Jump to content

Talk:The Great Giana Sisters

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Although the Spectrum version was (favourably) reviewed by one magazine, I've seen Rainbow Arts people deny that it was ever started.

iPod app

[edit]

There is a Giana sisters game on the iPod app store —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.173.2.230 (talk) 02:57, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Sisters vs. Brothers

[edit]

I think it would be great not to restrict ourselves to the similarities between Mario/Giana but also to show how Giana's gameplay is unique (e.g. disappearing platforms, absence of 1up mushrooms, homing shots).

Imho, you need to reach at least level 3 of GGS to experience the _real_ giana sisters, with more dangerous foes and pits than ever in Super Mario.

Giana Sisters does have 1ups, they come in the form of lollipops. But I agree with you, there should be a mention of the ideas Giana Sisters added. Disappearing platforms and homing shots are some of them. Another thing is the boulders that fall down from some bricks if you head-butt them while wearing a mohawk hairdo. Are the pink bouncing ball enemies also a new idea? I don't remember seeing such enemies in Super Mario Brothers. I seem to remember Giana Sisters had power-ups that froze or killed all enemies on the screen, but I just played through the entire game on VICE and didn't notice any such effects. JIP | Talk 18:44, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I see that such material was already added, but later removed. I could perhaps add it back, but in a shorter, more restricted form. JIP | Talk 18:56, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Does anybody know the current legal status of the game? It has been rereleased for mobile phones a while ago.

-- Grumbel 15:44, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This screenshot

[edit]

The screenshot on this page shows a black and white version of the game. What platform was it from? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.203.201.141 (talk) 20:17, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's from the ZX Spectrum version. -- JediLofty User ¦ Talk 09:53, 3 April 2008 (Utm)

Sinclair ZX Spectrum version

[edit]

As shown in the above screenshot , there was at least a beta/review copy for the ZX Spectrum, which was pulled before it could be officially released. Did any copies of that unreleased version ever get "leaked" ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.2.16.5 (talk) 22:22, 13 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

SID Soundtrack and Winamp Plugin

[edit]

A Winamp plugin made for Winamp 2+ called Nullsoft DSP Demo that changes the tempo of the music allows you to hear the music from the underground (#3) as played in the SMB ad hoc if set to +12. LReyome254 05:05, 2 July 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by LReyome254 (talk • contribs)

Giana's Return screenshot

[edit]

I just downloaded Giana's Return from the website linked in this article, and found, not to much surprise, that the executable works straight out of the box even though it was compiled on Ubuntu Linux and I use Fedora Linux. I could make a screenshot of that game too, but should one be included in this article? I mean, Giana Sisters and Giana's Return are different games, although closely related. JIP | Talk 20:15, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Unofficial" Sequels

[edit]

Why are Giana Sisters DS and Project Giana being considered unofficial sequels? The official Giana Sisters DS available from retailers, in particular, is not a port (although it does confusingly share its name with an unofficial port of the C64 original), is an official sequel (it includes the original, but as a hidden bonus), and should have its own entry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.24.162.214 (talk) 04:46, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on The Great Giana Sisters. 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.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:50, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Giana Sisters: Twisted Dreams Rise Of The Owlverlord

[edit]

there seems to be a new (7 new tracks?) version of the Giana Sisters Twisted Dreams, but not sure if it's a sequel or a superset https://www.gamersgate.com/DD-GSTWRO-H/giana-sisters-twisted-dreams-rise-of-the-owlverlord — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:2149:870F:A900:1E9:3DF5:CD1A:B398 (talk) 01:20, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Validity of German-language sources

[edit]

The only citation for the first paragraph of the "Alleged lawsuit" section is a German-language source. I was able to track down the original German text and then translated it into English using Google Translate. Though the translation is imperfect, it's clear that the source says nothing whatsoever about any Nintendo lawsuit, real or myth. It's merely a description and academic critique of the game's mechanics "in a vacuum", without even mentioning that it was originally based on Super Mario Bros. As further proof, a search on Google Books shows that the word "Nintendo" only appears three times in the entire book, and only in footnotes and image credits.

