You make some good points... especially about the characters of the Toa Inika. While I thought the Piraka had diverse enough characteristics, the Inika do seem a little bland, but its not that they changed much from their Matoran representatives. Of the six Matoran, Hahli and Jaller got the most characterization in previous media, with Nuparu and Matoro getting a little and Hewkii and Kongu getting minimal. My big problems with their characters is that I envisioned those Matoran in my own stories, so when those didn't match up to the official storyline, it felt odd.

But, anyway, interesting rant.

Very well put!

Back in 2003-2005 I could take any of my larger sets, and using only those pieces create something else, be it a Rahi or a Toa or another figure, I could create something.

I noticed that with Axonn and Brutaka. (Don't have Vezon). It's a Piraka body with bigger limbs and a Kanohi. (Give or take, especially on Brutaka)

And now I feel that in many ways BIONICLE is fallling into the same trap, wherein Greg is forced to adapt sets into the story, rather than deciding

"This is where we feel the story should go, could you create _____?" Which I feel would be a far superior structure.

That'd be nice. PM GregF and see what the design process really is like. (and if you're right, ask what would happen if he tried this approach before 2009 is set in stone?)

gone are the simple and almost tribal mask shapes, masks that look ancient and powerful, now there are complicated and elaborate designs that obviously have a more technological and futuristic bend to them.

And the plastic's feel. Compare the feel of a smooth Kanohi from 01 or 02 with even the plastic of 04. (and obviously 06. I can't wait to feel it on the 07 once I get a Mahri)

And totally on the simpler design. That was to save money if Bionicle was a flop, and just because TLC has more money from it doesn't mean they have to make complex masks. If they want/need to save money why not get a simpler mold?

Good entry. Thank you for giving me hope that someone else out there feels a slight turn from what we started with.

-CF

And so to come to the crux of the issue, I find it wonderful that the BIONICLE books exist, it's a great way to give the story some depth--however now I find that the BOOKS are what contain most of the story, and the comics are really there to showcase all the nice toys you can buy, and show how 'cool' everyone is.

 

A dissapointment [sic], in my eyes.

I will also admit that much of my problems come from the "Kanohi" from 2004 onwards. While the interesting characters distracted me from it, I now find that what I had hoped wasn't true was indeed--gone are the simple and almost tribal mask shapes, masks that look ancient and powerful, now there are complicated and elaborate designs that obviously have a more technological and futuristic bend to them.

Quoted for emphasis.

I LOVE YOU, JANUS.

Quoted for truth.

-KIE

Amen to all points, Janus, especially #1, 2, and 4.

On 1: In the beginning, the storytelling of Bionicle was just comics and the online updates; different from most storylines, and I would say better. Lego sold the toys, but presented the storyline in an almost indie-way. Now it's all the books, and somehow, it isn't the same that way. The Bionicle world started as a visual experience, and let some things to be wondered at. Now they explain almost everything quickly. It's different.

2: I don't like how generic the characters have become, but what really kills me is the endless stream of smart/corny challenge comments they spout. >> They seem too basic.

4: TOTALLY agree! It was a marriage between sci-fi and fantasy, the two managing to tread in a perfect, but simple way. That's what really made me love Bionicle. Fantasy left. I haven't been able to find another story that does that so well.

Totally agreed.

-Seran

I, on the other hand, disagree with much of this. Possibly the only point I do agree with is set structure. I'm most disappointed in how the pieces are getting larger and more specialized as well...

But you are entirely entitled to your opinion, as am I.

I LOVE YOU, JANUS.

Quoted. Quoted for the truthiness it holds.

On the current state of BIONICLE

 

I'm not happy.

 

Strong words to start off with, I know, but it's true. I'm simply not happy with BIONICLE at this time.

I don't look at it that way, Janus -- one of the things I bring up in complaint topics all the time is the difference between each of our individual tastes and the tastes of the majority; i.e. between what each of us wishes LEGO could do, and what LEGO objectively should do to please the majority.

It's not surprising, unusual, or IMO anything to ashamed of that you aren't happy with the current direction. The old cliche that you can't please everybody, basically -- it's true. Many of the things LEGO's moved towards now are opposites of what a lot of BZPers prefer. BR's article a while back talked about this quite well.

The question is, to me, though: Is whether one fan is happy or not indicative of the current state of Bionicle itself? No, I don't think so -- it's more about the "relationship" between Bionicle and that one fan. Bionicle itself is not for any one individual. If it was, ardent fans of scifi and technology like me wouldn't be happy if Bionicle appealed to a fan of pure fantasy, and same idea with a balance, etc.

So there's not that much to say in agreement/disagreement with this entry, because it's clearly what you prefer. You are entitled to prefer that. But.

So all I can really do is give my take on these issues, rather than your opinion of them per se.

Comics -- I had the same problems with not getting the comics, BTW, but that's beside the point (unless that wasn't just us...). I frankly think this "the story is all in the books" thing is more of an illusion simply because 1) the books are there now whereas they weren't before, 2) the books used to be just resumming-up of what was in the comics, but around the end of 2004-2005 they started to take off as their own works of art, and 3) Different artists, different content, different characters, different sets and everybody's own likes and dislikes of those things affects our perception of the comic quality itself.

In other words, I have seen the comics as "shallow" and all about fighting all along. That's what comics do, and just pick up the first three and look at what they're about. There's virtually no character depth; the Toa Mata were just archetypes (as many have commented for years) being put into situations where they had to fight. The main differences were in style and presentation. By their nature, comics must be shallow, because they are so short, and also by their nature, they must be very visual, which requires battles and that sort of thing.

But your perception is your perception, and nothing I can say is going to change that. My point is more that I see a trend in who agrees with you -- it is usually among people who do prefer the feel and style of the older Bionicle. You say it's not about those things. I'm not so sure -- maybe not consciously, but among the ardent fans of the newer stuff that I see posting out there on BZP, I see them getting everything from the newer comics that you and I got from the older ones. (And frankly I have gotten a lot more from the newer stuff than many of the members saying things like what you said.) I think it is more perception than reality.

And so to come to the crux of the issue, I find it wonderful that the BIONICLE books exist, it's a great way to give the story some depth--however now I find that the BOOKS are what contain most of the story, and the comics are really there to showcase all the nice toys you can buy, and show how 'cool' everyone is.

Hate to break it to you, J, but the comics have always been for that purpose. And if you pay attention to the posts of those who preferred the original comics, you see them commenting on how it made the toys look better, and made them look cool. There was a recent post by Kohran, to cite an example, in the poll about the comics artists that captured that feeling perfectly. The comics, storyline, books, everything have always been marketing for toys.

Sounds harsh, but there are advantages to that. For one, it makes the writers work with what they have, rather than bring in random new characters on a whim that come off as Deus ex Machina and we know ahead of time that those are the pieces on the chessboard. Of course, there are also disadvantages, most of which you covered.

A sensitive spot for many, I know. It is not that I dislike the characters, no, I quite enjoy many of them. It's more the fact that in my eyes in many ways they've ceased being just that, characters, rather they seem in many ways to be character-types.

I don't see it as a sensitive spot at all -- I see it as another perception thing. Frankly the most posts I've seen about characters being archetypes have been comments on the Toa Mata/Nuva. It's the same rarer group that is seeing them as unique characters. It also probably has a lot to do with what other story franchises we're each used to and thus what we see as cliche and what we don't. It was with the newer characters that I see an increase in characterization.

Yes, that is mostly through the books, but prior to the books we didn't get it at all in the comics; we got archetypes. You had the temper tantrum incarnate, the cold ice Toa, the calm but powerful water toa, the quiet guy who disliked bright sunlight, etc. They were basically molded after their element in terms of personality, which is by definition highly archetypal.

the Toa while powerful had different opinions on how power should be used, they fought, they lost, they argued and they seemed to live. Around 2005 I began to notice this changing, with the advent of the books much of the life seemed to be leaving from the characters--even in said books (I've read quite a few of them, thank you very much) they simply weren't diverse, weren't interesting.

