This article is written in
British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other
varieties of English. According to the
relevant style guide, this should not be changed without
broad consensus.
Wipeout (video game) is part of the Wipeout series, a
good topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the
Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it,
please do so.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Electronic music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Electronic music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Electronic musicWikipedia:WikiProject Electronic musicTemplate:WikiProject Electronic musicelectronic music articles
There is a screenshot of Wipeout available at Image:PSX_Wipeout.png (I can't figure out how to put a link to an image without inlining the image). It'd be a great addition, but I'm not sure where it would look best in the article.
Also, does anybody know if the two drivers for each team give different characteristics to the ship? I lost my game disc a LONG time ago, and I don't remember. Please add it to the article if they do make a difference. —
Wwagner23:52, 4 May 2006 (UTC)reply
Added the pic. And I don't think the pilot does have any effect on the way the ship looks, except for the numbering. If there isn't any numbering on the ships, then I am probably way off.
JD00:10, 5 May 2006 (UTC)reply
We'll need to keep working on the placement. I think it's a little cluttered at the top, and the lead text gets a little lost; I tried a bunch of different placements, but most of them didn't work much better. It appears that you did too (just FYI, the Show Preview button will allow you to see how different things look without having to save and re-edit). Maybe down at the Tracks heading on the right side? That kinda fits, don't you think? I don't think I tried it that far down. —
Wwagner01:20, 5 May 2006 (UTC)reply
lmao i know, but I thought it would look alright so I didn't bother using it.
I moved the image again, and I think the new positioning is better than having it at the very top. Some of the text still gets a little squished, but I think we're just going to have to put up with that. I tried putting it way down under some of the headings, and it just looks lost down there. —
Wwagner04:29, 10 May 2006 (UTC)reply
It was fine where it was - do you have to keep changing the smallest things?
The "Wipeout (1995)" Section
I put it like that so the table of contents appeared at the top of the page, rather than below the info. Maybe it could be changed to something else if you don't think that's appropriate, unless there's a way to have the table of contents appear above the text. I also reckon the team info should stay in this article, as the Wipeout teams article is far too long.
JD00:21, 5 May 2006 (UTC)reply
I removed the toplevel heading because standard article organization on Wikipedia seems to have one or two lead paragraphs above the TOC, and then the rest under it. If you want the TOC to move up, I would suggest placing another heading at the discussion of the 1995 launch (third paragraph, call it "Wipeout Launch" perhaps?) would move the TOC up, but not put it at the top. —
Wwagner01:13, 5 May 2006 (UTC)reply
Does anyone else notice that there's an extra music track on the Saturn version? It's not on the Playstation release, and unfortunately I don't have a copy of the Saturn version, so I can't find out the name. But I remember the guitar riff that runs through it - quite catchy.
The Saturn exclusive music tracks and their artists have been discussed here:
http://www.wipeoutzone.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-1841.html
According to MobyGames, both Rob Lord and Mark Bandola have at one time worked for Psygnosis, so I assume the information is correct.
per overlinking rules, the OST should only be linked once in the body outside the lede
Gameplay caption doesn't explain what's happening
Gameplay doesn't go into depth as to differences between teams and ships or how races are won or scored, how boost works, you know, basic stuff
"Wipeout was later ported" is a runon
Do you have any sources on the development's timespan?
Is the tech specs stuff necessary? Seems really out of place as minutiae
Music is small enough that it could fit into the dev section
Doesn't it make more sense to start the Reception with Metacritic than IGN?
'saying that despite the game's "reliance on track-based power-ups" would "limit Wipeout’s lifespan"' what?
Do any of the mags go into greater detail?
Why isn't EGM in the review box?
