Bionicle 2015 Discussion

[Dr_Chronos]

Mind you, I'm in no hurry for an underwater wave either. How about something Bionicle's never done before, like an OVER-water seafaring theme?

I LOVE this idea a lot more than I should.

Could you imagine it though? Toa exploring the ocean, searching small islands for treasure, facing sea monsters, or pirates, or both!

(I need to make a Bionicle version of Davy Jones now)

Personally, what I would like to see is some brick based play sets.

Ehh, as an owner of a few playsets (piraka outpost, some barraki thing) They were just "ok" lego sets in their own right.

But if they returned I would buy them just for the mini toa and the AWESOME weapons. Like seriously those playset weapons are some the best minifig gear I've ever seen.

Just LOOK at this hammer:

http://www.bricklink.com/catalogItem.asp?P=55237j

Glorious

Edited July 5, 2015 by Dr_Chronos

[Toa-Nuva]

If this is true, then why did LEGO choose to make half of the Toa the price of what would be a Titan-class set back in Gen 1?

They are the bigger/more expensive sets, but they are also the red, white and black sets, which I think are the three best-selling colors among the six typical Toa colors. So I'd say they tried to compensate for the higher price by giving them the more popular colors.

[Lyichir]

Don't hold your breath for playsets, those were the single worst selling features of the original line.

Which makes me sad. I'd like to think that the reason for the classic playsets' failure was due less to the concept (which was incredibly appealing for a story buff like myself who had always wanted to see Bionicle's rich locations represented in sets) and due more to the execution (with terrible, disproportionate, unposable, and mismatched figures, and the poor luck to debut right after Bionicle abandoned diverse and interesting elemental biomes in favor of dour battlescapes and fortresses).

Playsets with the amazing figure designs from last year's Hero Factory IFB wave (which were similarly less successful than other waves by virtue of timing and circumstance) and the lush and mysterious background of Okoto would be the bee's knees. But numbers speak louder than words, and the numbers form a clear argument of why playsets are a bad idea. I'll continue to hold out hope for Bionicle figs appearing in Lego Dimensions or some other avenue for release, but it's a fool's hope, all things considered.

[VBBN]

Don't forget we have a 2016 wish list, please keep this thread relevant to 2015 only.

PLEASE NO

DON'T TEMPT FATE

Yasss

sweg

These do not contribute to the discussion, please refrain from making similar posts in the future. Thanks

[Kalta the Noble Mind]

i remember reading that TLG only had a finite list of approved names during G1 which is why they use those generic term code names for the darkhunters since they could get more characters without wasting names. wonder if the current generic title naming convention in G2 is there for the same reason. not only do they get the ideas of the characters across but lets you use the copyrighted names sparingly. like in the summer wave Skull Grinder is the leader of the skull creatures so needs to have an actual name to make him distinct and integral to the story thus only he gets named Kulta. or something.

makes even more sense when i heard elsewhere in this thread that the G2 story team want to do their own thing with no connection to G1 so outside of using the original 6 Toa/masters for brand recognition they have to come up with their own lexicon of names and terms which would cost money to copyright.

using generic terms where they can saves them on copyright cash, like here in year one of G2 we have i believe a grand total of 3 unique names (okoto,Ekimu,Kulta) while i think we had a total of 27 unique names in the first wave of G1 (6 toa,6 turaga,12 kanohi, 3 aformentioned character/element terms).

that's what i take away form this anyway.

EDIT: also just remembered the Maori fiasco that made Tohuga into Matoran. so maybe lego is going super safe and using generic terms when possible so they dont have to worry about copyrighting existing languages or put the money used on that once extensive lexicon towards research into finding truly unique names that wont tread on any existing terms.

also i think i read elsewhere about the trouble translating fantasy terms into other languages so generic descriptors are ideal as most if all languages have words that can describe the same concept thus make translation easier.

Edited July 5, 2015 by Kalta the Noble Mind

[TwistLaw]

i remember reading that TLG only had a finite list of approved names during G1 which is why they use those generic term code names for the darkhunters since they could get more characters without wasting names. wonder if the current generic title naming convention in G2 is there for the same reason. not only do they get the ideas of the characters across but lets you use the copyrighted names sparingly. like in the summer wave Skull Grinder is the leader of the skull creatures so needs to have an actual name to make him distinct and integral to the story thus only he gets named Kulta. or something.

makes even more sense when i heard elsewhere in this thread that the G2 story team want to do their own thing with no connection to G1 so outside of using the original 6 Toa/masters for brand recognition they have to come up with their own lexicon of names and terms which would cost money to copyright.

using generic terms where they can saves them on copyright cash, like here in year one of G2 we have i believe a grand total of 3 unique names (okoto,Ekimu,Kulta) while i think we had a total of 27 unique names in the first wave of G1 (6 toa,6 turaga,12 kanohi, 3 aformentioned character/element terms).

that's what i take away form this anyway.

jesus it's so sad

THAT'S what should be said when people say G2 has no lore: we have NO NAMES.

