Talk:Resident Evil Gaiden

Wikiproject Video Games assessment

The article seems to be coming along nicely, however it still falls under C class criteria as it falls short of B-Class criteria #2:

C-Class Criteria

Taken from Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment#Grades WikiProject article quality grading scheme Class Criteria Reader's experience Editing suggestions Example C The article is substantial, but is still missing important content or contains a lot of irrelevant material. The article should have some references to reliable sources, but may still have significant issues or require substantial cleanup. More detailed criteria The article is better developed in style, structure and quality than Start-Class, but fails one or more of the criteria for B-Class. It may have some gaps or missing elements; need editing for clarity, balance or flow; or contain policy violations such as bias or original research. Articles on fictional topics are likely to be marked as C-Class if they are written from an in-universe perspective. Useful to a casual reader, but would not provide a complete picture for even a moderately detailed study. Considerable editing is needed to close gaps in content and address cleanup issues. X-Men Origins: Wolverine (video game) (as of August 2010)

B-Class Criteria

Taken from WP:BCLASS The article is suitably referenced, with inline citations where necessary. It has reliable sources, and any important or controversial material which is likely to be challenged is cited. The use of citation templates such as {{cite web}} is not required, but the use of <ref></ref> tags is encouraged. The article reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. It contains a large proportion of the material necessary for an A-Class article, although some sections may need expansion, and some less important topics may be missing. The article has a defined structure. Content should be organized into groups of related material, including a lead section and all the sections that can reasonably be included in an article of its kind. The article is reasonably well-written. The prose contains no major grammatical errors and flows sensibly, but it certainly need not be "brilliant". The Manual of Style need not be followed rigorously. The article contains supporting materials where appropriate. Illustrations are encouraged, though not required. Diagrams and an infobox etc. should be included where they are relevant and useful to the content. The article presents its content in an appropriately accessible way. It is written with as broad an audience in mind as possible. Although Wikipedia is more than just a general encyclopedia, the article should not assume unnecessary technical background and technical terms should be explained or avoided where possible.

Some notes to be more specific:

• The gameplay section is lacking. Having not played this game I don't know how simple it is, but even a game as simple as Defender has one large paragraph. I'd like to see at least one more paragraph of the same size *if* possible. If not, please provide a rationale as to why it's so short here.
• The History section should be broken into two sections: Development (the first paragraph) and Reception (the second)
• The Reception section could do with at least another paragraph, as it seems there are plenty of online reviews accessible.

All in all great work, but it's not quite there yet. --Teancum (talk) 15:28, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Note that these comments are no justifications to get a higher rating but just some explanations:

Gameplay is so short because the game really is pretty simple: you run around collecting items and you fight enemies in the process. Wouldn't know how to appropriately expand that section without going into WP:GAMEGUIDE-like specifics (such as weapons available, how your protagonist can be healed etc.). I'm open to suggestions, but I'm afraid I can't add much. Maybe a sentence on several characters being controlled by the player simultaneously and another one on the puzzles (which are basically collect item X and bring it to location Y to open the path to location Z), but that's about it.

Per WP:VG/GL#Organization, the history section can be broken up, but that does not make any sense here. A development section with two sentences is bad style, it doesn't get more informative with a header. Unfortunately, there are no sources to expand that aspect of the article further, either. Subsections are debatable, but I still find that overblown for a mere two sentences on the development.

Reception is pretty much the only section that can and still has to be expanded substantially. Just don't feel like doing that at the moment. Prime Blue (talk) 13:58, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Resident Evil Gaiden. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090221175207/http://www.capcom.co.jp/bio_series/series_title.html to http://www.capcom.co.jp/bio_series/series_title.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090810082505/http://www.gamespot.com/gbc/adventure/residentevilgaiden/review.html to http://www.gamespot.com/gbc/adventure/residentevilgaiden/review.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:52, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Capcom as developer and Kato as designer

This page had Capcom as developer in the infobox, and Kato as one of the designers, but this is a stretch of the truth. According to Itchy, Tasty by Alex Aniel, Capcom had barely any part in development. It was only Mikami and Kato who were involved. Mikami did some advising but was mostly hands-off, and yes Kato is credited for "Scenario and Planning" in the game credits, but in reality he had limited involvement: "I wrote the story and handed it off to the developer, but that was all I ended up doing. I do not remember interacting with the development team directly. Resident Evil Gaiden needed a plot, so I just wrote one." TarkusAB^talk/contrib 22:23, 25 April 2023 (UTC)