Watch Dogs Delay Means Game Systems Were Not Cut For Sequel

Watch Dogs Delay Means Game Systems Were Not Cut For Sequel

WatchDogs

Watch Dogs Creative VP says the delay allowed the team to include systems they were considering leaving for a sequel.

Watch Dogs hasn't even been released yet, but like pretty much every major new IP these days, its developers are already thinking about its sequel. Thankfully, due to the game's sudden, lengthy delay, a whole bunch of game systems that were initially cut, to be left for a potential sequel, have managed to make it back into the game. Ubisoft's creative VP, Lionel Raynaud says he has "few regrets" about how the final product has turned out.

"There were several systems that were not going to be in the game if we released in November," he said. "There's always the discussion of, 'should we leave them for the sequel, or do we take the time to finish them?' And we decided to take our time and do it right."

He added that the delay has "made a big difference" as the team has been able to put a nice, proper polish on everything in the game. "The things we've developed the most are the interactions with hacking, and how in many situations being smart with chain reactions can offer something unique from any other open-world game."

He firmly stated that "If we weren't able to deliver this aspect, it wouldn't feel new enough to be worth a new IP," which he feels justifies the development delay.

Despite this good news, every creative vision ends up being limited in some what when you try to actually achieve it, and ultimately a few ideas did have to be cut. Raynaud confirmed that some larger concepts that emerged during development were deliberately 'saved' in order to avoid disrupting the "consistency" of the game.

"There are always things that you have to keep for the next game. In this case, the extra time allowed us to put a lot of our ideas into the game, so we are happy with that."

It looks like Watch Dogs is shaping up to be a completely different beast from what we were expecting in November last year. It's currently slated for a May 27 release date.

Source: Computer and Video Games

Permalink

So they delayed it and added a bunch of stuff that wasn't in it before it was delayed? I've always thought this game was a little overhyped, but now I'm starting to think it's going to be a trainwreck.

ccdohl:
So they delayed it and added a bunch of stuff that wasn't in it before it was delayed? I've always thought this game was a little overhyped, but now I'm starting to think it's going to be a trainwreck.

From what I understand they delayed it originally because in play tests people complained that it was very repetitive. Think the first Assassin's Creed, over all a decent game but after you did one mission you'd done them all. So with the delay they decided to add in mechanics and such to make the game less repetitive.

Does this mean the game won't be buggy, unpolished and repetitive? I dunno but I generally take everything devs say about a game pre release with a grain of salt.

synobal:

From what I understand they delayed it originally because in play tests people complained that it was very repetitive. Think the first Assassin's Creed, over all a decent game but after you did one mission you'd done them all.

so all the Assassins Creeds then?
meant in a non douche bag way

i think i really lost interest in this game now. this up and down behavior just a bad move from ubi.

"There are always things that you have to keep for the next game" Yeah... Why make an actually good game when you can just milk a franchise with average ones.

ccdohl:
So they delayed it and added a bunch of stuff that wasn't in it before it was delayed? I've always thought this game was a little overhyped, but now I'm starting to think it's going to be a trainwreck.

That's actually what a delay is supposed to do. I don't see why it would be a trainwreck because of that

I don't see why people get so up in arms about game delays. So they need more time to finish the game. At least I know that when I get the game, I'll be getting a finished, polished game and not a half finished game, with the other half (maybe) delivered over the course of the next year (*cough* GTA5 *cough*), or a game that obviously did not spend enough time in the debugging phase because it was rushed out to please the share holders ("cough* BF4 *cough*).

Grabehn:
"There are always things that you have to keep for the next game" Yeah... Why make an actually good game when you can just milk a franchise with average ones.

To be fair, what often happens in game development is that you design the game, and during playtesting you get feedback and ideas that would improve it a lot, but would also require rebuilding most of it from the ground up (which takes an extraordinary amount of time and money). So instead, you implement lesser improvements that can still be done on a reasonable schedule, and when you start to make the next game, you make sure that you lay the right foundation.

The real question is did they spend any time polishing the game to reflect the content shown at E3 or do we get to have all these "new" mechanics in last gen graphics?

So, does "not cutting systems for the sequel" mean they were going to leave a Linux version to the sequel, and now they're going to do one for this game?


Yeah, they "Added more stuff". More like removed items once they realized new consoles actually are very slow.

Once i saw the new stuff the only game that i was anticipating for, i no longer am. Looks like its going to turn into another average "want to be GTA" clone.

*sigh* game companies cant win can they?

its either ZOMG Y U RUSHED DIS? DIS GAMEZ FILD WIT DER BUGZ@ DERP HERP!.

or

Delayed? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!I WAITZ TOO LONG! Y U NO RELEASE NAOW? IDC ABOUT ANYTING ELSE JUST GIMME DER GAME NOW! HERP DERP!

Release a buggy, half-finished mess and we all scream "You should have finished it before released instead of rushing it out the door!"
Hold it back to fix problems found in testing and we all scream "Well you said we'd have it by now I'm not buying it you lied to us"

Guy's, let's be realistic about this

1)If it is false marketing and they stepped back the graphics because consoles run about as fast at potato's, then aren't you glad they showed us the true quality before release instead of letting the pre-orders ship and the profits roll in?

