Wikipedia:Peer review/Monaco: What's Yours Is Mine/archive1

Monaco: What's Yours Is Mine

I've listed this article for peer review because I'm interested in bringing it up to FA class but I know there are issues and kinks that need to be ironed out. Any advice would be greatly appreciated! Anarchyte (work | talk) 04:53, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

Comments from Rhinopias

I'm not familiar with the standard layout of video game articles, so I can mainly suggest prose edits.

Lead

• I think the examples of some of the characters' characteristics are too detailed for the lead. Maybe if "characteristics" is expanded to "beneficial skills" or something it wont' need an example?
• The development paragraph can be trimmed down too I think, including examples of Wintory's other works and everything about Nguyen
  • Maybe just make an effort to determine what, if more besides what I've mentioned, can be cut from the lead as it may be more appropriately detailed in the body?

I've cut it down a bit. What do you think of it now? Anarchyte (work | talk) 08:36, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

It reads well! A couple things:

• "The main difference between the single-player and cooperative modes …" sentence seems kind of out of place without first stating that the two modes exist, but maybe that's just me
• If you want to keep "before he founded his own independent company Pocketwatch Games" I'd maybe tie it into the game's later development like "before eventually publishing the final version" (or whatever) "with his independent company, Pocketwatch Games."
• I was going to add the word "and" to the last sentence about art style, but I'm not sure if you're now going for / which would be better "Reviewers liked the art style and said that its minimalistic design suited its gameplay" or "Reviewers who liked the art style said that its minimalistic design suited its gameplay"

That's just my brain being odd. I readded the "and". I also changed the lead to answer the other two dotpoints above.

• Is "nothing more than a Pac-Man clone" substantiated in a source somewhere? I don't see it in connection with the "The Sims meets Diablo meets Hitman" quote.

Removed.

• "Reviewers liked the art style and said that the gameplay suited the minimalistic design" seems kind of awkward. "Reviewers liked the game's art style and said that its minimalistic design suited its gameplay." or something? Also, if "art style" is referring to art design development (as it's pointing to Game art design), I think it should read "art design" unless it links to Video game art.

Plot

• To avoid confusion with "The first four are available immediately …" later, can they be listed in the same order? But also… what do you think of my rework of that part in Gameplay for clarification with this edit?

I think that's great.

• Made a couple prose edits also (Special:Diff/819049277) to help with the "following" thing, feel free to alter.
• pursuades them into helping him clean up after a previous heist. After this, they – I think some clarification could help here, mostly "clean up"

Changed to when the Gentleman persuades them into helping him dispose of evidence from a previous heist.

• Would it be better to refer to the character names as just the capitalized name without using "the"? I feel like using it would mean they shouldn't be capitalized, but I don't know how characters with generic names like that should be treated. So basically I'm suggesting Four thieves, Locksmith, Pickpocket, Cleaner, and Lookout, discuss … in Plot and Locksmith, Cleaner, Lookout, and Pickpocket are available immediately, while Mole, Gentleman, Redhead, and Hacker must be unlocked by completing levels in Gameplay, and then whenever they're referred to individually, treating "Locksmith", etc. as their actual "name". In contrast, Four thieves, the locksmith, the pickpocket, the cleaner, and the lookout, discuss … etc.

In both the game and the sources, all character names are prefaced with "the". I think it's fine to leave it as-is.

Jan 18

• Edited the first paragraph for flow between sentences here; is the Gentleman under house arrest on his yacht? If so, might make more sense to say so when mentioning house arrest so the leaving the harbor part makes immediate sense.

No, not on his yacht. I've made it clearer.

That works. Should "the harbour" be "a" or is the harbour obvious within the game? If my thought process makes sense.. just seems like "the harbour" comes out of nowhere.

• Should Monaco be wikilinked?
  • Probably not, according to MOS:OVERLINK--Alexandra IDV^talk 22:10, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

I don't know if Monaco is really a "major" location (per the manual), but I was thinking more so that Monaco isn't mentioned as the geographic location rather than the game (written in italics as Monaco) anywhere else in the article so linking could provide clarification? Rhinopias (talk) 03:54, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Sure, that's fair.--Alexandra IDV^talk 11:30, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

So Monaco should be linked in Plot? @Alexandra IDV and Rhinopias: Anarchyte (work | talk) 01:39, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

I personally think so, but it could also be mentioned and linked in the lead (in gameplay paragraph) or an introductory sentence in #Plot prior to the current first sentence. Rhinopias (talk) 02:02, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

I've just linked it in the Plot section for now. Anarchyte (work | talk) 12:35, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

• 3rd paragraph: The first thief he asks about is the Mole, to which she tells him that he already been caught – can the second part be who she says has already been caught?
• The final thief she tells him about is the Cleaner, who she says is acting on behalf of his brother with a disorder – can the second part be reworded?
• Most of the second paragraph and the third paragraph seem to be dialogue; is this dialogue being used to describe the actions interspersed (e.g. "This is because the thieves have replaced all evidence …") which would otherwise not make sense? Or is the dialogue actually actions in the game? Just wondering if all of the details (in what seems to be the characters talking) need to be described, as I'm guessing they're minor plot details. For example, can this:

The Pickpocket tells him that the Gentleman was not on house arrest and is rather a master of disguise. While smuggling out the weapons, they purposefully blew up the boat to distract Interpol. Inspector Voltaire proposes Davide and the Gentleman are the same person, to which the Pickpocket insists there is no evidence. This is because the thieves have replaced all evidence leading to the Gentleman with evidence pointing to Davide, who is later murdered.

Be shortened to:

The Pickpocket reveals that, while smuggling out the weapons, they purposefully blew up the boat to distract Interpol. Though Inspector Voltaire is unaware, the Gentleman is in fact also Davide, and the thieves have covered up evidence prior to Davide's "murder".

Yes, that could be shortened to that. I tried to make the third paragraph shorter but the whole act is dialogue between the two characters, so there's not much to condense. Anarchyte (work | talk) 01:24, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Makes sense. Just suggesting the obvious that making it more concise will put focus on the more important plot points. It's under 700 words per WP:VG/CONTENT now though so not critical.

Gameplay

• Linking of "stealth action game" is different than in lead, and maybe a little confusing; does it need to be linked again at all?

Fixed linking

• To simplify the sentence, maybe cut the characters bit from "… allows up to four players to each control one of eight characters while they partake in …" since the number of characters is specified immediately after?
• "Each character has different traits and advantages." – I'd suggest moving this to just before the descriptions of them, after the list
• "The first four of the eight characters are available immediately." – and maybe putting this just after the original listing so the reader doesn't need to go back up
• which instead of what in "what characters the player or players choose"

Development and release

• Is "made within six weeks" describing his intended time frame for development or is it a description of Xbox Live Indie Games?
• Can you add a year to when the prototyping took place, perhaps in the first sentence? I'm a little confused by the comparison to a 2014 video game and then the company he was working at closing down in 2005.

I removed the 2005 mention as it wasn't directly related. The first prototype was shown 15 weeks into development. See here for the change.

I think the sentence is a bit long now; maybe remove "and Wildlife Tycoon: Venture Dinosauria", the second example?

Removed. Anarchyte (work | talk) 02:12, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Also, I think the image you added is good because the section talks a lot about him but since the award isn't spelled out until #Awards maybe make the caption more general and include that tidbit, like "Andy Schatz accepting a design award at the 2010 Independent Games Festival, fifteen weeks into development". (But I like it better in Development rather than in #Reception.)

Same. I don't think it'd fit well in #Reception. I've modified the caption accordingly.

• Commas around "Schatz responded, saying 'they were crazy', and asked"
• "As a result, the game had to be ported from Empty Clip to the RapidFire engine." – I thought Empty Clip Studios had already started moving it to RapidFire?

Removed. I'm not sure why that repetition was there, to be honest.

• The quote box doesn't seem like it adds much, just sort of offering some life advice. Unless Nguyen's contributions to the development of the game really were that significant? If it's kept, [Nguyen] should probably replace Schatz's use of "Andy" to avoid confusion. Also block quotation templates with colored backgrounds are "discouraged" according to MOS:BLOCKQUOTE.

Removed the quote entirely

• "The Gentleman's Private Collection contains" unless "soundtrack" is added before contains

Reception

• If it's established that the subtitle of the game doesn't need to be mentioned throughout the rest of the article, should it be at the start of this section?
• Start "The Xbox 360 release sold poorly." with "However" or combine with the following sentence

I've modified it. What do you think of it now?

I like it better! I took out "the" in "Despite the praise". I think that the movement into "and Andy Schatz believed" sounds a tiiiny bit awkward still, but it's probably just me because I've read this part too many times.

I think that bit's fine. :)

• Should the game's version of multiplayer as "co-op mode" be specified in #Gameplay?

I used cooperative and multiplayer interchangeably, but I'll replace multiplayer with coop.

• I'm not sure translating the source will help, so I'll just ask if "was made too easy to be fooled" should be "was made too easy to fool" or "was made to be easily fooled"?

I just used Google Translate for the articles in other languages, but yeah, I think "was made too easy to fool" is better.

What I meant by that was I was too lazy to translate it. :P

• "GDC Independent Games Festival Seumas McNally Grand Prize" is a few adjacent links… maybe "Seumas McNally Grand Prize at the GDC's Independent Games Festival" or something?
• Use of "beating" seems a bit strong

Changed to 'against": "Monaco won Destructoid's Best of 2013 Co-op Multiplayer award against titles like"

• "Professional category" – should professional be lowercase per MOS:CONFORM?

Nothing else jumped out at me regarding the refs in reading and a couple of spot checks, looks well sourced. Images look good. Nice job, Anarchyte! Rhinopias (talk) 23:42, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the pointers Rhinopias. I've answered most and replied to some above. I've also added another image to the development section. Do you think it fits? Anarchyte (work | talk) 08:36, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

Replied to some comments above. I'm a complete FA noob so can't say whether or not it's ready, but looks to be in pretty good shape to me! Rhinopias (talk) 21:32, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

Great, thanks! I've asked HJ Mitchell (someone pretty experienced in FA) to take a look, so I guess we'll see where the article stands once he's had a look. Anarchyte (work | talk) 02:12, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Well, sweet. Everything I can think of has been addressed! If you have a few minutes in between work on this article and you wouldn't mind glancing at the request I just opened in any capacity I'd appreciate it! But I'm in no rush, so no worries. Rhinopias (talk) 03:41, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

@Rhinopias: Turns out there's a plot to the game which I forgot about. I added this but I'm sure it needs work. (Uses the word "then" and "after" a lot). Anarchyte (work | talk) 14:07, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

@Anarchyte: ah – that's an important addition! I made some edits and added some comments above in a new section. Rhinopias (talk) 03:33, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for looking over it Rhinopias. I started that section thinking I'd only need to explain the first act and that the rest were less important, but I changed my mind and so I've added a some more info. It needs a bit of a trim because it's almost double the size of #Gameplay. HJ Mitchell, would you also be able to take a look if you've got some time? Cheers, Anarchyte (work | talk) 05:08, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

@Anarchyte: just read Plot and added some comments above! Rhinopias (talk) 18:47, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks @Rhinopias:. I've replied above. Anarchyte (work | talk) 01:24, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Comments from Alexandra

Extended content

Lead/infobox It's the Xbox 360 version, not the Xbox Live Arcade version - 360 is a platform, XBLA is a download service, so unless there are multiple 360 versions of which the one distributed through XBLA is different, you wouldn't say that. This should be fixed both in the lead (the Xbox Live Arcade version was published by) and in the infobox (Majesco Entertainment (XBLA)) The gameplay consists of up to four players who each control different characters while they partake in heists and robberies in many different locations. Players can control one of eight characters, each of whom have their own specific beneficial skills. can be simplified to who each control one of eight characters while they partake in heists and robberies in different locations. Each character has their own specific beneficial skills. The main difference between the single-player and cooperative modes is that when a teammate dies they must be revived before the level can be completed. This feels like way too in-depth for the lead just give an overview of how the gameplay works. After being turned down twice by Microsoft Game Studios, Monaco was released for the Xbox 360 by Majesco Entertainment. is one of the last things that happened, but is described early on. I think what Andy Nguyen's previous employer was is too much detail for the lead. The game was eventually released under Schatz' independent company, Pocketwatch Games, in mid-to-late 2013. Hmm? In the infobox it says it was released in April. And regardless, the time of the release is already mentioned in the first paragraph of the lead. Many comparisons were made between Monaco and other media; the most common being the 1960 heist film Oceans 11. can be simplified to Many comparisons were made between Monaco and other media, most commonly the 1960 heist film Oceans 11. I would probably start by saying the story is divided into four acts before describing their contents. So something like The story consists of four acts, of which the first three follows three characters' recollections of prior experiences, and of which the final one is from the perspective of a police. I would also probably describe the gameplay before the plot, since this is a video game. You should mention what role Schatz had in the development here. Gameplay the Redhead can charm enemies into not attacking them and make characters follow them - I haven't played the game, and have only done some quick googling, so I don't know for sure, but the Redhead is a woman, correct? Unless other pronouns are specified within the game, "she" should probably be used. Correct. once a character is unlocked it can be used on any level and any level can be completed as any character. Kind of unclear on a first read. I think clarity would be improved by changing it to once a character is unlocked, it can be used to play through any level. Plot Like with the lead, I would move this to after the gameplay section. I would suggest shifting the most important information to the beginning (what the sentence is about, basically) in Narrated by the Locksmith while Inspector Voltaire, a police officer, questions him, act one is his recollection of the recent events, whereby there are four thieves, the Locksmith, the Pickpocket, the Cleaner, and Lookout, and they discuss their imminent deportation from a Monaco prison. - ie Act one depicts the Locksmith being questioned by Inspector Voltaire, and his recollection of his and three other thieves' recent actions. Sometimes this goes too far into how they got to the important parts. A lot of the time that can simply be cut out - for instance, they discuss their imminent deportation from a Monaco prison. The Locksmith opines that he can help them escape and they subsequently use a truck to get away. Upon breaking out, the four agree they need to find some friends. The Lookout proposes the Mole, an inmate. After rescuing him, they steal passports and money to get smuggled out of the country. can be shortened to something like They discuss their imminent deportation from a Monaco prison, and escape together with an inmate, the Mole, and steal passports and money to get smuggled out of the country. We care about what the problem is and how they got through it, but how exactly they executed the escape plan has no real importance. Development and release Is it important to know where TKO Software was based? I don't think it hurts to include it. We've got Category:Video games developed in the United States, so it's nice to have verification in the article. Oh, I see. I misunderstood TKO's importance a bit, so never mind. described by Schatz as being similar to Jason Rohrer's 2014 video game The Castle Doctrine during its early stages of development. Unclear if Monaco resembles early The Castle Doctrine, or if early Monaco resembled The Castle Doctrine. When Andy Schatz pitched the game to Microsoft Game Studios, it was turned down. Schatz responded, saying "they were crazy", and asked if he could repitch the game; they agreed to let him do so. He continued to work on Monaco for roughly a year in order "to make it something really marketable". When he pitched it to Microsoft Game Studios for the second time, it was turned down. This whole thing can be simplified to "When Schatz pitched the game to Microsoft Game Studios, it was turned down, so he worked on it for another year to make it more marketable before repitching it and getting turned down again." or something similar.