Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Peer review/LittleBigPlanet

LittleBigPlanet
Renewed request - no response after one month. I think this article meets the criteria for a FA. Before it's submitted, it would be good to get some feedback on anything that people think needs to be improved to achieve this. Thanks.  ChimpanzeeUK  - User | Talk | Contribs 10:37, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
 * You should change the wording and reference 115 for this. GamerPro64 (talk) 01:49, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
 * This was used before. However, Gamasutra (along with many other websites) mis-quoted Harai. The G4 video shows exactly what he said and this is reflected in the article.  ChimpanzeeUK  - User | Talk | Contribs 09:01, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
 * At the start of the "Reviews" section, do you think that one sentence should be merged into a paragraph? It looks unusual on its own. Tez kag 72 01:13, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Is it suitable to use the game's advertising tagline (Play. Create. Share.) as section headings? Can't they be changed to more neutral titles (Level creation instead of Create maybe, and Online play instead of Share) AlexJ (talk) 23:28, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Comments by Guyinblack25
I agree with the statements above by Tezkag and AlexJ. I've only read the first half of the article, so this is only a short list. Hope this helps. (Guyinblack25 talk 19:50, 29 January 2009 (UTC))
 * 1–2 sentences do not constitute a paragraph to me. Plus, given the size of the other paragraphs, the short sentence looks unbalanced when compared. Another instance appears at the end of "Sales performance".
 * The sections should have descriptive headings that will help the reader understand what they are about to read. While the words are somewhat descriptive, they are too simple to really describe the section.
 * There were a number of run on sentences that should be broken up. I'd try to limit each sentence to conveying two ideas. For example:
 * LittleBigPlanet, abbreviated to LBP and developed under the title The Next Big Thing, is a puzzle platformer and user-generated content video game for the PlayStation 3, . It was first announced on 7 March 2007, by Phil Harrison at the 2007 Game Developers Conference in San Francisco, California.
 * Seen as an important title for Sony and the PlayStation 3, the game received an overwhelmingly positive reaction from critics, . The video game press who praised the game's presentation including its graphics, physics and audio, as well as its gameplay and large array of customisable and online features , including its scope and future potential based on user-created content ; minor criticism was reserved for some specific elements of the gameplay mechanics and level creation facilities.
 * I believe many of the sentences can be trimmed down to reduce redundancy. Some sentences need just a word or two to be removed, while others may require a complete rewrite. Sometimes sentences need to be wordy to help give context, but once that context is established in previous sentences it's not needed. Some examples
 * "...for some specific..." Some is a vague number that is already implied here.
 * "...consists of a number of levels that have been created by Media Molecule..." Excess words that do not change the phrase's meaning when removed.
 * I highly recommend checking out User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a and User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a: redundancy exercises. I revisit them every so often to improve my writing. I never took in the whole lesson the first time and I get better every time I go through them.
 * Several citations are placed in odd parts of sentences. If a single reference is used for two or three sentences, then only a single citation is needed at the end of the last sentence. If some minor content does not appear in the source, that is fine as sources are not needed for non-controversial content. For example:
 * Citation 12, Chris Roper's IGN review, is placed in three different places of one sentence. I'd remove those first three and just keep the last one on the last sentence.
 * Citation 18, Marks Serrels Gameplayer review, is also placed in three different places of one sentence. If there are no other different citations between the same numbered citation, then it would be best to consolidate.
 * There are a number of sources that look questionable to me and I'm sure may not be acceptable to the FAC reviewers.
 * Only some Kotaku and Jotstiq editors are considered reliable. I believe Michael McWhertor and Brian Ashcroft are fine, but I would suggest you prepare a rationale of his writing and video game industry credits in case you're asked.
 * PS3Attitude looks like a privately owned blog. Such sources are generally not accepted, and are normally asked to provide information about their editorial oversight and other sources that have cited them.
 * PlayStation Beyond, same as above.
 * Play.tm, same as above.
 * The SixthAxis, same as above
 * Videogaming247.com, and many more.
 * Three Speech is listed as semi-official, which I believe most would interpret as semi-reliable.
 * If you can replace the questionable sources with ones from more reliable sources at WP:VG/S, the that would certainly help the article's chances at FAC.

