# Talk:Alienation (video game)

PlayStation blog
GameReactor
GamesRadar
Eurogamer
GameSpot
IGN
Destructoid
GamerPro64 00:23, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

Cheers GamerPro64. I'll use these when I'm expanding those sections. Just adding these here for future use:
GameInformer
Metro
GamesRadar
Anarchyte (work | talk) 08:03, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
And a few more, this time for reception.
IGN Sweden
IGN Italy
IGN Spain
IGN Denmark
Eurogamer Italy
Eurogamer Poland
GamesTM
Anarchyte (work | talk) 10:18, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Alienation (video game)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: PresN (talk · contribs) 17:25, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Reviewing:

It can't be both isometric and top-down- those are both graphical view styles. Applies to both lead and gameplay sections, though the link in the lead is also a duplicate of the very next word.
Changed to only be isometric.
The "one to four" links are pushing the surprise-link limit; it would help to make the second link "four players" instead
Done.
"of a local co-op" - jargon, change to co-op mode and link to Cooperative gameplay
Fixed.
"game's lack of weapons and ammunition" - more fair to say they criticized the lack of variety of weapons and ammunition
Fixed.
"Up to four people can play at once" - right here you should explicitly mention that you can play in a single-player mode or in a cooperative multiplayer mode with up to four people
Expanded.
"can spend points on a total of six abilities on three separate skill trees (three active and three passive)" - slightly confusing, may be more clear as "can spend points on three active and three passive abilities, chosen from several options on a trio of skill trees". If that's not correct, then I guess the sentence was confusing enough that I didn't get it
Rewrote
"more levels in a procedurally-generated ship" - what ship? This is the first time you've mentioned a ship.
Rewrote.
I don't mind quote boxes in articles, but in this case you both have the quote and then discuss it in the text with enough quoting and paraphrasing as to duplicate it.
I don't see what's wrong with this. The box is simply a more complete version of the paragraph, while the prose only uses one of the sentences.
"In a question-and-answer article on the PlayStation Blog" - add that the Q&A was in April 2014
Done.
"saying that it would feature three character classes, "plenty of loot and a ton of weapon customisation"." - needs an "and"
Fixed.
" highly demanded local co-op mode" - editorializing, and you just linked coop gameplay a few sentences ago
Rewrote.
" On August 23, Housemarque introduced three new expansions: the Weapons Pack, the Armor Paint Pack and the Veteran Heroes pack, all of which (with the Survivor's Pack and the Conqueror’s Pack) were included in the season pass." - you call them expansions, but they seem to be DLC, and this is the first you've mentioned of the Conqueror's Pack. If these three are different, explain why (also, why do these get a noted release date and the other two not?); if they're not, be consistent.
Expanded.
You don't seem to use either of the OPM reviews in the text, and aren't even citing them directly instead of the metacritic page, so they should be dropped from the table.
Removed.
"Alienation was released with positive reviews from video-game critics" - "released to" or "was met with positive reviews upon release"
Reworded.
The second paragraph of reception feels like its just repeating the same sentence 6 times in a row with different names. It needs to be restructured so as to combine similar statements together.
How do you suggest it gets written? Never been good at the reception :/
"The game's lack of weapons and ammunition was cited by reviewers" - variety, as I said about the lead
Rewrote.
"did not have enough weapons; "samey weapons"" - should be a colon
See below.
" "samey weapons" were the game's only disadvantage,[7] and Ingenito was disappointed that many of the weapons looked and behaved the same way." - those... are both the same thing.
Removed the "samey weapons" bit.
"GameSpot's Jason D'Aprile was annoyed by his inability to pause the game even in single-player mode." - you said this exact thing in paragraph 2
Rewrote.
References have mixed date styles- use either "month day, year" or "day month year" consistently
MDY. Fixed.
A lot of the links are redirecting; it's not a big issue, but airstrikes, clip, invisible, respawn, minimap, GamesRadar, Metro, Jaz Rignall, single-player, and GameReactor don't look intentional.
They're all fine and get to where they need to go. Fixed the GameReactor one as that was a stylisation error on my behalf.
The gameplay image file is a bit large and the rationale a bit scant.
Fixed rationale, what size should I make it? 620x350? I see that around a lot.
That's all, putting on hold. --PresN 17:25, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

@PresN: Cheers for the review! I've left comments under everything you mentioned. Anarchyte (work | talk) 06:18, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
Made a couple tweaks; upon re-reading I think the biggest issue with that reception paragraph is actually the overuse of the term "co-op", so if you fix that it will read a lot better. The general rule of thumb for images is a total of 100,000 pixels, unless that's too small to read the details; if you think that's the case here (100k pixels is like 365x274) then 620x is probably fine. --PresN 17:46, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
I've cut down on the usage of the word co-op. I've also edited the image to be a lower res, feel free to delete the previous version. Anarchyte (work | talk) 00:52, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
OK, promoting. --PresN 12:05, 25 February 2017 (UTC)