Talk:Shovel Knight: Specter of Torment/GA1

GA Review

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: Vrxces (talk · contribs) 05:15, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

General comments

Thanks for drafting this article - it's looking good. I'm starting on some comments below and will follow up when I'm finished. Doesn't look like any major barriers to GAN as the article is generally well structured and written.

Index

* This is an issue I think is directly relevant to the GAN.
  This is an issue I think is indirectly relevant, but worth addressing.
? This is just a personal preference or comment that could help.

Article

* Sorry, this is a little pedantic but good form and a common issue with the WP:MOS - the grammar for quotations in the article doesn't quite conform to MOS:LQ. Rule of thumb is for grammar to remain in the quote if it's a self contained sentence (He said "This is an example of a quote.") and not if it's a fragment (He said many things, including "this is a quote", "and this is one too".)

Thank you! Corrected a few of those

Headline

? Specter Knight can run up walls... This seems a little like gameplay specifics and less of a summary. Perhaps describing that Specter Knight generally features a different control scheme is more germane.

Reworded to be more of an introduction

Gameplay

  I’d personally try to minimise plot context in the gameplay section, and move the description of Specter Knight and his quest into the Plot section, where it better provides overarching information.

Moved some material here

Plot

  The parenthesized date of Shovel Knight can be removed, as it’s not relevant to the plot.

Removed

? Plot sections are generally considered to be self-evidently referenced from the work. You might like to add in the citation elsewhere to illustrate that the game was intended as a prequel.

Added information that the game is a prequel in the lede section

Development and release

* The section is only supported by several articles from one source that discuss the level design at length. It incidentally overlaps at times with visual design and controls, but this has a very specific focus. If there is genuinely no other development information, I'd try to reorder the information to cover the different aspects of the game's development instead of an overly specific focus on level design just because the one available source focuses on it.

There is no other significant development information that I could find in other sources. The developers said themselves that most of the game's development was centered around designing just the new levels, so most of the information reflects this focus. There were small mentions about the visuals and the like, but most information was centered around level design. How would you like me to reorder the information specifically?

I have edited the development section and tried to reorder it to be about background --> level design --> visuals and other soundtrack. Turns out there was a little more information on the soundtrack, but not much on the narrative. How does the new version look?

That is much better - thanks for reordering.

? Are there any other sources out there that might assist with adding context to the overarching development process or furnish the approach to the narrative?

I could not find any sources that go substantially in-depth into the wider context behind the development process, but there were little tidbits in interviews regarding the narrative. Since I am planning to work on this article some more in the future, I will try to compile what I can.

I couldn't find much else, but you might also like to cite the developers' motivations around the design of the expansion stated at [1]. There are also some interviews from lower-quality sources at [2] and some YouTube interviews. At any rate, these are probably not necessary to making or breaking a GAN at this point.

I'm aiming for FAC in the future, so I will probably integrate these at some point. Thanks for finding these sources!

  ‘equated the arrangement of rooms with a repetitive cycle’ – I’m not sure what the sentence means, and it could be simplified.

Reworded

? To save a follow-up click for the reader, when specifically was the Game Awards announcement?

December 1, 2016, added in-line

Reception

? ‘According to the review aggregate website’ – the common use is to call this a ‘review aggregator’ or a ‘review aggregation website’ as suggested in the wikilink.

Fixed

* "generally favorable reviews." - the period looks like a typo?

Good catch!

  The 'worthy entry' framing of the first paragraph is fine, but not too descriptive. A better hook could be that the sources are unanimous that the expansion builds upon the merits of the original game through its new and unique additions. There is also some room to balance it with comments that the game is a bit too similar to Shovel Knight in some areas.

Reworded the framing somewhat

Brilliant, thanks for expanding on that.

  The content provided in the moveset section could be framed more helpfully, especially if a reader does not know the gameplay of Super Smash Bros. or Strider Hiryu. The content doesn’t help illustrate how it informed critics’ evaluation of the game, which is more focused on the responsiveness and ease of use of the new controls.

Reworded to be a little more descriptive hopefully

Fantastic, thanks. Reads much better!

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.