Talk:Border Down

Organization:

I generally like the "Plot --> Development --> Release --> Reception --> Legacy (optional)" organizing structure. It makes it easier to find information on sales data and re-releases. Reception should just be for reviews and that alone. For this article, there needs to be more contemporary reviews. That means Japanese mags, which are hard to track down. Dorimaga supposedly reviewed it, Famitsu and Dreamcast mags probably did as well. Harizotoh9 (talk)

I wish. There is a draught of reviews because it was a late Dreamcast release. By 2003, the official Dreamcast magazines in the US, UK, and even Japan were all out of publication. The system was dead in the west so it's a miracle Edge covered it. Maybe Famitsu covered it, and yea there is supposedly a Dorimaga review but late 2003 issues are unavailable on the web. For these reasons, I think including the contemporary reception with its release history tells a more fascinating story, but I can live with how it is now. Just saying, we don't always need to put critical reception in its own section like it's some kind of rule. TarkusAB^talk 15:12, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Border Down/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: SoWhy (talk · contribs) 16:47, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Since the nomination is now over a month old and I am actively contributing new nominees, I felt some kind of obligation to help out with the backlog. Since this is only my third review, please bear with me. Regards SoWhy 16:47, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Review

Gameplay

• [...] launch a new type of unmanned aircraft. The player takes on the role of a pilot, controlling these aircraft through a remote control interface - Is there more than one aircraft or only the one? It's a bit unclear since later it says players lose "lives" but "drop" to a different stage. Also, do I read this correctly that the game has multiple stages but if you fail one stage, it's completely over, no matter how far you have come?
  • Only one, fixed. And yes there are multiple stages, but Game Over is Game Over no matter which stage you're on. You can Continue by putting in more 100 yen coins, or changing the Continue settings in the Dreamcast version I suppose.
    • I think that is relevant to mention here, that the game over can be avoided by adding more money or changing a setting, because as it currently stands, the game ends without a way to continue. SoWhy 06:26, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
      • OK I added a phrase based on the HG101 article.
• If players "drop" to another "border", do they have to repeat the stage or do they continue from the point they "dropped"?
  • They continue from approximately where they died. It's "approximate" because each border is slightly different. I thought it was too minor worth mentioning.
• A power meter slowly fills up over time which determines the strength of the ship's main weapon. Which one is that? The barrage of bullets or the homing missiles? Doesn't the meter fill when you hold down the fire button?
  • It's both. I changed it to say "ship's weaponry". Both the barrage and missles are fired from the same "main weapon." Yes it fills up when you are firing.
• This meter can also power a secondary laser attack, which can take down enemies - Isn't that the point of any weapon? How is that different from the bullets or missiles?
  • Reworded
• Ref #1 says Border Down also uses a rank system, which means that the difficulty is reduced whenever you get killed which seems to conflict with The player starts on the easiest border ("green") , and if they lose a life, drop to "yellow", and then finally the difficult "red" border in the article
  • They're flat out wrong. The game most certainly gets more difficult. Score multiplier is also increased on more difficult borders. See [1] TarkusAB^talk 00:56, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
    • Then you probably shouldn't cite the source at this point? SoWhy 06:26, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
      • Yea probably, I replaced the footnote with another source.

Development

• a team founded by producer Hiroyuki Maruyama with the explicit purpose to develop a shoot 'em up. needs a ref. Same goes for the next four sentences, especially since Gradius V contains no (in-article) mention of G.rev and says the game was first announced in January 2003, i.e. three months before Border Down was released, so it's not clear how the company could use their earnings for work on Gradius to develop Border Down
  • This entire section is derived from the Retro Gamer article. I only put footnotes at the end of the section if it's all attributed to one source, but went ahead and dispersed them to make the sourcing clear. Also I felt the same way about the timing on Gradius. Nevertheless, that's what the source says.
• The section also lacks any specifics on when the development actually began
  • Yea the source doesn't say unfortunately.
• The whole The initial concept for Border Down took root with Maruyama before he founded G.rev. He was heavily inspired by Taito's shooter Metal Black (1991), specifically the game's "Beam Level" system. He also borrowed ideas from his experiences with producing G-Darius (1997) with Taito, particularly the game's branching level system which inspired the border system in Border Down. With a parallel world system like this, the team would not need to develop as many distinct levels. needs sourcing because as it stands, it sounds like OR.
  • Footnote addded
• This was one of the few parts of his original concept that was kept in the final game. - What wasn't? You only mention a single part. It leaves me wondering what was cut.
  • He doesn't say. He only says it was the only idea he kept and the rest of the concept was a completely different kind of shooting game. (Wink wink the Retro Gamer issue 53
• visual inspiration, Maruyama pulled from Kim Stanley Robinson's science fiction novel Red Mars. - Same OR problem
  • Footnote addded
• The team had to cut a significant amount of material due to lack of funds. n particular Maruyama wanted to flesh out the ending and opening cinematics. Source needed
  • Footnote addded

