[Lore] Character pieces and Bios: Can we have both?

So, there seems to be this divide between the two means of lore we've been getting as of late. There's the typical bio that we're very familiar with: a short summary of the champion's origin and their motivations. Additionally we've been getting character pieces recently (see: Vel'Koz and post reworks). The difference being that character pieces aren't third person omniscient (meaning they aren't a narrator telling you about the character), but rather are first person or a variation of that (field reports, journals, etc.). These pieces also don't give you a complete image of the character as you would with a bio, in that a bio is a very simplified characterization (for the most part), but rather seem to be the prologue or introduction to a longer character driven narrative.

The issue seems to be that people are becoming frustrated because they don't feel like the character pieces are communicating character well enough to substitute the limited characterization of a bio. This becomes especially difficult when the reworked champions receive lore that doesn't match up with their original versions, leaving questions about which blanks we (the players) can fill in.

Both formats for story serve different purposes: the bio establishes a "quick and dirty" version of the character, allowing players who just want to know the bare bones of who they're playing before they purchase them, whereas the character pieces allow for more detailed and elaborate characterization and potential world-building. I don't think these formats are mutually exclusive, but rather should be working in tandem with each other to provide a rich and understandable backstory for champions.

What are your thoughts? Is one format simply superior to the other, or am I right that they both serve a purpose?