Watch_Dogs shows exclusive content

OrionG

Commented on 2014-03-20 19:11:03

so, Xbox will get Redhat and PC will get nothing...

In reply to

KORNdog

Commented on 2014-03-20 19:13:49 In reply to OrionG

Posted by OrionG

so, Xbox will get Redhat and PC will get nothing...

PC will gat a non shit looking game....maybe?

In reply to

Eamon

Commented on 2014-03-20 19:24:37

at least it doesn't look as bad as the previous trailer. Definitely not E3 2012 level but much better than the previous trailer. Downgradegate is taking its toll though

In reply to

bombastico

Commented on 2014-03-20 19:33:55

Looks definitely everything else than shit in my oppinion. I am looking forward to it, and I am very sure that I will have a lot of fun with watchdogs. Never would`ve thought that the amount of hate going on nowadays could or would be even bigger than during the release of last gen consoles. What the heck, I have fun with any system, game or whatever since I just love my hobby (and my job aswell ;))

In reply to

digi_matrix

Commented on 2014-03-20 19:50:45

I don't see the downgrade.

In reply to

KORNdog

Commented on 2014-03-20 19:52:51 In reply to digi_matrix

Posted by digi_matrix

I don't see the downgrade.

Then you'll be fine. I wish i couldn't see it.

In reply to

sebasrd24

Commented on 2014-03-20 20:33:16

I can see a downgrade but calling it shit... I think It´s talking too much.

In reply to

bleachedsmiles

Commented on 2014-03-20 21:45:46

frankly I think this sort of marketing is bullshit and makes zero sense. Basically charging the same price for less content if you happened to own the 'wrong' machine to play the game on - how does this make the consumer feel valued in their purchase?

In reply to

KORNdog

Commented on 2014-03-20 21:47:39 In reply to bleachedsmiles

Posted by bleachedsmiles

frankly I think this sort of marketing is bullshit and makes zero sense. Basically charging the same price for less content if you happened to own the 'wrong' machine to play the game on - how does this make the consumer feel valued in their purchase?

It doesn't. It just makes the publisher money since it's clearly been moneyhatted...It's basically a lesser form of what happened with titanfall.

In reply to

bleachedsmiles

Commented on 2014-03-20 22:44:11 In reply to KORNdog

Its nothing like what happened with titanfall though is it. If titan fall had come to ps4 with the same asking price yet less content on the disc then that would be the same. It didn't, so it isn't. You get the same content on xboxone as you do on pc, and I assume 360.

If I was selling a product via different platforms I really don't see how i'd win favour with people buying my product by advertising that only a percentage of you will get more content for your money - especially when my products not even out. Sure those that this favours are fine. But i'm basically telling the others i'll gladly take your money but I don't value you the same. Its crazy marketing really.

The ps3 saw quite a bit of it last gen. And people argued it was the same as exclusive DLC costing an additional price - which of course it isn't as you're being charged extra for something extra - which is more reasonable.

In reply to

KORNdog

Commented on 2014-03-20 23:04:29 In reply to bleachedsmiles

Posted by bleachedsmiles

Its nothing like what happened with titanfall though is it. If titan fall had come to ps4 with the same asking price yet less content on the disc then that would be the same. It didn't, so it isn't. You get the same content on xboxone as you do on pc, and I assume 360.

If I was selling a product via different platforms I really don't see how i'd win favour with people buying my product by advertising that only a percentage of you will get more content for your money - especially when my products not even out. Sure those that this favours are fine. But i'm basically telling the others i'll gladly take your money but I don't value you the same. Its crazy marketing really.

The ps3 saw quite a bit of it last gen. And people argued it was the same as exclusive DLC costing an additional price - which of course it isn't as you're being charged extra for something extra - which is more reasonable.

It's console manufacturers moneyhatting third party content. What's the difference between sony paying ubisoft (a third party publisher) for partial content in a ubisoft title (a third party developer) and MS paying EA ( a third party publisher) for an entire game made by respawn (a third party developer)?

It's done to make that platform appear better at the expense of the other group of consumers. I see no difference between this and the COD/MS dlc deal, or the battlefield 3/sony dlc deal, or the battlefield 4/MS map pack deal. Or more recently, titanfall.

Manufacturers paying for content NOT to appear elsewhere (as is the case with titanfall, an originally planned timed exclusive) is no different in my eyes. It's all bullshit. Third party content should be on everything, or at least announced from the start as being exclusive (see alan wake or heavy rain)

In the case of this game though, it looks wank, who cares.

