I will review this one shortly (this means in less than 24 hours)--ChiefjusticeDS 22:18, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
Right, your humour is definitely well on it's way. The style that you have chosen for the article essentially relies on amusement being derived from the text and not your presentation of the same. This works very well in some parts, and less well in others. If you want to solve this then you need to try and include some variations. By the middle of the article I was pretty sure that th e game sucked and you wanted me to see it as such. I was therefore slightly disappointed that you included no other sources of humour in an article that is clearly crying out for them.
Your concept runs well as far as I can see, I am certainly intrigued by your decision with regard to the narrative point of view in this article. I also appreciate the parts where you relate the game back to a certain system. Your decision to narrate from a purely third person perspective means that you do not fall into the trap of consistently stating that the game is bad throughout. The problem with your concept, as I see it, is that while you go a long way towards making the game seem boring and repetitive you mention a couple of extra parts that you do not explain in the synopsis. The hard labour idea was the one that caught my eye. While it fits perfectly well into the article, it lacks the attention that has been paid to the other sections of the game, and seems bolted on to flesh out the plot. If you are going to include it then why not add a comment explaining how the player controls that section. For example "In order to control this section a unique peripheral was released exclusively for the PS2 etc etc. Alternatively the section was controlled by pressing the R2 and L2 buttons as fast as possible for 10 minutes, whereas PC users were forced to etc etc etc."
Prose and formatting:
You have a couple of very minor difficulties with your spelling and grammar that would not bother anyone unduly. Your sections are short enough to avoid feeling long and boring while still getting the appropriate point across. Just be aware of repeating yourself, it is an easy thing to do but just try and be vigilant against it. For example I thought that you restate the features of Mandela's imprisonment rather too much. You might consider merging some of the later explanations into the earlier part, since no reader wants to put up with the same joke twice just with a different section in between. Otherwise I don't see much to be improved here.
Your first image is very good and was the first thing that I noticed in your article. Perhaps it is the influence of this image that makes some of the cannibalized shots from GTA:SA seem a bit horrendous. I accept that it is going to be very difficult to attain images for a non-existent game and that these may be all you can do. I just think that they look ugly, and while the information they present is relevant to the sections they compliment they just break the flow of the article for me and make it seem much less professional. The other images are very appropriate and I would urge you to retain them, their captions are amusing and they both flow well with the sections you use them in.
My overall grade of the article.
A good article that I enjoyed reading that is just struggling at the moment with a couple of problems. I would urge you to take another look at your humour and to revisit the concept of binding the made up missions and in-game actions to real-life systems. Your article has indeed come a long way following Saberwolf's review and that is to your credit. This article could be made even more enjoyable very easily, just by sorting a couple of problems. Good luck with editing or re-writing that you decide to do.