Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Paper Mario: The Origami King/archive1: Difference between revisions

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Source spot check; changing subheading 5 to 4
Line 254: Line 254:


'''Ref 31, 32, and 33:''' I don't think this one is straightforward. The nominated article says that critics were surprised by the addition of companions, but I don't see any of them indicating surprise. The three citations are all attached at the end, but all three aren't in total agreement (though they do all agree that they are underused; it’s the prior sentence that's the issue). I think that 'critics' is too vague language here; I recommend breaking this sentence up and properly attributing the critics. "[...] caught many critics by surprise" =/ "to the devastation of many fans". '''Not passed.'''
'''Ref 31, 32, and 33:''' I don't think this one is straightforward. The nominated article says that critics were surprised by the addition of companions, but I don't see any of them indicating surprise. The three citations are all attached at the end, but all three aren't in total agreement (though they do all agree that they are underused; it’s the prior sentence that's the issue). I think that 'critics' is too vague language here; I recommend breaking this sentence up and properly attributing the critics. "[...] caught many critics by surprise" =/ "to the devastation of many fans". '''Not passed.'''
*:I've removed the beginning sentence, and replaced it with something that makes more sense. The sentence I removed was true (As I also did research on YouTube), but couldn't find any publications talking about the matter.


'''Ref 2, 42, 49''': Paraphrasing is good. '''Pass.'''
'''Ref 2, 42, 49''': Paraphrasing is good. '''Pass.'''
Line 262: Line 263:


On an unrelated note to sources, while reading I noticed a part in Development about glitches in the game. That feels more related to release than development. I understand why it’s there... but the location—sandwiched between a non-chronological account of development—does seem strange.
On an unrelated note to sources, while reading I noticed a part in Development about glitches in the game. That feels more related to release than development. I understand why it’s there... but the location—sandwiched between a non-chronological account of development—does seem strange.
*:Now, more and more info about the game's release came out as time went on, but I couldn't find a proper spot for it. I could add a sub-header, but I'll need your opinion on it. This is what it would look like.

== Development ==
[[Intelligent Systems]], the creators behind the earlier ''Paper Mario'' games, developed ''The Origami King''. While [[Shigeru Miyamoto]] was involved initially with the ''Paper Mario'' series, producer [[Kensuke Tanabe]] claimed he was barely involved in its creation, and that Nintendo gave the developers "almost complete control".

[[File:Kensuke Tanabe GDC 2011.jpg|thumb|left|alt=Photo portrait of Kensuke Tanabe | Kensuke Tanabe, developer and producer of the franchise since ''[[Paper Mario: The Thousand Year Door]]''.]] In early 2020, [[Shacknews]] revealed leaked plans for ''Paper Mario'' installment on the [[Nintendo Switch]]. According to ''[[Eurogamer]]'', Nintendo had intended to announce the game at [[E3 2020]] as part of a presentation celebrating the ''[[Super Mario]]'' series' [[Super Mario Bros. 35th Anniversary|35th anniversary]], but had to change plans after the convention was canceled because of the [[COVID-19 pandemic]].

Nintendo's Kensuke Tanabe, the game's producer, said he, "challenge[d himself] to create something new" by innovating different concepts than those used in other games in the series. He explained that ''The Origami King''{{'}}s gameplay differed from ''[[Paper Mario: Color Splash]]'' because he did not believe in repeating identical concepts from a previous game. He would use the same concept, but would develop it until it eventually reached its maximum potential. To establish a new non-''Mario'' direction for the game, [[confetti]] and origami became ''The Origami King''{{'}}s two major themes. Tanabe thought of paper-based ideas that had not been used in the series, and came up with origami, while Intelligent Systems had the idea for confetti.

=== Characters ===
Since the release of ''[[Paper Mario: Sticker Star]]'', new characters in the ''Paper Mario'' series could not be modified versions of existing characters, such as a change in age or gender, and any original characters had to have had no previous involvement with the ''Mario'' universe. Character designs went through a critical review by Nintendo's [[intellectual property]] team, although the designers were allowed to give Toads different outfits. On June 12, 2020, Nintendo released another trailer revealing partners that will join Mario on his adventure and help complete tasks, such as aiding in combat. Although the feature had remained absent from the games since ''[[Paper Mario: Sticker Star]]'', critics were still disappointed that the allies did not seem to have much functionality; some were hoping for partners that would help solve puzzles progress in skill alongside Mario.

[[File:Origami Princess Peach.jpeg|thumb|right|alt=Sketches of different versions of Princess Peach | The iterations of origami [[Princess Peach]]. While the variations were intended for design concepts, the image appears in game as a collectible.]]

Tanabe intended the origami Princess Peach to have an inhuman aura which he used to appeal to a more adult audience. He visualized her approaching Mario while she turned into an origami form; the game's opening sequence eventually used this action. To ensure characters would still be recognizable in their origami form, the artists analyzed each character to determine "whether a side-on or front-on view would be best to bring out their individuality". They created real-life mock-ups to make sure the in-game forms would be similarly realistic.

{{Quote box|quote="The Paper Mario series is all about paper. We came up with the idea of office supplies when we were thinking about various motifs that are related to paper but are not anti-origami. We found that the somewhat strange-looking real-life representation of office supplies without adding human features to them could work well as a visual hook for the game. In the end, "normal" isn't necessarily exciting, is it?" |source= Producer Kensuke Tanabe, 2020 ''PC Games'' interview|width=30em|align=left}}

The Legion of Stationery is an example of the concept of having characters not involved with the ''Mario'' franchise. The developers chose "objects that everyone will have interacted with at some point in their lives" for these roles. Tanabe referenced his childhood to develop these characters imagining what their weaknesses would be based on their function, such as hitting the backside of the [[hole punch]] during its boss battler to knock out previously punched paper. He also conceptualized their attacks based on childhood imagination and how children pretend what objects could do. For example, [[colored pencil]]s act as [[missile]]s in-game because of their shape.

