Talk:Rayman (video game)

Untitled

There I started the clean-up of this article. Removed the tag (which was already on it since June!). I'll finish it later on. --Steerpike 22:29, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

Update: consider it done for now. --Steerpike 11:32, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

Fair use of the images

Why were all the screenshots removed? I don't understand. These are free promotional caps from the game? I have no clue who took them but does it matter? It's always the same image regardless. --Steerpike 15:06, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Well, we need to know who took the screenshots in general; oftentimes people will rip off screenshots from game sites, which isn't okay. Also, user-made screenshots of Ubi-owned games are free (as in libre), so we should use those instead of other screenshots. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 08:55, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Technically I don't see the difference between a screenshot taken by me or taken by a game site. It could be the exact same shot, and who can tell the difference? Why not put your own name under it? Anyway, the fact is that I don't remember where I got the screenshots. Some from the gallery at mobygames, possibly. --Steerpike 11:15, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

A game site may have a copyright claim, based on their choice of when the screenshot was taken. It's lame, but it's there. If you didn't take the screenshots, they really need to go, to be replaced with screenshots taken by the uploader. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 11:30, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

In other words, I could have said I took them and no-one would have been the wiser. This all strikes me as slightly absurd. However, the truth is I don't really care one way or another. I mean, it's been a while since I contributed to this page and have had it off watch for quite some time now. I won't revert it back or anything. Cheers. --Steerpike 15:52, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Well. Yeah. Basically it's due diligence for sourcing images; if you lie about it, it's your problem when the copyright holder gets annoyed (or when someone notices the images somewhere else). We just need someone to take their own images, that's all. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 15:57, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Rayman Junior

There was a spin off seris called rayman junior... It was centralised on learning, does this deserve a mention on the bottom of the article? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.137.67.157 (talk) 16:44, 8 December 2006 (UTC).

Raving Rabbids

Shouldn't Raving Rabbids be considered a spinoff since it isn't really the same kind of game (minigame collection vs. platformer)? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 217.116.246.5 (talk) 14:19, 15 April 2007 (UTC).

Also it says that its being released for Xbox 1, Game Cube and PS3 which is false according to its page Bushido Brown 12:11, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Rayman no longer exists

Now I'm no expert, and neither do I know what was there before, but it seems insane that there are articles called Rayman (video game), Rayman (series) and Rayman (character), but no article under the namespace Rayman as of 19:46 today. Surely one of the three should be moved to the main namespace? U-Mos 20:44, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Original Rayman.jpg

Image:Original Rayman.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 09:22, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Raymano.jpg

Image:Raymano.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 17:29, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Something Wicked This Way Comes connection?

Okay, I noticed today something odd--the boss of the game is Mr. Dark, the last level seems carnival-ish (mainly due to the presence of clown enemies), Space Mama (who appears again in this level) sprinkles dust on you, and the game is called RAYman...doesn't this sound like Something Wicked This Way Comes? Mr. Dark and a carnival appear, Space Mama could be the Dust Witch, and the character is named Rayman, possibly after Bradbury. Think this is worthy of mention? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.243.176.166 (talk) 03:29, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

"The PlayStation version has fewer lums"

Maybe someone could define the word "lum" here. The only definition I could find on wikipedia says "an item in the rayman game", which isn't exactly helpful. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.252.236.219 (talk) 07:13, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

"This idea was scrapped for obvious reasons"

"Early in its life, Rayman was going to be about an eleven-year-old boy named Jimmy. Jimmy takes advantage of the realms that he discovers within his computer to create a fantasy world called Hereitscool. When evil invades Hereitscool, Jimmy turns into a superhero named Rayman to save Hereitscool. This idea was scrapped for obvious reasons [...]" Perhaps an explanation of quite what these reasons are would be a good thing, I'm not getting anything especially obvious (unless it's "because that was stupid", but it really isn't all that much compared to some other games). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.14.243.53 (talk) 11:41, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Jaguar version

It seems to me the jaguar version is completely and utterly wrong and rather misleading. It sounds, from reading the Jaguar section, as if the other consoles versions of Rayman were made first and they thought "hey lets make a Jaguar version and ignore parts from the ps1 version etc." Problem is the Jaguar version was the original (and even the release dates on this very article back that up) so that rather than being, for example, "The ability to shrink is also missing from this version and one of the last boss phases (Space Mamas) has been completely ignored" that explanation ought to be in a different section of the article and should read more like "Newer versions, released after the Jaguar original, added the ability to shrink and included whole new areas not seen in the original Jaguar game, such as the boss phase Space Mamas." It strikes me that the Jaguar section is incredibly poorly written. I mean; if you read lord of the rings and Tolkien started to use the future tense to refer to the past, you would be very confused. Well that's exactly what this article seems to have done. 86.134.15.151 (talk) 14:08, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Done…well, kinda. Hey, it's a start! - someone who just all-caged Dream Forest and must now tackle Gong Heights (a breeze compared to Bongo Hills) :D —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.175.252.243 (talk) 23:45, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

I've found more in regards to the Jaguar version! Feel free to check them out! KGRAMR (talk) 00:17, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

