Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Devil May Cry

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted 03:22, 12 April 2007.

Devil May Cry[edit]

Admittedly, it still needs work. I'm sure there will be issues which need to be resolved before it can be promoted to FA-class. However, the article as it currently stands is in better shape than when Devil May Cry 2 was nominated for Good Article class, so I'm confident about the quality.

Thanks in advance to anyone who takes the time to review and voice their concerns. Cheers, Lankybugger ○ speak ○ see ○ 13:47, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support I have done my share of work in the article and I can assure anyone with any concern about the article, that they will be attended to ASAP. -凶17:59, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - It seems fine, it has references and good information--$UIT 22:44, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I agree that it is a gddo article with a lot of fine references and it is written real well. Heat P 23:03, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comments — references need to be expanded. All sources should have a publisher (the website or company that published the article or website), and references 23 and 24 are incomplete. If I have time, I'll see if I can find any other things that should be fixed. — Deckiller 23:33, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose: The prose needs serious work. For example:
"The game is currently the second game in the Devil May Cry series to take place chronologically." --Is it the second game with a chronological order, or the second game in a chronological order? It implies the former.
"The game itself consists of missions with specific goals in the player influenced area of the game itself." --"the game itself" twice in the same sentence? Plus, "player influenced area"? Needs clarification.
"The game features puzzle-solving and exploration elements that involve the player examining their surroundings to find items and orbs, though these are downplayed from the game's Resident Evil roots." --I'm just going to let this one speak for itself, but I will point out that the last part is original research.
  • Simply put, the article could use a heavy copy edit. Also, on a less serious note, I was under the impression that Devil May Cry was the first game in its genre (which now contains such games as God of War). A mention of this, with sourcing, would be nice. If I'm wrong, then sorry for bringing it up. Finally, I could see the Reception section getting some expansion. Using only 3 reviews is incomplete work for a game this well-received, and there are no negative comments. It would be nice to see some Electronic Gaming Monthly, Game Informer and Edge in there, but the choice of sources is up to you. If these issues can be cleaned up, I'll support. JimmyBlackwing 23:36, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • I was thinking the same thing; the reception section can probably be doubled in size. As for the prose, I might have time to copy-edit, but my favors for people are starting to accumulate, so no promises :) — Deckiller 23:44, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I have added references to Game Informer, Edge and Electronic Gaming Monthly I clarified some ref but there are some taken from a script and only Lankybugger can fix them since he is the only one with the info; I will deal with those sentences now, I won't add references to the God of War thing yet but I will look for them. ---凶 00:37, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • More critical commentary doesn't just mean list the score from the Edge db. We can use Gamerankings and Metacritic for that kind of thing. It actually means quoting choice parts from the text. The user rated EGM score is not a very good source. - hahnchen 17:52, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • How about now, I added ref links and quoted their reviewers. User rated sites are still important it shows the customer's reception. -凶 20:26, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment 2 I have also tweaked the lines mentioned above, I need to know what do you think of them now. --凶 01:05, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Minor Support the article is fine, though not as broad as the DMC2 one. One suggestion for the reception is ANY criticism the game may have brought, before someone complains about "1b - Comprehensive". igordebraga ≠ 23:41, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - This is NOT a comprehensive article. The Reception section is underdeveloped, I would like a Japanese perspective there, as well as more in depth critical commentary. Its success obviously spawned further games in the franchise, the games legacy should be mentioned in the article (possibly in the reception section).
  • Nothing is made of the Soundtrack, it's not always an important facet of computer games, but given that a separate release was made - Devil May Cry soundtracks, then it should feature.
  • And as a minor point, please clean up all the references, so they display an author, access date, publisher etc. - hahnchen 23:45, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment Refs cleaned up, Reception expanded, and the soundtrack is mentioned alongside the rest of the stuff Devil May Cry spawned in the Legacy subsection. Cheers, Lankybugger ○ Yell ○ 20:12, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment -I added a link to the soundtracts page and mentioned the release date of the soundtrack I don't think a more extensive mention is needed since there is a link for that there, I can't find any reference to Devil May Cry being the first 3rd-person action genre or of his influence in the gaming industry and believe me I looked all over the web, so please help me on this one I won't add a section without references. -凶 01:54, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I dug around on the Internet a bit, myself, and came up short. A few critics ([1], [2]) say that it was the first 3d action game to capture the gameplay of a 2d action game, but that isn't exactly what we were looking for. However, the book 21st Century Game Design talks about how Devil May Cry was the "nucleating game" of the "extreme action" genre. I will try to get my hands on this book again, and get you a few excerpts. This could go in a "legacy" section, along with discussion of the game's sequels. It should go somewhere, in any case. JimmyBlackwing 04:41, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Conditional support As noted above, there are some problems with the writing, but it's nothing that can't be overcome. I do think reception can be fleshed out, it would be nice to find some references to the game's influence on the action genre, as it's now a benchmark frequently mentioned in articles about similar games. Perhaps an "influence" section could be added. I think some of the info about the lead character could be cribbed from the Dante (Devil May Cry) regarding how the character and the game seeks to subvert the normal survival horror formula. --Boradis 