Bonkle Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 (edited) This could definitely be considered a general LEGO discussion, but I'm talking specifically in terms of Bionicle. Which system do you like better? I like the pistons-and-gears look of the old pieces, but CCBS is really great and provides a more universal building choice. Sometimes I like to use 'old school' pieces on my MOCs, but generally I prefer CCBS. Have fun and take the nostalgia goggles off if you can. Edited August 7, 2015 by Bonkle 1 Quote I been away a long time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cambion Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 no middle-ground option? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonkle Posted August 7, 2015 Author Share Posted August 7, 2015 I'll add that. 1 Quote I been away a long time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sydorack Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 Objectively, ccbs is better. Subjectively you can argue which looks better. Bionicle system parts are very greebley and robotic and unique but ccbs allows much better physique sculpting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Banana Gunz Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 I mean... I always loved the old aesthetic of gears and pistons and such, and it'll always be a part of how I remember Bionicle, but the building system itself I feel has been replaced for the better, for now. It was pretty good for its time but I think constraction was bound to separate from Technic eventually. CCBS though, I still don't feel it's the exact building system I've been looking for. It's great- it really is- but I still feel that there's more that could be done for constraction, and CCBS could eventually evolve into something even better. As good and creative and useful it is, there are some flaws in it that bother some more than others. For some people, CCBS is perfect, but for some like me those little cons can be bothersome. The progression from the old system to CCBS was natural and necessary, and though I feel CCBS has flaws and will eventually grow and change into something else and better, it does work better creatively in a lot of ways. My main complaint with it is that sometimes models don't feel and look as solid as some older ones (though plenty old sets aren't exempt from that either), but with the new G2 toa sets, it's proven itself plenty in my mind and is very welcome. The best question I have to ask myself to answer this one is "Which one would I have preferred to see come 2015?", and as cool as lots of the old sets were, I feel the system is outdated and wouldn't hold up. So, CCBS, until we get something even cooler. 2 Quote tumblr: it's a lovely place to be if you've gone madflickr: mah yummy gross pics mmmPew Pew Pew Pew Pew Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hiddenderek Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 (edited) I'd have to say CCBS. By bionicle system, I'm assuming you mean the inika build. I feel like that relied on too many specialized parts, and parts that could only really be used on robotic stuff. As a result I like ccbs more, its more versatile and fits with the Lego spirit more. One thing I dont like about ccbs is the lack of interesting ways you can build humanoid figures. Its a little too standardized. They're all extremely similar builds but with different armor placements, versus stuff like the toa metru and the rahkski. I really hope they change this. If each figure that is humanoid is just gonna have the ccbs bone torso and an armor plate attached to it for the chest from here on out, that's gonna get really boring no matter how many different chest plate prints you make. Edited August 7, 2015 by hiddenderek 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishers64 Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 CCBS. Now granted, I'm pretty biased. See, back in the day when my brother and I got Bionicle sets, we bought 'em, assembled the figures, and that was it. The end of creative possibility. Rumor had it that if you disassembled Bionicle, the parts would break, and it would be no good. Plus I couldn't see why you would want to disassemble them - they looked like cool figures, and all the details on the parts felt like they went together - to make the set they made and nothing else. And those were my brother's sets, not mine. The CCBS sets that I have tell me that there is loads of creative possibility in them. This black piece with five ball joints on the end of it is not just a torso. It is the side of a box, the bottom of a circus hoop, the top of a tower. I don't have enough time to explore everything I can do with it. And that's just that one piece. The limb parts aren't just limbs - they are vectors indicating which direction I can expand a chain and what I can put on the end of it. Bionicle system is only one option. CCBS is 40 options. That's why I like it. 1 Quote Hero Factory RPG | Bionicle Mafia XXIX: Storyline & Theories Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sumiki Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 They both have their advantages and disadvantages that it's really hard for me to choose one. They're not as far apart as System is from either one, but I've used both and I've enjoyed the wider range of parts offered by the existence of both. Quote avatar by Lady Kopaka Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iruini Nuva Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 Definitely