Jump to content

Bionicle G2 wouldn't have ended if it was packaged in canisters?


Recommended Posts

I'm wondering what would have prevented g2's end and also how kids could have noticed the sets on the shelves because it seems like g1 wasn't difficult to notice thanks to those canisters and it's how I first noticed bionicle so I'm wondering if that's a leading factor's in it's early death

 

Here's my video discussing this topic:

Video with inappropriate content removed. -B6

Edited by Black Six
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think Bionicle's end was because kids failed to notice the sets. Why should Bionicle need a completely unique style of packaging to get noticed when all other LEGO themes do not? LEGO Ninjago, City, Creator, and Technic sets sell just fine in plain rectangular boxes. LEGO Friends and LEGO Elves sets sell just fine in rectangular boxes with beveled edges. Bionicle G2 already had more unique box designs than ANY of those themes, or any other theme for that matter. If that wasn't enough to get them noticed, then chances are the problem didn't have anything to do with how the sets were packaged.

 

Back when Bionicle G1 was around, it was not the only theme that had plastic canisters. The Dinosaurs sets, Knights' Kingdom buildable figures, Racers Tiny Turbos, and $5 Creator sets, among others, had similar packaging. But today LEGO has stopped using this type of packaging in general, not just for Bionicle. This is because it was more expensive and had a bigger carbon footprint to produce and ship than cardboard or plastic foil packaging.

 

I don't understand why many people's idea of what Bionicle needed to succeed hinges on it needing special treatment or special gimmicks beyond what other themes its size get. Isn't that presupposing that it's less desirable to begin with than other themes? And if that were the case, why would LEGO have been motivated to invest more in it and not in other themes that could pay off much more handsomely?

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

I don't think lego really cares that much about their "carbon footprint" because it doesn't matter to them as long as their able to be profitable and I don't think a bunch of elitist environmentalists are a very big number of their sales or customers.

 

Bionicle being in canisters made it different than many other themes, it helped it stand out and be a different type of lego and I'm aware that many themes around its time were also in canisters, but those such as dinosaurs and knights kingdom were very unusual lego themes on their own as well.

 

I'm not saying they should bring back canisters just for nostalgia sake, I'm saying they should bring them back because it would help kids notice it at store shelves because I first noticed bionicle at my local pharmacy back in 2001 because of their canisters that you claim are so "evil" and so "environmentally dangerous" and so "bad carbon foot print" or whatever. The enviro elites can't get in the way of bionicle and constraction being great again! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think lego really cares that much about their "carbon footprint"

 

https://www.lego.com/en-us/aboutus/responsibility

• Environmental leadership

We want to create positive impact through our environmental actions. We want to address climate change by reducing our emissions through improving our energy efficiency, and we want to source and use resources responsibly and to improve our waste management. This is to ensure we do not consume resources and materials at a faster rate than they are regenerated, so that future generations can also benefit from the same variety of resources and materials our generation has access to.

 

 

(The environmentalism is coming from inside the house!! :o )

 

I was never into BIONICLE for the canisters.  The only ones I ever particularly liked were the Toa Metru ones because of how their lids functioned.  I'd rather see the budget and resources be put into the set itself, not the packaging.  Plus, the G2 boxes were pretty cool-looking.

  • Upvote 5

OpAXNpl.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the g2 boxes were so "cool looking" like you're claiming, then why is g2 cancelled and why is it that I saw so many kids not even notice bionicle at the store shelves? meanwhile I noticed them right away back in g1 thanks to those canisters. if bionicle was brought back again and they had the toa metru style of canister, would they do well? also lego should focus on making high quality products for people who actually buy their sets instead of bio degradable stuff that enviros won't buy but will feel good about

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the g2 boxes were so "cool looking" like you're claiming, then why is g2 cancelled and why is it that I saw so many kids not even notice bionicle at the store shelves?

