Watch_Dogs: Who says that the gaming industry is too afraid of new IPs?

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 NEXT
 

Zeh Don:
A US$10,000,000,000.00 A Year Industry's single largest event, where the biggest and best gather to show off their biggest best, and we get one new title we haven't heard of before. One. At least it looks cool.

This.

You no longer go to E3 for new announcements. Just for new trailers and announcements of things that everybody already knew was coming.

I miss the day when there was at least a new console announcement every 4 years. And no, the Wii U doesn't count for this year's E3.

I'm a little confused as to why people are saying this looks scripted... The thing with the traffic lights looked entirely optional. It looked pretty open ended to me.

I think it looked brilliant, and if there are many ways to approach each situation, Blood Money style, this is gonna be a must buy for me

i like how he hacks the bridge at the end to get away from police,

also i noticed that you can look into peoples medical history hopefully you can sneak up on them and inject them with something they have an allergy to. that would be a really cool feature

Griffon_Hawke179:

Jorec:
Also seeing the guy that Pierce pulls out of the car try desperately to see if his wife/girlfriend(?) is still alive was really sad.

Yeah, Pierce seems like a total dickhead, although maybe it's just the way people can play it, but it's odd that they would portray him as so callous in the demo if there's nothing to say about it. Obviously he's angry... maybe a little psychotic?

Wait what? He was protecting the guy, telling him to keep his head down so that he didn't suffer the same fate. Doesn't seem dick-ish to me.

Except for the part where he, y'know, caused the freakin' pile-up. But heej at least he cared a wee bit.

The Human Torch:
I miss the day when there was at least a new console announcement every 4 years. And no, the Wii U doesn't count for this year's E3.

No thanks, my wallet hated that. I'm actually quite pleased about what they're managing to get out of this generation of consoles. Yes, most games we saw (like Watch_Dogs) were shown on the PC (a sign for a new appreciation for the platform perhaps?) but still, if they intend to release that on the consoles I doubt they'll do the horribly failed thing Battlefield 3 pulled.

1 new ip in the sea of shit does not make up for much.

Cobbs:
For example he may have been able to just stop his car at the lights, walk up and pop the guy then leg it. Maybe he could have effectively EMP'd the car. Maybe he could have hacked the weather to smite the car with righteous lightning.
And judging from the slice of game shown it may have been scripted, it may not have been scripted.

If that is the case, then it is a game I would very much like to play (especially the lightning part! :-) ). If it is not the case, then it really doesn't have much appeal.

Vrach:
Yeah, but how is that any different from having a takedown button in stealth games? I mean, yeah, it's a script, but it's a really small one (it controls a simple combination of two actions), it's a "press button to jump over hood and shoot the dude on the other side".

I think we're talking of two different scenes here. I'm referring to the actual assassination target being pulled out the car (which I linked to directly in my earlier post), one-linered and shot.

And to address your first point, if this is case as it appears, then it is in fact no different from a "takedown button". That's precisely what it is. And takedown buttons suck. They are a crap, boring and unimaginative mechanic. It might look cool with a slow-mo, martial arts takedown, but it means we, the player are not performing the action, the game is. It's sucked in every game it's been used in and if it is the case in Watch Dogs, then what exactly are we supposed to be playing? A modern sandbox Assassin's Creed made up of QTEs? Yeah, I'm gonna pay money for that [rolleyes].

KingsGambit:
I think we're talking of two different scenes here. I'm referring to the actual assassination target being pulled out the car (which I linked to directly in my earlier post), one-linered and shot.

No offense, but you're overreacting a tad bit to a cutscene. Honestly, it would have looked more ridiculous if you just walked up to the car and shot the guy in it with no dialog or anything like that. It's a cutscene, it's meant to progress the game forward. It's no quicktime event or anything like that. I don't think you have to press the trigger while aiming at the guy to be fully satisfied with the game.

