Watch_Dogs is quite simply AMAZING!!!

Brownie80

New member
Jan 27, 2014
996
0
0
Phoenixmgs said:
Drunken_step_dad said:
WATCH_DOGS, to me, is quite simply the biggest disappointment I ever seen. Not just due to what they promised us originally but even just as a open world game. It's missing things like being able to blind fire or fire from cover without having to aim in case an enemy flanks you. And the hacking is pretty lame, barley a step up from the hacking in Deus Ex Revolution, adding only a handful of new ideas. The controls feel just awful, especially while driving, with the controller layouts feeling a bit weird at times. And if you want to make the comparison to GTA V then your going to be kidding yourself by saying this game has better graphics or is more detailed, it can hardly even compare to GTA 4.

As much as I have played so far, being about 15%, I feel like I've been only having fun maybe 20% of all that time I played. I can see playing thru once but after that it's in the dust. They better come back with what we we're promised in 2, which with Ubisoft's record we can expect in about 1 year.
Are you talking about the PS4 version of Watch Dogs or the PS3/360 version? Because graphically, Watch Dogs on PS4 looks way better than GTAV, the NPCs look better than GTAV's main characters.

Why the hell do you want blindfire? It's useless 99.9% of the time due to all the accuracy penalties (besides for that bullshit auto-aim blindfire in Uncharted). Even if an enemy is super close, you still ADS fire for better aim as you still need to center the camera on the enemy regardless if you're using blindfire or not so I never got the point of using blindfire in TPSs. In the following video, you see how I always ADS fire even when the enemy is really close to me like at 3:50 and 6:30 (even with a sniper rifle):
I disagree. GTA V on PS3 looks way better than Watch Dogs on PS4. There is just more variety in the environment and the NPCs. Los Santos is just more varied than Chicago which is a very flat city with few differences.
 

Phoenixmgs_v1legacy

Muse of Fate
Sep 1, 2010
4,691
0
0
Brownie80 said:
I disagree. GTA V on PS3 looks way better than Watch Dogs on PS4. There is just more variety in the environment and the NPCs. Los Santos is just more varied than Chicago which is a very flat city with few differences.
Are you talking about aesthetics or graphics? Because Watch Dogs is way better looking than any PS3 sandbox game, it's not even close. It's like the people that said such-and-such PS3 game had PS2 graphics, every PS3 game looks so much better than any PS2 game, same thing with PS4 as well.
 

josemlopes

New member
Jun 9, 2008
3,950
0
0
Phoenixmgs said:
Brownie80 said:
I disagree. GTA V on PS3 looks way better than Watch Dogs on PS4. There is just more variety in the environment and the NPCs. Los Santos is just more varied than Chicago which is a very flat city with few differences.
Are you talking about aesthetics or graphics? Because Watch Dogs is way better looking than any PS3 sandbox game, it's not even close. It's like the people that said such-and-such PS3 game had PS2 graphics, every PS3 game looks so much better than any PS2 game, same thing with PS4 as well.
Nice way of dealing with absolutes, it isnt as if games like Turning Point or Knack exist.
 

Brownie80

New member
Jan 27, 2014
996
0
0
Phoenixmgs said:
Brownie80 said:
I disagree. GTA V on PS3 looks way better than Watch Dogs on PS4. There is just more variety in the environment and the NPCs. Los Santos is just more varied than Chicago which is a very flat city with few differences.
Are you talking about aesthetics or graphics? Because Watch Dogs is way better looking than any PS3 sandbox game, it's not even close. It's like the people that said such-and-such PS3 game had PS2 graphics, every PS3 game looks so much better than any PS2 game, same thing with PS4 as well.
"It's no contest." Sorry but what is no contest is that GTA V blows Watch Dogs out of the water and just because it's on better hardware doesn't mean it looks better.





See the NPCs doing something other than looking on their phone all the time? And the various side occurrences like the third picture and this gem:

Here's Watch Dogs:


Half of the NPCs are doing the same thing.

