Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Zero Escape: Virtue's Last Reward/archive1
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
The article was promoted by Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 11:12, 29 September 2016 [1].
- Nominator(s): Famous Hobo (talk) 09:09, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Participation Guide | |
---|---|
Support | |
Famous Hobo & IDV (nominators), Dissident93, PresN, Jaguar, Tintor2 | |
Comments/No vote yet | |
Czar, David Fuchs | |
Oppose | |
None |
This article is about Zero Escape: Virtue's Last Reward, a 2012 visual novel developed by Chunsoft. It features an incredibly convoluted story (as you'll soon read) with more WTF moments than I can remember. It was well received by critics, and was even nominated by GameSpot for Game of the Year. This was the first article I ever put serious time into editing, and together with IDV and ThomasO1989, we've brought this article up to what we believe are FAC standards. Famous Hobo (talk) 09:09, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comments by Czar
[edit]- The Reception section is exceptionally short right now and overquoted. Needs more paraphrasing and elaboration on major and minor themes from the reviewers. czar 22:39, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- The thing about the reviews for this game is that they really don't go into a whole lot of detail about the smaller intricacies in the game, or what they liked and disliked. Seriously, it's weird, but I think it's because since it's a visual novel, most critics didn't want to spoil any plot related stuff. In fact, most reviews spend the majority of their time explaining how visual novels work and how the Nonary Game works. The EGM review for example states that "I know I’ve been decidedly obscure about explaining what you’ll find in Virtue’s Last Reward—but I cannot stress enough that the less you know about this game going in, the more enjoyment you’ll have" while the Eurogamer reviews states "To reveal how it does so would be to ruin the fun and take away the dizzying, off-kilter moments that make Virtue's Last Reward such a frequent joy." However, rereading through the reviews, I did find how some reviews felt the character animations were wonky, and I could add to each paragraph a little bit. I'll also try to condense the quotes into paraphrased sentences. Although, I would like to keep the quote "among the best performances I've ever heard in any game, period." Not often you see a quote like that for a game. Famous Hobo (talk) 00:14, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- @Czar: I've expanded the paragraphs in the review section. I think you'll like the changes. Famous Hobo (talk) 07:43, 22 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- The thing about the reviews for this game is that they really don't go into a whole lot of detail about the smaller intricacies in the game, or what they liked and disliked. Seriously, it's weird, but I think it's because since it's a visual novel, most critics didn't want to spoil any plot related stuff. In fact, most reviews spend the majority of their time explaining how visual novels work and how the Nonary Game works. The EGM review for example states that "I know I’ve been decidedly obscure about explaining what you’ll find in Virtue’s Last Reward—but I cannot stress enough that the less you know about this game going in, the more enjoyment you’ll have" while the Eurogamer reviews states "To reveal how it does so would be to ruin the fun and take away the dizzying, off-kilter moments that make Virtue's Last Reward such a frequent joy." However, rereading through the reviews, I did find how some reviews felt the character animations were wonky, and I could add to each paragraph a little bit. I'll also try to condense the quotes into paraphrased sentences. Although, I would like to keep the quote "among the best performances I've ever heard in any game, period." Not often you see a quote like that for a game. Famous Hobo (talk) 00:14, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comments by Dissident93
[edit]Comments by Dissident93 (talk) 01:06, 24 July 2016 (UTC) [reply]
Resolved
|
---|
Lead Developed for the Nintendo 3DS and PlayStation Vita, it was released on February 12, 2012 in Japan, and in North America and Europe later that year.
Nine Hours, Nine Persons, Nine Doors was originally released as a stand-alone title, but its unexpected success in North America prompted game director Kotaro Uchikoshi to continue the series with a sequel.
However, the game was not commercially successful in Japan, which led to the development of its sequel to be put on indefinite hiatus.
Gameplay
Plot Each character description is taken from the Aksys Games website.
Development Uchikoshi also considered including several scientific and philosophical theories/experiments that eventually were left out including: Dissipative system, Monty Hall problem, Gödel's incompleteness theorems, Toxoplasmosis, Folie à deux, Capgras delusion, Fregoli delusion, Sally–Anne test, and Project MKUltra.
Promotion and release
Reception The aggregate-review website Metacritic rated the Nintendo 3DS version 88/100,[48] and the PlayStation Vita version 84/100.
It was also tied for the seventh highest rated PlayStation Vita game of 2012 on Metacritic.
Sequel
|
Summary
- One final thing I'll say is that I thought Visual Novel Database external links were considered user generated, and therefore should be removed per WP:ELNO #12? Outside of that, the article follows WP:VG/GL and WP:MOS guidelines and policies, and once the aforementioned issues above are addressed, I'll support the article becoming featured. But again, first time I've ever done this, so I'm not sure if I did anything wrong for a nomination. You might want to re-check your Dota 2 comments to see if I properly addressed them too, if you haven't already.