Mario's first partner conceptualized for the game was Bobby. He was conceived with the intention of providing more memorable events tied to specific areas, rather than having a complicated story. ''The Origami King'' established characters that would appear alongside Mario and Olivia as the game progressed. In an interview with ''[[Video Games Chronicle]]'', Tanabe claimed Bobby became just as memorable as Olivia.<ref name="layout"/> Deciding upon other additional characters, he added "we chose the characters that would be the best fit for the events in each stage of the game". Bowser Jr. "was an exception"; the team added him as a character before they had figured out what role he would play because Masahiko Nagaya, an Intelligent Systems director, "had strong feelings about including a storyline where a son sets out to save his father".

When developing Olivia, the creators aimed to give her as much personality as possible. Tanabe said most characters that aid the protagonist tend to be guides or teachers and have little personality. He wanted to have a female character with as much of an outgoing personality as possible. He modeled her on "a certain Japanese actress". Initially it took a lot of effort to write her dialogue, but toward the end of development, it became rather easy. Tanabe felt she was almost "writing her own lines".

=== Design ===
The world design and the game's locations were created before the writers produced any dialogue. During the development of a scene, and the events that were unique to each section, the creators determined the emotion these should evoke in the player such as "astonishment or enthusiasm". They decided whether a scene should be shown as a "cutscene, dialogue or as a playable mini-game". The creators worked closely with Nintendo as they produced the game's many mini games so that the rules and the degree of difficulty matched the game's intended "emotional flow".

{{Quote box|quote="I’m not opposed to the fans' opinions. However, I view my game development philosophy as separate from that. If we used the same gameplay system wanted by the fans again and again, we wouldn't be able to surprise them or deliver new gameplay experiences. We always try our best to exceed expectations in surprising ways." |source= Producer Kensuke Tanabe, 2020 ''Eurogamer'', Germany interview |width=30em|align=right}}

Tanabe spoke with the director of ''Color Splash'', Naohiko Aoyama, who wanted "a battle system in which the enemies surround Mario to attack from all sides". They collaborated to form the game's ring-based combat, and Tanabe later implemented the idea of being able to slide enemies across the circles. He compared the idea to a [[Rubik's Cube]] saying, "it worked well. That is the moment I was convinced we'd be able to build our battle system." To demonstrate his idea for boss battles, Tanabe "drew concentric circles on a whiteboard, put mock-ups of some panels using magnets with arrows and other things drawn on them". He noted boss battles were designed to be "the opposite of regular battles" and worked with assistant producer Risa Tabata to simulate how the battles would work in-game, then proposed the idea to Intelligent Systems.

''The Origami King'' uses open world navigation, as opposed to the linear-based style of previous ''Mario'' games. Tanabe recalled the design team were "careful [...] to make sure there is always something in the player's field of vision to catch their attention". When asked if they had considered using a party-based system in ''The Origami King'' like the first three ''Paper Mario'' games, Tanabe replied that he never considered the idea. "[W]e chose the characters that would be the best fit for the events in each stage of the game". He felt that having partners exclusive to certain areas "create[s] more memorable moments".

Responding to criticism over the game's lack of several RPG elements, Tanabe commented on the difficulty of being able to satisfy fans who prefer the RPG genre. Not wanting to ignore casual players, he implemented several puzzle solving elements hoping to satisfy the franchise's core fans. He explained that:<blockquote>"players need to guess the weak points of bosses based on their characteristics and search for the solution to defeat them, otherwise they won't be able to win these battles. This is an adventure game after all, so it wouldn't be right if the battles didn't also have some kind of puzzle solving element!"</blockquote> When asked if he was aware of the criticisms of the previous games, Tanabe replied that he could not address every fan suggestion. Instead, he challenged himself to move towards new and innovative concepts, and focus on them so a large audience can enjoy them.<ref name="layout"/> He said he had not decided whether the series will return to the original RPG style.

=== Release ===
Nintendo released a trailer announcing ''The Origami King'' on May&nbsp;14, 2020, alongside promotional pamphlets produced exclusively for Japan, before they released the game on July&nbsp;17. The trailer announcement, released on [[YouTube]], appeared without the traditional two-day notice that Nintendo had given previously. Alongside the physical copy, pre-purchases of the game at the Nintendo UK store came with a bonus pack of origami sheets and magnets. ''[[VentureBeat]]'' wrote that the sudden announcement came because Nintendo was still adjusting to the transition of having employees working from home. Players discovered multiple glitches in the game that prevented the player from progressing; Nintendo resolved these on August&nbsp;5. On August&nbsp;28, Nintendo added Olivia, King Olly, and Origami Princess Peach as collectible spirits in ''[[Super Smash Bros. Ultimate]]''.


*:[[User:Le Panini|<span style="color:#1303fc">Le </span><span style="color:#F40">Panini</span>]] [[User talk:Le Panini|<sup><span style="color:#1303fc">[🥪]</span></sup>]] 20:26, 3 January 2021 (UTC)


'''Conclusion: A couple of issues.''' Fifteen total references were checked. The article's strongest point is a creative use of language, preserving ideas and rendering them recognisable (and findable by readers) while sustaining the ideas. Sourcing is judicious and well-researched. One instance of a two long sentences being tethered to three citations, feels a bit muddled. Need Ian's input about the E3 thing. Once these are addressed (in whatever form that takes), you can consider this a passed spot check from me. Happy to do any follow-ups as needed but I anticipate no issues given how straightforward most of it is. — '''[[User:ImaginesTigers|ImaginesTigers]]''' ([[User talk:ImaginesTigers|talk]]) 15:41, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
'''Conclusion: A couple of issues.''' Fifteen total references were checked. The article's strongest point is a creative use of language, preserving ideas and rendering them recognisable (and findable by readers) while sustaining the ideas. Sourcing is judicious and well-researched. One instance of a two long sentences being tethered to three citations, feels a bit muddled. Need Ian's input about the E3 thing. Once these are addressed (in whatever form that takes), you can consider this a passed spot check from me. Happy to do any follow-ups as needed but I anticipate no issues given how straightforward most of it is. — '''[[User:ImaginesTigers|ImaginesTigers]]''' ([[User talk:ImaginesTigers|talk]]) 15:41, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Revision as of 20:26, 3 January 2021