Anyways, in other news, is anyone else intrigued by the multi player twist towards the end? It sort of makes you wonder if the players would be working with each other or against each other or anything like that. Was the guy just off on his own mission and happened to run into the person playing Pierce? It seems... Fascinating.

Why am I hating E3 this year? All the demos are running like some high-prime TV show. It tells me shit about the game and I have to wait until they scratch off the gloss and show the game for what it really is and in return it just makes them look like scripted to hell.

TheCommanders:
I maintain that although Bioshock Infinite isn't exactly a new IP, it's not a sequel in the serialized sense that we are used to, so I'm looking forward to that as well.

That just makes it worse. It's like that recently announced Splinter Cell game which doesn't involve stealth - why not just go the whole hog and make a new IP, rather than relying on the marketability of a 5-year-old brand?

Though I do admit, if there's one thing this year's E3 did well, it was throwing out the new IPs. It feels like most of the big trilogies (Mass Effect, Gears, Uncharted) have come to an end, meaning we're going to get a lot of new stuff in the next couple of years. Kyne knows we need them.

I absolutely loved it.... Until he pulled out a gun. That.... That just felt completely unnecessary. Do we really need guns in every single game?

KingsGambit:

Cobbs:
For example he may have been able to just stop his car at the lights, walk up and pop the guy then leg it. Maybe he could have effectively EMP'd the car. Maybe he could have hacked the weather to smite the car with righteous lightning.
And judging from the slice of game shown it may have been scripted, it may not have been scripted.

If that is the case, then it is a game I would very much like to play (especially the lightning part! :-) ). If it is not the case, then it really doesn't have much appeal.

Vrach:
Yeah, but how is that any different from having a takedown button in stealth games? I mean, yeah, it's a script, but it's a really small one (it controls a simple combination of two actions), it's a "press button to jump over hood and shoot the dude on the other side".

I think we're talking of two different scenes here. I'm referring to the actual assassination target being pulled out the car (which I linked to directly in my earlier post), one-linered and shot.

And to address your first point, if this is case as it appears, then it is in fact no different from a "takedown button". That's precisely what it is. And takedown buttons suck. They are a crap, boring and unimaginative mechanic. It might look cool with a slow-mo, martial arts takedown, but it means we, the player are not performing the action, the game is. It's sucked in every game it's been used in and if it is the case in Watch Dogs, then what exactly are we supposed to be playing? A modern sandbox Assassin's Creed made up of QTEs? Yeah, I'm gonna pay money for that [rolleyes].

Thereby suggesting that Human Revolution was a bad game? Really? Oh, and I love your earlier suggestion that Assassin's Creed gives you any sort of freedom in how you assassinate your targets, because that stopped being true after they re-released 2 twice.

I like how he causes a massive car-pileup, probably killing some of the drivers, then "saves" one of the people who he just put in massive danger.

How the fuck is that supposed to be sympathetic?

KingsGambit:

Vrach:
Yeah, but how is that any different from having a takedown button in stealth games? I mean, yeah, it's a script, but it's a really small one (it controls a simple combination of two actions), it's a "press button to jump over hood and shoot the dude on the other side".

I think we're talking of two different scenes here. I'm referring to the actual assassination target being pulled out the car (which I linked to directly in my earlier post), one-linered and shot.

And to address your first point, if this is case as it appears, then it is in fact no different from a "takedown button". That's precisely what it is. And takedown buttons suck. They are a crap, boring and unimaginative mechanic. It might look cool with a slow-mo, martial arts takedown, but it means we, the player are not performing the action, the game is. It's sucked in every game it's been used in and if it is the case in Watch Dogs, then what exactly are we supposed to be playing? A modern sandbox Assassin's Creed made up of QTEs? Yeah, I'm gonna pay money for that [rolleyes].

Oh I'm sorry - yes, we are. I thought you meant the moment where he slides over the car's hood and shoots the guy on the other side.

