• Watch Dogs Sets Record for Best Launch of a New IP in History
    119 replies, posted
[QUOTE=codemaster85;45001442]now thats just wrong, each assassins creed had a different studio working on a sequel. so four years were done on each game.[/QUOTE] They're still yearly releases
[QUOTE=codemaster85;45001450]if youre playing watchdogs on console to begin with then youre not really getting the full game since the level of detail is extremely lower and theres much less life on the streets compared to PC.[/QUOTE] so as far as next gen consoles go, a next gen console game fails to be a next gen console game in any significant way?
[QUOTE=codemaster85;45001450]if youre playing watchdogs on console to begin with then youre not really getting the full game since the level of detail is extremely lower and theres much less life on the streets compared to PC.[/QUOTE] That sounds like something you'd say to diss the game, not defend it.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;45001312]well you are dumbing anyone that doesn't think it's an awesome game[/quote] I dumb rate more than I should, it's a filthy habit. [QUOTE]seriously, what's good about the story? what's good about insta fail missions like they still haven't learned what we hate most about Assassins Creed? What's good about on screen pop in? [/QUOTE] I found the story to be okay at best, not everyone has a problem with "insta fail" mission, the only time they are like that in WD is during a dynamic events like random crimes. If you spook the target before he commits the crime it's game over. What good about screen pop in? Nothing is good about any performance issues. It's safe to assume a patch will fix the other issues. [quote]But this game is an example of how the industry is constantly trying to lie to you and sell you on things that aren't real.[/QUOTE] I got exactly what was advertised when I purchased Watch Dogs. How was I lied to? And before you say E3 2012 visuals.. [QUOTE][QUOTE=Delta616;44998653]Did you look at any media released over the past year? It looks exactly as it's been marketed. 2 year old E3 demos are not an accurate representation of final products, and the game looks damn close. People need to look at it from a logical perspective. Perhaps Watch Dogs was intended to look like that, but they sacrificed those extra effects for stability.[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]
That really isn't saying much. How long has it been since we had a new IP? :v:
[QUOTE=Delta616;45001470]I dumb rate more than I should, it's a filthy habit. I found the story to be okay at best, not everyone has a problem with "insta fail" mission, the only time they are like that in WD is during a dynamic events like random crimes. If you spook the target before he commits the crime it's game over. What good about screen pop in? Nothing is good about any performance issues. It's safe to assume a patch will fix the other issues. I got exactly what was advertised when I purchased Watch Dogs. How was I lied to? And before you say E3 2012 visuals..[/QUOTE] the game was sold on being a next gen visual title. Regardless of how nice it does look(it does look nice) it doesn't push lighting, shadows, wind, physics, dust, smoke, fog, at all like they said they would. you can say i'm dumb or whatever for buying into that, go ahead, do it, I know you want to, but the industry does that. They like to make elaborate mock ups and then sell us on them. Then they don't deliver them. You can personally be okay with that. You can say that's fine, you don't care, you got what you were promised, but you're defending an industry that makes billions of dollars, and allowing them to get away with selling you on one thing and letting you go home with another. Yeah, that's what we need more of.
[QUOTE=Delta616;44998653]Did you look at any media released over the past year? It looks exactly as it's been marketed. 2 year old E3 demos are not an accurate representation of final products, and the game looks damn close. People need to look at it from a logical perspective. Perhaps Watch Dogs was intended to look like that, but they sacrificed those extra effects for stability.[/QUOTE] The game is real stable right right now, isn't it?
[QUOTE=Solo Wing;45001480]That really isn't saying much. How long has it been since we had a new IP? :v:[/QUOTE] It means even less when you realize the game isn't actually a new IP, it's part of assassin's creed.
[QUOTE=Solo Wing;45001480]That really isn't saying much. How long has it been since we had a new IP? :v:[/QUOTE] This is actually a legitimate point. I also can't think of any games that have released recently besides Watch_Dogs, so most of the focus was around this. Really good timing sales wise.
Doesn't seem too bad. Hopefully this is one of those cases where the first game of the franchise lays the messy framework for a truly great sequel. I think that could very well be the case because the main issues in this game don't seem to be with the core gameplay. It seems like all the problems are in the small details and it's just super, super unpolished.