Paper Mario: The Origami King

Paper Mario: The Origami King (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): Le Panini Talk 22:02, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about the sixth entry of the Paper Mario series. This game was considered one of the best games of the franchise (except Paper Mario: The Thousand Year Door because people can't move on) and is on track to be the best-selling game in the series. It's received significant coverage, almost all of the sources being cited using Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Search engine, a video game source that only shows content from reliable sources. The game has been checked over for copy-editing by Spicy, SandyGeorgia, and Atsme during a peer review. Additionally, Gerald Waldo Luis, czar, and PhotoDrake gave their points to take care of the WP:MOS/VG. I had PresN as a FA Mentor, and Twofingered Typist did a copyedit on December 12.

Upon entering the third world of this game, I absolutely fell in love with this game. It has amazing visuals, writing, music, combat, and I know that "It's not TTYD" isn't a valid reason to dislike this game. I like it so much that I'm going out of my way to promote the series to good topic, because why not? That's just how much of an effect the game had on me. I'll be nominating this for TFA after a hopefully successful promotion. Le Panini [🥪] 06:14, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Aoba47

Unfortunately, I do not have the time to do a full review, but here are just some quick things I have noticed:

Apologies for not being able to do a full review, but I just wanted to point out some things I noticed during a quick read-through. Best of luck with the FAC, and I hope you have a great rest of your week! Aoba47 (talk) 18:46, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the suggestions. Feel free to leave any more. Le Panini Talk 00:16, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Support from Scrooge200

So, in the plot section, you introduce Bobby by saying that he doesn't have a fuse. In the next paragraph, you say that he lights his fuse and explodes. I've played this game so I know where he got the fuse from, but this should be cleared up. Additionally, it's not technically "his" fuse; it's his best friend's, after his got knocked off in the battle against Gooper Blooper. Scrooge200 (talk) 21:07, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Support from MilkyDefer

I mainly work in Chinese Wikipedia, and I have been planning to translate this article into Chinese. This is a very rare chance that I can connect to Wikipedia without a VPN. I may be forced to use a VPN at any time, making me unable to edit Wikipedia, nor responding to any further comments. I have the IP ban exception user right in Chinese Wikipedia, so if you need further comments from me, please feel free to drop a comment on my talk page on zhwiki.

@Nihonjoe: Sorry for sending an email to you. I will make use of this chance to post the contents of my email here.

  • The reference #38 is the game's review from Famitsu. The translation of the website's title is not correct to me. Paper Mario Origami King is only a small part of the whole sentence.
    • 『ペーパーマリオ　オリガミキング』 == Paper Mario Origami King
    • レビュー == review
    • ペーパークラフトのような世界は == In a world of paper crafts
    • I cannot understand the final part: 冒険心をくすぐる遊びの玉手箱だった, and I am seeking the editor who provided the original translation for help. @Nihonjoe: Could you help me by providing the whole translation of the sentence, thanks.
  • I would also like to point out that the Chinese version of this game has caused a controversy. I think you could include it in the article's Controversy section. The traditional and simplified Chinese version of the game both removed words like "freedom" and "human rights" from the game. After the Hong Kong protests last year, many people believe that Nintendo is kneeling in front of Chinese government. The following sources (in Chinese, mainly Hong Kong and Taiwan) are usually considered reliable by Chinese community: [1] [2] [3]. I am afraid that I cannot find reliable opinions from mainland China, this topic itself may have been censored in China.
    @MilkyDefer: I added a section about the issue. Do you have any additional sources that talk about the reception of this issue? I couldn't find much. I (hopefully) left a message on the Wikiproject Video games on the zhWiki. Le Panini Talk 13:50, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    @Nihonjoe: Additionally, I'm gonna need help with new translated titles and was wondering if you could translate traditional Chinese. I used google translate for now, but I have a slight feeling that " Paper piece Mary Lee Europe " isn't right. Le Panini Talk 14:05, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Your slight feeling is correct. Paper Mario's traditional Chinese version removed "freedom" and "human rights", making its meaning different from Japanese and English version, that's the correct translation. BTW, I responded to your comment on zhwiki. I think I got a broader view on this controversy. MilkyDefer (talk) 14:42, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    @MilkyDefer: Yep, I saw. I added "Controversy" as a sub-section in "Reception". How does it look? Le Panini Talk 15:18, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    @Le Panini: Looks fine to me. I suggest expanding the "original poster has received some criticism" part a little bit. Also to mention that both "strange Nobbio" and "Chinobio" refer to Toads (which means that machine translation is wrong), and there is a suspected typo: "as\nd". MilkyDefer (talk) 15:36, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    @MilkyDefer: Done. I was just gonna do this, but then you did. Le Panini Talk 17:47, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    @MilkyDefer: While you're active, do you have any more comments? Le Panini Talk 02:09, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You have done a great work. Good luck with this FAC! MilkyDefer (talk) 11:57, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It just came to me that I might need to check the references. I have fixed one broken URL and one broken archive. Please double-check all references, as IA-bot can sometimes make mistakes. MilkyDefer (talk) 02:10, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Le Panini: Wait a minute, while I was doing my translation job, I spotted that the table of the list of awards got its header wrong. Under the "award" column is the year. MilkyDefer (talk) 07:41, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Le Panini: Looks like reference #27 and #29 are the same. You may consider a merge. MilkyDefer (talk) 12:24, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • @MilkyDefer: Done. That should take care of it. It also seems that Nihonjoe has been inactive for about three days, and it might take a bit to hear a response from them. While you wait, I'm open to addressing any more concerns (although your suggestions seem to be required technical changes). Le Panini Talk 12:35, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your efforts. I just changed two reference URLs. One of them is an archive URL, you may submit a bug report to the one behind IA-bot because it seems to misinterpret the # symbol in the URL. That's all from my technical view. I will hold my support until the results of The Game Awards come out. A quick notice is that the reference you used for the Golden Joystick Award only supports that the game received a nomination. There is no reference supporting that the game did not win it. MilkyDefer (talk) 05:56, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Nihonjoe: What about you Nihonjoe? Would you mind giving suggestions while you're here? Le Panini Talk 03:09, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'll see if I have time. Beyond the reference above, I haven't ever read this article. I don't know when I'll be able to get to it. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 17:05, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Nihonjoe: No worries, just ping me if you start a review. Le Panini [🥪] 19:27, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The translated article in Chinese Wikipedia is currently under good article nomination. Someone commented that the "Reception" section was over-cited. Some sentences were supported by four or even six references, and a large number of review scores were not used in the content of the article. I'm currently doing a cleanup in response to this, and maybe it is a good idea for you to do the same thing. MilkyDefer (talk) 13:54, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The voting has ended and the article is promoted in Chinese Wikipedia. Thank you for your outstanding work! Here are some suggestions from the community (when saying "article" I an mainly referring to the translated article in zhwiki):

