Win! Xbox 360 Elite console and Blur

[Mighty_n00b]

yeah, i guess you could blow the **** out of everyone else or get super speed

or, you can shoot fire out of every side of your car!

Smokingshoots a wall of fire in a ring around your car, that protects you from attacks and also burns the other cars to a cinder, and throwing them backwards, putting you so far in front that there is no way that you can lose!

[Breet]

Timewarp: can be used on self or target vehicle.

Target (Offensive): Surrounds car in a 'time dilation bubble' effectively slowing down time for the driver. Collisions made with target will extend the bubble to incorporate both objects. (4-5x slow)
View from effected driver: Passing vehicles are a blur of colour.
View to everyone else: Vehicle traveling super slow.


Self (Buff): encases the car in a 'time dilation bubble' effectively increasing the rate of which time flows inside the bubble. Due to the nature of accelerated time, collisions with objects will not extend the bubble but rather sheer off the accelerated section of collided object from its remaining mass outside bubble (4-5x speed up)
View from driver buffed: Everyone around traveling at slow speeds.
View to everyone else: A blur of colour going by.


edit: 360 =o

[rayhay]

edit: i'd prefer xbox 360

[GoTHic SaMurai]

The Simon Hackett

The icon would be a bloke hugging a tree ... basically the power up changes your car into Simon Hackett's Tesla Roadster. Sure you might not win the race, but one of the key points in blur is to get fan approval. This power up gives you + 10,000 fans for being eco friendly to the planet.

[Max]

5. Only one entry per person is permitted for the Promotion.

7. Subject to other limitations set out in these terms and conditions, to enter and be eligible to win, eligible entrants must: Create your very own Blur power-up. You can write about it, create a new logo, make an animation - whatever you want. It must be posted in the comment section of this post.

Can I please get clarification that people that have submitted more than 1 powerup in 1 post is considered as multiple entries?

[leoman]

I think the posts here it has ended up being faster to just put all the concepts into one post. Thats what I did. Opps... so many have others have done it now that I guess you just treat the whole post as one entry and pick a skill that takes ya fancy and thats the winner.

[taintedfeather]

I think the posts here it has ended up being faster to just put all the concepts into one post. Thats what I did. Opps... so many have others have done it now that I guess you just treat the whole post as one entry and pick a skill that takes ya fancy and thats the winner.

But that's hardly fair. Someone who's posted more than one concept means they have a better chance of winning, as, if one skill doesn't please the judge(s), then the second, or even the third, might. That means these people get two to three chances at winning, whilst others only get one. And just because several people broke the rules by posting more than one concept doesn't justify that it should be acceptable.

As with Max, I think that competition was very explicit in its rules, and in addition to this, several of initial posts also only posted ONE skill concept, so people shouldn't have had any reason to post more than one anyways.

[Mugsy]

I suspect the confusion is whether 1 entry is considered to be 1 concept or 1 post.

IMHO, the purposive approach to statutory interpretation seems highly appropriate to use here in that the purpose behind the entry rule:

5. Only one entry per person is permitted for the Promotion.

was to keep the competition fair so that everyone has the same chance of winning with only their skill determining if they were better.

Under most situations like these, usually those who don't follow the terms and conditions are immediately disqualified.

I think this was the case with the PS3 Lost Planet 2 comp in that someone has posted over the word limit and wasn't counted (else they would have won).

[taintedfeather]

IMHO, the purposive approach to statutory interpretation seems highly appropriate to use here in that the purpose behind the entry rule:

was to keep the competition fair so that everyone has the same chance of winning with only their skill determining if they were better.

Not that I disagree with your central argument, but I don't think the purposive approach is the correct approach to use in this case. It would be better to use the literal approach i.e.

7. Subject to other limitations set out in these terms and conditions, to enter and be eligible to win, eligible entrants must: Create your very own Blur power-up. You can write about it, create a new logo, make an animation - whatever you want. It must be posted in the comment section of this post.

As the rules clearly state "Blur power-up" and "You can write about it" it indicates that you must give a singular response, not a plural one since it doesn't state "power ups" or "write about them." If you use the purposive approach, a lawyer could argue in trial the definition of "entry" and state that it was a single entry, and just because his client had greater capacity to create more than one power up in his (singular) entry, he should be able eligible to compete. This is why the purposive approach fails sometimes, but then again, this is more about contract law than statutory interpretation.

Since one party did not fulfill their share of the contract to the written terms, the contract is void, and the party becomes ineligible.

[Bennett Ring]

We've been blown away once again by the impeccable quality of the entries in our recent Blur competition. We're about to pick the winners, but before we do so we need every entrant to edit their post and let us know which platform they'd prefer - PS3 or 360. We'll give everybody a day to do so - thanks for your assistance! In the meantime, we're heading off to play some more of the Blur review code that arrived last night...

[Mugsy]

If you use the purposive approach, a lawyer could argue in trial the definition of "entry" and state that it was a single entry, and just because his client had greater capacity to create more than one power up in his (singular) entry, he should be able eligible to compete. This is why the purposive approach fails sometimes, but then again, this is more about contract law than statutory interpretation.

I'll remember that one... only ever took one law subject in my studies (for my Project Management degree) so I'm by no means a pro at it but I'm always looking to improve my understanding (or relearn something I've probably forgotten). Agree that this is probably more about contract law.

[RamjetR]

When this powerup is collected and activated... your car dispenses BACON out of the back thus caused an oily grease deposit on the road and an obstacle which others must make emergancy maneuveres to avoid!!!!

Push Button = Receive Bacon!

XBOX360 (or PC if you have one... that'd be nice)

hmmmmmm bacon....

[GlenGrainger]

Sonic Pulse.

With this powerup it causes a sonic pulse to run through your cars electricial system, your car gets double horsepower and speed, but your opponents get their horsepower and speed decreased, all this lasts for 15 seconds before returning to normal.

Would like Ps3 version.

[Yurtles]

It must be posted in the comment section of this post by 11:59pm, 25th May, 2010.

Competition has closed guys

[taintedfeather]

If you use the purposive approach, a lawyer could argue in trial the definition of "entry" and state that it was a single entry, and just because his client had greater capacity to create more than one power up in his (singular) entry, he should be able eligible to compete. This is why the purposive approach fails sometimes, but then again, this is more about contract law than statutory interpretation.

I'll remember that one... only ever took one law subject in my studies (for my Project Management degree) so I'm by no means a pro at it but I'm always looking to improve my understanding (or relearn something I've probably forgotten). Agree that this is probably more about contract law.

Project management sounds great. I'm doing Law/Arts, so I'm tempted to do a unit in video gaming. You never know when game developers might need a legal practitioner - especially with all the piracy going on now...

Also, I hate to sound naive, but is a project manager's role similar to that in The Apprentice (the t.v series)?