bonesiii

Ahhhhhhh, that fourth one looks just like Xia! I love Xia.

Oh darn, I was hoping I could just read your blog without needing to dig up the approval banner again. The irony that I read this given the themes in the epic I'm writing is funny, lol.

The one thing I would clarify is that we aren't a government, and such comparisons have been abused before -- this is an ownership system, and a website. So I prefer not to make such a comparison generally. Still, the aspects of the comparison you used are accurate (as they could be to any "community" or group with any kind of organization).

Also, my understanding of chaos theory (which is admittedly not that much) is that it actually is the opposite of chance -- it is actually showing how physics leads to the results, given the situation in hand, like when you drop a feather and it falls in a seemingly random path -- it's actually not random at all. "Random" is really an illusion created when something too complex for us to immediately understand is going on.

But to finish what I'm saying there I'd have to cross the same line of what is allowed to discuss here that you mentioned, so I won't continue except for a single word -- "Domino". Just one of the most interesting aspects of physics to me.

Anyways... On to the approval:

MoIaS: -Adv- and I were talking about an actual shield first. So the whole parrying thing is irrelevant. Neither of us were talking about parrying, nor denying that this is possible.

You mean find out how original your name is. Or how successful your claim on it has been...

I am my first google hit too.

And the second.. and the third... and the fourth, etc. Though there are a few other guys that snuck onto the list somehow.

Exaggeration can be a problem when others don't get that it's exaggeration, though -- this can lead to flame wars too. Also, I know for a fact that many people are actually making this mistake, not just using poor wording, etc.

That's basically right, Toa Nuhrii. I would use "IMT" to be incredibly clearer, personally, but IMO usually means the same thing. However, I would discourage using words like "dumb" because that implies that there's an actual intelligence problem on the set designer's part, which sounds flamey and is also the whole "I dislike it therefore it's dumb" fallacy format.

"IMO the sets are ugly" would be perfectly fine though.

-Adv.-: Well, by my math:

Greats: Hau, Miru, Akaku, Huna, Rau, Faxon, Rode, Akaku Nuva.

Nobles: Almost Huna, Rau, Mahiki, Komau, almost Ruru, and Matatu. Also, Hau noble.

Note that the Hau Nuva doesn't really (at least not unless you can count some other more textured roughly round masks like many of the Inika ones, or the Kaukau Nuva).

So I count 15.

Oh, and question: How do you know who is actually using no bias judgement and who isn't? I honestly have no idea.

Well, bias would be if we let our personal tastes affect our forming of statements intended instead to be factual. Meaning even if we don't like the masks, we would admit where there are similarities.

ToM:

Two, the mouth. The Hau and Hau Nuva share the same large, deep, distinct, ovular mouth. The Hau Mistika doesn't. It's as simple as that.

I agree -- what I think you're pointing out as a mouth looks more like the edges of the serration areas on the Hau Mata, Wrinkle -- so if a matching mouth was present it would be "cut into" the serration area in the middle. See that?

Lol that some of you noticed similarities even I missed. I'll take that back about "no" similarities, then, and add the word "almost" to it. I haven't really put the two images side by side yet, so that was too hasty a judgement to make there. Mainly cuz not the point of this entry, but yeah.

Edit: As to it being the same as Toyfair, no, look more closely. The texture is smooth now, where it was rough and rubbery before, and the edges aren't rounded like with that one. Also, the hexagon eye area has a border it didn't have previously, and the toyfair one was wider on top, this is wider on bottom. The differences are subtle, yes, but they're there.

But yes, this is also a better pose too.

I have stated the serrations all along, but I don't think your points about the mouth area or the eyes or back of head really work. For the record, I didn't like the Nuva 03 masks much either though, I preferred the Mata.

