If Mistika like Canister come back

[VampireBohrok]

I mean sure, you've got those Eco-consense people out there, but if I'm paying 20+$ for a set, i expect it to come in a container more sturdy.

reminder that this means a bigger portion of your $20 would be going towards the packaging, so the set itself would inevitably be smaller. and despite providing an (arguably) better experience, canisters are worse from both an economic and an environmental standpoint. given Lego's current packaging policy, it would be quite a double standard if they started making plastic containers again. I'd rather have them improve the sturdiness of the current box design, the fragility is its biggest flaw in my opinion

[Ballom Nom Nom]

I voted "no, never, goodbye". But honestly, the Mistika canister was not awful, as canisters go. It didn't have any special functionality like the mask storage function of the Mata/Nuva canisters, but I thought the Ignika-shaped lid was incredibly stylish, especially how one side was "pure" and the other side was "corrupted".

I had completely forgotten what the canisters even looked like until I saw your post and it jogged my memory, so thanks for that.

 

They were okay, overall. I thought the dual-patterned Ignika was rather neat, for reasons like Aanchir said. Pretty fitting of a year with waves split between heroes and villains.

 

~B~

[Pranciblad]

Mostly I'm indifferent on this matter, but I have to say that if any canisters were to come back, It'd be the X-pods. They're not Bionicle, I know, but they were probably the best iteration of the canister concept Lego produced. They were compact, modular, And each part of them was also a useful building element. Still not perfect by any means, but they were my personal favorite.

[Munty]

They had a cool looking lid but were too big, difficult to open and don't stack (or otherwise store) very well at all. So I said no. I was a fan of the canisters though and, despite people pointing out they weren't an economical packaging solution, I wouldn't mind a return to them. Most of my 2015 cardboard packages are in various stages of squashing as we speak and I've been very careful with them. That isn't good for me or my collection

 

I guess it's kind of good for the planet though

Edited April 17, 2015 by Munty

[TheSkeletonMan939]

Look at all this hate for the Mistika canisters. Wait, what was wrong with them? I kinda liked them. The Ignika on top was cool.

 

it would ripe your out your thumbnail

 

I'm sorry for your loss.

 

I never had any problems opening them. :/

Edited April 18, 2015 by TheSkeletonMan939

[Jobber]

I would like to see Phantoka/Toa Mahri-like canisters; the Toa Mahri's more so because those actually had playability.

 

Plastic and cardboard mix, best of both worlds.

Edited April 17, 2015 by Anonymous User

[Aanchir]

I would like to see Phantoka/Toa Mahri-like canisters; the Toa Mahri's more so because those actually had playability.

 

Plastic and cardboard mix, best of both worlds.

I wouldn't call the Mahri canisters "the best of both worlds". Frankly, I'd almost call them the worst of both worlds. They're not practical as reusable storage, not good for the environment, expensive to produce (at least, compared to foil or cardboard packaging), not able to be printed on all sides, not able to be stacked vertically, and not collapsible. Their playability was pretty much their only redeeming quality.

[Jobber]

Wow, way to burst my thought bubble.

 

It's been happening a lot on this site lately to other folks as well.

Edited April 17, 2015 by Anonymous User

[LegoSWfan]

 

I would like to see Phantoka/Toa Mahri-like canisters; the Toa Mahri's more so because those actually had playability.

 

Plastic and cardboard mix, best of both worlds.

 

I wouldn't call the Mahri canisters "the best of both worlds". Frankly, I'd almost call them the worst of both worlds. They're not practical as reusable storage, not good for the environment, expensive to produce (at least, compared to foil or cardboard packaging), not able to be printed on all sides, not able to be stacked vertically, and not collapsible. Their playability was pretty much their only redeeming quality.

What dose printing on all sides have to do with anything.

[Cwog]

 

 

I would like to see Phantoka/Toa Mahri-like canisters; the Toa Mahri's more so because those actually had playability.

 

Plastic and cardboard mix, best of both worlds.