• http://www.arcadeattack.co.uk/frederic-houde-rayman/
• https://archive.org/details/Gamefan_Vol_2_Issue_09
• https://archive.org/details/Gamefan_Vol_2_issue_10
• https://archive.org/details/Gamefan_Vol_3_Issue_02
• https://archive.org/details/Gamefan_Vol_3_Issue_05
• https://archive.org/details/Gamefan_Vol_3_Issue_09

Section Request: Plot

I know little of this game, but this article doesn't seem to even really mention a plot. I suggest adding a section with the plot of the game, because it seems this article is implying that the game has no storyline. 70.15.212.110 (talk) 18:33, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Playable on PS3

I was looking to see how I could play this game and was disappointed to see it hadn't been added to PSN according to this page, but I went to check and it is on their store! So can we add "PSN" or "Playstation 3" to the platforms list? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.122.241.113 (talk) 17:13, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

The PlayStation 3 version available for purchase on PSN is a PS2 Classic, meaning that the game files from the PS2 version are taken and emulated on PS3 hardware. Per our guidelines, we do not elaborate on emulations in such a regard. Lordtobi (✉) 17:17, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

According to the PS Store it is a PSOne Classic: https://store.playstation.com/#!/en-gb/games/rayman/cid=EP0001-NPEF00023_00-GRAYMANXXX000001 As far as I know the PS2 is unrelated, the game was never on the PS2 was it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.122.241.113 (talk) 14:49, 28 January 2017‎

Correct, my mistake. It is, however, the same result: An old game only emulated on (not ported to) a specific other platform, wherefore it does not belong to the infobox. Lordtobi (✉) 15:35, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Import from Polish Wikipedia

Can we start importing stuff from Polish Wikipedia, mainly legacy and sequels?

• Can we expand the release section? Rayman was first released for the Jaguar in 1995. 78.148.59.52 (talk) 12:43, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Is it reliably sourced? Do we have someone who can reliably translate? That should answer your question. Sergecross73 msg me 01:47, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

No Android version anymore?

Is there still no Android version anymore? --Jobu0101 (talk) 22:48, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

Sources

• https://archive.org/details/the-play-station-9-7-28-1995/page/86/mode/1up

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:Rayman (video game)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: NatwonTSG2 (talk · contribs) 23:35, 29 April 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: Vrxces (talk · contribs) 09:38, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

I can take this one on. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 09:38, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

• Hi @NatwonTSG2:, I will add more soon but here are some initial comments!

Review

Has the nominator significantly contributed to the article? Yes, quite clear you've added a lot to the article.

Does the article conform to the general standards of WP:VG articles including the WP:VG/MOS? Yes, all good here:

• The Development section's subsections are fine. If you wanted to simplify them further, you could break them down to 'Concept' and 'Design' but not a big deal!

Is the article generally well-written? Grammar needs a copyedit. I have the faintest hint that this could be because the article originally was transposed from the French version or had a multilingual editor, which is understandable! See below:

• Commas and sentence flow are a tricky thing to get right. There's a few mistakes in this article where the commas get in the way of the flow of the sentence:

• Lead P2 S1 - Can remove the comma.
• Gameplay P1 S1 - Can remove the second comma.
• Conception P2 S6 - A second comma is needed here after his in-game avatar. Alternately change to his in-game avatar Rayman and remove all commas.
• Completion P2 S5 - Add a comma after announced and remove the one after however, or rewrite to were also announced but never released.

• It's important to manage the tense, which should be the present tense. Past tense is only used for a gameplay section if the game is no longer playable:

• Gameplay P1 S3 - gained to gains
• Gameplay P1 S4 - included to include
• Completion P2 S5 - replace has with had - obviously it's no longer considered lost if it has been discovered, so the tense needs to change.

• There's a bunch of WP:LQUOTE punctuation issues. I used to fall afoul of this quite a lot. Make sure to only keep punctuation in the quotation marks if a complete sentence is being quoted.

• Some other minor fixes:

• • Gameplay P1 S1 - Omit it from which it
  • Gameplay P1 S2 - Omit as from The player controls as
• Gameplay P2 S1 - In each world ends is unclear. Perhaps: Completion of each world requires defeating a boss with special abilities at the end of the level.
• Completion P1 S1 - Replace who with where or who he with and'.
• Completion P1 S5 - Suggest inserting the Atari Jaguar, a console that
• Release P1 S2 - Can remove the in which isn't necessary.
• Reception P1 S4 - fifth=generation > fifth-generation
• Reception P3 S1 - received mixed review - received mixed reviews or similar
• Reception P4 S4 best visually games -> Something else - maybe most visually appealing. Best to check what the source actually said on this one.

Is the article broad enough in its coverage and contains reliable sourcing?

• Out of nowhere there appears content about Rayman Advance which is not supported by information in the article. Is this a port or remake? Does its gameplay differ at all from the original title, and is there release information on it?

Do the sources cited verify the text in the article? Spot check TBA.

Are media and links properly attributed and do not have copyright issues? The images within the article appear to be attributed and licensed correctly.

