Hacker’s Paradise: Ubisoft On Watch Dogs

And also, everybody is Spider-Man.
Much like the news that your house is being repossessed after a particularly brutal bout of identity theft, Watch Dogs came out of nowhere. Hot on the heels of a Ubisoft press conference that could charitably be described as “at least probably not offensive to some breeds of orangutan,” Watch Dogs mopped up that particular mess and then some. Main character Pearce hacked everything from cell phones to traffic lights as naturally as most of us draw breath. He stalked, he talked, and then, well, he shot some dudes. Lots of them, actually.

So Ubisoft’s spilled quite a gooey glob of GTA into our Deus Ex, but is that necessarily a bad thing? Do we really need a rather large helping of lead to spice up our near-future cyberpunk intrigue? I spoke with producer Dominic Guay about that concern, Jedi hacker powers, how discovering someone’s sexual history can lead to a side mission, and more. Hack your way past the break to read on. Or just click on it like a normal person.

RPS: The press conference demo ended with a zoom-out to a different character whose objective was to defend [main character] Pearce. What was happening there? Was it some form of co-op? 

Dominic Guay: Yeah, it was actually me playing another character. So I was basically jumping into his adventure having my own objective, and we crossed paths physically. So we’re not giving all details on what we’re doing with multiplayer, but I’m totally OK with sharing our mission statement.

It’s a bit presumptuous, but we feel that – in action-adventure games – the way multiplayer and single-player blend is a bit broken. You have a great adventure on one side, and then a lobby and a deathmatch and an arena on the other. We want to fix that, so we’re really focused on making a consistent universe where you’re focused, immersed, free to go wherever you want, and when you play with other people, you keep all of that. You keep quality, the ability to choose where you go, etc. So what you saw there was a little piece of how two players can meet and exchange goals in the game.

RPS: So you had your big spiel rooted in real world events at the beginning of the demo, but then Pearce waved his hand and took out entire phone networks and stoplight systems like some kind of magical Hollywood hacker Jedi.

Dominic Guay: It’s not. It’s not [like that]. So obviously, the player will build up his abilities. He won’t start out being able to do everything. Obviously, for the purpose of the demo, it was kind of a late game moment. You have a lot of abilities built up. There will be a very realistic reason behind his access to the city – how he can grow his power gradually. It’s going to be the player choosing where they want to put those efforts – on what type of control, how much he wants to invade the privacy of whom, and what he wants to do with that information. It’ll be the player who chooses that.

And really, all the things we’re doing in the game – so you saw hacking radio frequencies, hacking traffic systems, watching people through surveillance cameras – we have concrete references from the real world for all of that. Obviously, he has some pretty good back doors there, but that’ll be explained in the game.

RPS: The demo opened with a big speech about the marginalization of the individual and the idea that we’re all just data points now. It seemed very cautionary in nature – like, “Oh, this is clearly an impersonal, almost inhuman attack on who we are as people.” Which is a bit odd, coming from, well, a giant corporate entity like Ubisoft. Is that dissonance something you’ve been aware of in creating Watch Dogs? 

Dominic Guay: We’re not putting judgment on it. We’re not saying it’s either bad or good. It’s just what you do with it, right? Some people have asked us “Are you a good guy or a bad guy?” We’re really going on the gray there. So you choose as a player what you do with that power. It’s either good or bad.

We don’t think technology’s bad, right? We love technology. We’re saying it’s powerful. We’re all dependent. We’re putting our personal lives on cell phones. We’re all dependent on the city that’s run mostly through computers – traffic, communication, electricity grids – and that can become an incredibly powerful weapon in the hands of a single man.

RPS: The demo opened at a very methodical, atypical (at least, for games) pace, but ended with slow-mo shooting and cyberpunks dying very real deaths. So, is this an action game, or a game about hacking that just so happens to contain brief, powerful moments of action?

Dominic Guay: It’s definitely going to be an action-adventure game at the heart of things. Every player is going to play differently. It’s an open world, and every mission objective has different ways of pulling it off. You saw how he got into the [art show] center by doing something very subtle – hacking the system. He could’ve also stealthed in through a back door or barged in through the front. So some players may want to play very violently, and some others might want subtlety and control. Obviously, we’re going to give you options to use all of those things, and you as the player – depending on your type of approach – are going to be able to mix that up.

RPS: Is that, in some ways, to your disadvantage, though? I feel like the hacking mechanic – given proper attention and nourishment – could stand alone and really evolve into something special. 

