Aanchir

The main reason I have doubts about LEGO returning to builds like that is that presently, LEGO has had a lot of success in themes like Ninjago, Nexo Knights, and Super Heroes with similar sized but much more detailed minifigure-scale mechs using more standard System parts. Even though System-based mechs and creatures at any scale usually don't have as much articulation as constraction sets (to the frustration of many AFOLs), they seem to be pretty popular with the same six to fourteen target age group that constraction themes generally target. So I can't see LEGO bringing CCBS back on a wider scale specifically for a theme that would have such similar subject matter to many of their existing themes, but with less crossover appeal for people whose main prior experience and existing collections consist of other System-based themes.

Doesn't this describe most types of constraction set, though? Like, aside from the Toa Hordika, all of the main Toa builds we saw in G1 (Mata, Metru, and Inika) were used at least twice, just with varying armor shapes, armor colors, limb length, and equipment/weapons. Among the Toa at least, there were at most one or two per team that varied on more of a structural level, namely Pohatu and Onua in 2001 and 2002, Kongu and Matoro in 2007, and Pohatu in 2008. That's right, just five individual Toa out of 50+ Toa over eight years who varied in a meaningful way from their team's generalized skeletal structure… mostly by way of ridiculously wide shoulders and/or attaching the neck to the front of the torso instead of the top to create a "hunchback" look. If anything, I think the CCBS was a considerable step up in that most armor shapes were not nearly as specialized for use on one particular section of a standard formula build. For the most part, building a Metru or Inika style Toa meant picking between a handful of part options in mutually exclusive categories like upper limb armor design, upper limb length, lower limb armor design/length (single-piece lower limbs meant you didn't even get to make separate choices for those), chest armor design, and foot design. A Mata/Nuva style Toa often had even fewer options to really change up the body shapes and proportions: for each limb, choose between five single-piece limb designs, only three of which are reversible. Then, choose if the Y-joints for the hips and shoulders are attached by the cross axle hole at the top and the cross axle hole at the sides (remember, only the latter allows shoulder armor). Then, choose whether the torso is right side up or upside down (about two ways to attach the neck for the former and one for the latter. And finally, decide whether to add additional torso armor. Congratulations! You have a Toa. CCBS, on the other hand, let designers choose limb length, armor style, and armor orientation for each part of the body individually, and even add a second layer of armor on some parts of the build. For the most part, no armor part was limited to being used in specific places on a standard skeleton — frankly, the restrictions on variety in those first two waves of heroes probably had less to do with the building system than with them reverting to Mata/Nuva-level price points, with the Phantoka/Mistika/Glatorian-level price points in those waves reserved for the villains. As such, the Breakout wave's greater variety can largely be chalked up to the decision, largely unprecedented at that time, to break both the heroes and villains up between two or three different price points (as well as a $1 price hike on the smallest of those sizes). That said, both CCBS and pre-CCBS parts were far more versatile in MOCs than they could ever be in sets, since there are bigger limits on how many parts can be in production at any one time than how many parts an individual can have in their collection after years of collecting. Not to mention bigger limits on what level of complexity the target age range can handle, or how much you can fit within a fixed price point. Personally, I think the inherent limits on how many of the creative liberties of either CCBS or pre-CCBS builds would look natural on human or animal characters with skin and muscles rather than robot characters with just armor and bones, was arguably a bigger nail in the coffin of the Star Wars buildable figures than the unsurprising decision to depict actors with bodies of similar sizes and shapes using parts of similar sizes and shapes. The lack of alternate model instructions (online or otherwise) was one of the most striking differences to me with Star Wars buildable figures than the Chima or Super Heroes ones that came before, but it's not hard to understand why that was the case. Realistically, if a future action figure building system were engineered with human characters in mind, it would probably have to focus more on making outfits and proportions more customizable rather than Bionicle or Hero Factory style customization, which in any building system tends to be better suited to robot and alien characters. As far as price goes: pretty much every constraction building system to date (including the more System-based Knights' Kingdom II buildable figures) has tended towards larger and more complex parts than typical System sets, and consequently has had a higher price per piece — usually, around 20 cents per piece, whereas System sets are often more around 8 to 12 cents per piece. As such, I'm not sure how effectively costs could be pulled down EXCEPT by either using fewer pieces, or by using more standard System parts shared with other themes, the way a lot of dragon, creature, and mecha sets from themes like Ninjago, Legends of Chima, and Elves have been constructed. Zidonaro's GUNPLA-esque suggestion is interesting, but I'm not sure how well it would translate to LEGO, since from my understanding GUNPLA kits usually involve three or so sprues of parts (each coming off of a single mold) specific to one model. This is a very different production and packing process from LEGO, in which the usual tendency is for parts to be shared between models but come from separate molds depending on their shape, even when they are in the same color. The number of sets and parts in LEGO's portfolio in any given year might rule out devote so many molds to individual sets, and of course it goes without saying that AFOLs would hate that level of specialization, but that's not to say it couldn't be explored for a more limited range of products like we saw with the Star Wars buildable figures. I am aware that a lot of older GUNPLA models were extremely technical to construct, often needing the use of glue and a hobby knife, but I hear newer ones are usually easier snap-together builds sort of like a typical construction toy. That said, I wonder what kind of quality control costs and concerns might be associated with molding so many pieces on one sprue and ensuring all meet the LEGO Group's usual precision tolerances and standards for clutch power. In any case, that's probably something only somebody involved with the production process at either LEGO or Bandai would really be able to answer, since usually companies aren't very open about how many customer service complaints they get about molding issues, let alone how many improperly molded parts are detected and removed from the production line before they get packaged and shipped to customers.

