Hero factory or Zero factory

[Cederak]

I didn't bother to immerse myself in Hero Factory much. I stopped buying Lego sets (Bionicle included) in 2008 and Hero Factory didn't change that for me. As a story, it didn't catch my attention with the same sort of spark Bionicle introduced. So the short answer is no, I don't like Hero Factory.-Ced

[Daiker]

I hate it simply because it's a constant reminder of what happened to Bionicle.

I personally see this as a horrible reason. It's like getting a prosthetic limb and hating it simply because it isn't the original. You should be lucky you have it, because you could've simply gone on without the arm. There's of course reasons which have been explained a million times in topics just like these so I bother not to reiterate. Having nothing would be even worse, and there is a reason for the continuation of Constraction.You don't have to be in love with HERO Factory, but there is no reason to hate it seeing as it has done nothing but be a successor, not replace it. You shouldn't travel to the other side of the spectrum just to say "I'm not a fan.". Edited September 18, 2012 by Daiker

[ankyfdarkness]

I can't help it, I have to post here. To start off I want to say that I don't think a true argument can ever exist on which line is better. They're very different and that's that. The things that do matter when analyzing the two lines is the story and the marketing.I am not keen on the idea of calling Hero Factory superior to Bionicle because it has "better" sets or vice versa. That's ridiculous. For one thing, think of how many people are fond of Bionicle's 2001 line over it's 2007 line. Or how many like the 2006 line over the 2005 line. Simply put, sets change with time. It would have been incredibly easy for Bionicle to adopt Hero Factory's ball joint style of building. Heck, just take off the hero cores and give them masks and Lego's new line of heroes would be Toa. Case in point. And you guys can't tell me that some of these new Hero Factory villains don't remind you of some of Bionicle's villains. Bitil and Waspix seem familiar?And one final note: can you imagine how boring MoCs would get if the only parts everyone had to work with were Hero Factory ones? I've seen some great MoCs use Hero Factory pieces, but they always used Bionicle pieces as well.As for the story and marketing aspect of the two lines we actually have a interesting comparison. In general, I prefer Bionicle, but I'm 18. The mythology, dark atmosphere, and complexity all sing to me as a consumer. I found the 2007 Bionicle website to be very compelling as apposed to Hero Factory's current site. But again, I'm old. Hero Factory's simplicity is a great place to start for the younger generation. Simple (but by no means stupid) stories are never a bad thing and Hero Factory does just that. What's more, Lego has so far delivered on their promise to keep the story simple.But I also know that this newer batch of kids will never get to experience their favorite toy line's story grow with them. I distinctly remember how much I adored my Pohotu Mata when I got him in 2001. 8 years later Pohotu had grown and matured with me into something more than just a "toy." Hero Factory will never give kids that feeling. While the Hero Factory line is a renewable source of money for Lego, it's take something away from kids as well.I will always prefer Bionicle over Hero Factory as a toy line just for that one point above. Does it mean that Lego should have kept going with Bionicle? No, it does not. Should they stop making Hero Factory sets? Nope. At the end of the day they are very different lines.Anyways, just my two cents.

Edited September 19, 2012 by ankyfdarkness

[bonesiii]

But I also know that this newer batch of kids will never get to experience their favorite toy line's story grow with them. I distinctly remember how much I adored my Pohotu Mata when I got him in 2001. 8 years later Pohotu had grown and matured with me into something more than just a "toy." Hero Factory will never give kids that feeling.

Why can't kids get that kind of feeling from HF characters? You were just saying -- rightly so -- that your experience of it is different because you started old. (Although I started old with Bionicle and I "got it" too with characters like Pohatu... It's a talent. ) Why can't a kid identify with Furno's maturing through the story as you did with Pohatu?It's always irked me, even when I was a kid, when adults would pretend to be able to know that a kid couldn't identify with something that wasn't part of the adult's generation. When in history has that ever been true, lol? It's like music. Need I say more, lol?It was a lesson I vowed to keep in mind when I got older, which is probably how I was able to get so into Bionicle, and also enjoy HF for what it's worth. Maybe a lesson others of yall could enjoy learning. :)Also, pet peeve, but "ridiculous" just means "able to be ridiculed", which applies to everything. It doesn't really work as a logical argument. :PAnd doesn't it make sense that LEGO learned from its mistakes as time when on and gradually improved the sets for the target audience? Finally, I'm not sure what point you were trying to make about the villains, perhaps you could elaborate? Do you see those similarities as good or bad?I had a more in-depth post, but then my HP did one of its random "Hey let's make this sequence of keys that you typed so fast you've got no idea what it was activate a keyboard shortcut for 'erase all your hard work instantly with no safeguards! wheee!!!'" things that we just ever love so much...