Dominic Guay: Well, the reality of things is that we want to give the player a lot of power. So we want Pearce’s actions to have impact. As you saw in the demo, you start a firefight in the middle of downtown – you hack a traffic light to make everyone crash – there’s collateral damage. A woman got killed. And then we choose to save a bystander there amidst the collateral damage. Do I want to do those things? Do I want to create those collateral damages?

Or maybe I could have taken a different approach. Maybe I could’ve followed the guy to the park and then taken him out much more subtly than just starting a firefight. So I think letting players express their freedom – and not just through violence, though he’s definitely capable of it – and mixing it up with his ability for control, that’s the sweet spot. I mean, he hacked a traffic light but ended up in a firefight. That’s the sweet spot we’re aiming for.

RPS: Everybody’s hackable, and during the demo, you briefly mentioned “side opportunities” that could arise from successful hacks. What sorts, though? I mean, I saw that someone was HIV positive. Can you provide examples of how that kind of thing leads to missions? 

Dominic Guay: Obviously, you saw one specific example during the demo. You saw how we hacked into a conversation to find out that someone was coming. But another example… you might have noticed that one person was guilty of plagiarism. So maybe you can follow that person home, hack into his personal laptop, and actually find out that he’s doing it again, and blackmail him for money.

Another example is maybe you can find a guy’s bank account number. So maybe you decide you want to start slowly stealing from that bank account. With so much information available on computers now, we’re trying to support as many types of both honorable and dishonorable uses of information as you want.

RPS: So what’s Pearce actually trying to accomplish with all of this? 

Dominic Guay: That’s something we’re keeping under wraps for now. He’s fighting a corrupted system. But it’s a pretty large system. He’s been hurt. People close to him have been hurt. So he’s definitely upset. The guy’s totally obsessed with power and control, and he’s trying to fight a corrupted system. But, you know, the answers for that will be in the game.

RPS: And the demo was running on PC?

Dominic Guay: Yeah, we’re running on PC at E3.

RPS: Good. Then all is as it should be. Otherwise, I wouldn’t have felt right about thanking you for your time.


  1. Tom De Roeck says:

    Hm. I like this game so far, this interview did definitely make me like it more.

    However, it will remain to be seen if they handle the multiplayer and singleplayer mixing well. I have nothing against ubisoft DRM, but their online content systems can be a bit lackcluster at times.

    • McDan says:

      Very much agree with this. I really hope they do manage to get a good balance in multiplayer without people being able to do anything or what it. Still excited for this.

    • Gnoupi says:

      I agree as well. The trailer was interesting and impressive, but it was complicated to tell what was really going to be the game in the end, especially with the amount of things triggered and shown.

      The fact that things will be unlocked progressively and allow for different approaches is very interesting.

    • Zelius says:

      I do have something against Ubisoft’s DRM. Still, I got over it for Anno 2070, and I’ll get over it for this. If it turns out to be as good as I hope it will be.

      • Phantoon says:

        I’ve been boycotting all Ubisoft products since the ridiculous DRM for Assassin’s Creed was first announced.

        Have they done away with it yet? This interview makes the game sound interesting, like a hi-def Gunpoint.

        • Ragnar says:

          AC2 was eventually patched to require a one-time online activation, and they’ve backed off on the DRM for subsequent products.

    • Vorphalack says:

      I do have something against Ubisoft DRM. Play Heroes 6, while connected to the conflux, and prepare to let the mouse cursor bugs drive you mad. Thankfully they let you play Heroes 6 offline in the end, but the DRM is a steaming pile of shit that offers nothing more worthwhile than achievements, and actually breaks part of the game.

    • PopeJamal says:

      Yes, with UBI, I’m still very skeptical. I dusted off my Xbox only to be disappointed by that turd “I Am Alive”. “Fool me once…” and all that.

      • AlexVy says:

        I actually colossally enjoyed I am alive. Sure it was tough but not too hard to win. Watchdogs looks great (and sandboxy)

  2. Dammokles says:

    Who watches the watch dogs?

  3. Ian says:

    Is this going to be dogged by UbiDRM?

    • John Walker says:

      Well, Ubisoft are well known for keeping players on a tight leash.

      • Dammokles says:

        Throw them a bone, they’re trying to get better in that respect…

      • Antsy says:

        Oh John, what have you done? Starting another rabid pun thread? You must be barking.

      • mangrove says:

        If they put that junk in, I’ll scream until my voice is husky.

      • Jarenth says:

        UbiDRM in this game would be terrible. I do hope you’re barking up the wrong tree.

      • IshtarGate says:

        Ubi’s hounding of paying customers will surely come back to bite them in the mutt one day.

      • Gap Gen says:

        Don’t try to lead us a stray, Ubisoft will keep poodling along as they’ve always done.

