# Talk:Xenoblade Chronicles 2

Hi, I just want to add Pyra to the category Fictional characters with multiple personalities, but whenever I try to it just links Xenoblade Chronicles 2 and doesn't actually say Pyra or take it to her section on the page. Please help, I have no idea how to use this wiki lol.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by TruthfulEditors (talk • contribs) 00:08, 17 December 2020 (UTC) 

If she doesn’t have her own article, she doesn’t really belong there anyways, so I wouldn’t worry about it. A word of advice, since I’ve seen you really going to town on plot/character stuff - you may want to read WP:VG/PLOT. Wikipedia’s guidelines say that you need to keep plot/character stuff brief and to the point. Wanted to make sure you knew before you spent the time quadrupling it’s current length or something. Sergecross73 msg me 01:38, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for your reply, I actually looked into this and found out I should make a redirect page if they are to be included in that category (which I will do soon). And that's good you let me know about that, I'll try to keep it straight to the point, thank you! TruthfulEditors (talk) 01:16, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

Editors keep making this edit. I'm indifferent to whether or not we use the exact term of "chibi" or not, but I'm against the removal of the entire sentence/source. Reliable sources have noted that the game moves away from the realistic proportions of the prior 2 games. I believe that's worth noting to some capacity, however we want to word it. Sergecross73 msg me 18:07, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

