On 4/11/2015 at 2:03 AM, MakutaOfWar said:

Okay, so as a fan I should accept the fact that I give love and receive none in return? Whatever.

Just as in real life, you are not entitled to affection from another just because you have been a nice guy fan. How you spend your money and interests is your business. If you don't like the sets- don't buy them.

Edited April 11, 20159 yr by Darth Vader

  On 4/11/2015 at 8:59 AM, Darth Vader said:

Just as in real life, you are not entitled to affection from another just because you have been a nice guy fan. How you spend your money and interests is your business. If you don't like the sets- don't buy them.

Then they lose a customer. Not a very smart move on their part is it?

Gotta agree with DV, Lyichir & co. Honestly I'm not sure where this sense of entitlement comes from. I see it all the time even outside this situation in particular. Some people seem to think the world has to revolve around them or something and when something isn't exactly to their liking, they try to back up their opinion by making up a claim of their opinion being that of a supposed majority and pretending that their opinion is objective fact. LEGO has changed in the past years and some things are not coming back, others are here to stay for a while. You can be sure LEGO has put much more thought into this than any of us and LEGO's sales and profit numbers from the past few years seem to prove them right.

  On 4/11/2015 at 9:26 AM, MakutaOfWar said:

Then they lose a customer. Not a very smart move on their part is it?

And here we have it again. Why would LEGO care about you and your opinion in particular any more than it should care about that of other people here? What's more, why should they value any of our opinions higher than those of the target audience who actually buys the sets? It's not like LEGO hasn't done any focus group research or anything. That's just what I meant about the sense of entitlement.

Edited April 11, 20159 yr by Gatanui

  On 4/11/2015 at 9:37 AM, Gatanui said:

Gotta agree with DV, Lyichir & co. Honestly I'm not sure where this sense of entitlement comes from. I see it all the time even outside this situation in particular. Some people seem to think the world has to revolve around them or something and when something isn't exactly to their liking, they try to back up their opinion by making up a claim of their opinion being that of a supposed majority and pretending that their opinion is objective fact. LEGO has changed in the past years and some things are not coming back, others are here to stay for a while. You can be sure LEGO has put much more thought into this than any of us and LEGO's sales and profit numbers from the past few years seem to prove them right.

And here we have it again. Why would LEGO care about you and your opinion in particular any more than it should care about that of other people here? What's more, why should they value any of our opinions higher than those of the target audience who actually buys the sets? It's not like LEGO hasn't done any focus group research or anything. That's just what I meant about the sense of entitlement.

I'm not the only one with my opinions, I'm pretty sure there are others who feel the same way. With that there is a possibility for a percentage loss instead of trying to fully appeal to both ends of chart.

What would kids care if Tahu had actual red hands and feet instead of silver? They could probably overlook it, but I definitely have seen other people complain about it who are below this "target audience" which may or may not turn them away from the sets but there is still that chance, but I guess it's TLG's risk in that department.

All I'm saying is I wish Bionicle had the same complete feel as it used to, which appeals to old fans while raking in new ones. It's not a sense of entitlement, just because a fan wishes times were like they were. It's not like I'm demanding TLG fork over the Gen 1 building system to feed my desires, or that of others who feel the way I do, I'm just stating they could have done more. Although it is only the first year, so there's that. And I said before, I still love the sets, as do many others, but TLG shouldn't focus on the "target audience" more then old fans, find an equal ground. Ranking a group higher then another is elitism, which sounds stupid since we are talking about action figures but it's true and not morally right. :P

  On 4/11/2015 at 10:04 AM, MakutaOfWar said:

I'm not the only one with my opinions, I'm pretty sure there are others who feel the same way. With that there is a possibility for a percentage loss instead of trying to fully appeal to both ends of chart.

What would kids care if Tahu had actual red hands and feet instead of silver? They could probably overlook it, but I definitely have seen other people complain about it who are below this "target audience" which may or may not turn them away from the sets but there is still that chance, but I guess it's TLG's risk in that department.

