Easy Bake Dinos
http://rpcsandbox.wikidot.com/easy-bake-dinos
I am well aware that there are syntax errors, and I want to know if I can execute the twist better.
Easy Bake Dinos
Forum
» Writing & Drafts / Archived Drafts
» Easy Bake Dinos
Summary:
An easy bake oven toy that brings back prehistoric creatures - with a twist!
The discovery portion is succinct and to the point. Only thing I could think of to improve would be the following. Where you have written:
"Henghsall was going to throw RPC-XXX out, however, he was persuaded by his child to let the device run." you might consider changing it to:
"After some time of not being used, Agent Henghsall was persuaded to let the device run by his child despite intending to throw it away."
The list of instances being located within a collapsible is a good move, and I don't see anything that I believe could be improved upon. I did notice in the footnotes that you didn't use a full-stop at the end of footnote 20 despite having included one in every other footnote.
Also, I see you are using the DD/MM/YYYY date format, which is used primarily in the UK and Europe. Nothing wrong with that, of course, I had just assumed you were American or possibly Canadian, lol!
The image and its descriptions are both great. Regarding containment protocols, you may want to include a comma after the word 'standard' just before 'medium-grade', but that's up to you. Other than that, it's perfect.
In the description section, you may want to consider replacing:
"Attempts to identify the creator of RPC-XXX have yielded no results, however, RPC-XXX instances will often appear on online listings, garage sales or in the gift shops of zoos and museums, especially during days of cultural significance such as holidays or the release of new paleontology-related media."
With:
"Despite attempts to identify the creator of RPC-XXX yielding no results, RPC-XXX instances continue to appear on online listings, garage sales, or in the gift shops of zoos and museums. They tend to appear more often during days of cultural significance, such as during holidays, or coinciding with the release of new paleontology-related media."
And that's about it!
Possessed, owned, controlled, by the common-sense infected rational gaze.
Edit: Added images by Mr Makor and
Superspambot, thanks for the hard work! I've also incorporated some of the crit I've received, hopefully the page feels less aimless.
Don't really have much to say honestly. I like it's a short article but, I don't know, I feel like it's missing something. Maybe a couple of tests logs could help it.
The article is fairly simplistic which is not necessarily a bad thing. In fact, I think what you have here is a solid foundation for an article that can be a very useful building block for other articles and tales. The issue is that while the premise is both simplistic and interesting, you need to be the one to present a compelling narrative first in order to show off how these things can work in a story.
The logs with the families having to give up their dinosaurs approaches something compelling without it getting there. Although I do have to ask why we’re focusing on them in the first place? Because to be blunt, it’s not the interesting part of the article. I think in this particular instance the meat of the article isn’t in how the general populace reacts to the dinos but how the Authority does.
The Authority, notoriously conservative in the use of anomalies, decided to take a risk on the domesticated dinosaurs. That’s interesting because it immediately makes me ask a lot of questions. “Why?” “Was there an incident that caused this reaction?” “Who made the call to push for the dino-workers?” And the way these are answered is in an incredibly mundane way of just pest control and because it was cheaper.
It almost becomes an anti-climax in how the Authority goes about it, just like any other wednesday. If you were to take focus away from the families in the video log and instead focus on the why and how the Authority switched from containing the dinos to using them, it would make a much stronger article.
RPC-715 instances are to be contained in standard medium-grade containment lockers
What’s a medium-grade locker? This wording feels vague. Why not just have it in a “storage locker” or “Containment locker” instead?
Populations of RPC-715-A exceeding 50 instances may be used as livestock.
What? Are they eating dino meat? Cause the later part of the article describes them being used as hunters or weed killers, but this is a whole other use that never gets brought up again or elaborated on. Either expand on this concept or axe the sentence.
RPC-715 instances are often disguised as non-anomalous toys and are branded with pictures of extinct creatures
I’m slightly confused here. Is this saying that the toys sometimes take the branding of non-anomalous variants or that the whole thing looks non-anomalous from the surface? Because the latter was already established the sentence previous. Either explain more clearly or remove the disguise portion of the sentence.
correlating to the organisms featured on the back of RPC-715's packaging
Here’s a question: Is there any way to tell what you’re growing before you grow it? Or is it simply luck of the draw? Not necessarily a criticism, this can be left as is, if I’m being honest, but something that may be neat to toy around with.
RPC-715-A and -B instances
I believe this is a vestigial part of a previous draft, because this is the only mention of a -B instance in this article
[REDACTED], Main,
Wrong Maine, hah. Unless you’re talking about Main City, Missouri, which is a real place
later identified as a velociraptor.
This sentence isn’t needed as the boy later identifies the dino as a raptor anyway. It’s just a footnote for the sake of having one. Not to mention it being a raptor has little bearing on the story so having the point hammered home serves no purpose
makeshift leashes.*
Forgot the second asterisk, borks the formatting
Hogarth: Me too.
The children embrace each other before picking up their respective animal kennels.
Forgot the second line to space it properly.
I want to like this article, and the idea of having domestic dinosaurs in the universe of RPC is really cool. I want this article to be the best it can be so that concept can get the attention it deserves. As-is, it’s almost a little bland; earlier I had mentioned that the foundation is really solid, and I stand by that. The issue I’m having is that you need to be the one to pioneer that step forward, really show that these things can be used in an interesting story.
What I would have you do is take a moment, leave the video tape as-is, and really cook up a compelling story as to why the Authority would use the dinosaurs. That would really help sell the concept altogether and make a powerful closer for the article so it sticks in peoples’ heads. Right now I’m saying “Wouldn’t it be cool IF…” which is partially the point, but this article gives me so little to work with it doesn’t actually push me to write about those scenarios.