In 2001 I saw it that way, yes. In 2002 and 2003, though, it was just the same plot being recycled. "Should we work together? Should we not?" I didn't get a sense of "living" out of that. I got a sense of, frankly, boredom. A sense that the story team didn't have any more ideas on where characters can go, who they can be, what their conflicts can be, etc. Thankfully that changed in 2004 and beyond...

But that wasn't why I quoted this passage -- what I just want to point out is the word "interesting", which is subjective. Again, it's a perception based on your preferences. To someone else, like me, they have been much more interesting characters. The theme of the darkness inside in 2005 for example was frankly the deepest Bionicle had ever had, far deeper than 2001-2003 "Should we work together?"

That's my perception -- and it isn't necessarily reality either. My point is more that it has more to do with our interests than anything Bionicle is actually doing.

I noticed this more than ever in 2006. Describe the defining characteristics of The Piraka, Vezon, and The Inika. Now describe the characteristics of the Toa Nuva--notice a difference?

The Piraka are about the true nature of evil, basically what I was talking about in my blog entry about good and evil recently -- they really don't give a flying ice bat about anybody but themselves, and in the end that came back to bite them. They enjoy hurting others, they do whatever it takes for #1. Thus, no matter how much they may pretend to be on each others' side, no matter how much they act like a team, in the end they will each backstab the other whenever it's most advantageous. Even the act of betrayal itself can be a false teamwork maneuver, as with Hakann and Thok when they stole Brutaka's power.

Running out of time here -- but when I compare that to the Toa Nuva... well frankly "Should we work together or not" is a little shallow. It was fine for its time, don't get me wrong, and sure, it's a good lesson to draw as well. But there came a point when they were splitting up yet again despite just proving that teamwork is a good idea, when I had to wonder, do these guys have brains in their heads? I had to roll my eyes a lot during those years.

And out of time for now. More later.

Point #1

The "continued in Mask of Light" thing actually makes sense to me. Why bother buying a movie for $20-30 when you can find out everything that happens for free in the comics?

I agree with you on the deteriorating comics. I barely even read them anymore.

Point #2

If you only read the comics, then this makes a lot of sense. But to someone who loves the Piraka more than any other Bionicle villain before or since (me), what you're saying about the Piraka being character-types is wrong. The Piraka had a lot more differing personalities than the Bohrok, Rahkshi, or Visorak, each had major differences in the books. The comics did not display this very much, though.

But the Inika/Mahri... ugh. They may not be clones on the outside anymore, but they seem to have cloned personalities, very few differences between them, which annoys me.

Point #3

I kinda agree with everything you said here, but the toys are just more important than the story.

Point #4

There is still plenty of fantasy stuff. Even the zamor launchers, which had a high-tech appearance, had a "magic" effect when you got hit. You didn't explode when you were hit by them, you were enslaved, or cured, or had your power drained.

It was also around this time that characters truly began to suffer--gone were the brave and diverse Matoran of Mata-Nui, no, upon transforming into Toa it was as though they'd lost their old personalities completely--and still feel this. The Toa Mahri to me seem flat and uninteresting. Now I will admit that I have not read any of the books, but I going back to my first point, I don't think someone should have to read all the books simply to feel like there's a real character, rather than a generic hero.

I've seen a few other people make this personality accusation, albeit before it was including the books. Frankly I don't think that's what it is -- I think it's that we didn't get that much characterization before, and so we often filled in the gaps with our own ideas, but now that the story is actually delving into those characters more, it isn't lining up with what we had imagined. Understandable, but also unavoidable. One good example would be Kongu's humor, which Screenguy and I once debated -- he saw Kongu as totally serious, with no sense of humor until 2006. But I was able to show that there were several hints that he did have a sense of humor, we just never saw it until now.

This refers to two things, one, the construction of the sets, while having a definate shakeup in 2007, has been growing more and more generic. Two piece body, plus head, plus limbs.

Well, yes -- this is on purpose, because most fans prefer a quick build so they can get on to the roleplaying. Remember Bionicle tried the more complex builds with sets like the Rahi in 2001 and beyond, and they sold poorly. Technic fans largely weren't into this story-driven line, but roleplayers were, and they want sets designed to play well, more than be a super-interesting build.

For that to happen, you have to make the builds somewhat formulaic.

The pieces seem to be growing ever larger ESPECIALLY in larger sets--now I am not at all advocating for a return to the "Technic" style of the 2001 Rahi, nor the Bahrag. I'm asking for a between-ground.

Nothing wrong with asking for that. I have agreed before that a minimal amount of such things, like a gear on one out of six Toa for example, might be a good experiment. Just remember such a thing would be a risk that likely -would- result in lower sales. And we've had in-between grounds before anyways; gears in sets that otherwise were action figury, like the Metru. Yet the gears still seem to have harmed the sales, and definately were still major complaints.

Toy/Story

 

I believe that BIONICLE has a fascinating story, a story in many ways WEIGHED DOWN by the toys. While some of the toys are simply amazing, the fact that we have to constantly 'mutate' or otherwise change previously known Toa or 'create' them from somewhere is frustrating.

That would be one of those downsides I was talking about. No way around it, so personally I don't see the point in worrying about it. It's just something you get used to, accept, because if not for the toys, the story never would have existed in any form so that fact is something we can be grateful towards.

Now I understand that LEGO is a play company, but I feel that the STORY should be at the forefront--Throwbots and Roboriders were good toys, but were utterly defeated by a lack of story.

If the story neglects its purpose, though, to sell the sets, Bionicle risks going away, and then there is no story. It's not just a play company, it's a toy company. The purpose of the story, as I see it, is to provide inspiration for play, yes, but play with the toys. That's why, I think, roleplayers ended up as the main fanbase. Not that surprising really.

Obviously that is never going to produce Lord of the Rings. But as long as you keep that in mind and enjoy Bionicle for what it is -- a story designed for toys -- you can enjoy it for what that means -- a story designed for fun.

At least I can -- perhaps I shouldn't imply I'm speaking for all here. I dunno. But it works for me.

And now I feel that in many ways BIONICLE is fallling into the same trap, wherein Greg is forced to adapt sets into the story, rather than deciding

"This is where we feel the story should go, could you create _____?" Which I feel would be a far superior structure.

With what goal in mind? Remember, again, the purpose has always been to sell the sets. Set design is really best done by those whose talents and experience is in that category. You point out a true downside -- the set designers aren't necessarily that great at story. But realize your suggestion would simply create a different problem, and a more serious one -- story writers aren't experts at toy design.

So I don't see that this qualifies as a "trap" -- because now that the set designers have been using that expertise and research to improve the sets towards what most fans want, sales are going up.

Again, that is going to affect the story to a degree. On the other hand, Greg has often said that the story team does give ideas to the set designers. Toa Lhikan is a case in point. And really, IMT the story team is doing an excellent job at taking what the set designers give them and making a fascinating, rocking fun story out of it.

Technology:

 

BIONICLE, in my eyes always walked a fine line. Mysterious and fantastical, yet tempered with the obvious technology of the world (I mean, they're bio-mechanical)...yet with the advent of Metru Nui we began to move away from that and technology began to rise to the forefront, gone were the trials of seeking for the mystical Kanohi masks--here you could simply create them as you pleased

That's not an accurate description, IMO. In the story, never have I seen anyone "simply creat[ing masks] as [they] pleased". Vakama was the only one that could do that, and most of the time he couldn't. The one mask we saw him making, the Vahi, was a source of frustration constantly, and even that was perhaps more a curse than a blessing.

Obviously Metru Nui was more tech than nature. I'm a little tired of that subject, though. In 2004 we were told that this would be the end of Bionicle, the sky is falling, etc. but Bionicle's sales went up, and now polls are saying 2005 was the worst year ever, with 2004 barely registering, and that was the year all that technology got smashed to bits and the archives were set loose, and Metru Nui became a jungle of Rahi and webs and spiders. So I don't see the argument holding any water anymore.

unfortunately the Piraka and Inika felt that they needed technologically superior weapons in order to combat one another--even in 2007 we see this trait, Toa with high-tech gattling guns?

Boxor.

IMT, I don't agree with being tiptoey about technology in a story about biomechanical beings. If it makes logical sense for the characters to try to get better technology, I want to see them do it. Rather than avoid that for arbitrary reasons that are forced artificially on the story. IMT, IMT, though...

