Talk:Crash Bandicoot: On the Run!

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Crash Bandicoot: On the Run!/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk · contribs) 21:10, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

LEAD

• The lead sounds like an advertisement. There's no need to highlight that the team wanted to make "The Crashiest Crash game ever". it comes across as promotional and bias.
• The lead doesn't cover enough about the article's actual gameplay and development details.

GAMEPLAY

• Avoid subjective words such as "Widely" and "immediate".
• Progress throughout the game is driven by "battle runs", in which a mini-boss at the end of a level must be defeated using an assortment of weapons such as serums, bombs and rayguns.
  • What does it mean that the game is "driven" by battle runs? I would advise using more recent sources to supplement the descriptions given by the initial press release sources.
• Additional resources can be obtained by completing a checklist of three achievements regularly provided by Aku Aku.
  • What does "regularly" look like? Daily? Hourly? Weekly?
• The weapons must then be crafted from the gathered ingredients within a hub area referred to as "Coco's Base"
  • Avoid "must" unless there's a clause for it. Why must weapons be crafted from the gathered ingredients? For example, in Tetris "Players must make a complete horizontal line using tiles, in order to gain points and prevent tiles from reaching the top"
• In terms of sourcing, two of the sources are used by the games quotes. I don't think that would be enough to prove the content.−

The Gamereactor source may address both points adequately enough, but the first game quote clarifies the game's structure of defeating a series of mini-bosses before accessing a boss, and the second game quote elaborates that the explosives used in boss battles are berries as opposed to generic cartoon bombs as Gamereactor might suggest. Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 03:12, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

The gameplay section isn't clear enough, and should be revised. Ask yourself, can someone understand how the game is played without actually playing it? If not, then it needs to be revised. Apparently, there is a "narrative" that's being driven, I'm not so sure that's the best way to describe the gameplay.

Zapped that wording. Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 23:58, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

DEVELOPMENT

• The title's existence had apparently been leaked through Brazilian Facebook advertisements.
  • Again, "apparently" is one of those words that need context, or be removed altogether.
• I don't think it should be relevant to list the characters if it doesn't give new readers any context.

Zapped Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 23:58, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

RELEASE AND UPDATES

• I touched it up myself, but it needs more work. For starters, I think it gets into too much detail on what each seasonal content offers, and where characters come from. It may be beneficial to add an order to the

I condensed the update info into a single statement summarizing the general gist of them. Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 23:58, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

• There seems to be an overuse of Twitter comments as sources. I understand in some areas, Twitter comments are covering content that isn't covered in other third-party sources, but for the redundant ones, I recommend removing them. Some of the Twitter sources imply Crash 4 was successful because of Crash on the app, but it doesn't outright say it in the tweet.

Substituted a source which clarifies that point better Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 23:58, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

RECEPTION

• For the critical responses, I recommend breaking down aspects. Making one paragraph related to the gameplay, and another on visuals or music.

That's what I'd normally do for a bigger title, but in this case, the amount of reviews is too few to make the kind of sweeping consensuses that would make that format viable. Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 23:58, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

• Avoid using parenthesis in the main body of the article regarding encyclopedic content. All relevant information shouldn't be sidelined in parenthesis, and all irrelevant or trivial information should be cut down or summarized further.

I'll give more of an update soon on the rest of the article.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 22:12, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

All points thus far have been addressed. Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 03:12, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

New points have been addressed. Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 23:58, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

@Blue Pumpkin Pie: Pinging after a week of silence. Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 15:05, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

Sorry for the wait. I'm still reviewing the article. I'm also not sure if in-game tutorials should be used to reference gameplay. Although somewhat verifiable, the quotes aren't the most descriptive. I made some changes, not to improve the content, but to make it easier to navigate and easier to review.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 04:37, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

After careful consideration, the article uses too many inconclusive sources. Sources such as Pocket Tactics, GameReactor, Collider, and Firstpost. On top of that, other sources can be used such as Eurogamer Italy and Multiplater.it are not used. These are things that I don't think I can give enough time to wait for it to pass. Once you clear out questionable sources and use more reliable ones, then it can be re-reviewed.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 05:56, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

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:Crash Bandicoot: On the Run!/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Cat's Tuxedo (talk · contribs) 02:30, 25 June 2025 (UTC)

Reviewer: DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk · contribs) 08:39, 6 July 2025 (UTC)

Hey, I will be reviewing this :) Expect comments in a few days! DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 08:39, 6 July 2025 (UTC)

Review:

Hey, well done on the article! It is really well-written and researched and you should be so proud! I would recommend going towards FA afterwards. Earwig shows no copyright issues and I cannot see any major problems. These are my comments: They are mostly things to help readers unfamiliar with video game terminology.

