Jump to content

Talk:Jetpac Refuelled/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: AdrianGamer (talk · contribs) 07:50, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]


  • There is different types of shooters out there. What kind of "shooters" Refuelled is?
  • The game is the fourth and final instalment of the Jetman series and is a remake of Rare's 1983 ZX Spectrum game, Jetpac. - the second "is" is not necessary.
  • the game follows Jetman as attempts to rebuild - as "he" attempts
  • first leaked on Unterhaltungssoftware Selbstkontrolle - where it was leaked is not something for the lead.
  • Rare took care to ensure that the game did not feel too similar to the original Jetpac, - Instead of "took care", "attempted" sounds more appropriate
  • Critics praised the updated graphics and addictive gameplay, however they criticised the overall repetitiveness of the game and its mediocre multiplayer mode. - I do not think these adjectives should really be used here. It is something for the reception section, not the lead
  • Who are you playing as actually. Jetman?
  • The game is a remake on the original Jetpac - remake "of"
  • his rocket (which spawns in segments scattered around the map - Do not really need to use bracket here. "Spawn in segments" sounds weird to me. Does this means that players collect parts of the rocket throughout a level before assembling it into a rocket? Instead of the map, it should be "a map". I assume Jetman needs to find parts in every single map.
  • and then fill it with fuel - "fills"
  • For people that don't know what Jetman is, a setting section before the gameplay section would be great.
  • A setting section? Jetman (unitalicised) is the player-character of all the games in the Jetman series. I've made it clearer in the gameplay section that Jetman is the playable protagonist, but other than that there is no 'plot' in this game (as it is a remake of the 1983 original), and there was barely any plot in the other games. I don't think there would be enough content for its own section, so should I just expand the gameplay section? JAGUAR  14:22, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • In addition, the player-character has to defend him or herself from each planet's hostile aliens - Who is "the player-character". The player? "Him or herself" should be replaced by simply "Jetman"
  • The GameSpot review has some detailed information that you may wanted to add to the article. Something like "two" upper pieces of the rocket, "six" fuel boxes. The VideoGamer review told me that you can upgrade weapons as well.
  • Some basic information, things that are obvious to you and me but not general readers, were left behind in the gameplay section, such as it being a shooter, and Jetman having a jet boost. What weapons (besides rockets), and movements system are featured in the game? How players use the boost?
  • consists of six platforms which Jetman can manoeuvre onto and the part about unlimited lives are not mentioned by the source given.
  • The IGN review makes mention of various platforms in every level, but the actual number is always six in the game. MundoRare's review states that there are unlimited lives in multiplayer, but since it's a fan site I didn't use it in this article so I've removed the statement about unlimited lives in the gameplay section JAGUAR  14:48, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • In this mode, the player has to compete one-on-one in a race to build and refuel their craft before their opponent does. This sounds like a competitive mode more than a co-operative mode. Something is needed to be added here so that the point of "players working together" can be highlighted.
  • shooting them out of their hand - a bit confusing.
  • Items can be stolen from opponents - What items. The article has never mentioned that you can get items in this game.
  • with overhauled high-definition graphics - Should cite this using the VideoGamer.com review source. It is directly cited.
  • I personally feel like there should be more information on the game's development.
  • I wish I could expand, but I think I exhausted the only two sources I could find on the game's development. The Next Gen overview was only two paragraphs long and even though the Rare Gamer interview was crucial, half of it was filled with useless questions! I'll see what I can do with putting in a bit about Rare Replay, though JAGUAR  15:01, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • The team went to extra lengths to keep the original core mechanics of the Jetpac - not sure why you need "went to extra lengths".
  • owing to size constraints and the need to support the game on all Xbox 360 titles - can be more specific. "small" size constraint? I do not understand "the need to support the game on all Xbox 360 titles" as well.
  • I see why it sounded confusing. I threw "the need to support the game on all Xbox 360 titles" out of the window and rephrased the sentence so it's now going by on what the source said. JAGUAR  18:50, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • in what was called a “clean room” test. - Then what was a "clean room" call?
  • The reception section looks really neat, though it can be benefited from some expansion. I am satisfied with its current length though.
  • I think you can use the adjectives I mentioned before after listing all the scores, so as to give a broad view to readers what critics like and dislike. After that, you can split a new paragraph for the visual style style.
  • The reception on graphics are broadly mentioned in the first paragraph? Which part did you mean?
  • The Rare Replay part can be put into the development section. More information on that would be nice.
  • Would be great if you can wikilink the website/magazine linked in the work and publisher fields of citations.

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:
    B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list corporation:
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. Has an appropriate reference section:
    B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:
    C. No original research:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects:
    B. Focused:
  4. Is it neutral?
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. Is it stable?
    No edit wars, etc:
  6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
    A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
    B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:

It is a well-written article. Some information is missed, and some need additional citations. When the issues I raised above are addressed the article should be good to go! AdrianGamer (talk) 13:24, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@AdrianGamer: thanks for the review! I have addressed all of your concerns except the part where you mentioned I could split a new paragraph for the visual style, which I didn't quite understand? Other than that I think I've clarified everything. I hate to disappoint but I've done everything I could with the development section, although I love writing them when I have the full information. Sometimes that sort of information is hard to come by, especially with small projects like these. JAGUAR  18:50, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
For the reception part, I was hoping that after listing all the scores, you can mention what the reviewers like and dislike. Something like an introduction paragraph, such as "Reviewers liked the game's updated graphics and combat, but disliked the game's repetitive nature". Then start a new paragraph about how reviewers feel about the game's visual style. For the setting part I would like to see the motivation and purpose behind Jetman. However, I do think that the article meets the status even without the implementation of these suggestions. Jetpac Refuelled is now a good article. Congratulations! AdrianGamer (talk) 08:45, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I see what you mean! I've added a short intro in the reception section (using the previous adjectives in the lead). There was a bit about how Jetman was created in the development section of the NES game, but seeing as this is a remake of the first game I didn't add it in, which I regret doing. Thanks again for the review, we're slowly getting there with Rare Replay now. JAGUAR  14:35, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Jetpac_Refuelled/GA1&oldid=1085915432"