Talk:Silhouette Mirage/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Crimsonfox (talk · contribs) 21:50, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Crimsonfox

The reception needs the most work but I don't think the rest of the article is that far off. Here's some things that need doing. CrimsonFox ^talk 21:50, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Images:

Fair use rationale for the screenshot needs clarifying
Stated as high resolution when it's not

Purpose needs to be specific to the article, not generalised like it is currently

Refs:

There's quite a lot of missing information from references, retrieval dates, authors, proper names etc.
Dates need to be correctly formatted, see MOS:Date

Lead:

The lead doesn't cover anything from the story or development and very little from the Saturn versions reception
Too in depth regarding gameplay mechanics, keep it high level and try to avoid using game specific terms. See Ikaruga for some inspiration.

Gameplay:

"Since getting on the correct side of an enemy is an integral part of gameplay, Shyna is capable of grappling, throwing and sliding, all of which can be used to get an enemy on the correct side so they can be damaged with the corresponding (opposite) attribute attack. These melee attacks do not damage enemies." - The first sentence can lose everything before the first comma and the last sentence can be re-written into the previous as it doesn't read quite right on it's own.
The names of the parasite weapons and vendor name are not necessary
"Most of the initial options are also locked in this version, and can only be modified by completing the game's five paths, upon which a special bonus feature is also unlocked" - Remove this per WP:Gamecruft, it's weirdly specific and vague at the same time

Development:

Unless there's multiple Guardian Heroes, you don't need the date (1996)

Release:

Is there no further information regarding the Saturn release?
"Also, the Hare Wares sprites were censored/edited." - Who? Don't use the name or if you do, clarify that it's a character/item/whatever. Also, there's no source stating it was for censorship reasons, so just stick with "edited".

Reception:

As opposed to giving a breakdown of only a couple of specific reviews (Edge/Next Generation & Ign/Gamespot), try to give information on the reception overall and pickout the relevant parts from the reviews or back up comments with refs instead.

Comments by TarkusAB

@Crimsonfox: For one thing, I think the nominator has disappeared. They last edited in early July, over a month ago. But I have some serious concerns with the article:

First, the cited Shmuplations translation has a lot more development information that was left out of the article for no particular reason.
Second, the reception section is weak and needs a serious rewrite.

I think it's best to fail the nomination unless someone wants to take on this major work. TarkusAB^talk/contrib 12:52, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

User:TarkusAB Thanks, good catch. Considering the inactivity, I'll give it 48 hours to see if anyone responds and then close after. CrimsonFox ^talk 13:47, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]