Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Teardown (video game)/archive1

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Gog the Mild via FACBot (talk) 31 July 2024 [1].

Teardown (video game)

Nominator(s): IceWelder [✉] 20:47, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dear colleagues, please find attached my favourite game of 2022: Teardown. In this game, the player is given the tools to destroy and shape the game world around them, which is made entirely of destructible voxels. The core gameplay loop has the player plan and create efficient paths between objectives (say, cars to steal) that must then be completed within only 60 seconds. I began writing the article just as the game was about to enter early access in October 2020. It has been a Good Article since November 2022 (thanks, @Shooterwalker) and was a DYK item on the Main Page in December 2022 (cheers, @Theleekycauldron). Following the release of the console versions last year, plus the completion of the GOCE editing spree just this week (props to @Dhtwiki), I feel ready to tackle my second Featured Article nomination. Thank you to all commenters in advance! IceWelder [✉] 20:47, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

Teardown cover.jpg – good.
Teardown screenshot.jpg – good.
Alt text explains all images perfectly.

This passes the image review. — VAUGHAN J. (t · c) 02:29, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

LunaEclipse (Source review)

I will get to this in the following days. If I somehow don't, trout me. — lunaeclipse ^(talk) ^(contribs) 11:47, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is a CNET citation in the article. I'd heavily recommend removing it as the publication is unreliable per WP:CNET.
You should also remove the Game Rant source (situational per VG/S).
What makes Voxagon reliable?
Ref formatting seems ok to me. Nothing to do here.

lunaeclipse ^(talk) 23:03, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the review, @LunaEclipse!

I removed the CNET source.
The VG/S comment for Game Rant reads "Topics of low potential for controversy such as general pop culture topics or game information are allowable areas." I reduced its usage to the mention of the top-down view, which I think is invaluable to state. I also left the Reception comments intact for now, although I have no hard feelings in this regard. Would you say that this usage is justified in this case?
Voxagon is the blog of the game's designer, Dennis Gustafsson. It should be treated as a primary source.

Regards, IceWelder [✉] 09:35, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

IceWelder, ehh... I don't think if Game Rant should be here though. FAC demands high-quality sources, and Game Rant is not one. Additionally, many video game FAs don't use it at all. lunaeclipse ^(talk) 11:55, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's fair enough. I removed it entirely. IceWelder [✉] 16:34, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support on source review. lunaeclipse ^(talk) 20:10, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Draken Bowser

I think we have everything we need here content-wise, which means I'll focus on tweaks. I like the sleek leads of the last few video game articles and would prefer for the lead to be just a bit shorter. For the first paragraph I'd suggest something more like this (additions are underlined, omissions are not ~~struck~~):

Teardown is a 2022 sandbox–puzzle video game developed and published by Tuxedo Labs. The game revolves around the owner of a financially stricken demolition company, who is caught undertaking a questionable job and becomes entangled between helping police investigations and taking on further dubious assignments. Teardown features levels made of destructible voxels, and the player follows the campaign through consecutive missions. In most missions, the player must collect or destroy objects connected to a security alarm, which triggers a timer. The player has unlimited time to prepare and is given upgradable tools, vehicles, and explosives to create a path within the level that allows them to complete the objectives and escape before the timer runs out.

The second paragraph feels like it tries to follow the twists and turns surrounding Bengtsson's involvement, but I don't think it's necessary to describe it here because it is not possible to adequately cover it with so few words, and the lead doesn't need more text. I'm not satisfied with my attempts to resolve it so I can't provide an example, yet. The third para seems fine.

Will return to discuss the body later. Draken Bowser (talk) 11:08, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I rewrote the portion around Bengtsson a bit to make it flow better. I didn't remove him outright as his involvement in the development seems large enough to warrant a lead mention. IceWelder [✉] 09:09, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nice! Moving along:

Gameplay

The first sentence asserts that the game "is played from a first-person perspective", but it's a bit confusing since there's an in-game image displaying an apparent third-person perspective right beside the text.
"Some voxel materials require stronger tools to destroy." -- should probably be moved down a bit, the use of tools hasn't been introduced yet
"The spraycan can be used to mark points of interest." -- this feels a bit vague on its own, I think you'd need to elaborate on the utility of the spray can and/or points of interest.
"New structures can be erected using planks." -- one or a few examples of how this might help the player could be useful to the uninitiated.
"previous progress" -- level-specific?
"the player can design levels and objects by painting with voxels of various materials within the game world." -- I'd turn this into at least two sentences with a little more info on how the editor of this mode and it's interface works.
"Teardown on PCs highlights developer-curated mods" -- how are they highlited?

