Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Limbo (video game)/archive2

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by SandyGeorgia 21:35, 26 November 2010 [1].

---

Limbo (video game)

Limbo (video game) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

• Featured article candidates/Limbo (video game)/archive1
• Featured article candidates/Limbo (video game)/archive2

Nominator(s): MASEM (t) 22:57, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Once again I delve into FAC limbo... :)

The previous FAC (more than 3 weeks ago, natch) failed heavily from copyedit problems. Since then, two separate editors (one from the LoCE even) have CE'd this article. Also since then, a good reliable source article came out that filled out a lot of early BG on the game and the creation of PlayDead, thus allowing me to fix the redlink issue that Tony highlighted last for the studio. I've also fixed a problem that Tony has listed for the infobox image with his input. MASEM (t) 22:57, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

• Comment—no dab links, no dead external links. Ucucha 23:04, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Good luck this time! Taking my fourth read through the article.

• "to its short length, might deter" Remove comma?
• "startled; the game abruptly ends at this point.[6][7]" Does one of the sources use the word "startled"?
  • Yes, actually, the ArsTechinca one about Limbo's ending.
• You could add to the rationales of the images that free images were requested from Playdead, but that they did not provide any. (Fine without it, but the stronger the rationale the better, right?)
• "using a bear trap to secure the base of a rope" If that's the part of the game I'm thinking of (that animal corpse hanging from the rope?) then I wouldn't call that the best description of what you do. Again, that in the source?
  • I've rewritten this slightly, but as its directly from the game, its just a matter of making sure the description is accurate and makes sence.
• "Jensen had sketched" Repetition of "Jensen"
• "for the Windows platform, was" Again, lose the comma
  • This comma's needed as to end the phase starting with "initially..."
    • The sentence is "According to producer Mads Wibroe, part of their decision not to release for the Windows platform, was to avoid issues with software piracy, something they could control on the Xbox 360." The main clause is "part of their decision not to release for the Windows platform was to avoid issues with software piracy", and there are no subordinate clauses in the middle. It should not be split. Think about it- "According to producer Mads Wibroe, part of their decision not to release for the Windows platform" does not make sense independently. J Milburn (talk) 23:42, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
• "controls–jumping and grabbing–outside" Those the right kind of dash? I have no idea, but I thought it may be worth checking...
  • They should be emdashs, fixed.
• "pointed to, was the use" Again.
• "15 U.S. dollars or 15 euro." As this is a European title, perhaps euros first? Also, the plural of euro is euros. British English, include the price in pounds? I dunno, your call.
  • euro before dollar makes sense. However, the only reason British English is being used here is that the game source is primarily European; Britian (the country) has nothing to do with it, thus I don't think the UK price is necessary here.
• "of limbo or purgatory," Limbo is a proper noun (and purgatory/Purgatory can be)
• "Other theories consider: the scenario that both or either the boy and his sister are dead; the implications of change in setting as the boy travels through the game; and the similarities and differences between the final screen of the game and the main menu.[6]" Odd listing- perhaps rephrase?
  • Broke it out into two sentences; the first part is really its own statement on a scenario; the last two are about observations from the game itself.
• "IGN named it the third best Xbox Live Arcade title of all time in a September 2010 list.[57]" Perhaps mention what beat it?
• Both "plot" and "sales and accolades" have some tense shifts- a quick read through in order?
• One thing that came to mind- you didn't mention those worms that you come across a few times in the game; the ones that burrow inyo your head. No big deal, but did no source mention them?
  • Added a mention in gameplay

Generally looking great. J Milburn (talk) 10:47, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

• • I've addressed the points above (even if not commented on). --MASEM (t) 14:23, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
    • One reply. J Milburn (talk) 23:42, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
      • Fixed that point too. --MASEM (t) 13:56, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
        • Support. J Milburn (talk) 13:01, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Sources comments: I checked out the sources at last month's FAC. I raised a few fairly minor points which were satisfactorily answered. I've looked again; there are additional citations, but I don't see any fresh problems. Brianboulton (talk) 23:07, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Comment: I recently did a full copyedit of this article, and will be helping with any fixes if necessary. – S Masters (talk) 01:50, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Comment Nice work, interesting topic, thanks for working on it. I have some points/questions/suggestions:

General

• The images look fine, the non-free ones have appropriate rationales and since alt-text was removed as a requirement there's nothing to criticize about omitting it.
• I think it's problematic to use " he/shefelt" for expressing someone's opinion, which is done often - say/state etc. is better suited because "felt" implies some intimate knowledge of the commenter or an unreasonably emotional comment by him/her, unless the person used the word him/herself. Not sure if I'm the only one "feeling" that way :)

Gameplay

• "... pulling it taut, allowing ..." - is that just "pulling it out" or do I miss something?
• "In addition to other achievements ..." - I had the page printed out and without the link that is confusing, may I suggest a very short explanation in parentheses after "achievements"? are those actual eggs or game easter eggs or what exactly?

