Character Detailing

Hence why I'm saying they're both flawed and not claiming absolute supremacy for either side. There was a time that I would, but now...not so much. :wink:


What does any of that have to do with being streamlined, consistent, simple, or their imposing presence?
Sure the sets have flaws but you listed those out in response to my positives as if those somehow cancel them out.

I don't think it's really fair to use a single set out of the entire roster to try to make a point that the sets aren't streamlined. Especially considering the fact that it's only a single point of articulation that Lewa loses versus the others. The Toa Metru and Vahki also had the same issue with reduced articulation in their heads, the Mata/Nuva had barely any articulation whatsoever, so it's not like this issue is 2015 specific and there were far more sets in a single wave of Old Gen BIONICLE with worse articulation. (Should I even bother mentioning the Piraka?)

...Also I just don't see what articulation has to do with a streamlined appearance. So there's that too.

I prefer the sluggishness as well as the compensation for posing. Rapid swinging is overrated.

I just ctrl-f'd to see what you were talking about. Yet, my searches didn't bring up any results of anyone claiming the sets to be flawless, so to be honest it seems like you pulled that quote out of nowhere.

Even with their flaws these are the best sets we've ever gotten.


Be that as it may, I still much prefer the old aesthetic. Of course, that's entirely subjective and has nothing to do with the quality of the sets.

I suppose the biggest gripe I have with them, aside form looks, is their masks. The popping off function is as unnecessary as it is stupid. It only makes it so that the masks fall off easily, and adds no meaningful play function.

Their gear boxes were alright, although I found Gali's to be a bit irksome as her armour pieces kept clashing with my hand. The rest of them, however, are pretty alright, and I really like how they brought that function back.

Overall, I like the 2015 toa, I really do. The metru will always be my favourite, but these guys hold their own pretty damn well, and I'm pretty content with how LEGO is handling the whole thing.


obligatory comment about the toa mata.


I've never been too fond of the Mata, but at least their function made sense as it was an actual game you would play. You'd try to knock off your opponents mask, and it worked. This new function is just like: "Ok?"


The box's of the 2015 Toa may not outline how to use the gears but knocking down an army of Skullspider sounds way more fun and easy than knocking the mask of a Toa

Alright, then detail to me how exactly you're going to "knock-off" skull spiders? They're crappy little things that are going to be so low on the ground you're going to have to really try to hit them.

People keep mentioning how the SS "add conflict to the box", but it ain't much of a conflict is it? The BIONICLE community seems to be divided into either people who defend the 2015 sets against all flaws with whatever excuse they can find, or people who worship the old sets like they're some sort of godsend. Both are wrong. The old sets had their ups and downs, as do the new.

It's about time we stopped picking a side and blindly defending it, and start examining the news sets with constructive critique. They're good, but they're not perfect. The mask connection is bad. The gearbox on three of the toa (Gali, Lewa, and Tahu) can be a bit of a pain. The skull spiders, while not detracting from the set, certainly don't add much to them either.
On the other hand, the mata and metru toa were unposable in the shoulders, and the mata had little to no posability at all. The Inika build was alright, but it didn't have much functionality, and as some would say, were a tad bit simple.

Both the old and the new are good. Both have their flaws, and both have their selling points. Cool? Cool.


I completely agree, actually...speaking of which.

There's a difference between looking streamlined and actually being streamlined. The points I mentioned mainly pertain to keeping them from being streamlined, but if we're going to go by looks alone, then there's still the open ball-joints. Also, guess we'll have to address the colors after all, like all the lovingly clashing gold and silver on Kopaka and Onua, or the out-of-place silver on Lewa that by all means should have been brown, or the silver on Gali that goes against the dark grey, sort of like the Mistika everyone likes to harp (more or less rightfully) on, but I guess it's fine here. Or what about the yellow gears? No, I'm not going to let Lego's excuse that kids are too stupid to know why a gear is sticking out of their Toa's spine slide. This hasn't been an issue before so lord knows why Lego thinks it's one now.

Did you just skip over everything I ever said concerning comparisons to G1? I said they were as flawed as most of G1, not more. I even went as far as saying that Mata/Nuva sets probably suffered even more, but I guess you skipped that too. Also, the Metru and Vahki, as limited as they were, still had better articulation than Lewa where the head is concerned. And if you want the other sets brought in, we can always talk about Kopaka's bulky shoulder armor getting in the way. Or how Gali's shoulder armor moves with her arms and wacks the torso. Also, again, articulation may not affect it looking streamlined, but it keeps it from actually being streamlined.

