Detailing on Character Models

[Ford]

Moderators, please have mercy on my profile.

 

Allow me to start off by asking a question:

How much detail does a character need in order to define who they are?

 

It’s been a debate for a while now in the Bionicle community that detailing in sets is of some sort of importance. I’d like to go in depth of how I feel about this debate, and hopefully gain some understanding. 

I’m not asking you to change your mind about something; I’m not trying to be persuasive in any way:

I just want to give you my perception of both sides, as well as my own.

 

Let’s start off with the sets themselves. A lot of people in the Bionicle community feel that the new sets (2015, for those unaware) are not as good as the old sets (from 2001-’10) on the basis of small detailing. Older Bionicle parts had small, intricate details, and many believe that the resurrection of the characters in CCBS, the newer system, sacrifices those details and overall makes the sets look bad. To me, bad and hate are such strong words (especially now that I have taken a Developmental Psychology course, so… back on topic! he he). Why must we throw these words around like nothing today? 

 

I digress.

 

The point I am trying to make is that characters truly are not defined by small details, but sometimes small details can be distracting. Some people dislike the keetorange on Lewa’s chest plate. I’m okay with that; sometimes it bothers my eyes, too. When some say that small details made the characters better is where I have a problem.

 

Take, for example, the new picture of Jared Leto as “The Joker”. The picture reveals that the new iteration of the villain has several tattoos and markings while keeping the same green hair and white makeup from the original design. What is distracting to me, you ask? Answer: the teeth. When I look at a picture of a character, I usually look at their eyes first, but on the picture in question, I began at the teeth. Not the best first impression in my opinion.

 

I digress. Again.

 

The new Toa bring something great to the table: they pull off the character designs with no need for small, insignificant details. Just look at Onua. You can tell without reading his biography that he looks strong and heavy. A similar response can come for any of the other characters introduced thus far.

 

Then there are the summer sets. There are even complaints about those sets not being detailed. Because apparently the bone aesthetic parts (being the ribcage, printed chest plate, skulls, and “bones” on arms/legs) aren’t enough. To me, they get the point across that they are the villains in the world just by overall design alone. Even LOSS gets the point across. After all, spiders are more often than not the villains.

 

So what are your thoughts? Are small details necessary to define a character in most cases? Let me know!

Edited May 10, 2015 by GSR
Updating title per request.

[Regitnui]

Most of those small details in G1 were entirely cosmetic. So they had less functional detailing than the sets from G2. Of course, I've expressed my opinions on the new sets elsewhere. I'll bring those up after some other opinions have been expressed.

[Mocmaker]

How much detail does a character need?  It depends on the purpose of the character.  

 

For example if your character is going to be in a complex plot of a story; then you will want more details to show he is that character who went through Voya Nui, did something heroic, and look that is the scar he got from so and so.

 

If your character is going to be in a not so complex plot; then details won't be that necessary like in Hero Factory and Bionicle 2015.  (So why do I complain about 2015 not having detail if that is the case?  Because for me to buy them it is necessary to have details; just my opinion.)

 

Another way you can look at this is like this:  Which looks better the Mona Lisa or a stick figure?  The Mona Lisa because of the details that define her.

 

EDIT: This is a very controversial topic in the Bionicle community and FordianL, you did very well at presenting it in a unbiased and respectful manner. *applause*

Edited May 10, 2015 by Mocmaker

[Evergrey: Toa of Music]

Honestly, I liked the aesthetic of the original Bionicle because they looked more mechanical than the new Gen, but I really think Lego fixed a great many problems with Bionicle in terms of looks and builds.

 

Let's start with Toa size. Ok, I understand that toa teams usually have 6 members, give or take in some cases, and each toa has control over an element in addition to a mask power; each toa has the same amount of power as another, that I 100% understand. What I NEVER understood is why each Toa has to look identical to others in terms of size, armor, and everything. By size, I mean the story in which ALL TOA are 7 feet tall (by our customary system of measurement). I for one LOVE that Onua looks heavier than the others, that Pohatu looks like he's a runner (a reference to Gen 1's Mask of Speed), and a bunch of other things. Kopaka's leg armor certainly divides fans, I like it even if it does sacrifice articulation because it's at least a unique concept/design with the CCBS. The toa have different builds, different armor and look like they are different people who act as a team. THAT is a HUGE improvement imo. They don't look like they're clones of each other in different colors with different masks.

 

As far as the detailing goes, I never thought that armor details really defined characters. Borrowing from my previous point, all the toa in a team all had identical armor/builts and were all the same size, etc. The details just solidified that they are biomechanical organisms, but they did absolutely nothing in terms of defining a character for me. Now, the detailing of the weapons on the other hand, Gen 1 had some really beautifully designed/detailed weapons. Gen 2 is the exact same. While Tahu and Kopaka use the same sword/shield piece and Gali and Lewa use the same flipper/axe piece, those respective pieces are far more detailed than any Hero factory pieces we've gotten since the first wave of it that still used Bionicle parts. I mean Tahu's new magma swords are arguably one of the best Bionicle sword pieces in the history of Lego just because of the detailing and such! But also, Lego is designing these new pieces to have multiple uses (like all Lego bricks should) and I think the weapons do a good job of balancing detail and versatility.

