Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Blizzard Entertainment games/archive1

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

The list was promoted by Giants2008 via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 19 November 2018 (UTC) [1].[reply]

List of Blizzard Entertainment games[edit]

Featured list candidates/List of Blizzard Entertainment games/archive1

Nominator(s): Pres N 18:06, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The latest list in my series of 90s video game developers/publishers (3D Realms/id/Raven/Epic/Firaxis), we have a developer/publisher whose history has been a swift rise to the top of the industry. Unlike many of the other companies I've done, Blizzard Entertainment hasn't had a rise and fall, but instead has gone from a small company doing ports of older games to the successful developer of computer RTS games to the creator of some of the biggest games in the world, including the genre-defining World of Warcraft, and some of the games that are the roots of the concept of eSports. Despite all this, it didn't have a standalone games list, so now it does. Thanks for reviewing! --Pres N 18:06, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from TompaDompa

The current logo of Blizzard Entertainment – I'd write since when.
and in 1996 Condor – I'd add a word or two for clarity, e.g. "and in 1996 the company Condor".
As was the case with the nomination for the corresponding Civilization list, I'm not a fan of the table layout. The more information an entry contains, the more the readability suffers.

TompaDompa (talk) 18:40, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done and done, and yes, I'm still using the same layout as at that prior FLC. --Pres N 20:22, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I only found a couple of things:

I found this sentence in the lead a bit confusing: "The company originally concentrated on the creation of computer ports of other studios' games, released in 1992 and 1993..." as it goes on to say the company released original games also in 1992 and 1993, indicating they weren't only concentrating on ports.
In the note "Heliotrope Studios took on the project", I would write "Heliotrope Studios assumed development of the project".

That's all! – Allied45 (talk) 11:45, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Allied45: Adjusted both; the idea with the first one is that Silicon & Synapse was founded in early 1991 and initially made ports of games, but within a year was using the money from those ports to fund original projects; the ports/remakes were all released in 1991 through 1993, and the original games were released starting in 1992- once they started making enough money on original games, they stopped doing ports. Let me know if its still unclear in the text. --Pres N 17:12, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, that's a lot clearer for me! I am happy to support – Allied45 (talk) 06:58, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 10:08, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

I think you need a few pixels of whitespace around the logo.
"concentrated on the creation of computer ports of other studios' games, released in 1992 and 1993, as well RPM Racing " minor issue but perhaps "focused on porting other studios' games, ... , as well as the release of ..."
"Soon afterwards in 1992," you've already mentioned 1993 in the preceding sentence...
"began ... and beginning..." repetitive.
"prior to its rename, " which rename?
You've overlinked "port" in the lead.
"and Blizzard itself has been an" reads a little odd, why not "while Blizzard itself..."?
"All of Blizzard's games released since 2004 still receive expansions and updates, such as..." if they all do, why cherry pick some?
"US$9 billion in revenue," etc, as of??
"Blizzard Entertainment has developed 19 games" again, {{as of}} here.
"Puzzle platform game" sea of blue, especially compared to "Real-time strategy game" and "Action role-playing game"
"In the early years of the company, while it was named Silicon & Synapse, Blizzard worked as a for-hire developer creating ports of already-released games.[78]" is this needed since it's covered in the lead?
Linkable items should be linked every time in sortable tables.
"Cancellation date" column doesn't sort correctly.

Just keeping you on your toes. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:15, 29 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, some of these are a bit sloppy of me. Done all but the logo, which I'll get to tomorrow. --Pres N 05:00, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@The Rambling Man: All done now; I've actually removed the logo after discussion with some other VG editors, who expressed concern that it shouldn't qualify for PD-logo in the first place (meaning it can't be on this list, as per prior precedent). --Pres N 22:52, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support my concerns addressed. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:08, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support – Looks good to me. Great job! Quick question, should you add Diablo Immortal to the list? BeatlesLedTV (talk) 00:37, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@BeatlesLedTV: Yes I should; added. --Pres N 02:55, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Giants2008: Just FYI, since I nominated this and TRM supported up above, you're the only potential closer, whenever you think it's ready. --Pres N 03:09, 15 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Giants2008 (Talk) 22:15, 18 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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