|
Bobbin Threadbare posted:It's very kind of the game to admit that it's treating hacking as magic straight off the bat. This is like a 90's hacking movie plot if wireless devices had been invented twenty years ago. The year is 2014. It is the future.  I've read two books about real-life super-hackers, and both were gym-junkies, so the martial prowess of our hero is not unrealistic, although his inspirations would have used cyber-bullying, not actual physical torture. But as we've seen Aiden doesn't have to worry about police or cleaning ladies.
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2014 20:30
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 20:50 |
|
|
Apparently it's a staple of music videos, according to something I read I don't remember where. The only actual thing that comes to mind is, I think, "New Divide" by Linkin Park. I think. The one with transformers. Ah. I think that was a book called "The Most Human Human" about AI, but it had a section about digital artifacts becoming an art form. Sorry if no one cares.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 30, 2014 10:16
|
|
|
Er... Do gangbanger thugs often volunteer in homeless shelters? 
|
|
#
¿
Sep 3, 2014 22:24
|
|
|
Oh, yeah... It would have been a more palatable statement to me in the form "former gangbanger thug".  Or maybe "a vigilante-style criminal" or something? supermikhail fucked around with this message at 22:49 on Sep 3, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Sep 3, 2014 22:45
|
|
|
I consider as the gold standard of non-lethal gameplay a game called "Robin Hood: The Legend Of Sherwood", which supplies you, or, to be precise, your minions, with an infinite supply of rope. (That's as far as the games I've played. Your mileage may vary.) And in this game Aiden could simply activate a short-range WiFi connection to an enemy's trousers to make them stick together and prevent movement. 
supermikhail fucked around with this message at 22:59 on Sep 5, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Sep 5, 2014 22:39
|
|
|
I had a heretical thought recently that maybe it's us, those who don't like this game, who are the vocal minority, and wrong in a sense. And the majority actually isn't that complicated. I mean, for one, psychologists take their statistics from somewhere, and if most people here don't buy into hype, then we are an aberration. The same goes for spending extravagant amounts of money for preorders and feeling better about the game because of it... Actually, those aren't very good examples. Well, I postulate that the majority likes Batman impressions (and voice impressions in general), appreciates grenade launchers from the start, and enjoys silly billboard messages... I'm probably saying something obvious? Well, I guess I'm trying to justify the amazing success of some kind of mediocre (or so I've heard and read in this thread) releases this year.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 11, 2014 20:45
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 20:50 |
|
|
tomanton posted:Clearly whatever they were doing worked since they have a blockbuster hit on their hands and hopefully the Aiden of the sequels will have more depth. I struggle to think of a precedent for a situation like this. It's not like customers couldn't wait to give away provisionary money, for the promise that the franchise holds. On the other hand, I can easily think of a few examples of games that didn't do that well but the developers managed to stay afloat and knew where they could improve (System Shock comes to mind, although it's not the best example because the second game didn't work out either, financially), or games that did well and the sequels only got better (say, Thief 1 and 2. Also, Assassin's Creed 1 and 2). And there's plenty of examples of games that were great successes and had lackluster sequels (Dragon Age, Deus Ex, Halo, Bioshock?). Of course, if Watch_Dogs is in the last category, the sequel could work out better if the devs immediately skipped to number 3, or did a prequel. Why did I write that?  I'm so sorry, I'm kind of stressed right now. 
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2014 15:25
|
|