Talk:Just Cause 2/GA1

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

Reviewer: Cognissonance (talk · contribs) 18:55, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Gonna take a shower and then start on this. Cognissonance (talk) 18:55, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Lead

 * "developed by Swedish developer" — Minimize repetition, remove "Swedish developer".
 * "destroy government property on Panau for Chaos points. These Chaos points" — Minimize repetition, remove second "Chaos".
 * "They worked with" — Clarify: "Avalanche Studios worked with".
 * "generally-positive" — Remove the hymen--I mean, hyphen.

Gameplay

 * Establish that it is played from a third-person view and link to Third-person shooter.

Development

 * "According to Johansson" — Clarify: "According to Peter Johansson".
 * "The team also refined parachute" — Fix grammar: "The team also refined the parachute".
 * "an island with a variety landscapes" — Fix grammar: "an island with a variety of landscapes".
 * IGN (source 22) is dead. Archive or replace it.
 * PRNewswire (source 23) does not seem to connect.
 * "allows the user to capture gameplay video and export it to the XMB or upload it to YouTube from the game" — "from the game" is unnecessary when gameplay recording is already established.

Marketing and release

 * "A sequel to Just Cause was announced" can be simplified with "Just Cause 2 was announced".

Multiplayer mod

 * Cinema Blend (source 40) is unreliable. Use the source it's quoting, GameSpy.
 * Would be nice to have source 42 with the website=IGN parameter.

Reception

 * "generally-positive" — There it is, again.
 * "the game was widely regarded as a significant improvement of its predecessor" — Fix grammar: "the game was widely regarded as a significant improvement to its predecessor".
 * Add website=VG247 to source 52.
 * "The explosion was praised for its visual effects" — I think what is meant is "The explosions were praised for their visual effects".
 * Source 51 should be updated with this and put website=IGN instead of "Pc.ign.com".
 * "Kevin VanOrd of GameSpot and Ryan Clements of IGN noted a number of gameplay problems" — Keep it short, but establish what the gameplay problems were.
 * "and travelling between locations was so enjoyable that players would rarely use the black marketeer" — If this is what VanOrd said, just prefix the sentence with "and stated that".
 * "The game's difficulty and artificial intelligence were criticized as frustrating, sometimes spawning in front of the player" — What spawns in front of the player?
 * "the standard and presentation of its cutscene was not on a par with the game world" — Fix grammar: "the standard and presentation of its cutscenes were not on par with the game world".

Legacy

 * Microsoft Windows — Link to Microsoft Windows

Overall

 * 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: The article has minor, but noticeable problems with references, grammar and prose.
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Cognissonance (talk) 21:27, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the review! I have addressed all the issues. AdrianGamer (talk) 10:54, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall: The article has minor, but noticeable problems with references, grammar and prose.
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Cognissonance (talk) 21:27, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the review! I have addressed all the issues. AdrianGamer (talk) 10:54, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the review! I have addressed all the issues. AdrianGamer (talk) 10:54, 20 October 2016 (UTC)


 * 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):
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Cognissonance (talk) 11:23, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Cognissonance (talk) 11:23, 20 October 2016 (UTC)