Is LEGO Disrespecting Bionicle?

That specific part is an updated design. It was specifically done so for CCBS. Hence, it is a CCBS piece. It does not match any of the hand pieces from 2001 - 2010.

2 Likes

Just because it got redesigned it doesn’t really change the fact that it is basically the same piece.

So you would use this piece interchangeably with its predecessors on sets and visa versa?

I think I actually did it, yeah.
That was before I learned from your reviews that the older ones are much easier to brake, but none broke on me.
So the answer is yes. If I would be out of new ones, I would use older ones and the other way around.

Not MOCs. Sets.

Because if you were to use CCBS hand pieces/joint pieces on sets and then tried to sell that set, you would be selling an incomplete set that would not have its proper pieces. Because the new hand piece is a new mold, hence a new piece.

1 Like

It would say that it was “brought into” the new CCBS parts family. Similarly to how, when the part was originally redesigned in 07, it was “brought into” the new (doomed) part family of TECHNIC lift-arms with socket joints on the ends (usually used as upper limb pieces in BIONICLE sets).

The newer CCBS style joint is much stronger and easier to insert than the older G1 parts. I was babysitting some friends’ 5 year olds the other day and was letting them play around with some BIONICLE parts. I was a bit surprised at how much trouble they had trying to fit the older G1 joint pieces together. They sometimes required a fair bit of force (unlike stacking regular LEGO bricks).

Honestly, I’d say CCBS was one of the best things LEGO did to BIONICLE when they brought back G2. They made the sets feel high quality again.

2 Likes

I mean, if I would go on to sell my sets, I would obviously go and try to find the newer mold.
But just because lego identifies the newer minimally modified mold as new piece doesn’t mean it actually is and that I consider it as one.
Is like if Disney would come in and say “Yeah, remember that re-release of the OG Trilogy we did back in 2011 to slightly make it better? Yeah, those are three completely different movies”.

This doesn’t really change the fact that at its origin its a Bionicle (how do we even call the Bionicle system?) piece.

We don’t call it anything. Cuz it’s not a system. :stuck_out_tongue: It’s simply a large set of highly specialized parts that were difficult to reuse for other things. Many of the later 2008 and 2009 G1 sets suffered from conflicting textures because of this.

It’s not though. It was introduced with Throwbots/Slizers in 1999.

4 Likes

Ah yeah.
Let me rewrite that:
That doesn’t change the fact that the piece was made in a completely different millennium before the CCBS system.

Uh… sure…

But the fact remains. The original part molded in 1998/1999… and the 2010/2011 redesign (which was the third redesign in four years, RIP)… are still not the same piece…

I’ve gotten a bit confused about what position each of us is arguing about :stuck_out_tongue:

Ultimately, I still stand by the fact that CCBS was vastly superior to G1 BIONICLE parts in most ways. That being said, CCBS never could have gotten as good if it wasn’t for a decade’s worth of trial and error with BIONICLE G1.

3 Likes

I say that all of the redesigns should be considered the same piece. See my Star Wars example above.

I am actually accepting this.

Many are. LEGO often makes tiny tweaks to parts when they cut new moulds (notice how much the lightsaber bar-sized clip pieces have changed over the years. Those usually aren’t considered new parts and both pieces usually get mixed together in sets.

As for the redesigned ball-joint piece, the whole situation is kinda muddy. I’m gonna have to go back to my instruction booklets and try to compare physical inventories and part numbers, cuz the Bricklink/Brickset databases don’t seem to be entirely accurate. Some stuff may have been miscatalogued over the years.

2 Likes

To be honest, I don’t knowif most of them, if not all of them, count as CCBS.

I never said they were CCBS. All of the pieces shown originated specifically for a constraction line whether it be bionicle or hero factory. LEGO set designers don’t stick to any one element system so it’s pointless to argue over what is CCBS and what isn’t. They can just make a new constraction system if they want to.

3 Likes

This debate isn’t worth reading. Seriously guys, you’re talking about plastic “hands”

2 Likes

Welcome to the BIONICLE fandom :wink:

10 Likes

whoops, almost forgot to mention this cute bugger and his recolored hordika heads:


but yeah, can’t seem to see much ccbs outside of that, though iic, pretty sure the takanuva model was at least developed in 2018, and i can’t imagine lego putting “can ccbs molds” on the agenda. either way, prob just a mech for fig takanuva? would be neat in the movie

but that should blow that last bit of rise’s post out of the water; sorry lol

3 Likes

You know your series is dead when this is all we can talk about.

1 Like

Not at all. There are still plenty of really great discussions to be had, especially when it comes to creative work. I had lots of great discussions with fellow fans about MOCs at Brickfair. I’ve had several great discussions with @Political_Slime, @KlendaV, @ColdGoldLazarus and many others about lore, set design, fanfic ideas, you name it.

The BIONICLE fandom is far from dead my friend :smile:

4 Likes

I agree with you. This community isn’t going anywhere. I was referring to Bionicles line of products itself. It was also a joke.

4 Likes

Fair enough. Though I’d recommend a /s or silly emoji next time. Helps to communicate tone.

2 Likes