Talk:Calculations: Difference between revisions
imported>RebeccaAWB m Adding {{Talkheader}} |
imported>Sol Pacificus →Source for name: new section |
||
| Line 21: | Line 21: | ||
As title, do we need a gallery in article?--[[User:UJ112013|UJ112013]] ([[User talk:UJ112013|talk]]) 12:28, February 25, 2018 (UTC) | As title, do we need a gallery in article?--[[User:UJ112013|UJ112013]] ([[User talk:UJ112013|talk]]) 12:28, February 25, 2018 (UTC) | ||
== Source for name == | |||
Is there an explicit source for this being a proper noun and an official name? Darby's tweet specifically refers to it as an "in-house" name, meaning that the devs used it unofficially among themselves. In all other instances I have seen it used in the series, it was in a descriptive, not nominal, way and not as a proper noun. I could be wrong, so please correct me if there is a source that I missed. As it is, I fear that this is another case where we prematurely canonized a term in an official capacity (like how we treated Kassandra's official epithet as ''misthios'' for the longest time, when it is actually "the Eagle Bearer"). If we take Darby's tweet on this alone, it still does not confirm that it is official or used as a proper noun, and therefore this article needs to be marked as having a conjectural name. [[User:Sol Pacificus|<span style="color:#990000;font-family:Monotype Corsiva;font-size:17px">'''Sol Pacificus'''</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Sol Pacificus|<span style="color:#D4AF37;font-family:Californian FB;font-size:11px">(Cyfiero)</span>]]</sup> 02:15, 12 July 2021 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 04:15, 12 July 2021
Orelov's vision
Now I personally think Orelov's vision in Assassin's Creed: The Fall is a great early example of calculations in the series, where the Staff enables him and Daniel to perceive the shape of time, and events past and future. While what little they saw of Daniel's meeting with the Mentor proved accurate, any future is always a probability until it comes true. The futures Juno showed to Connor in the Nexus and Desmond at the Colosseum Vault were the future until she directly intervened. I feel I'm at fault for someone removing this example simply because I forgot to list it when I created the page. --Alientraveller (talk) 12:10, August 13, 2013 (UTC)
Other(s) Function(s)
The question I ask is what are the calculations have another function or other (s)? For example, a space-time travel?
(I feel there are people who will criticize me ^ ^) Math34 (talk) 12:29, August 13, 2013 (UTC)
Desmond's Description
In Subject 17 Memo 2 in the Abstergo Entertainment research analyst's personal files, Desmond describes the Calculations as Clay Kaczmarek saw them as he descended into insanity. Should the quotation at the top of the page be replaced with that one? As it is now, it seems to be normal (albeit complex) mathematical equations the way Jupiter describes it, but that is probably the point anyway, as that's how he thinks of them.GZilla311 (talk) 14:55, May 8, 2015 (UTC)
- Which part do you think we should put in the article? Because we can't put the whole lot in there. (Well, technically, we could, but it would be a ridiculous eyesore.) --Jasca Ducato (talk | contributions) 18:14, May 8, 2015 (UTC)
- How about this much? "They had these tools, these powerful machines, that could predict POSSIBLE FUTURES. Not what was going to happen, but wha-what COULD happen... probabilities. And... well, they spent a lot of energy trying to decide what was the most likely scenario for the future. Their's and ours." It seems to be a much more accurate assessment of them than Jupiter's comment.GZilla311 (talk) 19:37, May 8, 2015 (UTC)
Do we need a gallery?
As title, do we need a gallery in article?--UJ112013 (talk) 12:28, February 25, 2018 (UTC)
Source for name
Is there an explicit source for this being a proper noun and an official name? Darby's tweet specifically refers to it as an "in-house" name, meaning that the devs used it unofficially among themselves. In all other instances I have seen it used in the series, it was in a descriptive, not nominal, way and not as a proper noun. I could be wrong, so please correct me if there is a source that I missed. As it is, I fear that this is another case where we prematurely canonized a term in an official capacity (like how we treated Kassandra's official epithet as misthios for the longest time, when it is actually "the Eagle Bearer"). If we take Darby's tweet on this alone, it still does not confirm that it is official or used as a proper noun, and therefore this article needs to be marked as having a conjectural name. Sol Pacificus(Cyfiero) 02:15, 12 July 2021 (UTC)