And about that PS3 thing:


Kind of a small difference, isn't it? Other than it being a little shinier?
 

EternallyBored

Terminally Apathetic
Jun 17, 2013
1,434
0
0
So, I beat the game last night, main missions were shorter than I thought they'd be, but I got through it and managed to complete most of the side missions, collectibles (the only one I'm missing are those ctOS boxes that you scan on a timer for the audio files).

That said, I still think the game shares a circumstantial similarity with the original Assassin's Creed, some big flaws, and questionable gameplay choices, and there is definitely some room for improvement, but there's a real chance at getting a glimpse of something special when all its elements come together, and I can see a true current gen sequel being a big hit, they are definitely going to need to do a massive overhaul or scrap the current graphics engine though, especially if they try another PC port.

The story is still nothing to write home about, and after all the conspiracy and hinting at how sinister ctOS really is, including finding dozens of audio files in the side missions about just how pervasive everything is, the protagonists just kind of gloss over it beyond a quick scene where one character implies that that particular program needs to be deleted. The story then quickly returns to the generic revenge plot it stuck with throughout the game, and in the end:

There's an interesting sort of mundane happenstance that plays out when you find out how Aiden's niece died. It's a letdown as far as the big conspiracy being set up by the audio logs goes, but the locality of it, that it didn't jump to secret national or international level conspiracy stuff, is kind of interesting in that the whole reason for ctOS being circumvented isn't some grand conspiracy from the start, but that it was corrupted by a sort of old-fashioned evil when an old mob boss with political connections gets a hold of it.

Even the main character expresses disappointment that the video that set into motion the events of the game and killed his niece wasn't some grand conspiracy meant to topple governments, it was a mob bosses' blackmail for the mayor of Chicago. It's not a terrible element, but it was disappointing that the game flat-out tells you the ctOS can be used to basically mind control people and the protagonists still treat it like its some mysterious program that nobody understands the implications of, then kind of halfheartedly sets up Bellwether to be an obvious sequel hook for the even more obvious sequel.

The final chapter that pits you against your old partner who has complete control of the city, is a massively chaotic mission that has a lot of fun and atmosphere once you get the hang of the (still clunky) driving mechanics and physics, although it's a bit on the easy side once you know what's going on. The motivations for Damien to try and cripple the city are kind of silly and melodramatic, and the final encounter with Quinn in the previous chapter felt much more weighty and better set up. Damien just comes off like an excuse to include a final boss that can actually hack things.

It's a shame that the game throws so few rival hackers at you, because that tended to be when the game was really shining, when you were dodging police, and environmental traps going off, without that, the chases often just descended into glorified QTE's as you drive around eliminating pursuers with a single button press. The environmental hazards are pretty fun the first few times, but vanilla chases get old when your battery life the biggest limiter to being able to take out enemies, and sometimes when your looking back, you can see them teleport into environmental hazards because nailing that QTE is pretty much guaranteed success.

The side missions are plentiful, but can be hit or miss. A massive chunk of side missions can be boiled down into finding boxes to hack, either on a timer, or by following a line down the street. The gang hideouts and convoy are probably the best of the side missions and will often allow a fairly diverse approach to solving them, sometime decending into a high speed chase if you botch taking out the target. Blackout is still massively overpowered for stealth though, I managed to do multiple gang hideouts by just using blackout at night and then running straight to the target, knocking him out, then running out of the restricted zone, all before the lights come on again.

Weapon progression is basically useless, Ubisoft has always seemed to have trouble making money useful in Assassin's creed games, and it still seems to hold true here. It's absurdly easy to get, and you can pretty much buy all the best guns in the game within the first couple of hours of gameplay, side missions also have a tendency to have crummy rewards (cars that don't have anything special about them, or guns that are often worse than what you can buy in a store, or are copies of guns you can buy). GTA has the same issue, but it's disappointing to see another game where a lot of the side activities have very little incentive to complete them, especially when the more boring ones have basically no reward.