prefer the older styles (even pre-Inika). CCBS doesn't seem to get the feel right, and it feels super limiting to me in terms of build options. Granted, I've been building with the older sets for much longer. It's also worth noting that my wife strongly prefers the look and feel of CCBS, ha. 2 Quote Makuta: Consumed By Light • Rebrick Entry • Topic & Backstory • Blog ----------------- 2015 Sets: 18/18 + 3 • Polybags: 1/2 • SDCC x2, NYCC Clear MoF, Trans-MoF 2016 Sets: 17/17 + 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonkle Posted August 7, 2015 Author Share Posted August 7, 2015 When I said 'Bionicle system', I didn't just mean Inika onwards. All I meant were the parts used in Bionicle's original run. Quote I been away a long time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evergrey: Toa of Music Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 I like CCBS better because the characters just look complete. There aren't the holes that aren't filled in anymore like the mata waist or the metru waists. Sure, there are gaps here and there, but even looking at Skull Warrior (so far the only summer set I own) he doesn't feel gappy or incomplete. He looks basic/zombified, but he's supposed to look that way. And to boot he's pretty solid. On the flip side, Onua is a tank. He's probably one of the best filled out sets from Bionicle, if not THE best! Tahu and Kopaka may both have leg issues (to skinny and fat respectively) but they still look very complete and very well built. Now for detail, I definitely miss the older weapons. The Tahu 2015 swords are amazing, but I miss parts like Lewa's air katana, Takanuva's staff tip and Solek's blades. But overall, CCBS Bionicle is pretty great 1 Quote Other great bands: Iron Maiden Journey Mercenary The Unguided Trivium Boston Stratovarius Symphony X Epica Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ballom Nom Nom Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 I use both a lot (basically every single MOC of mine nowadays has both), but I really enjoy the smooth, solid shapes of CCBS shells and parts in general, so maybe that wins out. ~B~ 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toa Smoke Monster Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 I like both of them, personally. Both of them have their strengths and flaws, but I really don't prefer one over the other. 2 Quote Everyone is one choice away from being the bad guy in another person's story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalija From Indian Lakes Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 CCBS undoubtedly! It takes some to grow on. But Lego did an excellent job at evolving a system to feel smoother while also catching the bionics feel. It's a win-win in my eyes. Maybe a few more unique armor add-ons, perhaps, but even that doesn't seem too necessary. 1 Quote all this is temporary.Follow me on Twitter! @sean52711I'll follow back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ford Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 CCBS.While I do use a mixture of both part systems, I prefer the smooth shapes of CCBS because it creates a solid look and fills in a character. That and the system is durable; I refuse to use Inika torso frames as I have broken six in the past few years, but combining the front portion of an Inika torso with a CCBS frame can create a flow between the two systems. 1 Quote http://i.imgur.com/kbP5Svg.gifhttp://i.imgur.com/O8CcqC5.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/kbP5Svg.gif Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Petewa Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 I like them both, but I tend to find myself using ccbs more and more. 1 Quote Mataru Nui, an Interactive Adventure Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wazdakka Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 My goodness, I'm appalled. CCBS is terrible. For a great many reasons. First of all, it's much worse at MoCing with because it cannot easily interface with Technic or Bionicle parts. Bionicle parts always had a multitude of pinholes and axle-holes, but CCBS is much more sparse in that regard. CCBS bone pieces have one "armor-attaching balljoint" - Bionicle's Rahkshi and Piraka legs, to take some popular limb pieces, have two (or even three) pinholes, allowing for much greater creative freedom. That's just looking at leg-pieces, let alone anything else. Secondly, and much more importantly (in my opinion), is that CCBS looks terrible. It looks terrible because it is bland and generic. It looks terrible because there's absolutely no depth, no texture, and no details (with a few exceptions) that make pieces look unique or mechanical. Bionicle had pistons, hinges, gears, gribbly bits, textures, and more - CCBS has... lots of boring smooth shells. For me, the only time CCBS ever worked was in Invasion From Below, making large, featureless metal battle machines for the Heroes. However, for anything else, the building system totally lacked Bionicle's visual complexity. Okay, so "a great many reasons" was two, but CCBS is still trash, as outlined above. 