Development

• "Initial development was funded personally by Jensen and Patti, along with Danish government grants, before moving onto larger investors ..." - what moved? the devolpment, the funding? or did Jensen and Patti move on with what? this should be clarified
• "He further asserted that there will never ..." - assertion is not the right word I think, because he's not speculating but stating something over which he has control.
• "... never be a port of Limbo to another console ..." - I think that should be explained briefly, the meaning of porting is not common knowledge, even for people who often work with computers, or it should be explained simpler with something like "adapt"

Story, art and music direction

• "For the second goal, Jensen wanted ..." - what does "for" refer to here? it's just an opaque way of saying "as the second goal", no?
• "... with specialization in acousmatic music." - it's unclear whether that refers to the game's audio creation or Andersen's education. also, acousmatic could do with a brief explanation, too, to make the article not totally dependent on others/guarantee a certain degree of self-containment.
• "...; this was intended in the same manner as the game's own art and story that left room for interpretation by the player." - I find that formulation inartful and unclear, but that could just be me

Gameplay direction

• "... for the game's custom engine, ..." - what is a custom engine? it's not clear from the context.
• "... elements to aid and gain the friendship of the player." - how can one gain the friendship of a player by making puzzles easier? is the team referenced in the sentence making friends with the player? how?
• "Limbo has received universal acclaim, comparing it favorably to previous minimalist platform games ..." that's a weird use of gerund and not such a great formulation because it doesn't say who made the comparison - the sources show that Limbo was compared to the other games and that Limbo received acclaim, but not necessarily that the two things were combined. I think that would benefit from a clearer, more straightforward reformulation.
• "Matt Miller commented that part of the success of Limbo is [...] varying the elements throughout the game, and preventing the player ..." - I omitted the first part because then it becomes clear why that formulation doesn't work, it should use "the variation of elements", no?
• "... from getting too accustomed since 'everything changes'." - too acustomed to what? I think that only works when it refers to something. Something like "unalert" or "negligent" is meant, or "habituated" or "conditioned", or not? that would work without referring to a specific thing.
• "the game is 'undermined by the title's lack of innovative gameplay' he claims has been seen in earlier platform games" - I think a word is missing, "which"? then "which he claims could be found ..." is perhaps better.

Presentation

• "... were exceptionally regarded ..." - what does that mean?
• "... showing human figures across a chasm that disappears once the player crossed it." - right now it reads as though the chasm disappears, perhaps "who disappear" would be better
• is there any negative review comment on the presentation?

Plot

• "Another spiritual interpretation suggested ..." - "spiritual interpretation" seems more like a judgement over the review than the content, I suggest removing "spiritual" as obsolete
• "Other theories considered scenarios where both or either the boy and his sister are dead." Weird formulation, perhaps simply use "where the boy, his sister or both are dead" (since the article doesn't use serial comma)
• why mention how other theories attempt to incorporate details of the game without spelling out how this is done? the sentence about this reads pretty redundant at the moment, or at least that's how I read it.
• "... the game ends on a profound revelation." - that's not clear from the cited reviews, the eurogamer.net review calls the ending understated and the IGN review calls the ending unexpected (unless I missed something), and also not from the (first) plot section, which only states that he finds a girl, presumably his sister, and the game promptly ends, so I wonder where that comes from and why it is emphazised here
• "Haywald had contrasted Limbo to Braid, a similar platform game with minimalistic elements, but communicated its metaphorical story to the player through in-game text." - that reads as though Haywald communicated the story.

Sales and accolades

• "... Limbo represents a shift in the type of game that gamers want out of the services; ..." - what services?

Hekerui (talk) 14:53, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

• • All these points should be addressed with proper clarifications. As a note "taut" here is wikt:taut - without slack (eg tight). --MASEM (t) 15:32, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
  • Also to comment: there really isn't any negative comments on the presentation (outside of what reviewers considered a lack of music unaware of the intent). There are some reviews from unreliable sources that call it a depressing environment. (And normally, no, for a vg, I wouldn't go into this much detail with sections on the reception; that is I would group positives and negatives together, such as in this case the lenght-vs-cost, and the second half pacing would be there; but this game has generated that much word of mouth and the like that the most logical approach is how its been broken down, meaning some sections will have no real "negatives" against the positives.) --MASEM (t) 15:58, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Support The "taut" is duly noted, and the presentation part looks okay. I made some changes to make the content more easy to understand using the sources, and I fixed some issues of typos and redundancy that came up during the edits made as a response to my comments. Hekerui (talk) 17:54, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

• Placeholder pending review. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 17:46, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Image review: File:LimboGame1.jpg could be worth elaborating the fair use rationale further, but I think it suffices as it is of the gameplay, which has its aesthetics and form significantly commented on in the article. File:Cboxlimbo.jpg's rationales, although from a standard template, suffice for the identification shot. File:Dino Patti - Game Developers Conference 2010.jpg is appropriately licensed. No serious image issues. Jappalang (talk) 22:57, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

