If you look at the box art for 7692, you can see that they never removed the Prototype driller, and the final is just pasted on top:
Additionally, in the shot with the two Rotors, you can see two Scorpios as well, not to mention that all the Savage Planet Animals turned good by the end of 3.0, so there’s no point putting them in prison.
the prototype is visible on the instruction booklet aswell.
I was just randomly looking on brick instructions at Good Guy… when I saw this:
Weapon on the packaging:
Weapon on istructions:
I’m wandering why…
Now that’s an oof.
I honestly have no idea why that is…
Maybe a misprint on either the instructions or cover?
This is a mystery well-represented in the Bionicle community.
My guess: LEGO didn’t pay too much attention to Swedish advertising.
A tragedy, really.
In order to combat this, when I ordered parts to build Good guy, I got both pieces.
He’s perpetually dual wielding.
ah…
perpetually.
I see now…
This kinda stuff happens with Transformers a lot (I’m singling out TFs because I collect those; I’m sure it happens with other toys, too). Sometimes the instructions or stock photos will use an earlier version of the toy. For various reasons, the toy undergoes changes during its’ design/development, and they just don’t do a re-shoot, or make a new set of instructions.
This might just be a case of that.
Misprint on the cover, yes. The Turahk staff is the piece included in the polybag.
Ha. That’s funny
Swapped LEGO bios on their website made me believe one of my current favorite Star Wars characters was a former Imperial pilot who eventually joined Rogue One.
And that Bodhi Rook was an aquatic species of alien who became a Rebel.
Watching Rogue One cleared that up pretty quickly.
Many sets have been released that feel…unfinished. Whether it’s the gappy chest and legs of the Mata Nui titan, the terrible legs of Teridax, or strakk’s weird neck, bionicle sets aren’t always what they could be.
I’ve been playing with bionicle for over almost 20 years, but I didn’t think of this until today: did LEGO leave perceived flaws in their toys on purpose?
I hypothesize that “flaws” were left in the final design to stimulate the creativity of the consumers, which leads to more sales. The more you build, the more you realize how important an abundance of parts are, thus we have master accessory kit and the like.
Let me be clear, this is not a question for Greg, because he had nothing to do with building the models. This is a question for the community.
I would say more of a budget is the constraint, but it is interesting to think about.
