View source for Talk:Assassin's Creed/Archive 1



== Assassin's Creed II Platforms ==

I added Mac OS X to the list of platforms as ACII is now being sold on the Mac platform as well.  <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/131.247.36.116|131.247.36.116]] ([[User talk:131.247.36.116|talk]]) 23:39, 17 November 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

I added Brotherhood as available on OS X since they just started offering it. [[Special:Contributions/98.232.18.134|98.232.18.134]] ([[User talk:98.232.18.134|talk]]) 18:05, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

== Assassin's Creed II: Multiplayer ==

Why was Assassin's Creed II: Multiplayer (2010) for the iPhone removed from the list of games?  If no one answers, I may just put it back.
[[User:Agiar2000|Agiar2000]] ([[User talk:Agiar2000|talk]]) 20:13, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Update:  I have received a message from the editor who removed Assassin's Creed II: Multiplayer from the list, and he did not realize that it was a separate game for the iPhone.  That is why I am placing it back in the list. [[User:Agiar2000|Agiar2000]] ([[User talk:Agiar2000|talk]]) 19:04, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Why was Assassin's Creed II: Multiplayer (2010) for the iPhone removed from the list of games again?  It is a real game that has actually been released already.  http://assassinscreed.us.ubi.com/assassins-creed-2/iphone_multi.php
[[User:Agiar2000|Agiar2000]] ([[User talk:Agiar2000|talk]]) 11:14, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

== Assassin's Creed II: Discovery ==

I did not put up the neutrality dispute tag, but I agree that there is something wrong with that section as it stands.  While the first part of it seems okay to me, the rest of it reads more like a review in and of itself than of an encyclopedic article or even an article reporting on a review.  I do not think it is appropriate to use words like "guy" or qualitative phrases saying how great something is or isn't as part of an encyclopedic article.  I especially do not think it should ever mention the first person, "That's pretty much '''my''' only large '''complaint''' about Assassin's Creed: Discovery, though."  This should not read like someone's blog or personal take on the game.  What say you Wikipedians out there?  Can we get this cleaned up?  If I do not see any responses, I may try to clean it up myself, whenever I can get around to it. [[User:Agiar2000|Agiar2000]] ([[User talk:Agiar2000|talk]]) 20:43, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Agreed. The section seems somewhat personal and subjective.  <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/99.233.52.194|99.233.52.194]] ([[User talk:99.233.52.194|talk]]) 22:51, 20 March 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== Games ==

I'd suggest removing all the games listed after Assassin's Creed III in this section, because 1.) there hasn't been any statements referring to any games past that, and 2.) this series was confirmed as a trilogy, long before the first game was released.  All the games listed after AC3 are just speculation and wishful thinking on someone's part.  Not only that, but the year that AC3 comes out is speculation as well, we only have one known Assassin's Creed game possibly coming out as late as 2011, and that's Brotherhood.  In fact, I'd wait for them to actually announce any more games past Brotherhood before actually listing them or possible release dates for them.

<b>EDIT</b>:  I went ahead and fixed it.  Removed all the games listed after AC3; changed the release dates for AC: Episodes, AC: Brotherhood, and AC3; and fixed spelling errors.  I left Brotherhood and Episodes separate, though it's likely the same game given that they just now acquired the Brotherhood domain.  

One more edit, apparently it wants to have that section expanded now that I deleted that, but since I'm new to editing this sort of thing, I'll let someone else deal with that. - <span class="autosigned">&nbsp;—&nbsp;<nowiki>[</nowiki>[[Wikipedia:Signatures|Unsigned]] comment added by [[User:74.133.10.50|74.133.10.50]] ([[User talk:74.133.10.50|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/74.133.10.50|contribs]]) 19:10, 25 April 2010.]</span><!-- Template:Unsigned -->
:It was caused by an error in the table. You'd deleted the close table marker which caused the table to think that the following expand section template was the end marker. - [[User:X201|X201]] ([[User talk:X201|talk]]) 08:42, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

== Assassin's Creed II: Brotherhood ==

I've reverted the Assassin's Creed II: Brotherhood section back to its original "Episodes" title. All that has happened is that Ubisoft have registered a domain name. There is no evidence that this is for one of the Episode games. It may be for a totally unconnected title or even Assassin's Creed III. To say that Brotherhood '''is''' Episodes is total guesswork. - [[User:X201|X201]] ([[User talk:X201|talk]]) 08:46, 26 April 2010 (UTC)


Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood has been confirmed via Kotaku<ref>http://kotaku.com/5531849/gamestop-placeholder-art-names-assassins-creed-brotherhood-+-update</ref> to be the Episodes project.  I've gone ahead and updated the page to reflect that.  <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/74.133.10.50|74.133.10.50]] ([[User talk:74.133.10.50|talk]]) 23:22, 5 May 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:No. It hasn't been comfirmed to be one of the Episodes games. Only that its an Assassin's Creed title. I have reverted your edit untill there is confirmation that Brotherhood is one of the Episodes games. Either way the Episodes section will need to stay because there is at least one other game that we know nothing about. - [[User:X201|X201]] ([[User talk:X201|talk]]) 08:16, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Considering the fact that the Episodes project (only one game, not more than one as you've stated) was said to be out this fiscal year, I highly doubt it's anything but.  In addition, IGN's listings for the Episodes project also redirects to Brotherhood now.  And everything listed on the cover of the Brotherhood reserve box is what we were told was the Episodes project.  <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/74.133.10.50|74.133.10.50]] ([[User talk:74.133.10.50|talk]]) 09:30, 6 May 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== Assassin's III period ==

Has it been stated for sure that it will take place in the colonial era?  <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/69.245.201.211|69.245.201.211]] ([[User talk:69.245.201.211|talk]]) 00:14, 22 June 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:No, not by a reliable source. - [[User:X201|X201]] ([[User talk:X201|talk]]) 08:44, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
::It states that in the table, maybe we should remove it?  <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/69.245.201.211|69.245.201.211]] ([[User talk:69.245.201.211|talk]]) 17:29, 22 June 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:::Speculation should only be based on a reliable source from Ubisoft itself or the developer subsidiary. Either something they let slip or cruising the Ubisoft forums and seeing if anyone who actually works for the company gives hints. Putting it just because says it on some gaming site isn't good enough, they need to be using a good source themselves. [[User:Hpelgrift|Hpelgrift]] ([[User talk:Hpelgrift|talk]]) 16:49, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

== Creation of Assassin's Creed Portal ==

I Think Assassin's Creed is popular enough we should create a portal for AC  <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Dannywahyudigho|Dannywahyudigho]] ([[User talk:Dannywahyudigho|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Dannywahyudigho|contribs]]) 11:02, 21 July 2010 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:I whole-heartedly support this idea as this game series is incredibly popular with ever expanding media and as Ubisoft have said they plan on milking it for everything it's worth and saying they could do as many as 30 games (run-on). It's also incredibly awesome and pwns like no other game, but that's just my opinion (It's really fact, but I can't put that.)[[User:Hpelgrift|Hpelgrift]] ([[User talk:Hpelgrift|talk]]) 16:43, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

== Additional material on Assassin's Creed: Project Legacy ==

Heres an article by the Sydney Morning Herald's Digital Life section about the game: [http://www.smh.com.au/digital-life/games/ubisoft-sends-assassins-to-facebook-20101004-163ak.html Ubisoft sends 'Assassins' to Facebook]. [[User:Salavat|Salavat]] ([[User talk:Salavat|talk]]) 05:47, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

== What's is the games rating? ==

It would be good to have the rating of the game(s) in the main article.  (Tim)  <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/210.23.136.200|210.23.136.200]] ([[User talk:210.23.136.200|talk]]) 00:55, 2 January 2011 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== Requested Move ==

<div class="boilerplate" style="background-color: #efe; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px dotted #aaa;"><!-- Template:RM top -->
:''The following discussion is an archived discussion of a [[WP:RM|requested move]]. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. ''

The result of the move request was: '''pages moved''' per request and discussion. - [[User:GTBacchus|GTBacchus]]<sup>([[User talk:GTBacchus|talk]])</sup> 16:43, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

----


[[Assassin's Creed (series)]] → [[Assassin's Creed]] — According to [[WP:NCVG]], this page should be shifted to Assassin's Creed as the series now consists of 8 games, 2 graphic novels, 1 novel, a series of comic books, a short film and an animated short film. Thus it is more common for people to be searching for the series rather than the first game when they are looking for "Assassin's Creed". [[User:KiasuKiasiMan|<span style="color:#333399">'''''Kiasu'''''</span><span style="color:#318CE7">'''Kiasi'''</span><span style="color:#1560BD">''Man''</span>]] 11:03, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

* [[Assassin's Creed]] → [[Assassin's Creed (video game)]]

* '''Oppose''' - within the general VG community, while it is a series, the title "Assassin's Creed" used alone almost always is about the first game.  To most gamers, there's only 3 games (the portable versions don't count for them, and spinoff media doesn't matter much).  --[[User:Masem|M<span style="font-size:x-small;">ASEM</span>]] ([[User Talk:Masem|t]]) 14:21, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
** '''Comment''' - I'll pull ''[[Kingdom Hearts]]'' as an example, its a game with only 2 numbered games but 4 handheld games, it also has a series of mangas and novels. So as long as a series has more than 3 games (I don't think mobile phone titles count) as well as media of some form in a media other than video games. It should take the main series' name, especially given a series which is currently releasing a game every year.[[User:KiasuKiasiMan|<span style="color:#333399">'''''Kiasu'''''</span><span style="color:#318CE7">'''Kiasi'''</span><span style="color:#1560BD">''Man''</span>]] 10:34, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
*** I release the quantity and type of media for KH and AC are nearly the same, and I do agree that when most people say "KH" they mean most anything from the franchise and not so much the first game.. But based mostly on a general read from articles and forums, "Assassin Creed" nearly always refers to the first game.  Why they are treated differently, I dunno (possibly AC having larger exposure on new consoles...), but that's my interpretation and read for why the first game is more significant than the series. --[[User:Masem|M<span style="font-size:x-small;">ASEM</span>]] ([[User Talk:Masem|t]]) 14:52, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
*** And to add - with something like KH, most people would likely have difficulty differing what happens in what game (unless they are die-hard fans of it), while each AC game is very distinct from the others, making the individual titles stand out more, than this general "when did this happen in the series" concept. --[[User:Masem|M<span style="font-size:x-small;">ASEM</span>]] ([[User Talk:Masem|t]]) 14:53, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' wouldn't people look for the first game as [[Assassin's Creed 1]] ? [[Special:Contributions/65.94.45.167|65.94.45.167]] ([[User talk:65.94.45.167|talk]]) 05:31, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
**'''Comment''' naming a game with the number "1" behind it isn't according to naming conventions. See: [[Final Fantasy]] and [[Final Fantasy (video game)]] or [[Twisted Metal]] and [[Twisted Metal (video game)]] for reference.[[User:KiasuKiasiMan|<span style="color:#333399">'''''Kiasu'''''</span><span style="color:#318CE7">'''Kiasi'''</span><span style="color:#1560BD">''Man''</span>]] 10:34, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
***I agree there. Since the first Assassin's Creed game does not have a 1 in the title that would make Assassin's Creed 1 a made up title which we can't use. The only way I could ever see that used would be if the developers rerelease the game using the 1.--[[Special:Contributions/76.66.180.54|76.66.180.54]] ([[User talk:76.66.180.54|talk]]) 23:08, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
*'''Support''': [[WP:NCVG]] – "If a video game series has a naming conflict solely with the first game in the series (e.g., Final Fantasy), the series page should reside at the primary name if the series possesses a minimum of 3 video game articles as well as at least one other unrelated video game or related media item." Seems to be the case here. [[User:Prime Blue|Prime Blue]] ([[User talk:Prime Blue|talk]]) 13:12, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
*'''Support''': As per nom and also in the hope that it will generate more traffic and help improve this article. - [[User:X201|X201]] ([[User talk:X201|talk]]) 13:20, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a [[WP:RM|requested move]].  <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.''</div><!-- Template:RM bottom -->

== Possible Kinect use in future AC Games ==

This might deserve a sentence or two: Ubisoft said that they think there is a kinect future for all of their brands possible: http://www.thesixthaxis.com/2011/02/02/ubisoft-hint-at-kinect-assassins-creed/ Leave how it will actually work up to the reader's imagination (the idea of the avg gamer actually being able to use this for parkour and free-running is hard to imagine, but leave that to the gamer sites and gamers.)[[User:Hpelgrift|Hpelgrift]] ([[User talk:Hpelgrift|talk]]) 16:59, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

== Assassin's Creed Books ==

I was at Walmart a few minutes ago and I saw an Assassin's Creed book titled "Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood", though it hasn't been listed in the "other media" section.  <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:One-eyed Nero|One-eyed Nero]] ([[User talk:One-eyed Nero|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/One-eyed Nero|contribs]]) 20:59, 4 April 2011 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== Pseudo-history science fiction. ==

The "Pseudo" here is unnecessary, we already have "fiction", which describes the nature of the genre. It's basically saying "false historical fiction", what the hell is that, how can fiction be "false"? '''Rehevkor''' <big>[[User talk:Rehevkor|<span style="color:black;">✉</span>]]</big> 12:54, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

:That is why I took it out those two times it was put it, the second time suggesting the fellow come to the talk page. In fact, I see he put it back a third time. Isn't that [[WP:EW]]? :| [[Flinders Petrie|Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie]] [[user_talk:Flinders Petrie|Say Shalom!]] 18:56, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
::[[WP:3RR]] applies, but that's only two actual reverts by the IP. Hopefully there won't be any further issues. '''Rehevkor''' <big>[[User talk:Rehevkor|<span style="color:black;">✉</span>]]</big> 19:45, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
:::Ah I thought it was basically fighting rather than just crossing the 3RR rule. Well I put a little thing on his talkpage explaining why I think it is there and invited him to come to this page for discussion if he still wishes to add it. [[Flinders Petrie|Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie]] [[user_talk:Flinders Petrie|Say Shalom!]] 20:26, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

::::Oh come now. Someone made it so that it now only says historical, it's definitely not historical, rather historical science fiction. ''Now'' it's misleading. [[Flinders Petrie|Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie]] [[user_talk:Flinders Petrie|Say Shalom!]] 00:58, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

== Constantinople-era? ==

''AC:Revelations'' should be put under Rennaissance, as A, that period is still in full-swing at the time of tha game (1509 or 1511), and B, the main ancestor you play as is still Ezio Auditore da Firenze. Also, I don't think there is such a thing as "Constantinople-era", it just sounds strange and made-up. [[Flinders Petrie|Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie]] &#124; [[user_talk:Flinders Petrie|Say Shalom!]] 09:08, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

:As there were no objections, I have removed that header. [[Flinders Petrie|Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie]] &#124; [[user_talk:Flinders Petrie|Say Shalom!]] 07:08, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

== Add secret before megacorporation ==

In "Cluster 9" of the glyph puzzles in AC:Brotherhood, it's revealed by this "phone call" that Abstergo's existence is not actually public knowledge. As this is something in-game, I think you would have to use a YouTube link, there's simply no other way. [[Flinders Petrie|Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie]] &#124; [[user_talk:Flinders Petrie|Say Shalom!]] 18:26, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

== Third Book coming out on June 28th ==

There's a third book coming out about Altaïr [<nowiki>http://www.amazon.com/Assassins-Creed-Crusade-Oliver-Bowden/dp/0441020992/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1306727261&sr=8-1</nowiki>]. Who the hell is Erazo btw? I hope they mean Ezio and the schmuck who put that there just has no idea what the story's about. [[Flinders Petrie|Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie]] &#124; [[user_talk:Flinders Petrie|Say Shalom!]] 03:51, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

:Ah, this is much better. I found it on a site called Play.com with a much better blurb. [http://www.play.com/Books/Books/4-/20048962/Assassin-Creed-The-Secret-Crusade/Product.html?searchtype=bookall&searchsource=0&searchstring=assassins+creed&urlrefer=search&strefer=bookall&searchfilters=s%7Bassassins+creed%7D%2bc%7B91%7D%2b] "''Niccolo Polo, father of Marco, will finally reveal the story he has kept secret all his life - the story of Altair, one of the brotherhood's most extraordinary Assassins. Altair embarks on a formidable mission - one that takes him throughout the Holy Land and shows him the true meaning of the Assassin's Creed. To demonstrate his commitment, Altair must defeat nine deadly enemies, including Templar leader, Robert de Sable. Altair's life story is told here for the first time: a journey that will change the course of history; his ongoing battle with the Templar conspiracy; a family life that is as tragic as it is shocking; and, the ultimate betrayal of an old friend.''" If no one has any objections (and judging by the activity I have seen here thus far, no one will have any...) I will add in what I can. [[Flinders Petrie|Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie]] &#124; [[user_talk:Flinders Petrie|Say Shalom!]] 13:06, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

== AC:III in Paris (that rhymes with proper pronunciation of Paris) ==

An IP-fellow has been trying to add info saying that III will take place in Paris during the French Revolution. He's put it in about the right place, but there is still no source for it. It would make perfect sense for it to take place there. This is the only thing I have found about it. [http://gamercrash.wordpress.com/2011/04/06/rumor-assassins-creed-iii-image-leaked/] <--- key term is rumor in the URL btw. [[User:Flinders Petrie|Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie]] &#124; [[user_talk:Flinders Petrie|Say Shalom!]] 20:30, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
:It's just rumours/speculation/wishful thinking, no setting has been confirmed, virtually no information on the game has been released. Should be removed. '''Rehevkor''' <big>[[User talk:Rehevkor|<span style="color:black;">✉</span>]]</big> 20:42, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

::Agreed, though I'd place money on it being the setting (like I said, it makes sense when you think of the possibilities what with the Reign of Terror and the Templars Napoléon and Robespierre :p) and on the game coming out in 2012 (for obvious reasons). Until then though, yep it should be removed. [[User:Flinders Petrie|Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie]] &#124; [[user_talk:Flinders Petrie|Say Shalom!]] 20:49, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

== WiiU additions ==

People keep adding that Revelations will be on ''Wii U'' without any confirmation. Can someone change the table in a way that it doesn't show that as yes? I don't know how to make it something like unconfirmed or a variation of that. [[User:Flinders Petrie|Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie]] &#124; [[user_talk:Flinders Petrie|Say Shalom!]] 02:04, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
== File:Assassin's Creed logo.svg Nominated for Deletion ==

{|
|-
| [[Image:Icon Now Commons orange.svg|50px]] 
| An image used in this article, [[commons:File:Assassin's Creed logo.svg|File:Assassin's Creed logo.svg]], has been nominated for deletion at [[Wikimedia Commons]] for the following reason: ''Deletion requests June 2011'' 
;What should I do?
|-
|
| A discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so ([[commons:COM:SPEEDY]] has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs.

