Killah184 Posted May 9, 2014 Share Posted May 9, 2014 I am honestly not blatantly trying to troll, but does anyone else feel like Watchdogs is going to be a yearly cash-cow like Assassin's Creed/COD/Madden etc? I'm sure this game will get a 9 rating (although it deserves a 7 at best.) I honestly don't see what all the hype is about. It basically looks like a modern Assassin's Creed. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlindMango Posted May 9, 2014 Share Posted May 9, 2014 (edited) During its original unveil I fell in love with it because it had the prefect "mood" and atmosphere and character to it. Ever since then, its seemed like they've slowly been "cartoonizing" it somewhat to where its not so serious and not like its original unveil, which is highly disappointing but I'm hoping it's still a great game. As far as a yearly cash-cow - I hope not. I hope they take the GTA route and do every three years at least, and I hope the next Watch Dogs gets closer to the dark and mysterious mood of the original unveil of this Watch Dogs =P Edited May 9, 2014 by BlindMango 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IntenseFATE98 Posted May 9, 2014 Share Posted May 9, 2014 I agree with Mango. The graphics seem to have been downgraded a lot since the original reveal. As for the next Watch_ Dogs games, IF they make more Watch_Dogs games, I hope they release them once every two/three years. Whether I will buy the next games or not will or depend on the first one. Hopefully, it will be worth the wait Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Killah184 Posted May 9, 2014 Author Share Posted May 9, 2014 Im just afraid it being Ubisoft that it will be out every year in May. If that is the case I may wait until 2015 to buy the sequel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Soadisthebest Posted May 9, 2014 Popular Post Share Posted May 9, 2014 (although it deserves a 7 at best.) Interesting method you're using. Rating the game based off nothing. 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
damon8r351 Posted May 9, 2014 Share Posted May 9, 2014 How are we able to rate a game before it's even out in stores? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr_Mayus Posted May 9, 2014 Share Posted May 9, 2014 I am honestly not blatantly trying to troll, but does anyone else feel like Watchdogs is going to be a yearly cash-cow like Assassin's Creed/COD/Madden etc? I'm sure this game will get a 9 rating (although it deserves a 7 at best.) I honestly don't see what all the hype is about. It basically looks like a modern Assassin's Creed. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Killah184 Posted May 9, 2014 Author Share Posted May 9, 2014 Interesting method you're using. Rating the game based off nothing. It's basically a carbon copy of Assassin's Creed - there isn't one game in that series that is deserving of a rating better than a 7. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlindMango Posted May 9, 2014 Share Posted May 9, 2014 (edited) It's basically a carbon copy of Assassin's Creed - there isn't one game in that series that is deserving of a rating better than a 7. Just because it's a third person game by Ubisoft does not mean that it's a carbon copy of Assassin's Creed, this game has a ton of different gameplay mechanics that Assassin's Creed has never had before (Driving, shooting (instead of a focus on melee), hacking, urban/city exploration & movement, etc...) I mean, I imagine that if Assassin's Creed were to be set in modern times, this would probably be close to what it would be, however there has never been an Assassin's Creed purely in modern times, so that means that this game cannot possibly be a "carbon copy" of Assassin's Creed as you state it is, it may share some artistic flare and inspiration to it, but gameplay-wise, there's a good amount of difference here to which you can't pre-rate the game without playing it. It's like saying GTA is a carbon copy of Red Dead Redemption or LA Noire since they're made by Rockstar Games and are third-person games when that's clearly not true since they have different gameplay mechanics among other things. Edited May 9, 2014 by BlindMango 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PREDRAG-K Posted May 9, 2014 Share Posted May 9, 2014 Watch_Dogs always looked like nothing but a modern day Assassin's Creed, so I've never been interested in it. But rating it before you've even played it is pretty silly. I also don't think it will become a yearly release. We don't even know if it will be set up for a sequel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BooneJusticius Posted May 9, 2014 Share Posted May 9, 2014 I agree with BlindMango. I also think it's a bit early to condemn a game and give it a review based on nothing when it's not even out yet. I know you say you're not trying to troll but that's pretty much exactly what this kind of judging a game that's not even out yet typically looks like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soadisthebest Posted May 9, 2014 Share Posted May 9, 2014 It's basically a carbon copy of Assassin's Creed - there isn't one game in that series that is deserving of a rating better than a 7. I see what you're saying. Its like with Mass Effect. Carbon copy of Uncharted. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Killah184 Posted May 9, 2014 Author Share Posted May 9, 2014 I see what you're saying. Its like with Mass Effect. Carbon copy of Uncharted. Those are two completely different developers. The mechanics (movement [running for instance], fighting, etc is all the same.) Hell, at least R* didn't put the same running mechanic in two completely different games. i.e RDR/GTA. But I wouldn't expect someone with the words "yolo or swag" anywhere in their profile to look closely at detail. Just because it's a third person game by Ubisoft does not mean that it's a carbon copy of Assassin's Creed, this game has a ton of different gameplay mechanics that Assassin's Creed has never had before (Driving, shooting (instead of a focus on melee), hacking, urban/city exploration & movement, etc...) I mean, I imagine that if Assassin's Creed were to be set in modern times, this would probably be close to what it would be, however there has never been an Assassin's Creed purely in modern times, so that means that this game cannot possibly be a "carbon copy" of Assassin's Creed as you state it is, it may share some artistic flare and inspiration to it, but gameplay-wise, there's a good amount of difference here to which you can't pre-rate the game without playing it. It's like saying GTA is a carbon copy of Red Dead Redemption or LA Noire since they're made by Rockstar Games and are third-person games when that's clearly not true since they have different gameplay mechanics among other things. I just think that Ubisoft is very lazy. Excluding the driving mechanic; the character movement, stance, etc is all the same. At least R* changed the mechanics between different games Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soadisthebest Posted May 9, 2014 Share Posted May 9, 2014 Hell, at least R* didn't put the same running mechanic in two completely different games. i.e RDR/GTA. ayyyy yeah they did. both use the exact same engines unlike watch dogs and ac lmao #YOLO #SWAG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nenugalimas Posted May 9, 2014 Share Posted May 9, 2014 Ah gamers, getting mad about something thats not even out yet... 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KratosTheMighty Posted May 9, 2014 Share Posted May 9, 2014 I think it looks cool. A vigilante type game that is smarter than just run, shoot, rinse and repeat. Hacking looks interesting, the way that the people on the streets have different personalities, likes/dislikes, and the fact you can even save citizens from crimes... Just looks awesome. IMO anyway. It may look similar to Assassin's Creed, but only because it's from the same developer, and is third person. I don't think this game is going to become a yearly release. Ubisoft can't have all of its studios working on 2 series. Just because one series by Ubisoft is yearly released, which is kind of funny since they get more dev time than just one year, doesn't mean that every potential series is going to be released every year. If the game doesn't interest you.... then simply don't buy it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WuTangJase- Posted May 9, 2014 Share Posted May 9, 2014 I lost my hype for it and cancelled the pre-order. I'll buy it if i'm convinced enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goekie Posted May 9, 2014 Share Posted May 9, 2014 I fail to see how WD is anything like AC. The game isn't even out yet, saying that WD will score a 9 overall is pure speculation based on nothing 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STRANGEgenius Posted May 9, 2014 Share Posted May 9, 2014 I highly doubt it will be a yearly franchise, and isn't AC the ONLY franchise by Ubisoft thats a yearly release? All Ubisoft has said, is that they are interested in making WD a franchise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quikdrawjoe Posted May 9, 2014 Share Posted May 9, 2014 I feel you would have a better argument if the game was you know actually released. Not random speculation from a variety of sources. You would be better off complaining about how the new CoD game is going to get a 9 rating when it deserves less. At least you would have historical evidence to base your opinion on rather than spewing random vitriol about something you know nothing about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parker Posted May 9, 2014 Share Posted May 9, 2014 You already have issues with a game that hasn't even been released yet? It may look like a modern Assassin's Creed but that doesn't mean it plays like it. Who knows, maybe it does but there is no point in getting worked up over something that no one has even had the chance to play. Parker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amebapiko Posted May 9, 2014 Share Posted May 9, 2014 Very ridiculous thing to say since it's not even out, if you already have 'issues' with it, maybe you shouldn't buy it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gotakibono Posted May 9, 2014 Share Posted May 9, 2014 I'd personally reserve judgement until the game is released. I think it has vast potential, but it could just as easily be a complete and utter fucking bust. Only time'll tell, I guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HaSoOoN-MHD Posted May 9, 2014 Share Posted May 9, 2014 (edited) This is such a horrible ad hominem I don't even know where to begin. Trust me, i'm not all that excited for Watch_Dogs either because I feel as if it lost what made it stand out during its first showing, that immense attention to detail, the ambitious story or world ideas and the atmosphere *it looks its been reduced to something pretty generic, in terms of story and as someone put it in the first page, they've been slowly cartooning it*, but its definitely not an Assassin's Creed clone with multitude of different mechanics, and scoring it without playing it as asinine. Edited May 9, 2014 by HaSoOoN-MHD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malfuras Posted May 9, 2014 Share Posted May 9, 2014 Still looks bloody fantastic to me! But one will only tell once it's been played.... to death.... and then some. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now