39
votes
The Lego Group has asked for the fan-made game Bionicle: Masks of Power to be shut down entirely
Link information
This data is scraped automatically and may be incorrect.
- Title
- BIONICLE: Masks of Power (@masksofpower.com)
- Authors
- BIONICLE: Masks of Power (@masksofpower.com)
- Published
- May 17 2025
- Word count
- 62 words
In the end, you shouldn't spend 8 years of work on an IP-derived product without a written, signed, and legally enforceable contract with the IP holder that you are allowed to make this product.
The only reason not to make a legally-distinct, but thematically similar, IP of your own, like Bloodstained and Castlevania, is that you don't get to piggy back off of the fame and reputation of the original IP.
But if your work isn't viable without relying on piggybacking from the work of the IP holder, then you can hardly complain when they shut you down.
Or, alternatively, they worked on it because they're fans of the specific IP and want more content for it.
That's one of the big reasons fan works are so prevalent. It's made with genuine love and passion for the source media, not to try to capitalize on its popularity. The fact they spent eight years on it tells me they were working on it solely in their free time, and also that they really like Bionicle. It'd be one thing if they planned to profit off of it, but it was going to be released for free.
Yes, it's a risk since it's not officially sanctioned, but as their note said, they'd been following the publicly available fair play guidelines for producing fan-created content. That's beside the point though. They worked on it because they wanted a Bionicle game. Not an off-brand offshoot, not some brand new IP that might be cool, not a thematically similar game. They're fans of Bionicle who specifically wanted a new Bionicle game, and decided to make one themselves that they could share with other fans who also specifically want a Bionicle game.
Your comment just feels overly cynical to me.
Not doubting you, but where did you see that they were in contact with LEGO about it? I couldn't find that in the doc posted on the OP's link. The best I found was that they were following the fair play guidelines which are just public materials as far as I'm aware.
As I stated on another comment, I hadn't heard anything about the game so I'm out of the loop and maybe this was mentioned in some other docs or communications from them?
Looks like they didn't. Saw it mentioned in some articles when trying to look up if there were any recent Bionicle games (most recent was a pair of mobile games in 2015 and 2016, and before that I think 2008), and could've sworn it was also mentioned in the statement. I'm guessing the articles misconstrued this line to mean there was some form of contact:
I'll edit my comment to remove that bit.
That's just another facet of "piggy-backing from an existing IP's fame". They're fans of Bionicle because of the IP ownership's direction and curation. You can hardly blame anyone when you get shut down as a result. Fan works can greatly effect the way an IP is perceived, and thought of.
As a concrete example, I know a lot of people who would never watch My Little Pony because they don't to be associated with adults who want to have sex with fictional adolescent ponies. That's not particularly fair to the IP, but fairness doesn't really amount for much in the real world. All that is to say, if you, say, use an MLP PFP, people will have "thoughts" about it.
Part of the reason the developers love Bionicle is that they, subjectively, enjoy the way Lego deployed the IP. So them being culled is part and parcel of that experience as well. Is what it is.
Like zestier said, fan communities are separate from fan works. Fan works do often arise from and influence fan communities, but plenty of communities give their beloved IP a bad reputation without any specific fan works contributing to it. It's just the community being hostile and/or gross.
Also: the developers aren't blaming Lego. I wouldn't even say they're complaining. The tone of their statement is largely neutral, just a factual announcement and their speculation of why it got canceled, and then news they're pivoting to an original project. At worst, they say "This has been heartbreaking news for our entire team, but we’re also incredibly excited about what the future has in store, and for what we’ll get the chance to create next. We hope that you’re all just as excited as we are." That sentence still reads overall positive to me, no complaint other than the mention of heartbreak.
And even then, it's okay for them to be upset that their work suddenly got shut down. Eight years on a passion project—because this is a passion project, because a love for the IP is what motivated them to spend eight years on it in the first place—is a long time, and it's natural to be upset for that work to be rendered almost moot. Almost, because they can use the skills they built (and even plenty of the assets) to make a new project, and they're already looking to the future rather than dwell on the fact it was shut down.
However, all of that is beside the point. I'm not objecting to the fact the project got shut down because, as you said, it's always a distinct possibility. It's a risk that any creators of fan-created content face, and we all know and accept that risk. It hurts harder when a project is super close to release or finishing before getting blindsided with orders to stop, but we know we legally have no right to object if it gets shut down by the creator.
I specifically object to the part of your original comment I quoted: "The only reason not to make a legally-distinct, but thematically similar, IP of your own ... is that you don't get to piggy back off of the fame and reputation of the original IP."
That phrasing makes it sound like the only reason to make a fan work in any medium is because you want a taste of the IP's success. That's a motivation for some creators, yes, but the real driving force behind any fan work is passion and love for the original IP.
They CAN make an original, totally viable IP of their own without "piggybacking from the work of the IP holder", as you put it. But that's not the point of making a fan work. They love something about that IP—the world, the characters, the rules of how everything works—and they want a chance to explore and expand on it, directly, themselves. I speak from experience when I say that making and consuming a fan work satisfies a different internal craving than making and consuming an original work.
That is why I dislike your comment. You're overlooking the love and care for the IP that motivated its creation in the first place, and your attitude comes across as overly cold and dismissive as a result. It just feels like a really cynical outlook of the world.
They already updated the Steam page but if you search for it on Google it still shows up under Masks Of Power, that's pretty funny to me.
I remember a long time ago, a bunch of modders got together to reskin Command and Conquer: Generals with a bunch of Halo-themed objects. Master Chief, Warthogs, Scorpion tanks, etc.
Then Microsoft hit them with the cease and desist, and everyone was upset. A couple years later, Microsoft released Halo Wars, an RTS game.
I'm betting something similar is happening here. Making mods isn't a problem until the IP-owning company decides they want to make money with the same idea and they don't want the competition. I think it'd be cooler if, in each instance, Microsoft/Lego hired some of the original modders/developers. If only as a consultant to get their ideas on the work they've done so far, and the roadmap they had planned.
I hadn't heard of this game at all, but is this a mod?
From the doc they posted is seems like a full fledged game that's been in development for 8 years using LEGO IP? Genuine question since I'm so out of the loop on it.