The second paragraph wrongly cites this source again. But it also cites a second German source that I've not been able to track it down. It's possible that this source contains information about Nintendo's action in response to the game (the title sounds promising). But we should treat it as suspect until someone is able to track down that source and confirm exactly what it says.

135.180.119.77 (talk) 06:31, 14 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No mention of Mario Mod

[edit]

There was a very well-known user-made reskin of GGS at the time that essentially turned it into Super Mario Bros. I still have it on floppy. The article has omitted this arguably significant detail. It may not be canon, but at least in parts of the USA, it was more popular than the original GGS. 2603:7081:1342:9B00:8186:65BA:1A0:1B1E (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 22:19, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Find a source and add the information then. Cortador (talk) 07:18, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Mario Bros is a blatant TGGS rip-off

[edit]

Hi, I grew up in Greece in the '80s and TGGS was huge on Amiga pc back then. There was also a rumour at the time that the creator of the game was ripped off when they went to present it to a gaming company and their disk was fully copied while presenting it. The rumour was that that had happened to the existing TGGS version at the time though but it got me thinking. TGGS is so much more sophisticated and complex than the plumber bros dummied down version that it's hard to believe that it didn't predate Mario Bros. If you lived anywhere in Europe at the time and even remotely knew anyone with access to an Amiga pc (i.e. my rich neighbours) you knew TGGS. I strongly feel that someone just copied TGGS, changed the players' gender and reintroduced it as a new game to the US continent that had no knowledge of it, although I have no proof of this. Who else feels like Nintendo has gotten away with murder screwing the little guy/gal game designer? How can we prove this? Goes to show you don't even have to be a living breathing woman to be plagirised in this world. Even our digital representations get screwed over. Cheers. #crushthepatriarchy

VegetarianCat (talk) 02:11, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

While yes, TGGS did in fact debut before the official public European release of Super Mario Bros. as cited by both the Super Mario Wiki (and presumably Wikipedia as well) and this page, Super Mario Bros. actually debuted in other countries before, with the original Japanese release of SMB coming out for the Famicom in September of 1985 and the US version debuting for the NES in October of the same year. For reference, that's almost two years before the cited release of TGGS, so that makes it technically impossible for Super Mario Bros. to be a copy of The Great Giana Sisters. Sorry, I just wanted to point this out for clarification purposes. 24.19.193.26 (talk) 06:41, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Per the current prose in the article and per the "Making of" article from Retro Gamer from the later 2000s, the developers of the game specifically were told to make a game like Super Mario Bros.. So despite the sisters popularity in Europe, Nintendo did not borrow from their game. Andrzejbanas (talk) 19:48, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Re-write

[edit]

