GOTY Watch Dogs Sequel is in Development, According to Employee CV - Polidicks

[quote]Watch Dogs 2 is in development, according to one of the original title's senior gameplay programmers. The LinkedIn profile of Julien Risse, who's based at Ubisoft Paris, had the unannounced game listed on his profile alongside Watch Dogs and its Bad Blood DLC before removing it. Unfortunately, not before VideoGamer managed to grab a screenshot. [img]http://i.imgur.com/nLU5xnT.jpg[/img] Though Watch Dogs 2 has yet to be officially announced, there's been a strong suggestion it's on the way. No details about the game have leaked but, back in January, creative director Jonathan Morin said the original was flawed and the team needed to take risks with any potential sequel. [/quote] It was a small article so I posted the entirety of it. Source: [url]http://au.ign.com/articles/2015/04/30/watch-dogs-2-is-in-development-according-to-employee-cv[/url]

Seeing as though the first Watch_Dogs was a smashing success, I can't see why they wouldn't make a sequel.

yeah watch_dogs was fun if like me, you were expecting it to be straight up garbage and got the game for free.

[QUOTE=Adamrd;47633296]Seeing as though the first Watch_Dogs was a smashing success, I can't see why they wouldn't make a sequel.[/QUOTE] Are you speaking in terms of the amount of money it made, or the critical reception?

Everyone and their mom preordered it, ofcourse it was a success

[QUOTE=A B.A. Survivor;47633312]Are you speaking in terms of the amount of money it made, or the critical reception?[/QUOTE] I was joking in the sense that it actually failed hard in critical reception.

[QUOTE=A B.A. Survivor;47633312]Are you speaking in terms of the amount of money it made, or the critical reception?[/QUOTE] I believe he's speaking quite sarcastically. Watch Dogs wasn't terrible, it certainly wasn't great(I'm actually playing through it now, it's not really that bad, and I believe recent patches have fixed the visual downgrade at least partially) but it's reception was so tepid and mediocre due to a mediocre launch that it shot itself in the foot. A sequel isn't the worst idea ever because at the heart of Watch Dogs was a pretty interesting game play loop using "hacking" and I'd actually really like to see that kind of real world/digital playground thematic taken to the next level. But fuck, I do not trust Ubisoft anymore.

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;47633347]I believe he's speaking quite sarcastically. Watch Dogs wasn't terrible, it certainly wasn't great(I'm actually playing through it now, it's not really that bad, and I believe recent patches have fixed the visual downgrade at least partially) but it's reception was so tepid and mediocre due to a mediocre launch that it shot itself in the foot. A sequel isn't the worst idea ever because at the heart of Watch Dogs was a pretty interesting game play loop using "hacking" and I'd actually really like to see that kind of real world/digital playground thematic taken to the next level. But fuck, I do not trust Ubisoft anymore.[/QUOTE] I like to think of Watch Dogs as Assasssin's Creed 1: the first game was interesting, but had way too many mistakes that made it not be as enjoyable as it should; the second game fixed that for Assassin's Creed in every single way, and I think the same could happen to Watch Dogs. I remember a rumor that it would have a more Ezio-like protagonist since many people hated Aiden, so there's one step in the right direction.

Watch all people expecting game to be failure but it actually turns out 11/10 this time Then everyone rush to buy limited editions at the last moments :v:

They got a lot of criticism about the game so the sequel will most likely be good.

Ubisoft tend to do that I guess, break new ground with a new game but it has a lukewarm reception and they make a second game that is a pretty big success.

Given how much improved between the first two Assassins creed games, I'll try to keep my faith in the devs. Atleast until a review.

[QUOTE=usaokay;47633676]It was sort of like Far Cry 3 in third-person and with hacking.[/QUOTE] Would you like a position on the Ubisoft exec board of directors?

it was worth the 3 dollars i liked the shooting

I actually liked the gameplay, but the story was shit, and it was shit technically, ran like absolute dogshit.

[QUOTE=nikomo;47634120]I actually liked the gameplay, but the story was shit, and it was shit technically, ran like absolute dogshit.[/QUOTE] that might have been the case on launch but at least now it's pretty good on that end lets just hope they learn from that.

I liked Aiden as a character but it just started to feel repetitive gameplay wise towards the end and the downgrade of the graphics was a load of bullshit.

i got watch_Dogs with my graphics card a while back. i still have not installed it yet. Is it worth it?

[QUOTE=nikomo;47634120]I actually liked the gameplay, but the story was shit, and it was shit technically, ran like absolute dogshit.[/QUOTE] That's a lot of shit

I thought watch dogs was alright. Didn't really live up to expectations though. I'm excited for a sequel though. I feel like the original was the "Assassin's Creed 1" of the franchise.

[QUOTE=ashrobhoy;47634185]i got watch_Dogs with my graphics card a while back. i still have not installed it yet. Is it worth it?[/QUOTE] yeah give it a play. it's a decent game and it's certainly better now than at launch, it's got some interesting concepts for gameplay, but it's overall a little under polished and suffers from Ubisofts general design philosophy of "All our games must be the same", utilizing Assassins Creeds style puzzles to unlock regions, Far Cry style camp/hide outs to dispose of and other such stuff. Drivings stiff and arcadey but you'll get used to it. I enjoyed it and if you got it for free it's going to be an enjoyable playthrough.

I'm currently playing Watch_Dogs now on the Xbox One and I'm enjoying it so far. Yeah, it's lacking polish and perhaps gameplay wise it could use a little more depth for free roaming the city but really it's got a solid base to work off of. As many have said, AC1 was a test bed for the AC series so Watch_Dogs could be the same. Fingers crossed they learn from their mistakes and make a successful sequel.

They just really should have gone all the way and made it full on cyberpunk.

The bugs were the only good part of the game imo [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/8GUgu4H.png[/IMG]

"Game of the Year."

I kinda liked Watch Dogs, it had some interesting ideas and missions.

The segments where you had to avoid the cops magic hacker detectors were all hilariously stacked against you. Saints Row's escort missions weren't even that bad in comparison. I really hope they improve that. I didn't get far enough in the story to get a proper idea of how well written it was (but the first bits weren't exactly great works), but the gameplay was passable (again, except for the fucking escape segments).

the escape segments were fun IMO. They gave you, or forced you, to use all the neat abilities over the course of the game

[QUOTE=usaokay;47633802]I'll [B]RUN THIS SHIT INTO THE GROUND.[/B][/QUOTE] With ideas like "It's sort of like Far Cry 3 but with x" then you'll probably make the company billions.

That E3 showing looks like a tech demo to me. don't all tech demos look amazing compared to the game they're for?