Jump to content

Set Uniformity: Is it gone so soon?


meowmachine

Recommended Posts

  The original Toa Mata had 6 toa fairly similar to each other. The Toa Nuva were more similar to one another. The Vahki were the last clone sets(sets less than $10). Greg and fans looked back to the vahki with distaste. They were the same set over and over again. Then flash-forward to 2008. The Phantoka was composed of 3 makuta and 3 toa.  The Mistika was also composed of 3 makuta and 3 toa. On paper, releasing villains and heroes was a good idea.

 

  However, 2008 sold poorly. This was for a number of reasons. One primary problem was that the toa team didn't look like a team. Even in the same wave, Lewa, Pohatu, and Kopaka didn't even look like a team. Lewa was propelled by jetpacks, Pohatu flies with propellers. Kopaka had huge wings. The early 2008 Makuta, on the other hand, had a different problem. They were too similar. Despite coloration and size differences, the leech seeds made them seem unnecessarily similar.

 

  The new toa have this problem. With titans and canister-sized heroes mixed together, they look like a very unbalanced team. I see they tried to unite the toa with the breastplate, but it ends up looking oversized on the smaller toa. The size difference is a real killer. Trying to pose a fight between large and small constractions in general is hard. 

 

  Could you guys discuss the merits and problems of differently sized toa.

What do I write here?

 

Someone, say something funny so you can be remembered for posterity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I personally liked the Vahki's uniformity because it captured the 'robotic' feel. Same with the Bohrok. 

Methinks that the reason why the '08 Nuva didn't look like a team was because they weren't released in the same wave. There also weren't that many CGI images of them together, usually it was with their respective Makuta, which may have also been a contributing factor. 

I could be wrong because this isn't backed by an research, however this is from my personal observation. 

  • Upvote 4

bZpOwEr

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really really loved 2007 onwards with the different body types and designs. Seriously, it's not fun to by the same 6 builds just with different colors and heads. And I don't think your argument is valid if you say the Toa are too different, and the Makuta are too similar, and that's why they sold bad. Different shapes and sizes means diversity. If you have a team of warriors, you need some with specialized traits.

Edited by bioniclepluslotr
  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  The original Toa Mata had 6 toa fairly similar to each other. The Toa Nuva were more similar to one another. The Vahki were the last clone sets(sets less than $10). Greg and fans looked back to the vahki with distaste. They were the same set over and over again. Then flash-forward to 2008. The Phantoka was composed of 3 makuta and 3 toa.  The Mistika was also composed of 3 makuta and 3 toa. On paper, releasing villains and heroes was a good idea.

 

  However, 2008 sold poorly. This was for a number of reasons. One primary problem was that the toa team didn't look like a team. Even in the same wave, Lewa, Pohatu, and Kopaka didn't even look like a team. Lewa was propelled by jetpacks, Pohatu flies with propellers. Kopaka had huge wings. The early 2008 Makuta, on the other hand, had a different problem. They were too similar. Despite coloration and size differences, the leech seeds made them seem unnecessarily similar.

 

  The new toa have this problem. With titans and canister-sized heroes mixed together, they look like a very unbalanced team. I see they tried to unite the toa with the breastplate, but it ends up looking oversized on the smaller toa. The size difference is a real killer. Trying to pose a fight between large and small constractions in general is hard. 

 

  Could you guys discuss the merits and problems of differently sized toa.

The new Toa have recurring motifs that help to show that they are a team. Their printed chestplates do a great deal of that heavy lifting, but their color-coded nature also helps. And that allows them to look more diverse and interesting than any previous team. I had honestly been a little apprehensive to the return to a series of humanoid heroes after the amazing set designs of Hero Factory's Invasion from Below sets. But the new Toa have exceeded my expectations by making their diversity itself into a unifying feature.

