Generation 2 - Anatomy of the collapse

[Umm Durmán]

In a few hours it will be exactly a week after the unexpected collapse of Bionicle Generation 2. While this event, cataclysmic to our beloved hobby, has answered a few questions, it has created many more new questions that loom over not only Bionicle, but over constraction as a whole. We know that Generation 2 has collapsed and I think that we can be certain that LEGO wouldn't have cancelled Bionicle if Bionicle was a success - in fact, if they cancelled it so quickly, unexpectedly and in defiance of their earlier plans, it must have been, financially speaking, extremely unsuccessful. I am quite certain that if it were only a minor unsuccess they would have merely decreased its production and stocking and not cancel it. The end of Generation 2 seems to indicate that the line must have been a true massacre unsuccess 

 

Which brings me to what we don't know - to the main question why I created this thread - What has failed? Was it Bionicle? Or was it constraction itself?

 

Now the thing that really put this big question mark into my head was this tweet:

 

 

 

@Tahu_136 There is no theme set to "replace" BIONICLE. As far as a new constraction theme, we'll have to wait and see.

 

This is a tweet released by the LEGO group itself. I really find it hard to believe that they wouldn't have contingency plans for a sudden collapse of one of their lines - you don't get to be the leader in the toy market without covering all the angles. They had exact financial figures so, unlike us, they had to see this coming. Yet they don't have a replacement for Bionicle. I can think of several interpretations of this kinda vague tweet - one of them being that this failure might have been something bigger than just Bionicle. What if constraction as a whole is dying? Truth is, this tweet seems to suggest that for the first time in many years, there won't be a constraction exclusive theme around. Now this is obviously mere speculation on my part - I am not saying that I know something about this issue, I am merely highlighting that I don't know what's happening and that I am puzzled by it. And because I am puzzled by this I would like to hear the opinions of other forumers, so please share your thoughts and maybe we can get some answers in this sea of proto .... ehm, I mean in this sea of questions 

Edited August 4, 2016 by Umm Durmán

[Iruini Nuva]

The tweet simply reads as PR to me. Gives you room to make the decisions you need to make without setting expectations inappropriately.

 

I can't say yay or nay to constraction as a product. Bionicle's cancellation feels like a strategic decision rather than a purely $$ one. Sales might have been so disastrous as to merit an immediate halt, but I have a gut reaction that this is an intentional leadership decision about something broader and Bionicle is collateral damage.

 

Now, that decision could be "constraction isn't where we want to go (cancel it all)" or it could be "we want to realign what constraction means, and Bionicle won't make sense in that world 2 years from now". Could be a statement on financial viability, or could be a byproduct of long-term thinking.

[Sir Keksalot]

Ultimately, Bionicle was what dun goofed. G2's marketing is what killed it; with G1, there was always a sense that it was something greater than a toy, and the multimedia fulfilled this expectation. Such was not the case with G2. Lego is probably confounded that their cash cow of old has flopped so hard, and they're probably just re-assessing the whole thing so they can make a G3 which, they hope, will prove successful. The removal of constraction is probably to make Bionicle's return that much more monumental; with the return of Bionicle will come what kids will see as an entirely new form of Lego, and it'll be eaten up in the same way G1 was eaten up for being one of the first true constraction lines.

[turaga edron]

I wonder if they're going to give Hero Factory another try?

[unknown456]

Well, to me, the tweet seems kinda ambiguous; it doesn't straight out say yay or nay in terms of an eventual constraction line, it leaves it open. Basically, I could see it going either way: either, due to how suddenly/unexpectedly G2's collapse/implosion came, they didn't have time to think up another constraction line, or, Lego is just keeping its cards close to its chest, and they want to keep their plans for an eventual constraction line quiet.

 

That brings me to another question though: to anyone who paid attention/was here in 2010, how long of a delay was there between the news that G1 was ending and that a new line would be replacing it? Was it a while? Because if so, this might just be history repeating itself.

 

But, then again, what do I know? (Hint: not much )

[ToaTImeLord]

I wonder if they're going to give Hero Factory another try?

Go in the corner.

If contraction isn't dead yet it die with that line.

 

Back to a more positive note.

This is my theory.

I call it the Masklift theory.

 

I think the Designers saw Bionicle was having poor sales and instead of dragging it along another year they pulled it.

 

You may ask why would the Designers do this?

I'll tell you.

They heared what the Bionicle community liked and disliked and are now going to apply this to G3, so it can make the impact Bionicle was meant for.

In short they pulled the line to give it a facelift or "masklift".

 

And as a clue if this is happening we will no new CCBS themes for a good year.

Well, to me, the tweet seems kinda ambiguous; it doesn't straight out say yay or nay in terms of an eventual constraction line, it leaves it open. Basically, I could see it going either way: either, due to how suddenly/unexpectedly G2's collapse/implosion came, they didn't have time to think up another constraction line, or, Lego is just keeping its cards close to its chest, and they want to keep their plans for an eventual constraction line quiet.

 

That brings me to another question though: to anyone who paid attention/was here in 2010, how long of a delay was there between the news that G1 was ending and that a new line would be replacing it? Was it a while? Because if so, this might just be history repeating itself.

 

But, then again, what do I know? (Hint: not much )

I wasn't here when it happen but I remember that we waited a good month tell we heared about Hero Factory. Edited August 5, 2016 by ToaTimeLord

[Endless Sea (Alaki Nuva)]

_{I was okay with Hero Factory... :/}

[ToaTImeLord]

_{I was okay with Hero Factory... :/}

I'm sorry for putting you in the corner.

Want a hug.

[Sir Kohran]

 

 

I can think of several interpretations of this kinda vague tweet - one of them being that this failure might have been something bigger than just Bionicle. What if constraction as a whole is dying?

 

It wouldn't be a huge surprise if it was. Bionicle's original success was partly because most of Lego's System lines at the time weren't selling. Now that today's are, and that constraction is even being incorporated into System themes, themes that are completely constraction face a lot more competition.

 

 

 

That brings me to another question though: to anyone who paid attention/was here in 2010, how long of a delay was there between the news that G1 was ending and that a new line would be replacing it? Was it a while? Because if so, this might just be history repeating itself.

 

There wasn't a delay at all, as the fact that a new line was on the way was announced in the same news about Bionicle ending. It took a while for that new line name and details to be revealed, though.