Lead: It may be best to replace "aggressive" perhaps to make the article sound more neutral?

Gameplay:

1. Is it possible to please link "runner game"?
2. Is it possible to clarify what the "main series" is?
3. Could you please clarify what "hub world" is?
4. "shared with the community" - Could you please clarify what the community is?
5. Picture caption - could the caption be more specific (e.g. which level/setting is in it? Which character etc?)

Release and updates:

1. "Starting in May" - Can you please write the year after "May" for clarity?
2. "The game's latest update was released on September 23" - Same as above
3. "in favor of building improvements and new features" - Could you please clarify if they meant updates and improvements for this game or for other games in general?
4. Is there any information on why the app was deactivated?

No. Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 08:00, 9 July 2025 (UTC)

1. Is there any information on how much it cost? I am wondering as the following section mentions its "cost structure" and critics discussing its costs etc

There does not appear to be so. Besides, per MOS:VGSCOPE, purchase costs shouldn't be included in articles unless the press widely reports on it, like with a new game console. Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 08:00, 9 July 2025 (UTC)

Reception:

1. Could you please link or put in brackets (or replace) "time-waster" for clarity please?
2. "Glen Fox of Pocket Tactics was cautiously optimistic, hoping for future updates to add variety" - Could you please state when this review was for clarity due to it mentioning future updates?
3. Could you please link "console entries" and "grind" or clarify them if possible?
4. Is it possible to link "microtransactions", "switches", "mid-range devices", "minor frame rate issues" and "platforms" to aid readers unfamiliar with these terms? No worries if not
5. "though not on par with console titles" - Could this please be reworded? I struggled to understand
6. "served as a veneer" - Could you please replace this as some readers will not know what this phrase means?
7. "between the App and Google Play stores" - Should "App" be in capitals?

Yes, as it refers to Apple's App Store. Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 08:00, 9 July 2025 (UTC)

Also - I have run the IABot to archive some links but could you please archive the rest?

When these have been done I will do a source spotcheck and pass the article! Please let me know if you need any help or have any questions :) DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 06:55, 9 July 2025 (UTC)

All points have been addressed. Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 08:00, 9 July 2025 (UTC)

Hey, thank you for the changes! I have spotchecked Sources #8, #13, #28 and #37. I will pass this - well done! DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 15:04, 9 July 2025 (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: promoted by Darth Stabro talk 21:34, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that the endless runner game Crash Bandicoot: On the Run! featured The Noid, a Domino's Pizza mascot, as a mini-boss?

• Source: Kotaku

• Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/John Jonik

Improved to Good Article status by Cat's Tuxedo (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 31 past nominations.

Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 18:50, 9 July 2025 (UTC).

General: Article is new enough and long enough
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: Done.

Overall: @Cat's Tuxedo: some comments to be addressed

• fastest downloaded mobile game Ever? On the app store? What does this mean?
  • Fixed. Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 07:53, 10 July 2025 (UTC)
• These comments about "critics universally praised" and "Critics unanimously described" are not cited inline and are SYNTHY.
  • Fixed. Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 07:53, 10 July 2025 (UTC)
• The hook is sufficiently reliably referenced, but it would be better if you cite it to this Polygon article which is more reliable
  • Added, though the Kotaku source is retained since it cites the skin and cosmetic rewards more clearly. Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 07:53, 10 July 2025 (UTC)
• I think it passes on interestingness, but a tighter hook would be better, e.g.

ALT1 that the endless runner game Crash Bandicoot: On the Run! featured a Domino's Pizza mascot as a mini-boss?

Sure, we can go with that. Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 07:53, 10 July 2025 (UTC)

Thanks Cat's Tuxedo, what you've done should be okay. To avoid a scuffle at WT:DYK, I'll also ping DaniloDaysOfOurLives, as they passed the GA but didn't comment on the reasons the first failed. Were you satisfied with the sourcing? Rollinginhisgrave (talk | contributions) 00:33, 11 July 2025 (UTC)

Wouldn't hurt to get their input on the matter, but personally, I'm satisfied. I saw no reason to question Pocket Tactics or Gamereactor based on their publishers, and the Collider article is written by an established journalist whose articles have been cited many times on Wikipedia. Though based on the previous GAN, I did zap Firstpost and add Eurogamer and Multiplayer.it. Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 00:58, 11 July 2025 (UTC)

No input from DDOOL, and I'm also satisfied. Thanks for your replies, approving now. Rollinginhisgrave (talk | contributions) 05:46, 10 July 2025 (UTC)