My feeling tends to be pretty similar… presently, it feels like buildable System characters and creatures tend to both be more efficient/economical (in terms of not needing as many specialized, theme-specific parts) and have greater crossover appeal with the expanding audience of other System-based themes. There are certainly some types of subjects/interests that System builds have not shown the same suitability for, like more organic-looking humanoid dolls and action figures, but a lot of people felt like more Technic/CCBS-based constraction sets were never able to achieve that adequately either. If LEGO wanted to invest in more doll-like theme, for instance (and right now I'm not sure they would — the doll market isn't exactly booming), it's doubtful that the rugged, armor-plated, somewhat mechanical look of most Technic-based constraction themes and the emphasis on customizing their body and armor shapes rather than their clothing would be that well suited to those types of creations. So for right now I don't think Technic-based constraction really is a priority for LEGO, nor do I think it necessarily should be.

this is the ONLY legal connection

I turned 18 in March 2009, so the final LEGO themes of my childhood would've been the things I was collecting in the first few months of that year, which as far as I can remember would have been Bionicle, Power Miners, and Agents. I didn't have a "dark age" of any sort. Perhaps Bionicle helped carry me through that, since besides collecting Bionicle throughout G1, a lot of my purchasing decisions in my teen years were focused on themes that I first became interested in due to having parts that looked useful for Bionicle MOCs (like Knights' Kingdom II, Vikings, and Exo-Force). After Bionicle, I continued focusing mostly on colorful action/adventure themes with 7-and-up builds, though I took a very brief hiatus from constraction themes until the CCBS launched in 2011 and pulled me right back in. So even with Bionicle over, my collecting habits didn't really change much. Right now the main themes I focus on are the LEGO Movie and spin-off themes, Ninjago, and Elves.

Good review! Regarding the comment about sets not usually coming with a full set of the original four ninja, it’s interesting to think about how often that has happened with some of the larger releases at this point. Ultra Sonic Raider in 2012 and Ultra Stealth Raider in 2016 both had all four of the original ninja, while Temple of Airjitzu in 2015, Temple of the Ultimate Ultimate Weapon and Destiny’s Bounty in 2017, and the upcoming Monastery of Spinjitzu set for 2019 all have a full set of six ninja. Of course, the Hunted wave in particular is surprisingly generous when it comes to giving multiple options to get the main characters, even if some might mean slight variations or missing out on other less familiar characters. For example, the four original ninja and all the pieces of dragon armor except the flag and decorated torso/legs pieces that are exclusive to this set’s Dragon Master figure can also be obtained for even cheaper by getting the two other dragon sets, Firstbourne and Stormbringer. Or if you don’f mind spending a bit more but getting some beefier sets you can do the same with Firstbourne and Dieselnaut (the latter of which has a full set of dragon armor by itself, plus a Teen Wu minifigure in dragon hunter clothes who doesn’t appear in any other standard sets). As for the two remaining ninja, they and Harumi can be obtained either in the Throne Room Showdown set (which also includes Skylor and Samurai X) or the Oni Titan set (which also includes Garmadon). It feels like a big step up from some previous waves which seemed carefully engineered to require getting all or nearly all of the sets if you wanted every collectible AND every ninja. Of course, this might feel like a double edged sword to people who were planning on getting every set anyhow for other reasons besides the figs/collectibles, but I suspect that most Ninjago fans quickly learn that even if you can afford that, it’s often more trouble than it’s worth. Better that the sets target the much bigger audience that has to pick and choose one way or the other and would rather not miss out on the most significant characters or artifacts in the show by doing so. Overall, there is enough overlap between the contents of this set and Dieselnaut that I knew right away I’d probably only plan on getting one or the other. Generally I’m leaning towards this one, since I’d rather get the Golden Dragon Master, the new Earth Dragon, and Arkade and pick up Teen Wu via BrickLink or a convention vendor than vice-versa. While Skullbreaker is technically unique to Dieselnaut as well, it’s easy to recreate him by swapping Muzzle’s muzzle with a spare ninja mask, and I’ll have a duplicate Muzzle after getting both the dragon sets.