I wouldn't call the Mahri canisters "the best of both worlds". Frankly, I'd almost call them the worst of both worlds. They're not practical as reusable storage, not good for the environment, expensive to produce (at least, compared to foil or cardboard packaging), not able to be printed on all sides, not able to be stacked vertically, and not collapsible. Their playability was pretty much their only redeeming quality.

What does printing on all sides have to do with anything?

 

Fixed some typos you had. To answer the question, though, it creates more room to put information that should be on the packaging, legal and safety stuff aren't made almost unreadable to fit. Also, I'm going to assume that printing on cardboard is cheaper than printing on stickers, which are then put onto the plastic.

[evil_jaga_genius]

Mostly I'm indifferent on this matter, but I have to say that if any canisters were to come back, It'd be the X-pods. They're not Bionicle, I know, but they were probably the best iteration of the canister concept Lego produced. They were compact, modular, And each part of them was also a useful building element. Still not perfect by any means, but they were my personal favorite.

The X-Pods were one of my favorites too!  I only wish I'd gotten more of them while I had the chance...

 

 

I would like to see Phantoka/Toa Mahri-like canisters; the Toa Mahri's more so because those actually had playability.

 

Plastic and cardboard mix, best of both worlds.

A nice thought.  Maybe Lego just needs another shot at getting that style down.  Though what do you mean by playability?  I remember using my can-part-thing as a sort of teleporter, but nothing with the actual Toa.

[Jobber]

 

Mostly I'm indifferent on this matter, but I have to say that if any canisters were to come back, It'd be the X-pods. They're not Bionicle, I know, but they were probably the best iteration of the canister concept Lego produced. They were compact, modular, And each part of them was also a useful building element. Still not perfect by any means, but they were my personal favorite.

The X-Pods were one of my favorites too!  I only wish I'd gotten more of them while I had the chance...

 

 

I would like to see Phantoka/Toa Mahri-like canisters; the Toa Mahri's more so because those actually had playability.

 

Plastic and cardboard mix, best of both worlds.

A nice thought.  Maybe Lego just needs another shot at getting that style down.  Though what do you mean by playability?  I remember using my can-part-thing as a sort of teleporter, but nothing with the actual Toa.

 

The Toa Mahri canisters had pin holes on the tops and bottoms so you could use them as turrets, if I remember right.

[Petewa]

They aren't half bad, but if they're bringing back canisters, I'd hope for the Mata/Nuva shaped ones first, personally.

[LegoSWfan]

 

 

 

I would like to see Phantoka/Toa Mahri-like canisters; the Toa Mahri's more so because those actually had playability.

 

Plastic and cardboard mix, best of both worlds.

 

I wouldn't call the Mahri canisters "the best of both worlds". Frankly, I'd almost call them the worst of both worlds. They're not practical as reusable storage, not good for the environment, expensive to produce (at least, compared to foil or cardboard packaging), not able to be printed on all sides, not able to be stacked vertically, and not collapsible. Their playability was pretty much their only redeeming quality.

What does printing on all sides have to do with anything?

Fixed some typos you had. To answer the question, though, it creates more room to put information that should be on the packaging, legal and safety stuff aren't made almost unreadable to fit. Also, I'm going to assume that printing on cardboard is cheaper than printing on stickers, which are then put onto the plastic.

So, more room for the legal text no one cares about?

[Lyichir]

 

 

 

 

I would like to see Phantoka/Toa Mahri-like canisters; the Toa Mahri's more so because those actually had playability.

 

Plastic and cardboard mix, best of both worlds.

I wouldn't call the Mahri canisters "the best of both worlds". Frankly, I'd almost call them the worst of both worlds. They're not practical as reusable storage, not good for the environment, expensive to produce (at least, compared to foil or cardboard packaging), not able to be printed on all sides, not able to be stacked vertically, and not collapsible. Their playability was pretty much their only redeeming quality.

What does printing on all sides have to do with anything?

Fixed some typos you had. To answer the question, though, it creates more room to put information that should be on the packaging, legal and safety stuff aren't made almost unreadable to fit. Also, I'm going to assume that printing on cardboard is cheaper than printing on stickers, which are then put onto the plastic.

So, more room for the legal text no one cares about?

