Talk:Age of Empires III

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Age of Empires III article.
Article policies
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4
Good article Age of Empires III has been listed as one of the Everyday life good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a reassessment.
To-do list for Age of Empires III: edit · history · watch · refresh

Here are some tasks you can do:
Priority 4  
Archive
Archives


Contents

[edit] Age of Empires III Review - User:Lethaniol and User:AndyZ/peerreviewer

Hi everyone

I have been asked by User:TomasBat to undertake a review of this article, to help give you some ideas on how to improve and help get it to Featured Article status. Note that I think this is already an excellent article, and that really it just requires tidying up and other small improvements. Note also I know nothing about this game (though it does sound cool), and though I have played computer games extensively I will try to bring an outside perspective of the article, and so help pick up anyway jargon/inconsistencies that might otherwise be missed.

To start off with I have run an automated peer review that may highlight some issues. Note not all these issues may be relevant as this is review in generated by a BOT:

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

  • Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at Wikipedia:Lead. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.[?]
  • Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates), months and days of the week generally should not be linked. Years, decades, and centuries can be linked if they provide context for the article.[?]
  • Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Build the web, years with full dates should be linked; for example, link January 15, 2006.[?]
  • Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (headings), avoid using special characters (ex: &+{}[]) in headings.
  • Please make the spelling of English words consistent with either American or British spelling, depending upon the subject of the article. Examples include: honour (B) (American: honor), organize (A) (British: organise), criticise (B) (American: criticize), ization (A) (British: isation), aging (A) (British: ageing).
  • Watch for redundancies that make the article too wordy instead of being crisp and concise. (You may wish to try Tony1's redundancy exercises.)
    • While additive terms like “also”, “in addition”, “additionally”, “moreover”, and “furthermore” may sometimes be useful, overusing them when they aren't necessary can instead detract from the brilliancy of the article. This article has 29 additive terms, a bit too much.
    • Vague terms of size often are unnecessary and redundant - “some”, “a variety/number/majority of”, “several”, “a few”, “many”, “any”, and “all”. For example, “All pigs are pink, so we thought of a number of ways to turn them green.”
  • As done in WP:FOOTNOTE, footnotes usually are located right after a punctuation mark (as recommended by the CMS, but not mandatory), such that there is no space in between. For example, the sun is larger than the moon [2]. is usually written as the sun is larger than the moon.[2][?]
  • Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. End of automated review.

Right I will spend the next few days adding my comments as I think them up. Thanks, and good luck User:Lethaniol 15:40, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

  1. I would not wikilink to the disambiguation pages RTS or RPG instead use [[Real-time strategy|RTS]] and [[Role-playing game|RPG]]. Have changed the first instances in the open paragraph but needs to be changes throughout article.
  2. Also for not computer game player RTS means nothing, better to expand the acronym the first time it used, again as I have done in the introduction.
  3. Synopsis section needs some work. Although mentioned in Introduction a mention here that this is based on the colonisation of the New World - at the start of this section would help. Also needs some tidying up/condensing e.g. There are two main branches to game play, the nation's military and economy, and winning a battle depends on a mastery of both of these. does not read well, and the use of the word skirmishes is confusing - what does it mean to a non-gamer (also it seems like a game specific term).
  4. Campaign - the name of the family and the names of the Acts too specific, maybe better just to say - during campaign mode the player follows a family through three generations with a specific story line - or something like that.
  5. Mutliplayer section – have linked to multiplayer, condense ranking system to basics if possible. What does home city level mean? Citation for connection speed needed. Link to website needed. Do not need CD key info, suffice to say that each copy of Age of Empires III does not allow multiple accounts or user name changes.
  6. Setting, change his/her to their (throughout article). Added wikilink to HP. Please use one style of quotation marks e.g. “Unkown”. This section contains a lot of in game jargon e.g. Wood, Coin, Food, seeded - that either need wikilinks to concepts, explanations or removal. Suggest condensing this section.
  7. Ages section to game specific, try to simplfy to general concepts especially the last paragraph.
  8. Civilisations section. I am not sure people will be that interested in the Main Bonus part of the table, maybe change it to pre-named wikilinked leader and if available a summary of this civilisation from the game.
  9. Home cities – need to emphasis that this part of the game is retained between actually play, and can lead to between game development and improved long term gameplay.
  10. Units – too much description of how explorer can be developed. Suffice they can be developed. Paragraphs too short – need to flow better with better prose
  11. Building section – this is a good section that should be used as a model for the Units section. No fancruft, description enough with good examples. Note might want to mention (in one sentence) what building do – e.g. allow use of certain resources or training of troops.
  12. Development – sort out use of Italics – should computer games titles be italiced – most likely yes – then do throughout the whole article. Add link to Mac OS X and PC. Add links to New England and Texas states. Need citation for criticism - otherwise remove. Add link to where to find patches.
  13. Reception – need citations for reviews, have added fact tags to remind people
  14. Wikilinks - remember to wikilink to gaming concepts that the average Joe won't know. Also make sure you link to the page you are interested in not the WP:DAB page.
Generally having spent a hour reading this - there is a little too much fancruft. There is a difficult balance to be made - putting enough info in to give the reader an idea of gameplay with a few real examples that make sense if you have not played games - without putting too much specific information about individual items. People should concentrate on description of the concepts not the individual attributes e.g. the explorer is used to search/scout out the map with some tactical functions (do not really need to explain the details much further- though can give interesting examples such a air balloon to allow quicker/further exploration). Note the Settler section is perfect it giving the concept and a few examples without going into too much depth. This is real difficult - good luck. Cheers Lethaniol 14:54, 6 February 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Proofread Multiplayer section