''This notification is provided by a Bot'' --[[User:CommonsNotificationBot|CommonsNotificationBot]] ([[User talk:CommonsNotificationBot|talk]]) 09:24, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
|}

:{{done}}I've dealt with this. A user had replaced the existing image; that had a correct FUR. With a version of the logo that they had uploaded to commons. - [[User:X201|X201]] ([[User talk:X201|talk]]) 09:58, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

== Wikia as an External link ==

I'm heard several different opinions on this. So I want to clarify this once and for all. I added links to the Assassin's Creed Wiki on Wikia to this article and [[Assassin's Creed: Revelations]], I have been reverted twice by {{user|Rehevkor}}. He says it's not allowed per [[WP:ELNO]] and this confuses me because I've seen Wikia linked to for years on enWP and if it were forbidden like WP:ELNO state why would [[Template:Wikia]] be allowed to exists? In short I'm asking for clarification on if Wikia is allowed in the External Links section. Thanks. <b style="font-family:sans-serif;font-variant:small-caps;">[[User:CR90|<span style="color:#000;">chris</span>]][[Special:Contributions/Christianrocker90|<span style="color:#000;">†</span>]][[User talk:CR90|<span style="color:#000;">ian</span><span style="color:#0000cd;">rocker<small>90</small></span>]]</b> 01:21, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

:To the best of my knowledge, wikia is linked to well over 100,000 times from mainspace; whether or not each particular link is valid is up discussion however. But, a wikia wiki dedicated to the article's subject seems, in this case, to be a valid EL, given precedent. '''''[[:m:User:Fr33kman|<span style="color:#9966CC;">fr33k</span>]][[User talk:Fr33kman|<span style="color:navy;">man</span>]]''''' 01:36, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

::Assassin's Creed's wiki is also a very well-maintained and well-sourced wiki from what I have seen. One of the best I have seen. [[User:Flinders Petrie|Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie]] &#124; [[user_talk:Flinders Petrie|Say Shalom!]] 07:08, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

*As far as I know, external links to Wikia wikis are allowed, if the wiki in question is well-maintained and sourced, i.e. if it's a genuine help for readers (there are many Wikia fan wikis who contain less information about a subject than Wikipedia). [[Wookiepedia]] for example is a definite precedent for this on most [[Star Wars]] related articles. #12 of [[WP:ELNO]] also clearly allows this by saying "[[.]] except those with a substantial history of stability and a substantial number of editors." With [[:wikia:assassinscreed:Special:Statistics|1300+ articles and 1000+ active users]], I have to agree with Flinders Petrie that AC Wikia is one of the better examples of a Wikia wiki and should be allowed as an external link. Regards '''[[User:SoWhy|<span style="font-variant:small-caps; color: #AC0000">So</span>]][[User talk:SoWhy|<span style="font-variant:small-caps; color: #35628F">Why</span>]]''' 08:00, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

:For comparison, please review the two Futurama wikis [http://futurama.wikia.com/wiki/Futurama_Wiki] [http://theinfosphere.org/], both of which are indiscriminate repositories of info rife with OR, speculation, and every other problem you can imagine. [[User:Flinders Petrie|Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie]] &#124; [[user_talk:Flinders Petrie|Say Shalom!]] 08:22, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

::I don't think the Futurama wikis are that bad, they are probably an average example. Both have some active users and a high number of articles, as well as structure and some great articles. You can find much, much worse examples than that. Regards '''[[User:SoWhy|<span style="font-variant:small-caps; color: #AC0000">So</span>]][[User talk:SoWhy|<span style="font-variant:small-caps; color: #35628F">Why</span>]]''' 09:30, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

As far as I know wikis being linked is certainly the exception, not the rule - the exceptions that spring to mind (Memory Alpha and Wookipedia) seem to qualify "substantial history of stability" at least. What other examples are there? That have been established as usable by consensus? Gaming wikis in particular here, I'm struggling to think of any. I should also point out that most Wikia sites run afoul of [[WP:ELNO]]#11 (and to a lesser extent #10).  '''Rehevkor''' <big>[[User talk:Rehevkor|<span style="color:black;">✉</span>]]</big> 11:11, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

:Nowhere in ELNO it says that there has to be consensus before they can be added. If they have a "substantial history of stability and a substantial number of editors", they can be added. AC Wiki meets these requirements. Of course this can be challenged, which is why we have this discussion here now to determine whether the requirements are fulfilled. ELNO #10 and #11 do not apply though because ELNO #12 was clearly meant to handle such wikis. As such, it's clearly [[lex specialis]] to both #11 and #10. Regards '''[[User:SoWhy|<span style="font-variant:small-caps; color: #AC0000">So</span>]][[User talk:SoWhy|<span style="font-variant:small-caps; color: #35628F">Why</span>]]''' 11:32, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

::ELNO is vague on wikis and subject to opinion, "substantial history of stability and a substantial number of editors" is not specific, it begs for a consensus, I feel it should be established that a wiki qualifies on an individual basis. The consensus here so far seems to be to include it, this is good news. I may not agree that #10 overrides #12 but I'm not going to argue that point. '''Rehevkor''' <big>[[User talk:Rehevkor|<span style="color:black;">✉</span>]]</big> 11:40, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
:::I'm not sure what "it begs for a consensus" is supposed to mean, exactly. The guidance is intentionally unspecific though; it's fine as is. If this link is acceptable, which it appears that everyone here agrees with (including myself, for the record), then there's really no reason for this RFC. Wikipedia is not a bureaucracy, and all.<br/>—&nbsp;[[User:Ohms law|<span style="font-family: Courier New, monospace ;font-style:italic">V = IR</span>]] <span style="font-variant:small-caps">([[User talk:Ohms law|Talk]]&thinsp;&bull;&thinsp;[[Special:Contributions/Ohms law|Contribs]])</span> 17:52, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

::::"it begs for a consensus" because ELNO specifies links that are ones that one ''should generally avoid'' - I think it's perfectly acceptable to want a consensus when making exceptions to this guideline. I didn't start this RFC, an informal discussion is a perfectly acceptable way of gaining a consensus too. Anyhoo, I think we're off track here this discussion is about the suitability of the link, not to attack my reasons for asking for a consensus. I have conceded that my original judgement was against consensus and have already said this is a good thing, but I maintain I was correct to request a consensus also. '''Rehevkor''' <big>[[User talk:Rehevkor|<span style="color:black;">✉</span>]]</big> 18:35, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

::::So no one has any objections to it being put back then? [[User:Flinders Petrie|Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie]] &#124; [[user_talk:Flinders Petrie|Say Shalom!]] 19:26, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

:This RFC is not about how to change a policy or guideline.  Therefore it does not belong in the "policy" category.  I've corrected it for you.
:In general, these questions are usually taken to [[WP:External links/Noticeboard]], which you may find quicker and simpler in the future.  [[User:WhatamIdoing|WhatamIdoing]] ([[User talk:WhatamIdoing|talk]]) 21:19, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

*'''Permit external link''' -The link is [http://assassinscreed.wikia.com/wiki/Assassin%27s_Creed_Wiki this page].   It can be kept in this article for a few reasons:
**The [[WP:ELNO]] guideline states that links to wikis are generally discouraged:'' " [avoid] links to open wikis, except those with a substantial history of stability and a substantial number of editors. Mirrors or forks of Wikipedia should not be linked."''   Upon scrutinizing the A.C. Wikia, that link appears to satisfy the requirement of  "substantial history of stability and a substantial number of editors".   
**The [[WP:ELOFFICIAL]] guideline expressly permits "official" external links, namely ''"the linked content primarily covers the area for which the subject of the article is notable"'', and the A.C. Wikia appears to meet this definition of "official"
**The wikia appears to have a large amount of information that would be valuable to readers of Wikipedia
**This article does not have an excessive number of external links (only one)
**The nature of the topic is a video game, which naturally has a vast amount of information on-line, and so it a few external links are to be expected  (e.g. "Halo" has 4)
**Other video game articles in WP include external links to Wikia sites
:so, for those reasons, the external link should be included. --[[User:Noleander|Noleander]] ([[User talk:Noleander|talk]]) 01:48, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

::I don't see how it can be considered "official", the wiki is basically a fan site in that respect (it is contributed to by and run by fans), which the guideline specifically rules out. '''Яehevkor''' <big>[[User talk:Rehevkor|<span style="color:black;">✉</span>]]</big> 20:45, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
:::All the articles are sourced and are well maintained. A fan site is something without moderation. This ''wiki'' has moderation. <b style="font-family:sans-serif;font-variant:small-caps;">[[User:CR90|<span style="color:#000;">chris</span>]][[Special:Contributions/Christianrocker90|<span style="color:#000;">†</span>]][[User talk:CR90|<span style="color:#000;">ian</span><span style="color:#0000cd;">rocker<small>90</small></span>]]</b> 06:43, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

== Eagle or Flying One? ==

When I looked up the meaning of [[Altaïr]], it said it means Eagle. What is the source for the meaning being "Flying One"? In the context of the series eagle would have made more sense. So where did this Flying One idea come from? [[User:Flinders Petrie|Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie]] &#124; [[user_talk:Flinders Petrie|Say Shalom!]] 18:28, 15 July 2011 (UTC)


Ezio means flying one, I think.

== ACIII addition ==

So an IP fellow added ACIII. This is of course a real story, but I think it needs a bit of editting. As well, should the entries not all be set to no on the table? I'm mulling over whether to put ACIII in its own separate area. I know it'll be a different time, but still, it's a bit OR. Then again, [[WP:IGNOREALLRULES]].... [[User:Flinders Petrie|Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie]] &#124; <sup>[[user_talk:Flinders Petrie|Say Shalom!]]</sup> 7 Tishrei 5772 02:07, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

:I've removed it. It was extrapolation. The original article made no mention of AC3 and only covered the conclusion of the AC2 storyline. - [[User:X201|X201]] ([[User talk:X201|talk]]) 08:30, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

::Must have been different from the article I read then which did talk about it. [http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2011-10-03-first-details-on-2012s-assassins-creed] I'll admit I didn't read the one the other dude sourced. [[User:Flinders Petrie|Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie]] &#124; <sup>[[user_talk:Flinders Petrie|Say Shalom!]]</sup> 7 Tishrei 5772 19:04, 5 October 2011 (UTC) Edit: Though they use the terms suggest and such, which makes it a bit iffy in my book. [[User:Flinders Petrie|Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie]] &#124; <sup>[[user_talk:Flinders Petrie|Say Shalom!]]</sup> 7 Tishrei 5772 19:05, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

== mobile installments of AC1, 2 (multiplayer) Brotherhood and Revelations ==

There is a mobile version of AC1 for Android (and probably other platforms). There are a few differences, but the game's splash screen states "Also available for PC, XBOX 360 and PS3". So, shouldn't this be added to AC1 in the platform table? [[User:Allyddin Sane|Allyddin Sane]] ([[User talk:Allyddin Sane|talk]]) 16:28, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
:Got a link? - [[User:X201|X201]] ([[User talk:X201|talk]]) 16:30, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
::Don't think it's for sale anymore, but here's a link from the AC wikia http://assassinscreed.wikia.com/wiki/Assassin%27s_Creed_%28mobile_game%29 [[User:Allyddin Sane|Allyddin Sane]] ([[User talk:Allyddin Sane|talk]]) 20:00, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
:::Changed the header because my thesis research revealed there are more mobile games unmentioned here. I am still uncertain of whether to add the checks to the main (console/PC) version or add another line to that already humongous table. Perhaps it should be split somehow? [[User:Allyddin Sane|Allyddin Sane]] ([[User talk:Allyddin Sane|talk]]) 23:25, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

== Velayudham vs Assassin's Creed ==

hey did anyone know that there is an [[India]]n film called ''[[Velayudham]]''? well it is important to know that the superhero costume worn by the hero in it is loosely borrowed from Assassins's Creed! [[User:Kailash29792|Kailash29792]] ([[User talk:Kailash29792|talk]]) 05:25, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
== Parallels with Alamut (1938 novel)? ==

It occurs to me that the premise of this series is in some ways similar to [[Alamut_(1938_novel)]], the maxim "Nothing is true, everything is permitted" is referenced frequently in the game. Is there any official or reliable source that shows this connection?
[[Special:Contributions/64.9.146.171|64.9.146.171]] ([[User talk:64.9.146.171|talk]]) 07:17, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
: Hrm a quick google shows [http://www.computerandvideogames.com/148805/interviews/assassins-creed/ this interview] Perhaps worth including into the main article? [[Special:Contributions/64.9.146.171|64.9.146.171]] ([[User talk:64.9.146.171|talk]]) 07:22, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

== Brotherhood summary Typo ==

In the Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood summary there is the sentence “…he spends the night with Caterina Sforza, waking up armourless to find the city besieged by Cesare Borgia.” “armourless” is not a word in the English language, I would correct it if I knew what was meant, "amorous" perhaps?
:Clearing inferring "without armour". Removed it though as it does nothing to explain the plot. '''<span style="color:red;">Я</span>ehevkor''' <big>[[User talk:Rehevkor|<span style="color:black;">✉</span>]]</big> 23:40, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
== URL Spelling ==

I'm sorry guys, I don't know how to do this, never done it before - Please delete this as appropriate - Just letting you all know that the URL to the following page is misspelt

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assasins_creed

It should be "Assassins" - note the double "SS" - whereas the URL has "SS" and "S"

Hope it can be sorted by you guys? Keep up the good work.

-Pete, a regular Wikipedia user (but not contributer)  <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/86.145.80.91|86.145.80.91]] ([[User talk:86.145.80.91|talk]]) 23:28, 29 March 2012 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:Actually the link you gave goes to a redirect page, which then brings you to this page. If you type the URL with 'assassin' spelled correctly, then you will arrive directly at this page (although you have to use '%27_' for the apostrophe if you want to get here directly). The redirect is more of a convenient feature than a bug.[[User:Fyrael| -- Fyrefly ]] ([[User talk:Fyrael|talk]]) 14:03, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

== Assassin's Creed: Graphic Novel ==

Is "Assassin's Creed: Graphic Novel" an official title or a Wikipedia neologism. If it's an official title for an 8-page comic magazine, it seems massive proof for the watering down of the term. [[User:Wakuran|惑乱 Wakuran]] ([[User talk:Wakuran|talk]]) 09:57, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

: Seems that it was merely called ''Assassin's Creed'' [http://www.comics.org/series/57839/][http://www.comicbookdb.com/title.php?ID=33810] - it doesn't even seem to have been a [[graphic novel]]la as it'd require an ISBN to qualify. It appears to be an 16-page promotional [[one-shot (comics)|one-shot]] that was given away at conventions and with pre-orders. (17:46, 5 November 2012 (UTC))
== Order of Platform List in Games Section ==

Just wondering what other people thought about the order of the table.  A recent change by user {{user|Zntrip}} changed the order to alphabetical, while I felt it should be in it's original order, where the main consoles were first, followed by handhelds, then mobile, etc.  Not trying to start anything of who's right, who's wrong, but IMO I felt that it is better to represent the order by the consoles that the games have mainly come out on, followed by those that are least used for releases. [[User:Favre1fan93|Favre1fan93]] ([[User talk:Favre1fan93|talk]]) 01:39, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

:In general it is best to have alpha grouped orders based on console/computer, portables/handhelds, and then mobile, particularly since the game started on the former systems and extended out in that order.  (If AC started as a DS title, I might argue otherwise, but this is most neutral anyway). --[[User:Masem|M<span style="font-size:x-small;">ASEM</span>]] ([[User Talk:Masem|t]]) 02:14, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

::That was my feeling as well.  I will change it back and refer here as reason. [[User:Favre1fan93|Favre1fan93]] ([[User talk:Favre1fan93|talk]]) 03:38, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

:: No, Who the hack are we trying to decide what platform should be given first order.I mean to say that what if I want Xbox 360 first and PS3 second? It would be a complete mess.So, Just avoiding any dispute, put it in a alphabetical order.This would never ever create any type of dispute.[[Special:Contributions/59.161.23.88|59.161.23.88]] ([[User talk:59.161.23.88|talk]]) 04:03, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

