If anyone's interested, it was hard for me to follow the mission log, so I sorted it in Excel.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1_bLYYrwwQC3YA5fyaW2szwa4sej1-ZQXMA6Oyt9_yHQ/edit?usp=sharing
SCP-3210 / Discussion
Forum
» Per Page Discussions / Per page discussions
» SCP-3210
This is the discussion related to the wiki page SCP-3210.
Oh thank god. I was giving up on being able to actually read this.
I like the concept, but the execution of the mission-log was a deal-breaker for me. Meaning I didn't bother tabbing back and forth after literally every line, and mentally correlating timestamps, just to read it.
I get that the writer wants to emphasize the individual perspective of each MTF member, but what's wrong with plain old name tags? Current writeup emphasizes perspectives at the expense of continuity and reader immersion. IMHO the following format is more readable, and still makes it clear who is perceiving what:
00:00:00: Washington: All present. Let's move in.
00:24:06: Washington: Approaching the town.
00:37:20: Jefferson: Do you see that? Over there, by the lamppost. Looks like a ghost.
You know, like a movie or play script.
The only problem I can see with this approach is that seeing Jefferson: Jefferson during the check-in seems pretty redundant. The solution to this is to skip the first check-in.
Thanks again for the transcript, Dr. Coyle. Good luck in the contest, Rejekyll. IMHO the above suggested format change would really help your chances.
IMHO the above suggested format change would really help your chances.
Too late for that.
Oh, right.
Well, after the voting is closed, maybe consider it.
(Runners-up are still considered for the mainlist, right? That was the case back in the 2000 contest.)
All surviving articles are going to be Series IV articles. The runners up through 5th place just get first pick.
I got mixed feedback on the log format but ultimately decided to keep it. I did this for a few reasons:
- Multiple members of the team split up. I found it easier to show those parts this way rather than synthesize the log into a normal format
- This way, the order in which you read the log is not chronological. So Adams has the last entry rather than Lincoln
- I wanted to emphasize how every person's experience in-A is unique
But now I've changed it to a format similar to the one you suggested, because overall I think it reads better.
I'm sorry for only being able to provide piecemeal feedback, and not having time to clarify. I think the speech is a better addendum than the interview logs that you had previously - while the theme is a little lost (I suspect I only see it because I read the previous interviews), it is much more atmospheric. That's enough to get me to a neutral vote - still undecided over the mission logs.
I wonder whether re-ordering the tabs to Washington > Roosevelt > Madison > Lincoln > Jefferson > Adams might help with peoples' comprehension (or even swap Madison and Lincoln, although I assume you want the long ending of Lincoln to be in the second half of the logs)? That keeps a lot of the physical pairings together, making the story easier to follow.
You almost lost me with those fractured logs, but I was able to piece it together. I still think that threading them back together would help with comprehension, and would still be able to convey the fractured nature of the situation, especially with some analytical commentary.
I'm going to +1 this in hopes it gets to the main list so you can play with those logs more and maybe come up with a better solution. Over all, I like it, though the title is a little misleadingly tongue-in-cheek.
(account deleted)The logs were an interesting experiment, and I get what you were going for there, but I have to agree that they were extremely confusing.
I also think you might have missed an opportunity there: you could have included audio recorded from other nearby team members in each log. Even if we only got snippets of the other side of the conversations, it would make things much less confusing, and it would also let you play with variations between the conversations as their perceptions diverged.
Still, +1 because ultimately the article works as a whole, and the logs are a cool concept- just one in need of some tinkering.
I'm unfortunately short on time this morning and was unable to follow all of the links, but I'm curious- were the prior assignments of the mtf members in some way significant?
From what I can tell, they're mostly involved with other towns or urban locations that have weird spatial/extradimensional/occult weirdness going on, which was a neat touch.
As far as the overall article… +1. I'm largely in agreement with Scorpion451 here, it works as a whole.
Favorite moment: "Command says we're affected, evac is a no-go." Oh shiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
Least favorite moment:"Ghosts with guns.. a cruel joke."
Two things I noticed, at leas one of which can be edited I'm sure:
- Why doesn't Lincoln have a designation?
- You've got an extra "and" in the green text ("and and will die mercifully" if read right) in the speech.
Fixed both of those errors. I do intend to play around with the logs after the contest; I had to rush this piece out in order to get it in on time, so I apologize for the quality. It looks like the article will survive at least, which was my goal (I wasn't going to get above 200 in ten days regardless). Once this piece is resting comfortably in the new series, I'll give it a bit of a rewrite (including to that admittedly narmy line you pointed out, which I put in solely to give more context to the injury).
The links to prior assignments bug me, personally. A note about "members have previous experience with anomalous urban locations" would be fine, but the links feel too involved, like the author's pawning a chunk of the work off on other authors/on the readers. And I open enough tabs on my own; I don't need the author giving me six more.
I love the guy stealing candy.
This is great. A complete breakdown of consensus reality in a limited area, infecting those who stick around too long, orchestrated by some nefarious or possibly enlightened force, and there's literally no way to tell. Once I figured out the logs — and it only took me until the second one, really — I very much appreciated the way you present them. It illustrates the "everyone experiences this differently" in a way that's almost like experiencing it yourself. I strongly urge against changing them, as others have suggested.
This phenomenon is also apparent in recorded images and representations, which has complicated exploration and documentation. Subjects may perceive any visual or audio content related to SCP-3000-A uniquely, including photographs, videos, and computer-generated representations.
"This phenomenon is also apparent in" makes it sounds like recordings/representations are themselves affected, which is contradicted by the following sentence. Should be "This phenomenon also affects perception of"
Sorry to be nitpicky, but can something be done with red/green colorization? Confusing if you're colorblind, and although you can infer from the context it still breaks immersion when you have to guess like that.
Gee wiz, what a topical title.
In all seriousness, I dig it. The basic effect is simple, but interesting, and the speech from the mayor was a good read. I can see I am not alone in saying that the exploration log was a bit of a chore to read and comprehend, but once I got what was going on, each team member's experience was fun to compare and contrast to the other members of the crew. As Scorpion and Petrograd stated above this comes together as a pretty solid whole, and is certainly worth an upvote.
+1.
This article has had major edits made to it since the posting deadline, which is a violation of the contest conditions. Major edits are any edits you would not do to someone else's article, even if those changes are minor or adding in something small which was not present before. This includes adjusting the color of the article or adding in small details or tweaks. Please revert the major edits made to this article before the contest ends. If this is not done, the entry will be disqualified.
e: Article has been amended.
Whether you like it or not, history is on our side. We will bury you!
/forum/t-2214910/scp-3210#post-
page revision: 2, last edited: 15 Jan 2023 15:06