 

No. More room that ISN'T taken up by the legal text no one cares about. That legal text is required by law to be there and be a certain size, which means that on a canister like the Mahri canister, there's much, much less usable space for more appealing design elements like environmental art, alternate product shots, and creative borders and layout.

[Cwog]

 

 

 

 

 

SNIP

SNIP

SNIP

SNIP

So, more room for the legal text no one cares about?

 

No. More room that ISN'T taken up by the legal text no one cares about. That legal text is required by law to be there and be a certain size, which means that on a canister like the Mahri canister, there's much, much less usable space for more appealing design elements like environmental art, alternate product shots, and creative borders and layout.

 

tl;dr, Printing on all sides (8, in this case) is very, very good.

[LegoSWfan]

 

 

 

 

 

I would like to see Phantoka/Toa Mahri-like canisters; the Toa Mahri's more so because those actually had playability.

 

Plastic and cardboard mix, best of both worlds.

 

I wouldn't call the Mahri canisters "the best of both worlds". Frankly, I'd almost call them the worst of both worlds. They're not practical as reusable storage, not good for the environment, expensive to produce (at least, compared to foil or cardboard packaging), not able to be printed on all sides, not able to be stacked vertically, and not collapsible. Their playability was pretty much their only redeeming quality.

What does printing on all sides have to do with anything?

Fixed some typos you had. To answer the question, though, it creates more room to put information that should be on the packaging, legal and safety stuff aren't made almost unreadable to fit. Also, I'm going to assume that printing on cardboard is cheaper than printing on stickers, which are then put onto the plastic.

So, more room for the legal text no one cares about?

No. More room that ISN'T taken up by the legal text no one cares about. That legal text is required by law to be there and be a certain size, which means that on a canister like the Mahri canister, there's much, much less usable space for more appealing design elements like environmental art, alternate product shots, and creative borders and layout.

... There still cereal boxes though.

[Munty]

... There still cereal boxes though.

 

Wait, what are? Mahri canisters? Mistika canisters? I assume you mean the 2015 ones as none of the gen 1 canisters were ever even remotely cereal boxes. But noone in any of those posts was talking about 2015 sets were they? I think that whole debate was more about the pros and cons of large shaped plastic pieces like the Mahri and Phantoka had vs the extra space for graphic design provided by other more regular packaging methods. That doesn't strictly mean cardboard boxes though, a whole bunch of the early plastic canisters had wrap around artwork without being cereal boxes

Edited April 18, 2015 by Munty

[Cwog]

 

... They're still cereal boxes though.

 

Wait, what are? Mahri canisters? Mistika canisters? I assume you mean the 2015 ones as none of the gen 1 canisters were ever even remotely cereal boxes. But noone in any of those posts was talking about 2015 sets were they? I think that whole debate was more about the pros and cons of large shaped plastic pieces like the Mahri and Phantoka had vs the extra space for graphic design provided by other more regular packaging methods. That doesn't strictly mean cardboard boxes though, a whole bunch of the early plastic canisters had wrap around artwork without being cereal boxes

 

Again, fixed Salvus's typo. He was referring to the 2015 boxes. What is your deal with them, though, Decepticonwarrior? LEGO has moved on from the older, more expensive, less eco-friendly containers, and gone to new packages that do their job just fine, if not better. Is this your vandetta against Gen2, in just another form? I think that the boxes are great. If not for the marketing value, they're better for the planet! Who doesn't want that?

[Munty]

The new boxes look pretty good but they don't seem to have any longevity to them. That's my main gripe with them at any rate, clearly I can't speak for others! I have a few of my 2015 boxes which are already dented squashed or even slightly torn and that's from a careful adult collector. I know a lot of people don't care about keeping these things in which case it's undeniably a great step forward, for me though it's still a bit of a bummer to not have more collectible, enduring canisters.

[Cwog]

Well, Munty, that's just the thing. These are toys first, collectibles second, and parents buying these for their kids don't want canisters cluttering the house/apartment. Trust me, we keep ours in the attic for a reason. Back in January, when I bought Lewa, Gali, Pohatu, and their Protectors, the first thing I did after building them was recycle the boxes. The instructions went soon after, as I had already downloaded the instructions to my Onedrive in December. Point is, unless you really want to collect the containers the sets are in... and I honestly don't know why you would (but to each their own)... these boxes are the best form of packaging Bionicle has utilized, ever.