I agree there should be something noting the change in art style, but I don't think that source is the best for this when it incorrectly uses a term to describe the change. You mention other "reliable sources [that] have noted that the game moves away from the realistic proportions of the prior 2 games", so could one of those be used instead? --Bean the Dynamite Duck (talk) 18:15, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
In the Japanese art/otaku world, chibi just basically means oversized heads/smaller bodies/non-realistic proportions, like Chibi (term) says. It's not really a black and white, objectively right or wrong type concept where its necessarily one or the other, so I'm not sure I agree saying things like they're "incorrect" here, especially when they call it "chibi-like" in their exact wording in the article. Multiplayer.it also calls it "almost chibi" too, so maybe something more to that effect is better? Sergecross73 msg me 18:47, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
The thing is, it's still most often used and associated with a very specific type of art style in English-speaking parts of the world, as its article says. It's still most often used to refer to things short in stature, and most of the cast really doesn't look that short; in addition, I don't think the proportions are anymore unrealistic than many other games and anime, some that even have separate "chibi versions." I think Sidequesting.com's article on the game would be a better source, as it says how "its art direction implies more of an anime influence, resulting in characters and proportions that are stylized", and I think that's pretty simple without using any terms that could be a bit complex in meaning. --Bean the Dynamite Duck (talk) 19:05, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
But we're talking about a Japanese/anime related topic, so one would think that reader would then assume its Japanese-related definition. And we're not comparing it to the rest of the world of anime, both the NintendoLife source and content in the Wikipedia article explicitly say more chibi-like than prior Xenoblade titles, which had more realistic proportions. I'm unfamiliar with "Side-questing" as a website, so I have no idea what sort of authority they would be on such a thing, or if they'd be considered an WP:RS, but their quote  provides less information to the reader. It's a worse comparison point, considering every Xeno title is "anime influenced" and something as vague as "stylized could mean anything from Jet Set Radio characters to Splatoon characters. Sergecross73 msg me 19:30, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
And which Japanese-related definition are we assuming readers to know about? Wikipedia's article on it also says "it means someone, some animal or something that is smaller in stature compared to the majority" when discussing its use in anime and manga, which still doesn't fit, and neither does your claim of "oversized heads/smaller bodies/non-realistic proportions" when most of the characters have none of the first two and I'm not seeing many body proportions that are much more non-realistic than other anime/games nor even the previous Xeno games (outside of the eyes and maybe some other facial details, I guess?). Even the Japanese Wikipedia page treats "chibi" and super deformed as the same thing, if we're going to argue about Japan's use of the word. From what I've seen, SideQuesting is about as reliable as NintendoLife or Multiplayer.it. I also don't see it as providing any less information than the other sources, as "chibi" is also not a very good comparison point with how most examples of it, such as those linked to in its very article and its main article image, aren't very much like what's found in this game. "Anime" and "stylized" may be more vague and provide less information, but "chibi" could be seen as providing misinformation due to the writers of those articles possibly not being too familiar with what it actually means. Is Hardcore Gamer's description of the game's art style as "new and cuter" better? "Cuter" doesn't have specific connotations unlike "chibi", and I believe Hardcore Gamer is also recognized as a reliable source, having its own article. --Bean the Dynamite Duck (talk) 20:32, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
Hardcore Gamer is classified as a RS too, per consensus at WP:VG/S (as is NintendoLife), but "cuter" is moving into even less descriptive territory. A number of other editors also maintain this article. Let's see if they have any input on the matter, as we appear to be in a stalemate. Sergecross73 msg me 20:45, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
Chiming in, but I don't really have a problem with calling it "chibi". But if you want to avoid the term altogether, I'd just say the game has "different art direction that separates it from the previous two Xenoblade games" or something along those lines. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 06:43, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
I think chibi implies that the character dimensions are more deformed than before and there's nothing to show that is the case here. The design of Rex seems to have thrown people off, but the E3 trailer showed us many more characters who aren't more chibified than those in the previous games. It's not really a matter of what source is even being used, but rather judgement of a game that was, and still is, in the process of being revealed.--Jram555 (talk) 13:31, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
Right, but if "chibi" means "deformed", and they're saying "chibi-like compared to prior two Xenoblades", which equates to "somewhat deformed in comparison to the other characters", then is that so wrong? Sergecross73 msg me 14:33, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
It could be in this context if Rex is simply short and the characters are actually being modeled in the same dimensions as before. In this context it implies there's more deformity, when it doesn't look like there will be. It's a misrepresentation of the rest of the characters in the game.--Jram555 (talk) 08:28, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
That would go both ways though - is there any particular reason to think Rex is the only character with these proportions? I haven't seen anything to suggest that... Sergecross73 msg me 14:58, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
There was also a 40 minute demonstration of the game at E3 where they went through the first town of the game that provides more evidence of humanoids being the same as the previous games. I'm going to maintain that the first trailer simply threw people off, as there is more evidence pointing to the shaded art style shift not having an effect on character proportions. However I cannot deny that the game is still in the process of being revealed.--Jram555 (talk) 19:58, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
The average English speaking reader is unfamiliar with the term "chibi", and the Wikipedia article for the term is a poorly written stub, which gives two definitions for chibi, only one of which refers to art style, and which cannot reasonably be applied to this game's art style after careful consideration of promotional artwork and footage. This is an unimportant detail and the source using the term is of exceptionally low quality (A hastily written article from Nintendo Life totaling eight sentences, serving as a comment thread starter). The sentence should be removed, it's unnecessary, potentially confusing, and not particularly encyclopedic. The artists should be named and supplemental images can be provided to give the reader an idea of the art style. 68.197.59.144 (talk) 08:47, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
A little surprised/disappointed to see not much progress made on this three months after it was brought up. An interview translated by Nintendo Everything has Tetsuya Takahashi describe the art style as "a means to make the protagonists more expressive." If there must be a note made on the change in art style, I believe replacing the claim of the art being "chibi" with mention of this would be much more informative, coming from the game's executive director himself. --Bean the Dynamite Duck (talk) 07:19, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

I'm not sure why this edit was made as it's not cover art, it's just promotional art. Yes it shares similarities to the art used in the cover, but it's not the same artwork. If you have some reasoning, please share. --Hedja (talk) 18:51, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

