A slow news day article and more importantly one in which Patrick misses the point buy a mile. From the looks of it because he never bothered to complete the sidequest.

If you played Aiden like a dick then the onus is on the player. The sidequest reveals Maurice's story and intentions completely. If you choose to kill him after that then yeah, Aiden is a heartless dick. But so is the player. Let him live and recognize he's a victim then Aiden (and you) realizes that not everyone is actually guilty in a black or white way, offers a reflection of his actions all the way through and is in part guilty of not only killing his niece but also destroying Maurice's family.

And more importantly, Maurice changed his mind about killing Aiden at the very beginning and the result was an accident. So there's a lot more to the end scene than this article actually bothers to cover.

The only open world games I have really loved were AC 2 and Red Dead. In those, I cared enough about the character and the world to not go around killing for no reason.

That feeling seems hard to replicate in a urban setting where the driving takes so much of a game. Of course you are going to run people over and once that happens the story falls apart for me.

@humanity: haven't played it but i feel i agree with you; the insane backlash seems really unwarranted even hearing jeff talk about it it seemed like he had a really good time with it overall and enjoyed some of the things it brought to the genre. i always get the feeling from the games he reviews he enjoys the three star ones the best, and when he talks about the five star ones he typically has a lot of "meh" feelings or only talks about the negative. it's weird.

Huh, I totally forgot that choice even happened at the end. I left him alive because he was already psychologically broken and thought it would be more funny to not end his suffering. Leaving him a gun to cap himself would've been my preferred end to that scenario.

I liked it quite a bit, personally.

As someone who just finished Watch Dogs yesterday, this was super poignant to me.

Also, not that it matters, but her name is mentioned enough in the game that Patrick or whoever edited it probably should've caught that the niece's name is Lena, not Leah.

@patrickklepek This article echoes my feelings to the 't' - and as an added note, one of my favorite articles you have written this year.

While I did enjoy the game overall, I feel it was wasted potential on a number of fronts - storytelling, the setting/premise, etc.

I hate using the phrase 'cognitive dissonance' because of the infamous "Cynics Vs Bioshock Infinite" 2013 debate - but this game tries very hard to be grounded in real life + real people + real Chicago unlike the cartoon-y city of Columbia & its whimsical characters.

@patrickklepek good write up, keep it coming!

@mormonwarrior: At least in Grand Theft Auto V and Red Dead Redemption, it's the point. GTA has you actively disliking the characters, even though you want to do the things they are doing. You try to identify with them, and the game looks you in the face with a stern look that says, "you sure you want to be like these guys". In Red Dead Redemption, with no spoilers, there is one way that game ends... There is set path for Marston, whether he likes it or not, and it's his fault he's on it. In Watch_Dogs, Aiden Pearce is an asshole who gets away with everything. He's the coddled bully on the elementary school yard. Everyone knows he's bad, but his parents (the writers) can't believe it, so they take him to charity events and he does good things because his parents say he's doing good things. "Oh, look at little Aiden beating u... rough housing with that sick homeless kid, isn't he great?"

I won't agree that Watch Dogs is a bad game, but I will agree that the storytelling is terrible. Watch Dogs, and GTA V have shown me maybe I should stop caring about realistic urban open worlds, and go play Saints Row.

At least he didn't get randomly killed in the end. He concludes his story, however weak it is, instead of the all too common let down ending, where you wonder why the heck you spent all those hours playing a game just to see your character die.

@impossibilium: The point is that there is no non-dick path. There is no way to complete the objectives of the game without being a dick to someone somewhere. You only get to choose how much of a dick you are.

This is why I found the arc of Joel in The Last of Us satisfying. While I felt that the game could give you a bit more interactivity (even if it was linear) in the end, Naughty Dog managed to create a consistent character that defied the notions of your typical video game protagonists.