• Two screenshots in an article tends to be discouraged per the WP:VG/MOS, which states that additional screenshots are required to have stronger justification for their use, backed by third-party or secondary sources, regardless of what aspects of a game they show. Is the depiction of the SNES graphics of Rayman treated with detail in the article and sourcing? Is this justified adequately in the rationale for the image?

Any other personal opinions or miscellaneous feedback that may or may not be relevant to the nomination? See below:

Plot

• As per WP:VGPLOT, you don't need to cite the game's basic plot on a specific point, as seems to be the case here. Can omit or put at the end. Manuals are also generally not seen as preferred sources if reliable secondary ones are available.

Development

• Absolutely accept that Laura Kate Dale's book is a reliable source of commentary, but as we're looking for evidence of the game's development and not commentary, it it's far better to find a primary source on this: these magazines on the Internet Archive seem to mention the original concept.

Reception

• As expressed in WP:QUOTE and WP:VG/REC, the quotes in this section are very long and opportunities to paraphrase. This section probably needs a rewrite to edit down the long quotes that appear in this section, which are considerable.

• Also under WP:VGREC, many of the paragraphs imply a theme but are not explored. For instance, the second paragraph seems to be a collection of Jaguar reviews, and and not actually about what is implied by the first sentence. Other than the Advance version, it's probably best to focus on the key themes i.e. platforming gameplay, visuals and so on and organise comments from reviews about this.

• The graphics received mixed review from reviewers is a tautology.

Legacy

• ...helped spawn a franchise that spawned is also a tautology

• Suggest not mentioning Spooky Raymansion unless these are notable aspects of the coverage in the articles.

• The Fans hoped and still hope for the game to become an official and canonical game has to go as unverifiable speculation. For one, the first two citations don't state that, with the Gipp source even dreading the encroaching beige of the prospect of a remake. The VK source is WP:USERG and at any rate inaccessible.

My question

• For the details of the second screenshot of Rayman on SNES, it seems that the image was intended to illustrate and identify what the game originally looked like before development being pushed to the Jaguar. While when looking at it rationale, it seems that it used a video game emulator as a source and the fact that the image is demonstrate when necessary so. NatwonTSG2 (talk) 13:04, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

  Thanks. Doesn't seem like a problem really so happy to keep. Could you please let me know if you have actioned the above? Welcome to tick Y or strike through things to demonstrate this. I will try and get around to wrapping up the above as soon as I can. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 01:47, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

  What do you means by the above, isn't it the review in the top of the talk which It I doY or isn't it the good article nominations at the top so. NatwonTSG2 (talk) 12:23, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

  Oh, as in, just to make it a little easier to see what you've done, could you tick or strike through the above comments if you've actioned them in the article? Thanks! ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 06:51, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for your feedback so:

• Lead P2 S1 - Y
• Gameplay P1 S1 - Y
• Conception P2 S6 - Y, remove all commas
• Completion P2 S5 - Y
• Gameplay P1 S3 - Y
• Gameplay P1 S4 - Y
• Completion P2 S5 - Y
• Gameplay P1 S1 - Y
• Gameplay P1 S2 - Y
• Gameplay P2 S1 - Y
• Completion P1 S1 - Replace who with where or who he with and
• Completion P1 S5 - Y
• Release P1 S2 - Y

NatwonTSG2 (talk) 12:54, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

Cheers. I'm sorry, I've been interstate. I'll take another review of the article and do a spot check. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 23:41, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

While I did fix those new changes at the top of the article, there are some fixes and questions like for Rayman Advance which it's a port to the original game, the mentioning of The Spooky Raymansion which i put it here since it unlikely for Rayman Redemption to explain on it Independent article and the information about the fans wanted the fan remake to became an official game is removed alongside with the two citations. NatwonTSG2 (talk) 22:02, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

@Vrxces: This good article nomination has been inactive for over 14 days. Do you have any additional comments? 🌙Eclipse ^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:47, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Apologies, it's been quite a disruptive time; I'll address this tomorrow. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 22:27, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Second pass

Deep apologies @NatwonTSG2: for the delay, I have been away for personal issues. There are still a lot of grammar and copyediting issues unfortunately; particularly noticeable in the Reception section. Not a problem and that's what this process is for, so no stress! But it does suggest more work is needed on the prose, for instance:

Gameplay

• P1 S1/2 - The inclusion of omit is a misunderstanding of the previous feedback - omit means remove; it's not a suggestion to add the word to the text.
• P1 S2 - who his main is incorrect tense.
• P1 S3 - gains early is odd tense; suggest 'acquired' or 'gained'.
• P2 S1 - which the player have to attacked is incorrect tense.
• P2 S2 - if the player has lost five lives results needs a fix too.
• P2 S3 - Hidden in a various levels - Omit 'a'.
• P2 P3 - earned is inconsistent tense. Suggest extra life.

Development

P4 S4 - incorporate it
P5 S3 - defined - wrong tense
P5 S4 - each world
P6 S5 - would became is incorrect tense

Release

• P1 S1 - You can dispense with the comma.
• P1 S3 - Was it called Rayman Advance for DSi and mobile? Otherwise suggest clarifying this sentence.
• P2 S2 - Need to fix "It would grew"; suggest merging sentences given the same topic.
• P2 S3 - Avoid contractions.
• P2 S4 - Again, suggest merging these into one sentence as they are data points measuring the same thing.

