• 79 results
  • 1
  • 2
#1 Posted by hellerphant (96 posts) -

The idea of being an elite hacker who can bend the city to his will is pretty bad ass. Unfortunately, from what I've seen so far in my limited time with the game, Watch Dogs is little more than an average open-world game with some neat hacking lingo thrown into the mix.

Personally I don't get why Aiden would openly be comfortable with shooting his way through the city. There are times where you are forced to kill, yet to me, it would make more sense if the game gave you a non-violent option to complete every objective.

I'd almost see these as puzzle elements that rewarded stealth and critical thinking with bonus objectives or new missions etc. It would be madness to expect the developers to drop the guns completely, but I really think playing to the fact that you are supposed to be the ultimate hacker could have made the game more varied and fun.

Thoughts?

#2 Edited by CornBREDX (5105 posts) -

I play it like an open world stealth game and never use guns (except when I get invaded).

The choice to use a gun is fine, it doesn't need to be removed, but if you don't want to use them then just... don't.

#3 Posted by SethPhotopoulos (5228 posts) -

Aiden is a piece of shit. I played him like the piece of shit he is.

#4 Posted by Dussck (195 posts) -

I set the difficulty to 'Realistic', which makes you very vulnerable for gunfire, so I'm always trying to avoid a gunfight (you really can take like 3 bullets or so). And for me this way the game is massive fun, trying to escape all the time instead of shooting your way out. It sure can become frustrating a bit when you fail the same mission for the 5th time, but then you probably have to think of another strategy.

I like that I only use guns when there's no other choice, having no gun at all seems a bit silly to me. Maybe they should've taken out the big guns though, like the AK's and the grenade launcher (which you just buy in a shop) or just use them in certain missions only.

#5 Edited by nasher27 (90 posts) -

I'm a bit of a role player, so I try to use the guns as little as possible and play as the stealthy hacker I see Aiden being. I'm not sure how much of the game you've seen/played, but there are a lot of scenarios where it's very possible to get through without firing a bullet. The problem, however, is that many missions still require you to kill people.

A good example is one of the missions in the quick look, the one where you must get into the Blume building via the truck entrance. In the quicklook, Jeff just shot everyone in the loading/unloading area (which I ended up doing as well, I think this is such a section where you just have to "eliminate" the guards in your path) but once I entered the building, my playthrough differed from Jeff's dramatically. Where Jeff just played it like gears of war killing every guard with an AK, I hid behind that vending machine Jeff triggered, used security cameras to make my way around the room, finding a guard with a camera on him who walks by the hacking objective, and hacking in that way, without touching one of the guards in that large room.

I think this is a good example of what many missions are like in the game. There are many sections you can play like a stealthy hacker, but unfortunately there are also sections (too many IMO) that simply require you to "eliminate" everyone, and environmental explosives and other hazards can only get you so far, you have to resort to guns at some point.

I hope for the inevitable sequel, they make the stealthy hacker playstyle a viable approach through 100% of the game, because playing the game that way is what really sets it apart from other open world games that do shooting and driving much better than Watch Dogs.

#6 Posted by hellerphant (96 posts) -

That's some useful insight guys, I might try to bump the difficulty up to realistic from the beginning and try it that way. I'm putting together a review at the moment, so I tend to always run through and then run through the opening again on a harder difficulty, but sounds like it might be worthwhile adopting it from the start.

Aiden is a piece of shit. I played him like the piece of shit he is.

Best response!

#7 Posted by Rowr (5537 posts) -

It always feels like ubisoft have the resources and talent to do some really interesting stuff with their triple A titles, but end up sort of going the really safe route in a "this focused better to the masses" kind of way. I've been finishing AC4 - and while i think it's pretty good, everything about that game from the puzzles to the combat is so terrified of scaring anyone away that it's just completely devoid of any challenge.

Watchdogs I feel is much the same in the way practically all the hacking is literally one button press. Surely they could of crafted a system with at least some interesting skill based mechanic associated. It's too bad because they often do really well establishing interesting settings.

