# Talk:Crimson Dragon

This review is transcluded from Talk:Crimson Dragon/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Shooterwalker (talk · contribs) 03:17, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

I'll pick this one up sometime over the next week. Shooterwalker (talk) 03:17, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Slowly working my way through this. Feel free to ignore any suggestions if you don't think they're helpful. I'll push back if I think the issue is important enough.
Gameplay
"Crimson Dragon is a rail shooter in which players take on the role of a dragon rider on the planet Draco, navigating their dragon through 26 3D levels across seven locations with varied visual designs" -> "Crimson Dragon is a rail shooter in which players take on the role of a dragon rider, navigating through 26 levels across the planet Draco."
"Levels are divided into sections lasting a few minutes each.[3] Levels, which feature both enemies and environmental hazards," -> "Levels are divided into sections lasting a few minutes each, featuring both enemies and environmental hazards."
"Levels, which feature both enemies and environmental hazards, are split into two types; traditional levels that take place on rails with automatic progression, and open arenas which focus on boss encounters with a single large enemy or a group of stronger normal enemy types" -> "Most levels take place on rails with automatic progression, mixed with boss levels set in an open arena."
"Clearing a stage rewards in-game currency and experience points, along with items collected during gameplay such as revival gems and food which can be used to raise the dragon between missions" -> "Players can also collect gems and food to improve their dragon between missions, with experience points and in-game currency awarded at the end of each level."
"The player uses an aiming reticule to fire at enemies and incoming projectiles."
"Attacks are split between a lock-on attack for multiple enemies, and a powerful manually-aimed attack" -> "The dragon has a lock-on attack for multiple enemies, as well as a more powerful attack that is aimed manually."
"dodge role" -> "dodge roll"
"There are six dragon types which can be selected for missions, each having different statistics and skills based around elemental strengths and weaknesses.[4][7][8] Each dragon has a main unchangeable skill, and interchangeable secondary skills.[7] " -> There are six dragon types with fixed elemental powers, statistics, and skills, as well as a selection of secondary abilities."
"The base game included asynchronous cooperative elements, with players able to hire their dragon from other players through Xbox Live for use in missions, with the mission rewards shared at the end" -> "The game includes asynchronous cooperative play through Xbox Live, allowing players to hire each others' dragons and share in the rewards from each mission."
You change the verb tense at the end of the paragraph, so just try to be consistent about are vs. were.
Plot
"; a century prior" -> ". One century prior,"
"The protagonist, a resident of the New Amara colony who can tame and ride dragons after surviving Crimsonscale, is directed by his superiors Sana and Cadmus to pursue White Phantom, a dragon who is spreading Crimsonscale through lesser dragons called White Reavers." -> The protagonist is a resident of the New Amara colony who survived Crimsonscale, gaining the ability to tame and ride dragons. His superiors, Sana and Cadmus, asks him to pursue a dragon called White Phantom, who is spreading Crimsonscale through lesser dragons known as the White Reavers."
It's not clear who the Seekers are.
"Once the protagonist defeats White Phantom, a portal in Amara triggers a vision revealing Draco has become a testing ground to discover biological immortality using Crimsonscale." -> "After the protagonist defeats White Phantom, they see a vision through a portal in Amara, revealing that Draco has become part of a Crimsonscale experiment to discover immortality."
"With failure following White Phantom's death," -> this part isn't clear. Does the vision reveal that the experiment failed? Maybe the last sentence sjhould be "revealing that Crimsonscale was a failed experiment to discover immortality."
"The spin-off Side Story follows Sana as she uses a White Reaver to trace the infection path of Crimsonscale carrier Dark Phantom as part of a secret assignment from the New Amara government" -> "The spin-off Side Story follows Sana on a secret assignment from the New Amara government, where she uses a White Reaver to track the infection path of Crimsonscale carrier Dark Phantom."
"Sana kills Dark Phantom, vowing to keep Crimsonscale from reaching Earth despite wondering if the infected humans were instinctually trying to reach home." -> After killing Dark Phantom, Sana vows to keep Crimsonscale from reaching Earth, while wondering if the infected humans are instinctively trying to reach home."
