Talk:Life Is Strange (video game)/GA1

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

Reviewer: AdrianGamer (talk · contribs) 16:05, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

First comments
I'll have a more detailed look at the article by the end of this week. I have found some sources for development section that are not currently used in the article. They may be useful.
 * Hannah Telle: Involvement in Life Is Strange is the ‘Greatest Honor’


 * Life Is Strange: Episodic Heartstrings - Kinda Funny at E3 2015


 * Life is Strange's co-director discusses the episode 2 ending fallout, Max's powers, and friendship
 * I see nothing of vital importance to add from it.


 * Life Is Strange Director Talks About The Theme Of "Identity" And Visual Novels
 * This source is used for the claim of the Catcher in the Rye influence.


 * Life is Strange - Michel Koch Interview
 * The video interview is cited in the development section as part of this source.


 * The article doesn't have any information on the franchise's future.
 * The only material I've found is this—"We would love to have the opportunity to do another season". It goes on to say that it would involve a new cast. (I'm saving that for when the second season is actually greenlit.) Recently, there were articles claiming season 2 was confirmed, but that resulted from a mistranslation. Cognissonance (talk) 15:57, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

— AdrianGamer (talk) 13:19, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Review

 * You need to arrange the platforms in the platforms field of the infobox in alphabetical order.


 * Life Is Strange is available for Microsoft Windows, PlayStation 4, PlayStation 3, Xbox One and Xbox 360 via digital distribution - I suggest putting them before "The game's plot focuses on Maxine Caulfield". Also arrange them in alphabetical order.


 * The player's actions will be able to adjust the narrative as it unfolds, and reshape it once allowed to travel back in time. - "be able to" is not needed


 * The lead seems to be a bit short. To extend its length I usually split it into four paragraphs (one for the game's basic information, one for gameplay and plot, one for development and the last one for reception.)


 * communicate with other NPCs - Don't use short form for NPCs


 * I expect at least two paragraphs from the gameplay section. The first paragraph can talk about the basic stuff, while the second paragraph can talk about the unique stuff like the rewinding features. It is a bit messily arranged now as every gameplay information are put together in one single paragraph.


 * The player can examine and interact with objects - What are the purposes of these objects. Would they reveal more narrative information to the player, or they are just there to enable puzzle-solving? [Optional]


 * Items that are collected before time travelling will be kept in the inventory after the fact - What is the use of these items? How can you use them? [Optional]


 * Life Is Strange started development in April 2013 - This should be a passive action. Change it to "The development of Life is Strange was started in April 2013."


 * The game was borne of the idea for the rewind mechanic - "born"


 * and consulted Google Street View - "consulted" doesn't seem to be the best word to use here.


 * It was decided early on that most of the budget be spent on the writing and voice actors - You can split a new paragraph starting from here.


 * French developer brought in via Skype. - Who is the French developer? The article never mentions Dontnod comes from France.


 * Although it holds significant differences from Dontnod's previous title - Put Remember Me there instead of "Dontnod's previous title"


 * it takes use of the tools and special effects like lighting and depth - "makes" use


 * The article is a bit overlinked. Game mechanics, lighthouse, nightmare, traffic collision, bunker, art gallery should not be linked.


 * But lighting and depth of view should be wikilinked


 * Square Enix announced Life Is Strange on 11 August 2014 along with its developer Dontnod - Should be "Square Enix and Dondnod announced ''Life is Strange on 11 August 2014"


 * Since it is an episodic game, it is missing a "Chapter" section. A section similar to this would be great.
 * On the talk page you will find the arguments I put forth against the Episodes table; basically, the table was removed because the content of the rest of the article made it obsolete.
 * The table is used to highlight the game's episodic format. In my opinion, it is still needed. The table can present information better than prose sometimes, especially for information about dates. I believe that if you put all dates information in prose (like the second paragraph of the release section) it would be very confusing for readers to follow.
 * ✅ (using the wikicodes for the table that was removed, not the ones from Tales of Monkey Island—I hope that's okay)
 * The physical release should be on there as well, but I don't know how to present the dates without citing them with each episode, which would falsely imply that the physical copies will launch episodically. Do you know how to put the physical release dates in the middle right of the table? Cognissonance (talk) 12:44, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
 * It shouldn't be. It belongs to the more general "release" section. Now that you have a table, I suggest to trim the second paragraph of the release section. It is now repeating the dates mentioned in the table.
 * ✅ Cognissonance (talk) 16:23, 28 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Hardcore Gamer gave Life Is Strange 4.5 out of 5 and declared it the sleeper hit of 2015. - Rephrased it to "Hardcore Gamer declared the game the sleeper hit of 2015". Score is not needed.


 * Mitch Dyer of IGN wrote that its "laughable script and worse performances obstruct its otherwise touching, human story" - You should paraphrase the quote.


 * first and second instalments. - "episodes instead of instalments


 * Though the fetch quests were said to interfere with its emotional quality, the episode built up to a "killer cliffhanger - Who said these?


 * Criticism was directed at its "cheap ways" of progressing the plot - what are the "cheap ways"? Any examples?


 * You should wikilink every single magazines/websites in the work field of all citations
 * ✅ Cognissonance (talk) 12:05, 27 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Not sure whether source 34, 134 are reliable sources or not. Try to find other reliable sources that can replace them.
 * Having followed Indiewire's coverage for years, I've found it to be extremely reliable. I couldn't find a replacement for The Game Fanatics, but am willing to remove the source and rewrite information that relies upon it (specificities like "lighting" and "depth of field") if you insist.


 * Source 68 is submitted by a contributor, making it unreliable.
 * ✅ Cognissonance (talk) 17:12, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

Overall
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:
 * B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and y:
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. Has an appropriate reference section:
 * B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:
 * C. No original research:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. Major aspects:
 * B. Focused:
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Pass or Fail:

Overall it is a very comprehensive article, supported by a lot of reliable sources. Points marked with [Optional] means that it is outside of the GA scope, even though I believe that they may make the article more detailed. You have done an amazing work on the article, and it will most likely be promoted after you have fixed all the issues. AdrianGamer (talk) 04:41, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Since all the issues had been addressed the article is good to go. Life is Strange is now a . Congratulations! AdrianGamer (talk) 06:38, 29 November 2015 (UTC)