Talk:Tomb Raider: The Angel of Darkness/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Tezero (talk · contribs) 19:51, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()

3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()

Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

This article is fairly close to GA status; my concerns, mostly minor, follow:

The prose is awkward at times. These phrases should be reworded, and I'll give suggestions:
- "dark, edgier" --> "dark, edgy"
- "the new team had run away with themselves" --> "the new team had gone off the rails"
- "a different setting and narrative situation" --> "a new setting and story"
- "sales than previous titles" --> "sales than previous titles had gotten"
- "scrapping the entire project once already and completing only the basic story" --> "scrapping the entire project and completing only the basic story of the new incarnation"
- "Reviewers praised the storyline, improved graphics, sound and the environments, while they criticized large amount of bugs, control system, combat system, camera, steep system requirements etc." --> "Reviewers praised the game's storyline, graphics, sound, and environments, while they criticized its large number of bugs and system requirements and its poor controls, combat system, and camera movement."
"The game garnered mixed to negative reviews from most critics." Per article conventions, this implies a range of roughly 35-50%, but Metacritic's scores are around 50 and GameRankings' are in the mid-50s. Delete "to negative"
Gameplay and Reception should be a paragraph or two longer each. For Reception, I'd recommend going issue-by-issue and mentioning how each critic felt, as is common in video game GAs and FAs. You can keep the organization the way it is, but then you should go into more detail about issues rather than listing scores, which can be found in the infobox.
Add a screenshot with explanation of the features it illustrates. As a reader, I want to know what Lara's new character model and the game's graphics and environments, which critics seem to praise, look like.

Fix these complaints (or tell me why they don't need fixing) and you will have yourself another GA. Tezero (talk) 19:51, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think I've done all the repairs to grammar and style: please tell me if I missed any or created new ones. The reception section has been expanded and detailed: the magazine reviews I can't do, because I don't have them in front of me. As to the gameplay section, I've done all I can think of, and I don't think I can extend it any further. I didn't want to include masses of stuff about her abilities from previous games without some reference that referred to them. I think I've done that, but I'm a little skeptical. I'm almost sure there's something else that will need doing, but for the moment I seem to have addressed or explained the issues above. --ProtoDrake (talk) 23:32, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Very good job. I'll be happy to pass this. Tezero (talk) 03:55, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]