Hi I changed the multiplayer page a bit if you think it needs to be changed or deleted just change or delete it please, and thank you.Hey Joe what you know? (talk) 01:15, 4 April 2008 (UTC) comment added by Retro2 (talk • contribs)00:19, 3 April 2008

[edit] Reception section

The reception section needs to be expanded... big time. Take a look at Starcraft, Empires: Dawn of the Modern World, and Rise and Fall: Civilizations at War, the three video game FAs (of course, Starcraft doesn't have as much as Rise and Fall, but they both have more than this article). For a game like Age of Empires III (i.e. one of the most famous video games, and most popular), I think it's better to go o'er the top. I'll list a few websites we can use as sources here:

I'll not be here, but will be back in a week or so. Sorry I had to mess up the talk page with all these links, but it's very convenient. :) · AndonicO Talk 08:50, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Oh, and this just came up; we'll have to wait until it's archived to add it though. · AndonicO Talk 11:12, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Images (Again)

We seem to have an images issue again - there are 5 fair use images on the page - slightly more than our required 2 or 3. In my opinion, we should have

  • 2 images
    • Cover image
    • Image of unit classes
  • 3 images
    • Cover image
    • Image of unit classes
    • Image of home cities, preferably replaced by new image that compares high-quality and low-quality home city.

I'll upload an example of the latter image later. ck lostsword|queta!|Suggestions? 21:00, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Starcraft has also got 5 fair-use images, and its an Fa... ♠Tom@sBat 21:19, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
True - but I suspect that their rationales are somewhat more detailed than ours. In the meantime, what do we think of these images?

Oh, and if the images aren't helpful, perhaps the rationales on their pages will be. ck lostsword|queta!|Suggestions? 21:44, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

The images all look nice, but I still don´t quite really understand why we´re comparing graphics... ♠Tom@sBat 01:12, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
I agree, there's no "rule" that says you can't have more than three images. For an article of this size, five is acceptable. —Disavian (talk/contribs) 02:19, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
This comparison follows a suggestion in our (very old) peer review. However, and more importantly, one of the key points made in the article is the development of the new graphics systems. This is perhaps well-represented by the images, which compare the new graphics systems against the old ones. Like I say, if they're no use they're no use ... just a suggestion :D ck lostsword|queta!|Suggestions? 22:02, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
I´ve checked the peer review and Ck is quite right, there was a suggestion on this possibility, and it all seems logical now, since graphics were an important change on the series. But, what if we compare say AoE2 graphics with AoE3 graphics? That way, we would be comparing the "jump in graphical quality" which occured when this game was released; this such possible comparism would be, in a way, somewhat similiar to this image, which compares graphics from the original version of Centipede and the 1998 remake... ♠Tom@sBat 16:22, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
I have nominated the redundant images for deletion as orphaned and updated the rationales of the others to be more precise. Perhaps we should start working on the reception section? ck lostsword|queta!|Suggestions? 20:22, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
Ok, the task seems done with the new pic on the article. And, yes, I agree on working more now on the reception section; we´ve got plenty of links for research so lets get to it... ♠Tom@sBat 21:20, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
I have removed the image of combat from the article as it doesn't actually illustrate any of the headings or points made - especially not in the multiplayer section where it was situated. ck lostsword•T•C 14:23, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

In the article Game Revolution said you can't rotate the camara, Well you can! With ctrl left/right arrow.