  • Per Template:Video game reviews/doc, only include reviews if they are cited within the text. A large number of less-known and not-used reviews were present in the review box, such as VG247 and Jeuxvideo.com. As a result, they have been wiped out from the article.
    Done. But kept some sources and included them in reception.
  • It makes no sense to cite Edge to claim that "Edge gave the game an 8/10, tying with Othercide for the highest-rated title of the week in August 2020." 8/10 is not impressive, Othercide is not well-known, and it is only the highest-rated (not sold, nor some serious game of the week) in a certain week. This sentence immediately follows the Metacritic score sentence, and no one can explain properly why include this Edge sentence. As a result, this sentence, as well as the review score from Edge, has been removed from the article (and VG reviews). I replaced that sentence with a synthesis of all topic sentences of the following paragraphs.
    Done.
  • Could you find some reviews that claim "the story seems pale compared to the dialogs"? A reviewer from a Chinese video game magazine claimed that, and made its way to the article. Maybe some English reviewer has the same idea and you might include that as well. If you could not find any, that is fine to me, too.
    I've read all these sources carefully, and I've seen no mention of the storyline.
  • The Famitsu source to reference its 36/40 score is incorrect. The correct link is this. (Title translation: Paper Mario Origami King's reviews, comments and thoughts. May seek assist from Nihonjoe)
    Done.
  • A picture of Rubik's cube (namely, File:Rubik's cube.svg) has been added into the article.
    We decided against this (by "we", I mean me and ThomasO1989), as it can be explained in text alone.
  • Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Video games#Awards, noteworthy awards and nominations that contribute to the overall reception should be documented in prose in this section. I have added a quick summary of the nominations right before that table.
    Done.

That's all from Chinese community. Wish you best luck. MilkyDefer (talk) 17:15, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Opposition from TZubiri

  • Oppose On three bases, First that the subject is not appropriate for front page featuring. Second that the subjects youth and commercial nature would convert the feature into a commercial advertisement, which is a bad precedent. Thirdly, all of the references are web citations, this is not a good standard for an encyclopedic article, in this case it's due to the youth of the subject and its digital nature, but not a good precedent in any case.--TZubiri (talk) 03:38, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wow, I haven't seen a luddite "non-'serious' subjects not written about in paper books should not be assessed for quality because I can't tell the difference between FAC and the main page" review in years. Please take some time to review the standards of the community you are participating in, both in regards to reviewing and what the FA standards are. This would, if promoted, be the 194th (extant) article on a specific video game to be an FA, and so not a precedent in any measure beyond how little time you spent looking into it. --PresN 05:38, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • @PresN: I haven't seen the other 194 articles, but I bet not all of them suffer from the exact problems I mentioned, pay close attention to the comment about young age of the subject and commercial interests, notice how all of the sources are close to commercial interests and could constitute as an advertisement themselves. If some of the 194 articles suffer from this problem, I would have opposed them as well, but that's irrelevant now.
I'm not seeing a big difference between an FA and a TFA, as far as I can gather, being FA is a requirement for being TFA and the TFA process is much less stringent. So one could say that the possibility of being featured on the main page is the most important consequence of granting FA status to an article. (P.S: The nominator also explicitly mentioned they plan to nominate for TFA) --TZubiri (talk) 17:51, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, I'm afraid these aren't actionable objections. Pls read the FA criteria re. sourcing -- the standard is quality, not book vs. web per se. If the subject passes notability guidelines then we can probably be said to have safely moved past the advertising concern. Lastly the type of articles that appear on the front page will tend to reflect their proportion among the pool of FAs -- not what's considered appropriate or inappropriate in anyone's opinion. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 06:30, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Ian Rose: I did glance at the criteria, they are nothing new to any wikipedia editor. Regarding sourcing quality, there is individual source quality and overall quality, an article may be based on several high quality sources, but if they are all of the same nature, web reviews made at release by the videogame journalism industry, then the overall quality of the reference corpus is low, not least because it's weak to biases. It is possible that there are no other sources on the subject to date, and you would be right in saying that this is not actionable, unless you consider waiting to be an action. Give the subject some time to breath, to develop more organic references.
I disagree with the comment regarding the absent relationship between FA and the main page, as I said, the most important consequence of a FA is that it has the possibility of being showcased on the front page, whether you consider the consequences of featuring an article or not, they exist.--TZubiri (talk) 17:55, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
So you're saying that we have to wait for this game to be sacred texts or something? The FA criteria is very specific of what ways an article can fail. "The article is only six months old" does not take effect. Also, all of these sources are confirmed reliable according to WP:VG/RS. Le Panini [🥪] 18:10, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It seems that the user did the Comments Opposition thing as if there was originally gonna be comments, but there never was. Do you have any suggestions? Le Panini [🥪] 10:54, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, wait a couple of years for other sources to comment on the subject and for commercial interests to die down.--TZubiri (talk) 17:51, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@TZubiri: I don't think that's necessary. Frankly, any mainstream interest of this game has calmed down drastically (as seen on the daily pageviews) and commercial interests hasn't been so "up in your face" as it used to. Everyone has moved on to the whole #freemelee something-or-other. The game has long received significant coverage, all of which confirmed by reliable video game sources. Le Panini [🥪] 17:59, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I think you can safely ignore this oppose (unactionable). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:19, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Support from SatDis