Open the door, get on the floor, agent, deploy the dinosaur.
All RPC-715 instances are to be stored within standard medium-grade containment lockers. Usage is prohibited without prior authorization from the Site Director. Owing to the limited quantity of RPC-715, usage is to be restricted to instances of substantial population decline among RPC-715-A subjects. RPC-715-A populations exceeding 50 individuals may be designated for livestock utilization.
TO
All RPC-715 instances are to be stored in standard medium-grade containment lockers. Item usage is prohibited without prior authorization from the Site Director. Owing to the limited quantity of RPC-715, use is to be restricted to instances with a substantially low population among RPC-715-A subjects. RPC-715-A populations exceeding 50 individuals may be designated for livestock utilization.
Neonatal RPC-715-A instances are to be transferred to incubators or assigned to surrogate parental hosts immediately upon creation. Only personnel possessing 715-/2R clearance or higher are permitted to imprint upon live specimens and will assume full custodial responsibility. Due to their nature as domesticated animals, RPC-715-A instances are to be classified using taxonomic nomenclature reflecting their status as domestic subspecies of extinct fauna.
TO
Hatchling RPC-715-A instances are to be transferred to incubators or assigned to surrogate parental hosts immediately upon creation. Only personnel possessing 715-/2R clearance or higher are permitted to imprint upon live specimens and are expected to assume custodial responsibility. Due to their nature as domesticated animals, RPC-715-A instances are to be classified using taxonomic nomenclature reflecting their status as domestic subspecies of extinct fauna.
On days of national or paleontological significance, museum gift shops, toy stores and other retail locations will be monitored for RPC-715 instances disguised as non-anomalous toys. Illegal pet markets are also to be monitored for live RPC-715-A instances.
TO
On days of historical significance in paleontology, a day-long surveillance sweep will be instigated. Museum gift shops, toy stores, and other retail locations will be monitored for instances of RPC-715, which may be disguised as non-anomalous toys. Constant surveillance of the illegal pet trade is also in effect to find live instances of RPC-715-A in circulation.
RPC-715 designates an Amazing! Co.-produced series of toys resembling commercially available "Magic Grow Capsule" products, sold under the branding "InstaDinos! Grow Your Prehistoric Pals!". RPC-715 packages are often disguised as non-anomalous toys and are branded with pictures of extinct creatures, usually members of the clade archosauria or mammals from the Pleistocene Epoch.The specific organisms depicted vary based on regional distribution and temporal marketing trends, including the release of paleontology-adjacent media. For instance, packages discovered in China may feature organisms found in local fossil sites, such as Zhenyuanlong or Liaoningosaurus, on their rear. Each package contains fourteen RPC-715 capsules.
TO
RPC-715 designates an Amazing! Co. produced toy line resembling commercially available "Magic Grow Capsule" products. Sold under the branding of "InstaDinos! Grow Your Prehistoric Pals!" RPC-715 packages are often disguised as non-anomalous toys. Each comes with random pictures of extinct creatures, typically members of the clade Archosauria or Pleistocene mammals. The specific organisms offered vary based on regional distribution and temporal marketing trends, including the release of paleontology-adjacent media. For example, instances recovered from Chinese stores featured organisms found in nearby fossil sites, such as Zhenyuanlong or Liaoningosaurus. In total, each package contains fourteen RPC-715 capsules.
When submerged in water, RPC-715 capsules undergo a rapid metamorphic process, resulting in the emergence of RPC-715-A instances. RPC-715-A designates domestic subspecies of previously extinct fauna, each corresponding to species depicted on the rear panel of RPC-715 packaging. Genetic analysis of RPC-715-A instances and their extinct wild analogues (e.g., Raphus cucullatus, Pinguinus impennis) reveals near-identical genomes, with deviations limited to genes associated with domestication syndrome.
TO
When submerged in water, RPC-715 capsules undergo a rapid metamorphosis, culminating in the emergence of an RPC-715-A instance. RPC-715-A designates domestic subspecies of previously extinct fauna, each corresponding to a species depicted on the rear panel of RPC-715 packaging. Genetic analysis of RPC-715-A instances and their extinct wild analogues (e.g., Raphus cucullatus, Pinguinus impennis) reveals nearly identical genomes, with deviations limited to genes associated with the domestication syndrome.
The intelligence of individual RPC-715-A differs greatly, with mammalian instances usually displaying more intelligence on average. All RPC-715-A instances can be trained to follow commands to varying degrees of success depending on the species. Despite apparent genetic modification, no sufficient explanation for the increased intelligence of RPC-715-A specimens has been conceived. RPC-715 creations are fertile and will attempt to procreate with instances of the same species upon reaching sexual maturity.
TO
The intelligence of individual RPC-715-A varies significantly depending on the species. Mammals typically exhibit higher intelligence on average compared to other animals. Despite this, all RPC-715-A instances can be trained to follow commands to varying degrees of success, given that it is within a species' natural capability. Despite apparent genetic modification, no sufficient explanation has been devised for the increased intelligence of RPC-715-A specimens. RPC-715 creations are fertile and will attempt to procreate with instances of the same species upon reaching sexual maturity.
