This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game articles
The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:
Iwasaki, Hiromasa (May 9, 2010). "1989年 - ハドソンで作られていたゲームについて: ニュートピア" [1989-About the game made in Hudson - Neutopia]. Colorful Pieces of Game (in Japanese). High Risk Revolution. Archived from the original on 2013-01-13. Retrieved 2021-06-12.
I just added a stubby plot summary that may need to be expanded within reason. I'm a little disturbed by the fact that the list of similarities is longer than the gameplay and plot summary sections combined. I'm gonna try to change that. Larrythefunkyferret00:15, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I figured the article is up to a decent size and is fairly broad in coverage, plus everything is currently sourced. Nobody has responded to the peer review in almost a month. –MuZemike22:04, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Prose is fine, save for one line: "Jazeta has a life meter, which increases by one edit every time the player collects a medallion or finding a monk throughout the spheres". For one, I assume that "edit" is either a typo or something not explained to the reader. And the "or finding" portion of the text sounds like it's missing a word to make it work right. Additionally, I feel that the Plot section should be moved above Gameplay; this allows us to not have to explain who the characters are in the Gameplay section. Also, in respect to the Reception section, opinions made should be cited to the original author, instead of the site (or if the author isn't available, use something such as "an editor for [website] said". - New Age Retro Hippie(talk)(contributions)22:42, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Defunct Games is an independent video game journalism website (i.e. they're basically like IGN, GameSpot, etc. but without all the corporate backing and other big-money BS). Their description is here (with more information on the people whom they look for in their "help wanted" section, which explains their video game journalism, reviews, podcasts, editorial standards, etc. –MuZemike19:38, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
My only concern with the images is that they link directly to the source; I was once told that they should link to the page that they are used on, to illustrate their use by the site owner. However, that could have changed, so what do I know? :v - New Age Retro Hippie(talk)(contributions)22:42, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Just as a note, I'm going to let it pass once the other issues I'm about to read are dealt with, with or without Defunct Games, on the condition that it be removed if determined unreliable for use. However, three little issues: one, the PS Nation blog doesn't seem to be very significant, and should be replaced with something more reliable; two, there's a URL without proper formatting; and three, Neutopia II should be mentioned in the article. - New Age Retro Hippie(talk)(contributions)21:44, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry about the delay, as I forgot the GAN, and the review fell off my watchlist. Anyways, #3 is corrected. However, two questions for the others:
Would GameZoneGameZone be an OK replacement for that PS Nation source?
I couldn't find the URL that lacked formatting, after scanning through. Could you point out the one that needs it?
Sorry, had to renege on that one source, as it didn't have anything on release dates. Instead, I included the release date from the Japanese PlayStation site with regards to the Japanese release date, and IGN for the North American release date; I also put in one more small thing, saying that it was released with several other TurboGrafx-16 games by Hudson Soft. –MuZemike20:32, 4 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):