A gave this article a re-write. Many sections were unsourced (plot, gameplay, etc.) were under developed (reception) or had a bit too much emphasis on topics a bit fringe from the main game (excessive details on sequels, rights holders, etc.). I've tried to balance it out. If there is anything majorly missing from the previous version, please re-add it or mention it here for discussion. Andrzejbanas (talk) 19:23, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the two "awards" items from the reviews infobox. Without context, the medals and other items don't really mean anything to the user. Are these just for high ranking games? actual awards? How are they determined? Its unclear, and without context, means nothing. The citations in question did state these items, but its not clear what is meant from them or what they mean. Andrzejbanas (talk) 19:42, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
They're awards given by magazines at the time. Zzap was a big deal on the C64, Crash was a big deal on the Spectrum. People who were around in the 80s are fully aware of the context and significance. No offense, but if you're unfamiliar, maybe you shouldn't be reverting work on vintage videogame articles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.148.155.34 (talk) 22:52, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not the case at all. Did I have to be even born at the time of Basic Math to write the article about it? Hardly. You've just re-added material and claimed to have a source for it, and have not. Without a source to back it up, these additions mean nothing and they don't seem to be real awards? The high scores speak for themselves regardless. Andrzejbanas (talk) 23:01, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Per your previous revert. Please refer to WP:ONUS. "All content must be verifiable. The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material, and it is satisfied by providing an inline citation to a reliable source that directly supports the contribution." If there is some rule I'm missing that people reading the article would already be familiar with the topic, please share it, but I don't believe there is.Andrzejbanas (talk) 05:54, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, not the reader, I said the onus is on AN EDITOR, MAKING EDITS, TO KNOW THE SUBJECT MATTER. To put it bluntly, if you don't know about videogames, stop editing them.
Back to my original point, it would appear you did look up that Crash review I cited - presumably a scan. Take a very close look at the top right corner of page 13. There's a big, bold, colorful logo saying "Crash Smash". In the original magazine it was probably 4 or 5 cm high. The fact GGS won this award is absolutely undisputable.
These awards were highly coveted, see front cover of Turrican or Bounder (video game), or adverts for plenty of games.https://worldofspectrum.org//pub/sinclair/games-adverts/b/Batman-TheMovie.jpg https://worldofspectrum.org//pub/sinclair/games-adverts/g/GraphicAdventureCreatorThe_3.jpg . They even released compilations consisting only of games that won awards in Crash and Zzap. Again, it's not the job of this article to tell the user how important the awards are.
:::You keep saying these awards were highly coveted and it would be obvious, yes I saw the same page you have, as I expanded on your citation for them. Looking further into this, we shouldn't even be using them per WP:VG/AWARDS which says "For the table, only include awards where either the awards individually are notable (e.g. Seumas McNally Grand Prize) or the awards body as a whole is notable (e.g. The Game Awards); omit individual publication awards and ranked lists from the table." currently you haven't showed me or added anything that suggests otherwise. Andrzejbanas (talk) 23:23, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
::::So you've spent a week reverting just because it was mentioned in a table instead of in text? Ok, fine. It's done. Case closed.
I honestly don't think the award as you call it seems important either. if it's just to indicate a high rating, that's already established by a high rating, and no, if you read what I said, you still haven't found sources to Indictate what these awards mean. Andrzejbanas (talk) 14:55, 4 May 2024 (UTC) 14:38, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not gonna repeat myself.

(1) The game won the award, that's why I said it. I have proved that the game won both awards. You have agreed that it says so in the sources you have read. The Zzap one is even mentioned ON THE GAME'S FRONT COVER ARTWORK!! (2) I'm not making any claims about what the award "means". This article is not the place to discuss whatever it is you're trying to interpret from this.

That's the end of the discussion.

Stating you are done working the discussion and just re-adding it and masking assumptions on what I'm asking isn't how we come to come to content disputes in wikipedia. The award requires context, I would suggest reading "Noteworthy awards and nominations that contribute to the overall reception should be documented in prose in this section. Individual publications often use awards to distinguish a game's lasting impact." You have not established its notability. If it's just for a high grade, which is what you claim (but have not backed up with any valid source) than that's not enough. Otherwise, readers won't knoe what its validity is or why it received something you claim has prestige. I would suggest doing a thourough read on Wikipedia:Dispute resolution and MOS:VG before editing further.Andrzejbanas (talk)
As there has been no addition and no source to still back up the claim, I do not feel like viewers are missing out on information and removed the fixing tag and removed the statement. The high scores speak for themselves. Andrzejbanas (talk) 14:05, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To the IP user 78.148.155.34: Andrzejbanas has every right to remove the award claims if you cannot provide a link to the sources where said prizes were given to the game into the article. Just my two cents in this regard. Roberth Martinez (talk) 17:36, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Copy-edit week

[edit]

This article is listed on Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests and I've had a go through. I've tidied up a lot of grammar & punctuation, but there's still a lot of repetition and overly-wordiness. I'm hesitant to dive too much into the content editing as I don't know anything about the topic and see there has been debate on this before! But happy to help fine-tune someone else's version. In general I think the tone needs to be more WP:Encyclopedic and the writing more succinct. TreeReader (talk) 00:02, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @TreeReader:! Thanks for going through the article. I removed the citation needed tags in the lead because per MOS:LEAD, I believe these elements don't need citations if they are cited in the prose? Did you feel these were too controversial of statements without a source?
For the reception, I'm going to try and re-format it back into prose instead of bullet points. But I think you did a good job of making this a better article generally. Thank you for your hard work on a topic that's not necessarily a personal interest of yours. :) Andrzejbanas (talk) 10:51, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! I'd come straight from academic-must-cite-everything-mode. I hadn't read MOS:LEAD so thanks for pointing it out; it does say citations are allowed. I would recommend cutting the lead down a bit more since the article itself is very thorough. TreeReader (talk) 22:00, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:The Great Giana Sisters/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Andrzejbanas (talk · contribs) 13:20, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: RFNirmala (talk · contribs) 05:43, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! My second GA review. Will complete the table in around 2 days.

Ping me if I'm inactive (and I'll let another reviewer decide on the verdict, since I might be on a wikibreak this month).

Rate Attribute Review Comment
1. Well-written:
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. Moved to a new section. See "Grammar and prose points".

Reception can be organized better by topic sentences (for the first and second paragrph). Resolved as of December 21.

1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. Not a major issue, I will raise or edit some minor points throughout the review.
2. Verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check:
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. If there are, search for URLs on your sources (such as the Internet Archive). I don't require this, although this would make spotchecking faster and sources more accessible.
  • I'm a bit back and forth on this. While as you stated, some sources are on the Archive.org, I'm not sure about the validity of some being there. As I wouldn't link to a video game rom or something on similar shaking ground, I feel anyone who wants to try and find these online, could easily do so, even if it is inconvenient. I hope that is ok. Andrzejbanas (talk) 09:47, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • I see. My concern was convenience for lay readers, since I took some time in finding the scans in the Internet Archive. The scans I have added seem valid, I'll remove them if found otherwise. This is over-the-top and optional, but are the Time War (1987a,b,c) refs from a C64 game manual or box? I didn't see the text in gameplay videos. RFNirmala (talk) 13:38, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • No totally, I understand that too and its definitely useful to have such links for that reason. That's why I'm back and forth on the idea. If there are any that still link to them, I'm totally content to either leave them in or not as the two sides are both very useful and valid reasons.
      • So the instructions are from the manual. The version I've played of the game had these instructions in the intro, but looking at footage, these may have been added by someone who cracked the game. The manual has them. I've since changed them to reflect the manual. Good catch! Andrzejbanas (talk) 22:13, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose). Appropriately sourced. On hold while article is being improved.
2c. it contains no original research. No original research.
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. No major issue so far.
3. Broad in its coverage:
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. The article does cover the main aspects of the game. Details on the background and release (e.g. where in Europe, other ports) may be included.
I've expanded a bit on the background (who are Time Warp and Rainbow Arts for example). Generally, release information for video games is hard to come by. To paraphrase the article I worked on Big Apple Rappin', "Small [companies] run by independent entrepreneurs hustling to make a buck, don't keep detailed documentation on the [content] they release." I feel this can be applied here. Either way, with the previous edits, I've added material that suggest it was released at least in Germany earlier than the UK release, so people can infer this information from the article, but as for specifics, I do not think I'll be able to hunt up anything too specific. To put this into similar terms, there is no confirmed release date for Super Mario Bros. in the United States on the Super Mario Bros. article. Andrzejbanas (talk) 09:47, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I understand that release dates are hard to find, so I'm okay with that. Still, I'd love to know other territories in Europe where the Giana Sisters was released (ofc, with reliable sources). RFNirmala (talk) 13:50, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If I can find anything, I'll add it. Its hard to tell especially for this game as its been pulled from the market, but at least Germany and and least the UK for sure. Again, I don't even know if that MSX version is legitimate, but sources claim it to be I have my personal doubts. (To clarify, heres the cover for the MSX version. I know some early computer games have some dodgy box art, but this looks very home made. You can see its packaging here, this ranges from the liner notes that are going into some serious Nintendo-bashing. Andrzejbanas (talk) 22:16, 15 December 2024 (UTC) )[reply]
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). No major issue so far.
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. Neutrality isn't an issue, "Reception" just needs organization.