It seems that in many ways BIONICLE has decided to stop walking that line and has sided unconditionally with Technology.

Okay, what about the Kanohi? You brought those up, but the theories about how Kanohi worked before we knew were always about technology. And yet the truth turned out to be basically the "magical" physics of a material, a fantasy material that enables these powers, rather than technology using forcefields, etc. to do it as had previously been theorized.

But again, it's all preference here. I like science fantasy best, so technology amongst fantasy physics appeals to me a lot, and it doesn't have to feel exactly the way 2001 did.

Also, don't forget a lot of this sense of "magic" in 2001 was, again, a perception, not reality. I saw a lot of it manifesting in rumors when I joined in 2003, that surprised me because none of what these popular BZP "rumor theories" said was how I had seen 2001. For example, the idea that the Kanohi were mystical objects of spirituality, or that the Toa were mystical spirits rather than heroes with superpowers, really the whole mysticism idea. There was a mystical feel to 2001 marketing, that I enjoyed, but these material ideas of that literally being what these things were about... they weren't actually grounded in anything Bionicle had done.

They were fan created concepts. And they weren't what most fans out there were apparently thinking, though that often wasn't realized or stated online at the time. There was this feeling that BZP represented the average fan, when in reality it represented the vocal minority. At least that was the sense I got in 2003 -- it's been a relatively new thing that most our active members recognize how unusual we are in the Bionicle fanbase.

While the interesting characters distracted me from it, I now find that what I had hoped wasn't true was indeed--gone are the simple and almost tribal mask shapes, masks that look ancient and powerful, now there are complicated and elaborate designs that obviously have a more technological and futuristic bend to them.

I.e. "coolified."

For example, compare the Faxon of Hahli Mahri to the KauKau of Gali Olda, the difference is astonishing.

Indeed -- to my tastes the Kaukau is mediocre, but the Faxon. The Faxon. Ahhh, now there's a cool design! The merely practical aspects of the Kaukau were my main complaints, and that has been primarly what has been improved (again, IMT).

Now while there is much more that I could nitpick, that's not the point of this entry. I still quite enjoy BIONICLE in many ways and am thankful it continues, and am thankful for all the hard work that LEGO puts into making it, these are just my thoughts on its current state.

In essence, most of these differences are purposeful changes designed to get closer to what most fans are seen as wanting. Now, not saying it's always necessarily what they actually want -- LEGO can certainly be wrong. But this is expected, and it's a good thing, IMO, because LEGO is proving they really do listen to the fans. And, from a logician's perspective, to logic, not just assuming that because they see one post online saying something, it means that's what they should do, etc.

I don't look at it that way, Janus -- one of the things I bring up in complaint topics all the time is the difference between each of our individual tastes and the tastes of the majority; i.e. between what each of us wishes LEGO could do, and what LEGO objectively should do to please the majority.

This isn't a complaint topic, though. It's an entry basically summing up where he stands in Bionicle. Of course it's his tastes. It's his Blog. He's not asking Lego to change everything just for him. And everything stated is subjective, not objective.

Hmmmmmm...Interesting points. I'm not going to comment on everything, but I do want to present one view of mine on the issue of technology.

Personally, I think that the whole aspect of technology in the Bionicle cosmos is very cool - I was particularly impressed when 2004 rolled around. While cities and industry contrast greatly from the '01-'03 feel of Bionicle, I absolutely loved how it was pulled off in the story - With some of the most backwards and disjointed technology conceivable. The lack of some of the most basic necessities for a bustling metropolis, like wheels and electricity, forced these imaginary technologies to move in a competely different direction. And look what we got - Proto chutes for travel, massive lava furnaces for heat, Kilometer-high towers made of pure crystal, Airships (with some absolutely ludicrous and unconventional propulaion mechanisms, I might add), etcetera...I mean, we could've been presented with something out of Flash Gordon or The Jetsons, but instead we get something that is so offbeat and surreal, it's just as much an imaginative fantasy as Mata Nui was, and yet remains completely believable.

Of course, some of this may just be my personal imagination speaking out. For example, when I first read about Mahri Nui in Bionicle Legends#6, my first mental image was not of a giant air bubble, but of a massive dome of crystal blocks with a chandelier of lightstones hanging from the ceiling. Not exactly how it's supposed to be, but I've always liked that particular visualization

Whatever Janus. Whatever.

-Omi

I don't look at it that way, Janus -- one of the things I bring up in complaint topics all the time is the difference between each of our individual tastes and the tastes of the majority; i.e. between what each of us wishes LEGO could do, and what LEGO objectively should do to please the majority.

This isn't a complaint topic, though. It's an entry basically summing up where he stands in Bionicle. Of course it's his tastes. It's his Blog. He's not asking Lego to change everything just for him. And everything stated is subjective, not objective.

I knew someone would say that, lol. Yes, it was the phrase "State of Bionicle" that confuses that issue, but he was clear about that. These are the comments in his blog entry, where we say what we think/feel in response. As I said:

So there's not that much to say in agreement/disagreement with this entry, because it's clearly what you prefer. You are entitled to prefer that. But.

 

So all I can really do is give my take on these issues, rather than your opinion of them per se.

I'm joking with the "But", BTW.

X, that is how I felt about Metru Nui too -- it was in many ways "fantasy tech", more magic than technology feeling (at least to me but I realize I'm weird 'cuz I'm a physics geek here so I know what is and is not possible with real world tech in Bionicle). Metru Nui always struck me more as a mysterious, exhilerating paradise city made totally out of this mysterious protodermis, with magical machinery than a "hi-tech metropolis" as the complainers usually characterized it. Aaaand lovin it.

I think you may be on to something there. Mostly, I preferred ball joints that didn't keep breaking or sagging under too-heavy limbs. And Matoran color schemes.

I completely agree with everything in this entry. As I've told you. But telling you again can't hurt.

To say more would necessitate repeating what you've already so eloquently and observantly stated.

*loves Janus too*

How right thou art!

-ToT-

The thing about your comment about how set design should be dictated by the story instead of the other way round is, the only point of the story is to help sell the sets. Which do you think makes lego more money, the $10 sets or the $5 books (which haven't been selling very well lately) and free comics? Lego is a toy company. The set designers make whatever the focus groups like, and the story team makes the story for people to make sense of things. The new structure you are suggesting would make Lego less money, so, for Lego, it's an inferior structure than what we have now, and who decides the structure? Yep, Lego.

Well said, dmmcg. Not to beat a dead horse, but it's important we don't lose sight of what LEGO is and what Bionicle is -- a toy company, a toyline. Sometimes I think on BZP we get lulled into a sense that the story exists independent of the sets as its own self-sustaining entity. That's partly due to Greg and others doing such a good job that it isn't Power Rangers, I'm sure -- it is such high quality that it can be enjoyed for itself. But we do have to keep in mind that this story is supposed to do the same thing the most annoying marketing ad you ever saw is for -- to sell the sets.

Also, this rule means the characters in the story will be what most fans want, don't forget. So it's more of a benefit than a limitation.

But why couldn't the two camps work together? In all seriousness, Bones, why couldn't the storyline squad and the set designer squad have meetings and discuss the direction of the franchise as whole? Yeah, sure, it'd be another thing to schedule--but isn't Lego supposed to be striving to provide a truly quality product (the story is a part of the Bionicle "product")? Haven't they always prided themselves on going the extra mile for the customers?

I like Smeag's idea there. A little teamwork would no nothing but good for Bionicle. Would probably save other lines from an early demise after one or two years as well. It would also get rid of the current 'slapped-on' vibe I'm getting from the storyline nowadays.

PART THE FIRST

Xccj,

Well thank you,

I'm not fond of the Inika simply because there were preset characters laid down for them—and now that seems to have vanished. As for the Piraka, don't get me wrong. I like them, I just think at times they're a little generic—but I also haven't read any of the books.

I feel well the pain of Stories vs. Official Story (Or Alternate Universe vs. Canon), but I suppose mine are so strange that I don't feel it to the extent others do.

One thing, though. I don't want this being taken as a rant (as some others have.) This is by no means a rant, it's simply me giving my thoughts.