I will leave some comments below;

  • In the last sentence of Gameplay's first paragraph, could you split into two sentences like this; Throughout the game, the player sets out to follow each of the streamers, which occupy wide spaces for exploration. These areas contain puzzles the player will need to complete to proceed.
  • Could you change Nintendo Switch Paper Mario to a Nintendo Switch instalment/version of Paper Mario?
  • Link YouTube.
  • Fix the order of refs [28][27] in Characters section.
  • This quote "[W]e chose the characters that would be the best fit for the events in each stage of the game". sits as its own sentence without any introduction. Was it meant to be included in the prose?
  • The paragraph that begins with Responding to criticism... and leads into the quote, doesn't have a citation until into the next paragraph (visually). I would expect a citation at least right next to the direct quote.
  • Fix order again in Reception [51][52][53][42] and [37][12][43] and [36][12][46]... just check this section!
  • I would change the title of the "Awards" section to "Awards and nominations".
  • Ref #53 and #54 are not archived - was that a problem with the Kotaku site?
  • Apparently so, but I could archive one of them.

Well done with the article, I hope these comments help. SatDis (talk) 02:54, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@SatDis: I've addressed all your concerns, but did some rewording for better flow of transition. Le Panini [🥪] 03:47, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Support from ImaginesTigers

Hi there, Le Panini! I'm about to read over the article and give my overall impressions. Following your response (and if you decide to implement my edits), I'll apply the FA criteria and we'll see where we end up. Overall, my initial impressions are pretty good.

  1. The first sentence in paragraph three of the lead just reads very strangely to me: The Origami King's development emphasized innovation to a greater extent than previous games in the series. Development cannot really emphasise anything, right? So it'd be the team emphasising innovation during development, or something to that effect.
I shoved a little "team" in there.
  1. Does "Scenario" really need to be its own sub-heading? It’s only a paragraph, and it doesn't seem all that significant of a piece to be packaged so discretely. Especially because it begins by talking about design, and so seems suited to just be slotted into the next section as a self-contained paragraph.
I guess you're right, so I combined the sections.
  1. The game's Reception is wonderfully done. I'm really impressed. I do think that your paraphrasing is so excellent elsewhere in the article that there's no need so many large quotations elsewhere in the article, though. Especially the large block quote at the end of the Paper Mario: The Origami King#Design, about it having a puzzle solving element. I definitely think you have your own style as an editor; but that quotation just doesn't need to be there to that extent.
It's more or less not my style of writing; when I set this up for peer review, everyone was all like "too many quotes" (because it was bad before [5]), but a copyediting brought some of these quotations back. There was a reason (to help it read better), so I left it as is.
  1. I see that "role-playing" has been typed out in full several times before it is given its "(RPG)". I also understand why; it doesn't make sense to do it in the prior instances. At that point, though, may it just be better to remove it and stick with the fully written form? For consistency's sake.
That's an error; I've made some changes.
Sourcing is excellent. Not a single besmirch-able source. Kudos, really.
Right back at ya. Le Panini [🥪] 04:01, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

These are all pretty minor things. You've done a really great job with this article. There are some things I'm not a fan of — lots of quotations instead of paraphrasing — but ultimately that's my own style. You did a really great job. I don't really need to list the criteria to know (though I will, for posterity). I'll come back tomorrow to apply it. — ImaginesTigers (talk) 02:36, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@ImaginesTigers: Okie dokie! I've also responded to your initial comments, and I assume the quotations are Twofingered Typist's writing style (who did the copyedit), which brought along some additional quoting. I might not respond to you swiftly, being Christmas Eve and all. Le Panini [🥪] 04:03, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Looking forward to reading your next nom (feel free to hit me up for proof-reading)! — ImaginesTigers (talk) 04:10, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Support from GamerPro64

Going to stake a claim to review this nomination. Will go over this soon enough. GamerPro64 05:49, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Going to be honest. I came into this article with low expectations. But this is honestly a much more detailed article than I expected. My only gripe I have is noticing that some sources in the Reception section are not in numerical order and should be rearranged correctly. But once that gets done, I would be comfortable supporting this. GamerPro64 03:54, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    @GamerPro64: Done. It seems that IGN was moved up to ref 12, and made the organization all wonky. Le Panini [🥪] 04:34, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@GamerPro64: Sorry, I like to add the Comments thing to show that you previously had comments. Change it back if you'd like. Le Panini [🥪] 22:18, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Coord note

