Talk:Insane 2/GA1

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: A412 (talk · contribs) 19:24, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

I'll do this one. ~ A412 ^talk! 19:24, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

• Non-prose stuff done. ~ A412 ^talk! 02:20, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
• Lead done. ~ A412 ^talk! 04:38, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
• First two sections done. ~ A412 ^talk! 06:25, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
• Done. Ping me for another pass when addressed. ~ A412 ^talk! 22:08, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written. a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): It is factually accurate and verifiable. a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism): } It is broad in its coverage. a (major aspects): b (focused): It follows the neutral point of view policy. Fair representation without bias: It is stable. No edit wars, etc.: It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate. a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall: Pass/Fail:

References

References as of this version.

Spot checks:

• [1] -- Are you sure you have the Steam release date correct? Article dates to 25 January 2012 and says "today".

The only other articles I could find are by Multiplayer.it and Sg.hu, which I presume is a Hungarian technology website. The Italian source seems to have the date wrong, and the Sg.hu article also says "today" and is dated January 25. However, the Steam store page and reviews with information boxes containing the date (such as this) have "January 24".

• [6] -- Reading machine translated German, but I don't see where the article discusses "Gate Hunt". Is it hidden in the section discussing capture the flag?

It is in the gallery under the section "Bremsen sind überschätzt", about the game emphasizing speed.

• [11] -- Checks out.
• [16] -- Reading machine translated Russian, but the source seems to say that GFI distributes the game in Russia only, but the article seems to indicate that GFI distributes it everywhere-but-Germany-and-Japan.

You are right. I thought source [23] implied that GFI also handled the worldwide release, but, in hindsight, that could have just been a company press release (and it is unfortunate that the full release was not archived.) I am not sure why the Steam page lists Game Factory Interactive as the publisher, though. The article has been corrected, and it also notes that Codemasters distributed the game in the West.

• [21] -- Checks out.
• [26] -- Checks out.

RS: I'm not familiar with some of these .ru sites. What are gametech.ru, gameguru.ru, km.ru, and stopgame.ru?

For the "game" sources, you should head over to this page on the Russian Wikipedia. Two are explicitly considered reliable there, with gametech.ru having spun off from iXBT Games, another reliable source. km.ru is admittedly frustrating. Although it appears to be cited over three thousand times on the Russian Wikipedia, I could turn up little discussion about its quality. My guess is that it was a fine source to use in most cases until ten years ago. Would you like me to remove it?

Eh, it's cited for an interview. I think that the source is used enough that I'm confident it's a real interview, so it should be fine to keep per WP:ABOUTSELF.

OR: Everything appears cited.

CV: Earwig comes back clean.

Images

Cover art: I have no doubt that this is the correct cover art, but sourcing it from ModDB seems to fail WP:USERG.

It is true that I obtained the cover art from ModDB, but what if I were to source it instead from the official website? Frustratingly, there is almost nowhere else on the Web that has a cover art just like the official one, only higher-resolution.

I think the official website would be preferable.

Gameplay image: No issues.

Prose

Lead

• Insane 2 (stylized as In2ane)[1] citations go inside parentheses WP:REFPUNCT
• Players take control of an assortment of motor vehicles -- Do players control multiple vehicles at a time? I think the gameplay section words this better as "one of..."

Never thought anyone could believe this might mean multiple vehicles! Also the urge to utilize higher-level vocabulary. I thought I could compromise by changing it to "Players control one of an assortment of motor vehicles ...", since the vehicles are sorted into classes. If need be, I can remove the "assortment" part.

• completing objectives in one of ten different game modes. -- It seems like off-road racing is something of a "main" game mode. Would it be clearer to say something like "participating in off-road races or completing objectives in one of ten (nine?) other game modes, such as Capture the Flag."?

Come to think of it, off-road racing is a major mode. And yes, there are a total of ten modes, so "nine other game modes".

• Invictus had no known input in the team's creative process, and so the latter relied on the details of the game to be succeeded and the reviews published at the time of its release -- There's some really confusing pronoun usage occurring here. I think both "the team" and "the latter" refer to Targem, and "the game" and "its" refer to the first Insane, but that's super hard to parse out.

I just reread it, and clearly I hiccuped. I was confused, too, by my own writing, especially with the "game to be succeeded" part. Such awkward phrasing there. Also concision.

• Notably, the team altered the game mechanics so as increase the dynamics of the gameplay at the expense of some physical realism. -> either so as to increase or , increasing

It slipped past my watch, but I decided to just make it concise; "so as" is replaced with "to", and "some" is deleted.

• The variety of the game modes -> The variety of game modes
• Reviewers were divided on the artificial intelligence -- artificial intelligence of _what_?

It never occurred to me in all my history of editing video game articles that I would need to clarify what AI refers to, but this proves me wrong. A casual reader may not readily grasp what it is. I fixed it.

