# Talk:Project Copernicus

This review is transcluded from Talk:Project Copernicus/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: IceWelder (talk · contribs) 08:44, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

 Reviewing... IceWelder [✉] 08:44, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

Infobox
The current image is a screenshot. Per infobox rules, screenshots should only be in the body. Is there any chance you can isolate the logo? For example, you could use the thumbnail of this video as a basis.
Did my best here.
Did Curt Schilling not have a creditable role?
None, as far as I can find. He seems to have just had some kind of executive creative role, nothing that would fit into Wikipedia's infoboxes.
Lead
"... was the codename for a ..." - The game was publicly referred to by this title, so I think this part can be struck. The body should instead mention it as a "working title" at the point where the name was first used.
Done.

"... a fantasy universe shared with action role-playing game Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning ..." - Consider mentioning that Rockoning was in development simultaneously at 38 Studios' Big Huge Games subsidiary, also fixing any MOS:SEAOFBLUE concerns.
Did my best here.

"Several noted its ambition ..." - "noted" as in positively or negatively? Maybe use a more definitive verb here.
Changed to "Its overly high ambitions and place within the changing MMO market were noted."
When talking about Amalur as an IP (i.e. a creative work), it should be italicized. Same for later occurrences.
Done.
Overview
Remove "the codename for" per above.
Again, done.
Link "fantasy world".
Done.
"a land inhabited by multiple races and trapped in a cycle of death and rebirth" - Assuming it's the races and not the land that is trapped in the cycle, remove the "and" before "trapped".
I just rewrote this bit a little.
Also, "trapped" sounds rather negative and stands in stark contrast to the "gifted" from the lead. Is immortality a blessing or a curse (or neither?) for these races?
Changed "trapped in" to a more neutral "subject to". As to the lead, I changed it to "having achieved", again less specific.
Also, "multiple" can probably be struck as the plural by itself is sufficient.
The above sentence could be two, so split after "death and rebirth".
Split.
The source describes the world as a "post-apocalyptic magical future", but "following a magical apocalypse" implies the apocalypse was caused by magic.
I used the quote.
"Players would have an influence over the story" -> "Players would have influenced the story".
Done.
Link "server".
Done.

"humans, elves, gnomes and ogres" - Consider using an Oxford comma.
Used.
"and explored open environments accepting quests and fighting enemies" -> "and explored open environments, accepting quests and fighting enemies"
Done.
Was it an open world?
Not as far as I can find.
"The aim was for a large environment ..." -> "The aim was a large environment ..." or "The team aimed for a large environment ..." or "Players would have explored large environments ...".
Chose "team aimed for" one.

"such as new cosmetic armor sets" -> "new" feels redundant here.
Done.
"with a concept" -> "with the concept".
Done.
Link fonts; "text" is probably redundant since font always refers to text.
Done.
Production
"a game developer and publisher" -> 38 Studios was not really a publisher (handling only internal projects) and being a developer is obvious per the preceding sentence. Could be simplified to "a company" or "a studio".
Done.
"The game was intended to ... being the basis" -> "be the basis".
"basis for a multimedia franchise based on its world and lore" - This sounds like the same idea twice; maybe "Its world and lore were to be the basis for a multimedia franchise"?
Done.
Also link multimedia franchise.
Done.

"high profile game developers" -> "high-profile game developers".
Done.
"The credited art director at 38 Studios was Thom Ang" - This makes it sound like Ang was only credited but did not actually work in that role.
Done.
"Aubrey Hodges, Duncan Watt and Gene Rozenberg" - Consider using an Oxford comma.
Done.

"McFarlane and Ang reportedly shared art direction duties." - This feels like it should be in the prior paragraph. Consider merging with the other sentence on Ang. For example: "38 Studios' art director Thom Ang shared duties with McFarlane".
Done.
"in a Dungeons & Dragons group, and worked with McFarlane" - Remove faux Oxford comma, since the clauses are not independent. Consider: "in a Dungeons & Dragons group, and he worked with McFarlane".
Done.
"The backstory's large scope was insisted upon by Salvatore, who" -> "Salvatore insisted on the backstory's large scope, as he".
Done.
"an artifact which grants" -> "an artifact that grants".
Done.
"but technical difficulties with their animations and programming" - The source talks about centaurs being left out due to additional work, not technical issues.
Whoops, adjusted.