Hi Le Panini, I can see some commentary on images and sources (including coverage) but didn't notice a formal image review for licensing or source review for reliability and formatting. This being, as I understand it, your first FAC I'd also like to see a spotcheck of sources for accurate use and avoidance of plagiarism or close paraphrasing. I'll add requests for these to the top of WT:FAC. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 05:49, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've sent a message to Buidhe but never got a response back. I'll be here to deal with any changes. Le Panini [🥪] 07:24, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Ian Rose: Hi, Ian. I'd be happy to carry out a review of sources tomorrow given that this one seems to have stalled. I'd already looked through a handful of the sources, but I didn't realise I should have logged them. I'm quite familiar with WP:VG/RS because I've done a lot of editing in that area. I can do it tomorrow if you think that's okay, logging them as I go and looking for close paraphrasing. The article has 83 references—if you are okay with letting me do so, what is a reasonable amount for a spot check (percentage-wise)? It'd be good to know what is standard for my future reviews. Hope you're well! — ImaginesTigers (talk) 00:31, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ImaginesTigers, thanks for offering to do that, and I realise now I didn't put these requests at the top of WT:FAC as I said I would... :-P There's no hard and fast rule for how much to spotcheck but I'd trying aiming for at least 10 percent to start with, and if there are a few problems coming up then perhaps another 10 percent to get a good feel for how things are. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 12:29, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Gerald Waldo Luis

Sorry, Le Panini, I wasn't able to do a review back then, due to some burden on other stuff. Will help with this candidacy.

Lead
  • "...video game for the Nintendo Switch console." I would restructure this to "...video game released exclusively on the Nintendo Switch console".
    Done.
  • "The Origami King features cross-genre gameplay, blending elements of action-adventure, role-playing (RPG), and puzzle games." Supported by ref 1. It has been cited about in the body, so it's encouraged to have as little references in leads as possible.
    Done.
  • "...used enemies uninvolved with the Mario franchise"-- I would suggest changing "with" with "in".
    I believe with is the better use here. It's implying that new characters created for the game cannot leave a mark on the Mario franchise, like in timelines n' stuff.
  • "Anticipating an inability to satisfy every fan"-- "every fan" makes it seem delusional. Perhaps have it "...to satisfy fans".
    It's because everybody wants different things, and the developers couldn't cover all of the grounds. The "every" part is in there to show that different people want different things.
  • "Critical reception of the combat system was mixed, being praised for its innovation and criticized for its difficulty and lack of purpose." There's a double and here, so suggest changing to "Critical reception of the combat system was mixed: being praised for its innovation, and criticized for its difficulty and lack of purpose." I would also refurbish "lack of purpose" to "vagueness", but that's just me.
    I don't see how this would fix the problem, as two and's are still present. I went with "Critical reception of the combat system was mixed; being praised for its innovation, there was also criticism for its difficulty and lack of purpose."
  • "The game had sold three million copies by September 2020"-- I would have this fragment followed with how many months/weeks/days passed by from Sep 2020 since its release, so it'll be "The game had sold three million copies by September 2020, two months after its release". Gerald WL 13:53, January 2, 2021 (UTC)
    Done.
Plot
  • Linking festival seems to be too much of embeds.
    Done.
  • "...into origami enemies called Folded Soldiers." Perhaps "into origami enemies called the Folded Soldiers"?
    Done.
  • "...five multicolored streamers"-- which of the streamers is it referred to? I don't have the game, and am not generally a fan of the Mario franchise, so just asking here.
    Like, those streamers you'd find at birthday parties. Are those going to get an article? I can't really do anything about this, but its been addressed before.
  • Olly is your typical antagonist, eh? Gerald WL 16:13, January 2, 2021 (UTC)
    Yep, but Olivia isn't your typical Navi.
Development
  • Vague ref 14 following "Intelligent Systems,".
    Oops, Done.
  • "The YouTube announcement"-- Link YouTube?
  • Entire third paragraph relies on ref 27 and 28. So, perhaps move ref 27 to below and remove the initial ref 28 to save space?
  • I can't stand that image of Princess Peach. It's fucking cute.
    I removed it.
    No, no, no, that's not what I mean—
  • "...review by Nintendo's intellectual property (IP) team"-- Suggest linking intellectual property. Also, is the term IP used later in the article? If no, it seemed vague.
    Done.
  • "The announcement of Mario having companions throughout the game caught many reviewers by surprise, as it was a feature that had remained absent from the games since Paper Mario: Sticker Star. However, critics were still disappointed that the allies did not seem to have much functionality, and were hoping for partners that would help solve puzzles progress in skill alongside Mario." Suggest removing the initial ref 31, again, to save space. I'll continually refer to this suggestion below as "initial-save-space".
    Done.
  • "...backside of Hole Punch"-- links to the typical hole punch, but with the capitalization, I think it's a character in the video game instead. Mind addressing?
    Done. Did some clarification.
  • "Bowser Jr. "was an exception"; The team"-- decapitalize "The".
    Done.
  • Initial-save-space on last paragraph.
    Done.
  • Initial-save-space on Design para 2 and 3.
    Done.
  • "...as opposed to the "chapter"-based style"-- The term chapter is not uncommon in video games, so I don't see why the quote-endquoting.
    I just changes it to linear.
  • I don't think it needs a block quote; it's not that long anyways. Gerald WL 16:13, January 2, 2021 (UTC)
    It's the biggest quote that doesn't paraphrase, however.
Reception
  • "According to Hong Kong's unwire.hk people"-- Needs clarification on unwire.hk to not make it seem like a typo.
    Done. Added some clarification.
  • "on the GfK chart of digital sales." What is GfK?
    No idea. I removed it, as it didn't serve much to the text anyways.

Hope my comments help. Gerald WL 16:14, January 2, 2021 (UTC)

@Gerald Waldo Luis: Thanks for the review! I've addressed your concerns. Le Panini [🥪] 19:22, January 2, 2021 (UTC)

Source review

Not sure how to format this, but I've learned via the Project's Talk that formatting is a bad thing, so this is going to look completely hideous... I'll try to just use bold to separate.

