Talk:Max Payne 2: The Fall of Max Payne/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
I am reviewing this article for GA and will be entering my comments below. My initial comments follow. —Mattisse (Talk) 22:46, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"who later tries to kill Mona because she is a fugitive and had stumbled upon secrets that were not meant for her to know. However, Max kills Winterson before she can kill Mona, and together they set out to resolve a conspiracy of death and betrayal" - a little ambiguous - Max kills Winterson first, and he and Mona set out... or some wording you like.
"Video game critics gave Max Payne 2 generally favorable reviews" - is it mixed reviews, considering your next statement? Then you could leave out "Despite the positive reception"
"Gameplay" - this section is very confusing for someone who does not know the game e.g.

"the artificial intelligence will decrease" - this is bad, I take it, so the artifical intelligence is an obstacle?
"while more health in the form of painkillers will be available" - bad health is an obstacle?

"Plot" section - It is not clear to me how a long, detailed plot, like a movie plot, fits with a video game, nor with the elements mentioned under the "Gameplay" section.
"Development" section - some of this section would be more helpful in the gamplay or plot section.

eg "The story, sometimes told through in-game dialogue, is also pushed forward with graphic novel panels that play during cut scenes.
"When using graphic novel panels, it was up to the player to interpret each panel."

"Reception" section

Some if this seems POV such as "a near-perfect game" and "lauded".
"Despite positive reactions, the game had several issues that were brought up in reviews" - I am not clear if the reviews were generally positive. However, the impression is given that they were, but then there are listed disappointments and complaints.

It would help if you could refer me to another video game article (preferably FA or GA on the same type of video game as this one is. I looked around but could not find a third person shooter video game. If I knew what this article was aiming for, I could figure out what the problem is that I do not understand how this works.

—Mattisse (Talk) 22:46, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Here's an FA video game that I worked on: Metroid Prime 3: Corruption. Metacritic says that the game received "generally favorable reviews", which is where I get the statement from. Video games that have a story have plot sections; the section here is about 450 words, which is smaller than the plot for most films. Those lines in Development are useful in explaining the developers' reasoning behind adding them; I don't think they should be added to Gameplay as they aren't directly related to the gaming aspects of the video game. I don't think it's POV to say that some reviews lauded the game's story; sure, there are probably reviews that say they don't like it, but the paragraph only contains positive things about the story, which is what the paragraph is meant to do. The negative reviews come later. Gary King (talk) 00:23, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that Metroid Prime 3: Corruption is good and much more understandable. Perhaps if you broke this one down in the same way, that would help. The "Gamesplay" section is more general. Compare the opening of that section.

Metroid Prime 3 (Gamesplay):

Metroid Prime 3: Corruption is a first-person action-adventure game. The player controls the protagonist, Samus Aran, using the Wii Remote and Nunchuk devices. The Nunchuk enables the player to perform actions such as moving Samus and locking on to enemies and targets. The Wii Remote allows the player to execute actions such as jumping, aiming, and firing weapons.

Corruption is a large, open-ended game that takes place across several planets, each with regions connected by elevators, rail systems, and bridges. Each region has rooms separated by doors that can be opened when shot with the correct weapon. The gameplay revolves around solving puzzles to uncover secrets, jumping on platforms, and shooting enemies with the help of a "lock-on" mechanism...

Max Payne 2: The Fall of Max Payne (Gamesplay)

Throughout most of the game, the player assumes the role of Max Payne; during several levels, the player plays as Mona Sax to gain a different perspective. When first played, the game only offers one difficulty level that is adjusted on the fly if the player is having trouble defeating enemies. For example, if the character dies too many times, the enemies' artificial intelligence decreases, while more health in the form of painkillers are available. After beating the game once, the remaining difficulty levels are unlocked. Two special game modes are also activated: New York Minute and Dead Man Walking. In New York Minute, the time taken to complete each level is timed, and the player can choose to improve their timed score by attempting the same level again. The Dead Man Walking mode places Max in one of five scenarios, in which he must survive for as long as possible while fighting off endlessly respawning enemies.

The section "Synopsis" with the subsections "Setting" and "Plot" helps a lot also. Comparing the articles, side by side, I see the differences just in sequence in which information is introduced. The reader is given more orientation and direction, with less meaningless (to the general reader) detail. As far as "generally" I would point to Avoid weasel words - examples - fifth from the bottom, regardless of what a review says, unless you want to quote him. Review writers are not necessary goog prose writers by wikipedia standards. Editorial judgment is involved in the use of words. GA would not argue over "lauded" but you might not get that word through FAC. —Mattisse (Talk) 01:45, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I will put this on hold for the time being. —Mattisse (Talk) 00:08, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I have added some more information to the Gameplay section. I don't think that Plot here needs to be broken down, because the backstory isn't very detailed. Currently, the section assumes that the reader has no prior knowledge of the original game. Gary King (talk) 21:07, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Great. It is much much better. Thanks! —Mattisse (Talk) 01:14, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Final GA review (see here for criteria)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): Well written b (MoS): Follows MoS
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): Well referenced b (citations to reliable sources): Sources are reliable c (OR): No OR
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): Sets the context b (focused): Remains focused on subject
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias: NPOV
It is stable.
No edit wars etc.:
It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

Good work. Congratulations! —Mattisse (Talk) 01:14, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]