It's still giving up absolute efficiency on one feature in favor of another, regardless of whichever you prefer. That's still a fault.

The quotes were meant to symbolize my disagreement with the term, and even if flawless isn't the precise term people use, you guys seem to hold the sets pretty darn close to it.

Case in point. I don't consider the 2015 sets inferior to G1 as a whole. I consider them on the same level. They have just as many, in some cases the same, faults as many of the G1 sets, revered or not, so I don't see how the G2 sets somehow claim supremacy.

Yeah i agree with pretty much everything you said.

1 Like

Incorrect. Both are right.

People are free to like whatever they want to like without the need to be challenged or to defend their opinion. The funny thing about preference is that it's entirely subjective..... speaking of which.

Literally every point you listed out has nothing to do with streamlining a design so I have no clue what you're talking about.

What does color have to do with a streamlined build?

What does articulation have to do with a streamlined build?

You're just listing out flaws that have nothing to do with what I said. The only thing that even remotely comes close to ruining a streamlined appearance is the ball joints. And sure, there is a difference between looking streamlined and being streamlined. But for starters, I was merely speaking in terms of appearance, and even if I wasn't, your points still have nothing to do with being streamlined.

I have no clue what you're trying to achieve here. I listed out my reasons for liking the sets. I never said the sets were flawless, I merely said they were the best sets we've gotten, and I gave my reasons for why I think that.

You don't think so?

I shouldn't have to state that my thoughts on the 2015 sets are my opinion when a statement of preference should, by default, be an opinion.

No we don't. That's a conclusion you fabricated yourself. All I did was say I liked the sets, you're the one who tried to start some rightous campaign to prove me wrong :unamused:

You seem to be under the impression that my thoughts on the 2015 sets are law. You can think they're on the same level all you want.

But I don't.


inb4 cordak gets railed on in the next podcast

As far as my opinions go on detailing, I'd say that I like both the looks of the old Bionicle parts and new CCBS parts. Greebling looks cool, but it can also look cluttered. CCBS is nice and smooth, but can also look simple.


What have I done.

If croak gets railed on the next podcast, do I take the blame for it occurring in the topic that I made?

1 Like

1) theres not really any "blame" if that happens, and 2) if there was blame, it would likely be on Cordak. You can't control what goes on in your own topic man. =P


Just saying, and I mean this with utmost respect...but you might want to fix that quote.

Color disrupts the build it keeps it from looking complete. No matter how smooth parts themselves may flow, faults in the color scheme can detract from that smooth look.

This has to do with being streamlined in function. They can look smooth, but be incapable of having substantial movement, meaning they aren't streamlined on a functional level.

I was judging the streamlined aspect more from the functional level than the appearance level. If you simply wanted to speak for the appearance alone, fine, but that doesn't mean what I said is irrelevant. Streamlining refers to providing an ease of movement, a goal which articulation restrictions and (by extension) a hindered gear system are counter-productive towards.

And I've been stating why I disagree and have listed my reasons for thinking so. The goal here is arguing an opinion against an opinion and seeing the other's perspective while not necessarily agreeing entirely. Instead, you keep declaring most of my points I bring up as irrelevant, and have only provided subjective counterarguments for a few, such as the slow gear systems, saying it's your preference. This is an understandable opinion, even if it doesn't mean it's not a fault on the set's part, and isn't something I agree with. This is an opinion that justifies why you like the sets and why a certain fault doesn't bother you. It was conclusions like these that I wanted to work towards, with statements like "I can see this flaw, and it's there" (which you just did with the open ball-joints) or "That flaw doesn't bother me because so-and-so".

And you don't. This has been nothing more than one opinion being argued against another opinion.

So it's a flaw. I can understand why it doesn't bother you (probably should've pointed that out earlier), but it remains a flaw with the set. Just not one that affects your perception of them, because opinion.

That's not what you said.

Liking something and saying it's the outright best sets we've had aren't the same thing. Hence why I began arguing my points to begin with. That's a pretty big claim, which I disagree with, and want to hear you back up, because curiosity.

Opinions vs. opinions to find why you make the large claim you do, because I have a dissenting opinion, and want you to back up yours. Instead most of what I bring up is ignored. You say they're the best sets we've ever gotten. Fine, but I want you to argue what I brought up.

And that's great. What I want to know is why, and where do the faults I brought up stand.


