Talk:Fahrenheit (2005 video game)/GA1

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

Reviewer: ProtoDrake (talk · contribs) 09:28, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

I'll take this on. If you don't hear anything from me by Saturday next, ping me. --ProtoDrake (talk) 09:28, 23 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Cognissonance (talk) 19:51, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

Alrighty, I think I gave give you a few things.
 * Infobox
 * Just a suggestion, but putting the additional developers and publishers in a Notes section. Makes it less overwhelming.
 * Also a suggestion, but putting the release dates into a collapsable format will also help make the infobox look less overwhelming.
 * I usually prefer everything to be visible. Cognissonance (talk) 08:04, 31 May 2020 (UTC)


 * There isn't a series for Fahrenheit, it's just a standalone title.
 * The people on wikidata say it becomes part of a series after it gets remastered. Cognissonance (talk) 07:16, 31 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Same thing happened with Observer (video game). Cognissonance (talk) 08:04, 31 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Lead
 * It's rather short. Barely anything on the gameplay, and the other versions should be put in the first paragraph after the original release version and date.
 * I'm a minimalist with leads, boiling everything down to the essentials. One plot summary, one line from gameplay as the section isn't large, a little more from development, etc. For chronology's sake, I prefer that the remaster comes after mentions of reception and sales, as it was ported long after the original release. Cognissonance (talk) 08:04, 31 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Maybe say how long it was in production as part of expansion, as that's mentioned in the text. Not essential.
 * It already says it took two years to make. Cognissonance (talk) 07:30, 31 May 2020 (UTC)


 * " It sold over one million copies." - Maybe changed to "Selling over one million copies, Quantic Dream considered the game a commercial success."


 * Gameplay
 * Image caption, at least add a full stop. As it stands, it looks like someone started typing then stopped without finishing.
 * It is not a full sentence, so it shouldn't have a full stop. Cognissonance (talk) 08:04, 31 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Plot
 * Can you mention the ending variants here?
 * As with many articles with multiple endings, if I'm doing most of the plot work myself, I only write what has to happen. Cognissonance (talk) 08:04, 31 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Development
 * "Fahrenheit was developed by Quantic Dream,[2] whose founder David Cage served as writer and director.[29]" - Maybe split this into two sentences, thus: "Fahrenheit was developed by Quantic Dream.[2] Company founder David Cage served as writer and director.[29]"
 * When you mention Vivendi Games, did they publish their previous title, or were they attached to Fahrenheit, or what?
 * The previous game isn't mentioned here, so don't know why you would think that. I added "initial" as Vivendi was the first publisher of Fahrenheit. Cognissonance (talk) 07:45, 31 May 2020 (UTC)


 * "Sex scenes were omitted from this version, but included in Fahrenheit: Indigo Prophecy Remastered, which launched for Windows, Android, iOS, Linux, and macOS in 2015, and PlayStation 4 in 2016.[2][40]" - This sentence just seems to transition very abruptly from the omitted sex scenes to an 'oh, there's a remastered version'. There should be some transition, or if there's more information on its production or origins or similar a smaller section on the remaster.
 * That line refers to North American censorship of the original game and the lack of censorship in the remastered version. Cognissonance (talk) 07:13, 31 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Reception
 * There are rather a lot of quotes here. I'd rephrase and paraphrase some of them. Not all, but some.
 * I gotta disagree, I think it strikes a good balance between objective description and quotations, like in Tales of Monkey Island or most my GAs. Cognissonance (talk) 08:04, 31 May 2020 (UTC)


 * References
 * All refs are missing accessdates. Not essential or really GA relevant, but something to note.
 * I don't use accessdates in my sources. Cognissonance (talk) 07:21, 31 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Ref 5 is just a website page, which can be edited by users apart from site staff. Have you an alternative journalistic source for that date? If you haven't it can pass, but it's a bit of a question mark.
 * I scoured the web to just find that one. Cognissonance (talk) 07:22, 31 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Refs 31, 32, 34 and 35 are different URL types of the same page, but otherwise identical. Is there a reason for this? If you like, you could use the code for it.
 * They all have the same title and I prefer not to embellish in that parameter. If there is a working page= parameter I could add a number on each of them. Cognissonance (talk) 07:28, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

That's some stuff for you to be going on with. Not a huge amount, mostly fiddly stuff. Basically the article's sound. Once you've addressed or explained the above, I'll give the article another look through. --ProtoDrake (talk) 21:38, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Addressed some of it and explained the rest. Cognissonance (talk) 08:04, 31 May 2020 (UTC)
 * You've made valid points. I think it's mostly come down to style preference. On the whole, this can Pass. Congrats! --ProtoDrake (talk) 09:42, 31 May 2020 (UTC)