Watch Dogs 2
- Thread starter antijoke
- Start date
I'll give you Watch Dogs, but that was a turning point internally. The Division delivered.
They delivered a decent game but it wasn't the game that they showed at e3.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xNter0oEYxc&t=3m18s
There was like two years of development between, of course it wasn't the same game. The original E3 video was prior to Watch Dogs release and the internal moves to make sure anything showed in trailers is definitely going to be in the game.
Honestly I don't know how anyone can sit and play The Division and say it isn't up to snuff visually. The PC brigade went quiet after spamming their troll memes and claiming the screenshots were fake once the game arrived and it *did* look pretty amazing.
That and the fact there was a public open beta on all platforms prior to The Division's release, it's very hard to understand how anyone can think they were misled about what they were purchasing.
Honestly I don't know how anyone can sit and play The Division and say it isn't up to snuff visually. The PC brigade went quiet after spamming their troll memes and claiming the screenshots were fake once the game arrived and it *did* look pretty amazing.
That and the fact there was a public open beta on all platforms prior to The Division's release, it's very hard to understand how anyone can think they were misled about what they were purchasing.
Last edited:
If I show you a house I'm going to build and then two years later I give you a shed because of development issues, you're still going to want the house I first showed aren't you?
Sorry but showing these amazing vertical slices and then selling us a downgraded finished product is shady business practise, doesn't matter how you spin it, it's just not good for the consumer and is very 'bait and switch'.
[edit: You're only using the Division as an example, what about all the other games they've done this with?]
Sorry but showing these amazing vertical slices and then selling us a downgraded finished product is shady business practise, doesn't matter how you spin it, it's just not good for the consumer and is very 'bait and switch'.
[edit: You're only using the Division as an example, what about all the other games they've done this with?]
Last edited:
Caporegime
- Joined
- 9 Mar 2006
- Posts
- 58,555
- Location
- Surrey
It's not in any way shady. If you watch a trailer 2/3 years before then watch nothing else and buy a product then you are dumb as ****. Ubi constantly show gameplay demos and even had a FREE beta to let people try it.
Looking forward to this, I thought the first was highly underrated and a lot of fun.
Looking forward to this, I thought the first was highly underrated and a lot of fun.
Erm, if I'm getting a house built, I will get an architect to draw a very explicit and precise set of blueprints details exactly what is going to be delivered. I don't make a minute long teaser trailer video and hand it to the builders 
Watch Dogs was a complete shambles, it was acknowledged it was a screw up and the company has acted to avoid things like that happening in future.
The most recent major release has been visually excellent, and with a superb PC version. I know it's still fashionable to bash Ubisoft, but judge them on what they're doing now, not what happened in the past.
Watch Dogs was a complete shambles, it was acknowledged it was a screw up and the company has acted to avoid things like that happening in future.
The most recent major release has been visually excellent, and with a superb PC version. I know it's still fashionable to bash Ubisoft, but judge them on what they're doing now, not what happened in the past.
Soldato
- Joined
- 7 Aug 2012
- Posts
- 2,652
You can attempt to defend your company all you like. The bottom line is that ubisoft are notorious for showing early versions of their products that are far above the visual fidelity of the finished product. Just check the video posted earlier in the thread.
Soldato
- Joined
- 7 Aug 2012
- Posts
- 2,652
Interesting that you use The Division as an example - go watch from minute 2:30 until 5:55 in that video and try and tell me that the finished product was anything remotely as good looking as the early vertical slices.
Some of us have better things to do with our time than poring over 3 year old E3 videos trying to find things to get upset about.
Did Ubisoft force you to buy the Division? Did they *not* have multiple open beta phases so anyone and everyone could try the game before they made a purchasing decision? Did they not deliver a game that ultimately has been very well received?
Did Ubisoft force you to buy the Division? Did they *not* have multiple open beta phases so anyone and everyone could try the game before they made a purchasing decision? Did they not deliver a game that ultimately has been very well received?
Like I said, after Watch Dogs' release version failed to reach the visual expectations set by the E3 build, there has been a clear policy put in place to make sure it doesn't happen again.
Its not fashionable, its largely the truth and its been what 4 years of this consistently. You could reel off half a dozen AAA games this has happened to that have been released back-to-back so its not like its the odd one here or there, its basically their whole AAA portfolio for what is half a gen of gaming...
P.S. Rainbox Six Siege was announced after Watchdogs was released - still ended up downgraded on top of losing features from previous titles. Ubisoft have shown zero commitment to not doing it in the future from what Ive seen.
'Charlie charlie breaker Im talking like Im a normal gamer chatting in a MP game - alright team lets begin the assault on my command'
But Ubisoft arent the only ones that do this...
ps3ud0
Last edited:
Far Cry 4, AC:Syndicate, Far Cry Primal, The Division, R6 Siege. The recent AAA catalogue has been pretty damn good and if people want to get upset over differences between expo builds and release, well you enjoy yourselves next week, I've got games to play (and make) 