Online
#8 Posted by Dussck (195 posts) -

@rowr said:

It always feels like ubisoft have the resources and talent to do some really interesting stuff with their triple A titles, but end up sort of going the really safe route in a "this focused better to the masses" kind of way. I've been finishing AC4 - and while i think it's pretty good, everything about that game from the puzzles to the combat is so terrified of scaring anyone away that it's just completely devoid of any challenge.

Watchdogs I feel is much the same in the way practically all the hacking is literally one button press. Surely they could of crafted a system with at least some interesting skill based mechanic associated. It's too bad because they often do really well establishing interesting settings.

Well, to their defense: there are hacking objectives which require you to complete a little puzzle. It's not that difficult most of the time, but some of them can activate a timer which makes it alot more exciting (I think when it runs out you get either CTOS or cops after you).
About Ubisoft taking the 'safe route' with their games: hell yea. Can't really blame them either, those games are just too big to take alot of risks.

#9 Posted by Unilad (559 posts) -

@hellerphant: I think this game could have been better.

That's all.

#10 Edited by Strife777 (1520 posts) -

Well technically, according to the story, Aiden is more of a "street guy" first and a hacker second. He learned how to shoot, fight, etc. and later learned hacking from Damien.

Like you also mentionned, taking guns out completely wouldn't make sense. You can still play most of the game non-lethally, with a few exceptions. I personally played on realistic and didn't shoot a single cop. I also tried to take on most scenarios with stealth but didn't refrain from shooting when it made sense (One particular mission in Rossi-Fremont for example).

I certainly think they could've focused more on other mechanics and pushed further into hacking but I liked how the shooting felt and had fun with it. But hey! It's a first in what is obviously going to be a profitable IP for Ubisoft, so let's hope the sequel turns out like AC 2 (better than it's prequel in almost every way).

#11 Posted by Jesus_Phish (687 posts) -

Aiden is a piece of shit. I played him like the piece of shit he is.

This. Aiden truly is the worst person in video gaming in a long time.

#12 Posted by Humanity (9054 posts) -

@dussck said:

@rowr said:

It always feels like ubisoft have the resources and talent to do some really interesting stuff with their triple A titles, but end up sort of going the really safe route in a "this focused better to the masses" kind of way. I've been finishing AC4 - and while i think it's pretty good, everything about that game from the puzzles to the combat is so terrified of scaring anyone away that it's just completely devoid of any challenge.

Watchdogs I feel is much the same in the way practically all the hacking is literally one button press. Surely they could of crafted a system with at least some interesting skill based mechanic associated. It's too bad because they often do really well establishing interesting settings.

Well, to their defense: there are hacking objectives which require you to complete a little puzzle. It's not that difficult most of the time, but some of them can activate a timer which makes it alot more exciting (I think when it runs out you get either CTOS or cops after you).

About Ubisoft taking the 'safe route' with their games: hell yea. Can't really blame them either, those games are just too big to take alot of risks.

Some of the "Dead Maus" boss hacking puzzles in the late game are actually kinda challenging. Those grids get pretty big. It was also really interesting to go up against another hacker and see all those tricks you've been using turned against you. Pretty awesome mission and it's funny that they used something from basically the very end of the game to demo at E3.

#13 Posted by hellerphant (96 posts) -

I'm going to give it another bash tonight after I finish the game I'm currently reviewing. So far I'm like most of you, clinging to the hope that WD2 turns out like AC2 and blows us away. Maybe a move towards a complete "new gen" only release will give them some more room to play with too.

#14 Posted by CorruptedEvil (2614 posts) -

Aiden is completely batshit, it makes sense for him to be using guns and murdering hundreds of people to save one.

#15 Posted by TheAcidSkull (369 posts) -

@sethphotopoulos said:

Aiden is a piece of shit. I played him like the piece of shit he is.

This. Aiden truly is the worst person in video gaming in a long time.

Wow what the fuck lol? What he do? :P

#16 Edited by TheHT (11145 posts) -

That's pretty much how I played it, save for a few instances, like when you storm Rossi-Freemont, where it seemed appropriate to pick up and use a shotgun or something.

Stealth hacker who was in and out. When it came to "eliminate all enemies or escape", I'd go with escape. I was by no means going for a pacifist playthrough though; if a dude was layin in to me or was a target I'd take em out. But it was fun to make a break for it and round a corner into a dude, extendo his ass, and then get the fuck outta there, bullets whizzing by and all that.