• Comment The first sentence I read has a misplaced modifying phrase: "The game's story and its ending have been open to much interpretation, purposely left vague and unanswered by Playdead." Will give it a full read-through shortly. --Andy Walsh (talk) 05:38, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

• More
  • "worms that dig into the boy's brain and force him to travel in one direction until exposed to sunlight and killed" Is it the worms that are killed when exposed? As written, it sounds like the boy who is exposed and killed. If so, why would he be killed from being exposed to sunlight?
  • "By this point, Limbo, initially intended as a freely available Microsoft Windows title, was set to be released as a retail title." Unsure what this means.
  • Problem with parallel structure: "such as the addition of multiplayer play, adjustable difficulty levels, and extending the game's length"
  • "The game underwent numerous iterations" An iteration is a creative version... you don't really "undergo" a version.
  • "While the first half of the game contains scripted events, the developers found it necessary to drop planned events in the second half of the game" This statement isn't adequately explain, in my opinion. Why did they have to drop planned events?
  • "Jensen also wanted the puzzles to feel like a natural part of the environment, and to avoid the feeling that the player was simply moving from puzzle to puzzle through the course of the game." There you have parallel structure, but the meaning is wrong; the "puzzles" don't "avoid the feeling".

Sorry but I only got up to Reception for now. --Andy Walsh (talk) 05:40, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

All these points to here (including the earlier statement) should be addressed. --MASEM (t) 13:52, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

• Comment - Although the visual style has been consistent throughout development, it would be better to use an actual screenshot of gameplay rather than the prerelease screenshot at File:LimboGame1.jpg - hahnchen 20:36, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
  • I had asked this to the VG project a while back [2] with the few agreeing that the pre-release is fine as long as it still is truthful to the appearance of the game. --MASEM (t) 22:10, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
• Spot checks still show potential for improvement—the most concerning issue is the mammoth paragraph size. Other concerns include the occasional clunky phrase ("prior to" has been pretty much scared out of Wikipedia), redundancies (random "any"s floating around), and comma use (commas after coordinating conjunctions is very inconsistent throughout). —Deckiller (t-c-l) 03:39, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
  • I beg to differ on the paragraph size. There really isn't any large paragraphs here save in the reception, and that's for logical grouping of common thoughts (but we're still looking at paras with 5-6 sentences at the end of the day). Also, given that this has now gotten at least 3, maybe 4 copyeditors by uninvolved editors, including one from the LoCE, it would be more helpful to be citing specific fixes you feel need to be made. (I have gone through and nuked Priors and Anys). --MASEM (t) 13:46, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
    • I went through last night and added a few paragraph breaks. I'll go through again in a bit and see what can be fixed. —Deckiller (t-c-l) 13:52, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
      • Ugh, my bad. I was looking at the version you had broken up regarding the length, thinking that was the way I had last edited it (its been a busy week offline here). You're absolutely right that the former version was too long. Thank you for that. --MASEM (t) 14:20, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
  • This sentence is a bit confusing: Andersen sought to create non-traditional acousmatic music solely on the sound effects of the game's environments; one example he pointed to was the use of electricity...— are the sound effects comprised of acousmatic music only, or is acousmatic music used only in the sound effects? —Deckiller (t-c-l) 14:34, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
    • It's the former (music that only uses the sound effects ...) I've tried to fix that sentence to establish it. --MASEM (t) 19:28, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

• Note, I don't see that any reviewer has spotchecked for WP:V and WP:COPYVIO. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:25, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

  I'll do one now. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 16:07, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

  Spot-checked the following references: 5, 10, 16, 17, 37, and 49. Five doesn't fit entirely but works ("There are occasional glimpses in the distance..." vs. "Once during the journey, the boy catches a glimpse..."), 10 is fine, 16 is fine, 17 doesn't mention the "Summer of Arcade" promotion that it references, 37 is fine, and 49 is fine. In conclusion, looks mostly good, no plagiarism. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 16:15, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

  I know before Boston Herald archived the article, it supported the "Summer of Arcade" claim. Does this need to be corrected? --MASEM (t) 20:00, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

• Support - performed a copyedit of the article. Some minor changes, but other than that everything looked to be in order. Good work. Jujutacular ^talk 15:01, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
• Support—I think the prose is passable now, and it seems all other issues have been addressed for a while now. —Deckiller (t-c-l) 21:01, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

• Support Looks good. I support it.--AlastorMoody (talk) 06:39, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

• Contribs. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:12, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

• Support per above. Look like an excellent article. JJ98 (Talk) 07:42, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

• I found this in the lead:

  The player guides an unnamed boy through dangerous environments and traps while searching for the boy's sister.

  Who's searching for the sister: the player or the unnamed boy? When I read further into the article, I find it's the unnamed boy, yet the lead implies it's the player. I didn't read further; another check needed. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:44, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

This instance seems inelegant not misleading because the player is playing the unnamed boy, no? Nevermind, was changed. Hekerui (talk) 00:57, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

I did change it to be clear; technically, yes, it could be the player looking for the sister, but it's more accurate with the clarity. --MASEM (t) 00:58, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.