RPC-715 was discovered in May of 1993 when multiple instances of the item were released in 12 stores throughout North America and Europe to commemorate the release of the then upcoming film Jurassic Park, set to release the following month. The packages containing RPC-715 advertised fourteen creatures, including:
&
Approximately 300 unsuspecting customers purchased RPC-715, resulting in the creation of over 1000 RPC-715-A instances. After an ACI investigation isolated the factory which produced RPC-715, MST Sierra-08 ("Sundowners") was dispatched to seize the installation, located near Xalapa, Mexico. The manager of the facility could not be found, however, knowledge of RPC-715's effects were known to the employees at the facility, some of which had brought RPC-715 packages home to their families. An interview with a technician working at the factory was conducted and may be found below:
TO
RPC-715 was discovered in May 1993, when RPC operators flagged 300 suspicious calls made across North America and Europe with similar reports. All unsuspecting callers combined have produced 1,000 RPC-715-A instances. Caller IDs were flagged, and their purchase history was traced back to 12 stores across both regions. The marketing and timing of the product's release correlated with the then-upcoming film Jurassic Park, which was scheduled to be shown in theaters the following month. All packages containing RPC-715 advertised fourteen creatures, including:
&
Supervisors at the stores were questioned by ACI investigators, which led to the identification of a single factory as the primary producer of RPC-715. MST Sierra-08 ("Sundowners") was dispatched to seize the installation, located near Xalapa, Mexico. The manager of the facility could not be found; however, the employees at the facility were aware of RPC-715's effects, as some had brought home RPC-715 packages to their families. An interview with a technician working at the factory was conducted and may be found below:
(Staff edit: Post removed after its author admitted to writing crit with ChatGPT.)
Did you really use ChatGPT to write this crit?
I could describe this draft in three words: boring, scattered, and pointless. It's difficult for me to write a coherent review, because this article isn't very coherent. Is this table supposed to be at all interesting? I'd presume so, since it makes up a quarter of the draft, but it's a wall of text that's fruitless to the rest of the draft and light on even grammatical content, let alone literary quality. For the rest of this review, I'm going to pretend it's not there, because that's how it should be; it has no bearing on anything anyway. However, keep in mind that my ignorance of it isn't because it doesn't matter that much, it's because I would have a hard time getting past it if I didn't just go out of my way to.
As I indicated at the start, many disparate veins stem from the heart of this draft, and none of them terminate anywhere interesting. I'll crop the weakest two right away: the discovery section and the ending incident. The former is the quintessential pointless discovery story: "the Authority found it when they found it in the scenario in which it is normally found." Besides the fact that this doesn't need to be here, it's a glaring missed opportunity for wacky happenings when civilians find it. These "bought by an Authority insider from a weird yard sale" discovery stories, of which I'm surprised there have been several, are generally the worst because there's so little opportunity for variation or excitement. On the other hand, the ending incident has absolutely nothing going for it, and I don't know why it was added.
Beyond that are some further blunt ends that didn't emerge as the result of frivolous tangents but instead naturally during the course of the article but then mysteriously put to sleep. The first, the mystery of the object's creator, is alluded to twice, maybe thrice, and looms over the article for no reason, never to be explained, maybe because there was never an answer. Still, the article is weirdly insistent on alluding to this mystery man, beyond the boundaries of reasonable clinical tone. Regardless, "attempts to identify the creator of RPC-XXX have yielded no results" for reasons completely unspecified.
The chemical makeup of the "dinosaur mix" is suggested to have been isolated, but that information is apparently insignificant. To be fair, this would never be that interesting, but glossing over it was an audacious move nonetheless. Why not come up with something that sounds suitably scientific, at least for a footnote? More importantly, though, the oven has plot armor preventing it from working on anything that isn't the correct material placed properly in its tray. Why? Is it because that would also present a serious risk of something interesting happening? This would've been great for foreshadowing or a hook, but instead it was patched up with arbitrary video game logic.
After all those distractions, it's finally time to dig in to that promised twist: the weird dinosaur machine made a weird dinosaur. "Holy crap, bump up that classification level!" What exactly is so compromising and confidential about this? What does this recontextualize that demands a whole second offset? Nothing, which the article kind of admits itself when the second page includes the content of the first, only dramatically abbreviated. The only real change is that the article now focuses on a completely different anomaly with no thematic connection to the previous one, but only for the duration of one interview where, again, nothing happens.
This is a great example as to why "writing your hyperfixation" isn't the safe touchdown I've heard some make it out to be. In fact, it's more difficult than writing something you don't care about, because then you'd see through the eyes of the unadjusted reader. With the little substance that actually is here, I prescribe three directions this draft could take: focus on the toy oven that creates living beings, focus on the sapient childlike dinosaurs, or combine the two. Either way, everything irrelevant deserves a speedy amputation. While you're doing that, figure out the theme of the story you're telling. Write for depth, not breadth.
It's bizarre to lead an article about a toy oven with a picture of a dinosaur. Starting with an image of the oven would help the visuals immensely.
On many occasions, scientific names should be italicized, and the first letters of genuses should be capitalized.
RPC-XXX-B instances are not to be kept as pets or livestock.
"Don't take it home with you" goes without saying.
RPC-XXX refers to a series of electronic toy ovens similar to the Easy Bake Oven™ and Thingmaker™ lines from Hasbro.
Tarbolin got on my case about using trademark symbols in an RPC draft three years ago, and now I shall pass it on. Yes, it's technically correct, but it's goofy to suggest anyone in the Authority cares.
lack any visible branding or user interface aside from an off switch.
You could call it a power switch; I presume it also turns on.
Attempts to identify the creator of RPC-XXX have yielded no results, however, new
Comma splice before "however"; it should be a period or a semicolon.
RPC-XXX's interior will heat to 1240℃ after 4 minutes, far exceeding its expected maximum temperature.
In a literal sense, there is no "expected maximum temperature"; it never promised not to heat up to 1240℃. In practice, this should be information you leave up to the reader's discovery: "Woah, that's hot!"
the deposited RPC-XXX-A will have transformed into RPC-XXX-B eggs.
RPC-XXX-B refers to previously extinct creatures produced by RPC-XXX.