If it's a cop and I had to shoot em I'd go for the knee since according to the loading screens that wouldn't kill em (but I never got into a shoot-out with the cops), and I'd always avoid taking out civilians no matter what (using Focus while driving helped a lot for that). Even with some of the enemies during the stealth sequences, I found myself avoiding the bad guys that seemed less bad according to the facial recognition, and sometimes planned routes to go through the bad bad guys specifically.

But then when you get to the human trafficking part it's kinda weapons free at that point, because fuck those guys. It's kinda weird, I don't think I've ever played a game like this where you're learning more about the random goons you're fighting. You might joke about that sort of thing with friends of whatever, but it kinda changed the dynamic for me when the game was taking steps to make them seem more like people and less like nameless cannon fodder, even it is all random.

It was actually a ton of fun, but it's easy to see how someone could just play it as any other third-person cover shooter. Not engage in the hacking or stealth, just shoot up everywhere instead. The shooting or cover mechanics aren't all that great though, so I imagine most of those folks would've had a whatever kind of experience, at least when it came to the combat.

Good game though! 4/5. Would play the side-quests.

#17 Posted by MooseyMcMan (10910 posts) -

I think it would have been better if the game only let you carry ONE gun (a pistol), and make it only viable in extreme situations. How? I dunno, I'm not a game designer, but I would have liked to see the game go down that route.

Moderator
#18 Edited by Immortal_Guy (113 posts) -

I know basically nothing about Watch_Dogs, but I remember seeing one part of an early demo that got me super excited. Aiden is on the run from the law (as he always is), and during an escape he gets cornered by one police officer with a pistol. And he has to throw his arms in the air and surrender to buy himself some time, so that he doesn't get shot. And I remember thinking, I would love a game where being cornered by one guy with a pistol meant that I had to surrender - a game where even the lowliest of armed enemies are a legitamate threat, and when you're on the run you really ARE on the run (rather than choosing to run when you could easily stand and fight, as in most open world games I've played). From what I've heard since, it doesn't sound like Watch_Dogs ended up being that game.

#19 Posted by TheHT (11145 posts) -

I think it would have been better if the game only let you carry ONE gun (a pistol), and make it only viable in extreme situations. How? I dunno, I'm not a game designer, but I would have liked to see the game go down that route.

Having only a pistol slot and having to pickup temporary bigger guns that you couldn't magically holster could be good.

#20 Posted by Humanity (9054 posts) -

This game would be awful without guns.

#21 Posted by TheAcidSkull (369 posts) -

Could someone explain why Aiden is a jackass? I haven't played the game. I'm genuinely interested.

#22 Posted by Rowr (5537 posts) -

@humanity said:

@dussck said:

@rowr said:

It always feels like ubisoft have the resources and talent to do some really interesting stuff with their triple A titles, but end up sort of going the really safe route in a "this focused better to the masses" kind of way. I've been finishing AC4 - and while i think it's pretty good, everything about that game from the puzzles to the combat is so terrified of scaring anyone away that it's just completely devoid of any challenge.

Watchdogs I feel is much the same in the way practically all the hacking is literally one button press. Surely they could of crafted a system with at least some interesting skill based mechanic associated. It's too bad because they often do really well establishing interesting settings.

Well, to their defense: there are hacking objectives which require you to complete a little puzzle. It's not that difficult most of the time, but some of them can activate a timer which makes it alot more exciting (I think when it runs out you get either CTOS or cops after you).

About Ubisoft taking the 'safe route' with their games: hell yea. Can't really blame them either, those games are just too big to take alot of risks.

Some of the "Dead Maus" boss hacking puzzles in the late game are actually kinda challenging. Those grids get pretty big. It was also really interesting to go up against another hacker and see all those tricks you've been using turned against you. Pretty awesome mission and it's funny that they used something from basically the very end of the game to demo at E3.

Ahh fair enough, yeh I'm not that far into the game. Made a few assumptions from what I have seen so far.

I think getting back to the thread title, if they were to make this game without guns the basic hacking would have to be way more interesting.

