Wikipedia:Peer review/Buffy the Vampire Slayer: Wrath of the Darkhul King/archive4

Buffy the Vampire Slayer: Wrath of the Darkhul King

Previous peer review

I have listed this article for a peer review because I would like to put this through the FAC process sometime next year, but I have never worked with a video game article on that level before so I wanted to make sure that everything was as ready as possible before that time.

Apologies for all of the peer reviews I have done for this article in the past. I have recently rewritten the article completely to the best of my ability, and I will leave this peer review open for a few months (ideally if there is enough commentary to support that amount of time) to avoid rushing anything and to make sure I give this the amount of time it needs.

Thank you in advance. I really do appreciate any help to better improve this article. Aoba47 (talk) 21:00, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

Comments by FrB.TG

FrB.TG (talk) 17:14, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. That is very kind. I am looking forward to your comments, but take as much time as you need of course. Aoba47 (talk) 17:18, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

I've been away for the past few weeks so apologies for not getting to it sooner. I'll take a look this weekend at the latest unless you plan to nominate it for FA beforehand in which case I'll leave my comments there. FrB.TG (talk) 13:46, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the update and no need to apologize. I plan on keeping this peer review up for a while longer to have as much feedback as possible to improve the article prior to the FAC so it will still be a while until I archive it. Take as much time as you need. I hope your 2024 is going well so far! Aoba47 (talk) 17:34, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

• "Both companies had previously collaborated on Buffy the Vampire Slayer for the Game Boy Color in 2000." Maybe clarify that Buffy the Vampire Slayer is a video game here. I know we have the link to the VG but I could still see some thinking it refers to the TV show. FrB.TG (talk) 22:27, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

• That makes sense. I have tweaked that part so the GBC game descriptor goes first so it is more immediately clear that this is referencing a video game and not the show itself. Aoba47 (talk) 22:37, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

  I've looked at the rest of the article and it looks FAC-ready IMO. FrB.TG (talk) 22:58, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

  Thank you for the kind words. I greatly appreciate that you took the time to read through the article. Apologies again for my suggestion at the "Speechless" FAC. I agree with your approach and I genuinely did not want to cause any confusion or annoyance with my suggestion. I just wanted to apologize again as it was still on my mind. I hope you are having a wonderful end of your weekend. Aoba47 (talk) 00:13, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

  No need to apologize. It was an insightful thought, and I really appreciate your input. Honestly, between the back-and-forth between me and Gog, I thought of getting you involved but given your already big contributions to the FAC, I instead pinged Gaga-related editors. FrB.TG (talk) 08:27, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

  Thank you for the kind words. I just wanted to make sure. Aoba47 (talk) 00:59, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

NØ

I am not an expert on games, to be honest, but I will give this a go! I enjoyed some of The Night Watch's FAs about games, and nothing jumps out as an obvious red flag when comparing this article to those.

• "The game follows Buffy Summers who fights vampires, demons, and other supernatural entities as the Slayer." - I believe a comma might be useful after "Buffy Summers" here, as someone would probably pause there while reading this sentence out loud.

• Added. Aoba47 (talk) 16:15, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

• "Reviews were generally negative from critics" - Suggest "Wrath of the Darkhul King received generally negative reviews from critics"

• Revised per your suggestion. Aoba47 (talk) 16:15, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

• I think it might not be necessary to introduce Amazon as "the online marketplace". Most people would probably be familiar with the company.

• Removed. Aoba47 (talk) 16:15, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

• Buffy the Vampire Slayer is first mentioned in the Gameplay section, so maybe the description of it as a television show could be moved there from the first line of the Plot section.

• That makes sense. I have moved it up. I have modified the first line of the "Plot" section a bit as well. Aoba47 (talk) 16:15, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

• "she is interrupted when a demon steal a talisman" - steals?

