Talk:Islands: Non-Places

Copyedit comments
I saw this nomination at FAC and thought I'd try the game; it's short and entertaining, so thanks for the recommendation! (Though I think Feed the Head is the champion oddball game.) I started reviewing at FAC but found myself wanting to do more copyediting than is appropriate at FAC, so I thought I'd post here to see what you think. Here's what I'd like to change the "Gameplay" section to -- let me know what you think. I can give you my reasons for the changes I've made but I don't want to overcommunicate so I'll wait for your comments. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 14:50, 10 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Islands: Non-Places consists of a series of ten scenes, each of which represents a constructed environment such as a parking lot, a hotel lobby, or an airport. These spaces are rendered in the stylized manner that characterizes Burton's work, with solid monotone colors, dark shadows, and foggy backgrounds, and although each environment is clearly built by humans, there are no people in any of them.  These mundane scenes become increasingly surreal as the player interacts with the scenery: for example, in one scene, an empty bus stop becomes an incubator for eggs; in another, a malfunctioning fountain opens up to reveal a vast underground space beneath it.  The soundtrack mainly consists of assorted artificial sound effects and ambient environmental sounds such as distant cars or birdsong, which are not always obviously connected with the visuals of a scene; the sounds are all pre-existing, freely licensed recordings which Burton found on the internet.


 * The gameplay is minimalist: the camera can be rotated around the scene in a fixed circle, but the player cannot move within it. The only way to interact with the game is to click on the scene, which prompts the next events to unfold, and eventually leads to the next scene. Interactive areas are usually–but not always–noticeably lit up. There are no puzzles to be solved, and no overarching narrative or goal aside from interacting with each scene. The game is short, and can be completed in less than an hour. Because of its minimal interactivity and heavy emphasis on visuals, it is usually described by critics as an art game.
 * I don't agree with all of your changes, particularly the elimination of mentioning liminality, which I think is essential. I have made some alterations based on what you posted above - what do you think? &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 01:02, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

