Bionicle 2016 Sets Discussion

[TwistLaw]

I don't know, I liked Ninjago: Rebooted okay.

In all seriousness, Ninjago is probably a lot stronger than Bionicle has been in a long, long time. A look at Google Trends could give you a good sense of that. It's generated more search interest in the past twelve years than Bionicle did, and it didn't even exist for the first seven of those years. I think Bionicle still may have a lead in terms of net sales by virtue of having had a longer overall lifespan, but in terms of single-year sales, Ninjago beat Bionicle (and for that matter, every other previous theme) in its very first year. And it continues to demonstrate an insane amount of momentum, especially for a theme that was very nearly discontinued.

Weren't you the same guy that, when I noticed the Google Trend divide, told me that it was mostly because of the Cartoon Network show?

Le ebin meme aside, it should have been pretty clear I was talking about sheer sales, and having been on the market for a longer time sure helped BIONICLE being marketed as "LEGO's strongest IP ever" last year when it was rebooted (I'm not saying that, LEGO itself did on the retailer catalogues).

Besides I'm surprised, Aanchir, that you mentioned Google Trends without adding that it didn't exist during BIONICLE's strongest years (2001-2003). I'm pretty sure that, if it did, the overall percentage of searches would still be in favour of BIONICLE up to this day.

[Bigger Fish]

One thing that baffles me is why Onua has clear crystal add ons instead of purple ones. Even JTO shows him having purple crystals. Also, I'm kind of disappointed he didn't get a crystal blade, that would look neat in purple.

[Quisoves Pugnat]

Besides I'm surprised, Aanchir, that you mentioned Google Trends without adding that it didn't exist during BIONICLE's strongest years (2001-2003). I'm pretty sure that, if it did, the overall percentage of searches would still be in favour of BIONICLE up to this day.

Without further evidence, what you're saying is pure conjecture, surely?

[Voxovan]

Non-existent? This year, it's got a Netflix-series. Last year, it had the animations. Not to mention the various TV spots and the books and the graphic novels. That's far from non-existent.

I was mostly talking about last year, and the books and graphic novels weren't even released in most countries, not to mention that the graphic novel showed up at the end of the year. Sure, it may have been well-advertised in the US and some other countries, but there are also countries (the one where I live included) where Bionicle didn't get pretty much any advertising, which results in low sales to the point that even Lego refuses to send sets to various retailers, because the line isn't making enough money there. Well I wonder why the sales are low, if Lego doesn't put any effort into advertising their theme outside the most profitable countries >.>

[TwistLaw]

Without further evidence, what you're saying is pure conjecture, surely?

Weeeell technically yes, is conjecture, but the 4-points difference between the searches of the two themes suggests me that it may be reduced to 0, or at least 1, if we could count in the years that sold by themeselves almost half of the BIONICLE sets that were sold during G1. Is that enough?

Besides this is really a pointless argument, we would need actual sales data from LEGO in order to seriously discuss the matter, and not some searches on Google that are inflated by a TV show.

All we know is that in late 2014 LEGO defined BIONICLE as its strongest IP of all times. That said, things may have changed (let's say they did, for the discussion's sake), but officially, that's what we know.

Edited February 19, 2016 by TwistLaw

[Lyichir]

Weeeell technically yes, is conjecture, but the 4-points difference between the searches of the two themes suggests me that it may be reduced to 0, or at least 1, if we could count in the years that sold by themeselves almost half of the BIONICLE sets that were sold during G1. Is that enough?

Besides this is really a pointless argument, we would need actual sales data from LEGO in order to seriously discuss the matter, and not some searches on Google that are inflated by a TV show.

All we know is that in late 2014 LEGO defined BIONICLE as its strongest IP of all times. That said, things may have changed (let's say they did, for the discussion's sake), but officially, that's what we know.

Source on that "strongest IP of all time" quote? Because I don't remember that statement, and I was AT the panel where the theme's return was first officially announced. This press release from around that time period simply said it was "one of our most popular LEGO franchises and our first ‘constraction’ or constructible action figure line." Which is not even close to saying the same thing.

[VBBN]

One thing that baffles me is why Onua has clear crystal add ons instead of purple ones. Even JTO shows him having purple crystals. Also, I'm kind of disappointed he didn't get a crystal blade, that would look neat in purple.

Yeah, I had asked John Ho about this on Flickr (One of the designers who worked on Onua) and unfortunately all I got was;

I've have to say that is kind of out of my hand. Details are too complicate to explain, but I think the final outcome still looking cool.

