Talk:Tomb Raider III/GA1

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

Reviewer: Indrian (talk · contribs) 18:18, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

The beginning of the long, slow decline of Tomb Raider at Core Design. Sounds like a fun topic for a GA Review! Indrian (talk) 18:18, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

Okay, down to business:

Lead

 * ✅"Development of the game was led on the PlayStation console, with the Microsoft Windows version being simply a better-looking conversion of it." - Awkwardly worded and passive voice. "PlayStation" should be the subject of the sentence rather than "development."  Perhaps something like "The PlayStation served as the lead platform for the game."  Also, "better-looking" is vague and subjective.  How is it better looking?  Higher resolution?  More detailed textures?  I realize we don't want too much detail in the lead, but we need something a little more defined.
 * Changed the sentence but kept the "better looking" part. Although I suspect it means higher resolution, the source does not give more details.

Plot

 * ✅"that impacted with Antarctica millions of years ago" - The meteorite either "collided with" or "impacted on" Antarctica. As either one works and I have no strong preference, I will leave it to you to chose one or the other rather than fixing it myself.
 * Fixed


 * ✅"and found that it had incredible power" - Had is poor verb choice here. Perhaps "held incredible power" or something similar?
 * Fixed


 * ✅"Lara confronts Sophia in her office and obtains the artefact after shooting a fuse box connected to an electric bridge that Sophia was standing on" - How does shooting the fuse box gain her the artefact? The connection is not clear in the way this is currently worded.
 * Removed the second part because it is not necessary to understand the plot.


 * ✅"Lara deactivates the meteorite by taking the artefacts out of their positions that they were put in" - Awkwardly phrased.
 * Simplified

Development

 * ✅"Development of the engine was led on the PlayStation console" - Same problem with this phrase as in the lead.
 * Fixed


 * ✅"with the Microsoft Windows version being simply a better-looking conversion of it" - Rather than simply calling it "better-looking," there should be a little detail here on what was enhanced graphically.
 * No more details are given in the source
 * That's fine. I tweaked the language a bit, but we can leave it at that. Indrian (talk) 20:59, 27 March 2017 (UTC)


 * ✅"pseudo medium resolution" - Technical jargon with no clear meaning from the text.
 * Added quotation marks because the source does not give more details
 * That works under the circumstances. Indrian (talk) 20:59, 27 March 2017 (UTC)


 * ✅"a factually correct storyline linking all the locations was written" - I assume "factually correct" is meant to imply the crafting of a plot tailored to actual landmarks and lore in each location, but the term does not really convey that concept effectively. Instead, it sounds more like they were basing the plot on a true story.
 * Removed the "factually correct" bit.


 * ✅"The 1995 film Desperado was seen as an influence on Lara's gun play" - Was it "seen as" an influence in the sense that the source is guessing it may have been a factor, or was it actually an influence as revealed by the developers? If the former, I think this should be taken out entirely as the opinion of a single author.  If the latter, the language should be changed.
 * Fixed. The film was actually an influence.

Marketing and release

 * ✅I think we need just a little more info on the expansion. Does it take place during the events of the original game, or after?  Is it tied to the plot of the original, or is it a whole new plot?  Does it add any features (weapons, vehicles, etc.) not found in the original?
 * Done. The expansion is essentially a set of new levels and there is not much info about them.
 * Still feels a little light, though that may be just because there is not much to say. Its fine for GA purposes, however. Indrian (talk) 20:59, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

And that's it. I made a fair number of edits for grammar, mechanics, and flow myself, leaving the relatively small issues above. I will place this review while the concerns are addressed. Indrian (talk) 15:03, 24 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your review and great copy-edits, really appreciated! I think I have addressed most of the issues you have listed above and left a comment regarding your first point. Please let me know what you think. --Niwi3 (talk) 21:00, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Okay, everything looks good. I will go ahead and promote.  Well done! Indrian (talk) 20:59, 27 March 2017 (UTC)