Let's pause there. I'm confident that this can reach GA with some consistent work. Shooterwalker (talk) 19:13, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
@Shooterwalker: I think I've done everything above. Did my best with the story, it's really confusingly told. --ProtoDrake (talk) 19:57, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
The plot already reads a lot better. You're doing great, and we can keep going.
Development
Does it make sense to cram two different images together with two different captions? One of these could be moved to the design subsection.
"Crimson Dragon originated during a talk between Yukio Futatsugi, noted for his work on the Panzer Dragoon series and Phantom Dust, and Microsoft Studios about developing a small-scale title for the Xbox 360 that would use the Kinect peripheral" -> "Crimson Dragon was directed by Yukio Futatsugi, noted for his work on Phantom Dust and the Panzer Dragoon series. He conceived of the project when talking to Microsoft Studios about developing a small-scale game that would use the Kinect peripheral for the Xbox 360."
"which were struggling" -> "which was struggling"
Add a paragraph break when you start talking about personnel.
I'm not at the release section yet, but consider moving some of the development stuff about the release to that section. (If you felt it's important here, you could still state it in both sections, as long as it helps explain two different things.)
"to its eventual release the game" -> "to its eventual release, the game"
"Futatsugi and Microsoft's Phil Spencer did not use the term, with Spencer saying there was inspiration but no direct references, and Futatsugi stating he returned to a rail shooter similar to Panzer Dragoon as it fitted best with the design premise." -> "Futatsugi and Microsoft's Phil Spencer did not use the term, with Spencer saying there was indirect inspiration, and Futatsugi explaining that the design premise worked best as a rail shooter similar to Panzer Dragoon."
"The Kinect-focused gameplay of the 360 version, which only used the rail shooter format, was a challenge to develop as the team wanted it to be approachable for new players.[20][27] Following the platform change, balancing the two control styles was one of the most difficult parts of production" -> "The team found it challenging to create a Kinect-driven rail shooter, as they wanted the game to be approachable for new players. The project became even more challenging after shifting to multiple platforms, with Kinect-based controls for the 360 and conventional controls for the Xbox one."
The talk about the sequel feels out of context here, and might belong in a subsection after the reception?
"over other potential rides and mount types " -> "over other potential mount types"
Is Video Game Music Online a reliable source?
Some amount of primary source / interview based coverage is fine, but three paragraphs starts to feel like WP:UNDUE weight. I recommend shortening the section in a summary style with less detail, and finding a few third-party sources if you can.
Release
"The game was re-revealed for the Xbox One at E3 2013." -> It might not be important to share every single promotion or burst of news coverage, though maybe this is important enough if you make it clearer that this is a change in platform.
I'm trying to figure out if there's a better way to handle side story. Right now it's breaking up each section in an unintuitive way, but it might not be suitable for a stand-alone article either. Does it make sense to consolidate all the side story information into its own section, maybe after the first release or reception?
Reception
"Futatsugi, Kobayashi and Garren all recalled the game seeing a mixed reaction from players;" -> can drop this (next part covers it better)
"Several gaming websites outside reviews negatively noted the use of microtransactions in Crimson Dragon in relation to their recurring use in early Xbox One titles and growing presence in gaming at the time." -> "Several gaming websites began to note the consumer backlash to the trend of microtransactions in early Xbox One titles, and Crimson Dragon was among the games being criticized."
There might be some flow / organization issues in this section, to keep related ideas close to each other. But let's focus on the raw prose first.
"Destructoid's Chris Carter was very positive compared to other reviewers regarding the gameplay and presentation, with his only complaints being occasional camera problems and the microtransactions." -> "Destructoid's Chris Carter liked the gameplay and presentation overall, with his only complaints being occasional camera problems and the microtransactions." (starting to creep into WP:SYNTH)
"Martin Robinson of Eurogamer positively noted the art design though faulted its graphical quality, and described the game as "a thin and troubled tribute to the original [Panzer Dragoon games], slim on the ambition, vision and art that made its predecessors what they were - and some way short of the invention and execution in the games they inspired."" -> Martin Robinson of Eurogamer praised the art direction despite its technical quality, while criticizing the game as "a thin and troubled tribute to the original [Panzer Dragoon games], slim on the ambition, vision and art that made its predecessors what they were."
