Watch Dogs

RasTa

M!Ck^ wrote: »

Cool then 30 euro. Happy? Or il take on lone from someone else. No issue. Patience is a great thing to have.

Well since your using gamestop's pricing, The Last of Us is €55 for the PS3 so you'll never get it.

I don't particular care but wasting €30 on a game you don't like is the same as wasting €70 to me. Or €50 if you buy from Amazon.

speedboatchase

DARK-KNIGHT wrote: »

I dont understand some people defending a game that clearly isnt up to the hype that followed it. People that have raised concerns have been burnt before with bf4 and few other muck titles

I'm defending it because I'm playing it and it's good.

But my point about how intense the backlash seems to be isn't based on posters here, it's based on, for example, the Metacritic user rating that is 5.7, with 14 'reviews' (0-4/10) from people moaning that it doesn't look like it did in 2012. That's just nonsensical to me.

Wooden Jesus

Penn wrote: »

Because GTAV was far more likely to make their money back in sales and make a huge profit. It was one of the most anticipated game releases ever. A new franchise like Watch Dogs, with the effort and money they're putting into marketing, special editions etc, it's largely because they are not as safe. Yes, they spent less than Rockstar did, and they had a smaller team, but it's also a game which won't appeal to as many people. it's a game which will never have the sales or profits of GTAV. For Ubisoft to make a profit, there's no way they could sell it for €50-60. If anything, that's a huge warning sign to any consumer that it's not a top game.

Comparing graphics/gameplay/driving with GTAV, that I can understand. Comparing price/budget/sales etc with GTAV is comparing apples and cheese.

Watch Dogs promised a lot from the initial E3 reveal in 2012 and it seems very lacking in content.
The thing about GTA V was that it was held back for a long time to become a finished product and to deliver what people expected of it. Watch Dogs seems like it could do with a lot more work and I would wager on watch dogs 3 being out before we see the next GTA.
It's the amount of content and the final finished product that makes GTA stand head and shoulders ahead of any other open world game. If a company wants to compete with GTA they need to deliver the full package which is something I don't see with watch dogs

Wooden Jesus

speedboatchase wrote: »

I'm defending it because I'm playing it and it's good.

But my point about how intense the backlash seems to be isn't based on posters here, it's based on, for example, the Metacritic user rating that is 5.7, with 14 'reviews' (0-4/10) from people moaning that it doesn't look like it did in 2012. That's just nonsensical to me.

When it comes to false advertising I think people have every right to voice a negative opinion. If i see a gameplay video on next gen or pc that can replicate the 2012 video then I'll be interested

biggebruv

Just picked it up in argos for 67

My gamestop was charging 75

Will have to get stuck in later on tonight
Looking forward to it now

The people going ape**** all over the internet over the reviews are funny lol soo its not a 10/10 game that means its just crap altogether now is it?

Sleeping dogs had its issues aswell still enjoyed the hell outta that one

Retr0gamer

Worst game ever.

RasTa

RasTa wrote: »

Well since your using gamestop's pricing, The Last of Us is €55 for the PS3 so you'll never get it.

I don't particular care but wasting €30 on a game you don't like is the same as wasting €70 to me. Or €50 if you buy from Amazon.

I will lone it for free then. Such a thing to get worked up over. Its laughable. If the game doesn't sell well you will pick it up cheaper than you think. The last of us is still a top seller. That's why it still costs 50. That's how game trading works.

folan

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Worst game ever.

Wow. worse than ET?

speedboatchase

Wooden Jesus wrote: »

When it comes to false advertising I think people have every right to voice a negative opinion. If i see a gameplay video on next gen or pc that can replicate the 2012 video then I'll be interested

Downgrades suck, but they happen all the time. Dark Souls 2 for instance, but that gets a pass because it's a known quantity, while a new IP like Watch Dogs gets completely sh*t on.

johnny_ultimate

Everyone needs to brush up on their review score scale.

9 or 10 - Masterpiece or 'near masterpiece'
8 - Massive disappointment
7 - Mediocre and / or even more massive disappointment
6 or less - Gaming equivalent of a war crime

Please note that every game in the top two categories probably had its reviews bought.

folan

its available from gamestop for 9.99 when you trade in two games.

One of the games can be watch dogs.

humanji

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Everyone needs to brush up on their review score scale.

9 or 10 - Masterpiece or 'near masterpiece'
8 - Massive disappointment
7 - Mediocre and / or even more massive disappointment
6 or less - Gaming equivalent of a war crime

Please note that every game in the top two categories probably had its reviews bought.