All I'm saying is I wish Bionicle had the same complete feel as it used to, which appeals to old fans while raking in new ones. It's not a sense of entitlement, just because a fan wishes times were like they were. It's not like I'm demanding TLG fork over the Gen 1 building system to feed my desires, or that of others who feel the way I do, I'm just stating they could have done more. Although it is only the first year, so there's that. And I said before, I still love the sets, as do many others, but TLG shouldn't focus on the "target audience" more then old fans, find an equal ground. Ranking a group higher then another is elitism, which sounds stupid since we are talking about action figures but it's true and not morally right. :P

Of course you're not the only one with your opinion, I never claimed otherwise. Obviously I'm not the only one with my opinion either, though.

Saying LEGO shouldn't focus on the target audience more than on the old fans is a fundamental mistake. It has nothing at all to do with elitism or with morality. That's ridiculous. Toys are made for kids and so are these. We should be glad LEGO is putting so much effort in appeasing such a tiny percentage of its customers in the first place. Pretending we here are somehow important enough that LEGO should even do such a thing as to find an equal ground between our wishes and those of the target audience is exactly the sense of entitlement I was talking about. The target audience, which are the kids of today, and of course LEGO's core values are the absolute priority. Only then and only if it doesn't contradict any of the former LEGO can try to cater to us.

Edited April 11, 20159 yr by Gatanui

It's true that I;d like it to look more piston-y and such, but I feel that, for the most part, the bones and shells are fine. Sure, I'd like less bley and more coloured bones, but if trans-purple isn't a fantastic start on that, I dunno what is.

THe only parts I take issue with are the 2.0 shells and feet. A new torso shell would be nice, since we got one almost every year up to Brain Attack, I don't think it's too much to ask, or just give us the BA torso shells in the Toa's main colours, that'd be fine. As for the feet, they just don't look good. I find that the best I've been able to make them look is on some of my Toa MOCs, all of whom are at least two units taller than an Inika. The feet are oversized, and frankly, with everything getting oh-so-versatile, a foot-piece with a built-in socket is a bit too 2001-2 for my tastes. Actually, that's not fair. The Mata and Bohrok feet were more versatile than the 2.0 foot. Still, one dodgy part out of all of them isn't bad.

THe one othe refinement that I think CCBS needs is in the neck area. They need to find a way to stop the heads and chestplates interfering with each other. Either make the neck longer, make a new armour add-on which doesn't stick up as much, or make a new torso shell with the notches for the addon to attach to a bit lower.

No set is perfect, but I think the Toa are the closest we've come to that in a long time. Not only have they fixed the problems that a lot of HF sets had, but they also look a lot better than Tahu and co's last outing (Soft spot for Lewa Phantoka aside).

Personally, I like the simple 2.0 torso shell. It works great for almost any type of figure and, with the use of add-ons, can be customized to give almost any aesthetic. And that's kind of the point of the CCBS system. I do want a more organic add-on, and less bulbous than the Breakout one. The neck thing I think would be hard to fix. We're used to action figures and similar having necks far shorter than humans do, and trying to change that would at the very least prompt kids to say that it looks weird.

I also kind of want to see a shell that can be layered properly. It can be done with the 2.0 torso shell, and it looks very scale- or armor-like, but that's too large for most purposes.

  On 4/11/2015 at 10:04 AM, MakutaOfWar said:

And I said before, I still love the sets, as do many others, but TLG shouldn't focus on the "target audience" more then old fans...

Yes they should. In fact, that is EXACTLY what they should do. The target audience vastly outnumbers the number of old fans who still care about BIONICLE at this point anyway. After all, it is a kids' toy — most fans from the olden days have already "grown out of it".

