Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Zero Escape: Virtue's Last Reward/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 11:12, 29 September 2016 [1].

Zero Escape: Virtue's Last Reward[edit]

Nominator(s): Famous Hobo (talk) 09:09, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about Zero Escape: Virtue's Last Reward, a 2012 visual novel developed by Chunsoft. It features an incredibly convoluted story (as you'll soon read) with more WTF moments than I can remember. It was well received by critics, and was even nominated by GameSpot for Game of the Year. This was the first article I ever put serious time into editing, and together with IDV and ThomasO1989, we've brought this article up to what we believe are FAC standards. Famous Hobo (talk) 09:09, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Czar[edit]

  • The Reception section is exceptionally short right now and overquoted. Needs more paraphrasing and elaboration on major and minor themes from the reviewers. czar 22:39, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The thing about the reviews for this game is that they really don't go into a whole lot of detail about the smaller intricacies in the game, or what they liked and disliked. Seriously, it's weird, but I think it's because since it's a visual novel, most critics didn't want to spoil any plot related stuff. In fact, most reviews spend the majority of their time explaining how visual novels work and how the Nonary Game works. The EGM review for example states that "I know I’ve been decidedly obscure about explaining what you’ll find in Virtue’s Last Reward—but I cannot stress enough that the less you know about this game going in, the more enjoyment you’ll have" while the Eurogamer reviews states "To reveal how it does so would be to ruin the fun and take away the dizzying, off-kilter moments that make Virtue's Last Reward such a frequent joy." However, rereading through the reviews, I did find how some reviews felt the character animations were wonky, and I could add to each paragraph a little bit. I'll also try to condense the quotes into paraphrased sentences. Although, I would like to keep the quote "among the best performances I've ever heard in any game, period." Not often you see a quote like that for a game. Famous Hobo (talk) 00:14, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Czar: I've expanded the paragraphs in the review section. I think you'll like the changes. Famous Hobo (talk) 07:43, 22 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Dissident93[edit]

Comments by Dissident93 (talk) 01:06, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved
  • I've never did an article review before (I'd rather just edit it myself and save the time), but here is what I'd change, based on a policy or guideline. Here is what I found based on a solid skim through the article:

Lead Developed for the Nintendo 3DS and PlayStation Vita, it was released on February 12, 2012 in Japan, and in North America and Europe later that year.

  • Dates should always be generalized in the lead, per WP:VG/DATE.
Done, though I'm a bit worried about having the word "in" used three times in the same sentence. I'll try to fix that soon

Nine Hours, Nine Persons, Nine Doors was originally released as a stand-alone title, but its unexpected success in North America prompted game director Kotaro Uchikoshi to continue the series with a sequel.

  • Unexpected according to whom? And did it not have success in Europe, or was success expected there from the start?
According to Uchikoshi, it's a rarity for a game developed in Japan to be more commercially successful in the West than in Japan. I could add "but its unexpected commercial success in North America" if you want. As for the second part, Nine Hours, Nine Persons, Nine Doors was not released in Europe. I feel that would be unnecessary to mention in the lead
Oops, I must have been looking at another article's infobox at the time or something. In that case, adding commercial works. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 09:57, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

However, the game was not commercially successful in Japan, which led to the development of its sequel to be put on indefinite hiatus.

  • Indefinite hiatus, but the sequel was released last month? This needs to be re-worded or sentences merged to seem less like they were written in two different eras (which seems to be the case).
Done

Gameplay

  • Seems to be fine, I would have to nitpick to say anything needs to be fixed.

Plot Each character description is taken from the Aksys Games website.

  • Some meta-comment like this doesn't need to be stated in plain sight. Either turn this into a footnote, or remove it all together and find a better place for the source. Rest of the section seems fine.
Done

Development Uchikoshi also considered including several scientific and philosophical theories/experiments that eventually were left out including: Dissipative system, Monty Hall problem, Gödel's incompleteness theorems, Toxoplasmosis, Folie à deux, Capgras delusion, Fregoli delusion, Sally–Anne test, and Project MKUltra.

  • Run-on sentence that lists random (to a casual reader) linked concepts. Not saying this needs to be removed, but it could be better written or trimmed a bit.
I agree, but I'm not quite sure how to fix this. I'll get back to you on this.

Promotion and release

  • Section itself is fine, but normally we just go with "Release" as the subsection title on game articles. Probably just a nitpick though, but it's something I'd personally edit.
Agreed, so I changed it to just release

Reception The aggregate-review website Metacritic rated the Nintendo 3DS version 88/100,[48] and the PlayStation Vita version 84/100.