Reception

• This section still is a loose collection of reviews that don't really evidence the headlining sentences at all.

• P1 S1 - "games of the year or any year" sounds like it's a direct quote and not a summary.
• P1 S2 - "though noting a lack of" is awkward framing to start with, fix "pay ability" typo.
• P1 S3 - this "ennobles the adolescence world of video games" is a direct quote, but doesn't make much sense at all without framing it as Strauss stating that the game may be the title that does so. At any rate, I feel like the focus is incorrect here; you could focus on his praise of the "lovingly-drawn" animation. He also isn't comparing the game to Snow White, he's saying that this game is doing what that film did for its respective medium.
• P1 S4 - Suggest not starting with "Also"; i.e. Strauss also stated...
• P1 S5 - Suggest leading with the review being the best system of the Jaguar. The quote's punctuation sits within the parentheses as you're quoting a full sentence.
• P1 S6 - Remarking should be in past tense. This sentence needs a rewrite given the present tense and awkward structure. I think stating that Glide praised the "precise" controls is all you need here.

• P2 S1 - "Despite the visual presentation of an acclaimed game" - could be clearer. Maybe something like Despite the innocent visual presentation of the game, many reviewers commented on its difficult gameplay. Also "critics and reviewers" is a bit tautological here.
• P2 S2 - Unless you're quoting, use past tense: "was" not "is"; "paled" not "pales".
• P2 S3 - "criticised"; also this is too direct a paraphrase, either quote it or summarise more generally. The text about players being "easily fooled" isn't informative; focus on what Hickman is criticizing the game for rather than the flourish of his prose. Also fix the typo in "it's lack interest" > "its lack of interest".

• P3 S2 - This is basically a paraphrase of the whole review and is a very fraught sentence. Either focus on the aspects that support the headline about the graphics, or summarise i.e. Sengstack considered the game to feature "wonderfully clever" gaming elements, "engaging and humorous" characters and "terrific" music, although considering the game lacked frequent save paints. The point about the animation is a red herring; it's a pretty minor complaint! Also apropos of nothing there's a typo on Donkey Kong Country.
• P3 S3 - Larry is not contradicting the previous review, which was largely positive, so a "however" isn't needed. Again, this seems like it's quoting the prose rather than summarising it.
• P3 S4 - They don't seem to have called the game "impeccable" and it's a four-star review, so this is misleading. Suggest adding "with" to the quote if going for the WP:LONGQUOTE.

• P4 S1 - "state" to past tense. This is a WP:LONGQUOTE and could be shortened or paraphrased.
• P4 S2 - Again, this is a quote and not a paraphrase. You need to more generally identify what the review is praising or critiquing, or make it a quote.

Legacy

• P1 S1 - "which spawn its sequels" -> suggest rephrasing, i.e. "spawned several sequels
• P1 S2 - "ubisoft would used" -> "would use"
• P2 S1 - "which said game features" -> there's no need for "said game" here
• P2 S2 - The point about The Spooky Raymansion is still not really clear. Is the relevance that the developer previously created a Rayman fangame?
• P2 S4 - "have" -> had; also what is this option? The phrase traumatized is editorialisation, keep it neutral.
• P2 S5 - "add" -> "added"; also add new additions to it as well - this sentence is doubling down on the redundant use of additional qualifiers.

For the second pass, here what I done.

Gameplay

• P1 S1/2 = Y
• P1 S2 = Y
• P1 S3 = Y
• P2 S3 = Y
• P2 S4 = Y
• P2 S5 = Y
• P2 S5 = Y

Development

• P4 S4 = Y
• P5 S4 = Y
• P5 S5 = Y
• P6 S5 = Y

Release

• P1 S1 = Y
• P1 S3 = Y (For DSI and Mobile, it's just titled Rayman)
• P2 S2 = Y
• P2 S3 = Y
• P2 S4 = Y

Reception

• P1 S1 = Y
• P1 S2 = Y
• P1 S3 = Y
• P1 S4 = Y
• P1 S5 = N (This one doesn't really give me a clear vision so)
• P1 S6 = Y
• P2 S1 = Y
• P2 S2 = Y
• P2 S3 = Y
• P3 S2 = Y
• P3 S3 = Y
• P3 S4 = Y
• P4 S1 = Y
• P4 S2 = Y

Legacy

• P1 S1 = Y
• P1 S2 = Y
• P2 P1 = Y
• P2 P2 = Y
• P2 S4 = Y
• P2 S5 = Y

NatwonTSG2 (talk) 12:00, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Thanks mate. Going at this section by section. Happy to work through this, but the number of mistakes and grammar issues really suggested it ideally needed a copyedit before nomination. I appreciate you actioning these. Also what was the issue with P1 S5? And the point about the headline statements is sort of still there. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 23:47, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

