FANDOM


  • I'd like to propose that we allow quest walkthroughs for all quests in all games. I am aware that this wiki is more lore-based than game-based, but I think many people would find it useful. One of the benefits of being with FANDOM is that this wiki is almost always at the top when someone searches something Assassin's Creed related. If someone were to search for a quest, this wiki would come up first- but they wouldn't be able to get help with the quest.

    I believe we should do one of two things:

    a) Include a  Walkthrough  section on quest articles;

    b) make individual pages for walkthroughs.

    If anyone has any better suggestions, I'm willing to hear them.

      Loading editor
    • I am against this idea for a number of reasons:

      First, we're not IGN, we're a wiki. Our current purpose is to provide an in-universe educational perspective on the subject, not to advise how best to play the games.

      Secondly, any walkthroughs would be very simplistic in nature; unlike games like Tomb Raider (or any other puzzle-based game) wherein one might feasibly find a use for a walkthrough when encountering difficulty with a puzzle, Assassin's Creed's gameplay is not designed like that. "Kill these guards, climb this building, kill some more guards" is fairly easy to understand without an online guide holding your hand.

        Loading editor
    • Jasca Ducato wrote: I am against this idea for a number of reasons:

      First, we're not IGN, we're a wiki. Our current purpose is to provide an in-universe educational perspective on the subject, not to advise how best to play the games.

      Secondly, any walkthroughs would be very simplistic in nature; unlike games like Tomb Raider (or any other puzzle-based game) wherein one might feasibly find a use for a walkthrough when encountering difficulty with a puzzle, Assassin's Creed's gameplay is not designed like that. "Kill these guards, climb this building, kill some more guards" is fairly easy to understand without an online guide holding your hand.

      Why not include some explanatory pages as well as in-universe knowledge? It'd mean more views, and more editors. Many gaming wikis include quest walkthroughs.

      You say that quest walkthroughs aren't necessary, and yet refer to IGN. Doesn't the existence of this website, and its AC quest guides, tell you that obviously some people need them? You might not, but others do; I myself have on occasion found myself stuck and come to the wiki, only to find it can't help me.

      I understand what you're saying, which is why I think creating new pages rather than adding to current ones would make more sense. But I absolutely believe that they would be a useful edition to this wiki's ever-growing collection of pages.

        Loading editor
    • The Supreme Argonian wrote:

      Jasca Ducato wrote: I am against this idea for a number of reasons:

      First, we're not IGN, we're a wiki. Our current purpose is to provide an in-universe educational perspective on the subject, not to advise how best to play the games.

      Secondly, any walkthroughs would be very simplistic in nature; unlike games like Tomb Raider (or any other puzzle-based game) wherein one might feasibly find a use for a walkthrough when encountering difficulty with a puzzle, Assassin's Creed's gameplay is not designed like that. "Kill these guards, climb this building, kill some more guards" is fairly easy to understand without an online guide holding your hand.

      Why not include some explanatory pages as well as in-universe knowledge? It'd mean more views, and more editors. Many gaming wikis include quest walkthroughs.

      You say that quest walkthroughs aren't necessary, and yet refer to IGN. Doesn't the existence of this website, and its AC quest guides, tell you that obviously some people need them? You might not, but others do; I myself have on occasion found myself stuck and come to the wiki, only to find it can't help me.

      I understand what you're saying, which is why I think creating new pages rather than adding to current ones would make more sense. But I absolutely believe that they would be a useful edition to this wiki's ever-growing collection of pages.

      I oppose this idea as well. For one thing, my perspective is perhaps a bit unique in that I care less for competition and more for diversified, specialized roles in a fandom. For example, I considered making gameplay walkthroughs for YouTube, but given how many there are out there and how well done a few or one channel does with them, even if I had the time and resources, I wouldn't want to compete against that; I would find that my content is just redundant. In the same way, my perspective is that while walkthroughs and guides are needed for players, there are many resources online for them to defer to other than this wiki. On the other hand, there is no other resource as dedicated to professional and comprehensive (even if our productivity is behind) lorekeeping as the AC Wiki. Thus, we hold a specialized purpose in this fandom.

      Now we can do both and supplement our lorekeeping with walkthroughs, but I think to streamline our content, it is best to stick to pure lorekeeping. We do have the stats for weapons, but those are just charts.

      If providing walkthroughs can attract more manpower, then I would consider it, but then would that manpower only be interested in working on out-of-universe material that goes against the special, in-universe, lore aspect of this wiki? Would it also confuse them from that focus?

      Finally, Jasca brings up a good point in that the quest walkthroughs are unlikely to be deep and particularly insightful. There are ways to make them so even with a game such as Assassin's Creed: you hold mission accomplishment to a high standard, guiding players to not just complete it, but complete it without ever getting detected or getting hurt. But otherwise, I fear the walkthroughs would just be so superficial as to be little more than a distraction.

      What were the specific problems you ran into in the game and that you found the wiki unhelpful with that inspired this proposal?

        Loading editor
    • The Supreme Argonian wrote:

      You say that quest walkthroughs aren't necessary, and yet refer to IGN. Doesn't the existence of this website, and its AC quest guides, tell you that obviously some people need them? You might not, but others do; I myself have on occasion found myself stuck and come to the wiki, only to find it can't help me.

      Clearly, there is a need for such walkthroughs, which is why IGN exists to cater to that requirement. Since IGN is doing it, why would we need or want to duplicate that effort? You're clearly aware that the Wiki is not a game guide, so I am unsure why you would come here looking for assistance on gameplay mechanics (and be surprised by the lack thereof) in the first place.

        Loading editor
    • Jasca, I'm not sure what are our policies on blogs, but do you think the Supreme Argonian can make blog posts for walkthroughs if he wanted to?

        Loading editor
    • Technically, I don't see why not. If it's going to be one blog post per mission walkthrough, however, I can see it getting out of hand. Supreme Argonian would also have to write the walkthroughs himself.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
Give Kudos to this message
You've given this message Kudos!
See who gave Kudos to this message