ChocolateFrogs,

Again, thank you.

I also don't have Axonn or Brutaka (Though I'll admit Brutaka did interest me to an extent), but I simply find the MOCing potential to be rather dismal on many of the new larger sets (Albeit I have no 2007 large sets as of yet, with luck Maxilos and Spinax are on their way)

I've considered it before, to tell you the truth. However I do not believe that my idea would go over well, as it is a toy company, and story sadly matters little in lieu of selling product.

The plastic's feel is actually something I support, as it was done for safety's sake. You break an old Kanohi mask and that thing was Jagged, a new Kanohi mask is softer and thus less dangerous. But I do wish that some simpler moulds would make their return.

And thank you for giving me the same hope. I've seen a lot of complaint topics, but none of them really thought about it, it was generally whining

Smeagy,

Everyone loves me. Everyone,

But nobody can have me, nuh-uh.

KIE,

Glad to see you agree with me. Us Oldschoo' staff gotta stick together, yo.

Puppygirl,

On 1: In the beginning, the storytelling of Bionicle was just comics and the online updates; different from most storylines, and I would say better. Lego sold the toys, but presented the storyline in an almost indie-way. Now it's all the books, and somehow, it isn't the same that way. The Bionicle world started as a visual experience, and let some things to be wondered at. Now they explain almost everything quickly. It's different.

I completely agree with you there, Husky. There was something unique and refreshing about BIONICLE and its presentation, I was burned out of standard action figures by that point, only buying the occasional Transformer, and even LEGO was on my wary list due to the monumental (in my eyes) flop of Throwbots and Roboriders—but BIONICLE managed to snare me again—but it seems to have lost that, in my opinion.

2: I don't like how generic the characters have become, but what really kills me is the endless stream of smart/corny challenge comments they spout. >> They seem too basic.

AGREED. It seems that so much of the comics are filled with the heroes and villains being 'witty' and fighting. It drives me crazy and seems so ridiculously generic, as though it could be any 2/3/4/5/6 characters fighting.

4: TOTALLY agree! It was a marriage between sci-fi and fantasy, the two managing to tread in a perfect, but simple way. That's what really made me love Bionicle. Fantasy left. I haven't been able to find another story that does that so well.

Absolutely, there was an organic blending between the fantasy and the technology in BIONICLE and I feel that it's fading too much. It's a disappointment because I found it immensely fascinating.

Seranikai,

Glad to have another supporter--but would you mind telling what exactly that is you agree on? Or even something you disagree on?

ET,

I find absolutely no problem with that, I do not expect a monopoly on people's thoughts or feelings, however I am happy that you agree that the set structure seems to be going down hill.

Thanks for leaving your thoughts.

MakSnakPak,

Awww, maybe you'll get the love you deserve one day. That's all the Truthiness I need.

Bonesiii,

While I understand your thoughts, I do not necessarily appreciate them.

First off, I do not appreciate my blog being treated the same as a complaint topic. I never once stated what BIONICLE should do, I merely stated my personal preferences, as is my right within my blog.

It's not surprising, unusual, or IMO anything to ashamed of that you aren't happy with the current direction. The old cliche that you can't please everybody, basically -- it's true. Many of the things LEGO's moved towards now are opposites of what a lot of BZPers prefer. BR's article a while back talked about this quite well.

I completely agree with you here, however, you will never please everyone, and that's a good thing in my opinion. But once again I am not stating that BIONICLE should change, or that anything should be done, I'm merely voicing my thoughts on what BIONICLE has become in my eyes.

The question is, to me, though: Is whether one fan is happy or not indicative of the current state of Bionicle itself? No, I don't think so -- it's more about the "relationship" between Bionicle and that one fan. Bionicle itself is not for any one individual. If it was, ardent fans of scifi and technology like me wouldn't be happy if Bionicle appealed to a fan of pure fantasy, and same idea with a balance, etc.

Now is where you seem to misunderstand. This is my view on the overall state of BIONICLE—can I really say that I know the current state of BIONICLE? No, can you? Can anyone really say that they are aware of the current state of this hobby of ours? Minus those working there, I don't think so. This is my subjective view on what I see in BIONICLE at this time, and I do not believe I was masquerading it as anything but that.

Comics -- I had the same problems with not getting the comics, BTW, but that's beside the point (unless that wasn't just us...). I frankly think this "the story is all in the books" thing is more of an illusion simply because 1) the books are there now whereas they weren't before, 2) the books used to be just resumming-up of what was in the comics, but around the end of 2004-2005 they started to take off as their own works of art, and 3) Different artists, different content, different characters, different sets and everybody's own likes and dislikes of those things affects our perception of the comic quality itself.

I believe that there were a few people that had difficulties getting the comics, perhaps LEGO was switching over to a new system? Regardless I know that most of the subscribers received their comics, and I was one of the unfortunate few. I'm okay with that.

However I completely disagree with your take on it being an illusion. I have noticed an incredible decline in the 'meat' of the story being contained in the comics—sure, we see the bare bones, but the majority of what happens goes on in the books. Toa are in one location worrying about something at the end of one comic, and the next comic they're somewhere completely different with the original worry completely forgotten.

Now, I have no problems with the books fleshing out the universe, my problem comes with the books seemingly superseding the comics in the universe, leaving us the choice of either buying the books, or getting rather jerky and cut up story. (Jerky as in the motion, not as an insult,) Id' be far happier if the books just kind of clicked together with the comics, fleshing them out and showing unseen adventures, stuff that doesn't even have to be hinted at in the comics.

The art, sets, and characters make no differences to me. I will admit that I adored the original art of the comics, and wasn't so happy with the second artist, however I feel that Stuart Sayger is perfect for the 2006-2008 saga, and find his art very dynamic. It's just unfortunate that the story contained in the comics isn't to that level.

In other words, I have seen the comics as "shallow" and all about fighting all along. That's what comics do, and just pick up the first three and look at what they're about. There's virtually no character depth; the Toa Mata were just archetypes (as many have commented for years) being put into situations where they had to fight. The main differences were in style and presentation. By their nature, comics must be shallow, because they are so short, and also by their nature, they must be very visual, which requires battles and that sort of thing.

I disagree, the 2001 comics showed fighting, yes, but the showcase here was the mythos and characters of Mata-nui, their strengths AND weaknesses. I also completely disagree with your assessment of the first three, we see inside Kopaka's for the first, then Lewa and partially Gali, and finally we see the unification of the Toa—as well as Makuta's perspective—how is that not character depth?

Of course I also disagree with your entire perspective on comic books, but that's for another time.

But your perception is your perception, and nothing I can say is going to change that. My point is more that I see a trend in who agrees with you -- it is usually among people who do prefer the feel and style of the older Bionicle. You say it's not about those things. I'm not so sure -- maybe not consciously, but among the ardent fans of the newer stuff that I see posting out there on BZP, I see them getting everything from the newer comics that you and I got from the older ones. (And frankly I have gotten a lot more from the newer stuff than many of the members saying things like what you said.) I think it is more perception than reality.

Oh don't think I don't see the trend of who agrees me. However please do not imply that I don't know what I'm thinking. This is not a 2001 Vs. 2007 debate. There are things I adore about 2007 and there are things I adore about 2001, there are also things I loathe about both. For example, I found the Rahi battles in 2001 to be ridiculously boring and nearly painful. I thought the sets were awesome, but that their presentation in the story could have been a million times better.

Hate to break it to you, J, but the comics have always been for that purpose. And if you pay attention to the posts of those who preferred the original comics, you see them commenting on how it made the toys look better, and made them look cool. There was a recent post by Kohran, to cite an example, in the poll about the comics artists that captured that feeling perfectly. The comics, storyline, books, everything have always been marketing for toys.

I'm aware the comics have always been about marketing the toys, however it was the difference in the marketing. As I mentioned before, I saw the Toa's strengths and weaknesses, saw them evolve as characters which engaged me, rather than unflawed heroes with no depth and no problems. Heck, from what I've seen Jaller Mahri doesn't even have problems underwater—Despite being a FIRE Toa!

And of course note, this is all Opinion, rather than fact. I never presented anything but.