 

By varying their builds, the new Toa give the impression that each brings unique strengths to their partnership. For example, Onua's brute strength is clearly evident from his build, as opposed to previous years when it had to be inferred. But a Toa that size isn't going to move that fast, and that's where the small and speedy Pohatu comes in. Meanwhile, Tahu's two sets of weapons make clear that he is geared toward attack, while Kopaka's bulky armor and shield are there to provide defense.

 

See what I mean? Back in the day, I would've been the first person to defend cloned Toa sets with the justification that their similar appearance helped convey a sense of unity. But uniformity is the most boring source of unity, both in terms of visuals and in terms of relationships. By varying the Toa's builds, they achieve a far greater visual balance than they would through being essentially identical, and their roles in the team become more clearly identifiable.

  • Upvote 9

Formerly Lyichir: Rachira of Influence

Aanchir's and Meiko's brother

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know what you mean about the new Toa. Their proportions are varied, but on an aesthetic level they feel like a team without a doubt. They all have the same kinds of decorative motifs on their chest plates, and they all have the same design language for their building elements.

 

Their proportions are varied, but not a whole lot. Onua and Pohatu are considerably shorter than the others, but that has always been true... well, except for 2008, in Onua's case. The others are scarcely any more varied in height than the Toa Metru... Tahu is 27 modules tall, Kopaka 26 modules tall, and Gali and Lewa 25 modules tall. I struggle to understand how you think the chest plate on the "smaller Toa" feels oversized when there is barely any size difference in height between Tahu, Kopaka, Gali, and Lewa. It'd be like saying the chest plates on Toa Metru Vakama, Whenua, Matau, and Onewa were too large because they were two modules shorter than Nuju and Nokama.

 

Tahu and Kopaka have slightly wider shoulders than Gali and Lewa, and Onua of course has MUCH wider shoulders — but having one set stand out from the rest hardly breaks the team's sense of uniformity.

 

Also, your idea that the Toa in 2008 didn't look like a team (and didn't sell for that reason) seems a little bit presumptuous. The Toa in 2008 felt VERY much like a team. They followed a fairly strict set of color scheme rules (solid masks and grey or silver secondary color for the heroes, blended masks and black secondary color for the villains), there was a clear dichotomy between organic flight and motifs for the villains and mechanical flight and motifs for the heroes, and the characters' proportions were generally more similar to one another than they had been in 2001! It seems like you're taking a personal gripe about the 2008 sets and assuming that it had a real impact on sales, even when there is no real evidence that this was the case.

 

Frankly, it almost seems like you're LOOKING for reasons to dislike the new Toa, and thus seeing huge differences where there are none. I agree that the sets are not anywhere near as repetitive as they were in 2001 or 2002, but the Toa Mata and Toa Nuva don't have to be the benchmark for a team that feels cohesive, any more than the 2010 and 2011 heroes were for LEGO Hero Factory.

  • Upvote 15
Link to comment
Share on other sites

huh. that's odd. i was under the impression for the entirety of Bionicle's original run that clone sets were undesirable. how silly of me. i see now that Lego should just go back to making sets that only vary in colour, mask shape, and weapon, because that's the right way to make a team.

  • Upvote 14
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the new sets have just enough in common so you can tell that they're all on the same team while also having each toa feel unique and I like that. Before it felt like all the toa were just slightly different copies of one another and it just got to feel kinda boring.

 

 Lego has done a pretty good job with the new designs, in my opinion

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you know what would really make them look like a uniform team? Same colors. Like even if they all had different shapes, if they were all the same color, you could tell that they belong together without sacrificing unique builds.

excellent idea! Lego should just ditch the unnecessary stuff like green or purple or what have you and make every set silver, gold, black, light grey, and dark grey. it's the perfect colour scheme; it works for every element if you really, really think about it!

  • Upvote 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you know what would really make them look like a uniform team? Same colors. Like even if they all had different shapes, if they were all the same color, you could tell that they belong together without sacrificing unique builds.

