What the hell is Sector-?? Better, I guess.
SCP-1739 / Discussion
Forum
» Per Page Discussions / Per page discussions
» SCP-1739
This is the discussion related to the wiki page SCP-1739.
After subjects disappear, the chat client can be used to communicate with individuals given handles that are variations of the name "Isaac".
Considering what you told me in chat, there is only one Isaac. So this sentence bugs me.
I don't really remember what I told you in chat, so…
For each branch universe that is created, a new "Isaac" handle is created. As in, if you're in the branch universe, and you walk up to the machine and use the chat client, you will type something and it will show, "IsaacXXX: blah blah blah." So anybody who's in that branch universe has one handle. And everyone in another branch universe will have another handle. because they're using the same machine to communicate.
What you told me in chat was there was one Isaac, but you didn't really mention different Issac, but this cleared it up.
can destroy an entire universe just by passing its shadow over it
Is this a reference to the He-Who-Made-Dark/Light mythos? It doesn't seem in keeping with the rest of the article, but I seem to recall hearing a very similar phrase used elsewhere. Regardless, this is a very good article - simple and interesting, but with details that certainly warrant Keter classification when you think about it. My only complaint would be that it feels a little too obvious in places - like the explicit explanation of the dog-and-chain metaphor.
Uh, haven't read the He-Who-Made-Dark/Light mythos, so I don't know :p.
There's been a really wide distribution of comprehension for this article when it was still in draft form, ranging from "got it before the collapsible" to "zero understanding." As such, I'm erring on the side of understandable.
This is good. This is so good. I love the way information is gradually revealed to the reader and the touch of old-school "phantom_dog.exe" creepypasta flair. +1.
I find this beautiful.
Living the dream, or dreaming the life?
(account deleted)Might be talkin' out of my ass here, but I dislike how the narrative does more tell than show. I like the concept and I like what they're explaining.
It would be more palatable to see it laid out in a format other than "here is the concept and here is why horror" verbatim. So I guess my major qualms with this would be the flow and the narrative device itself. Branch seems like a sloppy reader surrogate to me.
Yeah, I definitely see your point here. The Isaac/Branch conversation used to be less direct, but this ran the risk of making the article simply incomprehensible. I really don't know how'd I make this more tell-y while simultaneously explaining everything clearly.
What happens if you use the device while the dog is already out?
I agree with Famine, but I think the concept is cool enough that I'm upvoting regardless.
The woman throws another ball and then the dog comes back with two. There's a ton of itty-bitty mechanics that don't really matter that I guess I could have included in a test log that wouldn't have mattered so I didn't write it.
+1
Wow. Upvoted hard. So many good things.
-You've effectively contained a universe-ending horror with a Foundation-verse plausible method. Well done.
-This starts off as a stupid corporate laptop computer and escalates into universe-ending Keter horror. Great flow.
-You've effectively captured the existential horror of being a tiny spec on some cosmic horror's tuna fish sandwich in a skip.
-I love that the Isaacs are the same person as the researcher, along with the subtle hints to his own prior existential struggles.
-Not sure what's worse… Using this over and over again to contain Dog, or NOT using it and letting him get stronger. Interesting choice of ending.
I love that the Isaacs are the same person as the researcher, along with the subtle hints to his own prior existential struggles.
well gold star for you :p. nobody i've asked has gotten that first time around.
Yeah, I wouldn't say it was obvious, but once I realized it, it was clear that's what you were doing, and it made the dialogue instantly go from "a little odd" to "really intimate" in a weird way makes complete sense if think about how weird and intimate it would be to have a conversation with yourself. Very well done dialogue.
/forum/t-767867/scp-1739#post-
page revision: 2, last edited: 15 Jan 2023 15:06
