How we research our guides
Luminesca Games is an unofficial fan reference site. We publish under a single editorial byline rather than individual staff names, and we do not claim professional credentials, competitive play experience or first-hand testing we cannot document.
Where our information comes from
Every guide is compiled from public documentation: official game sites and store pages, developer patch notes and update logs, publisher press material, and community-maintained wikis. Each page lists the sources it draws on so you can verify the data yourself.
What we do and do not claim
We describe mechanics, locations, stats and progression based on the published sources above. We do not present our content as first-hand playtesting, frame-data measurement or competitive-grade analysis. Where a game is in Early Access or has recently changed, we state which build or patch version the page applies to.
Corrections and game changes
Games change constantly, and community documentation can lag behind patches. If you spot an error, email [email protected] — we check the claim against the cited source and update the page. Material corrections are noted on the page itself.
Sources, in order of trust
Primary sources first: official store pages, developer patch notes and update logs, publisher material, and the in-game data read from the interactive tool pages we built. Community findings — drop rates, hidden mechanics, frame data — are welcome and credited when they check out, but they are attributed as community findings rather than restated as measured fact. We do not claim to have played through every boss or system on this site: where a page describes mechanics or stats, it does so from the published sources it lists, against the build or patch named on the page.
How tools stay honest
The interactive pages — the Pal Team Builder and the type-coverage tools — are built from the same verified dataset as the written guides, run entirely in your browser, and version-checked whenever the game's data changes. When a tool and a guide disagree, that is a bug worth reporting: both come from one dataset and should say the same thing.
The editorial standard in one line
When a page's advice is opinion — build rankings, weapon tier lists — the page says so; when it is fact, it carries the patch date it was verified against. We do not datamine unreleased content, we do not present theorycrafted numbers as measured ones, and we do not speak for any studio. That split is the whole standard, and the correction workflow exists to keep it honest in public.
What the name covers
Luminesca is the name under which this site is published, and it covers the small group of editors and tool builders who maintain the games catalogue. It is not a media company and there is no editorial board; decisions about what to cover and how to correct it are made by the people whose names appear on the pages they wrote. When a page has no byline, it was produced by the core team and reviewed the same way.
We keep the structure deliberately flat. Fewer people between a reader's correction and the published fix means errors get repaired faster, and it also means the person who answers your email is the same person who edits the page.
Why there are no bylines on most pages
Reference pages on this site are heavily revised over time. A boss guide written by one person may be re-verified by another after a game patch changes the fight, and tools are maintained separately from the articles they support. Attaching a single name to work that several people have touched tends to misrepresent who is responsible for the current version, so most pages carry the site byline instead.
The standard is the same either way: every claim should be checkable against the game itself, and every correction should leave the page better than the report found it.