Talk:Otogirisō/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Nominator: Andrzejbanas (talk · contribs) 21:37, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
Reviewer: ProtoDrake (talk · contribs) 21:02, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
I'll take this one on. If I don't get back with comments by this time next week, ping me. --ProtoDrake (talk) 21:02, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
Review
[edit]- Lead
- The game appears exclusive to Japan, but this isn't mentioned in the lead.
- While I went through the details, no sources directly says its exclusive to Japan. The Nintendo Power article listed that the game was never released in the United States while the Time Extension article announces it received an English translation, but nothing specifically stating its exclusive to Japan. Andrzejbanas (talk) 14:38, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
- The story part of the lead could be less wordy. At the moment it feels very cumbersome to read through for a lead.
- Tried to re-phrase this a bit. If this does not help, I'd welcome more specific suggestions.
- "The games director Koichi Nakamura developed the game" -- "The game's director" or simply "Director Koichi Nakamura"
- Went with latter. Changed. Andrzejbanas (talk) 14:38, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
- On the whole, the flow of prose here feels rather clunky due to some redundant elements of the prose.
- Tried to update. If there are more specific corrections, that would help me figure out what you'd like me to change. Andrzejbanas (talk) 14:38, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
- Gameplay
- Feels like the first two sentences could be combined.
- Attempted to tackle this. Andrzejbanas (talk) 14:38, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
- "Unlike regular novels, " -- This feels unnecessary.
- "The game keeps track of how many times they've progressed to a narrative ending in the game" -- "they have", not "they've".
- Plot
- The protagonist uses gender-neutral pronouns in the lead and is masculine in the plot. Which is correct?
- Masculine is appropriate, I don't think its that complicated, but I can add it to the lead if absolutely needed. Andrzejbanas (talk) 14:38, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
- The final paragraph seems to be missing something. I don't get what the point of Nami's family is about.
- So this is what is complicated. The relationship between Nami and family changes depending on the narratives paths. The beginning mostly stays the same with some tone differences, but the actual endings are varied. Listing all of them would be exhaustive and there is no "true" ending per se, so I'm not sure on how to handle this. Andrzejbanas (talk) 14:38, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
- Development
- "He thought of older text adventures but even felt those were a bit complicated.[12]" -- the "a bit" feels redundant. Maybe "similarly" or "also" or something else.
- Tried re-phrasing. Andrzejbanas (talk) 14:38, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
- The second paragraph has a LOT of quoting in it that could be paraphrased.
- Cut it down, left some in that are opinions on stuff (i.e: he implied that making a simple game at first would hypothetically lead to non-gamers trying other games.) Andrzejbanas (talk) 14:38, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
- Release
- Some of the statements about delays and such can be condensed so it reads less like "X did this, and then X did this."
- There aren't any statements about delays. Not sure how to re-phrase the content if its really just information about different releases. Suggestions? Andrzejbanas (talk) 14:38, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
- "Otogirisō was released for the Super Famicom on March 7, 1992.[16][5]" -- Refs the wrong way round.
- Switched. Andrzejbanas (talk) 14:38, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
- "This version of the game was titled Otogirisō soseihen[c].[22][21]" -- Same as above.
- Fixed. Andrzejbanas (talk) 14:38, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
That's all I've got for now. And that's definitely not everything, probably need two or three passes. --ProtoDrake (talk) 17:33, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks! I have followed-up and corrected some items as requested. Andrzejbanas (talk) 14:38, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Andrzejbanas: Took another look through, and it feels like a pass to me (feel free to get a second opinion, no-one's perfect). I assume good faith on the sources given translation/access issues on my end. As to the point about Nami, it was a grammar point more than anything which I addressed. Hope you don't mind. --ProtoDrake (talk) 20:35, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
- No thank you for doing it. Its usually easier for the reviewer to fix then to try and explain someone else to tidy it up. I appreciate it. Thanks @ProtoDrake:! Andrzejbanas (talk) 20:45, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Andrzejbanas: Took another look through, and it feels like a pass to me (feel free to get a second opinion, no-one's perfect). I assume good faith on the sources given translation/access issues on my end. As to the point about Nami, it was a grammar point more than anything which I addressed. Hope you don't mind. --ProtoDrake (talk) 20:35, 21 January 2025 (UTC)