Talk:X-Men Legends II: Rise of Apocalypse/GA1

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: David Fuchs (talk · contribs) 18:15, 13 December 2012 (UTC) Review forthcoming... ping me if there's nothing here by tomorrow :) Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 18:15, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Prose

Players choose a team of up to four characters from a larger group of characters. As players proceed through the game additional characters are unlocked. - That just sounds really clunky. I'd rephrase.

Did a first rewrite. I'm not totally happy with it, but it's an improvement --Teancum (talk) 16:05, 21 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

On the console versions up to four players can play on one machine cooperatively, with the ability to add or remove players at any time. The game also features online play for up to four players, a first for the series. - I would specify what features the PC version has more explicitly, since you single out the consoles.

This was old information, actually. I've modified it after researching and finding all but handheld versions allow for these features --Teancum (talk) 16:05, 21 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'd suggest reorganizing the gameplay section to focus less on iterations and changes since the first game and make the article stand a little more on its own. People aren't necessarily going to have read about the first game. Things like explaining X-Men ("superhero team or whatnot") when they first come up would make a nice difference.

Done --Teancum (talk) 03:18, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

players can upgrade their four main powers and other abilities unique to that character. - You probably need to make sure you're being consistent about referring to the player, or the players characters. In this case I'd think the latter is better since you aren't dealing with a single player character.

Rephrased this, hopefully it helps clarify things --Teancum (talk) 16:05, 21 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Biographies of the X-Men and their enemies can be accessed on computers located in the mansion. What mansion? What's the Danger Room?

Modified, again old info, but also copy edited --Teancum (talk) 16:05, 21 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Upon freeing him, the teams relocate to Genosha to work through the wreckage - is what happened in Genosha part of the first game's events? If so why does it ask what apocalypse wanted in the area? When was he there? Why is the explanation for what these locations are only given in the development section (Savage Land, etc.) but not here?

Explained in-universe information a bit more --Teancum (talk) 16:05, 21 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Angel is transformed into Archangel to act as a Horseman of Apocalypse, to defend Apocalypse's tower. - Someone who hasn't read the comics isn't going to know that Angel becomes an agent of Apocalypse necessarily, reading the above; I'm also unsure if the transformation is willing or not (like in the comics).

Expanded/explained, and in general gave the plot a copy edit. --Teancum (talk) 16:05, 21 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Karthik Bala, CEO of Vicarious Visions felt strongly that the PSP version should have the same gameplay as the consoles. "One of our main goals [...] was to really bring the depth and detail of the console game over to portable form on the PSP." - but, according to the gameplay element, this isn't what happened (unless the PSP gameplay is different from another handheld's.)

Clarified the gameplay section. The PSP version matches the console/PC, so I specified that the mobile phone version is the unique one. --Teancum (talk) 16:05, 21 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comprehensiveness

The lead could probably be expanded to give a little about development.

Done --Teancum (talk) 14:47, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I assume the units sold on Xbox is the only sales figure we've got?

Correct --Teancum (talk) 16:05, 21 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Since there's a fair amount of reception in the article, I'd suggest rewriting the lead to focus on the various aspects of the game, rather than reciting each critics' thoughts one after another.

References

Sources look fairly good; you might have to defend Joystiq at FAC but I think it meets GA criteria. Have not done any spot-checks yet.

Noted. Don't ever plan on taking any of my GANs to FAC however. --Teancum (talk) 16:05, 21 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Media

File:X-Men Legends II.jpg could use a more descriptive and strengthened fair use rationale on how its use is essential. If you've got an image illustrating a specific point of critical commentary, that might be the best option.

Updated both the rational and image caption per your suggestion. --Teancum (talk) 16:12, 21 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

--Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 16:27, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Should have time to tackle it this weekend. --Teancum (talk) 14:25, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Responses added. Still Doing... --Teancum (talk) 16:05, 21 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

LLLStill working on this, I presume? Not trying to heckle, just trying to keep myself on task with reviews :) Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 16:16, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, just busy with Christmas and family. --Teancum (talk) 02:54, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Still going to tackle this, just been busy with the holidays. Going to do at least some around noon tomorrow when I wake up in the new year. --Teancum (talk) 21:37, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say I'm pretty done at this point. I'm not sure exactly how to reword the lead to better summarize the Reception section per your comments above. Can you be a bit more specific on what you want? I typically write the lead like this article, so I need help thinking out of the box. --Teancum (talk) 14:47, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've done a copyedit of the article; with your changes I think the prose is fine now. As for the reception section, an example of what I'm talking about is the reception section for Halo Wars. I generally use the first paragraph to give general comments, aggregate reviews, and basic critical commentary; the following paragraphs break down each aspect of commentary, like gameplay, audio/visuals, plot, etc. If you have any more questions you can let me know. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 17:51, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I'm following now. You're talking about the lead paragraph of the Reception section and not the lead of the article. Not a problem, I'll get to that ASAP. --Teancum (talk) 18:34, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Took a stab at making the Reception section more cohesive per your comments. Let me know if I need to do more. --Teancum (talk) 14:09, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, at a glance that looks much better. I'll try and run through the article once more later on today. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 16:17, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ok passing as GA. Thanks for your work in improving the article. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 19:07, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]