 

If I have one last point, it's that Lego only has the budget to make so many new pieces in a year; we've seen many new masks, some new weapons and such; but in the winter wave, we only have one new armor shell/piece. Only Mata Nui knows that we'll see in 2016 and later in terms of adding "detail" the CCBS Bionicle. I for one think that the current wave of Bionicle is the best designed and highest quality wave the line has ever had.

[sydorack]

I think the reason people are naysaying the lack of fine detailing is that it makes the parts less special. G1 bionicle parts were for the most part very specific to bionicle alone. The new ccbs parts aren't as exclusive, aside from the masks and weapons and select pieces. That sentiment I do partly agree with. The pieces of bionicle g1 were and are very dear to me.

 

That being said, I do agree with you about g2 though. What it lacks in specific detailing, it makes up for in over-all asthetic. Like you said, onua now blatantly looks like he possesses the hulking strength he was always supposed to have. Tahu looks brave a fierce. Pohatu looks tough and fast. Gali looks graceful. Etc etc. ccbs has allowed them to shape the bodies of the characters in a much greater way than the old bionicle system did. In order to acieve alternate body shapes, you really had to work with the pieces and try to come up with something. Now, with the usage of shells and add ons and various bones, you can easily sculpt the physique of the characters.

 

As for the bone daddies coming soon, I LOVE the bone bones. They look awesome. Any and all naysayers are whack Arnold.

[Aanchir]

I don't think people's frustrations with the lack of details had anything to do with how they defined the characters as individuals. After all, it wasn't until the Toa Hagah in 2005 that Toa even had substantially different armor than their teammates. I think most people who miss the detail of G1 miss it because for them, it defined BIONICLE as a theme.

 

One reason I like G2's lower detail, besides adding to the versatility of the parts, is that it allows detail to be used more selectively, which in turn lets you add emphasis to different parts of a build. When every single part of a model is highly detailed, those details compete for attention. But being able to use detail selectively lets you control which parts of a model command the viewer's attention.

 

Ironically, the easiest way to emphasize a certain part of a model in G1 was to use parts with REDUCED detail, like the smoothness of the Nuva armor. But I prefer G2's method of adding emphasis, as from my experience it is easier to ADD detail to any model (no matter the building system) than to take it away.

 

Color can also be used to control what parts of a model command the viewer's attention, of course, but in my eyes, two levels of control are better than one!

[Gipsy Danger]

For me, they need LOTS of detail and the right color to define who they are.

[Rahkshi Lalonde]

I deeply love bio G1 with all my absurd human pump-biscuit, but holy clashing aesthetics batman!

 

I can find like, four or five distinct textures/motifs on Pridak alone, and they, as others have mentioned compete with each other instead of complimenting. I rarely see an artist who doesn't stylize the heck outta the pieces because they're just so so so soooo dang awkward and piston-ridden that few people care to draw them in their entirety.

 

I'd have to say the selective detailing of the new system wins here by virtue of not almost always looking cobbled and awkward, and generally being easier on the eyes with it's cohesive shell shapes. o:

[Evergrey: Toa of Music]

Also pople say the tribal aesthetic of Bionicle was lost after the story moved to Metru Nui and onward; I never thought it had a tribal aesthetic, maybe tribal stories, but not looks. The current chest plates are much more tribal than the old designs imo. Also with the return of the gear functions, the characters' "loss of detail" is void because the gears still give a robotic/mechanical feel. But I definitely agree with all who've said that it's easier to add than remove detail.

[believe victims]

The title "Character Detailing" seems misleading, as it seems to imply the detailing on pieces in G1 had anything to do with giving each character individuality. Considering how many characters were more or less the same model with a different mask, this was obviously not the case. Even the more character-filled builds like the original Mata stood out not from individual detailing, but from the diversity of parts use and profiles. The details don't matter nearly as much as the big picture in defining an individual character, and I think Bionicle G2 has realized this, because each Toa now has an incredibly defining silhouette instead of more or less the same build.

 

(Not to say I thought all of the detailing of G1 was terrible, but it certainly wasn't doing any favors for individual personality. If you showed someone silhouettes of the Piraka when they didn't know their personalities, could they tell you who was the cunning one, who was the bruiser, who was the inventive one, etc.? Meanwhile, show someone the silhouettes of the G2 Toa, and they can, at the very least, tell you who the strongest member of the group is.)

[Nidhiki of the Shadows]

As much as I liked the detailing in G1, I think over-detailing is actually just detrimental as a whole. Like Hewkii Mahri - alright, his head looks like a manta ray. I get it. The over-abundance of intricate weapons, decal arm pieces and busy armour just kills off any vibe I get from the character. It's to the point where I can't even say anything regarding what kind of character archetype he is cause he's just all over the place.

 

However, the simplicity of the new CCBS, in terms of armour, can be problematic. It looks almost too generic and lacks character on its own. That's where I think G2 succeeds. It relies on the build and stature for characterization, not just on the armour and mask itself. Tahu's tall, lean look makes him look powerful and noble. Lewa's hunched look feels very jungle-like. Onua can clearly be seen as a strong, bulky figure. I definitely agree that these sets have managed to pull off very distinct looks without relying on smaller details, unlike sets from the later Metru Nui or early Mask of Life era. 

 

-NotS

Edited May 10, 2015 by Nidhiki of the Shadows

[Owlexander]

I've always been a fan for minimalism, so I really like small, simple details.