Aanchir

By my count there are 27 new molds across this year's 18 sets? So one and a half new molds per set? That's not bad.

With that said, even in the later years of Bionicle there were a LOT of new molds each year, which is part of why it became unsustainable as its sales continued to decline. The Barraki and Toa Mahri series each introduced 23 new molds, not counting their packaging. Add in the small blades from that year's Matoran, the four new mask/faceplate elements from that year's Warriors, and the eight new parts from the three playsets, and you've got 59 brand-new molds in a year with just 26 sets.

I'm not sure what melodrama or cheesiness has to do with bad names, but okay.

Are you saying the name General Grievous is NOT cheesy? Because if you don't think it's cheesy then I don't see why it bothers you.

Unfortunately. Well, at least it simplifies the rather confusing SW canon to just the six, soon seven then eight then nine, movies.

Also the TV series The Clone Wars and Rebels. I was just explaining to somebody earlier today that those are also still considered canon.

I know the "OTC" in the title was probably supposed to stand for "off-the-cuff" but I couldn't help reading it as "over-the-counter".

Wow, you took an overgeneralization waaaay too seriously.

 

I apologize. I didn't read it as a generalization, since the causation was flipped. It sounded almost like if you'd said the new Star Wars constraction sets are the true successors of Bionicle because they're action figures based on a series of movies.

Not quite a perfect comparison since Bionicle movies didn't exist until the sets had already been out for two and a half years, but I hope you get why I read it that way. Goodness knows I'm used to seeing confusion about this particular subject.

Galidor returned as Ben 10, gosh why does everybody keep forgetting that. Mediocre and overpriced sets based on a TV show.

 

I feel the need to correct this as always. Everybody seems to think the Galidor sets were based on the TV show, when really it was entirely the other way around. Give pages 57–59 of Brick by Brick a read.

Starting in 1999, LEGO started developing "an entire building system that omits the brick". They came up with Galidor's building system, but originally intended it for creating free-form fantasy creatures without instructions, not specific characters. The concept at this time was called LEGO Beings.

Meanwhile, LEGO was becoming aware of an action figure craze in Europe and North America. LEGO decided to cash in on that craze by developing their own action figure theme using the LEGO Beings building system, which they named Galidor.

"To boost the line's chances of becoming a runaway hit, LEGO followed a marketing script that offered a striking departure from the toy industry status quo. Instead of promoting the toy by tying it to an existing TV series, LEGO hired Hollywood producer Thomas Lynch to create its own TV series, Galidor: Defenders of the Outer Dimension, which tied into the toy."

So in reality, Galidor wasn't any more "based on a TV show" than Hero Factory, Ninjago, Friends, or Legends of Chima.

These look awesome! My brother has gotten Mario Maker but hasn't created much with it yet, certainly nothing this elaborate!

I believe it has been said that there is only about 7 hours of content for the story. $100 for 7 hours.

More like $70–75, actually, considering that the bricks in the Starter Pack are equivalent to a $25–30 LEGO set (a Creator set with the same piece count and number of minifigures could be $25, but $30 is more realistic for a set with licensed characters from two brands, many specialized bricks, and several unique printed elements). That's still not great compared to games without any peripherals, but I suppose the electronic components of the "toy pad" account for some of that cost.

Likewise, you're right, the level packs cost $180 for just twelve levels' worth of in-game content. But you're getting more than twice as many bricks and minifigures as in the Starter Pack (Assuming the Midway Arcade and Jurassic World level packs are similar in piece count to the other four, since we've only seen the European packaging for those two). So $50–60 of the cost of those six sets is in bricks alone.

Lego's prices used to be a lot better. You got more for your money. I do understand that the economy has changed especially for the company. However, the economy has also changed for the family and parents buying this stuff. Especially with such low minimum wages and high costs of living.

This much, at least, is completely untrue, and the numbers prove it. When you adjust for inflation, the price of LEGO has actually gone down considerably since the 1980s, whether you measure by weight or by piece count. The average piece count of sets has increased since the 1980s but the average price has remained stable. There are far more $100+ sets than there used to be, but there have been plenty of smaller sets to offset them.

Issues like low minimum wages and high costs of living do make it harder for many families to buy LEGO than in the past, but the real cost of LEGO has not increased measurably.

It may have all of the required story levels with the game, but those bonus levels are a huge amount of content. I find it disappointing that the game itself has less content then the bonus level packs.

Where are you getting that statistic? Because that... seems really unlikely to me. As I understand it, the starter pack gives you 14 levels and three adventure worlds, whereas the level packs each give you one bonus level and one adventure world. There are 14 story levels, 6 bonus levels, and 14 adventure worlds in all. Even if you treat the adventure worlds and bonus levels as equivalent to regular levels (and I haven't seen enough to know whether this is a fair comparison) that just makes 34 levels total, half of which are in the starter pack.