:::But we are doing it alphabetical for priorities.  PS3 and Xbox 360 are the main consoles that the games are coming out on.  Thus, they should be first, alphabetically.  Then the computer based (Mac, Windows, OnLive).  Then the handhelds (PSP, Vita, DS) followed by mobile operating systems and Facebook.  I get what you are saying 'Who cares Xbox or PS3 first?'.  It doesn't matter but it looks better alphabetized.  And while overall alphabetized looks nice, why would we put Android first when the only games it has had is one meant for handhelds and one that was not a major number release?  We can look at it as we are ordering it by the systems that have had the most releases, which in turn essentially creates it in the order of consoles/computers, handhelds, then mobile. [[User:Favre1fan93|Favre1fan93]] ([[User talk:Favre1fan93|talk]]) 04:18, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

:Anything other than alphabetical order is arbitrary and confusing. Alphabetical order is the most neutral, common sense approach. What platforms the series debuted on is largely irrelevant as it has now expanded to included many others. If your concern is that the core console releases will be less prevalent, perhaps those titles can be in bold text? – [[User:Zntrip|Zntrip]] 09:48, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

::It is not arbitrary though.  It is separated into three sections as I have mentioned: consoles/computer, handhelds, then mobile.  This is not arbitrary since games like Assassin's Creed are intended for release on consoles/computers first.  Then they branch off for non-numbered games on handheld devices and sometimes mobile.  If you look at a page like [[Madden NFL#Series_overview|Madden NFL]], while the table is not in the same format, the order of which the games were released on are in the order of consoles, then handhelds and mobiles.  This order is accepted when talking about main console game series.  That is why there is no arbitrariness to the order.  While it was not perfect, it is close and can easily be changed to a better order of console/computer, handheld, mobile. [[User:Favre1fan93|Favre1fan93]] ([[User talk:Favre1fan93|talk]]) 14:40, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

:::I think I understand. How about we split the platform section up so that it is easier to understand where one section begins and one ends? This will also make it easier to see which game is a console or handheld release. The five sections I came up with are consoles, PCs, handheld, mobile, and other (for Facebook and OnLive, since both can be accessed from numerous PCs and mobile devices). – [[User:Zntrip|Zntrip]] 20:18, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

:::{|class="wikitable" style="text-align: center"
|-
! rowspan="4" | Year
! rowspan="4" | Title
|-
! colspan="15" | Platform(s)
|-
! colspan="3" | Consoles
! colspan="2" | PCs
! colspan="3" | Handheld
! colspan="5" | Mobile
! colspan="2" | Other
|-
! style="width:3em;font-size:90%" | [[PlayStation 3|PS3]]
! style="width:3em;font-size:90%" | [[Xbox 360|X360]]
! style="width:3em;font-size:90%" | [[Wii U]]
! style="width:3em;font-size:90%" | [[Mac OS|Mac]]
! style="width:3em;font-size:90%" | [[Microsoft Windows|Win]]
! style="width:3em;font-size:90%" | [[Nintendo DS|DS]]
! style="width:3em;font-size:90%" | [[PlayStation Portable|PSP]]
! style="width:3em;font-size:90%" | [[PlayStation Vita|Vita]]
! style="width:3em;font-size:90%" | [[Android (operating system)|And]]
! style="width:3em;font-size:90%" | [[iOS]]
! style="width:3em;font-size:90%" | [[Symbian|Symb]]
! style="width:3em;font-size:90%" | [[webOS]]
! style="width:3em;font-size:90%" | [[Windows Phone|WP]]
! style="width:3em;font-size:90%" | [[Facebook Platform|Face]]
! style="width:3em;font-size:90%" | [[OnLive]]
|}

::::That is a good suggestion and I'm glad you understand the point I made.  I wasn't trying to bash or put down the alphabetical order, but with video games it does not make sense to do it that way most of the time. :) I think after I wrote my other response, I had done more work on the table so it should be in a better organized state.  If it comes to a point where there are more complaints about the order, then we can definitely implement the formatting that you suggested. [[User:Favre1fan93|Favre1fan93]] ([[User talk:Favre1fan93|talk]]) 22:02, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

:::::We don't have to wait until there are complaints. The only reason I changed the table was because I didn't understand the reason for how platforms were ordered. The order confused me and will probably confuse others, but if the table is changed to my above suggestions I don't think that will be the case. If there aren't any objections I will go ahead and change it. – [[User:Zntrip|Zntrip]] 23:14, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

::::::Okay. Fine by me.  I took care of adding the headings.  I kept the order as I had changed it to before, but it overall is stil the concept that you suggested. [[User:Favre1fan93|Favre1fan93]] ([[User talk:Favre1fan93|talk]]) 02:30, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

:::::::Cool, made some more changes to the abbreviation and some other things. Tell me what you think. – [[User:Zntrip|Zntrip]] 07:53, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

::::::::Fine. I think we are all set now. [[User:Favre1fan93|Favre1fan93]] ([[User talk:Favre1fan93|talk]]) 13:48, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

== Second paragraph of "Future" ==

Does anybody mind if I delete the second paragraph under the "Future" section? It's redundant, because the same information is found above it in the section talking about the games. --[[User:Packinheat2u|Packinheat2u]] ([[User talk:Packinheat2u|talk]]) 06:08, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

:No need to ask permission, just [[WP:BRD]] it. - [[User:X201|X201]] ([[User talk:X201|talk]]) 07:38, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

== Regarding Assassin's Creed IV: Black Flag ==

Could the time for release of further info be changed from CT to CET as there are seven hours difference and this is misleading as the Facebook page clearly states CET  <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/81.129.168.219|81.129.168.219]] ([[User talk:81.129.168.219|talk]]) 12:07, 1 March 2013 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:Done -[[User:Favre1fan93|Favre1fan93]] ([[User talk:Favre1fan93|talk]]) 17:55, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

== Cancelled games ==

Can we remove cancelled games like Lost Legacy from the other games list?  Theyre not other games if they dont exist.  <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/98.231.60.40|98.231.60.40]] ([[User talk:98.231.60.40|talk]]) 01:59, 14 May 2013 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== Historical fiction? ==

There has been a disagreement among several users pertaining to the labeling of the genres in the first sentence of each game.  The third game in the series, as well as Brotherhood and Revelations have all had "historical action-adventure stealth video game" to signify their genres.  User: Darkwarriorblake wishes for the year to go in place of historical, however I would personally have to agree with User: TJD2, User: Jasca Ducato, User: Seth Forsman PhD, and the IP: 71.95.82.119.  This section is for us to discuss what we think the header should be.  [[User:Midnightstrike3625|Midnightstrike3625]] ([[User talk:Midnightstrike3625|talk]]) 23:09, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
:Generally, in describing the genre of the video game we use the gametype and not the narrative type, so AC games are "action-adventure video games that include elements of open world structure, and stealth and parkour gameplay." There should be mention of the games using historical fiction narrative in the lead but it wouldn't be included in genre. --[[User:Masem|M<span style="font-size:x-small;">ASEM</span>]] ([[User Talk:Masem|t]]) 23:27, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
::I think it should be in the lead. "Assassin's Creed X is a historical action-adventure open world stealth video game" has been the opening line in every Assassin's Creed article since as long as I can remember, and when I first changed it I thought it was a simple mistake and didn't expect any controversy at all with it.  That's why I marked it as a minor edit. [[User:TJD2|TJD2]] ([[User talk:TJD2|talk]]) 23:49, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
:::There are two problems in that neither "open world" or "stealth" are genres. They're gameplay elements, and major ones at that, and should be highlighted, but not part of the genre statement. --[[User:Masem|M<span style="font-size:x-small;">ASEM</span>]] ([[User Talk:Masem|t]]) 00:02, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
The article for [[Stealth]] describes it as a genre, as well as in games such as [[Metal Gear Solid]] and [[Tom Clancy's Splinter Cell]] which are usually categorized as "Stealth games" and "Stealth Action" titles.  Is stealth a gameplay element for those as well?  I've always considered stealth a genre or game category, just like "first person shooter" is to Halo.  I'm a bit new here so I don't claim to be an expert on genre labeling.  I was just going off of what seemed like an error to me as well because all the other AC articles use historical in the opening line. I can see "open world" being a gameplay element, so no concerns there about leaving that out.[[User:Midnightstrike3625|Midnightstrike3625]] ([[User talk:Midnightstrike3625|talk]]) 00:15, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
:Okay, stealth is a genre (I didn't realize we had an article for that but my mistake). IT's just that "action-adventure" and "stealth" seem contradictory in terms of what they imply.  But still, "open world" is not a genre, but gameplay. --[[User:Masem|M<span style="font-size:x-small;">ASEM</span>]] ([[User Talk:Masem|t]]) 00:45, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
It seems like a lot of people wish for it to be like User: TJD2 stated with the opening sentence, I'd opt for leaving open world out myself, but most people don't want the year like User: Darkwarriorblake.  He is the only one who is reverting everyone else's work, whilst not discussing it here. [[User:Midnightstrike3625|Midnightstrike3625]] ([[User talk:Midnightstrike3625|talk]]) 07:42, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
:I'd be fine with removing historical fiction, but not to replace it with "2010 game". That is not a genre and has no business being there. [[User:Seth Forsman PhD|Seth Forsman PhD]] ([[User talk:Seth Forsman PhD|talk]])  <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|undated]] comment added 15:24, 6 June 2013 (UTC)</span><!--Template:Undated--> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
*Interesting interpretation of saying I haven't turned up to discuss TJD2 when noone has informed me of the discussion, and an ongoing discussion doesn't give you the right to continue to edit war or claim that ALL the AC articles were that way when they weren't (also [[WP: Other stuff]]), they were with the year in the opening sentence and Historical Fiction linked in the second paragraph within context well before you began edit warring over it.
**Seth Forsman, 2010 is a year, it implicitly opens with when the game was first released and provides context for it's release, a release date at the end of the opening paragraph is not the same, nor does it need to include the year and so is explicitly not the same. And I do not know where you have picked up "2010 game" from, that was never an option, it was "2010 action adventure video game". 
**Midnightstrike, I am not the only one reverting, others reverted , do not disguise the facts. That others have continued to edit war over the content without holding a discussion or informing all parties of it to make it easier on themselves is not a good step either.
**Historical fiction has no place in the opening sentence, it's a description of the setting, which would need to be applied to any and every game that does not take place in a modern setting if you wish to apply it so loosely since every game based in the real world is a historical fiction. That said Historical Fiction IS PRESENT IN THE LEDE, it is present where it belongs, describing the setting of the game in the opening of the second paragraph of each and every article that is being warred over but apparently not read.
*There is no justification for putting it in the very opening and even less justification for why the users all conveniently make the exact same edit to the articles and all believe somehow that the year needs to be removed to put in place historical fiction. Frankly I'm fairly sure the IP, TJD2 and possible Midnight are socks of TJD2, but either way there is no explanation given for why having the year there is some offensive affront. [[User:Darkwarriorblake|Darkwarriorblake]] ([[User talk:Darkwarriorblake|talk]]) 17:44, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
::::User TJD2 has again reverted the edit on an established stable article instead of allowing the stable version to stand until discussion had concluded. One must ask what his problem is, why he cannot wait for discussion to end and why he continues to edit war over that content that was in place LONG BEFORE he started all this. A discussion doesn't mean you put your change in place repeatedly while we wait an outcome. [[User:Darkwarriorblake|Darkwarriorblake]] ([[User talk:Darkwarriorblake|talk]]) 19:10, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
Putting the accusations aside, this user has been blocked numerous times dating back to 2006 for this very thing.  User Masem, I am requesting a block for User:Darkwarriorblake for harassment, false accusations (which other administrators have said are false as well per http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/TJD2&diff=prev&oldid=558185628), and violation of the 3RR. [[User:TJD2|TJD2]] ([[User talk:TJD2|talk]]) 19:22, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
:::::The admin said there wasn't enough evidence not that it was false. As for harassment, accusing you of being a sockpuppet with reason is not harassment, it's a genuine attempt to stop abuse of the system. This user hasn't been blocked numerous times at all, this user has never been blocked except once, which was an accident the admin apologised for. And none of this or your ignorance of the ongoing discussion and continued edit warring has anything to do with solving the discussion at hand. If you had simply adhered to the discussion you wouldn't be throwing all Caps-lock fits for receiving a warning. Why you feel the need to keep reverting the stable version instead of waiting, I don't know, but it isn't how discussion works, not informing all participants is also not how discussion works. There is an ongoing discussion and I have given multiple reasons for why the particular articles are correct, and your only argument so far has been that some of the other AC articles do it the way you want them to. That is not a reason. [[User:Darkwarriorblake|Darkwarriorblake]] ([[User talk:Darkwarriorblake|talk]]) 19:27, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
User: Darkwarriorblake I am curious as to your reasoning for the edits themselves.  So far all you have done is made accusations at me and other users.  It's almost like you're saying "I'm right and all those who disagree are the socks of another account".  If you wanna know who I really am, I'm on youtube!  I'm not a "sock", as you call it, of anyone else...I just want to improve the articles of the media I review; that's all.  Everybody on the talk page has come to the consensus that the year should not stay, now we have to decide whether or not "historical" should be put in it's place.  On a side note I did respond on my talk page and said I am putting up a discussion, you probably just didn't see it.  What are everyone's thoughts on this issue? [[User:Midnightstrike3625|Midnightstrike3625]] ([[User talk:Midnightstrike3625|talk]]) 21:05, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
:Edit: Upon closer inspection, you give reasons as to why "historical" should not be included, but what are your reasons for including the year?  Aside from the fact that it's when the game was released that is. Lots of games, including your previously mentioned Bioshock Infinite do not open with the year. [[User:Midnightstrike3625|Midnightstrike3625]] ([[User talk:Midnightstrike3625|talk]]) 21:22, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
:::Please don't make me keep linking [[WP: Other stuff]], Bioshock is a long article that exists, that does not by default make it a perfect article or one that can not be improved. Bioshock also does not include historical fiction in the opening, though by the logic used to apply it to Assassin's Creed why wouldn't Bioshock have it there? And who on the talk page has come to a consensus that the year should not stay? Only you have repeatedly said it, the rest just keep removing it as a consequence of hitting undo/revert instead of editing the article considering no explanation was given for its removal nor has any justification been given AGAINST the reasoning I've given for its inclusion. 20 people can say the sky is red, doesn't make it so. No one, not one so far has given a reason why the year would not be there nor why historical fiction should be nor why historical fiction in the second paragraph is not sufficient nor why they keep reverting the same thing yet not REMOVING the properly placed link to historical fiction.  I have explained why the year should be there above, please read that as I won't repeat myself.  

:::As for your comment about sock accusations: Your registration coinciding with the edits TJD2 was attempting to force through and the unregistered IP, despite the IPs few edits and your relative newness, you have all edited the same or associated music articles with just a cursory glance at your history relating to Black Sabbath and Newsted. It COULD be coincidence, but the exact same reversions on these AC articles and disregard for the 27 times I've said Historical Fiction is linked in the 2nd paragraph makes you all seem very similar and raises a case that you are one and the same. That may not be the case as I can't check your locations, but I'm not accusing you of being a sock simply for disagreeing with me. I don't have your talk page on my watchlist so I was unaware of the discussion. [[User:Darkwarriorblake|Darkwarriorblake]] ([[User talk:Darkwarriorblake|talk]]) 21:31, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
Again all bands and games that I have reviewed. I apologize for not linking you to the discussion, like you said I'm very new to Wikipedia and I thought you would check my talk for a response.  Would you be for dropping both the year and historical, so it'd be "Assassin's Creed is an action adventure video game" or something along those lines (Masem said stealth and Action Adventure contradict each other)?  I would like to come to a resolution.  Also I personally have not touched the AC articles since I posted the discussion, so no I am not TJD2 or the IP. [[User:Midnightstrike3625|Midnightstrike3625]] ([[User talk:Midnightstrike3625|talk]]) 21:41, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
::Historical fiction is in the lede's second paragraph, it doesn't need dropping I just don't think it belongs by the genre as it is setting and I think where it is right now, it gives the game a good framing context for the narrative and helps better explain what the historical fiction refers to. I don't see a reason to drop the year, it provides an instant guide to when the game was released which in AC's case can help with ordering the generally otherwise unuseful titles and helps understanding. For instance if I go to [[Leisure Suit Larry in the Land of the Lounge Lizards]], while it is handled in a different way, I can instantly get an idea of what kind of game it will be because of the year it was made, it is the same with films, all films have a year in the opening, though it is a different project the two share many style similarities such as opening with the genre. [[User:Darkwarriorblake|Darkwarriorblake]] ([[User talk:Darkwarriorblake|talk]]) 22:22, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
:::The year can be in the second sentence or even in the first, it just shouldn't be mixed with the genre terms. "AC is an action-adventure, stealth-based series of video games first published in 2010." --[[User:Masem|M<span style="font-size:x-small;">ASEM</span>]] ([[User Talk:Masem|t]]) 22:58, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
Darkwarriorblake - I was just trying to come up with compromises so we can agree on what to do with the article.  I wasn't necessarily saying it SHOULD be that way.  Masem - that kind of makes it sound like the series ITSELF was published in 2010.  It already states the release date in the first paragraph so wouldn't putting it in the first few sentences be a bit redundant? [[User:Midnightstrike3625|Midnightstrike3625]] ([[User talk:Midnightstrike3625|talk]]) 03:16, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
:I agree with Midnightstrike3625. Neither historical fiction or 2010 should be in the header, as both pieces of info are already in the next few lines. Also, I find it funny how Darkwarriorblake claims he wasn't made aware of this discussion, even though his own talk page disproves this. Please stay honest in these discussions. Thank you. [[User:Seth Forsman PhD|Seth Forsman PhD]] ([[User talk:Seth Forsman PhD|talk]]) 04:31, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
::The talkback message on my page was in relation to an earlier comment on Midnight's talk page. I had neither this nor his talk page on my watchlist and wasn't aware of it until TDJ2 continued edit warring on those articles citing this discussion as a reason to do so. [[User:Darkwarriorblake|Darkwarriorblake]] ([[User talk:Darkwarriorblake|talk]]) 06:49, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
It's quite possible actually that he may not have seen it.  We were discussing on my own talk page about the issue, so I didn't think I had to post a second time reminding him.  It was my mistake, I just thought he would check my talk page for my response after he had made his. [[User:Midnightstrike3625|Midnightstrike3625]] ([[User talk:Midnightstrike3625|talk]]) 04:57, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Alright, so as I am a total newbie for editing articles, I hope people don't yell at me for not knowing my stuff, but I just wanted to put a suggestion, an idea out there (or rather, in here) for how to word the opening sentence and the following sentences of these AC articles..so the way they are at the moment is perfectly fine, doesn't bother me at all, but would this idea make sense and please tell me everything that you find not right about it, criticism I will embrace-the first sentence Could be like, "Assassin's Creed is a video game series that consists of..." so just take out all descriptions of what type(s) of video game(s) it is, then maybe in one of the following sentences they could be placed instead, in such  a manner like: "the series has a historical fiction narrative, and features action-adventure in an open world with stealth and parkour elements" and it could be something like that, but I'm not sure, does that go against the norm? Thanks for taking the time to read this, and I hope this is not the wrong place for this..  <small><span class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:3randomtrippycolors|3randomtrippycolors]] ([[User talk:3randomtrippycolors|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/3randomtrippycolors|contribs]]) 06:06, 4 March 2014 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:Hello {{ping|3randomtrippycolors}} Per the [[WP:VG/GL|guidelines at the Video Game project]], it states that leads for game articles should first state "The name of the game in bold italics, its gameplay genre, release date, platform, and other identifying information." So the ordering should follow that format, and thus the info can not really be stated as you suggested. Thank you for it suggestion though! - [[User:Favre1fan93|Favre1fan93]] ([[User talk:Favre1fan93|talk]]) 06:25, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