This is what I call if-you-give-a-mouse-a-cookie writing: end one paragraph with an object that was never alluded to before and start the next paragraph with that object. It sounds juvenile and is a poor way of explaining things, since the mental image of the sentence is left incomplete.
have revealed them to be genetically identical, save for their internal microbiomes. The microbiomes and diets of RPC-XXX-B instances are adapted to modern environments.
Combine these similar sentences: "[…] save for their diets and internal microbiomes, which are […]"
It has been hypothesized that the creator of RPC-XXX, if such a figure exists, chose organisms based on their size, as more iconic prehistoric animals such as tyrannosaurus rex have yet to be discovered as RPC-XXX-B instances.
There's no reason to posit the intent of a creator, which is an uncouth assumption for a clinical writer to make: something like "Size may be a limiting factor for the creation of RPC-XXX-B instances, as […]" would suffice. "Iconic" might warrant scare quotes, too.
Furthermore, the fauna produced by RPC-XXX will vary depending on its region of discovery.
Remove "furthermore"; this sentence has little to do with the previous one.
instances discovered in Mongolia and Kazakhstan correspond to organisms found in the Djadochta Formation, such as velociraptor or protoceratops, while devices from East Africa come with the equipment necessary to produce individual raphus cucullatus and abrictosaurus specimens
I suspect the wording was varied between these two parts to avoid sounding "dull", but it's so different that it creates a confusing, imagined sense of distinction.
who purchased the device at a local auction for his child under the assumption that it was an unanomalous toy.
It's redundant to specify that he thought it was a normal toy; of course he didn't know it existed if he obtained it "unknowingly" before the first instance was discovered.
Hengshall was going to throw RPC-XXX out, however, he was persuaded by his child to let the device run.
Same "however" comma splice as before.
The first confirmed RPC-XXX-B instances hatched on 20/4/89, numbering 20 in total.
This sentence is confusing; it's presumably the result of the previous sentence, but doesn't allude to it whatsoever.
RPC-XXX and its creations were relocated to Site-012. More instances have since been discovered. New species will be denoted in footnotes.
These sentences are weirdly staccato.
Besides all the other reasons I don't like the RPC-XXX-B tables, the fact that they aren't connected and the widths are all inconsistent makes them an eyesore.
The parasitic nature of (echidna name)
You missed a spot.
RCI reports reveal that PCAOO
PCAAO is misspelled, and did you mean "ACI"?
RPC-XXX is the collective designation of four entities:
I loathe the "collective designation". It's a strangely ubiquitous buzzword that almost always precedes a lazy explanation, because if they should be classified together, there must be some natural sequence to explain them better than leading with "it's a bunch of stuff." You had this natural sequence in the first offset; as I stated in my review, I assume this was shortened because you didn't want the offset to be repetitive, but the offset should be a complete document in its own right, in which case it would be repetitive, because this draft shouldn't have an offset, because nothing changes.
Basically, this sentence will certainly go away if you apply my review anyway, but I yelled about it because I hate "collective designations" and I'm in love with my own voice.
RPC-XXX-C is a species of omnivorous synapsid reptile distantly related to Suminia, and believed to have lived from 251.4-251.9 years.
I don't know what this means. "RPC-XXX-C is believed to have lived from 251.4-251.9 years"? "RPC-XXX-C is a species of omnivorous synapsid reptile believed to have lived from 251.4-251.9 years"? It strikes me as a peculiar level of precision regardless.
RPC-XXX-C specimens are known to create and utilize primitive tools such as spears
This sentence lacks a punctuation mark, and the next paragraph isn't separated properly.
RPC-XXX-C was discovered when RPC-XXX-A material was placed into its attached device.
Redundant; just say it was created by RPC-XXX.
The RPC-XXX-C instances were initially believed to be non-sapient RPC-XXX-B instances.
This can be safely assumed.
<Begin Log, 0:00>
<End Log, [05:00]>
These time indicators are mismatched.
This concludes our interview.**
Stray asterisks.
Doctor Hekekia was forbidden from making direct contact with RPC-XXX-C instances after this interview, though continues to work on the RPC-XXX-C project.
Change "though" to "but".
Addendum no. 2:
No formatting? Also, there was no addendum 1, unless you count the discovery.
The clade names, species names, and movie titles should be italicized. And the first word in a species name is capitalized.
ConProcs
Description
The devices lack any noticeable branding, but may be packaged as non-anomalous toys, such as the Thingmaker line.
“The devices lack any noticeable branding, but may be packaged as the aforementioned brands.”
RPC-XXX instances typically appear in toy stores, gift shops and other retail locations following the announcement of paleontological media, such as the release of a new movie, or on days of natural significance.
“RPC-XXX instances typically appear in toy stores, gift shops, and other retail locations following the announcement of dinosaur-related media….”
What exactly qualifies as “natural significance?”
RPC-XXX-A is an organic substance rich in amino acids
“With high concentrations of amino acids”
such as the organism's diet, eggs and environment.
How is an organism’s “eggs” something you cna print on the package?
Subjects describe the eggs as having a foul odor and experience nausea upon consumption.
This just feels like an unnecessary detail
If the RPC-XXX-A material is placed into the correct mold, then RPC-XXX-A will be transmuted into embryonic RPC-XXX-B instances encased in eggs
“If RPC-XXX-A is placed into the correct mold, it will be transmuted into a fertilized egg.”
only opening to allow RPC-XXX-B instances to leave.
Add “after hatching”
RPC-XXX-B refers to previously extinct species made extant by RPC-XXX, usually but not exclusively belonging to the clade archosauria.
