bonesiii

Sorry for the slow reply. It took a while (given the existence of homework) to make this:

Some of what you said wouldn't please me, but that's beside the point -- you posted a reasonable, thoughtful version of how you would make the Newva if you were in LEGO's shoes. With plenty of details to get the idea across. Folks, this is how you do constructive criticism.

Thanks for doing that, ToM.

And for what it's worth, a lot of it would actually please me. I wouldn't change Pohatu's colors; but that's me and orange. Dunno if you're interested in a point-by-point list of what I'd like in there and what I wouldn't, but if you request I'll post one. No time right now and you probably aren't.

A couple things I would/wouldn't do:

-- No brown, Avak or otherwise. Unless it was something like Carapar with orange or yellow melding into it. I'd want Pohatu to be as strong a seller as possible and brown in any form seems to be a weakness. (Though I love brown.) Not going to specify whether I'd make him yellow or orange, 'cuz I think we need to get results of this instance before we can judge orange's popularity.

-- I'd probably keep the "bley". My sense is, based mostly on my own tastes I'll admit so take with salt, that most fans like that color. I doubt changing it to another cool color would hurt too bad though. I wouldn't see something that superficial as a secondary color change as very important either way, especially since with silver kept it's really more of a tertiary color.

-- Kopaka feathers -- I still think a coolified airplane style wing fits him much better, personality-wise. (As in, probably cooler than what they made.) The kind of wing you suggested sounds more fitting for someone like Matoro than Kopaka.

-- Lewa's green -- I don't see using Mata green as necessarily a bad idea this long after its last appearance. Either way it would be a "new" color, as lime green hasn't been used in mainline Toa either (Lesovikk isn't a core six canister set).

The argument could go two ways -- on one hand, a mainline lime Toa to go with Lesovikk is both innovative, a "new" color for most fans, and for the ones that did get Lesovikk who may be more likely to be MOCers, more pieces in a color they already have which can be used for MOCing. It's also a little more eye-catching than Mata green.

On the other hand, I've never heard anything about Mata green selling poorly, and it would also be a "new" color for most fans, even newer than lime, plus a boon for older fans who still remember Lewa Mata/Nuva. So on that one I'd probably flip a coin, unless set designers or somebody showed evidence like focus data that one color or the other is more popular.

--

You've got name recog now man.

I really like what you've got so far, ToM. I agree about his name, BTW -- I can't read it without it sounding like "Aunt Rose." Maybe it's "Ahntrahz"... but still, awkward. Still sounds like a british-accent "Aunt".

About the wings, I'm torn because the first pic wings don't look flexible but the held in arms thing isn't as good as a seperate wing on the back. I don't mind handheld wings but "Makuta" to me means seperate wings on the back, ever since Ultimate Dume, heh.

With the build you've got so far in the first pic, I really wouldn't change anything except maybe some more red around the feet. Very inventive, and very "cool" as I define it. Much better than your redesigned Nuva IMT.

It's not the line down the middle and I haven't closed the shapes...

Okay, then my guess is the blue shapes are joined in the center but the yellow shapes are not? And the line is the blue showing up between. Looking closer that does seem to be the case. So the solution would be to ungroup everything and move the yellow parts towards each other with the arrow keys once or twice.

Lemme know if that does it..

Wow, I like the way you 3-D-ified it. The shading thing is just plain tricky and really not something I've used too much before. The sample mask is really amazing, although the two halves don't seem to match up perfectly in some of the larger images... looks like there's a bit of a white gap. Still, amazing.

That's because the halves weren't stitched up yet at the point I took those screenshots (and in one I was showing how I was changing on half during revision -- and would later delete the copied half and recopy the new design) -- that's on purpose. Those errors are gone in the final mask, as far as I can see.

And thanks.

So are you going to have a whole series of Powerpoint useage into entries? Kinda fun to read.

 

Wasn't planning on it, as I think I've said the vast majority of what I have to say. Maybe if there are enough questions you guys raise that I didn't already answer there'd be enough for a third entry. It takes a good amount of time to make these kinds of entries, so I don't want to keep it up, as I have many other entry ideas sitting on the shelf.

Glad you enjoyed 'em though.

I like the first one better. See my reply to your PM about the line -- it was explained in the Symmetry and Layers sections of the other entry, but you might not have caught it, as it's a little confusing.

Smeag, man -- you don't need to be so defensive. I think you're forgetting that I'm not talking just to you -- blog comments are just as public as forum posts, so I design them to be understandable to an audience as well as the person I'm talking to.

I've seen the term used the "new" way several times in the last two months, so I know you're not the only person using it, and by clearing up how I mean it, I can prevent the need for clarification later. Once it's cleared up, we can then better understand what we are both saying with the topic at hand. And in this case, my pointing out the difference between the two has a point -- though in all fairness, it's directed at a recent entry in Ikki's blog more than at anyone here.

Remember the saying that 90% (or whatever) of disagreement is caused by confusion over terms, so it's wise to take a step back now and then and define how the terms are being used to avoid any possible equivocation fallacies/confusion by readers.

No need to be defensive about it. You'll notice I was not defensive when ToM stepped back and did the same thing earlier; I commended that as a wise choice, and I stand by that statement.

All you had to do was answer the question "yes."