== 2nd game for the PS3 & Xbox 360 ==

According to IGN, Ubisoft a planning to release 'ACV - Comet' at the same time as 'Unity' for the previous/current generation of systems. Maybe this needs to be mentioned in the 'Unity' section? http://www.ign.com/articles/2014/05/15/10-ubisoft-studios-developing-assassins-creed-unity?watch [[Special:Contributions/31.209.163.158|31.209.163.158]] ([[User talk:31.209.163.158|talk]]) 19:44, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
:Info for "Comet" is in the "Future" heading. - [[User:Favre1fan93|Favre1fan93]] ([[User talk:Favre1fan93#top|talk]] – [[Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Marvel Cinematic Universe films/archive1|Comment on List of Marvel Cinematic Universe films' FLC]]) 20:09, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

== Change of Lead Developer ==

[[Ubisoft Quebec]] has just replaced [[Ubisoft Montreal]] as the lead developer for the future Assassin's Creed title (which is not include Unity). Putting it in the future part I assume is the best. They also take part in previous Assassin's Creed titles like III and Black Flag. It should not be removed. If you want to check, check the link out. http://www.computerandvideogames.com/470093/interviews/interview-assassins-creed-has-a-new-lead-developer/
:Ubisoft Quebec are only leading development on a single game. They have not taken over responsibility for the entire franchise; that is still Ubisoft Montreal's baby. --[[User:Jasca Ducato|Jasca Ducato]] ([[User talk:Jasca Ducato|talk]]) 17:35, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

== Semi-protected edit request on 16 July 2014 ==

{{edit semi-protected|Assassin's Creed|answered=Yes}}
<!-- Begin request -->
Please change "However, Hutchinson stated both he and May were open to the idea of a future entry set during the time of the British Raj, which now consists of the modern states of India and Pakistan.[32]" in the Future section of the article to "However, Hutchinson stated both he and May were open to the idea of a future entry set during the time of the British Raj, which now consists of the modern states of India, Pakistan and Bangladesh.[32]"
<!-- End request -->
[[User:ArgRaihan|ArgRaihan]] ([[User talk:ArgRaihan|talk]]) 13:38, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
:{{Done}} - [[User:Favre1fan93|Favre1fan93]] ([[User talk:Favre1fan93|talk]]) 14:04, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

== Game Engines ==
Physics engine used in all the games released for home consoles is [[havok]], hard to know wich version/revision of the havok engine is used in each game though  <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/85.49.170.202|85.49.170.202]] ([[User talk:85.49.170.202|talk]]) 21:54, 14 August 2014 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== What's a main game? ==
Hasn't Assassin's Creed: Liberation been "elevated" to a main game with the HD release? The same studio also did Assassin's Creed: Rogue. On the other hand, isn't AC: Rogue a tie in game only released for very specific consoles (no PC release yet), which is kind of telling a side-story? Compare to the Call of Duty series where back in 2005 there was an entirely different Call of Duty 2 for the then-last gen consoles, but those weren't counted as part of the main series? My point is, I think either AC: Rogue isn't really a main game or AC: Liberation could be considered a main game as well as it features elaborate gameplay the same engine and mechanics as the other games and has been made available to relevant consoles. [[Special:Contributions/91.23.134.184|91.23.134.184]] ([[User talk:91.23.134.184|talk]]) 09:33, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
:On the lemma for [[Assassin's Creed: Rogue]] it says it is "the eight major installment" and "the sequel to '''Black Flag'''". So yes, obviously '''Roque''' is a "main series game". '''Liberation''' was first released as ''AC 3: Liberation'', and on the Asassin's Creed Wiki, it's labeled as a spin-off game, not part of the main series. I think this makes sense, no matter what engine it uses or how long the gameplay is, and regardless of the fact that they restyled the name of the game (without the "''III''") later. The story is somewhat parallel to (or a spinoff of) the main series title Assassin's Creed III, it features a different protagonist, and within the in-game logic of the Assassin's Creed world, is described (self-referential) as a game that was first released by Abstergo Industries (the main antagonist in the story of the game series) as a propaganda tool. Also, it was first released on the exact same day as ''AC:III'' itself, first only for PS Vita, which (no offense to PS Vita) makes it pretty much a NON-main game, even though they released a polished version of the same game on the "main" consoles PS3 and XBOX360 later. So I think it's a special case on multiple levels. Good for them (and the fans) that they released two (more or less) full-fledged games at the same time, but even though it may be a full fledged game (I don't know from first hand experience) that still doesn't make it a main series game.
:By the way, the ''Call of Duty'' game you are referring to, I think, is '''[[Call of Duty 2: Big Red One]]'''. As the title shows, it is not '''[[Call of Duty 2]]''' itself, but a special release with a "spin-off" title. ''CoD2'' is a "main series" title, and ''CoD2:BRO'' henceforth, is not, also because as you said it was released for the then-previous-generation of games. Greetings, [[User:RagingR2|RagingR2]] ([[User talk:RagingR2|talk]]) 14:33, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

:Anyway... (a bit of a meta discussion what follows next)... I think anytime you say or think "main game" or "non-main game" you should at least think/consider "MARKETED AS a main/non-main game" and/or "GENERALLY PERCEIVED AS a main/non-main game. I mean, it's all a bit subjective of course. The only thing we can say (more or less) objectively is whether a game is labelled as one or the other by the publisher. And even that often doesn't happen explicitly in oral or written statements, but often has to be inferred implicitly from expressions such as the level and method of of marketing. So that's largelt in the eye of the beholder and not 100% objective either. So I would say it's at least as important to consider whether or not it is '''''seen as such''''' in the general opinion of the fanbase. With AC3:Liberation first released as a spin-off, I think it became a spin-off in the general opinion of the fanbase, and the fact that the publisher apparently (possibly) wanted to upgrade the title to a more independent status later by slightly changing/restyling the name (probably just as marketing trick to increase the chance of decent sale figures amongst PS3 and XBOX360 users) really won't change the status of the game in the popular experience, and won't change any of the other characteristics/facts about the game that I mentioned here. Greetings, [[User:RagingR2|RagingR2]] ([[User talk:RagingR2|talk]]) 14:33, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

== Semi-protected edit request on 22 September 2014 ==

{{edit semi-protected|Assassin's Creed|answered=y}}
<!-- Begin request -->

<!-- End request -->
[[User:Moh4151|Moh4151]] ([[User talk:Moh4151|talk]]) 17:11, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
Hi, Ubisoft also released Assassin's Creed Encyclopedia 3.0 on November 2013 so just wanted to add that aswell.

:[[File:Red information icon with gradient background.svg|20px|link=]] '''Not done:'''<!-- Template:ESp --> as you have not cited [[WP:RS|reliable sources]] to back up your request, without which no information should be added to any article. - [[User:Arjayay|Arjayay]] ([[User talk:Arjayay|talk]]) 18:22, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

== Edit request ==
{{edit semi-protected|answered=yes}}

Please add Assassin's Creed Chronicles: China to the table of games. It will be out for the same platforms as Unity (PS4, Xbox One, PC) in early 2015. It is also covered by Unity's season pass (not sure that's relevant here, but I think it's pretty cool!). http://blog.ubi.com/assassins-creed-unity-season-pass-assassins-creed-chronicles-china/
:{{done}} - [[User:Favre1fan93|Favre1fan93]] ([[User talk:Favre1fan93|talk]]) 21:37, 22 September 2014 (UTC)


And actually, should Freedom Cry maybe go in there as well, considering it's a standalone game that doesn't require Black Flag?  <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/173.160.130.14|173.160.130.14]] ([[User talk:173.160.130.14|talk]]) 21:43, 23 September 2014 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:I don't believe so, because it was not a game - it is still the DLC, even if released independently. - [[User:Favre1fan93|Favre1fan93]] ([[User talk:Favre1fan93|talk]]) 03:45, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

== Add game "Assassin's Creed II: Multiplayer" to the games section ==

After AC: Discovery there should be AC II: Multiplayer (http://assassinscreed.wikia.com/wiki/Assassin%27s_Creed_II:_Multiplayer)  <small><span class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Socialpsychology|Socialpsychology]] ([[User talk:Socialpsychology|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Socialpsychology|contribs]]) 20:59, 25 September 2014 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== Manga ==

There seems to be a manga based on the Assassin(')s Creed franchise, not sure if it is official canon or not.  <small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/213.52.31.165|213.52.31.165]] ([[User talk:213.52.31.165|talk]]) 18:35, 5 December 2014 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== Semi-protected edit request on 17 March 2015 ==

{{edit semi-protected|Assassin's Creed|answered=yes}}
<!-- Begin request -->
Please complete the list of other games. The correct list is 
Assassin's Creed (mobile game) 
Assassin's Creed: Altaïr's Chronicles
Assassin's Creed: Bloodlines
Assassin's Creed II (mobile game)
Assassin's Creed II: Discovery
Assassin's Creed II: Multiplayer
Assassin's Creed: Project Legacy
Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood (mobile game)
Assassin's Creed: Multiplayer Rearmed
Assassin's Creed: Revelations (mobile game)
Assassin's Creed: Recollection
Assassin's Creed III (mobile game)
Assassin's Creed III: Liberation
Assassin's Creed: Pirates
Assassin's Creed: Liberation HD 
Assassin's Creed: Memories
Assassin's Creed: Identity
Assassin's Creed Chronicles: China
<!-- End request -->
[[User:Parham akbari|Parham akbari]] ([[User talk:Parham akbari|talk]]) 17:49, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
: [[File:Red question icon with gradient background.svg|20px|link=]] '''Not done:''' it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format.<!-- Template:ESp -->  These are already covered in the article.  [[User:RudolfRed|RudolfRed]] ([[User talk:RudolfRed|talk]]) 18:00, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

== Semi-protected edit request on 21 April 2015 ==

{{edit semi-protected|Assassin's Creed|answered=yes}}
<!-- Begin request -->

<!-- End request -->
[[Special:Contributions/2.190.131.148|2.190.131.148]] ([[User talk:2.190.131.148|talk]]) 16:25, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
:[[File:Red question icon with gradient background.svg|20px|link=]] '''Not done:''' it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format.<!-- Template:ESp --> [[User:Amortias|Amortias]] ([[User talk:Amortias|T]])([[Special:Contributions/Amortias|C]]) 17:27, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

== Semi-protected edit request on 28 December 2015 ==

{{edit semi-protected|Assassin's Creed|answered=yes}}
<!-- Be sure to state UNAMBIGUOUSLY your suggested changes; editors who can edit the protected page need to know what to add or remove. Blank edit requests WILL be declined. -->
<!-- Begin request -->

Please add this time line: (From french version.)

https://fr.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Assassin%27s_Creed_(s%C3%A9rie)&gettingStartedReturn=true#Chronologie

Careful, two DLC must have their original names. (Freedom cry and Jack the ripper)

<!-- End request -->
[[User:Dugom|Dugom]] ([[User talk:Dugom|talk]]) 04:23, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
:Not done; content is already covered in the "Release history" table. — [[User:Diannaa|Diannaa]] <span style="color:red">🍁</span> ([[User talk:Diannaa|talk]]) 18:53, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

== Semi-protected edit request on 17 February 2016 ==

{{edit semi-protected|Assassin's Creed|answered=yes}}
<!-- Be sure to state UNAMBIGUOUSLY your suggested changes; editors who can edit the protected page need to know what to add or remove. Blank edit requests WILL be declined. -->
<!-- Begin request -->

hi, i want to add a new game to the article. "Assassin's Creed IV: Black Flag - Freedom Cry" it must be added to the 'Release History' table after main game "Assassin's Creed IV: Black Flag", also please edit the 'Other games' and add description for the Freedom Cry. here is the original article from assassin's creed wikia. thankyou

http://assassinscreed.wikia.com/wiki/Freedom_Cry
<!-- End request -->
[[User:Sandun Wellage|Sandun Wellage]] ([[User talk:Sandun Wellage|talk]]) 02:50, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
:As "Freedom Cry" is DLC and not a new game, it doesn't make sense to include it on this as a separate entry. --[[User:Masem|M<span style="font-size:x-small;">ASEM</span>]] ([[User Talk:Masem|t]]) 03:11, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
:{{not done}} - [[User:Favre1fan93|Favre1fan93]] ([[User talk:Favre1fan93|talk]]) 04:52, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

== Semi-protected edit request on 14 June 2016 ==

{{edit semi-protected|Assassin's Creed|answered=yes}}
<!-- State UNAMBIGUOUSLY your suggested changes. Other editors need to know what to add or remove. Blank edit requests will be declined. -->

The content and tense of the section "Assassin's Creed Syndicate" should be changed to reflect that the game has already been released. The existing text references only one new protagonist when there are two.

Original:

In December 2014, images and information leaked for a new Assassin's Creed game, titled or code-named Victory, which was later confirmed by Ubisoft. Victory will release in late 2015 for Microsoft Windows, PlayStation 4 and Xbox One and is being developed by Ubisoft Quebec. It will be set in 1868 Victorian era London and feature a new assassin protagonist.[18] In May 2015, Kotaku leaked that Victory has been renamed Syndicate.[19] On May 12, 2015, the game was officially announced by Ubisoft.[20] The PlayStation 4 and the Xbox One version of the game was released on October 23, 2015, while the Microsoft Windows version was released on November 19, 2015.[21]

Proposed:

In December 2014, images and information leaked for a new Assassin's Creed game, titled or code-named Victory, which was later confirmed by Ubisoft. In May 2015, Kotaku leaked that Victory has been renamed Syndicate.[19] On May 12, 2015, the game was officially announced by Ubisoft.[20] Syndicate was developed by Ubisoft Quebec. The game is set in 1868 Victorian era London and features two new protagonists: twin assassins Jacob and Evie Frye.