If anything, I think my gripe with the Rebooted season is that it was too long and meandering, rather than too short. There were quite a few story beats like Pythor abducting electric eels from an aquarium as a new Nindroid power source, the ninja getting up to video game shenanigans in the Digiverse, fighting metal-eating alien bugs while trying to escape a comet, and the ridiculous plan of defeating the Overlord with a shrinking pill that prolonged the story but also made it feel rather tonally disjointed. Since then there have certainly been longer seasons based on as few or fewer sets that still managed to feel more coherent and evenly paced to me, like Skybound, Sons of Garmadon, and Hands of Time, but I still don't get the sense that the weaknesses of Rebooted stemmed from it being too short. A bigger factor was probably both the sets AND story needing to be created in somewhat of a rush after the unexpected backlash to the theme's planned conclusion. Anyhow, as I understand it, the writers have generally improved at giving each ninja their own challenges to overcome and ways to contribute to the team effort in recent season. While Day of the Departed was chiefly Cole's story (which was less due to lack of running time than the writers feeling a sense that Cole was due for a starring role after having less impact than his teammates in many previous seasons), even it still managed to tap into some more personal stuff for the other ninja: for instance, Lloyd's grief about the loss of his father, Cryptor having almost a "sibling rivalry" with Zane, and Kai and Nya getting one of their first real opportunities to bond as siblings and reflect on their shared background since Nya became a ninja.

If it's 4 episodes long, then that's twice the length of the original pilot/TV special or Day of the Departed. In fact, assuming each episode minus opening titles is somewhere between 20 and 22 minutes long, that's longer than any of the Bionicle movies (which were each between 70 and 75 minutes long). What's more, I wouldn't say a movie or TV special being focused particularly on one character is a bad thing, especially in an ongoing series where it's normal for different characters to have a "starring role" in different episodes or story arcs. If I had any major storytelling gripe with Day of the Departed, it was the same as with the LEGO Hero Factory Breakout special: that it was weakened by having to balance six simultaneous storylines in a relatively short running length.

It's probably more accurate to say that Bionicle music (for the last four years of G1, at least) had a Cryoshell feeling to its music. Stuff like "Move Along", the soundtracks of the first three movies, and the Power Pack music from 2001 didn't sound very much like Cryoshell at all. That doesn't mean the sense of Bionicle-associated nostalgia doesn't apply, though!

While at this point the first wave of Overwatch sets is known not to have CCBS/Technic-based buildable figure sets and I am not really expecting them in future waves, I don't really care for the way this article and headline frame as a disappointment/letdown what on most other sites was an exciting or at least intriguing announcement/reveal. It feels like the sort of very narrowly focused editorializing that has made FBTB's news articles such an unpleasant reading experience for years now (I can't remember the last time anything I read there offered any kind of valuable insights or perspectives to people who didn't share the admins' likes and dislikes to a fault).