[ankyfdarkness]

Why can't kids get that kind of feeling from HF characters? You were just saying -- rightly so -- that your experience of it is different because you started old. (Although I started old with Bionicle and I "got it" too with characters like Pohatu... It's a talent. ) Why can't a kid identify with Furno's maturing through the story as you did with Pohatu?

Good question. It really comes down to my personal opinion. To me, Pohatu makes a better character than Furno because of his interactions within the group. The Toa Mata are a volatile and dynamic group of personalities. I find it easier to relate to Pohatu with that in mind as apposed to Furno who, as the years go on, has very little friction with his own team. In addition to that, there's not a lot that defines Furno as a character. He's a hero who does heroic stuff. His motivation is the same as all the other heroes in Hero Factory. Where as Pohatu's motivation is in direct contrast to Kopaka's motivation and Tahu's motivation. One could argue that Furno does have a unique motivation from other heroes in that he feels the need to prove himself to Stormer, but to me that just doesn't come across as strong as some of the Toa Mata's motives.

It's always irked me, even when I was a kid, when adults would pretend to be able to know that a kid couldn't identify with something that wasn't part of the adult's generation. When in history has that ever been true, lol? It's like music. Need I say more, lol?

What can I say to this, bones? I was never trying to state that kids would never get Bionicle, I was only stating that the experience of growing-up with an evolving story like Bionicle's is different than growing-up with a largely static story like Hero Factory's is. Kids might get that experience from some other media, but not from Lego's current action figure line.

Also, pet peeve, but "ridiculous" just means "able to be ridiculed", which applies to everything. It doesn't really work as a logical argument.

"Ridiculous" meant exactly what I wanted it to in that sentence.

And doesn't it make sense that LEGO learned from its mistakes as time when on and gradually improved the sets for the target audience?

Exactly. Liking Hero Factory because of its sets seems silly to me when Bionicle could have just as easily been on the receiving end of newer, "better" ways to build. Defining the quality of the Hero Factory and Bionicle line based on their sets is weird to me because one would expect Lego to make improvements over time. And as Hero Factory came after Bionicle...

Finally, I'm not sure what point you were trying to make about the villains, perhaps you could elaborate? Do you see those similarities as good or bad?

Basically, that Hero Factory's unique style could easily be molded to fit Bionicle's style. Bionicle could have easily adopted the new ball joint system.

[Aanchir]

Why can't kids get that kind of feeling from HF characters? You were just saying -- rightly so -- that your experience of it is different because you started old. (Although I started old with Bionicle and I "got it" too with characters like Pohatu... It's a talent. ) Why can't a kid identify with Furno's maturing through the story as you did with Pohatu?

Good question. It really comes down to my personal opinion. To me, Pohatu makes a better character than Furno because of his interactions within the group. The Toa Mata are a volatile and dynamic group of personalities. I find it easier to relate to Pohatu with that in mind as apposed to Furno who, as the years go on, has very little friction with his own team. In addition to that, there's not a lot that defines Furno as a character. He's a hero who does heroic stuff. His motivation is the same as all the other heroes in Hero Factory. Where as Pohatu's motivation is in direct contrast to Kopaka's motivation and Tahu's motivation. One could argue that Furno does have a unique motivation from other heroes in that he feels the need to prove himself to Stormer, but to me that just doesn't come across as strong as some of the Toa Mata's motives.

