Talk:Sonic Adventure/GA2

GA Reassessment

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Members of WP:VG have noted discrepancies between this article and the GA criteria for a good while, dating back to its original GA promotion. I'm one of these users and, while I don't mean to mob with the others, their existence suggests I'm not nuts. As I've scored a few GAs and one FA related to Sonic, I may work on this eventually, but it's not one of my top projects. Whether I eventually get to it or not, I'm nominating this article for a reassessment so that if it is not improved, it doesn't falsely advertise by staying on the GA list.

Problems I see with the article:

Reception is way too short and summative. This is a game that received a large number of reviews that are easy enough to find, and the section barely even touches on all of the major points made by critics, let alone illustrating them.
Moreover, a table of scores isn't necessary for all video game articles, but putting them into the body text of Reception to fluff it up isn't a good substitute.
Likewise, Adventure DX and the other ports are covered only very briefly. I've read reviews of those while digging for reception for a few characters; critics talked a lot about the differences between the ports and originals as well as how the source material had held up over time.
The article also scarcely covers the game's notable, though ephemeral, rivalry with Super Mario 64. It was the talk of the town how Sonic, largely thought irrelevant in the mid-1990s sea of spinoffs, had gotten onto the Dreamcast in what was, for the time, a very technically impressive and expansive game. Comparisons to Mario and his recent success were all over the contemporary coverage I've read of Adventure.
As the game features six main play styles, I don't think another screenshot is out of the question. Actually, I'd be down with scrapping the current one, as it really doesn't give a good sense of even Sonic's style, definitely not of the commonalities of all of the characters'. As someone who's beaten five of the six (well, seven) stories (Big's freaking controls, though), I'd prefer a back view of Sonic in one of his typical levels, as well as a second shot from maybe Knuckles', Tails', or Amy's. (While Big and Gamma have more unique gameplay, their campaigns are much shorter.)
Speaking of which, the Gameplay section could use some beefing up and reorganization. It doesn't at all cover how the main gameplay actually works: platforming, collecting rings, beating up robots, getting to the ends of levels, etc. The first paragraph in particular is a bit of a mess and far too long.
The references to "Game Developer Research Institute" and "Sega Considering Saturn Download Releases" are unformatted, and I doubt they're reliable anyway.
Elsewhere, there is a proliferation of uncited statements. One or two aren't the end of the world, but it really raises eyebrows when a GA carries an "additional citations" banner (as well as an "expand" one).

I'll watch this in case any major changes start happening. Otherwise, I'll close the review and demote the article in a while. Tezero (talk) 03:18, 13 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'll see what I can do about it, but I'm still on a temporary wikibreak. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 04:48, 13 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm adding some stuff I feel is necessary to Legacy now. This isn't a pass of the rest of the article; I just feel it needs to go in and, in all fairness, you might not know where to look for it. Tezero (talk) 04:36, 16 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'll fix up the gameplay section and expand the reception section if I can get to it, but that will need to take a bit of time here. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 04:00, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Alright. Tezero (talk) 04:16, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delist on the Reception section alone, pending changes. I'll add that the Story section needs major trimming. I'd love to work on this over the summer (Q2, Aussies) if anyone would be interested in collaborating then. Until then, this article is not GA quality. czar ♔ 21:57, 19 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure about major trimming in Story (as I've said on WT:VG, there are seven character stories, each with at least several significant events), but regardless, I'm going to delist this article. I apologize, @Sjones23:; it's just that we can't wait on you for too long. You're welcome to help czar and possibly myself work on the article later on. Tezero (talk) 22:01, 19 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Tezero: I'd give it at least a few more days. It doesn't need to be open months, but the GAR hasn't even been open a week yet (and there's no deadline). czar ♔ 22:03, 19 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Czar: Eheh, too late. Regardless, I doubt it could be improved in this amount of time, and Sjones23 isn't around anyway. Should I revert my delisting changes? Tezero (talk) 22:07, 19 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

To be fair, maybe, but I'd just let it be and revert if Sjones objects. It needs a lot of work, but I hope to get to it in the new few months. czar ♔ 22:11, 19 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Alright. Tezero (talk) 22:21, 19 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]