And I don't think it's out of line for me to point out that I don't appreciate my responses constantly being replied to with some sort of "now now" comment. I don't mind honest reactions -- I use 'em too -- but that particular one is getting mighty old. The way I'm posting these comments is the way that has been honed over years of debate now, but of course no single strategy of speech is going to resonate the same way with everybody; people are like snowflakes, as I say. (Again, this is not directed only at you either, Smeag. I am demonstrating that I am fully familiar with this particular topic by posting a complete and coherent explication of that topic, as it were.)

When you see making these kinds of posts, it's carefully designed with several factors in mind; I'm not just posting random thoughts. But I understand, of course, that that fact isn't inherently obvious. I guess it'll be time for another blog entry I can link to, sigh... (Not that I don't make mistakes!)

It's coo'. You're learning.

Try to think outside simple geometry, and you'd have something really cool.

Ikki -- Well, if you didn't, I can't tell. Looks good.

Sora -- great job! I love the shape; that's very close to the quality I aim for with coolified stuff, congrats! There is a small error on the lower center of the visor; your green shapes are stretching a little too far inward there. That's one I would fix with Edit Points before copying the second half, moving the point precisely onto the vertical guideline.

Not that you should bother, but while I'm thinking about it I should mention it as I sorta breezed past that ability in the entry...

Also, if it helps, I'd change that diamond in the center to a more unique shape, and I'd put an outline around the far left and right edges of the visor. Otherwise, it's a very inventive mask, I like it.

Chuckio -- Lol. Sorry I didn't give you a fancy post like Sora; it's very good too (was in hurry). Looks every bit as quality as a typical company logo. LEGO could conceivably use that for their website or the like.

xccj -- BTW, saw your blog entry, good job on the Bionicle characters in powerpoint!

I am a regular guy. [...] I used to be a radio disc jockey.

I love irony.

And by the way, I am awesome.

 

Not if you have to remind people.

*psst* It was a joke. He doesn't have to remind people. We're the ones that told him. He is simply acknowledging our opinions.

That's a good point to make, but it still leaves the question of whether doing it differently would be a wise move for LEGO.

Arguments can certainly be made pro and con, but I think it comes down to just remembering the budget balancing that has to go on every year, and asking ourselves this -- if we support new builds each year, are we willing to accept the cuts in other areas for every year?

Of course, what you mentioned you'll have a blog entry on would help. Looking forward to that.

Personally, I really don't care either way, as long as the end product is cool and the team of six isn't cloned, etc. Of course, my definition of "cool" is pretty involved too, so yeah...

I haveta make a quickie reply for now, more later:

The only, only only only only, thing I'm complaining about here is the problem of the clone sets and I still don't see how anyone would logically consider a clone superior to an original set with the same appealing aesthetic style. You don't need to bother trying to dissect my posts to detect other complaints in what I'm writing, because they aren't there.

I'm seeing a confusion over a term a lot these past few months, and I wish we could get this cleared up. The issue of "clonism" that LEGO decided needed addressed was when six members of one group were all cloned.

The issue raised by the Kal, which is what you are also talking about with the Nuva/Mahri/Newva, is usually called repetition, rather than clonism (or it used to, back when the issue of clonism was still a problem).

Look at the sets now, you can see they're not clones in that sense. Clonism was fixed. We clear on that?

As to "repetition", I am clear that that's what you're saying. More later...

Dude. Adventurer. Adventure Master doesn't sound cool. It sounds wordy.

Or Adventurerer.

Fine, fine. Basically, the parts about the Nuva, Takanuva, Hagah, Lhikan, Mahri and Newva -- they're all following in a longstanding tradition of re-using the basic build from one to two years previous. I.e. nothing new about this. Pun not intended. That would be why the Newva look more like the Inika/Mahri than like the Nuva, aside from the move to the new style too.

Can we use the spoiler tag a little more, please? I know a lot of people aren't, but I would prefer it for now.

I didn't see this entry -- check out ToM's blog. We're discussing this right now in his "Why" entry comments. My replies to some of Smeag's recent comments will be especially useful. As well as what we're talking about in your most recent entry, of course.

I think where we differ is our view on clonism; whereas you approach the look and features of the set in question, I tend to look at construction mainly.

Yeah, seems so.

Objectively speaking, it seems logical to say that the canister sets of this three-year arc are quite differentiated in terms of look, whereas they are very much similar, practically to the point of being clones, when it comes to build. Good, we're halfway to forty-two!

Yes, that is more like how I would word it. That would explain why many who, like you, focus a lot on construction, have been saying basically that these aren't original, are cloned, etc. That's been puzzling me, as even at a glance it's clear they're not clones. But in terms of construction, they are pretty close, yes.

Hopefully I don't have to rehash all the reasons why.

So, a well-reasoned guess could be that the majority of LEGO's fanbase cares little to zip about how the sets are built, and tons about how they look when actually built. That seems to match the fact that sets have gotten rid of complicated builds and likewise functions.

Yes, correct, quick build preference. Those were the reasons in question, as have been rehashed to death many times over before in debate topics.

That's interesting. I wonder why these kids are into a building toy in the first place?

Yes -- remember that nothing about this says they dislike building -- they prefer a quick build. Most people do, when you think about it, just to a more or lesser degree. I don't mind complex builds myself, but I wouldn't want to have to build a Death Star. Got better things to do with my time that give more payback, yaknow?

So basically, these kids want to get right to playing with something that they built. My theory is that there's a thrill to them in playing out roles (roleplaying, which is what most fans are) with a toy they themselves just snapped together from pieces. So they don't like anything that they see as a waste of time that doesn't appeal to them in the toy, like an unnecessarily complex build or gears, etc.

