Wikipedia:Peer review/Development of Final Fantasy XV/archive1

Development of Final Fantasy XV

I've listed this article for peer review because… I'm planning to nominated this as a Featured Article in the future. It was upped to Good Article status in 2017, and since then has been expanded due to new information relating to the game's post-release support and new development information. This may well have caused grammar and stylistic issues that need addressing or lessening before the nomination. There is also the question of whether the current sources will be admissible for a featured article.

Thanks, ProtoDrake (talk) 13:22, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

STANDARD NOTE: I have added this PR to the Template:FAC peer review sidebar to get quicker and more responses. When this PR is closed, please remove it from the list. Also, consider adding the sidebar to your userpage to help others discover pre-FAC PRs, and please review other articles in that template. Thanks! Z1720 (talk) 14:42, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

Comments from Z1720

Hi ProtoDrake, I am sorry that it has taken so long for someone to review this article. My best advice is to return to reviewing WP:FACs: reviewing helps editors understand the intricacies of the FAC criteria and Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. It also builds goodwill among FAC reviewers and demonstrates that you read and understood the FA criteria before nominating your article. I see that you have conducted some reviews in the past; it takes at least five reviews to promote an FAC, so I suggest conducting at least that many reviews before starting your nomination. Since you already have a lot of FAs, your expertise will be greatly valued.

If you want more comments on this PR, I recommend advertising it at various Wikiprojects or with editors who have worked on similar articles. As you probably already know, since this is a PR it will not be considered canvassing to contact specific editors and asked them to comment. Below are some comments about the article. I will review this as if it was an FAC, but instead of fixing things as I go along I will post them here so that you can gain a better understanding of what needs to be fixed. I will also look at the sources, per your request.

• "was brought on board to aid production." -> was recruited to aid production? I'm concerned that "brought on board" might be too far into MOS:IDIOM territory.
• "multiple other studios were brought in to help with various aspects of the game." This feels a little too general. Can some specifics be stated here?
• "but the team eventually realized that such techniques had become dated." Delete eventually
• "Nomura had wanted to use a present-day setting for a Final Fantasy game ever since this idea had been considered but abandoned during the development of Final Fantasy VII." -> Nomura had wanted to use a present-day setting for a Final Fantasy game and previously abandoned this idea during the development of Final Fantasy VII." I think this makes this sentence clearer.
• "who was most widely known for her work" -> who was known for her work
• "cutscenes-exclusive" -> cutscene-exclusive?
• "a consideration that was closely tied to the story." Delete closely
• "There were even plans for the game to have a "unique" support" Replace even with also
• "This quote was intended to evoke the atmosphere Nomura was aiming for." What was this atmosphere? can it be described?

This brings me to "Gameplay". I will finish this later when I have more time. Feel free to start working on these. Z1720 (talk) 22:41, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Continuing:

• "There were even plans for the game" -> Delete even.
• "Although after the game's transition there were technological and mechanical changes," -> Although there were technological and mechanical changes after the game's transition
• "the basic elements established in trailers such as Noctis' warping and weapon abilities were carried over." Comma after trailers and abilities
• "with the others being relegated to command functions governed by the game's artificial intelligence (AI)." Delete being
• "The team experimented with a multi-character battle system," -> The development team
• "but as this would not have worked from a gameplay perspective, the team created a story-related pretext that allowed other characters to wield magic." -> but this was changed when the team created a story-related pretext that allowed other characters to wield magic.
• "This quote was intended to evoke the atmosphere Nomura was aiming for." Describe this atmosphere.
• "for several successive years" I think several can be deleted here.
• "E3 2010 was apparently prevented due " Remove apparently, as it is not NPOV. Instead, maybe state "it was reported by..."
• "The 2013 trailer was again a concept piece -> The 2013 trailer was another concept piece
• "was made at TGS 2014" Delete made
• "This project is being referred by Square Enix as the "Final Fantasy XV Universe"." -> This project was referred to by Square Enix as the "Final Fantasy XV Universe"?
• "A free tech demo, Platinum Demo: Final Fantasy XV released on March 30, 2016." -> A free tech demo called Platinum Demo: Final Fantasy XV released on March 30, 2016.
• "Birthed from the initial announced wish to develop a second tech demo and forming part of the "Final Fantasy XV Universe" I don't like birthed, and I don't think this phrase is necessary.
• "In August, rumors began circulating" -> In August, rumors circulated"
• " as the team wanted to bring the game out in the west close to its Japanese release." -> as the team wanted to release the Western and Japanese versions of the game in close succession. Or something similar, as "wanted to bring the game out in the west" is awkward phrasing.
• "dialogue matching mechanism" -> dialogue-matching mechanism
• "some scripted character interactions to join up the different sides of the narrative." -> some scripted character interactions to connect different sides of the narrative.
• "on November 19, 2019 as a launch title." comma after 2019

Looking at the sources. Version reviewed.

• What makes JPGames a high-quality source? The About Us page seems like these are all volunteers with little editorial oversight.
• "Corriae, Alexa Ray (2015-08-29)" Does not appear to have been written by a staff member at Gamespot. Why is this a high-quality source?
• "Yoshinori Kisate and Tetsuya Nomura Interview" What is this publication and why is it high-quality?
• What makes qj.net a high-quality source? I cannot find the editorial policy of the site. The author's name is given as "Kristine S." so the lack of a lastname is problematic
• Playstation Lifestyle has not achieved consensus at WP:VG/RS. If it cannot pass the lowered bar of reliable, then it might be difficult to say it is a high-quality source.
• Why is Nova Crystallis a high-quality source? I cannot seem to find their editorial policy on their website.
• What makes Finaland a high-quality source? The website seems to be run by a team of volunteers with no editorial oversight.
• Ref 38 also uses JPGames. See above.
• Ref 75 also has Corriae, Alexa Ray as an author
• Ref 83: What makes "Final Fantasy World" a high-quality source? The source's author is named "KujaFFman" and the website doesn't seem to have paid staff.
• Ref 90: What makes "Game-OST" high-quality? The author seems to be "Andre Marentette" but there's no profile of them, and I can't find the editorial policy of the site.
• Ref 93: What makes "Final Fantasy Dream " high-quality? The author is named Skypirate.
• Ref 94: WP:VG/RS says about Video Game Music Online that staff articles are reliable, but that the site is situational. What makes the authors of these articles high-quality sources? (Ref 95 and 99 are written by site staff members)
• Ref 144: What makes "La Capital Ovidada" high-quality? I can't seem to find the site's editorial policy and the author's name seems to be Viento and they are not listed as staff.
• Ref 223: WP:VG/RS says to only use this site if the author can be established as reliable. Why is this author a high-quality source?

Some of these websites and authors are used multiple times in the article, so if you decide to remove them please ensure that you remove all instances of the reference. It is a well-written article that needs a little polish to get it to FA status. This concludes my thoughts, please ping if you have questions or concerns. Z1720 (talk) 17:21, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

@ProtoDrake: To ensure you saw the comments above. Z1720 (talk) 20:22, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

Closing note: I am going to close this PR due to inactivity, since the above has not been addressed and the nominator has not edited the article since September. Once the above are addressed, the nominator is welcome to open a new PR. Z1720 (talk) 15:17, 9 November 2021 (UTC)