# Talk:Silent Hill HD Collection

https://web.archive.org/web/20150716013547/http://www.1up.com/features/the-problem-with-preservation
https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-03-23-original-silent-hill-developer-disappointed-at-poor-hd-re-release
Rapunzel-bellflower (talk) 00:38, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-what-went-wrong-with-silent-hill-hd
Rapunzel-bellflower (talk) 22:33, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2019-02-24-life-after-harassment-ex-silent-hill-dev-tomm-hulett-speaks-out
Rapunzel-bellflower (talk) 01:32, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
https://web.archive.org/web/20160528021935/http://www.1up.com/features/best-worst-video-game-compilations
Rapunzel-bellflower (talk) 19:45, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Silent Hill HD Collection/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: ProtoDrake (talk · contribs) 08:59, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

This looks both easy and interesting. I'll take this on. If I haven't gotten back with anything before Friday next, ping me. --ProtoDrake (talk) 08:59, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for reviewing! I'm looking forward to your thoughts on it. Best wishes, Rapunzel-bellflower (talk) 23:53, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
@Rapunzel-bellflower: Sorry for the day. Here's some initial thoughts.

"The Silent Hill HD Collection, a compilation of the high-definition remastered video game ports of Silent Hill 2 (2001) and Silent Hill 3 (2003), took more than two years in development." - It should be "spend more than two years in development" or "took more than two years to develop".
Is there another source side from SH3's PS2 review for that info?
Specifically, for this sentence: "Both games belong to the survival horror genre and share gameplay elements, including a third-person perspective, similar controls, and a combination of firearms and melee weapons made available to the player."
Link Konani in the main text. First appearance in second paragraph of first section.
There are multiple places within Reception where the references aren't arranged by descending number. Example: "[25][26][30][28]". Please fix this.
I'd recommend archiving all links ASAP. It's not essential for a GA review, but it's wise.
Refs 2 to 6, 8-12, 15-24, 26 and 27 need their websites/publishers linked to their Wikipedia pages where possible. Not essential, but desired.
That's what stood out for me. --ProtoDrake (talk) 18:40, 30 November 2019 (UTC)

@ProtoDrake: Thank you! I've gone ahead and replaced the PS2 ref with another one from the HD Collection and went a bit more in depth about the gameplay of the two games, which is more or less the same. I've made the other changes as well. Please do let me know if you'd like anything else changed! Best wishes, Rapunzel-bellflower (talk) 01:19, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
Pass. --ProtoDrake (talk) 20:24, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
Wonderful, thank you! Rapunzel-bellflower (talk) 23:23, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

A lot of Wikipedia articles have graphics comparison screenshots that have resolutions so low that it's basically impossible to tell how it was improved. This completely ruins the entire point of having a graphics comparison. Derpyhoi (talk) 14:44, 26 June 2023 (UTC)