And as I've observed before, it really shouldn't be surprising, given that Bionicle is a line based highly on both imagination and storyline in an action figure toyline -- combine those two keeping the fact that it's an action figure in mind, and you get roleplaying. Think through what a roleplayer would like best with a construction toy, and you get a quick-build preference. Voila.

(One area I differ from most fans in; I enjoy MOCing a lot more than roleplaying so I can appreciate complex builds.)

Another intriguing question is, would it hurt LEGO to actually try out something groundbreakingly new in terms of construction?

Depends -- in canister sets, or titans, and would it be seen as "needlessly complex" to kids who want the construction toy to be a good action figure, not a fancy construction? It seems doubtful. I'd look for something like that more in the Titans, myself. Also, from what I hear, they just did with Gadunka, which is also, of course, what makes some dislike him so strongly.

Obviously the sets can still be plenty humanoid, but sporting different techniques when it comes to assembling body, legs, arms, etc.

For humanoid hero canister sets? Let's take Toa specifically -- what about them, other than torso design (which is where I would also like more complex builds myself), can be done differently without sacrificing quick and easy builds? And can that be kept up year after year? Or are there really only so many ways to do it within the quick build style?

I'd be interested to hear example ideas.

amusingly, the Barraki and seemingly the Phantoka-Makuta do actually feature, in part, new methods like I described.

Yes, I agree, but notice they do so by sacrificing what fans want in a humanoid hero set -- a noble humanoid hero. That works for them because they aren't heroes, they're villains. But I think that explains why you don't see that so much in the heroes. Pity, yes.

So, I would be mightily obliged if this began to appear in the hero sets as well fairly soon...

Well, that brings up the Toa Hordika. I wanted more of that in them, but later found out they actually sold poorly because they had too much of it, from most fans' POVs. (Well, I didn't want the gears, but I mean more unique builds making them less humanoid -- I wanted them to be more like Rahi, which is what storywise they were.) Most fans wanted them to look more standard noble hero.

It's very subjective, Mandra, like a lot of the things you and I tend to disagree on. To you, it's a bad thing no matter what the form, apparently. To me, it's the degree of it -- the Nuva are clearly far, far less cloned than most sets in the past, let alone the Kal, so slight instances of it aren't that bad to me. Ideally, though, I'd still like even less of it.

But even that might just be me. Some people actually like clonism, so it's actually possible this is the level of balance between clonism and nonclonism that most prefer. My sense is most dislike clonism, but they don't mind a slight amount of it in some ways so that budget can be allocated for new parts to reduce it in others and for other reasons like making new pieces for small sets, etc. (like the Matoran 2008, for example).

(I came up with the answer. )

On[c]e I got over the initial shock and anger, I started to like them.

Lol -- now, see, this is a point I raise many times. Why not skip the shock and anger and get right to the liking of whatever you like? I mean, we knew these would be "updated" to the new style, right? So why not accept that before it comes out rather than after?

I think that's what explains a lot of the negative reactions that we get right away, as many have pointed out for years, and then later some of the same people start to realize they actually like the new set, whatever it is. What confuses me is, why not just skip the negative step and go right to judging the set for what it is? You're still going to dislike things, of course, but the steps I'm talking about are where we for some reason force ourselves to ignore our own tastes that would make us like something, just because it's new.

I'm not talking about whether it's a "transformed" set or not -- I'm just talking about judging the actual set itself for itself, regardless of its storyline or name. Imagine you're seeing this character for the first time. I think that approach is a lot healthier.

Something to think about.

I've already mentioned how much I hate the airplane wings. (To quote Lah, "Kopaka is not, to my knowledge, an airplane." I agree with her.)

On what basis? Is Hahli, to our knowledge, not a penguin? What about Takua not being a Toa? When something changes, like with Kopaka becoming like a "Toa-plane", it... well... changes. So your past knowledge of what he used to be is irrelevant.

This is a good example of how what is innovative and original is also inherently absurd. This is a key thing to understand about what makes "originality." Toa on a tropical (in some places) island is "absurd" -- to those of us who like its style, we like it, and so we think of it as original. To those who don't, they simply can't get over the absurdity of it. It's how taste works.

I've run into this a lot with a poetry class I'm taking. There are some lines people include that I see as just absurd. But really, what is "absurd" about them is that they are something I've never thought of, and I lapse into "boring" mode, and for some reason I don't appreciate the cleverness of it. But others in the class instantly get it, and so they see it as original, and often those lines are what they point out as the strongest in the poem!

And vice versa, many times I have loved lines someone else (usually the professor, lol) hates.

Remember that -- clever absurdity, designed to harmonize with certain tastes, is the key to originality.

By definition, it will displease strongly those whose tastes it doesn't appeal to (it will strike them as absurd and often so much so they honestly cannot imagine liking it). But it is still more original than boringness, and hopefully everybody can at least appreciate that.

And it's different than non-clever absurdity, which is either illogical, or just doesn't happen to please anybody anywhere, XD (that might be possible ).

All that said, I wish the wings were cooler. Didn't have a problem with an airplane style. It fits Kopaka's coldly strong personality, like a fighter jet. Just didn't think the piece was "coolified" enough. More ridges, spikes, something like that.

