Talk:Five Nights at Freddy's: Help Wanted/GA2

GA Review

Passed. ~ A412 ^talk! 01:19, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

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

Reviewer: A412 (talk · contribs) 19:00, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'll do this one. ~ A412 ^talk! 19:00, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Non-prose stuff done. ~ A412 ^talk! 20:46, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Finished up, article looking very good. Probably good to go with listed fixes. ~ A412 ^talk! 00:22, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it well written?
A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
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. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):

C. It contains no original research:

D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
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):
Is it neutral?
It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
Is it stable?
It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:

B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:

References

Ref numbers as of this revision.

Spotcheck

[1] For the cite in the second paragraph of the reception section, I don't see where Vandal described the game as accessible. I see them describing the game as tense, replayable, and having good audio.

There is a sentence in the last paragraph stating that it was the "best way to be introduced to the franchise", which I interpreted as one of the most accessible games in the series, but I can remove it if you would like.

I think including it is okay.

[6] "IGN contended... Other reviewers called the jumpscares effective..." is a bit weird, because IGN Italy is cited for both these statements, and I don't think IGN Italy is an "other reviewer" to itself.

Changed to "Some reviewers"

Thanks.

[11] Checks out.
[16] Checks out.
[21] Checks out.
[26] Checks out.

RS

Checks out.

OR

Checks out.

CV

Checks out. Only matches in Earwig are for the title.

Coverage

Has all expected sections.

Stable

Appears stable.

Images

Infobox image: The image uses Template:Non-free logo, but I think it should use Template:Non-free video game cover.
Gameplay image: Checks out.

Infobox

Lead says developers are Steel Wool Studios and Scott Cawthon. Infobox says Steel Wool Studios and Lionsgate Games. Development section appears to indicate that Steel Wool Studios and Cawthon are the correct "main" two to list?

Changed

ScottGames as publisher, Topolski as director, Riskin as composer, and UE4 as engine are currently only in infobox, and therefore uncited.

Removed, thanks

Lead

and expanded his original plan to adapt all of the previous games in the series - The sentence as worded is somewhat ambiguous; it could be read as that his original plan was always to adapt all of the previous games in the series, although I suspect you mean that he expanded the original plan, after which the plan consisted of adapting all the previous games in the series. (wow, I can't even find an unambiguous way to word it in this comment)

Changed

May, 28, 2019 - no comma after May

Done

Gameplay

General comment: Having never played this game, the gameplay section leaves me wondering how the game works, structurally. Are there a bunch of disjoint minigames? Are there separate levels that are each an adaptation of a single FNAF game? Does it have the survive-through-the-night structure of the main series games?

They are mostly disjoint minigames, some feature the survive-the-night structure, others do not. Think of it like this: One of the minigames features identical gameplay to Five Nights at Freddy's 3 but in a virtual reality format, completing the four stages of the minigame unlocks a difficult version of the same minigame with the warped graphics and music. Another one is "Vent Repair" which is a new experience not based on an earlier game and is puzzle-based instead of survive-the-night. Completing Vent Repair unlocks the same difficult version with warped graphics.

Ah, I get it now. I wonder if we can get a summative sentence of the structure near the beginning of gameplay. I think Destructoid's summary is good, if trimmed down and opinion removed:

My favorite part of Five Nights at Freddy’s VR is that it isn’t merely the main-series games reimagined for virtual reality (although that would’ve been fine in its own right). Rather, this is a bunch of separate modes, all of which are entertaining for different reasons. It’s a surprisingly well-balanced spread. After keeping your eyes glued to security cam feeds in the bread-and-butter survive-the-night modes that span the events of Five Nights 1, 2, 3, and 4, you could try to catch your breath with the shorter, more puzzle-oriented offerings.

I tried to clarify it a bit more, hopefully the new version works but please tell me if it isn't clear enough

Another general comment: I feel the gameplay section assumes a lot of familiarity with the series and its continuity. For example, from the first game to Sister Location - I think there are five (1-4, Sister Location), but it's not entirely clear, and In addition to the minigames based off the mainline series - Is the "mainline series" a reference to the previously listed games, or does that have some precise meaning within this series?

It means the five earlier adaptations (1-4 through Sister Location) Is there a way that I can clarify that these games are the ones that adapted?

I don't know how without just listing all of them as the main entries in the Five Nights at Freddy's franchise: 1, 2, 3, 4, and Sister Location, but this is probably too wordy and the links are very hard to click.

Tried my best to clarify it is the main entries chronologically from FNAF 1 to Sister Location.

and include varying gameplay and mechanics. - I think this is vague to the point of not saying anything.

Removed as superfluous

Completing the levels grants access to alternate minigames with greater difficulty and warped graphics. Hidden inside the levels are gold coins that allow the player to obtain collectables, and several cassette tapes that provide background information on the plot. - Do these two sentences apply to only the "new experiences" described right before them, or are there also alternate unlockable minigames / collectibles in the adaptations of previous minigames?

They are in all the minigames, not just the more difficult ones, arranged this a little more.

Plot

In an attempt to improve their relations - Would this be clearer as their public relations or their image?

Done

Lastly, The tapes disclose the existence of a malicious code - no uppercase on The, and of a malicious code is uncountable, so you either want of malicious code or of a piece of malicious code.

Done

Development and release

General comment: I see some sources and previous talk page discussion calling the game Five Nights at Freddy's VR: Help Wanted. Were the VR and non-VR versions of the game released under different names? In any case, I wonder if the alternate name should be mentioned somewhere.

I'll add a footnote saying that it was originally released as Five Nights at Freddy's VR: Help Wanted before being marketed under its current name.

A trailer announcing the game was shown during Sony Interactive Entertainment's State of Play live stream on On March 25, 2019 - State of Play (livestream event) could be linked, and fix double on On.

Done

A Halloween-themed downloadable content (DLC) pack, Curse of Dreadbear, was released was released - fix doubled was released was released

Done

Curse of Dreadbear was launched on all platforms available at the time, and was later released for Oculus Quest in December 2020 - I don't understand this sentence. Was Oculus Quest not available at the time? Its July 2020 release date appears to predate the DLC's October 2020 release date.

Apparently the DLC was not released on Quest until that December even though the base game was released in July 2020, clarifying.

Reception

General comment: Optional, but including the Nintendo Life review in prose might help explain why the Switch reviews are so much worse (because no VR, by my quick reading).

The problem is that none of the other Nintendo Switch reviews are from reliable sources to my knowledge, so I was worried that having only Nintendo Life would be undue weight for the opinion of one reviewer. But I can include it if you would like.

I found this, from Kotaku's more reliable era: [1], which does seem to have commentary about the quality of the game on Switch. I won't hold up the review over this point if you don't want to add them though.

Thanks, I'll see if I can add little more commentary on the Switch version.

General comment: Has Help Wanted 2 been released? It looks like the release date has come and gone.

Added source confirming release.

No specific fixes in this section.

A412, thank you. I believe that I have addressed some of your comments. The Night Watch (talk) 19:04, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A412 follow up ping, added a little more for the Switch version. The Night Watch (talk) 01:17, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good to me. ~ A412 ^talk! 01:18, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.