I am concerned there are still a quite large amount of grammar mistakes in the document. Can you please do or request another to do a copyedit before proceeding? ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 02:32, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

Okay, did request them a copyedit. NatwonTSG2 (talk) 23:13, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

The article still seems to still have grammar errors: "in which displays" in Gameplay P1 S1; "control as" in P1 S2; "had lose five of their lives" P2 S3, and that's just starting with the gameplay section. After several reviews of this article, we are still on grammar. Some substantive feedback on the reception section's headlining hasn't been actioned, which makes me feel like I am sort of just relaying changes to bring it up to my own standard at this point. I really appreciate your efforts to improve this article but I think another editor may need to be involved to help bring this article to GA. Apologies for the long delays in this journey but I am sure you will get there in the end. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 22:55, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:Rayman (video game)/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: NatwonTSG2 (talk · contribs) 18:20, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: IceWelder (talk · contribs) 17:07, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

Will do this in the next few days, probably tomorrow. Please nudge if I haven't done anything in a week. IceWelder [✉] 17:07, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

---

Infobox

• The infobox (and lead) normally shouldn't include any sources. Please move them into the body where appropriate.  Done
• Some of the release dates appear to be unsourced, crucially also the very first one. Please provide sources for all dates listed.  Done
• Listing four platforms as the title for the collapsible list is a bit measling, especially when both lists are collapsed. Please only use one platform in the title.  Done
• For collapsible list titles, use {{nobold}} instead of |titlestyle=. The latter does not render correctly in Wikipedia's new native dark mode.  Done
• Are the GBC/GBA version ports or adaptations? In the former case, the developers of these versions should not be in the infobox, or at most in a footnote.  Done

Lead

• Is "platform" or "platformer" the preferred name for the genre? I would tend to say it's the latter, but whichever you decide on, it should be used consistently throughout the article.  Done
• "published by Ubi Soft for MS-DOS, Atari Jaguar, Sega Saturn, and PlayStation" – Listing the platforms here is likely redundant since Ubi Soft published all versions of the game. Instead, use the development/release summary to mention platforms the game appeared on.  Done
• "The gameplay involves rescuing Electoons and gaining new abilities throughout the game." – Electoons were already mentioned in the prior sentence. The gameplay summary should be expanded a bit so that the reader gets the general gist of what is happening. The lead is quite short at the moment, so there is ample room for more text.  Done
• The plot summary here could also include the minimal detail of Rayman's motivations.  Done

• Is Gérard Guillemot's involvement relevant enough for the lead? He is mentioned only once in the body, and not in the role mentioned up here.  Done
• "Ancel pitched a demo for French software developer Lankhor before being hired at Ubi Soft." → "Ancel pitched a demo to the French developer Lankhor before being hired by Ubi Soft."  Done
• "In later development, Ubi Soft decided to make the game a launch title for the North American and European releases of the PlayStation as a way to compete with Japanese platform games." → "Rayman was first released on the Atari Jaguar on [DATE], and Ubi Soft decided to make it a launch title for PlayStation in North American and Europe to compete with Japanese platform games." Obviously, this hinges on whether the Atari Jaguar was indeed the first platform to release. According to some sources, the game premiered on the PlayStation. Please take your time to find the correct release order.  Done
• Surely there is a little bit more about the development that is important enough for the lead?  Done
• Also at this point, you could mention the various platforms it was released on.  Done

• "with praise going towards its visuals ... The graphics received mixed responses" – These conflict.  Done
• "who wrote that the game was showing off the Atari Jaguar's capabilities." – The placement makes this out to be negative/divisive, but it reads as a positive. If the opinions were mixed, this should mention what caused them to be mixed.  Done
• Platform mentions should be removed here, since they new should have appeared in the prior paragraph.  Done
• There should be a brief summary of criticisms as well.  Done
• "Due to its commercial success, the game spawned the Rayman franchise" – The series was already mentioned before, so it doesn't need to be repeated here.  Done

Gameplay

• Please find a way to separate "side-scrolling" and "platform game" per MOS:SEAOFBLUE.  Done
• "that displays a two-dimensional graphics engine" – It doesn't really display an engine, but this fragment is probably unnecessary anyways since you already precede this statement with explaining that the game is side-scrolling (without being 2.5D).  Done
• "incorporating hand-drawn animation" – Specifics about how the graphics were created should be in the Development section, not here?  Done
• "and multi-layered worlds with enemies" – What does "multi-layered" mean in this case? That it has a parallax effect? If this is just a graphical quirk and doesn't affect the gameplay, it shouldn't be here.  Done
• "that allows him to punch enemies from a distance" – I assume punching is Rayman's default mode of attack? The base mechanics (traversal, enemies, combat, level targets) have not been mentioned thus far, but they should be among the first things to state.

I couldn't find a way to mention (traversal, enemies and combat) in the first paragraph in the gameplay section other than in sentence 3 and 4.

• "Other abilities include a grabbing fist and the ability to hang on platforms." – Are these any different from the previous abilities? Why are they in a separate list?  Done

It's to avoid a redundant sentence list of abilities.

