Talk:Black Myth: Wukong

Contested deletion

This page should not be speedy deleted as an unambiguous copyright infringement, because the cited article was created in September 2020, after this wikipedia page was created. In fact, the cited article is a copy of this Wikipedia article.

--Big Wang (talk) 06:11, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

Contested deletion

This page should not be speedy deleted as an unambiguous copyright infringement, because the page itself is properly cited, if very sparse on details. The website the nominator alleged that this article has committed a copyvio for, behaves strangely when I clicked on it...the window just closes automatically for some reason. Perhaps it is a dodgy website which mirrors or rips off the Wikipedia article, and not the other way around. A better approach would be to send this to AfD instead, if notability of the subject topic is a concern. --Haleth (talk) 14:17, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

Black myth wukong

Is Black Myth Wukong gonna be a open world??? 2601:140:8400:FDD0:BC5F:1B68:5D:795F (talk) 21:47, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

It's not expected to be, no. 37.223.106.200 (talk) 15:47, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Controversy

The controversy section seems to contain content that is not directly related to this game, what is the intention? --高田の鉄橋 (talk) 02:41, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

Yes, the section does seem to be a loose fit for the article. The article on the game shouldn't include every questionable tweet and comment by those who made it, or even controversies about the company that made it. It's the same reason why sexual misconduct allegations for Ubisoft or Activision Blizzard aren't incorporated into the articles of every game they made. I went ahead and removed it per WP:CSECTION. Meeepmep (talk) 09:42, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Why is controversies connected to some companies and games allowed but not others?

Generally when LGBTQ communities does the attacks the controversy gets deleted.

But when LBTQ communities gets attacked its kept.

Why is that? 155.4.92.41 (talk) 15:30, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

in that case, if this kee continuing im advocating this article should be locked into semi-protected. Just to steer clear only confirmed users could edit. 118.136.207.29 (talk) 14:11, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

I think some of the recent edits, specifically those claiming that Sweet Baby Inc. attempted to extort the developers, are knee-jerk reactions to an IGN article on the development of the game which covers the harassment and sexism women faced at the studio. There's a conspiracy theory claiming that Sweet Baby Inc is behind these articles because the studio didn't use their services. So far the only source cited for this claim is an article which is a retelling of a Youtuber going over a handful of tweets and unfounded claims. I think locking this article would be a good idea as I think it'll be constantly edited with this misinformation. 157.211.217.149 (talk) 22:19, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

What are you even on about you absolute buffoon? The criticism is about poorly translated text from Chinese being used to smear the company as sexist. Was the text crude and vulgar? Yes. Were they sexist? No. SBI has barely any connection to this matter if any at all, so all this nonsense about CoNsPiRaCy ThEoRiSts are just you attacking a strawman you set up

Do better my man 2A05:9CC3:7C:1631:5C37:F88:FD5C:6F4A (talk) 07:51, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

I don't want to cause a flame war on Wikipedia, but I think dismissing the article because of mistranslations (which, after double checking the translations, don't seem to exist) is silly. What about the interviews with former employees who all have experienced the sexist culture at the company? 203.76.224.90 (talk) 01:11, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

What about them? The scope of the article is the game, so content needs to stay on that topic. Social commentary on the company culture or the gaming industry on its own is offtopic. --Cold Season (talk) 15:04, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

It's literally the only reason I even went to this article, because I saw there was a controversy about it. Stop with your "deplatforming" nonsense and allow articles to contain the information people actually are looking for. Wclark (talk) 23:20, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

Get your facts straight. This article is about Black Myth: Wukong. Here's the article about the developers, Game Science, the topic you are looking for. Goodbye with your nonsense. --Cold Season (talk) 18:00, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Your edits and commentary on this subject have been extremely suspect and merit increased scrutiny. 2601:1C0:717E:4C0:48ED:231D:CEA4:D6 (talk) 03:36, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

This "controversy" is indeed not related to this game at all. It belongs on the developer's page, not here --FMSky (talk) 03:47, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Controversy, again: include a reference, at bare minimum?