• Revised. Apologies for the typo. Aoba47 (talk) 16:15, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

• "The artists were Tomoki Hamuro, Masashi Kudo, Chie Yoshida, and they were directed by Sosuke Yamazaki" - Perhaps, "The artists were Tomoki Hamuro, Masashi Kudo, Chie Yoshida, who were directed by Sosuke Yamazaki"

• Thank you for the suggestion. For whatever reason, I always struggle with wording this kind of information as I want to make sure to keep it engaging for readers and not too list-y, and your suggestion helps with that a lot. Aoba47 (talk) 16:15, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

• "Natsume targeted the game towards a younger audience and viewed Buffy as an aspirational for children" - I believe this should be "an aspiration" or just "aspirational"

• Thank you for catching that. Apologies again for the typo. I have revised it to just "aspirational". Aoba47 (talk) 16:15, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

• "Wrath of the Darkhul King does not explain the characters' backstories or relationships, instead marketing itself to the show's established fanbase" - Apologies for nitpicking, but "instead being marketed" might work better. It is a bit jarring to read the game is marketing itself.

• No need to apologize for nitpicks. I have been looking at this for so long that I read over and miss things like this. You are right that the original wording is not the greatest, and your suggestion helps it. I have revised that part. Aoba47 (talk) 16:15, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

• The Critical reception section is honestly really well-written. I have been told not to add more than 10 reviews to the score tables on album articles in the past, but I am not completely sure if a similar rule exists for games.--NØ 21:06, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

• That is a good point. I would have no problem cutting down the score tables to 10 reviews if necessary. I am not super familiar with video game articles so I do not know the answer for this, but I will ask the WikiProject Video games momentarily. While working on this article, I referenced video game FAs such as Paper Mario: The Origami King and Panzer Dragoon Saga, which both uses over 10 reviews in their scores table. I'll try to get a clearer answer though, and I'll let you know. Thank you for bringing it up as I think it is important to use things you've experienced and learned from other FAs to help others, and I could see the potential benefits of limiting the score table. Tl;dr: I am not sure, but I will ask about it and keep you updated. Aoba47 (talk) 16:15, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

• I asked at the WikiProject Video games, and it seems that the recommended range is seven to ten reviews. I have cut down the table to nine reviews, but let me know if this could be improved further. Aoba47 (talk) 18:40, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

• Thanks for clarifying this part.--NØ 21:31, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

• Thank you for pointing it out as I learned something from it. Aoba47 (talk) 22:08, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

• "As Buffy continues her patrols, her allies—Giles, Willow Rosenberg, Xander Harris, and Anya Jenkins—do research on the demon" - I would suggest simplifying "do research on the demon" to "research the demon" as the meaning would be unchanged.

• That makes sense. It is always best to be concise. I have used your suggestion. Aoba47 (talk) 22:08, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

• "The website calculated an 44/100 score based upon 16 reviews" - This should be "The website calculated a 44/100 score based on 16 reviews" I believe.

• Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 22:08, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

• "Other critics enjoyed the combat, like a Herald Sun writer and Entertainment Weekly's Kimberley Reyes who highlighted" - I would suggest a comma after "Reyes"

• Added. Aoba47 (talk) 22:08, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

• "Although he found the gameplay formulaic, Griffiths praised the levels as well-made" - The position of "he" and "Griffiths" could be switched in this sentence, as the antecedent is unclear when one first begins reading it.

• Switched around. Aoba47 (talk) 22:08, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

• "In a 2017, SyFy Wire's Brittany Vincent found the gameplay to be generic" - "In 2017"

• Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 22:08, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

Aside from these few nitpicky comments, everything looks good to go! I anticipate supporting the FAC whenever you do go through with it. Best of luck with your work on this article, and I hope your week is going well!--NØ 21:31, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

• Thank you for the help. I greatly appreciate it. I will let you know when I nominate the article for a FAC. I plan on doing it sometime early next year so the peer review could be open for an appropriate length of time. Best of luck with your Wikipedia work and anything off-Wiki as well. My week has been going well, but I still cannot believe it is almost the end of the year. I hope you are having a good week as well! Aoba47 (talk) 22:08, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

PanagiotisZois

This isn't a full review, and I'll make a few more comments later:--PanagiotisZois (talk) 13:44, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for the help. I greatly appreciate it. Any comments are extremely helpful. Aoba47 (talk) 01:35, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

• Not exactly "necessary", but I would add some more information in the second paragraph regarding the game's development; primarily from the 4th paragraph in that section. The part about the bosses could prove fruitful for that paragraph of the lede.