Yeah, I see what you mean now. I agree, would've preferred to see the assassination itself be more freeform (I wonder what's stopping us from shooting him from a distance, blowing up his car and such? maybe this is just one of our options?), but if it's an exception and not the rule for the sake of a story moment, I'm ok with it. We've had this stuff in games like GTA IV, with the last dude, there's a monologue (yeah, he doesn't shoot him in the end, but only because it's a choice moment).

I hope the game's as open as possible though. Would suck for the game objective to be "reach the target" rather than "eliminate the target". Again though, I can easily see this being an exception or just one of the approaches available (that they'd obviously go for when playing the demo for the sake of showing how cinematic it is).

Btw, could be just me, but I'm very impressed by the script and the dialogue. Somehow feels a notch above other games.

edit: As to your point on takedown buttons, just to note what I mean - games like Splinter Cell, where you sneak up behind your target and click the button to take him down. Don't see what the game does there for you, it's the bread and butter of stealth games (but I'm assuming you mean something else).

sheah1:
Thereby suggesting that Human Revolution was a bad game? Really? Oh, and I love your earlier suggestion that Assassin's Creed gives you any sort of freedom in how you assassinate your targets, because that stopped being true after they re-released 2 twice.

No, Deus Ex was a masterpiece of a game with the odd foible. Jerky character animations and yes, the takedown button among them. It was an incredible game that could have been even better with those two things resolved. Replace takedowns with lethal/non-lethal melee attacks and it would be significantly better. Having a "press button so the game can play itself for you" mechanic is rubbish and lazy.

That's not the same thing as cutscenes to advance plot. They have a place, even if they themselves aren't as good as having story play out in other ways (eg. in-game). Show don't tell, or in the case of a GAME, unravel it with the gameplay like Half-Life as an example.

Anyway, will wait to see and hear more of this title before I make up my mind. The premise is brilliant if uninspired, but my reservations about a game of set-pieces, QTEs and scripted cutscenes which this appears full of holds me back from more than a mild interest.

Vrach:
Yeah, I see what you mean now. I agree, would've preferred to see the assassination itself be more freeform (I wonder what's stopping us from shooting him from a distance, blowing up his car and such? maybe this is just one of our options?), but if it's an exception and not the rule for the sake of a story moment, I'm ok with it.

That is precisely what I mean. If we can choose to snipe from long range, plant a bomb on the road, rig the car, pretend to be his driver, knock him out and drive off with him, etc, etc with that being one of the options, or as you say, with that being a specific case of a plot-critical element among a host of choices, then yes, that would be a game worth playing.

KingsGambit:

sheah1:
Thereby suggesting that Human Revolution was a bad game? Really? Oh, and I love your earlier suggestion that Assassin's Creed gives you any sort of freedom in how you assassinate your targets, because that stopped being true after they re-released 2 twice.

No, Deus Ex was a masterpiece of a game with the odd foible. Jerky character animations and yes, the takedown button among them. It was an incredible game that could have been even better with those two things resolved. Replace takedowns with lethal/non-lethal melee attacks and it would be significantly better. Having a "press button so the game can play itself for you" mechanic is rubbish and lazy.

That's not the same thing as cutscenes to advance plot. They have a place, even if they themselves aren't as good as having story play out in other ways (eg. in-game). Show don't tell, or in the case of a GAME, unravel it with the gameplay like Half-Life as an example.

Anyway, will wait to see and hear more of this title before I make up my mind. The premise is brilliant if uninspired, but my reservations about a game of set-pieces, QTEs and scripted cutscenes which this appears full of holds me back from more than a mild interest.

......What? Set pieces? What set pieces? What QTEs? And if you really have a problem with scripted cutscenes then I must wonder if you can have more than a "mild interest" in more than one game every five bloody years.

Witty Name Here:
So I just saw the gameplay demo of "Watch_Dogs" and I have to say... It looks amazing.

It's hard to explain it just seems... Unique.

Here's the demo, I can't honestly put it to proper words.

image

I just hope that Ubisoft doesn't let us down with hyping up the game and then releasing a pile of shit..