That's not to say the LEGO Group should completely ignore older fans or go out of their way to alienate them. And they haven't — there have been many extremely sincere appeals to nostalgia in the new line, from moments in the webisodes that echo moments of the original story, to masks that echo the most beloved of the original Kanohi, to changes that many of the older fans actually approve of. But when push comes to shove, if the newer fans want one thing and the older fans want another thing, it's better to let the newer fans have their way. BIONICLE is a kids' toy, and always has been.

Anyway, I think you've seen from this thread alone that there are lots and lots of older fans who really like the direction the new sets have taken things. This isn't a black and white "old fans versus new fans" thing — there are plenty of old-school fans who are either ambivalent about these changes or even see them as positive changes to the classic sets.

Personally, I love that the new BIONICLE sets have a cleaner and more streamlined aesthetic, which isn't as bony or gappy as many of the older sets. I love that the parts are no longer covered in an assortment of specialized textures that clash if you're not very particular about how you combine them. I love that instead of being set apart by functionally-identical parts with varying motifs and textures like the feet, forearms, and torsos of the Toa Inika, the new Toa and Protectors are set apart by actual differences in their builds. I love that the Protectors' launchers are simple and compact and use non-specialized ammo instead of being huge, specialized contraptions with extremely limited uses, and that the Toa feature both posability AND functionality instead of just one or the other.

The new sets are definitely a lot different than what BIONICLE used to be. But they seem to me very much like what BIONICLE should have been.

  On 4/11/2015 at 1:29 PM, Aanchir said:

And they haven't — there have been many extremely sincere appeals to nostalgia in the new line, from moments in the webisodes that echo moments of the original story

Yeah, but Lewa never got facehugged so that means the entire line is a flop.

Why do I get the feeling someone is going to think I'm serious?

Guess I have to be the "unpopular opinion" guy that thinks the new sets have a whole bunch of flaws that no one else cares about, like Gali's gappy tibia/fibula or the shoulder armor on Gali and Tahu looking really weird.

  On 4/11/2015 at 3:29 AM, GK733 said:

Asking for one new mold isn't that bad. I would had ditched boomerangs for one pistonic CCBS mold to be honest.

This ^ A billion times this... not entirely sure why tons of people are finding issue with people desiring this... :L

  On 4/11/2015 at 1:45 PM, Mandate said:

Guess I have to be the "unpopular opinion" guy that thinks the new sets have a whole bunch of flaws that no one else cares about, like Gali's gappy tibia/fibula or the shoulder armor on Gali and Tahu looking really weird.

Noticed that also... i believe they CGI'd it on the box art as i've had to mod mine to get it in a similar position where it doesnt look rediculous. Though i suppose with those complaints they are mostly based on design aspects that are more likely to be fixed in future sets or modded by fans, sadly fans are unlikely to have the resources to make new molds.

----

As for the rest going to spoiler the responses to save space

  On 4/10/2015 at 11:27 PM, Lyichir said:

No one alleged that Lego isn't caring about the theme beyond how to make it profitable. They've put a ridiculous amount of effort into the design and promotion of the theme. At the same time, they're not being as flagrantly wasteful as the original theme.

  On 4/11/2015 at 1:03 AM, Darth Vader said:

Yeah, I hate that a toy company is trying to make money and stay in business!

  On 4/10/2015 at 11:46 PM, LN-01354 said:

LEGO isn't being cheap; they're acting like a real TOY COMPANY. They're not going to give a new theme a massive budget, and make all new pieces so that some picky fans can be happy.

Reveal hidden contents

That was not what i was saying, you've misunderstood. I believe they care for the theme, i just understand that the current period is a transition and people dont really seem to be understanding that believing this is how Bionicle Gen 2 will remain and defending it based on it being cost effective. I think its excuses when people think being creative and making unique pieces that actually represent the theme is a bad thing which seems to be the general jist of those defending the CCBS system rather than understanding the CCBS system refers to the method of the interlocking pieces rather than the potential for new shell pieces which is what i clearly stated i was referring to.

