Talk:P.N.03

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the P.N.03 article.

Article policies
Good article P.N.03 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.
July 17, 2006 Good article nominee Listed
Famicom style controller This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Good article GA This article has been rated as GA-Class on the assessment scale.
Low This article is on a subject of low priority within gaming for inclusion in Wikipedia 1.0.

[edit] Paragraph

A gamecube game, P.N.03, or Product Number 03, sets the player as Venessa Schnieder, in the distant future. After C.A.M.S goes down (the main computer network on Mars), Venessa is sent in to clean up the mess. You only have one weapon, your suit, which is equipped wit ha hand shot, and a list of combo moves. Your main goal in each level is to get to a certain area, and/or destroy a certain objective. However, destroying enemies faster, without being hit, yields a higher combat point bonus, which is used to buy things like continues, or different suits. As you progress through the game, levels get longer, enemies get stronger, and your skills get better. The game has a pretty good future/techno soundtrack, and with all the bonus missions, it might take a while to complete.

[edit] Ga Failure

  • Poor lead, should be 2 - 3 paragraphs
WP:LEAD States only 1-2 paragraphs are needed for short articles.
>< Forgot.
  • "Gameplay" and "Critical reponse" are a little low on the ground
P.N.03 is a pretty simple game, everything that needs to be covered is covered. Critical reaction is small because it was considered a pretty average game. If it was notable for being critical acclaimed or majorly panned, then it might need to be expanded, but as it is it doesn't benefit much from additional comments. Plus, WP:WIAGA only states such topics need to be covered, specifically stating that they do not have to be comprehensive.
  • No reference to strategy guide
A strategy guide was not used in reference. Neither was the manual (as it is pathetic). Very few video game articles have been citing strategy guides as sources, the Pokemon articles are the exception.
  • Low external links
Not a criteria for GA or FA at all. Plus, there aren't really any suitable links to put.

Keep trying, send me a message if you need me to explain anything, Highway Batman! 10:24, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Most of your comments aren't really applicable for failing the article. However, I will add rationales and try to add a bit more content, but I an unable to atm so I'll try to get around to it later.--SeizureDog 20:46, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Addition of review link that understands the game?

--Charlesr 09:32, 26 October 2007 (UTC) Please note I'm biased here because it's a review on my website. I've not seen any other review out there that actually seems to understand how to play the game. All the others seem to be approaching it as a 3rd person action title like Bloodrayne, whereas it's much more akin to a 2D trad shooter (shmup). And they all think it's a memory test and learning the time between enemy fire, but all you need to do is listen to the audio cues and suddenly it makes sense. Just wait for the cue and jump out of they way. Even the insertcredit review misses this point completely. I've added a brief bit of text to the gameplay section to mention this and since it's an average game on gamestats etc, a fan's viewpoint (in the reaction section) to balance out the critic's notions. Anyway, the review link is: [1]
The game can be completed in under 2 hours on hard mode, whereupon you get ranked and scored on your entire game's performance. Like a shmup, it's supposed to be brief so you play again and better your rank. Again, all most of the reviews do is talk about how short it is, with no mention of ranking. (discussed properly in the review link above). The aim isn't to finish (like normal action shooters like bloodrayne) - it's to finish with high scores.

--Charlesr 11:03, 1 November 2007 (UTC)Ok, no reply yet so I'm adding it. Remove if you need to.