"Schilling was eager to develop a new large-scale title in the genre" - "New" is redundant as you do not develop old games.
Also, clarify that "the genre" is MMORPG.
Done and done
"although in 2009 he noted" -> "although he noted in 2009".
Done.
"together with" -> "with" or, better yet, "alongside".
Done.
"finding investor funding for the company" -> "finding investors for the company"
Done.
"In July 2010, 38 Studios completed an agreement ..." - I cannot find the month mentioned in either source used here.
Also, was the agreement "completed" at that time or just reached?
What is described as a "financing package" here is said in the Boston source to be a loan, one that 38 Studios defaulted on.
Addressing the points above, I did my best with some rewriting and a new source. This whole thing was a massive mess, and trying to construct anything balanced out of what happened was a nightmare. I found a New York Times feature which gave some more concrete information, and added it in. Kinda thinking this mess was why an article wasn't created on this project before.
"An official title and platform were to be announced later." -> "The final name and target platforms were to be announced later."
Done.
Announcement and cancellation
Use the introduction to this section to mention Project Copernicus being the working title as mentioned earlier.
Done.
"along with" - Choose either.
Done.
"Big Huge Game's project" -> "Big Huge Games' project".
Done.
"This title, an action role-playing game titled" - Replace one of the "title"s to avoid repetition.
Done.
Specify Reckoning's release date as "February 2012" to help with the timeline later in the section.
Done.

"frequent missed deadlines" -> "frequently missed deadlines" or just "missed deadlines".
Done.
"McFarlane later described the project as being close to completion." - "Later" could mean after its cancellation. This should be clarified.
Done.
"and basic zone storylines were finished" - Exchange "finished" with "complete" or similar to avoid repetition.
Done.
Link COO and ideally write it out.
Done.

"and by May of that year was unable" -> "and, by May 2012, was unable".
Done.
"unable to fulfill a loan repayment" -> "unable to repay the loan" - The same loan mentioned earlier.
Also, consider linking "unable to repay" to Default (finance).
As far as I can find, the loan was being repayed in instalments. Adjusted to try and reflect this.
"state's new governor Lincoln Chafee regarding" -> "state's new governor, Lincoln Chafee, regarding".
Done.
"exacerbated by hostile comments ... which were blamed for" - This reads as though the comments were blamed. Please clarify.
Did my best.
Link bankruptcy.
Done.
Aftermath and reactions
"The Amalur IP and associated projects including Project Copernicus" - Is Copernicus not part of the IP?
I dropped it.
"the rest of 38 Studio's assets in December 2012" -> "38 Studios' assets"
Also, this should be December 2013, right?
Fixed. I was dealing with 2012s so much it...overran.

Link CEO and ideally write it out.
Done.
"and initial failure" -> "and the initial failure".
Done.
Link "social media".
Done.
"Smedley, Buttler, and Pachterall" -> "Smedley, Buttler, and Pachter all", maybe "each" since they did so independently of each other.
Done.
"after its initial launch" -> "after its launch".
Done.

"Multiple staff" - "staff" is uncountable, maybe use "employees" or "staffers".
Done.
Reorder the references after "... and they were deeply attached to Project Copernicus." in order.
Done.
"he held no grudges about the game's collapse" -> "he held no grudges against the game's collapse".
Done.
"on May 18, 2012 less" -> trailing comma after "2012".
Done.
"to show what they had done, and was shown in the office" -> Remove bad comma.
Also, since this must have occurred before the aforementioned May 18, 2012, put the sentence into past perfect.
Two points above, I just did a rewrite for consistancy.
"footage of character creation" -> "footage of the character creation" or "footage of the game's character creation".
Done.

"in gaming that year, mentioned" - Remove bad comma.
Done.
After "rapidly evolving climate", swap punctuation per MOS:LQ.
Hopefully done.
"Stephen Messner" -> "Steven Messner".
Done.
"entry into the genre" -> "entry in the genre".
Done.
"had potential to be" -> "had the potential to be".
Done.
Finally, I would swap the first two paragraphs with the latter two for a more chronological order.
Done.
References
I already checked for incorrect or missing names, dates, and titles earlier and fixed them accordingly.
What makes Ten Ton Hammer and GameWatcher reliable sources?
A possible replacement source for Ten Ton Hammer would be Joystiq / Massively.
GameWatcher is a content-copy of Strategy Informer (hence with the author "Import"). The original source is here and should be used instead of GameWatcher. However, even then, Strategy Informer is listed as "inconclusive" at WP:VG/S.
@IceWelder: I'll address these first. I wish there were other sources, but there weren't that I could find, and the Joystiq one above doesn't cover the same ground as Ten Ton Hammer, which is why I used the latter. Both sources were the only ones I could find where some of the information was present, such as the art style choice. So unless we scrap everything from those references along with the references, I feel they should be taken under the same trust as fan site interviews; usable until proven phony. --ProtoDrake (talk) 10:36, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
Since neither is source is used for any contentious material, I suppose this should be fine for now. IceWelder [✉] 10:59, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

@ProtoDrake: Above is my initial review. Feel free to strike through or reply to individual comments as you work on them. Regards, IceWelder [✉] 10:01, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

@IceWelder: I've hopefully addressed everything. Apologies if I've missed anything. Having learned more about corporate stupidity in writing this than I ever wanted to, hopefully there isn't too much more. --ProtoDrake (talk) 11:30, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
Looks good to me. Happy to  pass this. Regards, IceWelder [✉] 12:03, 31 August 2023 (UTC)