. Technic was, and still is, mostly defined by low-detail axles, connectors, beams, and functional elements. Things like fake pistons and joints were not an aspect of Technic at all.

 

In fact, modern Technic parts are much like the CCBS, with large, smooth panels and mechanical details limited largely to parts that are actually functional.

 

Fake pistons and joints were actually an aspect of Technic.  Bionicle was a product of technic originally, and the product before it was the Slizer series.  Both the Slizer and Bionicle products were apart of technic and because of that they were designed to look like robots so that is why you see all the fake piston's, mechanical parts and the functioning gearboxes in a part of G1.

A signature is supposed to be this:

 

Jaeger_Gipsy_Danger_Decal_02.png

 

and BTW https://screen.yahoo.com/star-trek-convention-000000768.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

 

So which parts do you think is better? ccbs or bbs?

You asked, we told.

 

Oh, my bad. That was on my end.

 

 

Personally, I prefer CCBS over the BIONICLE Build System. Parts from BBS were often one trick ponies, being used only in certain ways. The overly-detailed parts also alienated them from the rest of LEGO, not to mention the thin plastic caused them to break. CCBS has very sleek, simply designed shells and bones, similar to LEGO System bricks. The fact that they all use the same connection points allows for the ability to mix and match parts more comfortably and easily, allowing more potential. Also, the inclusion of the gearbox in the new Master sets, it being a Mata or Metru torso boiled down to it's most basic elements, allows for more potential and possibilities of use.

But that "overly detailed" stuff makes the OLD Bio different that the rest.

 

But BIONICLE shouldn't have to be different from the rest. Yes, it is clearly not classic System, but the fact that the majority of many of the parts made for BIONICLE could only be used in BIONICLE betrays one of the core ideas of every LEGO sets: interchangeability. Because they looked like no other TECHNIC, or even LEGO, line, they could not be used for anything but BIONICLE. However, once in a blue moon, a good, generic part was made (the Bohrok eye, or the Hordika neck) which could be used interchangeably between themes, giving them more of a longevity. So, when BIONICLE ended, it shouldn't be that big of a surprise that those parts are pretty much the only BIONICLE parts still produced. So yes, although BIONICLE is different than other LEGO lines, it is still primarily LEGO, and shouldn't be treated differently than the rest.

 

(Also, intricate detailing in a small space can lead to thin plastic, causing eventual breaking in small, isolated areas, like the sides of the "jaw" on the '01 Miru.)

 

Old Bionicle is basically techinc in a sense since they made it.

 

What do you mean, "they" made it? Both systems are Technic-based and the parts for both were designed predominantly by Lego designers who specialize in Technic parts. The only difference is that CCBS sets don't include the Technic branding—but neither did the vast majority of Bionicle sets.

 

Both? No, you understand HALF of it. OLD Bio had DETAIL, ccbs parts don't have any detail. ccbs have 50% "Technic-based" for the system because they don't have any detail.

I loved the overly detailed look.

So do I.

 

No, I think it's you who doesn't understand. The high detail of Bionicle was barely an aspect of Technic. Technic was, and still is, mostly defined by low-detail axles, connectors, beams, and functional elements. Things like fake pistons and joints were not an aspect of Technic at all.

 

In fact, modern Technic parts are much like the CCBS, with large, smooth panels and mechanical details limited largely to parts that are actually functional.

 

Fake pistons and joints were actually an aspect of Technic.  Bionicle was a product of technic originally, and the product before it was the Slizer series.  Both the Slizer and Bionicle products were apart of technic and because of that they were designed to look like robots so that is why you see all the fake piston's, mechanical parts and the functioning gearboxes in a part of G1.

 

But my point is that those were not integral parts of Technic. In fact, for the most part, those features WERE limited to themes like Bionicle, Slizers, and Roboriders. The fact that CCBS themes feature fewer of those details doesn't make them any less "Technic", because Technic itself rarely features those sorts of details either.

 

And of course, there's the fact that figures don't have to be covered in exposed pistons to look robotic. In fact, many actual robots opt for smooth, clean, and non-threatening shapes, like the armor shells of the CCBS.

  • Upvote 2

Formerly Lyichir: Rachira of Influence

Aanchir's and Meiko's brother

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

So which parts do you think is better? ccbs or bbs?

You asked, we told.

 

Oh, my bad. That was on my end.

 

 

Personally, I prefer CCBS over the BIONICLE Build System. Parts from BBS were often one trick ponies, being used only in certain ways. The overly-detailed parts also alienated them from the rest of LEGO, not to mention the thin plastic caused them to break. CCBS has very sleek, simply designed shells and bones, similar to LEGO System bricks. The fact that they all use the same connection points allows for the ability to mix and match parts more comfortably and easily, allowing more potential. Also, the inclusion of the gearbox in the new Master sets, it being a Mata or Metru torso boiled down to it's most basic elements, allows for more potential and possibilities of use.

But that "overly detailed" stuff makes the OLD Bio different that the rest.