Personally, I find there is a lot more depth to some of the heroes' characterization than some people seem to understand. While most of the heroes are motivated primarily by the desire to perform the functions they were built for, I don't see how that's much different than the way the Toa were motivated to perform their destinies (which could generally be summed up as service to the Great Spirit). The nuances of how they go about following that motivation is what makes them unique. For instance, Tahu (in the early years, at least) seemed to feel that to best serve the Great Spirit and achieve his destiny he had to work alone. In contrast, Gali felt that all the Toa could best fulfill their destinies by working in tandem with each other. Kopaka felt that his destiny was best approached with a serious, analytical attitude, while Lewa was spontaneous and easygoing, even if it often got him into trouble.Similarly, in Hero Factory, we see some diversity in motivations:

• Furno is motivated by a desire to meet the world's expectations, which due to his great track record are incredibly high. He puts a lot of stock in both his successes and failures, going to great lengths to prevent repeating the same mistakes and relishing even the most modest signs that he has met Stormer's expectations.
• Breez's motivations are shaped by her desire to cast off some of the stereotypes about female Heroes, and to prove that she has the same dedication to her job and capacity to get things done as any other Hero.
• Bulk has shown a strong desire to break free of the perception that he is dull or stupid (which embarrasses him greatly), even though he fully knows that he was built for brute strength and is smart enough to know when brute strength will serve him better than elaborate plans.
• Mark Surge is shackled with the concern that he might have been built with a flaw that could stop him from meeting his heroic potential. Believe it or not, this does get addressed in more detail in The Doom Box than in any of the episodes, although it was slightly addressed in "Ordeal of Fire" when he was worried about being "useless".
• Preston Stormer is motivated by the safety of his team, specifically the rookies on his team, above all other considerations, and would be more than willing to compromise a mission to ensure that all of his teammates make it back safely.
• Von Ness is pretty much a foil to Preston Stormer in that he is concerned with his personal safety more than with the safety of his team. As the villain Von Nebula, his motivations don't get explored nearly as much as they should, but I have always interpreted his drive for revenge against Preston Stormer and the Hero Factory as misplaced guilt, considering Stormer a glory-hog for finishing the mission that he was ready to dismiss as a lost cause.
• Rocka is a foil to Furno-- another hotshot Hero who excels in both training and field experience. However, unlike Furno, he basks in the glory of being celebrated for his successes. He is reluctant to take orders from anyone at first, though "Savage Planet" concludes with him making a sacrifice by following Furno's plan, while Furno also makes a sacrifice by trusting Rocka to carry it out.
• Julius Nex is a showy and sociable Hero, and seems to enjoy everything he does. He's much like Pohatu in this respect.

Stringer and Evo have not received the most consistent characterization, and have had few moments to cement their motivations in my memory, but they also stand out as unique characters.

It's always irked me, even when I was a kid, when adults would pretend to be able to know that a kid couldn't identify with something that wasn't part of the adult's generation. When in history has that ever been true, lol? It's like music. Need I say more, lol?

What can I say to this, bones? I was never trying to state that kids would never get Bionicle, I was only stating that the experience of growing-up with an evolving story like Bionicle's is different than growing-up with a largely static story like Hero Factory's is. Kids might get that experience from some other media, but not from Lego's current action figure line.

Hero Factory has actually been showing itself to be less static than it originally seems. Although it's easy to jump in anywhere (at least so far-- that might change with the increase in continuity that the Breakout episode provided), if you follow it closely from whenever you start, you begin to see some parts of the narrative that build on each other. And of course each individual episode tends to have its own conflicts moving things forward, so even if the general role of the Heroes is always to capture villains, the episodes don't become too repetitive.

And doesn't it make sense that LEGO learned from its mistakes as time when on and gradually improved the sets for the target audience?

Exactly. Liking Hero Factory because of its sets seems silly to me when Bionicle could have just as easily been on the receiving end of newer, "better" ways to build. Defining the quality of the Hero Factory and Bionicle line based on their sets is weird to me because one would expect Lego to make improvements over time. And as Hero Factory came after Bionicle...

I agree that sets naturally tend to progress, and that BIONICLE sets would have continued to improve if the theme had continued, even if they might not have developed into exactly the same building system as Hero Factory's did due to the unique aesthetics of the two themes. However, I think it's still fair to like Hero Factory due to its sets. I like the sets of both themes, and I like HF's better because they have developed beyond what BIONICLE's did, just as I preferred BIONICLE to Slizers due to the construction aspect. But I'd never use that to claim that Hero Factory's sets are better than BIONICLE's ever could have been.With that said, starting fresh with Hero Factory probably made it easier for TLG to change things up so dramatically without driving off their existing audience. The fact that some concept art for Hero Recon Team (and future Hero Factory waves) shows sets resembling the 2010 building system suggests to me that the decision to shift to a new building system was not originally expected to come so soon after the theme began.

