Talk:Lego Indiana Jones: The Original Adventures/GA1

GA Review

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

Nominator: Vacant0 (talk · contribs) 22:02, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: ProtoDrake (talk · contribs) 17:17, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

I'll take this on. If I'm not back with something next Sunday, please ping. --ProtoDrake (talk) 17:17, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

Review

Mostly points of grammar/writing/structure to start off.

General

• There is a lot of "the game" repetition in the prose, too much to mention, where sentences might be more sensibly combined or rephrased to make the text flow more smoothly.
  •  Done
• There are a LOT of commas where some statements could be combined, which makes reading a bit of a chore.
  •  Done

Lead

• "assemble Lego blocks," -- Maybe "assemble Lego constructions" or some other description, because "blocks" sounds to me like they're putting together singular bricks.
  •  Done
• "Climbing, swinging, and throwing objects as weapons are new inclusions that have not appeared in previous Lego video games by Traveller's Tales." - Change to past tense, sounds too much like marketing speak in presence tense.
  •  Done
• "A mobile Lego Indiana Jones game and a sequel, Lego Indiana Jones 2: The Adventure Continues, were released in 2008 and 2009, respectively." -- Was the mobile game a spin-off? A port? Calling it a "game" seems pretty genetic.
  • It was definitely not a port. It's a platformer.

Gameplay

• "the Barnett College, which serves as Indiana Jones' teaching location in the Last Crusade." -- Barnett College is a place, not an object, no need for the extra "the". Also, you can rephrase the second part as "a recurring location in the film series", since it also appears in Lost Ark.
  •  Done Correct.
• "Segments from the first three films were recreated, including the boulder escape from Raiders of the Lost Ark and the minecart escape from Temple of Doom." -- In this instance, present tense seems better, so it's "are recreated" not "were recreated".
  •  Done
• " the game's artificial intelligence controls the second player's character." -- Just "second character" seems sufficient to get the point across.
  •  Done
• "The story mode can be completed in about 10 to 14 hours.[6][14] " -- This isn't relevant to the gameplay, or anything much it seems to me.
  •  Done Removed.
• Maybe paraphrase so the word "characters" isn't repeated as often.
  •  Done
• "Lego Indiana Jones characters have limited ammo." -- As someone who played the game, that's technically untrue. It's more like "weapons picked up from enemies have limited ammunition" or something like. Needs addressing/sourcing.
  •  Done Yup, this is a better way to explain this feature.
• "When Indy is near snakes, his fear prevents him from being productive, forcing the second player to assist him out.[1] The same effect applies to Willie Scott and her phobia.[6][13]" -- There were other characters in story/freeplay with phobia debuffs. Maybe generalise this?
  •  Done Correct, but from all sources I've read they've only mentioned the phobias of Indy and Scott.
• The DS port's section needs rewriting. Reviews aren't things you cite developer intent from, so better to phrase it as described differences rather than "devs did this, devs thought that".
  • Example of above per request: "In comparison to other console versions, the developers placed a greater importance on the game's platforming and combat components in the DS version." -- Is there a direct quote in the reviews? If not, it's just reviewer assumption.
    •  Done Removed.
• "The DS version also includes a number of minigames, including action minigames, Tangram, and minigames in the game's hub." -- Are the hub minigames different from other minigames?
  •  Done It seems like this minigame is just one of the minigames featured in the game, so I've removed the mention.
• "The game also features a minigame where monkey brains are roasted, as seen in the Temple of Doom." -- Maybe rephrase to "featured a minigame where monkey brains are cooked, a reference to Temple of Doom."
  •  Done

Development/Release

• Make sure to link platforms in their first instance.
  •  Done
• Again, you're using reviews to cite development information rather than interviews or developer statements.
  •  Done I've removed the content that was not attributed to developers. GameSpot ref is a Q&A with producer Shawn Storc, IGN ref is an interview with producer Nick Ricks, CVG has some commentary from director Jon Burton, PG is an interview with Jonathan Smith of TT Games, and GI ref is an interview with associate producer Kellam Eanes.
  • Example as requested below: "The game features references to previous franchises Traveller's Tales has worked on.[38]" -- While possibly a valid point, it uses a review as a source for this.
    •  Done Removed this as this is attributed to reviewer and not a developer commentary.
  • Second example, clearer: "The game's soundtrack is a mix of John Williams compositions featured in the films and a custom soundtrack inspired by them.[45][46]" -- This is only cited in reviews, so it could be entirely wrong (reviewers have gotten this kind of thing wrong before).
    • This is also mentioned in the credits.
  • Further, there seems to be a bit of a jumble of development and release information between the two sections.
    •  Done I see that some sentences related to development were left off in the Marketing and release section.

Reception

• Nothing of note.

References

• Can you find an alternative for Refs 20 and 22? My previous experience is that game guides aren't strictly reliable.
  • While looking through various sources I did find a couple of mentions of the bonus levels, but they do not go into detail nor they mention how many of bonus levels are in the game. The same goes for the four health points mention.

@Vacant0: This feels like a lot, and there's likely more to come. Putting the article on Hold so issues can be addressed. --ProtoDrake (talk) 11:12, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

I agree with your points, but would like to get some examples regarding the 8th point in the Gameplay section and the second point in the Development/Release section. I’ll work on this later this day or tomorrow, so once I address all the issues we should finish it off with the Reception. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 11:33, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

@Vacant0: As requested, I've included illustrative examples of the points you wanted clarified. --ProtoDrake (talk) 12:11, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

@Vacant0: I don't see any real issues going forward, so I think this counts as a Pass (others might pick it apart, but I'm not seeing huge issues now.) I will say, due to sourcing problems, it's unlikely to get beyond GA level if you were thinking of taking it any further. --ProtoDrake (talk) 13:17, 4 October 2024 (UTC)