Talk:Laya's Horizon/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

Nominator: PresN (talk · contribs) 21:20, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: Vrxces (talk · contribs) 00:57, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

I'll take on this review. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 00:57, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Comment: Netflix is listed as a publisher in the infobox (I had written it like that then), but I recall IceWelder said that is incorrect on Terra Nil. For example, The Game Awards lists "Free Lives/Netflix", but it depends on how the infobox field is defined. I think the developer/publisher naming structure is a bit arbitrary. IgelRM (talk) 22:31, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

I think Terra Nil was a different case- it was released for a bunch of platforms by their publisher, and on mobile it was sold on the Netflix Games subscription service (so Netflix wasn't the "publisher" as they had no input on the game itself, but was the "distributor". For this game, Netflix actually was the publisher, and it's only been released on their service- ref#7 has a Snowman producer talking about how Netflix was involved in the production process beyond being a sales platform, in the sense that he's happy about them not trying to push creative decisions on them (which is a publisher relationship, not a distribution relationship). --PresN 22:43, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

I agree that it is a different case but the evidence could also be seen as an external producer relationship like with "produced by Apple Inc." games. Platform exclusivity doesn't necessarily mean publisher, but sources indeed appear to go with the label here. (I think there are some game articles which list distributors under the publisher field too, so I could argue that Netflix produced and distributed Terra Nil's mobile versions; anyway off-topic) IgelRM (talk) 22:28, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

It's a very good pickup! Without deeper interrogation, I will defer to the developer's press kit which identifies Netflix as the publisher for the game; if the developers are comfortable with their relationship being depicted in this way, it is probably a good compromise, even if there is an ambiguity. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 08:00, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Review

Does the article conform to the general standards of WP:VG articles including the WP:VG/MOS? Yes, no problem here.

Is the article generally well-written? One or two typos, nothing major.

• compay's -> company's (Development P5)
• Plaforming -> Platforming (Reception P1)

• Done both.

Is the article broad enough in its coverage and contains reliable sourcing? Yes, as mentioned below, after looking into sourcing, this seems to capture the breadth of reviews out there.

Do the sources cited verify the text in the article? A spot check of citations is fine. There's some minor editorialisation but it seems most of this is to simplify the expressions used in the sources.

• Suggest avoiding quotes where paraphrasing. For instance, Pocket Gamer suggested the flying "combines exhilaration with freedom", not "exhilarating" as quoted.

• Done

• The Edge accolade should be sourced directly the magazine and not the game website. For reference, its nomination assesses: Its twin-thumb interface, once mastered, offers remarkably granular input: this is a rare game that wouldn't, you imagine, be improved by a controller. I've included the citation.

• Done

• As above, you may want to also directly cite the Pocket Gamer accolades.

• Done both

Are media and links properly attributed and do not have copyright issues? Mostly fine!

• Snowman and not Built By Snowman is the correct name of the studio in the rights template.

• Done.

• Suggest directing the source to the developer's press kit and not from Mac Format as this is the correct source of origination of the image. See here: https://layashorizon.com/press/.

• Not done- it's not from the press kit (as I didn't think the 9 images there showed as much as they could of gameplay elements.

Any other personal opinions or miscellaneous feedback that may or may not be relevant to the nomination? See below:

Lead

• Are the dates of release of previous titles necessary to include in the lead?

• Removed

• open 3D game surely means open-world 3D game?

• Done

Gameplay

• Not a lot of feedback here - I think you've done an excellent job describing the gameplay.
• Would the screenshot be best placed in this section given that it's illustrating gameplay?

• Moved here- I had it below because on my screen the infobox would push it way down, but I see on narrower screens it would be fine.

• Noting the game is plotless, is information on the setting available i.e. the name of the island?

• Added a little bit, but it's unnamed and there's not much concrete setting- it's mostly single, evocative sentences like "Oh, these shipwrecks are from when our ancestors first arrived" or "I'm from this village, and it's just fish, fish, and more fish, I can't wait until I get my own cape."

Development

• The section is not overlong per se, but is paraphrasing quite a lot of content from primary interview sources that could be more concise. For instance, P2 takes some time to convey a single idea: the developers added features such as updrafts, air cushions and time rewinds to create an authentic flight experience that would guide players and minimise the disruption of crashing. But this one is definitely a matter of personal taste and not as necessary to nail for the GAN.
• Reading between the lines here, but development on Laya's Horizon had a five-year turnaround. Do the developers comment on why this was, presumably the disruption of the pandemic?

• They didn't say, no

• Given the OST title is synonymous, this may be a redundant detail to add.

• Removed

Reception

• The sentences pair together generally related ideas from reviews. Sometimes this structure doesn't work too well. Some sentences are a little light on detail from the reviews or can be a little confusing, such as the long, fragmented structure of the last sentence in P2.

• Tried to make that last sentence less bad (partly by cutting it in half).

• That said, I'm mindful this just isn't a game that had a lot of reviews, many of them not particularly in-depth, and this section does completely reflect available sourcing.

• It got shockingly little attention given how popular the Alto games were (and how good the game is); I have concerns about Netflix's marketing team. And yeah, some of them are just about the vibes of the game, which I find helpful as a reader but annoying as a Wikipedia editor.

• The section is also thematically organised by three topics: its accolades, praise for the flight and controls, and environment design and gameplay. So it's fundamentally set out well too.
• Suggest adding more details on the MacFormat citation as below.

• Done

@Vrxces: Done- responded inline! --PresN 18:58, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, cross-referenced and everything looks good. Great work! ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 07:59, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

References

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.