Interesting side note -- since I've started to understand this truth about absurdity relating to originality, it's interesting that I've been able to appreciate and even like a lot of things that I once hated a lot. Brings up the question of choice in taste, how much of it do we have? I still don't know, but it's interesting. Regardless, it does at least show why skipping the negative step, at least trying it, is worth a try.

If it were up to me, I'd have given Kopaka angelic wings more similar to Hahli's – combine sword, shield, and wings, and voilà, he's an angel!

It's an interesting idea, but I don't think it would fit his personality. Might be just me, dunno. But angel wings could work on an ice Toa. I just don't see it as fitting Kopaker.

On Lewa, the boosters look fine on the set, but he already had a means of flight – the alternate function for his Katana, combined with his Miru and elemental power.

Good point, except for the Katana part -- he only has one now. No idea if we call that a "Katana" now, though. But he could "fly" by hovering with his Miru (and he still has a Miru Newva, Greg said), and using wind to blow himself forward.

On the other hand, that takes both elemental energy and mental focus/energy, and is rather clumsy compared to a cool jet.

Perhaps the jets are powered seperately; providing a much easier method of flight, which is vital in battle. Toa need their elemental energy and especially their focus. Freeing those up for other things is good.

But that makes me question whether the Miru is now the best choice of mask. I suppose if the jets conk out, good to have handy (lol), but then the other two Nuva seem to be able to fly too.

I wonder if they all still have all six Nuva masks? Oh, and they can share powers -- maybe Lewa can share powers with K and P and others for a benefit in battle...

Anyways. This tangent is rather... tangential.

Proportion-wise, they suffer many of the flaws of the Inika and Mahri. Kopaka and Lewa both have arms the length of their legs – that's a big no.

Ha ha. Sorry, I just always laugh when I read that one. Can't help it, since I love the long arms look so much. Ah, how varied taste can be -- this is one of those that I can't imagine not liking. Apes -- they so cool IMT.

But serious mode -- of course it's fine to feel that way.

The villains I want to see frontal pictures of instead of just from above before I decide on them

I thought they were frontal pictures? Certainly not the clearest, but I didn't see any that were from above. I made a blog entry focusing on all the pics closely, and I see frontal every time.

Chirox (a question on him: how do you readers pronounce his name?)

Cheer-ocks.

Overall I think I'd like the latter two more if they had a more formidable air to them.

Did you mean the former two, since those were the ones you said you liked least?

I might go over just what I'd change in the Nuva to make them acceptable in another entry. It's quite fun to think about...

Looking forward.

Why does everyone's liking or disliking of the new sets tend to contrast with my own?

That's how personal taste works. People are like snowflakes. No two are the same.

Because we're looking at them from a storyline point of view?

No, no, no, common myth. That can play a role in either like or dislike of just about anything, and it doesn't even need to be a factor for two people to like different things in the sets. Most of the time it isn't actually a factor, directly, with most fans, because story geeks are actually somewhat rare. (Most just roleplay.) For example, I like the new Nuva better, and storywise I see that as good because they are being "improved" storywise. Yet someone else could see it storywise as bad because they are less "true" to the old form. Story or not isn't what's up with that.

It's different personal tastes.

More etc.?

Interesting, thanks, DV. Especially about the summer sets not being branded as such. Changes things a lot...

Nonononono. Don't you guys pull this with me. I have never said the Nuva were great sets--in fact, I'm not that fond of them. You're trying to pin a stereotype on me.

I get this a lot, and it always puzzles me -- it sounds a little as if you (and others) are mistakenly pinning onto me the idea that I am pinning anything onto you. I can't speak for Aanchir, but that was not my intent. I was using it as an example, nothing more.

I'm saying, you're right that the Nuva are less original than the Inika, or Metru, or Mata. But at the same time, that's nothing new, and there's really no way around it, as the Nuva, Takanuva, Hagah, Lhikan, Mahri, Lesovikk, and even Toa Ignika demonstrate.

Thus, if you keep them within that context, they are original. Just as the Hagah were or the Nuva were, etc.

My point that they are more original than the Nuva were was a side point that this discussion reminded me of, not directed at you. Sorry if that was confusing.

LEGO has a good reason for reusing the same pieces,

 

Which would be what?

Gotta call you out on this one, Smeag -- surely you can think of some yourself?

For one, limited budget given that they are already making more new pieces nowadays than ever before (roughly, I dunno about comparing to 2007 as that had a lot too, but don't forget we haven't seen all the 2008 sets yet so we don't know what's been allocated to those). For two, people have been asking for more old pieces in new colors for a long time; LEGO is now doing that. For three, the pieces fill the need in those instances (in the set designers' opinions, not necessarily mine in each case), so there's no urgent need to spend money on new pieces just to do it -- there's a much greater repertoire of Bionicle pieces to choose from now than there were a few years ago, so less need to do what they did from 2002-2005, making sixcloned new leg pieces for a whole team, for example.

And possibly other reasons, but those stand out to me.

How are they better than you could have logically expected? You're just saying things without giving examples to back them up, which is another cardinal mistake according to Bones.

I'll agree with you there, Smeag -- I dunno if I'll use the word "expected", but I was hoping for several things that I "logically" thought they could do, like more cool style on the new projectile weapon, new chest armor for Toa, etc. as I've outlined in my most recent blog entry. (See, examples. )

What you said is only true if you take all of the sets out of context, and say that because the Nuva are still staying true to the "new" style that most fans like, they are unoriginal.

