# Talk:Lumines: Puzzle Fusion

Lumines Live for XBLA is mentioned, why is there nothing on the PSN Title?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.74.228.42 (talk) 18:34, 31 December 2008 (UTC) 

added a couple sentences  Davermont
"said to be pronounced"? -Branddobbe 17:22, Mar 25, 2005 (UTC)

What does Lumines mean? 86.134.81.144 10:52, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

And does it have anything to do with Lumine from Mega Man X8? --Damian Yerrick 03:29, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Lumines is Latin; it is the nominative and accusative plural of Lumen - meaning light (hence, Lumines mean "lights"). Therefore it is not only homophonic to "luminous", but is in fact a word in its own right. I'm going to go ahead and add this information to the main section.

For example, Minesweeper has a list of clones. This article had one too, but A Link to the Past  deleted it: "These links aren't all that relevant." Why is that? (I went back and reverted the change.) --Damian Yerrick 16:43, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

This is not really the place for game reviews (ie, "known to have inaccurate sweeping" - known by whom? and when?), I am removing the parenthetical statements attached to them as NPOV.  The list is too large already (the subject of the article is "Lumines", not "Lumines clones"), and Wikipedia is not a link repositiory. RobLinwood 01:45, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Would be nice. 207.126.230.225 22:56, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

I second this, how about a section where it lists each skin, then tells which of the lumines games they're in, and whether the skin is downloaded content or not. It'll help me decide which version of game to get.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tman7776 (talk • contribs) 01:26, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
I added a soundtrack section. Maybe someone can help expand it. Portillo (talk) 06:15, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Since the exploit, people tend to buy Lumines just to downgrade their psp on version 3.50 in my opinon.
Now is it pretty hard to buy the game in stores such as EB games this time of the year due to out of stock. --Johndoe789 17:07, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

And what does this have to do with the article? ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ 18:28, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
pfft, just rent the game :D  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.191.176.47 (talk) 06:41, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

I edited the line that said "a 5900% sales increase" to say "5900% increase in the sales rank" because the sales didn't actually go up 5900%.... It moved up from 59th to #1 (or something comparable)....  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.136.215.85 (talk) 04:36, 7 October 2007 (UTC) 

It needs to be put back up
It DOES have to do with the game  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.143.148.172 (talk) 01:53, 27 August 2008 (UTC) 

I too disagree with 71.146.96.128's assertion that (freeware clones have no place in this article), especially because we have a national newspaper mentioning one of them in an article about the homebrew scene: Routine Upgrades Are the Bane of 'Homebrew' Enthusiasts (Posting in talk because of potential COI.) --Damian Yerrick (talk | stalk) 13:07, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Somehow "caseyporn" doesn't strike me as a gamer site. 68.229.185.85 (talk) 09:53, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

You'd think so, but it was legit. It's on the Wayback Machine, so I fixed it. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk) 10:54, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Lumines. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070620092323/http://www.ulb.ac.be/di/algo/jcardin/lumines.pdf to http://www.ulb.ac.be/di/algo/jcardin/lumines.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:58, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Lumines: Puzzle Fusion/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Namcokid47 (talk · contribs) 15:59, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

One of my absolute favorite puzzle games, alongside Mr. Driller, Tetris and Columns. I'll get to this soon, likely when I finish redoing R-Type Delta. Namcokid47 (Contribs) 15:59, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
Okay, this article is definitely gonna need a lot of work. Doesn't seem to have been copyedited (or copyedited well, at least), so I'd definitely advise seeking somebody to do it. Just glancing at the lead I can already see some glaring issues.

"Lumines: Puzzle Fusion is a 2004 puzzle video game that is based on sound and light patterns that were created by game designer Tetsuya Mizuguchi and his company Q Entertainment." This entire sentence reads awkwardly. It can easily be shortened to something like "Lumines: Puzzle Fusion is a 2004 puzzle video game developed by Q Entertainment for the PlayStation Portable". You should also follow that with something similar to "It was published by Bandai in Japan and internationally by Ubisoft."
Why is the platform for the game listed in the second paragraph? That seems like pretty important info for the first paragraph.
"The game's objective" is redundant, considering the article is talking about the game.
"and said it has an addictive factor." What does this mean, exactly?
We don't need to list all the platforms for its sequels. Just saying "it was followed by series of sequels and ports for other consoles".
"HD remastered version" can just be "HD remaster"
Overall, this makes me pretty concerned about the rest of the article. I haven't looked at it yet but I'm not very sure about it if the lead alone is very problematic. Namcokid47 (Contribs) 01:09, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