Technically that adds up to $279.93. For just the level content alone. Keeping in mind there is a good chance most of the initial stuff is on the disc just waiting to be unlocked.

This is something I often hear as a criticism of toys-to-life in general, honestly, as well as day-one DLC. There are a lot of people who believe that any content that game developers have completed by the time of release should be available in the game at no additional charge. But I don't know how realistic that is in all cases. Just because all the content is on the starter pack disk to begin with doesn't mean the starter pack cost is inclusive of the cost of all the locked content.

I'm sure some developers use alternate ways of charging for content, such as paid DLC or toys-to-life, as just an excuse to charge more for the same work they would have ordinarily put into the game anyway. On the other hand, I'm sure there are other developers who generally do only charge for the base version what it cost to produce what is unlocked by default in that version, and use paid DLC or toys-to-life to recoup the cost of the extra unlockable content, as it was intended. Most probably fall somewhere in between, using separate transactions to boost profitability but also charging less for the base version than they'd charge if all the digital content were unlocked by default.

Until LEGO Dimensions comes out and we have more detailed information about things like how many hours of gameplay the 14 story levels constitute, I don't think we can really accurately judge which camp it falls into.

The problem with this argument is the cost of Lego. Those $15 packs have a small vehicle, a minifig, and the NFC chips. It's a small amount compared to the size of other figures. And in most cases this is more expensive than other figures. They may  be better as toys, but they are more expensive toys. By a lot.

I'm not sure what you mean. LEGO is and has always been an incredibly expensive toy for its size. A lot of that comes from the precision tooling of the molds to ensure that parts will be able to snap together and come apart easily and reliably over and over again, something that is not a concern for a figurine that is not designed for assembly/disassembly after it hits store shelves. Granted, many of the other toys-to-life figures are incredibly high quality (my brother got his first Amiibo figures the other day and they're really impressive), but I think a LEGO minifigure and mini-model can easily measure up in value to a single static figurine, especially since the LEGO Dimensions packs seem to unlock much more in-game content: a character, an adventure world, and three vehicle modes with different abilities.

Looking it up on Target.com, individual Amiibo, Disney Infinity, and Skylanders figures cost thirteen to fifteen dollars new, not counting the Skylanders "trap packs" from Skylanders Trap Team. I know that these figures are often subject to price reductions after they've been out for a while, which takes some of the bite out of that cost, but there's no reason to assume it won't be the same for LEGO Dimensions.

From here:

Disney Infinity 3.0 was released on August 30, 2015 in North America. The Starter Pack, which includes the game disc, Anakin Skywalker and Ahsoka Tano character figurines, one playset piece (Twilight of the Republic), one web card and the Disney Infinity Base, will be released on the game's launch. The game will also receive a digital download release. Exclusively in Europe, Disney Infinity 3.0 will also have a game disc only release, which will not include the figurines, web cards and Disney Infinity Base, included in the Starter Pack.

 

The disc only release is only in Europe (which is dumb and something I wasn't aware of until reading this) but it is an option that is available for some customers. However you can download the game on the various system shops. Which means it is compatible with the previous Disney Infinity Base. 

 

Which also means as the game is already out that Disney incorporated backwards compatibility first. Or in this case forwards compatibility.

 

Interesting. It's good to see that LEGO isn't the only company using their head about this.

Disney infinity however... uses the same model as Lego Dimensions does. If you want to play all the levels... you need the figures. Or at the very least the playsets that unlock the content.

For LEGO Dimensions, that's not true at all. All of the story levels are included in the starter pack by default, and you do not need any additional packs to complete them. Level packs unlock "bonus levels" (for instance, you can play Portal levels with just the starter pack, but the Portal Level Pack unlocks additional Portal-inspired test chambers, and the Midway Arcade level pack unlocks an arcade level with a bunch of playable "minigames"). And any figure from any franchise can unlock an "adventure world" (sort of an open-world "free play" area inspired by that franchise).

Technically, with just ONE pack from each individual franchise (including the level packs for the franchises that feature them) you will have access to every story level, every bonus level, and every adventure world. The only reason to get EVERY pack is if you want every character and vehicle, same as with any other toys-to-life game.

In past LEGO games, you DID need to unlock a lot of different characters to get "100% completion" in the story levels, as there were a lot of things only certain characters could do. LEGO Dimensions actually seems to be assigning specific abilities to specific characters a lot less. Instead, many powers are unlocked via the starter pack's Toy Pad functions, like the "Scale" function that makes your character larger or smaller or the "Elemental" function that gives your character elemental attacks. So instead of needing to unlock a smaller character to get through small spaces, you can literally just make your three starting characters smaller or larger. There might still be character-specific obstacles I'm not aware of, though.