</> Shortened the second part of the sentence but kept the first "they were crazy" bit because it ties in to the next bit (below). All right, cool. After these events, Schatz got the impression that the game was not going to be released on the Xbox 360. "That really bummed me out", Schatz said in an interview with Mike Rose from Gamasutra, "because I felt like the Xbox was the ideal platform for this particular game, because of the prevalence of headsets, the marketplace being strong, and the Xbox being the easiest console to work with. And of course the game was written in XNA, so it was a no-brainer". What he said is what's important, not who he said it to. I would paraphrase and shorten this as much as possible, to something like "This disappointed him, as he felt the platform's ease of working with and strong marketplace, as well as the prevalence of headsets for it would have made the Xbox 360 the perfect platform the game." "Flow" is the standard way of spelling it. notable composers - it's up to the reader whether it's considered notable or not. "Notable" is mostly WP jargon, not something we'd use within articles. "When else am I ever going to be asked to write anything remotely like this?", he exclaimed. To me, including this kind of quotes to liven up the text (?) feels like outside of WP's tone. I'd just paraphrase it, something like because it involved using humorous "old-timey piano", something he would otherwise not normally be asked to use. I'm not a music expert, so if you know of a better wording than "use", go ahead. I removed the "he exclaimed" bit but kept the quote. I agree that "he exclaimed" makes it too casual but the quote itself is harmless, in my eyes. All right The music albums are separate from the game's development, so I would move that to the end of the paragraph, just before the bit about how they were released on Bandcamp. On July 3, 2013 the Mac version was released[22] and on October 21, 2013, the Linux version was released.[23] Kind of repetitive. I would go for something like "The Mac version was released on July 3, 2013,[22] and the Linux version on October 21 of the same year.[23]" The Mac and Linux versions were released on July 3 and October 21, 2013, respectively.[22][23] Reception Confusing at first how Eurogamer has two scores, both labeled "PC". I would add them as custom reviewers and label them Eurogamer Italy and Eurogamer Sweden. I'm not good at writing reception sections myself, but I think this does have that typical problem of "Reviewer A said X. Reviewer B said Y. Reviewer C said Z." I would suggest reading the essay Wikipedia:Copyediting reception sections. It's great, and I reference it all the time. Will do. I've never been good at receptions, either. Anarchyte (work | talk) 12:48, 14 January 2018 (UTC) I've tried to rewrite it to make it less "x said y". I've also added a sentence regarding the sales. Do you think it's necessary to include To promote Pocketwatch Games' next release, it was free on for 24 hours in September 2017.? Anarchyte (work | talk) 11:54, 16 January 2018 (UTC) I think it's an improvement. It being free for 24 hours is a pretty minor detail - I would only include it if there was very little else to write about a game's development/release. If you do include it, I think you're missing a word in "it was free on for 24 hours". Other issues I think you have a problem with overlinking. For instance, robberies, diamonds and monkey (there are more links like this) are commonly understood words that don't need to be linked in this context. See MOS:OVERLINK I tried to cut down on the links. Do you think any more should be removed? I think it looks good now. You don't need links for the game's social media accounts, see WP:ELMINOFFICIAL I believe the names of publications that produce material (such as IGN and Eurogamer) should be italicized (as opposed to ones that merely publish data, such as Metacritic) Done. I added italics to all publications in the section. The template is a different issue as it's set up to not have italics elsewhere. All right. Should probably be uncontroversial to update that, too, but it's not really part of this article.

--Alexandra IDV^talk 10:46, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

@Alexandra IDV: Cheers. I've addressed these initial comments. Anarchyte (work | talk) 11:36, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Sorry about taking time, I haven't had a lot of uninterrupted time to edit WP. I added some more comments, but it's getting late, so I'll have to stop for the night. I hope to finish the review tomorrow.--Alexandra IDV^talk 00:55, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

All good. I've addressed the issues above. Anarchyte (work | talk) 02:07, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Nice. Rhinopias already wrote more about the plot section, so, uh, I guess my job is done, then. I'll take a look at your comments on the Uchikoshi article asap, sorry for taking much longer than I expected--Alexandra IDV^talk 22:10, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for your help, Alexandra IDV. Anarchyte (work | talk) 01:24, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Like my copyediting is law or something! Rhinopias (talk) 03:59, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

---

@Rhinopias and Alexandra IDV: Do either of you have any more ideas? If not, I'll close this PR and open the FA review. Anarchyte (work | talk) 12:35, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Don't think so! Just made a couple random small edits. Rhinopias (talk) 23:46, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Great. I'm going to close this now. Anarchyte (work | talk) 02:50, 22 January 2018 (UTC)