Reception is lacking broadness—I can't tell what their common concerns and praise was
Make sure the contents of the infobox are sourced within the article (esp. release dates)
Might want to update the cover art FUR and use a template for the screenshot's file page
Lede should do a better job of summarizing overall coverage rather than pulling their quotes out of context. Also those quotes would need immediate citations if left in the lede
Thanks for the review, Czar! I currently have five GANs open at once so I'll address this one after PlayStation and Jumping Flash! 2 (should be a couple of days). I know you're busy too so it won't be a problem. By the way, I don't know how to address your first concern about the stylisation of 'wipEout' as the title screen, logo(s), packaging and everything else in the game uses that style but for the sake of Wikipedia this page uses "Wipeout" instead. I'll try to find some sources but they are scarce. ☠Jaguar☠14:27, 29 August 2014 (UTC)reply
Sounds good. I understand re: the stylization, but I'd say that it's not worth mentioning if none of the sources mention it either, especially as it's so weird. Also readers can get the impression of the stylization from the box art, for what it's worth czar
♔14:51, 29 August 2014 (UTC)reply
I'm attending to this review now, sorry for the wait as I couldn't edit yesterday as I got abused at by an old man. I should have this one done by the end of the day! ☠Jaguar☠15:30, 1 September 2014 (UTC)reply
I'm in the middle of the review now. I'll do the references last, but what do you think of the development section now? Do you think I should remove the jargon-y two final paragraphs as I can't find any reliable sourcing for them? ☠Jaguar☠16:30, 1 September 2014 (UTC)reply
The last paragraph with the tech specs can likely be tossed. The rest needs to be copyedited and tightened (fewer paragraphs). I'd keep the penultimate paragraph that covers the launch and try to source it. Also you'll need to check every source you're using for facts against the
WP:VG/RS list. Some of the sources don't look reliable. Hope the old man situation wasn't too abusive czar
♔00:06, 2 September 2014 (UTC)reply
I have now addressed everything except the reception section - which I will copy edit and expand now. I have removed all unreliable references (although Discogs remain in the External Links), and have copy edited the development section. I've almost finished, thank you for your patience! And the old colonel, I couldn't understand anything he said (too stereotypical maybe)!
As far as I know this Wipeout did not win any awards despite it being well received, however, the sole music provider CoLD SToRAGE won a few awards during the release. I'm not sure if this is relevant... ☠Jaguar☠21:49, 2 September 2014 (UTC)reply
@
Czar: I think I have addressed all of the issues raised in the GAN. I have copy edited the article, removed all unreliable references and have replaced them. As for the development section, I used all of the information I could find but it's surprising enough to find that this Wipeout didn't receive many reviews compared to the others. Anyway, let me know what you think now? ☠Jaguar☠13:56, 3 September 2014 (UTC)reply
@
Jaguar, I see that it's been edited, but I see a lot left unaddressed. Like the infobox people are unsourced (not cited or mentioned in prose), the stylization is unsourced. I'm also finding things like "with CoLD SToRAGE being the most notable omission given his prevalence" which is original research if not actually said by the source cited. We shouldn't be making these claims ourselves—only citing what reliable sources say about a topic. There are also a number of grammatical errors: "The game positively received from critics upon release; who praised the game for its originality and its vast "unique techno soundtrack" however was criticised for its in-game physics" with run-on sentences. The added poster is too high res and needs to be reduced and its FUR does not adequately cover the NFCC needed for its inclusion. And the source used to make claims about Sara Cox, TheAverageGamer has no editorial policy and does not appear reliable. It needs to be taken to
WP:VG/RS for discussion if you think it has other merits. And what about the added "Wipeout gained a significant amount of controversy upon its initial release in the United Kingdom." Bold claim! Needs citation. This is all to say that unfortunately the article still appears to have too many lingering issues to pass muster. I'll leave it open a few more days in case clarification would be useful, but I would recommend nominating it again at a later time (similar to what I'm saying on all the Wipeout articles) after there has been some time to fact-check and copyedit with input from other editors. (Also re: the lack of reviews—they exist, they're just in print sources. Magazines were much bigger in 1995 and, in fact, I remember reading reviews of this game. Try the main PlayStation and PC gaming mags.) czar
♔20:15, 6 September 2014 (UTC)reply
Ah, sorry about that. I have the Saturn version and I clumsily checked that alone instead of the other versions. I'll write a multilayer paragraph in the gameplay section soon. ☠JAGUAR☠22:35, 9 September 2014 (UTC)reply
The article says, "Wipeout was ported to the Sega Saturn in 1996, however because the company behind the PlayStation, Sony, owned the applicable rights to most of the PlayStation version's soundtrack, new music was recorded for the Saturn version by Psygnosis's in-house music team, CoLD SToRAGE." However, the
PS1 soundtrack has the same Cold Storage tracks as the
Sega Saturn soundtrack according to Discogs. The Sega Saturn has three extra tracks by other people, though. Mobygames
explains this better, IMO. SharkD Talk 09:44, 14 April 2017 (UTC)reply
I would also like to add another note about something I think is wrong about the OST section. I got a PS1 PAL version of the game (came with PAL PS1 winter 1995 AKA bundled launch title), and it does not have anything other than Cold Storage tracks. 100% sure. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
85.167.12.240 (
talk)
08:03, 3 May 2017 (UTC)reply
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on
Wipeout (video game). Please take a moment to review
my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit
this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
this tool.