I'm gathering that there may have been technical issues with the mold here, or at least something more than just "clear would look better."

[Aanchir]

Weren't you the same guy that, when I noticed the Google Trend divide, told me that it was mostly because of the Cartoon Network show?

I'm not denying that the TV show is probably responsible for a lot of that data. The TV show is unquestionably a big part of why Ninjago is as popular as it is. That doesn't mean searches related to the TV show somehow don't count, aren't valid, or aren't a factor in overall IP strength.

Le ebin meme aside, it should have been pretty clear I was talking about sheer sales, and having been on the market for a longer time sure helped BIONICLE being marketed as "LEGO's strongest IP ever" last year when it was rebooted (I'm not saying that, LEGO itself did on the retailer catalogues).

I don't remember this quote. I guess you mean from this page? Google Translate tells me it translates to "LEGO Bionicle is the most requested and popular IP of all time". Can't argue with that. However, "of all time" sounds like it means cumulatively. Whereas my post was about which is the strongest currently. Bionicle hadn't been as strong as Ninjago in many, many years.

It's also tough to tell whether that blurb applies to worldwide popularity or regional popularity.

Besides I'm surprised, Aanchir, that you mentioned Google Trends without adding that it didn't exist during BIONICLE's strongest years (2001-2003). I'm pretty sure that, if it did, the overall percentage of searches would still be in favour of BIONICLE up to this day.

That's why I stated very clearly "in the past twelve years". Google Trends can tell us nothing about Bionicle at its peak. However, it does tell us that Ninjago has generated much more search interest since 2004. Bionicle was the LEGO Group's strongest IP of all time, but that doesn't mean it still is their strongest IP. And that means investing in the Bionicle reboot as if the theme's popularity had been stable since 2002 would not be a sound business decision.

Ninjago didn't really have to prove itself as much as Bionicle did because hit its peak popularity in December 2012, pretty much right when the decision to continue it was announced. But Bionicle had fallen pretty far since its peak, and really had to work to prove that it could still do better than Hero Factory did. Being unmatched in its success many years before didn't mean the viability of the reboot was a sure thing.

Also, if it's sales data that concerns you, I don't have all-time sales data for either theme or specific numbers for either theme. But according to Brick by Brick, page 265, "The LEGO Group reported a 20 percent increase in sales in the first quarter of 2011, largely due to the overwhelming popularity of the Ninjago line, which went on to rack up the highest single-year sales of any LEGO-invented theme in the company's history". That was before the first full season of the TV show even launched. I think that says a lot.

Edited February 19, 2016 by Aanchir

[TwistLaw]

Source on that "strongest IP of all time" quote? Because I don't remember that statement, and I was AT the panel where the theme's return was first officially announced. This press release from around that time period simply said it was "one of our most popular LEGO franchises and our first ‘constraction’ or constructible action figure line." Which is not even close to saying the same thing.

Here you go.

Right column, second dot. It's in italian, but it should be easy to translate.

[Lyichir]

Here you go.

Right column, second dot. It's in italian, but it should be easy to translate.

Thanks. I found it and had trouble translating because of the small text, but my brother managed to decipher it. Not sure that's referring to global sales or sales in Italy, though. And as my brother pointed out, it sounds like it's talking about cumulative success over the theme's ten year lifespan (a length that still hasn't been repeated by any Lego IP, though Ninjago seems to be well on its way to doing so), rather than its overall popularity at a specific point in time.

Looking back, though, this topic does seem to have started with the specific phrase "strongest IP". Which is probably why it seems to have been all over the place—that initial description was very vague. "Strongest" could mean most popular at its peak, most popular overall, highest sales at its peak, highest sales overall, longest lived, etcetera, etcetera. In the context of "highest cumulative sales and success over its lifespan", Bionicle probably does take the cake as the strongest. But it hadn't really been the most popular or successful theme when it last left shelves, not by a long shot.

Edited February 19, 2016 by Lyichir

[TwistLaw]

I'm not denying that the TV show is probably responsible for a lot of that data. The TV show is unquestionably a big part of why Ninjago is as popular as it is. That doesn't mean searches related to the TV show somehow don't count, aren't valid, or aren't a factor in overall IP strength.

Neither I implied such thing.

I don't remember this quote. I guess you mean from this page? Google Translate tells me it translates to "LEGO Bionicle is the most requested and popular IP of all time". Can't argue with that. However, "of all time" sounds like it means cumulatively. Whereas my post was about which is the strongest currently. Bionicle hadn't been as strong as Ninjago in many, many years.

It's also tough to tell whether that blurb applies to worldwide popularity or regional popularity.

