Talk:Shin Megami Tensei: Digital Devil Saga/GA1

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

Reviewer: AdrianGamer (talk · contribs) 14:37, 26 August 2015 (UTC)


 * I personally think that this should split into two articles.
 * Japanese author Yu Godai, but withdraw from the project for personal reasons - "withdrew"
 * The second game began development immediately after the first - Rephrase it to "Atlus began developing the second game immediately after the completion of the first"
 * After reading the lead, and the sources you have, I do believe that Digital Devil Saga 2 deserves its own article. With the two intertwined with each other, it is a bit confusing.
 * Characters navigate to-scale environments, encountering enemies in both random encounters and story-focused boss battles - Too many "encounter" in this sentence
 * experience points (Karma) are awarded to characters. - I do not really think the use of bracket is really appropriate here. It makes "Karma" sounds like something supplementary but it is not in this case. The same also applies on Mantras are bought using Macca (the in-game currency), then mastering them by gaining "AP" (Atma Points)
 * The maximum number of skills that can be equipped are 8 - I do not really think you can equip "skills".
 * Both player characters and enemies being governed by a mechanic called the Press Turn system: - enemies "are governed"
 * each character a symbol to represent a turn - missing a verb
 * People also begin exhibiting basic emotions after previously being devoid of them. - What does this mean?
 * but Lupa goes berserk and must be killed - Sentence structure is almost identical to last one. It would be great if there is more variation.
 * Production began prior to the beginning of active development on Shin Megami Tensei: Nocturne, beginning under the working title New Goddess. - Too much "begin" in this sentence. Secondly, when exactly Atlus began Nocturne's development?
 * The game's formal title was decided upon fairly late in its development cycle - Is there a particular reason that lead to this?
 * on their person to signify their demon power - on their "person" sounds weird.
 * The first game's themes were defined as "awakening" and "change", referenced in how the characters gradually awoke to their emotions and the static environment of the Junkyard was drastically changed - Instead of using "first", "initial" sounds more accurate.
 * The idea did not appear in the finsihed game - "finished"
 * while staying truth Kaneko's distinctive designs - "staying true to" sounds better
 * It feels unbalanced, with so many information focusing on the first game and so little on the second one.
 * For the second game, Meguro changed from the original's dark tone to give it a harsher feel and techno instrumentation - "from" is not necessary.
 * During 2004, the first game sold 153,421 units in Japan - Can it be more specific? The beginning of 2004, mid 2004, or the end of 2004?
 * several staff members being let go - I do not think "let go" sounds formal. "laid off" may be better.
 * There is too much quotes in the reception section. Paraphrase some of them.
 * General praise went to the story, characters and gameplay. The high difficulty, issues with repetition and pacing, and the cliffhanger ending drew criticism - This sentence should be the beginning of the second paragraph. The structure feels better this way.

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 lists:
 * 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:

Article is well-written and verifiable. Great work with this! However, I am worried about the inclusion of 2 here, given that they are basically two different games. It is not really a compilation, so I do not really see the need of including 2 here. 2 also seems to have get extensive coverage from reliable sources so I think splitting it out would be the best idea. for now. AdrianGamer (talk) 10:23, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I've done my best to fix the grammar issues you raised, but I feel I should explain why I didn't split the article. The first reason is that, apart from the differences noted, the gameplay of the two titles is virtually identical. The second is that the game's main staff are actually identical. The third is that there isn't actually that much citable information about the second game's development, so if things were split, the second article would actually be quite small for what is admittedly a fairly major console title. The biggest reason in my mind is the two games' multilayered interdependence, and a general attitude I've seen from Atlus developers and press to place the two games under a single banner. The information from the first two paragraphs, as far as possible, relate to elements that carry over between both games. The Persona 2 games are quite different from this one in that a large amount of information on both games is readily available. This duology is different: the game's didn't get the attention of the Persona games, which in turn adds to the problems mentioned above. If you feel otherwise, I'm willing to discuss how this article can be sensibly split so as to preserve their quality and give the potential twosome the GA symbol in the future. --ProtoDrake (talk) 11:44, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
 * If the developers refer the two game as just Digital Devil Saga, it seems reasonable for not splitting them. Since other issues were addressed already ,Shin Megami Tensei: Digital Devil Saga promoted to . Congratulations! AdrianGamer (talk) 12:27, 28 August 2015 (UTC)