Wikipedia:Peer review/Metal Gear Solid (1998 video game)/archive2

Previous peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
Lost FA status mainly because of poor info on the reception of the game. I'm sure with a little work we can return this to FA status.


Thanks, Buc (talk) 18:13, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dihydrogen Monoxide

Since reception was the issue, here are some notes on that...you can get feedback on the rest if you like - just ask and I'll do it when I have time!

Might as well just review it all. Buc (talk) 16:36, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Will do when I get the chance. dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 23:25, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Shouldn't the metacrtic review box score be based on reviews, not votes?
  • IGN shouldn't be in italics in references (etc.) - noticed this on ref 81
  • "The game was generally well-received by the media, and was given high scores by some of the most prominent gaming critics." - this is kinda meaningless, as the reviews box and subsequent commentary should give this impression...
  • First para of reception is awkward...basically just listing scores for the first half, then you start quoting etc. It basically needs re-organisation; eg. quote IGN when you first give the score (more than just "incredible")
  • "Further criticism came from the website Adrenaline Vault" - if it's a website, it shouldn't be in italics (if it's a magazine, it should).
  • A lot more general receptive commentary is necessary for such a major game...plenty of VG FAs do this well, but basically a short paragraph like that isn't enough...
  • "Members of GameFAQs ranked it the 8th best" - 8th best WHAT? (same with next sentences)

dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 10:04, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]