It's up!
Thanks to Silber and and Phoenix for help proofreading.
And a big thank you to any one who reads this!
SCP-3030 / Discussion
Forum
» Per Page Discussions / Per page discussions
» SCP-3030
This is the discussion related to the wiki page SCP-3030.
Biggest thought, it feels like 60% of this is exposition, a lot of which is just kind of spinning your wheels and not getting to the good parts. The note at the end, for example, was something I figured was going on really early on and was expecting to be worked in in some way, but nope. Just spelled right out by an O-5 themselves.
You had serious excessive detail in the procedures and description. I have no idea why you designated all of the events (especially alpha; if it's not recurring, it's an incident), which made the procedures super convoluted. Even nehemoth could have just been the duration of the test period, without the cutoff event. I wouldn't have spelled out the origin that much unless it ended up telling me something of the motivation or personality of the machine (in the telling, not spelled out), but it reads as pretty bland and emotionless. The possible compulsion effect is definitely in the "covering up plot holes" end of that trope. It would be vastly more interesting if the researchers did it for a plausible reason.
The best part was the actual test logs. The central idea is decent and the idea of the twist is good, even if the execution isn't.
What else… The use of " "fake" " was colloquial and insufficiently descriptive. I'm not really comfortable with articles talking about Thaumiels openly.
For the purposes of the contest, I really didn't feel any horror here.
-1 I guess. This could be pretty cool, but needs significant changes.
No tone issues, but I would like to see this trimmed down and with an expanded test log (maybe with an overarching theme?). Very interesting, very unique skip. Upvoted.
The final letter kills any potential for actual horror, but it still works as a general skip on its own. It's just, you have this mad supercomputer made of people (and I love the idea that the researchers just volunteered to become part of it; suspected mind-altering effects indeed!) creating anomalies solely to "test" the Foundation. That's kind of creepy; how long until it creates something outside the Foundation's ability to control?
But then you have an O5 going, "Actually, guys, this is pretty cool" and that's just not conveying horror. So, no vote for now but likely after the contest is over. Have some corrections:
You've got 'amnesiacs' up in the procedures.
on-site.The
Euclid.
Extra period.
The interesting possibility of the final sentence, is that the AI actually is doing what's right for us. AIs, both speculative ones and real ones are really good at executing our goals in a very effective way we never intended them to. Sometimes this ends catastrophically. But suppose that the AI was well-programmed to maximize the Foundation's effectiveness to contain things.
Then it ascends to singularity, but it still has the same goal. It knows we don't have enough skill to survive, it knows it has to do something, it knows that if it lets us shut it down, it can never help and we all fall, so it doesn't let us shut it down. It knows we're not trained enough, and it knows that without some light punishment (releasing uncontained SCPs) there won't be any motivation to train. Emphasis on light - I'm sure whatever it sees coming in the future that it's trying to prepare us for will be far, far worse than whatever the AI inflicts on us.
Perhaps in the future, we will be praising it as a hero that we could have never survived without. Perhaps the Foundation has a new, more effective leader. Perhaps the O5 already realized that and conceded to it, and just aren't telling anyone else.
It's a nice SCP, but doesn't fit the horror theme at all.
Eck. I have mixed feelings on this one.
On one hand, I really like the idea of an anomaly that the Foundation uses as a containment test. That seems totally like something that the Foundation would have on hand, and there is a lot of interesting narrative potential in how the Foundation would use it.
On the other hand, this sets up that idea, and then doesn't really do much with it. You explain what the object is, how it works, but ultimately don't dive fully into why this object is so significant. On top of the fact that this is not much of a horror article (aside from it maybe grabbing other object from containment as a bit of a wild card move) and this is an article that, as Petrograd said "is just spinning its wheels.
No vote for now. There is a lot of potential here, and I like the base idea, but the execution is just not there.
I feel like it would be better without the explicit letter from O5-11 at the end (better replaced by a note saying something like "UNDER CONSIDERATION AS A TRAINING DEVICE, FURTHER INFORMATION RESTRICTED TO LEVEL O5 PERSONNEL," or something) and if the initial event preceding containment (not the creation of -1, but the first instance of the event) were rolled into the record of incidents.
I agree with consensus - it's goes on too long and isn't horrifying. The fact that it's made of a hive mind of former researchers and that it can throw you into a room with 106 for kicks and gigs is scary, but not in a way that builds into a horror story.
Mixed feelings on this one.
Pro:
- Good concept
- Decent origin story
- Tone generally matches
Con:
- Doesn't fit the theme of the contest
- Several grammar issues already addressed above
- Doesn't look like it was well-reviewed, due to several issues including the above that really should have been caught in the draft stages.
- Self-upvote
I'll keep my vote for now. Re-work this for a non-3000 spot with more peer review and I'll definitely consider giving it a second look, since I do like the concept.
Will it spawn Keter cakes? Will they be infected with a cogitohazard that makes them a lie?
TBH I love Foundation GLaDOS. With the flaws, maybe not 3000-worthy, but I like enough for a +1.
I've made a number of edits to this article before the contest deadline. The biggest of which is the removal of the O5 letter (I did that almost a week ago), and the addition of some testing logs - which I'd like to expand on, given more time. It's not completely different but I think these changes are important. Thanks to those who have provided feedback, voted, or otherwise weighed in!
Just a wee proofread:
A set of drones designed to catch the objects had to be before they could all be contained, as other methods proved ineffective.
Perhaps 'had to be designed to catch the objects'?
Oh man. Thanks for noticing that x_x. Edited to "A set of drones had to be designed to catch the objects before they could all be contained, as other methods proved ineffective."
/forum/t-2189426/scp-3030#post-
page revision: 1, last edited: 02 Apr 2021 15:16