Eyes -- All masks have eyes of some sort, aside from the Vahi and Kakama Newva. I don't see that as relevant, at least not how you outlined it. Also, the actual shape of the plastic above and below is different between the two, whereas with the Nuva Hau (my fave of the six in 03) it was the same. However, the basic equals-sign division between the lower edge of the eye area, and upper, stretching across the nose area, is a similarity

Back of Head -- This has been pointed out before and as I said then -- tons of masks have the roundish back of head shape. Take the Matatu 01 as one example. I don't think that counts.

Mouth area -- It doesn't really look like a mouth to me -- it looks like an area where a ninja-like mask is totally covering the mouth area. And if it's a mouth, the serrations on the Mata are outside it anyways, so I don't think it counts as similar.

So again, I think the only real similarities are that it does have serrations, and the eye area bears a slight similarity, and also something you didn't bring up -- the shape of the things on the lower cheek follow the lines of the boundaries of the serration area of the Hau 2001, though obviously jutting out this time.

But similarity is also not as simple as that -- fact is, when you look at it, while honestly assessing whether it's very similar or not to a Hau and trying not to let any bias affect judgement, don't you have to conclude that overall, it's barely similar at all? I can't honestly say this is similar to a Hau.

But if you look at any of the Phantoka's masks, it's easy to see the similarities. Those are similar, which nobody can really dispute (well, some have tried, and of course you can dispute whether they could be more so, but I'm just talking unbiased facts).

I'll be especially interested in your takes on the other two Kanohi, though, since this was the one out of three I have been saying does have a slight resemblance. I really don't see it in the other two even slightly.

Edit: BTW, the image you linked to later in the entry gives an access forbidden error.

I didn't analyze your numbers much, because it seems you may have missed this topic: Price Hike. Just in case you didn't have that link previously.

Price per piece, as I'm reading what you're saying, isn't really the factor in question here, so the exact numbers there probably aren't all that relevant. It's the increased price of plastic, and steel for new molds. It would be interesting to see a number breakdown of how many new pieces are in each set, BTW -- but still, pricing isn't that simple.

If it was, the Mahri and Phantoka should have been more expensive, because at the time LEGO was holding the prices despite increased pressures for our sakes. But prices have since skyrocketed, and they need to increase it more than usual to make up for it.

We're lucky it wasn't 13 USD half a year ago.

Got your PM that you do want the seal. (Janus man you needs to have a seal! When one has blog, one has seal! )

Good job, again!

What?

 

How can an AXE be less violent than a RIFLE?

 

As bonesiii would say... "opinions can be wrong."

Yes they can but I think that one can be seen either way -- depends on how you define violent. A sniper rifle can kill you with very little gore, whereas an axe is going to be a lot more messy -- of course, that's real life, not Bionicle where there is no gore.

So from a distance, maybe an axe is less violent. But if you assume that both weapons kill a victim, the axe can be seen as a lot more violent.

I'm assuming that's what he meant. It's a point that's been discussed before.

Why would a color change "alienate the age group?"

Well, what if the older colors (which I think was what that quote brought up) are less popular to target audience?

There could be reasons they dropped them, yanno. Although I've never seen evidence either way other than that they did drop them so I have no opinion on it. Ahm just sayin.

2. Opinions:

 

This is something I see a lot too: Flaming or harassment of members by other members because they share different opinions. Why this goes on, I know, but still, it's not a pretty thing to see. My friend WX (Who has an awesome blog) is a target of another member, who will remain nameless, because he shares different opinions than that member. It warms my heart to see people such as this nameless member and Wiki defiler to get torn down by admins.

 

See, I just stated an opinion that that member should be treated that way because they're a troll. Your opinion may differ, but, again, it's an opinion. If my opinion doesn't match your own, let it go. Constantly ranting and saying "You are wrong" because I don't share your opinion is an instant recipe for fail on your part because you're no longer following a basic rule of life: Everyone is free to their opinion.

 

If you go around yelling at people and ranting about them because they don't share your opinion, who is the bad guy? You are. By trying to force your opinion on others, you are making yourself look immature. People like that cause problems. Having an opinion is fine. Pushing your opinion on others because to you they're wrong is in itself wrong.

