# Talk:Tomba! 2: The Evil Swine Return

Image:Tomba2cover.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 04:41, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

The innovations section is moved here.  It was tagged for weasel words.  Is any of this innovative enough to be considered innovative and put back in the article? RJFJR (talk) 16:28, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Tomba 2 added voices to some of the characters. The game was mainly 2.5D. Most elements were rendered in 3D, but Tomba could still only move left or right like the previous game, except for in certain locations, such as villages, where free-roaming is allowed, but only on one plane; Tomba cannot climb off the floor (i.e. onto objects).
The Evil Pigs look radically different, and they are harder to beat. The Pig Bags are weaker and spits the Pigs back out 3 times, however, the Pigs get weaker each time they've been in the bag.
Near the end of Tomba 2 there is an area which allows you to check your memory-card for Tomba 1 data. If you have reached a certain progress throughout the original game, four new tasks are added into Tomba 2 for you to complete, with characters from the original title hosting them.

I looked over the article since it was flagged for review. Here's some things I found:

The lead has some citations that can be used elsewhere, as the lead doesn't need citations per the style guide.
The lead could use some info on the plot.
Gameplay section could be split up into information about core gameplay mechanics, depending on how much there is to talk about.
The plot is nicely cited and well-summarised.
More information about development would be nice. See if you can find some period interviews.
The reception needs more details about what reviewers liked, as well as a sales section.
Can you split the reference section into two columns, please?
The general prose is curt and stuttery, as well as having some structure and grammar issues. It should flow more naturally.
Overall, not a great article, but has room for improvement. I rate this C because it's more substantial than what it used to be on the last assessment. --Kiyoshiendo (talk) 00:11, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

http://shmuplations.com/tomba/  TarkusABtalk 17:25, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
Details about exact issue, page number, etc needed. Harizotoh9 (talk) 00:47, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Tomba! 2: The Evil Swine Return/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Jaguar (talk · contribs) 14:50, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

I'll get to this soon. ♦ jaguar 14:50, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Lead
"The game is a sequel to Tomba! and centers on the exploits of a pink-haired feral child named Tomba" - perhaps rephrase this to centers on the exploits of the eponymous feral child to avoid repetition
"retains the basic gameplay mechanics" - link game mechanics
"it features the additions of 3D polygonal graphics" - this sounds misleading as the vast majority of PS1 games included 3D polygonal graphics to some extent. Do you mean to say that this game featured fully 3D environments, as opposed to its 2.5D-scrolling predecessor?
Development
"A fully polygonal approach was taken to the game's graphics" - this reads awkwardly. Perhaps try A fully polygonal approach was applied to the game's graphics, or [The team/Fujiwara] sought to apply a fully polygonal environment to the game's graphics
Reception
I usually mention GameRankings' aggregate score in prose at the very beginning, but it's up to you
That's all I have. Overall this is a solid, well written article which provides good readability and is also comprehensive. Once those very minor points are out of the way I'll be happy to promote this. I was aware of this game as a child, but never got to play it sadly! It seems to be something I would have liked.  ♦ jaguar 21:42, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Done. As an aside, I was lucky enough to have the game in my own youth, and it's certainly something I'd recommend if you can get your hands on it. Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 22:10, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
Thanks Cat'sTuxedo. With those minor points out of the way this is definitely good to go. Yes, nothing an emulator can't solve!  ♦ jaguar 22:14, 29 September 2021 (UTC)