[QUOTE=Meller Yeller;45001509]Doesn't seem too bad. Hopefully this is one of those cases where the first game of the franchise lays the messy framework for a truly great sequel. I think that could very well be the case because the main issues in this game don't seem to be with the core gameplay. It seems like all the problems are in the small details and it's just super, super unpolished.[/QUOTE] The core gameplay is boring as shit. Unless they completely revamp the hacking then sequels will have the same boring feel to it. Literally everything hacking related is done by holding one key.
[QUOTE=Ganerumo;45001491]It means even less when you realize the game isn't actually a new IP, it's part of assassin's creed.[/QUOTE] that's not how IP's work that's like saying Portal and Half-Life are the same IP but they're not
[QUOTE=Ganerumo;45001464]That sounds like something you'd say to diss the game, not defend it.[/QUOTE] im saying consoles in general are really shitty with performance and pop in anyway like most high system requirement games. look at crysis 2 on xbox and PS3. both looked fucking terrible with shitty frame rates. And people who sit here and compare it to GTA are a joke because this is ubisoft's first real open world sandbox game that isnt separated by load screens in a urban. Not to mention although they had the same dev time as GTA5, they also had to make a whole new engine for vehicle handling which i still don't understand why people are saying its sluggish unless you're playing with KB+M. and most of all, they tried to port it to PC, R* hasn't made a PC port since Max Payne 3 and don't really show much love at all to their pc fanbase. Servers were fucked up at launch but honestly how in the fuck do you even prepare for millions logging onto servers all at once, and have been fine so far with very few outages. The game is rough around the edges but holy shit its expected when its their first attempt at this kind of genre. To say the game is complete shit is an massive overreaction since there is plenty of fun in the game to keep you busy and distracted from the main missions. If you seriously just wait for the sequel I bet it can easily be a well polished game just like AC1 was to AC2/brotherhood.
The cover system is literal shit. When I start aiming (Right Mouse) while behind cover I expect the game to allow my character to stand up so it can shoot over my cover...
[QUOTE=Ganerumo;45001491]It means even less when you realize the game isn't actually a new IP, it's part of assassin's creed.[/QUOTE] Ubisoft's current flagship games take place in the same universe, that doesn't make them the same IP. [editline]4th June 2014[/editline] After playing 30 mins with M/KB I now understand the gripe with the cover system with some players.
[QUOTE=Stents*;45001601]The cover system is literal shit. When I start aiming (Right Mouse) while behind cover I expect the game to allow my character to stand up so it can shoot over my cover...[/QUOTE] It does? Maybe I'm missing something here.
[QUOTE=Awesomecaek;44998328]Direct proof that the gaming scene will throw ridiculous amount of money at a literal sack of shit if it gets enough sugarcoating.[/QUOTE] What is it with gamers and hyperbole?
I can understand if people are a bit let-down because they had high expectations, but I think it's a bit far to be calling it 'shit'. I've been having a great time with the game so far.
[QUOTE=Overwatch 7;45001675]I can understand if people are a bit let-down because they had high expectations, but I think it's a bit far to be calling it 'shit'. I've been having a great time with the game so far.[/QUOTE] Aside from stuttering issues, this.
Having played it for about 5 hours, I think it'll be like Assassins Creed. The first was good, as is this. But it'll take a sequel to really perfect the formula. And then it gets run into the ground, I believe in you Ubisoft.
[QUOTE=Delta616;45001733]Aside from stuttering issues, this.[/QUOTE] It's a sack of shit. Doesn't look anything like the pre-release content, runs like shit, full of bugs and lacks game content. You got scammed and you enjoyed it too.