Online
#23 Posted by FluxWaveZ (19329 posts) -

I would have preferred it if hacking was more effective. It's just so much easier to gun everyone down instead of trying to play with stealth and hacks primarily.

#24 Posted by Jesus_Phish (687 posts) -

@theacidskull: He's a thief first of all. He gets caught robbing money from people in a hotel lobby through hacking into their bank details or some such. As a result a hit is put out on him and the hitman is told about Aiden's family (his sister, nephew and niece) and told not to hold back if they're present. The hitman attacks Aiden one day and causes a car crash which kills his niece. That's all in the intro to the game.

The rest of the game, he spend stealing money from people bank accounts, murdering people, causing an ungodly amount of car crashes and trying to get revenge on the people who put a hit on him despite his sisters plea's that he stop because he's putting them all in danger again, having already gotten her child killed.

He is just a massive jerk with almost no likeable characteristics.

#25 Posted by TheAcidSkull (369 posts) -

@theacidskull: He's a thief first of all. He gets caught robbing money from people in a hotel lobby through hacking into their bank details or some such. As a result a hit is put out on him and the hitman is told about Aiden's family (his sister, nephew and niece) and told not to hold back if they're present. The hitman attacks Aiden one day and causes a car crash which kills his niece. That's all in the intro to the game.

The rest of the game, he spend stealing money from people bank accounts, murdering people, causing an ungodly amount of car crashes and trying to get revenge on the people who put a hit on him despite his sisters plea's that he stop because he's putting them all in danger again, having already gotten her child killed.

He is just a massive jerk with almost no likeable characteristics.

He's definitely dick from the sound of it, but I wouldn't say it's the first time we encounter a guy who's an asshat in video games. A lot of the times the main protagonists are dicks lol.

#26 Posted by Humanity (9054 posts) -

@theacidskull: He's no better or worse than your typical open world protagonist. When people say he's killing, stealing money, causing car crashes etc - thats the player, not Aiden. If anything, in most cutscenes where the action is out of your control he's trying to do the right thing. It's somewhat ironic that people play the game like assholes and go on to complain about the character being one. If one would be so inclined, and wanted to really roleplay Aiden as a lawful vigilante then you never have to hack any accounts - money is not an issue in this game at all; you never have to kill any civilians and even when faced against "innocent" ctOs security guards you can sneak around or knock them out; you never have to cause any car accidents by either choosing to finish your pursuers off with more subtle traps or going as far as to lure them into an empty alleyway and shoot them there. There is nothing stopping people from being the good guy.

During the course of the game Aiden: catches a serial killer murdering women, dismantles a ring of illegal gun distribution, exposes people running a human trafficking operation and more. So yah, he's a real asshole.

#27 Posted by SharkEthic (1043 posts) -

The gun play is one of the few things this game has going for it.

#28 Posted by TheAcidSkull (369 posts) -

@humanity said:

@theacidskull: He's no better or worse than your typical open world protagonist. When people say he's killing, stealing money, causing car crashes etc - thats the player, not Aiden. If anything, in most cutscenes where the action is out of your control he's trying to do the right thing. It's somewhat ironic that people play the game like assholes and go on to complain about the character being one. If one would be so inclined, and wanted to really roleplay Aiden as a lawful vigilante then you never have to hack any accounts - money is not an issue in this game at all; you never have to kill any civilians and even when faced against "innocent" ctOs security guards you can sneak around or knock them out; you never have to cause any car accidents by either choosing to finish your pursuers off with more subtle traps or going as far as to lure them into an empty alleyway and shoot them there. There is nothing stopping people from being the good guy.

During the course of the game Aiden: catches a serial killer murdering women, dismantles a ring of illegal gun distribution, exposes people running a human trafficking operation and more. So yah, he's a real asshole.

Yeah exactly what i thought, I mean, Alex Mercer from prototype isn't a good guy, but in story mode he isn't a complete jackass, that's the player, because we choose to kill people roaming the city, we choose to destroy cars and stuff like that.

I thought that most of the complaints came from the games story actually.