Pausing here for a moment. Draken Bowser (talk) 19:35, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reworded a bunch. Vehicles are driven from a third-person perspective, everything else happens in first-person. I'm having trouble finding a source for this, though (except for this blog post, even highlighted by the developer, but it would likely not stand a chance here). Perhaps I should exchange the image? IceWelder [✉] 13:29, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, such a shame that the sources ain't cooperating, but that's one way to resolve the mismatch.

I'm gonna cut my review short here to go on vacay for about two weeks. If the review is still pending by then I'll resume. Draken Bowser (talk) 07:57, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

After some scouring, I finally found that the review in Multiplayer.it (reliable per WP:VG/S) mentions verbatim that "Teardown uses a first-person camera, but when you're driving machinery this will switch to a more useful third-person." It appears Google is no huge help when the target text is in Italian. I included the source to mention the camera shift, leaving the image as-is. Thank you for now, and safe travels! IceWelder [✉] 11:12, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi DB, gentle nudge. Gog the Mild (talk) 12:44, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Draken Bowser, assuming you're back, would it be possible to continue the review? Thanks. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:55, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Certainly, I had lost my print-outs, but they were recovered two days ago, so at this point I'm just dragging my feet. Thanks for the nudge. Draken Bowser (talk) 21:30, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Plot

I think introducing characters by name only is a bit abrupt, let's give Mr Woo a job title or something. Mr Lee is immediately tied to his company, so I don't think he necessarily needs one.
In the meantime, Tracy purchases a new company vehicle and retains the old one for herself. - this statement is a bit isolated, we don't get the follow-up until the end of the plot section. Perhaps we could even remove it, since Tracy has been introduced as the mother of the owner it is not inconceivable that the company car would occasionally be parked at her house.

Development and release

Prefer Destructible voxels appeared easier to implement to re-emphasize the destruction element.
Prefer which Gustafsson had discovered on Twitter ~~early in his work~~.
stochastic transparency - very technical, since we don't have an article on this might we add a footnote or inform the reader some other way?
A popular request from fans was to have the security helicopter not spot the getaway vehicle when the timer runs out and instead chase after the player. Gustafsson disliked this idea, saying that it "would introduce an element of randomness that would discourage the strategic thinking and careful planning". - is this important?
He once looked into procedurally altering levels to reflect damage the player had inflicted earlier but scrapped the idea due to time. - so like, between sessions?
Gustafsson revealed the game as Teardown on 1 October 2019. - do we include the title if the title didn't change?
Gustafsson formally founded Tuxedo Labs in Malmö in 2019. - it's been a while since the reader last heard of Tuxedo Labs, and the sentence doesn't tie into neither the preceding or following sentence.
Gustafsson planned to release the game as a Steam Early Access title for Windows later in 2020. He made it available as such on 29 October 2020. - if things go as planned I don't think planning needs to be mentioned, these sentences could be merged.
The initial release included one half of the game, Part 1, with the second half in development by January 2021. Part 2, released on 2 December 2021, added further missions and tools, enemy robots, and tornadoes. The completed game was released on 21 April 2022. The trailer announcing the release date, published earlier that month, included the updates made during the early access phase. - is it important to stress that it was in development by then, and wouldn't it rather be weird for the updates not to be included in the trailer?
which was itself owned (by) - is it better to say "a subsidiary of"?
alongside the ports - my concern is that the uninitiated won't know what this means, even in context.

~~That's it for tonight! Draken Bowser (talk) 21:30, 25 July 2024 (UTC)~~[reply]

Scratch that, just realized that I have a total of one more comment: under accolades the sentence beginning with For the latter site seems to have been moved from somewhere else and could use a rephrase. Draken Bowser (talk) 22:32, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Actually just one more itty bitty comment: It developed like a mod as a way to introduce players to the modding system's capabilities. - I'm a bit confused by this. Draken Bowser (talk) 22:45, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My edits continue! Thank you for your continuing comments. To clarify a few things:

I don't really know what "stochastic transparency" transparency is. I could take an educated guess, but the specifics of the engine are not necessarily the focus of the article, so I removed the mention instead.
Yes, I think the mention of the requested-but-unimplemented mechanic is important because it would have lifted the 60-second restriction that is now a key pillar of the game.
When Gustafsson "revealed the game as Teardown", it was the first time the name was mentioned publicly. There may be better ways to phrase this; the current solution is just quite concise.

Regards, IceWelder [✉] 20:05, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine by me, and since there's nothing else I'd like addressed I'm ending my review with a pledge. Nice work on this one! Draken Bowser (talk) 20:16, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Support by Vacant0

Will leave comments here. I saw the FAC at WP VG. --Vacant0 (talk) 12:47, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dennis Gustafsson also worked on Smash Hit, so that is another reason to review this FAC.
I don't see any issues with references themselves, some of them have been addressed above.
There are two images in the article and both of them are properly licensed, under the non-free licence.
Could add Portal:Video games at the bottom of the article (where it is supposed to be, according to MOS:ORDER)?
Gameplay: New structures can be erected using planks. Could this be moved at the end of the first paragraph?
In the rest of this section, and the Plot, I did not find any problems. I will review the other two sections by the end of the week.

Hmm, the planks are part of the standard tool belt that can be upgraded (number, width, length), so it currently flows into the sentence about upgrades. Is there any particular way you would want me to rewrite this portion? IceWelder [✉] 09:54, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, okay. The rewording sounds nicer, so it can stay there, IMO. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 17:25, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Continuing the rest of the article.
Post-launch content and console ports: Typo in "divsted".
I've read the rest of the article and did not notice any issues. The article is well-researched, this can be seen in the inclusion of foreign-language sources, for example. For the rest of the FA criteria, I think that this article does meet the listed criteria. I will change my vote towards support once the typo gets fixed.

Fixed :) IceWelder [✉] 07:12, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good to me then. Good luck! Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 10:02, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Spotcheck by NegativeMP1

Since there's already been some prose comments posted and a source formatting review, but no spotcheck, I'll do one within the next couple of days. I'll aim for checking about 50% of the articles references, which will hopefully be satisfactory. λ NegativeMP1 19:27, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm still planning on doing this. I've gotten a few sources checked so far and added to a text document, but I haven't gotten to check 50% of them yet. Sorry for the wait, and hopefully I'll be done by this weekend. λ NegativeMP1 08:27, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry this took a bit, this is a fairly long article and certainly longer than my own FA. Spotchecked several uses of 46 (two-fifths, reduced it from 50% due to some sources not being in English) out of the articles 115 sources. Hopefully this is satisfactory.

1: Verified.
3: Verified. It doesn't say the player starts with a spraycan, but 5 does.
4: Verified.
5: Verified.
6: Verified.
7: Verified.
8: Verified.
9: Verified.
10: Verified.
11: Verified.
14: Verified, but it doesn't state that the game has getaway vehicles. I'm going to assume this is verified by ref 13, which I can't check due to it not being in English.
15: Verified. Source review above states that this a primary source, so reliability isn't a concern.
17: Verified.
19: Verified.
25: Verified.
33: Verified.
34: Verified.
39: Verified.
41: Verified.
42: Verified.
43: Verified.
45: Verified.
For 46, please add video timestamps to the citation/source since it's fairly long.
47: Verified.
50: Verified.
55: Verified. Again, another primary source.
56: Verified.
57: Verified. This one and the prior are primary sources.
60: Verified.
67: Verified.
71: Verified.
72: Verified.
73: Verified.
74: Verified.
76: Verified.
83: Verified.
88: Verified.
98: Verified.
99: Verified.
100: Verified.
106: Verified.
107: Verified.
108: Verified.
111: Verified.
113: Verified.
115: Verified.

Pass on the spotcheck, and support. λ NegativeMP1 03:46, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers for this! I added {{rp}} tags for when citing the GDC video. Regards, IceWelder [✉] 22:17, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Shooterwalker

I reviewed this article for GA and believed it was well on its way to FA. Based on the latest improvements and the support from other editors, I would like to add my support as well. This is great work. Shooterwalker (talk) 21:17, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you again! :) IceWelder [✉] 22:18, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Drive-by comments

References: article titles should be in a consistent case - sentence or title - regardless of how they appear in their original.

"The game was announced in October 2019 and made available as an early access game in October 2020 with one half of the campaign". I don't understand what this is meant to be communicating.
"Teardown had sold 1.1 million copies by August 2022". Nothing more up to date than a year ago.

Gog the Mild (talk) 15:14, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Gog the Mild: Thanks! I shortened the release sentence a bit and added the updated player count from the body, though I'd avoid calling it a sales number since it includes PlayStation Plus members who could play it for free. The source capitalization is new to me since it wasn't a requirement for my previous FA and GAs. I'm a big fan of "source-case" (apart from all-uppercase shenanigans), espcially since some outlets have short, work-esque titles ("Teardown Preview"), others have full sentences or even quotes as titles. How strict is this requirement? IceWelder [✉] 18:16, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks.
It is strict. I used to work like you, but the MOS has always been for consistency and 'enforcement' at FAC is stricter these days. There was a chat on FAC Talk about it recently.
I think there is a minor issue around whether a non-expert would understand what is meant by early access. Would it be possible to pipe something more generally understandable in with it? Or, if not, give a brief in line explanbation, either instead or as well? Gog the Mild (talk) 20:47, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Amended capitalization in this edit; can't say that I'm a fan and MOS:TITLECAPS is extra confusing when you're not a native speaker. Is "Looking Into" a phrasal verb? Oh well, please review if this is alright. "Early access" clarified here. IceWelder [✉] 19:59, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Gog the Mild (talk) 20:16, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.