Talk:Remedy Entertainment

Untitled

"In November 1997, Remedy created a new company that would handle its 3D benchmark program called Futuremark" so thats way in 3dMark2001 there's a scene similar to Max Payne gameplay :) --83.9.211.184 23:41, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Untitled

This image is in use on the LucasArts article. It should probably be stuck here somewhere too. --84.64.51.100 22:26, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Current Projects

"Remedy is currently recruiting for two projects, an unannounced AAA project and an unannounced iOS project, the former of which was revealed to be Quantum Break..."

Doesn't this mean it's been announced? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.210.91.150 (talk) 14:57, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

GA Review

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

Reviewer: SoWhy (talk · contribs) 12:11, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

I'll try to complete my review within a day or two. Regards SoWhy 12:11, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

Okay, AdrianGamer, below are my remarks. Please ping me if you have any questions or once you addressed them. Regards SoWhy 14:21, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

@SoWhy: - Thanks for the review! I should have addressed all your concerns. Most of the unsourced content is based on the Complex video, so I simply put them at the end of a paragraph rather than the end of each sentence. I don't know exactly when the logos were used by the studio, so I opted not to mention about it.

@AdrianGamer: Okay, I struck everything I felt addressed sufficiently below and added comments for the rest. Please have another look and feel free to reply directly to the comments. Also, please remember to sign your posts, otherwise pings won't work. Regards SoWhy 11:12, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

@SoWhy: - I should have fixed the remaining issues. I have responded to some of your concerns below as well. AdrianGamer (talk) 13:39, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

@AdrianGamer: Almost there. I made additional comments below. Regards SoWhy 20:00, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

Review

Lead / infobox

• Avoid duplicate links (Max Payne, Alan Wake and Quantum Break are all linked twice)
• Future Crew was not really a "predecessor" of Remedy, was it? They share members but there is nothing in the article to suggest that all of Future Crew went on to work for Remedy

  That depends. Future Crew dissolved the same year, and most of Rememdy's founders together resembeled a large part of Future Crew. Per the book I cited, they all decided that they wanted to move into commercial VG development and abandon the demogroup, so Remedy can be one of multiple successors for followed after Future Crew. Lordtobi (✉) 15:42, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

  That might be true and can be mentioned in history but it does not belong in the infobox. Regards SoWhy 11:10, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

• Sam Lake, the writer and the face model for Max Payne ... - Omit the second "the"
• After spending seven years creating the Max Payne franchise, the developer decided to create a new intellectual property called Alan Wake. Creating...create..., avoid using the same words twice in the same sentence
• Remedy decided to pursue a new project named Quantum Break, which further expanded the live-action component of Alan Wake. The team had transitioned to become a multi-project studio, and had three projects in development, including Control and the single-player portion of CrossFire 2. - When?
• Remedy Entertainment had specialised in making cinematic single-player action games featuring a strong central character. They always created a game engine for their titles, most notably Northlight for Quantum Break. - Are those things no longer true? Then tell people from when to when they were true.

History

• Initially known as HiSpeed, the game had network capabilities - So what? How is that important?
• Following the release of Death Rally, Remedy began pitching their next project to Miller. One was a space flight simulation game like Descent: FreeSpace, while another was an isometric shooter named Dark Justice. - needs source. Ref #9 says they pitched three games.
• He wanted bullet time and slow motion, a hallmark of Hong Kong action films, to be the core mechanic for their game highlighted part not in the source