While granted the CCBS system itself is not changing, that doesnt mean they will not introduce new shell pieces as they are already being shown to do so in the Star Wars Ultra Builds and have introduced new shell pieces for other lines in the past. I dont see why everyone thinks that this is not a transition period.

  On 4/11/2015 at 1:03 AM, Darth Vader said:

The argument that the shells are Hero Factory and that this is a "transition year" is one I have seen all over the Internet. It is wrong. The purpose of CCBS was to keep the basic building blocks the same and vary the designs and details pieces, the same way system sets do. You will notice very few system fans complain that TLG continues to use 2x4 basic bricks in so many sets. This is the same as that. The system has been used for four lines now, each introducing only a small number of specialized parts. That isn't going to change just because the name says BIONICLE.

Reveal hidden contents

Star Wars Ultra Builds are introducing new shell pieces to help with their sets and it is likely several of these new shell pieces will be used for the 2016 Bionicle sets. We already have new shell pieces for the 2015 summer sets, the new trans-bone body piece is a new shell. While its not going to be a drastic transition, i hardly expect the line to just remain stationary with only new masks and weapons each year. Granted it introduces a small number of specialized parts each time it now has two lines that contribute to how many new pieces they can introduce (Star Wars and Bionicle) so over time their will be more specialised parts until it varies from just a bunch of these.

  On 4/10/2015 at 11:27 PM, Lyichir said:

What new parts, specifically, do you think they should have made? Because the reuse of standardized shells and beams was the entire purpose of the CCBS. The new Bionicle sets do have a similar aesthetic to other CCBS-based themes, of course—but it was DESIGNED for that look. Just because it doesn't cover every set with excessive detail doesn't mean that it's "not Bionicle" or "cheap" or that they "didn't care".

Reveal hidden contents

Shell pieces that actually look like armour would have been more cost effective than creating an armour piece to go over the pre-existing shell. It would have cut the number of pieces essentially removing about 6 from each set while also creating an asthetic that was more what they were trying to go for with Bionicle's return (Evident from the work gone into mask designing) It would have also made the toy more sleeker with less change of the pieces falling off when rough play occurs while retaining the asthetic idea of having armour.

Its been 3 years with the same parts that were primarily made for very simplistic Superhero sets, made for a target audience that was younger than the target audience of Gen 2 Bionicle. While it worked to an extent for Hero Factory because Hero Factory was not a theme based around a pre-existing design asthetic, when it comes to Bionicle the whole idea is replicating the old. That is why so much work went into making the masks a culmination of all that came before it.

It feels like people are just accepting the standardized shells as being 'Bionicle' when they were never intended for that purpose. Sure they were intended for the CCBS building system, but in terms of progress they've made none in a long time simply keeping the pre-existing shells and covering them rather than altering them. We're still getting the same shells as 3 years ago that dont fit the theme its being used for.

  On 4/10/2015 at 11:27 PM, Lyichir said:

No one's making excuses—we're explaining why what you seem to expect from the sets is impractical, unrealistic, and based largely on the classic theme's mistakes. I think you would qualify more as "making excuses"—you clearly don't like the sets, and that's okay! But you're trying to brand them as objectively bad just to justify your personal dislike.

Reveal hidden contents

If i disliked the sets i would'nt have brought them all plus duplicates, i like the general idea and their are creative elements. Its just that as i've stated, i believe this to be a transition year similar to the first year of Hero Factory. The sets are not as good as they should have been and the asthetic as such is suffering. I heavily doubt the intention is to stick with the simplistic CCBS pieces with no alteration throughout Gen 2 Bionicle, otherwise they would have just done that without introducing the new armour pieces to cover the shells. As such i find it an excuse when people say its not TLG being cheap, because that is precisely the intention as it was with the first year of Hero Factory. Use whatever spare pieces they have lying around to make models with limited new pieces.

