Talk:Crazy Taxi: Fare Wars/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: IceWelder (talk · contribs) 13:48, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Dibs. I will review this during the week, the weekend at the latest. Regards, IceWelder  &#91; &#9993; &#93; 13:48, 4 August 2021 (UTC)


 * GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):  d (copyvio and plagiarism):
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:


 * Infobox
 * Hitmaker is only mentioned in the infobox. If it is listed merely because it developed the original games, it should be moved into a note with added context like "Based on Crazy Taxi and Crazy Taxi 2 developed by Hitmaker".
 * ✅ I just removed it. No part of this game was technically developed by Hitmaker.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 16:27, 7 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Sniper Studios appears (per the lead and the Gamasutra postmortem) to be the primary developer and should be first on the list.
 * ✅ See above.


 * Black Hole Entertainment should be wiki-linked.


 * Stephen Frost is not mentioned or sourced in the body. If he appears in the in-game credits, cite these credits and fill out the other credit fields as well.
 * ✅ I couldn't find the full credits, but I did find sources for the executive and associate producers.


 * Optional, but if you would like to use a clean, logoless cover art, there is one here.
 * That doesn't load for me, so I skipped it.
 * Since I was still able to retrieve the file from Sega Retro, I went ahead replaced the cover with the HQ version (cropped according to the original) and amended the rationale appropriately. Regards, IceWelder  &#91; &#9993; &#93; 22:28, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks, it looks better. Sorry for the delay, but I intend to do the last thing with adding more reviews. That is the most time consuming as I have to read through them all. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 01:32, 28 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Lead
 * The Japanese title appears superfluous as this is a Western-developed game. If you still want to keep it, place it in a footnote or use a Nihongo foot with the Japanese-script rendering (クレイジータクシー ダブルパンチ).


 * Mention the release year in the first sentence and remove "open world", as it is not a genre. Suggestion:
 * Crazy Taxi: Fare Wars is a 2007 racing video game developed by Sniper Studios as part of the Crazy Taxi series.


 * Black Hole Entertainment could also be mentioned here.


 * Reorder the lead so that the introduction is followed by a brief gameplay description, the all appropriate development/release details, then the reception. Currently, they are somewhat interlaced.


 * There should be a few more of the central development details, e.g. how the studios were involved. For example:
 * While Black Hole Entertainment ported the original games from the Dreamcast to the PlayStation Portable, Sniper Studios added multiplayer features. A new single-player campaign was foregone due to budget and time constraints.


 * Move the precise release dates into the Development section and simplify them in the lead. Suggestion:
 * The game was released for the PlayStation Portable in North America, Australia, and Europe between mid-2007, followed by a Japanese release in 2008.
 * ✅ Moved them to "release" section of development.


 * The reception summary contains points not discussed in the Reception section, such as dated gameplay and control issues.
 * ✅ Added a GameSpot quote that says these things.


 * Gameplay
 * In the See also hatnote, the game names need to be italicised (which will make them un-italicised in the rendered note).


 * The Gameplay prose should start with the game's central aspect of being a compilation. Suggestion:
 * Crazy Taxi: Fare Wars combines the games Crazy Taxi and Crazy Taxi 2, leaving their respective original gameplay intact. In the single-player mode, ...


 * Briefly explain what the Crazy Box and Crazy Pyramid modes are about as you cannot expect the reader to have read the original games' articles beforehand. The introduction could be along the lines of:
 * Fare Wars carries over the two minigame modes from the original games: In Crazy Box, ...
 * Fare Wars carries over the two minigame modes from the original games: In Crazy Box, ...


 * Rephrase the sentence about the new modes with at least one separate sentence for each, making it less of a run-on sentence. Possible introduction:
 * Fare Wars adds three multiplayer minigames: Time Trials has players compete ...


 * Differences
 * Consider merging the Differences section into the Development section, since it contains details on the development.


 * Swap the brand and soundtrack sentences for a better flow on the soundtrack.