Thank you all for your comments. Seems like theres some work to be done but nothing too major. Regarding sources, ThreeSpeech, VG247 and TheSixthAxis seem to be widely accepted as reliable sources among editors on video game articles as they have shown in the past to have good editorial policies. Is there a process for getting these officially recognised as RS?  ChimpanzeeUK  - User | Talk | Contribs 09:14, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
 * The most common practice is to provide a link to a page that displays their editorial process. That page should also give enough detail to evaluate said process. Ownership by a reputable business entity helps as well; like Time Warner owning Joystiq. In addition to that, showing that other reliable sources have cited them and/or praised their reliability will really help. For example, here's an example at an FAC I used for Killer List of Videogames.
 * If the site itself doesn't pass muster, then you can use this same process for the article's author to establish them as an industry expert. That's what we normally do for Joystiq and Kotaku authors.
 * Keep in mind though, that even if it's successfully used once in an FAC, be prepared to provide it again in future FACs. (Guyinblack25 talk 20:33, 5 February 2009 (UTC))

Comments by Noj_R
Heh, another UK English article. Please be patient with me, I'm prone to giving grammatical advice and corrections that aren't possible in UK English.

Lead
 * "abbreviated to LBP" - Wouldn't "commonly abbreviated LBP" be better? Maybe this isn't possible in UK English.
 * ✅ - X201 (talk) 11:49, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree with Guyinblack, the first sentence should be split: Second sentence beginning "It was first announced"
 * ✅ - X201 (talk) 11:49, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
 * "The game revolves around the player's control of small avatars" - a bit ungainly, how about "In LBP, the player controls a group of small avatars"
 * ✅ I've altered the sentence because the player only controls a single avatar at a time and its previous form could lead to people thinking that more than one avatar was controlled at the same time - X201 (talk) 11:49, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
 * "of equal importance is the game's customisable nature" - awkward -> "the game's customisable nature is equally important"
 * ✅ - X201 (talk) 11:49, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
 * "Seen as an important title" - This most likely be a source of contention when trying for FA status. In this statement, "Seen" implies many ("Saw" implies one) people declared LBP important, but only one reference from IGN is given. In effect, Many considered it important, but in reality only one person (an IGN reviewer) actually said it.
 * ✅ Is "many saw" better than "seen"? Ffgamera (talk) 10:24, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "presentation, including its graphics"
 * ✅ - X201 (talk) 11:49, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
 * The last sentence in the lead is a very long run-on sentence. Split into two or three smaller sentences.
 * ✅ Could you comment on the new version please. - X201 (talk) 11:49, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Gameplay

Gameplay could be condensed. I've seen FA articles with more complex gameplay do so.