[Munty]

Well, Munty, that's just the thing. These are toys first, collectibles second, and parents buying these for their kids don't want canisters cluttering the house/apartment. Trust me, we keep ours in the attic for a reason. Back in January, when I bought Lewa, Gali, Pohatu, and their Protectors, the first thing I did after building them was recycle the boxes. The instructions went soon after, as I had already downloaded the instructions to my Onedrive in December. Point is, unless you really want to collect the containers the sets are in... and I honestly don't know why you would (but to each their own)... these boxes are the best form of packaging Bionicle has utilized, ever.

 

Honestly, I can't understand why people would throw them out but as you say each to their own I think the point is, they were designed to be cool and to be kept back in the day. Just look at the mid-line sets when they started including information in the instructions (and sometimes on the canister) which showed you how to pose your figure so it would fit in the tub. Remember the Suvas, Bohrok Hangars, all that good stuff that encouraged us to keep the boxes. Even if you do throw them out you still need to store the sets somewhere if you put them away so then you need to get another (albeit smaller) box! But anyway, I'm derailing this topic over a matter of personal preference I think

 

For future reference, I'd be happy to take the packaging and instructions for the summer wave off your hands rather than see them be recycled. And yes, I agree to a point that this is one of Lego's better packaging methods. But I won't agree it's the best. I'm sure there is a happy medium somewhere that doesn't clutter up the house OR kill the planet. We just haven't seen it yet!

[Lyichir]

The new boxes look pretty good but they don't seem to have any longevity to them. That's my main gripe with them at any rate, clearly I can't speak for others! I have a few of my 2015 boxes which are already dented squashed or even slightly torn and that's from a careful adult collector. I know a lot of people don't care about keeping these things in which case it's undeniably a great step forward, for me though it's still a bit of a bummer to not have more collectible, enduring canisters.

The thing is that I would probably consider the new ones to have MORE longevity than canisters, simply because they aren't a burden to keep.

 

Simply by cutting the tape on all sides of the box and flattening it, you can preserve all the artwork from the new packaging in a like-new state. And by stacking them and putting them in a box or folder, they take up a fraction of the space of the old canisters. The canisters were certainly durable, but that's a blessing and a curse—for archival purposes, there is literally no way to reduce the space taken up by the canisters. And so you're left with a choice—hoard all the canisters, until you're drowning in them? Or, with a tear in your eye, finally accept that you need the space more than you need the memories?

 

The advantage of these new boxes, is that unless the theme has an exponentially longer lifespan than the classic theme, you are literally never forced to make that choice, because the boxes can be preserved while taking up a fraction of the space they took up as containers. Am I totally happy with them? No—I kind of miss the Hero Factory pouches, which had the same advantages (being able to be collapsed for storage, allowing for detailed designs on all sides of the package) while still being able to be used as storage again if the need arose. But I would rather continue with boxes than have to deal with canisters again, because I have enough trouble keeping my space neat and organized without burying myself in an ever-growing collection of rigid plastic containers.

Edited April 18, 2015 by Lyichir

[Aanchir]

The new boxes look pretty good but they don't seem to have any longevity to them. That's my main gripe with them at any rate, clearly I can't speak for others! I have a few of my 2015 boxes which are already dented squashed or even slightly torn and that's from a careful adult collector. I know a lot of people don't care about keeping these things in which case it's undeniably a great step forward, for me though it's still a bit of a bummer to not have more collectible, enduring canisters.

 

That's my biggest frustration also. I got a very negative first impression of the packaging because my Kopaka set that I reviewed for The New Elementary was shipped to me in a padded envelope rather than a box, and as a result was slightly torn and also so dented that it wouldn't stand upright.

 

Granted, I don't think there's any sense in returning to bulky plastic canisters (even "cereal boxes" that you can collapse flat are way better than those for my purposes), but I never had these problems with the foil pouches of the Hero Factory and Legends of Chima constraction sets, which in my eyes remain the most practical constraction packages we've ever gotten. All the sturdiness and reusability of a hard plastic canister, a lower economic and environmental cost, and the ability to collapse to the size of their contents? Those things were a dream come true, especially in the Invasion from Below sets which added stylish artwork to the top and bottom of the packages.

