 | | Re: Bi*nicle folks went away?
|
|
I personally think the objections to Bionicle here is the storyline side, not the building side. The storyline just has little interest in those of us who are not into the fantasy aspect of LEGO. I have to admit having the same feeling reading some (...) (23 years ago, 14-Mar-02, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Bi*nicle folks went away?
|
|
(...) Now that would be something! How about an Expert Builder version of Bionicle? LOL- a challenge indeed. TJ (23 years ago, 14-Mar-02, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | RE: Bi*nicle folks went away?
|
|
(...) Isn't that an oxymoron? William (23 years ago, 14-Mar-02, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Bi*nicle folks went away?
|
|
(...) It seems that William has taken up the challenge to put his parts where his mouth is. (23 years ago, 14-Mar-02, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | RE: Bi*nicle folks went away?
|
|
(...) his (...) Nah! I like the Bionicle bits - lovely colours, great parts, love the ball and socket stuff, but the only thing you (may) be seeing from me are pneumatic walkers using the lift arm with ball parts as legs and other such creatures. (...) (23 years ago, 15-Mar-02, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Bi*nicle folks went away?
|
|
(...) Stipulated! I thought the fact of your response to the challenge was acceptance enough. :) I'm thinking of giving it a go myself, but I'm afraid the existence of such a massively recursive Technic model may open a rift in the time/space (...) (23 years ago, 15-Mar-02, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Bi*nicle folks went away?
|
|
<<snip>> (...) In the same scale or can I upsize things a bit? /Tobbe (URL) (23 years ago, 19-Mar-02, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Bi*nicle folks went away?
|
|
Do what you can. I think, however, that making one the same size, to fit in the same package, using parts that you approve of as "real technic" is not only possible, but would be a good way to show LEGO how it "should have been". --Jack Gregory (...) (23 years ago, 19-Mar-02, to lugnet.technic)
|