That's not what I'm saying at all. I'm saying these sets, these specific sets, don't display originality at all, because they are copies in design (and right down to the pieces, too, in a lot of places) to the past two years' sets.

Again, gotta disagree still with this. This "copy" strategy you mention has been used three seperate times since 2002. See above. Again, you're talking out of context -- the Inika, Metru, and Mata were the most original out of that context. Would you agree?

What I think you need to understand is that the Hagah strategy, of copying a basic design of the main recent sets, is done in order to allocate money to other things, especially new pieces for other sets besides the heroes. Look at 2001, 2004, and 2006, and look at where most of the new pieces are -- they're with the Toa (and to a lesser extent, the canister villains except during 2001 when there were no canister villains). Look at 2002, 2003, 2005, 2007, 2008 -- the new pieces are primarily with the Bohrok, Rahkshi, Visorak, Barraki, and now Phantoka (or whatever the name is, lol; calling them that to not be so spoilery...).

The main exception is 2005, which broke this pattern with a Toa shape that hasn't been copied since then. Apparently for storyline reasons.

Would I like less copied designs in the newer Toa? Sure, and I've said so many times. But is it a problem? Not convinced of that.

I understand that the kids these days aren't into the "technicism" style (which always baffles me; when I was young, nothing seemed cooler than a toy that could actually do something...but I guess times change).

Hang on here -- I'm seeing the "new fans" fallacy here, if I'm reading you right. The Technicism style was less popular than the new style even in 2001, although certainly it is likely expanded since more fans of the "coolified" style have likely been brought in by the newer sets. Otherwise the Rahi should have sold well and the gears should have been popular even back then. But they weren't -- that's why a term like "modernism" doesn't work. It's not that the style is modern that matters -- it's that it's what most fans liked about Bionicle all along. They liked the Kanohi and tools in 2001, for example, or the Toa feet or some of the stylization of the limbs, etc. They mainly didn't like the things that weren't very "stylish", with is what I mean by "technicism".

It's not about doing something or not -- it's the style of what it does. Projectiles are doing something now just as gears were then. But they're a different style. Kids don't have anything against "gimmicks" that do something, as long as they're in the style they happen to prefer. You preferred the style of "technicism" (right?).

But doesn't it seem illogical to assume that something different, but equally appealing, would sell worse?

You're misunderstanding -- it's the "equally appealing" part that is still debatable.

I would predict it would sell better.

I would sell the same... If it's truly equally appealing, it would logically sell the same. Not better, not worse. Wouldn't it?

I never said it was the most logical course – I said my proposal (see immediately below) was equally logical to Lego's. Showing it to be equally logical is quite enough.

Fair. I'm just not convinced. But you're talking mostly about colors -- that I can understand, and I don't think it would have hurt sales -too- much for Lewa Newva to be Mata green. Thanks for answering my question on that. How would you do Pohatu and Kopaka?

What I'm pointing out is, as Greg said:

As for the designers knowing who they are designing -- yes, because it was decided in late '06 that we would need to bring the Nuva back in 2008. At the same time, they were not told to prioritize making them recognizable to their 2002 forms, because the vast majority of the 2002 fanbase is long gone. Most of the current six million or so fans started in 2004 or 2005, and have no idea what the Nuva used to look like or any sentimental attachment to those forms.

So given that, can we agree on this -- there's no reason LEGO "should" absolutely have chosen your idea (for Lewa, let's focus on). They could have gone either way and prolly not that much problem, right?

Now, I'll concede that your idea of keeping them just as (or more) "cool" and yet also more recognizeable, if possible, would be wise. It's that "if" that concerns me. But this is worth discussing.

Again, my proposal isn't what is in Project Nuva, but something so simple as replacing the dark grey in Lewa 2 with green. You asked what I would do were I in the position to make new Nuva sets, so I think it would be something like this – if I used Lewa 2's design as a base, I would make the dark grey green, change his mask to be instantly recognizable as the Miru Nuva, and design a new duo of chest and shoulder armor pieces that could be easily recognized as Nuva armor.

That does indeed sound good. And with the Miru, the top of the Nuva mask was a little "cooler" (more spikiness) than this mask.

New pieces being designed -- I want to make sure you're aware there's both pros and cons with doing that. I would like new chest and shoulder armor, as I said in my recent blog entry. Cooler chest armor especially is something I've been hoping to see since the Inika and have been dissapointed on. No idea if that's just me -- but the point is, spending resources on new pieces in the canister sets means there's less budget for new pieces elsewhere. So that's a con, that I wanna make sure we all understand here. A lot of times I've seen this fallacy being used on here -- we ask for less clonism, for example, so LEGO allocates money to improving that, and then we complain about the parts they took the money away from to do it (like making extra new pieces). Sometimes we forget the budget is largely fixed.

Again. Not accusing you of that. Just asking if we're clear on it.

That said, I would like your idea.

think one problem we're having here is an ambiguity between "recognizable," "resemblant," and "believable." Believability is completely subjective, purely a matter of individual taste. Clearly you find the Nuva 2 believable; I do not. Resemblance is the most debatable, as it is possible to find similarities between many things. For instance, Aanchir thinks the Kanohi Inika resemble the original six; I do not think (most of) their similarities are sufficient to qualify as resemblance. Recognizability is, I think, the most objective, but because it involves individual interpretations it certainly has some subjectivity to it.