Well obviously it's because the G2 boxes were hexagonal rather than rectangular.  LEGO's biggest hits right now are being sold in rectangular boxes, and they're doing phenomenally well.  Not sure why you'd want to go back to canisters when kids clearly prefer packaging in the shape of quadrilateral prisms.  I mean, if canisters were so great then why was G1 canceled?

  • Upvote 2

OpAXNpl.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the g2 boxes were so "cool looking" like you're claiming, then why is g2 cancelled and why is it that I saw so many kids not even notice bionicle at the store shelves? meanwhile I noticed them right away back in g1 thanks to those canisters. if bionicle was brought back again and they had the toa metru style of canister, would they do well? also lego should focus on making high quality products for people who actually buy their sets instead of bio degradable stuff that enviros won't buy but will feel good about

 

G2 was cancelled for any number of reasons. There are so many factors that could've caused the theme to end like, I dunno, kids not liking it? It not being successful story-wise? It being marketed properly? A change in consumer interest? But to say something like packaging is the exclusive or even major reason for it being cancelled is just short-sighted. If the packaging for G2 sucked it could've still done amazingly, so that argument feels mute.

 

And what do you mean you saw so many kids not notice Bionicle on the shelves? How can say that without jumping into their skin and knowing exactly what they were thinking? Maybe they weren't paying attention to Bionicle because they didn't want constraction or they already had the sets or they were specifically at the store looking for something else. You're comparing the experiences of others which you yourself can't measure to your own personal experience which is entirely subjective. What people notice changes based on who you are, ex. I'm extremely attracted to sci-fi/space aesthetics but maybe someone else like castles and more old timey things.

 

And I agree, LEGO should focus on making better products and sets instead of focusing on overproducing a pricey and expensive to manufacture style of packaging like canisters. And no one is going to buy a product just because of the package. You don't walk into an Apple store and blow several hundred dollars on an i phone just because you like how pretty the packaging is. Yes, packaging is important to how you market a product and how consumers see it but that has more to do with the design of it and what they see, not the physical form of the box. LEGO switched to cardboard instead of canisters because it was cheaper. Canisters are far more elaborate and pricey, so you ought to check your facts. Cardboard is cheap and recyclable.

 

And it's clear you already have an agenda against "elitist enviros" which makes no sense in itself. If keeping the planet and humanity alive meant me having to give up canisters and even LEGO I'm sure I'd be able to get by for the sake of a larger cause.

 

As someone who's taken several design classes and has practiced designing packages and logos I can say that it doesn't matter what the package is made of as long as the design is strong and grabs the consumers attention. They should be designed for practicality, efficiency, and to be attractive to consumers, the first two something canisters are imperatively lacking in and the third something that depends on the skill of the designer and their understanding of consumer psychology and how to make a product seem attractive.

 

I'd love to see LEGO make cardboard canisters like that one packaging design that someone made of G2 Tahu for a G3 to evoke and call back to the mata landing on the beach, but there's no reason for them to be bulky, more expensive or more harmful to the environment than need be.

Edited by Banana Gunz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If kids love hexagonal boxes so much then why is g2 cancelled and why are so few lego themes using those types of boxes?

 

G1 was cancelled after 10 years with canister, g2 was cancelled after 2 years and it was in boxes, clearly kids prefer canisters over boxes you smelly elitist!

 

g2 didn't stand out the way it did back in the early 2000s.

 

here's the difference between a bionicle set and some apple phone, bionicle's packaging was able to have actual lego pieces attached to it, it didn't cause things to get warped/bent like if they were in boxes/bags. people don't buy things solely on packaging, but it helps grab attention to that product and it's clear that's what g1 did for many fans including me. I work on logo and art designs at school too.

 

like I've said before lego fans don't care that much about the environment, it's just way to make them look cool in front of the enviro elites who pretend to have tons of power, but are just control freaks

 

Cardboard canisters are a TERRIBLE IDEA! the av-matoran packaging was terrible and was terrible in every way. if they brought back canisters I'd want them to be 100% solid plastic

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think lego really cares that much about their "carbon footprint" because it doesn't matter to them as long as their able to be profitable and I don't think a bunch of elitist environmentalists are a very big number of their sales or customers.

