...Smeag, you're one of my favorite dudes. I agree completely!

There's really no denying that Bionicle did change, one way or another. If you take in the whole storyline now, in order, from the videos to the books to the movies, with the serials and comics, it's kind of hard to deny once you're finished (FYI I just did that; not making this up. XP) Whether the changes were good or bad, that just depends on who you are and what you like. But I did like the first few years a lot. The Flash updates are simple in look and design, and easy to replicate, like Emzee said. I mean, I taught preteens how to make stuff like that in Flash. But. There's still something about just watching it, and all the mystery that was still there. It was a lot of fun trying to guess what had happened, and come up with theories and little details. But I personally feel like that element died when every little tiny thing was explained. It was just like information overload, and catching up with the story in the later years was like reading a wiki. Even though you get the information, it's not related in a characterized or personal way.

In the end, I feel like it's not about the story's genre, scifi or fantasy or what. I personally like stories from many different genres. A story's value seems to rest more on the way the information is presented. It can be a very difficult thing to do in an appealing way, and especially in a way that appeals to a lot of people. Bionicle was popular, sure, but not wildly so like other stories. It really was for kids, specifically young boys, though parts of it were enjoyable to teenagers and adults. The funny thing about Bionicle is that it had the potential to be successfully marketed to the older demographic. But it wasn't, which is understandable, though some of us are still a little disappointed. Now, there are those who still like it for its later years, who are older. Nothing's set in stone, see; just because you market only to one group, it doesn't mean you aren't going to attract members of another group.

Not to mention the styles of marketing, to different demographics, rotate. When I and others here were preteens/early teens, what was marketed to us then is different than what is marketed to preteens and teens now. It changes eh, every 3 to 5 years, I'd say, from studying it out. So the tactics and toy line stories used back then are different from the ones used now. That's one reason I think it changed. You can compare other marketable storylines from the early 2000s to other ones introduced after about 2005 or 2006, and you'll see some differences. The thing is, Bionicle went through that heavy demographic style shift, that took place in the mid-2000s, which is something a lot of still-updating, marketable storylines don't go through. Most that try end up dying out as their fans move on, get older, and potential new fans have different tastes. It could be viewed as a little risky on Lego's part, to be willing to do that, but they still had fans and made money. It probably helped that they shifted their story style and tactics.

Some people think differently, and that's okay. And other people enjoy debating over and defending what they like, which I guess is how things have always been. But arguing about Bionicle, to me, always made the story as a whole less enjoyable. What's not normal is for everyone to think the same way or be convinced of the same thing, so running an argument into the ground is a big time waster. Sure, sharing your personal thoughts, even if they contradict those of another, is great. But just going against what someone else says, over and over just spouting why they're wrong, is ridiculous. They think one way, you think another. If you didn't convince them of your views the first time or two, why would they accept it if you kept on sparring with them? I just don't ever see that happening, and I've seen so many arguments. Life is happier when you just say "Here's my view" and then go on your way.

Does anyone else remember actually waiting for the MNOLG to be updated so we could explore new parts of the island? Those were the days. I recall getting seriously creeped out inching down the tunnels of Onu-Wahi, waiting for a Kofo-Jaga to attack me.

Oh man, that was awesome. It felt like forever before they updated with the Le-Koro addition. Wasn't it being released in the summer, too? Those were good days, playing outside all morning, then sitting inside with the air conditioner during hot afternoons, playing MNOLG.

I agree completely. Old school Bionicle was the chizz. The different tribes had different characteristics, different ways of life. The Toa were just an extension of the story, instead of dominationg it as they did later.

Fly on,

Zakitano

My mistake, Primis. I'd never seen that before, admitedly, and was just going by interviews and questions I'd had with Greg F in the past. I wasn't really trying to "blame" Greg for everything, I was just stating a few things that he said he influenced or suggested with LEGO from some of his interviews.

On another note...One thingI remember back in the early years was when the snowball sling game was online...I used to waste many hours on that game....rolling around ina huge ball of snow after a short while...

-Jordboy1

Reading this made me realize just how badly I missed the whole tribal aspect of the whole series. From the mystical fires, to the (at the time) great powers, the fact that Makuta actually seemed like a god-gone-mad instead of mad scientist...

