FANDOM

 
14,477 Pages

This is the discussion page for Elysium.
Here, you may discuss improving the article.
To discuss the subject itself, use the Forums.

  • Be polite
  • Assume good faith
  • Do not insult other people

Lede

Now that Fields of Elysium has been released we are, of course, seeing links to this article popping up in articles on a daily basis. Technically speaking, these articles are referring to a simulation of Elysium and not the "real" Elysium of Greek mythology; I feel it is important that a distinction be made.

To date, I have taken to inserting references to "a simulation of Elysium" in our articles, but I concede that this is not entirely practical (or even preferable), so I am now of the opinion that this article should be changed.

Currently, the lede of this article references the "real" Elysium before detailing the simulation - I believe that this should be changed. The way I see it, we have two options:

  1. Alter the lede to prioritise the simulation aspect over mythological representation
  2. Split the article into Elysium and Elysium (simulation), at which point we can decide which to give precedence too

Thoughts? --Jasca Ducato (talk | contributions) 09:48, April 25, 2019 (UTC)

My vote's with the first. Similar to how we deal with deities and other mythical aspects who haven't been split into two already which turn out to be...something else in AC-franchise. So prioritize the simulation and mention the mythological further in the article. Sadelyrate (siniath) 10:23, April 25, 2019 (UTC)
My vote is with the first, same as Sadel. XOdeyssusx (talk) 11:28, April 25, 2019 (UTC)
If the mythological place becomes more relevant, and/or the article grows too large, then the second suggestion would be more valid. As it is, I for one am not seeing the need for it, atm. Sadelyrate (siniath) 12:06, April 25, 2019 (UTC)
I say it depends on which is based off which. The common school of thought is that myth concepts are based off Isu counterparts but I feel in this case it might be different, that Aletheia instead based her simulation off .Greek mythology as it would already be somewhat familiar to Kass. Lacrossedeamon (talk) 12:19, April 25, 2019 (UTC)


I'm with Lacrosse, the game mentions that these simulations were built by Aletheia herself in order to test the Eagle Bearer in her way to withstand the Staff's corruption. This gives the possibility that the Isu there existed in AC's real-life but they act as Aletheia intends them to. Everything is a test as far as I know, not the official representation of an Isu city or the Isu themselves. (Unless some of them decided to escape to this virtual realm before the Grand Catastrophe). My vote goes for the first option.Cristophorus35 (talk) 13:20, April 25, 2019 (UTC)
Got nothing to add, agree with the previous comments as far as the article name goes. For the lede, it could go either way, tbh. One one hand Elysium just doesn't seem to exist outside of the simulation as far as we know and as such it could be considered redundant to state that it's a simulation. On the other hand, it is more informative, and for example if we're using the only other case of playable simulation (outside of genetic memory simulations) we always clarify when something happened in the simulation create by the Apple for Ratonhnhaké:ton and George Washington. — Zero-ELEC (talk) 16:24, April 25, 2019 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.