Interesting article although I'm uncertain if Patrick didn't like Aiden because of his own morale viewpoints and expectations to main characters in videogames or because Aiden was simply badly written. I haven't played Watch_Dogs but from what I saw from the QL and taking in mind Ubisofts earlier attempts at such things as "story" and "character build-up", I'd say the latter is probably true. Still I think Patricks sentiment that Aiden is a bad character, because he doesn't follow Klepeks own ways of traditionally playing open world characters, is both troubling and revealing of a larger problem in gaming narratives. The 'Han Solo' archetype Patrick is describing may be what he is most confortable with.... But it seems that that is the case with every video game writer in existence.

How many games allow you to play the villian? And I don't mean some sad ass excuse for an 'anti-hero' such as it is the case with most of Rockstars games in which the protagonists actions in the end always seems to be 'justified'. The only examples I can think of are Gears of War (you play as a bunch of fascist space-colonists who acts all surprised when the local residents aren't super thrilled by their presence), Cathrine (the game doesn't try to justify the fact that Vincent is a cheating asshole other than "hey this guy is kinda scum, what did you expect?") and the Wario Land-series (there is nothing redeemable about Wario and I love him for it).

Klepek often talks about how he loves when games and gaming narratives 'divergts the players expectations'. What could be more challenging for the player than to play a character they actively disliked and whose action WEREN'T justified by some bullshit excuse?

It's a matter of personal preference of course. I don't see myself as a 'bad person', but I do enjoy stories in which the protagonist doesn't jive with my own views of the world. And it's fun to get to root for the bad guys sometimes. Just a thought.

John Marston is indeed a great character, and one that I certainly wouldn't consider to be an irredeemable monster. Though it's weird that RDR actually has a morality meter to reflect any terrible deeds you happen to commit, given how the story continues on with Marston as someone who's genuinely trying to get out of the game and just go back to his family. In fact both Marston and Niko from GTA IV I roleplayed to their character. I never went on random rampages, and always responded in kind to people who said hello to me in RDR.

That's also the reason why the bounties made for such a great side mission series, given that it allows you to engage in open world combat while not feeling like you're breaking out of character.

A bit off topic since this is an article about Watch Dogs, but it brings to mind other such open world crime game protagonists. I haven't played Watch Dogs myself and Aiden has admittedly been one of the primary driving forces that's stopping me giving it go. That bloody Bale Batman voice... I just can't get past it.

And even then, the choices range from complete dickwad to total asshole. There's no "well-meaning vigilante" here. Just a selfish cretin that threatens the lives and safety of numerous innocents to avenge a single death.

The only time i made an actual choice about killing in the game was outside what the devs intended. When you get the side-missions to track down the buyers of the auction i murdered every single one of them (usually with grenades, or a shot in the face). The game only reaction was to punish me lowering my reputation, as they are considered normal civilians as far as game mechanics go. I killed countless thugs and the game rewarded me but the only time i felt actually compelled to kill someone in the game (i couldn't care less even for the main antagonists) i was actually punished. Not that that stopped me, it was the only time in the entire game I felt like roleplaying a vigilante/justice seeker/whatever; the choice at the end meant absolutely zero to me; and I felt it was absolutely useless, since the devs try to make you empathize with maurice through his audiologs, not through character progression of Aiden.

@civid: My impression is that he's more annoyed that the game and the world tries to present him as a justified and righteous hero/anti-hero, even though he's just an irredeemable dick.

Aiden isn't interesting. I think that's why he is hated so much. That's why I hate him. He's an asshole with little to no redeeming qualities. There have been plenty of stories told where the protagonist isn't a good guy or he/she didn't deserve any form of redemption but they were interesting to watch/read/play as/etc. Aiden is a bland mess with confused morals. The story wanted you to side with him but failed to give me a reason to. I agree with Patrick. Aiden is a piece of shit. He doesn't deserve to be forgiven no matter how much the game says he should be.

@yummylee: Yeah from watching video Aiden just seems like a dick. I mean I handled Jason from Far Cry but Aiden seems like a no fun dick.

Here's an idea for Watch Dogs 2: Play as a former bystander that Aiden inadvertently screwed over and have them seek their own vengeance against him. Only make an effort to make this character actually, you know, likeable.

Hm, Patrick, you bring up a truly intriguing point on our perceptions of characters in stories, especially in video games, (where we have the ability to literally play out the story) where our interactions have an impact on the world but not the plot. A rogue-like, Han Solo esque character that comes to mind for me is John Marston and is a great foil to Aiden's, seemingly, non redeeming qualities and actions.