Though, I think it was 2007 that killed it to me somewhere. 'Cuz I kinda just stopped following the series in that year.

"Average Joe?" Forgive me, but in my 20 years of life and immersion into various forms of fiction, not once have I found a villain that lives up to what Makuta turned out to be over the years of BIONICLE.

I found about fifty. The other Makuta

I know I'll probably get a ton of people in here who will write huge walls of text explaining how I'm wrong, and the Bionicle story just got better and better, and that I'm inferior because my opinion is different, or whatever. But that's okay - I think comparing these episodes to the books and comics and movies of the later years really speaks for itself. And I for one and just going to choose to remember Bionicle for its great two-and-a-half year run. Because it was really fantastic.

Nah. But I might write a huge wall of text agreeing with you.

You raise a very good point here. I don't totally agree with you about the Matoran though. In the movie they're wimps. But if you look at them in Legends one? And yeah. Bionicle to me will always pretty much be the island of Mata Nui.

Thanks for pointing all this out.

-Zarayna, Sonic Blade

If I were to describe what eventually made me lose my interest in Bionicle, that text would most likely look an awful lot like yours.

I did enjoy the early stages of the Metru Nui saga - the spiritual quality was greatly subdued and the tribal feel went right out the window, but there was still enough mythicality to go around; the near-religious reverence for the Great Spirit; elemental powers were still elemental powers and not another technology fangle; and let's not forget Energized Protodermis (can you say, "Virtue of Destiny manifest"?). I suppose I simply have a flair for reading fantasy elements into the most determined futuristic setting.

The fact that the ferocious Rahi turned out to be the Makuta Brotherhood's test tube babies rather than indigenous animals was a let-down. The fact that Greg decided to go to town with that Kanohi of Dimensional Gates yet had it end up a cheap plot device was a disappointment. The fact that we now have an infinite number of alternate realities to mix and match wits with was what finally turned Bionicle on its head.

Also, Lots And Lots Of Characters. Adaptation Decay. :annoyed2: The Big Bad's ultimate defeat? Dropped A Moon On Him. There are a lot of things, especially in the final years, that could've been presented much better, written much better, plotted and fleshed out much better, hadn't they had the constant requirement to keep Bionicle a marketable toy line. And that became its demise.

But there will always be Fanon.

And we will always remember the Templar flashimations with the greatest fondness.

--Tuan

I believe I have a somewhat odd perspective, as I became intrested in Bionicle due to my younger brother getting comics and leaving them around. That was in Mahri days. What got me was the plot and story. The best part was the terrible debate of Makuta and the Toa....."I bore you. For I am Nothing. And out of Nothing you have come, and into Nothing you will go." Seriously, although at many points the later story rivaled this, they never surpassed it.

I too was disappointed when Makuta turned out not even to be the first and oldest of these other random Makuta: I had thought he was a spirit who took energy as a form to unite with matter. It was rather a letdown. The Great Beings seem to be going the same way, now that GregF seems to be referring to the marvellous weird biomechanical beings as "nanotech" and "AI" (eewwww!!!!) and "95% mechanical" (give me a break!!) I hate the new sci-fi twist. Originally Bionicle had spirit and matter mingling, giving machinery magical powers and bizzare attributes. The giant robots kept that for a time, at least until the boring stereotyped latter part of the battle and the destruction of the Matoran Universe. The baterra showed promise.

But, now that the Great Beings (minus Angonce and "Mr. It's Alive") are being revealed as evil scientists, things might get intresting.

Another thing I really liked was that the Tohunga acted like adults! Check out Takua and Nuparu having a war briefing with Kongu and Tamaru in this episode. They're definitely not the child-like figures that mid-2003 and onward portrayed the Matoran as!

Sorry I saw this late, and only because of HH's entry that mentioned this... Anyways, I just wanted to point out that this appears to be selective memory (or selective review? ). Especially since you're focusing on MNOG, of all things -- the protagonist himself is a case in point of an immature character! Though admittedly he had recently grown somewhat in his adventures from the GBA game.