If anything I wouldn't see this as LEGO's violence policies easing so much as becoming more consistent. The setting, scenarios, character/weapon designs, and storyline of Overwatch are just as fantastical and fictionalized as in Star Wars, and arguably a lot less aggressively military-coded. Just look at the characters in the Overwatch sets revealed so far: a futuristic cowboy, an assassin in cartoon supervillain garb and her superhero speedster nemesis, a ghostly mercenary with comically oversized guns, a gorilla astronaut/scientist, a super-soldier in red, white, and blue biker garb, a knight in powered armor that could've come straight out of Nexo Knights, and a mech piloted by a teenage celebrity pro gamer. Is that really scarier or more militaristic than actual armies of "Stormtroopers" casually committing genocide in their war to wipe out a movement of camouflage-garbed rebels? I can't think of anything more violent, militaristic, or realistic about Overwatch than stuff like Star Wars, Indiana Jones, or The Lord of the Rings, and what's more in the US and UK the game is rated T (13 and up) or PEGI 12 (12 and up), comparable to movies rated PG-13 (13 and up) in the US or 12A (12 and up) in the UK. Considering how stuff like Star Wars episodes 3, 7, and 8, Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom, The Dark Knight, and most Marvel movies have been rated similarly, as was the Nintendo DS version of LEGO's own game Bionicle Heroes, it's a bit odd that a T-rated games license seems so shocking. Perhaps some of that surprise is on account of the fearmongering/scapegoating of first person shooters promoting real-life violence (which evidence generally fails to support), or the toxic aggression that permeates so much of "gamer" culture (which is ubiquitous, but most obvious to many people with games that include online multiplayer and voice chat). But then again, in this era of boycotts and harassment associated with comics and movies starring female or nonwhite male characters like Ms. Marvel, Captain Marvel, Captain America: Sam Wilson, The Last Jedi or the Ghostbusters reboot which supposedly demonstrate "political correctness gone mad", I think it goes without saying that this sort of aggressive toxicity isn't at all unique to gaming, let alone to FPS games. Let's not forget, LEGO's reputation for being anti-violence/anti-warfare hasn't always manifested in particularly sensible ways. Back in 2004, the Knights' Kingdom comics and video games had the knights' swords shoot energy blasts because LEGO — a company that had been manufacturing sword-wielding knight minifigures for two and a half decades — thought depicting an actual swordfight was too violent for their tastes. This same perhaps excessive caution had motivated LEGO to refer to all Bionicle weapons as "tools" up until 2006, to threaten to fire an employee for jokingly putting a "LEGO skeleton" in the dungeon of an 80s LEGO Castle prototype, to refer to all LEGO Space lasers as "sensors" for many years, to make the first LEGO Castle in yellow because they were afraid kids would use grey bricks to build tanks (as the designers themselves had been caught doing), and to worry that black spaceships or spacesuits might be too scary for kids in the earliest days of LEGO Space. Honestly I think the current policy established in 2010 (which expressly prohibits products resembling or associated with modern military conflicts and equipment, but also expressly allows for good-vs-evil conflicts in sci-fi, fantasy, and historical contexts) shows a lot more honesty and sincerity with regard to how kids use conflict narratives in their play, not to mention a clearer understanding of the real-life child development outcomes associated with conflict narratives in play and storytelling, than the previous unwritten rules. There's something that feels a little duplicitous/hypocritical about employing a de facto violence policy that less than 15 years ago considered swordfights and shootouts inappropriate for kids, while still putting swords and guns in sets knowing full well that a lot of the kids buying them would use them to role-play swordfights and shootouts. The fact that the current "Conflict and Weapons Policy" is clearly written out rather than enforced somewhat arbitrarily according to the whims of LEGO Group management also helps ensure that the gradual acceptance of conflict and weapons in sets will not continue towards actual modern military sets without openly repealing or amending this established rule.

(for instance, the version of Bye Bye Babylon from Cryoshell's EP and album includes a mild swear that was cut out of the LEGO.com version) All these years, I never even noticed. Kind of annoying that they had to cut out a name for a location in religious cosmology to appease the American soccer moms, thus making that lyric not work in remotely the same capacity. While I agree the reduplication of "be sure I will be there" is weaker than varying the lines more according to their context, I think it has to be understood that some people with more religious leanings or who were raised in a time when religious profanity was just as taboo as sexual or scatalogical profanity might interpret "you can wish me ____" as literally invoking the threat of eternal damnation, rather than using the swear in question figuratively to refer to an unpleasant ordeal (as in idioms like "this job is ____" or "there's gonna be ____ to pay"). Not to mention, LEGO is a toy line — and while sure, toy-based media like the Transformers movies can get away with mild swearing, it's in a context where the movie's rating already warns concerned parents that elements of it might not be appropriate for younger kids. Suffice to say even for brands that dabble in that kind of more mature media, it would be bad PR to have an audio clip featuring swearing as a free download on the Transformers website. Language is complex, and there's been plenty of controversy over kid-oriented brands using language that has an unintended literal or figurative meaning. An example LEGO encountered only a few years back was when Turg, one of the long-tongued Lixers tribe of Mixels. was described as a "window-licker". In a broad sense, it's an insult that is sometimes used (even on primetime TV) to mean simple-minded or incapable. But the roots of that term, which arose in the 1980s, are as a slur against disabled people. And unlike terms like "dumb", "stupid", "idiot", "moron", "nincompoop", and "imbecile", which also have ableist roots but are not widely associated with those specific meanings any more, this word is still widely used with its original ableist meaning. So I think LEGO pretty much invited the controversy that erupted from that.