Sounds harsh, but there are advantages to that. For one, it makes the writers work with what they have, rather than bring in random new characters on a whim that come off as Deus ex Machina and we know ahead of time that those are the pieces on the chessboard. Of course, there are also disadvantages, most of which you covered.

Actually, it doesn't sound harsh. It's simple fact. However you're slightly off here, we know the pieces on the chessboard—but that's because we have access to all the latest BIONICLE news. Most people don't, and thus many characters/sets come out of left field for them.

I don't see it as a sensitive spot at all -- I see it as another perception thing. Frankly the most posts I've seen about characters being archetypes have been comments on the Toa Mata/Nuva. It's the same rarer group that is seeing them as unique characters. It also probably has a lot to do with what other story franchises we're each used to and thus what we see as cliche and what we don't. It was with the newer characters that I see an increase in characterization.

Again, I never stated that this was anything but perceptions. However I've seen some people react very badly to perceptions, so of course I mentioned that it was a sensitive spot.

I simply cannot understand what you say next, though. Again, this is all my Opinion, so keep that in mind. However I felt that the Toa Mata/Nuva were very effective in being characters, and not simply defined by their most obvious characteristics. However I find it difficult to find any shred of character for the Toa Inika/Mahri simply because all I ever hear them spouting off is one-liners.

Yes, that is mostly through the books, but prior to the books we didn't get it at all in the comics; we got archetypes. You had the temper tantrum incarnate, the cold ice Toa, the calm but powerful water toa, the quiet guy who disliked bright sunlight, etc. They were basically molded after their element in terms of personality, which is by definition highly archetypal.

Yes, the Toa Mata/Nuva were modeled after their element in terms of personality, but there was more to them than that. For example, Tahu began with a heavy temper but gradually cooled down and became a leader through example rather than through fear. Just because a character starts off as an archetype doesn't mean they can't evolve. I still hold hope for the Mahri.

In 2001 I saw it that way, yes. In 2002 and 2003, though, it was just the same plot being recycled. "Should we work together? Should we not?" I didn't get a sense of "living" out of that. I got a sense of, frankly, boredom. A sense that the story team didn't have any more ideas on where characters can go, who they can be, what their conflicts can be, etc. Thankfully that changed in 2004 and beyond...

Now, this is pure opinion on my part, and absolutely perspective, but I'm honestly flabbergasted that you felt that way. It's not like friendships or teams are formed and then stay strong for forever. The Toa were a team towards the end of the Makuta saga, and they faced the Bahrag together—but for the most part operated independently simply because they enjoyed staying with their people.

When they became Nuva some felt that with this power there would be no need to team up—which is a commonly held feeling, more power = less teamwork. Of course they learned that this wasn't true a few times before it really sank in, but that's reality.

Additionally, I quite enjoyed 2005 and the pathos therein.

The Piraka are about the true nature of evil, basically what I was talking about in my blog entry about good and evil recently -- they really don't give a flying ice bat about anybody but themselves, and in the end that came back to bite them. They enjoy hurting others, they do whatever it takes for #1. Thus, no matter how much they may pretend to be on each others' side, no matter how much they act like a team, in the end they will each backstab the other whenever it's most advantageous. Even the act of betrayal itself can be a false teamwork maneuver, as with Hakann and Thok when they stole Brutaka's power.

Now, I was mistaken in my appraisal of the Piraka, I agree. I quite like them actually, however I don't find them that interesting—why? I honestly couldn't say, I find that their appearances are incredibly cool, but I THINK that at times they're almost characterized as a whole, rather than their own individual characters, however moments when they individually shine through are incredibly cool, I will not deny.

Running out of time here -- but when I compare that to the Toa Nuva... well frankly "Should we work together or not" is a little shallow. It was fine for its time, don't get me wrong, and sure, it's a good lesson to draw as well. But there came a point when they were splitting up yet again despite just proving that teamwork is a good idea, when I had to wonder, do these guys have brains in their heads? I had to roll my eyes a lot during those years.

You had to roll your eyes, and I had to congratulate the storyline team on getting inside the heads of characters and making them realistic. I work in psychology, it's a simple fact that working as a team once or twice does not cement the concept as sound, rather it begins to bridge the connection, but it'll take a lot of work, especially with people like Kopaka and Tahu.

PART THE SECOND

Munkiman,

Point #1

The "continued in Mask of Light" thing actually makes sense to me. Why bother buying a movie for $20-30 when you can find out everything that happens for free in the comics?

Oh I never said it didn't make sense (and If I did I'm rather abashed), rather I just found it aggravating that in order to understand what had happened I'd have to purchase something—in retrospect it was making way for the books. However I would have preferred a simple mention of the movie and adventures that didn't happen in the movie. I mean, don't reveal the movie at all, just work around it. Makes for a more fulfilling experience in my opinion.

Point #1

Point #2

If you only read the comics, then this makes a lot of sense. But to someone who loves the Piraka more than any other Bionicle villain before or since (me), what you're saying about the Piraka being character-types is wrong. The Piraka had a lot more differing personalities than the Bohrok, Rahkshi, or Visorak, each had major differences in the books. The comics did not display this very much, though.

 

But the Inika/Mahri... ugh. They may not be clones on the outside anymore, but they seem to have cloned personalities, very few differences between them, which annoys me.

As I mentioned above to Bonesiii, that was an absolutely mistake on my part. The Inika are the ones who truly lack characterization. However as I also mentioned, at times it seems that they were characterized as a group rather than individuals, which led to some "Generic character" comments, or feeling on my part. As for the Inika/Mahri, yes, I completely agree.

Point #1

Point #3

I kinda agree with everything you said here, but the toys are just more important than the story.

I disagree with that, Story and Toys are tied in my eyes—after all, what made Roboriders and Slizer/Throwbots fail—for many people it was the lack of any real story. The Story is what made BIONICLE so intriguing. So while the toys are what bring in the cash for LEGO, the story is what makes those toys sell in many ways—as far as I know.

Point #1

Point #4

There is still plenty of fantasy stuff. Even the zamor launchers, which had a high-tech appearance, had a "magic" effect when you got hit. You didn't explode when you were hit by them, you were enslaved, or cured, or had your power drained.

Once again this is a misunderstanding. I didn't mean to say that the fantasy element is completely GONE from BIONICLE, rather it has been diminished in my eyes. The line has been crossed and technology is the dominant, whereas the fantasy element is the lesser.

Bonesiii,

I've seen a few other people make this personality accusation, albeit before it was including the books. Frankly I don't think that's what it is -- I think it's that we didn't get that much characterization before, and so we often filled in the gaps with our own ideas, but now that the story is actually delving into those characters more, it isn't lining up with what we had imagined. Understandable, but also unavoidable. One good example would be Kongu's humor, which Screenguy and I once debated -- he saw Kongu as totally serious, with no sense of humor until 2006. But I was able to show that there were several hints that he did have a sense of humor, we just never saw it until now.

No, I'm sorry. Just No.

There was characterization in 2001, if you chose to ignore it then that was your choice, however it was there. Subtle hints are one thing, but I've always FELT that Kongu was a rather humorous character—now I can't back this up with the facts, as its been ages since I played the MNOLG, but I felt the characterization was rather obvious back then. Not so much now in my opinion.

Well, yes -- this is on purpose, because most fans prefer a quick build so they can get on to the roleplaying. Remember Bionicle tried the more complex builds with sets like the Rahi in 2001 and beyond, and they sold poorly. Technic fans largely weren't into this story-driven line, but roleplayers were, and they want sets designed to play well, more than be a super-interesting build.

For that to happen, you have to make the builds somewhat formulaic.

Now this I was aware of, I don't approve of it, but I'm aware. However once again, this is all opinion, Bones. My thoughts, and for ME I love the builds, that's why I got into LEGO in the first place. Now don't get me wrong, there are many wonderful pieces coming out, it's just a pity that genius configurations such as the BOXOR have to be sacrificed.

Nothing wrong with asking for that. I have agreed before that a minimal amount of such things, like a gear on one out of six Toa for example, might be a good experiment. Just remember such a thing would be a risk that likely -would- result in lower sales. And we've had in-between grounds before anyways; gears in sets that otherwise were action figury, like the Metru. Yet the gears still seem to have harmed the sales, and definately were still major complaints.

