>>7466253while your stance on story and lore is understandable, you also have to remember that in addition to what
>>7466265 said, it is also a system meant for mainly designing characters (while still being used for machines/vehicles, mechs, and creatures thanks to Technic compatibility).
If you have a line of toys explicitly designed around characters, even if it's LEGO, you can't exactly not have a story. Why should I buy a prebuilt [character] when the [character] has no, well, character?
Regular LEGO sets and even mechs and creatures have more leniency, but they still require context usually. If you have a mech, what is it? A construction vehicle, a battle mech, or what? If you have a creature, what kind of creature is it? Is it a fantasy creature? What does it do and what kind of world does it live in? That's a lot of questions you'd ask where otherwise it'd just be "oh police car, cool. Oh spaceship, cool."
Actually, I think a good modern LEGO line to compare constraction to is the CMF line. They both have ONLY characters, and sell themselves based on that. But even then, the CMFs are much more detailed and special compared to regular set minifigs usually, to entice people to buy them (rather than just a set already with minifigs), and well, they're five bucks.
Constraction figs are lucky to be ten dollars, and are generally robots or something. Could you make a general constraction line with less restrictions on character designs by having a looser story? I'd be up for it, but it's tough to say many kids will buy some random figure they know nothing about (as opposed to an action figure of Iron Man/Spider-Man/Batman/Superman/etc, a character whose story and personality they DO know).
tl;dr, story is just a necessary evil when selling action figures.
