# Talk:Crash: Mind over Mutant (Nintendo DS video game)

I left the following feedback for the creator/future reviewers while reviewing this article: Fantastic work for an article largely created and maintained independently to B-class. This is broadly in GAN territory.
ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 05:21, 3 April 2025 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Crash: Mind over Mutant (Nintendo DS video game)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Nominator: Cat's Tuxedo (talk · contribs) 05:48, 3 April 2025 (UTC)
Reviewer: Cukie Gherkin (talk · contribs) 03:37, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

Infobox

The staff listed seems like it's excessive, especially when they are cited only by the game credits. This definitely causes the infobox to be way too long. If there was adequate sourcing, for future articles, I would recommend that you use  to condense the infobox size.
Lead

I feel like mentioning what the mechanic "jacking" is called is merited for the lead. It does read a bit like jargon where capturing could suffice.
Since the lead section is a little small, I think you could benefit from adding a little more elaboration on reception, such as why the graphics received a mixed reception. You could also mention the story and cutscenes in this section.
I would recommend saying what the console version plays like.
Images

Could you link to the page where the box art was from rather than the file link? It's helpful to be able to see how the image was used.
Caption for the gameplay image could be better; for instance, I feel that explaining the gameplay across two screens would be best, dropping "in this example of gameplay in Crash: Mind over Mutant." For instance, I'm left curious of a lot of the UI details, such as what (if anything) in the image refers to the pocket icon or Mojo Gaude.
The screenshot rationale is bad, but could be improved. For instance, you could say that it conveys the vertical nature of the display and the user interface.
I wonder if switching to a screenshot of Crash while riding a Mutant may be better. For instance, I assume that there is an extra UI element for the Mutant's health.
Gameplay

Its status as a single-player game should be mentioned alongside its genre, as well as the fact that it's 2D (this can be cited with the GameZone citation already used)
Regarding side-scrolling, is it possible to cite whether levels have a typical direction they go in? I.e., could it be mentioned that Crash progresses from left to right through the level (if that's how levels work)?
How many Mutants can be stored?
"Crash's health can be maintained by collecting Wumpa Fruit, which can also restore the health of jacked Mutants." Asking for clarification, how does healing jacked Mutants work? Do they always heal when Crash, while riding a Mutant, picks up a healing item? Can they be healed by a Wumpa Fruit while Crash is not riding them? If the Wumpa Fruit always heals a jacked Mutant, it should be rephrased to say "which also restore the health of jacked Mutants." Also, I noticed that the current sentence implies that Mutants regain full health from a Wumpa Fruit (due to "restore"). Do Wumpa Fruit heal a certain amount of health or all of it? I would personally phrase it something like this (I'm making assumptions of the game mechanics): "Crash's health can be restored by collecting Wumpa Fruit, which also restore the health of jacked Mutants." How does that read to you?
Going off this sentence, how does health work in the game? Is it a three-health system, do enemies do varying damage?
How is Mojo collected?
Do each level end with a boss, or each world?
"Levels that have not been completed are marked with an N, while completed levels are marked with a paw print." This feels like an unnecessary detail and could be dropped without issue.
I think it's not needed to clarify what the checkpoint is, but I'm also curious whether there are other crates in the game. It may be worthwhile to mention it being a crate if it's not the only crate, and if there are crates, I think it could be good to bring them up since crates are so strangely ubiquitous to the franchise.
Are the minigames multiplayer only?
I noticed in the reception that unlockables and collectibles are in the game; what do these things refer to? I assume the skins, but I was not sure.
In general, I will not complain even remotely about the use of a manual, but I'd personally verify with a secondary source (if possible; otherwise, don't worry about it).
Development and release

Like I mentioned in the infobox, I feel that mentioning a lot of these staff members is undue coverage due to being cited only to credits. And, while I know that Tose typically doesn't get staff credits often, but with the IGN review emphasizing their lack of credits, I don't think it's worth listing them, as much as it may hurt the section to look scrawnier.
Like with the lead, it should be made clear what kind of game the console version was
[1] This source verifies that DS-Wii connectivity was planned but scrapped
Reception

I actually did a super thorough check for sources just to make sure nothing was missed. It does seem like this article is fairly comprehensive, great job, though this and this source can be used.
I didn't check to see if this adds anything at all, but this preview might help in some way.
Small bit of advice, but I personally like to put the original citation in the reviews box so that it makes source editing less cluttered. Not a big deal though, obviously, but food for thought!
Great job using all the review box sources, that's something I see people forgetting to do sometimes.
I'd recommend changing Jeuxvideo.com to JV since the site has changed its name since 2021 (and honestly I always prefer not saying a URL as the name of a website if I don't have to, haha)
What does "anarchic difficulty" mean? I assume it's saying it's too hard, but I think the average reader may be confused what this means.
I'd recommend doing an "intro" for the music and visuals section; i.e., "The visuals received mixed reception."
Not a major or even potentially failing issue, but consider looking for ways to paraphrase certain things more.
Sources

Aside from my recommendation that you consider finding secondary sources to replace the manual source, all sources look good. One exception is the primary source on the NA release date, which I would recommend replacing with a secondary source, as I reckon one likely exists.
Speaking of the manual sources, I would recommend grouping the manual citations using this template: Template:Harvard citation no brackets
Spotcheck

[2] - Reviewed this; first use seems fine. Looking at the second, I noticed it says "clothes," so maybe calling them "outfits" instead of "skins" might be clearer to the reader?
[3] Doing this one; it's all good except for one concern, which is that, while it does link to the FF4 review, it seems to refer to both FF3 and FF4, so that should be clarified.
[4] Reviewed, looks good.
[5] Reviewed, looks good.
Alright, after so much distractions and procrastinating, I've finally gotten around to addressing all points as far as the reviews and manual could take me. Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 21:02, 24 April 2025 (UTC)
Checked, it all looks solid. Great work, I always enjoy alt version articles. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 00:46, 25 April 2025 (UTC)