Talk:My Time at Sandrock

My Time at Sandrock was nominated as a Video games good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (August 18, 2024, reviewed version). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated.

Video games: Indie Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. 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 articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is supported by the indie task force.

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks

AfDs

Merge discussions

Other discussions

No major discussions

GA Review

Unsuccessful. TWOrantula^TM (enter the web) 04:54, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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.

This review is transcluded from Talk:My Time at Sandrock/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: JuniperChill (talk · contribs) 18:27, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: TrademarkedTWOrantula (talk · contribs) 04:53, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for nominating this article for GA status. Unfortunately, I am going to have to fail this article due to it not meeting criterion 3a, which states that it must address the main aspects of the topic. As of this review, the reception section has an insufficient amount of information to accurately depict the most liked and disliked parts of the game. This page gives great advice for writing such a section. Below are some other notes I've made. TWOrantula^TM (enter the web) 04:53, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

Should mention a one-sentence summary of the reception of the game (e.g.: "The game was praised for its graphics but criticized for its repetitive gameplay.")

Gameplay

The game starts by the player creating a character, then after that, a cutscene of the train plays. - Not really relevant because it's more of a "decorative" or "ambient" element of the game rather than a fundamental one.
Sandrock combines elements of farm life sims and role-playing video games. - Could be the first sentence of the paragraph.
The introduction of combat is a bit too sudden. Why does the player have to fight in the game? Also, you don't have to mention it's similar to My Time at Portia.
Twenty-one characters are romanceable. - Irrelevant... but interesting. ;)

Development

I'm seeing more primary sources than secondary sources. I'd recommending using the reliable sources engine at WP:VG/S to find information on it.
For comparison, Coral Island, another farm sim that entered early access and fully released in 2022 and 2023 respectively, pledged $1.6 million. - Original research (or irrelevant statistic, I get those mixed up). Point is, it's bad to mention comparisons.
What's a "local rating certification"?
Unlike My Time at Portia (which never planned to introduce multiplayer) - Uh oh. Another comparison...
Never heard of eXputer.com. Are they a reliable source?

Reception

The major problem, as I've mentioned before, is that it doesn't use the game's reviews from Metacritic to their full potential. There are multiple reliable sources from Metacritic that could've been used. (BTW, you should use WP:VG/S to help you determine whether a source is reliable.)
Another point I'd like to mention is that the section falls into the "[critic] likes that and said this" trap. A good reception section should unite the opinions of critics. For example:
- "Critics praised the game as entertaining. Some liked its cozy nature, while others praised how the game made them fall asleep. Crit Critic of Example magazine described it as a [unique thought]."
Third (but not really crucial) point: The scores from the reviews should be added into the reception table.

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.