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 by Ian Rose (talk) 11:40, 30 June 2014 (diff).


Anachronox[edit]

Nominator(s): GamerPro64 21:33, 13 May 2014 (UTC), ZeaLitY[reply]

I've been trying to make this introduction sound interesting, but honestly I believe that the article being nominated has that taken care of. But I guess it doesn't hurt to try. Being made by Ion Storm, makers of the early 2000s classic Deus Ex, and Daikatana, infamous for being an overhyped flop and having founder John Romero wanting "to make you his bitch", Anachronox is amazing beast in its own right. While it received some positive reviews when released, it failed to keep the company's Dallas office from closing down and resulted in Romero and Tom Hall, co-founder of Ion Storm and the one behind Anachronox, leaving the company. There's many more interesting details about the game in the article, which I believe meets the FA criteria. But since not everything can be perfect, I expect some constructive criticism will present itself to help secure this article a bronze star. GamerPro64 21:33, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Glad to see this is finally up at FAC. Way back when, I helped User:Zeality dig up many of the sources that this article is based on, but I never got to see it taken all the way. I feel like I should mention, though, that several of those sources went dead when GameSpot enabled robots.txt. All of the GameSpot Designer Diaries are now gone, and (to my knowledge) they aren't available anywhere else on the Internet. Hopefully the information taken from those links is available elsewhere. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 03:51, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review from czar[edit]

Please respond below my signature so as to leave the original review uninterrupted (see last FAC instructional bullet). Any questions below are rhetorical: I'm looking for clarification in the article, not an actual answer.

I'm hitting way too many potholes so far. Can one of the noms give it a good read-through for these types of concerns before I come back to continue the copyedit? czar  16:05, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Czar: Zeality and I fixed your concerns now. GamerPro64 01:36, 8 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Distribution CD-ROM, digital distribution: per Template:Infobox_video_game#media, I don't think the field is necessary czar  23:10, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
So you're saying that section of the infobox should be removed? GamerPro64 01:03, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

czar  06:01, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review by SnowFire[edit]

  • "The game developed a cult following." This doesn't appear to be referenced or elaborated on in the article itself though.
  • "its developers were disappointed with producer support." Yet later in the article you quote a developer saying "I sing the praises of Eidos for sticking with us through all the craziness—they were amazing." I'm sure the developers would have liked more time / support, but they sound understanding about the amount they did get, not disappointed...
  • "Use of MysTech and equippable shield cells require NRG, a separate energy reserve" - What's NRG stand for? Or is it just NRG? (I realize that this may be in-game trivia but I was puzzled on seeing the acronym first without having had something like a "Natural Resource Grade (NRG)" earlier.)
    • NRG stands for "Neutron-Radiated Glodents". Funny how that's a thing. GamerPro64 16:30, 4 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Hall also drew dramatic inspiration from a scene in Trigger in which the characters discuss the theme of regret around a campfire." - Go ahead and spell out "Chrono Trigger", it's just one extra word. Also... I haven't played Anachronox, but I have played CT, and I'm not sure I'd really call it a "theme of regret" in that scene. Is that really what the source says? (The passage is fine if that's what the Anachronox developers really thought it was about, of course.) SnowFire (talk) 12:30, 4 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • I wasn't the one who put the reference in so I don't have the magazine. So I may need to find the one who did to see if its correct. GamerPro64 16:30, 4 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      • Here is a scan of the page that talks about it. It's Tom Hall's interpretation of the scene, it seems. ZeaLitY [ Talk - Activity ] 00:43, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Interesting. Any thoughts on my first two comments, though? Lots of games claim to have "cult" followings simply because they have fans - I'd be skeptical of including the claim without a really good reference, and there appears to be no such reference at all at the moment. SnowFire (talk) 20:27, 7 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I removed the mention of developers being disappointed and mentions of "cult classic" in the article. GamerPro64 21:28, 7 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I could have sworn there was a citation for that disappointment that specifically referred to the limited marketing of Eidos as the point of contention. But I can't find it, and the game probably wasn't going to get huge sales numbers anyhow with the outdated engine and offbeat genre. So yeah, I agree with just leaving it out. ZeaLitY [ Talk - Activity ] 23:23, 7 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@SnowFire: I myself checked to find sales figures on the game with no results. But besides that I believe all your comments you raised have been addressed. Unless you have more you spotted. GamerPro64 01:35, 10 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm still here. Sorry, been meaning to give the article another closer once-over but haven't gotten to it. Call it a weak support then for now, I'll try and come back later and either upgrade to full support or else comment on other issues. SnowFire (talk) 03:09, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Image review from PresN[edit]

Polished the rationale on both of those with references to the article. ZeaLitY [ Talk - Activity ] 19:46, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Now passed. --PresN 23:34, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Expansion pack: File:Anachronox gameplay.jpg - non-free screenshot, with problems- 1280x960 is not small enough, please get it down to 300x225 or thereabouts like the image you were replacing. Also, the FUR is weird- your minimal use statement says no, then gives a further purpose of use, you don't say why it's not replaceable with free media (no such free media exists for this game), and you don't answer the commercial oppotunities (just say that the image is too low-res to be used for commercial purposes, once you resize the image. --PresN 01:38, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. I made the image 300x225 and updated the FUR. GamerPro64 02:05, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Cool, passed for that image as well. --PresN 06:18, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Crisco 1492[edit]

  • Commment. Assuming you meant "contractions" not acronyms, I'm strongly opposed to this advice. Wikipedia's voice is not some stuffy 1960s BBC announcer. It's perfectly professional English to include contractions. SnowFire (talk) 20:27, 7 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'll stop here. Good read. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:15, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Source comments from Hamiltonstone[edit]

All right. Now I just need to hear back from Hamiltonstone go see if the sourcing has the all clear. GamerPro64 06:37, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The only possible sourcing issue I can see is the text in those early footnotes. I don't have the experience with game articles to call that particular point one way or the other, but the delegates probably do. I certainly think you've explained the rationale, and you've gone over them and trimmed where you think appropriate. That's good.hamiltonstone (talk) 11:39, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I think Hamilton and Gamer both have valid points: perhaps the quotes in the sources are more than is needed, particularly given they're in a plot section; OTOH other FAs (not just game articles) have used quotes in citations to help establish the veracity of the sourcing. I'm comfortable going with it as is for the purposes of this review. Tks/cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 11:39, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

References are otherwise generally excellent. Unrelated to source comments: Caption (and indeed the picture itself) for first image (other than one in infobox) "Paco uses the GroundPound BattleSkill" is truly incomprehensible.hamiltonstone (talk) 13:37, 24 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Mr. Gonna Change My Name Forever[edit]

Support The article looks great. Thank you @GamerPro64:, I'm happy with your work! =D }IMr*|(60nna)I{ 14:10, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.