Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Bullfrog Productions games/archive1


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Giants2008 via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 3 October 2022 (UTC).

List of Bullfrog Productions games

 * Nominator(s):  Pres N  02:58, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

After a long string of animal lists, I'm taking a break to resume a project I last touched in 2019: a series of lists of games from 90s video game developers/publishers (3D Realms/id/Raven/Epic/Firaxis/Blizzard/Relic). There's not much of a theme to these lists beyond "in the right time period for me to have played at least one of their games when I was younger", but they all have their own stories. This one is part one of a duology of the rise and fall of Peter Molyneux, famous for being the creative lead behind a lot of amazing—and amazingly overhyped—video games.

This one is the rise, about the video game studio started, appropriately enough, with the money made by hyping a pack of lies about what his software company could do. They hit it into the big leagues almost immediately with Populous, the biggest seller of 1989 and still one of the best-selling PC games 30+ years later. From there they had a wildly successful 6 years, at which point Molynuex et al sold out to Electronic Arts for, to be fair, an absurd amount of money plus a vice presidentship despite having no real ability to run international businesses. Two years later Molyneux and a lot of the creative staff were gone, and Bullfrog—termed the most innovative and imaginative video game company in the world just prior to being bought—hung on making sequels for another four years before getting closed.

This list has a big section of cancelled games, because of a pair of Molyneux-isms: he announces games way too early, and also hangs on to projects even if they're not working, sometimes for years. So, we have sources and even articles on projects that never became products. If you've heard of Molyneux in this century, it's likely for what he got up to after this company—in this era, though, he was a king, who designed a series of innovative projects developed with firm technological constraints but not financial ones. I've tried to shake off the rust for this list type and follow my prior patterns, so I hope you enjoy it, and thanks for reviewing. -- Pres N  02:58, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Comments

 * "and lead the company" => "and led the company"
 * "Bullfrog released a further five games after his departure through 2001" - as this article is about a British subject I presume it is written in British English and over here we don't use the expression "through [date]". Change this to "between his departure and 2001"
 * Where the first note gives multiple genres, there's inconsistency as to whether the second is capitalised, eg we have both "Real-time strategy game, God game" and "Real-time strategy game, god game"
 * That's all I got - great work as ever! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:59, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
 * All done, thanks! -- Pres N  16:36, 22 August 2022 (UTC)


 * Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:22, 23 August 2022 (UTC)


 * Support Cowlibob (talk) 17:40, 9 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Support Just like the lionhead studios article, it looks like the quality of a featured list.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 22:46, 19 September 2022 (UTC)


 * Source/image review – The page doesn't have any images, so that part is easy. All of the references are reliable and well-formatted. I will note that the script I've installed that attempts to flag unreliable sources is giving a yellow caution highlighting for GameSpot links, for some reason. This surprises me since GameSpot is one of the more reliable gaming sites. Maybe the script thinks it is GameStop instead? It isn't a concern for this review, but I wanted to pass it along as the video game project might want to inquire as to why that is happening. The link-checker tool is flagging a PlayStation.com link as being dead, but I can't see it in the article anywhere. Please double-check that I didn't miss it in there and repair/replace it if you find it. Giants2008  ( Talk ) 21:28, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure why Gamespot gets flagged- WikiProject Video games/Sources has it as reliable. It may be because their game database shouldn't be used directly, which the text there notes. There is a playstation.com link in ref 45, but it's dead and marked as such and archived. -- Pres N  00:08, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
 * That was the one. Happy to see that it had been archived; not sure why the tool didn't pick up on it. Either way, I'd say that both reviews have been passed. Giants2008  ( Talk ) 01:22, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Giants2008 ( Talk ) 21:08, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.