- I know that movie articles tend to have IMDb in their external links, but since the Visual Novel Database isn't well established, I have no problem removing it. As for the review, don't worry, you did exactly what you needed to do. I'll ping you once I've finished the run on sentence in the development section. Famous Hobo (talk) 06:19, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- @Dissident93: I've fixed all your comments. You might also want to check over the lead again, since I shortened it to three paragraphs, and reworded a bunch of the sentences. Famous Hobo (talk) 21:39, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- The only thing that looks off is the very first paragraph, which looks a bit small in comparison with the other two. But of course, we should never add bloat just to increase a section, and it gets all of the article's major points across, so it's fine. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 23:10, 26 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- @Dissident93: I've fixed all your comments. You might also want to check over the lead again, since I shortened it to three paragraphs, and reworded a bunch of the sentences. Famous Hobo (talk) 21:39, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- I know that movie articles tend to have IMDb in their external links, but since the Visual Novel Database isn't well established, I have no problem removing it. As for the review, don't worry, you did exactly what you needed to do. I'll ping you once I've finished the run on sentence in the development section. Famous Hobo (talk) 06:19, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comments by PresN
[edit]- Review by PresN
Resolved
|
---|
The reception section's choppiness is the largest problem I saw with the article. --PresN 17:24, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
|
- Much better, now Support. --PresN 17:12, 22 August 2016 (UTC) (note: pings don't work if you don't sign in the same edit, so I never got this one)[reply]
Comments by David Fuchs
[edit]{{doing}} Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs(talk) 14:53, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- @David Fuchs: Just pinging you to see if you're still interested in doing the review. Famous Hobo (talk) 23:32, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved
|
---|
Overall, this is a solid article. I have a few comments, as follows:
|
- @David Fuchs: I believe I have fixed or otherwise addressed everything you brought up so far.--IDVtalk 20:50, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comments by Jaguar
[edit]- Support I've read through the article and couldn't find any issues to raise, given the fact that I also came late to the review. It is well written, well sourced and comprehensive, so it meets the criteria. Nice work! JAGUAR 16:02, 2 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Wow, thanks! Famous Hobo (talk) 16:45, 2 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Image review
[edit]- File:Virtue's Last Reward 3DS Boxart.jpg: Non-free file, which seems correct to me. It has a boilerplate NFC rationale but it seems like each point of WP:NFCC is met (it is highly unlikely that using box art has noticeable financial effects that would result in a WP:NFCC#2 violation).
- File:Virtue's Last Reward escape the room.png: Non-free file, which seems correct to me. There is discussion of this specific scene in the article so I think that WP:NFCC#8 may be met, as an illustration of what is being discussed. The use rationale is far too generic with regards to "purpose of use" - it needs to indicate why the inclusion of that image enhances the understanding of the article topic and why its absence would result in said understanding being lost.
Both images have good ALT text. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 15:38, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- @Jo-Jo Eumerus: Thanks for the image review! Since it appears that the boxart image was fine, I just improved the "purpose of use" in the gameplay screenshot. I believe it is now up to standard. Famous Hobo (talk) 16:20, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Famous Hobo: The article looks like ready to become FA so I would give two small issues I found while reading it. If you have some free time later, could you also provide feedback to my review (Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Allen Walker/archive1)?Tintor2 (talk) 15:23, 23 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- In Story and themes, I would avoid using "()" and reword it like "a brain teaser based on probability, the Monty Hall problem".
- The first reception sentence is a bit small. I would suggest merging it with the next paragraph.
- @Tintor2: Done and done. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 16:40, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- @Famous Hobo:, you have my support.Tintor2 (talk) 17:24, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Coord note
[edit]@Famous Hobo: Since this appears to be your first time through FAC, it is customary to get a spot-check of your sources for any issues with verifiability and close paraphrasing. I have requested one at WT:FAC. --Laser brain (talk) 01:37, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Source review - all OK
[edit]- No dead links - OK.
- No DAB links - OK.
- Thorough consistent sourcing - OK.
- Apparently reliable sources for a game-related article (mostly gaming websites and reviews, interviews for uncontroversial details) - OK (disclaimer: not a gaming expert). GermanJoe (talk) 01:02, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Spot-check for verifiability and close paraphrasing - all OK
[edit]10 randomly selected online references: 16 20 21 31 33 42 52 69 72 74.
- 42 - OK (my Japanese is non-existant, but the sales numbers are clearly listed)
- 52 - all OK (6 usages)
- Not listed numbers without comments are all OK as well (just avoiding spam).
No problems with close paraphrasing, all checked sources accurately verify the referenced content. GermanJoe (talk) 01:02, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- @GermanJoe: Thanks for the reviews! Famous Hobo (talk) 04:41, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Final comments?
[edit]@Ian Rose and Laser brain: So anything else needed? There are four supports (two from experienced FA editors), both the spot check and source reviews passed, and we got a image review (although the reviewer never responded, there was only one issue brought up, which was fixed. Should we wait to see if the image review passed, or is it good as is?). Famous Hobo (talk) 04:52, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- @Famous Hobo, Ian Rose, and Laser brain: (you need to sign in the same edit as the one where you added the "ping" for it to work)--IDVtalk 05:53, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Ian Rose (talk) 11:12, 29 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.