Talk:Final Fantasy XIV: Heavensward

Final Fantasy XIV: Heavensward has been listed as one of the Video games good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: November 13, 2018. (Reviewed version).

Video games Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks

AfDs

Merge discussions

Other discussions

No major discussions

DYK nom

--DYKReviewBot (report bugs) 18:31, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Date, length and hook all OK. QPQ done, no close paraphrasing. I would recommend using ALT1 however the original can be used if the fact is made clearer in the article. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 09:08, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review! I think I prefer ALT1 as well, now that I think about it. Axem Titanium (talk) 01:59, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It would be hookier to fashion a hook around the fictional dragon language and skip all the release details. Yoninah (talk) 21:15, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What were you thinking of? I'd like to keep something about the 5 year gap between creation and implementation if possible, since I think that's one of the "hookiest" parts of the factoid. Axem Titanium (talk) 23:45, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Axem Titanium: Then it's the first hook that you want, not ALT1. @The C of E: why didn't you think the ALT0 hook fact isn't clear in the article? Both the fact that it was released in 2015 and the fact that the dragon language is from the 2010 release are clearly cited in the article. Yoninah (talk) 14:27, 16 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Yoninah: Maybe this one splits the difference between ALT0 and ALT1? I don't have a strong preference, ALT0 is fairly compact and gives all the necessary details, IMO. Also, since we missed my first proposed date, do you think we could swing for September 27, which is the date of a major patch? Axem Titanium (talk) 17:23, 16 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ALT2:... that the fictional dragon language featured in Final Fantasy XIV: Heavensward was originally developed for a previous version of the game over five years earlier?

@Axem Titanium: Yes, ALT2 sounds fine to me. Before I approve it, I'd just like clarification on what the source is talking about. It says: As I mentioned in the past, far back before even the original release of 1.0, I was tasked with creating an original language for the dragons of Dravania. How does that reconcile with developing the language for the 2010 edition? Yoninah (talk) 19:14, 17 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Yoninah: Ah, Final Fantasy XIV (released in 2010) is colloquially referred to as "1.0" by fans and by the developers themselves internally (A Realm Reborn is thus "2.0" and Heavensward is "3.0"). Here's a source describing the original release as "1.0": [1] Axem Titanium (talk) 13:31, 18 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks. ALT2 hook ref verified and cited inline. Rest of review per The C of E. ALT2 good to go. Yoninah (talk) 18:42, 18 September 2016 (UTC)</noinclude>[reply]

A fact from Final Fantasy XIV: Heavensward appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 27 September 2016 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that the fictional dragon language featured in Final Fantasy XIV: Heavensward was originally developed for a previous version of the game five years earlier?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2016/September. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Final Fantasy XIV: Heavensward.

Wikipedia

GA nomination?

It looks pretty good, perhaps someone could nominate it, help make a Final Fantasy XIV Good Topic. :) Judgesurreal777 (talk) 21:00, 26 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Axem Titanium: 3.2, 3.3, and 3.4 patches are all unsourced in the table, unless I'm missing something. Anarchyte (talk | work) 06:02, 5 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've added references to the official patch notes for each patch. Does that suffice for verifiability? Axem Titanium (talk) 19:02, 5 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Final Fantasy XIV: Heavensward/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: TheJoebro64 (talk · contribs) 17:17, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Waiting four months for a review? I'm surprised this wasn't picked up earlier. JOE BRO 64 17:17, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the pickup! Axem Titanium (talk) 17:24, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Lead (or lede)

... for Microsoft Windows, Mac OS X, PlayStation 3, and PlayStation 4. If I remember correctly, the name of Mac OS X had been changed to just OS X by 2013. WPVG consensus is to use what the OS was called at the time the game was released. Same point applies in the last paragraph of the lead (i.e. "the company suspended sales of the Mac version", "Mac sales resumed in February 2016")
- Done. Axem Titanium (talk) 06:05, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It was released on June 23, 2015—nearly two years after the debut of A Realm Reborn and almost five years after the ill-fated launch of the original Final Fantasy XIV. Is the latter part (almost five years after the launch of the initial version) really worth mentioning? It doesn't seem that important.
- Comment: It connects to the next sentence about Uematsu ("Nobuo Uematsu, who had not worked on the title since 2010, returned to collaborate with Masayoshi Soken on the soundtrack"). How about: "It was released on June 23, 2015, nearly two years after the debut of A Realm Reborn. Naoki Yoshida served as director and producer and Nobuo Uematsu, who had not worked on the title since the ill-fated 2010 launch of the original Final Fantasy XIV, returned to collaborate with Masayoshi Soken on the soundtrack." Axem Titanium (talk) 06:05, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  - @Axem Titanium: that seems good. JOE BRO 64 12:20, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
IMO level cap should be linked at the expansion pack increases the level cap
- Done. Axem Titanium (talk) 06:05, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Heavensward was well received upon release—I advise striking "upon release". This is usually pointless because almost all reviews for a game/expansion are written at the time of release.
- Done. Axem Titanium (talk) 06:05, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
... the title had reached a cumulative total of 5 million subscriptions. From my understanding, MOS policies say numbers under 10 should be written out. Up to you though.
- Done. Axem Titanium (talk) 06:05, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Gameplay

I know we're told in the lead that "MMORPG" is an abbreviation of "massively multiplayer role-playing game", but it still needs to be stated in prose.
- Done. Axem Titanium (talk) 06:05, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Could you possibly replace a few of the "base game"s with "A Realm Reborn"?
- Done. Axem Titanium (talk) 06:05, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
What are Free Companies? And Sea Clouds?
- Done. Axem Titanium (talk) 06:05, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
an open world area—"area" is tautological
- Done. Axem Titanium (talk) 06:05, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
~~In addition to new dungeons and raids, ... Unnecessary. An "also" could easily be used instead.~~
- Comment: I think it needs to be said somewhere that there are new dungeons, even if it is perfectly obvious and expected that there are. Axem Titanium (talk) 06:05, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  - Scratching this point; I had thought this was already mentioned when I wrote this point. Sorry. JOE BRO 64 12:21, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
No other comments here, pretty well-written and well-sourced.