Yes, while I can't find any WP:VG/S approved websites covering this (I think only small blogs/fansites are the only type to report on minutia like box art reveals), Nintendo has revealed the the boxart, and its the version with just 2 characters on it, not the version with 6 characters on it. This website points it out directly. Unless there's a new development, please stop changing this. Sergecross73 msg me 19:16, 21 August 2017 (UTC)
Even if it was legit, shouldn't the WP:STOPCHANGINGIT guideline prevent us from changing it simply due to personal preference? The page either needs a short term protection or an IP block range on the user, who continues to change it back despite being told to stop. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 19:03, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
Yes, STOPCHANGINGIT would still apply, though with that, you're supposed to keep it at the original image used, and I'm not sure which one was there first. That said, the WP:BURDEN is still on the IPs to prove their image is boxart at all - I haven't seen anything to indicate it is, and if it isn't, then it fundamentally doesn't belong there at all. I've protected the page for a short period so that hopefully the IP address will be forced into discussing. I've tried to leave messages on their talk page, but they tend to switch IPs before reading it. (Or they just don't care.) Looks like they've at least found their way to the talk page (see section below) but even there, they're aren't actually discussing... Sergecross73 msg me 16:50, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

| image      = Xenoblade Chronicles 2 Boxart.jpg
| caption    = North American cover art

 Not done - The reason why the article is locked is because you/anonymous IP addresses keep on changing the image without explanation. As far as I can tell, the current image on the page is the correct one. Can you provide proof that this other one is boxart? Sergecross73 msg me 14:04, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

This edit contains some interesting content, but also, contains a number of unreliable/unusable sources (Nintendo Everythong, Operation Rainfall, some others). Currently on mobile, so I can really work through it now, but writing this as a reminder to work through later, or to look at it later if someone does a wholesale revert too. Sergecross73 msg me 17:36, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

I did some copyediting as the user also introduced some redundant info. The Operation Rainfall source was posting a NeoGAF-translated message from Takahashi, which originally came from the game's official Japanese website. Not sure how we can handle this, as NeoGAF is unreliable, and us citing a full-on Japanese message without an English translation isn't helpful either, so I just removed the whole section until this can be figured out (and it doesn't need a section anyway). ~ Dissident93 (talk) 19:55, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
If we can verify the content directly from the JP website, that'd be fine. But unreliable sources that originates from a message board post doesn't work for a number of reasons, as you likely know. Sergecross73 msg me 17:25, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
Here is the image (directly from the JP website) of Takahashi's message.--MomoQca (talk) 02:46, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
Nintendo's JP website is usable in itself, but we need someone who knows Japanese that can verify what it says it true, or at least do a machine translation to verify the rough message at least. (Which personally, I am unable do with just an image of text, rather than actual text that can be copy/pasted.)
Alternatively, in like 24 hours from writing this, there will be a Xenoblade 2 Nintendo Direct presentation, so we can just wait until then too, where they may very well mention it there, in which there'd likely be no shortage of sources verifying it at that point. Sergecross73 msg me 15:10, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
Checking the post date on NeoGAF, and it appears this message dates back to at least June, if not earlier, so it's sort of unlikely they would mention this now, although who knows. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 18:31, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
Yup, and indeed, they didn't. It does seem like generally good information if we could source it right though - I'd never heard of Galaxy Express 999, but looking over its article, it seems interesting to have that as an influence. Sergecross73 msg me 15:27, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

Good one for future use - 3 page hands-on preview interspersed with interview quotes - http://www.gameinformer.com/games/xenoblade_chronicles_2/b/switch/archive/2017/11/07/xenoblade-chronicles-2-hands-on-feature.aspx?PostPageIndex=1 Sergecross73 msg me 02:43, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
Side note, but I hate multi-page articles, it makes citing them messy. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 17:57, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

I have found a couples "sources" disclosing sales numbers for Spain and France. If none of the below sources are acceptable, please let me know. Better yet, if you happen to find a better/more reliable source providing these numbers, please add them to the article.