Finally, I'm not sure what point you were trying to make about the villains, perhaps you could elaborate? Do you see those similarities as good or bad?

Basically, that Hero Factory's unique style could easily be molded to fit Bionicle's style. Bionicle could have easily adopted the new ball joint system.

It could have. Maybe. It'd be a little more tricky to do so, because BIONICLE had a high-detail design style whereas Hero Factory had more solid armor plates that are easier to mold into shells like the new building system uses. Then again, BIONICLE's aesthetic style changed a lot between 2001 and 2004, so a similar shift could have been possible for that theme-- the BIONICLE Stars even started to show a few more of the design styles that would go into the Hero Factory theme.

[bonesiii]

Anky, so you're just saying the way they connect to Furno won't be exactly the same as the way you connected to Pohatu, both because you are different from those fans and because Furno and Pohatu are different? That makes sense. I thought your wording implied something much more absolute, though, when you said HF will never give kids that feeling.Not that exact feeling, certainly, but you could say the same about any other Bionicle fan and Pohatu, or any other fan and any other Bionicle character. Right? So what is the point in saying it to begin with?And they could get a similar feeling, if their tastes are such as the HF characters and their interactions and growth appeal to them. Do we agree there?

Exactly. Liking Hero Factory because of its sets seems silly to me when Bionicle could have just as easily been on the receiving end of newer, "better" ways to build.

You keep seemingly moving in and out of sounding completely reasonable, and then you say things like this... Maybe I'm just not understanding what you mean... But liking HF because of its sets... isn't silly... it's perfectly natural.I think you're trying to say something about the end of Bionicle from a purely set perspective, versus putting those changes in HF, but there are plenty of reasons that I've talked about before (dunno if you saw it though) why that argument alone doesn't really work. Bionicle had plenty of story reasons to end when it did, and as I pointed out many times before, it makes more sense to save a big improvement in sets for a new line rather than in hopes of saving an old one, to get both the boost from that and the "new factor." And don't just assume all Bionicle fans would like the new HF system. It may have been much less successful due to being too different for existing Bionicle fans, but new fans who are into HF don't have such a long-standing attachment to the old style of building. (For example, I fully expect that if the armor attachments went balljoint in Bionicle, many old Technic fans may cry foul.)Also, it's "couldabeen" logic. The fact is, the newer HF sets ARE different from Bionicle sets. That's how it happened. So here in reality, it makes perfect sense to like HF over Bionicle setwise, if that's to your taste.Yeah?I'm not saying it's silly to wish Bionicle had gotten that upgrade though. I get you there (if I'm understanding you right ), but there are just too many practical reasons against it, and it just isn't how it is.

Defining the quality of the Hero Factory and Bionicle line based on their sets is weird to me because one would expect Lego to make improvements over time. And as Hero Factory came after Bionicle...

Applies just as much to story and everything else; all that came after Bionicle too and as I've pointed out, everything HF's doing pretty much COULD fit within the larger Bionicle universe.But anywho, ultimately LEGO is a toy company, so judging the two lines based on the set styles that became primarily identified with them makes perfect sense. :)As for lack of development in HF, have you really been following it? I haven't been following it as totally closely as I did Bionicle but I've seen enough to see lots of development. Sometimes I think some of yall formed a narrative in the early first year about HF and have repeated that without really thinking it through and giving HF's story a chance...Certainly not as much as Bionicle, but nobody is claiming otherwise, so yeah... Edited September 19, 2012 by bonesiii

[~Shockwave~]

to put my two cents in: I will probably never connect with an hf character the same way as I would with a bionicle (or transformers) character. but I was into both of those when I was very young. but as a building toy, HF has just about nailed it. the figures are extremely flexible, and have pretty nicely desighned around that skeleton build. it will never be the same as bionicle for me, but that's because I'm almost 18.

[ankyfdarkness]

Bones, all I'm saying is that I think Hero Factory's story and thematic elements are not as strong as Bionicle's and sets don't factor into the equation. That's it.I talked to about how Bionicle "could" have adopted the Hero Factory building system just to illustrate my point that judging a Lego line by it's sets (while natural and expected) doesn't mean anything to me. Yeah, the new line has better sets. I would have expected nothing less from Lego.

