Talk:Virtual Lab/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) 05:02, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

I'll take up this one and review it when I can. I'll let you know when I've finished! @Vrxces: Hey, just checking if the review is done. I'd prefer to get working on it all at once. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 03:36, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

Ok, I think that's most things that stand out - thanks for your patience! ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 23:56, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

GAN Review

Lead

• Nacoty moniker -> suggest moniker Nacoty (or pseudonym)
• As below, 'most valuable' is up for debate! Maybe 'expensive' etc.

Gameplay

• Add a period to end the first sentence.
• while the player -> suggest separating sentences as these aren't interrelated concepts
• The structure could be rejigged a little - the second paragraph discusses core gameplay that would seem to better follow on from the second sentence in the first paragraph. If there are any more details worth putting in, it may be helpful, as the section is a bit light.
• The Jeremy Parish Works video is not quite WP:VG/S but I recognize Parish has published books on Nintendo and therefore has some level of authority discussing the game even if independently published.
• Do any of the sources describe the pieces as 'worms'? I might be missing something obvious.
• The caption of the screenshot could be improved. The point about the prominent breasts was an aside in an interview - which strikes me as interesting but not what the non-free use rationale purports to be, which is depicting the design of the puzzle gameplay and user interface.
• The game is over wikilink is probably a bit obvious compared to other concepts that may be linkable i.e. 'falling block puzzle game', but harmless to keep in.

  I believe I've addressed these points; let me know if there's anything I missed, or any new issues.

  • Thanks @Cukie Gherkin: - I think the only thing is just the suggestions to make the comments in the review section more representative of the reviews and any additional citations as below you think may be useful. Otherwise I'm satisfied notwithstanding WP:NONENG sources that we've worked to get the article in as good shape as it can be, and that meets the GA standard. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 22:13, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
    • Thanks for all the help with the review. Apologies if I'm a little slow on it, traveling a lot due to my dad's health stuff! - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 00:37, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

      No apologies at all - life comes first; hope all is alright and let me know when you've been able to take a look. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 02:54, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

Development

• BGHOF is not a WP:VG/S but is a primary interview source, which is fine to include, but it's a shame there is no coverage to corroborate it. Generally I'd try and make this paragraph more concise as it's a summary of a single primary source. There's also signfificant coverage on the game in a separate article you can find here, although again, probably not best to rely heavily upon it.
• due to -> suggest before
• The evidence around the rarity of the game seems established, but the labelling of it as a "collectors item" seems an embellishment; the sources are unable to assess whether the price flows from its supply or demand.

Reception

• Generally, the reviews are sound as they are presented in summary style, but the choices on what the reviews are portrayed as saying miss some of the context and detail, and could provide more information:
  • Retrogames notes the game is unfinished, but doesn't critique its lack of content. The section focuses far more on the "shoddiness" of its design mistakes and may be better characterized as such.
    • I worry that I misattributed a source, I have to look into this. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 00:09, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
  • There's plenty more that could be taken from the Hardcore Gamer review, including its characterisation as a kusoge, labelling it as the "worst offender" of poor-quality Virtual Boy games, and specific mention of the various design mistakes and overly difficult gameplay.
  • The Famicom review could be better represented, if you trust my translation. They don't seem to call it 'cheap'. See below:

It's a puzzle game where the objective is to combine panels that fall from the top of the screen and are missing various parts on the top, bottom, left, right, and left so that there are no missing spots, and erase them all from the screen.

• 5 It's a rather unique and fun game in which what appears to be internal organs fall down one after the other, and you have to connect them together. I'm sure many people find it creepy rather than refreshing. I'm sure they're trying to make it a bit more gory by putting a cute girl on the screen, but it's all the more creepy.
• 3 A falling game like the water pipe game. It is too difficult to follow up when a block is placed in the wrong place. Since a wrong move can be fatal, the play feels more like a game of chess and is less exhilarating. It's sad that there are no elements that utilize stereoscopic vision, other than the funny thing about the girl's breasts displayed in the lower right that appear to be swaying in the foreground.
• 4 I just can't get into it... I think it's because if you place even one of the internal parts (!?) incorrectly, it's difficult to unwind it. The Puyo Puyo series isn't all that's going on in a game, so I'd like to appreciate this idea. If you're going to use parts like this, I'd like the production to be creepy as well.
• 4 It's exhilarating to eliminate large snails, but it's difficult to aim for them. Virtual Boy's style of production is rarely seen. In the case of Virtual Boy, which has weaknesses compared to other models such as monochromatic colors and easy eyestrain, it seems that there is little point in developing software that can be used with other models.

• • Same with the Commemorative Guidebook, which seems to be a trivial mention, doesn't seem quite to be calling the premise "strange". In ironic affect, the point about the breasts is not critiqued but praised as a "must-see"!

It's a light game that almost seems like an intermediate umpire's imagination, in which you connect and erase images (which look like moving, falling images). The unnaturally three-dimensional shape of the girl's breasts swaying as she stands aimlessly nearby is a must-see.

Additional Sources

• You may like to add one or more of the below sources into the article, although most don't have much to add other than evidencing the rarity and price of the game:

A soupily slow game that made our ears bleed, falling block puzzler Virtual Lab threatens to become passably fun at times. They're empty threats, though, and it never escapes its crushingly dull, repetitive loop. It's not insultingly offensive, but if you're after an excuse to splurge on a near-mint Virtual Boy on ebay, this ain't it.

"A lot of the hardware and software is freely available on eBay" says Christian Radke, editor-in-chief of the excellent Planet Virtual Boy. "But if you want to go for a complete collection, you'll need a few thousands bucks, especially for the 'rare four'. These are SD Gundam Dimension War and Virtual Bowling — which both fetch about $800 - closely followed by Virtual Lab.

The games differ greatly in price on eBay, although the four rarest ones will cost you an arm and a leg: Virtual Lab, Space Invaders Virtual Collection, SD Gundam Dimension War and Virtual Bowling.

In Japan, most Virtual Boy games are relatively easy to get a hold of save for a trio of titles that shipped in severely limited quantities right as the whole operation was collapsing: Virtual Lab, SD Gundam Dimension War and the rarest Virtual Boy game in the world, Virtual Bowling. These easily fetch upward of $500 each.

There were a handful of Virtual Boy games released at the end of the system's lifespan in Japan in severely limited quantities, and I don't have the other three – Virtual Bowling, SD Gundam and Virtual Lab. I saw the latter two in Akihabara on this trip, selling for $300 and $400 respectively. Ouch.

@Vrxces: I think I got everything. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 07:29, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

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.