 

But BIONICLE shouldn't have to be different from the rest. Yes, it is clearly not classic System, but the fact that the majority of many of the parts made for BIONICLE could only be used in BIONICLE betrays one of the core ideas of every LEGO sets: interchangeability. Because they looked like no other TECHNIC, or even LEGO, line, they could not be used for anything but BIONICLE. However, once in a blue moon, a good, generic part was made (the Bohrok eye, or the Hordika neck) which could be used interchangeably between themes, giving them more of a longevity. So, when BIONICLE ended, it shouldn't be that big of a surprise that those parts are pretty much the only BIONICLE parts still produced. So yes, although BIONICLE is different than other LEGO lines, it is still primarily LEGO, and shouldn't be treated differently than the rest.

 

(Also, intricate detailing in a small space can lead to thin plastic, causing eventual breaking in small, isolated areas, like the sides of the "jaw" on the '01 Miru.)

 

Old Bionicle is basically techinc in a sense since they made it.

 

What do you mean, "they" made it? Both systems are Technic-based and the parts for both were designed predominantly by Lego designers who specialize in Technic parts. The only difference is that CCBS sets don't include the Technic branding—but neither did the vast majority of Bionicle sets.

 

Both? No, you understand HALF of it. OLD Bio had DETAIL, ccbs parts don't have any detail. ccbs have 50% "Technic-based" for the system because they don't have any detail.

I loved the overly detailed look.

So do I.

 

No, I think it's you who doesn't understand. The high detail of Bionicle was barely an aspect of Technic. Technic was, and still is, mostly defined by low-detail axles, connectors, beams, and functional elements. Things like fake pistons and joints were not an aspect of Technic at all.

 

In fact, modern Technic parts are much like the CCBS, with large, smooth panels and mechanical details limited largely to parts that are actually functional.

 

Fake pistons and joints were actually an aspect of Technic.  Bionicle was a product of technic originally, and the product before it was the Slizer series.  Both the Slizer and Bionicle products were apart of technic and because of that they were designed to look like robots so that is why you see all the fake piston's, mechanical parts and the functioning gearboxes in a part of G1.

 

But my point is that those were not integral parts of Technic. In fact, for the most part, those features WERE limited to themes like Bionicle, Slizers, and Roboriders. The fact that CCBS themes feature fewer of those details doesn't make them any less "Technic", because Technic itself rarely features those sorts of details either.

 

And of course, there's the fact that figures don't have to be covered in exposed pistons to look robotic. In fact, many actual robots opt for smooth, clean, and non-threatening shapes, like the armor shells of the CCBS.

 

@Italic, sure they do.  That's what made the OLD Bionicle, Bionicle.

A signature is supposed to be this:

 

Jaeger_Gipsy_Danger_Decal_02.png

 

and BTW https://screen.yahoo.com/star-trek-convention-000000768.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gipsy Danger, it would be good form to at least acknowledge when your points have been adressed, instead of ignoring the numerous and well thought out responses you get. It appears honestly rather disrespectful.

 

Regarding the pistons being part of Bionicle, I have to agree, to an extent. The ball jointed arm that debuted (to my knowledge) in the Slizer line of toys featured two prominent piston designs, and many of the later Bionicle pieces would feature similar sculpted, nonfuntioning facsimiles of gears and/or pistons. Note, that while I agree, that this has been a design feture on many Bionicle pieces, it has decidedly not been a feature of Lego Technic as a whole.

 

However, as Dina Saruyama pointed out, this prevalence of sculpted machinery does not equate to the sole defining feature of Bionicle.

 

It also bears noting that there is no obligation for the new Bionicle to adhere to all visual design cues of toys released well over a decade ago.

 

In short, you not liking the absence (although it is not a total absence, there are sculpted pistons to be found) does in no way equate to an objective shortcoming.

  • Upvote 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gipsy Danger, it would be good form to at least acknowledge when your points have been adressed, instead of ignoring the numerous and well thought out responses you get. It appears honestly rather disrespectful.

 

Regarding the pistons being part of Bionicle, I have to agree, to an extent. The ball jointed arm that debuted (to my knowledge) in the Slizer line of toys featured two prominent piston designs, and many of the later Bionicle pieces would feature similar sculpted, nonfuntioning facsimiles of gears and/or pistons. Note, that while I agree, that this has been a design feture on many Bionicle pieces, it has decidedly not been a feature of Lego Technic as a whole.

 

However, as Dina Saruyama pointed out, this prevalence of sculpted machinery does not equate to the sole defining feature of Bionicle.

 

It also bears noting that there is no obligation for the new Bionicle to adhere to all visual design cues of toys released well over a decade ago.

 

In short, you not liking the absence (although it is not a total absence, there are sculpted pistons to be found) does in no way equate to an objective shortcoming.

I'm not DISRESPECTING or IGNORING them.  Unless if there is something that I want to clear, I will.

A signature is supposed to be this:

 

Jaeger_Gipsy_Danger_Decal_02.png

 

and BTW https://screen.yahoo.com/star-trek-convention-000000768.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...