I don't know the details (mostly passing by because I love Wukong and keeping articles tidy, tbh) but I feel like the whole controversy from the streaming regulations is still a relevant issue; certainly it meets notability guidelines, having a very recent BBC article cover the topic. Do we support or oppose mentioning it in the Release or Reception section?

Mia ^{a data witch (chat)} 17:39, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

I obviously support. IGN or whatever rabbit hole aside, it quite clearly has met notability guidelines. Mia ^{a data witch (chat)} 17:40, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

One of the most prestigious German newspapers is also got in on the action so it´s not just gaming or pop culture sites having a go at it. I have no idea what this game´s controversy section should look like but there is a lot to choose from. Residentgrigo (talk) 18:45, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, even if it's not a controversy section, it would fit in their marketing since it was a part of that. I'm sure they didn't want it to come across as a controversy, but it was part of their marketing push for content creators. Snakester95 (talk) 19:00, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

The BBC has also reported on the controversy, and it seems related to the developer rather than the game itself:

• Gavin Butler (2024-08-25). "Blockbuster Chinese video game tried to police players - and divided the internet". BBC.

Deepred6502 (talk) 04:36, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

An editor removed it from the Black Myth: Wukong wiki page for being unrelated and another editor removed it from the Game Science page for being off-topic. I don't agree, but I'm curious where it's supposed to be relevant if not those places. Snakester95 (talk) 19:22, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Asura Online spiritual successor?

Maybe there should be a mention about Asura Online, or its webnovel inspiration? It seems like Black Myth Wukong is a spiritual successor of Asura Online; or at least, the inspiration might be more Tale of Wukong webnovel than Journey to the West.

According to a reddit poster, Seigneel1, Black Myth Wukong is not inspired directly by Journey to the West, but rather, the Tale of Wukong (aka The Legend of Wukong, depending on translation), which is an webnovel that is a dark retelling of Journey to the West, that was also the inspiration to Game Science's previous game, Asura Online. So a lot of the differences between the Black Myth Wukong's story and Journey to the West, might actually be consistent if you compare instead with the Tale of Wukong. (I'm an english speaker, so I can't find the Chinese webnovel myself. I would love to know how the story of Black Myth Wukong matches the story of the webnovel or the story of Asura Online.)

According to the IGN source linked on Game Science's article, Feng Ji, who is the creative designer of Asura Online, is now the game producer of Game Science. And a lot of other people at Game Science also came the Asura Online team; according to a reddit post, the chief artist Yang Qi as well. If you look at the art of Asura Online, it does seem to me like the precursor to Black Myth Wukong concept art. Goose (talk) 16:02, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Bundling citations

@Cold Season please understand that citations are not being stripped from the content. The citations are being bundled to make the article more legible. its difficult to follow a sentence when its broken up by multiple citations. The edits are inline with WP:BUNDLING JonJ937 (talk) 08:37, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

WP:INTEGRITY states that citations need to support the content clearly. Your "bundling" (what you are not even doing to begin with) is actually stripping citations from content and moving separate citations to content that it does not support, which is against official guidelines. --Cold Season (talk) 15:51, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Exclusivity controversy

I don't know if it has been brought up yet, but should the article include a section talking about the controversy of whether Sony paid for the game to be a timed console exclusive on Ps5? Osh33m (talk) 02:30, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

I don't think so. There's nothing official one way or another as far as I've seen and the only "sources" would be Twitter rumors going back and forth. 2605:4A80:B401:AE41:5523:BD13:EFD:A4F8 (talk) 00:05, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Excessive number of images

While the article is a good length for a video game, and I understand all but one fall under the public domain through Wikimedia Commons, do we really need nine images (not counting the cover art) referencing individuals/structures in the game to their real-world counterparts? It just seems like the article is determined to inform the reader just how much in the game is based on reality. A maximum of three would be ideal. Wikibenboy94 (talk) 08:16, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

Yes, this article has a good length. The number of images is appropriate for that size, each placed near the relevant text and clearly captioned to further show their relevance in that context. Secondly, it is appropriate as video games are a visual medium. Notwithstanding that some are dual images, which are together in the same size as the standard thumbnail size. Three in the plot section. Three in the development section. Which is far from excessive. --Cold Season (talk) 00:56, 25 September 2024 (UTC)