Talk:Uncharted 2: Among Thieves

Uncharted 2: Among Thieves received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Uncharted 2: Among Thieves article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find video game sources: "Uncharted 2: Among Thieves" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · TWL · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk

Archives: 1, 2: 50 days

Video games C‑class Mid‑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

C

This article has been rated as C-class on the project's quality scale.

Mid

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

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks

AfDs

Temmie Chang (2 participants)
Greg Martin (artist) (2 participants)
PKHeX (5 participants)
List of James Bond villains (9 participants)
Evernight Games (1 participant)
Pokémon Home (2 participants)
List of Pokémon volumes (3 participants)
Gameplay of Pokémon (8 participants)
Lisette Titre-Montgomery (7 participants)
Party royale game (3 participants)
Cossacks (video games series) (3 participants; relisted)
Rat Race (video game) (7 participants; relisted)
Red Barrels (3 participants; relisted)

Merge discussions

Other discussions

No major discussions

Drake recovering the phurba

The way it is written now, I think it is just a little incoherent. One sentence it says that Drake has survived a train wreck, the next it says there is a flashback and Drake decides to take part in a heist. Then the very next sentence it goes back to the present in the train wreck again. A sentence referring to a flashback four months ago sandwiched within two sentences that are referring to events in the present. And then in the next paragraph, it goes back to the events four months ago again. It just doesn't flow well.

The way it was written earlier, I didn't find any problem with it. It flows much better in my opinion. We don't need to tell the story in the plot section in the same exact order as it is in the game, scene for scene. It only needs to convey the arc of the story. What's more, after Drake's shot the propane tanks and the train falls down the cliff, there is the cutscene where Drake recovers the phurba (the phurba pick-up scene is shown twice in the game), so putting the part where Drake picks up the phurba in the middle of the plot section would follow the order as it is told in the game anyway. The important thing is, I found the earlier version reads much better than the one as it is now. 130.216.213.184 (talk) 02:37, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Game Of The Year edition

Information about the GOTY editionis listed twice, under both Special editions and Downloadable content. Obviously the info should be merged, but under which heading? JaffaCakeLover (talk) 13:53, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I deleted the GOTY mention under Downloadable Content, as the mention under Special Editions was properly referenced and stated that all listed DLC was included in the GOTY edition. I think that sounds reasonable. Jagmastercd60ce (talk) 3:03, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Merging awards article into this

The list is too big, I don't think that it should be done. TGabunia (talk) 03:14, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Therefore, wouldn't it get its own article? That would have been the reason it got its own article in the first place. Merging would only cause the awards section of this article to be too big, and then it would be suggested to be made into its own article... It already has been done, so why take it away? --114.241.30.19 (talk) 02:34, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]