Watch_Dogs 2 may be released this year with radical changes

[TorqueS]

I actually liked the first Watch_Dogs. I didn't love it, but I liked it. It definitely had some flaws, both in gameplay and story(which was pretty lame but still entertaining enough).

The greatest flaw was the main character or rather, his personality. Aiden was too freakin vengeful.

"You killed my niece...I blow up an entire fucking city and the criminals in it...for revenge".

That and the voice acting ruined Aiden.  The voice itself wasn't bad as tone and accent but it simply did not match Aiden's character. That's my point of view. 

I'll probably replay the game during summer and pick up the sequel, I just hope Ubisoft will focus more on a better story and character building for this franchise(can we call it like that yet?).

[DarkBlade2117]

Didn't play the first one, won't play the second. Just like I've never played a single Assassins Creed game though my Step Dad owns them all.

Sorry but quite frankly I have this burning passion that I'll never buy another Ubisoft game until they dig that grave back up that they put themselves in.

[SurvivorNVL]

I liked Watch_Dogs, it wasn't up to the hype, and prettiness, but it was still okay looking, and was fun while it lasted.  Hopefully they make things more.. 3D in this game.  Protagonist was rather uneventful.  Side-characters?  Wonderful!

[Sauron]

I won't believe a word they say until we get a port report. Can't trust them after what happened with the original w_d and acu

[Commander Llama]

There were plenty of aspects of Watch_Dogs I actually enjoyed. The core concept was cool. Slightly futuristic completely IoT city and you've got a bunch of hacking software. Funville!

 

Then it tried to copy GTA a little too much by making it another city murder simulator. I'm supposed to feel sorry for this Aidan guy because his niece died in a car crash? Uhhh he killed like 100 people today. And he's gonna kill another 100 tomorrow. Innovation? Naw, they could do better.

 

Then there were the technical problems that plagued my experience. Did they fix those? They weren't fixed by the time I was 30 hours in.

 

Then there was Uplay, godfuck that's the worst online game platform I've ever seen. Even GOG Galaxy Beta is better.

 

Honestly the most innovative, and more or less useless, thing about Watch_Dogs was the Android app that let you do little car chases where the app user was The Police. Had some legit fun with friends there. I had more fun in the optional missions hunting down apocalypse robots and other nonsense then trying to feel immersed in the main component of the game.

 

What would it take for me to get Watch_Dogs 2? Geez... I guess if it won GOTY 2016 from everyone (0.01% chance), or if UPlay DRM was removed and you could buy it from your platform of choice (0.00% chance).

[christianled59]

Didn't play the first one, won't play the second. Just like I've never played a single Assassins Creed game though my Step Dad owns them all.Sorry but quite frankly I have this burning passion that I'll never buy another Ubisoft game until they dig that grave back up that they put themselves in.

If you never played them then what reason do you have to hate them? Assassins creed was a pretty good series. It's starting to deteriorate but imo assassins creed II and brotherhood were amazing.

[DarkBlade2117]

If you never played them then what reason do you have to hate them? Assassins creed was a pretty good series. It's starting to deteriorate but imo assassins creed II and brotherhood were amazing.

I watched my Step Dad play through them. Agreed, Brotherhood out of them all is the best.

[Doobeedoo]

I hope to see it without downgrades, performance issues and huge bugs this time. I mean they have time and all. I really hope we get pass some disasters in gaming that happened.

[Praesi]

Like it or not, Ubisoft is a pretty big game developer. Hate them all you want, you have every right to after a lot of their actions. However, you should not criticize a company for trying to do what everyone wants. Everyone wanted them to iron out bugs and make better games. Here they are, telling us they are trying that and you guys rip them a new one as if they just told us they would still release a pile of shit. In my opinion, that's fucking retarded.

Ubisoft are fucking Liars. Defending them is retarded.

[Diederik_Gr]

Yay, another title with little challenge and one button hacking. Let's see how much they advertise the graphics this year, they sure blew us away with the graphics they showed last time. Right?

[Belgarathian]

Radical changes, good. 

 

I'm still only about half way through the first one after taking a much needed 12 month break from playing it. 

[samcool55]

Watch_dogs 1 was indeed on paper a good game, and apart from running like an absolute potato, the game did show some nice new things i like.

 

The reason i don't play it anymore is just because the performance is awful. If it ran better i would play it more because it's a nice game.

 

Oh well, sadly ubisoft is on the case again and probably already ruining it, again... 

[samcool55]

I wouldnt say they got away with it. Syndicate was one of the lowest selling assassins creed games, solely due to their reputation. It was actually a good game. They are trying to redeem themselves. Or else it looks that way. Im not going to criticize them for that.

Syndicate has 1 big issue imho and that's the fact it's a bit too vram hungry.

Up to this point every game ran fine on a 560ti a friend of mine has. Apart from AC:S. That game just refuses to run with 1GB vram, and i think that's the issue.

A lot of gamers don't have a lot of money to spend and don't mind turning down the graphics to get 1080p 60fps, but with AC:S you just can't get it to run properly at all...

Even unity runs better D: So yes if you have a good rig with 2GB vram or more, it's fine, if you don't, you are screwed, even if you do have the gpu power it needs.