 * "controls a small character" then "each of which can" - Singular then plural.
 * ✅ - X201 (talk) 16:54, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
 * "the player controls" then "Players use" - Be consistent when addressing the player. Use "the player" (recommended) or "players"
 * ✅ Ffgamera (talk) 10:35, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "play and explore the environments" - Is this all the player does, or is there a goal similar to reaching the reaching the flag pole?
 * "mode is available, from which the player undertakes some" -> "mode is available and the player must complete some"
 * ✅ Ffgamera (talk) 10:46, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "free to continue playing" - The player isn't free to continue playing, he is now free to play the rest of game having completed the tutorials.
 * ✅ Ffgamera (talk) 10:46, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "completing the levels" - How do you complete a level?
 * ✅ Stand on the scoreboard Ffgamera (talk) 10:46, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "comprises eight" then "comprising three" - Comprising comprising. Try using a different word.
 * ✅ - X201 (talk) 16:54, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
 * "mini-levels; thus, the main" -> "mini-levels. In total, the main"
 * ✅ Ffgamera (talk) 10:46, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "pressure applied to the button" - Which button is this?
 * ✅ It is the action button Ffgamera (talk) 10:46, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "grab onto objects" - Which button do they press to accomplish this?
 * If we told you, we'd get hit with WP:GAMEGUIDE - X201 (talk) 17:02, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
 * "and these may be traversed"
 * ✅ Ffgamera (talk) 10:46, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "applying varying degrees" - How is this accomplished? The other various expressions are explained, but not this one.
 * By pressing directional pad buttons, but I have not added this. Ffgamera (talk) 23:16, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "whilst" - Is this word broadly used in the UK?
 * ✅ see Whilst Ffgamera (talk) 23:14, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "A large variety of pre-built..." - Another very long run-on sentence.
 * ✅ Ffgamera (talk) 23:14, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "As well as" and "also" - These are used alot, try to minimize it.
 * Have done "As well"s. Will do "Also"s later - X201 (talk) 10:33, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
 * ✅ - X201 (talk) 12:15, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
 * ✅ Ffgamera (talk) 23:14, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Character creation and level creation in content creation share the same paragraph; Split the two into separate paragraphs.
 * ✅ Ffgamera (talk) 10:21, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "User-generated content is not tied to any specific region, in that all user-created levels are accessible by users from all three gaming regions—Europe, North America and Asia" - Too wordy, just say "User-generated content is not limited to the player's region, but is available worldwide."
 * ✅ Ffgamera (talk) 10:21, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "A major focus" - POV, reword.
 * ✅ Ffgamera (talk) 23:39, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "players are able to tag the level with a list of predefined words" - What is the purpose of this?
 * ✅ Ffgamera (talk) 23:39, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "How multiple users play with each other is..." - This sentence could be worded much better.
 * ✅ Ffgamera (talk) 23:39, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "holds one scene" - what is a scene?
 * ✅ scene= level Ffgamera (talk) 10:46, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * The second paragraph of Interface expains the "popit" menu, but this was already explicitly explained in the third paragraph in Core gameplay.
 * ✅ Ffgamera (talk) 23:39, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Development

I will use this section to demonstrate some prose issues and improvements.