Edited September 19, 2012 by ankyfdarkness

[bonesiii]

Bones, all I'm saying is that I think Hero Factory's story and thematic elements are not as strong as Bionicle's and sets don't factor into the equation. That's it.I talked to about how Bionicle "could" have adopted the Hero Factory building system just to illustrate my point that judging a Lego line by it's sets (while natural and expected)doesn't mean anything to me.

To the first, I think most people agree, in general. But what equation do sets not factor into?And I guess what I'm driving at is, LEGO makes choices as to what set styles will, overall, be identified with what line. Once made, that choice becomes reality. So it's sensible to recognize this, for all of us. Yes?If you don't think about the sets when you 'judge' a line, then maybe you are using a different definition of 'judge' than most people do? Maybe recognizing that would help avoid taking issue with others using that concept to make set-based 'judgments'? ^_^Hope this helps.

[ankyfdarkness]

Bones, all I'm saying is that I think Hero Factory's story and thematic elements are not as strong as Bionicle's and sets don't factor into the equation. That's it.I talked to about how Bionicle "could" have adopted the Hero Factory building system just to illustrate my point that judging a Lego line by it's sets (while natural and expected)doesn't mean anything to me.

To the first, I think most people agree, in general. But what equation do sets not factor into?And I guess what I'm driving at is, LEGO makes choices as to what set styles will, overall, be identified with what line. Once made, that choice becomes reality. So it's sensible to recognize this, for all of us. Yes?If you don't think about the sets when you 'judge' a line, then maybe you are using a different definition of 'judge' than most people do? Maybe recognizing that would help avoid taking issue with others using that concept to make set-based 'judgments'? ^_^Hope this helps.

I take issue with no one on this site.Yes I do "judge" Lego lines differently than other people, that's natural. When I call a concept "ridiculous" that only means the concept is ridiculous to me. But sometimes it's fun to discuss why I think the way I do.And I'm talking about my equation for judging Lego lines. Edited September 19, 2012 by ankyfdarkness

[bonesiii]

I take issue with no one on this site.Yes I do "judge" Lego lines differently than other people, that's natural. When I call a concept "ridiculous" that only means the concept is ridiculous to me. But sometimes it's fun to discuss why I think the way I do.

Can't you see how reacting to others' opinions as "ridiculous" comes across as taking issue with them? Also, maybe it shouldn't be ridiculous to you? :)I agree it's fun to discuss the whys though. Just advice that I think if heeded would make you better off, as it has me. =D

[ankyfdarkness]

I take issue with no one on this site.Yes I do "judge" Lego lines differently than other people, that's natural. When I call a concept "ridiculous" that only means the concept is ridiculous to me. But sometimes it's fun to discuss why I think the way I do.

Can't you see how reacting to others' opinions as "ridiculous" comes across as taking issue with them? Also, maybe it shouldn't be ridiculous to you? :)I agree it's fun to discuss the whys though. Just advice that I think if heeded would make you better off, as it has me. =D

Sure, I can see why that would come across as me having and issue with people's opinions.Maybe it shouldn't be "ridiculous" to me. But it is.Better off? I thought the idea on forums was to have meaningful discussions? People will inevitably get into arguments when others don't agree with their ideas. That's just how it is. Healthy arguments are never a bad thing.Anyways, we've trekked off topic for long enough.

[bonesiii]

Better off? I thought the idea on forums was to have meaningful discussions?

That's exactly what I'm hoping for here. I see in your post what it seems are the results of approaches I have found less enjoyable; based on more than just taste but on some actual choices, that can be chosen different. Choices of how to look at it. And the value or meaning in a discussion comes in perhaps most of all when, then, someone like me could point out those mistakes so that someone else like you could gain a more enjoyable perspective. ^_^In this case, why not just acknowledge, simply, that HF is better setwise than Bionicle? (Since you appear to agree it is improvement. Although of course if your tastes are that they're worse, that's a horse of a different color. Personally I just see them as better in some ways, worse in others, namely not much MOCability by themselves (but more in some ways with System).)After acknowledging that you can then go into the reasons why; that it's natural for LEGO to improve with time and that this doesn't ruin your enjoyment of Bionicle. Yeah? Just advice, but advice based on a lot of experience with such meaningful discussions in the past on here. To put it another way, instead of pitting different observations about it against each other and creating internal strife, view them as positively supporting each other and creating maximum enjoyment for what it's worth. Edited September 20, 2012 by bonesiii

[NatureDruid]

and once you go bionicle YOU NEVER GO BACK.