#29 Posted by VeRKK (97 posts) -

For most of the game, I only played with Stealth and the silence spec ops 1911 pistol. When things got a little crazy used an assault rifle, but I mainly played the game in Stealth as much as I can. and, yes, I would have loved if the game had only silenced weapons, but during the criminal convoy missions that would have been tougher.

#30 Posted by EXTomar (4687 posts) -

I think that would have been an interesting setup for a game but I'm unclear if it would "work" any better. Instead of being more like GTA it would be more like MGS. I'm not sure if that is better.

#31 Posted by UlquioKani (1045 posts) -

When playing, I tried to be as stealthy as possible and only used guns when I fucked up. I liked that the gunning people down option was viable because it meant I didn't have to start missions again when I messed up. Plus, it gave multiple styles of play which meant I never really got bored with the combat. The game just had far more gameplay options during action stages than other third person shooters. Something that games like GTA could learn something from.

#32 Posted by Humanity (9054 posts) -

@theacidskull: If you want to dig your heels in then there are certainly contrivances - like the fact that Aiden ends up blackmailing and using a guy so he can get out of being blackmailed and used himself. As for the story itself, because he's so laser focused on finding the people responsible for the death of his niece Aiden can come off as sort of a jerk at times. For instance he asks an accomplice to provide him with sniper support in a mission - when they meet up, the accomplice has broken into a family's house and tied them up so he can use their balcony as a sniper perch. Aiden isn't pleased but he also doesn't do anything about it - it's more that he's very apathetic to a lot of bad stuff happening around him if that means he will get closer to his goal.

Honestly I'm not trying to defend him as being a good guy - but he's certainly not the ultimate asshole.

#33 Posted by alwaysbebombing (1568 posts) -

The world would be better without guns.

#34 Posted by nasp (260 posts) -

NO! that is all.

#35 Posted by spraynardtatum (2811 posts) -

I don't think it needs to go as far as cutting them out completely but I do think that it would benefit from adding more weight to using them. Gun fights just aren't intense in this game. The guns sound weak, your health regenerates super fast, Aiden barely reacts to being shot (besides screen effects), focus gives you too much of an advantage, ammo is absolutely everywhere (I am always max on everything besides grenade launchers), and you can easily find and carry every gun in the game on your person.

It's pretty standard fare. I was expecting a more impactful gun game when they showed that demo in 2012.

#36 Posted by IIGrayFoxII (304 posts) -

No, because I think guns are a fun option when you do get caught. The cover system and the shooting feels pretty good, and I do not get as upset when a stealth operation goes haywire, because I know I can handle myself.

Combine that with your more offensive hacking abilities (hack comms, grenades, explode panels) and the firefights feel really good.

I think I am more surprised how good it feels as both a stealth game and a shooter and I wouldn't get rid of either. Stealth only games can feel very frustrating and limiting at times, requiring multiple restarts.

#37 Edited by TheAcidSkull (369 posts) -

@humanity said:

@theacidskull: If you want to dig your heels in then there are certainly contrivances - like the fact that Aiden ends up blackmailing and using a guy so he can get out of being blackmailed and used himself. As for the story itself, because he's so laser focused on finding the people responsible for the death of his niece Aiden can come off as sort of a jerk at times. For instance he asks an accomplice to provide him with sniper support in a mission - when they meet up, the accomplice has broken into a family's house and tied them up so he can use their balcony as a sniper perch. Aiden isn't pleased but he also doesn't do anything about it - it's more that he's very apathetic to a lot of bad stuff happening around him if that means he will get closer to his goal.

Honestly I'm not trying to defend him as being a good guy - but he's certainly not the ultimate asshole.

That's not even that bad when compared to some of the atrocities committed by many main protagonists. I mean seriously, on top of my head I could think of a lot of characters who are way worse.

Vito from mafia II thrives off killing. It's literarily his job to kill people.

Kratos is a hulking psychopath who will mow down anything standing in his way. Even if you're the kindest person on earth, if your living somehow hinders Kratos, he will kill you to get what he wants. I think he has shown sympathy towards like, 4 people. aside from that? No one.

Gabriel Belmont has probably done many horrible things as Dracula, and hell, Lords of shadow 2 starts with him slaughtering a family like lamb, yet a lot of people expressed sympathy towards this character.