It doesnt mean necessarily that the sets suck, but it does mean that they are trying whatever they can to avoid creating tons of new pieces. This is something evident from simply looking at the sets when a majority of the masks are duplicates such as the Protectors masks, multiple re-uses of the Toa masks, multiple re-uses of the Skull Spider mask, multiple re-uses of the weapons, multiple re-uses of the villain masks, etc...

TLG is bascially testing the return of Bionicle thats why it has so much gone into marketting rather than the sets having tons of unique parts that actually fit the asthetic. They want to sell to the biggest audience they possibly can during the first year or so and then they'll realise how much their profit will be and alter the sets accordingly. The idea being that this year will be a buffer, they'll get a large profit with minimal use of new pieces and then the next year they'll be able to experiment. I just find it odd how people are so acceptant of something that clearly is not intended to remain. We've seen the summer sets so we know they are introducing new shell pieces. Sure the CCBS building system will be a constant factory but as proven via the Star Wars sets also the intention seems to be to introduce new shell pieces for 2016, so i'm not 100% sure why people are making excuses and defending aspects that are going to change.

  On 4/10/2015 at 11:46 PM, LN-01354 said:

And you said they are "sacrificing the uniqueness and creativity that the original Bionicle had".......are you joking? First off, their were plenty of pieces in the early sets that were reused from Slizers and Roboriders. Second, what do you even mean that they lack "uniqueness"? Do you mean how all of the Toa have their own personal masks, weapons, colors, and builds, and all of the Protectors each have their own builds, weapons, and colors too? Or do you mean how these look like no Hero Factory set, and these new BIONICLE sets have created their own look?

</rant>

Reveal hidden contents

I'm saying they are attempting to replicate the style of Bionicle yet doing so half-heartedly because they are seemingly afraid of taking a risk with the theme. If they wanted to blend the simplistic pieces then they would have done so by going with much more simplistic mask and weapon designs, instead they created armour add-ons that were more based on the original wave. Why try to replicate a style and then not go through with replicating it completely?

While you mention their were plently of reused pieces from Slizers and Roboriders in the early sets, that is precisely my point. It wasnt a constant factor, it was a transition period as i have mentioned. I dont expect Bionicle to remain the same without changing the pieces, however it seems via the response to my comments that everyone else does... :L

As for my comment about uniqueness, its more to do with the overall idea of re-using parts that dont fit the asthetic. New colors on pieces that dont fit the asthetic do not change the situation. Most of the builds are incredibly basic in terms of the CCBS constructs, which is understandable as its a simplified system of building, but at the same time that is really not Bionicle. We're meant to see pistons, spikes and gears and things that look technic based, which is something the design team incoporated into the masks and add-on armour.

Is it too much simply ask that they be smarter with their choices and actually create new shell pieces rather than add-ons? As that is literally all that my comment was asking for in the first place

  On 4/11/2015 at 9:37 AM, Gatanui said:

Gotta agree with DV, Lyichir & co. Honestly I'm not sure where this sense of entitlement comes from. I see it all the time even outside this situation in particular. Some people seem to think the world has to revolve around them or something and when something isn't exactly to their liking, they try to back up their opinion by making up a claim of their opinion being that of a supposed majority and pretending that their opinion is objective fact. LEGO has changed in the past years and some things are not coming back, others are here to stay for a while. You can be sure LEGO has put much more thought into this than any of us and LEGO's sales and profit numbers from the past few years seem to prove them right.

Reveal hidden contents

Its less people having a sense of entitlement and more that they believe a succesful company should listen to constructive criticism as it helps them make the best choices as with the saying 'the customer is always right' because at the end of the day the customer is what keeps Lego going.

A similar situation happened recently with people asking for the 'easter' segment of the wallpaper to be removed so they could have it as a background. If Lego had refused or simply ignored the request then they would have lost out on people potentially being interested in the brand. Its a give and take situation, fans give critiques and buy the sets and Lego listen and adapt the sets on a yearly basis based on customer feedback.

Check out the

for an example, if Lego hadnt gotten Hackers to basically experiment then we would'nt have had as complicated sets as we ended up getting. Allowing for input and rewarding customers with improvement on a product that reflects their input helps make the customer feel like they matter.

