Wikipedia:Peer review/4X/archive1

===4X===



This peer review discussion has been closed.


 * A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for July 2008.

This article recently passed its GA review with flying colors. All along, I've hoped this article would reach FA status and had a feeling that this would be much harder to reach. The research here is solid, and the content is thorough. But "brilliant prose" isn't my strength. I would appreciate advise on how to reword different parts of this article to reach FA status. I know this may be selfish, but I'd like this to be a learning experience for me just as much as a chance to improve the article. Thanks in advance. Randomran (talk) 20:04, 11 July 2008 (UTC) :Note: Because of its length, this peer review is not transcluded. It is still open and located at Peer review/4X/archive1.

Review by Guyinblack25
I'm pretty bad at doing reviews in one sitting, so please bear with my disjointed review. I do plan on doing a full review as I think it's about time something this went to FAC. Here are some things that stood out to me, feel free to modify them as you think is needed.


 * The lead
 * Caption: Maybe try this. "Civilization II, is a prototypical example of a 4X strategy game . "
 * This sentence seem out of place compared to the rest of the paragraph. I'm not entirely sure when it can go though, maybe at the end of the third paragraph. "One well-known 4X game is Sid Meier's Civilization..."
 * Missing comma: "...strong emphasis on economic and technological development, as well as a range of non-military routes..."
 * Give some context to the non-gamer. "This can cause 4X games to take longer play/complete (take your pick) than other strategy games, often requiring more than one playing session."
 * Minor tweak, may still need some rewording: "4X games are sometimes criticized for becoming tedious by near the end of the game."
 * Split up and reword to improve flow: "Around the mid-1990s many 4X games were published, but in the late 1990s the real-time strategy genre outsold them, and for a few years publishers regarded 4X games as commercially risky" Try this: The 4X genre saw an increase in published game in the mid-1990s, but were outsold by the real-time strategy genre in the late 1990s. The decline caused publishers to view 4X games as commercially risky.


