Talk:Aperture Desk Job/GA1
GA Review
[edit]| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Nominator: Vacant0 (talk · contribs) 14:11, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
Reviewer: Vrxces (talk · contribs) 21:09, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
I'll take a look at this one soon. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 21:09, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
Will let you know when I'm done, but some comments are below. Feel free to tick em 
if done or make comments 
as needed. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 04:25, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
Sections
[edit]Headline
Gameplay
Synopsis
Development
Reception
- It's a bit light on actual reception. From what I can see, there's three generally reliable reviews: TheGamer, Rock Paper Shotgun, and PC Gamer, and these make the game comfortably notable but barely. Are there any other reliable review sources out there?
- I've tried looking for more reviews but these were the only ones that I was able to find.
- The Polygon and IGN sources are being misrepresented as reviews of the game when it's the authors reacting to the announcement trailer, which feels a little misleading.
- Gamepressure isn't praising the game's graphics, it's just saying it boasts a "similar graphic style" as previous Portal games. The site is reliable per WP:VG/S, but it feels clear the article is being written by someone that doesn't seem to have actually played the game, as no gameplay details are described.
- Steam user reviews are WP:USERG. Per WP:VG/REC, these are unreliable unless it's remarkable in secondary coverage. This probably should be removed unless the object of broader coverage.
- Per WP:VG/REC, the template is not necessary. Here it captures only one review, so its utility is quite low and should be removed.
- All
Done.
- All