My question here is where did I mention gears? In fact, I specifically said that I'm not advocating a return to the "Technic" sets of yesteryear. Rather I'd enjoy sets wherein the body wasn't one massive flat piece of plastic. Now I'm not overly fond of the original Toa bodies either, but at least they had depth! (Literally… like… dimensions)

If the story neglects its purpose, though, to sell the sets, Bionicle risks going away, and then there is no story. It's not just a play company, it's a toy company. The purpose of the story, as I see it, is to provide inspiration for play, yes, but play with the toys. That's why, I think, roleplayers ended up as the main fanbase. Not that surprising really.

I'm actually curious about this one; after all, in 2002 we witnessed the return of the Toa Olda and the advent of the Bohrok—was 2002 a bad year financially because people couldn't own the Toa? (Which would be odd, as they were at every store I went to)

Obviously that is never going to produce Lord of the Rings. But as long as you keep that in mind and enjoy Bionicle for what it is -- a story designed for toys -- you can enjoy it for what that means -- a story designed for fun.

Oh believe me I'm not expecting any great literature out of this in any way shape or form, but I point you in the direction of Beast Wars and Beast Machines. Both were just cartoons created to sell the strange new Beast Wars Transformers created by Hasbro in a desperate attempt to revitalize the then-defunct Transformers franchise. It worked, and is considered by many (Even non-Transformer fans) to be an incredibly good story with likeable characters. (It was also that show alone that convinced me to buy the toys with such a passion. Something I have never regretted to this day, even though I'm now rounding them up and giving them away to others)

Why can't BIONICLE be the same?

With what goal in mind? Remember, again, the purpose has always been to sell the sets. Set design is really best done by those whose talents and experience is in that category. You point out a true downside -- the set designers aren't necessarily that great at story. But realize your suggestion would simply create a different problem, and a more serious one -- story writers aren't experts at toy design.

Now I never, never, never said that Greg should say:

"I want a Toa with four arms, a green mask, and a big gigantic awesome sword"

No, that wouldn't be good, because that would be interfering with the set designers—as you said. I was thinking more along the lines of:

"Okay guys, could you create a team of six Toa who gained armor via a mysterious substance?" It's vague enough that it'd get imaginations inspired and think of all the ways it could be taken. So even if they've already created some prototypes they might be able to change them to fit the vague guidelines given to them by the storyline team.

That's not an accurate description, IMO. In the story, never have I seen anyone "simply creat[ing masks] as [they] pleased". Vakama was the only one that could do that, and most of the time he couldn't. The one mask we saw him making, the Vahi, was a source of frustration constantly, and even that was perhaps more a curse than a blessing.

Okay, Granted. I was completely in error while writing that section on the Kanohi, and the onus is on me. My apologies.

Obviously Metru Nui was more tech than nature. I'm a little tired of that subject, though. In 2004 we were told that this would be the end of Bionicle, the sky is falling, etc. but Bionicle's sales went up, and now polls are saying 2005 was the worst year ever, with 2004 barely registering, and that was the year all that technology got smashed to bits and the archives were set loose, and Metru Nui became a jungle of Rahi and webs and spiders. So I don't see the argument holding any water anymore.

Now there seems to be the usual misunderstanding here—I enjoyed Metru Nui, heck, I defended it from a lot of people and thought it rocked the socks—it was more that I felt the fantastical element was a little overlooked here, and more could have been done to preserve it.

As for being tired of debates and arguing—then why do this? Why essentially create a debate where there was none?

Once again you seem to assume I'm here to argue, but I'm not. I'm not here to say that technology is bad, after all technology is part of what makes BIONICLE so great, it's just that I feel there should be a balance.

Boxor.

IMT, I don't agree with being tiptoey about technology in a story about biomechanical beings. If it makes logical sense for the characters to try to get better technology, I want to see them do it. Rather than avoid that for arbitrary reasons that are forced artificially on the story. IMT, IMT, though...

Granted with the BOXOR, and the EXO-TOA just to be honest, however even there was the element of fantasy to it—the BOXORS weren't the new supertank, they were rather primitive war-wagons created from the ruins of the Bohrok. As for the Exo-Toa, here were six ancient armors with a mysterious origin that were unlocked via the Krana. That was some interesting stuff in my opinion.

Okay, what about the Kanohi? You brought those up, but the theories about how Kanohi worked before we knew were always about technology. And yet the truth turned out to be basically the "magical" physics of a material, a fantasy material that enables these powers, rather than technology using forcefields, etc. to do it as had previously been theorized.

Now correct me if I'm wrong, but you and your wacky physics were the one that inspired the series of technological beliefs over the Kanohi. I think that even the "Masks as Zero Point Energy Tappers" thread was formed as a response to that. Everyone I talked to had always taken them to be mystical artifacts that worked via magic—and lo and behold that's what it was. But how often are they used nowadays? (At least in the comics)

But again, it's all preference here. I like science fantasy best, so technology amongst fantasy physics appeals to me a lot, and it doesn't have to feel exactly the way 2001 did.

As for Science Fantasy, do you mean aspects of both? If so I agree, but I believe there should be a balance. Robots in robot-land isn't interesting, but change that into robots on a tropical island and you've got an interesting hook.

Also, don't forget a lot of this sense of "magic" in 2001 was, again, a perception, not reality. I saw a lot of it manifesting in rumors when I joined in 2003, that surprised me because none of what these popular BZP "rumor theories" said was how I had seen 2001. For example, the idea that the Kanohi were mystical objects of spirituality, or that the Toa were mystical spirits rather than heroes with superpowers, really the whole mysticism idea. There was a mystical feel to 2001 marketing, that I enjoyed, but these material ideas of that literally being what these things were about... they weren't actually grounded in anything Bionicle had done.

Your next opinion is in fact wrong. Now of course we know that opinions can't be wrong, but this is a misconstrued fact, rather than opinion. The idea of that the Kanohi were objects of spirituality was because of how the Matoran treated them in the storyline, whereas the Toa being mystical spirits? That was noted word for word in the Original BIONICLE: Quest for the Masks boardgame, describing them similar to roman gods. They WERE part of the storyline (whether part of current canon or not) and they WERE grounded in things BIONICLE had done. Simple fact.

They were fan created concepts. And they weren't what most fans out there were apparently thinking, though that often wasn't realized or stated online at the time. There was this feeling that BZP represented the average fan, when in reality it represented the vocal minority. At least that was the sense I got in 2003 -- it's been a relatively new thing that most our active members recognize how unusual we are in the Bionicle fanbase.

On this I actually agree. BZP has always represented the vocal minority and likely always will (until we start implanting internet microchips into newborns. Of course the spam would be terrifying.) But I digress, you're correct about BZP always being in the minority, and indeed about the attitude in years past believing that we represented the average fan. You'll hear no argument about this from me.

I.e. "coolified."

Correct me if I'm wrong, but that's simply an opinion. Just like mine. I never said it was a bad thing, I quite like the new mask designs, they simply don't say "Kanohi" to me.

Indeed -- to my tastes the Kaukau is mediocre, but the Faxon. The Faxon. Ahhh, now there's a cool design! The merely practical aspects of the Kaukau were my main complaints, and that has been primarly what has been improved (again, IMT).

Actually on this I agree, the Kaukau was a bad example simply because the Kaukau was moulded to like a scuba diving mask. Albeit it still managed to look more primitive, but it was rather…utilitarian—Again, I quite like the Faxon. I just don't consider it a Kanohi mask.

In essence, most of these differences are purposeful changes designed to get closer to what most fans are seen as wanting. Now, not saying it's always necessarily what they actually want -- LEGO can certainly be wrong. But this is expected, and it's a good thing, IMO, because LEGO is proving they really do listen to the fans. And, from a logician's perspective, to logic, not just assuming that because they see one post online saying something, it means that's what they should do, etc.

Additionally, I never once said that LEGO should do anything. I never once raised myself to the level of talking down to LEGO and telling them what to do. Please don't treat me like I did.