I think some of these songs may be slightly different edits than the ones that were released on LEGO.com (for instance, the version of Bye Bye Babylon from Cryoshell's EP and album includes a mild swear that was cut out of the LEGO.com version), but yeah, they're still good, and if you're in a position that you are able to buy either individual songs or a whole album from an artist, you like I think it's good form to make that effort to support them. That said, I may be wrong, but your post gives me the sense that your inability to buy songs like this has less to do with money and more to do with a technical issue like not having an account or credit/debit card you can use for online transactions. If you do have an account on any of these types of sites, a lot of stores (like pharmacies, convenience stores, supermarkets, Target, Walmart, etc) sell gift cards you can use to put money on your account even if there's no credit or debit card linked to it. That was the method I used to pay for music and apps on iTunes for years. Even some people who do have credit/debit cards prefer the gift card method if they're particularly worried about account security.

Whoops, while looking for something on Archive.org a while back, I found that it looks like this question was already answered decisively a long time ago. It turns out BZPower actually died in 2002 and we've just been hanging out in its corpse ever since. Wasn't expecting that one!

It's a bit of a tough call for me (having loved the 2015 Toa so much in general) but I think I have to go with Gali Master of Water. It might sound surprising because from a structural standpoint she has perhaps the most average build of any of the Toa from the first wave. She's not taller than average like Kopaka and Tahu, or shorter than average like Pohatu and Onua. She doesn't have unique weapon molds like Onua or Pohatu, or a really elaborate shoulder construction like Onua and Lewa, or an asymmetrical design like Pohatu. Her proportions (whether of her armor or her skeleton) are neither beefy like Onua and Kopaka, nor lanky like Tahu and Lewa. Even one of her most distinguishing characteristics, the heavy armor that sits atop her shoulders, is not constructed that much differently than Tahu's shoulder armor, just with differently sized and positioned shells. With so few obviously unique traits to her construction I'm not surprised I'm the first person to vote for her in the poll. At the same time, for me, part of the satisfaction of the build involves how much I like the design of the final set, since a lot of the fun of a LEGO build is watching a great design come together step by step. And Gali was without a doubt my favorite of the 2015 Toa designs. Her "average" proportions are more visually appealing than the slightly stretched look that Tahu and Kopaka's longer legs gave them. Her proportions are reminiscent of the proportions of the Toa Metru (albeit without such a jarring difference in length between the upper and lower legs), whereas Tahu and Kopaka's proportions reminded me more of the cartoonishly long limbs of the Toa Inika. The added height suited those two personality-wise, but it wasn't as appealing to me in a more general sense. The CCBS shells chosen for Gali's legs and torso also make her perhaps the curviest-looking Toa of Water (besides perhaps the 2002 Gali Nuva, but the parts of her design that made her "curvy" were general Nuva design traits, rather than ones that set her apart from her teammates). And besides my general love of curvy gals, that also made the new Gali look very well-suited to maneuvering in aquatic environments. Even if Gali's build did a lot of the same stuff as the other Toa's, in many ways I felt like she pulled it off better. I loved Gali's fairly consistent and well-balanced color layering across her arms and her legs, which kind of gave me the impression of metallic boots, gloves, and torso armor over a blue armored bodysuit that glowed with elemental energy (similar armored boot color blocking had been done on several Hero Factory sets from the Breakout series, but mirroring that same color blocking on the arms was new. Her weapons not only suited her character, but also required more building than the weapons of the other Toa (besides Onua, maybe) and it's kind of neat how it kept getting bigger as parts were added, culminating at the end of the build when the instructions call to combine it with her flippers to form her misleadingly-named-yet-super-impressive Elemental Trident! As an older Bionicle fan, building the G2 Toa was pretty much invariably a nostalgic experience. While Gali's new mask took more liberties from her original and Nuva masks than many of the other Toa's (with the triangular shape around the mouth, the ridges on the forehead, and the scuba mask as some of the most obvious commonalities), I actually think it might be my all-time favorite mask design, and certainly my favorite mask design for a Toa of Water. The aforementioned Elemental Trident called back to the two-bladed design of her Aqua Axes, but in a way that really physicalizes