• Source needed for each sentence in these quotes because it currently reads OR-ish:
  • The team proposed different possibilities, ranging from "Dick Justice" to "Max Heat", a name the company trademarked for $20,000, before settling on the name "Max Payne".
  • The game's lead designer was Petri Järvilehto.
  • They decided to position it as a resource for players to use. With an expertise in computing because of their demoscene background, the team crafted their own game engine for the game. Sam Lake was appointed the game's writer. He introduced elements commonly found in crime fiction and film noir into the game. The team wanted to use real-life photos for the game's texture, though this was initially met with heavy resistance by the artists. In 1999 the designers travelled from Finland to New York to research the city and get ideas for environments.
    • Refs at the end of a block are not useful because it's unclear whether they support only the last sentence or all preceding sentences. SoWhy 11:10, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  • The company spent most of its time in 2000 further refining the game's graphics. Having delayed its release twice, Max Payne received critical acclaim when it was released in July 2001.
  • Apogee outsourced the development of Max Payne's console versions to Rockstar Games, whose parent company Take-Two Interactive spent $10 million to purchase the intellectual property rights to the franchise. As part of the acquisition agreement, Remedy would return to develop a sequel for the game. Take-Two gave Remedy plenty of creative freedom. The development cycle for the sequel game was much shorter than the original.
    • Still needs source. SoWhy 11:10, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Lake returned to write the game's script. He went to the Theatre Academy of Finland to study screenwriting to be able to write a more "ambitious" story. Lake's script had more than 600 pages, five times that of the original.
  • After working for seven years on the Max Payne series, the team wanted to develop something new. They began prototyping and experimenting with different gameplay mechanics with the intention of making a sandbox game. However, due to limited resources, the team found that developing an open world was not feasible and decided to refocus the game as a linear experience. The company was inspired by Stephen King's novels, Twin Peaks, ghost towns in the American Northwest, and tornado patterns. They invited a landscape architect to serve as the game's consultant.
  • Some media outlets suspected the game had become vapourware as it disappeared from the public spotlight for a considerable time after its announcement. Microsoft Game Studios acted as the game's publisher after securing an exclusivity deal with Remedy. The title, Alan Wake was released for Microsoft's Xbox 360 to generally positive reviews in May 2010. Remedy pushed for a PC version after the game's launch, and Microsoft greenlit its production in mid-2011.
    • [1] does not support "generally positive reviews" and the last sentence also still needs a source. SoWhy 11:10, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Unlike Max Payne, Alan Wake's narrative was written to accommodate the release of multiple sequels. The company began developing different prototypes for Alan Wake 2
  • The company showed the prototype it had developed for Alan Wake 2 to different publishers.
  • and the development team recouped their budget in three days.

Facilities

• Remedy eventually moved to a four-story office in Espoo. When?
  • Still unsourced and missing information. SoWhy 11:10, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
    • No source mentions when, so it is better for us not to mention it.
      • Which leads to the sentence sounding incomplete. If you cannot specify when the move took place, you probably should mention what you know, e.g. instead of
        Remedy moved to a four-story office in Espoo. In addition to the work area, the office had various facilities including a café, a sauna, a bar and a gym. you could write
        By 2017, Remedy was using a four-story office in Espoo which offered various facilities including a café, a sauna, a bar and a gym. SoWhy 20:00, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

Culture and philosophy

• It offers different welfare and benefits to its employees, including leisure and health insurance, and allowances for sports and cultural activities. Source? Considering this is Finland and not the US, these seem like normal things, so some explanation seems required how this is special
• and relocation services - Source?
• The studio also believes work-life balance is important and each employee has five weeks of paid vacation each year in addition to public holidays. According to List of minimum annual leave by country, 25 days is the minimum required by law, so how is that in any way remarkable? In fact, it seems as if they offer only the bare minimum and no bonus vacation
• The team also aimed for "movie realism", where real-world believability was important. Quotes but no source
• but Remedy began exploring ideas like multiplayer gaming and open-ended gameplay When?
• and attempted to motion capture a dog. Needs context why this is relevant / important / significant
• As an independent AAA video game developer, Remedy was adaptable to changes in the industry. PR-speak. The whole section needs reliable sourcing as well, the only source is a primary source directly from the subject
  • Still only sourced to subject. SoWhy 11:10, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

I hope I have improved the section, but using primary sources shouldn't be a problem.

Primary sources are not a problem per se but having a whole paragraph that is only sourced to primary sources is problematic per WP:WIAGA #2b. Also, per WP:RSPRIMARY, Large blocks of material based purely on primary sources should be avoided. So please see if you can find some secondary sources. After all, these are significant changes, they should have been covered by someone. SoWhy 20:00, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

Gameindustry.biz is a reliable secondary source recognized by WP:VG/RS, but I have added another Gamsutra source to the section as well. AdrianGamer (talk) 04:36, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

So it is but only for stuff it reports. Interviews are per definition primary sources, even if they are reliable (which is why I cited WP:RSPRIMARY), so having at least some secondary sourcing is preferable. Thanks for adding that source. SoWhy 07:14, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

Images

• File:Remedy Entertainment logo (1996).png has an incorrect FUR, citing use in the infobox
• Both logos should have captions that include information from when to when they were used
  • Still missing. The text addresses this (1998) and the source does so as well (it even mentions another source, albeit now offline but archived). SoWhy 11:10, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
    • I have added the source you provided. However, we don't know when the new logo was put up, so I did not add any caption for it.

Status

I will update this section with the addressing of raised concerns. 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:

   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:

   C. It contains no original research:

   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:

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

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail: