Wikipedia:Peer review/Guitar Hero Smash Hits/archive1

Guitar Hero: Smash Hits

• A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for June 2009.

This peer review discussion has been closed.
Seeking peer review to verify there's no major omissions with this article. (At the time of adding this PR, there is no reception section, but this game came out yesterday, I expect to have this filled in in a couple of days.)

Thanks, MASEM (t) 13:49, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs)

• "expanding them to be based on master recordings" I don't understand how that is an expansion; maybe a modification?
• "four instrument band"-->four-instrument band
• Link rhythm guitar.
• "guitar portions that was omitted in the original"-->guitar portions that were omitted in the original
• "The game also includes the "Expert+" mode introduced in Guitar Hero: Metallica that uses double-bass drum pedals.[3] The game borrows the graphical interface from Metallica, including the rearrangement of on-screen meters for band mode." These sentences could be combined: "The game incorporates elements from Guitar Hero: Metallica, including the "Expert+" mode, in which the player uses double-bass drum pedals; and the graphical interface from Metallica, which includes the rearrangement of on-screen meters for band mode."
• "with the "GHTunes" custom song sharing service already present in World Tour and Metallica"
• "and the 8-player"-->and the eight-player
• "to play at venues at various Wonders of the World. " Do we know what classification of Wonders of the World?
• "Guitar Hero: Greatest Hits in Europe and Australia." Should be italicized.
• "Guitar Hero: Smash Hits was announced in early 2009 along with two additional titles for the Guitar Hero series in 2009." Would this revision change things? "Guitar Hero: Smash Hits was one of three new titles for the Guitar Hero series announced in early 2009."
• "the name had changed to Guitar Hero: Smash Hits when the cover art was released to various vendor sites" I'm sure the name didn't change itself.
• "While the game supports user-created songs through the "GHTunes" service (common to Guitar Hero World Tour and Guitar Hero: Metallica) other existing downloadable content does not work with Smash Hits." "While"-->Although, comma after the closing parentheses.
• The Promotion section doesn't have a source.
• Ref 13 doesn't have a publisher.
• Here's stuff you can add about promotion. This probably isn't relevant, but I found it interesting anyway.
• Also, 'big-box' electronics retailer Use double quotes Dabomb87 (talk) 16:32, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

I've addressed all the points above -- though one comment: you can see the names of the venues yourself and quickly see they're not exclusively man-made or natural wonders of the world (or even always one of those, eg Atlantis), so I can't fairly narrow that down further.

Also this PR spurred me into at least getting the basics of a review section down, and I would appreciate a once-over on that as well. Unfortunately, RS reviews are a little sparse (maybe not unsurprising given the "milking" situation) though it has only been a couple of weeks since release. --MASEM (t) 19:30, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

I think the article looks good for now. I make some unsubstantial tweaks; hope they were all right with you. The only think that I have to say is to replace Giant Bomb when possible, as it seems a little iffy. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:52, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

I will note that I don't think many more reviews will be forthcoming, as this seems to be a "recycling" game in terms of gameplay and songs. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:54, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Normally I'm hesitant on Giant Bomb, but given the lack of other notable reviews, and that the review is by a noted games journalist (who started GB after leaving Gamespot), it is more reliable than any of the other reviews listed in the MetaCritic/GameRankings. There may be some print reviews in the next month, however. --MASEM (t) 04:13, 28 June 2009 (UTC)