My opinion on the entirety of Bionicle, and why I think the community is so split by the new sets

LEGO BIONICLE
1

Very simple: Older sets are more collectible, newer ones are more playworthy. Simple as that.

Now, for those of you who enjoy reading, let me elaborate.

I feel that the older sets are more collectible and hold much more value to many fans. The whole “vintage” feel of the old ones, some nostalgia blinders on max, and the actual collectibles included make up for some serious sentimental value. For people (like me) that like to have stuff to collect and display, this carries some serious value which I (and probably most of you) enjoy.

However, I feel the new sets are currently more poseable and playworthy. I mean, a kid can pick up one of the new 2015 sets and have a lot more fun with it (objectively speaking) than they can with a set from, say, 2001. While this is good, they don’t hold that value described for the older sets that many appreciate, and to those of us used to the value those sets carry, feel slightly… well… cheaper.

Now, don’t get me wrong. I love the new sets, and they are right up there on display next to my 01-03 collection, on the top shelf. I own every one so far, and plan to get the summer wave too. They really are well made, and while some are better than others, they are all exceptional sets. But, I still value the older sets more than the newer ones, and that is just me. Anyone that happens to value play value and stuff over collectibility, will value the newer sets more. But for many, they will find mroe value in the collectibility offered by older lines.

Personally, I’m slightly more neutral. Sure, I prefer the older sets, but that doesn’t mean I don’t love the new ones.

What do you guys think? I’m curious.

12 Likes
2

well I love the new set the only thing i really have a problem with is lack of detail, we need more piston-like pieces to really make them look bio-mechanical, other than that I love them. I also agree with what you said I think that’s one of the reasons the community seems spit other ones are just like “It’z not liek G1 so it’s bad” (even though the universes could still be connected)

5 Likes
3

I think you’re right. There’s no real reason one should be so biased towards the new sets. Nostalgia factor is great, in fact, I have the original forms of each toa on display right now, and I love them. The new sets are, objectively, better toys. I like them a lot too.

I feel like I shouldn’t have to consider myself either a G1 or G2 fan, I want to just be a BIONICLE fan. But, it seems the community wants to split itself like such. It’s a shame really.

13 Likes
4

^^^^^^^^^^

4 Likes
5

Bionicle provides me with two things. Sets to ogle over, and a story to love. I think Gen 1 and Gen 2 deliver both in not-so-equal quality, but that is not to say I enjoy one over the other. In my opinion, Bionicle gen 1 had a more rich and dynamic story than gen 2 currently has. I understand that gen 2 hasn’t had time to flower into a cohesive story, but that’s besides my point. On the other front of sets, I think Gen 1 and Gen 2 are fairly equal. Gen 1 had it’s amazing titan sets, and gen 2 has it’s objectively good smaller sets in the form of protectors and Toa. Remember, this is all my opinion. I am not stating this as fact.

5 Likes
6

you and me both bio

3 Likes
7

I’m going to rant about why people don’t like the sets really quick. When bionicle began, there were no bendable elbows and knees, and the majority of the sets had gears that powered a function. Then they invented the Toa metru, who had bendable knees and elbows and obtained a greater range of poseability. We didn’t complain about that. Then they invented the Toa inika, who had no gears, but had bendable knees and elbows. We didn’t complain about that. Then we had the Stars, which ditched the bendable knees and elbows in favor of making small sets of older characters. Some of us complained, but not many, because we liked the pieces. Then they cancelled bionicle, and we were distraught. We waited 5 years, then they brought bionicle back. 5 YEARS. The new toa have the same names as the original 6, mostly stay true to their original color schemes, invented a bunch of new weapons, masks, and heads for us to use, as well as bring back bendable elbows and knees and giving them gears, while keeping the same range of poseability as the inika had. And we complain. WHY IS THAT?! “Well, they don’t look the same.” Well guess what? The inika don’t look like the original mata. This is because the sets evolved over time.

How many new pieces does lego make in a year? I’m going to say about 100. In 5 years (the time that bionicle was gone) Lego would have invented about 500 new pieces, many of which would be bionicle-type pieces. They just wouldn’t be called Bionicle. However, if there is no “bionicle” for 5 years, then something else is re-labeled bionicle, we complain. If the bionicle set line had gone through the same evolution as hero factory, I think that fewer people would complain.

okay, I’m done ranting.

I do agree that these new sets are not as good, but that’s because we are comparing them to the older bionicle sets, which had progressed in their own fashion. As an example, we hadn’t seen anything like the inika when we first got the toa mata, so we had nothing to compare the toa mata to. However, we are comparing the new toa mata to and old bionicle in its prime. If we give this line a few years, they’ll probably have a lot better sets for it. And when they end this line after a huge success, people will probably think of these as collectibles too.

Now for the story. People are complaining that it’s not as good. Of course its not. It’s only been around for about 2 months. I you are hoping that Lego will produce as good a story as bionicle, with all of the history and detail, and give it to you IN TWO MONTHS, you’re wrong. It tool them 10 year to give us the original Bionicle story, and it’s still not done.

Chill out; bionicle is back. Roll with it for a while, and eventually the stories and the sets should improve.

4 Likes
8

I never said that the new sets weren’t as good, I actually said that, objectively speaking, they were the better sets. But you have a very good point.

9

I think G2 needs a richer story like we got in MNOG and then it would be perfect. But each line has its own pros and cons, so it often comes down to personal preference.

4 Likes
10

My main issue with G2 is with the lack of detail in the parts and just little things overall. They don’t look like “Bionicle”, at least G1 speaking. By themselves they’re excellent sets. The site has had several, easily fixable issues at times (Onya? Gali Master of… Ice? Speaking of Gali, male Gali voices even in the stop motion?). I really want G2 to succeed, but I’m cautiously optimistic based on how LEGO has been promoting it.

1 Like
11

But MNOG wasn’t released in January 2001! there was new chapter every month and it got finished in September.
Just give it time.

6 Likes
12

Exactly.

13

I still stand by this statement.

The reason for this is you can add detail to the armor if you wish, by now we have tons of armor add-ons from Hero Factory, Chima, Ben 10 and Marvel builds to help with this out. Not to mention the level of creative body shapes you can make with this style in comparison with the same old same old Inika/Av-Matoran build.
This is what Lego constractions should be, its not only for Bionicle sets, its everything you wish it to be and thats what Lego is about with all its system sets (interchangeable parts are way better than the one themed oriented ones).
Constractions arent just lego blocks or technic line, they are their own thing now which still follows the lego set standards (good quality pieces, interchangeable parts with different constraction themes and its own lego themed building experience).

As for the story, it could use a dash of complexity in it but thats an entirely different problem now.

4 Likes
14

I honestly like both lines about to same. End of story for me, although obviously not for others.