Board Thread:Wiki discussion/@comment-84037-20170106215439/@comment-18014300-20170201031223

Roger Murtaugh wrote:

Sol Pacificus wrote: I forgot. Do we order Appearances/References by alphabetical order, chronological order by release date, or in-universe chronological order? And if we follow the last, do we order base on the present-day time of the game as technically the majority of most games are flashbacks and technically a game like Assassin's Creed III is set in 2012?

If we don't have a policy on it yet, what are your preferences?

So far, I think that the appearances have mostly been in in-universe chronological order. I think that it makes sense to list them by the chronological order for the characters in whatever time period they're in. I think that that is what Wookieepedia does.

See, if we're being technical, Assassin's Creed I, II, Brotherhood, Revelations, and III are all set in 2012 not their historical time periods. This does have the benefit of matching up with the release chronological order for the most part except you'll have the confusing case where a game like Discovery is actually set in 1491 not 2012 despite what the HUD might suggest. Discovery poses it like you're playing within the Animus, but it's not clear who is the user, though it really doesn't make sense for it to be Desmond since we know he skipped this part of Ezio's life. So for mobile games, I have often thought that we should assume that they're actually set in their historical time periods, which aren't flashbacks/regressions and the Animus-like HUD is just to be consistent with the AC style. I guess my assumption could be totally flawed though... since it does use the Animus. Just don't know who is using it.

But with Chronicles: China for instance. That would be set in 1520s right? So it would be positioned before Assassin's Creed I set in 2012 (with flashbacks to 1191)? I'm not sure if every game really does pose it as though it were being played through the Animus.