Talk:Assassin's Creed Origins

Development and Gameplay info
− 2012MarcoMDNA (talk) 11:23, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
 * GameInformer cover story and articles
 * UbiBlog article
 * Official website
 * Julien Laferriere Interview
 * Developer Q&A
 * Of these, only the first and the last is properly usable, wherethough the first is already in the article ("Five Things You Need To Know About Assassin’s Creed Origins"). Lordtobi  ( &#9993; ) 11:27, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Sources in the gameplay section
Overnight, I updated the gameplay after IGN published a few videos about the game with Ashraf Ismail discussing the new gameplay features. Unfortunately, I haven't been able to upload these videos as sources&mdash;almost all of my browsing activity is done via mobile device, and as I was watching the videos through the YouTube app, I could not get the URLs to include them as sources. Does someone mind adding them to the article? Prisonermonkeys (talk) 01:41, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

I've noticed that the Premise section does not have any valid sources/references to back it up. Could someone please verify if possible? — Preceding unsigned comment added by SH3RIFFO (talk • contribs) 14:51, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Leak needs sources? References?
The following sentience; "Information on Origins, then titled Assassin's Creed Empire, first leaked in January 2017, showing several screenshots of a character on a boat and in front of a cave." does not have any source or reference to back it up. Could someone possibly verify this and add what it's mentioning? I would love to see what it's talking about. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SH3RIFFO (talk • contribs) 14:56, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

The review-dance: "recent", "since Black Flag" vs. "either the best or one of the best"
Hello everyone,

Since this is a topic that seems to pop up often enough to ruffle some feathers or at least cause different ideas on phrasing to surface, I wanted to make a short statement on the talk-page concerning the case of "reception" in the overview-section. In short, the problem concerns the depiction of critical "canon" of the article in either the phrasings "recent", "since Black Flag" vs. "either the best or one of the best by multiple critics".

On Wikipedia, we all try to stay neutral and give an overview of the topic at hand as complete and as neutral as possible so that the readers can inform themselves without authorial ulterior motives. The problem I see here in regards to Origins is that both "recent" and "since Black Flag" are way more limiting and inaccurate in scope than "either the best or one of the best by multiple critics". Thus, these phrasings damage the quality of the article by leaving out the featured critical assessments claiming it is thew best in the series overall.

By writing "recent", it is subtly connotated that only the sample of recent games is taken into consideration, leaving out the junk of featured reviews in this article (and in general) stating that it is the best entry overall (which obviously includes the "older" games in the sample, not just the recent ones). By writing "recent", this phrasing is thus contradicting the reviews claiming it is the best game in the series overall(/the best application of the Ubisoft-formula) or it is inferring something the reviewer has not stated.

The same problem arises with "since Black Flag", only that "recent" is now given a definitive point in time which is even more problematic. Quite simply, if there is a reviewer writing it is the best entry in the series, it is contradicting to his/her claim to write that it only is the best in the series since "Black Flag".

In short, I do not really see why "either the best or one of the best by multiple critics" is not neutral and should not be applied in the overview as it takes all aspects of the reviewer-spectrum into account and informs that not all critics are of these opinions, only "multiple" (which the written reception-section confirms). Maybe the "multiple critics" is throwing some off or comes off to strong, in which case I would suggest that someone please edit it since I can only think of "a number of critics" which (sounds nonsensical and) really could be applied to everything in existence if there is just one sourceable critic of this opinion. Other than that, I can only think of "some" which is problematic, too, by both simultanously under- and overstating the importance of certain critical assessments plus one could be accused of arbitrariness.

So, as a conclusion, I will return the overview-phrase to "either the best or one of the best by multiple critics" for the time being and if there are problems with this, we can always discuss how to improve this phrase or replace it by discussing in this thread. Thanks for reading, feel free to comment/agree/disagree/back this up at any time.

Kind regards, 46.84.175.143 (talk) 19:12, 4 November 2017 (UTC)Autorefiller

Plot expansion
The plot could be expanded a bit more. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drumerwritter (talk • contribs) 22:27, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
 * So do it. Remember the basic guidelines though and keep it concise and under 700 words. -- ferret (talk) 22:34, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Wouldn't it be a good idea to add the plot of the latest DLC "Curse of the pharaohs" to the plot section? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drumerwritter (talk • contribs) 21:32, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Truly, it would. Please go ahead. Lordtobi  ( &#9993; ) 06:11, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

There are no references in this entire section, is this not an issue?

Intro reads like an advert
The current opening reads extremely positively, its unsourced, and I don't think its backed up any actual critics, I've not heard of any critics lauding any aspect of the game, let alone referring to it as the best installment of the series. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7D:DA42:200:F986:386B:B684:DE91 (talk) 00:23, 23 November 2017 (UTC)
 * The lead is pretty standard. Leads generally don't require sourcing, as they are summarizing the rest of the article that is sourced. See the reception section. -- ferret (talk) 00:35, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

Limited Editions table
I had added a table overview of the available Editions, as there is one in the Assassin's Creed Syndicate page as well. As suggested by Lordtobi I have now removed it by Opting it out for now, and seeking consensus here. The opted Out version of the table is a cleaned up version, removed store links from the first version I made, and added with a secondary source. Krughal (talk) 08:18, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
 * As there has been no response and reason not to include for the past 8 months, I will remove the Opt out tags, and make the table visible again. Krughal (talk) 20:42, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

Screenshot
File:AC Origins horse.jpg has been the screenshot since 2017. This was replaced with File:Assassin' Creed Origins gameplay screenshot.jpg by. Reasons given: Revert, the original screenshot is from (1) pre-release which didn't fully represent the game (2) horse-riding is such a generic component that didn't reflect the uniqueness of gameplay (3) The HUD from final game is different from the screenshot shown here.

A few problems. Horse-riding is far more unique than fighting, which also happens in Mortal Kombat, Super Smash Bros, etc etc etc. The HUD in the new screenshot can hardly be made out after non-free reduce. And because the characters in the new screenshot are in the shadow, they are also difficult to see, particularly after the non-free reduce.

I'll take a look around for another screenshot as I do agree that a pre-release screenshot isn't ideal, but the new upload isn't an improvement. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 22:51, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Maybe the first screenshot on is an option? I think a screenshot should give some impression of the fact that this game is set in an open world. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 23:00, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I've updated the horse screenshot with something more recent. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 08:52, 15 March 2021 (UTC)


 * I am fine with the new screenshot. OceanHok (talk) 11:26, 15 March 2021 (UTC)