In reply to

[quote=bleachedsmiles]Its nothing like what happened with titanfall though is it. If titan fall had come to ps4 with the same asking price yet less content on the disc then that would be the same. It didn't, so it isn't. You get the same content on xboxone as you do on pc, and I assume 360.

If I was selling a product via different platforms I really don't see how i'd win favour with people buying my product by advertising that only a percentage of you will get more content for your money - especially when my products not even out. Sure those that this favours are fine. But i'm basically telling the others i'll gladly take your money but I don't value you the same. Its crazy marketing really.

The ps3 saw quite a bit of it last gen. And people argued it was the same as exclusive DLC costing an additional price - which of course it isn't as you're being charged extra for something extra - which is more reasonable.[/quote]

It's console manufacturers moneyhatting third party content. What's the difference between sony paying ubisoft (a third party publisher) for partial content in a ubisoft title (a third party developer) and MS paying EA ( a third party publisher) for an entire game made by respawn (a third party developer)?

It's done to make that platform appear better at the expense of the other group of consumers. I see no difference between this and the COD/MS dlc deal, or the battlefield 3/sony dlc deal, or the battlefield 4/MS map pack deal. Or more recently, titanfall.

Manufacturers paying for content NOT to appear elsewhere (as is the case with titanfall, an originally planned timed exclusive) is no different in my eyes. It's all bullshit. Third party content should be on everything, or at least announced from the start as being exclusive (see alan wake or heavy rain)

In the case of this game though, it looks wank, who cares.

bleachedsmiles

Commented on 2014-03-20 23:37:17

Already stated the difference between something like this and something like timed DLC you see in the MS/COD deal etc - you're not excluding anybody from content that's on the disc. Yes, as another platform owner you have to wait a little longer... but those timed deals aren't offering anything for free. And you still have the opportunity to play that dlc when it hits if you care to pay for it.
Titanfall was a 3rd party deal that was exclusive to Microsoft platforms.. its not EA asking those with Sony platforms to pay the same price for less content.. its them simply not selling to sony platforms - and advertised as such.

This on the other hand will be a £50rrp price tag on both Microsoft and Sony platforms yet will be offering more value on the disc for one platform than for the other - and worse, is acceptably marketed as such.

I Just don't get how, for a third party developer, this equals good marketing. Regardless of if the games good or not, its not the first time we've seen it..and its doubtful it will be the last.

In reply to

Already stated the difference between something like this and something like timed DLC you see in the MS/COD deal etc - you're not excluding anybody from content that's on the disc. Yes, as another platform owner you have to wait a little longer... but those timed deals aren't offering anything for free. And you still have the opportunity to play that dlc when it hits if you care to pay for it.
Titanfall was a 3rd party deal that was exclusive to Microsoft platforms.. its not EA asking those with Sony platforms to pay the same price for less content.. its them simply not selling to sony platforms - and advertised as such.

This on the other hand will be a £50rrp price tag on both Microsoft and Sony platforms yet will be offering more value on the disc for one platform than for the other - and worse, is acceptably marketed as such.

I Just don't get how, for a third party developer, this equals good marketing. Regardless of if the games good or not, its not the first time we've seen it..and its doubtful it will be the last.

KORNdog

Commented on 2014-03-21 00:07:33

But there is no difference. You're claiming there is but i'm yet to see how? Whether it's timed dlc, additional platform specific content, or full blown exclusivity after it was advertised as a timed exclusive. At the end of the day, in all those situations, the platform holder is compensating the publisher so more people are drawn to THIER platform. It doesn't matter that it's backwards marketing to the consumer, the publisher has earned their money via the platform holder for keeping that content away from the other, be it a month, a year, or forever. The publisher is happy. It cost MS $70 million to keep titanfall away from sony platforms. That is no different to sony paying whatever they paid to keep this watchdogs content away from MS platforms. At the end of the day, they've both created more interest in their own platform by securing that content. And that's all there is to it. The consumers feelings don't even factor into the equation. Sony/MS get a game to draw in the punters, and the publishers get paid for the privilege. It's like how avatar was exclusive to panasonic 3D bluray players. It's BS for us. But it makes business sense for everyone else.

