>>7825297>You're right, the fact that it, along with 2002 and 2003, outsold the rest of the years combined is what makes it the best.Good sales don't make it the highest quality. It literally just means more people had them, ergo more people are likely to be nostalgic for it.
>Well no shit, that's the whole point. The rahi of that year were supposed to be the ultimate obstacles that only the bravest and mightiest of warriors could overcome. And their appearances made more sense than retarded fish mutants.The rahi looked thrown-together and inconsistent, like they were from Slizers and got tossed into Bionicle with a couple changes. And when I said ugly, I didn't mean "oh they're intimidating", no, I meant that their design seems flawed and they don't look good from most angles.
>Which they did by shitting upon the original lore and retconning all of it into a big fat lie, and explaining shit that literally nobody asked for i.e the Bohrok being dead Av Matoran and the red star.You're literally just saying "old good new bad" even though the new is from over a decade ago. Also, like
>>7825306 said, most of the stupid retcons were added way later.
>>7825317The first 3 years of lore were fine but vague compared to the rest, in my opinion. I just like the added complexities and bigger politics that 2004+ added to the mix.
Also, I believe there's been a misconception: I still like the first three years, I just don't think they're the best from g1.
alsi the nuva sucked