      • Fuzzball says:

        Well, now you’re just being asicanine.

      • squareking says:

        Really looks like it might be a howling good time.

      • Muzman says:

        It’s enough to give me paws. Canus poor players not get a break from this hounding?

    • Timthos says:

      They’ve stopped using their always-on DRM.

      • TechnicalBen says:

        You could say their dog days are over then?

      • Ringwraith says:

        They’ve pretty much back-pedalled from it, and EA’s taken up the reigns! (Almost).
        Although they still do weird DRM, like the tied-to-graphics-card one of Anno.

      • Narzhul says:

        Aren’t they still using it for some games? Settler’s 7, Prince of Persia Forgotten Sands etc?

        I would’ve liked it if Nathan had asked more about Ubi’s present stance on DRM and how to treat customers, if they’re starting or are interested in changing.

      • Hoaxfish says:

        I think it’s probably quite likely they’re going the “oh, but you have to be online for our immersive multiplayer”… the same reasoning the new Simcity, and Diablo, is always online.

      • Ian says:

        @Timthos : Was just getting the pun-train rolling, to be honest. :)

    • DanPryce says:

      Of course it will – you can’t teach an old dog new tricks.

    • kharnevil says:

      DRM is a man’s best friend!

  4. byteCrunch says:

    It certainly holds promise, the only issue when you start intergrating multiplayer and singleplayer experiences is that more often than not one suffers, parts of the singleplayer may seem missing if you choose to play without others for example.

    • Ragnar says:

      I’ve enjoyed every game I’ve played coop much more than playing that same game by myself. Playing games together in coop is inherently more fun. But many of those games would have made good singleplayer experiences.

      So you will certainly miss out on something by playing the singleplayer, namely the greatly increased fun that comes with coop, but that doesn’t mean that you won’t receive a good and rich singleplayer experience.

  5. Bakuraptor says:

    I find it interesting to think that to some extent that car-crash setpiece wasn’t entirely scripted, being able to actually make choices in that regard is nice. On the other hand, though, the thing with being able to blackmail the person charged with plagiarism and so on just seems overly ambitious. I don’t know, I just feel that in the past games that have tried to do stuff like that have often ended up being quite underwhelming.

    • xavdeman says:

      It’s been done before. I remember planting bugs in Obsidian’s Alpha Protocol during an optional side quest, and receiving extra funds and information on the safehouse computers from time to time. Really pulled you into the world and not impossible to implement at all. I do think the game will come in multiple DVD’s if you’d be able to actually enter this person’s home.

      • dsi1 says:

        That’s what procedural generation is all about though, it’s a city so buildings are going to be similar, maybe 3 major different classes (poor, middle, wealthy) and maybe even tech and non-tech for the last two.

        Make set pieces for each class, different doors, maybe the poor door has like three or four deadlocks, while the rich tech door has a keypad, camera, and speakerphone, and so on. Basically a set of hallways and rooms with various furniture, skinned differently for different income levels/ideals.

        So when you accept the mission of trailing this guy all of this stuff is generated, his randomly chosen apartment (based on income, ideals, etc) is formed, even letting you look into the windows. (other windows would be painted over of course)

    • Milos says:

      I don’t think it will end up being ambitious at all. It’s not like you will get info and then start pondering “Hmm, how can I use this to my advantage?” it will just end up being a straight up secondary quest you get from a certain number of tagged civilians. More likely to be a grind for extra cash/xp than an intriguing mechanic.

      • Bakuraptor says:

        If it’s scripted miniquests, fine – if it’s randomly implemented it might well turn out a bit of a letdown. I dunno, I guess I’m just a cynic in that regard.

        • Love Albatross says:

          The Eurogamer preview said that the sidequest missions were being hand-crafted, not just procedurally generated, though the same article also claimed every person you see on the street will have a back story, so…

        • The Random One says:

          A tad pessimistic, aren’t we? “Oh boy, I hope this mechanic is the old stuff we’ve seen over and over before, because if it’s something new and different, it might not turn out to be good!”

    • orange says:

      It may not have been scripted, but I did notice something (after watching it so many times) that indicates a bit of “cheating” for the sake of this demonstration. Just as he approaches the intersection before he hacks the traffic lights, notice that there are no cars for quite a distance on the oncoming road (the one parallel to the player). The player then starts looking to the right as if attempting to hide the road so it isn’t visible to us. Then just as he hacks the traffic lights, four cars right after each other appear out of no where and crash into the targets car. Maybe those cars were spawned for this demo?
      However, the actual accident and all the physicsy stuff looked great

  6. Flobulon says:

    Good interview, but it’s a shame you didn’t ask about how much of what we saw was scripted.

  7. Toberoth says:

    I really liked that Nathan asked some tricky questions instead of just letting Guay repeat some PR spiel. Good work!

    • TechnicalBen says:

      That and that the answers seem honest enough. Even to the point of “this is our aim, not necessarily the result we can deliver”.

      • PodX140 says:

        I really loved this interview, for 2 reasons.

        1) It asks the hard questions, and doesn’t beat around the bush. Get’s into the morals and mechanics, with no BS.

        2) The questions get answered in the same way. No BS, no PR crap, just a straight “This is what we intend, but it may not 100% be like that.”

        It really felt like a proper talk between a curious gamer and a developer/creative head, and I would love for every interview to be like this. If this releases in the state that it’s meant to and is described to aspire to, I’m not only buying it (breaking my no-ubi games ban), but pre-ordering it. It looks that amazing.

        • Grargh says:

          Do you see the problem with pre-ordering conditioned by the state at release?

          • PodX140 says:

            Oh, I understand fully that I may be purchasing a faulty product and all that jazz, but Ubi rarely actually fuck stuff up. Sure, they have horrible DRM and their PC ports sometimes aren’t the greatest, but I have still yet to see an absolutely unplayabl- Oh crap the latest anno. But it did have a day 1 patch, but still.

            I still have faith in them.

  8. Jamesworkshop says:

    I’m very impressed by this, even my most hardest to please friend (gamewise) went that’s the first time any game has made me interested in the story.

    What I liked is that this is the kind of city hinted at in Mirror’s edge but never fully developed as an idea.

    • G-Lord says:

      Interesting that you brought up Mirrors Edge. I got more the Hitman vibe.

      • Jamesworkshop says:

        It also helped with that rooftop semi-free running at the end of the demo.

        the open-ended approach is sort of Hitman-y but the world of Hitman doesn’t scream this, The city in Mirror’s edge was heavily surveillanced and information/communication compromised, hence the need for the Runners, but the idea was very much forgotten.

        I even think it’s going to be a better Syndicate than that Syndicate game was.

        • xavdeman says:

          Does anyone else think it’s ironic that the website for this game, watchdogs.ubi.com, has a “Follow us on Facebook” button, seeing as the game gives some unsettling implications of sharing all your information on social networks.

          • G-Lord says:

            Good point Jamesworkshop and yeah, the Facebook irony did not escape me ;)

  9. benjamin says:

    Coloured me interested! Does it have a release date?

    • neo_ says:

      according to their twitter on twitter.com/watchdogsgame somewhere in 2013

  10. John Connor says:

    Reminds me so much of Person of Interest. I love that show.

    • pilouuuu says:

      We could call it Game of Interest.

    • Wounder says:

      I described the demo, to a friend, as “Person of Interest by way of GTA”. Which probably/hopefully dumbs it down too much, but… y’know, I just couldn’t think of a better comparison.

  11. Iskariot says:

    This game sounds brilliant.
    I want this.

  12. RagingLion says:

    Really good questions asked Nathan – thank you for doing so. I can definitely enjoy an adventure with a heavy almost arcade-y slice of action as I do with Assassin’s Creed but I could have equally if not more so gone for a pure hacking adventure. I now know though. Hope this game comes off well – Ubisoft Montreal have good pedigree at least so I think they can pull something special off.

  13. Balm says:

    Is there a place where I can read more interviews like this? With questions going beyond “How excited you are?”

    • somini says:

      I only know one. Rock, Paper, Shotgun.

      Great interview, as usual from this site.

  14. Wurstwaffel says:

    “So maybe you can follow that person home, hack into his personal laptop, and actually find out that he’s doing it again, and blackmail him for money.”

    That kind of thing is exactly what people want from an open world game.

    Of course it now depends on how dynamic it all is and how much of it is actually in the final game. But if they can actually deliver I’m fucking sold man. (except if it has mouse acceleration. In that case fuck this game)

    • Wounder says:

      The desire to crash into random strangers lives (guilt and responsibility free) will be overpowering. “Story missions… or carefully entrap random passerby into a bank robbery distraction?”

  15. MuscleHorse says:

    I want this.

  16. db1331 says:

    RPS: And the demo was running on PC?

    Dominic Guay: Yeah, we’re running on PC at E3.

    RPS: Good. Then all is as it should be. Otherwise, I wouldn’t have felt right about thanking you for your time.

    I love this site so much.

  17. ninjapirate says:

    The footage that I’ve seen showed far too much unnecessary violence for my taste – seeing the antihero protagonist hacking the traffic lights and causing a car crash that kills innocent people literally had me shaking my head in distaste, mostly because it seems like the game is taking itself quite seriously… (I’m not being hypocritical here, I’ve also had my reservations about GTA).