Hell even Batman, who strays away from killing people, breaks thugs like toothpicks. Sure it's for a good cause, but it's no less brutal.

And hell I won't even mention any GTA games....

I'm not sure where the hate for Aiden comes from.

#38 Posted by Splodge (1284 posts) -

I generally play with the silenced pistol and that is it.

The other night though I was slightly drunk and went on a grenade launcher killing spree.

Such is life.

#39 Posted by Eaxis (912 posts) -

Sleeping dogs was awesome, and they mostly limited gun play.
I got the grenade launcher immediately so I could easily get rid of guys that you have to kill. I like the silencer, but only use it if I have to. I think it's awesome to park a car outside an area, hack into the server and they are completely unaware. This seems to be an issue in the main campaign where combat is not optional. I always go for the non lethal approach if I can.

1. It's unfair I can't shoot out of a car when chased.
2. Only stealth in restricted zones. Why no crouch button?
3. Hacking gets repetitive fast.(I.E hack camera, unlock door)
4. Aiden sucks.

#40 Posted by tildebees (75 posts) -

everything would be better without guns. proteus is the only good video game.

#41 Posted by MiniPato (2732 posts) -

@theacidskull:

Anyone is a saint compared to Kratos. I don't know why the people behind the GoW games thinks being a petulant manchild is somehow a compelling or sympathetic character.

In the context of his own story, Aiden is a massive hypocrite. He sees himself as above the criminals he punishes, but is willing to stoop to their levels to accomplish his own goals. Even before his niece died, he spent his days hacking and robbing people. Hell, during the prison transfer mission, he stalks someone else's niece and then uses that information to kill her uncle. Sure, you can baton him, but Aiden's demeanor is the same whether you kill him or not.

#42 Posted by TheAcidSkull (369 posts) -

@minipato said:

@theacidskull:

Anyone is a saint compared to Kratos. I don't know why the people behind the GoW games thinks being a petulant manchild is somehow a compelling or sympathetic character.

In the context of his own story, Aiden is a massive hypocrite. He sees himself as above the criminals he punishes, but is willing to stoop to their levels to accomplish his own goals. Even before his niece died, he spent his days hacking and robbing people. Hell, during the prison transfer mission, he stalks someone else's niece and then uses that information to kill her uncle. Sure, you can baton him, but Aiden's demeanor is the same whether you kill him or not.

I don't think that the people behind God of War thought that he was sympathetic, that's why they kind of added the filler PSP games like Chains of Olympus and Ghost Of Sparta where we actually see Kratos's downfall on a much deeper level, but i'm sure they know that Kratos is a fucking monster. He's cool and all, in terms of the background he's plugged into but that's about it.

Also,not defending Aiden, but just saying that the amount of hatred I've seen for the guy seems unwarranted, only because there are characters who are far more demented and hypocritical compared to aiden. That's all I'm saying.

#43 Edited by Strife777 (1520 posts) -

@theacidskull said:

@minipato said:

@theacidskull:

Anyone is a saint compared to Kratos. I don't know why the people behind the GoW games thinks being a petulant manchild is somehow a compelling or sympathetic character.

In the context of his own story, Aiden is a massive hypocrite. He sees himself as above the criminals he punishes, but is willing to stoop to their levels to accomplish his own goals. Even before his niece died, he spent his days hacking and robbing people. Hell, during the prison transfer mission, he stalks someone else's niece and then uses that information to kill her uncle. Sure, you can baton him, but Aiden's demeanor is the same whether you kill him or not.

I don't think that the people behind God of War thought that he was sympathetic, that's why they kind of added the filler PSP games like Chains of Olympus and Ghost Of Sparta where we actually see Kratos's downfall on a much deeper level, but i'm sure they know that Kratos is a fucking monster. He's cool and all, in terms of the background he's plugged into but that's about it.

Also,not defending Aiden, but just saying that the amount of hatred I've seen for the guy seems unwarranted, only because there are characters who are far more demented and hypocritical compared to aiden. That's all I'm saying.