I'd correct that by splitting "9 or 10" into

9 - Masterpiece or 'near masterpiece'
10 - Latest iteration of a AAA franchise

Benzino

M!Ck^ wrote: »

Yes its terrible marketing lies that get consumers to get dupped into squandering 70 euros. Exactly my point.

Pretty much every game does this. Sure we are all still waiting for heists in GTA :pac: If you get "duped" then that's your fault, when I buy a product I listen to user reviews and independent reviews on the product, not the developer of it.

M!Ck^ wrote: »

No I'm 100% sure it started in 2008 pulled from source. Check Google. Six hundred is still a very large group of developers. Have a count of how many devs in Naughty Dog dev team for last of us. Numbers mean nothing when its quality that should be the key.

Nobody is hating on it. Speaking with there wallets isn't hating.

Fair enough, a number of places online say it's 2009. Perhaps the 2008 date was the Driver game they were working on before they canned it?

600 is a very large team. But so is 400, an additional 400 members would make a huge difference. Naughty Dog are excellent, but they haven't made an open-world game like this or GTA, so you can't really compare the two.

People are hating on it, in fact some seem to enjoy the fact it hasn't lived up to the hype.

As a side note, in my opinion, even if Ubisoft matched Rockstar in terms of time, budget and team size, I don't believe they would match GTA quality as Rockstar are in the top 3 developers in the world in my opinion, they have an excellent team and while people may not like the GTA series, there is no denying they are technically superb (and I say this aware of all the bugs in GTAV).

johnny_ultimate

Disappointed but not surprised reading the reviews that the game is jam-packed with collectibles, subquests, mini-games and other unnecessary distractions. This is what holds most Ubisoft games on this scale back (Far Cry, AC3 etc...) - rather than focusing on pushing the core campaigns and mechanics to their next level, they simply fill up their games with busywork. It may buff up the running time, but the resources put into creating these would best be diverted elsewhere, or - heaven forbid - be brave enough to use sub-quest and variety ideas as once-off missions rather than copying and pasting them around the map ad nauseam.

Otherwise sounds like it has plenty of good ideas and execution. Really surprised by USgamer's take, completely gushing about it which is quite unusual for them.

Penn

Wooden Jesus wrote: »

Watch Dogs promised a lot from the initial E3 reveal in 2012 and it seems very lacking in content.
The thing about GTA V was that it was held back for a long time to become a finished product and to deliver what people expected of it. Watch Dogs seems like it could do with a lot more work and I would wager on watch dogs 3 being out before we see the next GTA.
It's the amount of content and the final finished product that makes GTA stand head and shoulders ahead of any other open world game. If a company wants to compete with GTA they need to deliver the full package which is something I don't see with watch dogs

Again though, GTA can afford such huge delays and longer development time (considering they already had much from GTAIV to build off rather than starting from scratch) because they're a much larger title and would undoubtedly make a huge profit anyway. Watch Dogs simply doesn't have that privilege. It's a new game in a new franchise with a new gameplay system.

tok9

I'll say one thing. Takes a bloody age to install. I'm at the end of the tutorial level I assume and it stops saying that it's installing to the HD.. that was about an hour ago.

PS4 really should let you know how much has installed before starting a game.

ripperman

I think all of this raises an interesting argument about release timeframes, drip feeding content to the public etc. I wonder what public reaction would be if the game was kept secret and just released as it is now? I know PR and marketing will always win out on this one though especially when pushing a new IP.

Benzino

Benzino wrote: »

Pretty much every game does this. Sure we are all still waiting for heists in GTA :pac: If you get "duped" then that's your fault, when I buy a product I listen to user reviews and independent reviews on the product, not the developer of it.



Fair enough, a number of places online say it's 2009. Perhaps the 2008 date was the Driver game they were working on before they canned it?

600 is a very large team. But so is 400, an additional 400 members would make a huge difference. Naughty Dog are excellent, but they haven't made an open-world game like this or GTA, so you can't really compare the two.

People are hating on it, in fact some seem to enjoy the fact it hasn't lived up to the hype.

As a side note, in my opinion, even if Ubisoft matched Rockstar in terms of time, budget and team size, I don't believe they would match GTA quality as Rockstar are in the top 3 developers in the world in my opinion, they have an excellent team and while people may not like the GTA series, there is no denying they technically superb (and I say this aware of all the bugs in GTAV).

Exactly and that's why I'm not getting duped :pac:

Again to state I'm so disappointed that it hasn't meet my expectations. Not sure why anybody would revel in it's failure. It's great at least to see somebody giving a new IP a go.