The enviro elites can't get in the way of bionicle and constraction being great again! 

G1 was cancelled after 10 years with canister, g2 was cancelled after 2 years and it was in boxes, clearly kids prefer canisters over boxes you smelly elitist!

like I've said before lego fans don't care that much about the environment, it's just way to make them look cool in front of the enviro elites who pretend to have tons of power, but are just control freaks

This man needs to chill out with the "enviro elites" talk.  That has nothing to do with anything.

And if anything, it's my personal opinion that the reason G2 BIONICLE sets were packaged the way that they were was to blend the modern box aesthetic with something that was a nod to the distinctive canister shapes of G1.  Hence, the hexagonal boxes.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If kids love hexagonal boxes so much then why is g2 cancelled and why are so few lego themes using those types of boxes?

Well obviously because they didn't love them!  G2 should've used rectangular boxes, the kind of boxes that kids want!  That way G2 would have gone on to become an evergreen theme, much like the rectangularly-boxed Ninjago, City, and Creator themes.

  • Upvote 2

OpAXNpl.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If kids love hexagonal boxes so much then why is g2 cancelled

 

Wait, since when do politicians frequent BZPower?

 

I mean, sure, let's completely ignore the subpar marketing G2 was treated to, the shifting market, different trends and all that jazz. Obviously G2 was cancelled because the sets were sold in cardboard boxes.

 

Which were actually cool.

 

And recyclable.

 

:kakama:

  • Upvote 2

:kakama: Stone rocks :kakama:

Model Designer at The LEGO Group. Former contributor at New Elementary. My MOCs can be found on Flickr and Instagram

:smilepohatunu: :smilehuki:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If kids love hexagonal boxes so much then why is g2 cancelled and why are so few lego themes using those types of boxes?

 

G1 was cancelled after 10 years with canister, g2 was cancelled after 2 years and it was in boxes, clearly kids prefer canisters over boxes you smelly elitist!

 

g2 didn't stand out the way it did back in the early 2000s.

 

here's the difference between a bionicle set and some apple phone, bionicle's packaging was able to have actual lego pieces attached to it, it didn't cause things to get warped/bent like if they were in boxes/bags. people don't buy things solely on packaging, but it helps grab attention to that product and it's clear that's what g1 did for many fans including me. I work on logo and art designs at school too.

 

like I've said before lego fans don't care that much about the environment, it's just way to make them look cool in front of the enviro elites who pretend to have tons of power, but are just control freaks

 

Cardboard canisters are a TERRIBLE IDEA! the av-matoran packaging was terrible and was terrible in every way. if they brought back canisters I'd want them to be 100% solid plastic

 

1. Okay but again you've completely ignored the argument that the two themes could've succeeded or failed for any number of reasons. Packaging might have a slight influence, but not an enormous one. That statement makes it sound like the only think worthwhile about Bionicle was it's packaging. People buy sets for what's inside, not what it came in. G1 had plenty of sets that came in regular boxes rather than canisters, so if you could find some sort of factual statistic that shows a difference in sales between sets packaged in canisters versus boxes I'm more than open to listen.

 

2. I genuinely have to question what is wrong with you that you immediately reside to calling me a smelly elitist. Me having a different opinion from you doesn't mean I think I'm better than you, people can't be compared that way. I don't think you even completely understand what calling someone an elitist is. Me pointing out flaws in your argument means I'm trying to be genuinely intelligent about how I answer, because speaking to others intelligently means you respect and trust them enough to assume that they're also intelligent enough to understand you and converse with you on a meaningful level. The fact I have to explain the basic properties of a conversation to you is worrisome. And calling me smelly? That's just plain juvenile. You know literally nothing about me, how look, how I sound, what I think and do. Residing to calling me smelly against any possible merit is babyish and I do wish you would at least respect both me and yourself enough to speak with a little more thought.

