Talk:Blast Corps

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Blast Corps/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: AdrianGamer (talk · contribs) 12:51, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

Ping @AdrianGamer, in case this slipped off your radar – czar 14:04, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

• I forget about it after the Rare Replay review. I should be able to get this done by the end of this week. Hope you won't mind. AdrianGamer (talk) 08:53, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

That's fine—no rush – czar 13:17, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

Review

• must figure out how to use items available from the start - All the items are given in the beginning of the game, or the beginning of the game's levels?
• its complex controls and repetition - remove "complex" for consistency
• The game was released in Rare's 2015 Rare Replay compilation for Xbox One. The compilation's reviewers considered Blast Corps one of its standout titles. - would be great if the two sentences can merged together
• Each of the eight vehicles vary in ability to clear structures - "varies"
• the player moves explosive crates, fills gaps, and creates bridges. - the player control vehicles to move explosive crates sounds a bit more accurate.
• The player controls the viewable screen with zoom and horizontal panning. - "viewable" is not necessary
• early states of the game - early "stages" of the game. "Early state" sounds like the game's earlier version, like alpha and beta
• team member voices encourage the player as each level wears on. - what team members?
• The player and players, choose one
• they would develop numerous games for the platform in the following years. - Not necessary. It was later mentioned again in the legacy section.
• they decided he "still looked really cool without it". - "thought" sounds more accurate
• The game does not use distance fog to obscure the draw distance - Then what did they do? Any information on that?
• Shōshinkai preview - wikilink "Shōshinkai"
• Blast Corps sold one million copies, though not as many as Rare had expected. The game was most successful in Japan - I personally don't think that this information should be included in the first paragraph, which is mostly talking about critical reception instead of commercial reception
• The magazine also praised Blast Corps‍‍ '​‍s level design and difficulty progression - EGM or CVG?
• IGN lauded Rare's new intellectual property in light of other safe and recurring industry trends. - Use the name of the reviewers, since his name was later mentioned in this section.
• EGM‍‍ '​‍s Dan thought Blast Corps looked boring until he played and became addicted. - This sentence should be moved after usually used to cover developer limitations. since it is in the middle of the IGN comments.
• Rare "doubled" the number of classic - Should have mentioned that this is from the Retro Gamer article writer point of view.
• Do not really think the screenshot of that console is really useful. It is relevant, but it does not really tell readers anything. Imagine a game like Lego Jurassic World to have all the console screenshots in their article.

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 corporation:

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:

It is a very well written article with very minor issues. If these are addressed the article should be good to go. Sorry for the long delay. AdrianGamer (talk) 06:54, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

@AdrianGamer, thanks for the review! I think I've addressed everything. A few notes: "each" is singular. Re: distance fog, I think it's more of a statement of fact—they didn't need to obscure the draw distance. I think the image of the N64 works because the game was only released on a single console and has a special connection to it (as the first of seven acclaimed Rare games). I wouldn't push for a console photo in Lego Jurassic World. – czar 16:04, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

The reason for not removing the screenshot sounds reasonable to me. With all the issues fixed, Blast Corps is promoted to . Congratulations. AdrianGamer (talk) 14:48, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

Lead edits

Hi @Czar:,

You mentioned two bits in your edit summary, which I've kept in tact. Why is the reception paragraph in past tense? Doesn't Metacritic still describe it as such, and isn't the game still the highest rated game? --Soetermans. T / C 13:11, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Don't have time to poke around in the MOS right now, but my understanding is that it's better to keep the same tense in a paragraph, which makes for easier reading. Metacritic's tense can go either way (it was then and it might be now)—the site really judged critical consensus at the time and it's not like the page is actively changing. I think the other edits are cosmetic or clunkier, and I don't see the reason for their change (save for staff/people—people is fine for that if you prefer) so please revert. czar 13:19, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

I see your point. I'm not sure about "second highest rated" versus "second highest Nintendo 64 ratings", as the latter seems clunky to me. I do prefer "people" over "staff", so I've left that one in. --Soetermans. T / C 13:28, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Famitsu

For posterity, a note that Famitsu has no review: http://www.famitsu.com/cominy/?m=pc&a=page_h_title&title_id=3318 czar 17:48, 4 June 2016 (UTC)