For Naughty Dog, a story driven action game at it's core. And a phenomenal one at that. I would have complete confidence that they would create an open world game of high quality if given or started such a project, to quote Johhny below; All this filler stuff in an open world is just plain boring aswell. Focus drawn away from the main campaign and you get choir tasks that are meh at best.

GTA V had the fillers like watch dogs but it's campaign was it's meat and was the highlight and focus of the whole game. And everything that was wrong with GTA IV campaign was addressed.

brianregan09

Ok be honest lads i'm heading into town in a bit is it worth getting ??

Kaizersoze81

No

Vinz Mesrine

brianregan09 wrote: »

Ok be honest lads i'm heading into town in a bit is it worth getting ??

Yes. I've played it for about 2 hours now and have enjoyed it.

Retr0gamer

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Otherwise sounds like it has plenty of good ideas and execution. Really surprised by USgamer's take, completely gushing about it which is quite unusual for them.

I like Jaz Rignall especially his digital foundry articles but he's not a reviewer I'd follow. Mike Williams second opinion was a bit more measured and he's be someone I'd trust.

Zero-Cool

Just got my copy from XV for 70 quid. A couple of ****ing gobshytes got it for me as a present. XV had a sign outside saying XV/HMV 69.99 VS. Gamestop 75. Not only did I get the Special edition with breakthrough pack, they gave me a 5 euro voucher. I was gonna preorder EA UFC in gamestop but might preorder with XV now.

I saw some vids of the driving and it does look crap, will have to give it a go myself for a proper verdict but how do the bikes handle? Looks like Aiden is better suited to a bike in this kind of game anyway.

Wooden Jesus

brianregan09 wrote: »

Ok be honest lads i'm heading into town in a bit is it worth getting ??

Watch a few youtube videos and twitch gameplay.

ShadowHearth

Watching this... Do not want anymore. Its not I anted in the first place, but now I completely meh about it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IBb2BIVrV7M

Benzino

tok9 wrote: »

I'll say one thing. Takes a bloody age to install. I'm at the end of the tutorial level I assume and it stops saying that it's installing to the HD.. that was about an hour ago.

PS4 really should let you know how much has installed before starting a game.

Just at that part now too, taking an age. Doesn't help that I can hear some guy go "hah!" every 15 seconds :P

Benzino

M!Ck^ wrote: »

Again to state I'm so disappointed that it hasn't meet my expectations. Not sure why anybody would revel in it's failure. It's great at least to see somebody giving a new IP a go.

I agree and hope the game sells well to encourage other publishers to follow suit.

M!Ck^ wrote: »

For Naughty Dog, a story driven action game at it's core. And a phenomenal one at that. I would have complete confidence that they would create an open world game of high quality if given or started such a project, to quote Johhny below; All this filler stuff in an open world is just plain boring aswell. Focus drawn away from the main campaign and you get choir tasks that are meh at best.

I agree, I think Naughty Dog would do an excellent job, just pointing out it's unfair to compare the two currently.

M!Ck^ wrote: »

GTA V had the fillers like watch dogs but it's campaign was it's meat and was the highlight and focus of the whole game. And everything that was wrong with GTA IV campaign was addressed.

I still play GTA V on a regular basis, mainly due to the online. But I feel the campaign wasn't great in it. Sure it was better than GTA IV but that wouldn't be hard haha. I found it disappointing and didn't really care for any of the three characters.

I disagree about the filler stuff. If done right, they can be excellent and really add to the fun factor of a game. I loved the ambulance, police, taxi, fire missions, gang wars and kill frenzies in the old GTA's. Now admittedly I was younger and had more free time to spend on them, but I do miss them from the current GTA games. Stuff like collect hidden packages, or the flags in AC we can do without, but in reality not much development time is wasted on these.

Watch_Dogs seems to have some cool side missions, like the spider robot so I'm looking forward to checking these out.

Soby

Anyone who bought it of us psn have a licence issue when trying to play of main account ?.restore licensed just gives a error

KillerShamrock

I played a few hours on pc last night. It runs fine on my system on high everything maybe because I'm on the green side. The bit I played is a bit slow but I liked it so far.
The driving isn't good its not terrible it's just not good very arcadey and on a m+know not easy but got a little used to it and didn't trash every car I got in haha so far it's worth the 30 I paid for it imo

Benzino

Soby wrote: »

Anyone who bought it of us psn have a licence issue when trying to play of main account ?.restore licensed just gives a error

No issues on my end so far, played a bit of it there and now it's finishing installing it.