00:39, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment I've cobbled together a "Legacy" portion for Reception, and I believe others have taken care of all of the other actionable objections thus far. Cheers, Lankybugger ○ speak ○ see ○ 00:58, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • I'm still not a fan of the prose in the Reception section, it doesn't, flow, at, all. It's just a string of unconnected quotes, each sentence is a different publication and there's no interlinking dialogue. Maybe if you started off talking about the graphics, and then the gameplay etc. It needs reworking. And I'd still like to see a Famitsu score up there. - hahnchen 23:13, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment First off, it looks pretty good, and I think all my initial concerns have been dealt with. I have one consideration, though: The 'Development' starts off sounding like its all about Resident Evil. While it obviously spiraled off, it seems kind of sudden when it starts talking about Devil May Cry. I'm probably not being very articulate... :( Could you take a look and see if you could twist it around so its more in the context of DMC? Dåvid Fuchs (talk / frog blast the vent core!) 22:40, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment I've removed the bits about Resident Evil: Code Veronica and RE3. It flows a little better now, and I think I'm going to reorganize it so it begins from a more Devil May Cry-centric position. Cheers, Lankybugger ○ Yell ○ 00:15, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Good for me. Dåvid Fuchs (talk / frog blast the vent core!) 20:27, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Oppose Overall, this is very good. However, it needs a longer section (at least one individual paragraph) designated to negative reviews, or even parts of positive reviews that criticized the game. --Brandt Luke Zorn 01:29, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment I would posit that the reception section should match the actual reception in the media and amongst the userbase. It wouldn't make sense to present an equal showing of positive and negative criticism for a game which, by all accounts, received an overwhelmingly positive response. I'll try to dig up some more criticism, but the only real item which comes up is the difficulty which is adequately covered by the Next Generation Magazine review mentioned. Cheers, Lankybugger ○ Yell ○ 02:38, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Excellent. There doesn't necessarily have to be equal showing of positive and negative, but the negative should be shown in one concentrated section. One more thing I'd recommend would be a thorough spellcheck, but the writing's all there. --Brandt Luke Zorn 05:57, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose (weakening) - This article's text is not ready for FA. As a great many editors point to FA articles as a guideline to for what a perfect article is, we can't support something that still needs lots of work with the prose and flow of the text. Arcayne 03:53, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Reasoning - Grammatical issues and word choices show marked improvement, but I still don't think we're there as of yet. Here are a few examples:
1. In the opening Plot paragraph, the main character is "violently attacked". Not to be glib, but most attacks are not feather-gentle.
2. Also in the first paragraph, "Trish abruptly vanishes over a high wall". This is unclear to me, not having played the game. Does she leap ovre the wall and vanish, or does she >bamf!< away via teleportation?
3. In the last paragraph, Dante "leaves the amulet and sword with Trish's body before departing". When someone is referred to in terms of their body, it usually means they are no longer using it (ie, dead). However, we discover that Trish is alive and well, and co-piloting to good ship DNC. Its confusing
Granted, these things (from just the Plot, though the same issues are in the other sections) may seem like nit-picking, especially when the structure of the article is superb (aside from the repetitions of the phrase at the beginning of the the Lead and the first sentence in the Gameplay section). However, we are talking aboutan FA article, to be read the world over. It has to be as good as it can be, to my reckoning. I would suggest that you get someone who has never seen the game before (if you can find someone who doesn't play that many, even better - good luck with that) to copyedit this for clarity and logic points. If points like the ones I noteed were addressed, I think it be just dandy. -Arcayne (cast a spell) 00:55, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - the section on reception needs a good dose of copyediting. once that is done i'd support. Chensiyuan 07:14, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • I know a lot of work went into the reception section, but it seems a little long. In terms of proportion, it is almost 40% of the article. Is the norm? Chensiyuan 03:45, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - i know it's undergoing some rewrites now but it looks better and good enough even in the meantime. Chensiyuan 10:31, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - The article speaks with a sound neutral tone, and is quite informative. I think the wording could be a little bit better but thats my only complaint. --ÄtΘmicR€£igionesїgñ
  • Comment - I've struck my above oppose. I feel that the prose could still do with some work, and would like an extra sentence or so about the soundtrack, but it's pretty much there. - hahnchen 15:18, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: The prose has greatly improved, and while I think it could still use some fine-tuning in places, it's good enough for my support. Good work! JimmyBlackwing 19:46, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose for now; not bad, but still needs work on the prose.
    • Please weed out the redundant "also"s, such as here: "The player character also has the ability to ..." (especially as this is at the start of a para). In a narrative-dominated account, you could insert "also" into every sentence, but that would be tedious and unnecessary. Mostly, it's stronger without. Careful of overusing time-based tags, such as "then", "finally", "eventually", etc. They can weaken the prose.
    • "in hopes of finding the ones who took his mother and brother"—"In hopes", not the most logical construction, is some kind of loose regional expression. "In the hope of", please.
    • "whom Dante holds responsible for the deaths of his family, is planning a return"—Nowadays, you could use "who", especially as the referent is the subject of the larger sentence.
    • "The scene then jumps to them arriving at an immense castle,"—strictly speaking, "them arriving" is ungrammatical (should be their arriving). "jumps to their arrival at" would be so much nicer.
  • "Dante's brother, Vergil. After Vergil's final defeat, his amulet joins with Dante's, and Dante's default sword, called "Force Edge" (which belonged to Dante's" "Dante's" x 4.
  • "in the English-speaking video game media,"—"English-language" would be better.