<!-- Write your request ABOVE this line and do not remove the tildes below. -->
[[User:Julsssark|Julsssark]] ([[User talk:Julsssark|talk]]) 15:58, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
:[[File:Red information icon with gradient background.svg|20px|link=]] '''Not done:''' please provide [[WP:RS|reliable sources]] that support the change you want to be made.<!-- Template:ESp --> [[User talk:Becky Sayles|'''<span style="color:#0092d6; background:#bae9ff"><sup>&nbsp;B </sup><small>E </small><sub>C </sub><small>K </small><sup>Y </sup> <sub>S </sub><small>A </small><sup>Y L </sup><small>E </small><sub>S&nbsp;</sub></span>''']] 20:02, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

== Sales Figures ==

This article states that the series has sold 73 million copies worldwide, but the The Bestselling Video Game Franchises article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_video_game_franchises) says that the Assassin's Creed series has sold 93 million copies with a reference, so should the number be changed?[[User:The Editor 155|The Editor 155]] ([[User talk:The Editor 155|talk]]) 03:32, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

Well,the number changed.Someone had edited that 14 hours ago.I think we need more accurate info(what a cliché lol). [[User:Editor Mr.Ninja|Editor Mr.Ninja]] ([[User talk:Editor Mr.Ninja|talk]]) 13:26, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

== error in 'future' section ==

Just a minor mistake that i would correct myself if the page wasn't locked. The side mission in AC Syndicate is set during WWI, not WWII.[[Special:Contributions/82.47.31.154|82.47.31.154]] ([[User talk:82.47.31.154|talk]]) 19:39, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

: You're right, corrected.--[[User:Comnenus|Comnenus]] ([[User talk:Comnenus|talk]]) 15:22, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

== Spiritual Sequels to Assassin's Creed 2, are 1666:Amsterdam and Ancestor: The Humankind Odyssey==
{{collapse top|Proposed additions}}
====Spiritual Sequels to Assassin's Creed II====

Patrice Désilets served as lead designer of Assassin's Creed I, II and Brotherhood, left Ubisoft in June 2010, which was confirmed by the company on June 13, 2010. The publisher explained to Game Informer that Désilets' role as creative lead on ''Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood'' was "essentially done," and that he's no longer involved with the completion of the game. Many players believe his departure from the series, is the reason for the extremely disappointing ending of Assassin's Creed III, and the mishandling of the [[Desmond Miles]] story.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5Hvoxw2n88</ref><ref>https://www.vg247.com/2016/02/15/ubisoft-lost-control-of-assassins-creed/</ref>

===1666 Amsterdam (Cancelled)===
Patrice Désilets would officially return to the games industry in the summer of 2011, joining [[THQ]] in their newly developed Montreal based studio.<ref>{{cite web|author=Curtis Brunet |url=http://www.totalactionadventure.com/content/patrice-d%C3%A9silets-returns-games-joins-thq-montreal |title=Patrice Désilets Returns to Games; Joins THQ Montreal |publisher=TotalActionAdventure.com |date=2010-10-19 |accessdate=2013-10-03}}</ref> The project ''1666: Amsterdam'', was described to be similar to the ''Assassin's Creed'' series.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.gamespot.com/articles/1666-was-to-be-the-new-assassins-creed-says-dysilets/1100-6411186/|title=1666 was "to be the new Assassin's Creed," says Désilets|first=Martin|last=Gaston|work=[[GameSpot]]|date=July 9, 2013|accessdate=April 19, 2016}}</ref> In January 2013, THQ Montreal was sold off to Ubisoft in an auction, Patrice continued working at Ubisoft for "1666: Amsterdam", describing it himself as a project where he put his 15 years of experience in video games.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://gamasutra.com/view/news/185343/THQ_cut_up_and_sold_off.php |title=THQ cut up and sold off |publisher=Gamasutra |date= |accessdate=2013-10-03}}</ref> On May 7, 2013, Désilets again left Ubisoft. When asked why, Désilets replied, "Contrary to any statements made earlier today, this morning I was terminated by Ubisoft. I was notified of this termination in person, handed a termination notice and was unceremoniously escorted out of the building by two guards without being able to say goodbye to my team or collect my personal belongings. This was not my decision. Ubisoft's actions are baseless and without merit. I intend to fight Ubisoft vigorously for my rights, for my team and for my game."<ref>{{cite web|author= |url=http://www.polygon.com/2013/5/7/4308980/patrice-desilets-departs-ubisoft-a-second-time |title=Game designer Patrice Desilets fired, intends to 'fight Ubisoft vigorously' |publisher=Polygon |date=2013-05-07 |accessdate=2013-10-03}}</ref> In April 2016, Désilets announced that he had gained back the rights to ''1666'', and settled the lawsuit with Ubisoft. He further added that ''1666'' would not be his priority, and that he intended to focus on and complete ''Ancestors: The Humankind Odyssey'' first.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.pcgamer.com/assassins-creed-creator-settles-his-lawsuit-against-ubisoft/?|title=Assassin's Creed creator settles his lawsuit against Ubisoft|first=Andy|last=Chalk|work=[[PC Gamer]]|date=April 25, 2016|accessdate=April 26, 2016}}</ref>

===Ancestors: The Humankind Odyssey===
In December 14 of 2014 Patrice Désilets with his team, composed of many staff members of "1666: Amsterdam" whom resigned with him after his second departure from Ubisoft, reunited to launch a new game development studio in Montreal, called "Panache Digital Games".<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.gameinformer.com/b/news/archive/2014/11/12/original-assassin-s-creed-creative-director-patrice-desilets-announces-panache-digital-games.aspx|title=Original Assassin's Creed Creative Director Patrice Désilets Announces Panache Digital Games|first=Mike|last=Futter|work=[[Game Informer]]|date=November 12, 2014|accessdate=May 12, 2015}}</ref>

In April 23 on "Reboot Develop 2015" Désilets and his team announced the title of their first game developed and published by Panache Digital Games ''Ancestors: The Humankind Odyssey'' which is a third person action-adventure survival episodic game.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.gameinformer.com/b/news/archive/2015/04/23/patrice-desilets-new-game-explores-mankinds-greatest-achievements.aspx|title=Patrice Désilets' New Game Explores Mankind's Greatest Achievements|first=Matthew|last=Kato|work=[[Game Informer]]|date=April 23, 2015|accessdate=May 12, 2015}}</ref> A teaser trailer was released by Panache Digital games, using the tagline:
"'''The minds that made you jump from rooftop to roftoop, climb a campanile with your brother, run on walls to avoid traps, and rewind time for your love. After having fought millions of Templars, hidden in haystacks and chased a Pope, it is time for something new...'''", clearly referencing Désilets and his team previous work in "Assassin's Creed II", and how "Ancestors: The Humankind Odyssey" is meant to be an spiritual sequel.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ucyi2WT7XwQ</ref>

After regaining the rights to 1666:Amsterdam, Désilets expressed that he intended to focus on and complete ''Ancestors: The Humankind Odyssey'' first.

===Talk page discussion===
{{collapse bottom}}
I believe we should mention the existence of such games here, it's super relevant to the franchise specially because developer Patrice Desilets and creator of Assassin's Creed has said multiple times over the years, that both games were conceived as Spiritual Sequels AC2. Maybe with a different wording but I shortened the story a much as  I could. <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small><span class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Rosvel92|Rosvel92]] ([[User talk:Rosvel92|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Rosvel92|contribs]]) </span></small>
:Considering I've never heard either of those games being called a spiritual successor to AC2, I would say that it's best to keep them ''of'' of the article. Besides, even if the were calld as such, their relevancy is dubious at best. -'''''[[User:Jasca Ducato|Jasca Ducato]]''''' <small>([[User talk:Jasca Ducato|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Jasca Ducato|contributions]])</small> 12:46, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

I added my edit here so it can be pasted at the bottom of the article if it's agreed upon. 

Search about it. Many fans, Desilets departure is the reason of the universally hated, awful ending of Assassin's Creed 3. I've never have known someone who liked the ending, included me. I think this need further discussion, but fans do see it as the game Assassin's Creed 3 should have been, thus an Spiritual Sequel. Also there's a huge controversy about why "1666: Amsterdam" was shelved by Ubisoft, many people have said the reason is that it completely was a better game, than Assassin's Creed and Ubisoft was afraid of it hurting their sales. Ubisoft tried to destroy it for many years.

The Banjo Kazooie series article, and the System shock article both mention their Spiritual Sequels at the bottom. So it's done frequently on other articles. I believe it's relevant to the franchise. The fact that the sequel to Assassin's creed the creator aproves is called Ancestors, i read in an interview that he was resented of how they is handled desmond 

Also someone an usser named Izno thanked my edit for adding the Spiritual Sequels section. 
This needs further discussion, we should have a discussion. 
Should we add mention the Spiritual sequels?
*My stance is '''Support'''
[[User:Rosvel92|Rosvel92]] ([[User talk:Rosvel92|talk]]) 23:58, 24 August 2016 (UTC)Rosvel92

:'''Oppose all changes by Rosvel92''' I agree with {{u|Jasca Ducato}}'s statements above. I've never heard these games being called spiritual successors. Just because they are developed by Desilets, doesn't mean that they related. Most games are all "spiritual successors" to some other game, as they all take and reuse similar concepts, ideas and gameplay mechanics, especially between game developers. Also for the other edits you did (re [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Assassin%27s_Creed&type=revision&diff=736075171&oldid=736056320 here]), once again, there is no need to further subdivide "Other games". Your insistence on games {{tq|like Project Legacy doesn't deserve to be in the same category as a real handheld game, because the browser games is too unimportant}} (quoted from my talk page [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AFavre1fan93&type=revision&diff=736064875&oldid=736029257 here]) goes against [[WP:NEUTRAL]] as you are adding your own bias and opinions. You can't determine what is or isn't important to a series and "Other games" is a perfectly suitable subheading for all games not released on consoles. Readers can see where they were released from the table and prose. As for your "Shared universe" heading, that was just an easter egg (it would help if you actually read the sources you were adding, because someone from Ubisoft is quoted in that article to confirm this: ""[Watch Dogs is its] own game in the Ubiverse," McDevitt wrote on Ubisoft's official AC Initiates forum. "We like to put Easter eggs in our games, but they are not literally connected."). - [[User:Favre1fan93|Favre1fan93]] ([[User talk:Favre1fan93|talk]]) 02:25, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

:Since you decided to make an official proposal, I guess I'll have to officially '''oppose''', for all the reasons above. --'''''[[User:Jasca Ducato|Jasca Ducato]]''''' <small>([[User talk:Jasca Ducato|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Jasca Ducato|contributions]])</small> 09:01, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
{{reflist-talk}}

== Semi-protected edit request on 12 September 2016 ==

{{edit semi-protected|Assassin's Creed|answered=yes}}
"A live-action film, Assassin's Creed, set in the same universe as the video games and other media,[50] is scheduled to be released on December 16, 2016."

This needs to be changed to December 21, 2016.

[[User:Section8Loco|Section8Loco]] ([[User talk:Section8Loco|talk]]) 20:03, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
:[[File:Red information icon with gradient background.svg|20px|link=|alt=]] '''Not done:''' please provide [[WP:RS|reliable sources]] that support the change you want to be made.<!-- Template:ESp --> <span style="font-family:Trebuchet MS">[[User:Mlpearc|<span style="color:#800000">'''Mlpearc'''</span>]] <small>([[User talk:Mlpearc|<span style="color:#FFD700">'''open channel'''</span>]])</small></span> 20:05, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

== Semi-protected edit request on 26 September 2016 ==

{{edit semi-protected|Assassin's Creed|answered=yes}}


[[Special:Contributions/116.68.121.116|116.68.121.116]] ([[User talk:116.68.121.116|talk]]) 16:13, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

'''Not Done''' Not sure what you want edited. [[User: WarMachineWildThing|<b style="color:Red">Chris<span style="color:Red"> "WarMachineWildThing"</span></b>]] <sup>[[User talk: WarMachineWildThing|<span style="color:Blue;">'''Talk to me'''</span>]]</sup>  16:17, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
:They wanted the new movie added to the "Future" section, but then clearly noticed it was already mentioned in "Other media" and attempted to delete their request. --'''''[[User:Jasca Ducato|Jasca Ducato]]''''' <small>([[User talk:Jasca Ducato|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Jasca Ducato|contributions]])</small> 16:19, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
::Yes, that's why I said not sure what they wanted done. I saw they removed the question but not the request. [[User: WarMachineWildThing|<b style="color:Red">Chris<span style="color:Red"> "WarMachineWildThing"</span></b>]] <sup>[[User talk: WarMachineWildThing|<span style="color:Blue;">'''Talk to me'''</span>]]</sup>  16:25, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

== Semi-protected edit request on 3 January 2017 ==

{{edit semi-protected|Assassin's Creed|answered=yes}}
Small QOL change: 
The [[Assassin's Creed#Assassin's Creed Chronicles|Assassin's Creed Chronicles]] section has a reference to 2.5D games. A link can be added to the 2.5D platform games section on the 2.5D page to find it easier.
The first line would read as follows:

Assassin's Creed Chronicles is an episodic [[2.5D#2.5D_platform_games|2.5D action game]] for ... [[User:Bdcon|Bdcon]] ([[User talk:Bdcon|talk]]) 22:10, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
:[[File:Yes check.svg|20px|link=|alt=]] '''Done'''<!-- Template:ESp --> [[User talk:Becky Sayles|'''<span style="color:#0092d6; background:#bae9ff"><sup>&nbsp;B </sup><small>E </small><sub>C </sub><small>K </small><sup>Y </sup> <sub>S </sub><small>A </small><sup>Y L </sup><small>E </small><sub>S&nbsp;</sub></span>''']] 23:17, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

== Typo in third paragraph ==

Additionally from the video-games the series has been expanded into a film, comics and novels; all of '''wich''' take place within the same continuity as the main video-games series.
:{{done}} - [[User:Favre1fan93|Favre1fan93]] ([[User talk:Favre1fan93|talk]]) 18:27, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

== Empire - next game of the series ==

Cheers, some information about the upcoming title called "Empire" should be added here. -- [[User:Horst-schlaemma|Horst-schlaemma]] ([[User talk:Horst-schlaemma|talk]]) 22:49, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
:So you requested that info be added without providing a reliable source, then added unsourced information to the page yourself? Please refrain from doing this in the future. Any reliably sourced information about any upcoming titles can be included in the article, but nothing else. Thanks! -[[User:Rmaynardjr|RM]] ([[User talk:Rmaynardjr|talk]]) 00:22, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
::There's various reliable information about this, check for yourself or the related ref. -- [[User:Horst-schlaemma|Horst-schlaemma]] ([[User talk:Horst-schlaemma|talk]]) 16:53, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
:::Its not a reliable report, its full of rumours. It fails [[WP:CRYSTAL]] item 5 - [[User:X201|X201]] ([[User talk:X201|talk]]) 17:02, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

== New game says time period is Ptolemaic Egypt, actually takes place in Ancient Egypt ==

Ptolemaic Egypt was the time when the Greek Ptolemic Dynasty ruled over it, this game takes place in ancient Egypt.  <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/104.255.240.9|104.255.240.9]] ([[User talk:104.255.240.9#top|talk]]) 06:52, 13 June 2017 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
: A reliable source - The GameInformer cover story on page 41 says the developers "decided Ptolemaic Egypt, around the ascent and reign of Cleopatra". [[User:2012MarcoMDNA|2012MarcoMDNA]] ([[User talk:2012MarcoMDNA|talk]]) 11:27, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

== Assassin's Creed Chronicles ==

Should the Chronicles games (China, India, Russia), have their own subsection in the console or other games section of this page? I am aware they have their own page altogether, but other than the table showing a chronology, they're virtually not mentioned on this page at all. [[User:Tostie14|Tostie14]] ([[User talk:Tostie14|talk]]) 02:57, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

== External links modified ==

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on [[Assassin's Creed]]. Please take a moment to review [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=prev&oldid=789972375 my edit]. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit [[User:Cyberpower678/FaQs#InternetArchiveBot|this simple FaQ]] for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120831144528/http://www.littlebigplanet.com/en/game_guide/ps3/downloadable_content/assassins_creed_ii_ezio_auditore_costume/ to http://www.littlebigplanet.com/en/game_guide/ps3/downloadable_content/assassins_creed_ii_ezio_auditore_costume/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

{{sourcecheck|checked=false|needhelp=}}

Cheers.—[[User:InternetArchiveBot|'''<span style="color:darkgrey;font-family:monospace">InternetArchiveBot</span>''']] <span style="color:green;font-family:Rockwell">([[User talk:InternetArchiveBot|Report bug]])</span> 19:56, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

== External links modified ==

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on [[Assassin's Creed]]. Please take a moment to review [[special:diff/819829821|my edit]]. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit [[User:Cyberpower678/FaQs#InternetArchiveBot|this simple FaQ]] for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141122143445/http://store.ubiworkshop.com/assassins-creed/books-and-comics/assassins-creed-encyclopedia-third-edition to http://store.ubiworkshop.com/assassins-creed/books-and-comics/assassins-creed-encyclopedia-third-edition

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

{{sourcecheck|checked=false|needhelp=}}

Cheers.—[[User:InternetArchiveBot|'''<span style="color:darkgrey;font-family:monospace">InternetArchiveBot</span>''']] <span style="color:green;font-family:Rockwell">([[User talk:InternetArchiveBot|Report bug]])</span> 14:10, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

== Colon in the titles of some of the games ==

Some of the game articles are titled in the format ''''Assassin's Creed: title'''' and that is also how a lot of websites refer to the games. However [https://www.ubisoft.com/en-gb/franchise/assassins-creed/ Ubisoft's Assassin's Creed franchise] doesn't use a colon after Assassin's Creed for any of the games listed. Should the articles be re-titled/moved to remove the colon? [[User:Chris Ssk|<span style="color:black;">'''Chris'''</span> <span style="color:red;">'''Ssk'''</span>]] <sub>[[User talk:Chris Ssk|talk]]</sub> 23:21, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

== Completely unnecessary spoiler in books section ==

There's a huge spoiler for Assassin's Creed Unity in the section for the book adaptation of the game. Could someone with the authorisation please edit it out? I know that being spoiler-free isn't exactly a Wikipedia priority for obvious reasons, but this one is completely unnecessary. Thanks!  <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Hophi|Hophi]] ([[User talk:Hophi#top|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Hophi|contribs]]) 11:09, 28 September 2018 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:{{Done}} -- [[User:Ferret|ferret]] ([[User_talk:Ferret|talk]]) 12:36, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

==Ficiton set in [year]==
A [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Assassin%27s_Creed&type=revision&diff=898331611&oldid=895785616 recent edit] by Cydebot drew to my attention the fact that this series hasn't been set in 2012 since, well, 2012. The modern-day stories of ''Black Flag'', ''Rogue'', ''Unity'', ''Syndicate'', ''Assassin's Creed'' (the movie), ''Origins'' and ''Odyssey'' are all set in their respective real-world launch years, which means that the following categories should probably be added: [[:Category:Fiction set in 2013|Fiction set in 2013]], [[:Category:Fiction set in 2014|Fiction set in 2014]], [[:Category:Fiction set in 2015|Fiction set in 2015]], [[:Category:Fiction set in 2016|Fiction set in 2016]], [[:Category:Fiction set in 2017|Fiction set in 2017]], [[:Category:Fiction set in 2018|Fiction set in 2018]], and [[:Category:Fiction set in 2019|Fiction set in 2019]] (DLCs for ''Odyssey''). Any objections to me adding these categories in? --'''''[[User:Jasca Ducato|Jasca Ducato]]''''' <small>([[User talk:Jasca Ducato|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Jasca Ducato|contributions]])</small> 12:27, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
:Unless there's clear evidence that the "present" of those games are in those years, they should not be added. Clear evidence here is something the player is assured to see through cutscenes or similar details, not something buried in in-game emails or the like. We knew AC1 was 2012 due to the reference to the Mayan end of world calendar date among other things, but the others less clear. --[[User:Masem|M<span style="font-variant: small-caps">asem</span>]] ([[User Talk:Masem|t]]) 15:50, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
::I don't see why there is a distinction being made between dates shown in in-game emails and... however else the game is supposed to show dates. Dated emails which do not appear until certain points in the respective game's stories (i.e. the email is "received") makes dating the games a non-issue. Also, as a point of interest, we didn't know the first three games were set in 2012 until ''Assassin's Creed II''; no dates which revealed the year–which finally did come via email, no less–were shown until the second game. --'''''[[User:Jasca Ducato|Jasca Ducato]]''''' <small>([[User talk:Jasca Ducato|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Jasca Ducato|contributions]])</small> 08:35, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
:::It's been months now and no further objections ahve been made, so I'm adding these additional categories in. --'''''[[User:Jasca Ducato|Jasca Ducato]]''''' <small>([[User talk:Jasca Ducato|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Jasca Ducato|contributions]])</small> 12:46, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

== Android ==

Is this game run on Android [[User:Guy kay|Guy kay]] ([[User talk:Guy kay|talk]]) 14:47, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

== Error in info about the first game? ==

To quote the section I'm referring to:
"in the left side of his room, the player sees "I Entered the Animus and never returned"."