-Spain: 15,094 copies as of Week 49 - from Hobby Consolas
-France: 30k regular edition + 12k special edition - I'm unsure if it's sold-through copies or not. I don't know French, so if someone could interpret the piece for me, I would greatly appreciate it! :)
--MomoQca (talk) 16:11, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

I'm currently taking a break from actively maintaining this article, because I'm currently playing the game and don't want to stumble upon spoilers, but FYI, within the last 24 hours, the game's plot has ballooned out to a ridiculous degree, (18,000 bytes, effectively making it 1/3 of the entire article) way outside of the guidelines like WP:PLOTSUM and WP:INU. It's way too long. I can take care of it someday, but that could be weeks out, so if anyone wants to do it in the meantime, I'd appreciate it. Otherwise, I'll take care of it eventually. Sergecross73 msg me 15:05, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

I'm unfamiliar with the plot, so I can't really be of help outside of general grammar/brevity type edits. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 19:59, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
From reading the first paragraph or two, the content doesn't appear to be erroneous, just written with excessive detail, so at least "brevity edits" that don't change the meaning of the content already there would still be a likely improvement at least. Sergecross73 msg me 20:17, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
Right, it's just that I wouldn't be able to tell what is necessary or not without knowing the in-game context. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 05:53, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
In the past, when I've been in your situation, I at least trimmed out some of the stuff that was obviously excessive. For example, changing something like:
Rex and Pyra started their trek through the field. They stopped just outside of the town. Pyra was nervous, but Rex reassured her. He gave a smile. They proceeded cautiously.
to:
Rex and Pyra cautiously traveled to the next town.
But by all means, you can just leave it if you don't want to deal with it. I'll take care of it someday. Or maybe someone else will come along too. I was just seeing if anyone wanted to deal with it in the interim - this game is massively long, so it's not like I'm wrapping it up next week and fixing it next week or anything. I just hate having an article I created and maintained look like garbage for months... Sergecross73 msg me 13:47, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
Agreed, I had this problem with Persona 5 when I finally got around to playing it last month. The article had many misleading, outdated, and missing info that I quickly fixed. I'm unlikely to ever play the game (the constant repeating chatter, over the top tropes, and excessively long combat don't do it for me), but I'll take a quick skim through the plot section and leave anything I'm unsure about up to you or somebody else. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 21:58, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
Yeah, I've done the approach I described above for games like Sonic and Zelda, where I hadn't played the games to know the story, but didn't really care about spoiling the story, so I just read what editors wrote, and I was generally able to trim it down substantially, and usually the hardcore fans came around and made minor adjustments to any errors I created. In my experience, they're not so much erroneous as much as they're way overly detailed and written in the wrong tone/type of wording. But the general scope of the plot is usually okay once you remove the obvious "And then the smiled, and he gave a wink, and then she smiled again" pointless details, or the OR sounding "and some fans believe that in the end the character did this or that, but is not confirmed" type stuff too. Sergecross73 msg me 22:08, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

Good evening, everyone!
"Xenoblade Chronicles 2: Torna ~ The Golden Country" appears to be a substantial expansion pass and will feature a standalone story, different gameplay elements, and new music. While the expansion pass can be bought digitally alongside the main game, it can also be bought separately in a physical format. Would this expansion pass be substantial enough to be considered for a separate article? I'd like to hear the thoughts of the Wikipedia community before taking action.--MomoQca (talk) 01:44, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Yeah, I've read some similar sentiments from websites - it seems to be a pretty substantial separate release. I'm not opposed to creating a separate article conceptually - there is precedent for it in situations like Witcher 3 has The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt – Blood and Wine - but I'd wait until there was something substantial to write about it first, or otherwise you'll likely just see it be redirected into this article. Sergecross73 msg me 14:10, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
Fair enough. I might revisit this topic in a few months when it comes out. --MomoQca (talk) 03:04, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Hi all, I recently finished this game, really enjoyed it. I see it's not been through a GAN, would anyone mind if I fixed up the article and nominate it when it's ready? It's got a good base, just needs some additional work. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 21:27, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

