Talk:Deactivators/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: TheJoebro64 (talk · contribs) 22:44, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take a stab at this. JOE BRO 64 22:44, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Review

A time limit is set based on the fuses of the bombs. Can you elaborate on this a bit? How is it based on the fuses? Length? Color?

I think I explained the reasoning behind the fuse in the article now. GamerPro64 23:43, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If a bomb goes off the room and everything inside of it gets destroyed. Is this supposed to say If a bomb goes off the room then everything inside of it gets destroyed?

Fixed up. GamerPro64 02:57, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think the caption of the image needs a bit more detail (mostly as to what is going on in the screenshot).

Expanded the caption. GamerPro64 02:57, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

David Bishop was the co-founder of Tigress Marketing, the developers of the game, with Chris Palmer having joined Tigress after leaving Argus Specialist Publications. I think you can cut "David" and "Chris" from this sentence. You've already mentioned their full names so saying them again is unnecessary.

Done. GamerPro64 02:57, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

published by Ariolasoft under its Reaktor label—would linking "label" to imprint (trade name) be helpful (and accurate)? I typically do this when I'm writing about comics DC publishes under Vertigo.

Done. GamerPro64 02:57, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have a couple issues with the reception section:
- It's pretty short. A decent number of critics reviewed this game, so I'd expect it to be bigger.
- Furthermore, I think the current length prevents it from going in-depth into what the reviewers said. "Andrew Wilton from Amstrad Action praised its gameplay, describing it as 'excellent'". Why did he think it was excellent? "The graphics received mixed reactions for each console, with Crash and Your Sinclair speaking positive of the Spectrum's graphics, while Andrew Wilton marked it as the most disappointing part of the game." Why were they spoken positively about and why did they disappoint Wilton?
- I'd recommend splitting the reception section into separate parts discussing graphics/presentation, gameplay, and overall, then add parts about what reviewers said specifically about this game. I think the Donkey Kong 64 and Knuckles' Chaotix reception sections are good examples of this.
- I recommend looking at Wikipedia:Copyediting reception sections for more advice.
  - Honestly with the Reception section the reviews used doesn't exactly have much to offer with what they think about the game. Reading through them the reviews recap what the game has to offer and then they say that somethings good or bad. GamerPro64 23:06, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    - @GamerPro64: I'd still just elaborate on what they praised and criticized. I looked at the reviews and they don't just say they thought was good or bad; they provided reasons as to why. JOEBRO64 11:36, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
      - Fair enough. I have expanded the section, with hopefully more elaboration. GamerPro64 03:24, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Palmer left the video games industry to work in IT. People may not know what "IT" means; I'd spell out "information technology."

Done. GamerPro64 02:57, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That's what I saw. I have a soft spot for short reads like this. Good work; once my comments are addressed, I will gladly promote this. JOE BRO 64 19:58, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Alrighty @GamerPro64, this is good to go. Nice work. JOE BRO 64 21:51, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]