To some extent, what you say here is true, though, to be fair (but there were "adult Matoran" moments in later stories too; I'm especially thinking of the Matoran Resistance in 2006).

But go back and play through the scenes that involved Taipu, for example. He behaves very childlike in almost every scene. Onepu is another great example (lol, maybe it's just Onu-Koro). There were several scenes with Kapura, even early on, that were like that. Tamaru, etc. (Heck, even Matau lol.)

In reality, there were simply varying personalities, just like in real life. You can't fairly lump them all into one box.

What IMO Bionicle really lost is basically hinted at in your entry, and it's the same thing we've all been saying for years -- they lost the MNOG style. Those things you are saying you dislike in later years were always present in Bionicle, even in 2001. But there was never anything like MNOG and the updates in later years. A few things came close, but yeah.

Heck, there's no Tolkien influence in sight.

Eh, there are Tolkien-esque themes. Tolkien is a pretty rich literature source. It's hard to get away that when you have epic journeys to a face-off like MNOG essentially is all about.

And as someone else pointed out, Makuta himself was essentially a copy off of Sauron (at least how Makuta portrayed himself, which is what you said you took as how Bionicle was portraying him -- another common misonception, BTW).

Just off the top of my head, here's several other examples.

- Immature adventurous character finally stepping up to join a defense force (Pippin or the other guy, I forget which, and Takua).

- Part of a defense force has not been heard from (this one's weak in all fairness, but the horse guys, and the Tren Krom Pass guards).

- Quaint, small communities that spurn travel and adventure (Hobbits, most "Tohunga"), with one guy who doesn't fit in who goes out on adventures and thus is looked down on by hometown folks (Takua and Bilbo, then later Frodo).

- Underground, shortish, strange enemy you don't want to attract the attention of, and if you "wake one you wake them all" (Orcs in the mountain caves in the first book, and Bohrok, though the Orcs weren't literally asleep).

- After small hero gets past obstacles to get to his destination, big bad guy who is (again) basically destruction incarnate, personified by a dynamic, liquid-motion-like spherical object floating high in the air, explodes. (Sauron and Frodo, Makuta and Takua.)

- Small hero must accomplish his destiny in order for the more powerful heroes to have a chance (Frodo and his friends, Takua and the Toa).

- Someone who isn't really your enemy can be corrupted by an evil influence to oppose you (the Ring, Infected masks).

- Mystical villain inside a suit of armor who isn't really physical (Makuta, Sauron's original form). Who, incidently, later returns in a different form since he's a shapeshifter (both, again).

- Someone is attempting to travel through a mountainous cold area and almost gets buried in snow (another weak one, but the Fellowship, and Takua... sort of Kopeke and the Tren Krom Pass guards).

I'm out of time, but this just scratches the surface.

I know I'll probably get a ton of people in here who will write huge walls of text explaining how I'm wrong, and the Bionicle story just got better and better, and that I'm inferior because my opinion is different, or whatever. But that's okay - I think comparing these episodes to the books and comics and movies of the later years really speaks for itself. And I for one and just going to choose to remember Bionicle for its great two-and-a-half year run. Because it was really fantastic.

Smeag, the thing that you seem to still not grasp is that different people have different preferences, and that's okay. I'm not 100% sure if you were trying to talk towards me with your first sentence, but if so and either way, you appear to be missing the point. You're trying to act as if there's some objective way to judge whether Bionicle was cooler or not, but you are using your own subjective tastes to try to argue that -- or at least, that's how it comes across. (I suspect most of this is just appearance, but that too is a problem -- there are easy ways to avoid that appearance.)

We don't need huge walls of text to explain why your feelings on this don't mean Bionicle wasn't cool in later years.

All we need to realize is what I said in italics above -- that different does NOT equal inferior. In all these years, it still seems to me that you have not quite grasped this? It really wasn't as cool -- to you -- and it really was as cool or better -- to others. And so no need to use that to "prove" something we all already know, that it did change, or prove something false that you don't need to prove -- that it changed in ways it really didn't.

(But I'll take as long as it takes. )

And that's the key to avoiding this:

Honestly, it makes me kinda sad inside.