Zeh Don:
A US$10,000,000,000.00 A Year Industry's single largest event, where the biggest and best gather to show off their biggest best, and we get one new title we haven't heard of before. One. At least it looks cool.

The sales would be much higher if publishers and developers would drop the price tag of the games so it more people can afford them. It worked for Wal-Mart, low margins on the majority of item sales but significantly higher volume. End result make billions in profits.

And yes this year's E3 was by and large a total let down.

Loved it. Looks great, it'll be good to see how freeform those gadgets are, whether I can stuff with all the traffic lights, tap into all the conversations. That always ads some verismilitude to me.

Not sure about the part at the end with the cutscene animation. I'm hoping, and guessing I guess at the moment, that it's optional: ie, if you get to the car, you can do it that way, or you can blow up the car, and avoid it completely. Just a guess, but I hope that's the case. I remember in GTA IV, there was a few scenes where you could execute (cutscene execute) key characters by targetting their head with a pistol out before shooting. The first time I played through, I didn't realise this, and I straight up murdered the first one of them by emptying my mag into his chest, and completely missed the cutscene.

I'm keen to see how this pans out.

TheCommanders:

Really looking forward to Watch Dogs, Dishonored, and Last of Us.

These are the ones to watch and maybe Beyond but it is way too early to tell on that one. I'd say I'm cautiously optimistic about all of them, after all we might be let down. Pretty much everything else that looks good is a sequel.

Why can't people make more 90sesque 2-D platformers for $5?

Not every game needs a multi-million-dollar budget. Stop being so scared. Let out some smaller stuff and see what happens.

Just look at Minecraft.

Witty Name Here:
So I just saw the gameplay demo of "Watch_Dogs" and I have to say... It looks amazing.

Honestly, I feel that if any game deserves some extra attention, it's this one. It looks like GTA mixed with a bit of Deus Ex and possibly even some Hitman.

It's hard to explain it just seems... Unique.

Here's the demo, I can't honestly put it to proper words.

So, it honestly seems to be exciting. I mean, unless the events for that mission were really scripted, it offers a lot of chances to play around with tech. Maybe you could have avoided causing a wreck at the traffic lights in favor of waiting for the guy's car to go somewhere private and ambushing it?

I'm definitely going to keep my eye on this.

Looks like what Assassins Creed might look like in a modern setting

It be interesting to see how both those games are going to turn out

This is like the second "Mind F***" moment I've had this year. At first, when hearing about the hype around this game, I though that it would be either another GTA sandbox clone or a side-story of GTA.

But man, was I wrong.

Everything about this game is like a breath of fresh air in this industry, and they have definitely raised the bar on what it takes to make a truly remarkable and interesting game.

This is definitely a game that I will keep my eye on, and hopefully, pick it up on release date.

KingsGambit:
That is precisely what I mean. If we can choose to snipe from long range, plant a bomb on the road, rig the car, pretend to be his driver, knock him out and drive off with him, etc, etc with that being one of the options, or as you say, with that being a specific case of a plot-critical element among a host of choices, then yes, that would be a game worth playing.

I really doubt the game is going to force you too cause a massive pileup. Both this game and Last Of Us got called scripted but remember, they want to showcase some of the crazier shit that can happen and they have one go. If they'd just shown the character sniping him as he stopped at a red light it would been called lame. I really hope I'm right about this though cause if it is just one long line of scripted assassinations it's gonna suck.

Also I don't understand the difference between having a 'punch button' and a 'press button to takedown'. In a game like this where you're playing some badass hitman I'd rather have a flashy takedown then just watching my dude punch and the enemy suddenly dropping. I could see your problem in cases like the newer Splinter Cell games where one button allows you too drop like 4 blokes. Yeah it looks cool but it turns the game into easy mode. Takedowns though..

