I mean that seems the sensible thing to do, but if that's what they were doing why call it 'Origins'? That it's a subtitle at all will probably put a lot of people off, as traditionally, non-numbered Assassin's Creed games have been 'holding pattern' games, keeping the story where it is while they decide what to do with it (and yes, I count Unity and Syndicate as falling into this category). I think they either need to shit or get off the pot - either make Assassin's Creed 5, or start a new Assassin's Creed series.
They dropped the numbers because it didn't made any sense and people would feel like they needed to play 4 before 5 etc.
So far if I understood your "holding pattern" thing there have been 4 main chapters in the history (both for the historical era-story arc and the game design structure)
Assassin's Creed 1
AC2/Brotherhood/Révélations
AC3/4 Black Flag/Rogue
AC Unity/Syndicate
and now Origins
Unity brought too much changes to be considered as a "holding pattern". They pretty much changed all the climbing/architecture, all the combat system and all the stealth + mission design.
"Origins" is a pretty good name :
-they want once again to focus on the core of the franchise with a soft reboot (get back to the origin of the serie)
-and to get back in time with the origins of the Assassins (story-wise)
Zelda is an action game?
It's action/adventure-exploration/puzzle without any role playing. As I said, they can share traits but Zelda isn't a role playing game. Action-adventure games, including Assassin's Creed and Far Cry, took some traits from RPGs but that doesn't make them RPGs. It's not the core of the game design.