Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Peer review/Blue Dragon (video game)/Archive 2

Blue Dragon (video game)
Have addressed all problems in previous PR and all problem from GAN, almost ready to nominate once more.-- Next-Genn-Gamer  16:25, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Per request, I've given the article a quick skim, and it is certainly in much better shape than last time. I'll put up a more detailed review when I have the time. I've checked my GA review from last time, and it seems that mostly everything has been fixed. One thing that hasn't yet been fully fixed, though, is the gameplay section. It still doesn't make too much sense to people who aren't completely familiar with the video game. Although it is much better than before (clarifying VG-terms), problems still exist. For example, the "Shadows" section describes a shadow nicely, and I understand what a Shadow is - but I don't know what they do. What is their purpose - and what exactly do they do? --haha169 (talk) 21:14, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you, I look forward to your full review.-- Next-Genn-Gamer  ( Sign ) 21:21, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Review by Haha169: All right-y, then, I shall begin by saying that the lead section is good enough for GAN. :) And so is pretty much the rest of the article, IMO, but here's some things anyway:
 * 1) Gameplay:
 * 2) Warp -> Teleport✅
 * 3) "Shadows" section needs fixing, see my first comment above.✅
 * 4) My original question with this may have been confusing, so let me re-phrase it. The section describes the concept of the shadow very nicely - but what does it do? Is it used for attacking, or purely for decoration? What is it's inherent purpose? --haha169 (talk) 17:18, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
 * 5) "Turn-based" could be wikilinked, I believe. Not sure.✅
 * 6) "Combat" section is very confusing, especially the second paragraph. Suggest re-write.
 * I tried to clarify the section I'm not sure if it helped any.-- Gears of War  2  (NGG) 05:06, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
 * It is slightly better, I guess. I still don't fully understand it, as the sentences tend to ramble a bit. Perhaps getting rid of the less important details and clarifying the important ones? --haha169 (talk) 17:18, 19 April 2009 (UTC)


 * 1) Reception:
 * 2) "X-Play" and "Game Informer" needs to be italicized in the text, because they are published works.✅
 * 3) "Eurogamer" can be wikilinked✅
 * 4) "Noted" is used many times. Try some variety✅
 * 5) References:
 * 6) Get rid of the citation needed tags. Find cites for those.✅
 * 7) Development/Audio section needs citation reinforcing.✅
 * 8) Are you sure you can't find more cites for "Gameplay"?
 * I really need help with this part.-- Gears of War  2  (NGG) 05:32, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
 * You could try citing a strategy guide using cite book. Or perhaps a reviewer mentioned gameplay techniques? --haha169 (talk) 17:20, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Basically, my comment is that the gameplay section is the weakest. Even so, it would likely pass a GAN if you put it up now - but I'd still suggest fixing up the Gameplay section a bit. Good luck! --haha169 (talk) 04:19, 19 April 2009 (UTC)