No neutrality issues in the article. RFNirmala (talk) 11:43, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. Will put this on hold while improving article's content and organization, but there's easily no edit war or content dispute.

Approved. RFNirmala (talk) 11:43, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. Non-free media and use rationales provided in respective images. No issue so far.
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. I recommend adding alt captions for the British art cover. I would almost say you should add an alt image for the German cover art, but it would be only for describing Giana's appearance (blonde, red shirt...) See MOS:ALT. Looks good.

I recommend adding a sample of the soundtrack to show its distinction from Super Mario, but the box arts and gameplay can describe the game enough. RFNirmala (talk) 11:43, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

7. Overall assessment.

Some things to add in the article content:

  • How long did development take place? How long was it sold in the UK before being pulled out from stores, or receiving the letter from Nintendo? Jones, Darran (2008) has content that can be added, but search for other sources to support this.
    • I've found a source more directly related to the production on how long the game was available. I know the Jones source states it was out for about a week (or something to that effect) in the UK Retro Gamer. I can't really tell for sure if Jones is being specific with these dates or he's just trying to say that as sort of a hyperbole as he does not give dates. If you think it should be included, I'm happy to do it, but these are just my concerns. Andrzejbanas (talk) 18:21, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Darran also included the developer's experiences of constantly revising the game after "hassle from management". You may consider adding that to the development's 'story'
  • You may expand descriptions of the enemies. "Giant ants" is good, but may you give examples of "cute enemies"? As I mentioned in the table, describing Giana and her sister may also be an option.
    • There isn't that much to say about them I don't think. I took out the term cute as that might be too much of a description borrowed from the Retro Gamer source. I could find some potentially describing the enemies, but it may be out of context for the comparison to the Super Mario Bros. enemies, which is the main key point of the sentence here. Andrzejbanas (talk) 18:23, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Super Mario Bros. doesn't have prose on Mario and Luigi being red and green, so I'm okay without descriptions of the sisters. You can check SMB's gameplay to connect how the Great Giana Sisters level and gameplay is similar (e.g. underwater enemies, how Giana defeats enemies...) RFNirmala (talk) 02:29, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I can probably dig up sources on how they attack enemies, is it appropriate in the gameplay section though to compare how that gameplay is similar to Super Mario Bros. or unique to the game? Andrzejbanas (talk) 06:34, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    There's no need to make a list on similarities and differences in the article, so there should be no sentence/paragraph explicitly stating differences in gameplay. There are already examples on /* Background and development */, which can be expanded if there are reliable sources on it. By the way, I only realized there aren't any underwater enemies in the game. RFNirmala (talk) 06:47, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Yeah I think there are only underground and cave enemies. I've added a bit on how to attack enemies and the kind of monsters you meet. Andrzejbanas (talk) 09:20, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Caoili, Eric (November 9, 2009) and Loguidice, Bill aren't cited in the article, but are present in the sources list.
    • Embarrassing spelling error aside, I've removed this citation. I think I was using it as a temp source for something, but removed it as I found that clarified information better as I went along. Andrzejbanas (talk) 14:52, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Some of the sources deviate from the name "Giana". Is it okay if you clarify this on the article? One-sentence paragraphs can be resolved by organizing the article. Organize /* Reception */ too by adding topic sentences and reviews according to their content points by WP:VG/REC. RFNirmala (talk) 03:18, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I've added a clarification about the spelling of "Giana/Gianna" which I think does the job. I'll try to tackle the review later as that seems to be a more thorough issue that requires a bit more thought. :) Andrzejbanas (talk) 15:50, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for the note. Take your time for the Reception. Is there a reliable source/game version on "Gianni"? Bielby, Matt (1988) only refers to it as so, and I'm not sure if that itself can be reliable, since they might've made errors in writing (e.g. assuming they're Italians). If none, I'm okay with just Gianna, which is reflected in a game port. RFNirmala (talk) 05:04, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    This is not really cited anywhere (I swear I read it somewhere, but can't find the source) that in the opening scrawl where the games title is written in blocks, Giana is spelled "Gianna" in a few versions, including C64 one. I tried to do a bit of a copy edit of the review, but I feel like it is mostly doing the points from the content. I believe you are on a wikiholiday, but I was told to ping you when I was done addressing points, so at this point, I'll let you give you a @RFNirmala: as requested. Andrzejbanas (talk) 19:42, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • If we can place it in the article, is there a sentence review on anything unique on the MSX port?RFNirmala (talk) 13:38, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • I think Retro Gamer may have said something unique about the MSX port, but this port seems very obscure. I found in Dutch which is complicated to sort out as they are reviewing the game so late, they seem to be a bit confused by its history. I'm even questioning if its an official port, but that's just my own judgement, I have nothing to back that up. Andrzejbanas (talk) 14:03, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      (Reply to your message at 3a) If we don't have evidence it's indeed "official", which I'm also leaning into (basing on the game's packaging, and its release in 1993), we can add a disclaimer stating that it could be an unofficial port, e.g. an instance on "piracy and emulation", which I found helpful in elaborating content. Removing it might be inconvenient in clarifying some information for lay readers. RFNirmala (talk) 02:47, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Sorry to clarify, this is all just original research on my own part. It seems to have gotten a release and seems to have been reviewed in video game review magazines. I don't think we should be applying that based on our hunches without someone who has actually discussed it. Andrzejbanas (talk) 04:07, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Andrzejbanas: "Further follow-ups to the game" has 4 citations, which is quite a citation overkill for listing the presence of follow-ups. RFNirmala (talk) 11:54, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Grammar and prose points