Wouldn't be surprised. Suffice to say that I should've been more clear on what exactly I wanted to argue rather than be outright confrontational.

Accursed hindsight...


In no sane world would you be held responsible for this. I started this argument...and did so terribly.


dude, just drop it. you don't seem to understand what Var's trying to say.


The colors of the new Toa are where I find most of their flaws. For the most part, they look nice. But often times they clash upon adding the golden mask (that feels like a meme). I'd go into more detail, but it's dinner time :stuck_out_tongue:


Fair enough, I don't think they subtract. But that is subjective.

Personally I've seen plenty of color alternatives fans have made and I think they all look rather horrid. Sometimes contrast is a good thing.

I appreciate that you're explaining what you meant, but this wasn't what I was talking about in my initial post that you replied to. I can agree that on a functional level, there are flaws- but those aren't important to me as I don't buy these sets to play with, I buy them to display. As such, appearance is what matters, along with an enjoyable build, and I believe these sets achieve both to a substantial degree.

Well if we're talking in terms of movement I associate "streamlined" to be in line with aerodynamics, which I don't think is applicable to these sets. If I wanted to praise their articulation and functions I would have done so using a different term.

The issue is, you misunderstood what I meant and you're trying to argue against something I never explicitly said. I was never talking about them from a functional perspective, nor did I ever say I thought they were perfect sets. I'm not really sure why you're trying to get me to admit the sets have faults when I never said otherwise.Your points are irrelevant because they have nothing to do with my original post or what I was even talking about to begin with. I already know the sets have flaws, I already know Lewa's head cant move, I already know the gear functions aren't rapid like the Mata.

I don't care. I like the sets because they look cool.

You're preaching to the choir with this debate. I have no interest in arguing my opinion because I have no interest in pushing my opinion on you. I've heard all these points plenty of times before, I've seen the flaws myself. I'm not blind, I had a good three months with these sets before anyone else to form my opinion.

That's what I said.

I like the sets more then the others. Therefore, they are the best sets we've ever had.

It was ignored because I don't care about the points you brought up. They have nothing to do with why I like them and don't bother me enough to make me dislike them.

It is indeed. I listed why, the faults you brought up have no impression on me.

I'm a big boy, I can handle myself. Besides, it's not like Cordak has done anything wrong.
(Even if he had, we talk about whatever we feel like talking about on TTV, good or bad, whether people agree or disagree, it's not for putting people on the spot its for discussing the topic at hand)

You actually made a very good topic with a lot of discussion! If only we had more topics like this.


Really? Hm...
Before this topic turns into a big argument (even though it already has, but that's beside the point), I just wanted to reiterate that I wanted to know if details defined a character.
In terms of the new sets, which do not have many fine details, I think there is no need for any small details to begin with. The sets send the message without any need for them, which makes them appear as better characters for a story, not just toys for a toy line even though they are.


Perhaps. Odd color contrasts have never been my cup of tea (ironic given my self-MOC's color scheme), but hey, if you think they're not the make-or-break factor, no biggie.

Then I'm sorry for dragging in the aspects you don't really care for. I tend to judge them as toys because they', but I guess it's easy to forget that they're stationary trophies to most over the age of 10...heck, that's what my G1 sets are to me.

Fair enough.

Seems like it.

Again, fair enough. Can't say I entirely disagree, either.

I wasn't trying to push them on you, just get your side of things and debate my side. i knew I wouldn't have you agree with me completely, since you have your own opinions and take on the sets. I'm sorry that I was coming off as, well, that kind of person.

In which case I'm useless. Hurray!
(no sarcasm intended)

I was referring to the statement that you considered them he best sets we've gotten, which I interpreted as being synonymous with being close to perfect. Either way, it was an opinion I disagreed with and wanted to debate...which I have officially turned into a complete disaster (a little late to the punch with that consensus, I know).

As stated before, this was the opinion I wanted to debate...which didn't go there well (No, I'm not pointing any fingers with that statement).

I was just wondering why it didn't matter to you (and you've already pointed out why for most of my points by now, anyways). If you don't want to talk about any of the otherr ones, and thus drag this out even more, I understand.

Then this fiasco is concluded...I think.


Seriously though, @FordianL, regardless of whether we've all had the most friendly of discussions, this thread has generated an interesting amount of exchanged opinions. We may not all agree, but at the very least we've all been able to share our opinions and see the views of the other side, even if it has been a bit of a bumpy road.


I can admire this statement. Thank you for your opinions. They help me, as well, to see both sides of the situation.