User:Popcornfud/sandbox2

A copyediting cheatsheet for video game articles
This essay is a list of common prose problems I find in video game articles and how to fix them. If you're looking for quick, easy ways to make a video game article simpler and easier to read, this essay may help you find them.

Many problems derive from patterns or vocabulary used in video game journalism that don't belong in Wikipedia, which should be written in plain English for a general audience. Other problems aren't specific to video games, but are so common in game articles they bear noting here.

Disclaimer: This is a user essay, not a list of Wikipedia policies. You might not agree with all of it — or any of it. Everything I write here comes down to editorial judgement.

TLDR:


 * Keep in mind that you are writing an encylopedia, not an article in a video game blog or news site. These are different missions.
 * Do not use cliches, idioms or habits absorbed from video game journalism.
 * Per WP:IDIOM, we avoid metaphors, idioms, turns of phrase, shortcuts, shrugs, flourishes and fudges. Be literal, be direct, be unambiguous, be clear; use exactly the right word.

"the game"
Hit CTRL + F and check every mention of "the game" in your article. Do you need them all?


 * The team hired the comic book writer Joshua Ortega to write the plot for the game
 * Players also ride a Brumak and Reavers in the game
 * an enemy controlled by the game's AI
 * An AI helps the player navigate the different areas of the game.
 * The player needs to locate a terminal in the game and insert Amanda's access card.
 * The development of the game -> Development took four years after Creative Assembly first pitched the idea to Sega.
 * Between October 2014 and March 2015, five additional downloadable content packs were released for the game, expanding the game's Survivor Mode with new features.

In many situations, when a subject is required, just writing "it" is simpler:


 * Sonic Mania homages the original Sega Genesis Sonic games. The game It won several awards.

title
There's no advantage in writing "title" as a synonym for "game". It creates ambiguity and has a weird journalese feeling.


 * Sega announced the title Sonic Colors could mean that Sega announced the game or the title of the game.
 * Resident Evil titles might refer to the Resident Evil films, games, or both.

Be clear and direct: call a spade a spade, and a game and a game.

For more information about this problem, see the essay...

titled, entitled, called, known as
There's usually no need to introduce titles with words such as "titled", "entitled" or "called". For example:


 * In 1995, Namco published a Game Boy version, titled Galaxian & Galaga.
 * An anime adaptation called Bayonetta: Bloody Fate was released in November 2013.

titular, title character, eponymous

 * In Sonic Mania, players control the titular Sonic the Hedgehog.
 * She designed the titular character to fulfill Kamiya's request for a modern, female witch

Readers can see when the character's name is in the title. You don't need to tell them.

If you're worried about repeating the name of a character, don't be. See The problem with elegant variation.

"ultimately"
A word that almost never adds information.


 * After several delays, the game was ultimately released in October 1999.

Microsoft Windows
The name of the operating system is Windows, not "Microsoft Windows". This is overwhelmingly reflected by sources, storefronts such as Steam, and on Microsoft's own website and materials. The Microsoft style guide even calls this out: "Don't precede the name with Microsoft."

Many editors appear to believe that "Microsoft Windows" is the proper name, as this is the title of the Microsoft Windows article on Wikipedia. This is not the case. The Wikipedia article is only called that to provide a natural disambiguator from window, and even then the utility of that has been disputed. In the context of video game articles, there's no need to disambiguate. If we say a video game was released on Windows, no one is going to think it was hurled out of a building.

Needless counting
Avoid the temptation to count things in prose.


 * Lame:
 * Cool:
 * Lame:
 * Cool:

The development team was composed of five people: John Carmack, John Romero, Adrian Carmack, Kevin Cloud and Tom Hall.

The development team was composed of John Carmack, John Romero, Adrian Carmack, Kevin Cloud and Tom Hall.

The same goes for "several", "numerous" and so on. We can see these games are numerous.


 * Galaga was included in several Namco game compilations, Namco game compilations including Namco Museum Vol. 1 (1995), Namco Museum 64 (1996), Namco Museum 50th Anniversary (2005), Namco Museum Virtual Arcade (2008), Namco Museum Essentials (2009), and Namco Museum Megamix (2010).

unrelated clauses
If you use the "dependent clause, independent clause" construction, make sure your clauses are related. This construction is not simply a different way to arrange bits of information – it suggests a connection between them.


 * Related clauses:
 * Unrelated clauses: One of the highest-grossing arcade games of all time, Daytona USA was the first Sega game to debut on the Sega Model 2 arcade system board.

In other words, the first part of the sentence has to be connected to the second. This might be easier to see with a simpler example:


 * Related:
 * Unrelated: Born in London, Samantha read a book.

Unrelated clauses can accidentally imply that events happened simultaneously. Take this example, from the Gabe Newell article:

While there's no doubt that Newell is a high achiever, he was presumably not born while he was attending high school.

For more information about dependent and independent clauses, see this Grammarly article.

An even worse version of this problem is the dangling modifier:

The sequel to The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild (2017), the player controls Link as he searches for Princess Zelda and fights to prevent the Demon King from destroying the world.