 

Except color is one of the biggest ways constraction lines differentiate characters :P even if you had six Toa with completely different builds, making them all red would still diminish their uniqueness.

 

@OP:

 

if there was anything that killed the 2008 Toa, it definitely wasn't a lack of team-ness. Considering they all dedicated themselves to dull color schemes with a single actual color (though their neutral shades DID cleanly divide the team in two, which was unfortunate) they had no problem looking like they belonged together. Rather, their issue was more in lack of resemblance to the characters they were supposed to be (that, and at that point the dedication to large, clunky launchers was so intense that Gali, Kopaka, and Onua didn't even have Toa Tools apart from their launchers, and Tahu's was merely a shield.)

 

I also think you're stressing uniformity too much for old sets; for all their shared pieces, the Mata were not straight-up clones of each other. They had varied limb pieces, a couple different neck attachments and shoulder attachments, and some had distinguishing features added due to pins needed for combination models. Sure, it wasn't the amount of diversity we see today, but to pass the Mata off as clones is disingenuous, because even then they knew to add some variety for personality. (Of course, the Metru were much clonier, sadly, with their only variance being one module's difference in their hip attachment.) I'd say playing up variances in body shape even more is exactly in the spirit of the original sets.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

(Of course, the Metru were much clonier, sadly, with their only variance being one module's difference in their hip attachment.)

And one module's difference in the length of their necks! A lot of people forget that. So technically Nuju and Nokama were two modules taller than the others, not just one module.
  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I give the Bohrok and Bohrok Kal a pass because you can't improve perfection.

 

Well... the Bohrok were certainly great sets but I wouldn't go as far as to say they were perfect. Every set has its own set of cons for its pros. And as great as they were, I think having twelve of them is a bit much. There simply is no need for most average people to have the same sets with minimal variations.

 

 

I think the Chir brothers have (as usual  :P ) put it best.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I love a certain degree of uniformity because it makes the Toa look like a team. For example, I like the Metru because I like their design and how they look like a team. I don't really like it to the level of everyone having the same mask, though

 

For the 2008 I never really felt like they did enough scenes with all of the Toa together and I only have 3 of them so I can't really say but I felt like they looked like a team

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had no idea that the 2008 sets didn't sell that well. I liked all of them. (Especially the Makuta sets) 

 

Anyway, I like that the sets look different from each other now. Getting six versions of the same set except for their color, weapons, and/or masks if they had one became a bit boring after a while. Having sets be unique on their own helped them standout more and made it feel like you getting a new set, not a recolored version of a set you already had.

Everyone is one choice away from being the bad guy in another person's story.


 


pc0lX6T.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is confusing me... first you say (rightly) that clone sets were a problem, then you say that the new sets aren't clones... and apparently that's a problem?

  • Upvote 2

The Destiny of Bionicle (chronological retelling of Bionicle original series, 9 PDFs of 10 chapters each on Google Drive)Part 1 - Warring with Fate | Part 2 - Year of Change | Part 3 - The Exploration Trap | Part 4 - Rise of the Warlords | Part 5 - A Busy Matoran | Part 6 - The Dark Time | Part 7 - Proving Grounds | Part 8 - A Rude Awakening | Part 9 - The Battle of Giants

My Bionicle Fanfiction  (Google Drive folder, eventually planned to have PDFs of all of it)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Short version: No.

Long version: Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

But yeah, I always felt excessive clone sets were a downfall of Bionicle, and the new team, with each character differentiated in cool ways relevant to their characters (Lewa is properly light and agile, as is Pohatu, Onua is appropriately hulking) forgoing that for clones would be quite bad.

~B~

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Do you know what would really make them look like a uniform team? Same colors. Like even if they all had different shapes, if they were all the same color, you could tell that they belong together without sacrificing unique builds.

excellent idea! Lego should just ditch the unnecessary stuff like green or purple or what have you and make every set silver, gold, black, light grey, and dark grey. it's the perfect colour scheme; it works for every element if you really, really think about it!