@Namcokid47: Unfortunately a lot of the copy edit wasnt that well off. Theres some questionable sentences or rewording. copyediting isnt my forté.
But other than just some sentence structure, I hope you find that this is something that can be worked into a GA quickly.
I'm willing to copy edit the article myself. I will have to do it day after tomorrow. Blue Pumpkin Pie Chat Contribs 06:00, 1 January 2020 (UTC)
@Namcokid47: i wouldn't call Lumines his debut work. as he's been making games for Sega prior. The original sentence was supposed to highlight that it was the first game he made (For Q Entertainment) as he was one of the founders of the company.Blue Pumpkin Pie Chat Contribs 17:43, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
Blue Pumpkin Pie Right now I'll turn towards the Reception, as I feel that's where the biggest issues with this page lie.

I don't understand the lack of a proper review box template. Right now it's just a bunch of Metacritic and GameRankings score (the GameRankings scores can also probably just be removed, since we don't really need two aggregator websites for one title).
Another issue with the reception itself is that it's pretty poorly-written. It's just a generic, boring laundry list of "[x] said [y]", "GameSpot said this and IGN said that". That's not how reception is supposed to be written, it should be weaved together into sentences that flow well. A good example is (not to toot my own horn, obviously) Ace Combat 2, as it connects reviewer's comments into sentences and does it well.
Ref 49 should include Destructoid, as it's not listed
"Lumines Remastered was received positive reviews" needs to be fixed, not grammatically correct
The bit about the exploit being discovered is too long, should probably be shortened to something along the lines of "an exploit discovered in 2007 that allowed for custom firmware to be installed boosted sales of the game by over 6,000%".
Lots of the comments don't have the titles of specific games italicized, specifically Lumines and Tetris.
Overall, this makes me very wishy-washy on the article itself. This is the largest section of the entire page, and it requires a lot of work to fix. I'm not gonna fail this quite yet, but I'd urge you to have somebody other than you copyedit this page. Namcokid47 (Contribs) 17:10, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

@Namcokid47:I did make an official request a copyedit, and this is the result we got.Blue Pumpkin Pie Chat Contribs 17:32, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
Yeah, I just looked through the edit history and noticed. Looks like the person didn't do a very good job it (no offense on their behalf), so I'd probably try requesting it again. I'd do it myself but I don't feel I'm up for the task... Namcokid47 (Contribs) 20:51, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
Namcokid47, per a request from the nominator on my talk page, I tried a copyedit of my own based on the suggestions on this page and my own observations. Then I saw the sheer scale of this article, and with my own work on Vanillaware and life outside Wikipedia at the moment I can't dedicate the time needed to straighten this article out. I've tried, but really can't dedicate the necessary time. Personally, I think it needs a total rewrite more than a copyedit, which can't be done within the confines of a GA review. --ProtoDrake (talk) 21:18, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
After reading over the gameplay and development sections, I'd also agree with ProtoDrake on having this article be completely rewritten. @Blue Pumpkin Pie:, if it's okay with you, I'm suggesting that this review be closed so that you're able to redo this article and make it up to snuff for the GA criteria. Once that's taken care of, I'll gladly give it another review. Namcokid47 (Contribs) 21:21, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
Fair enough. If it needs more attention than a few days, you can close it out.21:51, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
I do feel pretty bad about closing this, as I know this review has taken such a long time and you've put a great deal into working on this, but I feel this is the best way to handle this. Once you feel this article meets the criteria and you've fixed the things I've brought up, nominate it again and I'll take a look at it. For now though, I'll give you a few days to rework some of this stuff and see where that takes this review. Namcokid47 (Contribs) 22:39, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
Well my current concern is that i get someone else to assist. i trusted another editor to copy-edit and did a poor job (not Protodrake). So i'll have to look for another trusted editor to get it to GA.Blue Pumpkin Pie Chat Contribs 22:44, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
Popcornduff did a good job at copyediting Galaga when I was nominating that for GA, maybe you can ask them? Namcokid47 (Contribs) 22:46, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
He may deny, as we had previous debate in Jet Set Radio, but i'll ask.Blue Pumpkin Pie Chat Contribs 22:57, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
@Blue Pumpkin Pie:: How's this coming along? Namcokid47 (Contribs) 05:30, 13 February 2020 (UTC)
@Namcokid47: I've been having more free time to improving it. Trying to move all the comparisons to Tetris / Bejeweled into a single paragraph and see if i can summarize the more similar statements. Also looking into seeing if i can fix some of the reviews to "Reviewer X said statement Y" and combining the more similar ideas. The biggest challenge for me is creating a more detailed vg review template because of the remastered version is multiplatform.Blue Pumpkin Pie Chat Contribs 15:47, 13 February 2020 (UTC)
@Namcokid47: I believe I did all the copy-editing I could do on my own. Any bigger issues I haven't addressed would most likely need the assistance of another editor. If there are minor issues that can be addressed quickly or if I introduced a new problem with my most recent edits, let me know, and I can always go back and fix it. Some of the reviews were really cut and dry with just a brief description of the game modes and a final summary. So sorry if you need more detailed description of some of those reviews. I also try not to highlight a negative if the overall review is positive.

