Indeed. When you start thinking outside the box combining System rods and TECHNIC with CCBS can work wonders. @PekekoaOfJungle, @codenamelego39, take note. =)
1 Like
Personally, I use both, although the original bionicle system is atm more preferable than ccbs as I donât want to take apart my new bonkles, and I only got one ccbs set previously (voltix).
I see ccbs as a way to create much more human-like builds, but at the same time it has the potential to create creatures. The original system makes HUMANOID forms, but they often end up looking less realistic (not saying that is a bad thing). For example, my self moc (which I need to post) includes mainly original system parts including parts from hf 1.0 (think von nebula) but uses some ccbs parts too.
I personally find that ccbs is a lot easier to pose when you want a more human character (such as the protectors) but when using the older system you CAN pose the characters well, but they can often be quite hard to find a decent pose which looks good from all angles. You could say the same about ccbs, but if you know how to pose either, they are both good for posing.
I find that ccbs is a lot more compatible in any build than the old system is. I find that ccbs fits in well in old system based builds, whereas old system is more out of place in ccbs based builds.
Overall, I believe that they are both equal. They both have pros and cons. Before bonkle 2015 I would say, for nostalgiaâs sake, the old system was better. But now holding poj in my hand, I can see how well balanced both systems really are.
But this is just my opinion and I respect your own opinions whether they are similar to mine or not. How do you use both systems? Do you prefer one over the other, or do you appreciate both?
3 Likes
I truly believe CCBS is much easier to use (and thus much better for LEGO as a toy business) then the G1 âsystemâ (it really isnât one).
I recently acquired a giant tote full of G1 parts and my first thought was âhow the heck do I use these parts to make something that looks good?â Maybe it comes from a lack of experience, but I genuinely have trouble MOCing with the older parts. But I hope to change that.
5 Likes
Okay, I love CCBS to death. and I would use it any day of the year. but my own (Awful) style is very technic heavy and it is hard to make CCBS shells look good on the frames I make.
That is why blending all of the systems LEGO has is the best way to make the best MOCs.
1 Like
I have ta similar feeling. When I look on many older pieces i just see them as outdated. I consider Toa Mata as classic, as you can always go back to those sets and enjoy them, but Hordika, Inika, and so on⌠To me these are outdated.
1 Like
Okay, so we are men of different tastes.
Reinforcing my point.
Are kinda nice?
KindaâŚoldâŚandâŚstale?
we are not as different as I thought.
1 Like
This is a thing of opinion.
Most of people would agree that Toa Mata are classic, but nobody is forced to think so, of course. I love them a lot as I grew up with those sets. We were playing with them a lot in elementary school.
BTW just wondering: Everyone realizes that Techic isnât the Bionicle system right?
Yeap. same reason why I love all early HF sets, nostalgaâŚ
But because the Mata were a thing before my earliest memories âŚI have noneâŚ
and they do not appeal to me.
Yes I do. but it WAS the bionicle system way back whenâŚ
but then it merely became a side thing.
Same for me.
I still love them.
Though I did grow up loving Bionicle and looking at pictures of them wanting them.
No it wasnât. The Bionicle system was a sub system of Technic that also uses some technic pieces.
But CCBS also uses Technic too.
So by the logic of Techic being the Bionicle system itâs also the CCBS system.
Same for me, but it was not the mata, it was the Phantoka and later.
Iâd think itâs safe to say Bionicle was part of the Technic system for a time. Sure, it ended up using more specialized pieces from time to time, but the vast majority of non-canister sets up to 2004 were almost entirely Technic based designs.
I believe itâs around 2004 - 2006 when they officially dropped Technic as the primary building system for Bionicle, and instead used it supplementary.
3 Likes
Other then the fact that they did not have sets that WERE 99% TECHNIC. CCBS sets are obviously made from CCBS and TECHNIC is merely a supplemental thing.
I still donât feel itâs fare to call the whole tecnich system part of the Bionicle system in a âCCBS Vs Bionicleâ debate because they both use it and itâs more in the grey.
It may not be the wisest idea, Iâm not sure. A better way to put it would be that Bionicle was a part of the Technic system, however, since it undeniable was.
2 Likes
I agree. Itâs like calling Lego System a Technic, because itâs using technic parts.
1 Like
unless you are talking about 2001-2003
But BIONICLE was a SUBTHEME of TECHNIC for the first few years of its run. and CCBS uses it much more lightly. compare Furno XL to Muaka and Kane-ra.
Yep.
Anyways. Because I view technic as a grey area between the two I prefer CCBS over the Bionicle system.
1 Like
Indeed. but whenever anyone talks about the 01 BIONICLE system. they are also talking about technic.
Then theyâre stupidâŚ