  • This means nothing to a casual reader. It should be written simply in prose as "The game received generally favorable reviews, according to review aggregator Metacritic."
Done

It was also tied for the seventh highest rated PlayStation Vita game of 2012 on Metacritic.

  • This is not normally written in game articles, even ones who are listed as the best game of the year. I'd remove it, but this is another personal opinion, not a guideline or policy.
I just removed those sentences entirely. There not that important

Sequel

  • Nothing I'd change here, section is fine from what I see.

Summary

  • One final thing I'll say is that I thought Visual Novel Database external links were considered user generated, and therefore should be removed per WP:ELNO #12? Outside of that, the article follows WP:VG/GL and WP:MOS guidelines and policies, and once the aforementioned issues above are addressed, I'll support the article becoming featured. But again, first time I've ever done this, so I'm not sure if I did anything wrong for a nomination. You might want to re-check your Dota 2 comments to see if I properly addressed them too, if you haven't already.
I know that movie articles tend to have IMDb in their external links, but since the Visual Novel Database isn't well established, I have no problem removing it. As for the review, don't worry, you did exactly what you needed to do. I'll ping you once I've finished the run on sentence in the development section. Famous Hobo (talk) 06:19, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Dissident93: I've fixed all your comments. You might also want to check over the lead again, since I shortened it to three paragraphs, and reworded a bunch of the sentences. Famous Hobo (talk) 21:39, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The only thing that looks off is the very first paragraph, which looks a bit small in comparison with the other two. But of course, we should never add bloat just to increase a section, and it gets all of the article's major points across, so it's fine. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 23:10, 26 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by PresN[edit]

Review by PresN
Resolved
  • Reserving this spot; will start the review tomorrow. --PresN 01:42, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "These are presented from a first-person perspective,[9] with the player being able to move between" -> "with the player able to move between"
  • "if the player sets the puzzle's difficulty level from "hard" to "easy"" - you can't set "from", so either "changes the puzzle's difficulty level from 'hard' to 'easy'" or just "sets the level puzzle's difficulty level to 'easy'".
  • "For example, if a particular plotline cannot progress because a required password is unknown, the player must jump to other plotlines and find it before returning to the original one." - that "it" is problematic. I think the sentence would be clearer as "For example, if a particular plotline cannot progress because a required password is unknown, the player must jump to another plotline and learn the password there before returning to the original one."
Thanks - it's easy to overlook vague or confusing wording since I already know what's meant, so this is really helpful.--IDVtalk 16:31, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The player is thus required to jump often" - the "thus" is unnecessary.
  • "Although dependent on a given timeline, the characters either discover" - "Depending on the given timeline, the characters also either discover"; additionally, it's a bit vague on if you find these in the first puzzle room or later in the game - you don't say, but the connection with the prior sentence implies it to me.
Yeah, it's after the first room. I think it's better explained now.--IDVtalk 16:31, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The remaining participants proceed to the next set of puzzle rooms." - well, now I'm lost. I thought you were covering a big chunk of the game in the prior paragraph; was all that just in the first set of rooms? Or by "set" do you mean "series", as in several rooms that the player beats one after another?
@PresN: Yeah, the exploration of the characters' backstories take place throughout a large portion of the game. I think it is only confusing due to how the bit about Dio being restrained was part of the previous paragraph; I moved it to the next one, to clarify that everyone but Dio and Akane moves on after Sigma has defused the bombs. Let me know if you think this works.--IDVtalk 16:31, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "they uncover a holographic message of the old woman, the same woman Tenmyouji has been looking for, Akane Kurashiki" - the series of commas makes the center one an aside, which flows better if the name is the center instead of a whole phrase. "they uncover a holographic message of the old woman, Akane Kurashiki, who was the woman Tenmyouji was looking for."
  • "Dio sought to prevent this goal." - A "goal" isn't an action that can be prevented; try "Dio sought to stop the project."
  • Wow. That plot is... a lot more complicated than I expected for an escape-the-room visual novel.
Oh believe me, it gets MUCH more complicated if you play the game.
  • "and thus, moved production of the game to the Nintendo 3DS and PlayStation Vita" - "and changed production of the game to the 3DS and Vita"
  • "These scrapped ideas included Monty Hall problem [...] and Capgras delusion" - "These scrapped ideas included the Monty Hall problem [...] and the Capgras delusion"
  • "It was important to know whether information regarding each character had been revealed yet to the player" - "revealed yet to the player in that timeline"
  • Try mixing up the "Bob of Website" formula- "Website's Bob", "Writing for Website, Bob", etc.
  • The whole reception section feels like a list of quotes clumped by theme, and has the weakest writing of the whole article as a result; it could use some more variation and linking between statements. "Martin Robinson of Eurogamer appreciated that the cast was believable and that each character was powered by real emotion. Boosinger commented that the characters were not well written, and that there was little reason to care about them until their backstories were revealed." - these two sentences contradict each other, but are just laid side-by-side without so much as a "however". Additionally, for three paragraphs straight every single sentence is "X of Y said blah." "A of Z said blah". Mixing up the sentence structure would also help a lot in keeping this section from getting laborious to read- "The voice acting was praised by X of Y, who said "blah", as well as by Z's A, who complimented the bluh." See User:Mike Christie/Copyediting reception sections for a lengthier discussion about this topic.
  • "including: [X, Y, Z,] as well as Best Story and Best Graphic Adventure from RPGFan" - "as well as" doesn't work in a colon-separated list, and is kind fo awkward in general. Just "and" will do.
  • "The game also received nominations for: [X] and Game of the Year from [A, B, and C]." - and on the flip side, because of the "and" this isn't a straight list of nominations, so the colon doesn't work. Removing the colon fixes this.
  • "However, less than a year later" - Having "however" at the start interrupts the flow; reverse to "Less than a year later, however,"
  • "resembled the fonts from Nine Hours, Nine Persons, Nine Doors's cover art, which led some to believe that the countdown timer would end with an announcement regarding the third Zero Escape game." - feels a little "written in the moment, 4 years ago"; better as "resembled the fonts from Nine Hours, Nine Persons, Nine Doors's cover art, which led to speculation it was counting down to an announcement regarding a third Zero Escape game"