So overall, while I disagree that the game is "AMAZING", I do think the game was worth the $60 I paid for it, and I'm glad I got a fun 20 hours or so out of it, and will probably get some more in the future with the multiplayer, kind of wish it was easier to get people to invade my game though, the hide and seek mode is probably my favorite, and it's always fun to mess with invaders by camping in spots with nowhere to hide.
 

evenest

New member
Dec 5, 2009
167
0
0
I am not happy with this game at all. I can't get past the omniprescient police in the SECOND MISSION of the game. As such, the rest of the game is denied to me. Up until that roadblock, I found that the gun play was mediocre and being able to escape from police and/or other bad-guys to be near impossible. It has the typical ubisoft obscurity on how to complete a mission with a heavy helping of auto-mission-fail that contains NO FEEDBACK on how to correct whatever it was that I did wrong.

While it is a nice looking game, it doesn't seem any nicer looking than games from the previous generation. I did like the camera hacking stuff.

Overall, I am disappointed in it and regret spending $60 and all those weeks of anticipation on it.
 

Luca72

New member
Dec 6, 2011
527
0
0
The problem with Watch Dogs is that it draws an immediate comparison with other sandbox driving games at all. You know why? Because it's almost identical. They could have made a game where you play as a fairly vulnerable hacker who has to use clever solutions to get through missions (like Gunpoint, where the "hacking" is something dynamic).

Instead they just made another one. You know what I mean by another one - another game with regenerating health, third person cover-shooting, bullet time, instant take-downs, and context-sensitive commands with little dynamic application. These games are nearly interchangeable, with a synthetic flavor-of-the-week that amounts to little other than visual flair.

Saying Watch Dogs sucks is ridiculous. Saying it's amazing is naive. And marketing it as ground-breaking and putting nearly $70M US into what will ultimately be another mediocre action game is disappointing for the industry as a whole.
 

Artina89

New member
Oct 27, 2008
3,624
0
0
I managed to purchase the game for £30 on the day it was released and I am having so much fun with it, I find myself just exploring the world and doing all the side quests and collectibles. I sat down meaning to play it for an hour and I managed to tear myself away from it about 5 hours later and that is only because I remembered that I was meant to have lunch about 2 hours previously. It is by no means "The best game ever" but I find it a hell of a lot of fun and for me that is what playing videogames is all about.
 

Phoenixmgs_v1legacy

Muse of Fate
Sep 1, 2010
4,691
0
0
josemlopes said:
Nice way of dealing with absolutes, it isnt as if games like Turning Point or Knack exist.
I'm mainly talking about AAA games with decent to good budgets. I'm willing to bet that Knack is pushing more polygons while running at a higher resolution than say Ratchet and Clank on PS3. I saw a screenshot of Turning Point; yeah, it doesn't look very good but the resolution and polygons on screen could still be higher than a PS2 game. The fucking NPCs in Watch Dogs have more detail than GTAV's main characters.

Laughing Man said:
Okay, everything above that statement is bull of the highest order, I would even go as fr as to say it is pure troll bait but I am willing to bite on this last statement, so please for the good of the gaming nation tell us EXACTLY what advances this game has made to the open world free roam gaming genre?
World immersion (for a sandbox game) and density of the world itself. So many sandboxes go for big and sacrifice detail, I quit GTA after playing San Andreas because of that.

EternallyBored said:
That said, I still think the game shares a circumstantial similarity with the original Assassin's Creed, some big flaws, and questionable gameplay choices, and there is definitely some room for improvement, but there's a real chance at getting a glimpse of something special when all its elements come together, and I can see a true current gen sequel being a big hit, they are definitely going to need to do a massive overhaul or scrap the current graphics engine though, especially if they try another PC port.

The side missions are plentiful, but can be hit or miss. A massive chunk of side missions can be boiled down into finding boxes to hack, either on a timer, or by following a line down the street. The gang hideouts and convoy are probably the best of the side missions and will often allow a fairly diverse approach to solving them, sometime decending into a high speed chase if you botch taking out the target. Blackout is still massively overpowered for stealth though, I managed to do multiple gang hideouts by just using blackout at night and then running straight to the target, knocking him out, then running out of the restricted zone, all before the lights come on again.