2) They held the game back to add features because of below expected testing, so they found a problem and want to fix it. That sounds like the company we've all been waiting for. A company like Valve that would prefer to put out one great game than an only decent game in half the time.

If we all scream at a games company trying to do the right thing and fix their game's problems while showing where they were unable to meet the hype BEFORE the games launch, then we can only blame ourselves when the next buggy train-wreck hit's the shelves with a glut of pre-orders and no launch day reviews.

tl;dr - stop complaining about the good practices we've begged for.

Single Shot:
Release a buggy, half-finished mess and we all scream "You should have finished it before released instead of rushing it out the door!"
Hold it back to fix problems found in testing and we all scream "Well you said we'd have it by now I'm not buying it you lied to us"

Guy's, let's be realistic about this

1)If it is false marketing and they stepped back the graphics because consoles run about as fast at potato's, then aren't you glad they showed us the true quality before release instead of letting the pre-orders ship and the profits roll in?

2) They held the game back to add features because of below expected testing, so they found a problem and want to fix it. That sounds like the company we've all been waiting for. A company like Valve that would prefer to put out one great game than an only decent game in half the time.

If we all scream at a games company trying to do the right thing and fix their game's problems while showing where they were unable to meet the hype BEFORE the games launch, then we can only blame ourselves when the next buggy train-wreck hit's the shelves with a glut of pre-orders and no launch day reviews.

tl;dr - stop complaining about the good practices we've begged for.

this, so much this.
fans rage, game developer listening, people rage that they listened
I don't see the logic of gamers here

the new "mechanics" they are adding is just a cover up for "polishing the graphics we promised in our trailers".

I don't like the idea of holding things back and saving it for a sequel, I would much prefer they adopt the philosophy of giving everything they got like there's no tomorrow. Holding ideas back and saving it for later just means you're creatively limited.

Ken_J:
That's actually what a delay is supposed to do. I don't see why it would be a trainwreck because of that

It depends. Was the delay specifically so that they could add these things back in, or was there a delay for some other reason and they decided to take the opportunity to try putting things back in? If the former, then sure, no problem. If the latter though, it seems that things could be just as rushed as they would have originally been, since they'd be trying to work around an unrelated deadline rather than specifically being given the time to finish them properly.

Single Shot:
Release a buggy, half-finished mess and we all scream "You should have finished it before released instead of rushing it out the door!"
Hold it back to fix problems found in testing and we all scream "Well you said we'd have it by now I'm not buying it you lied to us"

Guy's, let's be realistic about this

1)If it is false marketing and they stepped back the graphics because consoles run about as fast at potato's, then aren't you glad they showed us the true quality before release instead of letting the pre-orders ship and the profits roll in?

2) They held the game back to add features because of below expected testing, so they found a problem and want to fix it. That sounds like the company we've all been waiting for. A company like Valve that would prefer to put out one great game than an only decent game in half the time.

If we all scream at a games company trying to do the right thing and fix their game's problems while showing where they were unable to meet the hype BEFORE the games launch, then we can only blame ourselves when the next buggy train-wreck hit's the shelves with a glut of pre-orders and no launch day reviews.

tl;dr - stop complaining about the good practices we've begged for.

Couldn't have said it better myself. As soon as they said they were delaying it to make it better, I was so relieved. This was a good move by Ubi. This behavior should be encouraged. Stop being so impatient! I'd rather have a good game soon than a bad game now. I've got other games to play while I wait.

Single Shot:
Release a buggy, half-finished mess and we all scream "You should have finished it before released instead of rushing it out the door!"
Hold it back to fix problems found in testing and we all scream "Well you said we'd have it by now I'm not buying it you lied to us"

Guy's, let's be realistic about this

1)If it is false marketing and they stepped back the graphics because consoles run about as fast at potato's, then aren't you glad they showed us the true quality before release instead of letting the pre-orders ship and the profits roll in?

2) They held the game back to add features because of below expected testing, so they found a problem and want to fix it. That sounds like the company we've all been waiting for. A company like Valve that would prefer to put out one great game than an only decent game in half the time.

If we all scream at a games company trying to do the right thing and fix their game's problems while showing where they were unable to meet the hype BEFORE the games launch, then we can only blame ourselves when the next buggy train-wreck hit's the shelves with a glut of pre-orders and no launch day reviews.

tl;dr - stop complaining about the good practices we've begged for.

thats all very true. i should have made it clearer in my comment that i wasnt upset about the delay but for removing things for the sequel. i can forgive them with the false graphic part but generally everything they say what they have made is not very good advertising for a new IP.

Ken_J:

ccdohl:
So they delayed it and added a bunch of stuff that wasn't in it before it was delayed? I've always thought this game was a little overhyped, but now I'm starting to think it's going to be a trainwreck.

That's actually what a delay is supposed to do. I don't see why it would be a trainwreck because of that

Well, I am thinking that it will be a trainwreck either way, not just because of the delay.

Roxor:
So, does "not cutting systems for the sequel" mean they were going to leave a Linux version to the sequel, and now they're going to do one for this game?

Systems as in play mechanics, not consoles/OS.

 

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here