 * Definition
 * I would list the magazine the 1993 preview appeared in.
 * Shorten; excess detail doesn't really help the reader understand it any better: "...because players must make large investments in research in order to colonize explore and expand into every type of planet area ."
 * Difficulties in definition
 * I would combine the three shorter paragraphs at the end into one large paragraph since they are all related to how different sources see the genre.
 * "Various" doesn't really add much to the idea of the sentence. Also what are these authorities an authority of?" Various Gaming authorities have stated that 4X games are..."
 * "A few sources" doesn't sound too professional to me: Try this. " A few sources Several gaming websites have suggested that true 4X games must..."
 * Same thing here: "Others sources state that 4X games involve greater complexity and scale than other strategy games. A few r R eviewers support this view, noting that 4X games are well known for their large detailed empires and complex gameplay. A few s S ources distinguish 4X games by their "complex uses of..."
 * The fifth X : eXperience
 * Tweak to improve flow: "In 2002, with the pending release of Master of Orion III, there were sparked claims that this it would be the first '5X game'"
 * I believe a semicolon should be used instead of a colon: "Master of Orion III received mixed comments from reviewers and players : ; a few liked the experience..."
 * "unrest or revolt" or "unrest and revolt"?
 * Gameplay
 * Minor tweak, just sounds better to me: "The gameplay involves constructing building an empire..."
 * Research and technology
 * Caption, tweak to maybe sound more objective: Note the complex <font color="#CC0000">multiple branching paths between technologies.
 * I think a semicolon or emdash would work better here. But that's just me: "4X games typically feature a technology tree, <font color="#CC0000">; a series of advancements..."
 * Longer doesn't seem like the right adjective here, but I haven't played to many 4X games: "Technology trees in 4X games are typically longer <font color="#CC0000">larger than in other strategy games..."
 * This looks like complex wording that could be more concise: " It is therefore sometimes necessary to <font color="#CC0000">This can first require the research <font color="#CC0000">of several civilian technologies first in order to build a more productive economy."
 * Trimming redundancy: " Another reason why r <font color="#CC0000">R esearch is especially important in 4X games is because battles are often won by superior military technology or greater numbers, rather than by ingenious tactics."
 * More trimming: "...allow players to improve their technology by building certain structures which grant access to more advanced..."
 * More trimming: "Typically, empires must generate research resources, which are to be invest ed in a new technology."
 * More trimming: "However, methods of providing resources for research vary from one <font color="#CC0000">by 4X game to another ."
 * The sentence structure seems off and I think it makes it hard to convey the idea. "In some games no buildings are needed at all, in some cases research productivity increases greatly if the right buildings are present, and in others research can only be done if research-oriented buildings are present. Try this: "<font color="#CC0000">Some games do not require buildings, while others require research-oriented buildings to either allow or increase research productivity. "
 * Combat
 * Trimming redundancy: "Combat is a<font color="#CC0000">n highly important part of 4X gameplay, because 4X games..."
 * More trimming: "...control over battles, victory is usually determined by superior numbers and technology rather than by ingenious tactics."
 * Tweaking, but I'm not too certain about this one: "Researching new technology will grant access to new combat units . <font color="#CC0000">; S <font color="#CC0000">s ome 4X games go so far as <font color="#CC0000">even offer the ability to <font color="#CC0000">allow the research <font color="#CC0000">of different unit components."
 * Peaceful competition
 * Trimming, the "an" is distributed by the "or": "...diplomatic relations are restricted to a binary choice between an ally or an enemy."
 * Reword: "Aside from making allies and enemies, this includes the ability <font color="#CC0000">players are also able to trade resources and information with rival<font color="#CC0000">s players ."
 * Unneeded comma—The two parts are related ideas. It might flow better to combine these two sentences: "For example, some 4X games offer victory to a player who achieves a certain score, or the highest score after a certain number of turns . <font color="#CC0000">, while M <font color="#CC0000">m any 4X games award victory to an empire that makes its culture predominant over their rivals."
 * Minor trimming: "Other games offer victory to the first player to complete an awe-inspiring..."
 * I would combine these two sentences together also: "Several 4X games award "diplomatic victory " to anyone who <font color="#CC0000">whoever can win an election decided by their rival players . The Space Empires series awards victory to someone who keeps the galaxy at <font color="#CC0000">, or maintain peace for a specified number of turns."
 * This sentence seems redundant to me, especially with the first sentence of the paragraph. "With these victory conditions, players can sometimes win a 4X game without engaging in extermination."
 * Complexity
 * Tweak to give the reader some more content and help flow into the next sentence about graphics: "4X games are known for their complex ity <font color="#CC0000">gameplay, as well as their strategic depth."
 * Combine the two sentences: "Whereas other strategy games focus on combat, 4X games also offer more detailed control over diplomacy, economics, and research . This <font color="#CC0000">; creat es <font color="#CC0000">ing opportunities for diverse economic and diplomatic strategies."
 * Tweak the last part: "This also challenges the player to manage several strategies simultaneously, and plan for the long-term <font color="#CC0000">objectives ."
 * The second paragraph names a lot of games as examples. I would remove the game titles and stick to generalized ideas.
 * Tweak two sentences for redundancy and flow: " In order t <font color="#CC0000">T o experience a detailed model of a large empire, 4X games are designed with a complex set of game rules . F <font color="#CC0000">; f or example, the player's productivity may be limited by pollution, as seen in Master of Orion and Civilization II ."
 * More consolidating for flow: "4X games often model political challenges, such as civil disorder in Space Empires V and the Civilization series. A few 4X games include <font color="#CC0000">or a senate, <font color="#CC0000">— which can penalize Galactic Civilizations players by voting their political party out of office, or force Civilization II players <font color="#CC0000">them to make peace."
 * This sentence seems tacked on and is redundant with the next paragraph: "Players must master the complexities of their nation's economy, technology, and government in order to overcome these challenges."
 * Tweak: "Such complexity means that <font color="#CC0000">requires players must <font color="#CC0000">to manage a larger amount of information than other strategy games."
 * More consolidating: "Game designers often organize empire management into different interface screens and modes . Many 4X games have a <font color="#CC0000">; for example, separate screen<font color="#CC0000">s for diplomacy, for managing each colony <font color="#CC0000"> individual areas, or <font color="#CC0000">and for managing battle tactics."
 * Tweak: "Some times a system<font color="#CC0000">s becomes <font color="#CC0000">are intricate enough to resemble a minigame<font color="#CC0000">s ."
 * The word detailed seems out of place, but that's just me. If it stays in you need a comma between "large" and "detailed": "Since 4X games involve managing a large detailed empire..."
 * Tweak: "Single player games may take <font color="#CC0000">last multiple sessions over <font color="#CC0000">spanning multiple days..."
 * I would wikilink "beer-and-pretzels" to Beer and pretzels game.
 * Tweak and missing comma: "In the early stages of a game<font color="#CC0000">, this is not necessarily <font color="#CC0000:>always a problem..."
 * Minor trimming: "...but players have criticized these governors for making bad decisions."
 * The last part of the last paragraph is missing some sentence to segue from developer efforts to the efforts' reception. Try this: "Such approaches have been generally well received, though some more than others."
 * Why was Master of Orion III's reception mixed? The sentence doesn't provide much info and is not a good way to end a section. No need for a lot of detail, but at least mention what the approach was.
 * Origin
 * Minor tweaking, just sounds better to me: " The first <font color="#CC0000">Early 4X games were influenced by..."
 * This sentence sounds off to me, mainly the underlined part, and I'm not sure how to reword it or what is meant to be conveyed. "...Reach for the Stars began to represent the relationship between economic growth, technological progress, and conquest."
 * Minor tweaking, I don't think "By" is the appropriate word: " By <font color="#CC0000">In 1990, Sid Meier released Civilization..."
 * The third paragraph seems a bit out of place as it is. I would consider combining it and the second one together since they both discuss influential titles.
 * In the last paragraph, I would link "Star Trek games" as "Star Trek games".
 * Grammar tweak: "This game is considered a classic for its elegant but <font color="#CC0000">, yet deep game design, and <font color="#CC0000">; future 4X games would be compared to the standard it set."
 * Peak
 * "But" is a weasel word in this case: "B ut <font color="#CC0000">y the <font color="#CC0000">late 1990s, real-time strategy genre began outselling turn-based games by the late 1990s ."
 * Minor trimming: " And d <font color="#CC0000">D espite the excitement over Master of Orion III, its..."
 * I think "release" or "develop" is more appropriate here, but that's just me. "Game publishers eventually became risk-averse to building <font color="#CC0000">releasing 4X games."
 * Recent history
 * The paragraphs seem a bit short and choppy. I would consolidate them some. Like adding the last single sentence paragraph to the previous one. Not sure what
 * Unneeded comma: "...such as Imperium Galactica in 1997, and Starships Unlimited in 2001."
 * In the first paragraph about Sins of a Solar Empire, was the gameplay the reason for it earning awards or the marketing of the gameplay? Can you clarify this some?