So overall, while I disagree that the game is "AMAZING", I do think the game was worth the $60 I paid for it, and I'm glad I got a fun 20 hours or so out of it, and will probably get some more in the future with the multiplayer, kind of wish it was easier to get people to invade my game though, the hide and seek mode is probably my favorite, and it's always fun to mess with invaders by camping in spots with nowhere to hide.
The 1st Assassin's Creed is the best IMO because it tried to have core gameplay to it, it was basically Hitman-lite but it had a core to it.

Side missions in these games are always hit and miss.

Glad you liked it.

evenest said:
I am not happy with this game at all. I can't get past the omniprescient police in the SECOND MISSION of the game. As such, the rest of the game is denied to me. Up until that roadblock, I found that the gun play was mediocre and being able to escape from police and/or other bad-guys to be near impossible. It has the typical ubisoft obscurity on how to complete a mission with a heavy helping of auto-mission-fail that contains NO FEEDBACK on how to correct whatever it was that I did wrong.

While it is a nice looking game, it doesn't seem any nicer looking than games from the previous generation. I did like the camera hacking stuff.

Overall, I am disappointed in it and regret spending $60 and all those weeks of anticipation on it.
The police are simple to get away from, you can hide in your car for example.

Luca72 said:
The problem with Watch Dogs is that it draws an immediate comparison with other sandbox driving games at all. You know why? Because it's almost identical. They could have made a game where you play as a fairly vulnerable hacker who has to use clever solutions to get through missions (like Gunpoint, where the "hacking" is something dynamic).

Instead they just made another one. You know what I mean by another one - another game with regenerating health, third person cover-shooting, bullet time, instant take-downs, and context-sensitive commands with little dynamic application. These games are nearly interchangeable, with a synthetic flavor-of-the-week that amounts to little other than visual flair.

Saying Watch Dogs sucks is ridiculous. Saying it's amazing is naive. And marketing it as ground-breaking and putting nearly $70M US into what will ultimately be another mediocre action game is disappointing for the industry as a whole.
The game systems in Watch Dogs are as dynamics as you are creative. You can play it like a standard cover shooter if you want to, that doesn't mean it's not dynamic.

Brownie80 said:
See the NPCs doing something other than looking on their phone all the time? And the various side occurrences...
See the NPCs doing something other than looking on their phone all the time? And the various side occurrences that happen all fucking video, which is just a straight stream of walking down a random street...

 

Brownie80

New member
Jan 27, 2014
996
0
0
Phoenixmgs said:
josemlopes said:
Nice way of dealing with absolutes, it isnt as if games like Turning Point or Knack exist.
I'm mainly talking about AAA games with decent to good budgets. I'm willing to bet that Knack is pushing more polygons while running at a higher resolution than say Ratchet and Clank on PS3. I saw a screenshot of Turning Point; yeah, it doesn't look very good but the resolution and polygons on screen could still be higher than a PS2 game. The fucking NPCs in Watch Dogs have more detail than GTAV's main characters.

Laughing Man said:
Okay, everything above that statement is bull of the highest order, I would even go as fr as to say it is pure troll bait but I am willing to bite on this last statement, so please for the good of the gaming nation tell us EXACTLY what advances this game has made to the open world free roam gaming genre?
World immersion (for a sandbox game) and density of the world itself. So many sandboxes go for big and sacrifice detail, I quit GTA after playing San Andreas because of that.

EternallyBored said:
That said, I still think the game shares a circumstantial similarity with the original Assassin's Creed, some big flaws, and questionable gameplay choices, and there is definitely some room for improvement, but there's a real chance at getting a glimpse of something special when all its elements come together, and I can see a true current gen sequel being a big hit, they are definitely going to need to do a massive overhaul or scrap the current graphics engine though, especially if they try another PC port.

