RPC-791 / Discussion

This is the discussion related to the wiki page RPC-791.

(account deleted) 02 Mar 2019 17:39

And, back.

Togetic 03 Mar 2019 14:36

Did this get vetted before being reposted? I don't really remember the original version exactly but I don't think this has changed much since then

I get what it is, a casting couch thing, but I don't think it pulls that together too much with it's effects and the story being told by the article. It gives us an idea of what it's supposed to be about, but doesn't follow up to really even hint at why the entity exists and why it's stuck repeating film lines interspersed with a woman being sexually assaulted by a film producer. It sets the tone well, but I don't think there's any real meat behind the tone, which is unfortunate since I like this concept a lot, and it's executed in a way strongly evocative of emotion, and then sort of falls flat when it comes to actually being a narrative and putting across anything more.

I'm giving it a three because of that, but it's very clear this isn't far off from being a lot higher than that

DarkGreenEspeon 17 Mar 2019 21:48

I'm switching between "not bad" and "really good" with this one, haha.
I'll be honest, at first I didn't really understand what the transcript was about. From the first few sentences and all the mechanical lingo, I thought the implication was that some woman had fused with an anomalous machine or something. After rereading the "first discovered" part, it makes a bit more sense. On to the critique.
I feel like you have a couple too many concepts here. "Giant Machine Protista"? Alright sure, cool. "Giant Machine Protista fed old american films"? Yeah, I mean, why not. But it's also unaffected by gravity? That's a bit much, isn't it? Not to mention that none of these facts imply that it's extradimensional or cannot be measured, yet the sentence "RPC-791's mass is impossible to measure" is in there and it's an Epsilon.
Moving on to the execution, I think there are a lot of problems in the description of this one. The article is written like we have a manual for the thing - so much information on it, with almost no mention of what tests (or how many tests) were done to get that information. Obviously not every article needs testing logs, but if you're not even going to acknowledge the existence of any tests, then sentences like "PC-791's level of intelligence will fluctuate according to the health and efficiency of its cells" stick out like a sore thumb. Right after that, the whole part about its antigravity is weird: Something hovering in the air isn't "being unaffected by gravitational forces", and one part of it pushing the other parts down isn't "being temporarily affected by gravitational forces" either.
Of course, there are also minor issues here, like the lack of any hazard tags and some spelling errors, but those aren't a big deal. I think the main thing here is that there's just too much going on here, conceptually. It needs to be simplified - even just cutting the implications of anything extradimensional and just adding some more talk of tests being done would improve this one by a huge amount.

---

No signature defined.

pogchamp 21 Mar 2019 22:59

:omegalul: What happened to the title?

Mong-bies 26 May 2019 18:05

This was a good read, very evocative and narratively solid.

The Schnozz 06 May 2020 19:11

Pretty good. I like the basic idea, fixation with film, and implied tragedy behind its emergence. However, its supposed origins are left vague in a way that feels like diving into a puddle. I understand not everything has to be a novella but another addendum would be nice.

Side Statment: Ignoring gravity seems very unnecessary.

Almarduk 08 Mar 2021 15:38

There's a bizarre concept somewhere here, but it's barely explored. There's just nothing done with the general casting couch theme and its connections to the entity.

+2