Pages

Tuesday, 7 February 2017

Now Playing: Watch_Dogs 2

Watch_Dogs was one of my favourite games of the last few years. I thought it was pretty great. I know I’m in the minority with that opinion, and particularly for my fondness of its protagonist – the ‘boring white guy’ Aidan Pearce. For many reviewers, Watch_Dogs 2 is a sequel that surpasses the original.

But few were fans of the original game, so that’s not exactly a surprising conclusion. But I am. So the question becomes – as a fan of the original, do I think Watch_Dogs 2 is a better game? Well, I do think it’s pretty good but once again, it seems I’m going to fall into the minority and say – the original was better.

Let’s begin with narrative. Watch_Dogs 2 is set in San Francisco and our new hero is Marcus Holloway, a young hacker with a grudge against the nefarious Blume Corporation – the creators of CTOS. To this end, he joins the ‘hacktivist’ group DeadSec, a collection of misfits and outcasts who embark on a series of ‘operations’ (missions) to increase their ‘followers’ (which is cleverly tied into the XP system) and undermine Blume and its allies.

The tone of Watch_Dogs has taken a dramatic shift from dark and serious to light and silly, and that’s immediately evident in your first main mission in which Marcus is running about in his underwear. As a result, Watch_Dogs 2 has a greater sense of fun and far more humour, reflected both in the characters and how they interact, but also in many of the missions you undertake.

But this playful tone also results in a narrative that lacks any real sense of drive. Why does Marcus care so much about ‘taking down’ Blume? And what does ‘taking down’ Blume actually mean? It’s a nebulous goal with no narrative progression and a wholly unsatisfying conclusion. Say what you will about the revenge based plot of the original, but at least it gave both Pearce and the player a clear motivation and goal.


The problem with Watch_Dogs 2, is that none of the characters have a comparable motivation driving their actions. Nearly everything is done purely because ‘it’ll be funny’. It’s done ‘for the lulz’. And that’s fine, to a degree, but it means the narrative lacks bite. It lacks any sense of danger or stakes. There’s little sense of threat to Marcus, despite him tackling a corporation we know is willing to kill to protect its interests.

There are odd moments when the game does try to be a little more serious, but these moments are quickly glossed over and forgotten. I did like Marcus and the supporting characters of Watch_Dogs 2, and I can’t deny it had me laughing a lot more than the sombre and serious original, but I also never really took their ‘mission’ very seriously because … well, neither did they.

There really needed to be a moment when they realised that ‘taking down’ Blume wasn’t just a game. A moment when Shit. Got. Real. That there were consequences to their actions. It’s a moment that never comes. And it doesn’t help that the main ‘villain’ of Watch_Dogs 2 is a hipster with a man bun.

The original narrative had a clear goal. It began with a mock execution, with Pearce pointing a gun to the head of the man responsible for killing his niece. And it ended the same way. It was a perfect circle bringing the story to a close. The narrative had structure and pace – a clear progression of Pearce (and the player) working towards a goal, a goal Pearce was emotionally invested in achieving.

But Watch_Dogs 2 doesn’t have any narrative thread guiding you from start to finish. It’s just a series of disconnected, narratively detached missions that eventually lead to a final mission which has no build up at all. Seriously, there’s no real narrative build up to ‘taking down’ Blume. The final mission just pops up, seemingly at random – and what a lame final mission it is.


And our heroes? When our heroes in Watch_Dogs 2 hit their first real hurdle, all of them aside from Marcus are immediately ready to quit. If they don’t really seem to care about their mission … then why should I? Where’s the personal investment? What’s really at stake?

The tone also creates an odd clash with the gameplay. Pearce was on a mission of revenge, fighting gangs, corporate assassination squads and career criminals whereas Marcus is fighting … hipsters. There is a small gang element to a couple of missions, but your primary ‘bad guys’ are poorly paid security guards just doing their job. It never felt out of place for Pearce to murder his way (if the player chose) through his missions, but Marcus?

Marcus isn’t a criminal, not in the same sense as Pearce. Remember, Pearce wasn’t really a ‘hacker’ in Watch_Dogs. He was a ‘fixer’ who worked with hackers, including DeadSec itself. He was accustomed to violence. Marcus is just a kid who likes cheesy 80s action flicks and taking selfies with his friends. So it’s all a little jarring when you can equip him with military grade weapons and begin murdering people. It’s even more jarring when none of your friends comment on the fact that you murdered 8 people just to spray some graffiti on an advertising board.

Sure, you don’t have to and like the original, there’s certainly non-lethal and stealth based options you can take. The point I’m making is that Marcus killing just doesn’t feel right, not for the character, not for the story and certainly not for the tone. I can’t really criticise the game for giving the player the option to use lethal violence, but I also can’t help but wonder what the game would be like if they’d taken the bold design choice to limit Marcus to entirely non-lethal weaponry and gadgets.

Speaking of gadgets, Watch_Dogs 2 introduces a remote buggy and drone to the series. These are a fantastic addition, opening up new ways to approach missions, although I do feel they’ve made the game significantly easier as a result. There are also cool new hacks to utilise, my personal favourite being the ability to take control of vehicles.


The core gameplay of Watch_Dogs remains intact, as you use a variety of hacks, stealth and combat to complete your missions. And that’s something I loved about the original – being able to approach and devise plans to complete these missions in my own way. The game provides the toys, but how you use them is entirely up to you.

The open world of Watch_Dogs 2 is a significant improvement over that of the original and a far more enjoyable sandbox to screw about in. It’s still not comparable to say, GTA V, but it’s a very good step in the right direction. The new hacks like the vehicle control or the ability to call the police to arrest people provide some extremely enjoyable ways to f**k about and cause all kinds of havoc.

That said, the side content of Watch_Dogs 2 isn’t as good. Although there’s more unique and elaborate side missions, there’s nothing quite as enjoyable or compelling when compared to those of the original. The original also had far more side content, including various mini-games (that Watch_Dogs 2 entirely lacks) and collectibles, which it cleverly tied together by building unique missions around them.

Player progression in Watch_Dogs 2 is also a little annoying in the sense that even if you’ve unlocked enough skill points to purchase a new ability, you may not be able to until you’ve collected a ‘research item’ on the map, forcing you to go and hunt it down. They’re not hard to find. There’s very rarely any puzzle or challenge to collecting them. It’s just a tedious way of slowing the player down.


In terms of performance, Watch_Dogs 2 isn’t great, with a frame rate that frequently dips regardless of settings. It also randomly freezes for a few seconds at odd times (even when using the menus) which isn’t game breaking, but certainly irritating so I hope we see some patches on the way.

Car handling could be better as it feels very ‘floaty’. The original didn’t have fantastic car handling either, but I’d have hoped for an improvement in its sequel, including better car physics and damage model – but we don’t really get either. This is one of the key areas that Watch_Dogs as a series really needs to improve.

Overall, despite my complaints, I enjoyed Watch_Dogs 2. The core gameplay remains intact with the ability to approach missions in my own way, at my own pace. And whilst none of the missions really connect narratively, they are all fairly enjoyable and cleverly varied in their own unique way. The open world is a good step up from the original, and the new characters are a lot of fun.

But Watch_Dogs 2 is also inconsistent with its tone, its narrative lacks bite, and it doesn’t provide the appropriate motivation or investment that the characters (and the player) need. Its side content is rather shallow compared to the original, and I don’t feel it offers such a wide range, variety and quality in terms of its missions. It’s a very solid and enjoyable continuation of the Watch_Dogs series, but I do think the original was better.

7/10

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.