Talk:Cold Fear/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: AdrianGamer (talk · contribs) 11:01, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

• The lead definitely needs to be much longer, per WP:LEADLENGTH. Gameplay/development information needs to be added as well.
• It was Ubisoft's first horror game, and Darkworks' second game, after Alone in the Dark: The New Nightmare in 2001. -can't find these information in ref 5. (I mean Zombi can also be counted as a survival horror game)
• Cold Fear is a survival horror/third-person shooter - don't use "/"
• All exos carry at least one exocel within them - would be great if you can elaborated more on "exocel". What is it actually?
• Would be great if the interior environment can be mentioned as well.
• That's a very solid gameplay section. I can find no original research.
• , but within moments of boarding, all but Tom Hansen are killed - killed by what?
• "it is set in a dynamic environment on a stormy sea, including intense combat, intelligent enemies, and a high element of the shockingly unexpected." - This quote can be removed/rephrased. It is not that important.
• The part about the game's pre-release reception should be included in the reception section instead.
• in the early stages of development the camera was constantly going through the walls because of the roll movement. So we had to develop an inertia-control system for the camera, just as if a cameraman is using a steadicam behind the hero." - you should rephrased this as well.
• and most of the NPCs had one hundred and fifty - non-playable characters
• "Cold Fear offers a never-before-seen visual experience in terms of animation richness. The interaction between the storm and the characters that are on the deck sometimes creates some really breathtaking moments. And on top of that, we managed to offer some really intense action sequences featuring far more enemies than in most horror games - can be trimmed down a bit to only "The interaction between the storm and the characters that are on the deck sometimes creates some really breathtaking moments"
• The music section is probably too short to have its own subsection.
• The reception section needs to be rewritten. It is a bit too formulaic, and I am afraid the excessive quotes used will resulted in severe close paraphrasing.
• I do not really like how the reception section was handled. It should talk about how individual aspects of the game was received. For example, "The game's graphics was praised. GameSpot thought it was amazing and IGN thought that it was impressive" something like that
• many "generic indoor locations." - "generic indoor locations".
• Can a better screenshot be used instead. A screenshot of Hansen grabbing onto a ledge and shoot would be great

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:

   B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. Has an appropriate reference section:

   B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

Overall it is a very well-written article, and it is very comprehensive, but the lead and the reception section needs quite a lot of work before passing. I will leave the article on hold for seven days, and if all the issues raised above are addressed, the article is good to go! AdrianGamer (talk) 03:49, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the review Adrian. I'll address many of those issues easily enough in a day or so. Fixing the lead and the reception section will be the main hurdles. I'll get back to you within 24 hours or so. 04:49, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

Yeah I'm planning on revamping the reception section first so I'll take care of that. GamerPro64 05:30, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

Reply

Okay so, I'll leave the review section to Gamer, that suits me grand. I'll leave the lead for now as well, and just address some of the small points above.

• "It was Ubisoft's first horror game, and Darkworks' second game, after Alone in the Dark: The New Nightmare in 2001. -can't find these information in ref 5."

This info comes from the infobox on the right of the linked page. The full quote is "The first horror title from Ubisoft features both action and adventure elements."

• "Cold Fear is a survival horror/third-person shooter - don't use "/""

Fixed

• "All exos carry at least one exocel within them - would be great if you can elaborated more on "exocel". What is it actually?"

It says a few sentences previously they're "parasitic" organisms, but I've expanded that to clear up any ambivalence. If it's still not right, let me know.

• "But within moments of boarding, all but Tom Hansen are killed - killed by what?"

It's never actually revealed. We don't see them being killed, Hansen hears them being killed over the radio. Presumably they're bumped off by exos. Again, I've done a small rewrite to clarify this, and again, let me know if it's no good.

• "It is set in a dynamic environment on a stormy sea, including intense combat, intelligent enemies, and a high element of the shockingly unexpected." - This quote can be removed/rephrased. It is not that important."

Agreed, I've removed it entirely.

• "The part about the game's pre-release reception should be included in the reception section instead."

I've actually removed that as well. It's not really important, and is a remnant from when I was new to writing VG articles. I wouldn't include something like that now (unless it was a case that pre-release impressions were widely different from actual reviews, which isn't the case here). So I just left the references for the demo release.

• "In the early stages of development the camera was constantly going through the walls because of the roll movement. So we had to develop an inertia-control system for the camera, just as if a cameraman is using a steadicam behind the hero." - you should rephrased this as well."

I'm not 100% sure what you mean here. Are you saying I should paraphrase the quote or shorten the amount of quoted material? The reason I ask is I think this is a pretty interesting quote, and to paraphrase it would probably end up wordier than simply quoting.

I think the part about just as if a cameraman is using a steadicam behind the hero is interesting and can stay, but the rest can be paraphrased. Your argument sounds reasonable though, so I will leave this one optional.

• "and most of the NPCs had one hundred and fifty - non-playable characters"

Fixed

• "Cold Fear offers a never-before-seen visual experience in terms of animation richness. The interaction between the storm and the characters that are on the deck sometimes creates some really breathtaking moments. And on top of that, we managed to offer some really intense action sequences featuring far more enemies than in most horror games - can be trimmed down a bit to only "The interaction between the storm and the characters that are on the deck sometimes creates some really breathtaking moments"

Done

• "Can a better screenshot be used instead. A screenshot of Hansen grabbing onto a ledge and shoot would be great."

We have a screenshot of him holding onto a ledge and pointing his gun at an enemy. Would one of him actually shooting be that much different? if he was firing in the picture we have, literally the only difference would be a muzzle flash. If so, I'll see if I can find one.

Then the caption may need to be reworked a bit. It is not very clear. You should clearly state that he is holding a ledge, as I cannot see that at all.

So that's the smaller points addressed. Let me know if you think there are still any problems (notwithstanding the lead and reception section), and I'll get on those. Cheers. Bertaut (talk) 23:29, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

I added some development information in the lead and trimmed down the reception section. Thoughts? GamerPro64 01:08, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Looks good. I added a bit to the lead as well, about how many animations the game contains. Bertaut (talk) 01:20, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Several more comments:

• The lead should summarized the article. Therefore, information about the game being the first survival horror Ubisoft game and the second game developed by Darkworks should be mentioned in the development section.
• The comments I made on the screenshot above is talking about the first screenshot in the gameplay section. (sorry for the confusion) The image in the development section should be moved up and the generic screenshot should be removed as its fair use rationale is not strong.
• The reception section's massive paragraph should be broken into two.

— AdrianGamer (talk) 12:20, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

• @AdrianGamer: What do you think of the article now? GamerPro64 20:18, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
  • The article looks great now. Cold Fear is now a . Congratulations! AdrianGamer (talk) 03:57, 6 February 2016 (UTC)