Makarooooooo,

Thanks for the support. I never meant this entry as anything but my opinion, so I thank you for helping me out. It's always appreciated.

~X-Clone~,

Actually, in many ways I agree. I was one of the people who defended Meru Nui against those who were diehard Mata-Nui supporters. I did love the contrast and indeed Metru Nui still has a special place in my heart. Heck, I even accepted the different colours because the brighter palette wouldn't make sense in such a dark industrialized world.

HOWEVER, It was simply an example of moving away from the <i>blend</i> that I felt between the two separate worlds of BIONICLE. There were fantasy elements within Metru Nui to be sure, but they were overwhelmed by the technological in my humble opinion.

Again, this doesn't mean that I don't like it. Ko-Metru and Ga-Metru are still two of my favourite locations in the mythos, it was more that something that I felt was an important part of BIONICLE was slowly being eased out.

Bonesiii again,

I knew someone would say that, lol. Yes, it was the phrase "State of Bionicle" that confuses that issue, but he was clear about that. These are the comments in his blog entry, where we say what we think/feel in response.

This makes absolutely no sense. You say that the phrase confuses the issue. But say immediately after that I was clear 'about that.' So either it was confusing or it was clear, otherwise this is completely illogical.

X, that is how I felt about Metru Nui too -- it was in many ways "fantasy tech", more magic than technology feeling (at least to me but I realize I'm weird 'cuz I'm a physics geek here so I know what is and is not possible with real world tech in Bionicle). Metru Nui always struck me more as a mysterious, exhilerating paradise city made totally out of this mysterious protodermis, with magical machinery than a "hi-tech metropolis" as the complainers usually characterized it. Aaaand lovin it.

Again, I quite enjoyed Metru Nui. It simply marked the beginning of a departure of something I feel was an important part of BIONICLE. However I will admit I never felt it was a 'paradise' to me. The atmosphere made it seem too mysterious and foreboding for me to ever think about it being a paradise. And I liked that.

I'll repeat, I am not a complainer. I am giving my opinion, just because we don't agree doesn't mean that I'm complaining.

Lah,

Thanks for the support, miss Bohrok. I also miss the non-breaking hipjoints, although the Bohrok feet have always shattered easily. Also, Matoran Colour schemes ruled the freaking school.

ToMmy,

Awww, I feel so loved. I love everyone too. Minus you. You know who you are. That's right. Me

Toa of Technology,

While I appreciate the sentiment, what exactly do you agree with, or disagree with? I appreciate people telling me I'm right (It helps my ego) however I prefer to know why people agree with me—to prevent too much of an ego.

Dmmcg,

To start with: Turn down the attitude. I am allowed to have my own opinion, ESPECIALLY in my own blog. Understood?

Now, as I said before I did not say that Set design should be DICTATED by the story, rather that Story should take precedence. Yes, I am completely aware of what the point of the story is. I've been with BIONICLE since 2001, thanks.

Obviously the sets make more money, and always have. The books are an addition that I feel wasn't even needed in the first place. LEGO is a toy company, and always have been. YET somehow the Roboriders and Throwbots failed terribly—was it design? I don't think so, they were pretty freaking cool when they first came out. Perhaps, just perhaps it was the fact that the STORY was never developed.

Like it or not, a big draw of BIONICLE was the story—and when you have a powerful story changing the designs of your characters so radically is jarring, and does not often go over well with those who grew up with the characters. Heck, all we really need is CONSISTENT COLOUR SCHEMES. If Matoro's a Toa he should be WHITE and SAND BLUE--or some variation thereof. (Actually Matoro's been rather good, always a shade of white and blue--it's the others) Something dictated by the story and the original set.

Also, how do you know that the new structure is either inferior or would lose money? Have you ever tested something similar? Can you show me anything that would lead me to trust your business sense? If not, then I would dare to say that what you're saying is an opinion.

Bonesiii,

You speak of beating dead horse—but isn't that exactly what you've done here? I was content to leave this alone but you seem unable to let this drop.

I am WELL aware of what BIONICLE and LEGO are and what they are designed to do. I'm also aware of the role of the storyline in all this—I don't consider the storyline to be a separate isolated thing, something that is independent of the sets. Rather I feel that they should be integrated and merged together, with both departments working in a symbiotic relationship with each other to create the best thing they can.

Again, I am aware of what the storyline exists to do—and indeed always have, but it seems there's something you're missing here. The characters the fans like will always be brought to the forefront, yes, but before I even knew Jaller's name I knew that I adored his colour scheme, the yellow and red complimented each other quite nicely.

That is not to say I'm asking for a big Matoran called a Toa, rather I'd like to see some consistency. Think of how cool Jaller Inika could have looked in those same colours, mata red and yellow. Very, very striking.

But to do that, the sets and the storyline would have to work together, instead we got the rather bland looking (in my opinion) Jaller Inika.

So yes, it is a limitation, it's also a benefit. They're both equal in that.

Smeagyboy,

You win, that is all. You've said everything I could have, and far better than I could have. I tip my nonexistent hat to you, sir.

But why couldn't the two camps work together? In all seriousness, Bones, why couldn't the storyline squad and the set designer squad have meetings and discuss the direction of the franchise as whole? Yeah, sure, it'd be another thing to schedule--but isn't Lego supposed to be striving to provide a truly quality product (the story is a part of the Bionicle "product")? Haven't they always prided themselves on going the extra mile for the customers?

Well, you might want to check out this comment of DV's in Mandragora's blog. It sounds like they already do that -- and what would make you think they aren't?

Again, how do you define "quality"? That's subjective and varies from person to person. It seems clear to me that they are working hard to provide the highest quality -- in the eyes of most fans. The problem is that everybody likes different things, so no set will be seen as high quality to everybody. On BZP many of us are in the minority, so we often see that as low quality.

That's how I see what's going on here.

Teamwork is one thing -- but what goals the team agrees are wise to pursue are quite another.

While I understand your thoughts, I do not necessarily appreciate them.

Lol. Why do I always get that?

Well, J, I do appreciate your thoughts.

First off, I do not appreciate my blog being treated the same as a complaint topic. I never once stated what BIONICLE should do, I merely stated my personal preferences, as is my right within my blog.

I'm not sure what to say to that, as I made that perfectly clear. I said I wasn't arguiing with you -- I was just posting my own reactions to your comments based on my own tastes (for the most part, though there were a few logic-based things I believed I saw flaws in with your post). The only reason my comments are posted in your blog is because that is where the comments they were a response to were posted.

I think that's the best way to get to the kind of respect of each other, despite our differences in taste, that you mentioned in your blog -- not to stop talking, but actually to talk. By learning more about each others' differences, it becomes much easier to respect each other.

That's what I've found through my experiences in debates. Of course, somebody has to start the respect, which is what I am trying (but not always succeeding, certainly) to do. In my experience, when both sides just hold it in and ignore each other, that's a recipe for resentment to grow until it bursts out at the worst time. Better to discuss our differences.

I know I sound like a psychobabblist, lol. But it's true.

Now is where you seem to misunderstand. This is my view on the overall state of BIONICLE—can I really say that I know the current state of BIONICLE? No, can you?

Yes, absolutely. Looks like this is where our disagreement is coming from. I canNOT do it based on my own tastes, of course. However, through logic and sales results and other research that is often commented on by Greg and other sources such as news articles, the objective state of Bionicle can indeed be determined. At least on some things, though not on everything when data is not available.

Of course, that isn't what we were discussing. But that's my point -- to call it the "state" of Bionicle is, IMO, a poor choice of words, because it seems to imply you did intend to discuss it, when you did not.

You posted in your most recent article that we shouldn't be bickering -- I agree, but I analyze by nature, so I've learned a lot about what kind of poor choices of words like that often spark conflict. I would word it more like "My current feelings on Bionicle" or the like.

Of course, "State of Bionicle" sounds cooler. That's really more of a nitpick than anything else, but I did feel it was worth bringing up, because I've seen that kind of wording lead to conflicts like that time and time again.

However I completely disagree with your take on it being an illusion. I have noticed an incredible decline in the 'meat' of the story being contained in the comics—sure, we see the bare bones, but the majority of what happens goes on in the books.