Gali's immense power over water as well as her strength of will. Yet even with all those nostalgic touches, she also brought a sense of novelty to the new generation. The change of her primary to Dark Azur (a new color for action figure sets at that time) made even just opening the package and pouring out the pieces feel very new and fun. As run-of-the-mill as the gearbox was, the Bright Yellow gears (which, unlike the other Toa's, were both internal AND external). On a more technical note, placing the gears that added friction to the whole mechanism behind the chest plate rather than in the shoulders added a nice sense of surprise and complexity, and kept her shoulder construction nice and compact. The most satisfying of the 2016 Toa to me, both as a building experience and a finished set, was Lewa, with a cool and compact shoulder construction and some neat changes to his color scheme, nice balanced textures, nifty changes to his mask and color scheme, and weapons that gave me some nice Nuva nostalgia. That said, even he didn't give me as much satisfaction as the 2015 Gali (frankly, I don't think any G1 canister sets did either). The gear function of the 2016 Toa was not as exciting for me as that of the 2015 Toa, even though it was something we hadn't really seen before in a canister set. A lot of the 2016 Toa also had weird proportional quirks — the new longer torsos felt slightly out of proportion with the legs of the smaller Toa, while the larger Toa's entire bodies felt out of proportion with their heads/masks. While the variations in shoulder construction for the Toa added some nice complexity and made the shoulders reasonably well suited in width to the characters, the "guts" of a build like that usually aren't as exciting to watch come together as the more external parts of a build that have a bigger visual impact on the final set, like armor shapes and textures. In general, each of the 2016 Toa had little things I wasn't as happy with as their 2015 counterparts, whether it was Pohatu's Sand Yellow cladding that washed out his more vivid Dark Orange primary color, the slight boniness Gali's right leg had as a result of her asymmetrical, coral-like armor, Tahu's wildly inconsistent armor textures, Onua's taller, leaner design, Lewa's slightly limited arm articulation. In addition, the new weapons in general didn't feel quite as unique or well-suited to their wielders as the ones they'd had in 2015, not to mention gave up the Toa's fun "battle mode/adrenaline mode" transformations in exchange for much less innovative moving-parts functions — except for Lewa, who didn't even get one of those! On the plus side, the 2016 Toa's masks were all good callbacks to both the G1 masks and the previous year's designs, although Gali's eye holes didn't line up all that well with her glowing eyes. And I loved the idea of elemental crystal armor as well as the ability to unite the Toa with their new animal companions. Also, to give the designers some credit: of all Bionicle character transformations (G1 OR G2), the 2016 Toa were the ones that did the best job keeping the characters recognizable for who they were. But overall I can't think of any of the 2016 Toa where there wasn't at least one point in the build that I wished that part of the design had been handled differently. The 2015 Toa in general gave me far fewer of those moments, particularly Gali, who came closer than ever to what I'd consider the ideal Toa set. To conclude (after this wholly unnecessary wall of text), you know how versions of Gali in BOTH generations have wielded a two-bladed axe, or labrys, as their weapon? Just saying, Gali is a feminist and a lesbian. *mic drop*

Great to hear that Ninjago is still doing really well! I'm a bit surprised not to see LEGO Friends mentioned, though, since that's typically been one of the major sellers over the past several years. With the shake-up that Toys 'R' Us's liquidation represents for the entire toy industry, I think stable results are good results under the circumstances.

I think you’re being rather unfair to the headline writers — to me, it seems pretty obvious that the point they’re making is that LEGO doesn’t want buyers to notice any difference in the bricks themselves. That’s different from keeping the whole sustainability initiative secret from the public.

Worth noting that part of the reason for "greeters" at stores, besides making the customer feel welcome, is to discourage theft. People are less likely to try and sneak off with unpurchased product if they know they have the employees' attention from the moment they enter the store. Never realized this phenomenon was not common in the UK… certainly when I went to Hamley's in London this past January, I was greeted by employees as soon as I entered the store, but perhaps this is part of that store's premium experience (or perhaps because I stood out as a foreigner/tourist they thought I'd need some guidance on how to find things in the store). I definitely wouldn't interpret this as any kind of desperation for sales. It's just the way things often are over here.