[Lyichir]

jesus it's so sad

THAT'S what should be said when people say G2 has no lore: we have NO NAMES.

Personally, I appreciate it. If anything, G1 had TOO MANY names. Did the Rahkshi really each need unique names when you could just describe them as "Rahkshi of Anger" or "Rahkshi of Fear" (and thus not have to worry about naming the many, many other types?) Did the Visorak all need individualized names? How about the Vahki? The Bohrok? Who here can list the eight types of Krana, and what powers those names each signify, without looking them up?

Again, this XKCD comic is relevant.

Would I like important characters in future story to have names to identify themselves with? Sure! But the fact is, I don't need mindless zombies to have individualized names, nor do I need one-of-a-kind dignitaries to go by anything other than their honorary titles. And more importantly, if simpler names actually make it easier for even one kid to get interested in the story (instead of all the work put into that story being wasted on them), then that's a measurable improvement over the overwhelming cruft and complexity that helped to kill off the classic theme. Accessibility is not a vice. It's a virtue.

Edited July 5, 2015 by Lyichir

[FordianL]

jesus it's so sad

THAT'S what should be said when people say G2 has no lore: we have NO NAMES.

All I say to this is: "do characters, who really don't need names, really matter in the long haul?"

After all, most of the characters who don't have names seem to be the stock characters who are just there to fill the gap, which they do quite nicely.

[Scarilian]

All I say to this is: "do characters, who really don't need names, really matter in the long haul?"

After all, most of the characters who don't have names seem to be the stock characters who are just there to fill the gap, which they do quite nicely.

The issue is more the acknowledgement that practically every other character this year other than the Toa and Kulta likely wont matter in the long haul. The developed lore for the characters is weakened when one realises that without a name they likely wont have an important effect on the plot.

Will anyone care for the manipulated and resurrected Skull Slicer the ancient champion fighter adored by all of Okoto if he is not given a name? To be honest thats probably why he has amnesia so they can explain why he doesnt have a name as he cannot remember.

Its just that in a couple of years time when the story has reached its concluding battle with the Toa fighting against Makuta or whatever dark force inhabits the mask of Ultimate Power - few newer fans will look back and remember any of the characters other than the Toa as they'll all have been nameless horde creatures or characters with unportrayed lore that lack a name.

[GK733]

All I say to this is: "do characters, who really don't need names, really matter in the long haul?"

After all, most of the characters who don't have names seem to be the stock characters who are just there to fill the gap, which they do quite nicely.

The six protectors need names, especially PoF. The rest are just villagers but need names too if and hopefully they appear more on the story not just "villager". The skeletons are a whole different thing, Kulta needed a name for sure and same I could say about Slicer, but then again he's far away from his past self. the rest of the skeleton army is just a horde. depends on Basher if he's just a horde but I'd doubt it.

[Mandate]

Personally, I appreciate it. If anything, G1 had TOO MANY names. Did the Rahkshi really each need unique names when you could just describe them as "Rahkshi of Anger" or "Rahkshi of Fear" (and thus not have to worry about naming the many, many other types?) Did the Visorak all need individualized names? How about the Vahki? The Bohrok? Who here can list the eight types of Krana, and what powers those names each signify, without looking them up?

Again, this XKCD comic is relevant.

Would I like important characters in future story to have names to identify themselves with? Sure! But the fact is, I don't need mindless zombies to have individualized names, nor do I need one-of-a-kind dignitaries to go by anything other than their honorary titles. And more importantly, if simpler names actually make it easier for even one kid to get interested in the story (instead of all the work put into that story being wasted on them), then that's a measurable improvement over the overwhelming cruft and complexity that helped to kill off the classic theme. Accessibility is not a vice. It's a virtue.

The "TOO MANY NAMES" argument isn't the greatest when we literally only have ten unique names total in the entirety of G2, only three of which are actually new. Especially when there aren't even unique names for any Okotoan locations, objects or creatures. All we know of really are "Fire Village", "Okoto's Greatest Volcano" and "The Ancient City".

Unique names add diversity and personality to a story. Lord of the Rings' world has a very deep complexity where almost everything is interconnected in some way and features unique naming schemes for nearly every location and character. While this can both scare off or welcome newcomers (usually the latter, seeing as they don't bring up that time Morgoth stole the Silmarils every moment someone says "Sauron"), complexity and diversity are virtues of a story that give it personality. Imagine if the forest of Lothlorien was simply called "Elven Forest" or if Rohan was named "Land of the Horse-lords". Sure, the new names are all fine and dandy but they detract from the overall quality of the story. In the case of BIONICLE, having unique names placed few and far between amongst an ocean of overly-simplistic names such as "Fire Villager" really detracts from the story, most certainly when said character/s have a main focus in the story.

