Watch_Dogs

Whilst I'm impressed I do doubt that the wider "they have family" element will be touched on in great detail. Ass Creed's routines were there but had no bearing other than making population movement look like it had purpose. Also, I very much doubt you'll have any way to interact with the supposed families... and what player would - most players will probably do something rather unspeakable.

In terms of mission objectives, wonder if it'll either reset the mission OR have you take over a nearby team mate who then has to pick up the slack after whatever went FUBAR.

Whatever they do, this is at least an interesting take on things. And one observer said they found a character with a trait that said "Terminally ill" - which meant they had a chance to die at ANY MOMENT.

Just wonder how many forced accents I'll have to put up with. The trailer narrator sounded like an Aussie trying to sound British.

"Ded Sec killed my relative!" modifier on random NPC will probably be the extent of the family interaction.

From what I could tell from the previews, when the game generates an NPC it also generates a short bio for them that includes other NP Cs that are their friends and family. So if you kill them, then their friends and family will be upset with Dedsec and become harder to recruit.

In practice this will make the process of recruiting them somewhat longer and more difficult. And of course unless you are really murder-happy, chances are you aren't going to run into this problem often enough for this to matter. But it could incentiveize using nonlethal takedowns whenever possible.

Edited by Falrinn on Jun 13th 2019 at 7:59:53 AM

Sounds a lot like the Nemesis system. I like.

Yeah. And it'll be nice to have that a bit more explicitly shown with hacked bios rather than a total black box from the player as it was with the orcs.

A nemesis system for allies and enemies. I still don't get how more games haven't used that - it'd be perfect for a more emergent GTA-like game, with dynamic gang structures.

What I find interesting is how this Watch Dogs is doing Cyberpunk quite well - all "fight the man" with punky-style clothing and dystopia, whilst also just trying to survive. Me Likey.

Because it takes a whole lot of effort and time to make it. And we're currently in a period of games commonly suffering from a distinct lack of those being put in. The ones that do put the effort in just choose to go for a tried and true classic fleshing out of the world.

It is also not a system that you can just randomly bang into something. Spider-Man game couldn't have it, he relies on a fixed cast of colorful villains. God of War is the same but with mythologies. You need a plot excuse to both view those biographies and relations and to make people switch sides.

Edited by Adannor on Jun 14th 2019 at 2:16:22 PM

I do hope they put a lot of effort into the systems for this game, although I can just see the criticism developing: Ubisoft can't figure out how to create interesting protagonists so they're throwing in the towel and letting us decide which characters we like.

Oh I know, the system as is in SOM couldn't just be lifted and shifted; but as I said, I am surprised more games havent tried to emulate what it does. There's plenty of other "follow the leader" things, but i agree with you that most of those are systems that are a) easier to make b) cheaper c) less time consuming.

Also, it wouldn't be applicable to ALL GAMES; but a GTA with a set of gangs? That'd work; a roguelike game with procedural enemies? have this system to show that enemy factions are fluid and change. Other RPG games could use something similar to give you a foe you feel YOU identify with, alongside the set cast of characters.

But seeing Watch Dogs apply a similar system to their recruitable NP Cs is great AND offers more depth beyond just "buffs" - gives the world some seeming depth.

My main concern isn't the likability of the characters per se, it's the linearity of the story. For all that the demo shows off the different characters you can use, the macroscopic plot seems to be the same. This could result in another by-the-numbers campaign with plug-and-play party members, which isn't bad, but could disappoint if the implied promise is a story that is shaped by your choices.

Ultimately, I'd like to see a game in this series that has the slightest replay value. Heck, WD1 didn't even give you multiple save slots at first.

Edited by Fighteer on Jun 14th 2019 at 9:38:20 AM

"Story is shaped by your choices!" is pretty much always a lie. Just flat out.

In here, the story is going to be about Ded Sec as an organization, potentially involving the AI as its static character, but it will not matter at all to which specific operative you're running the missions with. It is unreasonable to expect anything more.

You can shape and make ministories on the side with your operatives, just like how you could have personal vendetta with orcs in SOW. That's all you can expect to get.

Edited by Adannor on Jun 14th 2019 at 4:55:02 PM

As long as the marketing doesn't try to claim otherwise, that's fine. It does run the risk of the interactions between characters being superficial, though. Like I said earlier in the topic, if the attempt to add stakes to the game by having character permadeath is deflated by providing an infinite supply of randomly generated characters, then there aren't actually any stakes.

Each character has their own skill tree - so that does mean you lose a potentially useful tool (As that seems to be the only value gamers apply to things - its stats) meaning you have to find a similar sort of person again and start again.

They'll be more like "the right tool for the right job". So hopefully they'll be important. That infiltration mission - I wonder if it'd be different if you had a police-officer working for you - could you just walk in there without needing to infiltrate?

It does create the potential of dynamic approaches to missions. You could go in sniping everyone from stealth, using bluffing and charisma, being part of the targeted group, being innocuous, hacking, or guns blazing.

I wonder if the option to employ multiple members on missions will be an option - so you could use one to setup a distraction, another to be the gunner.... or if it's one per phase of a mission maybe?

Fun fact that just got revealed: Ben "Yahtzee" Croshaw was brought in as a writing consultant for Legion. He apparently did very little, just helping make sure the dialogue was authentic for certain characters and writing a few jokes, which he's been told are still in the game. He also made it clear that since he's already been paid he has no incentive to go easy on them come review time.

