Jason Freeman
Competition Judge
Long Island Iced Free
Posts: 3,271
|
Post by Jason Freeman on Dec 12, 2009 21:52:03 GMT -5
I dont like the idea of starting over. I like the rest of it, but dont want to abandon the history. It should be seen as a new chapter, not a restart. I dont want to ruin all the history people have spent years building up. I dont want to turn ACW into a different company, rather shake ACW up. It's still ACW. And anyways the history is important. I dont know how would people such as Senator and AK feel about all the storylines they've done being completely erased from history? That is an idea I just cant support. New title history? New titles? New staff? New show name? Sure. But I cant support getting rid of ACW.
|
|
|
Post by worldbreaker on Dec 12, 2009 21:59:43 GMT -5
[dm]xy1en_guns-n-roses-garden-of-eden_music[/dm]
|
|
|
Post by Jack Jefferson on Dec 12, 2009 21:59:52 GMT -5
I'm not saying to erase ACW because all the history would go into it, I was saying a change of name would explain why the titles were vacated. Although I suppose you could run the storyline where ACW goes under the same way but have them buy the name rights as well as the roster contracts.
|
|
Jason Freeman
Competition Judge
Long Island Iced Free
Posts: 3,271
|
Post by Jason Freeman on Dec 12, 2009 22:09:02 GMT -5
Yes I like the story where ACW goes under, in fact I proposed the same thing in chat, saying ACW goes under going bankrupt and new management comes in, which could explain all the changes in titles, staff members, etc, all I ask is that we continue to be ACW. The company is shaken up, but is still ACW, all the history remains, EVERYTHING. Anything else can change but it remains ACW.
And TK
A. Garden of Eden is like one of the worst GnR songs <_< B. ENOUGH ABOUT SLA >_>
|
|
|
Post by worldbreaker on Dec 12, 2009 22:18:08 GMT -5
A. Garden of Eden is like one of the worst GnR songs <_< B. ENOUGH ABOUT SLA >_> A. Your opinion is not greater than mine. B. HELL NO, WE WON'T GO!
|
|
|
Post by Kim Jong CP on Dec 12, 2009 22:31:08 GMT -5
I still think it's a straight fuckin' brill idea.
|
|
|
Post by worldbreaker on Dec 12, 2009 22:38:04 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Kim Jong CP on Dec 12, 2009 23:07:09 GMT -5
If everyone CP mentioned contributes that would be a great roster, but trust me...keep everyone together. A split into two companies could easily spell the end of ACW. Sure, it might give a competition element where the people on each show try to outdo each other but fuck that noise, make the show as great as it can be together, not against each other. Thing is, that'd just be in character. The split shouldn't end ACW in fact it should enhance it because it's something new, it's something fresh, it's something...out there. Quintessentially, the fed would be the exact same and if you want to work with someone that's fine, there's cross brand shows that that can happen with. Ultimately what it does however is allow things to be a bit more streamlined. As opposed to twelve feud marathons were feuds like Panthers and Wheelers from last month would get lost amongst Jefferson vs. Shadow, TK vs. Senator, London vs. DJ Blaze etc. those could be pushed as the second feud best feud on the show that won't happen with a big show. Also, two companies means two shows, on two dates which ultimately means two chats, two sets of dialogue, two sets of in-character interaction, and adds another massive story to write on, it's something extra. You don't really change ACW, all you do is add to it and can that really hurt...worst comes to worse Ginger comes back and re-unites the fed if it fails but is it not worth the college try?
|
|
Jason Freeman
Competition Judge
Long Island Iced Free
Posts: 3,271
|
Post by Jason Freeman on Dec 12, 2009 23:12:07 GMT -5
Im against it, but either way lets drop it for now, and focus on actually getting ONE good show, and then debate this later on
|
|
|
Post by worldbreaker on Dec 12, 2009 23:14:50 GMT -5
You know what I like? I like that we dwell on all this "history" and the lot, but when it comes down to it, a huge chunk of that "history" is no longer with us and no longer cares. What this place needs is enthusiasm.
Guess what? Writing MORE when nobody reads anything just means more people are wasting their time.
You need to MAKE people WANT to read what is going on. It's that simple. You do that, you increase participation. For those of you just saying, "we want people to write more," it's not going to change a damn thing. You need to change the backdrop. I hate to tell you guys this, but if you take a look at some of the other feds out there, they kick ACW's ass in presentation.
|
|
|
Post by Adrian Flamingo on Dec 12, 2009 23:17:31 GMT -5
TK's right, there needs to be more hype, more sizzle. The board could use a re-design, the site could use a redesign, and we need to blow something up.
All of the history in the world won't do ACW any good if we don't try to make our own history in the progress.
|
|
|
Post by Kim Jong CP on Dec 12, 2009 23:18:41 GMT -5
TK's right, there needs to be more hype, more sizzle. The board could use a re-design, the site could use a redesign, and we need to blow something up. All of the history in the world won't do ACW any good if we don't try to make our own history in the progress. More and more I grow to love this man!!!
|
|
|
Post by Bre Dubs on Dec 13, 2009 2:02:26 GMT -5
I don't really see why you'd change the name unless it was ACW 2.0 or something. ACW needs to change the way it operates. A big storyline is fun and all BUT YOU NEED PEOPLE TO WRITE IT.
Same goes with new NPC's, who's going to write all the new bios, come up with the new characters? that is EXTRA UNNECESSARY WORK. Those are the kind of changes you make when you have so many people writing that they just can't stop and they come up with an entire set of NPC's for example. BOTTOM LINE: How are new NPC's going to make you want to write more with YOUR character?
You guys have some positive energy going, but why don't you put that into your characters first?
ACW can use a little sprucing up, can use a change in terms of its operation, and a storyline re-birth is cool, but you wanna put the first things first.
|
|
|
Post by Jack Jefferson on Dec 13, 2009 2:09:56 GMT -5
Well as far as bios for NPCs I would actually suggest we but down what we have to a select list that would include: Edison McNally RAF Charlotte Kevin Anderson RAF
and bios? They wouldn't need to be too long, and I'd be willing to work on them if need be. The reason I suggested it is because it'll help show continuity in my opinion. There's solid bases there for all the characters I suggested but a little more detail would be a nice addition.
|
|
|
Post by Kim Jong CP on Dec 13, 2009 2:11:15 GMT -5
I don't really see why you'd change the name unless it was ACW 2.0 or something. ACW needs to change the way it operates. A big storyline is fun and all BUT YOU NEED PEOPLE TO WRITE IT. Same goes with new NPC's, who's going to write all the new bios, come up with the new characters? that is EXTRA UNNECESSARY WORK. Those are the kind of changes you make when you have so many people writing that they just can't stop and they come up with an entire set of NPC's for example. BOTTOM LINE: How are new NPC's going to make you want to write more with YOUR character? You guys have some positive energy going, but why don't you put that into your characters first? ACW can use a little sprucing up, can use a change in terms of its operation, and a storyline re-birth is cool, but you wanna put the first things first. Ultimately that's what we're trying to address though, but it's easier to write when you're having more fun and something is right there to right about. That's the point of a fed wide story, that'd be the point of new NPC's, to get people more involved, to not make it our father's e-fed but our e-fed, something we're creating not inheriting, something to call our own. It's more fun doing something for yourself that you created than pilfering off of what occured five years ago.
|
|