Ref 2: Although the source is in German, it mentions the paper and cardboard theming repeatedly, and uses the German word for "linear". Neither are a close paraphrase of what the article expresses. Pass.

Ref 8: This citation supports an especially long part of the gameplay, but the wording and expression is sufficiently transformed. Basic words that can't be easily substituted are retained ("limited"), but there's some creative use of language by Panini in other places ("transitions to a battle screen"). Pass.

Ref 9: This one took a minute to realise because it was so creatively transformed. The nominated article says that items can be used to restore HP points; the review says that it will take more consumable items to finish a mission if you take damage. It says "obtainable hearts" earlier in the article, but it’s clear they're consumable items. Pass.

Ref 14 and 15: Two citations, supporting one sentence, properly attached to the respective statements. 14 supports that IS developed the previous games in the series and this instalment; 15 supports both that they developed the game. Counting this as 1 reference. Pass.

Ref 18: The Eurogamer article says that Nintendo "was hoping to lift the lid on its Mario plans at E3 [with the] release timed to celebrated the 35th anniversary of Super Mario Bros. in September". As someone who follows gaming news, I know that E3 was cancelled because of the pandemic (prior to the Eurogamer article's publication). The nominated article says "but had to change plans after the convention as cancelled because of the COVID-19 pandemic", but Eurogamer doesn't say that. Eurogamer omits it, I expect, because it’s well-known (but is an error on their part imo; they should have mentioned it). This is a philosophical question more than anything. This could be resolved by adding another source says that E3 was cancelled because of the pandemic (and wouldn't be synthesis IMO—it’s just relating two separate facts, and there's no analysis). I think this is a pass, and will count it as one. Ian, as an experienced reviewer I'd appreciate input here!

Ref 28: Straightforward corroboration; no issues. Pass.

Ref 31, 32, and 33: I don't think this one is straightforward. The nominated article says that critics were surprised by the addition of companions, but I don't see any of them indicating surprise. The three citations are all attached at the end, but all three aren't in total agreement (though they do all agree that they are underused; it’s the prior sentence that's the issue). I think that 'critics' is too vague language here; I recommend breaking this sentence up and properly attributing the critics. "[...] caught many critics by surprise" =/ "to the devastation of many fans". Not passed.

  • I've removed the beginning sentence, and replaced it with something that makes more sense. The sentence I removed was true (As I also did research on YouTube), but couldn't find any publications talking about the matter.

Ref 2, 42, 49: Paraphrasing is good. Pass.

Because of the problems with Refs 31, 32, 33, I looked back at other grouped references which spanned two or more sentences.

Ref 29 and 36: I wasn't sure if this was synthesis, so I checked with a long-term WP:VG editor and admin, and they have said it isn't. It is just providing an example, and the guide is by a paid staff member of a reputable publication. That said, the sentence is a bit long and clumsy, so I do recommend splitting it up. Pass.

On an unrelated note to sources, while reading I noticed a part in Development about glitches in the game. That feels more related to release than development. I understand why it’s there... but the location—sandwiched between a non-chronological account of development—does seem strange.

  • Now, more and more info about the game's release came out as time went on, but I couldn't find a proper spot for it. I could add a sub-header, but I'll need your opinion on it. This is what it would look like.

Development

Intelligent Systems, the creators behind the earlier Paper Mario games, developed The Origami King. While Shigeru Miyamoto was involved initially with the Paper Mario series, producer Kensuke Tanabe claimed he was barely involved in its creation, and that Nintendo gave the developers "almost complete control".

Photo portrait of Kensuke Tanabe
Kensuke Tanabe, developer and producer of the franchise since Paper Mario: The Thousand Year Door.

In early 2020, Shacknews revealed leaked plans for Paper Mario installment on the Nintendo Switch. According to Eurogamer, Nintendo had intended to announce the game at E3 2020 as part of a presentation celebrating the Super Mario series' 35th anniversary, but had to change plans after the convention was canceled because of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Nintendo's Kensuke Tanabe, the game's producer, said he, "challenge[d himself] to create something new" by innovating different concepts than those used in other games in the series. He explained that The Origami King's gameplay differed from Paper Mario: Color Splash because he did not believe in repeating identical concepts from a previous game. He would use the same concept, but would develop it until it eventually reached its maximum potential. To establish a new non-Mario direction for the game, confetti and origami became The Origami King's two major themes. Tanabe thought of paper-based ideas that had not been used in the series, and came up with origami, while Intelligent Systems had the idea for confetti.

Characters

Since the release of Paper Mario: Sticker Star, new characters in the Paper Mario series could not be modified versions of existing characters, such as a change in age or gender, and any original characters had to have had no previous involvement with the Mario universe. Character designs went through a critical review by Nintendo's intellectual property team, although the designers were allowed to give Toads different outfits. On June 12, 2020, Nintendo released another trailer revealing partners that will join Mario on his adventure and help complete tasks, such as aiding in combat. Although the feature had remained absent from the games since Paper Mario: Sticker Star, critics were still disappointed that the allies did not seem to have much functionality; some were hoping for partners that would help solve puzzles progress in skill alongside Mario.

Sketches of different versions of Princess Peach
The iterations of origami Princess Peach. While the variations were intended for design concepts, the image appears in game as a collectible.

Tanabe intended the origami Princess Peach to have an inhuman aura which he used to appeal to a more adult audience. He visualized her approaching Mario while she turned into an origami form; the game's opening sequence eventually used this action. To ensure characters would still be recognizable in their origami form, the artists analyzed each character to determine "whether a side-on or front-on view would be best to bring out their individuality". They created real-life mock-ups to make sure the in-game forms would be similarly realistic.