Now presenting Bionicle: the drug.~~~I love Hero Factory, more than Bionicle honestly. Its sets are superior and it's a great concept.And, unlike Bionicle, there aren't hordes of kids taking everything about it far too seriously.

Well, to me, it has a nostalgia value.Honestly, I liked the theme of bionicle a bit more. Mystical powers mixed in with a dash of sci-fi. Heck, bionicle is what got me into elementals. However, I must say that the storyline did get convoluted at times (don't even bring up the comics, my head is going to explode). Edited September 20, 2012 by bonesiii
Double post merged. :) -bones

[Great Being Velika]

Bionicle really was not a simple "what's Makuta up to this time?" problem. A lot of the time, they did not know Makuta was involved until it was too late (2004). With HERO Factory, they always know who the main villain is, insted of the Toa Metru thinking that the Dark Hunters were the main bad guys, then finding out that their ruler, Dume was really a corrupt Makuta.

Edited October 10, 2012 by Brander

[Lyichir]

Bionicle really was not a simple "what's Makuta up to this time?" problem. A lot of the time, they did not know Makuta was involved until it was too late (2004). With HERO Factory, they always know who the main villain is, insted of the Toa Metru thinking that the Dark Hunters were the main bad guys, then finding out that their ruler, Dume was really a corrupt Makuta.

Actually, the Breakout episodes seem to suggest that there was a mysterious villain behind the Breakout. It's not hard to guess that it'll be Von Nebula, but in any case the story has left it ambiguous for the time being.And personally, I felt Makuta was a better villain once he stopped being the "man behind the curtain". Makuta's return came out of nowhere in 2003, when we had mostly thought he had been defeated two years prior. In 2004 his appearance at least made sense to the extent that it was a prequel, so it explained where his threat in 2001 came from. But by 2006, Makuta secretly being behind everything felt a little cliche, especially when we were set up to expect a different "ancient evil". Luckily, in 2007, he began to come to the forefront and stop hiding his presence, even though he kept his motivations a secret. From that point forward it became easier to piece together elements of his plan, while the Toa assisted in it only because they were often given no other choice. His role as a chessmaster, in my opinion, was far more impressive than his role as a mysterious, unknowable evil had ever been.

[Great Being Velika]

Bionicle really was not a simple "what's Makuta up to this time?" problem. A lot of the time, they did not know Makuta was involved until it was too late (2004). With HERO Factory, they always know who the main villain is, insted of the Toa Metru thinking that the Dark Hunters were the main bad guys, then finding out that their ruler, Dume was really a corrupt Makuta.

Actually, the Breakout episodes seem to suggest that there was a mysterious villain behind the Breakout. It's not hard to guess that it'll be Von Nebula, but in any case the story has left it ambiguous for the time being.And personally, I felt Makuta was a better villain once he stopped being the "man behind the curtain". Makuta's return came out of nowhere in 2003, when we had mostly thought he had been defeated two years prior. In 2004 his appearance at least made sense to the extent that it was a prequel, so it explained where his threat in 2001 came from. But by 2006, Makuta secretly being behind everything felt a little cliche, especially when we were set up to expect a different "ancient evil". Luckily, in 2007, he began to come to the forefront and stop hiding his presence, even though he kept his motivations a secret. From that point forward it became easier to piece together elements of his plan, while the Toa assisted in it only because they were often given no other choice. His role as a chessmaster, in my opinion, was far more impressive than his role as a mysterious, unknowable evil had ever been.

The reason that I think Makuta was a better "bad guy" BECAUSE it was harder to piece together his plan.

[fishers64]

The reason that I think Makuta was a better "bad guy" BECAUSE it was harder to piece together his plan.

I agree. Bad guys whose plans can be figured out in twenty seconds are so yawn-worthy. This is a preference of mine, but it probably explains (to some degree), why I don't like HF as much as Bionicle.That doesn't mean HF shouldn't exist, however, because some people apparently like bad guys that are straightforward. Lego can appeal to those people with HF if they want, which is probably the majority of the target audience, which are not exactly a bunch of S&T story geeks on BZPower.

[shellshock]

Rofl at the titleI can't say for sure yet because I still haven't bought one. I should get around to it though, eventually.