 

3. Boxes and bags in my experience are quite effective, especially for the budget. I can understand the argument that people would want them to be more secure or thicker, as I have seen opened up packages on LEGO stores showing they are somewhat more flimsy than the bigger boxes. It's great that you study design as well but if you do then I think you can agree with the basic principle that it's not about the materials but what you do with it. An effective package design is not based solely on it being a canister or not. And I agree that a package should be functional as well, but adding studs or axles onto it doesn't make it better or more effective. You were just saying earlier how LEGO should focus more on making better sets, so which is it? Do you want better sets or more ornate packages?

 

4. You're speaking in generalizations about LEGO fans and what they believe. I don't believe saving the environment is even a political view, it's an unabashed fact and something even LEGO has directly acknowledged and put into their goals as a company. I don't think most LEGO fans or even people in general care to look "cool" in front of anyone. I don't believe in what I do because it makes me fit in, I believe what I do because it's true or relevant to me and the world. And as someone who's worked as an intern for Environment New York and has had to do canvassing and has seen the difficulty of just trying to get the attention of people about honey bees dying off I can say we're not trying to act or pretend like we're powerful at all. In fact fighting for the environment is incredibly difficult and isn't about control, but rather about being responsible for our actions. Responsibility isn't wrong because you don't like it, it's a fact of life.

 

5. I can agree that the Av-matoran canisters were somewhat strange and I'm not a huge fan of them but I think that's largely to them having two large clunky plastic pieces with awkward shapes mixed in. What I'm suggesting is a fully cardboard canister design that manages to both be inexpensive and stylish since you seem so fond of the canister shape.

Edited by Banana Gunz
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think lego really cares that much about their "carbon footprint" because it doesn't matter to them as long as their able to be profitable and I don't think a bunch of elitist environmentalists are a very big number of their sales or customers.

 

Bionicle being in canisters made it different than many other themes, it helped it stand out and be a different type of lego and I'm aware that many themes around its time were also in canisters, but those such as dinosaurs and knights kingdom were very unusual lego themes on their own as well.

 

I'm not saying they should bring back canisters just for nostalgia sake, I'm saying they should bring them back because it would help kids notice it at store shelves because I first noticed bionicle at my local pharmacy back in 2001 because of their canisters that you claim are so "evil" and so "environmentally dangerous" and so "bad carbon foot print" or whatever. The enviro elites can't get in the way of bionicle and constraction being great again!

Hold up a sec. Don't start putting words in my mouth. I never once said canisters were "evil" or "environmentally dangerous". But they DO have a bigger carbon footprint than boxes. And as Bfahome points out, that's something LEGO cares about. It would be irresponsible of a company their size NOT to care. Not when caring is as easy as using cardboard, which has always served them well in their other best-selling themes.

 

Being "a different type of LEGO" was definitely a good thing back in the late 90s, when other LEGO themes were genuinely struggling to stay relevant. But today, LEGO is one of the most popular toys on the market, not just for kids but also for teens and adults. So being "different" from other themes isn't necessarily the great thing it once was. And if kids can notice City or Ninjago or Speed Champions sets just fine in normal rectangular cardboard boxes, why wouldn't they notice the fancy hexagonal boxes that are different from all other LEGO packages?

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the kids didn't notice the sets on the shelves, it's probably more due to a lack of marketing than the shape of the packaging.

 

Personally, I loved the canisters and was kinda sad to see them go, but that's nostalgia more than anything else.  The ones where you actually did something with the lids though were cool, setting up a little Suva, or hanging up Bohrok in their cans.  Also, has anyone else noticed?  You can take a Kanoka disk and fit it into the top of a Metru canister lid.  Little things like that.

 

But since Gen2 didn't really have any collectibles, there wouldn't be much of a point to designing the cans to act as pedestals to display them.  So I can see why they went with boxes.  Do I like the decision?  Not really.  Can I see why they did it?  Yes.

 

There are many factors as to why Gen2 failed, but the effect of packaging is negligible compared to some of the bigger culprits.