"echoed Robinson's thoughts on the art and graphics" -> "was also critical of the art and graphics"
"further faulting the music as "uninspired" and being disappointed its control issues and shallow gameplay considering Futatsugi's earlier work" -> "while also criticizing the music, controls, and shallow gameplay."
"Jon Blyth, writing for the UK edition of Official Xbox Magazine, praised the art design and core gameplay but faulted the RPG elements and microtransactions as unwelcome additions combined with its short length" -> "Writing for the UK edition of Official Xbox Magazine, Jon Blyth praised the gameplay and art design, but faulted the game's microtransactions, RPG elements, and short length."
"Rob Slusser of GameTrailers positively noted the Kinect implementation and found it generally enjoyable," -> "Rob Slusser of GameTrailers enjoyed the Kinect implementation,"
"Edge Magazine described the easier levels as the most enjoyable, being put off by later difficulty spikes prompting either repeated playthroughs of easier levels or use of the microtransactions." -> "Edge Magazine praised the game's easier levels, while criticizing the game's difficulty spikes as forcing a choice between repeat playthroughs or paying for microtransactions."
"Jose Otero of IGN found the core rail shooter gameplay functional if lacking in innovation and enjoyed the dragon growth systems, but faulted the AI-controlled companions, poor graphical quality and control issues in its open levels" -> "Jose Otero of IGN felt that the open levels created control issues compared to the rail shooter sections, while also criticizing the game's graphics and AI-companions."
"Justin McElroy of Polygon was fairly harsh, being frustrated and put off the game by both the core gameplay and its additional systems, concluding that Crimson Dragon "manages to take riding on a sweet flying dragon and make it a bland, frustrating slog." -> "Justin McElroy of Polygon expressed frustration with both the core gameplay and its secondary systems, concluding that Crimson Dragon "manages to take riding on a sweet flying dragon and make it a bland, frustrating slog."
I think the article is close to GA. Outside of copy-editing, the biggest questions are how to improve the music section and the layout of the side story. Shooterwalker (talk) 15:15, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
@Shooterwalker: Did my best, rephrased some stuff, used your suggestions except where they weren't factually accurate (platform change difficulties). I split Side Story into its own subsection in Release, it seemed easier. As to the music, that's all the sources I could find since this game's journalistic coverage was frankly terrible, but I've cut it down to two brief paragraphs and merged the album releases back into it (VGMO's been accepted as an admissable situational source and is fine for interviews). --ProtoDrake (talk) 15:43, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
Let's see if we can finish this off.
Lead
"The gameplay features the player moving an aiming reticle and shooting enemies while the dragon flies through 3D environments either on a fix track or freely within arena-like zones" -> "The gameplay focuses on aiming and shooting, while the controlling the dragon using either a standard gamepad or the console's Kinect peripheral."
"Several Panzer Dragoon staff worked on the game including" -> "Several staff had experience working on Panzer Dragoon, including"
"While praise was given to its core gameplay and art design, its graphical quality and progression systems saw frequent criticism." -> "While praise was given to its core gameplay and art design, it also received criticism for its progression systems, graphical quality, and microtransactions."
Body
"Futatsugi got little notice of the change, and while shocked felt pleased to be working on a system launch title." -> "The sudden change came as a shock to Futatsugi, but he was still overall happy to work on a system launch title."
"was no direct inspiration" -> "were no direct references"
The music section still feels WP:UNDUE, considering the lack of sources.
I like what you did with the side story, and that part feels more organized now.
"growing presence" -> "increased presence"
"Jon Blyth, Writing" -> small error here
The reception section is well-written sentence by sentence, but the sentences could be organized into more cohesive paragraphs.
Do your best on each of those. We're very close to wrapping this up and I appreciate your work on this. Shooterwalker (talk) 16:01, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
@Shooterwalker: I trimmed music more and cut the Microsoft-published video interview, so most of it's down to third-party source where possible (seriously can't find any other sources, so that's as far as I can comfortably cut unless it stops being a section and becomes a sentence in another paragraph). Did my best with the rest, including bringing reception into two paragraphs--I'd already tried arranging it in a rough order of most positive to most negative. --ProtoDrake (talk) 16:18, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
That all looks good, and congratulations on another WP:GA.  Thanks again for your hard work. Shooterwalker (talk) 16:35, 23 December 2022 (UTC)