The side missions are plentiful, but can be hit or miss. A massive chunk of side missions can be boiled down into finding boxes to hack, either on a timer, or by following a line down the street. The gang hideouts and convoy are probably the best of the side missions and will often allow a fairly diverse approach to solving them, sometime decending into a high speed chase if you botch taking out the target. Blackout is still massively overpowered for stealth though, I managed to do multiple gang hideouts by just using blackout at night and then running straight to the target, knocking him out, then running out of the restricted zone, all before the lights come on again.

So overall, while I disagree that the game is "AMAZING", I do think the game was worth the $60 I paid for it, and I'm glad I got a fun 20 hours or so out of it, and will probably get some more in the future with the multiplayer, kind of wish it was easier to get people to invade my game though, the hide and seek mode is probably my favorite, and it's always fun to mess with invaders by camping in spots with nowhere to hide.
The 1st Assassin's Creed is the best IMO because it tried to have core gameplay to it, it was basically Hitman-lite but it had a core to it.

Side missions in these games are always hit and miss.

Glad you liked it.

evenest said:
I am not happy with this game at all. I can't get past the omniprescient police in the SECOND MISSION of the game. As such, the rest of the game is denied to me. Up until that roadblock, I found that the gun play was mediocre and being able to escape from police and/or other bad-guys to be near impossible. It has the typical ubisoft obscurity on how to complete a mission with a heavy helping of auto-mission-fail that contains NO FEEDBACK on how to correct whatever it was that I did wrong.

While it is a nice looking game, it doesn't seem any nicer looking than games from the previous generation. I did like the camera hacking stuff.

Overall, I am disappointed in it and regret spending $60 and all those weeks of anticipation on it.
The police are simple to get away from, you can hide in your car for example.

Luca72 said:
The problem with Watch Dogs is that it draws an immediate comparison with other sandbox driving games at all. You know why? Because it's almost identical. They could have made a game where you play as a fairly vulnerable hacker who has to use clever solutions to get through missions (like Gunpoint, where the "hacking" is something dynamic).

Instead they just made another one. You know what I mean by another one - another game with regenerating health, third person cover-shooting, bullet time, instant take-downs, and context-sensitive commands with little dynamic application. These games are nearly interchangeable, with a synthetic flavor-of-the-week that amounts to little other than visual flair.

Saying Watch Dogs sucks is ridiculous. Saying it's amazing is naive. And marketing it as ground-breaking and putting nearly $70M US into what will ultimately be another mediocre action game is disappointing for the industry as a whole.
The game systems in Watch Dogs are as dynamics as you are creative. You can play it like a standard cover shooter if you want to, that doesn't mean it's not dynamic.

Brownie80 said:
See the NPCs doing something other than looking on their phone all the time? And the various side occurrences...
See the NPCs doing something other than looking on their phone all the time? And the various side occurrences that happen all fucking video, which is just a straight stream of walking down a random street...

Ah yes, the NPCs doing the same thing as the ones in GTA IV, six years ago. Completely ignoring GTA V had more variety than any of that. The NPCs in Watch Dogs have less detail than the then the ones in Saint's Row 2.
 

Phoenixmgs_v1legacy

Muse of Fate
Sep 1, 2010
4,691
0
0
Brownie80 said:
Ah yes, the NPCs doing the same thing as the ones in GTA IV, six years ago. Completely ignoring GTA V had more variety than any of that. The NPCs in Watch Dogs have less detail than the then the ones in Saint's Row 2.
There's plenty of stuff you probably missed like the NPC turning around because he heard tires squealing. And, I'm done with you if you actually think Saint's Row 2's NPCs have more detail.
 

EternallyBored

Terminally Apathetic
Jun 17, 2013
1,434
0
0
Brownie80 said:
Ah yes, the NPCs doing the same thing as the ones in GTA IV, six years ago. Completely ignoring GTA V had more variety than any of that. The NPCs in Watch Dogs have less detail than the then the ones in Saint's Row 2.
While GTA 5 had a ton of different NPC actions, I don't remember Saint's row 2 being that special in terms of NPCs, if anything, I'm pretty sure that game was fairly flat as far as NPC diversity goes, I remember playing it and GTA4 around the same time and thinking that the NPCs blew Saint's row out of the water, I preferred saint's row 2's minigames, and the driving was more solid than GTA 4 for me, but I don't think NPCs were anything special or unique, and really not at all as good as GTA 5 or Watch Dogs.