I haven't given a full look over it yet, but it looks a lot better. Namcokid47 (Contribs) 23:03, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
One question I have is, should there be a separate vg review just for the remastered or should it all be in the same review box?Blue Pumpkin Pie Chat Contribs 22:51, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

You can try to divide the one infobox that lists reviews for both the original and the remastered version. Namcokid47 (Contribs) 23:03, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
@Namcokid47: i split the list, let me know what you think so far.Blue Pumpkin Pie Chat Contribs 14:21, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
@Blue Pumpkin Pie:: I think it's looking a lot better now. I'd personally get rid of the GameRankings scores, since we already have ones from Metacritic and it's a bit pointless to have two aggregator websites listed. Namcokid47 (Contribs) 18:26, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
@Namcokid47: My main concern is that not all gamerankings score have migrated to Metacritic. As you can see that "Lumines Mobile" has a gamerankings score, but not a Metacritic. That's why i was hesitant to removing it.Blue Pumpkin Pie Chat Contribs 18:56, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
I think the ones that are already on Metacritic can be removed, and the ones that aren't can be kept. Other than that, I think this article is in good shape. Once that's done I'll pass it. Namcokid47 (Contribs) 22:49, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
@Namcokid47: ok I have removed the GR scores that already come with MC scores.Blue Pumpkin Pie Chat Contribs 03:41, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

At this time, Zxcvbnm wants to replace the current European cover art with the North American cover art, found here. The initial reason was for the version he has is higher quality. But after finding there is a higher quality cover art to replace without changing the version, it became a matter of preference. You can find the details of the discussion here in my talkpage.
So if anyone is willing to provide a third opinion or consensus. It would be greatly appreciated.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 22:41, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Not an expert here but is there a cover that shows more important visuals from the game? At least that seems to be route more preferred by guidelines.Tintor2 (talk) 23:16, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
The covers are roughly the same besides a few extra added elements in the NA version. I didn't expect it to really be a controversy tbh, I just went with the one that I could find in the highest resolution. However it's argued that the PAL version is better because it has less extraneous elements, hence wanting to find consensus.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 23:33, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
Here is a clean looking EU version. If you take that, convert to PNG, and then shrink, it will look just as good as the suggested NA version. The NA version looks higher quality because it was uploaded as PNG file which is lossless. Wikipedia displays PNG and JPEG files differently, I've noticed. Always use PNG for computer generated imagery! Current EU version is a JPEG, no good. TarkusABtalk/contrib 01:12, 23 July 2021 (UTC)
Based on the current direction the discussion is going, I made a bold edit and placed back the png file link into the article. However,  using the cover art TarkusAB found. I hope this doesn't spring any additional controversy. i understand it was a bold edit, so if you feel it was not done with proper procedure you would like, i'd be happy to discuss it further.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 02:12, 23 July 2021 (UTC)
I think this is the appropriate approach. Unless one cover art has better value, ie conveying more about the game than the other, we should stick with the image used first for stability purposes. - Whadup, it's ya girl, Dusa (talk) 02:29, 23 July 2021 (UTC)
I'm okay with this, although the fact that the Amazon art is slightly skewed is going to bug me. While it's not a big deal, I might try to fix it at some point.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 04:32, 23 July 2021 (UTC)
Related, are there any versions of the cover art without the logos, game ratings, etc as laid out in WP:VGBOX (not watching please ping). Regards  Spy-cicle💥  Talk? 21:11, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
@Spy-cicle: A good quality cover of this game is hard to find. i never found one that was just the cover.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 21:21, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
Indeed it can be. Steamdb can often be good for logoless covers but no such entry for the game exists there. Could not find any logoless cover art on image search either unfournately.  Spy-cicle💥  Talk? 15:17, 30 July 2021 (UTC)