 

Maybe LEGO will be able to improve these boxes in future years by cutting them from a sturdier stock of cardboard, like what they use for some of their larger boxes. They're definitely an amazingly creative design, and I think LEGO did a great job with them for what they are. It just makes me a bit sad that we had to lose those great foil pouches right when they were really beginning to reach their fullest potential.

[fishers64]

I think the brick-set boxes look more like cereal boxes than the constraction ones...

 

(I personally find it ironic that the only canister I have for Lego is one for a small Creator set. I'm pretty sure those sets were the last ones to use them, interestingly enough. But it's quite the niftest little thing, so I'm not complaining about canisters at all.)

 

Boxes are fine, and admittedly easier to chuck sets in for transport when you have to move house. 

[LegoSWfan]

Well, Munty, that's just the thing. These are toys first, collectibles second, and parents buying these for their kids don't want canisters cluttering the house/apartment. Trust me, we keep ours in the attic for a reason. Back in January, when I bought Lewa, Gali, Pohatu, and their Protectors, the first thing I did after building them was recycle the boxes. The instructions went soon after, as I had already downloaded the instructions to my Onedrive in December. Point is, unless you really want to collect the containers the sets are in... and I honestly don't know why you would (but to each their own)... these boxes are the best form of packaging Bionicle has utilized, ever.

The one known as Salvus is no more.

 

I do not have a vendetta against g2 (at least not a large one), I simply believe that if I'm going to be paying 20 $ for these things, I don't want them in the same packaging as Honey comb. Canisters are more durable, have play value (Ya know, for the kids!), and look a whole lot better on a display shelf.

[Cwog]

What play value? I certainly never had fun putting the figures back in their canisters. Like, never.

[LegoSWfan]

What play value? I certainly never had fun putting the figures back in their canisters. Like, never.

Um...

 

http://www.bzpower.com/galimage.php?galimage=/Imaging/stories/8910_kongu_mahri_16.jpg

[Jobber]

I honestly wish we got something that's not dog treat bags, or flimsy boxes that my cat can ruin. It doesn't even have to be bulky canisters, just something that looks cool and can take a beating.

 

I threw away most of the Toa's boxes because my roommate thought they were trash and stepped on them on accident. 

[Mr. Cup of Fail]

 

What play value? I certainly never had fun putting the figures back in their canisters. Like, never.

Um...

 

http://www.bzpower.com/galimage.php?galimage=/Imaging/stories/8910_kongu_mahri_16.jpg

 

You do know he said "canisters" right

[dotcom]

I think the fun part of this topic is people complaining about cardboard boxes as if half of the original line's sets didn't come in them...Especially, you know, once things got to the 20$ pricepoint and up. The bigger a set gets, the less economic plastic containers are, which is why you never saw titan sets in canisters (well, one of several reasons I guess). If there's a problem with the new packaging (and there is) it's just that they're frail. Calling them "cereal boxes" as if that were some kind of insult, when pretty much all Lego sets come in cardboard boxes, (and usually ones that more closely resemble a cereal box than Bionicle ones...)is just...it's silly. Really silly.

Edited April 18, 2015 by I-AM-YOUR-LORD

[LegoSWfan]

 

 

What play value? I certainly never had fun putting the figures back in their canisters. Like, never.

 

Um...http://www.bzpower.com/galimage.php?galimage=/Imaging/stories/8910_kongu_mahri_16.jpg

You do know he said "canisters" right

They are classed as canisters, thus, my point remains valid.

[Toa Doublebee]

I'd like the old cylinder canisters to make a comeback. 

[Mr. Cup of Fail]

 

 

 

What play value? I certainly never had fun putting the figures back in their canisters. Like, never.

Um...http://www.bzpower.com/galimage.php?galimage=/Imaging/stories/8910_kongu_mahri_16.jpg

You do know he said "canisters" right

They are classed as canisters, thus, my point remains valid.

