Talk:Hugo's House of Horrors/GA1

GA Review

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: Vrxces (talk · contribs) 09:13, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

I'll take this one on. It looks like it could do with some improvements but is very fleshed-out for a parser adventure game. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 09:13, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

Review

Does the article conform to the general standards of WP:VG articles including the WP:VG/MOS?   Mostly! The MOS usually has the gameplay section precede the plot. Development and release are usually merged, but this isn't a big deal, although I think those sections could be shortened as explained below.

Switched plot and gameplay. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 21:20, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

Is the article generally well-written?   Mostly, yeah! I'll put any writing quirks needing an edit below:

•   it was taken down after Gray issues -> issues to 'issued.

•   color pallet -> color palette (?)

Fixed both. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 21:20, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

Is the article broad enough in its coverage? N The article lacks good coverage contemporary sources of the game, which is a bit of a concern. Fortunately these do exist, but I accept they aren't strong and actual independent non-catalog reviews aren't abundant, but worth taking a look. English sources can be found in PC Review, the Public Brand Software Shareware Catalog, and the Software Labs 1992 Introductory Catalog. Non-english sources are trivial but plentiful and can be found in Club de Adventuras, Computer Privat, DER Disc EDV Report, Generacion 4, Hobby Computer Club Niewsbrief, and probably a million useless catalogs that makes this sort of thing tricky to research!

I looked through the English sources as well as Club de Adventuras. PC Review basically repeated the information provided by the manual, so I used it to replace a few citations to the manual. All of the sources I checked basically retreaded the same ground and used similar blurbs, and I didn't see anything particularly useful. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 21:20, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

No worries. Thanks for your patience and looking into the additional sources. I'll do a source check and finalise this review today if there's no other issues. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 21:22, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

Do the sources cited verify the text in the article? ? TBC on the citation spot check.   But I found some areas to work on, including:

•   Hugo's House of Horrors only has a basic plot... The 'basic' nature of the plot is not explicitly stated by the Hardcore Gamer source, and even if it was, this enters the territory of subjectivity.

•   Hugo's House of Horrors is sometimes compared to the point-and-click adventure game Maniac Mansion... Says who? This needs citation.

Fixed both. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 21:20, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

Are media and links properly attributed and do not have copyright issues? Y Yep, perfect. The description of what the screenshot depicts to justify its inclusion is great.

Any other personal opinions or miscellaneous feedback that may or may not be relevant to the nomination?

• For the Plot section, you might like to note:   WP:VG/PLOT states that basic plot details are self-evidently assumed to be sourced from the work itself, so you don't need to cite the game for this.

The plot is a mix of citations to the game and to other sources, so I wanted to make it clear which parts were cited to the game itself. Otherwise it might look like the secondary sources covered all of the plot points, which they don't. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 21:20, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

• The Development section could do with some work:   It sometimes has excursions into minutiae due to being strongly based on only onr or two sources. The fact that David Gray got into development because he met a gynecologist, or that he was in air traffic control and there were layoffs, is a bit WP:INDISCRIMINATE. It may be worth trying to better provide a concise overview rather than paraphrasing the sources in entirety.

I trimmed this background info down to one sentence. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 21:20, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

References

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.