The reception section's choppiness is the largest problem I saw with the article. --PresN 17:24, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review PresN! I will admit, I've never been the best at reception sections, but I'll see what I can do. As of the moment it is rather choppy. Unfortunately, this just so happens to be the week I move into my college dorm, so I might be a bit preoccupied for the next few days or so. I cleared up some of the smaller issues, but the story and reception issues might take a little longer to fix. Famous Hobo (talk) 20:03, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@PresN: Alright, together with IDV, I think we've managed to strengthen the reception section. We've added variations to the sentence lengths, changed the monotonous "Joe Nobody of IGN" stuff, and removed some unnecessary details. Hopefully this is now up to your liking
Much better, now Support. --PresN 17:12, 22 August 2016 (UTC) (note: pings don't work if you don't sign in the same edit, so I never got this one)[reply]

Comments by David Fuchs[edit]

{{doing}} Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs(talk) 14:53, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@David Fuchs: Just pinging you to see if you're still interested in doing the review. Famous Hobo (talk) 23:32, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved

Overall, this is a solid article. I have a few comments, as follows:

  • The story section is... uh, involved. Not entirely sure if there's any way to simplify it overall, although Depending on whether or not Dio murdered Akane in a given timeline, either Sigma's clone or Akane occupies K's armor, a quantum superposition just doesn't make sense to me. Just drop the quantum mechanics bit, it's a comma splice and doesn't illuminate anything.
Yeah, the writer is fond of multi-timeline stories, which makes it difficult to put together an ordinary plot summary. Regarding the "Depending on..." sentence: it's meant to say that in timelines where Akane was killed, Sigma's clone is the person wearing the K armor, and that in the timeline where she remained alive, she is the one wearing it. I have rewritten it, and hope it's clearer now. And yes, the quantum superposition bit doesn't really add anything to the reader's understanding of the plot, so I removed it.--IDVtalk 19:27, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't think there's a strong WP:NFCC case to be made for the inclusion of File:VLR cast.png. The commentary in the article is basically "they were designed to be diverse", which is great, but doesn't justify the image alone. There's nothing in the reception section or very precise details in development to buttress its inclusion either. My recommendation is to remove it.
Done--IDVtalk 19:27, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • References:
    • What makes Technology Tell, Geekster.de, and 4Gamer.net high-quality reliable sources?
According to WP:VG/RS, Technology Tell and 4Gamer.net are reliable sources. As for Geekster.de, it is not, but since it is the only source that mentions that the game was originally going to be developed for the Nintendo DS, I think it should be kept, especially since it is from Uchikoshi himself
(edit conflict) Replaced the first TT ref; the second TT ref and the Geekster ref are interviews, which I believe should be usable as self-published sources. 4Gamer.net is a major Japanese games news site, which I would compare to something like Eurogamer or IGN. CNET calls it a popular, established and comprehensive game news site with 3.3 million unique visitors monthly (as of December 2011), and says that it grew into the site it is now through its high-quality reviews. It has partnered with Gamesindustry.biz, and runs the Japanese version of the site, translating Japanese content into English and Western content into Japanese, and has been cited by several other RSs ([2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10])--IDVtalk 20:41, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • Ref 20 and elsewhere gives The Escapist's publisher as Gamer Network, inconsistently with other mentions.
No idea why it was like that, but I changed it to the correct Defy Media.--IDVtalk 19:41, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • I'm a bit confused by the use and necessity of the separate notes section; what are the Questions being cited with no context? Do we really need an explanation of Famitsu's score when it's not relevant to the article body? (Indeed, the Famitsu review isn't referenced in prose.) The bit on Chunsoft's merger just comes off as trivia.
Perhaps there is a better way to do it, but the reason for those question notes is that the Q&A page being cited is quite long, so it would be time-consuming for a reader to verify the information if they didn't know what specific questions/answers we were using. I see what you mean about the Chunsoft merger and the Famitsu score, so I went ahead and removed them.--IDVtalk 19:27, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
You can duplicate the same ref information and fill out the Example text element of {{cite web}} to give the question and/or exact quote. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs(talk) 19:32, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@David Fuchs: Done. Famous Hobo (talk) 20:08, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • Don't bother citing the game for the plot section if all you're going to cite is "the game".
Done--IDVtalk 19:27, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • @David Fuchs: I believe I have fixed or otherwise addressed everything you brought up so far.--IDVtalk 20:50, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Jaguar[edit]