 

In fact there not...         there not even close to being canisters...

[Munty]

 

- -

The thing is that I would probably consider the new ones to have MORE longevity than canisters, simply because they aren't a burden to keep.

 

Simply by cutting the tape on all sides of the box and flattening it, you can preserve all the artwork from the new packaging in a like-new state. And by stacking them and putting them in a box or folder, they take up a fraction of the space of the old canisters. The canisters were certainly durable, but that's a blessing and a curse—for archival purposes, there is literally no way to reduce the space taken up by the canisters. And so you're left with a choice—hoard all the canisters, until you're drowning in them? Or, with a tear in your eye, finally accept that you need the space more than you need the memories?

 

The advantage of these new boxes, is that unless the theme has an exponentially longer lifespan than the classic theme, you are literally never forced to make that choice, because the boxes can be preserved while taking up a fraction of the space they took up as containers. Am I totally happy with them? No—I kind of miss the Hero Factory pouches, which had the same advantages (being able to be collapsed for storage, allowing for detailed designs on all sides of the package) while still being able to be used as storage again if the need arose. But I would rather continue with boxes than have to deal with canisters again, because I have enough trouble keeping my space neat and organized without burying myself in an ever-growing collection of rigid plastic containers.

 

 

I know exactly what you mean and I'd have a huge amount of extra space in my house if not for these big canisters but I'm one of the people actively seeking out ALL of the packaging so in time my collection will continue to grow for the sake of canisters! My most recent acquisitions were tubs for Toa Norik and Iruini which were kind of a semi-grail for me for a long time. They're now part of a makeshift display in my bedroom (ie. standing in front of all of my stacked Titan boxes on top of a wardrobe!) Next to them are my Mahri boxisters which look amazing on display and funnily enough my 2015 protector boxes are up there too (simply because there was space for them but nothing else!) 

 

As you see, I'll never have to make that tear-jerking decision as for me the canisters are as big a part of my collection as the sets themselves. All of these sets are stored inside their respective packaging too thus turning ugly bags of parts (and boxes of bags of parts!) into more attractive and downright displayable collectible pieces. I can't imagine many people have the space to display their entire collection all built up and nice after all, especially once we grow up and move out of our folks house where we have 'our room' and go on to start families and such. I have 2 big boxes holding dozens of my other canisters and sets and it's a real shame that currently I don't get to benefit from owning them because I don't have space for them. If I were to throw out all the canisters in those boxes it would probably take up only 1/4 of the space but it would lose far more than 3/4 of the value to me if I did that. 

 

As mentioned before though I imagine I'm a fairly odd minority here! All comes down to different strokes for different folks again... I think the claim that these new boxes will not take up any space is somewhat short-sighted though as where will you put your sets? The reason the packaging won't take up space is because you can't really re-use it. I put away my Onua and LoSS sets and had to bag them before boxing them because the design is so unsuitable for storage. Perhaps this was their intention but it seems very strange to me, I guess that simply reflects on my box collector status though hey?!

 

 

- -

 

That's my biggest frustration also. I got a very negative first impression of the packaging because my Kopaka set that I reviewed for The New Elementary was shipped to me in a padded envelope rather than a box, and as a result was slightly torn and also so dented that it wouldn't stand upright.

 

Granted, I don't think there's any sense in returning to bulky plastic canisters (even "cereal boxes" that you can collapse flat are way better than those for my purposes), but I never had these problems with the foil pouches of the Hero Factory and Legends of Chima constraction sets, which in my eyes remain the most practical constraction packages we've ever gotten. All the sturdiness and reusability of a hard plastic canister, a lower economic and environmental cost, and the ability to collapse to the size of their contents? Those things were a dream come true, especially in the Invasion from Below sets which added stylish artwork to the top and bottom of the packages.

 

Maybe LEGO will be able to improve these boxes in future years by cutting them from a sturdier stock of cardboard, like what they use for some of their larger boxes. They're definitely an amazingly creative design, and I think LEGO did a great job with them for what they are. It just makes me a bit sad that we had to lose those great foil pouches right when they were really beginning to reach their fullest potential.