I will have a Medium!

I didn't know what to expect coming into this topic but I guess a dismissal of G2's intensely purposeful aesthetic considerations is I guess what I should have anticipated. How about G2's decision to elevate creators, specifically mask makers, to the most prestigious role in its canon? In fact, the centrality of masks is a defining aspect of Bionicle G2. All the key artifacts the Toa have to seek out are masks, the conflict that instigated the whole story culminated in the creation of a forbidden mask, and even the first villains we are exposed to are essentially living masks. And instead of the villages' spiritual leaders being singular Turaga who for their first two years have little characterization to imply any sort of "history", Bionicle G2's Protectors come from a hereditary line whose titles are passed through the generations — again, represented in the form of masks. That's all really powerful stuff! Or what about the whole aesthetic pushed particularly in the second year of elemental crystals as a visual representation of characters or places that are rich with elemental energy and in tune with the forces of nature? This is visible not only on the Toa and elemental creatures, whose armor and masks grow orderly crystal formations, and on the temples of the masks of unity, which have crystals growing amidst them almost like living things, but also on the elemental beasts, which represent violent and untamed elemental powers, and whose crystalline growths are accordingly jagged and aggressive. How does a mysterious city shrouded in fog and only accessible by a narrow bridge, or a great stone labyrinth that moves on its own, or giant mask carvings that dot the coastline, or a great temple in the shape of an hourglass where ancient rituals are held, or a wilderness that shows the ruins of a great civilization now struggling for survival, fail to excite as much of a sense of magic and mystery as a stock figure from two years ago looking up at a big LEGO piece in a desert? Granted, I am certain none of this will change your mind about G2. I have a feeling you made up your mind not to like it as soon as you realized it was not going to be the same as G1, and any differences are going to be interpreted as weaknesses through that lens. But just because you've chosen not to appreciate the aesthetic decisions that make G2 so visually enticing doesn't mean there is no depth to them or that they don't imply anything to anyone.

The reason for this is obvious, isn't it? Most of the bricks in Juniors sets are bigger on average than in normal System sets, and many of them are printed bricks, complex molds, or both. This has an even bigger impact when you have giant molded, printed, pre-assembled elements like the T-Rex head, tail, and body in the mix, because parts like that tend to be be pricy even in normal System sets. It's basically all the reasons out there for why one brick might cost more than another except for the presence or absence of electronics. For comparison's sake, last year's Demolition Site set was $30, 175 pieces, and weighed 0.56kilograms. Manta Ray Bomber at $30, 341 bricks (nearly twice as many), and still weighed only 0.54 kilograms. Even without considering the other factors like printing or complex molds, it doesn't make sense to expect the same price per piece when the average part in the demolition site weighs more than twice as much as the average piece in the bomber. I realize Juniors have some pricier parts. Which is why I mentioned that, given a few larger pieces, $30 seems more reasonable for this 150 piece set. $30 seems like a lowball estimate to me. Juniors sets in general have some pricier parts. But the T-Rex in this set is above and beyond even the usual for Juniors. Considering its size and weight is comparable to 31058 (subtracting the weight of that set's instructions and box) I think it would easily cost between $10 and $15 on its own. With the van and one minifigure, even being conservative you're looking at at least a $5 set (compare the price of similar-sized vehicle sets, even ones from a decade ago like 7731 or 7236), and the same with the lab/nursery (compare with sets like the Friends animal packs). So the only way the set ends up being priced at $30 is if you think that the entire gate and fence structure (including ground plates) would cost below $10. I certainly don't think I could make that case.

Considering Lesovikk and Mazeka were store exclusive sets, they may not have been developed as early as the Toa Mahri, so it was more difficult to find a place in the core story to fit them in. Alternatively, at that point LEGO had committed to the idea of Bioniclestory.com serials, so perhaps they thought it made the most sense to have at least have a few characters whose stories you could only follow by going there I suspect the decision to splinter off more of the story onto Bioniclestory.com in the later years had to do with the fact that the chapter books were not selling well enough in 2007 or 2008 to justify as many new releases per year as in, say, 2004.