"released"
In standard English, "release" is a transitive verb. That means that games can be released, but that games cannot themselves release, of their own accord. To take another example: "I eat sandwiches" makes sense, but "the sandwiches eat" doesn't.

In contemporary pop culture journalism, "release" is often used as an intransitive verb. That’s fine— language changes. But that change is a long way from becoming standard English. To someone who isn't immersed in pop culture journalism, "The movie releases tomorrow" sounds very strange. Wikipedia should stick to a standard plain-English approach.

OK:

OK:

Not OK: Resident Evil released in 1996.

"mainline"
Jargonistic and not necessarily clear to non-gamers. Use plain English and write "main series", "main game", "major game", etc. Or avoid entirely — is it really important to say?

"direct sequel"
Consider this example, from an old version of the Final Fantasy X-2 page:

"Final Fantasy X-2 is a direct sequel to 2001's Final Fantasy X, the first game in the Final Fantasy series to receive such a follow-up."

This requires the reader to understand a lot of things. What is a "direct" or "indirect" sequel? If Final Fantasy X-2 is a "direct sequel" to Final Fantasy X, was Final Fantasy X not a "direct sequel" to Final Fantasy IX? What makes X-2 a more "direct" sequel than any of the previous Final Fantasy sequels?

What the sentence is getting at is this: Final Fantasy games don't usually continue stories from previous games. That makes Final Fantasy X-2 a "direct sequel". But the uninitiated reader has no way of puzzling that out.

What's more, the terminology is inconsistent. No one describes Sonic the Hedgehog 2, Half-Life 2 or Halo 2 as "direct sequels", even though they're every bit as "direct" as Final Fantasy X-2 in that they continue the story.

When Final Fantasy X-2 was Wikipedia's article of the day, the sentence was summarized like this:

"The game was the first to be a sequel to a previous Final Fantasy game."

Wrong! Final Fantasy II was the first sequel to previous Final Fantasy game. Games don't have to use the same story and characters to be sequels — see Quake II, Team Fortress 2 or Worms 2, for example. Lots of games don't even really have stories or characters in the first place — that doesn't mean they can't have sequels.

The solution? If it's important to explain that a sequel continues the story from a previous game, then write that. If it isn't important, then don't.

"Whereas most Final Fantasy games have self-contained stories and characters, X-2 continues the story of Final Fantasy X (2001)."

"the Xth game in the Y series"
It is the sequel to the 1998 game  [[Half-Life (video game)|Half-Life ]] , as well as the second game in the  Half-Life  series.

Genre pileups
Many games combine elements of multiple genres. For the lead, pick the main genre described by sources and cut anything else. The rest of the lead (and the article body) can go into the other genre elements.

Someone completely foreign to the subject, looking up say, Deus Ex, does not need to be told immediately that it's a "role-playing first-person shooter stealth video game". That's information overload, and hits diminishing returns fast. Keep it focused and concise.

At one point, the lead sentence of the God of War article described it as "an action-adventure hack and slash mythology-based video game series". These shopping lists of genres may well have appropriate sources, but for the lead sentence it's just bloat.

The "video game" tautology
When specifying the genre, there's usually no need to include "video game".


 * platform video game
 * action-adventure video game
 * racing video game
 * survival horror video game
 * action video game
 * first-person shooter video game

Constructions such as "platform video game" are unnatural — basically no one ever writes or says them. They're also tautological: all platform games are video games, so this is like writing "sandwich food" or "truck vehicle".

Some editors worry that people don't know what, for example, a platform game is. This is a noble thought, but it's outside the scope of an article about a platform game to explain this. Anyone who doesn't know what a platform game is can follow the wikilink to the platform game article, which explains that it's a type of video game.

This is standard for Wikipedia. For example, see also Roland TR-808, which is introduced as a drum machine and not a "drum machine musical instrument"; the beagle, which is a breed of hound and not a "hound dog"; the Titanic, which is a passenger liner and not a "passenger liner boat"; etc.

Arbitrarily listing sequels and franchises
From an old version of the Bayonetta 3 article:

Bayonetta 3 is the third installment of the Bayonetta video game series, acting as a sequel to Bayonetta (2009) and Bayonetta 2 (2014).

This is a WP:DUH situation. If there is a video game called Bayonetta 3, then the reader can infer the following things:


 * there exists a video game series called Bayonetta
 * Bayonetta 3 is the sequel to Bayonetta 2
 * Bayonetta 3 is the third Bayonetta game

It's worth mentioning and linking to the series and previous games somewhere in the lead, but there needs to be a prose reason to mention them in the first place. Compare this to the lead for Sonic the Hedgehog 3:

Sonic the Hedgehog 3 is a 1994 platform game developed and published by Sega for the Genesis. Like previous Sonic games, players traverse side-scrolling levels while collecting rings and defeating enemies. (...) Development began in January 1993 by Sega Technical Institute in California, shortly after the release of Sonic the Hedgehog 2.

