Watch Dogs

Xenji

Looks like the review embargo has been broken, first review for the Xbox One Version

wccftech 7.2/10

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=820807

Leaked gameplay video here as well http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=cfc_1400346978

Not sure what to make of this part of the review if true

One huge caveat/punishment Ubisoft implemented is when you do turn off the Online Option, all your skills accumulated are reset to zero. You read that right. They all get reset to zero. All the online-specific skills reset to zero as punishment for not wanting to play online, something which is entirely disappointing. Either you keep getting invaded, or you get punished for wanting to play sometimes and not other times with the online mode.

Xenji

Xenji wrote: »

Looks like the review embargo has been broken, first review for the Xbox One Version

wccftech 7.2/10

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=820807

Leaked gameplay video here as well http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=cfc_1400346978

Not sure what to make of this part of the review if true

Ouch.....

Wolfenstien it is so..was struggling to chose

Zero-Cool

That would be a fairly big detail for the devs to hide. Like dark souls, the only time I would play offline is if my Internet was acting up but it would be crap to lose all skill stats just because my Internet dropped.

e_e

Only in the games industry would 7.2/10 be considered a negative rating. Madness.

2Mad2BeMad

e_e wrote: »

Only in the games industry would 7.2/10 be considered a negative rating. Madness.

a 7.2 is horrid for a game that has been delayed since last november for "improvements"
il still get it , but I'll wait for more reviews to decide if its a day one purchase or not

I can see a patch been released for that skills reset

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

7.2? I'll wait till it's a fiver in a steam sale

calex71

e_e wrote: »

Only in the games industry would 7.2/10 be considered a negative rating. Madness.

Agreed, I mean if its a bad game give it a score that reflects it like 4/10 or 5/10 or something, I often check films on sites like imdb or others, if I saw 7/10 I'd think hey it's well worth a watch.

Zero-Cool

calex71 wrote: »

Agreed, I mean if its a bad game give it a score that reflects it like 4/10 or 5/10 or something, I often check films on sites like imdb or others, if I saw 7/10 I'd think hey it's well worth a watch.

Haha yeah IMDB is usually 6 - 8.5 is definitely worth a watch. Over 8.5 is *usually* arty shyte. If a game gets under 8.5, it's an unplayable mess!!!

DarkJager

A 7.2 is a fairly **** rating to get, was expecting at least 8 or 9 for this. Oh well, I have it ordered so I'll make up my own mind. I recall sleeping dogs not getting particularly high scores and it turned out to be one of my favorite games of the last gen (I know it's not related to Watch Dogs )

CastorTroy

I'm not too up on the online aspect of this game since I don't play online games much. So the single player game more or less needs online to play? Or is it only in a separate multiplayer mode this affects?

Mr Blobby

It'll take more than one review (from a website i've never heard of) to worry me.
I'll be getting this regardless of reviews anyway.

Zero-Cool

CastorTroy wrote: »

I'm not too up on the online aspect of this game since I don't play online games much. So the single player game more or less needs online to play? Or is it only in a separate multiplayer mode this affects?

Like Dark Souls, in the single player mode, you can get invaded by other players to hack your data. Nice idea of having to constantly watch your back. There are seperate MP modes but this was the main online aspect.

Kaizersoze81

7.2 is an average review. What a let down this game has been in all regards. Heralded as the game to showcase the next gen properly, it looks like it's a big disappointment. Think I'll be holding off on a next gen console for another year.

Kerplunk124

That online skills reset bit is madness

DarkJager

Kerplunk124 wrote: »

That online skills reset bit is madness

Yeah that won't last. I'd expect a day one patch or very soon after launch to fix it, the backlash is going to be massive.

naughto

I doubt its even true

ShadowHearth

7.2 for a hyped game like this is fairly ****. It's not like I care much about scores, but 7.2 is not great and will make me be more careful before buying it.
Then again it's only one review and it might be full of **** too. We will wait and see. When it should be out anyway? Next week?

Deano7788

The 27th, so Tuesday week.

Zero-Cool

This screen says only notoriety skills are reset. Looking it up, out of all 57 skills notoriety only makes up 5 skills. The is a full list if you google them, those 5 are really minor.

Benzino

So basically we shouldn't trust anything that article/review says.

Xenji

Benzino wrote: »

So basically we shouldn't trust anything that article/review says.

The image is from the same review site, it all looks fairly questionable though and possibly based on the multiplayer beta.

Sephiroth_dude

Roll on Tuesday WK! Although I won't have till Friday due to ordering from amazon.

Kylo Ren

Keno wrote: »

Looks amazing.

Wow, just shy of 2 years since I started this thread. My excitement for this game has really dwindled since then. Announcing a game so far away really kills the anticipation. Then adding the clear decline in visual fidelity since that first reveal video.

I might pick it up when I get new console in the next month but I'll probably wait for it to get cheaper and pick it up then.

Robert ninja

e_e wrote: »

Only in the games industry would 7.2/10 be considered a negative rating. Madness.

Critic reviews are always in the 7-8 area. Not to mention actually using an arbitrary number to judge the quality of a game is asinine in my opinion. Seriously, 7.2... POINT 2? What could that 0.2 difference actually mean. Seriously I want the reviewer to explain to me the exact thing in the game that bumped it from regular ole 7 up by a fraction. And why put it in a number, why not EXPLAIN that thing in detail instead.

But here's me expecting quality from game journalism :rolleyes:

e_e

Exactly, there's just not enough integrity to games criticism. Reviewers are afraid to say what they want to say for fear of pissing off the the people shelling out 60 euro as well as the bigger companies. That's why so many mediocre and uninspired games get rated in the vicinity of 80-90 whereas the more interesting and unique ones get relegated to 7/10 "Interesting, not for everyone.". Critics should speak for themselves instead of tailoring their real opinion to what the mass market needs.

johnny_ultimate

Heaven forbid we'd actually wait for familiar and trustworthy sources rather than a random, poorly written review from a random website that people suspect might actually be based on a beta as opposed to the finished product! I'm sure an actual consensus or indication will emerge before long.

tok9

johnny stop talking sense.. get out the pitchforks and torches and let's rage! :P

Sephiroth_dude

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Heaven forbid we'd actually wait for familiar and trustworthy sources rather than a random, poorly written review from a random website that people suspect might actually be based on a beta as opposed to the finished product! I'm sure an actual consensus or indication will emerge before long.

That's what I was thinking,I'll wait for gameinformer,IGN'S review.

johnny_ultimate

Sephiroth_dude wrote: »

That's what I was thinking,I'll wait for gameinformer,IGN'S review.

I think I'd actually trust that deeply untrustworthy review more than I'd trust Game Informer or IGN

4Dlolz

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

I think I'd actually trust that deeply untrustworthy review more than I'd trust Game Informer or IGN

Wouldn't believe a word out of IGN's mouth. These are the same people that give COD nearly perfect scores year in year out. Nothing more than a mouthpiece for these multi billion dollar companies.