• "If the player loses five of their lives"; assuming the player only has five lives in total, this should read as "If the player loses their five lives". Additionally, the concept of lives has not been introduced yet. Do you lose a life for every hit (a hit point) or only after several hits?  Done
• "Hidden in various levels, the player can interact with The Magician" – A dangling participle!  Done
• "where they either earn Tings" – What are Tings? This is the only place they're mentioned.  Done
• "or an extra live" → "or an extra life".  Done
• "as long as they finish the level in the limited time given" → "if they finish the level in a given time".  Done

Plot

• "The people living in the valley" – "the valley" suggests it is a specific valley. Is there something that should be said about it, such as its name?  Done
• "in Rayman's world" – The plot is already understood to be in-universe, so I assume this can be removed.  Done
• "thanks to the Great Protoon" – Is there any information on who/what the Great Protoon is and how it achieved this peace?  Done
• "to use its power all for himself and spread havoc and chaos" → "and uses its power to wreak havoc".  Done
• Please explain what Electoons are. Are they inhabitants of this world?  Done
• "scatter over the world" → "scatter across the world".  Done
• "Betilla the Fairy, a guardian of the Great Protoon, battles Mr. Dark to protect the Great Protoon and the Electoons, but unfortunately fails and asks Rayman for help by assigning him the task to rescue the Electoons and defeat Mr. Dark." → "Betilla the Fairy, having been defeated by Mr. Dark as she tried to protected the Great Protoon, asks Rayman to help rescuing the Electoons and defeating Mr. Dark."  Done
• "Betilla frequently interacts with Rayman as needed to give him additional magical powers along his journey." – Is this relevant to the plot?  Done

• "After he rescues all of the Electoons, Rayman faces Mr. Dark, who attacks with various disorienting spells. Rayman arrives in a hall, where Mr. Dark traps him with walls of fire. At the last moment, the Electoons restore Rayman's ability to punch after Mr. Dark disabled it, with the latter continuing the fight by transforming himself into a hybrid of the bosses previously fought by Rayman." → "After rescuing all Electoons, Rayman battles Mr. Dark, who suppresses Rayman's punching ability and traps him between walls of fire. At the last moment, the Electoons restore Rayman's powers, such that he defeats Mr. Dark."  Done
• "Rayman rescues Betilla" – Why was Batilla in danger?  Done

Development

• Since this section also covers the release aspect, consider calling it "Development and release".  Done

Development – Conception

• Please avoid false titles.

For this it's just that many of the sources here such as almost all of the magazines' articles don't have/seems to have an actual article title,

• In the image caption, "(2007)" should probably read something along the lines of "(pictured in 2007)".  Done
• "in order to follow" → "to pursue".  Done
• "During development, he created a demo of the game for French software developer Lankhor." – This partially conflicts with the lead, which suggested that he sent in an existing demo, not that he made one specifically for Lankhor. Please clarify. The "During development" bit is redundant since the context of this sentence is the development.  Done
• Having just checked the source for the above statement, the timeline is obviously mixed up a bit. Ancel did create some demo for Lankhor, but not of Rayman. The source says he did so when he was 17 (i.e. 1989–1990) but only resumed developing Rayman in 1992.  Done

• "Hascoet recalled" – Please use special characters consistently.  Done
• "recalled the pair presenting" – Who is "the pair"? Ancel and Houde?  Done
• "Ancel said that "[t]hat's when everything changed."" – This feels like a filler and doesn't really add any information.  Done

• "15 million" should be separated by a non-breaking space.  Done
• "Founded in 1994 as Ubi Pictures, the studio became Ubisoft Montpellier." – Having written the Ubisoft Montpellier article, I know this is true, but you'll have to either add appropriate sources here or remove this segment.  Done
• I briefly glanced over the Game Informer source and noticed that tells of 100 people working on this game. This seems rather crucial and makes me wonder why this isn't mentioned in the article.  Done

Development – Design

• I'm fairly certain that Rayman does not have any ray tracing. The character may be named after the rendering technique, but the 60 Hz animation style is based solely on the rendering tools like in 3ds Max. These thoughts should be separated in the text.  Done
• Speaking of which, "60 Hz" should also be separated by a non-breaking space.  Done
• Since it appears that large parts of this text were written by various people of the years before you stepped in, I highly encourage you to re-read relevant sources to check for errors or find information presently missing from this article, thereafter rewriting potentially incorrect parts of the article.  Done

• "Steible drew rough models" – So Steible was also hired by Ubi Soft? This wasn't mentioned before. Perhaps you could use this source to fill some gaps.  Done
• "once the attitudes has been worked on" – What "attitudes" are meant here?  Done
• "for It to be scanned and reworked on a computer" → "for them to be digitised".  Done

