Talk:What Remains of Edith Finch

Source

• https://archive.org/details/edge2017005/page/n85

Good Article (GA) nomination.

I'm considering recommending this article to Wikipedia's Good Article system. Would anyone be willing to help if there are things that need to be done to prove it? Sjetha (talk) 23:09, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

I think the main obstacles to me for Good Article status is a lack of depth. Right now there's very little information on the gameplay, and the reception is mostly just a string of one-line sentences rather than a cohesive section. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^talk 15:04, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

Keep in mind, this is a "walking simulator" with numerous vignettes that all have slightly different control schemes. Any deeper gameplay would likely be inappropriate since you'd be resolving this at the vignette-level. --Masem (t) 15:11, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

Yeah, but the reviews go into the gameplay at that level, and at the very least the article should illustrate the breadth of that gameplay; as it is, currently the only details are in an over-long and unreferenced image caption. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^talk 17:04, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

Hmm, that is true. Probably would want to focus on those that are highlighted in the sources, which I would need to review what got pulled out as memorable scenes or those with the most unique facets that are beyond just walking around. --Masem (t) 19:16, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:What Remains of Edith Finch/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: David Fuchs (talk · contribs) 19:28, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

{{doing}} Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^talk 19:28, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Overall, the article is a decent start, but it needs some substantial work to reach GA status.

• (1) Well written:
  • The article needs a pretty heavy copyedit. The entire article is awash with run-on sentences and excessive use of commas, one after another, including this really tough-to-read paragraph One of the most-changed stories was Walter's, Edie's son that withdrew after the death of his older sister Barbara and locked himself away in a basement bunker, only decades later deciding to leave via a tunnel and getting hit by a passing train. Originally, once in the bunker, Walter would have experienced still people that moved when he looked away, similar to Doctor Who's Weeping Angels or The Prisoner, and then would imagine himself living on a model trainset where an invisible hand would move pieces around on the set. Both aspects were to represent the passage of time for the decades Walter lived there, and out of paranoia, Walter would then escape through the tunnel and to his demise. This was ultimately trimmed down to showing Walter going through the same routine each day, eating peaches from a can, until one day he decides to escape.
  • The reception section likewise needs a complete rewrite. As it currently exists, it's just scores from reviewers one after another instead of threading together and summarizing critical consensus. I recommend the essay Wikipedia:Copyediting reception sections for guidance on this point.
• (2) Verifiable:
  • I have concerns with some of the sourcing used: for example, the IGN review that cites the entire gameplay paragraph does not adequately cover all the material there (for example, Edith Finch's words being graphically displayed) and the caption for the image is completely unsourced. The line The team struggled on the diver idea until Dallas came up with the idea of a shark falling into a forest with a child uttering the line "and suddenly I was a shark", doesn't seem adequately cited in the PC Gamer retrospective, as the text there doesn't mention the diver and doesn't say that the quoted line was the spark that caused the shift.
• (3, 4, 5) Broad in its coverage, neutral, stable:
  • The article feels like it's missing details, even for GA standards. The gameplay section explains nothing of the various vignettes, besides saying they vary and the caption in the gameplay image; considering these vignettes are covered and discussed in development, at least more thorough examples should be mentioned here for context.
• (6) Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
  • Images appear freely licensed and checked off by OTRS where applicable. I'd recommend making the link between the retouched images used here and the originals more obvious, however, since it makes it easier to verify provenance.

--Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^talk 16:02, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

Player Character

The article states that at the end, the player character is revealed to be Edith's son, which is misleading as the main portion of the game is clearly played as Edith, as can be seen when looking down at her pregnant belly as well looking at her tanned and feminine hands and clothing. We see the game through the eyes of Edith's son only at the very beginning on the boat and at the very end where he visits her grave. 2A00:6020:4924:F800:A0AC:770E:480F:2E58 (talk) 23:27, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

Addendum, the article is consistent in naming the player character as the boy on the boat in the beginning as well as the same person in the end, but the wording is still misleading Since the game is played through many different perspectives, there is no single "player character". Yet if one was to be named, it would probably be Edith as she is the one central and consistent element that ties the whole plot together. She is also the one with whom the player spends most of their time. 2A00:6020:4924:F800:A0AC:770E:480F:2E58 (talk) 23:32, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

After the first sentence in the plot, it states " The player then takes the perspective of Edith as she reexplores ..." implying the switch of viewpoint to Edith. And its further explained how the vignettes are told from other perspectives. Masem (t) 01:05, 29 April 2024 (UTC)