Discuss everything about the 3rd installment in the watch dogs franchise.
I am wondering… Will this game follow the recent trend of many Ubisoft titles having a custom character? Or there will still be a campaign-driven storyline involving an actual protagonist, just like the previous two games? Personally, I will still prefer latter.
I can’t get over the title. Isn’t referencing Mark 5:9 a little passe at this point
When was this announced?
If you mean an official announcement, it was two days ago:
I really liked Watch Dogs 1 and 2. Both are polar opposites, but I hope this game has 2’s playstyle of using of gadgets and toys to fuck with people, with an open approach to each level.
The title does sound kind of grim, so if it was a mix of 1 and 2’s tone I’d be cool with that too.
I just hope they improve the technical parts, especially the physics engine and some character movements etc. And that they make this game less corny.
They mention that you will be able to choose and play any NPC in the world. I just hope they do have a fixed protagonist that you can play.
It could be similar to Driver San Fran. Another Ubi game, and like WD2, set in San Francisco.
EDIT: I need to mention that WDL will take place in London. I hope that the European location lets WDL be, err, good…
That is one of the most innovative racing game ever. I had a ton of fun by shifting into a 18-wheeler truck and blocking the highway traffic.
Post-Brexit London? I hope they don’t get political and portray it as A) A fascist occupation where aggressive nationalism masks open hate crime, or B) A peaceful utopia that extols the virtues of economic independence. Getting political can easily come off as cheap, and dates the piece.
It will be set in London… after the Blitz.
Kidding aside though… I don’t get this idea of jumping into anyone’s body. Everybody in London has hacking apps in their phones?
I don’t think I like the idea of it being set in London… But who know’s. Maybe it will turn out great.
Damien Brenks did muse about targeting London after Chicago.
Perhaps the city has become more dystopian and people are wearing wireless implants because they’re more ‘convenient’ than having to lug around a 1 gram smartphone. Hack into the implants, it’ll be like Deus Ex.
My favourite part of the first game was when Brenks was hacking the city and everything was going haywire as you drive through the explosions and the manic traffic, music bumping, taunted by the villain as Aiden shouts “Daaammiieeeen!” - I got some really cinematic shots from that.
HOld your posts to one comment. Do you think I have 10TB HARDDRVE! Stop thinking about yourself all the time Brownell ! jk
Okay I’ll shut up now!
Did you play WD2? What did you think about it?
Too late, shutting up!
I did play it and I got about ten minutes into it before going “What the Hell is this?”, it’s very different from the tone of the first game.
The obnoxious dialogue from the protagonists was so eye-watering I had to mute the speech volume, and I didn’t like that the plot had gone from gritty metropolis to “Let’s take a selfie on top of this building to get more social media followers! #Edgy!”
But I did enjoy the gameplay and I think it was tighter than the first game, and had a lot of cool new toys to play with, not least the remote-controlled drone that would have been very useful in the first game because you could only scout through restrictive CCTV cameras. And ctOS 2.0 felt like the natural progression from the Chicago-specific model.
San Francisco looked really nice, and I was able to recognise areas that were true to real life, something they’d done well in the first game in Chicago’s Loop district. The map was very large too, with lots of diverse atmospheres to explore.
Overall the plot and dialogue were awful and I was disappointed to learn the villainous billionaire just wanted to make more billions. I feel like Ubisoft did well to tap into ambitious themes in their Assassin’s Creed series with the human race being designed as slaves and all that world-changing stuff, so it was a shame to see that Watch Dogs 2 had such an unimaginative storyline and payoff. They built this interesting world, with Blume and ctOS and surveillance, but didn’t use all the pieces for their full potential. So it was a nice game if you mute the characters and avoid the millennial hipster activities, but I did get a refund after I finished the main storyline.
I saw the trailers for the game, so I knew it would be a shift in tone, but I decided to give it a go because the plot of the first one was good. This time I’m going to base my decision to buy the third game solely on the trailers.
I don’t have much time to play games these days because I work a lot in some pretty dangerous places, and so when I can play a game, I usually only have time for one, before I have to go again. So I’m very fussy about the games I play, because if it’s crap, I’ll have to wait another month or two before I can give a different one a go.
I’m kind of worried about the location, but other than that, I have no expectations. Who knows, maybe we’ll get to fuch around with the Crown’s chaps. I’ve developed quite a distaste for the ol’ bobbies, so maybe it’ll be cathartic or something.
I’m really interested to see how the whole NPC thing will work out. Sounds ambitious.
Both WD1 and WD2 sucked as far as the story is concerned. Pure cringe and anime-tier garbage. WD2 was better, but still… it’s hard to combine great writing with great game development. Compromises…
Can’t remember the last time E3 had this many interesting presentations coming. Looking forward to next week!
Here’s my “crazy” suggestion to make the Watch Dogs story more interesting:
Make Jordi the player character. The fans love the guy and by playing a morally ambiguous Hitman you wouldn’t have to worry a protagonist who’s supposed to be likeable yet commits murder and other crimes.