Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Half-Life 2: Episode One/archive1

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 not promoted 20:06, 28 November 2007.

[edit] Half-Life 2: Episode One

Valve's first foray into episodic gaming and the first expansion to the multi-award winning Half-Life 2. Though it is a short article, I believe it comprehensively covers the game and is a suitable candidate for featured status. Qjuad 22:10, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

• Support - I have to say great work here. All of the expectations I had before clicking on the article were met. Lead adquately summarizes the article. The plot section isn't bloated with unnecessary detail and good level of reputable citations. In particular, the development and critical reception sections are quite thorough. Wisdom89 17:53, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
• Oppose - The gameplay section is lacking, it should elaborate more on the "single player co-op" style of gameplay and touch on sections that highlight this such as the flashlight co-op sections. The in-game commentary provides insight into these areas of gameplay. You should move the Zombine into the gameplay section too, and make a distinction between that, and the 2 creatures introduced, but not fought (the Hunters, and the Advisor). - hahnchen 20:21, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Comment - The gameplay section has been expanded and additional references added. Qjuad 21:05, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Do you have access to the game? There's a lot that can be gleaned from the commentary nodes provided in game, especially when talking about the new types of gameplay and their design ideas. The Episode One commentary track is already referenced in the article, but as a single reference, it would be a lot more helpful if the node numbers were mentioned, such as you would mention page numbers when referencing a book.

Comment - I have seperated the commentaries into their respective chapter. However, providing the number of the nodes would prove difficult as the number order is not universal to the chapter but the specific map. Qjuad 01:15, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

I've read through some of the plot, and it's weak. Some sentences seem trivial and pointless, such as the "Alyx mourns..." line. All you need to state is that the train derails, and they're forced to flee on foot. And yet, it doesn't elaborate enough on the greater themes of the game and setting. It should stress that the Combine were deliberately accelerating the meltdown of the reactor in order to transmit a message. The Breen/Advisor video, is not as important development wise as the Mossman video, yet no mention is made of that. The overall theme of the game is the aftermath of the Resistance victory on City 17 as it desolves into chaos with the Combine in disarray. There are many instances of this, such as the Resistance having taken over the PA systems, but others should be mentioned. The Zombine, antlions making their way into the city, out of ammo sentry guns, the hazy air and sky all seek to accentuate this. - hahnchen 00:00, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Comment - Have begun to modify the plot section and remove redundancies, and have increased the gameplay section with comments from the developers in the commentary and previews regarding the re-design of the Citadel and City 17 to reflect the changes from Half-Life 2. Qjuad 01:15, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

• Comment How many games has this sold? hbdragon88 05:46, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Oppose until this is clarified. Cannot call it comprehensive without this information. hbdragon88 22:27, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
    • Comment I don't believe this information has been released by Valve. While retail figures may have, I don't think sales over Steam have been or will be which prevents any comprehensive coverage on how many copies have been purchased overrall. Qjuad 12:06, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
      • If Valve is being super special awesome secretive about it, there's nothing can be done. Do you have the retail figures at least, then? hbdragon88 19:43, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Commment The fact of the matter is that these figures will ultimately be released and available. Once they are, they can be included in the article - if you can concede that, then you might want to rescind your oppose and switch to support - that is, if this is the only information causing you to oppose the FAC nom. Just my two cents. Wisdom89 19:57, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

• Support. Comprehensive and nicely written. Axl 17:37, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Pass & support

• On the basis that it's acceptable. Learnedo 08:19, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Comment - After a quick read, this is a pretty good article and looks informative. Though I think it could use some organization to make it to FA.

1. The "Plot" section makes little mention of the setting of the game and seems to require knowledge of the previous games. Maybe take the current content and put it under a subsection, "Story", and above it create a new subsection, "Setting" and possibly "Characters", to give a bit more background information to the story.
2. The "Gameplay" section could use a screen shot that helps depict what the average gameplay looks like. If the gameplay is very similar to Half-Life 2, then I would think about trimming the content down and put a See also link to the "Gameplay" section of Half-Life 2.
3. The "Awards" section is a bit sparse compared to the "Critical response" section. Maybe remove the subsections and integrate the content into three paragraphs that are more evenly sized.
4. Given the size of the "Soundtrack" section, it may be best to move it into a subsection of the "Development" and rename it "Audio". Also maybe split the soundtrack list into two columns.
5. And of course, additional reliable sources never hurt an article and further help establish creditability.

My two cents (Guyinblack25 ^talk 18:20, 31 October 2007 (UTC))

• Comment - Guy is right, in that the Soundtrack section seems out of place. Is there anything else that can be said about the soundtrack? Is the track listing even important to the article? - hahnchen 18:22, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Comment - The soundtrack section has been merged into the development section - ultimately the soundtrack is unneeded, plus it is listed in the composer article. Qjuad 14:17, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

• Oppose—Prose could do with fresh eyes throughout. For example:
  • "fight to the surface"?
  • MOS: no final period if caption not a real sentence.
  • Long snakes need dividing for the sake of our readers: "After some initial confusion, sparked partly with an attempt at humour by PC Gamer UK, which suggested that Alyx was Episode One's playable character,[25] it was confirmed that players would indeed play as Gordon Freeman – unlike the original Half-Life expansion packs, which all dealt with different characters." Here's another, just below: "As the character of Alyx accompanies the player for the vast majority of Episode One aiding in puzzle solving and combat situations, Valve made major modifications to her AI throughout development that allowed her to react to the players actions - such as commentating on objects the player manipulates or obstacles they have overcome. She also acts as an important device in both plot exposition and directing the player's journey, often vocalizing what the player is required to do next in order to progress.[19]" And see MOS on em dashes, please.
  • 'hero moments'—see MOS on double quotes and "Words as words" italics. Your choice, but not singles.
  • "The developers explained a large part of their focus was creating not only a believable companion for the player, but also one that did not obstruct the player's actions; allowing them to dictate". You must insert "that" before "explained". See why? I don't mind the singular they nowadays, but does "them" refer to the companion? Make it clear by rewording. Tony (talk) 00:46, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Comment - I have begun to make the needed edits. Qjuad 18:55, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

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.