Jorec:
Yeah he does seem to be somewhat dickish in causing a such a large collision. At least that's how the person who played it did it. I'm sure there will be ways to eliminate targets without causing unnecessary casualties.

But, she didn't die in the collision... She died of a bullet from, what I assume are, the "bad guys". Fair enough, he caused the collision that led to that event, but technically he didn't kill her. But I do get your point that this is not the kindest light he is shown in.

But regardless, I am so excited for this game I can't wait to get my hands on it. It looks and sounds fantastic, the AI seems really good and if the gameplay offers freedom (I can choose my method of killing on most parts) this is a must buy for me.

Yes, it was probably scripted (those mechanics are in the game, but this is E3, they wouldn't show raw footage they would make a set piece level to show it off) and running on the PC so the console versions will look nowhere near as good. I am still interested though, it has potential if what we were shown was totally unscripted but I doubt it.

Witty Name Here:
Who says that the gaming industry is too afraid of new IPs?

I dunno. Who does say the game industry is too afraid of new IPs, considering we still keep getting new ones all the time?

'The gaming industry' in this case means big publishers. Not audiences.

this game looks awesome it,s really nice to see a new Cyberpunk game especially set in 20 minutes into the future

BiggyShackleton:

Also I don't understand the difference between having a 'punch button' and a 'press button to takedown'. In a game like this where you're playing some badass hitman I'd rather have a flashy takedown then just watching my dude punch and the enemy suddenly dropping. I could see your problem in cases like the newer Splinter Cell games where one button allows you too drop like 4 blokes. Yeah it looks cool but it turns the game into easy mode. Takedowns though..

Takedown buttons are simply un-immersive. They rip you out of the gameplay, and present you with a miniature cutscene that you have no control over, before handing control back to you after everything exciting is done.

To use an example from the last generation: Splinter Cell Chaos Theory. That was a game that allowed you to do all sorts of things to unsuspecting NPCs. You could shoot them, hit them with gadgets. You could run up to them and take them down with your knife, knock them out, or grab them for interrogation. You could snap their neck while hanging upside down from a pipe.

And most importantly, the game never ripped control from you. Even if you needed to follow a button prompt to, say, grab someone for interrogation, or to pull them over a railing, the game never felt like it was ripping control from you. The camera stayed the same, the action followed fluidly from your button presses, and it felt like a smooth, natural part of the gameplay.

The minute you start throwing 'cinematic camera angles' around, you're highlighting the non-game part of of your game. Pressing a button and watching as your character does all sorts of cool things from a bunch of crazy camera angles is a lot less engaging than pressing a button and seeing something happen that feels like a natural part of the gameplay. Games should hide the elements that aren't interactive, not highlight them. The minute a game wrests control from you to present you with a 'cinematic' takedown, then it is playing to the strengths of cinema, not gaming.

This isn't to say that there isn't a place for cutscenes, and the like. But making actual gameplay revolve around non-interactive cutscenes makes a mockery of the whole idea of interactivity.

SirBryghtside:

TheCommanders:
I maintain that although Bioshock Infinite isn't exactly a new IP, it's not a sequel in the serialized sense that we are used to, so I'm looking forward to that as well.

That just makes it worse. It's like that recently announced Splinter Cell game which doesn't involve stealth - why not just go the whole hog and make a new IP, rather than relying on the marketability of a 5-year-old brand?

With respect, you just answered your own question. This is a company with innovative ideas using the marketability of an old brand to make them happen. The fact that it's happening in a completely different location, with all new characters and themes, and a whole new component to gameplay meant that given a few more tweaks it could have been marketed as a new IP. However, by slapping the Bioshock name on it, strangely they are able to take more risks because they have a guaranteed section of sales based on the brand recognition alone. It's smart business, and considering it's being used to make a great game, I'm perfectly ok with it. Splinter Cell taking the Saints Row route of forgetting what made it good in the first place is a whole different ball game.

