Board Thread:Series general discussion/@comment-28601337-20170726211037 - Revision history

imported>Cristophorus35 at 21:11, 26 July 2017

2017-07-26T21:11:28Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:11, 26 July 2017
Line 3:		Line 3:
	But... there's something that bothers me. A tiny, little detail. Most of the pages, explaining the biography and personality of the characters, dont indicate if the character did exist at all or not.		But... there's something that bothers me. A tiny, little detail. Most of the pages, explaining the biography and personality of the characters, dont indicate if the character did exist at all or not.

	Of course, we learn ~~above~~ some of them, that did exist, at school and university: Napoleon, Richard the Lionheart, Saladin, Jean of Arc, Bartholomew Roberts, Edward "Blackbeard" Thatch, George Washington, etc, etc, etc. But what above the others less popular?		Of course, we learn about some of them, that did exist, at school and university: Napoleon, Richard the Lionheart, Saladin, Jean of Arc, Bartholomew Roberts, Edward "Blackbeard" Thatch, George Washington, etc, etc, etc. But what above the others less popular?

	An example is Julien Du Casse, the Templar with the big hat in ACIV:BlackFlag. He didn't exist at all. There isn't historical documents of him, it just like the developers invented him for the lore. And I thought he did exist. The only ways, aside of what we learn in history 101, that someone can know if a character did exist are: thinking logically or reading the trivia, but both are ambiguous and they lack of research.		An example is Julien Du Casse, the Templar with the big hat in ACIV:BlackFlag. He didn't exist at all. There isn't historical documents of him, it just like the developers invented him for the lore. And I thought he did exist. The only ways, aside of what we learn in history 101, that someone can know if a character did exist are: thinking logically or reading the trivia, but both are ambiguous and they lack of research.

imported>Cristophorus35: Created page with "I think this wiki is absolutely helpful. The fact that I couldn't play an AC game wasn't an obstacle, because I read the wiki to keep me in touch with the lore. I love that. ..."

2017-07-26T21:10:37Z

Created page with "I think this wiki is absolutely helpful. The fact that I couldn't play an AC game wasn't an obstacle, because I read the wiki to keep me in touch with the lore. I love that. ..."

Páàjì titun

I think this wiki is absolutely helpful. The fact that I couldn't play an AC game wasn't an obstacle, because I read the wiki to keep me in touch with the lore. I love that.

But... there's something that bothers me. A tiny, little detail. Most of the pages, explaining the biography and personality of the characters, dont indicate if the character did exist at all or not.

Of course, we learn above some of them, that did exist, at school and university: Napoleon, Richard the Lionheart, Saladin, Jean of Arc, Bartholomew Roberts, Edward "Blackbeard" Thatch, George Washington, etc, etc, etc. But what above the others less popular?

An example is Julien Du Casse, the Templar with the big hat in ACIV:BlackFlag. He didn't exist at all. There isn't historical documents of him, it just like the developers invented him for the lore. And I thought he did exist. The only ways, aside of what we learn in history 101, that someone can know if a character did exist are: thinking logically or reading the trivia, but both are ambiguous and they lack of research.

I think it's important to mark the characters that existed and the ones that are completely fictional in someway. Doing that, we do a great service of the new fans.

What do you think?<ac_metadata title="Real Characters and Fictional Characters." related_topics="Assassins|Templars"> </ac_metadata>