Talk:Grand Theft Auto V (re-release)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Dom497 (talk · contribs) 02:28, 28 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'll review the article. But I do have one critical question before I start: Why can this article not be merged with the main GTA V article? I don't see the need for two articles about the same thing.--Dom497 (talk) 02:28, 28 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Because it's appropriate to split and use summary style on articles that are growing too big, and I think the main article Grand Theft Auto V meets that. I'd say also that a separate page for the re-release is fine because it meets notability itself (plenty of coverage in reputable sources). CR4ZE (t • c) 03:48, 28 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. :) --Dom497 (talk) 18:29, 28 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Review

"..explore the open world..." - Sounds a bit cheesy to me.

"...increased draw distance, finer texture details, denser traffic, upgraded weather effects, and new wildlife and vegetation." - Copied exactly from the lead. Change it up a bit. :)

"It runs a native 1080p resolution at 30 frames per second on PlayStation 4 and Xbox One: the PC version is 4K resolution compatible." - Shouldn't it be a semi-colon not a colon?

"...the game required extra development time for polish" - Sentence ends abruptly. Do you mean polishing?

The second paragraph in the "Development" section doesn't seem to have anything related to development.

For the third paragraph in "Development", one citation (#10) at the end will do the job.

"Players may configure the camera to personal preference (for example, by making the view toggle to third-person when taking cover)." - Again, doesn't seem like it has to do with development. It also doesn't flow well with the previous sentence... it sounds like a random fact was thrown in.

"...to add more vegetation to "break up the hard edges [and] straight lines" of the open world." - Commas in between quotes.

"The ambient light pollution over nighttime Los Santos may dissipate in poor weather. A dynamic depth of field system sharpens and softens images to emulate camera autofocus. Improved shaders produce new colours in skin and terrain textures." - Rough ending to a paragraph and section. Perhaps a re-word will help.

Link all Publications/Aggregators.

Why is only Game Informer italicized?

Again, commas in between quotes.

For IGN's Dan Stapleton, in the second paragraph you only mention his last name. Then, in the third paragraph you go on to list his full name. His full name should be where the first reference of him is made. Then you can just use his last name for the rest.

@CR4ZE: On hold for 7 days.--Dom497 (talk) 18:42, 30 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Dom497: Thanks for the review. I think your comments on the language in the lead and development are a matter of different personal opinion. "explore the open world" was fine in the main article Grand Theft Auto V which has been through FA, and I don't see any problem with the last few sentences in the Development paragraph. I can reword if you mandate that I do, but I like the concision. Can you clarify what you mean about commas in between quotes? I don't see a problem. Game Informer is italicised because it's the only publication that is print-based. Everything else is done. Cheers. CR4ZE (t • c) 05:54, 3 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@CR4ZE: Sorry for the late reply. Regarding the sentences in the "Development" section, my main issue is that the paragraph ends abruptly as a result of the sentence structures. If you merge that last two sentences by adding an "and" or something like that, it should improve the flow. Regarding the quotes, check out the revision history of the article as I left an example. Also, I'll let "explore the open world" go.--Dom497 (talk) 22:41, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Dom497: I don't think the example you left is correct punctuation. The commas in between quotes break sentence flow, and I can't see anywhere in MOS:QUOTE that suggests they are required. I modified the Development sentence structure as per your suggestion. CR4ZE (t • c) 04:53, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@CR4ZE: I think this might just be differences in Canadian and American grammar. I'll let it go. Pass! --Dom497 (talk) 20:36, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers for that. Just a note, the article does adhere to British English. I'm not sure what the conventions in Canada are—maybe that's why there was confusion. Anyway, thanks for the review. CR4ZE (t • c) 07:37, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]