Talk:Panzer Dragoon Orta/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: TheJoebro64 (talk · contribs) 21:00, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

An early-aughts game from Sega towards the end of its creative apex? Can't miss the opportunity. JOEBRO64 21:00, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

@ProtoDrake: I'm sorry I haven't begun the review yet. I'll start as soon as I finish reviewing Aliens (film) at FAC, which will likely be tomorrow. JOEBRO⁶⁴ 22:13, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

Review time:

• As a general comment, I think the article really needs to be copyedited. There's a lot of "[word], [verb]ing"s, "[word], with [verb]ing"s, which were extremely distracting, for example.
• The article's not consistent with date formats. Since it seems to be written in BrEng, I'd assume DMY is what you'll want to go with.
• Panzer Dragoon Orta sold poorly... As far as I can tell, this isn't supported within the text itself.
• Orta was the final Panzer Dragoon game until the 2020 announcement... The announcement was in 2018, not 2020. The date of announcement is also not mentioned within prose.
• I've got several issues with the Gameplay section. There's a lot of jargon, like the different gauges and Pandora's Box, that either aren't explained or are introduced before they're actually explained, and you've also got unencyclopedic phrases like "with dragon forms capping at Level 5".
• You mention that the original Panzer Dragoon is an unlockable bonus in the Development section. Why isn't this anywhere in the Gameplay section?
• Orta, implied to be the daughter of Saga protagonists Edge and Azel... You can't state an interpretation like this in the plot section, especially when the developers disagree as to whether it's the case. See WP:VG/PLOT.
• Iva is implied to die from his illness in Emid's arms. Again, you can't state an interpretation. Just say what the game itself shows.
• Nothing much in the development section, other than the need for copyediting I noted above.
• I think the reception section needs to be reworked or rewritten. It follows an "A said B" format and doesn't do a great job of giving an overall impression of the critical consensus. See WP:RECEPTION for advice.
• The first paragraph of Legacy is very repetitive and falls into proseline territory, three sentences beginning with "In [year]..." in rapid succession.

You've done an excellent job researching, but I'm afraid there's too much work to be done that remains until the article is ready for GA status. I'm failing the review for now, but I will be more than willing to come back once my points have been addressed to do a re-review. I hope this isn't discouraging—I don't think we're a million miles off, we just need some additional work before it's GA-ready. JOEBRO⁶⁴ 16:40, 1 October 2022 (UTC)