Talk:Videoball
Videoball has been listed as one of the Video games good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Videoball is part of the Action Button Entertainment series, a good topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:
|
Unused video source
editThis is a video from Destructoid that could ostensibly be used if someone wanted, though I didn't think it was necessary. czar ♔ 18:17, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
Unexplained revert
edit[1] What's the issue with this edit? czar 16:07, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
- It seems like this user only reverted one of your edits, apparently concerning your removal of publishers from citations. The way they put it might be very wrong, but I'd also agree with them. I believe us two discussed it before because of an issue at Stephen's Sausage Roll, where you did the same, first stating that consistency is important, but later that it is not, and that you rather dislike the idea of even having them. I think that publishers are valid thing to put, useful or not, but simply removing them is not what it should be. If you consider the publisher field to be phased out, contact the {{cite web}} talk page to reach for consensus to do so. Lordtobi (✉) 16:56, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
- (1) It should be prima facie odd that an IP user's first edit is to revert such an inside baseball change. (2) I removed the publisher field from citations that I authored in an article that hasn't substantively changed since then. (3) As I've explained over and over, this has to do with style. It is already accepted to either use both fields or either—as long as it's consistent and I've never said anything to the contrary. There is no case for removing the publisher field from the template, but that's so far off-topic that you can bring it up there if you want. You have no case. czar 18:18, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
GA Review
editGA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Videoball/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Jaguar (talk · contribs) 18:57, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
Sweep. JAGUAR 18:57, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
- "Up to six human and computer players form two teams" - why not use artificial intelligence?
- " Each uses an analog stick and single button to control triangles" - a single button
- "The third charge level, a "slam", shoots a large triangle" - try The third charge level, known as a "slam", shoots a large triangle?
- " are "tackled" and projectiles that hit projectiles are "intercepted". [7]" - extra space before citation
- "but players can practice with computer-controlled teammates and opponents and in Arcade mode, a set of scenarios in which the player faces two computer-controlled opponents" - this seems like a run-on. It might be better to split the sentence at the Arcade mode
- "Games last an average of four minutes, though they can last several times more" - this isn't mentioned in the source given. I didn't find anything about "four minutes"
- "He broadcast gameplay from Twitch's booth at PAX East 2014 with indie publisher Midnight City" - Midnight City is a song?
- "GameSpot's reviewer wrote that Videoball was the 2016 equivalent of Rocket League" - de-link Rocket League here
- "While the controls are simple, Destructoid noted, the player's intent can easily backfire if they aim or charge the shot sloppily" - the beginning of the sentence feels like it belongs in a quote and doesn't feel right. How about Destructoid noted that the player's intent can easily backfire if they aim or charge the shot sloppily, despite the controls being simple or something similar?
- "Reviewers noted the game's accessibility" - noted, praised, or criticised?
Good work with this! I couldn't find many issues to raise. On hold JAGUAR 19:10, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks, @Jaguar! I think I got everything.
"Usually the games are over in about three to five minutes," Rogers said.
is the quote from PC Gamer, and I used "noted" since it wasn't explicit praise or criticism, at least universally. Glad to finally put this one to bed. czar 20:04, 8 August 2016 (UTC)- Thanks, looks good to go! Is this the best game in the universe? JAGUAR 21:23, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
Linux and OS X Cancellation
editI've edited the main article to include the fact that the Linux and OS X versions of the game have cancelled according to the game's designer Tim Rodgers.[1] As for the Infobox, I'm not sure what the procedure is. I've changed the Linux and OS X versions from "TBA" to "Cancelled," but perhaps the Linux and OS X versions should simply be removed from the Infobox altogether? I'm not sure how Google fetches Wikipedia's information, but when googling "VIDEOBALL" the results list OS X and Linux as available platforms, which is presumably a problem. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SherwoodBoss (talk • contribs)
References
- ^ Tim Rogers [@108] (28 November 2018). "the mac and linux versions were Permanently Canceled" (Tweet) – via Twitter.
- @SherwoodBoss: Indeed, platforms that a game did not or will not release on are not listed in the infobox, unless of course the entire game was cancelled. Thus, the infobox should not list OS and Linux. Regards. Lordtobi (✉) 10:23, 20 March 2019 (UTC)