joshdex

Which, ironically and disturbingly, was when Lord Recluse walked out of the bathroom, asking Grandma why she didn't wake him up if they had company.

If I am a winner, I permit NC Interactive, Inc. and NCsoft Europe Limited to use my name, likeness, photograph, hometown, and any comments that I may make about myself or this contest that I provide for advertising and promotional activities. I also certify that I am at least 13 years of age and am eligible to participate in this contest.

Or as they called it in Praetoria, community college.

If I am a winner, I permit NC Interactive, Inc. and NCsoft Europe Limited to use my name, likeness, photograph, hometown, and any comments that I may make about myself or this contest that I provide for advertising and promotional activities. I also certify that I am at least 13 years of age and am eligible to participate in this contest.

He was sure he'd convince her this time as he had brought along a very special advocate - Max the super powered puppy, who he'd taught to speak!


- J

If I am a winner, I permit NC Interactive, Inc. and NCsoft Europe Limited to use my name, likeness, photograph, hometown, and any comments that I may make about myself or this contest that I provide for advertising and promotional activities. I also certify that I am at least 13 years of age and am eligible to participate in this contest.

Bartender: "I don't care who's uncle he is. If he starts singing We didn't Start the Fire again, I'm tossing him out! It' not a holiday song, dang it!"


If I am a winner, I permit NC Interactive, Inc. and NCsoft Europe Limited to use my name, likeness, photograph, hometown, and any comments that I may make about myself or this contest that I provide for advertising and promotional activities. I also certify that I am at least 13 years of age and am eligible to participate in this contest.

Well.. we already have the accolade for that, so I can't envision getting another option for the same thing. Though it would be nice. Maybe a smaller bonus and just enhancements?

I highlighted my favorite part of your reply as it'd give another option for teaming heroes and villains.

Though on the flipside, that'd also be one theoretical less reason for vigilantes and rogues, which I'm not sure is a good thing.

It might not be considered important enough. I quickmarked the Games section so hopefully seeing it every day will remind me to check in for the latest games. (Monday, Wednesday and Friday, I believe?)

Hopefully it'll help remind me to enter these more often.

The thing is, the Screenshot and multimedia games never had a requirement of seven people's worth of can't win's in order to have a shot at having a winner.

The game might not be successful, but I disagree with the statement it's had 3 weeks to win.

No. It had 3 weeks being a the punchline to a bad joke.

The first edition required fifty posts in order to have a winner. That means, 16 people could post to their maximum and it would have still not had a winner.

Do you think any contest would succeed with a stipulation that the first 16 people who post automatically lose?

That said, this particular contest would probably be better off either awarding the prize to the best entry, or if that's too hard, a random entry.

And yes, I do think adding a day might help. How two unrelated contests managed to do in the same time period, I'm not sure matters, because they don't have any minimum amount required.

That looks better.

The problem isn't the game. Any of the other current games would be failing if they also relied on demanding people give up their chances of winning so someone else might possibly have a chance.

The rules to this game are akin to the 'screenshot caption' game saying, "There must be at least eight posts to win. And none of the first eight will be eligible to win."

If possible, this would be the ideal solution. That *and* a significant drop to the number of posts required. Think of the limit and posts required in terms of "What's the bare number of people who would need to give up their chance of winning just to ensure there is a winner?"

And raise the limit of posts per person allowed by at least one.

And optionally, give a courtesy "this does not count against your limit" to the first ohh ten posts or so. (Unless you're replying to yourself, that is.)

Saying we need a different game is silly until this game is at least given a fair chance to succeed.

Fortunately, he had an ace up his sleeve. Of course, having a single playing card wasn't going to do much good, so he decided. He was going to call Max, a German Shepherd puppy with superpowers and the star of last week's Tell a story contest!

Of course, you're always better off waiting and letting someone else do the hard work, then trying to post three times in the last few minutes if there's enough entries. I am not sure if that's why people aren't posting or if they're just not that into it.

I'd have posted except I forgot about the contest altogether.

Good first step. Thank you for making this change.

At least this'll make it possible to win with 7 people minimum. (Although six of them would basically have to pose just to lose.)