TheCommanders:

SirBryghtside:

TheCommanders:
I maintain that although Bioshock Infinite isn't exactly a new IP, it's not a sequel in the serialized sense that we are used to, so I'm looking forward to that as well.

That just makes it worse. It's like that recently announced Splinter Cell game which doesn't involve stealth - why not just go the whole hog and make a new IP, rather than relying on the marketability of a 5-year-old brand?

With respect, you just answered your own question. This is a company with innovative ideas using the marketability of an old brand to make them happen. The fact that it's happening in a completely different location, with all new characters and themes, and a whole new component to gameplay meant that given a few more tweaks it could have been marketed as a new IP. However, by slapping the Bioshock name on it, strangely they are able to take more risks because they have a guaranteed section of sales based on the brand recognition alone. It's smart business, and considering it's being used to make a great game, I'm perfectly ok with it. Splinter Cell taking the Saints Row route of forgetting what made it good in the first place is a whole different ball game.

I'm aware of that, I was really asking a rhetorical question to point out the industry's fear of creating a new IP. Honestly, BioShock was a pretty bad example, but the way you described it was indicative of the main problem.

SirBryghtside:

TheCommanders:

SirBryghtside:
That just makes it worse. It's like that recently announced Splinter Cell game which doesn't involve stealth - why not just go the whole hog and make a new IP, rather than relying on the marketability of a 5-year-old brand?

With respect, you just answered your own question. This is a company with innovative ideas using the marketability of an old brand to make them happen. The fact that it's happening in a completely different location, with all new characters and themes, and a whole new component to gameplay meant that given a few more tweaks it could have been marketed as a new IP. However, by slapping the Bioshock name on it, strangely they are able to take more risks because they have a guaranteed section of sales based on the brand recognition alone. It's smart business, and considering it's being used to make a great game, I'm perfectly ok with it. Splinter Cell taking the Saints Row route of forgetting what made it good in the first place is a whole different ball game.

I'm aware of that, I was really asking a rhetorical question to point out the industry's fear of creating a new IP. Honestly, BioShock was a pretty bad example, but the way you described it was indicative of the main problem.

Believe me, I completely agree that the industry has a problem of being so business minded it's impacting it's creative culture. My point was, dont' bash Bioshock when they're just making the best of a bad situation. Bash the EAs and other crap for brains producing companies whose sole purpose in this world is to suck all the money out of good developers and leave them husks of their former selves.

TheCommanders:

SirBryghtside:

TheCommanders:

With respect, you just answered your own question. This is a company with innovative ideas using the marketability of an old brand to make them happen. The fact that it's happening in a completely different location, with all new characters and themes, and a whole new component to gameplay meant that given a few more tweaks it could have been marketed as a new IP. However, by slapping the Bioshock name on it, strangely they are able to take more risks because they have a guaranteed section of sales based on the brand recognition alone. It's smart business, and considering it's being used to make a great game, I'm perfectly ok with it. Splinter Cell taking the Saints Row route of forgetting what made it good in the first place is a whole different ball game.

I'm aware of that, I was really asking a rhetorical question to point out the industry's fear of creating a new IP. Honestly, BioShock was a pretty bad example, but the way you described it was indicative of the main problem.

Believe me, I completely agree that the industry has a problem of being so business minded it's impacting it's creative culture. My point was, dont' bash Bioshock when they're just making the best of a bad situation. Bash the EAs and other crap for brains producing companies whose sole purpose in this world is to suck all the money out of good developers and leave them husks of their former selves.

...who said I was bashing the developers? I didn't say, but yeah, I place the blame entirely on the publishers.

SirBryghtside:
-snip-
...who said I was bashing the developers? I didn't say, but yeah, I place the blame entirely on the publishers.

In that case, we're on the same page.

The only thing that makes me wonder is how people will react to the combat. It seems to feel standard 3rd person mechanics. Setting up the situation like hacking with your smartphone is unique but when it comes to the actual stuff, I feel like I've seen it.

Still, I'm convinced. I really want to play this.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked