Jump to content

Talk:Genshin Impact

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Lowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs) at 20:06, 26 March 2024 (Archiving 2 discussion(s) to Talk:Genshin Impact/Archive 1) (bot). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Article milestones
DateProcessResult
March 14, 2021Good article nomineeNot listed
August 4, 2021Good article nomineeNot listed

Wiki Education assignment: Emerging Scholars

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 14 February 2022 and 22 April 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): UBCOM493Lau (article contribs).

Consensus needed - should Genshin be described as a JRPG in the lede, or simply as an RPG?

I am opening this discussion before an edit war breaks out.

I do not think it needs to be described as a JRPG. Simply describing it as an RPG is more appropriate according to MOS:JARGON, and other well-known JRPG series like Hyperdimension Neptunia, Fire Emblem and even Pokémon are not directly classified as such in their respective articles; the first and the third are described as RPGs, while the second is described as a tactical RPG. KingErikII (Talk page) 00:35, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Zero prose and sourcing right now that seem to call Genshin Impact a "JRPG". More importantly, kinda central to the definition... It's not a Japanese game. -- ferret (talk) 01:33, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, which is another reason why I find it unnecessary and inappropriate to label Genshin a JRPG in the lede. --KingErikII (Talk page) 01:44, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Right. Although we should acknowledge anime/manga aesthetic. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 13:29, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
JRPG does not mean the origin has to be Japanese.
The defiunition on Wikitionary is "Initialism of Japanese role-playing game, a traditional genre of role-playing video game generally understood as involving a pre-determined story and player characters, a party of multiple controllable characters, and an emphasis on narrative and storytelling."
I believe that Genshin fits the definition. GENeration.XVII (talk) 01:41, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Definition.* GENeration.XVII (talk) 01:46, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Genshin Impact's distinct blend of visual style, thematic elements, and gameplay mechanics warrants its classification as a JRPG (Japanese Role-Playing Game). The game draws significant inspiration from Japanese anime and manga, both aesthetically and thematically, and features gameplay mechanics commonly associated with JRPGs, such as party-based combat and character progression. Despite being developed by a Chinese studio, miHoYo, Genshin Impact's design principles and narrative influences align closely with traditional JRPGs. I believe there is no harm in classifying Genshin Impact in that manner. GENeration.XVII (talk) 01:49, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Feel free to provide some reliable secondary sourcing that backs your claim. -- ferret (talk) 01:51, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Though, describing Houkai Star Rail as a JRPG might be more accurate than Genshin. GENeration.XVII (talk) 01:51, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It doesn't matter; you need to provide reliable sources that back up your claim. Otherwise, "JRPG" just violates WP:JARGON, even if technically correct. --KingErikII (Talk page) 02:02, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Addendum: On Wikipedia, games are described based on what reliable, secondary sources say about them; the "JRPG" label is simply too niche compared to the more commonly-understood "RPG". Furthermore, when writing articles on Wikipedia, it's a good idea to stick with layman's terms to increase readability. "JRPG" is too technical, and a reader may wonder why a Chinese creation is described as a "Japanese Role-Playing Game". KingErikII (Talk page) 02:21, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]