It would be a little more palatable of the limit was 4 instead of three, though, if this isn't asking too much.

J/ Wilde

I only got mine a few weeks ago. I'm seriously regretting it now, as I could have gotten the whole pack for 100 points cheaper.

I think I am going to stop buying things not on sale from now on!

This's one of my favorite ideas I've seen here - but I don't see it working as a repeated purchase at all. I could see them releasing new sets and charging individually for them. But not in the sense of "Here's shag carpet. Pay a quarter every time you place it in a room!"

I guess it could work but I'd expect more negative feedback than purchases. Nevertheless, I hope they do this in some form.

J

Understatement.

Slightly correction. There weren't 9 participants, there were 5 participants who did nine posts. I (myself) did three posts.

I did a little math last night. You want at least fifty before you declare a winner but you tap it out at three entries to person. That means you could have of sixteen players to blow their shot at winning just to get close to the minimum needed for there to be a winner.

If asking for 17 people just to qualify and getting five doesn't change this, I'm not sure why we're doing it. I'm not sure the prestige of winning a costume code carries that much weight.

How I'd do it? Change it either to the one post per minute thing, or lower then requirement by half. AND stipulate the first ten or fifteen entries in thread do not count towards the 3 per entry requirement (which I'd consider raising to 4).

Then you'd only need approximately three people's worth of reaching their cap instead of 17.

Just a thought.
Respectfully submitted, of course.

J/ Wilde

Edit: Then if the thread hits fifty, award another random entry the code and title, maybe? Maybe a forum title for the best entry of the month if it isn't too much work.

And by "arrest," we're not making a double double entendre.

The weird thing? There was some technical writer standing half a block down, recording the entire fight. She looked like some kind of 'weaver of dreams,' or something.

If I am a winner, I permit NC Interactive, Inc. and NCsoft Europe Limited to use my name, likeness, photograph, hometown, and any comments that I may make about myself or this contest that I provide for advertising and promotional activities. I also certify that I am at least 13 years of age and am eligible to participate in this contest.

Of course, being as this is one of the first 49 posts, and the limit is three.. well you do the math.

That's three, I'm out. Goodluck, everyone. (Goodluck getting another 40+ throwaway posts.)

She found it rather annoying how the Outcasts, who'd always ignored her presence in the city, suddenly seeming to sense her newly developed powers, started alternatively attacking her and pestering her about joining them.

Can you blame her? "You should feel the cold fire.. in my pants!" is a horrible pick up line.

If I am a winner, I permit NC Interactive, Inc. and NCsoft Europe Limited to use my name, likeness, photograph, hometown, and any comments that I may make about myself or this contest that I provide for advertising and promotional activities. I also certify that I am at least 13 years of age and am eligible to participate in this contest.

(I'm not gonna win but maybe someone will.)

(PS: Why do the first 49 posts need the disclaimer when the rules make it impossible for them to win?)

If only Crey Industries hadn't influenced the city council to outlaw lunch for superpowered individuals not yet registered with Crey Industries!

If I am a winner, I permit NC Interactive, Inc. and NCsoft Europe Limited to use my name, likeness, photograph, hometown, and any comments that I may make about myself or this contest that I provide for advertising and promotional activities. I also certify that I am at least 13 years of age and am eligible to participate in this contest.

For the record, I totally agree.

Unless they want to reward two prizes for this contest, one for the best contribution and one for being the last poster. Otherwise, the contest requires heavily on contributing late and penalizing you for contributing early - - but if no one contributes early, there is no prize.

I'm kind of curious to see this succeeds, actually.

J

I wonder if this might help: rewarding the prize to the last person with *three* posts in the thread, if there is one. Encourage people to post more than once- but maybe disallow replying to yourself?

Congratulations. I knew I shoulda used an aura for my entry.

I wouldn't go quite as far as to say they 'should' wait a year or more to release it, but I definitely have no problem with it. either.

I was never a big fan of making items exclusive to West Coast conventions, and it always felt a bit out of place for City of Heroes. Doubly so when the pre-order exclusives started coming out as vet rewards.

So I'm, personally, quite happy with the idea of them eventually coming to the store. And if it's not til a year or more later, that's a fair compromise.

J