 

 

hey, it's the only "real" element in the MU, Protodermis! :V

  • Upvote 2

bnnrimg1.pngbnnrimg2.pngbnnrimg3.pngbnnrimg4.pngbnnrimg5.pngbnnrimg8.png

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

for robots like the Vahki, or a swarm like the Bohrok, clone sets make sense. For distinct sentient people, it does not. The toa all have different abilities and habitats, so it makes sense that they would have different physiques. For the most part, I feel that 2015 has captured exactly what I always imagined these characters being like (with the possible exception of how bulky Kopaka is, and Gali could do with being sleeker).

 

And... did he really just suggest making the sets the same colour? You do realise that the whole reason we have elements is as an excuse to make the sets a series of bright colours right? No child would feel motivated to buy 6 sets in the same colour, unless they were DRASTICALLY different in build, (something that lego can't really afford to do), and I know MOCists certainly wouldn't.

Edited by Timeline15
  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

for robots like the Vahki, or a swarm like the Bohrok, clone sets make sense. For distinct sentient people, it does not. The toa all have different abilities and habitats, so it makes sense that they would have different physiques. For the most part, I feel that 2015 has captured exactly what I always imagined these characters being like (with the possible exception of how bulky Kopaka is, and Gali could do with being sleeker).

 

And... did he really just suggest making the sets the same colour? You do realise that the whole reason we have elements is as an excuse to make the sets a series of bright colours right? No child would feel motivated to buy 6 sets in the same colour, unless they were DRASTICALLY different in build, (something that lego can't really afford to do), and I know MOCists certainly wouldn't.

We is about uniformity. The best way to show that is through color. That way it's evident to see who belongs together. Look at real life teams. Armies have matching uniforms despite different equipment between soldiers. Even military dogs have the same colored uniforms. Now even guns have matching camouflage as clothing.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the things I really liked about the early stages of Bionicle were that the "clone" sets (IE Bohrok, Rahkshi and Vahki), were clearly set out to be either army builders or minions, with no vast personality differences.

 

I'd like to think that this stage of Bionicle is going to be the same in that regard. All the characters look and feel unique because they will be written that way. The only *generic* characters we will be seeing this year will be the little spiders.

  • Upvote 4

20383310448_7d514f8ffa.jpg

 

Spoiler Alert

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

for robots like the Vahki, or a swarm like the Bohrok, clone sets make sense. For distinct sentient people, it does not. The toa all have different abilities and habitats, so it makes sense that they would have different physiques. For the most part, I feel that 2015 has captured exactly what I always imagined these characters being like (with the possible exception of how bulky Kopaka is, and Gali could do with being sleeker).

 

And... did he really just suggest making the sets the same colour? You do realise that the whole reason we have elements is as an excuse to make the sets a series of bright colours right? No child would feel motivated to buy 6 sets in the same colour, unless they were DRASTICALLY different in build, (something that lego can't really afford to do), and I know MOCists certainly wouldn't.

We is about uniformity. The best way to show that is through color. That way it's evident to see who belongs together. Look at real life teams. Armies have matching uniforms despite different equipment between soldiers. Even military dogs have the same colored uniforms. Now even guns have matching camouflage as clothing.

 

I think while this can work from a storytelling perspective (certain superhero teams like the Fantastic Four and the X-Men have had color-coordinated uniforms in the past, for instance), it can be restrictive as far as action figure sales are concerned. You CAN have a common, unifying color to make a group feel cohesive (like silver for the Toa Nuva and Bohrok-Kal, or black for the LEGO Ninjago ninja minifigures from 2013), but you need to include brighter, contrasting colors as well in order to help the individual characters stand out from one another on a toy store shelf.
  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've said it before, but the Vahki were fantastic. As enforcers of conformity, the clone-y aspect worked perfectly for them. They also looked more menacing than any other canister villains except, perhaps, the Piraka, and without looking so brutish. Sleek, elegant, and scary as heck.