Unless of course, you were using hyperbole for emphasis sake, in which case ignore my rambling post above.
 

Brownie80

New member
Jan 27, 2014
996
0
0
Phoenixmgs said:
Brownie80 said:
Ah yes, the NPCs doing the same thing as the ones in GTA IV, six years ago. Completely ignoring GTA V had more variety than any of that. The NPCs in Watch Dogs have less detail than the then the ones in Saint's Row 2.
There's plenty of stuff you probably missed like the NPC turning around because he heard tires squealing. And, I'm done with you if you actually think Saint's Row 2's NPCs have more detail.
An NPC turning around because a car was near? My gosh! What sorcery is this? And FYI I am done with you if you thought I was being serious. Like really I thought I couldn't make it more obvious. However SR2's NPCs appearances and the uniqueness of those appearances were amazing. Also you completely ignored my points about GTA V.
 

FrozenCones

New member
Dec 31, 2009
291
0
0
Zakarath said:
I'm having a lot of fun playing it almost entirely nonviolently, apart from occasional beatdowns. Used hacking to ghost most of the missions so far, using distractions and cameras to get line of sight on objectives. I really like the toolkit it gives you for that, and makes the game a much more challenging and engaging experience, when murdering everyone instead would be expedient but make me feel bad, as the profiler shows you that a lot of them aren't really that bad people.
This is the only way I would play it. One thing I love about Deus Ex: HR was the stealth, hacking and non lethal takedowns. I have high hopes that the stealth element is quite similar in this game.
 

Phoenixmgs_v1legacy

Muse of Fate
Sep 1, 2010
4,691
0
0
Brownie80 said:
An NPC turning around because a car was near? My gosh! What sorcery is this? And FYI I am done with you if you thought I was being serious. Like really I thought I couldn't make it more obvious. However SR2's NPCs appearances and the uniqueness of those appearances were amazing. Also you completely ignored my points about GTA V.
Immersion is all about the subtleties. I never played Saint's Row because I hate almost all sandbox games. The only point you made about GTAV was some gif of NPCs having a conversation, which is ordinary in Watch Dogs. I have no clue about what point you were trying to make. You act like GTAV is better because there's a UFO and FBI agents.
 

Brownie80

New member
Jan 27, 2014
996
0
0
Phoenixmgs said:
Brownie80 said:
An NPC turning around because a car was near? My gosh! What sorcery is this? And FYI I am done with you if you thought I was being serious. Like really I thought I couldn't make it more obvious. However SR2's NPCs appearances and the uniqueness of those appearances were amazing. Also you completely ignored my points about GTA V.
Immersion is all about the subtleties. I never played Saint's Row because I hate almost all sandbox games. The only point you made about GTAV was some gif of NPCs having a conversation, which is ordinary in Watch Dogs. I have no clue about what point you were trying to make. You act like GTAV is better because there's a UFO and FBI agents.
What I'm saying is that GTA V has more subtleties than Watch Dogs. GTA V has way more attention to detail.
 

Phoenixmgs_v1legacy

Muse of Fate
Sep 1, 2010
4,691
0
0
Brownie80 said:
Phoenixmgs said:
Brownie80 said:
An NPC turning around because a car was near? My gosh! What sorcery is this? And FYI I am done with you if you thought I was being serious. Like really I thought I couldn't make it more obvious. However SR2's NPCs appearances and the uniqueness of those appearances were amazing. Also you completely ignored my points about GTA V.
Immersion is all about the subtleties. I never played Saint's Row because I hate almost all sandbox games. The only point you made about GTAV was some gif of NPCs having a conversation, which is ordinary in Watch Dogs. I have no clue about what point you were trying to make. You act like GTAV is better because there's a UFO and FBI agents.
What I'm saying is that GTA V has more subtleties than Watch Dogs. GTA V has way more attention to detail.
Lol, no. A UFO and MiBs is not subtle nor are NPCs having conversations. No open world game has as much detail as Watch Dogs. I may have not played GTAV but I've seen it played, most of the map is the countryside, much like how about a quarter of Vice City's map was nothing but beach.
 

devotedsniper

New member
Dec 28, 2010
752
0
0
Overall I feel it's meh. Maybe it's because the game runs badly on pc, well it runs great but has issues...