I say go for it. I created it and maintain it with Dissident, but no one has done any serious work on the article for a while now, so there’s shouldn’t be anyone standing in your way. I’ll be around for help some too (though I played/beat it back at launch so some memories are hazy.) Sergecross73 msg me 21:36, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
Also another note - the character section was just very recently created by a brand new user and will probably require some trimming. None of it’s wrong, but it’s probably not high-level enough. Sergecross73 msg me 21:40, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
It was the first thing I saw that I thought needed a bit of a cull. Thanks. I'll post here when/if I'm happy for a nom. :). Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 21:43, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
Yeah, just wanted to make sure you knew it wasn't something I wrote or was trying to keep in the article or anything. Anyways, sounds good. Sergecross73 msg me 00:45, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
I've done some general cleanup of this one. The Reception section needs rewriting to not just be a series of quotes, and the gameplay section needs an expansion similar to that in Xenoblade Chronicles. Anything else that's blatently obvious that I'm missing? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 15:14, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
I skimmed it over and it’s looking pretty good. No glaring issues, for sure - if the reviewer has issues I would think it would be deep dive type stuff. Sergecross73 msg me 21:06, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Xenoblade Chronicles 2/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: HumanxAnthro (talk · contribs) 18:36, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
Hello, there. Since the Tin Star review didn't end so well, I hope reviewing this article makes up for it. 
Xenoblade Chronicles 2 looks good in many places, though I do have comments.