 * "Media Molecule co-founder Mark Healey recalled..." - This sentence is not relevant to the development of the game. You can mention how they "concocted the idea for LBP after viewing Howl's Moving Castle" within another sentence, but this sentence by itself is trivial.
 * ✅ - I've trimmed the opening line. But I still think that its an important line as it referrers to the initial idea that became LBP. - X201 (talk) 14:35, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
 * "and Evans et al. had received" - I am unsure if using et al. is appropriate here.
 * Its use is the same as etc for items. Its referring to a known group of people without having to list them individually again. - X201 (talk) 12:05, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
 * "The game was less..." - Another run-on sentence. Split it.
 * ✅ Ffgamera (talk) 10:21, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "said that the game"
 * ✅ - X201 (talk) 16:06, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
 * "announced that the game"
 * ✅ - X201 (talk) 16:06, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
 * "first shown at GDC 2007" - You need to specify that GDC is an abbreviation for Game Developer Conference at the first mention.
 * ✅ - X201 (talk) 14:35, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
 * "delayed by one month" -> "delayed for one month"
 * ✅ - X201 (talk) 14:35, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
 * "...and was finally scheduled for release on 21 October 2008 in North America..." -> "but also confirmed release dates for 21 October 2008 in North America..."
 * ✅ Ffgamera (talk) 10:21, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "On 17 October 2008 SCEE" -> "On 17 October 2008, SCEE"
 * ✅ Ffgamera (talk) 10:34, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "announced that the game's release would have to be pushed back"
 * ✅ Ffgamera (talk) 10:34, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "reported that the lyrics"
 * ✅ Ffgamera (talk) 10:34, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "The song in question was entitled" - We already know the song is in question
 * ✅ - X201 (talk) 14:35, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
 * "The game was then patched twice in one the day before its retail release for those players who had already received the game early..."
 * ✅ Ffgamera (talk) 10:34, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "stated that they"
 * ✅ - X201 (talk) 16:06, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
 * "announced that new versions"
 * ✅ Ffgamera (talk) 10:34, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "an SCEE press release d stated that LittleBigPlanet"
 * ✅ Ffgamera (talk) 10:34, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "would take place, with the possibility of a publicly available demo before the full game's release." -> "would take place; a public demo was mentioned as a "possibility"."
 * ✅ Ffgamera (talk) 10:21, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "their fate, the result of which was to keep the levels." -> "their fate; the players voted to keep the levels."
 * ✅ Ffgamera (talk) 23:56, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * " As such, these levels were"
 * ✅ Ffgamera (talk) 10:34, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "A feature that the title lacks, but that from first gameplay demonstrations was originally intended for inclusion, is the ability to import images from the console's hard drive for use as a sticker." -> "A feature the title lacks, but was included in demonstrations, is the ability to create stickers by importing images from the console's hard drive."
 * ✅ Ffgamera (talk) 23:56, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "Further confusion arose" - Did the reference actually state this? Otherwise stating "confusion arose" is OR.
 * ✅ Is speculation a better word? Ffgamera (talk) 10:21, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "A paintball gun power-up called the Paintinator was introduced which players can also use in their own levels and can be picked-up in a similar way to the existing jetpack." -> "A paintball gun power-up, called the Paintinator, can be picked up similarly to a jetpack and used in custom levels."
 * ✅ Ffgamera (talk) 23:56, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Reception
 * "at the 2007 Game Developers Conference (GDC)" - Use the abbreviation after the first mention in the article, or don't use it.
 * ✅ Ffgamera (talk) 23:56, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "praised the product, though he was" -> "praised the product, but was"
 * ✅ Ffgamera (talk) 23:56, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "gave the game a score of 10/10" - The score is already listed in the infobox and is redundant. Remove the infobox or remove the score from the text. Do this for each redundancy.
 * This has been done as a norm across many game articles. It's for emphasis rather than repetition. Ffgamera (talk) 23:56, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * " However he goes went on to say that they will would continue to work on that and refine refining it, suggesting that this may be improved improvements via a future update patch in the future ."
 * ✅ Ffgamera (talk) 10:34, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "IGN's review also commented on the game's that story mode that it ended "in a somewhat disappointing manner" and that the story as a whole doesn't make much sense."
 * ✅ Ffgamera (talk) 10:21, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "LittleBigPlanet did not failed to perform sell well as well as anticipated during its first few weeks on sale ."
 * ✅ Ffgamera (talk) 10:34, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "week on of sale."
 * ✅ Ffgamera (talk) 23:56, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "amongst" - like "whilst", is this a common UK English term?
 * ✅, I believe it is. Ffgamera (talk) 23:56, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "Sony defended the game's sales, citing the timing of the game's release in the run up to Christmas, with so many other games being released, as being a major factor." -> "Sony defended the game's sales, stating the abundance of other released titles at Christmas was a factor.
 * ✅ Ffgamera (talk) 23:56, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "And we've already started that, yes." - Is this "yes" referring to "Are you making a sequel?"
 * ✅, I believe it is. Ffgamera (talk) 23:56, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "Alex Evans has said that because of the "huge emotional investment" that the users have made in LittleBigPlanet, he doesn't want to ship the second game a traditional sequel." -> "The "huge emotional investment" users have made in LittleBigPlanet, Alex Evans stated, is the reason he does not want to ship a traditional sequel."
 * ✅ Ffgamera (talk) 23:56, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Conclusion
 * This article needs some work before FA can be reached. Foremost, a thorough copy-edit. I have only given little suggestions to improve the prose, the whole text must be gone through. Secondly, the gameplay section is too large. Cut out any unnecessary thing and concentrate on clearly explaining the gameplay. Thirdly, pat yourself on the back. It takes a lot of work to make it this far. I hope you find this review helpful and look forward to reading the article in the future. Cheers, -- Noj r (talk) 04:41, 11 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your comments. Very useful. I'll get started on this as soon as I've got a bit of time.  ChimpanzeeUK  - User | Talk | Contribs 08:18, 11 February 2009 (UTC)


 * A joint effort with X201, we helped meet all the standards you have required of the article, save for a few minor ones which I can't seem to do. I've done all I can, and I think so has everyone else, seeing as though this review is almost a month old. Ffgamera (talk) 00:01, 7 March 2009 (UTC)