Avatar by Nicholas Anderson (NickonAquaMagna)

My blog: The Jaga's Nest

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the g2 boxes were so "cool looking" like you're claiming, then why is g2 cancelled and why is it that I saw so many kids not even notice bionicle at the store shelves? meanwhile I noticed them right away back in g1 thanks to those canisters. if bionicle was brought back again and they had the toa metru style of canister, would they do well? also lego should focus on making high quality products for people who actually buy their sets instead of bio degradable stuff that enviros won't buy but will feel good about

Kinda jumping into this conversation but indeed you may have noticed them because of the canisters but myself all my six siblings and every other Bionicle fan I know personally did NOT notice them because of the canisters as our first sets that got us into it were actually turaga from 2001 which had boxes. Plus the later Hero Factory sets with canisters tanked on the shelves as I saw the Savage Planet sets on sale for a long time. Looking further back Robo Riders had canisters and they well didn't sell at all.

 

The reason that Bionicle canisters where so cool was not because they looked good but because they had story purposes (at least to most fans). At least in the first several years such as the suvas, toa canisters/transports, bohrok nests, rakshi stasis tubes and in 2004 it was the matoran spheres being made from the lids. Lego only continued to use them was because it was iconic for Bionicle at the time and they had no reason to change. However with moving onto gen 2 they had no real reason to keep them and honestly speakingthe new boxed kinda stick out from the rest.

 

If hypothetically we gave Gen 2 canisters everything more likely than not would have turned out the same as packaging was not the issue as I think the packaging for 2015 look way cooler and better than the last several years of Gen 1. 

 

-EDIT- Also from what I remember seeing in stores during Gen 1 the Titan sets which were in boxes sold much faster and were way more popular than canister sets and the small box sets were usually harder to find to them being sold faster. Honestly from my odservation (as I was collecting threw all 10 years) canister sets sold the worst of them. I still remember seeing mistika sets in some stores way after they were discontinued like 5 years later. Similar with the original pohatu as I saw him trying to get sold all the way into 2003 or 2004. While small and large box sets I never saw this issue.

 

-Onvermel-

Edited by Onvermel

"I believe in certainties. The strength of my limbs, the power of my mask, the sharp edges of my blades — that is what I build my plans around. Trickery, deception, complex strategies, they are for the weak! If you want power, and another has it, you get it not by outwitting him — you get it by stepping over his corpse." Makuta Icarax

"WHO ATE ALL THE PIES! WHO ATE ALL THE PIES!"

 http://onvermelreport.blogspot.ca/ --- https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCaX7xUwGu9-8kVqQ4BqOxWw               

onvermel_report_logo_24.bmp

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, may I note that some of the canister designs just didn't work well at all, not because they didn't look cool, but they were really stinkin' hard to open.  The Mistika cans, for instance, or the Rahkshi and Vahki cans.  Those were just painful to open.  Compared to those, the boxes were an improvement.

Avatar by Nicholas Anderson (NickonAquaMagna)

My blog: The Jaga's Nest

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Similar with the original pohatu as I saw him trying to get sold all the way into 2003 or 2004.

This makes me sad :(

 

However the point about the Bionicle precursors which also had canisters not selling well is also well made. I mean, the very idea that G2 stumbled just because of the packaging is absolutely absurd, but even if we keep it up for the sake of hypotheticals, it still fails.

 

I mean, does anyone remember those kinda-constraction-kinda-system Dinosaur sets which came in canisters the lid of which acted as a stand and all that? They were overly simple, with few parts and I think there was only a single wave of them in 2001. I had 6722 Styracosaurus, and honestly, it was disappointing even for a 5-year-old who liked dinos. Those had canisters too, and yet I hear they absolutely tanked in terms of sales. 

 

So yeah, canisters/boxes had very little no absolutely zero impact on G2's success.

 

:kakama:

  • Upvote 1

:kakama: Stone rocks :kakama:

Model Designer at The LEGO Group. Former contributor at New Elementary. My MOCs can be found on Flickr and Instagram

:smilepohatunu: :smilehuki:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The enviromentalist elites are an interest group that's controlling lego it appears and I doubt environmentalists buy lego sets.