This actually isn't true. I just finished playing through the game today, and it reads "I've entered the Abyss and never returned"
I wasn't sure if I should change it, so I figured I'd just point it out here. Honestly the whole sentence seems a bit out of place tin 1949it wasture that abe was not dwad he is still alive today beware he is a zombie in san deigo.

😥😥😥 [[User:Guy kay|Guy kay]] ([[User talk:Guy kay|talk]]) 14:48, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

== Semi-protected edit request on 31 March 2020 ==

{{edit semi-protected|Assassin's Creed|answered=yes}}
 [[Special:Contributions/37.237.128.37|37.237.128.37]] ([[User talk:37.237.128.37|talk]]) 10:40, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
{{notdone}} No changes actually requested. --'''''[[User:Jasca Ducato|Jasca Ducato]]''''' <small>([[User talk:Jasca Ducato|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Jasca Ducato|contributions]])</small> 10:50, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

== it says haven on the page it should say have must be a spelling error ==
"A series of art books, encyclopedias, comics, novelizations, and novels haven been published."
This should say "have"
[[Special:Contributions/71.223.170.249|71.223.170.249]] ([[User talk:71.223.170.249|talk]]) 10:55, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
:Fixed. - [[User:Favre1fan93|Favre1fan93]] ([[User talk:Favre1fan93|talk]]) 15:45, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

== Semi-protected edit request on 16 May 2020 ==

{{edit semi-protected|Assassin's Creed|answered=yes}}
Assassin's Creed Symphony section should have past tense verbs. Precisely:
First sentence:  Change—Assassin's Creed Symphony ''is'' to Assassin's Creed Symphony ''was''
Last sentence:  Delete—It ''will'' began in the summer of 2019,[159]
Last sentence:  Delete—and ''will'' feature holographic characters from the series.[160]
Last sentence:  Change—''feature'' to featured holographic characters from the series.[160]
--[[User:MissusD|MissusD]] ([[User talk:MissusD|talk]]) 20:51, 16 May 2020 (UTC) [[User:MissusD|MissusD]] ([[User talk:MissusD|talk]]) 20:51, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
:{{ping|MissusD}} [[File:Yellow check.svg|20px|link=|alt=]] '''Partly done:'''<!-- Template:ESp --> That section only has references announcing the tour.  Therefore, I changed the sentence to "It '''was scheduled to begin''' in the summer of 2019, and '''expected to''' feature...".  I also added {{tl|update section}} in the hopes that someone will add reliable sources that demonstrate the tour actually happened.  [[User:GoingBatty|GoingBatty]] ([[User talk:GoingBatty|talk]]) 23:03, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

== Release Timeline Suggestion ==

I remember someone wanted to use a color-coding system on a Release Timeline template for the franchise, and thought that it could be done per story arc. You know, the franchise has three story arcs for games, so... I figured something like one for the Desmond Miles series of stories, one for the games post-Miles, and a third for the current arc in the franchise being focused on. [[User:GUtt01|GUtt01]] ([[User talk:GUtt01|talk]]) 19:22, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
:Unfortunately, there are limitations to {{Tl|Timeline of release years}} which prevent this. Specifically, two entries released in the same year, but represent different eras cannot be coloured differently from one another. --'''''[[User:Jasca Ducato|Jasca Ducato]]''''' <small>([[User talk:Jasca Ducato|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Jasca Ducato|contributions]])</small> 16:28, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

== Request for comment ==


Regarding the release history table. The table previously showed the historical era setting of each game, making ot eaiser for the lay person to understand which games were part of which 'arc'. This table was [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Assassin%27s_Creed&diff=943014645&oldid=942967533 ‘simplified'] saying it was [[Wikipedia:Fancruft|FANCRUFT]]. I reverted it back to the older version, which was again [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Assassin%27s_Creed&diff=957171623&oldid=957086632 reverted] to the 'simple' version by the same user. I'm a newbie to Wikipedia and don't want to start an editing war so I figured I would ask here. I do believe that the older table is more informative and eaisier to comprehend, and is not FANCRUFT. Smithinson77 02:09, 18 May 2020 (UTC)
:This is not a proper RfC. You should have signed your comment and write a neutral question. I have signed your comment. See [[WP:RFCST]].--[[User:SharabSalam|<span style="color:#8D056C ">SharʿabSalam▼</span>]] ([[User talk:SharabSalam|talk]]) 03:10, 18 May 2020 (UTC)
::Whilst the signature is optional, the timestamp must be in ''exactly'' the same format that [[WP:4TILDES|four]] or [[WP:5TILDES|five tuldes]] would have produced. In this case, you omitted the parentheses around the time zone. --[[User:Redrose64|<span style="color:#a80000; background:#ffeeee; text-decoration:inherit">Red</span>rose64]] &#x1f339; ([[User talk:Redrose64|talk]]) 08:53, 18 May 2020 (UTC)
:::I agree with {{u|GUtt01}}'s edits. A huge table like [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Assassin%27s_Creed&oldid=942967533#Release_history this] is very cluttered: it's organised by setting first, next is a column of the years it is set in and only then we get to the actual game. But it's supposed to be a list of the games first, not the in-game fictional setting. ''Assassin's Creed'' is set during the [[Third Crusade]], but linking to the article on the actual historical event is not necessary. Wikipedia - and video game articles too - are written for a general audience, not for people necessarily interested or familiar with ''Assassin's Creed''. That the platforms are divided by console, computer, handheld, mobile and other is unnecessary too. In the descriptions of the games there is a mention of the historical setting, which is sufficient. [[User:Soetermans|<span style="font-variant:small-caps">soetermans</span>]]. [[User talk: Soetermans|<sup>↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A <span style="font-variant:small-caps">'''TALK'''</span></sup>]] 09:34, 18 May 2020 (UTC)
::: As the user who made those edits, [[User:Soetermans|Soetermans]] has fully explained my reasoning for the edit changes. Remember this CAREFULLY: Wikipedia is a General Encyclopedia, designed to provide a generalised view of topics and subjects for viewers, not detailed information for a specific audience. Such information is best left for the various Wikis designed for specific subjects. [[User:GUtt01|GUtt01]] ([[User talk:GUtt01|talk]]) 13:02, 18 May 2020 (UTC)
::: I have to agree with both Soetermans and Gutt01 here, with the only suggestion being the games featuring the same "historical" main character (like II going to Brotherhood and Revelations) but that would likely lead to editors wanting more ties between games marked, so better just to leave that well-enough alone and explain in text. The games themselves in the media are not typically seen in these "arcs"; if they were clearly described commonly in the media that way, then we'd have a reason to group them as such, but any such grouping right now requires really hunting and pecking for sources to support. --[[User:Masem|M<span style="font-variant: small-caps">asem</span>]] ([[User Talk:Masem|t]]) 13:56, 18 May 2020 (UTC)
*'''Is it covered in RS?''' - I think a really good rule for determining whether something is [[WP:FANCRUFT]] or not is to simply ask whether it's is covered in RS. I'm curious whether [[User:Smithinson77]] can point to any sources which provide tables similar to this one. [[User:NickCT|NickCT]] ([[User talk:NickCT|talk]]) 09:55, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
*'''Add back "Setting" and "Years" columns''' - the other columns are unnecessary (consoles, computers, handheld, mobile, other can all be collapsed into one), but the setting/years column looks helpful. [[User:Ikjbagl|Ikjbagl]] ([[User talk:Ikjbagl|talk]]) 05:00, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
:: [[User:Ikjbagl|Ikjbagl]], I agree that cutting out all the console columns is for the best, and strongly believe that the 'setting' and 'years' columns should return. As for [[User:NickCT|NickCT's]] question of RS, the setting and year of each game is almost always mentioned within the first few sentences of each game description in RS such as Ubisoft's website and game descriptions on all platforms stores. Regarding [[User:Masem|Masem's]] comment about 'arcs', I will note that as more games are being released and re-released, they are being marketed in 'arcs', with the [https://www.ubisoft.com/en-us/game/assassins-creed-the-ezio-collection/ Ezio Collection] and the [https://www.nintendo.com/games/detail/assassins-creed-the-rebel-collection-switch/ Rebel Collection]. Hopefully this adds a bit more to my original RfC, and I have properly made a case for at least the 'Setting' column to return. [[User:Smithinson77|Smithinson77]] ([[User talk:Smithinson77|talk]]) 06:16, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
:::{{reply to|Smithinson77}} - re "almost always mentioned within the first few sentences of each game description in RS " - Has any RS taken the time to compile that information into a table? If not, why is that compilation of information notable or helpful for readers? Just b/c individual things might have been noted by RS doesn't mean that a compilation of information is notable or helpful. WP is [[WP:INDISCRIMINATE|not an indiscriminate collection of information]]. There's got to be some indication that the compilation is notable or helpful. [[User:NickCT|NickCT]] ([[User talk:NickCT|talk]]) 10:04, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
::::{{reply|NickCT}} The obvious answer is that it's helpful because it organizes information chronologically and gives context/supporting information in nearby columns that the average reader looking at an encyclopedia page about this subject would want to know. I don't understand your argument that a table has to appear in another source to be helpful or to be included on the encyclopedia. There are probably thousands of lists, tables, etc., that appear on Wikipedia and are not found in an outside source because tables are a visually simple way to compile information from outside sources. It makes no sense to say we cannot include a table here because another source didn't make the same table first. It's not like Wikipedians are making up the information in the table; the table is a compilation of information from outside sources. Compiling information into a table is not what "fancruft" is. [[User:Ikjbagl|Ikjbagl]] ([[User talk:Ikjbagl|talk]]) 18:55, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
:::::"thousands of lists, tables, etc." - For example? [[User:NickCT|NickCT]] ([[User talk:NickCT|talk]]) 23:47, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
*'''Delete the table''' and replace with {{tl|Timeline of release years}}. -- [[User:Ferret|ferret]] ([[User_talk:Ferret|talk]]) 13:04, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
*There's a lot that I feel we need to reconsider on this page. There are far too many games to have anywhere close to detailed plot summaries for them, and instead tackle at best the high level arc (that there's been the time-worn history of assassins and templars, the Isu, the modern day stuff involving the animus). But because the individual narrative elements (either the historical characters that are followed, or the modern day ones) have such inconsistent arcs, its near impossible to sort them outside of a strict release chronological order, barring anything from Ubisoft akin to the "official" Zelda timeline.  Or that said, we can use an article like this [https://www.gamespot.com/gallery/assassins-creed-odyssey-story-recap-everything-tha/2900-1422/ from Gamestop] that aligns the main games in an order that we can break into the Desmond, John/Juno, and Layla arcs, with the games ''not'' mentioned on this list considered as spinoffs from the series (stories that don't advance this plot). But note this would be by the modern day stories, and using the modern day protagonist only to help break the arcs. But again, not the same as being asked.
*I do think that we want a small table to list game releases and platforms as to easily distinguish computer/console from handheld and mobile. If we do an abbreviate Timeline like Ferret says, and drastically kill the plot summaries, the current table can be moved below and better spelled out for release date and platform which is more salient data than the eras and the like. --[[User:Masem|M<span style="font-variant: small-caps">asem</span>]] ([[User Talk:Masem|t]]) 02:11, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

::[[User:Masem|Masem]] makes a good point about some issues on this page. There are so many AC games now that perhaps the best thing would be to go with a simple {{tl|Timeline of release years}} and create a new page, 'List of Assassins Creed Media' - like [[List_of_Call_of_Duty_media|this]] or [[List_of_The_Legend_of_Zelda_media|this.]]  In my original RfC I was trying to make the point that the historical setting of each game is important, and must be included on a basic overview table of releases to help the lay person distinguish 'arcs'. This information could easily be included when there is more space to do so. Having a 'list of media' page could also help show all the re-releases on different platforms, cut back on the 'In Other Media' section of the main page, and be better in the long run when more and more games are released. [[User:Smithinson77|Smithinson77]] ([[User talk:Smithinson77|talk]]) 04:25, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

{{Timeline of release years
| title = ''Assassin's Creed'' series release timeline
| subtitle = Main series entries in '''bold'''

| 2007 = '''''[[Assassin's Creed (video game)|Assassin's Creed]]'''''
| 2008  = ''[[Assassin's Creed: Altaïr's Chronicles]]''
| 2009a = ''[[Assassin's Creed: Bloodlines]]''
| 2009b = '''''[[Assassin's Creed II]]'''''
| 2009c = ''[[Assassin's Creed II: Discovery]]''
| 2010 = '''''[[Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood]]'''''
| 2011 = '''''[[Assassin's Creed: Revelations]]'''''
| 2012a = '''''[[Assassin's Creed III]]'''''
| 2012b = ''[[Assassin's Creed III: Liberation]]''
| 2013a = '''''[[Assassin's Creed IV: Black Flag]]'''''
| 2013b = ''[[Assassin's Creed: Pirates]]''
| 2014a = ''[[Assassin's Creed: Freedom Cry]]''
| 2014b = '''''[[Assassin's Creed Rogue]]'''''
| 2014c = '''''[[Assassin's Creed Unity]]'''''
| 2015a = ''[[Assassin's Creed Chronicles: China]]''
| 2015b = '''''[[Assassin's Creed Syndicate]]'''''
| 2016a = ''[[Assassin's Creed Chronicles: India]]''
| 2016b = ''[[Assassin's Creed Identity]]''
| 2016c = ''[[Assassin's Creed Chronicles: Russia]]''
| 2017 = '''''[[Assassin's Creed Origins]]'''''
| 2018a = '''''[[Assassin's Creed Odyssey]]'''''
| 2018b = ''[[Assassin's Creed Rebellion]]''
| 2020 = '''''[[Assassin's Creed Valhalla]]'''''
}}
:I've made a preliminary effort on utilising {{tl|Timeline of release years}} (as can be seen here), but it's worth pointing out that if we're going to use this template, there is a lot more transmedia in the series (i.e. novels, comics etc.) that will need to also be included. The easiest way to do this would be to have multiple instances of the template in the article (one for main games, one for transmedia). --'''''[[User:Jasca Ducato|Jasca Ducato]]''''' <small>([[User talk:Jasca Ducato|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Jasca Ducato|contributions]])</small> 10:49, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

:: '''Replace with "Timeline of Release"''' - There would be firm support for this, considering the problem we have at present with this table. Since the article is focused on the series in general, anything about the platforms for each game is best left to their respective articles. Any plot details would also be best left in the same manner as well; a brief summary of what occurs or what players do is simple enough here. However, I DO NOT agree to [[User:Smithinson77|Smithinson77]]'s comment:

<blockquote>In my original RfC I was trying to make the point that the historical setting of each game is important, and must be included on a basic overview table of releases to help the lay person distinguish 'arcs'.</blockquote>

:: The reason for this is simple: WIKIPEDIA IS A GENERAL ENCYCOLEPDIA, and this is a generalised article on the series. Anything about settings and historical eras are best left to the respective articles covering each game, and should not be included here so it can be tailor-made to suit a specific audience rather than a general audience. [[User:GUtt01|GUtt01]] ([[User talk:GUtt01|talk]]) 14:40, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
:::I attempted to modify the timeline to colour code eras, but due to a couple of games covering different eras, but releasing in the same year (i.e. ''Bloodlinges'' and ''Assassin's Creed II''), it doesn't quite work. By way of '''compromise''', we could organise the "Release history" section to group titles by era. For example:

<pre>
==Release history==
===Crusader era===
*''Assassin's Creed''
*''Assassin's Creed: Altaïr's Chronicles''
*''Assassin's Creed: Bloodlines''
===Renaissance era===
*''Assassin's Creed II''
*''Assassin's Creed II: Discovery''
*''Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood''
*''Assassin's Creed: Revelations''
</pre>

:::We would then remove the existing table and replace with the Timeline of Release template. --'''''[[User:Jasca Ducato|Jasca Ducato]]''''' <small>([[User talk:Jasca Ducato|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Jasca Ducato|contributions]])</small> 15:36, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
::::It's going to be original research to mix the physical game releases with the "era" of the game narrative, particularly once we get past Black Flag. --[[User:Masem|M<span style="font-variant: small-caps">asem</span>]] ([[User Talk:Masem|t]]) 15:41, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
:::::STOP IT RIGHT NOW - Don't keep suggesting arranging games by Historical Era!!! It's pure [[WP:FANCRUFT|FANCRUFT]] as I have pointed out. There is no point in continuing to say "Oh, we should include Historical Settings because it offers more information/ people might like to know this", because such information is best left to the articles for each individual title. Doing this just makes a complete mess of the information, and is not helpful. We need to list Release History purely with games and the year they came out with; platforms for games is debatable, and I've begun to start taking to a belief that should be the case of articles for the games themselves to detail out. [[User:GUtt01|GUtt01]] ([[User talk:GUtt01|talk]]) 19:42, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
[[User:GUtt01|GUtt01,]] I've reverted your edits because they had yet to be agreed upon. [[User:Jasca Ducato|Jasca Ducato]] talks of compromise, which is important. The 'timeline of releases' that you changed to was a preliminary creation, and doesn't even hi light the main series games! This clearly seems to be a issues that needs more discussion. Just because you personally believe that historical settings should not be mentioned in an overview does not mean it is not helpful and cannot be included in a neat table of information. I will stand by my point that the historical setting of and Assassins Creed game is of the utmost importance to the general reader. Think of how a layperson would be aware of the games. They do not know AC Origins as 'Origins', but most likely 'the Egyptian one'. If anything, the historical setting is the opposite of Fancruft! [[User:Smithinson77|Smithinson77]] ([[User talk:Smithinson77|talk]]) 08:18, 22 May 2020 (UTC)
:::::[[User:GUtt01|GUtt01]], I would appreciate it if you didn't start DEMANDING things of people. This is a civil discussion and shouting at people is not an effective way to get your point of view across. You have consistently stated that providing the historical eras for each game is FANCRUFT, but your argument lacks merit, in my eyes. If youdislike the use of terms such as ''Crusader era'', or ''Renaissance'', then there are Ubisoft-approved names like; "The Ezio Collection" for AC2, AC:B, and AC:R; the "Kenway Saga" for AC3, AC4:BF, and AC:RG which can be used - though this would leave us lacking for the first few games, and those from ''Unity'' onwards.