“RPC-XXX-B refers to specimens of previously extinct species, usually but not…”
Genetic analysis has revealed that RPC-XXX instances are genetically distinct individuals sharing no blood ties, and comparisons between RPC-XXX-B instances such as Raphus cucullatus2 and Pinguinus impennis3 with their deceased wild counterparts have revealed them to be genetically identical, save for the activation of genes associated with domestication syndrome.
This feels like it could be a bit clearer; talking about them being genetically distinct and then them being genetically identical so close together makes it a bit confusing
The species selected for de-extinction vary depending on the time of discovery and location. For example, a device themed after a movie prominently featuring velociraptors will likely feature the animal as an RPC-XXX-B instance, even if the actual animal seldom resembles its fictious counterpart. If an organism is too large to be kept as a domestic animal, a smaller relative of the animal may be chosen in its place.
“Species represented among RPC-XXX-B vary depending on time and location of recovery, but are usually connected with recently released dinosaur-related media. For example, a movie prominently featuring velociraptors will likely result in velociraptors being generated as RPC-XXX-B instances. Notably, this occurs even if the actual animal does not resemble its fictitious counterpart.”
I’m a little unclear about that “fictitious counterpart” sentence. Is it saying that RPC-XXX-B will look like the fictional version, or the real version? Also for the last sentence: what qualifies as “too large?” The oven definitely makes creatures bigger than itself.
RPC-XXX-B instances may be trained to follow commands and to use litter boxes despite lacking brains large enough for those behaviors to manifest naturally.
I don’t think it’s that simple; I mean about brain size automatically correlating with trainiblity.
Discovery
RPC-XXX was discovered in May of 1993 when multiple instances of the item were released in numerous stores throughout North America and Europe to commemorate the release of the then upcoming film Jurassic Park, set to release the following month.
“RPC-XXX was discovered in May 1993 when multiple instances were found in stores across North America and Europe as a promotion for the then-upcoming film Jurassic Park.”
While most instances of RPC-XXX were discarded or recalled under the assumption that they were defective, a few instances remained plugged in, resulting in the birth of several hundred RPC-XXX-B instances worldwide.
“While most RPC-XXX instances were discarded or returned under the assumption they were defective, several hundred RPC-XXX-B instances were born worldwide.”
All RPC-XXX machines and their creations were brought into Authority custody, and their previous owners issued the appropriate level of amnestics depending on their degree of exposure.
“All RPC-XXX instances were brought into Authority custody, and their previous owners issued the appropriate level of amnestics.”
Any remaining RPC-XXX instances sold in toy stores were seized under the guise of a recall.
“Any RPC-XXX instances remaining in toy stories were seized under the guise of a recall.
Final Thoughts
This didn’t really work for me. It didn’t feel like it went anywhere, or really left any impression. You seem really invested in the Easy bake Oven angle, which doesn’t really feel like it “goes with” the dinosaur angle. That last picture also just doesn’t belong. If you put more focus on the actual dinosaurs, give an idea of what they do or what the Authority has to do to deal with them, maybe you’d have something. But right now, this feels ironically half-baked.
Situation normal, Cap'n! Spiraling out of control!
I think your focus on bringing dinosaurs into RPC distracts from giving the article more substance.
I did read the previous draft for this, and your intention becomes obvious with the obnoxious name-dropping of specific creatures the average reader lacks a baseline image or understanding of. Reading stuff like “ protoceratops andrewsi, raphus cucullatus, diictodon feliceps” requires me to look up what these creatures are, and further reading if I’m to get a sense for their behaviours or general character. While fine if its done a couple of times and is vital for the enjoyment of the article, it ends up being repetitive and blends together into a mesh of “ok, and?” Its kind of a chekhov's gun scenario, where these elements of the article add little except the appearance of dinosaurs.
Yes, your article does introduce an array of possibilities for future authors who are interested in writing about domesticated dinosaurs, but that doesn’t excuse you from implementing a story yourself. While I agree that the previous draft was over-the.top concerning the reveal, and ultimately did nothing with it, this version pulls back way too much in terms of content beyond simply the demonstration of the dinosaur-creation process. You have tid bits sprinkled throughout, ones which I think deserve your attention and should be matured into narratives. It is this under-execution of your ideas, most likely caused by the hyper focus on the notion of getting dinosaurs into RPC, that is the article’s current, most major and concrete flaw.
For example:
Utilization of an anomaly is the path many author’s go for, as it usually involves the Authority as a character somewhat. Why did the Authority use this anomaly? Usage is not one of its core tenants, it needs a reason. Did some event inspire usage? How were utilization proposals treated? How is usage controlled? What have been the advantages of usage? Then there are other questions that are more story driven. Did usage result in an unforeseeable event that taught us something? How did usage affect these individuals or groups?1
Then there’s the domestication. I am not an expert in this field, but dinosaurs lived a long time ago. The ecosystem they’re adapted to is probably very different, and I don’t know if “domestication syndrome” really fixes all that. Additionally, dinosaurs were around for much longer that us, so there’s probably great variation between them. These unique behaviors of the dinosaur could be something worth developing. Picking a concrete example of a domestication and showing how this specific dinosaur could be kept as a pet and what challenges that would entail is also a way for you to name-drop a species without it feeling unnecessary.
There’s the discovery log, which I believe is the part with the most potential.You’re telling me hundreds of dinosaurs came back from extinction worldwide, and you dare not write me something exploring this? How these domesticated beasts interacted with anyone? Not even how they were contained? Absurd man. And correct me if I’m wrong, but I have a memory of you aiming for the theme of the article to be childhood dream-fulfillment? I might be mixing things up but this scenario is the perfect set-up for something like that.
