Wikipedia:Peer review/The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt/archive1

The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt
I made a peer review for when you're ready. No rush. Cognissonance (talk) 13:12, 23 September 2017 (UTC) Comments from Freikorp
 * From a glance, the first paragraph looks out of place in comparison to the size of the others.
 * Put it together with the second paragraph. Cognissonance (talk) 19:28, 24 September 2017 (UTC)


 * "who seeks to find his adopted daughter on the run" - I feel like this sentence is missing something. Maybe even just adding "who is" before "on the run".
 * I'd wikilink Quest (video gaming) into the lead when you start talking about quests.
 * Since we're officially writing for a general audience, as opposed to a gaming one, is it necessary to mention "monster contracts, and treasure hunts" when you've already mentioned "side quests"? I think just saying side-quests will be sufficient.
 * I've never seen an article with so many videos embedded in it. It's not a problem, pretty awesome actually, just an observation.
 * "Aard prompts Geralt..." Is it necessary to mention the names of the powers? Could you just say "has five different magical signs at his disposal: a telekinetic blast, a confuse spell ... etc? Incidentally how are enemies confused - what does that mean in terms of gameplay?
 * "players assume control of Ciri" - who? this character comes out of nowhere in terms of the prose.
 * "similar to the common mythological motif" - I think this would be better as "such as the common mythological motif", assuming that's accurate.
 * You could wikilnk bestiary, and accordingly remove the explanation of what it is.
 * "such as potions, runestones, glyphs, and bombs" - what do runestones and glyphs do? Why would I want one? I was going to ask you to explain this, but maybe just drop those two and say potions and bombs - everyone knows what they do. Up to you.
 * "36 ending outcomes" - I's say 36 possible ending outcomes.
 * You don't need to wikilink Geralt of Rivia in the 'setting' sub-section. That's already been done.
 * I feel a bit bombarded with names and places in the first paragraph of the plot. I was going to say you could drop some and improve readability, such as changing "Ciri was in Velen at Crow's Perch, the fort of the Bloody Baron" to "Ciri was in Velen at the fort of the Bloody Baron". Knowing the name of his fort isn't useful in the first paragraph, but since you refer to it later you probably need to keep it. Just thought I'd let you know it's a tad painful to read the first paragraph not knowing anything about these characters or places.
 * Fetch quest just redirects to Quest (video gaming). Maybe link it to the "Delivery quests" subsection of that article. Otherwise the link isn't overly helpful.
 * "The card game Gwent" - knowing something about how this game works might be of interest.
 * "The knights' voices were recorded with helmets over the speakers for post-processing." - What does that mean?
 * Will try to find a way to clarify. Cognissonance (talk) 19:28, 24 September 2017 (UTC)


 * At the Jill Valentine nomination I was told to introduce reviewers as, for example, "Gametrailers' Daniel Bloodworth" as opposed to "Daniel Bloodworth from GameTrailers". In subsequent mentions, say Gametrailers' Bloodworth. I thought that was a solid improvement (when I read "Bloodworth" in the subsequent mention I already can't remember what publication he was from), but up to you.
 * Made the mentions more varied. Cognissonance (talk) 19:28, 24 September 2017 (UTC)


 * "Wallace noted that the game's load times are too long." This sounds more like an accepted fact than the opinion of a reviewer. Of course, what he's saying might may well be true, but do you want to present it as a solid fact?
 * Wrote "were" to make it read more objectively. Cognissonance (talk) 19:28, 24 September 2017 (UTC)


 * "It debuted at #1" - see MOS:HASH. Also this is inconsistent with how you've previously stated "No. 1 in the UK".
 * Should you have a table for awards?
 * I prefer the prose summarising the main article. Cognissonance (talk) 19:28, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

That's all from me. Hope this helps. Freikorp (talk) 12:50, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks Freikorp! Cognissonance (talk) 19:28, 24 September 2017 (UTC)