Watch Dogs, Hackable Open World cyberpunk set in Chicago Options

[noonesshowmonkey]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FcMRkyoHKeA

Just announced at E3.

[Summerstorm]

Hm hm... well... it look s a bit too "Ubisoft".... but may be good.

(I always think in these games i just don't hack that much (and nor the in-combat, o midst-fleeing) It' sjust easier to murder everything.

Now same game without cover-based shooting and guns... and one/two hit takedowns and LOT of minigames/logic puzzles/roleplaying interactions and such... THAT would be AWESOME

[ggodo]

Ever played EYE? Hacking in that is a great way to do reconnaissance, control turrets, control enemies, shut down cameras, open vaults, open doors, and kill things. I really like the hacking in that game.

[_Pax._]

Oh. My. GAWD ...!

I must have this game. O_O

[nezumi]

Cute twist. Comes off as a little gimmicky in such a short video, but maybe it's pulled off well. And while five years ago, I'd be on that like ennui on a goth, right now that just isn't enough to sell me. Show me a world as immersive and fun, and a story as engaging as GTA was and I can love it, but I didn't see that in the video.

Thanks for the head's up, though. It's definitely worth keeping an eye on.

[noonesshowmonkey]

There is also the United Front / Square Enix venture Sleeping Dogs coming out...

Hong Kong based organized crime game from the producers of the True Crime series.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6MBFOidzHOo

[Sir_Psycho]

I was considering posting this up a few hours ago, I'm glad some-one else saw this and thought "AR hacker". Did you notice that he actually tilts his head down or grabs his cap in the presence of cameras, and particularly when the police chopper shows. He also keeps his gun behind his back and a hood over his face.

My mixture of analysis and hope tells me we might be getting a procedurally generated sandbox, with the ability to influence the game's world through hacking (That street light chaos was incredible). I noticed the AR profiles display yearly salary, so perhaps in-game funds can be garnished from accounts, whereas those personal details that flash up, like medical history, bad credit ratings, current employment, prominent skills (Krav Maga instructor was shown), could be paydata, or at least give you information. In the case of that bouncer noted for his close combat training, maybe that indication means he is less susceptible to the thorough trouncing the protagonist gave everyone who came in contact with his vicious baton swings.

I hope that stealth is developed and the range of hacking options is exhaustive. Examples I can think of not shown would be turning off lights, alarms, scanners. The cameras were marked on the overlay, so hopefully we can look through them, in addition to turning them off/creating loops. Another aspect would be a method of hacking analogous to Shadowrun's VR - An ability to sit down at a terminal and access parts of the city network, including websites like Dot Connexion*, a job network, online shopping for things like cars, gear, weapons, programs. I do hope there's more to it than just launching utilities at things in direct signal range of your glorified smart phone.

*By the way, those barcodes that flashed on the tv-cube headgear the bar staff at Dot Connexion were wearing provide a link to http://dotconnexion.ubi.com/ a viral marketing exercise centred on the club that was shown. It's pretty thin and vague as far as I can tell, but maybe those links to Windy City and WKZtv will become active in time. Also, considering the hacking focus, there may be some easter eggs hidden in there. Go nuts, I didn't get anywhere with the Konami code.

[hobgoblin]

Ever played EYE? Hacking in that is a great way to do reconnaissance, control turrets, control enemies, shut down cameras, open vaults, open doors, and kill things. I really like the hacking in that game.

The interface on that game drove me nuts...

[ggodo]

The interface on that game drove me nuts...

I enjoyed it, it's like a twitchier simplistic RPG. What parts did you not like?

[hobgoblin]

I enjoyed it, it's like a twitchier simplistic RPG. What parts did you not like?

Interface overload. I could not find my way around and so it ended up as a shooter with continually spawning mobs.

[Draco18s]

Two things:

1) The QR Code Waiter is scannable. It doesn't go anywhere interesting.

2) The game is apparently some weird passive hybrid between single player and multiplayer. There's a second video floating around (~10:00) that was filmed from another player's point of view that takes place after the car crash scene, where the two players just happened to cross paths at that moment, but were involved in unrelated missions.

[hobgoblin]

Gah, video players that do not allow the viewer to jump to time points outside the cached data!

[ggodo]

Interface overload. I could not find my way around and so it ended up as a shooter with continually spawning mobs.

Yeah, it could do with a manual.

[RelentlessImp]

My primary issue with games like this is the point of view - third person over-the-shoulder views do not make for an immersive gaming experience, in my eye, which means it's a damned shame that so many games are going with that camera angle. I think that Watch Dogs would be an incredible game from a first-person point of view with about an FoV angle of about 80-90. Putting the player over the shoulder doesn't immerse them at all, and makes them feel more like they're watching a movie rather than being inside the game.

But that might be just me. I think all these intrigue and corporate espionage games we're starting to see could really, really benefit from a well-done first-person perspective. If we're going cyberpunky, the HUD could be AR Overlays, after all.

[Sir_Psycho]

First person games are good for immersion, but third person games are much better for attaching you to a character, also for stealth and traversal (We're way beyond calling it platforming these days). I trust Ubisoft for animation and fluid user interfaces, but characters, plot, and gameplay depth, not so much. Did anyone else roll their eyes at the whole, "I know you're baaaad, I'm gonna kill you for all the badness" schtick?