  • Support I've read through the article and couldn't find any issues to raise, given the fact that I also came late to the review. It is well written, well sourced and comprehensive, so it meets the criteria. Nice work! JAGUAR  16:02, 2 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, thanks! Famous Hobo (talk) 16:45, 2 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Image review[edit]

  • File:Virtue's Last Reward 3DS Boxart.jpg: Non-free file, which seems correct to me. It has a boilerplate NFC rationale but it seems like each point of WP:NFCC is met (it is highly unlikely that using box art has noticeable financial effects that would result in a WP:NFCC#2 violation).
  • File:Virtue's Last Reward escape the room.png: Non-free file, which seems correct to me. There is discussion of this specific scene in the article so I think that WP:NFCC#8 may be met, as an illustration of what is being discussed. The use rationale is far too generic with regards to "purpose of use" - it needs to indicate why the inclusion of that image enhances the understanding of the article topic and why its absence would result in said understanding being lost.

Both images have good ALT text. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 15:38, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Jo-Jo Eumerus: Thanks for the image review! Since it appears that the boxart image was fine, I just improved the "purpose of use" in the gameplay screenshot. I believe it is now up to standard. Famous Hobo (talk) 16:20, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Famous Hobo: The article looks like ready to become FA so I would give two small issues I found while reading it. If you have some free time later, could you also provide feedback to my review (Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Allen Walker/archive1)?Tintor2 (talk) 15:23, 23 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • In Story and themes, I would avoid using "()" and reword it like "a brain teaser based on probability, the Monty Hall problem".
  • The first reception sentence is a bit small. I would suggest merging it with the next paragraph.

Coord note[edit]

@Famous Hobo: Since this appears to be your first time through FAC, it is customary to get a spot-check of your sources for any issues with verifiability and close paraphrasing. I have requested one at WT:FAC. --Laser brain (talk) 01:37, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Source review - all OK[edit]

  • No dead links - OK.
  • No DAB links - OK.
  • Thorough consistent sourcing - OK.
  • Apparently reliable sources for a game-related article (mostly gaming websites and reviews, interviews for uncontroversial details) - OK (disclaimer: not a gaming expert). GermanJoe (talk) 01:02, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Spot-check for verifiability and close paraphrasing - all OK[edit]

10 randomly selected online references: 16 20 21 31 33 42 52 69 72 74.

  • 42 - OK (my Japanese is non-existant, but the sales numbers are clearly listed)
  • 52 - all OK (6 usages)
  • Not listed numbers without comments are all OK as well (just avoiding spam).

No problems with close paraphrasing, all checked sources accurately verify the referenced content. GermanJoe (talk) 01:02, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@GermanJoe: Thanks for the reviews! Famous Hobo (talk) 04:41, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Final comments?[edit]

@Ian Rose and Laser brain: So anything else needed? There are four supports (two from experienced FA editors), both the spot check and source reviews passed, and we got a image review (although the reviewer never responded, there was only one issue brought up, which was fixed. Should we wait to see if the image review passed, or is it good as is?). Famous Hobo (talk) 04:52, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Zero_Escape:_Virtue%27s_Last_Reward/archive1&oldid=1086352940"