The CCBS Topic

Allow me a little rant here.

Everybody keeps talking about how CCBS is so superior to the old BIONICLE System because it is less specialized. This is absolute balogna. Neither system is better than the other. A lot of people say that the old Bonkle system was way too specialized; to me, that was one of the biggest things that made BIONICLE BIONICLE. The smooth textures of the CCBS are far too futuristic for the old, almost steampunk, look of BIONICLE. The new texture pieces certainly help to bring back that look, but by using the textures you loose connection points!

Besides that, CCBS is stale. LEGO Designers have yet to use it in a very creative way. MOCists have found very few creative ways to use it. In fact, it is rarely used by most MOCists! Most prefer to build "Custom" Parts out of Technic pieces. Even some of the people I know who claim that CCBS is a superior system rarely use it because it's actually an inferior system and difficult to make it look good.

CCBS armor is sometimes difficult to incorporate into MOCs without using the official CCBS bones, which generally detract from the overall appearance of a MOC. The fact CCBS armor attaches only attaches via ball joints and lightsaber pins is really the biggest problem with the system. It's so incompatible with nearly all other forms of BIONICLE and Technic parts that it just doesn't work. So in that way, CCBS is too specialized. It only connects well with it's own parts.

To sum it all up, neither CCBS nor the original BIONICLE system is superior to the other. The old system was more compatible with other Technic parts but had more specialized parts that couldn't be used to great extent. CCBS is less specialized, per say, but really is still only compatible with pieces from its own system.

Feel free to discuss this as I really would like to hear everyone's thoughts on CCBS.

(These are just my opinions. A little post I put together on the Official LEGO Message Boards but I thought I'd share over here and achieve total world domina--I mean uh, yeah....read it.)

15 Likes

They both have pros and cons. The old design was much better aesthetically, but this CCBS is probably easier for children to understand and use.

I think it is cool when used right, and I have seen some nice mocs that incorporate from both CCBS and old Bionicle. But yes I agree that it can be a bit stale, and I imagine it would be difficult to incorporate armor pieces into the older system. I don't moc often, and when I do it is always with the older Bionicle pieces, so I guess I cant speak from experience. However, when the 2015 sets come out, I intend to get two of each set: one to build and one to use for pieces to make mocs. And then I intend to try my hand at both systems.

8 Likes

The best MoCs I've seen combine the systems. Sure it takes some thinking, but there are truly some amazing things you can do. The problem with Technic is that when you look at it, it looks messy and incomplete, which is fine for small builds, but falls apart for larger ones.

3 Likes

@ToaN I suppose you're right that it's easier for children to use but to me, that brings up another problem: LEGO is a building system. It's supposed to be challenging to a degree. CCBS sets are hardly a challenge. It takes more time to actually put the pieces together than to try and work out a somewhat difficult connection.

@Verakion It is true that many great MOCs combine the two systems but unless it's used very well it just doesn't look good.

3 Likes

Yea that is a good point. One part of the more complex older Bionicle system was that it was more of a challenge, which added to the fun of it. HF design may be easier to understand, but at the same time it takes the fun out of building it.

Neither system is superior in all respects, but if I had to use one system or the other, I'd use CCBS.

3 Likes

Why would you choose the CCBS over the original BIONICLE system?

Because my MOCs need it more. CCBS limb elements are near indispensable in my skeletons, and I find plenty of places to use both shells and add-ons. CCBS alone can make some pretty neat MOCs (case in point: Exxtrooper.), and even simple CCBS builds seem more "complete" than simple BIONICLE builds. BIONICLE upper limbs I sometimes use, but lower limbs are near useless, as are upper torsos and the like. Armor pieces, feet, and masks are the only pieces I need/want that are exclusive to BIONICLE sets, and not all those armor pieces work as well as I want, and I could replace them with CCBS armor and add-ons if needed.

Also, you mention builders prefer to build "custom" parts as an attack on CCBS, but CCBS does not mean that TECHNIC is left out. CCBS sets use plenty of Technic, far more than BIONICLE canister sets, as the IFB sets and BIONICLE 2015 sets show.

5 Likes

Because its much more durable and much easier for little kids and lego designers to build and design constraction figures with.

plus there is alot of potential with CCBS. the old system was tired and worn out anyway.

this is why it is superior to the classic constraction system method.

1 Like

Much like what @Hawkflight was saying...

Even as early as Witch Doctor were they doing this, and very well, I might add. Though this was a larger set, which Bionicle had been doing for a long while.

I find that much like has been said already, both have their uses, CCBS has more. And when integrated with Technic, it can make for very impressive builds.

hell, I find myself using more CCBS in MOCs these days than classic pieces just in general. My most recent MOC, Toa Arikas, uses hardly any old Bionicle pieces, that couldn't also be considered Technic.