The reason for this is obvious, isn't it? Most of the bricks in Juniors sets are bigger on average than in normal System sets, and many of them are printed bricks, complex molds, or both. This has an even bigger impact when you have giant molded, printed, pre-assembled elements like the T-Rex head, tail, and body in the mix, because parts like that tend to be be pricy even in normal System sets. It's basically all the reasons out there for why one brick might cost more than another except for the presence or absence of electronics. For comparison's sake, last year's Demolition Site set was $30, 175 pieces, and weighed 0.56kilograms. Manta Ray Bomber at $30, 341 bricks (nearly twice as many), and still weighed only 0.54 kilograms. Even without considering the other factors like printing or complex molds, it doesn't make sense to expect the same price per piece when the average part in the demolition site weighs more than twice as much as the average piece in the bomber.

I think the fact that all three of the films you mention are Batman films demonstrates why that wouldn't work as well for getting kids into Bionicle… a lot of those films' popularity stems from the fact that they start with a lead character who's already familiar to basically every generation alive today, and generally quite popular among kids of all ages. You'd be hard pressed to find a 7 to 16 year old who doesn't have any idea who Batman is. But you'd probably find plenty who have never heard of Tahu or Vakama or Ekimu. As far as games go, I think the idea of a high-quality, story-driven game probably would present some issues for the core LEGO audience. Mata Nui Online Game was pretty phenomenal, aside from occasional bugs. But it could also be confusing enough that LEGO had to give it its own FAQ and walkthrough on their website, something they rarely have to do with their modern, pick-up-and-play mobile apps or even the fairly intuitive PC and console video games from Tt Games. And we saw even more so with Mata Nui Online Game II some of the issues with delivering a free game like that on a strict deadline… rather than an immersive work of art, you can just as easily wind up with something tedious, buggy, unfinished, and borderline unplayable. I wouldn't be surprised if games like this wound up being a major drain on LEGO's customer service department, which already costs them a pretty penny to maintain and has a hard time even keeping up with all the product-related complaints they are called on to resolve during certain times of the year.

Dear friends, The past year has been really bumpy for me in a lot of ways. I’ve grappled with emotional dependency, depression, anxiety, and more. One good thing that has come about over the past year, albeit with some challenges of its own along the way, is thinking critically about my gender identity, which has led to some big realizations. For a long time I have related really well to my female peers and have felt deeply invested in their personal struggles. Many of the fictional characters I was most inspired by as well as characters I was most interested in creating in my own art also tended to be girls and women. Meanwhile my feelings about my own more masculine traits have ranged from apathy to frustration — the closest I could generally come to pride in my appearance was a vague, dubious sense that other people might like or respect me more as an adult if my appearance and presentation were sufficiently “manly”. I was never quite satisfied with the way I presented myself in selfies and self-portraits and for the longest time I couldn’t figure out why. As a teenager, I would frequently try and visualize what it would be like to be a girl, sometimes in my head, sometimes with the aid of drawings or with software like the Yahoo Messenger avatar creator, and sometimes just by assuming feminine poses in the mirror when I was certain of my privacy. I didn’t really think too deeply about my motivations, though. Wasn’t all this curiosity just a quirky, introverted teenage way of coming to terms with my attraction to the female body? Come to find out, probably not! In early March I finally opened up to myself about the possibility (or rather, near certainty) that I might be transgender. By this point I had a lot of transgender friends in the LEGO community, and their experiences spoke to me on a personal level. I’d also had over a decade to move beyond the narrow-minded thinking that my after-school Catholic youth group lessons had tried to instill in me. And as soon as I started thinking about my feelings and experiences in the context of being a transgender girl, all these disconnected bits and pieces suddenly made complete sense within my life’s overarching narrative. It’s been extremely liberating to be honest with myself and with some of the people closest to me, whose support and encouragement has been invaluable. From here on out, you can call me Skye. I’m 27 years old and only just beginning the journey of loving myself for the sensitive, bright, and beautiful woman I am. I ask you to please be supportive of me as I engage with this process of self-reflection and discovery. It’ll be intimidating for me sometimes — even with as much social progress as there’s been as of late, the world is still a scary place for a woman. It’s also going to be a lengthy learning experience. It’s one thing to hear about how confusing things like women’s clothing sizes or prices can be; it’s another thing entirely to have to make sense of that confusion! But with all these big steps comes a long-overdue sense of pride and confidence in who I am, not just what I can do. I hope I can make all of you proud as well! With love, Skye