I agree with that with one exception -- the question of whether an opinion can be wrong -- which is why I made this blog entry: Can Opinions Be Wrong? (Basically it depends on what you mean by "opinion" -- one kind can't be wrong, actually, but one kind can.) To me at least, if I actually do have an opinion that's wrong, I want people to show me why, so I can change it -- to me -- to me that's helpful to me. (I think you get why I repeated to me -- and hopefully anybody can accept that too.)

But, that's not as important as your point -- that even if we disagree, we can and should still be able to be friends. So thanks for saying that! I'm planning another entry soon called "Friends can Disagree" on this subject, which is a pretty self-explanatory title I think.

So basically what I would say is intelligent discussion where two friends try to calmly figure out what the truth is ("truth-seeking debate") is fine. But yelling at each other and hating on each other just because we disagree is not fine at all. And if any of us feels that we can't keep our tempers under control even if we are trying just to use "truth-seeking debate", it's better not to post.

Also, I appreciate your other comments, especially about respecting staff. Yes, partly because I'm staff, lol -- but it's just a healthier way to live.

I should probably dig up my approval banner, but some might think it would nullify what you said about not being a modhugger. (If you would like it though, by all means I'll post it!)

And BTW kudos to Wrinkledlion for linking here.

Good point about the Nuva 2003 (or 2002, however you wanna slice it) not representing them very well. I've been trying to say basically that for a few days without figuring out how to word it. However, I do think the 2001 forms represented them pretty well, and so I would have wanted more similarity to those forms.

But even though I can see the logic behind the decision, the fact remains that who will like it is purely taste-related, not logical, probably including a bit whether each person thinks they match personalities or not. And actually I do have good reason to think most fans will like the Mistika (and we know the Phantoka are selling like crazy already, Greg said). So probably no actual problem.

About the hot-headed thing though -- actually, one interesting point here is that the Nuva's personalities have matured and thus changed a bit. Tahu isn't controlled by his temper anymore; he's learned that lesson. I'm sure it will be a story element still, but I suppose this is another good argument for the reasoning behind the change.

If you ask me, I think spinning blades are less effective than Keetongu's thingy.

I also want to point out that blades usually aren't used for blocking.

Nor are they usually used to channel elemental powers.

But maybe it's just me cuz in my other stories I have characters able to spin a sword to do that. Maybe only I would think of it. Although, actually, some star wars light-saber characters do...

But I still think the mask has some resemblance. It has the same basic shape and outline as both forms, besides that fin on the top. *Waits to get the set to prove my point*

Well... sorta. But then, almost every mask has that.

In the Middle Ages, a knight was seen as a symbol of power, protection, and heroism. All descriptions that can be aptly set to Tahu.

This is true, and this might mean it will do well. Personally it doesn't make me like it.

But of the three, I do like Tahu best because he seems to be the most coherent of the three.

Tahu's weapon isn't a shield. If it is, then it's the most mediocre shield that I've ever seen. I don't see how it can block anything. Besides, it's a Hau.

Why didn't I think of that lol?

But if the blades spin, it would work sorta like Keetongu's shield thingy, wouldn't it?

I personally believe that it's a spinning blade, a buzzsaw, a vegetation cutter. Not only is that useful in a swamp, but it fits Tahu's persona.

I'd assumed it had a triple purpose -- 1) buzzsaw, 2) shield, 3) extra propulsion (kinda like Pohatu Newva).

Ah, good old RPGmaker fire. Many times have I used that anim.

This is an argument that I expect to come against: "There are tons of Toa of Fire. Just because it describes fire doesn't mean it describes Tahu!"

In a way, it does. Tahu is the original Toa of Fire. When you say Toa of Fire, doesn't Tahu, the spirit of fire come to mind first?

 

In my honest opinion, Tahu Mistika represents fire very well. And fire by extension, represents Tahu.

Alright, but I think the argument is more that this mask doesn't resemble the Hau's other forms, except that it does have serrations. So it's more about the mask, at least to me, than the element of the weilder.