That's all I have time for right now. I'll try to do more sections later. (Guyinblack25 talk 21:21, 11 July 2008 (UTC))
 * There's part two. Once again, sorry for the disjointed review.(Guyinblack25 talk 15:33, 12 July 2008 (UTC))
 * Part three—sorry again. I should get to the "History" section sometime this weekend. (Guyinblack25 talk 21:21, 18 July 2008 (UTC))
 * And done. Sorry for the disjointed review over the span of two weeks. I hope it helps. (Guyinblack25 talk 18:44, 24 July 2008 (UTC))


 * Thanks a million. This is by far one of the most helpful peer reviews I have ever seen. I appreciate the time you put into it. I incorporated virtually all the suggestions. Randomran (talk) 03:31, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

- Comments from
 * Image:Moo2GalaxyAndSystem400.png doesn't have a proper fair use rationale (it was even tagged with a public domain tag until I replaced it with a fair use one). --Mika1h (talk) 21:55, 11 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for pointing that out. I added a fair use rationale to the image now. Randomran (talk) 00:35, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Comments from
 * You said you wanted to know what to work on before taking to FAC, so I looked at the sourcing and referencing with that in mind. I reviewed the article's sources as I would at FAC.
 * Watch out using reviews to source information other than the review itself. Reviews are subjective and are not always considered reliable sources for information. You are using them a LOT, and from a lot of sites that aren't well known.
 * What makes the following sources reliable?
 * http://tleaves.com/ (looks like a blog)
 * http://www.gamersinfo.net/
 * http://www.rakrent.com/rtsc/index.htm
 * http://www.gamezone.com/
 * http://www.bit-tech.net/
 * http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/
 * Be consistent with your formatting on the references. Mostly, you give authors in the last name first format, but a few are first name first. Pick one and stick to it.
 * Current ref 39 has no referencing to it.
 * All in all, a pretty interesting subject. Nice to see an article on the genre instead of just specific games.
 * Hope this helps. Please note that I don't watchlist Peer Reviews I've done. If you have a question about something, you'll have to drop a note on my talk page to get my attention. (My watchlist is already WAY too long, adding peer reviews would make things much worse.) 12:25, 12 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I know you might not check back in, but I finally undertook the task of improving the references. Some truly unreliable information was removed. But in other cases, information could be supported by other more reliable references, and the article looks stronger for it. There are still a few references from Rock Paper Shotgun and Game Zone, but they are considered reliable sources according to VG/RS. I still tried to minimize these, and I think they would even be considered a decent exception to WP:SPS since a few of them are interviews with the makers of the games, who are being quoted for authoritative information about their area of expertise (the games they made). Randomran (talk) 00:30, 26 July 2008 (UTC)