We don't need everything given a special name for it or some crazy backstory involving Artahka and the time Tahu thought he was a uniquely-named bio-mechanical chicken, but anything better than using "The Ancient City" to refer to a significant location would be good.

[MakutaOfWar]

Personally; You have the sets, you have the kids/people who show interest in the sets, the kids/people who buy the sets, and the kids/people who turn into fans of the sets, and the longtime fans of the theme. If you have someone who genuinely cares about the story they're going to want more, like names(or not), where I think it would be fitting to AT LEAST be put into books/comics and other material for those who will take the time to actually read. If someone wants to call Skull Grinder "Skull Grinder" or Kulta then let them, as with Ekimu/Mask Maker, but supply the options, you know.

Edit: There are two Slicer's in that commercial...

Edited July 6, 2015 by MakutaOfWar

[Leewan]

Unique names add diversity and personality to a story.

Yeah, I think it gives realism and life to the story. BTW, I've created a separate topic so everyone can discuss the names of the locations / characters / species (in both G1 and G2) without risking being off-topic.

[Logan McOwen]

Uh... Why do the Skull Creatures have skulls underneath their skulls?

[Nekchir]

Uh... Why do the Skull Creatures have skulls underneath their skulls?

Why do you?

[Ikaatril]

I'm pretty sure we don't have skulls underneath our skulls...

That would be weird.

What he's trying to say is that the Skulls (the sets) are wearing skulls (masks) on their skulls (the skull (the bone)) which is weird as normally you have faces or masks on skulls (the bone).

[Scarilian]

Uh... Why do the Skull Creatures have skulls underneath their skulls?

Only Slicer's makes sense to me as he is being controlled by the Skull Spider... the rest dont make sense unless their masks are the remains of their masks that have degraded over time. Even that option seems a little convoluted though as it implies Slicer and Basher have the same mask originally despite being different creatures.

Though i suppose they could establish later that they are not masks but are actually meant to be the real skull with the underneath skull simply being ignored.

[Logan McOwen]

I'm assuming that they are just stylized/degraded masks, or legitimate skulls worn as masks - I mean, Skull Basher is said to be wearing a bull skull.

Edited July 6, 2015 by LewiMOC

[MakutaOfWar]

Let me ask, in the commercial did Kulta put the MoCr on his Skull mask or take his mask off and put it on? Might not answer wheather they're masks or not but might help give some insight.

Also, commercials tend to not be canon to story these days...

Edited July 6, 2015 by MakutaOfWar

[Logan McOwen]

Also, commercials tend to not be canon to story these days...

So why even bring it up when trying to decipher canon? :v

To answer though, he just kinda slips the mask over the skull he's wearing - much like Takua does with the Avohkii in MoL and Vakama does with the Vahi in LoMn.

Edited July 6, 2015 by LewiMOC

[MakutaOfWar]

So why even bring it up when trying to decipher canon? :v

To answer though, he just kinda slips the mask over the skull he's wearing - much like Takua does with the Avohkii in MoL and Vakama does with the Vahi in LoMn.

Just... trying to conversate... c_c

And yeah, Vakama and Vahi came to mind when I asked that. Completely forgot about Takua, though.

A little off topic but in fiction how were masks held in place anyhow?

[SoupOrFishOil]

I interpreted them as being sort of like Egyptian death masks.

[Kalta the Noble Mind]

from what i understand Skull grinder is a sort of necromancer, using magic to animate fallen warriors to do his bidding yes? maybe wherever he learned his necromancy from they say to give the body you are reanimating a mask similar to your own so it can i dunno act as a proxy head for you. like how the mask that controls the skull spiders looks like a skull spider itself, it' a sympathetic magic interface.

or if they are legit skulls form other dead creatures they act as enchanted remotes. he treated those skulls with whatever magic he used to turn dead bodies "on" again and being a necromancer he just wears his bull skull as ritual dress or i dunno a fashion statement.

also doesnt the Pokemon Cubone wear the skull of its mother?

[dviddy]

Are we ignoring that the product descriptions just calls them masks, for some reason? They are just wearing masks stylized like skulls. Seems pretty simple to me?

[The Outsider]

Are we ignoring that the product descriptions just calls them masks, for some reason? They are just wearing masks stylized like skulls. Seems pretty simple to me?

Seconded. Though, this being BIONICLE, those masks probably have powers of their own depending on their shape and name. For example, the Skull Masks might animate humanoid "golems" made of random bones, the Bull Skull Masks might animate more animalistic creations, and the Spider Skull Mask animates actual corpses (at least I'm sticking to it until an official description comes along).

On another note, what do you think will be the site updates for the summer? We'll obviously get bios for the Skull Creatures and Ekimu and new webisodes, but what about character videos or a map of the City of Mask Makers?