In Conclusion
This topic strongly implies that what a lot of people actually care about in the Nuva is not how similar they are to their past appearances, it's how their personality is represented.
Now why are the Newva so dissimilar to their 2002 incarnations? It's because the 2002 sets did a poor job of representing the Nuva. Lewa and Pohatu are growling, Gali and Onua have savage slash and hack weapons, and Lewa has a pair of massive two-handed weapons. The list goes on. Good riddance, I say.
The majority of BZP members absolutely loathe change. Regardless of whether it's a good set or not, if a new incarnation of an old "character" looks different, it is heresy.Here's the good part, if LEGO did make the Phantoka and Mistika look similar to their predecessors, that would be evil too because then LEGO would be 'uncreative' or 'lazy' or something to that effect.
Another good part is that once good pictures -such as a BZP review- emerge, most members start to like them.
But wait, there's more. Nobody seems to realize that you can always take the set apart, and rebuild it what you think it should look like.
(Thanks to Slizer Prime)
Now if Lego made them too similar, then that would happen. But what I think Lego did here was only have a small bit of similarity, and let the parts that aren't similar reflect the personality of the Toa. That way, they are still the Nuva and they aren't too repetitive. Personally, I feel that was a brilliant move.
43 Comments
Recommended Comments