Here there is a natural reason to mention the Sonic series and the previous Sonic game. They're not shoehorned in — the prose is actually giving the reader information, and wikilinking accordingly.

Gameplay
It's simplest to describe game systems in the present tense.


 * If Sonic runs out of lives, the game will end ends.

Remove unnecessary qualifiers such as "can" or "able to"


 * players can earn points for completing levels quickly

Length
Games without significant plots don't need long plot sections. If the plot can be covered in a few sentences, do it.

Many games have trivial plots, or no plots at all. The article may not need a plot summary section. If the plot is trivial, it might be sufficiently covered in a single sentence elsewhere in the article.

Keep gameplay out of plot
The plot section is for plot. Don't mix in information about gameplay, credits sequences, or other stuff, as in the sentence below:



"lore"
This is nerdspeak — use the plain-English terms "story", "plot", "characters", "setting", etc.

"scenario"
Sources on Japanese games — particularly interviews translated from Japanese — sometimes use the word "scenario" to mean the game's story or script. This is an example of wasei-eigo (Japanese-language expressions based on English words that don't exist in standard English). In English, "scenario" doesn't mean quite the same thing. Use the standard English terms "story" or "script" instead.

"widespread acclaim"
Just "acclaim" is fine. If you write "acclaim" on its own without "widespread", readers will not wonder if only three critics liked it. The word "acclaim" implies public, enthusiastic praise and does not need "widespread".

"universal"
It's tempting to write that games or elements were "universally praised" or "universally panned", etc.

Wikipedia should written literally. When we say "universal", we are saying that this is true of every single thing we're counting, without exception. Not only might that not be true, it's extremely difficult to verify. When it is possible to verify, it means that the game we're writing about probably didn't get that many reviews in the first place, which makes the lofty claim of "universal" rather less impressive.

Besides, "universal" is another one of those words that doesn't really add much value in the first place. It's sufficient to write, for example, "The game received positive reviews." If the reviews were extremely positive, then this can be expressed in the ways in which this is measurable: write that it was included in such-and-such lists of the best games ever, or achieved whatever-score on Metacritic, etc. Let the facts speak for themselves without hyperbole.

The critical reception firehose
Avoid the temptation to write about criticism as if it's fired by journalists from a kind of cannon, with verbs such as "direct" and "aim". It's never the simplest solution.

Not OK: Praise was directed at the graphics and gameplay.

OK:

Not OK: Reviewers aimed criticism towards the multiplayer mode.

OK:

Not OK: The game received negative reviews, with criticism directed at its themes, design and controls.

OK:

The "reception reception" situation
From the Paper Mario: Color Splash article:

"The game received generally positive reception from critics."

This is convoluted! If you break this down, it's saying: the game was sent to the critics, who received it positively. Then the critics sent this reception back to the game, which received the reception.

We can simplify this: "The game received positive reviews."

"critical acclaim from critics", "reviews from critics", etc
It's usually necessary to specify that reviews, or acclaim, or criticism, or whatever, came from critics. When we say that a game received positive reviews, readers assume the reviewers were professional critics, not random YouTube commenters.

issue
Commonly used as a euphemism for "problem", as in "the frame rate issues were criticized". Avoid per Manual of Style/Words to watch.

An issue is a topic of debate, such as the economy, the environment or human rights. If what you're describing is in fact just a problem, then just write "problem". Be direct and literal, don't beat around the bush.

upon release

 * Upon release, the game received generally positive reviews

Almost never necessary — readers understand that games are reviewed once they're finished and not generally before — and often untrue — many games are reviewed shortly before release.

noted
According to Wikipedia articles, video game critics are endlessly noting things:


 * Many negatively noted the gradual unfurling of the player's abilities
 * Critics noted that the multiplayer was weak
 * Edge noted that while it did not do enough to make up for the opening chapters, at Gran Pulse the game "hits a sweet spot"

"Note" does not carry exactly the same meaning as "say" or "write". It suggests the recording of an objective fact, not an opinion.


 * Cool: This is a fact.
 * Not cool:  This is a subjective interpretation.

Note that "note" is also listed in the MOS under "words to watch" (WP:SAID). Use a plain, neutral verb instead — "wrote" and "said" are always good.

best-of lists
When games are included in critics' lists, such as a publication's best games of the year, there's usually no need to include the name of the particular list. Just write it in simple prose.


 * In April 2011, Empire ranked Shenmue at #32 in its list of "The Greatest Video Games of All Time".


 * In April 2011, Empire named Shenmue the 32nd-best video game.

Joseph Milne featured the game in his list of "Top 5 Most Underrated Games" at number 4 on the list.

Joseph Milne named it the fourth-most underrated game.

hyphens in best-of lists
When including numbers in prose for things like bestselling or best-reviewed games, be careful with the hyphens.

endless synonyms for "said"
commented, stated, highlighted, applauded, hailed, claimed

(WP:SAID). Use a plain, neutral verb instead — "wrote" and "said" are always good.

"divisive reviews"
A widely misused phrase. If something is divisive, it means it divides opinion. A "divisive review" is therefore a review that divides the opinions on others.