Besides that, part of the reason the individual packs are so expensive is that unlike many other Toys-to-Life games, they're not just static figurines. They're actual, buildable LEGO toys. So while they might be more expensive per figure than other toys-to-life packs (and not by all that much, all things considered), you're getting a lot more value for your money on the "toy" side of things.

And yeah, as Lyi says, LEGO Dimensions is doing one thing a lot better than its toys-to-life competitors: every single pack will be compatible with the original starter pack. They've made a point of advertising this. You won't have to buy a brand-new starter pack every year to use that year's new figure packs, as opposed to Skylanders and Disney Infinity which regularly release figures that only work with that year's starter pack. The upfront cost of the starter pack is higher, yes, but you won't have to worry about your starter pack becoming obsolete each year.

Depends where they're from honestly. Some restaurants' french fries are really good, others' are not so good.

Regardless of where they're from, I doubt I would eat as many french fries without any kind of dipping sauce as I would with mustard or vinegar to dip them in.

With or without dipping sauce, I usually only order french fries if I have somebody to share them with.

Seems to me that a forearm that small doesn't really need extra armor? Particularly when it's already got two colors. Sometimes less is more.

Since the cross axle holes in that particular Y-joint style can receive a stud there are all kinds of things you could use to add texture or thickness, but most of them would add more thickness to the part that's already two modules wide than to the part that's only one module wide, which doesn't really help the design at all.

There are several parts in this category on Bricklink that could be attached between the Y-joint and the wrist joint and wouldn't add much length to the forearm.

I don't think there was ever any reason to worry. Nintendo has a lot of franchises that are much less profitable than Pokémon that they've never officially cancelled. Let alone ever scheduled some big announcement that there WOULDN'T be new games. If they were going to be announcing BAD news, do you think they would have been trying to build hype for that announcement days in advance?

And yeah, it's pretty obvious that this is going to be a spin-off and won't be replacing the regular Pokémon games by any stretch of the imagination.

Which bad names did you have in mind? A lot of Star Wars names have always been kind of cheesy ("Jabba the Hutt", "Darth Vader", heck, even "Luke Skywalker"), but I feel like that's part of its charm. The whole franchise was basically a reconstruction of the "space opera" genre, after all — a genre that got its name for its soap opera–esque melodrama and cheesiness.

I thought the prequel trilogy had quite a few great names, like Ben Quadinaros, Mace Windu, General Grievous, and Jango Fett. But of course, I know a lot of the other names are more forgettable (by virtue of... having forgotten them).

omg didn't expect to see a new blog entry from you!

How is Luke worse than the others?  Yeah, the color is bland and the head is... y'know, whatever it is... but the actual piece design is basically the same on him as on the others.  (In fact, I think he's better rounded than the other sets at his price point, in that he has fuller back armor on his torso and legs.  (Or can y'all just not look past the head?)

 

I just feel like I must defend Luke's honor.    But yeah, Vader is amazing.

 

I think while Luke is well-rounded, he does have some faults, even for a person like me who doesn't have any problem with the head. Namely, his costume is possibly the least interesting of any of the figures in terms of shape and color blocking. Vader, at least, has some Titanium Metallic accents to liven things up. Obi-Wan, Jango, and Cody all have accessories like that alter their silhouettes (a cape, a jetpack, and a backpack). Luke, on the other hand, has an all-black costume and a generic humanoid physique. It's well-crafted but still kind of boring.

I've heard quite a few comments on other sites that Luke would be a better set if he were in a more interesting costume, like his Rebel flight suit.

Well, I think he came to that conclusion because much of the SW's solidness in design comes from the need for them to look somewhat lifelike. A Bionicle character that doesn't need to do that can be more "gappy" or loosely designed, since they're more mechanical in nature. There's also the fact that the lack of functions lends to making the sets feel more natural, something that cant really be done with a Bionicle set if it has a gearbox or something. Removing functions and gappier armor would basically be making the sets more lifelike, so...shrug,

Yeah, that's about what I was getting at. Generally the things that make the $20 Star Wars sets less "gappy and awkward" than sets like Tahu are the exact same things that make them more lifelike and less Bionicle-like — more human-like proportions, more solid armor, and less over-the-top armor shapes.

I forgot when I was making my previous post, but the designer who created Kopaka and Obi-Wan actually designed Skull Scorpio as well. He's going to be at BrickFair New Jersey. So that's the place to ask him why it's so much different from the Star Wars sets. I'm sure he could give you quite a detailed answer.