In reply to

But there is no difference. You're claiming there is but i'm yet to see how? Whether it's timed dlc, additional platform specific content, or full blown exclusivity after it was advertised as a timed exclusive. At the end of the day, in all those situations,  the platform holder is compensating the publisher so more people are drawn to THIER platform. It doesn't matter that it's backwards marketing to the consumer, the publisher has earned their money via the platform holder for keeping that content away from the other, be it a month, a year, or forever. The publisher is happy. It cost MS $70 million to keep titanfall away from sony platforms. That is no different to sony paying whatever they paid to keep this watchdogs content away from MS platforms. At the end of the day, they've both created more interest in their own platform by securing that content. And that's all there is to it. The consumers feelings don't even factor into the equation. Sony/MS get a game to draw in the punters, and the publishers get paid for the privilege. It's like how avatar was exclusive to panasonic 3D bluray players. It's BS for us. But it makes business sense for everyone else.

b0vril

Commented on 2014-03-21 01:19:16 In reply to bleachedsmiles

Posted by bleachedsmiles

frankly I think this sort of marketing is bullshit and makes zero sense. Basically charging the same price for less content if you happened to own the 'wrong' machine to play the game on - how does this make the consumer feel valued in their purchase?

I actually don't think it really makes a difference unless you own both machines. I mean, this kind of exclusive content has never made me go "oh shit, I am not getting my money's worth here! I am missing out on an hours worth of almost certainly SICK gameplay!"

I'd wonder how much this kind of exclusivity actually helps a platform.

In reply to

spacemanjupiter

Commented on 2014-03-21 05:13:04

Looks somewhat last gen, but that is to be expected of many games during the first year. I will wait for reviews and more gameplay videos. The concept is interesting and different.

In reply to

nostradamus

Commented on 2014-03-21 12:44:03

f****** hipsters. a cross between bathrobe and gay parade army.

In reply to

marklola

Commented on 2014-03-21 19:21:56 In reply to KORNdog

im with you on that, it looks total crap now, even in this new footage everything has been maxed out in the bland setting, the textures are plain, looks nothing special at all now

the cars look really crap now too, but then everything does looking back at how it looked in the reveal, i cant believe how bad it is

the pc version wont even look anything like the reveal i dont think

also The white jacket other than looking a bit silly looks like it hardly has any texture to it or any life when it moves around with the character

In reply to

marklola

Commented on 2014-03-21 19:22:38 In reply to spacemanjupiter

you say games in the first year...but most games dont get as long as this has had lol they have been making this game for about 5 years

In reply to

itaintrite

Commented on 2014-03-22 01:04:27

That coat looks fake as hell.

In reply to

marklola

Commented on 2014-03-22 13:42:58 In reply to itaintrite

i agree i think they are only adding it because the other coat they showed ..in the reveal anyway was way more real textures were great on it, the movement and creases etc

its obvious even the coat has had a bad downgrade lol

it all looks bland textured as hell

im not bothering with this game at all

In reply to

marklola

Commented on 2014-03-22 13:44:09 In reply to itaintrite

hell look at the rest of him, the jeans/trousers the top, the hat, his face ive never seen such a bland and bad textured character for ages and did not expect to see something that bad in a game this gen

Ubisoft has totally ruined my gaming experiance so far this new gen thanks to theu=ir fake watch dogs reveal and now the bad downgrade, i have infamous and everyone is raving about its graphics yet im very underwhelmed, seen the metal grear solid gameplay and that looks boring and blad to me also...thank you ubisoft because i dont think i will look at games this gen and be impressed lol

In reply to

r3tr0gam3r1337

Commented on 2014-03-23 07:11:02

i know people moan about PC gamers but when it comes to price the PC is cheapest (newer games rigs cost less than $500 and are easily able to play games on medium to high settings at 1080p).

In reply to

Lucent85

Commented on 2014-03-24 03:32:41 In reply to nostradamus

Posted by nostradamus

f****** hipsters. a cross between bathrobe and gay parade army.

Wow so cool.

In reply to

marklola

Commented on 2014-03-24 16:41:52 In reply to r3tr0gam3r1337

lol are you real??? to get a good gaming pc that will last and run watch dogs and the division you need to spend about £1000 and thats shopping around for cheaper parts

In reply to

marklola

Commented on 2014-03-24 16:42:11 In reply to Lucent85

yeh bit of a jerk it seems

In reply to

Watch_Dogs shows exclusive content

Artwork

Playstation Exclusive Trailer

All comments (26)

LEGO Horizon Adventures

Dragon Quest III HD-2D Remake

S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2: Heart of Chornobyl

P55 Pro HQ video coverage: Day Four

PS5 Pro HQ video coverage: Day Three

PS5 Pro HQ video coverage: Day Two