Did some work and fixed some problems found in the last peer review, though gameplay will always be a problem as I don't actually own the game (so if anyone of you owns the game, please give some help!). - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 22:08, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
- Hopefully being helpful this time, maybe a screenshot of the game should be added. GamerPro64 (talk) 04:39, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
- Meh, I dunno; I kinda like this. As it stands, I'm not sure the article requires any fair use images, as the images it has demonstrates the subject adequately. This way, I don't have to worry at all about fair use images. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 05:11, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah, but what about people who never played this game? Maybe they want to see a picture of it. GamerPro64 (talk) 05:13, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
- This is true, but with a free use image to demonstrate gameplay, the appearance of the game may not be enough to sustain a fair use image. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 05:36, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
Interesting article. Surprised a little WiiWare game stirred up so much content. Here are the issues that stood out to me.
- The lead
- I think some release years would be helpful for the lead.
"It was first released in North America in 2008, and was later released in Europe the following year."
- Trim and condense. The Speed Pong part is more detail than is needed for the lead.
"Players can either choose to playengage in the Pong Toss mode, the standard mode of play, orand the Speed Pong mode, which encourages playersallows them to strategically use power-ups to negatively effect their opponents in order to sink their ping pong ball first."
- I think these two sentences can be joined to improve flow.
"Each mode has its own top five score list. Up, with up to four players may play either mode togetherable to participate."
- Not crazy about the suggested wording I gave, but I think you get the idea.
- I think a word is missing.
"Pong Toss received a very negative reception..."
- Also, this sentence repeated in the reception. I would change one for variance.
- I think there's too much detail about what specific people said about the game. I would summarize the comments: Common criticism focused on the game's premise, graphics, and control scheme.
- There's nothing about the development of the game. There are some good bits in the first two paragraphs of "Development". Go ahead and add them in.
- Gameplay
- Don't think adding an extra word for context would hurt. Your call.
"...use the Wii Remote to throw a virtual ping pong ball across..."
- I agree with GamerPro about a screenshot image in this section. Does the game use 3D or 2D graphics? Are the graphics realistic or cartoony? What perspective do you play it from: first person or side view? Some of this can be added to "Gameplay", but a picture would really help. We can worry about shifting images later around to make it all fit in nicely.
- The bit about the JV Games adding speed pong should probably go to the "Development" section.
- Combine the two sentences to improve flow.
"Players can select from one of three environments to play in, with a choice of different tables. Players, and can also create acustomize their player character to play as."
Unfortunately, it's late and I'll have to finish up another time. (Guyinblack25 talk 07:57, 7 November 2009 (UTC))
Comment was removing the image in the infobox a good idea. While true it "does nothing to demonstrate the subject matter." it does make a significant contribution to user that this article is about a WiiWare game much as a cover would indicate for a video game or a logo for a piece of software. Keeping it there would prove no problems at a good article or featured article nomination. Salavat (talk) 15:19, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
- Additional comment: It seems the removal of the image maybe was done more to work out positioning on the image below the infobox and it that case maybe a logo should be considered if the cover doesnt work well. Salavat (talk) 15:27, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
