Is it just me or are 206's images broken?
[editline]15th May 2012[/editline]
I keep on getting the condom for 228.
[img]http://i.imgur.com/86TqI.jpg[/img]
Really reminds me of 682
[url=http://www.scp-wiki.net/scp-297]What.[/url]
[QUOTE=booster;35971507][img]http://i.imgur.com/86TqI.jpg[/img]
Really reminds me of 682[/QUOTE]
fuck you
[QUOTE=DesolateGrun;35972652]fuck you[/QUOTE]
yes, seriously, that image is fucking [I]terrifying[/I] when not expecting it.
It really isn't that scary.
[QUOTE=Krinkels;35972636][url=http://www.scp-wiki.net/scp-297]What.[/url][/QUOTE]
This is marketable....
[URL]http://sandbox.scp-wiki.net/the-nightmare[/URL]
Draft deployed. Feedback, please.
Based off an old creepypasta called The Painting. That fucking image terrified me the first time I saw it.
[QUOTE=DesolateGrun;35972652]fuck you[/QUOTE]
This was posted in the thread for generally terrifying things, and somebody gave this advice:
[QUOTE]oh my god this image is really funny to me
like, every time I see it, I just imagine that demon/monster thing asking "HEY IS THIS MR. SMITHS AP BIOLOGY CLASS??"[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Strongbad;35974697][URL]http://sandbox.scp-wiki.net/the-nightmare[/URL]
Draft deployed. Feedback, please.
Based off an old creepypasta called The Painting. That fucking image terrified me the first time I saw it.[/QUOTE]
1. The image is off format.
2. When reading, it's not as scary as it could be. I'll admit, the part where it says "If there are no living subjects in the picture, SCP-XXXX will look directly at the viewer" was a bit chilling, but that way it pops out and follows subjects around seems a little vague. Even though it's supposed to be vague, I didn't really find much reason to be afraid of it.
Still, a pretty cool start.
[QUOTE=Mr Shadyface;35967717]TEST LOG 11-A: D-class subject was left alone with SCP. After fifteen seconds, he blinked. SCP was found clinging to the back of test subjects neck. Subject reports some "Minor bruising"[/QUOTE]
[quote=SCP-5555J's article]Test Log 16 (7/11/20██, 9:00 AM)
Input: SCP-173
Output: Tiny concrete statue, closely resembling input in vague outline. Paint colors also similar, but arranged such that Mini-173 appears to be wearing makeup. Object is also, inexplicably, wearing glow-sticks and a tall striped top hat.
Note: Accidentally blinked. Mini-173 tried to strangle my penis. I quit.[/quote]
[QUOTE=liquidMountan;35975407]This was posted in the thread for generally terrifying things, and somebody gave this advice:[/QUOTE]
Yeah I posted it.
[QUOTE=sirdownloadsalot;35976287]1. The image is off format.
2. When reading, it's not as scary as it could be. I'll admit, the part where it says "If there are no living subjects in the picture, SCP-XXXX will look directly at the viewer" was a bit chilling, but that way it pops out and follows subjects around seems a little vague. Even though it's supposed to be vague, I didn't really find much reason to be afraid of it.
Still, a pretty cool start.[/QUOTE]
1. Yeah, I know. It's kind of a bitch to figure out the syntax, and after all, this is just the sandbox.
2. That's sort of the feel I was going for, based off the Nothing Is Scarier principle. If the article just flat-out says what happens, it's not really that frightening. It's like the Ring, where it just says "BUT WAIT GOAST GIRL WIL KILLED U IN SVN DAYZ K." It isn't scary at all, primarily because Samara Morgan can easily be thwarted by, I dunno, going somewhere with no reflective surfaces for her to suddenly pop out of, since you know when she's coming for you, right down to the second.
If you know what happens, you joke to take your uneasiness off, or you start formulating ideas to get out of it, and before you know it, it's not scary at all. It's more scary if you know little about what might happen to you if you fuck around with the object. It's supposed to feel vaguely unsettling at first, when you notice it far away, but as it starts to get closer, the SCP doesn't need any anomalous effects to make someone affected by it want to get somewhere with nowhere to suddenly pop out from Jason Voorhees-style.
[QUOTE=Strongbad;35977831]1. Yeah, I know. It's kind of a bitch to figure out the syntax, and after all, this is just the sandbox.
2. That's sort of the feel I was going for, based off the Nothing Is Scarier principle. If the article just flat-out says what happens, it's not really that frightening. It's like the Ring, where it just says "BUT WAIT GOAST GIRL WIL KILLED U IN SVN DAYZ K." It isn't scary at all, primarily because Samara Morgan can easily be thwarted by, I dunno, going somewhere with no reflective surfaces for her to suddenly pop out of, since you know when she's coming for you, right down to the second.
If you know what happens, you joke to take your uneasiness off, or you start formulating ideas to get out of it, and before you know it, it's not scary at all. It's more scary if you know little about what might happen to you if you fuck around with the object.[/QUOTE]
There's a rule on the foundation site; "Gears Razor: If in doubt, the scarier choice is the better one.
Also, there is a format example in the site. The image syntax is there which makes it perfect.
[QUOTE=sirdownloadsalot;35977870]There's a rule on the foundation site; "Gears Razor: If in doubt, the scarier choice is the better one.