2 Quote Steam Name: Toa Hahli Mahri. Xbox Live Gamertag: Makuta. Minecraft Username: ThePoohster.Wants: 2003 Jaller (from Jaller and Gukko), Exo-Toa, Turaga Nuju, Turaga Vakama, Shadow Kraata, Axonn, Brutaka, Vezon & Fenrakk, Nocturn, ORANGE FIKOU.I got rid of my picture, are you happy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kopekemaster Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 Definitely old Bionicle for me. It's much more compatible with Technic, which I like. 1 Quote My Writing Blog (more writing coming soon!) My Bionicle/LEGO Blog (defunct) Hyfudiar on Spotify (noise/drone/experimental music) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonkle Posted August 7, 2015 Author Share Posted August 7, 2015 My goodness, I'm appalled. CCBS is terrible. For a great many reasons. First of all, it's much worse at MoCing with because it cannot easily interface with Technic or Bionicle parts. Bionicle parts always had a multitude of pinholes and axle-holes, but CCBS is much more sparse in that regard. CCBS bone pieces have one "armor-attaching balljoint" - Bionicle's Rahkshi and Piraka legs, to take some popular limb pieces, have two (or even three) pinholes, allowing for much greater creative freedom. That's just looking at leg-pieces, let alone anything else. Secondly, and much more importantly (in my opinion), is that CCBS looks terrible. It looks terrible because it is bland and generic. It looks terrible because there's absolutely no depth, no texture, and no details (with a few exceptions) that make pieces look unique or mechanical. Bionicle had pistons, hinges, gears, gribbly bits, textures, and more - CCBS has... lots of boring smooth shells. For me, the only time CCBS ever worked was in Invasion From Below, making large, featureless metal battle machines for the Heroes. However, for anything else, the building system totally lacked Bionicle's visual complexity. Okay, so "a great many reasons" was two, but CCBS is still trash, as outlined above. There are larger bones with more than one ball joint. The pieces are lacking in detail, but that's what the add-ons are for. Not liking the aesthetic doesn't make it trash. The pieces are far more durable and compatible with each other. There are no holes on every piece and poseability is through the roof. 2 Quote I been away a long time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iruini Nuva Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 My goodness, I'm appalled. CCBS is terrible. For a great many reasons. First of all, it's much worse at MoCing with because it cannot easily interface with Technic or Bionicle parts. Bionicle parts always had a multitude of pinholes and axle-holes, but CCBS is much more sparse in that regard. CCBS bone pieces have one "armor-attaching balljoint" - Bionicle's Rahkshi and Piraka legs, to take some popular limb pieces, have two (or even three) pinholes, allowing for much greater creative freedom. That's just looking at leg-pieces, let alone anything else. Secondly, and much more importantly (in my opinion), is that CCBS looks terrible. It looks terrible because it is bland and generic. It looks terrible because there's absolutely no depth, no texture, and no details (with a few exceptions) that make pieces look unique or mechanical. Bionicle had pistons, hinges, gears, gribbly bits, textures, and more - CCBS has... lots of boring smooth shells. For me, the only time CCBS ever worked was in Invasion From Below, making large, featureless metal battle machines for the Heroes. However, for anything else, the building system totally lacked Bionicle's visual complexity. Okay, so "a great many reasons" was two, but CCBS is still trash, as outlined above. Exactly, I really miss the flexibility of pinholes, etc. With CCBS I find it harder to make custom armor, etc. from pieces that aren't explicitly slotted for it. Harder to make non-"character" MoCs as well, but I understand that characters are, by definition, what CCBS is made to handle. Been surprised by all of the durability comments about pieces I've seen lately. Maybe it's my general lack of sets from 08-10 (are those the weak ones?), but I've never outright broken a piece. 2 Quote Makuta: Consumed By Light • Rebrick Entry • Topic & Backstory • Blog ----------------- 2015 Sets: 18/18 + 3 • Polybags: 1/2 • SDCC x2, NYCC Clear MoF, Trans-MoF 2016 Sets: 17/17 + 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Makaru Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 I marvel over the stability, durability and the overall improved versatility of CCBS. It's also extremely easy to incorporate Bionicle pieces and system elements, way more than Bionicle ever could. 4 Quote Spoiler Alert Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tahu3.0 Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 CCBS is better and sometimes easier to do mocs. 1 Quote I'm just a simple man, trying to make my way in the Matoran Universe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jobber Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 (edited) Oh mercy me, I do declare that Bionicle is far better. CCBS is good for building short and simple figures, but when comes to dense and complex ones, OG Bionicle parts curbstomp. I only use 'em when I too lazy to add actual bulk to limbs and such. I might as well use system parts for more blocky designs. Edited August 7, 2015 by Minty Green Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bfahome Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 (edited) Both, interchangeably whenever I need whatever each offers. The old BIONICLE designs had more details to use as decoration, but they often clash with each other because of how dependent the pieces are on a specific look. CCBS is much better as a structural system due to its simplicity and versatility (it has introduced so many wonderful new TECHNIC-enhancing pieces), but on its own it can start to look repetitive