Plot

I haven't read this section fully yet, but it's massive—the main story section is over 1,000 words. Plot rules for video games usually follow the ones for films; 700 words is the recommended maximum length. I'd try to trim the excessive details that wouldn't matter to a general audience.
- I'm at a conference until Wednesday so I won't be able to respond in too much detail to this GAN until then, but I just wanted to respond to this real quick. Heavensward is part of a dense serial plot that relies heavily on knowledge of prior events to understand the context of the story at hand. It has far more in common with a serial television show than a film (but is unable to fit in the mold of how articles on TV shows summarize plot since it doesn't have "episodes"). As for the WP:MOS/VG guideline about a 700 word "limit", this was added to the MOS unilaterally by a single editor without discussion and WT:VG is littered with discussions criticizing such a strict limit. Many of these discussions include provisos that the length of the plot section should reflect how well-received the story was in reviews---this happens to be a facet of the game that has drawn particular praise. For Heavensward, I aimed for a similar word count as Final Fantasy XIV#Story, a GA that was promoted in January 2016. I believe that the current length of the plot section aids the reader in gaining a complete understanding of the story and warrants its length. Axem Titanium (talk) 09:04, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The three nations of the Eorzean Alliance—Gridania, Limsa Lominsa, and Ul'dah—play a smaller role in the story compared to A Realm Reborn, as does their adversary, the Garlean Empire. This should be sourced as it's WP:OR (based on your interpretation of the story)
- Comment: I took out the value judgment and stuck to the facts. Axem Titanium (talk) 20:23, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Development

... along with the patches leading into its story... Link to Patch (computing)
- Done. Axem Titanium (talk) 06:05, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The development team worked within the constraints of existing lore... IMO "lore" is jargon for "backstory"
- Done. Axem Titanium (talk) 06:05, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The expansion was officially announced at the Las Vegas segment of Final Fantasy XIV Fan Festival 2014, which took place in October. This is a case where "official" is redundant, as no one's going to assume it's unofficial.
- Done. Axem Titanium (talk) 06:05, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Instead, it draws influence from real events such as religion-based conflicts... Link to religious war
- Done. Axem Titanium (talk) 06:05, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
See my point about OS X above
- Done. Axem Titanium (talk) 06:05, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Both OS X and Microsoft Windows should be linked
- Done. Axem Titanium (talk) 06:05, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Also, this is more of a personal preference, but I feel like you could drop the "Microsoft" in Windows. Beyond physical windows, there's nothing else you could be referring to, and within this context it's clear you'd be talking about the OS.
- Done. Axem Titanium (talk) 06:05, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
... are required to purchase this bundle in order to play... "In order" is unnecessary
- Done. Axem Titanium (talk) 06:05, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
...the performance issues... This is minor, but in most cases "issue" is an euphemism for "problem"
- Done. Axem Titanium (talk) 06:05, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The chart of patches kinda falls under WP:GAMECRUFT #10, which says it's inappropriate to make lists of every patch for a game. It does look like there's some good info here though, so I'd take some time to convert it into prose and then remove stuff that wouldn't appeal to a general audience.
- Comment: I believe the present coverage is warranted per WP:DEPTH; each major numbered patch gets a raft of press and discussion in mainstream gaming websites and the article omits minor 3.XX patches, which conversely do not. I feel that the patch section is illustrative of the games-as-a-service model that this game has been praised for (see Final_Fantasy_XIV#Sales_and_subscriptions as well as the "best evolving game" award from BAFTA). Axem Titanium (talk) 06:05, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
General vibe around WP:VG in recent times has been that reviewer names (here for the soundtrack) are unnecessary; many of their statements can be made with simply the publication's name.
- Comment: I haven't really gotten that sense in my experience, and even if it were true, I don't see the benefit to intentionally eliding the labor of reviewers, especially those who cover niche aspects of games like the music. Publications are not people and they don't "say" anything, since they are inanimate objects. I hope we can agree to disagree about this stylistic decision. Axem Titanium (talk) 06:05, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Titles#Major works: "Online magazines, newspapers, and news sites with original content should generally be italicized"
- Done. Axem Titanium (talk) 06:05, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Reception

Critics and reviewers... Uh, aren't critics and reviewers the same thing? I'd remove one or the other
- Done. Axem Titanium (talk) 06:05, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Reception of the expansion was "generally positive"... Metacritic says "generally favorable", not "positive"
- Done. Axem Titanium (talk) 06:05, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
...making it the third best-selling video game... "Bestselling" does not need a hyphen
- Done. Axem Titanium (talk) 06:05, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
My points about reviewer names and italicizing publication titles also apply here.
- See above. Axem Titanium (talk) 06:05, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Otherwise good, no major issues here.

References

This isn't necessary for GAN, but some of your references seem a bit inconsistent. For example, your Metacritic references use both the website and publisher parameters, while your IGN, Square, Polygon, etc. use just publisher, and your Hardcore Gamer, Game Informer, etc. use website. Then some, like the Metacritic ones, link to the website/publisher articles, but others do not.
- I think I've made my referencing style consistent. It's easy to forget haha. Axem Titanium (talk) 06:05, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I recommend archiving your sources: https://tools.wmflabs.org/iabot/index.php?page=runbotsingle. A lot of websites are disappearing all over the place.
- Done. Axem Titanium (talk) 06:05, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]