As you can see, it's mostly armor/weapon pieces, outside those upper limbs. And even then, those are kinda the weakest part of the MOC.

But meh, each is entitled to their own opinion, so who am I to say much of anything.

4 Likes

I have not spent much time with the CCBS as I've wanted to, mainly because I stopped buying constraction sets as often as I did before BIONICLE was canceled. So, take my opinions lightly.

I've had a lot of experience with the older constraction parts, and building with them can be very enjoyable at times. The Inika builds actually look quite nice in person, and when I finish a larger MOC with the official skeleton parts, the result is quite satisfying.

On the other hand, creating custom builds was very difficult for me, because bunches and bunches of Technic parts had to be used. I was okay at building female torsos, but most other custom builds I came up with were failures.

Another problem with the old parts was the fact that the socket parts always broke. I can't tell you how many times I put a couple of parts together and the socket cracked apart.

The old system is nostalgically pleasing to the eight year-old inside of me, but the CCBS looks like a superior replacement. As far as I know, the new sockets are quite hard to break. There are multiple torso sizes, and the huge variety of bone lengths really pleases me. Just take a look at some of JANGBRiCKS' MOCs and you can see the new system's versatility.

So, just my two cents.

4 Likes

My reasons I don't use CCBS
1. As mentioned, it's to smooth and less mechanical in my opinion.
2. They have taken away most of the axle holes for adding stuff on, replacing them with extra ball joints. frowning

@Hawkflight To be fair, I'm not 'attacking' CCBS. I'm just saying that neither system is better than the other, really. I don't use the CCBS bones as much in my 'regular' MOCs, only in the smaller builds. I'll give you that bit about the Technic parts but at the same time, my one IFB set proves my point. The EVO Mech machine set really shows the way in which CCBS is flawed. The completely Technic lower legs are just garbage. So while I see what you're saying, I don't think it's enough to prove that either system is truly superior to the other.

@AidanBionicle1 It is more durable than the Inika parts and stuff but the 'potential' you speak of really proves my point. CCBS needs to fulfill that potential. It's been around for, what, 3 years? And yet it hasn't been used creatively at all. Hence why I called it a stale system. Designers just can't do anything new with it. You say the old system was tired and worn out, CCBS is tired and worn out now.

@Nyran You use that MOC as an example. In all it's not a bad MOC but I see the inside of the lower arms are not armored at all, which is somewhat understandable but that's part of my point. The upper legs have no covering on the backside. I really don't see any use of the CCBS that hasn't been used before as well, which is the main point of my problem. No body uses CCBS in a creative way, even I don't. While I see a few original BIONICLE parts used at least somewhat creatively (the mata hand on the waist, the lower leg armor as body armor).

@LoganDub I agree that the old BIONICLE parts broke easily. I think a lot of people are reading this post the wrong way: I'm saying both systems are flawed, not that CCBS is flawed and the old system is perfect. But the CCBS parts fit together better and I have yet to see one break so there is that.

@ENDfilms You are the first person to post in this topic aside from myself that I agree 100% with =P Like, you just summed everything I said about CCBS with 2 sentences. =P

1 Like

Yeah, the later Bionicles cracked a lot so sticking with older parts would be better (for joints that is). I do find people saying the newer parts from hf cracking less interesting, but the armor is meh.

I always end up condensing things (which is good except when it comes to papers for school :stuck_out_tongue: ).

1 Like

In my opinion CCBS is better when you just want to throw things together on a whim because it's easy to get something with a decent look, vs Bionicle where it was extremely easy to make a complete mess of it.

Bionicle had some interesting pieces, but I personally prefer the clean smooth look of CCBS.

1 Like

It's all a matter of taste. smiley

1 Like

@ENDfilms Yeah I usually prefer to be long and detailful when I can =P

@RangerSilver6 Eh. I guess. Maybe. I don't really prefer one system over the other but I think CCBS is just too smooth. And like I said, even with the texture parts that exist, you lose connection points by attaching them.

1 Like

Personally I like the new BIONICLE sets because they're FINALLY doing SOEMTHING new, but the main reason I like CCBS is because it's so smooth. People who know me off of MOCpages know I love smooth MOCs stuck_out_tongue

2 Likes

In my opinion both are good, when used well
We could combine pieces tho'....

5 Likes

Oh, had I felt it important, i totally could've used some system bits t cover that up. But I didn't, so whatevs. Your point stands I guess, due to my error.

I could've done this too. All that would be needed it to ditch the second spike on the inika armor, and use a Lightsaber rod to attach some CCBS Armor. I use this technique on other MOCs like my Knightpriest.

Darn. Don't I feel like a fool.

Here I thought I was clever with my Raw Jaw Paw Chestplate.

5 Likes