My problem with people's criticism is that they act like protagonists should always be likable. I can understand being critical if the game is trying to make him likable and totally fails, but here, the story, audio logs, cutscenes and other characters basically let you know that Aiden indeed has a problem. They acknowledge that he's doing a lot of wrong things Even he does and potentially accepts that fact.

I think it's important to have some diversity in main characters. I don't always wan't to play as a Nathan Drake, who you can't help but love (if we forget the entire murderous spree argument.)

While he's completely different from Aiden, it's the same reason I liked Connor in AC3 a lot, almost as much as Ezio (another example of the "perfect" cool guy.) He's different and not constructed for you to love him at all times. He's a character like any other, he just happens to be the one you control.

#44 Edited by BisonHero (6443 posts) -

@theht said:

@mooseymcman said:

I think it would have been better if the game only let you carry ONE gun (a pistol), and make it only viable in extreme situations. How? I dunno, I'm not a game designer, but I would have liked to see the game go down that route.

Having only a pistol slot and having to pickup temporary bigger guns that you couldn't magically holster could be good.

Yeah, based on that original E3 reveal trailer, I was hoping it would be something along those lines. Like, you have this list of bad people that you think deserve vigilante justice, so the hacking would be used to track them down, analyze their movements, look for flaws in their security, and to create distractions or confusion when you choose to make your move. Basically like a Hitman game or something, you would have a target, and use all your cyber mojo to find the best way to assassinate them. It turns out that that style of game probably doesn't sell as many copies as an open-world crime game where you hack wi-fi grenades on people's belts, and make pipes on walls explode all the time.

#45 Posted by MooseyMcMan (10910 posts) -

@theht said:

@mooseymcman said:

I think it would have been better if the game only let you carry ONE gun (a pistol), and make it only viable in extreme situations. How? I dunno, I'm not a game designer, but I would have liked to see the game go down that route.

Having only a pistol slot and having to pickup temporary bigger guns that you couldn't magically holster could be good.

Yeah, based on that original E3 reveal trailer, I was hoping it would be something along those lines. Like, you have this list of bad people that you think deserve vigilante justice, so the hacking would be used to track them down, analyze their movements, look for flaws in their security, and to create distractions or confusion when you choose to make your move. Basically like a Hitman game or something, you would have a target, and use all your cyber mojo to find the best way to assassinate them. It turns out that that style of game probably doesn't as many copies as an open-world crime game where you hack wi-fi grenades on people's belts, and make pipes on walls explode all the time.

MAAAAAN, that would have been a WAY better game! Not that I don't like it as it is (I do), but that would have been rad.

Moderator
#46 Posted by tourgen (4469 posts) -

No, not if you just removed all guns from the game they put out. It doesn't leave much.

Online
#47 Posted by Kaarloss (29 posts) -

I would prefer in watchdogs2 a greater emphasis in stealth and hacking, but there's always room for gunplay in stealth mechanics.

#48 Posted by FancySoapsMan (5816 posts) -

I just wanted it to be like Deus Ex.

I'm of tired of these huge open world games with really boring level design.

#49 Edited by Neonie (438 posts) -

@sethphotopoulos said:

Aiden is a piece of shit. I played him like the piece of shit he is.

That... actually..... yeah. You know what? That is pretty accurate.

#50 Posted by TheHT (11145 posts) -

@theht said:

@mooseymcman said:

I think it would have been better if the game only let you carry ONE gun (a pistol), and make it only viable in extreme situations. How? I dunno, I'm not a game designer, but I would have liked to see the game go down that route.

Having only a pistol slot and having to pickup temporary bigger guns that you couldn't magically holster could be good.

Yeah, based on that original E3 reveal trailer, I was hoping it would be something along those lines. Like, you have this list of bad people that you think deserve vigilante justice, so the hacking would be used to track them down, analyze their movements, look for flaws in their security, and to create distractions or confusion when you choose to make your move. Basically like a Hitman game or something, you would have a target, and use all your cyber mojo to find the best way to assassinate them. It turns out that that style of game probably doesn't sell as many copies as an open-world crime game where you hack wi-fi grenades on people's belts, and make pipes on walls explode all the time.

That's sounds like an Assassin's Creed game (or at least the first one), so I'm sure they could pull it off.