Edited April 11, 20159 yr by Scarilian

One thing I think they could do is inject more variety. We've got a fair amount with the Toa, but let's push the envelope a bit. Maybe make something more like this piece, but with an open back for the gearbox. Never understood why we didn't get that part more in HF, it looks great.

  On 4/11/2015 at 1:46 PM, Scarilian said:

Reveal hidden contents

Reveal hidden contents

Shell pieces that actually look like armour would have been more cost effective than creating an armour piece to go over the pre-existing shell. It would have cut the number of pieces essentially removing about 6 from each set while also creating an asthetic that was more what they were trying to go for with Bionicle's return (Evident from the work gone into mask designing) It would have also made the toy more sleeker with less change of the pieces falling off when rough play occurs while retaining the asthetic idea of having armour.

Its been 3 years with the same parts that were primarily made for very simplistic Superhero sets, made for a target audience that was younger than the target audience of Gen 2 Bionicle. While it worked to an extent for Hero Factory because Hero Factory was not a theme based around a pre-existing design asthetic, when it comes to Bionicle the whole idea is replicating the old. That is why so much work went into making the masks a culmination of all that came before it.

It feels like people are just accepting the standardized shells as being 'Bionicle' when they were never intended for that purpose. Sure they were intended for the CCBS building system, but in terms of progress they've made none in a long time simply keeping the pre-existing shells and covering them rather than altering them. We're still getting the same shells as 3 years ago that dont fit the theme its being used for.

I can't refute all of these right now so I'm going to focus on the one.

Creating a full range of sizes of new shells would be the OPPOSITE of cost-effective compared to a single new detail element. Yes, they'd need to include fewer parts per set (which, by the way, is generally perceived as a bad thing—buyers like getting more parts). But the cost of a single new mold represents a much bigger expense than the simple inclusion of an additional part in a set. New molds cost tens of thousands of dollars apiece to design, engineer, and produce. And you're suggesting creating a full range of modular sizes to replace the existing shells. That goes against the entire design principle of the CCBS— the full range of basic beams and shells was designed with the intention of being able to expand possibilities with add-ons.

  On 4/11/2015 at 2:02 PM, Lord-Vorahk said:

One thing I think they could do is inject more variety. We've got a fair amount with the Toa, but let's push the envelope a bit. Maybe make something more like this piece, but with an open back for the gearbox. Never understood why we didn't get that part more in HF, it looks great.

It looks great, but as someone who ordered a bunch of them for that reason—it's not as great as it seems. It covers up the majority of useful connection points on pretty much every style of torso shell, while only offering a few less useful add-on connections in exchange. Contrast that with the traditional torso shell designs, which only use one connection point while still allowing parts to be attached from behind on any of the remaining ball joints or technic holes.

It seems the more I try to make a point the more people want to argue. I suggest TLG show more fan love; "NO". I suggest find an equal appeal; "You're wrong." If you don't like my opinions then don't argue it. At the end of the day they're my opinions, though I can say I feel bad about this community and your accepting of under-appreciation. Again my opinions only, no need to argue now, is there?

It's funny, only Modders complain about the design of the sets. You don't see Collectors whining about the most trivial things.

  On 4/11/2015 at 1:46 PM, Scarilian said:

Reveal hidden contents

Reveal hidden contents

Its been 3 years with the same parts that were primarily made for very simplistic Superhero sets, made for a target audience that was younger than the target audience of Gen 2 Bionicle. While it worked to an extent for Hero Factory because Hero Factory was not a theme based around a pre-existing design asthetic, when it comes to Bionicle the whole idea is replicating the old. That is why so much work went into making the masks a culmination of all that came before it.

