Talk:Development of Deus Ex/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: ProtoDrake (talk · contribs) 19:57, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'll have a stab at this. Expect a input in a day or two. --ProtoDrake (talk) 19:57, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()

3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()

Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

Generally fine. Just some minor points that need addressing.

"Their text editor would let players could take notes in-game as well." - Poor grammar here.
"He also felt that matrix management structure under which the Dallas art team worked for the project but were not the project's staff hurt the game's progress." - Perhaps "that the matrix management" would work better.
"The game was designed to be "genre-busting"—partly simulation, role-playing game, first-person shooter, and adventure.[5] It's an "immersive simulation" (similar to Ultima Underworld[4]) in that there are no reminders of being in a game, such as interface or backstory.[5] Spector described the player's role-playing in player-character decision-making as developing a "unique alter ego" built from the ramifications of their unique gameplay choices.[5] The game is from the first-person perspective and includes shooting, but there are other non-violent gameplay options. And like an adventure game, Deux Ex is primarily based on a linear narrative story and item collection, though its puzzles are open-ended with many possible solutions and consequences. Ion Storm viewed the game as about "player expression" rather than themselves appearing "clever".[5] They treated the player as a "collaborator" and sought to empower to "make choices and ... deal with the consequences".[5]" - This whole paragraph doesn't read very well: when read out, it sounds more like pieces of promotional material strung together.

That's all I can see there. Fix those issues and it should be okay. --ProtoDrake (talk) 08:07, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@ProtoDrake, thanks for the review. Look good now? czar ♔ 12:46, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Alright. I think this can be considered a Pass. --ProtoDrake (talk) 12:52, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]