It's a little bit off from meeting 2a from the criteria. While most of the citations are reliable sources, there are a few that aren't or are questionable.
The first citation is from a Forbes contributor. WP:FORBESCON indicates strong skepticism about reliability of these types of sources. Are we sure the author is an expert in the field for the piece to be reliable?
There are two self-published sources in ref 14 and ref 30. It's fine to use self-published sources if they're verified to be from the original game creator by independent parties (see also Plok!) but these tweets are from outsiders who had nothing to do with the game's development.
Attack of the Fanboy is not reliable.
Is My Nintendo News reliable? Although it updates frequently, its layout plus username-like authors of the article suggests its an unprofessional self-published source.
I'm having similar skepticism about Nintendo Everything, with all of its news pieces written by one author and few other writers for pieces of other sections. Also, any "submit an article idea" button on a website is a bit of a red flag.
Is Switchwatch reliable too? While its layout looks pretty dope, it doesn't have many followers and it looks like a website run by a few Youtubers with no professional journalism experience.
I think I've got rid of all of these and replaced with new/existing items, let me know if I've missed any. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 15:37, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
Other comments:
"Gameplay"
"The game is the third title in the Xenoblade series" What does this have to do with how the game plays? Sounds like it should be in the section about the game's narrative.
Sure. It's a bit difficult to have a summary section, when the only info you want to get across is that it is a video game, and part of the Xenoblade series, so then you can clarify it is the same sort of gameplay as the games before that. I have reworded slightly. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 15:37, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
Although I understand it is a widely used description in sources, "Japanese role-playing game (JRPG)" is not a genre. It just categorizes the location of a game's development, not the style of gameplay. I think "action role-playing game" suffices.
I have removed this. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 15:37, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
As a dummy whose only gaming experience is a lot of retro platformers (plus Rock Band and various Nintendo Wii and Mario games), I can tell there's a lot of MOS:JARGON unique to RPGs and the game franchise that aren't specified or linked to another article for the reader to understand. For example
Blades are discussed a lot but I don't know what a Blade is. Is that is a sharp weapon of some sort?
Yeah, I agree. I've added that they are a type of character. It is a bit confusing. hopefully this is a bit nicer. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 15:37, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
What's a "character's class between Attacker, Healer, and Tank"? Plus what are those three things?
I've given clarification here. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 15:37, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
"The game's Blades and skills are based on eight elements, with enemies being weak to certain ones." What "eight elements"?
There is now a sourced note. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 15:37, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
"Health" is also video game jargon.
For the jargon, I recommend (mostly) to link to articles about those concepts or specifying what each concept is.
Should be much better now. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 15:37, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
"Each character has skills called "Arts", that can be used to inflict status effects.[9]" Good sentence. This is an example how I like the jargons to be made clear to casual readers...
I agree. That's a great point. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 15:37, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
"Synopsis"
More talk of the Blade in both sections, yet I still don't know what the heck it is.
"Release"
Why is the section one big paragraph? It's so uncomfortable to read and navigate this way.
I have split this up. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 15:37, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
Given that announcements, promo music videos, and expo showings are discussed, I'd rename the section to "Release and promotion"
Sure. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 15:37, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
"Reception":
"Pre-release":
I don't consider opinions of two citations enough evidence to indicate the full reception of anything, including the initial announcement and Gamescom showing.
Why is the Gamescom showing introduced here yet not in the release section that talks about other teasers and announcements?
I've moved all this to release. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 15:37, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
"Reviews" section is having some 3a issues:
The GAC doesn't require completeness, but only a disappointing five publications have their viewpoints represented, one of them (GamingBolt) far less notable and recognized than Edge, GameSpot, EGM, Famitsu, Game Revolution and Game Informer (which have their reviews only cited once for listing scores and not to present their opinions).
A look at sources for the Metacritic and GameRankings aggregate pages (which isn't listed for some reason) also showcases other far more recognized publications not represented, such as Hardcore Gamer, 4players, various foreign editions of IGN, Eurogamer Italy, HobbyConsolas, The Games Machine, GamesBeat (a gaming edition of VentureBeat), gamesTM, Pocket Gamer, and Easy Allies. Most of these are already coded in the Video games review template for crying out loud.
There's also no representation from reliable sources that specialized in RPGs (RPGFan, RPGGamer, RPG Site) or publications that don't specifically specialize in gaming (The Washington Post, The National Post, Slant Magazine).
I'm not saying to include every single review of these publications, just that the reception section needs more reviews to meet the GAC of broadness.
Also, no GameRankings aggregate listed? And why is the USgamer citation discussed in prose but doesn't have its score listed.
"Sales": Where in Ref 67 does it specify the Japan sales unit and year-end ranking of the game? All I'm seeing is how much of a share the big industry players had that year.
Looks like it's in that table that is now broken. I'm not sure how reliable it is so I've removed. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:52, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
"Awards and nominations."
Why is the IGN award presented in prose but not listed in the table? In fact, there's so few awards a table list is unnecessary. I'd present it all in prose.
Actually, I think you should put the accolades in the video games review template since they're so few to list and discuss. It's not worth its own subsection.
More comments coming soon. HumanxAnthro (talk) 18:36, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