[kuddlesworth9419]

I bought the edition with all the DLC when it first came out. I found it incredibly bland. I played through the entire game and completed it and then promptly uninstalled it. A complete waste of money. I didn't even go back to play the DLC. Waste of time more then anything. It was just so underwhelming and bland.

[MEC-777]

Meh. Played the first one a little on my friend's xb1. Wasn't impressed with the gameplay, graphics aside. Felt like a cheap GTA clone.

[bob345]

Yet not in the Silicon Valley?

that would make for a boring game. It would be mostly highway driving

[Fgtfv567]

Does Aiden Pierce move to SF or is this a new protagonist?

[christianled59]

Syndicate has 1 big issue imho and that's the fact it's a bit too vram hungry.

Up to this point every game ran fine on a 560ti a friend of mine has. Apart from AC:S. That game just refuses to run with 1GB vram, and i think that's the issue.

A lot of gamers don't have a lot of money to spend and don't mind turning down the graphics to get 1080p 60fps, but with AC:S you just can't get it to run properly at all...

Even unity runs better D: So yes if you have a good rig with 2GB vram or more, it's fine, if you don't, you are screwed, even if you do have the gpu power it needs.

Thats hardly ubisoft's fault. As games become more demanding, more vram is expected. Larger textures and assets need to be rendered at a time. Syndicate had a ton of polygons considering the buildings and how many of them there are. Most modern games out there require more than 1gb of vram.

Only blame for that would be optimization, but I don't see that being the case this time around. It runs flawless for me. Even on 3 monitors on a single 970, it's playable. Using over my 4gb (3.5+.5)

[samcool55]

Thats hardly ubisoft's fault. As games become more demanding, more vram is expected. Larger textures and assets need to be rendered at a time. Syndicate had a ton of polygons considering the buildings and how many of them there are. Most modern games out there require more than 1gb of vram.

Only blame for that would be optimization, but I don't see that being the case this time around. It runs flawless for me. Even on 3 monitors on a single 970, it's playable. Using over my 4gb (3.5+.5)

Well it's the only game failing to run with 1GB of VRAM.

And atm it's the ONLY game i found that fails to run properly with 1Gb of VRAM.

The textures just fail to scale down properly. And amount of vram has nothing to do with amount of polygons and assets. The performance of the computer is fine and good enough to run most games at low-medium at 60fps 1080p. But AC:S just farts down all the way to 15fps because AC:S kept the textures too big.

If someone made a mod and make the textures smaller it would run just fine. 

 

Or if they included a proper way to just convert the textures to smaller ones that would be enough. There are VERY easy solutions, but a big stupid company as ubisoft are d*cks like we know and didn't bother.

 

And i'm not suprised it's running fine on a 970, that one has more than 1Gb of VRAM.

Myself i have a 6950, the 2GB edition, and that one runs AC:S just fine because the textures fit in the VRAM. And the 6950 performs quite similar to the 560ti. So again, nothing wrong with it's performance, but it looks once more that ubisoft didn't care enough imho about the pc gamers.

 

It's just that only 1 game fails to run properly with 1GB VRAM and it's a ubisoft game... 

[NtB]

I would absolutely love if they really took a one year break from Assassin's Creed and came back with a fantastic game.

[EChondo]

Sorry, after them locking out graphics options and dumbing down the PC version Ubisoft has been so high on shit list that this just screams failed sequel.

[Guest Kloaked]

nb4 ubisoft hate

 

Admittedly, disregarding their problems, Ubisoft is actually pretty innovative. It's almost as if they're overly ambitious. They set the bar too high and everyone whines when they can't reach it. I believe that's their main problem. On paper, Watch Dogs sounds fucking amazing. 

 

Frankly, I wish people would hop off all these bandwagons and be less bias. 

 

Not saying Ubisoft doesn't deserve the hate it got, but they're trying to turn themselves around and people need to give them credit for that. Syndicate was a well rounded game. And here they are saying they are going to do everything they can to avoid the problems in Watch_Dogs 2 that they had in 1.

 

I've said this before, I'm sure their employees who actually work on the games do take pride in their work. Of course there's some who don't give a shit, and those kinds of people are literally in every part of the work force.

 

I'll buy Watch Dogs 2 if they just build on what they had with the first one. The first one was a solid foundation that was held back by bugs, poor PC port issues (such as mouse and keyboard controls and the obvious graphical downgrade), and a super edgy storyline.

 

EDIT: Plus the game was original, at least to me. I haven't seen another game that allows you to go into the electronic world like you could in Watch Dogs, but provide an open world city experience similar to GTA.

[Dabombinable]

If Uplay is ever mentioned in relation to this game it'll be another case of fuck Ubisoft.

[Guest Kloaked]

Meh. Played the first one a little on my friend's xb1. Wasn't impressed with the gameplay, graphics aside. Felt like a cheap GTA clone.

 

Probably because you were playing it like it's a GTA clone, which it's not.

[MEC-777]

Probably because you were playing it like it's a GTA clone, which it's not.

 

I suppose. Regardless, it just never captured my attention. I've never been partial to all the faux "hacking" stuff. Just not a game that interests me. I know there are people who do like it and that's fine. Hope the new game turns out better than the first.