[edit]
  • Wikilink what a "lolly" is, or change word to "candy", depending on the context of the source.
  • After coming third in a 1986 contest for a German magazine called 64'er..." you may add a few words what the contest was about.
  • "In the 1970s and early 1980s, video game clones of popular arcades were rampant, and this growth of clones were followed on home computers."
  • "The game is a platform game, where the player controls either Giana in single player mode, or in two-player mode, switches between Giana and Maria." The underlined phrase can be connected better. You can say "The platform game right away" instead of repeating the first sentence in the lead.
  • Quotation mark the word "twee" if it's in the original article.
    • Hi. I've tried to address the five issues above. The in-game text/instructions specifically says "lolly". The are indeed lollipops, so I've wikilinked the term to no have some unfortunate misunderstanding. Andrzejbanas (talk) 14:52, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • "As well as Trenz, who created the game's visuals and high score programming, the developers included Gessert, who developed the rest of the code, and Chris Huelsbeck who wrote the score." We can make this more concise e.g. "The game developers included..."
    Thanks! This sentence is good, and I can even say the same for the paragraph. I also did some copy editing, e.g. from "level-design" to "level design". Keep watch for such cases, and footnote numbers not sorted ascending. I have no problem so far with interchanging "box art" and "cover art".
    You can also check on Reception, especially on the 1st and 2nd paragraph, which fluctuates between praise and criticism. As I mentioned, topic sentences and thematic organization are good approaches.
    • In the 3rd paragraph (which I interpret to be about Giana on other platforms), does Dillion (1988) refer to the game itself, or through a particular port?
    • "The Great Giana Sisters received a sequel in 1989 with Hard'n'Heavy for the Commodore 64, Atari ST, and Amiga." I can't improve the prose here, focusing on the "with". I recommend "The Great Giana Sisters received a sequel in 1989, Hard'n'Heavy, for...", which you can revise, since I have some doubt with the appositive RFNirmala (talk) 13:12, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RFNirmala (talk) 05:43, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Organizing Reception

[edit]

I inferred that the "The reviewers generally praised the game, while finding it also lacking colour and that it ran slower than the Commodore 64 original." sentence refers to the ZX Spectrum. Wanted to let you know if I made a mistake.

You are correct. Andrzejbanas (talk) 19:33, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I edited the Reception. It looks good for me now after fixing MOS:QUOTEPOV in the "twee" but "excellent" review. RFNirmala (talk) 11:54, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Talk:The_Great_Giana_Sisters&oldid=1262025838"