So, I have moved the awards to the end of reception. I agree it is a bit short, and I've removed the small table. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:52, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
A couple notes:
The MOS says that GameRankings shouldn't be used unless it's significantly different from the Metacritic score, which I'm almost certain they're not.
Im not sure not addressing RPG centric sites is a shortcoming. They're often more obscure and on the fringe of reliability. It's probably better more mainstream sources are used.
Just so you are aware, there has been consensus of RPG Site, RPG Fan, and RPGamer being high quality and reliable. HumanxAnthro (talk) 12:28, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
Conversely, you are correctly, virtually all of the Nintendo fan sites, like My Nintendo News, and Nintendo Everything, are not reliables sources. They're generally pretty easy to replace though, as they repost news far more than they produce original content. Sergecross73 msg me 02:45, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
Hi! Thanks for taking up this review. I've been little under the weather at the moment, so I'll get to this as soon as I can. Pretty much what Serge said above, happy to replace the non-reliable RS. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 11:28, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
From what we've had above, I think the outstanding issue is the amount of publications listed in the reception. I'll try and get some more written in as soon as I can. Let me know if there are more issues outstanding. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:53, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
I've added a bit more on the reception. There is still some more that I can (and will) add, but some of those mentioned above (such as Washington Post), I am region/paywall locked, and I only have the scores for some of the reviewers (like Famatsu). Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 16:51, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
Excuse the delayed response. I've had a nasty flu the past few days that slowed down my activity significantly. 👨x🐱 (talk) 13:26, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
I hope you are ok. There's no issue in taking your time. I think I've put in quite a few other publications in the reception now, so hopefully this is a bit better. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 15:14, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
More comments
As a bit of a geography dummy, I would suggest linking or explaining geography-only jargon when it occurs just in case casual readers may not get it. The first paragraph looks weird all linkless.
I'll preface all of this and say I don't actually write plot sections (nor this one), I find them to be cruft magnets. I'll clean this up to make it easier to read. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 09:04, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
"inhabited by massive creatures known as Titans on which smaller creatures reside." Let me see if I comprehending this correctly. There are smaller creatures living on top of the heads or bodies of larger creatures? Japanese video games are weird, man.
I've reworded. Basically, instead of the contents we have on earth, the game is set in the cloud sea, which if you imagine really dense clouds in the sky, would act like water (you can float in it and such). The humans (and other things) live on giant Titans which act like the contents we live on. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 09:04, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
What is the "World Tree"? Is it a tree that is the size of the entire globe?
I've reworded. Its like a central pillar. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 09:04, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
"Because of this, Rex became very accustomed to the Cloud Sea and as such ended up becoming a salvager." Clarify what salvager is. Did he salvage the Cloud Sea or the creatures and/or people on it?
He salvages the sea for treasures. I agree the current wording is poo. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 09:04, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
"He is very close with Azurda, a Titan whom Rex calls "Gramps", where he lives a portion of his life." Clarification. By "he," is it Rex living "a portion of his life" on the Titan, or did Azurda live "a portion of his life" on the Cloud Sea?
Reworded. Azurda became like a ship for Rex. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 09:11, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
Any other voice actors besides those for Rex, Pyra and Mythra to credit?
These are the main ones, but I'll see what I can add. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 09:12, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
Only the lead states the Drivers are humans, but this is not clarified in the body.
Ah, that's me oversimplifying in the lede. Technically anything can become a driver. There's a bit in the story about a big ol' spider becoming a Driver. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 09:11, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
"Anúna after becoming a fan of theirs" I think it's only in British English where you pluralize possessive nouns for groups, and articles about Japanese topics generally don't write in the British English format. Correct me if I'm wrong
Changed Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 09:11, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
I'll say the Reception section, by GA standards, is representative-enough of the wider picture for now. When the time comes for FA, you're going to have to consolidate opinions using many more reviews (with WP:Bundle citations, of course ;)) and probably read WP:RECEPTION.
Yeah, I think if I were to take to FAC I'd get some additional help. My FAC backlog is pretty full anyway, so it won't be anytime soon! Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 09:11, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
Also, one of the reception paragraph starts with "However, the game did receive some criticism for its poor explanation of some mechanics," which implies that's what the paragraph will be away. However, only the IGN Japan rev has this kind of opinion presented, and there are so many other concepts discussed in all other parts of the paragraph.
"Sales": I think Takahashi's quote can be paraphrased.
I've cut down, rather than paraphrase, but I can change if that would be better. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 09:11, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
👨x🐱 (talk) 21:41, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

More comments (3/31/21)
Why does the lead start with gameplay summary, then go into development summary, than go back into plot and setting summary?
I have reordered, see what you think. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 11:25, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
Why are we listing the elements as a note citation? I don't see how having it as part of the prose detracts in any way.
Now in prose. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 11:25, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
"with enemies being weak to certain ones." I'd like elaboration on this. Examples, for instance.
I've just removed this. If we state what the elements are I think it gives it away, and this is very normal RPG mechanics. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 11:25, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
👨x🐱 (talk) 11:52, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

