"PanchoVilleneuve ST" (PanchoVilleneuve)
06/08/2016 at 13:18 • Filed to: None
0
10|
"PanchoVilleneuve ST" (PanchoVilleneuve)
06/08/2016 at 13:18 • Filed to: None | 0
| 10 |
I am going to spend hours waiting for NPCs to park so I can immediately run them over with their own car.
CB
> PanchoVilleneuve ST
06/08/2016 at 13:20 |
|
No. Not interested. Rode the hype train for the last one, was pretty disappointed. No hopes for this one.
|
PanchoVilleneuve ST
> CB
06/08/2016 at 13:32 |
|
You can’t deny that there were a lot of great ideas for a game in the first one. Great ideas that didn’t make for a great game because they had no idea what to do with them.
It looks to me like they have it figured out this time. Or at least they’re a lot closer to it.
|
CB
> PanchoVilleneuve ST
06/08/2016 at 13:37 |
|
There were some great ideas, yeah, but it just fell flat. Maybe they’ll get it right this time, but I’ll be a lot more cautious.
|
PanchoVilleneuve ST
> CB
06/08/2016 at 13:39 |
|
Look at the first Assassin’s Creed, then look at AC2. And Far Cry 2 and then 3.
Getting the first crack at something wrong and getting the next attempt right is kind of how Ubisoft works.
|
CB
> PanchoVilleneuve ST
06/08/2016 at 13:41 |
|
Fair enough. Watching the trailer now, there are some neat ideas (such as the 3D printed guns), but I’m wondering if they’ll be able to bring something cohesive to the table. Because right now, it seems kind of... I dunno, I’m not sold yet.
|
CB
> PanchoVilleneuve ST
06/08/2016 at 13:47 |
|
So far, one neat thing I wish they would have done has to do with hacking cars. I mean, the guy hacks what looks like an older muscle car. It’d be neat if they had people who had “analogue” vehicles that couldn’t just simply be hacked.
|
PanchoVilleneuve ST
> CB
06/08/2016 at 13:52 |
|
I’m sure there are design reasons as to why that isn’t the case, like to allow for variety in the open-world traffic spawn system without putting the player in situations where they are effectively locked out of one of their abilities at a time where they didn’t intend for them to be. It wouldn’t mesh well with how they’re really playing up the whole “play it the way you want to, any approach is valid” thing.
spanfucker retire bitch
> PanchoVilleneuve ST
06/08/2016 at 14:01 |
|
Worst 50 bucks I ever spent on a game.
Great physics engine though...
not for canada - australian in disguise
> PanchoVilleneuve ST
06/08/2016 at 14:06 |
|
I may be the only person who enjoyed Watch_Dogs. But then again I also completely skipped the story and immediately downloaded a 100% savegame. And the vehicle handling was some of the worst vehicle handling in any game I’ve ever played.
Basically it was just fun blowing up steam pipes when people drove over them.
|
PanchoVilleneuve ST
> not for canada - australian in disguise
06/08/2016 at 14:37 |
|
I had a good time with it, but I spent most of the time thinking about how much better it could all be.
Also, since having multiple studios around the world working on the same title is how Ubisoft works, they should really put Reflections in charge of the driving. The handling in Driver: San Francisco wasn’t realistic by any means, but it felt great and was fun as hell.