Talk:The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt

The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt is currently a Video games good article nominee. Nominated by Cognissonance (talk) at 02:08, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

An editor has indicated a willingness to review the article in accordance with the good article criteria and will decide whether or not to list it as a good article. Comments are welcome from any editor who has not nominated or contributed significantly to this article. This review will be closed by the first reviewer. To add comments to this review, click discuss review and edit the page.

The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

Video games B‑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

B

This article has been rated as B-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

Merge discussions

Other discussions

No major discussions

The Most Awarded game of all time thing

Hi there, i was checking and the witcher 3 is now the most awarded game of all time with 251 GOTY awards, the official Gotypicks page posted this morning, so i was wondering why isn't in the article yet, doesn’t CDPR deserves that recognition? anyway, i'm just a big fan of the game and i think that that mark is amazing and that it should be here, thanks in advance to the the person who answer this. EikeAmdrade (talk) 16:03, 17 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I second this, the gotypicks page is THE source for what video games win how many awards. Not to mention the last of us wiki page (the game that previously had the title, had this information also. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Suriranyar (talk • contribs) 21:55, 17 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

http://gamerant.com/the-witcher-3-gdc-game-of-the-year/ gamerant published this article, in it says that The Witcher 3 is the most awarded game of all time. Does it counts? Because i've seen some other sites publishing that Gotypicks is the official page for GOTY awards, so i think that this proves it. EikeAmdrade (talk) 16:51, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Blogspot and GameRant are not included on the list of reliable sources for video game articles. Majority of the awards from the Gotypicks page aren't considered notable by Wikipedia either, so does that still make it the most awarded game of all time? ~ Dissident93 (talk) 22:13, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Dissident93, see Game Revolution, Igromania (official page on VK). Federal Chancellor (NightShadow) (talk) 09:43, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Dissident93, you have not reached agreement with other users. Do not delete reliable sources, confirming that the Witcher 3 is the game of the year in history. "Majority of the awards from the Gotypicks page aren't considered notable by Wikipedia" — If a reputable source refers to them they have importance. Federal Chancellor (NightShadow) (talk) 13:53, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Dissident93 is correct. First, none of those sources support the "More than 800 awards" statement. Second, the "251 game of the year" awards are already covered in the article. Third this is the lead, which summarizes the articles key points. Further expansion on this belongs under Reception/Awards, where again, it already exists. -- ferret (talk) 14:36, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ferret, what does "more than 800 awards"? This does not apply to our topic. It was about the fact that he won more "game of the year" awards (251) than any other game in history. Federal Chancellor (NightShadow) (talk) 14:56, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit included the text The Witcher 3 has accumulated over 800 awards since its release so I'm not sure how you don't see it as relevant to the topic. I have expanded on the 251 GOTY awards in the awards section using your sources. This is sufficient, please don't keep readding all these sources back to the lead. -- ferret (talk) 15:13, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, yes, I see. Sorry. Thank you. Federal Chancellor (NightShadow) (talk) 15:19, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ferret, you added that the game has received 251 awards in the category "game of the year", using my sources, but why don't you let me write that "he won more "game of the year" awards than any other game in history"? About it it is written in my sources. Federal Chancellor (NightShadow) (talk) 15:28, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"in history" is a bit too peacocky. I've made a tweak to include "the most ever at the time." -- ferret (talk) 15:32, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

At the time? But he is now. Federal Chancellor (NightShadow) (talk) 15:47, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

And tomorrow might not be. The statement is accurate and future proof. -- ferret (talk) 15:50, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Why delete GameRankings reviews?

Why delete GameRankings reviews? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.223.141.19 (talk) 15:50, 20 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

WP:VGAGG says "Do not include GameRankings in articles about newer games." This is because the GameRankings score is usually similar to the Metacritic so it doesn't really add anything to the article --The1337gamer (talk) 15:56, 20 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Famous Hobo (talk · contribs) 17:13, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take this one up. Famous Hobo (talk) 17:13, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for a bit of a delay, life's been a bit busy lately. Should have some free time tomorrow. Famous Hobo (talk) 17:17, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Famous Hobo: Try getting to the review within the month. I'm moving in November. Cognissonance (talk) 17:16, 18 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Famous Hobo and Cognissonance: I'd be happy to take this one over if you don't have the time. Played the game to death and article looks like a great read. CR4ZE (t • c) 14:17, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It would definitely expedite the process. Cognissonance (talk) 18:44, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I am not reviewing, but I thought I'd post a few comments/questions:

Development's last paragraph talks about voices, but it doesn't clarify the language. Presumably the reenactment of the battle in Poland would be helpful for Polish voices, but did they record knights in helmet speaking in English? Or any of the other 15 or so game languages?
Which languages was the game localized in? I don't see a list
I think the DRM-free sentence could be expanded into a paragraph, I remember reading several articles about how CPR approach to TW3 was seen as innovative, compared to unfriendly DRM-locks and such by some other companies. And it was not only because people complained about DRM, but also because the developers/company think DRM are consumer-unfriendly, and removing DRM would increase sales.
I think there is some more or less valid criticism that should merit at least a sentence, ex. one of the refs [1] mentions discussion of sexism and minorities that were significant, and again I can see enough refs that this type of stuff should deserve at last a sentence.
comparing pl article to this, I note it discusses 1) the intro/trailer by Tomasz Bagiński, our article does not mention him at all. 2) It also mentions that the writer Sapkowski helped a bit as a consultant for some names and map, but didn't have any other influence (ref). 3) it also mentions that the collector's edition, not even mentioned in our article, came with a figurine, medallion and an artbook. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:30, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- The fact that nobody is bothering to even reply to my comments does not bode well for this GA. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 10:13, 31 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  - The fact that the reviewer is not reviewing does not bode well for this GA. Cognissonance (talk) 19:21, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    - Maybe they are waiting for someone to address the issues I raised. If the person(s) who submitted this GA don't bother replying to me, the reviewer may assume they won't bother to reply to their review, so why waste time? I thought about taking over this review, but again, why bother? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:31, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
      - This is not new behaviour. I take your comments as suggestions, and disagree that they would improve the article. Cognissonance (talk) 20:43, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
        Would you care to discuss them in more detail rather then this generic dismissal? I spent substantial amount of time reading this, identifying problems and offering my suggestions as to what they are, almost as much as I would do if it was regular GA. Your dismissive stance is not making a good impression on me or anyone else who may want to review your work. Why should anyone offer review if you don't seem to be interested in even engaging in a discussion about proposed suggestions? If you don't want to implement them, fine, but I do not think this article is ready for a GA until they have been at the very least discussed properly. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:35, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
        I have implmented some changes based on your suggestions above. Languages generally are WP:GAMECRUFT, and so is the part about the trailer and voices, which are sort of trivial details, so trivial that I can't really find sufficient source to substantiate them. The DRM thing you mentioned above is more about CD Projekt's philosophy rather than this specific game. AdrianGamer (talk) 13:14, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment As info, there's been some pretty extensive copy editing and changes the last couple of days, see this diff set. -- ferret (talk) 23:12, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Famous Hobo: Will you be doing the review or can CR4ZE take over? Cognissonance (talk) 11:32, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

— pinging @Famous Hobo: again. AdrianGamer (talk) 13:14, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]