Also, there is a format example in the site. The image syntax is there which makes it perfect.[/QUOTE]
Link, please. Also, I had no doubts about what I wanted the article to do; as I began to write it, I already had a firm idea in mind about what I wanted it to do. Besides, horror is, ultimately, in the eye of the beholder; different things will scare different people. Some people find the weeping angels from Dr. Who terrifying. I myself have never been really scared of them, or 173 for that matter, because, to me, they seem to be focused on bypassing rational thought and hitting the lizard brain that makes you jump, which is, in my opinion, a really cheap way of creating horror.
I suppose my ultimate question is: should I put it on the site? Is it good enough for that?
Edit:
Fuck, broken automerge
[QUOTE=Strongbad;35978962]I suppose my ultimate question is: should I put it on the site? Is it good enough for that?
Edit:
Fuck, broken automerge[/QUOTE]
Run it by them first.
Also, you should have seen this on your first visit;
[url]http://www.scp-wiki.net/how-to-write-an-scp[/url]
I think it's good enough, but you might want to revise some things such as the horse head's appearance. The Foundation would most likely have at least a very detailed description. [i]Black stallion head, no visible pupils, skin appears stretched and thin/very little flesh on head, emaciated appearance/in early stages of decomposition[/i] maybe? Most other articles also have the numerical designation of the storage site written down, so I would put down a number, like Site 207 or something. Otherwise, I can't think of any changes to make. I'd go ahead and submit it.
I fixed the image and got rid of the testing log because it was redundant. Any better?
[url]http://sandbox.scp-wiki.net/the-nightmare[/url]
[QUOTE=Ekalektik_1;35979157]I think it's good enough, but you might want to revise some things such as the horse head's appearance. The Foundation would most likely have at least a very detailed description. [i]Black stallion head, no visible pupils, skin appears stretched and thin/very little flesh on head, emaciated appearance/in early stages of decomposition[/i] maybe? Most other articles also have the numerical designation of the storage site written down, so I would put down a number, like Site 207 or something. Otherwise, I can't think of any changes to make. I'd go ahead and submit it.[/QUOTE]
it seems to me like descriptions of decaying/desiccated things are the default for scary things, which somewhat cheapens the effect when it's so accumulated. Are there any SCPs that refer to the opposite of death and emaciation, like unnatural weight or proportions or even liveliness? I guess it would be more difficult to implement something being so alive that it's scary, but the proportions thing is generally a good fallback, I think.
[QUOTE=Griffster26;35982906][URL="http://th08.deviantart.net/fs71/PRE/i/2011/232/2/9/scp_173_pull_out_poster_by_i_was_so_blind-d47b284.jpg"]nsfl[/URL][/QUOTE]
If 173 went to prison, Don't Blink.
I would say that SCP really has the same appeal as the Twilight Zone. You get to enjoy a good mindfuck.
I've had this idea for an SCP for a while, and I thought I'd share it.
Basically, it is a contained virus similar to [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Happy99]Happy99[/url],Except named "Happy00". In the first stage, the virus shuts down the user's computer, spreads through E-mails sent by itself, shutting down other comps whilst growing stronger, and finally at the last stage, [sp]spreads to miscellaneous electronic devices. Eventually causing y2k and throwing us back into the dark ages.[/sp]
So it's a completely normal virus. I mean, even if they didn't have like, 5 computer virus SCPs as it was that isn't even an SCP by any stretch of the imagination
[QUOTE=DohEntertainmen;35984545]I've had this idea for an SCP for a while, and I thought I'd share it.
Basically, it is a contained virus similar to [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Happy99]Happy99[/url],Except named "Happy00". In the first stage, the virus shuts down the user's computer, spreads through E-mails sent by itself, shutting down other comps whilst growing stronger, and finally at the last stage, [sp]spreads to miscellaneous electronic devices. Eventually causing y2k and throwing us back into the dark ages.[/sp][/QUOTE]
If you're doing an essay based on nature, you'll have to outdo mother nature. She's already got the good ones taken. Similarly, you'll have to outdo existing computer viruses. I've never written an SCP before but I'd assume at the very least that a super-virus wouldn't make for a particularly interesting one. There probably needs to be an interesting or creepy spin on it.
Anyway, if you must write a virus SCP, how about a virus which instils skepticism and a questioning spirit within any computer it infects? What if a computer would accept nothing simply given to it as fact? Perhaps the entirety of mathematics and science which it employs must be proven to it in order to perform certain operations. Maybe, citations and references in papers will require an electronic copy of the work available on the internet in order to confirm the presence of certain quotes. Spreadsheets couldn't really be edited without explaining why the apparently random change would reflect reality, and maybe even that wouldn't work.
It shares properties with other computer viruses in that it will make a computer completely unusable, however, computers infected could be rehabilitated and kept for studying. There could be experiment logs indicating how certain programs act, or how the skeptical programs run with other computer-borne SCPs. That said, virus SCPs suck and this idea really started to suck when I read it out loud to myself.
[editline]16th May 2012[/editline]
You know what we should do? We should make a virus that forces signal 17 to be sent and then when it is a little window pops up and it says 'We Are Cool Yet!'
Krinkels, you basically described Windows Vista, except instead of useless protection included, it's a virus.
Although a terrifying thought, indeed.
Have you guys seen the joke SCP we made in the Containment Breach thread yet?
Read this page if you haven't: [URL="http://www.facepunch.com/threads/1175222/43"]http://www.facepunch.com/threads/1175222/43[/URL]
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