Footnotes
1. By the way, I have a hard time believing the Authority would sacrifice much of its resources to help some dinosperg researcher maintain what would most likely be a high-maintenance animal. Where would it even be kept? At the site, at the researchers home? That risks a containment breach. Keeping an anomaly such as this could be something worth investigating.
contained in standard medium-grade containment lockers.
"Medium-grade" as a containment classification makes little sense. It is too abstract to be practical. It says little about the size, threat level, or secure access. I think something that either references the containment rating or access concerns is better.
Devices are not to be used without prior authorization from the local site director.
Usage requires approval by the Site Director.
On days of national or paleontological significance, museum gift shops, toy stores and other retail locations are to be monitored for RPC-XXX instances disguised as non-anomalous toys.
"On days of national or paleontological significance, museum gift shops, toy stores and other retail locations are to be monitored for RPC-XXX instances." Their disguise is obvious once the reader gets to the sentence after this.
The devices lack any noticeable branding, but may be packaged as non-anomalous toys, such as the Thingmaker line.
"The devices lack consistent branding, and are packaged as non-anomalous toys from established companies."
or on days of natural significance.
What? Do you mean days that are naturally significant or days that are significant in relation to nature?
RPC-XXX-A materials come in multiple colors and are contained in plastic bags labeled with the name of a prehistoric creature and relevant information, such as the organism's diet, eggs and environment.
"Instances of the material vary in color and come contained in plastic bags. Each is labelled with the name of a prehistoric creature, and information regarding its optimal diet, environment, and cultivation." I like this because it lets the reader guess what cultivation might but not too long before the next paragraph. A bit playful.
When active and containing RPC-XXX-A material, RPC-XXXX's internal temperature will increase to 900° C.
"Activation of RPC-XXX while it contains RPC-XXX-A will increase the internal temperature to 900 °C."
If RPC-XXX-A material is placed into a different tray than the one displayed on its plastic bag,
This is the first time you mention trays, hits you out of nowhere since you get the impression that the paragraph above is supposed to encompass all auxiliaries.
Also you say tray here but mold everywhere else.
only opening to allow RPC-XXX-B instances to leave.
"only opening after hatching." Or birth. Or whatever other terminology for stuff getting out of eggs.
genetically distinct individuals sharing no blood ties
I don't see why this requires specification.
Raphus cucullatus2 and Pinguinus impennis3
don't see why the examples are necessary either.
The species selected for de-extinction vary depending on the time of discovery and location.
"Available species in a given RPC-XXX package relate to the conditions of its manifestation."
resembles its fictious
fictitious
If an organism is too large to be kept as a domestic animal, a smaller relative of the animal may be chosen in its place.
Is this something necessary for the reader to know? I mean, really necessary? You don't need to cover all fringe cases unless they matter for your story. No ones gonna rate your article lower because "O-o-ohhhh what if I want a T-rex thats too big haha plothole -2 stars!"
first human being to make
"first human to make"
brains large enough for those behaviors to manifest naturally.
"neurological capacity required for such tasks."
As such, it is unlikely that behavior displayed by RPC-XXX-B organisms represents the behavior of their wild counterparts.
Obviously? They're genetically domesticated? But also, letting them display similarities in behavior would make each case of a domesticated species more interesting. Dinosaurs are as far as I know extremely varied, and its not like cats or dogs act similarly, or that there aren't variations within each group.
item were released in numerous
"item manifested in numerous"
I wanna like this article, but I don’t find anything to grab onto. It’s not written in a bad manner, it’s not uninteresting but it’s not that cool either. I totally understand what you were going for, but there’s a missing link with the execution that gives this article a fatal blow: it doesn’t make me care. Dinosaurs are cool and all, but it’s all so… vague? I would have preferred if the scope of the anomaly was a little smaller, or that at least we could actually get a more in depth view at some of the dinos the authority has contained, just so that we could get some more insight and story. As it stands, these are just artificial dino pets… not the most original idea ever.
The final part of the article is what I have the most gripes with. The logs… fail to make me care about the characters. They’re just kids who don’t wanna give up their pet, that’s it. As it stands, you could replace this with a few sentences saying “X people found Y thing and Authority took it from them” and it would have the same impact, or lack thereof. Also, I really don’t think the angle of a researcher trying to make turn dinos into stress pets is a good idea to begin with. These are still damn dinos, and that’s the issue with the whole article: they aren’t treated as such. You could have turned this into something really terrifying, but that was sacrificed to have domesticated raptors. What a shame! Dinosaurs were horrifying creatures, but these guys are just… inconsequential, like the entire article.
RPC-715 instances are to be contained in standard medium-grade containment lockers and are not to be used without prior authorization from the local site director.
Replace all the “are to…” with “must”. It’s shorter, and flows better, gets the same idea across. It’s scattered throughout all of the ConProcs but I’ll only highlight it here.
Due to the limited quantity of RPC-715 pills, samples are to be used sparingly and only after a significant decline in the population of RPC-715 creations. Populations of RPC-715-A exceeding 50 instances may be used as livestock.
I don’t understand… why does the Authority care whether or not the anomaly’s population is declining or not?
Also, don’t say “RPC-715 creations”, just say RPC-715-A.
Only individuals with a clearance level of 715-/2R or higher may imprint themselves on live specimens and are held responsible for their care.
Once again, why would the Authority try to domesticate anomalous dinosaurs?
Two children from [REDACTED], Main, Hogarth and Violet Bird, recorded their family's experience with RPC-715 on their film camera and stored the footage in VCR tapes.
I think you were trying to say "[REDACTED], Maine […]".
Marco Marchi B. Mark
Charlie's Critique
Grammar
(Le Containment)
Containment Protocols: RPC-715 instances are to be contained in standard medium-grade containment lockers and are not to be used without prior authorization from the local site director.