[Lyichir]

Bionicle really was not a simple "what's Makuta up to this time?" problem. A lot of the time, they did not know Makuta was involved until it was too late (2004). With HERO Factory, they always know who the main villain is, insted of the Toa Metru thinking that the Dark Hunters were the main bad guys, then finding out that their ruler, Dume was really a corrupt Makuta.

Actually, the Breakout episodes seem to suggest that there was a mysterious villain behind the Breakout. It's not hard to guess that it'll be Von Nebula, but in any case the story has left it ambiguous for the time being.And personally, I felt Makuta was a better villain once he stopped being the "man behind the curtain". Makuta's return came out of nowhere in 2003, when we had mostly thought he had been defeated two years prior. In 2004 his appearance at least made sense to the extent that it was a prequel, so it explained where his threat in 2001 came from. But by 2006, Makuta secretly being behind everything felt a little cliche, especially when we were set up to expect a different "ancient evil". Luckily, in 2007, he began to come to the forefront and stop hiding his presence, even though he kept his motivations a secret. From that point forward it became easier to piece together elements of his plan, while the Toa assisted in it only because they were often given no other choice. His role as a chessmaster, in my opinion, was far more impressive than his role as a mysterious, unknowable evil had ever been.

The reason that I think Makuta was a better "bad guy" BECAUSE it was harder to piece together his plan.

Bionicle really was not a simple "what's Makuta up to this time?" problem. A lot of the time, they did not know Makuta was involved until it was too late (2004). With HERO Factory, they always know who the main villain is, insted of the Toa Metru thinking that the Dark Hunters were the main bad guys, then finding out that their ruler, Dume was really a corrupt Makuta.

Actually, the Breakout episodes seem to suggest that there was a mysterious villain behind the Breakout. It's not hard to guess that it'll be Von Nebula, but in any case the story has left it ambiguous for the time being.And personally, I felt Makuta was a better villain once he stopped being the "man behind the curtain". Makuta's return came out of nowhere in 2003, when we had mostly thought he had been defeated two years prior. In 2004 his appearance at least made sense to the extent that it was a prequel, so it explained where his threat in 2001 came from. But by 2006, Makuta secretly being behind everything felt a little cliche, especially when we were set up to expect a different "ancient evil". Luckily, in 2007, he began to come to the forefront and stop hiding his presence, even though he kept his motivations a secret. From that point forward it became easier to piece together elements of his plan, while the Toa assisted in it only because they were often given no other choice. His role as a chessmaster, in my opinion, was far more impressive than his role as a mysterious, unknowable evil had ever been.

The reason that I think Makuta was a better "bad guy" BECAUSE it was harder to piece together his plan.

My point is that he became a more convincing villain when it became clear that he had a master plan that even covered his losses at the hands of the Toa, as opposed to just being defeated, being brought back, and finding some new way to cause trouble for the Matoran. This characterization really started in Time Trap back in 2005, but it came to a head in 2007, where as Maxilos he made no attempts to hide that he was stringing the Toa along for his own purposes. In 2003 his return came out of left field, as did the revelation that he had been behind the awakening of the Bohrok all along. Once it became clearer that Makuta did in fact have a master plan, all the mostly independent story arcs from previous years began to take on a sense of cohesion.

[Great Being Velika]

Bionicle really was not a simple "what's Makuta up to this time?" problem. A lot of the time, they did not know Makuta was involved until it was too late (2004). With HERO Factory, they always know who the main villain is, insted of the Toa Metru thinking that the Dark Hunters were the main bad guys, then finding out that their ruler, Dume was really a corrupt Makuta.

Actually, the Breakout episodes seem to suggest that there was a mysterious villain behind the Breakout. It's not hard to guess that it'll be Von Nebula, but in any case the story has left it ambiguous for the time being.And personally, I felt Makuta was a better villain once he stopped being the "man behind the curtain". Makuta's return came out of nowhere in 2003, when we had mostly thought he had been defeated two years prior. In 2004 his appearance at least made sense to the extent that it was a prequel, so it explained where his threat in 2001 came from. But by 2006, Makuta secretly being behind everything felt a little cliche, especially when we were set up to expect a different "ancient evil". Luckily, in 2007, he began to come to the forefront and stop hiding his presence, even though he kept his motivations a secret. From that point forward it became easier to piece together elements of his plan, while the Toa assisted in it only because they were often given no other choice. His role as a chessmaster, in my opinion, was far more impressive than his role as a mysterious, unknowable evil had ever been.