In Red Dead Redemption, the game in which Marston is the key figure, we also have an impact on our environment; much like in Watch Dogs. However, unlike in Watch Dogs, Marston's plot line takes a much more liberating path that has the player, and the character, reach an incredibly cathartic moment by the end. And, Red Dead's ending almost acts as a foil to Watch Dog's; pulling any sense of control from the player, and Marston, putting you before the void and telling you to dive in without any other choice.

Marston's history is rather similar to Aiden's, in regard to their sordid pasts. However, once again we have Marston truly trying to atone for the dark deeds of his past while continuing to commit atrocities more on the level of a mass murder; much like Aiden. Unlike Aiden, however, we have a true sentimental connection to Marston and feel that what he is doing is truly building a bridge to a better future for himself; whether it's by liberating a small desert town from an unruly gang or overthrowing a harsh, despotic, Mexican dictator. Simply, Red Dead Redemption built a fairly basic connection to his family, his land, and his desire to live a life in peace -something most of us wish for at some point. However, this plot device serves a much better basis for building an anti-hero that doesn't feel as though he deserves his ill begotten fate, despite his truly deplorable actions and past choices; most of which were circumstantial.

This is an interesting topic that really does deserve the attention of game developers. As creators, game developers deserve to give their characters a sense of life and awareness. Clearly, Aiden is not aware that he has created his own awful fate, and whether the developers knew this or not is in their ball park. However, as consumers, We have the right to say that their portrayal of this character type is not realistic or not emotionally significant, and/or left an incredibly awful taste in our mouths.

Hopefully, both consumer and developer continue to take a better look at what we are doing with our in-game characters and how the plot line impacts our perception of those characters and our choices.

I didn't like the game enough to even become invested in the character. Balls to this game!

Well written, I was having similar thoughts while playing the game. They threw you into it's world of characters like it's a know quantity, with no explanation or build up. I did not care about Aden and the game never did a good job telling me why I should. This is one of 2 games in the last 5 years that gotten about 75% into and thought: "what am I doing, I am not having any fun and I give zero shits about what it happening."... and just walked away.

Much like @humanity, I find myself wondering why Watch Dogs (and Aiden) is the thing worth questioning in a sea of poorly designed games and inconsistent characters. And honestly, I am not seeing this sea of issues people have with Aiden. I mean sure, he's a dick to everyone that tries to help him at some point, but mostly because he want to get the revenge he's working toward and he's lacking in patience. As someone else said, I kind of feel like the biggest issue with Aiden is that he's not anti-hero charming or funny. Besides, I don't feel like the story has anything to do about redemption. I mean, sure, maybe Aiden started out doing it out of some form of wish to set things right. But let's face it, this is a revenge story where eventually your ends doesn't justify the means to an outsider, but you'll continue down that path anyway because you feel justified.

I still feel like people are projecting their own imagined version of a Watch Dogs that never were and an Aiden that doesn't exist and they get bummed out when that realization comes to pass.

@zeik: At what point in the game does it try to portray Aiden as a hero (other than the fact that you play him)? Mind you, I haven't beaten the game, but I haven't felt like Aiden has been portrayed like anything other than a single minded revenge machine for all the hours I've spent with it. And I've questioned his ways more than once, but I never felt like the game ever tried to tell me to like him or be sympathetic to his actions.

I started out enjoying the game, but I was ready to be done with it towards the end of it. It felt to samey to me.

@ucankurbaga said:

But it was for her own survival and she at least express regret throughout most of the game. (Still a serial killer by the end of it but yeah, video games) The difference between her and Aiden was good writing.

I enjoyed Watch Dogs a lot as a game but as a story, it was pretty ridiculous. I love how Ubisoft goes on and on about their Alice storytelling department and their editorial process, yet even after major delays, this is the best they could come up with for Watch Dogs. I actually would be all for a game based around telling the story of a bad guy and having to play as the bad guy. That would be an interesting and somewhat bold move but games like this always have to have the concluding event (like the Maurice choice) to go "Naw, he's really kind of a hero with a conscience, see?" They'd get a lot more respect and props from me if they'd just gone all in and say "This guy's an amoral black hat and that's the role you'll play from beginning to end." GTA IV had the same problem, you're given a guy who throws morality to the wind when it suits him but is always shown as someone you should feel sorry for.