The hexogontal boxes are better than the av matoran packaging and hf bags, but they're still no where near as great as g1's canisters

What makes you think kids want normal looking boxes?
G2 wasn't marketed at all, it was neglected.
G2 being in boxes is one of the root causes of g2's demise

Goals are nothing as long as they're able to have as much more assets than liabilities.

A cardbaord canister is a terrible idea! You can't attach lego pieces to that. They're caring about the environment as a public relations strategy and nothing else. The real reason we don't got canisters is because they want to save money.

Kids notice city, ninjago and speed champions because they either have tv shows, are heavily marketed or they notice it right away because it's lego.  

I noticed bionicle because it was packaged in canisters.

The bigger sized sets in g1 sold well because they had better price per ratios than the canister sets, in g2 it's the opposite where small and medium sets have better value/price per piece ratio than bigger/titan sized sets.

I agree that the mistika canisters were very hard to open and I almost damaged my fingers trying to open them, but maybe we can get canisters from 2001-2004 or maybe 2007 with it's cool lookin' aesthetic.

I remember those dinosaur sets they had a lot of sand green and sand blue

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The enviromentalist elites are an interest group that's controlling lego it appears

Yeah, that's what we've been saying; the people who run The LEGO Group care about the environment.

 

What makes you think kids want normal looking boxes?

 

Well look at how successful other LEGO themes are.  If kids didn't love things packaged in normal boxes, then obviously LEGO would be in some serious financial trouble!

 

The bigger sized sets in g1 sold well because they had better price per ratios than the canister sets

 

Ah yes, I remember how back when I was ten years old I would bring my calculator to the store to determine if I really wanted that large BIONICLE set, because the only thing that would separate me from my beloved canisters was a solid cost ratio.

  • Upvote 2

OpAXNpl.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I noticed the price per piece ratio in sets back when I was a kid because it was a big deal when a set's piece count went up. Back then I remember titan sets like axonn had higher piece counts than the inika but he was short, but nowadays you can have a tall/big set, but have a lower piece count than many small or medium sized sets 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

G2 wasn't marketed at all, it was neglected.

G2 being in boxes is one of the root causes of g2's demise

 

You realize you're contradicting yourself in there? Being in boxes has literally nothing to do with commercial success. A lack of marketing does. 

 

A cardboard canister is a terrible idea!  

 

Opinion.

 

 

Kids notice city, ninjago and speed champions because they either have tv shows, are heavily marketed or they notice it right away because it's lego.  

 

Hate to break it to you, but this sentence is exactly what goes against your argument, and the same one everyone trying hands and feet to explain why canisters have nothing to do with this have been making.

 

 

I noticed bionicle because it was packaged in canisters.

 

Wonderful! Well why doesn't Lego just base it's entire packaging methodology around the anecdotal experience of a single customer?

 

 

The enviromentalist elites 

 

What is it with you and that phrase? 

 

 

Mate, you can't just repeat opinionated 'arguments' again and again in the face of well thought out arguments that oppose your unfounded proposition. This is not how debating works.

 

Seriously, this is pointless.

 

:kakama:

  • Upvote 2

:kakama: Stone rocks :kakama:

Model Designer at The LEGO Group. Former contributor at New Elementary. My MOCs can be found on Flickr and Instagram

:smilepohatunu: :smilehuki:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I noticed the price per piece ratio in sets back when I was a kid because it was a big deal when a set's piece count went up. Back then I remember titan sets like axonn had higher piece counts than the inika but he was short, but nowadays you can have a tall/big set, but have a lower piece count than many small or medium sized sets 

 

I mean, I haven't really been taking this topic seriously at all, but price-per-piece ratio isn't a good measure for sets like BIONICLE. The pieces vary in size and complexity far too much.  Blindly comparing price-per-piece ratios without considering what the pieces actually are is meaningless.

