Jump to content

Talk:Good Job!/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: DocFreeman24 (talk · contribs) 06:49, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Hi there! I'm going to take a look at this in the next few days and evaluate for GA! DocFreeman24 (talk) 06:49, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

DocFreeman24, Thanks! Before you begin, I know the article is short, but honestly, I think I found everything that's reliable out there. Panini 🥪 17:24, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]


GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

Hey @Panini!: here is my review! Pardon the pun but, generally speaking, good job! The review is on hold for now because one of the sources you rely on for a lot of the development section (Nintendo Everything) is considered unreliable by the community per Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Sources. If you can find a replacement source and address the other issues I flag below (which are mostly minor wordsmithing suggestions), then I think I can approve for GA status!

  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
    There were a few points in the article where the prose was hard to follow or a touch confusing. If any of these rub you the wrong way, feel free to say so/reject them as there's definitely some subjective preferences when it comes to word choice. But hopefully they are non-controversial.

Lead

"The developers decided with using minimal design to help appeal to a broader audience."
I would suggest changing "decided with using minimal design" to "decided to use a minimalistic art style" as I think that's what you're trying to say here? Alternatively, can you better explain what you're trying to convey with "minimal design" as it wasn't clear to me.
 Done.

Gameplay

"Upon completing the task, the player is graded on how long it took to complete the level, as well as the money repair costs for damage; there is generally no penalty from the amount of damage done."
This was a touch confusing to me as you say that the player is "graded" based on two things (the time it took and the money repair costs) but then you say there's no penalty for the amount of damage done. Is that statistic just calculated for the sake of it or does it go into the game's evaluation of the player's performance? Perhaps you can clarify.
The game suggests that its graded on both criteria, but according to reviewers, damage barely accounts for anything compared to the time it takes. I've clarified a bit more in the text.
 Done.
"The gameplay is broken up into levels, each level being a different floor that covers a different type of business."
Would suggest adding a "with" after "levels" and before "each" and removing comma.
 Done.
"Clothing pieces can be found throughout the level for customizing the character."
Would suggest tweaking to say "Clothing pieces can be found throughout the game that allow the player to customize their character's appearance."
 Done.

Development

"The process of developing new levels initially started with defining the main objective, quickly creating a prototype to determine if it would be enjoyable."
Would suggest adding an "and then" after the comma in this sentence.
"From there, they would consider the multiple ways of completing the task; they would create the level layout and a 'non-destructive' solution, where no damage is necessary. The non-destructive solution was created first, due to it being 'the most difficult thing to get right, level design wise.' After, the 'destructive shortcuts' were created."
These sentences are a somewhat hard to follow. I would sugest reworking to this (assuming its accurate in your view): "From there, the developers would consider the various ways the main objective could be completed, including how the level should be laid out and how the objective could be accomplished without having to destroy anything. This 'non-destructive solution' was created first, due to it being 'the most difficult thing to get right, level design wise.' Afterwards, 'destructive shortcuts' were created that allowed for faster or more creative solutions."
"The character design and minimal art style was decided upon from the beginning."
Should be "were" there instead of "was" since its two items that were decided upon at the beginning.
@DocFreeman24: This section has been deemed non-usable by us, so this section is gonna be blown up and rewritten with the new source. I'll need you re-evaluation once this is done!
@DocFreeman24: Finished, so needs a re-evaluation. It might be a little rough in organization after I removed info. Panini🥪 14:24, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Panini!, here's a few final notes on the development section. Once these are done, I'll approve the GA. Thanks for doing such a good job!
  • "For about ten years, Paladin Studios always hoped to partner with Nintendo, as most of the company's developers grew up playing Nintendo games."
I know this was in the earlier version, but can we please reword as it's a bit clunky (e.g., it sounds weird to say that someone had "always hoped" to do something for a specific period of time. Either its "always" or its a period of time). Here's my suggested rework: "Most of Paladin Studio's developers had grown up playing Nintendo games and the studio had always hoped that it would have the opportunity to partner with them."
  •  Done.
  • "as well as simple controls"
This doesn't really fit the sentence. Perhaps change to "as well as one that had simple controls"?.
  • Hey, grammar. I did a good job on this and definitely checked twice.
  •  Done.
  • "They decided to use an office theme due to it being easily recognizable and allowed for more surprising approaches to simple tasks."
Suggested rework as the "allowed" clause doesn't fit in this sentence structure: "They decided to set the game in an office setting, as it was easily recognizable and would allow players to use common objects in surprising ways."
  • ctrl c ctrl v
     Done.
  • "They liked the imbalance of a common setting with destructive actions."
The source (as read via machine translation) uses the word contrast and that seems to better fit the subject than "imbalance." So maybe something like "The developers came to appreciate the contrast between the mundane office setting and the chaotic, destructive gameplay."
  •  Done.
  • "To learn about themselves, both companies wrote personal biographies about who they are and how they work."
The IGN source doesn't support this as far as I can tell, so it needs to be removed, unfortunately.
  • I could've sworn it was in the gamer.nl source.
     Done.
  • "Due to both companies being in different parts of the world, it helped further their intentions of being enjoyable by a larger group of players. Although both companies had similar ideas, they sometimes had conflicting opinions on the office setting, as certain parts of a typical building were different in the two countries."
This is an awkward sentence and also not very well supported by the IGN source. Suggested rework: "The nationalities of each studio also played a role in the development, with both studios providing feedback into how their respective home markets would experience the game."
  • There's actually a hidden second interview, one from gamer.nl. They got an answer back that is explained in this source.
  • "Due to the game revolving around physics, play testers enjoyable to search for hidden bugs."
I think this is a typo, shouldn't it be "play testers enjoyed searching for hidden bugs."?
  •  Done.

