Misplaced Pages

Talk:XCOM: Enemy Unknown

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by SNAAAAKE!! (talk | contribs) at 20:08, 20 October 2012 (???). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 20:08, 20 October 2012 by SNAAAAKE!! (talk | contribs) (???)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

XCOM: Enemy Unknown is currently a Video games good article nominee. Nominated by Niemti (talk) at 20:08, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

An editor has indicated a willingness to review the article in accordance with the good article criteria and will decide whether or not to list it as a good article. Comments are welcome from any editor who has not nominated or contributed significantly to this article. This review will be closed by the first reviewer. To add comments to this review, click discuss review and edit the page.


Good articlesXCOM: Enemy Unknown was nominated as a good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (October 18, 2012). There are suggestions below for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated.
WikiProject iconVideo games C‑class Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game
CThis article has been rated as C-class on the project's quality scale.
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:
Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks
AfDs Merge discussions Other discussions No major discussions Featured content candidates Good article nominations DYK nominations Reviews and reassessments
Articles that need...
The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:

Platform(s)?

Has anybody found out what platform(s) this game will be coming out for? Frohike14 (talk) 22:46, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Genres - not RTS, not RPG

I'm going to remove references to the game being an RTS or an RPG. The sources cited for these statements (http://www.gameinformer.com/b/features/archive/2012/01/24/dissecting-a-classic-how-to-modernize-x-com.aspx for RTS, http://www.gameinformer.com/b/features/archive/2012/01/20/sid-meier-talks-xcom-enemy-unknown.aspx for RPG) do not support those assertions. The strategy element is discussed by the lead designer in the first interview at about 5:45 and "real-time" is not mentioned. Furthermore, this source http://www.gameinformer.com/b/features/archive/2012/01/09/first-screens-and-details-of-xcom-enemy-unknown.aspx says "So this is some kind of RTS?" to which the answer is "No". The RPG elements are discussed very briefly in the second interview, but Sid Meier does not assert that the game is an RPG, just that they hope it will appeal to RPG fans because it bears some resemblance to an RPG, which is an important distinction. If there is any actual evidence that the game has RTS or RPG features, then please do share it - but I've not been able to find any so I feel comfortable saying that given the current evidence, including it in the article is misleading. --FangXianfu (talk) 19:45, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

I'm happy on balance changing the reference in the header to the game being an RPG to calling it a TRPG to match the sidebar, rather than removing the statement all together. Reading the TRPG article, calling it that is supported by the sources. --FangXianfu (talk) 19:51, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

I'm going to add strategy video game to the title and sidebar to replace RTS. It does have strategic elements, it's the "real-time" part that's incorrect. --20:00, 27 September 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by FangXianfu (talk • contribs)

Of course it's not RTS, but the strategy is not turn based neither - it's pretty much like the original UFO. I think the tactical RPG elements are about how there are these few individual soldiers who get customized, which is pretty much like in (also mentioned) Silent Storm or Valkyria Chronicles. --Niemti (talk) 20:20, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Yes, exactly! Sorry for taking such a circuitous route in my comments above ;) I think it's at an accurate genre list now - that is, turn-based tactics, for the combat, tactical rpg, for the squad development between missions, and strategy (but not TBS or RTS specifically) for the resource management. Definitely better than saying RTS, TBT and RPG all at once! --FangXianfu (talk) 20:38, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

MERGE

http://en.wikipedia.org/Xcom — Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.152.168.88 (talk) 20:11, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

They're different games, developed by different studios. From this article: " Unlike the previously announced XCOM by 2K Marin..." So no, no merge. --FangXianfu (talk) 09:33, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
ADHD --Niemti (talk) 09:49, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Refs are broken

Only 20 of them display for some reason. --Niemti (talk) 19:03, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

I verified. Yep, broke. — Frεcklεfσσt | Talk 23:21, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
Looks like it was just a missing } from the end of a cite web template. --FangXianfu (talk) 18:06, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
Which was your fault. --Niemti (talk) 18:21, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
Yup, my bad! --FangXianfu (talk) 20:15, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Play Magazine review score reference

I just restored the source for the Play Magazine review score - it was replaced with a CN template. The source for the score is this page (name=RevPlayMag in the article). Please don't remove the citation again - the score is right at the bottom of the copy, in the same (quite small) font as the section headings. Thanks! --FangXianfu (talk) 07:42, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

Aggregators in copy of reception section

These edits refer:

I don't think there's any virtue in merely repeating content in the copy that's already in the vg reviews template. If there was more to say about the scores - an interesting quote, something to tie the scores into a theme, anything really - then that would be okay, but simply repeating the same stuff defies the point of having the vg reviews sidebar in the first place. Also, repeating it just means it has to be maintained in two places. Hence, I've removed the repetition. --FangXianfu (talk) 15:51, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

GA Review

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:XCOM: Enemy Unknown/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Sven Manguard (talk · contribs) 03:57, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

I'm going to do a summary fail on this nomination, as is permitted in the GAN guidelines.

This should not have been nominated at GAN while there is a valid "Needs Expansion" tag on one of the sections. The article is incomplete at this stage, and therefore fails criteria 3a.

Please refile after an expand the section has been made. Sven Manguard Wha? 03:57, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Categories:
Talk:XCOM: Enemy Unknown Add topic