My 660TI could play it on ultra but it would stutter for no apparent reason, luckily I thought my 780 will solve this which was being delivered the next day..nope still stutters on a £400 card.

As for game play it's again meh, the driving is dreadful it doesn't feel like a car. Gun play is average and hacking is just mini games from how far i've got (which isn't very far). If this is superior to GTA as you claim I'm not looking forward to playing it when it eventually comes out on pc.

Maybe it gets better later on but consider the stutter makes the game play horribly I have no more real interest, I got so fed up with it I went and brought the new Wolfenstein which played perfectly throughout the entire campaign, haven't gone back to Watch Dogs since.
 

Brownie80

New member
Jan 27, 2014
996
0
0
Phoenixmgs said:
Brownie80 said:
Phoenixmgs said:
Brownie80 said:
An NPC turning around because a car was near? My gosh! What sorcery is this? And FYI I am done with you if you thought I was being serious. Like really I thought I couldn't make it more obvious. However SR2's NPCs appearances and the uniqueness of those appearances were amazing. Also you completely ignored my points about GTA V.
Immersion is all about the subtleties. I never played Saint's Row because I hate almost all sandbox games. The only point you made about GTAV was some gif of NPCs having a conversation, which is ordinary in Watch Dogs. I have no clue about what point you were trying to make. You act like GTAV is better because there's a UFO and FBI agents.
What I'm saying is that GTA V has more subtleties than Watch Dogs. GTA V has way more attention to detail.
Lol, no. A UFO and MiBs is not subtle nor are NPCs having conversations. No open world game has as much detail as Watch Dogs. I may have not played GTAV but I've seen it played, most of the map is the countryside, much like how about a quarter of Vice City's map was nothing but beach.
Watch Dogs is probably the least detailed sandbox I've seen. Your logic is an NOC turning around is subtle but having conversations=UFO. It's a little touch. The map is half city and part desert and Vice City was not just beach. If you play GTA V you'll know what I mean, the little touches. Watch Dogs has one-button hacking, inferior graphics, uninteresting city (I mean Chicago is mostly just flat urban areas and some parks), less side activities, inferior story, etc. You ignore that the NPCs in GTA V are more alive: They take pictures, try to fight you, and have more personality than random NPC #572 walking down a sidewalk. GTA V has Easter eggs which encourage exploring the beautiful environment and their are more things to do in it. Also, if you never played GTA V or the entire map then why are you complaining about it. You can't say the game is inferior overall if you haven't had the full experience. I am only judging Watch Dogs for certain aspects. And you should know that you're opinion isn't absolute and people think differently. You might think it's okay but I think this is a major disappointment, and you can't tell me I'm wrong any more than I can for you.
 

evenest

New member
Dec 5, 2009
167
0
0
Phoenixmgs said:
The police are simple to get away from, you can hide in your car for example.
I appreciate your offering this hint to me, but it is exactly the same as that which the game gives and doesn't help to resolve the problem I was having with the mission. I found that the police weren't so simple to get away from because no matter what the circumstances of my hiding in my car, they inevitably sniffed me out, and I failed the mission. This caused a restart to the beginning of the mission with all that wonderful dialogue repeated each time. I found it to be frustrating as the game gave zero feedback on what I was doing wrong or how I might go about solving the problem. While this isn't necessarily a bad thing in a game, it is terrible game design when the failed mission acts like a gate, blocking off future advancement in the game.

If you would like to offer more suggestions other than what the game gives me, I am eager to hear it.