Edited by Dirtyblue929 on Jun 14th 2019 at 5:18:49 AM

He does, however, think they've finally taken to heart what he said in his review of WD2, which is that if you're going to tell a story about government control of the populace and corporations stealing everyone's data, the protagonist should be a, quote, "normal fucking dude", and it looks like that's what we're getting — or rather, we're getting a whole roster of normal fucking dudes.

Ubisoft's motto: Overcompensate so hard you go right off the the road, into a ditch, then down the hill and up the other side.

Edited by Fighteer on Jun 14th 2019 at 8:31:13 AM

Just my big obvious worry is we wont actually be able to latch onto anyone. Or that the player character will have no stakes or agency in ANYTHING going on around them.

The Assassin's Creed series suffered for years of not having a protagonist and being unable to do ANYTHING with it. All four games of Black Flag, Rogue, Unity, and Syndicate attempted (or halfass attempted with the last two) to explore the organizations of the series rather than an explicit lead.

And it was boring to awful. I dont have a reason to care, none of the characters were interesting, nothing really developed at all and especially not from anything the characters were doing, and it even got to the point where the entire plot got written off with "Well, the MacGuffin was among thousands of other skulls for the past 300 years and basically lost so there's nothing to be done! Good job, Player!" There was never anything at stake.

And, sure, WD 3 has at least character models, voices, and even unique skills for their interchangeable leads. But doesnt that create a MASSIVE wall between the PC and the world and characters around them? If the player cant get attached because they could die, neither can the game.

So, let's give an example. It really means nothing to help T-Bone in the first game after all this build up if... we're now playing as a character who never met T-Bone and has no stakes in the relationship built by the previous character. Or racing to save Clara from the gun men if... our PC has never met Clara and doesnt know who the fuck she is.

You can't build a meaningful protagonist because they could die and it'd be way too ambitious to try and reintegrate the randomly generated cast into the story. Which then means you can't meaningfully develop any side-characters since there's no relationship to the protagonist. Meaning even further that you can't develop an antagonist either since there's again no relationship and conflict to be created. Could you imagine losing your character 10 mins before you kill the Big Bad and end the story? What an anti-climax that is?

"Ah, yes, player_character_2, I've been waiting for this moment for 9 mins and 34 seconds."

Like even Bioshock, a game with a famous silent protagonist, still can build a meaningful relationship out of NP Cs (as you build trust doing quests for them) or the world (as gets built into why the hero even exists, what he's supposed to do, and the one guiding him). There's a massive relationship to BOTH Ryan and Fontaine just from your function as a tool in that game. He other wise has no personality or character.

At that point,... I'd honestly want Aiden back. Sure he was a complete edgy prick jackass with a total lack of empathy, but at least his story was structured and developed in a logical fashion. It's a bad story, sure, but A story with something to comment on at least.

The obvious answer to this might be to push the side-characters off to a Mission Control; a cast of characters in Ded-Sec that you're running quests for. Ones that can build a relationship with the player, have some agency in what's happening, and add consistent stakes.

But that really only pushes the problem elsewhere. Putting all the intrigue and development onto Mission Control and side characters... just makes me want to play THOSE characters. Why should I care about going to this parking garage and stealing some cars when what I actually want to know is what happens to Kevin from IT when the corrupt Gov find out he's part of Ded-Sec? Or I'm going to care a lot about tracking down the guys who kidnapped him and are interrogating him... but wouldnt that be better if I were playing AS Kevin? Or have better tension if I didnt play as a character who might never have met Kevin?

You created a new problem of creating protagonists I can no way engage with and will engage with the world in a way the player character just can't. There IS a story, but I'm not part of it at all.

And I'm not even overexagerating. Look at the comment they were supposed to take to heart from Yahtzee, "If you want to explore the government, corporations, criminals, and other individuals hacking the world, committing crimes, and exploiting people, then you need to tell it from the perspective of a normal fucking dude". And you can't explore that if the 'normal fucking dude' has all the agency and depth of a potato.

Edited by InkDagger on Jun 15th 2019 at 1:03:55 AM

And what, exactly, did this guy consider so not "normal" about Marcus?

Aggressive hipsterism, being all unflappable and too cool to care? I'm mostly guessing, it's been a while. IIRC his complaint was that wd2 cast didn't go beyond shallow stereotypes, they were just different shallow stereotypes than Aiden's gritty edgyness.

Edited by Adannor on Jun 15th 2019 at 12:11:50 PM

I don't think he really elaborated on it, so as far as feedback he ultimately says nothing.

When the entire Deadsec group (like 4 people which includes him) was in a major funk I think it was Marcus who convinced them all to go to Burning Man.

So damn he really is a hipster.

Edited by slimcoder on Jun 15th 2019 at 3:34:47 AM

I really don't know anything about hipsters so I don't know the context of all this.

Its like a big party where a bunch of people gather such as in the middle of nowhere that generally involves getting high on drugs, having sex, burning effigies, whatever that feels liberating & counter-culture.

One of the characters Wrench was wearing a thong & no pants during the level. The crew kinda dressed up for the party, with Marcus donning the attire of a zebra.

Its also where Marcus meets T-Bone a character from the previous game & start of his own DLC who ends up joining the group as a permanent member for the remainder of the game. He's one of my favorite parts of the game cause he brings a much needed "older" wisdom to the cast of young 20 year olds with their hip & trendy fashion.

Edited by slimcoder on Jun 15th 2019 at 3:48:40 AM

Uh huh.

It's been my general experience that when a white video game reviewer says "the protagonist wasn't normal" he means "the protagonist wasn't white".

But that's me.