Wikipedia:Peer review/StarCraft II/archive1

StarCraft II

• A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for August 2008.

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I'd like to receive feedback on how to improve the article. Thanks, Gary King (talk) 22:34, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Giggy

Yeah, generally seems a good coverage of what's known so far.

• Are the fair use screenshots necessary?

  Logo is. Terran briefing system is, as it's discussed in the same paragraph. We've got one screenshot showing Terran and one showing Zerg, so one could argue that they both show two of the three major races of the game, which is pretty important. If we had a screenshot for Protoss units in action then we'd add that, too. Gary King (talk) 01:58, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

• I dislike the use of brackets in the second paragraph of Gameplay. Can you weave that stuff out of brackets and into sentences?
• I suppose this can be done when the game is released... but the Gameplay section is currently just a comparison to the original (at least for the first part), where it really should just explain gameplay as if talking to a newbie.
• "and its expansion, Brood War," - wlink? (and then delink next section?)

But yeah, generally looks good... I didn't find much! Good work. —Giggy 01:47, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

The rest is done, except for Gameplay comparisons. A lot of it is still "Blizzard says..." and then they draw comparisons themselves, so the article tries to quote them as accurately as possible on that. The entire article will change substantially once the game is actually released. Gary King (talk) 01:58, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Comments by Yohhans (talk) - Overall things look really good. I just have a few things (mostly prose issues) I'd like to comment on.

• Blizzard has also stated they are monitoring fan feedback to the game's revealed features and are taking such feedback into consideration, which has already led to some features being altered. - Any way this can be said better? As it stands, it reads awkwardly.
• StarCraft II continues its predecessor's use of cinematic cut scenes—pre-rendered, high-quality CGI movies, between levels to advance the plot—while also improving the quality of in-game cut scenes—rendered on-the-fly using the same game engine as the graphics in the game proper—within the levels themselves. - This needs to be broken up into actual sentences rather than just using multiple mdashes. It is amazingly confusing as it stands right now.
• Improvements included advanced scenery - should be "include"
• Improvements included advanced scenery allocation and more detailed and involved space terrain, such as floating space platforms with planets and asteroids in the background. Small cliffs, extensions, and even advertising signs were shown to have been improved and refined. - Also needs to be broken up.
• Vice president Rob Pardo has stressed that the Zerg and Protoss campaigns will function very differently from the Terran campaign. - Does he say how? If he does, it would be great to include this information. (mostly because I want to know and am too lazy to watch the video :))
• "charge" - move rapidly when engaging in combat - while --> "charge"—move rapidly when engaging in combat—while
• Among these are the inclusion of units that can traverse varying levels of terrain,[15] or with the capability to teleport short distances for pursuit or escape. --> Among these are the inclusion of units that can traverse varying levels of terrain,[15] or have the ability to teleport short distances.
• using a specialized structure. --> using a specialized structure, the warp prism.
• It has also been confirmed that the Xel'Naga, the ancient space-faring race responsible for creating the Protoss and the Zerg, will play a major role in the story. - It might be good to include a line about how this was hinted at with the secret mission included in Brood War. Although, that may fall under original research, I'm not sure.
• Does the story section needs more sources. If nothing else, the statement involving Chris Metzen needs sourcing. Or is the entire section sourced by the gamestar source?
• ... rebuild the Dominion, consolidating ... --> rebuild the Dominion, and is consolidating
• It has been stated that development on the game began in 2003, shortly after Warcraft III: The Frozen Throne was released. - by whom? And we need a source on this.
• allowing realistic interaction with the environment, such as "debris rolling down a ramp". --> which allows for more realistic environmental elements such as "debris rolling down a ramp".
• In addition, there are --> Additionally, there are
• Periodically, Blizzard Entertainment provides their fans with Q&A batches, web pages about the units, buildings, and lore, podcasts (titled "BlizzCast"), posts from Blizzard employees on forums (For example, "Cavez" (aka Dustin Browder), the lead designer for StarCraft II, periodically creates posts and threads in the official StarCraft II forum). -- ..... Yikes. Reword (and break up) please.
• Refs all look good.
• Random comment: only 1/3 complete? Curse you Blizzard! Work faster!

Thanks all done Gary King (talk) 22:16, 31 August 2008 (UTC)