[edit] Spoiler

Do we need a spoiler warning on the campaign section? IMO, no - I feel that we don't give away enough details and the subject is not notable enough to merit the warning. ck lostsword•T•C 20:30, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

In the same light, is there any need for trivia section - again, no IMO, but there have been 2 'trivial edits' in a day. ck lostsword•T•C 22:49, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
Spoiler: No. {{spoiler}} is redundant in such cases. And we really don't need one piece of trivia (that you removed)! Giggy UCP 03:11, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cookies Section

Someone better at wikicode than I should add a section for little cookies in the game. Here's one to get you started: The Explorer dog when dead has this text above him: "Horatio, I am dead. Thou livest. Report me and my cause aright to the unsatisfied." This is in reference to Hamlet's last words to trusted Horatio in Shakespeare's play.

[edit] Question

Is there a way to work the game on Windows 9x? 58.170.198.30 05:34, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Nope PookeyMaster (talk) 03:56, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Havok is not a game engine

There shouldn't be Havok Physics in the Engine row of the table at the right of the article. Havok is only a physics engine, not a complete engine like Source used in HL2, so the entry should be deleted. I don't know if they use someone else's game engine or their own.Quiark 13:00, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

You're correct on that: it shouldn't be there. Feel free to remove it yourself. · AndonicO Talk 13:28, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Linking Dates

I have removed the date links (as many as i could find) per the above recommendations. PookeyMaster (talk) 04:13, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikiquote

I have created a page about the game on Wikiquote. See here: [1] The problem is, this article is a bit too short. Feel free to add anything to the article. 58.168.147.119 (talk) 22:47, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Hmm. There are a lot of unnecessary/trivial quotes there... · AndonicO Talk 00:35, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Campaign

Please delete the campaign section. It is not detailed enough - it does not even mention some important parts of the campaign. And it is the reason the actual article about the campaign was deleted. I like that article and want it back. There was no reason to delete it fully instead of just redirecting it here. 58.168.147.119 (talk) 05:59, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

ANSWER! 138.217.145.45 (talk) 23:25, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Flag of the Ottomans

The flag of the Ottomans (i mean the Ottomans in the game not in the real world) is not correct, see the game or the web page. --Ilhanli (talk) 12:29, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

It's the same flag, except that we can't use the exact image that is used in-game (even though it's better, it's also copyrighted). · AndonicO Hail! 12:34, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
It (the flag in the game) is same as the flag of Turkey, look at the star and it's angel to the Moon, Moon's and star's size. I was wery suprized when i sow the flag of the Ottomans'; it was not an Ottoman flag but it was the flag of Turkey. --Ilhanli (talk) 12:42, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
I can't tell any difference, but I changed the flag to the one in the lead here. · AndonicO Hail! 12:49, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
I was going to change the Turkish flag with the Late Ottoman flag but I saw that you werte already changed it, thanks and sorry for my bad English. --Ilhanli (talk) 12:51, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] AutoReview

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

  • Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at Wikipedia:Lead. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.[?]
  • Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates), months and days of the week generally should not be linked. Years, decades, and centuries can be linked if they provide context for the article.[?]
  • Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Build the web, years with full dates should be linked; for example, if January 15, 2006 appeared in the article, link it as January 15, 2006.[?]
  • Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (headings), avoid using special characters (ex: &+{}[]) in headings.
  • This article may need to undergo summary style, where a series of appropriate subpages are used. For example, if the article is United States, then an appropriate subpage would be History of the United States, such that a summary of the subpage exists on the mother article, while the subpage goes into more detail.[?]
  • There are a few occurrences of weasel words in this article- please observe WP:AWT. Certain phrases should specify exactly who supports, considers, believes, etc., such a view.
    • apparently
    • might be weasel words, and should be provided with proper citations (if they already do, or are not weasel terms, please strike this comment).[?]
  • Watch for redundancies that make the article too wordy instead of being crisp and concise. (You may wish to try Tony1's redundancy exercises.)
    • Vague terms of size often are unnecessary and redundant - “some”, “a variety/number/majority of”, “several”, “a few”, “many”, “any”, and “all”. For example, “All pigs are pink, so we thought of a number of ways to turn them green.”
  • The script has spotted the following contractions: aren't, if these are outside of quotations, they should be expanded.
  • Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, The Helpful One (Review) 21:33, 20 March 2008 (UTC)