Gotta disagree with parts of this (but you're wise to take a step back and look at the definitions here, as that is usually where a lot of disagreement/miscommunication stems from in debate) -- "Resemblance" is the most objective, because that has a very clear objective definition that can be measured, again, objectively.

It's clear that the Kakama Newva (as Pohatu's mask apparently could be called since Greg says it still has the power of speed) resembles the Kakama Mata, because many aspects of the shape are quite simply similar. The things on the side, the mouth area, the shape of the visor -- it is all measurable and cannot be subjective.

You see it as less recognizeable/believable because you associate it with the Vahi (if I'm understanding you correctly). That is more subjective, because for something to be "recognized", it must by definition be drawing upon what is inside your head -- if you know someone as a kid, they grow up, and you meet them again, you "recognize" them because your brain already has stored your idea of what they look like, roughly. Different people might store that information a little differently so they might or might not recognize someone who has aged, depending on who they are.

Believability I agree is purely subjective.

If you read this part of your statements carefully:

For instance, Aanchir thinks the Kanohi Inika resemble the original six; I do not think (most of) their similarities are sufficient to qualify as resemblance

I would agree with it if you used "recognizeability" at the end. I haven't seen what Aanchir is talking about, though he's mentioned it in my blog comments, but whether or not he is right, and the degree of similarity/resemblance, can be objectively measured. Whether or not an invidual recognizes the resemblance, though, is more subjective.

Anyways, don't wanna waste space on this, but glad you decided to mention it, as I see you and I were using two of those terms in opposite ways.

And so what I'd be interested in hearing from you is this: if you were shown Kopaka, Lewa, and Pohatu 2 completely out of the blue, ignoring your vast knowledge of storyline and forgetting that you first saw their redesigns with the names "Kopaka", "Lewa", and "Pohatu" attached to them – would you recognize them at a glance as the Toa Nuva?

Yep. This is probably based a lot in my being an artist, especially one that "coolifies" (although I can't speak for you, since you in essence have done the same thing yourself with many of your MOCs). It's possible I recognize them a little easier than others, I dunno.

I don't think the "Miru Phantoka" (for lack of a current official term) is in any way recognizable as the Miru Nuva.

And that would be because your brain isn't storing the idea of the Nuva in the same way mine is (apparently); but I on the other hand recognized it instantly as a Miru Nuva-inspired Kanohi. To the extent that I wondered if this even made sense, because I was under the false impression that these would be new powers (now I think it does indeed make sense ).

You would agree with me on the mouth area and lower cheeks "resembling" (as in, having clear similarities to) the Miru Nuva, though? And that the upper half and eye-visor area is the main difference?

As I've said, the instant I saw the first, blurry image of it, I thought "Faxon!", and the possibility of it being a Miru did not even occur to me.

Yeah, that's a good example of your brain storing information differently -- I have associated the Faxon with a Kaukau, myself, and more with Hahli than Lesovikk. So the color similarity didn't affect me that much when I was first seeing the Miru Newva, I guess.

The same occured with the "Kakama Phantoka" – I instantly thought of the Vahi.

And again, I didn't. The Vahi has always been similar to the Kakama, so that 1) isn't surprising, and 2) doesn't bother me. Impossible to make a Kakama-like mask without some similarity to a Vahi. And Vahi doesn't have a visor-top. Still, putting some plastic up there other than the visor might have been wiser -- if that had been done, would you have associated it more with the Kakama, you think?

Rhyme not intended.

Therefore, I do not think the Nuva are at all recognizable, and because of that I do not think them believable. But I will agree in an instant that there are similarities – I just don't find those similarities sufficient; you do.

In this sentence I think you're defining the words the same way I was.

(I know you must be thinking "But the Kanohi Nuva weren't all recognizable as the Kanohi, by that logic," and that's quite true. I'm waiting until I learn exactly what the origin of these Kanohi is before I finalize my opinion of them in relation to story.)

Actually, I wasn't thinking that at all. I don't see that as relevant, personally, since, as you say, it's simply quite true, so I would assume somebody who likes greater recognizeability would have had a problem with that too.

But I disagree with that. You are claiming my "Lego should" opinion, derived as much from logic as yours, is invalid.

No, I think you've clarified that. I apologize if I implied that; that wasn't my intention. I remember more asking you to clarify what you mean than judging your logic, because I wasn't clear what your logic was. How could I say it is invalid without knowing what it is?

I think you've clarified it well, and I think it is indeed valid (the idea that your idea could be just as good as what LEGO did). Now we can discuss if it's sound.

But I suspect we're going to have to agree to disagree on parts of this, because we just don't know how some ideas would play in terms of sales, because as you say, it hasn't been tried. One thing I'm pointing out is, fans who like lime green better than Mata green (like me) would like a Mata green Lewa a little less. (Question would be, how many of us are there? I have no data on that, so that's why it's prolly an agree to disagree moment.)

Or "agree to agree that we don't know", as I would prefer to put it.

I do not claim to be a logician of any sort, but this is what seems logical to me – if two opinions on a hypothetical situation are both derived from equal processes of logic, what makes one more valid than the other?

Nothing -- you are absolutely correct. The question then moves more to soundness -- to how many fans would prefer one or the other. If they're roughly equal, then cool. Either way would work.

It just rarely works that way. There's almost always a majority on any such taste issue.

But I dunno which is which here.

Well, as I see it there is either recognizability or there isn't, not degrees.

I can see the point, but what I mean is, if the Miru Newva was even closer to the Miru Nuva, as you had suggested earlier, I would recognize it even easier. So that's what I mean by degrees.