Plus more. Fresh eyes required for a quick run-through to polish. Tony 22:24, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: I agree with every one of Tony's points above, and only differ on one point made by Arcayne in that I think (as Dante obviously did!) that Trish was in fact stone dead. This being gothic fiction, her being a demon, and Dante leaving powerful magic items with her makes it completely feasible she resurrected. It's at least open to interpretation on that point, and saying "body" is as neutral as that description can get. --Boradis 03:43, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Also, Tony is correct regarding "in hopes of" but "to accomplish his ultimate goal of" is excessively wordy. A shorter way of saying that would be "in order to", but both phrases imply a guaranteed outcome which Dante admits he doesn't have. I do laundry in order to have clean clothes, (A) guarantees (B). Perhaps "in pursuit of those who took his mother and brother", as that implies a lack of a guarantee, and that he's hunting them. Thoughts? --Boradis 03:58, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • "In order" to is almost always redundant, except in the rare case of the opposite ("in order not to"). — Deckiller 04:54, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • I say "in pursuit of those who took his mother and brother" fits perfectly, let's see what Tony thinks.-凶 04:51, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Would it be OK to change the sentence on Trish being dead or unconscious to something non-specific? As I pointed out above, Dante clearly thought she was dead, and it's perfectly possible she was. The truth is we don't know, the game doesn't say, and having the article come down on either side is speculation at best, and OR at worst. How about calling her "immobile", or "apparently dead"? --Boradis 21:28, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment: It's possible although I think she was just ko'd, "immobile" is the best choice "apparently death" sounds kind of speculative. -凶 23:13, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • Comment: Cool. Unless anyone protests, I'll change it on Tuesday. --Boradis 09:05, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support- my own suggestion was taken, and aside from the above concerns, I see nothing else in need of work. Dåvid Fuchs (talk / frog blast the vent core!) 21:31, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Well sourced has well placed pictures it may be a tad short but in all its perfect. DBZROCKS 00:44, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Devil_May_Cry&oldid=1145695664"