Lol, the CCBS weren't made primarily for the Superheroes series :u They've been introduced year before this series even came out, in Hero Factory :u

Edited April 11, 20159 yr by Voxovan

Why are we assuming the new BIONICLE is attempting to attain the aesthetics of the old one? Obviously TLG wants to keep some resemblance (the Toa masks and the piston add-on), but bear in mind this is NOT the same BIONICLE we had before. Just because it shares the name does not mean it needs to adhere to the original style. I honestly think the new Toa masks were designed after the old ones to maintain the likeness of the characters, not to attain the aesthetics of the first line.

Will we see some new torso shells throughout the line? Sure. Various new add-ons as well, and maybe some new non-torso shells (I find this less likely; was surprised to see the skull guys' bone in the first place). But if I were a betting man, I would put down lots of money that they're not going to overhaul the system to bring back the old BIONICLE aesthetic.

The Skull Villians are already coming with a new torso shell.

  On 4/11/2015 at 2:58 PM, MonkeyChud said:

The Skull Villians are already coming with a new torso shell.

Yes, i saw that they will be with new torsu shells. It looks like six skeleton's fins, with bracingю

I'd say the system is perfect and doesn't need an overhaul, but it certainly needs to improve at some points. For instance the 2.0 feet piece has to go and be replaced with something that has an axle connection so it can be connected to ballsockets like 2003-2011. It could have a more piston-y look and allow to be used as back armor for example. The 2.0 foot does poor job of being anything else than a foot and is against the sole purpose of CCBS.

But aside from this debate, any ideas when the next LDD patch is coming? I have a feeling it should come this month.

  On 4/11/2015 at 2:09 PM, MakutaOfWar said:

It seems the more I try to make a point the more people want to argue. I suggest TLG show more fan love; "NO". I suggest find an equal appeal; "You're wrong." If you don't like my opinions then don't argue it. At the end of the day they're my opinions, though I can say I feel bad about this community and your accepting of under-appreciation. Again my opinions only, no need to argue now, is there?

No need to be upset. I Think we are all just offering our two cents as you are yours. We are in a forum full of thousands of people - surely there will be some disagreements. But hopefully we can turn this into a healthy discussion rather than an unhealthy argument.

Why do people complain so much about the 2.0 foot? It works great as intended, plus you can use two joined together with pins to fill up gaps in larger MOCs.

It's just one single solid piece and most of the times the ballsocket sticks out way too much. This plagued Dragonbolt, Rocka 4.0 etc. While it might do okay in MOCs, it's an awful piece for designers to deal with.

  On 4/11/2015 at 4:22 PM, DraikNova said:

Why do people complain so much about the 2.0 foot?

Because it looks UGLY.

  On 4/11/2015 at 4:08 PM, GK733 said:

I'd say the system is perfect and doesn't need an overhaul, but it certainly needs to improve at some points. For instance the 2.0 feet piece has to go and be replaced with something that has an axle connection so it can be connected to ballsockets like 2003-2011. It could have a more piston-y look and allow to be used as back armor for example. The 2.0 foot does poor job of being anything else than a foot and is against the sole purpose of CCBS.

But aside from this debate, any ideas when the next LDD patch is coming? I have a feeling it should come this month.

My worst complain about CCBS is that it doesn't allow you to put armor on a bone from both sides. Sure, you can use that little gray technic piece with a ball in the middle, but it doesn't look that good and doesn't work with all types of shells.

It's an atrocious foot design and has been used about ten times too many. One of my most hated things about the CCBS system. :P

  Quote

It's just one single solid piece and most of the times the ballsocket sticks out way too much. This plagued Dragonbolt, Rocka 4.0 etc. While it might do okay in MOCs, it's an awful piece for designers to deal with.

It's also just a bit of a boring foot. You can fill in the gap to stop it looking like a clown shoe, but it still looks like a generic humanoid foot. I personally preferred the 2 Inika feet. This is just an example of the change in aesthetic as a whoIe. prefer then Bionicle, even toa, looks sort of bestial and menacing. The current toa, as good as they are, took a tad too 'heroic' for my taste.