Still, those are good points. I hadn't thought of some of them.

Niiiice! Excellent news, about both years.

And good to hear about Walmart.

Nobody likes it, but fact is plastic and steel mold prices have increased, so eventually LEGO had to give into that pressure -- simple market forces.

So if anyone is saying "They should have kept prices the same" -- question is are you willing to have less sets, less new pieces, or smaller sets or things like this in order to do that? If you are, that's good, but if not, that's unrealistic.

Kyuubi -- the problem is that to do so, things would have to be cut back. Like less new peices, less pieces in a set, smaller sets, etc. These sets as they are really can't stay cheap forever. Maybe LEGO could have held off for 2008 on the grounds that they did for the spring -- but by 2009 I don't think that would be viable.

Krika? Looking female? Er... okay?

Didn't know Gorast was a female though. She does look somewhat feminine. I wonder if Gali is male? I can't really see how there's anything remotely fem about Krika -- he's a radcool masculine undead skeleton alien. Interesting view.

I agree about the armor and masks of the Newva Mistika. Especially Gali's -- that's Krekka! >_< Of course I much prefer the richer darker red and blue though to the more cheesy red of 01 Tahu (didn't mind 01 blue though; either would work, which might be related to the fact that most people have more trouble distinguishing blue diffs than other colors so maybe I have that too lol).

I don't think the red and green for Onua look very proper, personally. (Of course "proper" is the wrong word since it's subjective, but those colors just seem to clash.) I still say he should be purple and black to be more eye-catching.

And I find Vultraz the epitome of boring, both in vehicle and in rider.

XD! He's my fave of the group, in both vehicle and rider, lol. Taste is funny like that, innit?

If anyone is to blame, it is the consumers. If it were not for the consumers' existance, none of this would be happening.

Well... I guess maybe I'm not seeing your point. I mean true, if there were no consumers, we wouldn't have LEGO or Walmart or really anything (we'd probably all just be dead. ) Perhaps you meant that consumers like low prices -- but I don't see how that could be a bad thing when most of us have more pressing needs to spend money on than toys (talking about parents mainly, not kids or adult fans per se).

If that's what you meant.

Yes, this is why I have been warning for a while that the biggest risk to Bionicle's future isn't going to come from what is usually discussed in complaint/debate topics (set design, marketing, continuing innovation, etc.) -- but from plastic becoming a huge problem for the toy market.

If this gets out of hand, LEGO may have to make the second major shift in its core concept -- the first being the move to plastic. They might have to move away from it if price gets too high to make a decent profit.

Thankfully, for now we're probably a long way off from that.

Thanks, added.

Valenti -- I think I know what you're talking about; sounds like a place my brother goes to if I recall right (which is admittedly doubtful).

GB -- yeah, I'm a nostalgic too on a lot of things. MNOG and McToran come to mind, heh. Of course, since MNOG is downloadable (huzzah!) no problemo there personally, was just playing it, but would be nice to see more games like that, and more "ubercool" sets like the Mctoran.

DV -- Lol.

KoT -- Thanks. ^__^

StH -- Actually yeah, I think what I do is already more what you suggested than anything else -- I try as often as I can to remind people that their tastes are OK for them. As you said -- that's "as I would say." But I appreciate the comments anyways.

Saya -- You reminded me of another point I kinda sorta forgot to make in the entry, lol. Yeah, one easy response to the accusation is "If I was against free speech, why would I be exercising it myself, rather than just convincing my fellow staff members to close your topic?" Or, in other words, "I have free speech too," lol. And yes, I am in America. Technically, I'm here because I was born here, but it's not like I'm rushing to get out or anything, heh.

Lukos:

I have to say though, I somewhat disagree. Yes, it's wrong for people to disagree with something in Bionicle and then use that disagreement to act like everything should conform to what they think. But one must remember that individual opinions are valuable of course.

Yes, that's really all I am usually saying -- that we shouldn't expect everybody to be just like us.