• Thank you for the suggestion. I have never been particularly good at leads so I appreciate any and all ideas on how to further improve them. I have added some further detail to the lead, but let me know if anything should be changed or if it should be cut down. Aoba47 (talk) 01:11, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

• In "Gameplay", are the "two species of demons" named in the game? I guess one is the Baruk demons, but what about the other?

• The game unfortunately does not name both types of demons. One is the Baruk demons; I could name in that section and use of the in-game dialogues about Buffy fighting them as a citation for that. I was unsure if that would be appropriate so I wanted to check first. The game does not name the second type, and I do not think there is a bestiary feature or anything like that. Aoba47 (talk) 01:16, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

• That makes sense to me. I have revised that part using your suggestion as inspiration. Aoba47 (talk) 23:35, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

• In "Plot" there is "Set in Buffy the Vampire Slayer's fourth season". Is there a specific source clarifying this? I think there was one but was deleted.

• I have added a note to this part with citations for critics who believe the game is set in that particularly season. As part of the note, I also included how one critic came to that conclusion, as the game features a combination of elements that are exclusive to that particular season. Aoba47 (talk) 01:18, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

• The note is great. Shows how multiple sources reached the same conclusion, based on what elements, and even a timeframe.

• Is "Willow questions if a new big bad is behind their activities" necessary to the plot?

• I believe this part helps to tie together the vampire nest to the overall story by showing that the characters are suspicious that a larger enemy is present and responsible for the events happening. I think it ties into how the game is setting up the story in a similar way to the talk about an increase in demonic activity or the Baruk demons working for a master.

• My primary concern would be that without this part, the part on the vampire nest would appear random. To be honest, parts of the game do not make the most sense, particularly how the Gentlemen are just there for reasons unknown, so I could just be over-thinking it to try and make everything tie together. I would be more than happy to remove this part if you still believe it is unnecessary. I just wanted to explain my rationale for its inclusion in the first place. Apologies for the long response, and just to be clear, I would be more than fine with removing this part if it is not really needed. Aoba47 (talk) 01:35, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

• I understand, your reasoning. It does help tie things together. If anything, I believe the only necessary change is to connect that sentence with the previous one. Something like "causing / prompting Willow to question" or "with Willow questioning". --PanagiotisZois (talk) 19:26, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

• Would "apocalypse event" be better as "apocalyptic event"?

• Revised. I cannot remember why I went with the first wording so I do not have a preference either way. Aoba47 (talk) 01:35, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

I'll also try to look through the "Reception" section, but the fact it's already separated into different paragraphs based on a similar element / theme, rather than "X said Y" over and over, is already a good sign. By the way, did you play this game as a child or something? --PanagiotisZois (talk) 19:52, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for your help so far and for the kind words about the "Reception" section. That was my primary focus when rewriting this article. I was honestly quite nervous about it as that type of section has never been a strong point. I looked through user essays on "Reception" sections, such as WP:Reception, and through FAs on video games to give me a better idea on the overall structure.

I have actually never played this game. Buffy is one of my favorite shows of all-time, but I grew up with Buffy the Vampire Slayer (2002 video game), which was the Xbox-exclusive one, and Buffy the Vampire Slayer: Chaos Bleeds. I was completely unaware of Wrath of the Darkhul King when I was growing up. I decided to focus on that game instead because I felt intimidated about working on video game articles so I tried one that was smaller and more manageable. It probably makes no sense, but it did in my head at the time lol.

Admittedly neither of the two games I mentioned above are huge or anything, but I was not sure if I was ready to do either of them justice. Maybe one day I will work on them though because I do have a ton of very fond memories of both of them. It would be fun to dig them back up and play them again. Aoba47 (talk) 23:46, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

I'd love to see any future work you do on either the Xbox game or especially on Chaos Bleeds. The latter seems very good, but finding a copy nowadays would be nearly impossible. Anyway, going over the "Reception" section, the only thing that stuck out is "the game was let down". I think I get what the reviewer was trying to say, but it needs to be worded more clearly. PanagiotisZois (talk) 20:21, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the response. I have revised that part of the "Reception" section, but if you have any further ideas, I would greatly appreciate it as I was having trouble with revising it. I still have my copy of Chaos Bleeds somewhere so I should dig it up one day to play it. I remember having a lot of fun with it even though I never finished it. Aoba47 (talk) 03:00, 5 January 2024 (UTC)