Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Peer review/Crackdown

Crackdown

I've made significant efforts to clean this article up and looking to take it up through the GA/FA process. Looking for any suggestions on improvements to the article. (I know a couple references aren't formatted perfectly, but that's an easy fix) --MASEM 17:06, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Comments: After a quick glance I would suggest giving the article some organizational tweaks.

• Traditionally, most VG articles have the "Gameplay" section before the "Plot" section. This isn't that big of a deal though, I just personally think it flows well that way.
• I would remove the quote from the "Plot" section, I think stuff like that should be restricted to real life quotes from real people.
• In the "Development" section, I would combine the "Playable demo" and "Halo 3 Beta" subsections into one subsection titled "Promotion".
• I would remove the "Awards" subheading in the "Reception" section and combine it with the information about the sales. Then move it further to make it the intro paragraph to the reception and put the rest of the content in a new subsection titled "Critical response"
• The review table is a bit long. I'd remove some of the review scores to shorten it some. Maybe the 1UP.com and GameSpy since there is already mention of their review in the text.
• The "Soundtrack" section looks a little off where it currently is. I would move it above the "Reception" section. Also the spacing of the table listing the tracks looks uneven; the third column is not as wide as the others and it forces it be much longer than the rest.

I haven't read through the text, but I think this could make GA with very little effort. I'll give it a more thorough read later for more comments to get it to FA. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 19:47, 28 March 2008 (UTC))

• Needs more screenshots. Seriously, theres like one tiny screenshot in the whole article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.32.210.118 (talk • contribs)

• One screenshot is all that is needed; in particular, given that the developers felt that screenshots didn't do the game justice, it doesn't make sense to add more screenshots. --MASEM 16:32, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Further comments: Here's a more in-depth critique of the article. Hope it helps.

• General comments-
  • I would add more citations to the "Plot" and "Gameplay" sections
  • An extra picture wouldn't hurt. Maybe a screen of some new content.
• The lead-
  • The first paragraph is only two sentences. Personally I try to have at least 4 sentences per paragraph. Since this is the first paragraph, I'd beef it up some more. Also, both sentences begin with "Crackdown".
  • The phrase "near-future fictional Pacific City" sounds a bit off. Though I can't really think of an alternative.
• Plot section-
  • The first sentence in the "Plot" section is kind of lengthy. I'd split it into two sentences:
    "Crackdown takes place in the fictional metropolis of Pacific City, which is laid out across four islands with several districts and areas within it, and. The city is controlled by three crime organizations: the Central American Los Muertos, Eastern European Volk, and East Asian Shai-Gen."
  • The "Agency" kind of just pops out of nowhere. Maybe add a brief sentence explaining who they are.
  • When describing the "Agent", I'd try to integrate the parenthesized phrase "(controlled by the player)" into the rest of the text.
• Gameplay section-
  • I would use another verb than "take out"; sounds a too much like slang. Maybe "defeat"
  • The phrase "If the player should die, they can select any open..." should probably be "If the character should die, the player can select any open..." I hope the player doesn't die while playing the game. :-P
  • One more similar phrase. "...few concessions to realism: player abilities..." should be "...few concessions to realism: character abilities..."
  • Trim the phrase "...with the type appearing being primarily based on how..."
• Development section-
  • The flow of the content seems a bit off. I'd try to mention things in a semi-chronological fashion. Start with the designers, move onto the ideas behind the concept, mention progress of initial development stages, move onto later stages (closer to release), etc.
  • For the "Promotion" section. I'd combine the first two paragraphs into one larger paragraph and the same for the last two paragraphs. That's just me though; I prefer larger paragraphs of content.
  • Unbold the titles "Free-For-All" and "Gettin' Busy".
  • The spacing of the table listing the tracks looks uneven; the third column is not as wide as the others and it forces it be much longer than the rest. I would maybe move some of the track titles over to another column.
• Reception section-
  • The game's title is mentioned a lot and becomes a bit repetitive. Mix in a few other terms; "it" and "the game".
  • The sentence about not being sold in Germany looks a bit out of place. Maybe move it to the info about the worldwide release. "During the week of its worldwide release—not sold in Germany due to the USK's decision to not rate the game—^[Ref]of February 22, 2007,..."
  • I would trim down the review score table. Keep maybe 6-7 scores.

Hope this helps. I don't think it would take a lot to get this GA. Add more citations a light bit of copy editing. FA is possible, but would require another pair of eyes to do more copy editing. They've been real sticklers at FAC lately. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 17:33, 2 April 2008 (UTC))