If I had to guess, it probably boils down to Skull Scorpio needing twice as many limbs as most of the Star Wars constraction sets plus a Technic function at a price point $5 lower than the smallest of them, coupled with "bony mechanical monstrosity" being the design brief.

You do realize that "the Bionicle designers" designed these sets as well? The designer of Luke, Vader, Jango, and Cody also designed Pohatu, Onua, Skull Warrior, Mask Maker vs. Skull Grinder, and the Protectors of Earth and Stone. The designer of Obi-Wan also designed Kopaka. I don't know who designed Grievous.

Obviously, the Bionicle sets have much more mechanical-looking shapes and cartoony colors and proportions, but they're supposed to — they didn't have any real-life subject they were trying to replicate, so the designers were free to be a bit more imaginative. Plus, the Bionicle sets are designed with play value in mind. None of the Star Wars constraction sets from the first wave include a single action feature, while all of the Bionicle sets have at least two (a mask eject function and either a "battle arm" or a launcher), plus dual-function weapons in the Toa's case.

Making the $10 Protectors and $15 Toa as tall and lifelike as the Star Wars figures would have basically been impossible. Making the $20 Toa that tall and lifelike might have been possible, but it would have meant sacrificing many of the features that make Bionicle what it is.

I still don't get what all the fuss is about. It's a slightly simplified human face with a more or less neutral expression. Luke's looked a lot scarier in some of his actual movie scenes.

I'm going to guess that the in-story firing mechanism on Ekimu's Hammer of Power is different than it is in the set and more or less automatic. Maybe a magical mental link or a trigger in the handle or something like that. After all, it's not like the Protector of Fire had to reach around to the small of his back to fire his blaster in the webisodes.

I don't know what you mean about Skull Slicer's gearbox being lower than the others — it's higher than it is on most of the Toa, after all, and the same height as Kopaka's or Skull Warrior's.

I could see transparent shell add-ons being cool. One type of piece I've contemplated in the past would be something with a flame-like texture to go on top of an armor piece and make it look as though a character's limbs are wreathed in energy, like NRG Kai's fiery aura in this picture or NRG Jay's lightning aura in this picture. Might be even better if you could co-inject said armor piece like the flame pieces used on so many of the Protectors' weapons.

Have you considered starting a tracker ticket for this? Seems like an idea that's at least worth considering. I think it could be especially useful in the Games and Trivia forum (granted, I never ever use that forum, so maybe I'm wrong about that).

I agree that spoiler tags themselves should stay for spoilers. The LEGO Message Boards has "jammers" that you can use for whatever, and it gets really annoying when people use jammers (or worse, long chains of nested jammers) just to hide some spammy message and make you feel like a rube for clicking to see more in the first place. Granted, that could still become a problem with new tags, but at least you wouldn't be thinking something's a spoiler when it's really not.

I mostly never paid attention to the text colors in the first place? Unless I was specifically looking for them, that is. I mean, I hardly ever scroll down to see who's online anyway.

Just scrolling down to the bottom of the forums now, my name's actually an even brighter amber color since I became a news reporter earlier this year, and this is honestly my first time seeing it. o_O

There are a lot of little BZPower things that are a big deal for other people which I never actually paid too much attention to, like rank images and spinnies. Not something I'm bragging about (honestly, it probably doesn't reflect well on me that I pay so little attention to these things), just something weird I notice every time these things come up in discussions.

2. Because they're icky. And have sharp, pointy teeth. And they tend to jump around a lot, as opposed to just scuttling across the ground. And they operate in swarms.

You forgot one important point — Skull Spiders are huge. They're not puny little bugs that you can squish under the toe of your boot. Rather, they're bigger than the villagers' heads! It's kind of like asking "why doesn't anybody simply try stepping on a feral cat to kill it?" Maybe in Super Mario Land that'd work, but probably not in real life, let alone on Okoto.

I agree.  The whole "inner light/shadow" thing introduced in the 2008 storyline was a bit strange and confusing.  Definitely more interesting when people are evil because they want to be, not because the Makuta weapon du jour made them evil.

The whole point of the Matoran being turned evil by their light being drained is that the Makuta that wave were using a lot of vampire tropes and light was a metaphor for blood. Look at the things that could drain light that year: leeches, a bat-inspired villain, and a mosquito-inspired villain. What's the connection? Answer: they all suck blood.

it's a good movie marred by a ###### ending with an even crappier message

 

_{edit: wow BZP is that really still filtered? what year is it, 2006?}

Nah, it had a great message.

Technically, some of the comments there COULD be from children, since I'm pretty sure Brickset accounts don't have an age limit. Only accounts on the Brickset forums do (16), and you don't need a forum account to post comments on news articles.

But yeah, he says he "got out of his dark ages too late", which means yeah, it's an adult (if the entitlement wasn't enough to clue you in).