 * However, the game allows custom soundtracks – Change "However" to e.g. "Instead" as there is no contradiction.


 * These changes were carried over to the PlayStation Network and Xbox Live Arcade versions. – Does Fare Wars have PSN/XBLA versions or does this refer only to Crazy Taxi [1]? In the latter case, the sentence appears irrelevant and should be removed.


 * The FPS cap should be mentioned as part of the other hardware restrictions.


 * Development
 * a collaborative team consisting of – This bit seems redundant.
 * ✅ - Clarified in more detail what it means by that.


 * Per WP:NOPIPE, Sega of America should be linked directly and not piped.


 * Hungary should not be linked.


 * While Sniper Studios handled ... was handled by Black Hole – To avoid repetition change the first "handled" to "designed" or something similar.


 * The studio initially chose to work on Crazy Taxi because they believed the series had "near-perfect gameplay", and they wanted to make a true port. – Which of the two companies is "The studio"?


 * When referring to a company, either use "it" instead of "they" or point out the specific people the "they" is referring to.


 * I would also use this sentence to flow into why Sniper Studios collaborated with Sega as described in the IGN interview.


 * Believing that bringing the game to PSP would "make a lot of sense", ... – The short form "PSP" was not introduced yet and only appears one more time in the body. Use the long form in both cases and link the first of these (as the first occurrence in the body).


 * ... but would have cost too much in money and time to implement. – The "in" appears to be stray and should be removed.


 * The game's developers initially considered buying an original Crazy Taxi arcade machine from EBay for reference, but the shipping cost was "horrendous", and the game was ultimately based off the Dreamcast rather than the arcade version. – This suggests that the game was based on the Dreamcast versions because of the eBay shipping cost, but the source suggests that the arcade purchase was a mere consideration while the decision to use the Dreamcast versions was already made. Consider rephrasing:
 * For reference, Sniper Studios frequently had the original games running on a Dreamcast at the office. The studio refrained from buying an arcade version of Crazy Taxi via eBay due to high shipping fees.
 * For reference, Sniper Studios frequently had the original games running on a Dreamcast at the office. The studio refrained from buying an arcade version of Crazy Taxi via eBay due to high shipping fees.


 * ... was called a difficult challenge, ... – Challenges are difficult by definition. Consider: was considered a challenge.
 * ... was called a difficult challenge, ... – Challenges are difficult by definition. Consider: was considered a challenge.


 * ... the original games' AI to be re-engineered to ... – "AI" is mentioned first here, so use "artificial intelligence", link to Artificial intelligence in video games and introduce the short form in parentheses.


 * "re-engineered" is jargon/fluff, "altered" will suffice.


 * Instead of "UMD", use the full form and introduce the short form in parentheses.


 * Therefore, the multiplayer mode was moved to the game menu instead. – If I understand correctly, the two combined games have their own sub-menus. This should be made clear here instead of just "the game menu".
 * ✅ - Clarified that it was in-game to the single-player mode


 * Present-tense to past-tense: "results" "resulted", "improve"  "improved".
 * - It's meant to mean actions the player does in the present, not ones the developers did in the past.
 * - It's meant to mean actions the player does in the present, not ones the developers did in the past.


 * The wireless communication for the games was made more robust than its default game state ... – What is "its default game state"?
 * ✅ - changed to simpler "normal"
 * ✅ - changed to simpler "normal"


 * Reception
 * Quote Metacritic in that the game received "mixed or average reviews" reviews.


 * The reviews table contains eight reviews that go unused in the prose. The section would greatly benefit from incorporating them into the text.
 * However, the games were largely seen as inferior ports of the originals that suffered from problematic technical limitations. – The latter half is ambiguous and could suggest that the originals suffered from technical limitations. The "problematic" is superfluous as the sentence is already doubly-negatively connotated.
 * However, the games were largely seen as inferior ports of the originals that suffered from problematic technical limitations. – The latter half is ambiguous and could suggest that the originals suffered from technical limitations. The "problematic" is superfluous as the sentence is already doubly-negatively connotated.