 

 

Good point, I'd forgotten all about these (probably because I never owned any!) It's still not a very interesting concept for my peculiar particular tastes but at least it doesn't dent/tear like the flimsy cardboard ones do and works as a reusable yet flexible storage medium. In fact, I use plastic sandwich bags for storing my stock items which is a pretty good analogy for the foil pouches really so yes I can certainly see them being better than the cardboard in many ways...

 

 

 

 

 

- -

- -

You do know he said "canisters" right

They are classed as canisters, thus, my point remains valid.

 

In fact they're not... They're not even close to being canisters...

 

 

Fixed that spelling for you (It's a contraction ) As for the above debate, I think there's truth on both sides. All the toa sets (except these ones!) came in true canisters so these are referred to as canister sets too. Really though these are more like decorated boxes SWH is actually technically right. I think boxisters is a perfectly valid term

 

 

Also, I don't seem to have quoted this but someone mentioned it was silly that people are criticising these new boxes for being cardboard when that's what Lego uses for almost EVERY other set it releases. I think the two big things to consider in this argument is that first off big boxes usually use much better (thicker) material which give them some actual strength and second that Bionicle has historically always been delivered in canisters and people are nostalgic. As an addition to the first point, the interesting shape of the new Bionicle boxes kind of sucks at doing anything but looking kind of funky. They don't stack very well (and after any kind of damage don't even stand reliably) and the angular design removes all the strength you get in standard cuboid boxes. You can't even store sets in them because the lids don't stay closed once you've opened them (although the same can be said of many standard Lego boxes) 

 

Rant over, please don't TL:DR. I don't care if you don't read this, just don't respond at all if that's the case

[Cwog]

Munty mentioned that the 8-sided-ness of the boxes makes them weaker. I think that LEGO understood that risk, but wanted hexagonal cylinders because they stand out on shelves, even compared to their other products.  It's as if they're saying "We're special, look at us!" Good marketing technique, and again, I think only some collectors care about the durability of boxes post-opening. May I mention once more that Bionicles are toys first, collectibles second.

[LegoSWfan]

Bionicles are toys first, collectibles second.

Maybe to you. But not to me.

[Cwog]

I mean they are intended as toys. They were made as toys. Sure, some people, including me, like to collect them, but they are toys first! LEGO isn't marketing them as collectible figurines. If they were, maybe they'd have different packaging. LEGO just assumes that because the product is a toy, the container should be easily disposable, and cardboard is the way to go in that mindset.

 

I'd say it's safe to assume that most of the people who buy Bionicles are kids or their parents, and they want to get the toy out of the package. Then what? They most likely don't want to keep the container. That's where canisters failed. They didn't meet the need of the majority, that being the kids and their parents who buy the thing for the toy, not the toy and the package.

 

Decepticonwarrior, you said "Maybe to you, but not to me." "You" meaning Cwog? I'm a collector. Well, kind of. I made a resolve back in December that I would try my hardest to get every gen2 set. So, I have all 13 winter sets, and I intend to buy the 5 this summer, and any coming forward. In that sense, I'm a collector. However, I routinely take those Bionicles off their shelf, play with them, maybe make a short stop-motion film, pose them, and then put them back. That's how toys are played with, right? So, in that sense, I play with them as toys. However, like I said in the first two paragraphs, you made the wrong assumption as to what I meant.

Edited April 19, 2015 by Cwog

[LegoSWfan]

You stop motion? Me too!

 

I guess my definition of "collectables" is different than yours, I'm used to saying it in regards to Megabloks halo sets or CHUG transformers, I apologize if I offened you.

Edited April 19, 2015 by Decepticonwarrior

[Munty]

I think toys and collectibles make it sound way more black and white than it really is. Cwog for example sounds to be about right in the middle to me. I'm a collector but I don't get to play with my stuff very often as most of it is dismantles and boxed away due to space constraints (and I'm almost 30 ) but I certainly still appreciate them as toys too and my interest in the theme developed when I was a child anyway so I frequently played with them back then! Whatever our personal stance on the matter is, Cwog is absolutely right. Lego makes toys but what we do with the ones we buy is up to us.