Here's why I suggested the remaining differences: Hope you don't mind the detailed prose analysis; I enjoyed the game a lot and it made me pay a lot of attention to the prose here. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 03:03, 11 September 2021 (UTC) Reading through again, I have a couple more comments, but nothing very substantive, so I'll post at the FAC. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 13:11, 11 September 2021 (UTC)
 * "anonymous" -> "constructed" -- I don't think the sources support "anonymous" very well, and I'm not sure what is intended by it. It seems important (given the liminality comments) that the scenes are of places that are built by humans, but I don't think it's clear what "anonymous" means -- perhaps "not identified as a particular example of a space", e.g. this is a parking lot but it's not identified as the JFK long-stay parking lot?  Can you say why you think "anonymous" is the right word and how the sources support it?
 * Anonymous as in "non-descript", unidentifiable as anything other than a generic example of the type. It ties into the concept of "non-places" and liminality, which is clearly supported by the sources.
 * I like "nondescript"; could we use that instead of "anonymous"? I think it's more direct. Mike Christie (talk - contribs -  library) 13:02, 11 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Cheated and put it in addition to. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 15:47, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
 * "each scene clearly represents a constructed space" -> "each environment is clearly built by humans" -- I avoided "constructed" partly because I used it in the first sentence, but also because it has a figurative meaning -- there are abstract constructs as well as physical constructs. I was trying to be as clear as possible to the reader what it is about the scenes that's being commented on.  I'd like a better term in the first sentence too, but I couldn't come up with one.
 * I didn't use it in my first sentence, so there's no issue with repetition. My initial version specified constructed as opposed to natural, which seems to fix the problem you describe, but your version removed that.
 * I cut the "liminal" sentence because I don't think it fits in the Gameplay section, though I think it's a key part of the appeal of the game and I like the point being made. Given that the gameplay is so minimal, and the ambience is a big part of the game's appeal, I can see why you included it.  I don't think it's necessary here but it's a judgement call and if you really think it's necessary I'll drop the point.
 * Yes, I think it is significant. The whole point is that the scenes are intended to evoke the same feeling of liminality/non-place/disconnection that being in those spaces in real life can have.
 * I connected the two sentences beginning "The seemingly..." and "In one scene..." with a semicolon and "for example" for flow; the rhythm is getting a bit staccato at that point in the paragraph and the two sentences are a natural fit with each other.
 * Do that and we have 5 refs at the end of one sentence, I'd rather have slightly less flow and more ref separation.
 * Could we not have the refs at the ends of the clauses, so there wouldn't be five together? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 13:02, 11 September 2021 (UTC)
 * I really, really hate putting refs in the middle of sentences. It breaks up the flow visually and is super distracting imo.
 * Similarly the two sentences about the sounds seem to me to flow better when connected.
 * If we do that, we have a one-sentence paragraph, and I don't think the bits about the sound design ought to be put together with the visual design; separate topic, separate paragraph.
 * I cut "extremely" from "extremely minimalist" as unnecessary. There's an old newspaper editor's saying: "Use 'damn' instead of 'very' when writing your stories; that way you can be sure they'll be cut from the final copy".  I don't think we need to emphasize this beyond "minimalist"; we give a complete description of the gameplay so the reader understands just how minimal it is.
 * For readers who haven't played it, or who don't do much gaming at all, I think it's necessary to emphasize how extreme Burton takes the minimalism schtick, especially as it became a point of critique for some reviewers. So far the other people at the FAC haven't seen an issue with it, so my preference is to retain it.
 * I added "and eventually leads to the next scene", and you kept the addition but changed it to "leading to the next when it is finished". I think neither of these is quite right; my version is a bit vague about what it is that leads to the next scene, and your version doesn't say "next scene", so it could be read as "leading to the next step of the scene".  The point I was trying to get across is that the activity within a scene, and the transitions from scene to scene, are both caused by the same player interaction -- clicking on the scene.  I used "eventually" because there's no clue in the scene about when the scene will end.  Is there a better way to convey this?
 * Tweaked a little, should be more clear now I think. I'm glad you liked the game (out of curiosity, had you played it prior to the FAC?) and the article as well. Critique is always good - I wouldn't have gone to FAC if I didn't want any :) &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 03:27, 11 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Your tweaks are a definite improvement and resolve the issue I was concerned about. No, I hadn't played it before seeing the FAC -- it was your article that led me to try it. A couple more replies above -- for the ones I didn't reply to, I'm not sure I agree with your points but I think the remaining issues are matters of judgement so we can see if other editors chime in at FAC or afterwards. Mike Christie (talk - contribs -  library) 13:02, 11 September 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm glad that my writing got you interested in the game! I responded to the two remaining comments above, and have made changes per the FAC comments as well. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 15:47, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for adding "nondescript"; I do think that helps. Re your comments about having references in the middle and too many at the end, I've no problem with leaving that sentence as it is, but as a general rule won't that lead you to consistently use short sentences where multiple refs are needed to cover something?  If we can't add refs in the middle, and can't pile them up at the end, those sentences have to be chopped up.  Many sentences won't need four or five refs, so it won't be an issue often, but I'm not sure it's a good idea to let the visual aesthetics trump prose considerations.  Just my two cents. Mike Christie (talk - contribs -  library) 12:15, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
 * It's not something I've run into as a big problem in the past, to be honest. It isn't so much about visuals in the sense of aesthetics as it is about how the arrangement of text can be distracting for the reader. I have ADHD and I find it more difficult to parse text when refs and stuff are interspersed with it so I make things easier for myself (and, I like to hope, others with similar issues) by avoiding putting refs midsentence. I have a hard time with raw wikitext editing for the same reason - visual editor is a lifesaver for me. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 18:47, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Another Visual Editor fan! We can agree on that, then. Mike Christie (talk - contribs -  library) 19:37, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 09:22, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
 * James Turrell - Rendering for Aten Reign - Photo 01.jpg