If you want degrees, that's a quantification of similarity (for purposes of technicality of vocabulary, so we can both be clear on what the other is saying).

Yes.

I don't think the Nuva 2 are similar enough to be recognizable.

This is where I suspect you might be wrong -- IF (if) you mean not enough for most older fans who remember the Nuva. If, on the other hand, you just mean for you, no problemo.

And please don't say both man. I'm seperating the two because I'm only interested in debating the "thought" side of it, the "what should LEGO do" part, because the point you're raising could be a real problem, so it's worth discussing.

If you mean just taste, I do enjoy discussing those differences as they can help understanding of differencs. But not debating, cuz there's nothing to argue about with individual taste.

Anyways. Sorry if you're already clear on that.

For the I-don't-know-how-many-th time, making Nuva recognizable does not mean they have to be repetitive.

Gotta disagre, though -- to go back to your Miru idea. If you added spikes on top of the Miru Newva just like the Nuva had(for example), it would be more recognizeable, and it would be, literally, a "repeat" of a past shape. Now, I think you've got a point that it wouldn't be too repetitive. But let's not mince words -- it would be more so than the Newva we've actually got is.

(Though, yes, that was a misused word on my part. I ought to have said "not be recognizable as," because certainly there are similarities, though with just a glance, to me, they do not resemble their former selves.)

Yeah, that's all I meant.

It is quite true that the "Kakama Phantoka" resembles the original Kakama more than the Kakama Nuva, but its instant recognizability as a Vahi overrides that resemblance. The same is true, in my view, of how much Lewa 2 resembles Lesovikk much more than Lewa Nuva.

Since (I think) you're speaking only from your own perspective, no complaints with that statement. I just tend to doubt that's how most of us older fans are reacting to it.

I'm quite open to discussion – I enjoy talking to someone, bouncing ideas off them and hearing their thoughts, then hearing their own ideas... But what I don't like is when something intended as a simple statement of one's thoughts turns into a huge argument

There is no reason this has to be a "huge argument". As I say, all I'm interested in is, as I call it, a "search for the truth among friends."

I'm not going to overthink a lot of what you say next, because I think you were misunderstanding a lot of what I was saying; in that I wasn't judging your thoughts so much as asking you to clarify, as you have largely done. Still wonder what you'd do with Pohatu and Kopaka, though.

I feel like I'm being criticized or reprimanded for doing absolutely nothing other than stating my opinion.

I think you're confusing disagreement with that opinion with "criticizing for posting the opinion". Again, that blog entry I mentioned "Can Opinions Be Wrong" dealt directly with that confusion. I want to find other people's opinions. I track your blog because you have some of the clearest and most thoughtful opinions in the blog section, IMO. I'm just discussing where I disagree, or might disagree, or would like clarification/expanding on. You are not being reprimanded in the slightest.

Of course, if I see you using an actual logical fallacy, I'll call you on it. But I don't think you were.

As for why the "This is my blog" comment – I know I'm utterly insignificant with regard to the rest of the Bionicle fanbase, but this blog is about my opinions (both types, so please you, bones). Even though they often go against the vast majority of that fanbase, can't I voice them without being smothered on the basis of their not mattering? They matter a great deal to me.

The reason I reacted that way to the blog comment is based on why I do what I do -- Debates and complaints used to be a subject much like religion on BZPower. It was impossible to discuss them without flamewars breaking out, and complaint topics pretty much always got closed. So we sorta got an unfair reputation of stifling debate. (This was before blogs, keep in mind.)

Well, being a logician, I decided I should try to "moderate" such complaint topics (as in a debate moderator, not a forum moderator), challenge people to think through things in ways they maybe weren't, rather than just react emotionally and jump to conclusions like "I hate this; LEGO is evil for doing it". In doing so, my hope was actually that I could keep these topics civil enough to remain open, so that complaints could keep being posted. Because -- what if one of those complaints really was a real problem?

Since I began doing this, BZPower's complaint topics have remained open for the most part, partly due to my logician's perspective "moderating" them, and also thanks to others who have also started doing the same thing. I am quite proud of that accomplishment, and it's why I work so hard to keep it up. So if you think I'm somehow criticizing the right to post negative opinions, you're dead wrong -- I'm trying to protect it.

When blogs started up, I've seen an unfortunate trend to sometimes treat them as if they are somehow exempt from that kind of debate-moderation simply because they're not a topic. That is dangerous because it can lead to some illogical negative ideas (and positive) getting so hard-wired into people's brains that we, again, get what we had before and it explodes at the most inopportune moment. Could rip BZPower apart as it's ripped many other forums apart, as I have witnessed. So I'm pretty adamant that we should all treat blogs pretty much the same as we do topics, and hold them to the same standards we would a debate when it comes to opinions. In order to protect your right to voice these kinds of blog entries without flame wars erupting.

Also note, nowhere did I say your view didn't matter. It's because I think it might that I'm bothering to discuss this.

Perhaps all that last sounds more extreme than I meant it to, but it does express how I have felt... I don't mean to offend.

No offense taken, ToM. I want to make it crystal clear that I respect you immensely, as I do all staff members and indeed, pretty much anyone I talk to on here, heh. I accept blame for not communicating all this very well.

[Edit:] Oh, completely forgot. The "Why" in the title is not asking "Why do they have to be this way?"; it's a statement that they are why I pursued Project Nuva. Unintentional ambiguity, I assure you.

