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
The lead needs to be expanded slightly to comply per WP:LEADLENGTH. It needs to mention more parts about plot, development (if there is any) and the reception it received from critics
"Metacritic, which assigns a weighted average score out of 100 to reviews from critics" - how about It received an aggregate score of 73 from Metacritic, which assigns a weighted average score out of 100 to reviews from critics
"PC Gamer scored the game 69 out of 100" - needs italicisation
"The best part of the game in their view was the time bonus, which is necessary to earn full reputation" - tad informal, try The reviewer considered the best part of the game as the time bonus, which is deemed necessary to earn full reputation
The legacy section is too short, try merging it with a sub-section under reception?
Not a bad article considering the lack of coverage, which I totally understand as I used to write a load of obscure 80s games! I done a search for any other reviews and PC Gamer and GameSpot were the only ones considered reliable, so I suppose that can't be helped. Once all of the above are addressed then I'll take another look at this. Please let me know if you have any questions. I'll leave this on hold. JAGUAR18:42, 15 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Those were all of my comments, I see why it confuses people when I put "Initial comments" but that's a bad habit I've been doing since 2011! JAGUAR18:47, 15 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]