GA Review[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


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

Reviewer: Thebiguglyalien (talk · contribs) 17:39, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]


I'll have a review posted within a week. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 17:39, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rhain, I've posted the review below. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 00:18, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well-written

General

Lead

Gameplay

Plot

Development

Technical and open world design

Story and characters

Music

Release and promotion

Critical response

Accolades

Sales

Controversy

Legacy

Ports

Verifiable with no original research

The sourcing here isn't very strong, being mostly dependent on video game news websites and contemporary sources instead of analytic/academic coverage, but it's good enough for GA. If this were to go to FA, I'd expect more use of books and journal articles.

Source checks:

Broad in its coverage
Neutral

The article is neutral in tone. No one aspect is given undue weight.

Stable

No recent disputes

Illustrated

@Thebiguglyalien: Thanks for the review. I've gone through and addressed most of your concerns. To clarify, the "Critical response" section's paragraphs are grouped by thematic element and generally summarise the reception overall. Please let me know if you have other questions or concerns. Rhain (he/him) 03:38, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.