Interesting. Well, lemme ask you this -- what did you see as the meat in the original comics? What specifically went missing, in your eyes?

It's obvious to both of us that something is different, and again, not saying any of this means it's good/bad per se. But still, I am curious what you think about it.

Toa are in one location worrying about something at the end of one comic, and the next comic they're somewhere completely different with the original worry completely forgotten.

Okay... but weren't the original comics the same way? With mask collecting, for example -- this was one of the big reasons I personally wanted 2001 to be more fleshed out -- we never saw the vast majority of those masks get collected. With Makuta's MNOG battle -- if you follow only the comics, that was arguably the most confusing jump in the franchise. The Bohrok Saga, I would agree, didn't really have this issue. But the originals, to me, did. I guess I just see it as part of the nature of the comics.

Id' be far happier if the books just kind of clicked together with the comics, fleshing them out and showing unseen adventures, stuff that doesn't even have to be hinted at in the comics

I see. So, you were much happier with the original books, and probably the earlier 2004 books? That was how I saw them. Personally I found that boring -- I wanted the books to stand out as their own stories. But that's coo'.

However please do not imply that I don't know what I'm thinking.

There wouldn't be anything wrong with that though -- it isn't an insult. I have often discovered I was thinking something different than I realized. It's part of being human. It's not intended as an insult. But look, the trend that you and I agreed exists exists, so there must be a reason. I think the reason is that we prefer different things with the characters.

There are things I adore about 2007 and there are things I adore about 2001, there are also things I loathe about both. For example, I found the Rahi battles in 2001 to be ridiculously boring and nearly painful. I thought the sets were awesome, but that their presentation in the story could have been a million times better.

That's cool. Along the lines of something Mandragora said to me recently -- it helps when you provide that kind of thing; what you disliked along with what you liked.

Can't help but notice you said you felt the sets were awesome -- did you mean the Rahi? Again that is a classic sign of the kind of taste I often call "Technicism"; a liking basically of the highly mechanized style of the Rahi, just like past Technic sets (not to generalize, though; I'm sure you had your favs and not-favs). I, on the other hand, loved the battles in 2001, and I didn't like the Rahi sets, but I felt the art presentation and story presentation was fun and "improved" the sets images in my eyes.

Again, this is telling me it's probably taste talking when it comes to this difference in how we see the comic characterizations. And again -- that's not a bad thing! I'm just identifying what I see as a difference between us.

So what you said seems to actually back that up further. I am not arguing that this is 2001 vs. 2007 -- that would far too simplistic, and besides, I'm saying things I liked about 2001 too. I was around back then, but I also had different preferences back then. I'm saying I think it's between one type of taste, and another, both of which are basically wired into us. Everything you're saying is identifying you as within the taste group I'm talking about, for the most part (though no individual is the same).

And don't lose sight of this -- the reason I'm saying all this is that I think when we can recognize that difference, and be at peace with it, we can walk away happier, even though Bionicle isn't neccessarily appealing to our own tastes. In 2001, I had no problem with the sets being a style I didn't like that much (the Rahi, that is; I loved the Toa, except gears, lack of knees... but that's another story). They just weren't my cup of tea, and I was happy for those who did like 'em that they got them. Now, I do wish that old style could come back for your guys' sake. I can see why it probably can't, unfortunately -- as you agreed you do too -- but clearly recognizing all of this helps, at least to me, to be more at peace with it.

I'm aware the comics have always been about marketing the toys, however it was the difference in the marketing. As I mentioned before, I saw the Toa's strengths and weaknesses, saw them evolve as characters which engaged me, rather than unflawed heroes with no depth and no problems. Heck, from what I've seen Jaller Mahri doesn't even have problems underwater—Despite being a FIRE Toa!

 

And of course note, this is all Opinion, rather than fact. I never presented anything but.

Lol -- did you ever read my blog entry about the two meanings of the word "opinion"? Nobody said it's fact, but some kinds of opinions are intended to be "theories" about fact. I would say this isn't opinion (in that sense), but taste and preference. At least for the most part.

And I've got no qualms with the paragraph before, except I guess for the Fire part -- that's more physics than personality. But I will concede that I don't see the characters evolving in the comics; that's in the books. Good point there. (I just never really saw it in 2001 either -- especially when they kept forgetting they'd learned to work together over and over...)

Actually, it doesn't sound harsh. It's simple fact. However you're slightly off here, we know the pieces on the chessboard—but that's because we have access to all the latest BIONICLE news. Most people don't, and thus many characters/sets come out of left field for them.

Fair enough, but remember it's usually the more involved fans like us who pay attention to the story anyways. But yes, that was what I meant -- I was talking about those of us who follow the story for its own purposes. My impression is that most fans, mainly in the lower end of the age group, don't do that -- when they read the comic, they're mainly focused on the cool images and fights of the characters (cool in their minds -- though we tend to see much of it as childish, because it is, intentionally). Then they go from the comic (like an ad) to the store or the like. So yes, there is a difference there as well.

Again, I never stated that this was anything but perceptions. However I've seen some people react very badly to perceptions, so of course I mentioned that it was a sensitive spot.

Ya ya, not saying you shouldn't say that.

I simply cannot understand what you say next, though. Again, this is all my Opinion, so keep that in mind.

 

However I felt that the Toa Mata/Nuva were very effective in being characters, and not simply defined by their most obvious characteristics. However I find it difficult to find any shred of character for the Toa Inika/Mahri simply because all I ever hear them spouting off is one-liners.

Firstly -- understood. (I keep saying that over and over I know, but I just wanna be crystal clear here.)

Effective characters -- well, they were. In your tastes. Again, my very point is that it's subjective -- to you, they were effective characters, to me they weren't so much. There's gotta be an explanation for why we see them differently -- I think it lies in taste.

One-liners -- Again, fair enough; that is mostly in the books, as I conceded above. So would you say the dialogue/speech is one of the main "meats", to you?

In my tastes, I don't mind that, because they give one-liners in the situations were it makes sense to, and Ican go to the books for the "real" characterization. Also, they aren't as stereotypical in the comics or books, Jaller not being hot-headed, etc. But you obviously don't mind the elemental "stereotyping" of the mata/Nuva. That's cool.

Now, this is pure opinion on my part, and absolutely perspective, but I'm honestly flabbergasted that you felt that way. It's not like friendships or teams are formed and then stay strong for forever.

Heh. Well, that answers one of my questions above. So you did like that. Interesting. See, this is why I say it's good to discuss this. Now I know someone out there actually liked that, and took away something of value from it, even! That's great!

In my eyes, it felt like laziness on the part of the story team. And I dont' know that it was or wasn't. But I think it's a lot like how you feel about the Inika one-liners. Those feel like laziness to you -- to me I see real people in dangerous situations trying to distract their enemies with words rather than pure fighting.

Also, "taste" is the word I would use there, rather than "pure opinion" or "perspective". Back to that blog entry I mentioned -- "opinion" is actually a lot stronger a word than you probably meant there. Perspective is a clear word, though. I would also say "preference."

Additionally, I quite enjoyed 2005 and the pathos therein.

Cool.

Now, I was mistaken in my appraisal of the Piraka, I agree. I quite like them actually, however I don't find them that interesting—why? I honestly couldn't say, I find that their appearances are incredibly cool, but I THINK that at times they're almost characterized as a whole, rather than their own individual characters, however moments when they individually shine through are incredibly cool, I will not deny.

I would agree with that.

You had to roll your eyes, and I had to congratulate the storyline team on getting inside the heads of characters and making them realistic. I work in psychology, it's a simple fact that working as a team once or twice does not cement the concept as sound, rather it begins to bridge the connection, but it'll take a lot of work, especially with people like Kopaka and Tahu.

There you go -- that is a taste difference. You read something into it based on your own background that makes sense. This is much like what happens in writing workshop classes. Often I've had the professor in my current class say that something felt shallow, but I comment that I took something else away from it that he didn't get. He's talked about the same thing I'm saying -- that it's our different "aesthetic", as he calls it, that makes us see it that way. I agree, although I call it "preference" or "taste".

Hopefully I'm communicating what I mean about our tastes making us see things differently better than I was before. That's really cool that you took that away from it.