Gameplay

• The races are set in fictional locations on four continents of Eurasia, North America,[2] Africa, and Antarctica -- Is there something specific about North America being depicted that would require a citation in this manner? The source appears to list all four continents, so it should be fine to move the citation to after the phrase, or even to the end of the sentence.

It was there because it was the only source I could find to clarify which of the Americas, but it was probably not necessary how the citation was placed. The footnote is moved to after Antarctica.

• Up to eight players drive in one of 18 four-wheeled motor vehicles -> Up to eight players each drive
• There are as many as ten game variations -- I think there's a source that says there's exactly 10.

I thought about that part before the review started, and decided as well that it was pointless verbiage. I doubt I will ever be able to explain why I thought then that was important.

• Would you mind splitting the game mode paragraph (as it's kinda a wall of text) into old and new modes?

Very well.

• General comment on the game mode paragraph: the text uses both players and racers. Is this just for variety, or do the terms mean something different when used?

Generally, when I write, there is the desire to utilize a wide vocabulary of words to avoid using "repetitive" language, especially the sort that readers will find glaring. I may be the only one who will find such choice of words glaring. All instances of "racer" are changed to "player".

• In Gate Hunt, players attempt to deactivate as many gates as possible -- How do players deactivate gates? Drive through them?

You explained that better than apparently I could have.

• Return the Flag is another flag-based mode -- Can you group the two flag-based modes?

No, I don't think so. For brevity's sake, I will just replace most of that part with "has".

• In Greed, packages colored gold, silver, and bronze are parachuted from the sky -> gold, silver, and bronze packages are dropped by parachute
• and a certain number of points are awarded to whoever collects them, with gold being worth the most and bronze the least -> and points are awarded
• Zone Patrol is a new variation of Gate Hunt where one can pass gates claimed by an opponent and "recolor" it, diverting their point to one's score. -- The article describes Gate Hunt as "deactivating" gates, not mentioning claiming or coloring. I don't understand the description of this mode.

Reworded. It is wordier, but I think it is clearer.

• The only means of progression is by placing in the top three, which also awards the player points for purchasing three different kit upgrades[6] for a vehicle's five attributes of speed, acceleration, boost ability, off-roading, and durability, as well as tickets for buying a paint job -- "kit upgrades" is jargon, and this is probably too much information. Placing in the top three also awards players points, which can be spent to upgrade the performance of their vehicle, or to paint it. (are tickets just awarded, or bought?)

It has been rewritten, partly by me. I also removed the mention of tickets since it is not in either source, although I have no doubt that it appears in one of the screenshots by gram.pl.

• Placing better rewards more prize money -- Is "prize money" distinct from "points", as referenced in the previous sentence?
• The boost ability for each[10] vehicle is used to increase its speed. -- Mid-sentence cite again. Also, I would reflow the next two sentences here: Vehicles have access to a limited boost ability, which can be used to increase their speed and automatically recharges after being used. However, in modes with flags, carrying the flag disables the boost ability.
• In multiplayer, a second player can join the first in split-screen (located in the single-player menu), provided the former has a gamepad controller, the only one supported being the Xbox 360 controller. -- Couple issues. Using "the former" to refer to the second player is confusing. Also, I don't think the location of the menu needs to be mentioned here. If the publication mentioned it, you can add it to the reception section. Also, can collapse the last part to has an Xbox 360 controller.

It's fixed, although I do not see any point putting the parenthesized text under reception.

Development and release

• The first Insane game was created by Invictus Games, a video game company based in Debrecen,[2] Hungary -- Link the first mention of Insane in body text. And once again the cite can go at the end of the phrase.

Thought I did not need to link it since "Insane" was already linked in Gameplay.

• Plans to release Insane 2 were first announced in February 2009 -- Was it first announced in February 2009 or first planned in February 2009? Unclear.

Oh dear, I must have embellished my writing at the expense of obfuscating its meaning. I should stop doing that.

• Interviews: We don't need to mention that he was interviewed. Can just say "Game designer Nikolai Seleznev told Igromania" and similarly for the other mentions.

I will trim it down. However, with the other two sources, I removed their mentions since the reader can just look at the citations so see who was interviewing the designer. Is that all right?

• he revealed that dynamics was factored in Targem's development -- Is "dynamics" an understandable term to a casual reader? (I don't understand it) Is there a wikilink that can help here, or can we explain it inline?

This has been my peeve from before I nominated this article up to this point. I was sure how to clarify something that is not readily understandable, but, having understood the original source's context and only now explaining the term, I concluded that it should be understood as "pace".

• To increase the dynamics, the company decided to add the boost ability after much deliberation and changed the damage system so that parts would fly off and the only impact on a vehicle's performance is wheel loss -> and changed the damage system so that parts would fly off, but made wheel loss the only damage that would affect vehicle performance
• The obstacles include road trains, rail road transport, rhinoceroses, and stray lightning bolts that threaten to strike the racer's vehicle -- This belongs in gameplay, or removed, but not in development, I think.

