Talk:TouchTone/GA1

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

Reviewer: J Milburn (talk · contribs) 21:46, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Happy to offer some comments. Josh Milburn (talk) 21:46, 5 May 2015 (UTC)


 * "The pieces only move in rows in cardinal directions." Unclear. If they move in cardinal directions, they don't just move in rows, but also columns? I see from the review section that I've misread this- all the more reason to clarify!
 * I think we need more information about the gameplay gifs. Also, when you put them together like that, they look like they're related in some way which (I assume) they're not.
 * What's a "natural player"?
 * I'm left unclear on what the "political message" is and what the game's plot is.
 * "was traditional for Wohlwend" Do you mean "typical for Wohlwend" or "more traditional than is typical for Wohlwend"
 * "with the right amount of tension and recall of 1970s thriller film visuals" Could this be rephrased?
 * "though he also wished for an "undo" option and saved puzzle states upon quitting out" This needs rephrasing
 * "TouchArcade and Gamezebo appreciated" Personification?

Generally very nice. I made some fixes- please double-check them. The only other thing I would say is that this is a recent release- my worry is that there may be more material to cite in a few months time. Josh Milburn (talk) 22:12, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
 * , thanks for the review! I believe I've addressed the above, if you want to take a look. Edits are fine, though I think a few err on excessive detail. Also I think "well-implemented" doesn't use a hyphen unless used as a noun. If any further material is published, which isn't all that common for mobile games, I'd be happy to address it then. Thanks again czar ⨹   11:43, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
 * , courtesy ping czar ⨹   01:29, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Ok, another look-through:
 * "The story is told through a series of reflection puzzles wherein the player swipes the screen to reflect a beam around a room to its intended destination" Is this really much to do with the story?
 * I still feel that the two screenshots next to each other sharing a caption is somewhat misleading. At a glance, I'm assuming that both are going on at once. Perhaps if you kept them together but gave them different captions it would be clearer. I also worry about the fact that the article looks a little crowded- it may be worth considering something gallery-like, given the fact that the article's a little shorter. Alternatively, you could remove the portraits. I'm just thinking aloud, here.
 * You're still a little light on plot details- I'm unclear on what your "ambiguity" quote means.
 * "They felt that such handicaps prevented the player's natural, iterative growth" What does this mean?
 * I'm not quite clear on what you mean by players deciding if emails are relevant means. Does the story change based on player decisions? Are there bonus points/unlockables? What's going on there?

Once these have been looked at, I'm happy to promote. If you don't want to provide more actual story details, I'm happy to promote without it, but what is there should be made a bit clearer, if possible. Josh Milburn (talk) 18:24, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
 * , thanks—think I've resolved your points. About the plot, all of the secondary sources were really careful to not be very direct about it. Perhaps a source will spill more details in the future, but for now, all the RS chose to cover were the vague, overarching details. czar ⨹   22:12, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't object to you simply retelling the plot from the game, in the same way we would with films, TV episodes, novels and so on. I think this would probably be needed at FAC, but I'm not going to get too excited about it here. I'm happy that this is ready for GA status. Good work! Josh Milburn (talk) 22:25, 11 May 2015 (UTC)