I see. Yes, I misunderstood you there.

(Note, board is whining that I have two many quotes, so I'ma double posting here. )

The Kal and other clonism was characterized by tools looking almost identical, with the case of the Kal, nearly identical faces (just slightly different patterns, as I recall), and the whole team looking mostly identical. All of the sets you showed are miles more differentiated than any Kal -- isn't that obvious?

Re-used pieces are also nothing new. 2001 had many from Slizer/Throwbots, not to mention just Technic. It's the overall design that was the problem with the Kal; there was so little difference in the whole thing between each other and the past Bohrok. Look at a Piraka's spines, though, and compare them to Kopaka Nuva's wings, and it's crystal clear they are not clones of each other.

Also, you're comparing Bohrok, which were a unique "out there" shape with humanoids. Humanoids are "special" -- because we are humanoid (obviously), that's one shape that it's safer to return to again and again. With Kal, it was an unusual shape the first time, but the second time, it was just copying.

As I put it in my blog entry yesterday:

I was hoping for a few more new pieces than we see here, but old pieces in new colors are cool too. The best part of that is that now, seven years in, Bionicle has finally built up a good collection of varied pieces for legs, arms, feet, etc. This makes it much less expensive to reduce clonism today than in 2003 (for example), and is something I've been looking forward to for a long time. Still, almost all of the limb and feet pieces are recycled (possible exception being Pohatu's arms).

Finally, remember that many of the usual "complainers", especially in the MOCing community, on here have been asking for more reused pieces in new colors. But can't please everybody.

Good question, though.

Edit:

Dude,you think that's all that's wrong?

Toa olda=>toa nuva=>new nuva.

Toa metru=>hordika=>toa metru.

Toa inika=>mahri.

Toa hagah=>rahaga

Toa nidhiki=>spider nidhiki

All teams or parts of a team end up transformed.Basic(repetitive) mutation is standard for all Toa.I think I'de rather stay a matoran then.

KDT, it's "wrong" in your eyes, because of your own tastes -- it shouldn't be surprising that others see things differently. But I believe Ikki has pointed out other things he dislikes about these before, and nowhere here did he say this was "all".

Edit: MUST you have a sidebar on each side of your blog, Ikki? Really cuts into the comment width...

xccj -- It's whatever is in XP.

Adv. -- Better.

Chuck -- nice!

IT -- Lol at your sig.

The rest -- thanks.

I'll spoilerify all my replies:

I think he means lime green, Lewa's secondary colour.

 

So that would make him Green [base] and a lightrer shade of green [secondary]. An easy throwback to the original Mata that costs nearly the same, if any difference at all.

Well, if that's what he means, then I wouldn't like it as much as the grey. (Speaking only for me here.)

Except that these sets are not original.

 

Take a look at the Inika. Then look at the Mahri. Then look at these sets.

Take a look at the Mata and the Nuva, Smeag -- it was the same way then. Within the context of the taste style that is being targeted at any one time, they are original. That's all I meant -- and it's obvious that they have tons of original aspects, just like the Mahri and Inika did.

Within the context of the Technicism style of the Mata/Nuva (and indeed, many other sets from those years), the Nuva are original (but highly recognizeable).

Within the context of the "Coolified" style of the Inika/Mahri/Nuva, the Nuva Nuva are original.

Comparing them both, within their respective context, the Nuva Nuva are a lot more original than the 2003 Nuva were.

(Putting coolified in quotes because not everybody sees it as cooler, of course.)

What you said is only true if you take all of the sets out of context, and say that because the Nuva are still staying true to the "new" style that most fans like, they are unoriginal. Well, the problem with that argument is that most fans want the sets to stay within that style. To be original by that logic, the Nuva Nuva would have to establish a new style that's untested, which there seems to be no call for from what most fans want. There was a strong call to move to the "Coolified" style, as I argued for a long time before it happened, and now there's a strong call to remain within that context.

Also, MOCers on here are often calling for old parts in new colors. Pohatu's orange leg pieces, for example. I'll be trying to get my hands on them, heh.

Didn't the Toa Metru sell better than the Toa Nuva? [i haven't heard that specifically, but I wouldn't be surprised]

If you look at the above "chart", you can see why that would be (if it is; not sure). The Toa Metru, within the context of the older style, were more original.

They were also a move to a newer "in-between" style, so like the Inika and Mata, they were the most original in terms of basic body structure. They had their successors, Lhikan and the Hagah (them especially, being very similar in concept to the Nuva and Mahri in how they mix new and old pieces up in original ways), and the Hordika (mostly new pieces but less originality in specifics that compare to the Metru). It wasn't until 2006 that "new", preferred style evolved fully, with the trimming of gears, the fulfilling of a more "biomechanical" style, and the introduction of the Piraka-basis body design.

Do you follow the analogy?

The analogy fits what I'm saying a lot better than what you saying, it seems -- Led was more original, and more popular. It is ToM and others arguing for less originality here (less ToM than others I've seen, though, as he has made somewhat clear). Again, going back to that "chart", the Nuva are clearly far less original within the context of the style of the time than the Nuva Nuva are within the new style's context. Look at their limbs and you'll see far less clonism, far more original uses of pieces, many new pieces unlike any we've seen previously in Bionicle, etc. etc. Plus the first orange stone set. Did I mention I love that? But anyways, within each context, it is clear the Nuva are more original. Thus I predict they will sell well.