Reception

"with Nintendo Life noting how its results in good replayability"
Small typo as I think it should be "it" instead of "its"
 Done.
"Some like the amount of physical objects"
I would suggest changing to past tense here ("liked") to match the tense used in the rest of the section.
Sometimes I just forget about the tensing.

" Done.

"Eurogamer reviewer Christian Donlan praised the rising complexity of each level, saying how it fit well."
Can you make this sentence a bit clearer? The "it fit well" part doesn't make sense to me. What fit well? And what was it fitting with?
For some reason, my brain had trouble saying "levels got harder" at that time.
 Done.
"Siliconera like the simplistic graphics, calling them colorful and abstracted."
I would suggest changing to past tense here ("liked") along the lines of my other comment above. Also, I would suggest changing "abstracted" to "abstract" as I think it flows more naturally in the sentence structure here as opposed to the sentence structure in the source.
I think this time it was just a typo.

 Done.

"Donlan was fond of how certain tasks are exaggerated, such as oversized photocopiers, and it made him want to smash it through the wall willingly."
I would suggest re-working this sentence as follows to make it easier to follow and to better match nouns and verbs: "Donlan was fond of how certain tasks are exaggerated, such as making it extremely difficult to move an oversized photocopier through a doorway, which increased his desire to smash it through a wall instead."
 Done
"Due to the game releasing during the COVID-19 pandemic, reviewers found it enjoying having fun in an office space, something that they had a lack of during quarantine."
Small typo and I would suggest reworking the sentence this way: "Due to the game releasing during the COVID-19 pandemic, reviewers found it enjoyable to play around in an office space, something that they had missed during quarantine."
I would also remove the citation to the Polygon review here as I don't think it supports the proposition?
A misinterpretation of their first paragraph.
 Done.
  1. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
    As mentioned in my overall comment, Nintendo Everything is unfortunately not considered a reliable source by the community per Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Sources. So you'll need to find a replacement source for those sections.
Additionally the link to the Kotaku review is broken. So please fix that as well.
 Done.
  1. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
    Could you please add a sentence or two regarding how multiplayer works in the Gameplay section? You mention it very briefly but the reader is not told how it works and it comes up in the Reception section as a criticism.
Although there isn't much to say about it, due to the fact that there's just another player, I put some more info.
 Done.
  1. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  2. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  3. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  4. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
    On hold for now in the hopes that a replacement source can be found for the development section.

DocFreeman24 (talk) 02:56, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

DocFreeman24, Before I begin...
I wish I could replace the Nintendo Everything source, but I can't. This is an exclusive interview for a game that went under the radar, as in not many sources are talking about this in general. After a brief discussion here, the consensus was "fine, I guess", due to the interview leaning towards the primary source side. I've seen Sergecross73 (now summoned to this discussion, hopefully) mention before that this could be used with caution, and only should be used if the content cannot be replicated elsewhere. Other than one Dutch reference about dealing with different timezones, this is the only source on development I could find. I would like their opinion on this issue before I begin. Panini🥪 03:15, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'm short on time at the moment but will look into things tomorrow. I'm intrigued by this game in general so I'll try to dig into things some. Sergecross73 msg me 03:25, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Panini!, if there's a consensus that this article is reliable, then I certainly won't be the hold-up here.
That said, there have been four separate discussions regarding Nintendo Everything over the last few years, and each time the issue was raised the consensus was that Nintendo Everything was not a reliable source. And I can see why that conclusion was reached. Looking at their website, there's really very little information about who is running the site, what standards are being applied, whether there is any sort of quality or fact-checking, etc. Looking at the latest top posts, nearly all are written by a "Brian" and no information other than his Twitter page is available as far as I can tell. In this respect, it's difficult to tell how Nintendo Everything differs from a user-generated blog.
So, bottom line, if you can demonstrate that there's consensus for deeming this article reliable, I'll certainly respect that and approve the GA. But I don't feel comfortable making that call on my own given the prior discussions and its inclusion on the unreliable sources list. While I appreciate the talk page discussion you supplied, I don't think it really demonstrates consensus on this, in particular given ImaginesTigers's point about potentially needing to remove this article for GA. DocFreeman24 (talk) 04:11, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
DocFreeman24, Previous discussions (from what I see) about this only really mention their video game reviews, and is never included because they never have anything unique to say. This is different in my opinion, as it actually is unique, across the internet. I'll wait for Sergecross. Panini🥪 11:31, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
So here's my thoughts on the matter.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Good_Job!/GA1&oldid=1002869182"