As an italian I'm pretty sure Ninjago exceeded BIONICLE a long time ago. Italy's a small market, with a overwhelming majority of people enjoying bricks rather than bones. Besides I think nobody in his/her right mind would ever state that BIONICLE is selling better than Ninjago nowadays also, ninja'd lol.

That's why I stated very clearly "in the past twelve years". Google Trends can tell us nothing about Bionicle at its peak. However, it does tell us that Ninjago has generated much more search interest since 2004. Bionicle was the LEGO Group's strongest IP of all time, but that doesn't mean it still is their strongest IP. And that means investing in the Bionicle reboot as if the theme's popularity had been stable since 2002 would not be a sound business decision.

Ninjago didn't really have to prove itself as much as Bionicle did because hit its peak popularity in December 2012, pretty much right when the decision to continue it was announced. But Bionicle had fallen pretty far since its peak, and really had to work to prove that it could still do better than Hero Factory did. Being unmatched in its success many years before didn't mean the viability of the reboot was a sure thing.

Completely agree on that. Especially since we all know that worldwide LEGO is synonym with bricks, and everything related to that has far better chances of being successful.

(better chances of being successful under the LEGO brand, of course)

[Mutant Orc]

Well yesterday I got Pohatu and I think that's it as far as this current wave goes. I now have Uxar, Lewa, Kopaka and Melum, Umarak and Pohatu. Unlike last year where I got them all I'm unsure about the rest despite them coming with some interesting parts.

Does anyone think there're any others worth getting?

[DraikNova]

Onua seems more cohesive than the other toa, at least in my opinion. It being in black helps obscure some of the excessive detailing of the torso plate, amongst other things.

[Shakar]

I don't have him yet, but I really look forward to getting my hands on Onua, whom I like a lot more than his 2015 version (unpopular opinion, I guess).

[Fulcrumfan91]

Eh...I got Onua as well....I like him a lot, his design is great....but the hammer makes the figure suffer from Gali '15 giant axe syndrome....essentially, it's hard to wield because it's so large. Also, loading the studs back into it is awfully difficult to do without having them constantly pop off every time you try to place another one back into the clip. Surprisingly I hate his weapon and have to say I kinda prefer his 2015 version (I mean the figure in general).

[Voxovan]

Eh...I got Onua as well....I like him a lot, his design is great....but the hammer makes the figure suffer from Gali '15 giant axe syndrome....essentially, it's hard to wield because it's so large. Also, loading the studs back into it is awfully difficult to do without having them constantly pop off every time you try to place another one back into the clip. Surprisingly I hate his weapon and have to say I kinda prefer his 2015 version (I mean the figure in general).

Having the set in hand I disagree with pretty much all of this. How is this weapon suffering from 2015 Gali's axe syndrome, when Gali's weapon is wielded in one hand, while Onua's drill hammer in two hands? Loading the studs is also easy, you just have to prevent the triggering piece from moving while doing this.

[Dorek]

Not a huge fan of Onua Uniter's weapon (the spinning is ew) but the rest of the figure is great. Obviously not as good as 2015 Onua, but still one of the best Uniters. Cohesive colors, trans purple, shoulder plates, all good stuff.

[Ikaatril]

To be honest, I think the reason why BIONICLE, Chima and very likely Nexo Knights aren't selling/sold as well as LEGO hoped is because they keep trying to repeat Ninjago's success and failing. and BIONICLE had earlier success so they tried to repeat that as well, without actually understanding what made them sold so well. They are a large corporation, after all, and large corporations are known for making some pretty bad decisions and misunderstanding the things around them. What they need to make G2 BIONICLE successful is a Bohrok equivalent, something I don't think they understand given the Skeletons and the Beasts.

[Lyichir]

To be honest, I think the reason why BIONICLE, Chima and very likely Nexo Knights aren't selling/sold as well as LEGO hoped is because they keep trying to repeat Ninjago's success and failing. and BIONICLE had earlier success so they tried to repeat that as well, without actually understanding what made them sold so well. They are a large corporation, after all, and large corporations are known for making some pretty bad decisions and misunderstanding the things around them. What they need to make G2 BIONICLE successful is a Bohrok equivalent, something I don't think they understand given the Skeletons and the Beasts.

I don't even know where you're getting the impression that Nexo Knights is unsuccessful, considering it's only been out a few months and I haven't seen any evidence that it's failing to meet expectations. Chima was also far from a failure (it wasn't as successful as Lego intended, but part of that is probably due to running alongside Ninjago instead of replacing it as planned, and it still lasted three years). And the new Bionicle isn't trying to repeat Ninjago's success in the first place—it's not even a Big Bang theme like those other themes.

