Talk:Torrent (Elden Ring)

One concern

Jumping in here, while notability is definitely not an issue, the subject itself feels inaccessible to someone that hasn't played Elden Ring, as a lot of the terminology and handling is strictly for that. Even the dev section isn't really quite the dev section but covers enemies using a shared animation.

Not trying to rain on your work with that, just looking at this after the FF articles I feel you need to better take into account people aren't going to understand what they're reading or why this is important enough for an article without that effort, y'know? Kung Fu Man (talk) 20:41, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

WP:BEBOLD definitely applies - any contributions to make it more clear are welcome! I try to give it as much context as possible but I fully admit that it may need additional explanation to a lay person. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 02:25, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

@Kung Fu Man: You still have not explained examples of how exactly the articles are in-universe but continue to slap tags on the pages, even after I made a good-faith effort to fix the issues. I am really not sure what you mean at all, and without making your ideas about it clear, it's starting to feel disruptive. I have followed Wikipedia policy to the letter and you continue to imply, without evidence, that it's poorly-written. Please give actual examples of what is in-universe about the pages you have tagged, as simply using ingame terminology is not inuniverse. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 07:16, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Try reading this from the perspective of someone that hasn't played Elden Ring, let alone gaming in general. I am seriously having a hard time believing you are unaware what someone saying "this is written in-universe" means given how much you engage with character articles. Torrent may be better than the other one, but readers aren't going to be able to understand what half of this means and just reading it aloud will illustrate that.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 07:31, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

@Kung Fu Man: I know full well what it means. WP:INUNIVERSE says it is "Describing aspects of the work as if they were real." In no part of the article is anything described pretending it is real. It makes it very clear and obvious Torrent or Radahn are not real beings, and are fictional characters.

What you are talking about has nothing to do with in-universe perspective, and would fall under WP:INDISCRIMINATE as lacking context. The correct tag for that would be Template:Context. But, I don't think that's true either. The lede gives full context for where the character is from, what they are, and why they are well-regarded by critics. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 07:45, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

See this behavior is why everyone gets frustrated with you eventually. "I'm right, let me thump this policy that says I'm right" and you clearly don't understand anything. You can cite as many pages you want but it doesn't change the fact that

• Nothing on this page indicates what Torrent is as a fictional character.
• What type of game is even Elden Ring in the context of the body?
• What does it matter to me to know the exact rate Torrent's health regenerates?
• Why is the development info more of a trivia section? What does it matter to know there was a bucking animation? Was it cut or just shared?

And this is just a surface level. This isn't written like an article on a fictional character, it's more about a game mechanic. And let's not get to the reception section which feels more cherry picked and gives zero indication of why Torrent matters, again, as a fictional character compared to a horse discussed in the context of Elden Ring's gameplay. There is at least some design commentary in there, but it's so buried it's hard to notice, and makes one wonder if the article wouldn't fit better merged in Elden Ring.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 08:01, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

You are trying to prove vehemently that Torrent is "just a game mechanic" and therefore shouldn't be mentioned, but this is simply demonstrably untrue. If Torrent was a mere game mechanic he would not have a name or a story role. He would, at best, be a generic "Spectral Steed" with no identity whatsoever. The game goes through pains to indicate Torrent is not a generic horse. I would also be dubious if someone made an article like "Horse (Red Dead Redemption 2)" but this is not the same thing. Think Epona from Zelda, if she were standalone notable. Polygon states "should Torrent be killed, I absolutely mourn", which would be ridiculous if Torrent was merely a random ghost with no identity. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 02:27, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

But what discussion about Torrent is there as a character? Yeah you mention Epona, but Epona had reaction beyond just gameplay no? A better comparison would probably be Roach from the Witcher series in terms of what one should look for in a subject like this: a quick google search shows there's discussion of Roach as a character. Torrent's discussion is predominantly gameplay as it relates to JUST the Elden Ring title. You could replace its name with "spectral steed" in this article and the work would feel the same.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 07:44, 27 March 2024 (UTC)