Change to:
Containment Protocols: All RPC-715 instances are to be stored within standard medium-grade containment lockers. Usage is prohibited without prior authorization from the Site Director.
Due to the limited quantity of RPC-715 pills, samples are to be used sparingly and only after a significant decline in the population of RPC-715 creations.
Change to:
Owing to the limited quantity of RPC-715 pills, usage is to be restricted to instances of substantial population decline among RPC-715-A subjects.
Populations of RPC-715-A exceeding 50 instances may be used as livestock.
Change to:
RPC-715-A populations exceeding 50 individuals may be designated for livestock utilization.
Infant RPC-715-A instances are to be placed into incubators or introduced to surrogate parents upon creation.
Change to:
Neonatal RPC-715-A instances are to be transferred to incubators or assigned to surrogate parental hosts immediately upon creation.
Only individuals with a clearance level of 715-/2R or higher may imprint themselves on live specimens and are held responsible for their care.
Change to:
Only personnel possessing 715-/2R clearance or higher are permitted to imprint upon live specimens and will assume full custodial responsibility.
Because of their domestic nature, RPC-XXX-A instances are to be assigned taxonomic nomenclature indicating their status as domestic subspecies of extinct animals.
Change to:
Due to their domesticated behavioral traits, RPC-715-A instances are to be classified using taxonomic nomenclature reflecting their status as domestic subspecies of extinct fauna.
On days of national or paleontological significance, museum gift shops, toy stores and other retail locations are to be monitored for RPC-715 instances disguised as non-anomalous toys.
Change to:
During dates of national or paleontological relevance, museum gift shops, toy retailers, and similar commercial outlets are to be monitored for RPC-715 instances masquerading as non-anomalous toys.
(Description)
RPC-715 refers to a series of toys similar in appearance and function to the Magic Grow Capsule toys commonly sold at retail locations, branded "InstaDinos! Grow Your Prehistoric Pals!".
Change to:
RPC-715 designates a series of toys resembling commercially available "Magic Grow Capsule" products, sold under the branding "InstaDinos! Grow Your Prehistoric Pals!".
The exact organisms included may vary depending on certain factors, such as the item's location or the release of new paleontology-adjacent media.
Change to:
The specific organisms depicted vary based on regional distribution and temporal marketing trends, including the release of paleontology-adjacent media.
All packages contains twelve RPC-715 pills.
Change to:
Each package contains twelve RPC-715 capsules.
When placed in water, RPC-XXX instances will transform into instances of RPC-715-A.
Change to:
When submerged in water, RPC-715 capsules undergo a rapid metamorphic process, resulting in the emergence of RPC-715-A instances.
RPC-715-A refers to domestic subspecies of previously extinct fauna, correlating to the organisms featured on the back of RPC-715's packaging.
Change to:
RPC-715-A designates domestic subspecies of previously extinct fauna, each corresponding to species depicted on the rear panel of RPC-715 packaging.
Genetic comparison between RPC-715-A instances and recently extinct wild counterparts, such as Raphus cucullatus and Pinguinus Impennis reveals the organisms to be identical, save for the activation of a few genes associated with domestication syndrome.
Change to:
Genetic analysis of RPC-715-A instances and their extinct wild analogues (e.g., Raphus cucullatus, Pinguinus impennis) reveals near-identical genomes, with deviations limited to genes associated with domestication syndrome.
An example of an RPC-715-A instance in the form of acheroraptor temertyorum authorensis contained at Site-012.
Change to:
One documented RPC-715-A instance, a domestic Acheroraptor temertyorum authorensis, is currently housed at Site-012.
All RPC-715-A instances can be trained to follow commands to varying degrees of success depending on the species.
Change to:
All RPC-715-A subjects are capable of responding to conditioning and command-based training, with effectiveness contingent upon species.
RPC-715 was discovered in May of 1993 when multiple instances of the item were released in 12 stores throughout North America and Europe to commemorate the release of the then upcoming film Jurassic Park, set to release the following month.
Change to:
RPC-715 came to the Authority’s attention in May 1993, following the distribution of multiple instances across twelve retail outlets in North America and Europe. The release coincided with promotional campaigns for the upcoming film Jurassic Park, slated for release the following month.
Two children from [REDACTED], Main, Hogarth and Violet Bird, recorded their family's experience with RPC-715 on their film camera and stored the footage in VCR tapes.
Note: What do you mean here? Did you mean today two children from Maine followed by their names? Maybe I’m reading it weirdly. Here is how I’d fix up the sentence.
Change to:
Two minors, identified as Hogarth and Violet Bird of [REDACTED], Maine, documented their family's experience with RPC-715 using a personal film camera. The resulting footage was stored on multiple VHS tapes.
(Interview)
Hogarth: Clears throat Boys n' girls, I present to you: Real dinosaurs!
Change to:
Hogarth: [Clears throat] Boys and girls, I present to you: real dinosaurs!
The focus changes to the two children leaning over a bowl. Hogarth rubs his hands together in a conniving manner.
Change to:
Note: Use “//” infront and at the end of the sentence to turn into italics.
Camera focus shifts to the children leaning over a large bowl. Hogarth is seen rubbing his hands together in a theatrical manner.
Hogarth picks up the camera and changes its focus to the table. An infant RPC-715-A instance is floating in the water while other instances begin to form.
Change to:
Hogarth repositions the camera toward the table. One infant RPC-715-A instance is seen floating in the water as several more begin to take form.
The RPC-715 material can be seen transforming into organic matter correlating to an RPC-715-A instance.
Change to:
Footage captures the RPC-715 material undergoing rapid transmutation into organic tissue consistent with RPC-715-A classification.
Hogarth: Audible gulp We're gonna need to tell Mom!
