Jump to content

Talk:Wipeout 2048

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Featured articleWipeout 2048 is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Good topic starWipeout 2048 is part of the Wipeout series, a good topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on August 12, 2022.
Did You Know Article milestones
DateProcessResult
March 17, 2017Good article nomineeListed
May 20, 2017Featured article candidatePromoted
June 23, 2017Good topic candidatePromoted
April 20, 2021Good topic removal candidateKept
Did You Know A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on March 26, 2017.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the developers of the video game Wipeout 2048 speculated that they influenced design elements of the PlayStation Vita console (pictured), such as the inclusion of two analogue sticks?
Current status: Featured article

Expand lede:

[edit]

It's a bit short. Only two paragraphs. If this article is to get to FA status, it should be a bit longer and summarize more information in the article. --Harizotoh9 (talk) 22:03, 18 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I've expanded the lead to three paragraphs. The article is quite focused so there wasn't too much of a variety to include in the lead, but I hope it summarises the article more now. JAGUAR  22:20, 18 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Wipeout 2048/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Freikorp (talk · contribs) 02:01, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]


I'll take this one. Freikorp (talk) 02:01, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    "however its long loading times and minor technical issues were criticised" - think this would be better as "however its long loading times were criticized, as were some minor technical issues"
    Changed. JAGUAR  11:26, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    "It is set in the near future" - this seems redundant as two sentences later the actual years it is set in are specified.
    Reworded. JAGUAR  11:26, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    "The game also featured downloadable content (DLC); namely the HD/Fury DLC," - this would seem better placed along with 'release' info, rather than in the gameplay section.
    I've never seen the DLC mentioned outside the gameplay section? I think it's more relevant to gameplay as the development and release subsections strictly talks about the game's design etc. I'm not too sure about this... JAGUAR  11:26, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    "(formerly known as Psygnosis)" - does this need to be in brackets? I think ti would be better as standard prose.
    Removed brackets. JAGUAR  11:26, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    "stated that it was something Studio Liverpool had done before" - are you able to specify what title they did it with before? That would be interesting.
    The source doesn't specify this :( JAGUAR  11:26, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    'Release and subsequent closure of Studio Liverpool' - this section seems slightly off topic; I think it only belongs at the article for Studio Liverpool. Unless this game's development somehow affected the studio's closure, I don't see why this should be mentioned outside of one sentence mentioning that it was the last game developed before their closure.
    Since I might take this to FAC, I think it would be worth mentioning that this game was the last to be released by the prestigious studio, but the subsection does seem a bit awkward, you're right. I've cut it down slightly and removed the section. Hope this is OK. JAGUAR  11:26, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  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:
    I will note that the Reception section goes into much more detail than is typical for a gaming article. It's certainly better than not enough info, but that being said I've never really seen over-detail to this extent ever before, so I'm not sure what to say about it. For starters, can you explain to me why you've decided to make the section so long?
    I think I got carried away! I admit I've never seen a reception section this long before, and since I will most likely take this to FAC in the future I would have ended up condensing it anyway. I've merged various sentences together to give the section a more compact feel, and tried organising the section so it reads like cohesive prose rather than an arbitrary list of reviewers themselves. JAGUAR  11:26, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    Conversely there's a complete absence of 'Release' info in the release section other than the first sentence, which doesn't actually tell us anything we haven't been told already. You need to expand this sub-section with relevant information. For starters you can move the DLC info to down here.
    I've removed the release subection and I'm not too sure about moving the DLC info to that section as I've never seen it done before. Do you think I should do it? JAGUAR  11:26, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Is it neutral?
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. Is it stable?
    No edit wars, etc:
    As indicated by article history and talk page
  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:
    File:Wipeout 2048 gameplay.jpg has a tag. Please remove it if the issue has been addressed or address it now.
    Removed. JAGUAR  11:26, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:

Placing this one on hold while I wait for responses. Freikorp (talk) 11:50, 13 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Freikorp: thanks for the review! And sorry for the delay in getting to this—been very distracted and busy in RL. I should have all of the issues addressed. I will most likely take this to FAC within the foreseeable future, and I recognise that I might have to cut some content from the reception section regardless. The only thing I didn't address is moving the DLC into the release subsection. I removed the subsection altogether when I realised that the bit about Studio Liverpool's closure seemed redundant. I'll move the DLC info from the gameplay section, if you think it's best. Thanks again for reviewing! JAGUAR  11:26, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Happy for this to pass now. Well done. Freikorp (talk) 23:24, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Removed text

[edit]

CC-BY-SA declaration; text in this section removed by me because it's about the studio rather than the game, so irrelevant to the article. I'm leaving it here in case its removal breaks any refs.

Design

[edit]

In 2010, Sony Computer Entertainment restructured Studio Liverpool as part of a "project prioritisation" of Sony's global assets and several of the studio's upcoming projects were cancelled.[1] On 8 August 2012, Sony shut down Studio Liverpool in an effort to focus on alternative investment plans.[2] At the time of their closure, the studio were reportedly working on a Wipeout title for the PlayStation 4 and a Splinter Cell-style game;[3] the unnamed Wipeout game had been in development for 12 to 18 months.[4]

References

  1. ^ "Sony Computer Entertainment Restructuring Studio Liverpool". Siliconera. 29 January 2010. Archived from the original on 4 February 2017. Retrieved 3 February 2017.
  2. ^ "Sony Shuts Down Wipeout Developer Studio Liverpool". Siliconera. 22 August 2012. Archived from the original on 5 January 2017. Retrieved 4 January 2017.
  3. ^ Orland, Kyle (22 August 2012). "Wipeout developer Studio Liverpool closed after 28-year run". Ars Technica. Archived from the original on 5 March 2016. Retrieved 24 August 2012.
  4. ^ Reynolds, Matthew (22 August 2012). "Wipeout 'was in development for PS4'". Digital Spy. Hearst Magazines UK. Archived from the original on 5 January 2017. Retrieved 4 January 2017.

Baffle☿gab 23:16, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Spoken Article

[edit]

I plan to record a spoken version of the article soon. I have done seven so far. Any feedback is welcomed. 0101Abc (talk) 15:00, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 12 August 2022

[edit]
118.189.126.113 (talk) 11:48, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You need to explicitly state what changes you want made. e.g "change x to y in this section." and the change will be made by others. This template isn't a request for you to be granted the right to edit the article yourself. - X201 (talk) 13:04, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Wipeout_2048&oldid=1218281652"