I did a lot of the side stuff cause I actually enjoyed it but if you didn't, I recommend find Maurice's audio logs on YouTube. They actually do a pretty good job of humanising that character (ostensibly your enemy) and showing the epic emotional struggle he went through and how he actually did have to do what he did to protect his own family interests, unlike Aiden who just refuses to back off, even when everyone around him is practically begging him to.

I'll play the bad guy if you want, in fact I'd be up for that once in a while. This is supposed to be escapism after all. But then don't expect me to empathise with him too. Watch Dogs feels an awful lot like Assassin's Creed 1. A good idea that in spite of delays and the studio's past experience, still feels like it has a lot of evolving to do. Watch Dogs 2 will likely be a marked improvement. Personally, I'd prefer they just scrap Aiden and his baggage and make it about a new character.

All that said though, I'm not sure why the fact that you can kill a lot of people unlike real life has suddenly become such a big deal. These are video games, they aren't real life. Personally, if Watch Dogs mimicked the real world's rules, I would find it boring as Hell.

The story was fairly throwaway for me. They did manage to get me to care about killing Damien, but otherwise I really didn't care about Clara dying or what happened to Maurice.

I enjoyed the game mechanically for the most part, but just too much repetition. As some others have said, it reminds me of the first Assassin's Creed, but with a weaker story and less focus. So much of the side content was the same type of mission just repeated endlessly. I started this game thinking I may go for the platinum trophy. Now I don't even want to pick it up and play it again, it's exhausted me.

Like I said I'm sure this game is very badly written. But I still think it's a shame so many people only want to play as characters they find 'likeable'. Since most videogames are violent and requires the protagonist to shot a shit ton of duders and dudettes that mostly limits you to the John McClane/Han Solo/Jack Bauer/Batman archetypes of the world... Which I don't find all that compelling to play as. My point is that videogames needs more irredeemable dicks. They're often a hell of a lot more interesting than the good guys.

I don't normally just stop playing a game but this one rubbed me the wrong way enough that after the part where I was gunning down a bunch of mooks to C.R.E.A.M. I sat and asked myself what the hell I was doing. That was weeks ago and I haven't launched the game since.

@pikadrew: @patrickklepek: Exactly. If you collected all of the burner phones it gives you more insight into Maurice. While he pulled the trigger he was merely a puppet who was already suffering severe mental trauma, so I let him live.

Plus, as others have pointed out, Maurice wasn't trying to kill Aiden or anyone else; he was trying to scare Aiden after the heist with Damien.

It's kind of goofy, I agree. And Aiden isn't at all sympathetic. If they tried to portray him as a good guy, they have probably failed. He killed hundreds of hired guns and gang members in my game, not to mention civilians. I tried to play stealthy non lethal in the beginning, but it just got frustrating.

I guess I ended up seeing him as more of a sociopathic vigilante with a misguided sense of justice. He does a lot of bad things, but he tries to achieve what in his mind is the right thing. And he does do a lot of good.

I hated the Mafia in the game even more, some of those audio logs... jeez... Especially Lucky Quinn.

The whole Lena angle and seeking revenge seemed silly.

Despite that I enjoyed the game.

Isnt the whole point of the game that Pearce is a shithead? He's an ex hacker turned vigilante (wannabe) good guy; who in trying to prevent bad things from happening only causes more bad things to happen. His obsession with his murdered daughter drives whats left of his family to shambles, causing him to give up more and more of what would be considered a normal life just trying to figure out who was behind the murder.

@patrickklepek The niece's name is Lena not Leah. In the opening cut scene of the car crash, Aiden is babysitting her sisters kids, he didn't know the Hotel robbery was a job that got a hit placed on him yet.

As said, in the side quests based on Maurice, you learn the Club put his girlfriend into the human trafficking auction for not killing Aiden, among other things about Maurice.