 

That said, that was one of the only times clone sets actually worked.

 

 

@bioniclepluslotr- I legitimately can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not.

-------------------------------------
bohrok_lol.jpg
-------------------------------------
Rate The Song Above You

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the things I really liked about the early stages of Bionicle were that the "clone" sets (IE Bohrok, Rahkshi and Vahki), were clearly set out to be either army builders or minions, with no vast personality differences.

 

I'd like to think that this stage of Bionicle is going to be the same in that regard. All the characters look and feel unique because they will be written that way. The only *generic* characters we will be seeing this year will be the little spiders.

that's definitely true, but even so, the Toa - the actual characters - were all near-clones as well up through 2006. but like you said, Bionicle 2015 is already looking to be much better about that kind of thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've said it before, but the Vahki were fantastic. As enforcers of conformity, the clone-y aspect worked perfectly for them. They also looked more menacing than any other canister villains except, perhaps, the Piraka, and without looking so brutish. Sleek, elegant, and scary as heck.

 

That said, that was one of the only times clone sets actually worked.

Vahki had a good excuse for being clone sets, but I wouldn't call them fantastic. Many of their parts were extremely specialized, and they offered a really pathetic value for money as far as parts were concerned. 32 pieces for $9 is rubbish even by BIONICLE standards. Also, they had a rather mediocre transforming function, and their gear function was a repeat of the Matoran and Rahkshi gear functions in 2003.

 

I think if I wanted to point to a series of sets that really made "clone sets" work, the Bohrok would be my prime example. Frankly, if they weren't clones, then it would have been difficult for the LEGO Group to get their money's worth out of all those specialized new molds. But the Bohrok packed enough unique functionality into their designs that the repetition wasn't nearly so bothersome. With that said, I think we've moved past that kind of design philosophy by now.

Edited by Aanchir
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really like that they're differentiating the sets, if only so that I actually have a reason to buy all of them. :P Earlier, with the Metru or Hordika, my reaction pretty much was that I already have one of these, the others are the same just in a different colour. So there wasn't much incentive to seek them out.

 

I like the points made above that the only time having all the sets look alike was when they were supposed to pretty much be clones of each other. I never really though of it that way. :)

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I've said it before, but the Vahki were fantastic. As enforcers of conformity, the clone-y aspect worked perfectly for them. They also looked more menacing than any other canister villains except, perhaps, the Piraka, and without looking so brutish. Sleek, elegant, and scary as heck.

 

That said, that was one of the only times clone sets actually worked.

Vahki had a good excuse for being clone sets, but I wouldn't call them fantastic. Many of their parts were extremely specialized, and they offered a really pathetic value for money as far as parts were concerned. 32 pieces for $9 is rubbish even by BIONICLE standards. Also, they had a rather mediocre transforming function, and their gear function was a repeat of the Matoran and Rahkshi gear functions in 2003.

 

I think if I wanted to point to a series of sets that really made "clone sets" work, the Bohrok would be my prime example. Frankly, if they weren't clones, then it would have been difficult for the LEGO Group to get their money's worth out of all those specialized new molds. But the Bohrok packed enough unique functionality into their designs that the repetition wasn't nearly so bothersome. With that said, I think we've moved past that kind of design philosophy by now.

 

That's all fair. I admit my love for the Vahki is slightly irrational. And I don't think I ever actually bought any -- I got a couple as gifts, and the rest through those special edition $20 barrels of parts Toys R Us had in '04-'05 -- so I can't really speak authoritatively on the cost-to-piece count ratio. There was also the added excitement of seeing Mata arms and feet return in new colors (even if the latter was dark bley and nothing else). I personally didn't mind the repeat of the gear function, I liked the way the disk launcher was incorporated into the head to preserve symmetry, and I thought the transforming function was the coolest thing since widely-available individual Matoran sets :P But, like I said, my love for the Vahki is a little irrational :)

 

I agree that the Bohrok were very cool sets -- well-designed and with a lot of functionality for their size -- but I never thought they looked sufficiently villainous to really fill the role they were given in the story.