To be honest, I don't even know what you mean by a "Bohrok equivalent" or why you'd think it'd be some sort of magic bullet for the new Bionicle. The Skull Villains are pretty much unquestionably better sets than the Bohrok, and the last thing we need are more clone sets made up of overly specialized parts.

[DraikNova]

As someone who has both a Bohrok and a Skull Warrior right next to each other, I've got to say that, while they aren't as good for building, the Bohrok look exponentially more coherent. One thing a lot of Bionicle G2's design team seems to have trouble with is keeping things compact, coherent and flowing together well. There are so many MOCs with the right level of simplicity and size for sets that are better built than the actual sets it's embarrassing.

[Lyichir]

As someone who has both a Bohrok and a Skull Warrior right next to each other, I've got to say that, while they aren't as good for building, the Bohrok look exponentially more coherent. One thing a lot of Bionicle G2's design team seems to have trouble with is keeping things compact, coherent and flowing together well. There are so many MOCs with the right level of simplicity and size for sets that are better built than the actual sets it's embarrassing.

Eh... I'll grant that the Bohrok were coherent designs. However, that came at the expense of actually being interesting, diverse, or versatile. Bohrok parts were designed for the express purpose of being good for building Bohrok, and to this day a greater percentage of the Bohrok's parts were brand-new than any other series of sets. But to take advantage of this narrow-focused design philosophy, they were all identical apart from their colors and the design of their shields. I think you'd have a hard time marketing a set of six identical sets today, let alone twelve.

The Skull Villains, by contrast, are diverse, with entirely unique builds. And while they may be less "coherent", they're designed with that in mind, with zombie-like designs that feature bony limbs with patchy armor. Altogether, I'd take a new set of figures like that over something like the Bohrok any day.

Also, we will never, ever stop seeing MOCs that are better-looking than set. It happens in System. It happens in System. It happens in Technic. Heck, you could probably even create a Duplo MOC that looks better than sets at a similar scale There are a ridiculous number of constraints on set designers that MOCists just don't have to work with—making sets easily buildable by the target audience, making them sturdy and stable for long-term play and display, making use of a specific palette of available parts rather than having decades' worth of parts at their disposal, having a specific budget to shoot for... the list goes on and on. I don't think it's an "embarrassment" that sets sometimes fall short of the lofty standards of AFOLs who don't even have to think about some of those factors.

[CabooseBM]

I'd argue that Bohrok made for some of the best "Building" sets of G1, with a good collection of useful parts for building all sorts of critters both alone and with other Bohrok.

But I dunno if comparing them to the Skull Villains is really useful, though. Apples to oranges and all that.

Edited February 22, 2016 by CabooseBM

[Strakk]

Also, in my opinion, it was very fun to play with the Bohrok. I do not play with my sets anymore, but with that number of pieces they offered a lot in terms of playability.

Back to the 2016 sets, I am not a big fan of the beasts, but I'd like to see more pictures of Umarak. I am still not sure if I like it or not.

[DraikNova]

My point was exactly that, that there are more than enough MOCs that do take those requirements into account. Easy buildability, sturdy design and a limited parts palette (which, in the case of constraction, doesn't seem to be particularly limited when dealing with sets, often featuring ridiculous numbers of recolours and specialized molds for the number of sets there are) are basic factors to take into account when making a MOC.

[Lyichir]

My point was exactly that, that there are more than enough MOCs that do take those requirements into account. Easy buildability, sturdy design and a limited parts palette (which, in the case of constraction, doesn't seem to be particularly limited when dealing with sets, often featuring ridiculous numbers of recolours and specialized molds for the number of sets there are) are basic factors to take into account when making a MOC.

You're going to have to share some examples, because without knowing what the sets are being compared against it's hard to tell how feasible those would be as sets or whether their improved costs might come with other unforeseen drawbacks.

Take your mention of "ridiculous numbest of recolors and specialized molds". I'm not sure I even agree with that, since even as someone who reviews sets with an emphasis on those parts the number doesn't really seem excessive. But a set WITHOUT many of those sorts of parts would be a hard sell even if it were a fantastic build. New parts offer fans building opportunities they couldn't get without the set, while even the most impressive use of older parts might just inspire them to do the same with the parts they already have. The trick is to provide a useful and impressive selection of new parts without breaking the budget, which, yes, might mean that some corners might have to be cut. But that's preferable to the alternative, an amazing, solid build that just doesn't have that essential shelf appeal.