The Missing Person's side quest is worse then the final decision in the game. You find out who is killing women and then you shoot him via a typical "stop a criminal mission." It's the only option, why wasn't there an option to tie them up call the police and place a flash drive on them or something.

If I were to write an article about this game, my subject would be why they decided to make the police so inept of doing actual police work. Like why can't you work with them even though it's totally not sanctioned. Why can't they find Aiden via his sister? Why are they so corrupt and CtOS doesn't flag any of that.

I really enjoyed the game itself but yeah, they really botched the writing. It's like there's an actual story there, but you only see the second act of it. The game does mention (quite often actually) that Aiden is a miserable hypocrite and a mass murderer, but it doesn't ever go anywhere with the idea. You spend the whole game waiting for that moment where he turns the corner and realises he's a bad guy, but it never happens. Very weird.

But again, it's a fun game, and I never expected anything from the story portion anyway. I'd still recommend it overall.

@phished0ne: It's his niece, not his daughter. And they kinda do portray him that way, but they try to squeeze in a redemptive ark there.

And the only reason I would say it kinda sort of works, is because the people he is fighting are even shittier than him. For me he was the biggest bad ass among the criminals and the lesser of evils. Less Batman, more Punisher.

@fluttercry: Spoiler tags, yo.

I was hoping Watch Dogs would be a game about hacking, espionage, and stealth. Violence as a last resort and restricted to things like stun guns and maybe a compound bow or something. Instead, it became Gears of War with cover shooting and open warfare.

I am still waiting for the game the treats violence as something that is really punished.

You are totally right about Aiden, Patrick, but the story in general was so uninteresting that I largely stopped paying any attention during cutscenes. I nonetheless had an enjoyable enough time with the game.

@mormonwarrior: I believe Marston is probably the best of that bunch, because all the time you have options that defined you as the man with no name or Lee Van Cleef. True, you had the option to rob Banks, kill deputies and tie people to train rails, but you also have the option to stop lynchings and assist people being robbed. You were never a "straight" good guy (because that is not the old west way), but you have enough variety between good and evil karma missions to help define your character as you wanted, between rough but honorable and murderous sociopath.

The rest of your examples are pretty spot on, though. Niko Belic and Kratos are so badly written as people looking for redemption that they are almost laughable... almost, but mostly are just bad. From what I heard about Watch Dogs, Aiden seems to be the exact same archetype of evil character that is redeemable only because the game says so.

I haven't read this article as I left the game dangling on mission 11 or 12 of Act II after clearing out most of the side content. But I really want to participate in this discussion. I'm going to have to play more Watch Dogs, aren't I?

@pezen: I'm not gonna spoil, just finish the game. They spell it out during the ending. Otherwise the rest of the game is indeed a revenge story about a bad guy that can't let go.

@hermes: What was wrong with Niko Belic? I think he's just as good a character as Marston. To lump him in with the likes of Kratos in particular seems awfully harsh...

@yummylee: I find Kratos one-track mind for all things vengeance to clash less with the activities in the game when compared to Niko. Offcourse that's the advantage when not dealing with an openworld.

I played the game mostly stealth so my civilian casualties were very low. I didn't kill any cops(except for in the final mission) and all the other bad guys i saw as paid mercenaries.

I loved the Online Fixer contracts so maybe they can make that a separate game for the sequel ala GTA: Online. If Assassin's Creed taught us anything it's that, unlike movies, video game sequels can be a hundred times better.

He never deserved redemption but rather just want everything to end. Maybe Aiden was designed as someone with blind rage. He is a selfish bastard. He probably just doesn't give a fuck. The problem I noticed is that the development of Aiden and the world influencing him lacked enough detail to make it convincing. It's an interesting idea to play someone who is probably supposed to be unlikable but I guess they were unable to fully flesh it out.

1) I assume Patrick didn't finish collecting the Maurice's dead drops. He would've made a more informed decision about Maurice's fate at the end

2) Patrick thinks this game is the origin story of a hacking super hero? Where the hell did he get that information? With all the crime and rampant murdering, he's more of an anti-hero.