Edited by Jacks

-------------------------------------
bohrok_lol.jpg
-------------------------------------
Rate The Song Above You

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that the Bohrok were very cool sets -- well-designed and with a lot of functionality for their size -- but I never thought they looked sufficiently villainous to really fill the role they were given in the story.

 

 

But the role they were given in the story wasn't villainous. Antagonistic? Yes. But their role was not evil, so why should they look it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In previous times, lack of set uniformity made it harder to get multiples of the same part in different colors. 

 

But with CCBS, that sort of thing is mostly burned except for the outer shells, which are all the same part. You can have the same parts used in Tahu in red that Onua has in black, and both can have 60% of the same parts and be very different sets.

Edited by fishers64
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Uniform and uniqueness have both been used in the past with varied effect. The Mahri looked great as unique individuals in a team, whereas the Newva did not. The Mata looked great as 'uniform' individuals in a team, whereas the Vahki were bland and only had colour and weapons to distinguish them.

 

In my opinion, the reboot Toa look good together but less so on their own. They are not amazing, they are not terrible, they are just good.

 

I think it's my beef with Onua and Tahu's figures, but that's how it goes. I'm sure some people will love all six Toa together and separately, so they will enjoy showing them together when they are available.

index.jpg


 


Twitter: @enkindle_this


 


 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know where you are getting that 2008 information from. The heroes and villains both looked like they were part of a team - this was due in part to the uniform colour scheme the three on each team possessed (orange eyes and black secondary colour vs green and bley/silver) as well as organic vs inorganic look of the Kanohi. You could tell the Makuta Phantoka were a team because they were fairly uniform, likewise you could tell the Phantoka Nuva were a team thanks to the more leaner "Inika" build. 

 

The Toa of this year seem uniform in aesthetic. They all have similar chest armour and decals, similar features and functions. Seeing them side-to-side isn't actually that big a difference. And I think LEGO seems to actually want to differentiate them a bit (with the golden armour etc) to show that half are more complex build. But I don't think this will affect the buyers decision to pick these up based on uniformity.

 

-NotS 

tahubanner.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One question, wasn't one of the things about Matoran -> Toa that they ended up looking how they imagined a toa should look like?

Online presences (main ones, at least):

DeviantART: Heontris

YouTube: Heontris

Anything else with the name Heontris is also me. As far as I know.

 

"Don't be a night owl, it gets boring after the first 6 hours." - Me right now

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One question, wasn't one of the things about Matoran -> Toa that they ended up looking how they imagined a toa should look like?

 

Yes, which I think was a terrible thing to make canon, because while it explained why Takanuva looked like the Nuva and why the Metru shared a build with Lhikan, it made future advances in the build need convoluted explanations for why they weren't clones of the Toa they knew.

  • Upvote 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't miss the uniformity aaat all. The new Toa look like a team to me, and their varied builds are very welcome. It really feels like you're getting your money's worth when you're not buying what are essentially recolors of the same toy. And the MOCing! The more parts, the better.

  • Upvote 1

pomegranate-banner-sm.png .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I agree that the Bohrok were very cool sets -- well-designed and with a lot of functionality for their size -- but I never thought they looked sufficiently villainous to really fill the role they were given in the story.

 

 

But the role they were given in the story wasn't villainous. Antagonistic? Yes. But their role was not evil, so why should they look it?

 

 

True, but they were portrayed as strange villains at the time. Whatever they were suppose to be later, they were meant to be the villains at the time they were made. To the fans they were villains, because we had no idea that they were just cleansing the island because Mata-Nui.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...