"The Paper Mario series is all about paper. We came up with the idea of office supplies when we were thinking about various motifs that are related to paper but are not anti-origami. We found that the somewhat strange-looking real-life representation of office supplies without adding human features to them could work well as a visual hook for the game. In the end, "normal" isn't necessarily exciting, is it?"

Producer Kensuke Tanabe, 2020 PC Games interview

The Legion of Stationery is an example of the concept of having characters not involved with the Mario franchise. The developers chose "objects that everyone will have interacted with at some point in their lives" for these roles. Tanabe referenced his childhood to develop these characters imagining what their weaknesses would be based on their function, such as hitting the backside of the hole punch during its boss battler to knock out previously punched paper. He also conceptualized their attacks based on childhood imagination and how children pretend what objects could do. For example, colored pencils act as missiles in-game because of their shape.

Mario's first partner conceptualized for the game was Bobby. He was conceived with the intention of providing more memorable events tied to specific areas, rather than having a complicated story. The Origami King established characters that would appear alongside Mario and Olivia as the game progressed. In an interview with Video Games Chronicle, Tanabe claimed Bobby became just as memorable as Olivia.[1] Deciding upon other additional characters, he added "we chose the characters that would be the best fit for the events in each stage of the game". Bowser Jr. "was an exception"; the team added him as a character before they had figured out what role he would play because Masahiko Nagaya, an Intelligent Systems director, "had strong feelings about including a storyline where a son sets out to save his father".

When developing Olivia, the creators aimed to give her as much personality as possible. Tanabe said most characters that aid the protagonist tend to be guides or teachers and have little personality. He wanted to have a female character with as much of an outgoing personality as possible. He modeled her on "a certain Japanese actress". Initially it took a lot of effort to write her dialogue, but toward the end of development, it became rather easy. Tanabe felt she was almost "writing her own lines".

Design

The world design and the game's locations were created before the writers produced any dialogue. During the development of a scene, and the events that were unique to each section, the creators determined the emotion these should evoke in the player such as "astonishment or enthusiasm". They decided whether a scene should be shown as a "cutscene, dialogue or as a playable mini-game". The creators worked closely with Nintendo as they produced the game's many mini games so that the rules and the degree of difficulty matched the game's intended "emotional flow".

"I’m not opposed to the fans' opinions. However, I view my game development philosophy as separate from that. If we used the same gameplay system wanted by the fans again and again, we wouldn't be able to surprise them or deliver new gameplay experiences. We always try our best to exceed expectations in surprising ways."

Producer Kensuke Tanabe, 2020 Eurogamer, Germany interview

Tanabe spoke with the director of Color Splash, Naohiko Aoyama, who wanted "a battle system in which the enemies surround Mario to attack from all sides". They collaborated to form the game's ring-based combat, and Tanabe later implemented the idea of being able to slide enemies across the circles. He compared the idea to a Rubik's Cube saying, "it worked well. That is the moment I was convinced we'd be able to build our battle system." To demonstrate his idea for boss battles, Tanabe "drew concentric circles on a whiteboard, put mock-ups of some panels using magnets with arrows and other things drawn on them". He noted boss battles were designed to be "the opposite of regular battles" and worked with assistant producer Risa Tabata to simulate how the battles would work in-game, then proposed the idea to Intelligent Systems.

The Origami King uses open world navigation, as opposed to the linear-based style of previous Mario games. Tanabe recalled the design team were "careful [...] to make sure there is always something in the player's field of vision to catch their attention". When asked if they had considered using a party-based system in The Origami King like the first three Paper Mario games, Tanabe replied that he never considered the idea. "[W]e chose the characters that would be the best fit for the events in each stage of the game". He felt that having partners exclusive to certain areas "create[s] more memorable moments".

Responding to criticism over the game's lack of several RPG elements, Tanabe commented on the difficulty of being able to satisfy fans who prefer the RPG genre. Not wanting to ignore casual players, he implemented several puzzle solving elements hoping to satisfy the franchise's core fans. He explained that:

"players need to guess the weak points of bosses based on their characteristics and search for the solution to defeat them, otherwise they won't be able to win these battles. This is an adventure game after all, so it wouldn't be right if the battles didn't also have some kind of puzzle solving element!"

When asked if he was aware of the criticisms of the previous games, Tanabe replied that he could not address every fan suggestion. Instead, he challenged himself to move towards new and innovative concepts, and focus on them so a large audience can enjoy them.[1] He said he had not decided whether the series will return to the original RPG style.

Release

Nintendo released a trailer announcing The Origami King on May 14, 2020, alongside promotional pamphlets produced exclusively for Japan, before they released the game on July 17. The trailer announcement, released on YouTube, appeared without the traditional two-day notice that Nintendo had given previously. Alongside the physical copy, pre-purchases of the game at the Nintendo UK store came with a bonus pack of origami sheets and magnets. VentureBeat wrote that the sudden announcement came because Nintendo was still adjusting to the transition of having employees working from home. Players discovered multiple glitches in the game that prevented the player from progressing; Nintendo resolved these on August 5. On August 28, Nintendo added Olivia, King Olly, and Origami Princess Peach as collectible spirits in Super Smash Bros. Ultimate.


Conclusion: A couple of issues. Fifteen total references were checked. The article's strongest point is a creative use of language, preserving ideas and rendering them recognisable (and findable by readers) while sustaining the ideas. Sourcing is judicious and well-researched. One instance of a two long sentences being tethered to three citations, feels a bit muddled. Need Ian's input about the E3 thing. Once these are addressed (in whatever form that takes), you can consider this a passed spot check from me. Happy to do any follow-ups as needed but I anticipate no issues given how straightforward most of it is. — ImaginesTigers (talk) 15:41, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  1. ^ a b Cite error: The named reference layout was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Paper_Mario:_The_Origami_King/archive1&oldid=998098708"