[Critias]

Well, this looks friggin' sweet.

I'm really curious about the sandbox part of it, especially as it combines with some of the stuff we saw in the trailer. How many different ways can you solve each mission? How violent do you have to be to get various jobs done? Do you get spiraling, ever-increasing, police threat levels for bloodier or more expensive actions? How easy (or hard) is it to dodge the cops, once the time comes? Does your overall body count affect the storyline at all?

This game's got some cool, cool, potential, for sure. I mean, "Assassin's Creed + Hacking" was already enough to pique my interest, but if it's as cool and smooth as the trailer made it look, this'll be a heck of a game.

[RelentlessImp]

First person games are good for immersion, but third person games are much better for attaching you to a character, also for stealth and traversal (We're way beyond calling it platforming these days).

Going to have to disagree with this. Mirror's Edge was a really good game, got you (or at least me) attached to the character, and it was first-person with parkour movement, which is a lot of very fluid action (once you got the control scheme down) and it never felt clunky or overdone. If you could replicate that with a game like Watch Dogs, you'd have a better overall game, in my opinion.

[Sir_Psycho]

I loved Mirrors Edge, not to mention the aspects of body awareness DICE carried over to Battlefield 3. When I was couch-surfing, I stayed at a place where we took speed runs of levels, mastering the system to be able to do things like skip entire floors by disarming an enemy and shooting out high window with their pistol. However, I scarcely remember the story or the character. The character was pretty bare bones, the vitality and immersion came from the viewpoint. You were moving through the world at great speed, eyes forward, focused on the goal. In a third person game, you're in control, but you're watching the character experience the world, and the range of emotion and circumstance that is conveyed is much greater, because you can read body language, expression, reaction to the environment and circumstance.

An example I can think of is in Max Payne 3, the protagonist is shot in the arm, and as he stumbles down a hallway he takes to the wall, leaving a smear of blood. In Dead Space 2, you are forced to take control of a machine that inserts a needle into the protagonist's pupil, and the tension is unbearable, as the needle grows closer and you watch him start to struggle and panic. That sort of empathic response is much harder (if not impossible) to elicit from a first person perspective.

What I'm saying isn't a hard and fast rule, but it's still a valid comment on how we experience games, and the strengths and weaknesses of certain perspectives. First person games are making headway in this area, but they still can't show you a character's expression or posture. Look up Prey 2, they're using a first person traversal mechanic. Metro 2033 in my mind is the best linear fps since Half-Life 2 in terms of immersion and using an environment as a story-telling device, and it's pretty underrated, maybe you should give that a try.

[RelentlessImp]

Mostly what I'm saying is that the character that's supposed to represent you - your avatar in the game world, your arm, your means of change - doesn't need facial expressions, posture, body language... because it's supposed to be you. Third person detracts from that, by giving you a character to watch and maybe tell what to do every once in a while.

[Darksong]

really it's just two different types of storytelling. not every game has a main character who is supposed to "be" you. some games instead strive to have a very well-defined character more in keeping with "traditional" fiction. RDR had John Marston, PST had The Nameless One, Assassin's Creed plays with the notion a bit. Even being able to customize Shepard in ME3, she was still a distinct character, not just an in-game suit you put on.

Then there are your more "first person immersive" games like TES and Fallout 3, which tell a different type of story. Deus Ex 3 did a pretty good job of blurring the line between the two styles, with first-person gameplay but still a strong main character (largely because of the third-person elements like cover mechanics and dialogue and cutscenes I think.)

Personally, I prefer games that tell a story more in keeping with the 3rd person style games.

[ZeroPoint]

Thats really a difference of storytelling, not so much a gauge of character immersion. So in that way Sir_psycho is still correct.

If YOU are the character in a first person game, then you don't need to be immersed in yourself, you're immersed in the world.

This is anecdotal because there is no hard yes or no, but a few examples:


Prototype
Infamous
Hitman series
GTA
Saints row
The newer spiderman sandbox games
These are all sandbox games, in third person. You remember the characters from these games.

compare that with First person sandbox games

Skyrim (elder scrolls)
Farcry 2 (havn't played other ones yet)
fallout

In these the only reason their memorable is because they are your character. And in the case of farcry...I don't even remember the name of the character i chose to play as.

As is the case with all storytelling, choice of perspective can be important.

[ZeroPoint]

really it's just two different types of storytelling. not every game has a main character who is supposed to "be" you. some games instead strive to have a very well-defined character more in keeping with "traditional" fiction. RDR had John Marston, PST had The Nameless One, Assassin's Creed plays with the notion a bit. Even being able to customize Shepard in ME3, she was still a distinct character, not just an in-game suit you put on.

Then there are your more "first person immersive" games like TES and Fallout 3, which tell a different type of story. Deus Ex 3 did a pretty good job of blurring the line between the two styles, with first-person gameplay but still a strong main character (largely because of the third-person elements like cover mechanics and dialogue and cutscenes I think.)

Personally, I prefer games that tell a story more in keeping with the 3rd person style games.

I was totally going to make a mention of Deus Ex and forgot about it in my post, but was going to make your exact same point.