  • Upvote 1

OpAXNpl.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I noticed the price per piece ratio in sets back when I was a kid because it was a big deal when a set's piece count went up. Back then I remember titan sets like axonn had higher piece counts than the inika but he was short, but nowadays you can have a tall/big set, but have a lower piece count than many small or medium sized sets 

 

I mean, I haven't really been taking this topic seriously at all, but price-per-piece ratio isn't a good measure for sets like BIONICLE. The pieces vary in size and complexity far too much.  Blindly comparing price-per-piece ratios without considering what the pieces actually are is meaningless.

 

Well, it is a fair point. Sets packaged in boxes (including the G1 titans and pretty much all the G2 sets) DO generally have better price-per-piece ratios than sets in canisters, because canisters are very expensive to produce compared to folded cardboard, which in turn reduces the number of parts that can be included at a given price point. LimeFlavoredLibertarian is really just proving why boxes are a better choice.

Edited by Lyichir
  • Upvote 1

Formerly Lyichir: Rachira of Influence

Aanchir's and Meiko's brother

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can them environmental elitists because that's what they are, they seem to not be bionicle/lego fans like you and me and seem to only care about if it'll affect their fake climate change/global warming plans.

 

I'm aware most system sets price per piece ratio is 10-15 cents a piece and constraction is 15-20 cents a piece, but I'm saying compare the price per piece ratio of small and large sets from the 2000s to now.

 

According to my strawpoll, a majority of fans or about 50-60% of them I think want canisters, 30% want boxes and less than 10% want bags. so canisters are the choice of the fandom!

 

look at this chart!

tumblr_nyg514H1hv1tsesg2o1_r1_500.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 fake climate change/global warming plans.

 

Oooooooooookay I'm out. I mean, there is a lot wrong with that post/argument, but I'm just not going to bother after this.

 

:kakama:

  • Upvote 5

:kakama: Stone rocks :kakama:

Model Designer at The LEGO Group. Former contributor at New Elementary. My MOCs can be found on Flickr and Instagram

:smilepohatunu: :smilehuki:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's clear this wasn't ever even a conversation in the first place, this was you trying to feel valid by throwing your thoughtless opinions out onto other people and refusing to see any other perspective other than your own. No matter how many time people will point out your fallacies, correct your assumptions, disprove your brash statements, and provide valid counterpoints to everything you say you will stick by your idea because this isn't about canisters, this isn't about LEGO at all. This is about you wanting to feel right, and I don't care if I get a scolding from staff for saying this but you are not valid for exactly that, and you don't belong in a place of discussion if all you do is try to push your political agenda and refuse any and all reason. You never even apologized for calling me a "smelly enviro", and I suppose it was too much to expect something as rational as that from someone like you.

 

The reason people get hostile towards you is because you don't listen. You already decided exactly what you will believe before anyone came here to talk. You're not a community member, you're a preacher, and the only moment you become wrong is when you fully accept something you believe as an absolute and indisputable truth. You're controversial because you want attention, not because you're right. There's a reason why your proto is so low and it's because you don't know how to communicate with people and be respectful. You're so insecure and afraid of others peeling away your ignorant, thin layer of dillusion that you become aggressive, offensive, and irrational.

 

The ambiguity that comes with the internet makes you feel safe, and yes, you're safe from others, you're not directly physically affect-able by others. You don't have to look stronger people in the eyes and act the same way you do on the internet. But that's what makes you weak, because you take that as an excuse to act irresponsibly. You don't want to change, you don't want to learn, and for people to sit around and deal with your baby-ishness is unfair to them. This topic is worthless, and I hope that you take what I say with consideration that all I want is for people to try to be better, to try and accept any other voice than their own. I don't want to offend you, I don't like hurting other people, but out of respect for you as a human being you deserve to understand the truth, even if you don't care to accept it.

 

Good day.

  • Upvote 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can them environmental elitists because that's what they are, they seem to not be bionicle/lego fans like you and me and seem to only care about if it'll affect their fake climate change/global warming plans.