:::::I am, personally, indifferent on the matter of inclusion, but it is clear that there are at least a few people who believe we should work to find a way to include this information in-article. EDIT: I would like to add that, according to [[Wikipedia:Fancruft#Tone and focus]] ''"One of the major aspects of fancruft articles is that they tend to focus entirely on their subject's fictional relevance, '''as opposed to their place in the real world.'''"'' Adding "real world" eras would, thus, not necessarily be considered fancruft. --'''''[[User:Jasca Ducato|Jasca Ducato]]''''' <small>([[User talk:Jasca Ducato|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Jasca Ducato|contributions]])</small> 09:31, 22 May 2020 (UTC)
::::::But what is the point? Release History is focused on the release history of games and other medias in the franchise. It's not about defining what historical setting they belong to. The original table made the most bizarre decision of defining release history for games with columns for Historical Era and Year, which is most bizarre. No release history table for video game franchises does that thing for games set within real-world environments, let alone those in historical periods. Let me give an example - ''Call of Duty'' features a number of real-world settings for two set of games: Modern (Present) era; and World War II. Now in the table given for all games within this franchise, it never states anything about Historical Era and Year; its not relevant for a table pertaining to the Release History of titles in the franchise. By adding these, it just compounds the table with more information than is needed. What should a Release History Table be all about? Simple: All games in the series, platforms they were made for, Year of Release, and Developer (if titles had different ones). [[User:GUtt01|GUtt01]] ([[User talk:GUtt01|talk]]) 10:44, 22 May 2020 (UTC)
:::::: Defining games by Historical Era (not Year in that Era) is something that could be done within the section of information, but its not something that is suitable for a Release History table. Just a suggestion. [[User:GUtt01|GUtt01]] ([[User talk:GUtt01|talk]]) 10:59, 22 May 2020 (UTC)
:::::::As I said, I am, personally, indifferent on the matter. I care not a whit whether the historical eras are included in ''this'' article or not, but others do. I'm merely offering suggestions as to ''how'' the information can be included, should that be the final consensus. --'''''[[User:Jasca Ducato|Jasca Ducato]]''''' <small>([[User talk:Jasca Ducato|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Jasca Ducato|contributions]])</small> 11:03, 22 May 2020 (UTC)
:::::::Understood. But I think this RfC was about including these in the Release History table, not the article in general. And that's the issue in question.[[User:GUtt01|GUtt01]] ([[User talk:GUtt01|talk]]) 11:38, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

*'''Include the setting'''. [https://books.google.com/books?id=8rW9DwAAQBAJ&pg=PT80 Reliable sources] [https://books.google.com/books?id=AQpQDwAAQBAJ&pg=PT122& frequently reel off a list of settings] when discussing the series as a whole, including in the context of a list of releases. Identifying the setting in this table would help users know which games are which at a glance without getting into the summary of each game, which I think is where the cruft in this article really lies - summaries ''this'' detailed should be reserved for the main article on each game, we can trim that a lot. –[[User:Roscelese|Roscelese]] ([[User talk:Roscelese|talk]] &sdot; [[Special:Contributions/Roscelese|contribs]]) 03:29, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
:: Only in the main bulk of information; not the Release Table, which was what the editor who started this RfC was asking for. [[User:GUtt01|GUtt01]] ([[User talk:GUtt01|talk]]) 07:18, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
:::{{reply|GUtt01}} Is there a separate easy-to-hand table that you think the setting could be included in? I'm specifically stating that I do not think the user should have to scroll through the descriptions of each individual game to see its setting. –[[User:Roscelese|Roscelese]] ([[User talk:Roscelese|talk]] &sdot; [[Special:Contributions/Roscelese|contribs]]) 14:52, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
:::: No. The simple answer is this - setting is not essential for a Release History Table, and no other table design should include it for a franchise. Users will have to make do about finding out the setting for either a section about each game that was released or the main article on the game. We cannot return the table back to its previous arrangement that included Historical Era and Historical Year; the table should never have been designed in that manner. Anyone wanting to do that, should do it for the Wiki devoted to the franchise, not on Wikipedia. [[User:GUtt01|GUtt01]] ([[User talk:GUtt01|talk]]) 16:23, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
:::::I very much disagree that "the place/time the game is set" is fancruft-type information. It is generally something reliable sources, including reliable sources from outside the world of gaming, discuss. –[[User:Roscelese|Roscelese]] ([[User talk:Roscelese|talk]] &sdot; [[Special:Contributions/Roscelese|contribs]]) 23:02, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
:::::: But the RfC is about the Table for Release History, not the section as a whole! [[User:GUtt01|GUtt01]] ([[User talk:GUtt01|talk]]) 23:13, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
:Exactly, it's about release history table, a table which shows the real-world information about the video games. Assume a person knows ''nothing'' about any of the ''Assassin's Creed'' video games and they stumble upon this article. Listing real-world years, linking to real-world historical events creates a [[WP:SEAOFBLUE]] and doesn't help in understanding the ''Assassin's Creed'' video game franchise. Might I suggest creating a separate fictional chronology template (see {{tp|Metal Gear chronology}}, {{tp|Kingdom Hearts chronology}} or {{tp|Contra chronology}})? [[User:Soetermans|<span style="font-variant:small-caps">soetermans</span>]]. [[User talk: Soetermans|<sup>↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A <span style="font-variant:small-caps">'''TALK'''</span></sup>]] 06:27, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
::{{reply|Soetermans}} I don't agree with the distinction you're drawing between real-world information and fictional-world information here. "The developers chose to set this game during the Crusades" is a real-world fact. I don't think the release table needs to name the protagonists, but a list of settings absolutely does help a user understand the Assassin's Creed video game franchise at a glance. –[[User:Roscelese|Roscelese]] ([[User talk:Roscelese|talk]] &sdot; [[Special:Contributions/Roscelese|contribs]]) 15:12, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
::: Within the sub-sections within Release History - yes. Within the Release History table - NO. That is not what the table is for! The table is to help users know about the release history of the games in the franchise, not specific details within - not protagonists, not major characters, not setting, nothing about fictional or real-world elements. The only information in it should be about the titles that were released, the year they released, and the platforms they were released on; review scores can be included, but that's optional and requires citations, naturally. To keep claiming that video game elements other than what the table is designed for, is pointless. Even if you want to help a user know these, look below the table - we got sub-sections for each game which help to clearly identify the setting for a game as such. We should not be including those details in the table: Wikipedia is mostly a generalised encyclopedia, and tables are mostly designed in that respect. Adding such information is not essential, other than for such tables within Wikis for the respective franchises. [[User:GUtt01|GUtt01]] ([[User talk:GUtt01|talk]]) 16:09, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

::::Hi {{re|Roscelese}}, you don't agree that we should treat [[WP:UNIVERSE]] content differently? We shouldn't say anything about the stories or protagonists, but we should mention in ''what period of history'' it is set? How would that help the general reader? "After looking at this table of releases, I don't know anything more about ''Assassin's Creed'', third-person action-adventure games with stealth elements, the Assassins, the Templars, Abstergo or Desmond, but I do know for that the first game is set during the Third Crusade!" I don't want to start sounding like a broken record, but it's a table of the franchise's releases, not a description ''of'' the releases. They're games first, and we don't list gameplay elements either. And to make a [[WP:OTHERSTUFF]] argument, that's not how video game franchise articles tend to be organized. [[User:Soetermans|<span style="font-variant:small-caps">soetermans</span>]]. [[User talk: Soetermans|<sup>↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A <span style="font-variant:small-caps">'''TALK'''</span></sup>]] 16:21, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
:::::Based on what reliable sources talk about, the fact that the game is set in the Third Crusade is ''way'' more significant than Desmond or Abstergo! –[[User:Roscelese|Roscelese]] ([[User talk:Roscelese|talk]] &sdot; [[Special:Contributions/Roscelese|contribs]]) 17:05, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
:Are you up to double-check the sources?  I'm just going to guess they will mention the names of protagonists and the plethora of gameplay elements too. But we don't include that either. [[User:Soetermans|<span style="font-variant:small-caps">soetermans</span>]]. [[User talk: Soetermans|<sup>↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A <span style="font-variant:small-caps">'''TALK'''</span></sup>]] 17:11, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
::Further up the page, I linked two sources that list the settings and do not talk about Desmond, etc. Beyond those, [https://books.google.com/books?id=3s8xBwAAQBAJ&pg=PA175 this source] does go into more detail but it foregrounds discussion of the various historical settings, and [https://books.google.com/books?id=RZqfDwAAQBAJ&pg=PT136 this] is another source that includes a table of the games with their settings before going into further detail. This is a common way that sources talk about the games; they consider the games' historical settings to be a key feature. –[[User:Roscelese|Roscelese]] ([[User talk:Roscelese|talk]] &sdot; [[Special:Contributions/Roscelese|contribs]]) 17:28, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

* '''Include the setting'''. I am convinced by Roscelese's sources and I think it is useful information. [[User:Pikavoom|Pikavoom]] ([[User talk:Pikavoom|talk]]) 08:28, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
::: '''Include in Section, not Table:''' This RfC is about the table, not the section itself. Anyone entering this discussion should please note that this was the original talk of the RfC. [[User:GUtt01|GUtt01]] ([[User talk:GUtt01|talk]]) 19:12, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
::::{{re|GUtt01}} Please stop trying to limit the scope of this conversation. The discussion is about including historical time periods in the article, and how this can be achieved. Some of these options include it not being in the table. --'''''[[User:Jasca Ducato|Jasca Ducato]]''''' <small>([[User talk:Jasca Ducato|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Jasca Ducato|contributions]])</small> 16:26, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
:::::{{re|Jasca Ducato}} Please read the top paragraph of this RfC. The original subject was about the release history table; I'm not against the historical settings being in the section for each game, I'm just clarifying that the original reason for the RfC was in regards to the Release History table's layout. [[User:GUtt01|GUtt01]] ([[User talk:GUtt01|talk]]) 18:34, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

* Thinking about this more, given that we have at least one RS article (Gamespot's) that broadly covers the series' narrative, I would support two separate tables but given that we'd be drastically culling back details on individual games in the series on this page:
** One table would be narrative breakdown based on the Gamespot's ordering/era. Would NOT include release information, but would include era (of the simulation), historical protagonist, and modern-day protagonist. This might nt include all the spinoff games which may not be easily placed in the larger arc. This table should be used to accompany the discussion of a very high-level plot smmary of the entire series as a per-arc level (not per game level) much as the Gamespot article works from. Alternatively, we may not need this table if we are clear that each arc is a new paragraph that identifies the games in that arc.
** The other table is strictly the release table, which should be the game in chronolical release date, the lead studio(s) on it, and target platforms. That can be later in the body. This needs to stay a table.--[[User:Masem|M<span style="font-variant: small-caps">asem</span>]] ([[User Talk:Masem|t]]) 18:15, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

:: We can't do a table for fictional element breakdowns - no franchise article on Wikipedia does that. I mean, check out [[Star Wars]], [[Pokemon]] or [[Grand Theft Auto]] - none of them incorporate such an arrangement. The only thing that could be done, in terms of say "Story Arc" is to use the Release History Timeline template, and color-coding games per the story arc they encompasses. To break it down with elements such as Historical Era and protoganists would be excessive; this is an article about the franchise, and this section is focused on summary of Release History and their brief summaries of each game in the franchise, not the fictional elements within each per se. [[User:GUtt01|GUtt01]] ([[User talk:GUtt01|talk]]) 18:34, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
::: Actually, we do for [[The Legend of Zelda]] which has a more convulted but confirmed timeline from Nintendo. Here, the problem with the AC games is that the narrative history is not coincident with the release history or as simple to describe with, say, Star Wars. --[[User:Masem|M<span style="font-variant: small-caps">asem</span>]] ([[User Talk:Masem|t]]) 19:04, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
:::: ''Legend of Zelda'' has that, but within a section devoted to providing insight on the fictional chronological set of events that the games are arranged to and the sort of story arcs as such, including arcs defined by one possible outcome from a game. Here, such fictional information would not be suitable for the Release History section; if the information is important to these people, it might be better suited to setting up a separate section, similar to ''LoZ'', but only if they conform the information to a generalised view. Otherwise, it might struggle and could cause further problems for the article. [[User:GUtt01|GUtt01]] ([[User talk:GUtt01|talk]]) 19:17, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
:::::So yes, for a release history, I still point to the second table: game, date of release, primary studio, and platforms. But that should be lower in the article as that is a bit more detail than a broad overview of the series. I'm just saying that nearer the top we can consider a separate table for summarizing the broad series plot via era similar in nature to the Zelda box there, but NOT containing any release date information. --[[User:Masem|M<span style="font-variant: small-caps">asem</span>]] ([[User Talk:Masem|t]]) 19:26, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

== Semi-protected edit request on 11 June 2020 ==

{{edit semi-protected|Assassin's Creed|answered=yes}}
In the table in the section "Release History", it is stated that "Assassin's Creed Origins" is available on "Stadia". I did check the stadia offering and Assassin's Creed Origins isn't part of it. (source: https://stadia.google.com/store/list/3)

'''Please change the Platforms for  "Assassin's Creed Origins" to "PlayStation 4, Xbox One, Windows" 
Keep "Assassin's Creed Odyssey" with "PlayStation 4, Xbox One, Windows, Stadia"
''' [[User:Lndium|Lndium]] ([[User talk:Lndium|talk]]) 23:19, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
:[[File:Yes check.svg|20px|link=|alt=]] '''Done'''<!-- Template:ESp --> '''[[User:NotTheFakeJTP|<span style="color: red">JTP</span>]] <sup>([[User talk:NotTheFakeJTP|talk]] • [[Special:Contribs/NotTheFakeJTP|contribs]])</sup>''' 00:46, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

== Semi-protected edit request on 13 June 2020 ==

{{edit semi-protected|Assassin's Creed|answered=yes}}
Change lots to time to lost to time [[User:Josiahmac|Josiahmac]] ([[User talk:Josiahmac|talk]]) 12:30, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

first edit hope I did it correctly  [[User:Josiahmac|Josiahmac]] ([[User talk:Josiahmac|talk]]) 12:31, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

:[[File:Yes check.svg|20px|link=|alt=]] '''Done'''<!-- Template:ESp -->, thanks! &#8209;&#8209;'''[[User talk:ElHef|<span style="color:red">El</span><span style="color:orange">Hef</span>]]'''&nbsp;<small>([[Special:Contributions/ElHef|<span style="color:black">Meep?</span>]])</small> 20:07, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

== Some suggestions going forward ==

Given the above, here's what I would suggest going forward as this page is still awfully repetative:

First, I've made up the following table for the purposes of aiding in the narration section ONLY , not to be combined with the release table (as emphasized by discussion above:

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align: center; font-size: small;"
! Game
! scope="col" style="text-align: center;" | Historical character<br/>{{small|Period/Era}}
! Present-day character
|-
| ''[[Assassin's Creed (video game)|Assassin's Creed]]''
| rowspan="1" | [[Altaïr Ibn-LaʼAhad]]<br/>{{small|[[Third Crusade]]}}
| rowspan="5" | [[Desmond Miles]]
|-
| ''[[Assassin's Creed II]]''
| rowspan="3" | [[Ezio Auditore da Firenze]]<br/>{{small|[[Italian Renaissance]]}}
|-
| ''[[Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood]]''
|-
| ''[[Assassin's Creed: Revelations]]''
|-
| ''[[Assassin's Creed III]]''
| Connor (Ratonhnhaké:ton)<br/>{{small|[[American Revolution]]}}
|-
| ''[[Assassin's Creed III: Liberation]]''
| Aveline de Grandpré<br/>{{small|[[French and Indian War]]}}
| ''unknown''
|-
| ''[[Assassin's Creed IV: Black Flag]]''
| Edward Kenway<br/>{{small|[[Golden Age of Piracy]]}}
| ''unknown''
|-
| ''[[Assassin's Creed Rogue]]''
| Shay Patrick Cormac<br/>{{small|[[Seven Years' War]]}}
| ''unknown''
|-
| ''[[Assassin's Creed Unity]]''
| Arno Dorian<br/>{{small|[[French Revolution]]}}
| rowspan="2" | The Initiate
|- 
| ''[[Assassin's Creed Syndicate]]''
| Jacob and Evie Frye<br/>{{small|[[Industrial Revolution]]}}
|-
| ''[[Assassin's Creed Origins]]''
| Bayek and Aya<br/>{{small|[[Ptolemaic Kingdom|Ptolemaic period]]}}
| rowspan="3" | Layla Hassan
|-
| ''[[Assassin's Creed Odyssey]]''
| Kassandra and Alexios<br/>{{small|[[Peloponnesian War]]}}
|-
| ''[[Assassin's Creed Valhalla]]''
| Eivor<br/>{{small|[[Great Heathen Army|Viking invasion of England]]}}
|}

I would expect to float this table on the synopsis section and even if necessary collapse it by default. Note this follows the GameSpot article on the game's chronological order so this is no guesswork in terms of series order.