Development – Completion

• "Ancel initially produced Rayman for the Atari ST and worked alone on every aspect of the game." – Him working on the game alone stands in stark contrast to the previous sentence. Is this in the incorrect order?  Done
• At the current stage, I believe the sectioning is a major hindrance to establishing a coherent timeline. I strongly recommend either reducing it to two (Ancel's background / the proper development under Ubi Soft) or not using any sub-sections.  Done
• "However, in 1993, Nintendo cancelled the system" – In particular, Nintendo cancelled the peripheral; "system" may refer to the SNES itself.  Done
• I'm having a hard time believing the claim by Apogee Entertainment that Ancel pitched the game there after 1993, since he was already working for Ubi Soft, an established publisher, with a set budget. It relies solely on a primary source from Apogee 30 years after the fact, so I'd rather see it removed.  Done
• The quote "the thing that has not changed in video games is the way that it is changing all the time" is again a nothingburger, especially since you go on to summarize it in the same sentene.  Done

• "Yves Guillemot noted that the PlayStation version of Rayman is a way of "beat[ing] Japan on platforming games"" – You're mixing a direct quote with incorrect appllied indirect quoting here. It would be better to just settle on something like "Yves Guillemot sought Rayman on the PlayStation to outclass competing platformers from Japan".  Done
• "Ancel recalled that the number of developers working on the game began to increase." – But not at the very end of the development, right?  Done

Reception

• Per WP:VG/REC, star-based scores should be converted to numbers.  Done
• I tend to put sales last in a reception section, or within a separate "Sales" subsection. This is optional, but I think it would flow much better.

Comment: I would do either one of these suggestions however, the information about the sales is too small be a subsection and also I prefer the sales to be first in a reception section.

• "as Eurogamer felt it was "no shame in admitting" that it was an acclaimed platformer" – Peacock wording and it doesn't really fit in with the sales numbers, so I think it should be removed.  Done

• "critically acclaimed" may be a bit much if it generally got around 75%. You could use the Eurogamer source from above to just summize that it got positive reviews.  Done
• Wording like "to date" must always be relative to the contemporary context but here could be confused as meaning "up to the current time". Please rephrase such instances.  Done
• "Next Generation, though noting a lack of original gameplay elements, agreed that" – With whom did Next Generation agree?  Done
• "most visually appealing games yet" → "most visually appealing games of the time".  Done
• "the like of Disney animated films" → "the likes of Disney animated films".  Done

• "Many reviewers have commented" → "Many reviewers commented".  Done
• "Electronic Gaming Monthly assessed that" – This suggests an objective finding, but the following sentence expresses an opinion.  Done

• "Reviewers wrote mixed reviews of the game's graphics." → "Reviewers raised differing opinions on the game's graphics."  Done
• This is highly optional, but I like to try to resolve the pseudonyms of some of the authors of old magazines. For example, "Scary Larry" was the pseudonym of Lawrence Neves.  Done
• "kiddie-oriented" doesn't sound too encyclopedic.  Done
• "solid game speed even on low-end PCs" – So, optimization?  Done
• "multitude of challenges" probably doesn't need to be quoted; it could be rephrased as "challenge variety" or something.  Done
• "[w]ith its vast color palette" – Minor capitalization changes in quotes generally do not need to be noted, and it reads much better without the brackets.  Done
• Furthermore, when a quote does not pertain to an entire sentence, the punctuation should be outside the quotation marks (MOS:LQ).  Done

Legacy

• "later spawned a franchise that spawned several sequels" – Avoid repeating "spawned".  Done
• "would influence" → "influenced".  Done
• "would be ported" → "was ported".  Done
• Also link porting.  Done
• The PlayStation Classic is probably not important enough to mention two full dates. Just "December 2018" as the release date should suffice.  Done
• "The titular character Rayman would become one of the most recognizable video game characters" – As of when? You only cite a 1995 source here, so the claim seems doubtful.  Done
• "and discussions were made about Rayman as the mascot for Atari Jaguar." → "and Rayman was in discussion to become the Atari Jaguar mascot."  Done

• "has been ported" → "was ported".  Done
• The Next Generation quote should be reduced to remove statements on gameplay elements not fit for a reception section.  Done
• This would also be the ideal place to state and cite the developer of this release.  Done

• "Rayman also inspired a fan remake under the title Rayman Redemption by Finnish game developer Ryemanni, which features new worlds, levels, and minigames compared to the original." → "{{xt|Rayman Redemption, a fan remake by the Finnish developer Ryemanni, features additional worlds, levels, and minigames.  Done
• "It was hosted in Game Jolt, and the development initially began three years before its release for the Rayman series' 25th anniversary." → "After three years in development, it was released via Game Jolt for Rayman's 25th anniversary."  Done
• "The game was made as "a reimagination of the original Rayman from 1995."" – This has already been established an can be removed.  Done
• "Kotaku also praised how Ryemanni decided not to just recreate the original game but also added new additions to it." → "Kotaku also praised the added content."  Done

References

• What makes Vidgames.com, Gamer Info, Unseen64, Retro Collect, and Vrutal reliable sources?  Done

Retro Collect is a reliable source according to [1], [2] I guess

Gamer Info and Unseen64 are replaced with better sources. The Vrutal source is basically Kotaku which is a situational source. And Vidgames.com may have reviews however, it pretty old website and I'm unsure whether or not, it could be reliable or not.

• DualShockers is noted by WP:VG/S as a low-quality source that should be replaced/removed.  Done
• When citing foreign-language source, please use |title= |language= |trans-title= constructs, instead of merely translating the title to English  Done.