More comments (4/3/21)
Development
" The development team grew impatient upon hearing the fanbase complain about the changes, and started work on another story-driven title.[10] " Grew impatient to do what? Make another game?
They were unhappy with the feedback is what it boils down to, as they got very average reveiws. I've made a change. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:54, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
"Initial work on the game was difficult because the technical specifications of the Switch were not yet finalized or known yet,[10] but once it was finalized, the game featured a shorter development period compared to the prior titles." Awkward writing, especially the "featuring a period" part. Here's how I would write it: "Xenoblade Chronicles 2 took shorter to develop than previous games, although development was difficult the beginning to a lack of finalization of the Switch's technical specifications."
Changed Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:54, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
". Executive director Tetsuya Takahashi cited being able to use the technological foundation established in Xenoblade Chronicles X as a means of speeding up development time.[11][12] " Another awkward sentence in how needlessly long it is. It should be "The technological foundation of Xenoblade Chronicles X was used for Xenoblade Chronicles 2 to speed up development." Also, some things need to be specificed: what "technological foundation" are we talking about, and how did it quicken development?
Sure. They are specially talking about the games architecture. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:54, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
👨x🐱 (talk) 20:03, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
Excuse the delayed response as my interest in expanding and reviewing film articles got in the way. There probably is more I could comment about with a re-read, but it might get into comments for making a FA, so I'll passed this. The comments about jargon and broadness have been address, and if there are other things I don't notice that other editors do when it comes to prose, I'm sure it can be noticed through a peer review. I will suggest if you are going to take this to FAC, that you read WP:RECEPTION, make sure most of the many reviews are represented to their fullest and concisest, and to re-read citations if you missed any details in the sources. Great work!

Thank you HumanxAnthro for your detailed and thorough review. The article is in a much better place now. :) If you do have any articles you would like to take to GA, let me know, and I'll be happy to pick up a review to make up for last time. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 08:38, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

It has already been acknowledged in this edit that the game contains examples of (or at least a close analogy to) Dissociative Identity Disorder, featuring it as a major narrative element. My edit sought to reflect the experiences of the characters as separate people, as the game depicts (for example, in the ending where they become fully separate people), in order to be more respectful of the condition and those like myself who live with it and conditions like it. The narrative goes to great lengths to illustrate their differences and their simultaneous coexistence (seeing both together in the sequence where Rex unlocks their combined power in the form of Pneuma; Mythra hearing Pyra talk to her while in the Indoline Praetorium); contrary to the article's previous (and after the reversion, current) insistence that one is simply an alter ego of the other.
I didn't feel it necessary to extend the plot into a full analysis of these moments as there seems to have already been a problem with the ballooning plot summary, but I did feel it important to not mislead a reader who had not played the game about the nature of the characters Pyra and Mythra and the real-world experiences they serve as an allegory for. In doing so I believe I also corrected some factual errors (such as the article claiming both Mythra and Pneuma to be Pyra's true form).
I was instructed to contest/discuss the edit here, and so that's my intent. I believe it was a necessary edit as it corrected factual errors about the game (where the article made inaccurate claims about the true nature of Pyra and Mythra) and potentially harmful misrepresentation of the real world condition they represent. PseudonymousNX (talk) 03:46, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi there. As a new editor, you'll want to familiar yourself with WP:PLOTSUM. It outlines how plot summaries are supposed to be written. Your changes don't gel with that in a few ways.

Plot summaries are just supposed to be an overview of main plot points.
Theyre supposed to be concise and be around 700 words.
They really shouldn't feature analysis.
Anything beyond basic occurrences and events need a reliable source to verify information. "Pyra walked into the house" does not need a source, but "Pyra walked into the house in the same way that Fei walked into Citan's in Xenogears would need a source, because it takes outside knowledge beyond just watching it to understand.
In short, I don't wish to discourage you from editing Wikipedia...but they were right to be removed. It is possible to add content about themes and messages intended by the creators, but that would belong in the Development section, and again, you would need reliable sources that verify it. It's can't just be your own personal observations.  Sergecross73 msg me Sergecross73 msg me 04:09, 16 February 2024 (UTC)