without additions. Overall I'd have to give an edge to the CCBS though, because it's designed as a unified system rather than relying on BIONICLE's old habit of "new molds for days". Edited August 7, 2015 by Bfahome 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heir of the Chronicler Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 Aesthetically, BIONICLE looked better- we've had nothing but the same recycled shells and handful of attachments for years now. As a building system, CCBS is vastly superior as it's much more modular. If CCBS could be updated with a diversity of shell styles, it would be all around better. My remaining gripe is how loose shells sit on the "skeleton". The design could have tightened that up, and I don't know why it doesn't. - Heir Quote Click the banner. You know you want to. Shia Lebouf would tell you to just do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonkle Posted August 7, 2015 Author Share Posted August 7, 2015 Aesthetically, BIONICLE looked better- we've had nothing but the same recycled shells and handful of attachments for years now. As a building system, CCBS is vastly superior as it's much more modular. If CCBS could be updated with a diversity of shell styles, it would be all around better. My remaining gripe is how loose shells sit on the "skeleton". The design could have tightened that up, and I don't know why it doesn't. - HeirWhat do you mean by loose shells? The only problem I've had is the Toa's chestplates (minus Onua) will move around a bit because the gearbox prevents them from fully clicking in place. 1 Quote I been away a long time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chro Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 (edited) CCBS for sets; combination of both for MOCing Oh mercy me, I do declare that Bionicle is far better.CCBS is good for building short and simple figures, but when comes to dense and complex ones, OG Bionicle parts curbstomp. I only use 'em when I too lazy to add actual bulk to limbs and such. I might as well use system parts for more blocky designs. 'scuse me Edited August 7, 2015 by Chro 1 Quote save not only their lives but their spirits Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
32one Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 I feel like CCBS is a missed opportunity. Having a proper, non-specialised system is a good idea, but the connection types (balljoints and System pins) are too problematic and ironically specialised. Lots of CCBS sets how have the designers using workarounds to deal with the shell connections,which often don't look very convincing. Some CCBS sets are wonderful and have a very clean design, like Core Hunter, but the more recent sets have clashing design styles and textures which result in a less cohesive look than most BBS sets. LEGO is now stricter with how many molds are allowed, so the new sets usually have some unideal pieces, or parts in an unideal colour. I'm better at MOCing with BBS, but I've only used CCBS for nine months or so. A big disadvantage with the G1 pieces is the fragile socket design, so taking apart sets or building MOCs can be risky. In regards to G2 Bionicle, I don't like how CCBS has been used, as the highly ambitious functionality of the sets takes a huge hit on their appearance. Bionicle system is only one option. CCBS is 40 options. That's why I like it. If you think that BBS is only one option then you've just never adapted to the system. The pieces are lacking in detail, but that's what the add-ons are for.But what if you don't want the limbs to be so bulky? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jobber Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 CCBS for sets; combination of both for MOCing Oh mercy me, I do declare that Bionicle is far better.CCBS is good for building short and simple figures, but when comes to dense and complex ones, OG Bionicle parts curbstomp. I only use 'em when I too lazy to add actual bulk to limbs and such. I might as well use system parts for more blocky designs.'scuse me Not good enough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chro Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 Ooh, harsh... defintely set myself up for that one though I linked that because, whether or not it's a good MOC, I believe it objectively counters much of what you said about CCBS, but maybe your MOCing standards consist entirely of bigfatslob/Steve Puckett 4 Quote save not only their lives but their spirits Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jobber Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 Ooh, harsh... defintely set myself up for that one though I linked that because, whether or not it's a good MOC, I believe it objectively counters much of what you said about CCBS, but maybe your MOCing standards consist entirely of bigfatslob/Steve PuckettHuh? I'm not entirely sure what's going here? My standards are that of an elite MOCist who only wants best possible thing next to perfection. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chro Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 (edited) I have no idea what you're even trying to argue at this point My standards reference was a joke about a MOCist whose builds (massive, dense, arguably sort of complex maybe, Bionicle system only) I am personally not fond of; basically the extreme extent of the argument you were making against CCBS The high standards sarcasm is sort of coming out of left field based on the context of the debate, unless I'm entirely missing something as usual Edited August 8, 2015 by Chro 3 Quote save not only their lives but their spirits Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Makaru Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 ...but maybe your MOCing standards consist entirely of bigfatslob/Steve Puckett I haven't seen a burn that fresh in a long time. 7 Quote Spoiler Alert Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meiko Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 CCBS all the way. The consistency among parts over the years is a lot more favorable in my opinion, whereas using Bionicle parts from a couple years apart, there is little consistency in the design and shape of the parts. 3 Quote -- Meiko - @georgebarnick LUG Ambassador and administrator at Brickipedia News reporter and database administrator at Brickset Administrator at BIONICLEsector01 DISCLAIMER: All opinions and contributions made under this account are based solely on my own personal thoughts and opinions, and in no way represent any of the above groups/entities. If you have any concerns or inquiries about the contributions made under this account, please contact me individually and I will address them with you to the best of my ability. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishers64 Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 Bionicle system is only one option. CCBS is 40 options. That's why I like it.If you think that BBS is only one option then you've just never adapted to the system. Point taken. But with CCBS I never had to "adapt". It's more intuitive and just makes the most sense to me. Now if I had spent years building Bionicle MoCs using the old system and adapting around all of its features like detailed parts and reliance on Technic connections, then I'd probably be irked that I can't use Technic connections no more, or as much as I used to. But I never did. Therefore I regard CCBS with unabashed glee. It's like an expensive plastic form of Tubers and Zots that don't break and have exposed wires when they do. 1 Quote Hero Factory RPG | Bionicle Mafia XXIX: Storyline & Theories Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iruini Nuva Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 (edited) Bionicle system is only one option. CCBS is 40 options. That's why I like it.If you think that BBS is only one option then you've just never adapted to the system. Point taken. But with CCBS I never had to "adapt". It's more intuitive and just makes the most sense to me. Now if I had spent years building Bionicle MoCs using the old system and adapting around all of its features like detailed parts and reliance on Technic connections, then I'd probably be irked that I can't use Technic connections no more, or as much as I used to. But I never did. Therefore I regard CCBS with unabashed glee. It's like an expensive plastic form of Tubers and Zots that don't break and have exposed wires when they do. Oh man, I haven't seen Toobers and Zots in forever. Edited August 7, 2015 by Iruini Nuva Quote Makuta: Consumed By Light • Rebrick Entry • Topic & Backstory • Blog ----------------- 2015 Sets: 18/18 + 3 • Polybags: 1/2 • SDCC x2, NYCC Clear MoF, Trans-MoF 2016 Sets: 17/17 + 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishers64 Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 Bionicle system is only one option. CCBS is 40 options. That's why I like it.If you think that BBS is only one option then you've just never adapted to the system. Point taken. But with CCBS I never had to "adapt". It's more intuitive and just makes the most sense to me. Now if I had spent years building Bionicle MoCs using the old system and adapting around all of its features like detailed parts and reliance on Technic connections, then I'd probably be irked that I can't use Technic connections no more, or as much as I used to. But I never did. Therefore I regard CCBS with unabashed glee. It's like an expensive plastic form of Tubers and Zots that don't break and have exposed wires when they do. Oh man, I haven't seen Toobers and Zots in forever. Thanks man, now I feel old. But I have very fond memories of Tubers and Zots and Fiddlesticks in terms of building toys. It reminds of the time before I got involved into books and building toys were made my brother's domain. I don't think they make Tubers and Zots anymore. I think toy regulations eventually banned them due to the exposed wires. But CCBS (to get back on topic) is a lot like that. The limbs are the tubers and the shells/add-ons are the zots. 1 Quote Hero Factory RPG | Bionicle Mafia XXIX: Storyline & Theories Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tarvaxx Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 (edited) Yeaaahhh NO. Those who say that CCBS is hard to use with technic are just letting nostalgia cloud their view. CCBS is 10x better than the old system. Now bow to Makuta Tarvaxx Edited August 7, 2015 by Tarvaxx 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hiddenderek Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 (edited) Basically all you need is a bunch of these and ccbs is perfectly compatible with technic and old bionicle, its what I used (13 to be exact) to make this: Edited August 7, 2015 by hiddenderek 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tarvaxx Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 Glatorian kneck pieces work just fine too, as do the connections used to connect the torso armor to the protectors 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.