Change to:
Hogarth: [Audible gulp] We’re gonna need to tell Mom!
Lucian: Yup. I wake up at midnight to the sound of glass breaking and animals shrieking! As if that weren't bad enough, I go downstairs to see my kids cryin' because of a bunch of dinosaur carcasses and the smallest elephants I've ever seen! What the hell is going on!?!?
Change to:
Lucian: Yup. I wake up ‘round midnight to glass breaking and animals shrieking! Then I go downstairs and see my kids bawling over dead dinosaurs and the tiniest elephants I’ve ever seen! What the hell is going on!?
ACI Agent Benjamin Manning, disguised as a member of the clinic, can be seen leading another patient into the clinic before turning to face the camera.
Change to:
ACI Agent Benjamin Manning, posing as clinic staff, is seen escorting another individual before turning toward the camera.
(Final Part)
Research into the potential uses of RPC-715 has been ongoing since its discovery.
Change to:
Research regarding potential applications of RPC-715 has remained active since initial containment.
The greenhouses and open farms of Site-130 were prone to being infested by invasive flora and fauna, resulting in a 40% decrease in annual crop yields.
Change to:
Greenhouse and open-field facilities at Site-130 experienced chronic infestations of invasive flora and fauna, resulting in a documented 40% reduction in annual agricultural output.
The instances were released into the fields upon reaching maturity, resulting in a significant decrease in the population of invasive species and the use of pesticides in the site.
Change to:
Once matured, the instances were deployed across agricultural zones, leading to a marked decline in both invasive species populations and site-wide pesticide usage.
Because of these examples, many proposals to reclassify RPC-715 as a Utility object were drafted but were rejected due to the resources necessary to train RPC-715-A and the limited availability of RPC-715 proper.
Change to:
As a result of these trials, multiple proposals were submitted advocating for RPC-715’s reclassification as a Utility-class object. All were rejected, citing the high resource cost of training RPC-715-A instances and the limited supply of RPC-715 capsules.
Story
I'm going to be real with you. The story part of this is lacking. Something is definitely missing. Who's making these things? How were they able to distribute these “toys” to people? 300 people purchased them, but from where? A store? How'd these things get to the stores?
You have a story here. Dive more into the mystery. I recommend you have the Authority launch an investigation into the origins of this product. If there is a distributor, are they behind the creation of the product or is it someone else?
Aesthetic Add-On
I recommend you choose an anesthetic theme for your article. Im personally a fan of this one:
[[module css]]
@import
url('http://www.rpc-wiki.net/component:dark-theme/code/1');
[[/module]]
It's called “Dark Theme” and it'll change the look of your draft. You can also look for other themes you like on the Theme Page.
I would also recommend you read some other articles with found footage of similar styles that have styled theirs.
Author Critique
Overall you have an idea that needs expanding. At its current state I'd give it a ⅗ stars. Expand the story more and honestly I think you'll have a great article. I wish you the best of luck in your writing endeavors.
Additionally, I'm sorry for what I did earlier.
First time I look at a draft of this, so excuse me if I repeat something already addressed above.
I presumed these are toy-sized like the real-life capsule counterparts, especially given its alpha-yellow designation. Since it does use the existent irl IP, I like to think the authority opted to covertly produce Magic Capsules the way they are now. That way people who had reported them growing into actual dinosaurs are dismissively thought to have been entertaining their children's imagination.
Image needs a minor edit to the specimen's contour, specifically the tree branch behind it should have a subtle cast shadow along the dinosaur's neck.
I can't comment much on Lopez's bit as I suspect it relies on the 186 connection, which I have not read yet. Even so I don't see the description of it very engaging, whereas it essentially builds up to something strange and mysterious that's just spoiled by confirmation. Maybe I do need to read 186 to get the full effect of this interview but I can't see what it adds to that article here either.
Second collapsible is bit dry; It's alright. It lacks a bit of flair from already cool ideas like dino pest control but it's a bit basic in just stating they occur without much comment on what this implicates (aside from logistics).
It has potential but as it stands it's still worth 3 stars.
and will
remove will
related lieforms
lifeforms
Epoch.The
Interestingly,
Notably
future - y'know the one.
Redundant phrasing when it is already the topic at hand.
Because of these examples, many proposals to reclassify RPC-715 as a Utility object were drafted but were rejected due to the resources necessary to train RPC-715-A and the limited availability of RPC-715 proper.
Try:
Several proposals to reclassify RPC-715 as a Utility object were drafted but were ultimately rejected upon review due to the logistical issues pertaining to vetting and limited availability of RPC-715.
Sharing my thoughts overall, there isn't anything that I can think of that others haven't been brought up in line by line crits.
I think that the incident in 1993 should've bump the containment rating up to beta, if not that then the fact that the InstaDino packages can be picked up at certain public events justifies it.
I think there is a lot of open ended potential with the concept, while the prehistoric are domesticated, they aren't inherently harmless, and I think the potential to show that they can cause harm in not handled well could've been explored without detracting from the wondrous tone. I like the interview at the factory, it gives a view into one of the many potential avenues Amazing!Co takes to manufacture, and distribute their products. It leans more into the sinister side of things, given what it stated in 186's article, and any means of linking articles to one another is something I'm personally fond of.
This article is like an open letter, and what I mean by that is it's something that has the capacity to be inserted into a wide variety of situations, in either articles or tales, and because of that it might not be everyone's thing, but I think that works as a strength of the article. There's enough of a foundation for it to stand on its own, while leaving a lot for others to build off of it. I'm bias, because I can't say no to dinosaurs, but I do genuinely like this article for how it handles its concept, and still managing to have tie back into the larger world.
/forum/t-17131016/easy-bake-dinos#post-