I concluded it was fitter to put it there since the source told it in the context of development, but you are probably right. It is moved.

• The company also conducted extensive analyses and surveys and conversed with players to determine the style of the gameplay -- very vague. Are sources more detailed? Can probably just drop this sentence if not.

I explained how exactly the company used the surveys.

• and tracks were ordered from youth musical groups -- What does this mean?

I replaced "ordered" with "bought". Is that sufficient for understanding the text?

Reception

• General: "it" feels like the wrong pronoun when referring to reviews / publications, especially when you also use "it" to refer to the game. You could use "they", or try to rewrite some sentences to avoid having to use ambiguous pronouns. Also use past tense consistently in this section.
• Critic reviews of Insane 2 were mixed -- Per MOS:VG, we should cite a source instead of making our own summative judgement of reviews. Is Metacritic or Gamerankings data available?

There is, but the Metacritic page suffers from having three reviews instead of four. Therefore, it gets no Metascore. I also checked an archive of GameRankings, but there was absolutely nothing about review data. I even briefly skimmed the situationally acceptable OpenCritic in the rare event it has an item on the game, which, naturally, it does not. I will take for granted that MOS:VG does not allow for such judgement in the absence of sources, so it has been removed. In case the guideline extends to the Hungarian reviews, I also deleted that part.

• The Czech division of Eurogamer generally praised the artificial intelligence -- of what?

I changed it to "driver artificial intelligence".

• , but felt that the vehicles were lightweight and the sound effects and music unimpressive, and criticized the lack of a speedometer or rear-view mirror in the user interface and the presence of only two camera angles -- Bit of a run on. Probably split this into a new sentence. Wikilink speedometer and rear view mirror.
• recommending that it be purchased only at a discount from the introductory price of €28 -- Per MOS:VG generally exclude cost. Can remove bolded section.
• Igromania found the program easy to learn -- I don't think the program is commonly used to refer to games.

I did it again, did I not? As I said, the desire for a wide diction of words. "Program", in retrospect, sounds artificial.

• Hungarian sources were also mixed, who expressed their preference for the first Insane game -> expressing

Not applicable, I already deleted the "mixed" part as per an above edit suggestion, assuming that MOS:VG forbids that type of language without a source.

• PC Guru criticized the maps for their smooth surfaces -- not sure what "smooth surfaces" is referring to

It has been replaced with "PC Guru criticized the flat courses ...".

• observed bugs in the AI in game modes demanding its capabilities -- what does this mean?

This should have said "observed bugs in driver AI performance".

• and that the AI in Pursuit mode had an upper hand of knowing the course of the helicopter's spotlight in the first lap -> the upper hand
• and negatively compared the vehicular physics to Burnout Paradise as an aberration from the quasi-realistic physics of the original game -- Did the reviewer negatively compare Insane 2 to Burnout Paradise or to Insane? Which game has physics described as an "aberration"?

It has been reworded. It should make much more sense now.

• It also found the speed of cars to be middling even with the use of nitro -- I think the article refers to this as boost

While my talk page never received a notification that this article was place on hold, I am crossing out edit suggestions while improving the article, as I typically do when responding to GA reviews, commenting and asking questions if necessary. I will be doing that for several days. Also, consider looking at what I wrote about the PC Games review. I apologize for not adding it in time. I should have done that not long after receiving a copy on January 6. FreeMediaKid$ 07:59, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Looking good. I'll do a final pass soon. ~ A412 ^talk! 00:37, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

I did some small copyediting. I think it's basically good to go, and I'll copy the outstanding things that I think are still an issue below.

• RS: I'm not familiar with some of these .ru sites. What are gametech.ru, gameguru.ru, km.ru, and stopgame.ru?
• he revealed that dynamics was factored in Targem's development -- Is "dynamics" an understandable term to a casual reader? (I don't understand it) Is there a wikilink that can help here, or can we explain it inline?

Hopefully we can finish up this review soon.

~ A412 ^talk! 06:21, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

Just to let you know, A412, I am nearly done fixing the article. There are only two issues is only one issue I have not addressed. Right now, I am out of time to do that and will do so later today, but I am notifying you to avoid giving this article the same treatment I did Super Mario Run years ago: propping it up only to respond to the GA suggestions too late. FreeMediaKid$ 19:07, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

Additionally, consider reading the comments to your suggestions. Some of them contain questions. Thank you, FreeMediaKid$ 19:09, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

I responded inline to the two things that seemed like open questions. I think your fixes on all the other suggestions are good. ~ A412 ^talk! 05:54, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

A412, do you mind rereading the article? Every point raised in this review is addressed, I believe, with Reception having just been improved. Thanks, FreeMediaKid$ 19:12, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Congratulations, and thanks for sticking with it. ~ A412 ^talk! 18:14, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.