 

God forbid people care more about the environmental state of this rock we're living on than the packaging of some plastic luxury items we occasionally buy.

  • Upvote 4

< - - - - - - - - - >
Dig in, pull back the skin
See what's inside you, the sickness that drives you
Beating black
Demoniac
< - - - - - - - - - >

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So canisters from g1 are your favourites then?

 

It takes all of my willpower not to type this in full caps, but please use the accursed quote function otherwise no one but you will be able to follow to whom you're addressing the question/response.

 

:kakama:

  • Upvote 1

:kakama: Stone rocks :kakama:

Model Designer at The LEGO Group. Former contributor at New Elementary. My MOCs can be found on Flickr and Instagram

:smilepohatunu: :smilehuki:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally, I'm pretty tired of the "Bionicle G2 failed because of a certain arbitrary thing I happened to dislike - and it has to be true because the mere fact that G2 ended somehow proves it true" logical fallacy present in the community. It's okay to speculate about the reasons why G2 got cancelled but at least try to stomach the fact that you may be wrong, okay?


 

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The enviro elites can't get in the way of bionicle and constraction being great again!

I concur! I say we build a wall to stop those "enviro elites" from getting anywhere near our Bionicle and constraction.

 

But seriously, Bionicle sets themselves were better than ever at the start of G2. While canisters would have made it extra nostalgic, they were far from necessary. The lack of their presence was not something that caused the theme's cancellation at all in my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The enviro elites can't get in the way of bionicle and constraction being great again!

I concur! I say we build a wall to stop those "enviro elites" from getting anywhere near our Bionicle and constraction.

 

But seriously, Bionicle sets themselves were better than ever at the start of G2. While canisters would have made it extra nostalgic, they were far from necessary. The lack of their presence was not something that caused the theme's cancellation at all in my opinion.

 

I'm sure you can build a wall with ccbs bones just like how you can do that with lego bricks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

The enviro elites can't get in the way of bionicle and constraction being great again!

I concur! I say we build a wall to stop those "enviro elites" from getting anywhere near our Bionicle and constraction.

 

But seriously, Bionicle sets themselves were better than ever at the start of G2. While canisters would have made it extra nostalgic, they were far from necessary. The lack of their presence was not something that caused the theme's cancellation at all in my opinion.

I'm sure you can build a wall with ccbs bones just like how you can do that with lego bricks
If you watch American politics or at least their comedic counterparts you would get that joke.

 

Time to toss in my two cents.

Canisters would have changed NOTHING.

It was most likely a combination of poor marketing and childish story that caused the great fall of G2.

For there sets were amazing and packaging were the most unique for 2015-16 out of any other box Lego made.

Also other sets back in G1's time had canisters so where are the reboots of slizers and knights kingdom?

Hey I got a Flickr because I like making LEGO stuff.

https://www.flickr.com/people/toatimelord/
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Something else I'd like to point out here. If your theory was true then how come matoran sets got produced year after year? Think about it. If the constraction figures in boxes didn't sell well then why were matoran and titans made year after year. Surely Lego would have stopped making them if they didn't make any money. Plus why wasn't there a massive drop in profits in 2007? The toa Mahri didn't come in canisters. Yet the theme wasn't cancelled till the next year and with decent profits. Clearly it was something else that made those sets sell. 

It's time to move on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Something else I'd like to point out here. If your theory was true then how come matoran sets got produced year after year? Think about it. If the constraction figures in boxes didn't sell well then why were matoran and titans made year after year. Surely Lego would have stopped making them if they didn't make any money. Plus why wasn't there a massive drop in profits in 2007? The toa Mahri didn't come in canisters. Yet the theme wasn't cancelled till the next year and with decent profits. Clearly it was something else that made those sets sell. 

I'm not saying all the sets should be packaged in canisters, but the main characters were back in g1 and I think that affect canisters had trickled down to non canister sets from bionicle and helped them sell or somethin' like that I guess

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...