Other

• Eliminate duplicate links (script).  Done
• I refrained from marking every grammatical error separately (especially since this seemed to drive the previous review's failure). Please re-read the article and correct obvious mistakes. I can help out with a quick copyedit at the end, and otherwise the Guild of Copy Editors is specialized for such work.

---

@NatwonTSG2: This concludes my initial review. Sorry it took so long! Feel free to strike through or reply to individual comments as you work on them. Regards, IceWelder [✉] 18:38, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

Why do you advice me to clear up tons of ideas and fixes which most of them seems unnecessarily and also I already send a request to the Guild of Copy Editors which was during the article's first GA review so. NatwonTSG^TALK 20:37, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

I would argue that none of the changes I requested are unnecessary. (If you feel differently on some points, please let me know.) The state of the article at the time of the review was very rought in terms of accuracy, sourcing, grammar, and style. I realize that writing good articles is a lot of work, so I'd rather provide many addressable points that allow us to get the article into shape. Vaguely saying "not good" and failing the nomination is, I feel, not productive.

That there already was a GOCE review is curious; while there certainly were edits, they appear to have missed large issues and the editor also forgot to tag the talk page appropriately.

Once you feel the article is ready for re-review, please let me know. If you need help with any writing aspects, I can help out as well. Regards, IceWelder [✉] 20:48, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

User:IceWelder Hi! I've changed the sales source with a different source. I think that's what it says? Timur9008 (talk) 15:32, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

@IceWelder: I feel like this article is ready for re-review so NatwonTSG^TALK 16:13, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

Great! I'll have another good look over the weekend. IceWelder [✉] 19:37, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

There are still some issues that stand out:

• Many of the release dates remain unsourced. All dates listed in the infobox should be mentioned verbatim in the body and have a citation to a reliable source.
• In the above list, you tagged altering the sections in the Development section as done, but the same subsections still persist in the article. As I noted, the section currently tries to awkwardly break apart an otherwise quite linear timeline.
• Mentions of Steible as an early contributor and Lankhor vanished from the Development section but remain in the lead. Was this a concious choice? If you have good information at your disposal, you should use it.
• If you wish to keep the sales inside the Reception section, I would highly recommend moving them to the end of that section to improve the flow. Usually, the quality of a game is what drives the sales, so this would also be the correct chronological order.
• When you say that Vrutal "is basically Kotaku", do you mean in terms of content or as in editors, publisher, or something in that direction? If it there is no glaring indicator for reliability, it should either be replaced or vetted at WT:VG/S.

IceWelder [✉] 16:39, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

For the new issues:

• All of the release dates are sourced and mentioned in the body in some form because listing all of them would be redundant.
• It's a bit hard for me to figure out the game's development most accurate timeline and for the sections, I merged two of my old sections into one and renamed them all.
• Mentions of Steible as an early contributor and Lankhor in the lead section are vanished.
• The sales in the reception section are moved at the end of the section.
• And for Vrutal, I do mean in terms of content, and for the editors, I do found some are annoymous and others use their nicknames.

NatwonTSG^TALK 01:48, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

The way you describe Vrutal doesn't inspire a lot of confidence and to a casual observer it looks like a low-quality meme site. I also noticed that GamerInfo.NET has been restored. I put up both for discussion at WT:VG/S. IceWelder [✉] 06:02, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

So far, both have only received negative-leaning feedback. Even prior to a formal closure of those discussions, I'd recommend that they are removed/replaced with better alternatives. IceWelder [✉] 17:29, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

As promised, I have performed a thorough copyedit of the article. I am generally happy with the current state apart from some unsourced dates (which I have now commented out) and some missing platforms, namely: Windows (1995), Windows Mobile (2002), Nintendo 3DS (2012), Android (2016), and Wii U (2017) [according to MobyGames]. Also, I'm sure there is a lot more information that can still be added from the sources already used, the sources listed at the top of the talk page, and sources that have not been uncovered yet. In light of the time we have already spent on this review, however, I decided to actually  pass the article in its current state on the condition that it is still improved on from here on out. The potential for this article is immense, even if the current text does not give off this impression. Regards, IceWelder [✉] 20:29, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: rejected by reviewer, closed by Schwede66 talk 03:30, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that Ubisoft decided to make Rayman a launch title for the North American and European releases of the PlayStation as a way to compete with Japanese platform games?

• Source: https://www.gameinformer.com/b/features/archive/2011/12/06/ubi-uncensored.aspx

• Reviewed:

Improved to Good Article status by NatwonTSG2 (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has less than 5 past nominations.

NatwonTSG^TALK 20:04, 20 July 2024 (UTC).

• I will be taking this one. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 08:33, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
• General eligibility:
• New enough: - Not new enough.
• Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

QPQ: None required.

Overall: Not new enough for DYK, I don't think it's smart to nominate the article after making the DYK nomination. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 12:31, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

Just for clarification, TheNuggeteer, this was nominated as a new GA, but the GA nomination was failed on 16 June. Hence, this isn't eligible. Schwede66 03:30, 22 July 2024 (UTC)