This is a discussion forum after all, it's unreasonable to expect everyone to conform to what the majority is.

Absolutely correct -- but one of the reasons I make it clear that "opinion" can mean two things is, when it's NOT about taste, and it's about "theories about what reality is", then there is good reason for us to consider that maybe we should change our minds about something. Like if we think LEGO's doing something "wrong", but we find out they had good reasons, etc.

While I have high respect for you, I often find that your definitions tend to cloud meaning rather than make it more clear.

Okay... interesting point. Reading on -- because the point of defining how I'm using terms is to clear things up, something that everybody should remember to do in debates.

Taste, opinions, majority...I understand these, and am a logician myself of sorts. But I still say that there's nothing wrong with someone saying, "I think the sets and storyline are getting really bad lately." On the other hand, there's nothing wrong with someone saying, "I think stuff is awesome lately!"

I agree, actually. Maybe you misunderstood something I've said if you think I disagree with that. When I usually post my "taste spiel" is when someone's saying something like "I hate this! LEGO's out of touch, lazy, horrible!" or some other extreme reaction. 'Cuz that's what leads to fights and flame.

On the other hand, learning how to express ourselves even more clearly even in the less extreme cases can help avoid misunderstandings -- which often also lead to fights too.

So for example while I won't jump on every member who posts "The Piraka rock", heh, I also try to avoid saying things like that myself, so that I can't be misunderstood, instead wording it to be clear I mean it subjectively -- "I love the Piraka!" And I don't see that it can hurt for others to do that too, if they so choose.

However, I think in the best criticisms of Bionicle, the criticizers(is that even a word? I guess so...the spell check didn't get it ) actually offer solid proof(ie, "There are no more gears, the emphasis is on playability instead of buildability, etc.) and then go from there into their opinions.

You kinda lost me on this one -- I'm not sure quite what you mean by "proof" there? For example, the fact that gears are (mostly, see Icarax) gone is an objective fact -- it "proves" nothing except that gears are gone mostly. Doesn't prove that this is good or bad objectively.

So again, if I saw someone saying "I miss gears!" I wouldn't object at all to that, and in fact have encouraged it many times before. But if they said "Gears are gone! LEGO's out of touch!", I'm going to point out their mistake. If I don't, it could become an "entrenched" view that could split BZP like the forums I mentioned.

Because as we both know, there's no such thing as neutrally looking at evidence and making immediate logical deductions from it.

Depends on what you mean -- what do you mean by "neutral", by "immediate", or by "evidence"? There are ways to be more objective about things -- mainly by avoiding logical fallacies -- and I don't remember ever saying anything had to be "immediate."

Zyglakky -- Point is basically that by keeping flame down, I'm helping to keep complaint topics open. And thus allowed. Meaning I'm for free speech, not against.

jimmybob -- I have never used the term as if it was an official title (it's a lowercase l) -- a logician is simply someone who chooses to use sound, valid logic, study logic, etc. Unfortunately, many schools don't even teach it as a required class, so no degrees, sorry (I would love to rant about conspiratorial-sounding reasons as to why, but it would get political -- suffice to say, I agree with the Professor in Narnia on the issue). Most colleges do offer classes on it, though, in a Liberal Arts concentration, or just as an elective in various degrees.

As far as careers go, logic will help you in just about any career, but professional debate teams are probably the kind of thing you're thinking of (which personally doesn't interest me, but a lot of people enjoy that). My sense from my own college experience has been that logicians tend to be in the English department, especially in creative writing, because that requires intensely strict logical abilities if you wanna produce coherent works. You could also go into teaching logic, heh.

So I am going roughly 85-90 mph on the Pike. Cars were behind me, however there was one that was behind me, and kept speeding up to me and kept getting closer. I first thought this guy was riding me, so I sped faster.

You'd think that would work, but it's better just to lay off the accelerator and slowly slow down so they pass in cases like that, almost always.

Not to preach or anything. And not to defend the cop there.