Wikipedia:Peer review/Halo 2/archive1

Halo 2

(Relisting because of lack of responses)--Zxcvbnm 14:18, 10 June 2006 (UTC) Like Halo, this is also a huge article & famous game which needs a peer review.--Zxcvbnm 00:30, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The lead definitely can be expanded, per WP:LEAD. AndyZ 00:24, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Random comments:

Cite the "vista exclusive" thing, which I haven't heard of; Pointing at an official announcement by MS would be enough.
What's the point of the "versions" section?
Plot summaries should be written in summary style, not blow-by-blow accounts of each miniscule part of the cutscenes. That's what makes them summaries and not transcripts.
Campaign section looks good.
Multiplayer: "Live mode offers a unique and, some would say, innovative approach" - weasely. Cite it.
I wouldn't begin the multiplayer section with an explanation of "traditional" Client-server architecture. I might word it more closely to "Players do not set up the server; Live pools players together before choosing a host."
There's a three-line-long parenthetical comment explaining the benefits of being host. Take out the parenthesis.
I would merge the powerups into the weapons article, to get it out of the way.
"A common complaint" - cite it, if it's so common.
Rename "criticism" to something more general like "reception" and include both good and bad.
A copyedit would be useful. There's a fair bit of odd wordings, strange sentence order, etc, that should be fixed before going to FA.

Hope that helps. Nifboy 00:18, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]