The reason that I think Makuta was a better "bad guy" BECAUSE it was harder to piece together his plan.

Bionicle really was not a simple "what's Makuta up to this time?" problem. A lot of the time, they did not know Makuta was involved until it was too late (2004). With HERO Factory, they always know who the main villain is, insted of the Toa Metru thinking that the Dark Hunters were the main bad guys, then finding out that their ruler, Dume was really a corrupt Makuta.

Actually, the Breakout episodes seem to suggest that there was a mysterious villain behind the Breakout. It's not hard to guess that it'll be Von Nebula, but in any case the story has left it ambiguous for the time being.And personally, I felt Makuta was a better villain once he stopped being the "man behind the curtain". Makuta's return came out of nowhere in 2003, when we had mostly thought he had been defeated two years prior. In 2004 his appearance at least made sense to the extent that it was a prequel, so it explained where his threat in 2001 came from. But by 2006, Makuta secretly being behind everything felt a little cliche, especially when we were set up to expect a different "ancient evil". Luckily, in 2007, he began to come to the forefront and stop hiding his presence, even though he kept his motivations a secret. From that point forward it became easier to piece together elements of his plan, while the Toa assisted in it only because they were often given no other choice. His role as a chessmaster, in my opinion, was far more impressive than his role as a mysterious, unknowable evil had ever been.

The reason that I think Makuta was a better "bad guy" BECAUSE it was harder to piece together his plan.

My point is that he became a more convincing villain when it became clear that he had a master plan that even covered his losses at the hands of the Toa, as opposed to just being defeated, being brought back, and finding some new way to cause trouble for the Matoran. This characterization really started in Time Trap back in 2005, but it came to a head in 2007, where as Maxilos he made no attempts to hide that he was stringing the Toa along for his own purposes. In 2003 his return came out of left field, as did the revelation that he had been behind the awakening of the Bohrok all along. Once it became clearer that Makuta did in fact have a master plan, all the mostly independent story arcs from previous years began to take on a sense of cohesion.

I kind of get what you are saying.

[Meta-Mind]

I personally feel that Hero Factory and Bionicle have their own merits - they're very different genres, and the genre that Bionicle evolved into is very different from Hero Factory.Hero Factory is more about the construction. Everything centers around the sets - if there's a major character (or, in many cases, a minor one), then they will almost always have a corresponding set released that year. This is similar to Bionicle's early years (with the exception of Teridax not getting a set until 2003), but Bionicle later developed beyond this - as illustrated by the Nuva returning in 2006, but not getting any new sets that year. Now, this isn't necessarily a bad thing, and it certainly does make it easier to "jump in" at any story year.Bionicle focused more on the story. Not every story character got their own set, especially later on when many Order of Mata Nui characters took on a prominent role. Teridax's grand Plan overshadowed the entire arc, providing a sense of a connection between story years beyond the episodial format of Hero Factory.I personally prefer Bionicle, if only because I began with it and followed it until the end - plus, I'm really a story type of person, so it appeals to me more than Hero Factory. However, I will say that they both have their merits, and I can see someone choosing Hero Factory over Bionicle if they felt so inclined.

[Great Being Velika]

I personally feel that Hero Factory and Bionicle have their own merits - they're very different genres, and the genre that Bionicle evolved into is very different from Hero Factory.Hero Factory is more about the construction. Everything centers around the sets - if there's a major character (or, in many cases, a minor one), then they will almost always have a corresponding set released that year. This is similar to Bionicle's early years (with the exception of Teridax not getting a set until 2003), but Bionicle later developed beyond this - as illustrated by the Nuva returning in 2006, but not getting any new sets that year. Now, this isn't necessarily a bad thing, and it certainly does make it easier to "jump in" at any story year.Bionicle focused more on the story. Not every story character got their own set, especially later on when many Order of Mata Nui characters took on a prominent role. Teridax's grand Plan overshadowed the entire arc, providing a sense of a connection between story years beyond the episodial format of Hero Factory.I personally prefer Bionicle, if only because I began with it and followed it until the end - plus, I'm really a story type of person, so it appeals to me more than Hero Factory. However, I will say that they both have their merits, and I can see someone choosing Hero Factory over Bionicle if they felt so inclined.

I actually think that in the beginning, BIONICLE focused on construction as well as story, but it eventually degraded to a story with strange action figures to go with it