Wolf’s Wicked Words: A WATCHFUL_DOGS Problem
Let me start by saying that I’m sick of WATCH_DOGS related articles — absolutely satiated by any graphical comparison between the final product versus the E3 2012 demo or comparisons between different platforms. I’ve seen the game on PC; it looks amazing and yet I am still more than happy with my supposedly horribly inferior PS3 copy of the game. Yet, here I am with my own WATCH_DOGS related opinion and hopefully without the added pessimism we’ve had these last few months.
This game has been surrounded by hype and a hefty measure of anticipation since the first live E3 demo was shown to the world and I too was very excited by the premise and idea of the game. Before launch a lot of speculation ran around any and all gaming related websites regarding the downgrade in visuals. The PC version and current generation of consoles have displayed the game still as a visually pleasing experience, but not quite as crisp and detailed as the aforementioned E3 demo. This is still slightly concerning but not nearly as severe as the case of Aliens: Colonial Marines and the faecal rain that followed after that title’s launch.
- Assassin’s Creed Syndicate Is All Style And No Soul | 5 days ago
- “Sony F***ing Nailed It” – Unity Boss On PS4 Versus Xbox One | 1 week ago
- A Cataclysmic Dawn: Daredevil And How Comic Books Adaptations Can Evolve | 2 weeks ago
- Steam Hands The Ban-Hammer To Game Developers | 3 weeks ago
Now we have an itsy-bitsy sized “mod” for the PC version that turns the E3 demo’s wondrous effects on that is not accessible via the bona fide options menu. Well, that happened.
For more official non-rambling information regarding this, be sure to check out this news piece.
I’m continuously asking why these graphical options are within the game, but not utilised. Can any one of us that have had no input into the game’s development ever know for certain, even if Ubisoft addresses this issue?
You may soon hear cries regarding the PC master race, inferior console hardware or even all sorts of conspiracy regarding this issue, but all the cries, nay, relaxed tone of voice you’ll hear from me is: silly Ubisoft.
I’ve always and still do enjoy their games, but this is just adding acidic ammunition to the assault rifle carried by a tremendously twitchy meth head running after a cap-wearing dog with the Ubisoft logo expertly stitched onto it. (The cap that is; not the dog.)
Speculative hounds may do what they’re good at and have the whole gaming world ablaze with theories, but I feel that one should ultimately wait for Ubisoft’s response – if there ever will be one. I am not keeping my hopes up, because of the feedback that followed after the Assassin’s Creed Unity’s issue regarding the lack of female protagonists, but we’ll get to that soon enough.
As I have stated in the past; I like to ask questions rather than provide answers. Why is there so much secrecy in the gaming world? It is after all an entertainment industry and not a genuine secret agency fighting terrorism. I do understand the need for secrecy to surprise the players with a new gameplay mechanic or interesting story, but lately all of this secrecy and dodgy business practices makes for a constant flow of skepticism among us gamers.
This skepticism is not helping the industry one bit, but it is not something I think we have developed all by ourselves. Also, the whole quandary regarding visuals nowadays makes me nauseated to my very core. Please stop fixating on resolution, level of detail or orgasmic rain particles and enjoy the game for what it is, because I am doing just that and it’s going pretty well so far, but I think it will be much easier to accomplish punching a wall and receive an apology from said wall.
I am quite curious as to what everyone’s opinion regarding this hidden settings and indeed graphical capability within WATCH_DOGS can mean?
Lastly, my own thoughts regarding the reason Ubisoft provided for not including female protagonists:
Credit for the header image goes to ArteF4ct.