I lost things I liked, like brown sets for example. But I don't have to feel sad about it, because I don't look at the majority as inferior to me, as your wording would seem to imply you do. You might not consciously think that, but over and over again, that attitude seems to seep through in things you've said. I am happy that more kids got toys in colors they liked better, like yellow and orange (though I love orange too, but anyways).

Still, I do think that MNOG's style of presentation, and I would agree with you, characterization, dialogue style, etc. were a bad loss in later years. Very few people that I have ever seen disagree that MNOG was the best Bionicle game, bar none, and that it was bad that they lost it.

The point I'm getting at is that Bionicle changed. Maybe you like its new form better, but I sure don't.

Smeag... You don't have to! It makes for an interesting blog entry, don't get me wrong. I always enjoy these sorts of entries, these things aside.

I just keep getting the vibe from you that you haven't yet come to accept this, and it seems to be causing you angst. I don't want you to suffer angst. It feels like I'm seeing something you're not, that's helping me be more content, and I don't want to hoard, yanno?

The thing was, I had thought that it was I who changed, and that Bionicle had stayed the same. But I've come to the conclusion that that's not really true: Bionicle did, empirically change, and as I said the difference between the original MNOLG/flash episodes and new story speaks for itself. I feel.

It's both, and it always has been. (Well, not "always" but always since the changes. )

"It speaks for itself" is, again, where I think you're running into trouble. It does not speak for itself. Your tastes influence how you feel about it -- you know this. So why do you use your taste reactions to (again, appear to) argue that there's something objectively worse here. Then again, maybe I'm the one making a mountain out of a molehill here, and you didn't mean anything negative by this.

(Lol, at this point I'm sure I've miserably failed to have the minimum smilies, and no time to fix so nuking the enable check... >__>)

There were superhero powers and technology in 2001. You admitted the latter -- and look Toa elemental powers, and Kanohi powers, for the former. I caught you making a false statement (not on purpose I'm sure, but false nonetheless, and I don't see how you could disagree) about childish versus mature personalities as one example. But in later years, there WERE a mix of both, and same in 2001.

Did the balance change? Of course.

But there was always a balance, and the things you say you dislike in later years aren't new. Also, about being like other stories, in some years, that is true. But 2001 was a lot like certain other stories. If you like mysticism with mechanical things involved, for example, Terry Brooks wrote the book(s) on that with the Sword of Shannara, and especially later incarnations in his series. "There is nothing new under the sun" -- and that applies to 2001 too. You can't get away from resemblance to other things.

But on the flip side, there was something unique about 2001. And so there was about others. You might not like the later years' original parts, but that doesn't mean they weren't there. Right?

For example, the giant robots, the giant stalactites, the floating island, the Shattering. All of these things can be compared to other things, but so can biomechanical beings in a mystic land, or wielders of elemental power, etc.

I think we can both agree that the later years (2006 - 2010 most definitely) would've been much better had they simply maintained the quality of the dialogue and characterization.

I sympathize with this as far as dialogue, but Emzee, this is the sort of statement that gets yall into trouble. The keywords here are "better" and "quality." What you really mean is that you and Smeag (and I) would have enjoyed the dialogue in later years more if it maintained the same style that happens to appeal to our tastes in dialogue. That doesn't make our style "better" or higher quality -- especially since all of us are older fans, who don't see things the way they come across to younger fans -- and especially younger fans of the more majority taste than us, who like "kiddy dialogue."

As far as characterization, I do wonder where you get that; there have been many great characters throughout the story, and that did not seem to, in my observation, significantly change much. Except that there were more characters later on, of course, and that did change the dynamic a little (annoyingly so IMT).

Although I'm also miffed about losing the tribal mysticism, because that was so large a part of what was appealing about Bionicle.

I cannot not agree with the jist of this. But again, I hope you understand that what you really mean is, what was appealing about Bionicle to you. You probably do, but the wording just bugs me. To others, that wasn't appealing, and they liked it better when it was dropped.

But I won't bother to repeat myself on that again, since you sorta said the same thing above. Just wanna be clear what I mean.

And the miffed part... I can't agree with that. I don't think it's right to be angry, even a little, about a story daring to do what a story must do; adapt to its core fanbase, even if I'm not among them -- or even simply change for variety's sake, which is important too. (Nor is it beneficial to myself to do that.)

As a writer myself, I make no apology about my stories do what really does occur in real life -- and change in stylistic ways over time. I as an author wouldn't personally appreciate past things that were cool being abused to tear down future things cool (though I know it will happen if I am successful enough to have readers, heh). Shackling a writer to such ridiculous rules seriously harms the realism of characterization, IMO.

For example, if Bionicle had stuck to mysticism in the only ways it ever truly had it in 2001, the Matoran could never progress beyond their primitive, decayed culture. That was a character trait that was developed over years of constant attack and virtually forced segregation. That which is not understood is mystic, to that mindset.

In order for them to progress as characters -- which is what quality storywriting, objectively, must do -- IMO they should be free to move beyond that. Even if it alters the style of the story -- the sort of reader I personally want is mature enough to be able to handle more than just one rigid style. Diversity.

But that, again, might be just me.

Okay, have been proofreading, but way out of time to finish... apologies for any errors from this point on...

Silly Primis.

 

You have different tastes than I (and most of the people commenting here) do.

 

What you think is good I think is yucky. And vice-versa.

 

And that's okay, so trying to argue your tastes against mine makes you look silly.

 

It's also not the point of this entry at all.

 

So yay!

*detects humor* (Hopefully. )

That aside, there is a problem with your entry, though. For one, you made some claims that I think are clearly false, as I said. Also, it is worded as if to imply that your own taste reaction to it "proves something." That it wasn't as cool in later years. And nowhere in the entry did you "asterisk" () that with clarifying that you don't actually believe that, you just mean it wasn't as cool to you.

You and I both know the response you'll probably have to that. I've seen many people argue against this, missing the point by focusing on the fact that it's your blog, so of course it conveys your opinion. The point, though, is people are reading your blog, and you aren't clear about what you're saying, they can misunderstand. Your entry wasn't worded as just your own tastes, so naturally he took it the way it was worded. I just want you to see that that really is a mistake on your part -- do you agree?

Besides, IMO it isn't healthy to spurn discussion of our different tastes. You post an entry about tastes, IMO, you should be ready and willing to engage others in discussion of where they disagree, etc. But maybe that's just me.

Anyways, though, what's more important to me is accurately observing what was actually in the years, not your reactions to it. If you aren't aware of what was actually there, it's hard to have a fair judgement, even just a purely subjective one. I think that's a bigger concern, so don't mind my long-winded taste stuff too much.

No matter how much Greg F says that BIONICLE was the same and never changed from year one, LEGO originally planned for the story to be much more mystical, mysterious, and, for lack of a better term, tribal.

Jord -- first of all, I suspected Smeag or others might have made this mistake. This is what logicians call the "Straw Man" argument. I am wondering if this might be why Smeag strangely seemed to think earlier that Bionicle didn't change -- even though everybody's been documenting the changes for years, and looking into the reasons for them, including and especially Greg.

Greg never said that Bionicle was exactly the same year after year.

What he HAS said is that sometimes people make false claims that things in later years are new (and thus bad, or whatnot), when in fact they have been there all along.

I caught Smeag in one in this very blog entry (see my first comments above). Did I not?

Greg was objecting to that sort of bad reasoning. And with good reason. He was NOT saying that applied across the board to Bionicle. Nobody has (at least nobody that has been active in this debate).

I hope you realize that to see you (and apparently others) on the "against the newer years" side fail to even understand that basic point, it only makes me further convinced you might be wrong about some other things. And maybe even it shows a basic blindness, that if you could work past, you might actually even like the laters years better than you do. Which I would hope for everyone -- not for Bionicle's sake, but for yours.

And perhaps more importantly, that selective blindness could be impacting other areas of your life that cause you degrees of misery, etc. so it could possibly be much more serious than anything about toys.

Thoughts?

One thing that always bothered me I think was the fact that Greg wanted to avoid spiritual and mystical powerful beings

Reactions aside, I do think you're right that he wanted to avoid that sort of thing. Which isn't really my style either, heh.

Just to be accurate, though:

that I think that's what ruined Mata Nui and Makuta (who by the way originally started out as "great" spirit people) by just making them people who were created with big responsibilities...

Actually, the original story Bible was not written by Greg; it was written by Bob Thompson. The truth behind the appearance of things was planned from the start -- not all the details, but things like Makuta being a species, etc. The hints for those were planted all along, it's just that many of you did not pick up on them.

Also, keep in mind that among "2001ers", very often the idea of the mysticism was way over-interpreted than even what was actually in the story. It seems clear to me that nobody on the original story team anticipated how big of mountains people would make of the molehills that were really meant to be nothing more than a primitive people's misunderstandings. Fun misunderstandings, and they were intentional -- don't get me wrong. But the fandom blew much of it waaaay beyond proportion, and took what should have been tentative theories almost as dogmatic fact.

So some of that was NOT a change, in reality. It was a change in appearance, as the originally intended truth behind the mystery came out.

That is unfortunate -- I would agree. I wish it hadn't happened, but the "blame" for that really lies among those who failed to keep a healthy emotional distance from their theories in 2001. But whatever -- if it made them happy in 2001, that's great. And selfishly, I walk away from that myself, intentionally styling my own fanfics more that way, as well as my non-Bionicle fiction, because that's what I love too.

Off-topic: BTW, whilst looking through your blog to find this entry, I stumbled on your Whakari MOC, and it is utter and sheer win and I love it and want it. :drools:

Did you have any intention for it in terms of fan fiction? Any willingness to farm it out for my fanfic use (with credit given)?

(Back on topic...)

Primis. Chill.

 

The point of this entry is just saying Bionicle changed and we liked its earlier incarnation better. Personally. That's all.

Smeag. Primis went overboard in his reaction, but how can you defend what Jordboy said? He put false words in Greg's mouth. That is NOT just about what you say here, so how is that an appropriate response to Primus's points? All of us need to play fair.

I hope you get where I'm coming from here, and don't take me the wrong way. (It's happened before with "certain types" of people, specifically on the staff, you know who yall are; this is a preemptive strike lol. I expect you to read what I'm saying as I intend it, not as anything objectionable, and if I'm wrong, simply calmly tell me why, rather than object that I said it. )

I don't think it was a lie -- that was too far, again. It's probably more of a misunderstanding -- a selective blindness. And my concern for that is NOT based on pride or a desire to Bionicle, just to be clear. I don't have a horse in this race, and I couldn't care less about Bionicle's reputation. What bothers me is seeing people so obviously experiencing emotional turmoil, even if it's just small, because of what to me appears to be a mistake in how they approach things. And I just know things like that bleed through to Bionicle discussion from other, far, far more important areas of life -- so while its effects here might really be trivial, its effects elsewhere might be far from it.

All that said, I'm a fallible human being too, and I'm often wrong, and yadda yadda yadda. So feel free to disagee -- I only ask that you self-check yourself and ask yourself if I might be right, before you do. And if you disagree, please know that I wanna know why -- I don't want just another "I'm different, that's all." You felt strongly enough about this to write a fairly in-depth blog entry, so should we not continue at least that level of depth in the discussion? And more importantly, if I'm wrong about something as important as what I'm alluding to, I definately wanna know about it.

And besides, it's not good to just leave these things unsaid. (In all seriousness -- there was a recent scientific study that backed that up. )

My mistake, Primis. I'd never seen that before, admitedly, and was just going by interviews and questions I'd had with Greg F in the past. I wasn't really trying to "blame" Greg for everything, I was just stating a few things that he said he influenced or suggested with LEGO from some of his interviews.

Thanks for clarifying that, Jordboy, and confirming my suspicion.

Well, I know this is long, and I don't expect you to reply to every point. I would greatly appreciate at least some on-point replies, though, and I've tried to keep it as short as I could while saying what I believe needs to be said. And I know I have been blunt and made no apology for calling you out where I think you're wrong -- I hope you appreciate that, rather than resenting it. Doesn't mean I'm necessarily right -- and it certainly doesn't mean my preferences are superior -- they are equal. Hope that in some way this helps. =)