Second, in the current Release History under the release history table, I would remove all the game descriptions except for the mobile games and collections that aren't covered by the above table or synopsis. We don't need to repeat between the synopsis and this section the same elements. By this point is should be fairly obvious what, say, AC III will be about even if we are only doing broad strokes. --[[User:Masem|M<span style="font-variant: small-caps">asem</span>]] ([[User Talk:Masem|t]]) 22:52, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
:Overall, I'm happy with this proposal. My only concern is that we have a number of spin-off titles to consider (e.g. ''Bloodlines'', ''Discovery'', the ''Chronicles'' releases) to which we do not know who the "modern-day" character is (or if there even is one). For that reason, I do think the third column is not strictly necessary. --'''''[[User:Jasca Ducato|Jasca Ducato]]''''' <small>([[User talk:Jasca Ducato|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Jasca Ducato|contributions]])</small> 15:41, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
::Those being the mobile games, we have no idea where they fit into the larger timeline narrative (all these do slot into that). And as mobile games, while we'll acknowledge they exist in the franchise, they really don't get considered as serious entries in the series. --[[User:Masem|M<span style="font-variant: small-caps">asem</span>]] ([[User Talk:Masem|t]]) 15:45, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

== Addition in the Comics section ==

The comics should be updated. [[User:Narottam Murmu|Narottam Murmu]] ([[User talk:Narottam Murmu|talk]]) 17:38, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

:Hi {{u|Narottam Murmu}}, thanks for your help. Could you also add [[WP:SOURCES]] when adding material? [[User:Soetermans|<span style="font-variant:small-caps">soetermans</span>]]. [[User talk: Soetermans|<sup>↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A <span style="font-variant:small-caps">'''TALK'''</span></sup>]] 13:15, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

== Semi-protected edit request on 10 November 2020 ==

{{edit semi-protected|Assassin's Creed|answered=yes}}
The latest release now in Assassins Creed Valhalla releases on the 10 November, 2020
Change
Latest Release : Assassins's Creed Oddessey
TO
Latest Release : Assassin's Creed Valhalla [[User:Moazashraf007|Moazashraf007]] ([[User talk:Moazashraf007|talk]]) 11:15, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
:{{done}}. [[User:Greyjoy|'''<span style="color: black">Grey</span><span style="color: DarkGoldenrod">joy</span>''']]<sup> [[User talk:Greyjoy|talk]]</sup> 11:17, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

== Assassins Creed Syndicate - Also on Stadia ==

The game listing should include Stadia as a platform for Assassins Creed Syndicate (it's available here: https://stadia.google.com/store/details/88a2945345f744519c5148ddd54f26d1rcp1/sku/8aa42ef528804d0ba75608240a6c0289p)

Thanks,

[[User:A1phanumeric|A1phanumeric]] ([[User talk:A1phanumeric|talk]]) 16:59, 12 January 2021 (UTC)Ed

== AC Brotherhood of Venice release date is incorrect. ==

It is going to be released in may. as anounced on ubisoft the game is funded by kickstarter and is where news on it is from 
https://news.ubisoft.com/en-us/article/7yYMlYPDm4sAhKqJwoVB4x/assassins-creed-brotherhood-of-venice-board-game-bringing-stealth-infiltration-to-tabletops
https://triton-noir.com/assassins-creed-brotherhood-of-venice/
https://www. kickstarter.com/projects/135116486/assassins-creed-brotherhood-of-venice/posts/3019728
--[[User:All the usernames I wanted|All the usernames I wanted]] ([[User talk:All the usernames I wanted|talk]]) 20:18, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

== Infobox ==
I propose swapping out the current infobox format on the page, from the "Infobox video game series" to "Infobox media franchise" template, as Assassin's Creed now encompasses a variety of novels, comics, board games, films (animated or live action), an audio drama, a symphony tour, and an upcoming TV series besides the original format of video games. Does anyone have any objections to that? [[User:Haleth|Haleth]] ([[User talk:Haleth|talk]]) 03:22, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

== Semi-protected edit request on 19 May 2021 ==

{{edit semi-protected|Assassin's Creed|answered=yes}}
I suggest to edit the use of italic font in the second bullet point of [[Assassin's_Creed#Main_series_(desktop/console_games)]], sub-section "Re-release compilations / Collections" in order to be consistent with the other points in the same list. Generally, only titles are italic, however in point 2, there's an unexpected mix of italic and non-italic used for various bits of information. My suggestion:

'''Change this:'''
* ''Assassin's Creed: The Americas Collection (American title)/ ''Assassin's Creed: Birth of a New World – The American Saga'' (European title): Developed by Ubisoft Montreal, features ''Assassin's Creed III'', ''Assassin's Creed: Liberation HD'' and ''Assassin's Creed IV: Black Flag'', for the PC, PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360. The collection was released on October 3, 2014 in Europe and October 28, 2014 in North America. The PC version was only released in Europe.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.gamespot.com/articles/assassins-creed-the-americas-collection-wont-ship-/1100-6422278/|title=Assassin's Creed: The Americas Collection Won't Ship on PC in the US, Ubisoft Clarifies|author=Rob Crossley|date=2014-09-12}}</ref>

'''to this:'''
* ''Assassin's Creed: The Americas Collection'' (American title)/ ''Assassin's Creed: Birth of a New World – The American Saga'' (European title): Developed by Ubisoft Montreal, features ''Assassin's Creed III'', ''Assassin's Creed: Liberation HD'' and ''Assassin's Creed IV: Black Flag'', for the PC, PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360. The collection was released on October 3, 2014 in Europe and October 28, 2014 in North America. The PC version was only released in Europe.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.gamespot.com/articles/assassins-creed-the-americas-collection-wont-ship-/1100-6422278/|title=Assassin's Creed: The Americas Collection Won't Ship on PC in the US, Ubisoft Clarifies|author=Rob Crossley|date=2014-09-12}}</ref> [[Special:Contributions/130.216.209.12|130.216.209.12]] ([[User talk:130.216.209.12|talk]]) 00:42, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
: {{done}}. Two apostrophes went missing. [[User:Ganbaruby|<span style="color:#960596">◢</span> <b><i style="background-color:#F7E3F7; color:#960596"> Ganbaruby! </i></b>]] <small>([[User talk:Ganbaruby|talk]])</small> 03:25, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
{{reflist-talk}}

==Related draft - Infinity==
Started a related draft about Infinity, [[Draft:Assassin's Creed Infinity]]. [[User:Spy-cicle|<span style='color: 4019FF;'><b>&nbsp;Spy-cicle💥&nbsp;</b></span>]] [[User talk:Spy-cicle#top|<sup><span style='color: #1e1e1e;'><b>'''''Talk'''''?</b></span></sup>]] 21:12, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

== Open-world ==

I’d like to bring up a point about this article being in the Open-world category: While yes the cast majority of the games do have an open-world, not all of them do, and as such calling the series an open-world series is entirely misleading, as that implies that the entire series falls under that, which isn’t the case at all. I know its a technicality, but it is a huge one that should be noted.[[User:NickWX28|NickWX28]] ([[User talk:NickWX28|talk]]) 15:28, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
:As you yourself admit, the "[v]ast majority of the games" in the series are open-world, which makes it an open-world series; there is nothing misleading about that. Categorisation does not require that 100% of releases meet the open-world criteria for the article about the series as a whole to be included in said category. -- [[User:Jasca Ducato|Jasca'''Ducato''']] <small>([[User talk:Jasca Ducato|talk]] &#124; [[Special:Contributions/Jasca Ducato|contributions]])</small> 19:07, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
::Wouldn’t that be a flaw with the categorisation system then?[[User:NickWX28|NickWX28]] ([[User talk:NickWX28|talk]]) 23:09, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
:::No, because there are often situations, exactly like this one, where articles broadly meet the criteria for inclusion within a specific category with one or more exceptions. [[:Category:Open-world video games]] is the [[WP:CATSPECIFIC|most specific category]] we have available, so it is appropriate that it be here. A similar example is [[Borderlands (series)|''Borderlands'' (series)]] which, like ''Assassin's Creed'', has several non-open world spin-offs but is still categorised as an open-world series. -- [[User:Jasca Ducato|Jasca'''Ducato''']] <small>([[User talk:Jasca Ducato|talk]] &#124; [[Special:Contributions/Jasca Ducato|contributions]])</small> 09:56, 2 September 2021 (UTC)
::::That may be a bad example to use considering I myself am the one that added all Borderlands games plus the series page to the category (with the exception of 3).[[User:NickWX28|NickWX28]] ([[User talk:NickWX28|talk]]) 23:42, 2 September 2021 (UTC)
:::::It's a perfect example to use then. Either both fit the category (which they do), or neither does. -- [[User:Jasca Ducato|Jasca'''Ducato''']] <small>([[User talk:Jasca Ducato|talk]] &#124; [[Special:Contributions/Jasca Ducato|contributions]])</small> 08:24, 3 September 2021 (UTC)
::::::I also haven’t re-reviewed those yet so thats still tbd. Like I said, I added those to the category in the first place. I’m reviewing the entire category though and being more thorough about things.[[User:NickWX28|NickWX28]] ([[User talk:NickWX28|talk]]) 13:30, 3 September 2021 (UTC)
:We generally need to consider the main games in the series to make this assessment and not so much the spin-offs. And limiting that to just the main games, they definitely all are open world games. --[[User:Masem|M<span style="font-variant: small-caps">asem</span>]] ([[User Talk:Masem|t]]) 14:57, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

== Chronology Table Missing Content ==

To round out the “premise” section we should add a couple more installments like the live-action film, chronicles, and/or Lineage and Embers. [[User:Jfucgighufiggugfvhg|Jfucgighufiggugfvhg]] ([[User talk:Jfucgighufiggugfvhg|talk]]) 00:10, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

:The live action film is not assumed to be within the same narrative timeline the games purposely align themselves. And some of the side games aren't as critical in their story to the larger premise of the series, being side games. --[[User:Masem|M<span style="font-variant: small-caps">asem</span>]] ([[User Talk:Masem|t]]) 01:01, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

My bad, I thought the movie was supposed to be in that universe. [[User:Jfucgighufiggugfvhg|Jfucgighufiggugfvhg]] ([[User talk:Jfucgighufiggugfvhg|talk]]) 13:25, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
:{{Reply to|Masem}} Respectfully, your point regarding the [[Assassin's Creed (film)|2016 live-action film]] not being a part of the same narrative timeline is incorrect. The events of that film are very much a part of the series' canon and have been referenced a few times in subsequent video game releases. That being said, nothing happens in the film that warrants specific inclusion in the Premise section of this article. -- [[User:Jasca Ducato|Jasca'''Ducato''']] <small>([[User talk:Jasca Ducato|talk]] &#124; [[Special:Contributions/Jasca Ducato|contributions]])</small> 14:27, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

== Semi-protected edit request on 14 January 2022 ==

{{edit semi-protected|Assassin's Creed|answered=yes}}
I am looking to add a component to the "Cultural Impact" subject which relates to Ubisoft's effort to make "Unity" free for PC owners for a time in response to the 2019 Notre Dame fire that heavily damaged the Cathedral. The initiative was undertaken to allow players to experience the chapel, as the Ubisoft team dedicated a great deal of effort in replicating the details of the cathedral prior to the fire. [[User:VenantiusOnline|VenantiusOnline]] ([[User talk:VenantiusOnline|talk]]) 21:20, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
:[[File:Red information icon with gradient background.svg|20px|link=|alt=]] '''Not done:''' please provide [[Wikipedia:Reliable sources|reliable sources]] that support the change you want to be made.<!-- Template:ESp --> [[User:ScottishFinnishRadish|ScottishFinnishRadish]] ([[User talk:ScottishFinnishRadish|talk]]) 21:31, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

== Semi-protected edit request on 12 July 2022 ==

{{edit semi-protected|Assassin's Creed|answered=yes}}
CHANGE

The entire game is presented as a product developed by the in-universe company Abstergo Entertainment, who have done a heavy a amount of censoring in regards to the Assassin-Templar conflict. At various points during their playthrough, the player is contacted by the hacking collective Erudito, who helps them uncensor the game to learn the true nature of the events depicted.

TO
The entire game is presented as a product developed by the in-universe company Abstergo Entertainment, who have done a heavy amount of censoring in regards to the Assassin-Templar conflict. At various points during their playthrough, the player is contacted by the hacking collective Erudito, who helps them uncensor the game to learn the true nature of the events depicted. [[User:Wimpkitty|Wimpkitty]] ([[User talk:Wimpkitty|talk]]) 18:37, 12 July 2022 (UTC)
:{{Done}} -- [[User:Ferret|ferret]] ([[User_talk:Ferret|talk]]) 18:43, 12 July 2022 (UTC)

== Semi-protected edit request on 15 September 2022 ==

{{Edit semi-protected|Assassin's Creed|answered=yes}}
Change Marc-Alexis Cotê to Marc-Alexis Côté [[Special:Contributions/207.253.166.234|207.253.166.234]] ([[User talk:207.253.166.234|talk]]) 04:52, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
:{{Done}} -- [[User:Jasca Ducato|Jasca'''Ducato''']] <small>([[User talk:Jasca Ducato|talk]] &#124; [[Special:Contributions/Jasca Ducato|contributions]])</small> 10:44, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

== Semi-protected edit request on 16 March 2023 ==

{{Edit semi-protected|Assassin's Creed|answered=yes}}
Original: After Syndicate, Ubisoft recognized that the series needed a major reinvention across both gameplay and narrative.

To: After Syndicate, Ubisoft '''decided''' that the series needed a major reinvention across both gameplay and narrative.

The reason for this change is that to say Ubisoft "recognized" something is to assert that this is objectively true. Saying that Ubisoft "decided" makes no claims about the objectivity of this decision and so is a better fit for an encyclopedic source. [[User:Gtyrovolas|Gtyrovolas]] ([[User talk:Gtyrovolas|talk]]) 23:23, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
:{{done}}<!-- Template:ESp --> —[[User:Sirdog|<span style="color:#058700">'''Sirdog'''</span> ]]([[User talk:Sirdog|talk]]) 23:35, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

== Fix the “legendary” Boar. ==

So I keep F* dying from all the pigs. Why is there so many, I’m literally level 30 and dying from level 21s, get rid of the other boars. Just have the damn boss so it’s a 1v1 and not a damn third-party. I had a bounty hunter help me bro [[Special:Contributions/64.156.99.174|64.156.99.174]] ([[User talk:64.156.99.174|talk]]) 14:16, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

== Ubisoft Montreal ==

Most of the games in the franchise were not primarily developed by Ubisoft Montreal [[User:James Goodyear|James Goodyear]] ([[User talk:James Goodyear|talk]]) 02:38, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

== Assasins Creed Mirage released ==

We should probably update Assasins creed mirage's information in Phase 3. It says it is expected to release in 2023. It just released this month. [[Special:Contributions/134.134.139.87|134.134.139.87]] ([[User talk:134.134.139.87|talk]]) 19:57, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

== Semi-protected edit request on 20 November 2023 ==

{{edit semi-protected|Assassin's Creed|answered=yes}}
Add that AC nexus also released on the meta quest 3 and meta quest pro [[User:Buttorsomething|Buttorsomething]] ([[User talk:Buttorsomething|talk]]) 18:22, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
:{{done}}<!-- Template:ESp --> <span style="font-variant:small-caps">[[User:Thriftycat|Thriftycat]] <sup>[[User talk:Thriftycat|Talk]] • [[Special:Contribs/Thriftycat|Contribs]]</sup></span> 02:37, 26 November 2023 (UTC)