Talk:The Case of the Golden Idol/GA1

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

Reviewer: Cukie Gherkin (talk · contribs) 00:42, 6 October 2023 (UTC)


 * Thanks @Cukie Gherkin for taking a look at this. I drafted most of this article last year and have changed my approach a lot since, so there's some great observations that I agree with on the improvements needed for this article. I'll work on it further and tick off the suggestions as I go through them. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 11:40, 6 October 2023 (UTC)
 * @Cukie Gherkin Appreciate your help and patience. I've actioned most of the items of feedback. Some thoughts are below. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 06:47, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

Infobox


 * 1) Is there any citable info about the composer? ✅ No secondary information, but the composer's website has some superficial commentary on the soundtrack, which I've added into the development section.
 * 2) Should include macOS and Windows mention in the article body (with accompanying source) ✅
 * 3) May be worthwhile to describe in gameplay that it's a puzzle game (in a way that feels natural ofc) ✅ Took the self-evident route - it's a detective puzzle game.
 * 4) Publisher not mentioned in body ✅ Briefly mentioned already in the headline and added a line about when the publisher contracted the developers.

Lead


 * 1) I feel like the Obra Dinn mention could be improved; perhaps say that the devs were inspired by it in the lead, and lead into the positive comparisons with that ✅

Development


 * 1) "n response, they aimed to create a game that empowered players to "feel like a detective" through the use of "gameplay and not just through narrative flavor", rather than just as a series of puzzles." I feel like the quotation "gameplay and not just through narrative flavor" is a little awkward when followed by the last part of the line. I'd recommend summarizing that quotation to make it flow a little better. ✅
 * 2) Generally, I think the development section could stand to use quotation less often; for example, "sense of nostalgia (for) the classic point and click adventure games of the nineties" could be done as "The developers made a conscious decision to pursue a pixel art style to invoke nostalgia for 90s point-and-click adventure games while putting a new spin on it." ✅

Reception


 * 1) I think you can stand to not put "best puzzle games of 2022" in quotes since it's basically the award. ✅
 * 2) Metro UK is recognized as an unreliable source on WP:VG/RS and WP:RSPSS ✅
 * 3) Sources used in the table should be utilized in some way in the Reception text. Nintendo World Report, TouchArcade, and IGN Italy (did IGN US not cover this game??) are not used. ✅ NWR helps reinforce some points so added a citation or two. The TouchArcade review is brief, so I omitted it. Surprisingly, some expected mainstream sources including IGN and GameSpot didn't review the game, so IGN Italy is appropriate here.
 * 4) Consider adding OpenCritic to the table, as well as including the percentage of critics who recommend it listed on the OpenCritic page Disagree on this one. It's a tricky one. Review aggregators are expected by convention, but they tend to aggregate scores from sources that would never be seen as reliable citations in the article. All aggregators have this tension to some degree, but I find Metacritic is more commonly used and includes less of those sort of sources.
 * 5) I would bump the Lucas Pope content up in the paragraph ✅
 * 6) Overall, I think that, like development, there is a bit too much quotation where I don't think it's needed ✅
 * 7) I would recommend removing the paragraph from Awards, since it's just summarizing the table below ✅

Images


 * 1) Not a failing issue, but it'd be good to provide a unique rationale for use of the screenshot. ✅
 * 2) Not a failing issue, but I think it'd be worth considering including a screenshot of a scene I'm not sure and would appreciate some guidance. MOS convention is that one screenshot is usually good form. Looking through GAs, it is not the norm to have two gameplay screenshots. So my thinking was that, out of the two modes, the 'Thinking' mode probably needs illustration with an image better.

Other


 * 1) Are there any sources on the art design, ie how the game animates? Or reception on the animation? I think that not only would that be valuable to include, but would also provide a justifiable fair use rationale for the inclusion of an animated gif (which I personally consider a notable aspect of the game). It has the odd mention in some sources, and I've added it as part of the description of the game, but the reviews don't attach much significance to it, from what I can see.

Lookin' good. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 16:46, 25 October 2023 (UTC)