Release

• It was common for NAOMI shooters to be ported to Sega's home console, the Dreamcast, making a significant portion of the aging console's extended output. Was it? Source please
  • Yes it was. Again, sorry about my footnoting style. According to Retro Gamer: "Consoles were still being manufactured in small quantities, and games - now led by NAOMI-to-Dreamcast conversions of 2D shoot-'em-ups - kept the most dedicated of Sega fans enthralled with the evident power of the hardware."
• Although a Dreamcast conversion would seem like an obvious choice - to whom? why?
  • I added some color. Retro Gamer: "Although a Dreamcast conversion of Border Down could have been a formality (with it being a NAOMI title),..."
• They decided against the PlayStation 2 because the game would have needed a complete rebuild from the ground up. As for the GameCube, they believed Border Down was not suited for the system's audience Source please, especially since a number of fly-and-shoot games were released on Nintendo platforms over the years (like Star Fox)
  • Maruyama interview in Retro Gamer: "we didn't think Border Down really suited its type of user".
• By 2007, Japanese retailer Messe Sanoh was still seeing demand for Dreamcast copies, and so approached Sega and G.rev to ask for another production run. of Border Down was still high. That sentence makes no sense
  • Whoops I think I fixed it
• In total, less than 20,000 copies were sold, and it has since become one of the most coveted Japanese exclusives for Dreamcast collectors. Of the second run or all runs?
  • In total, all runs. I made this more clear.

Reception

• Is there any coverage by third-party sources about the game's reception as an arcade version?
  • Maybe, but it's not readily available. I'll have to travel to the National Diet Library to find out. Some Japanese magazines covered arcade releases but the Japanese have a culture of not sharing copyrighted material.
    • It's not a deal breaker since the Dreamcast version is basically the same and there are reviews for that but if you can add some info later, it will surely be good. Maybe you can save yourself a trip by asking at WP:REX and WT:VG if someone has access to older magazines and is willing to share a review or two. SoWhy 06:31, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
      • Well since I don't know which magazines (let alone issue #) reviewed it, it will be difficult to find someone that will willingly spend time searching for me. However, do you know if REX has access to Japanese library sources? I know Western libraries don't have Japanese magazines and no one in the project has any either.
• They explained: "Border Down lacks the intensity that pervades the true frighteners of the genre...There is much to be enjoyed, but the action never really panics; always short of the digital rage that makes your hands sweat. And a shooter that doesn't scare just isn't doing its job." That quite is excessive and unnecessary. Quotations should be limited to text that can't be adequately summarized in passive.
  • Paraphrased

Images

Both File:Border Down screenshot.png and File:Border Down flyer.png have fields with "n.a." where more information is needed. You might want to use {{Non-free use rationale video game screenshot}} and {{Non-free use rationale video game cover}} instead which handle most of this.

• Replaced. Would be great if these were the default templates generated from the upload wizard.

The screenshot could use a more detailed caption for people unfamiliar with them game, i.e. who "the player" is on this screenshot.

• Done

Status

@TarkusAB: Please find my remarks above. I'll update the review template below as certain criteria are addressed. Please ping me once you have addressed those concerns or you have more questions. Regards SoWhy 16:15, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it well written?

   A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

   See above

   B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

2. Is it verifiable with no original research?

   A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

   B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:

   Since most of those are in Japanese, my check was based on GTranslate

   C. It contains no original research:

   See above

   D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

   B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):

4. Is it neutral?

   It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:

5. Is it stable?

   It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:

6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   See #Images above

   B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

   See #Images above

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

Thanks I will get to this soon. TarkusAB^talk 14:26, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

@SoWhy: Done. Please check my follow-up work. Thank you for the detailed review. TarkusAB^talk 01:02, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

@TarkusAB: Thanks for the changes. I struck those you addressed and left comments with the rest but those are only minor things left. Once they are completed, this should be ready. Regards SoWhy 06:33, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

@SoWhy: Done TarkusAB^talk 23:41, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

@TarkusAB: Thanks, I'll pass it then. As for WP:REX, it says at the top A request may be an open question or you may ask for a specific journal, article or work (emphasis added), so asking won't hurt, will it? Regards SoWhy 07:24, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Dorimaga review

I've been checking out the list of issues for Dorimaga at SegaRetro and if my assumption is correct, their review of Border Down might be between issue 19 (2003-09-26), issue 20 (2003-10-10, 24) and issue 21 (2003-10-17 extra). Roberth Martinez (talk) 18:28, 12 February 2022 (UTC)