 * ... games being unable to run at full speed on the hardware, as well as the removal of both the real-world stores and restaurants, ... – The only adjacent source mentions the former point objectively and does not include the other; neither is presented
 * ✅ Added the Eurogamer source specifically there


 * The songs were replaced with new music, requiring players to obtain the originals themselves. – This objective circumstance is already mentioned in prior sections and does not to be repeated here.


 * To improve flow, try to group common thoughts: For example, combine Kalata's and Sewart's statements on the soundtrack change and pair up Sewart's and Gibson's opinions on the speed. Potential additions from the many other reviews could be handled in the same way.
 * Avoid repeating "called".


 * Sources
 * The release dates are cited using MobyGames. MobyGames is user-generated and considered unreliable, so it should be exchanged for a better source.
 * I found sources that might help you support the dates: North America, Australia, Europe, and Japan. The JP date will need to be corrected in the article. The PAL version was apparently originally due to come out on September 7. The first source for the European release mentions the delay verbatim. Regards, IceWelder  &#91; &#9993; &#93; 22:28, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Sources #3, 8, 11, 12, 13, 15, 16, and 17 incorrectly use publisher instead of website


 * Based on the archive, the author for Siliconera #5 is "Spencer".


 * The credited author for IGN #6 is "IGN Cars" but generic staff monikers should generally not be mentioned.


 * Add author "Aceinet" to GameZone #14.


 * 1UP.com 1Up.com for #9.


 * External links
 * Based on WP:ELMINOFFICIAL, the MobyGames external link can be removed.

Sorry for the delay. Above is my initial review. Feel free to cross out or reply to individual bullet points as you work on them. I will go over the article again once the above issues have been addressed. Regards, IceWelder  &#91; &#9993; &#93; 14:10, 7 August 2021 (UTC)


 * I have added more to the reception of the game. Tell me if that is okay or if it still needs to be expanded further. Otherwise, all the other points have been addressed. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 00:20, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
 * The documentation for Video game reviews requires that "Every single-site review source should be used within the reception section". Currently, the Eurogamer, GameSpy, GamesRadar, PALGN, VideoGamer.com, and Maxim reviews go unused apart from the table (and Eurogamer in the Gameplay section). As I said before, the section would greatly benefit from incorporating these reviews in a way that common (or contrary) thoughts are grouped together, so to avoid WP:QUOTEFARM and create a good reading flow. This will also ease the process of aggregating the reviews for the lead. The release dates source also still needs to be changed away from MobyGames. I provided example sources for that above. Regards, IceWelder  &#91; &#9993; &#93; 17:09, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Alright, I will get to that as soon as I get a chance. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 10:12, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

Status query
IceWelder, ZXCVBNM, where does this review stand? As far as I can tell, ZXCVBNM has made over 250 edits on Wikipedia since their most recent post here more than six weeks ago, yet has not done any work on the article at all. Has this nomination been abandoned? Even if not, it's been a long while; perhaps a deadline for completion should be given—the typical wait time is seven days, so perhaps that (or twice that) should be requested. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:40, 28 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I kind of got burned out of editing it. I still absolutely want it to succeed though, so it's not abandoned. I will try to go back and finish it now that I have taken a break. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 09:23, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
 * It has been another month since the latest edit. I've gone ahead and replaced MobyGames so that this can be crossed off the list. Only the Reception revamp is outstanding now; if you need help with the writing, please get some. I hope that we can wrap up this review soon as it is nearing its four-month anniversary. IceWelder  &#91; &#9993; &#93; 13:33, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Pinging ZXCVBNM to be sure they see and respond to last week's comment. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:14, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
 * The additions to the reception section should be done now. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 12:20, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your work. I believe the article is now good enough under the good article criteria and has therefore been . Regards, IceWelder  &#91; &#9993; &#93; 13:59, 8 December 2021 (UTC)