[QUOTE=cyclocius;45001768]Having played it for about 5 hours, I think it'll be like Assassins Creed. The first was good, as is this. But it'll take a sequel to really perfect the formula. And then it gets run into the ground, I believe in you Ubisoft.[/QUOTE] [img]http://s14.postimg.org/f0ltfk25b/ubisoft.jpg[/img] [I]That's a good consumer, keep buying our games and we'll get it right eventually![/I]
Never spend more than 20 dollars on a computer game
[QUOTE=reedbo;45001827]You got scammed and you enjoyed it too.[/QUOTE] Do you realize how sad that sounds? 'Stop having fun! You can't be having fun because I don't like it!' [QUOTE=MoonlessNight;45001830][I]That's a good consumer, keep buying our games and we'll get it right eventually![/I][/QUOTE] Ubisoft is hardly the first company to do better on sequels than the start of a new IP. If the first game in a franchise is fun but flawed, and you feel like you got your money's worth, what's wrong with that? I haven't played Watch Dogs so can't comment but there are a [i]lot[/i] of comments in this thread along the lines of 'it's bad so nobody can enjoy it because I was personally disappointed'.
[QUOTE=codemaster85;45001596]i If you seriously just wait for the sequel I bet it can easily be a well polished game just like AC1 was to AC2/brotherhood.[/QUOTE] But that's fucking moronic. They should get it right or not release it as a fully-fledged game at $70. Go for broke or go home.
[QUOTE=reedbo;45001827]It's a sack of shit. Doesn't look anything like the pre-release content, runs like shit, full of bugs and lacks game content. You got scammed and you enjoyed it too.[/QUOTE] Looks just like the media shown off over the past year, doesn't run like shit aside from the stuttering, all open world games are full of bugs upon release, I've experienced nothing but minor bug that don't effect gameplay. Lacks content? 38 Main missions 93 side missions, 10 different collectible gametypes, [B]38 cash runs (my favorite thing about the game),[/B] make your own cash runs, several other mini games, and 5 MP gamemodes. Who are you to tell me I get scammed? I paid 45 dollars for the digital deluxe edition and another 10 for the season pass. It's the most fun I've had in an open world game on the PC in ages. Once the lack of unified memory is patched the game won't run like shit for everyone.
I thought it was great, I've completed the story and while the plot was evidently cheap, it was enjoyable enough and the gameplay was great. I think some people might be overrreacting.
[QUOTE=Delta616;45000986]A game that just came out with performance issues?! Let them release a stability patch. Dev/QA can only test so many hardware configurations for optimal stability before the game is released. Is that so? [video=youtube;ijhNIycrzBg]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ijhNIycrzBg[/video] [video=youtube;MWcqFkQLPls]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MWcqFkQLPls[/video] In video 1 I demonstated that thottling with gradual build up (Analog?) in the second one I drove around in a RWD, not so impossible now is it? Only time it proved semi difficult to control was when the game stuttered a few time in that vid. Sounds like connection issues to me, perhaps Uplay is still being wonky in your region. I've never experienced any issue with the cover system, nor it effected my performance in MP.[/QUOTE] it's hilarious that you and Ganerumo are adamantly defending or shitting on this game at any given opportunity ok we get it you like and hate the game just move on with your life jesus christ lol i mean just wow you actually made not one but two videos specifically to defend the game
[QUOTE=MoonlessNight;45001830][img]http://s14.postimg.org/f0ltfk25b/ubisoft.jpg[/img] [I]That's a good consumer, keep buying our games and we'll get it right eventually![/I][/QUOTE] Uhhh...this is how all consumer-producer relationships work. It's really fucking hard to make your product better if nobody is buying the product. Software even more so than other fields as it's still a young area and nobody has any real idea what they're doing.
Coming from someone who wasn't really paying attention to the Hype and bought it just for the hell of it, it's pretty alright from what I've played so far. I've been enjoying it a bit but it's not exactly got much depth as I would had liked and the controls (On the Xbox) could be better than what they are. Game has some nice touches though that I like although it could still have some work done, it leaves a bit to be desired. Better than GTA 5? I don't know if you can compare. GTA 5 is in desperate need for a rerelease on PC as well as PS4 and XB1 just for the extra power, and I don't know what the PS3 and 360 versions of Watch Dogs is like, I'm guessing it would have the same issues. GTA 5 might have a small edge but Mulitplayer wise, I think Watch Dogs runs away with it, although both systems aim for different goals, GTA Online failed at those Goals and Watch Dogs succeeds in doing what it was planning to do.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.