    Aside from that, I like the promises of an improved multiplayer immersion!

    • Skabooga says:

      Yeah, if I accidentally did that, I would feel terrible and have to reload. But what I do appreciate is that the interviewee stated that wasn’t the only possible route to taking out the target, that the player could choose to take a less collateral-damagey approach to achieve his goal. As long as there are legitimate non-jerk ways of resolving situations, I’m cool with it.

      • AJ_Wings says:

        If the game did live up to its promise of offering non-lethal options at every situation, that would be fantastic.

        I love it when games give me the choice of non-lethally approaching a situation.

  18. dazman76 says:

    Dear Agony Aunt,

    I’m genuinely interested in a Ubisoft game – is there any medication available for this, or am I screwed?


    • Ultra Superior says:

      If only you knew how HYPED I was for the first Assassin Creed – murderous thief sim in a broad daylight! The best game ever conceived!!!!

      How deceived I felt by that ‘gamified’ nonsense it turned out to be.

      So I won’t be setting my hopes very high, even though it looks incredible.

      • Toberoth says:

        A gamified game? Scandal.

        • Jimbo says:

          I for one was increedulous about it.

        • Ultra Superior says:

          Scandalous indeed. It makes you wonder what will be gamified next ? Hitmanship ? Thievery ? Bejewelling ?

      • MSJ says:

        Then they made Assassin’s Creed 2 and it was fantastic. Of course, now there are fistfights over whether AC2 or Brotherhood is better. AC3 seems to be better than any of them, anyway.

        • Ultra Superior says:

          AC2 was better though hardly fantastic. Some of the gaming mechanisms are so ridiculous your children will laugh at what kind of games their daddy thought is fantastic.

    • Shooop says:

      I seem to faintly recall most of the hatred against Ubisoft was because of this thing called always-on DRM, not so much the actual games themselves.

      Whether or not that will materialize later we don’t know yet.

  19. svick says:

    What I didn’t like about the video is how much “scripted” the car crash seemed. There was almost no traffic but the moment you hack the lights, a dozen cars suddenly appear and crash into each other?

    • Wurstwaffel says:

      I assume that trailer was more of a proof-of-concept video, where things actually are scripted, but are supposed to be dynamic in the final game. How much of it will be scrapped during development we can not now at this point

    • sneetch says:

      I think he cast Summon Cars VII as part of the hack.

    • Shooop says:

      That is how a lot downtown traffic is in reality though funnily enough. At least in American cites.

    • Ultra Superior says:

      maybe diverting traffic from radial highways and increasing their speed limits is all part of the “Car crash hack package”.

    • ScottTFrazer says:

      It’s a pretty picture perfect chicago, which is a bit off-putting when they get some little details wrong. That’s pretty clearly the corner of State and Lake, but there’s no gas station on that corner. Also, Lake (the street directly under the train tracks) isn’t 2-way.

      And they renamed the Chicago Theater, of course.

      Knowing Chicago drivers, though, if you messed up the traffic signals, there’d probably be a gun fight pretty soon after that.

    • yrrnn says:

      I also noticed that the animation and ensuing cutscene when he pulled his target out of the car looked so perfect, that this was the only way or one of only a few ways it could go down. But if they want to have a truly dynamic and random system and do stuff like that for every possible scenario, they can be my guest!

      • LionsPhil says:

        I suspect that’s a mixture of careful tweaking and presentation for a pre-prepared E3 video, and if we’re lucky some neat procedural animation (think Eurphoria, or Overgrowth).

        • yrrnn says:

          I suppose. I guess it could be that you always have to approach him to kill him regardless of where he is, which will always initiate a cutscene where he gets thrown down to the ground, complete with the oh-so-artful crooked glasses we see in the video.

          If that’s the case it does make me a little sad. I have always wanted games such as these (small sandbox experiences within a larger sandbox, or just boxes of sand in general) to allow you to kill people however you want, eg. if I want to avoid a shootout and take out a target from half a mile away with a sniper rifle, I should be able to if the opportunity presents itself. Of course the developers can still force me to approach the scene later on by making me retrieve something from his corpse or whatever if they deem it necessary, but there should still be a hint of that freedom.

          Or maybe it was just scripted for E3. Either way it’s still very impressive.

          • LionsPhil says:

            Oh I’m sorry, I misread and thought you were talking about the guy he pulled from the car to “rescue”.

            The last one looked like pure cutscene, yeah, but it’s not necessarily the only cutscene, given the comments. I guess it depends how insist they are on wanting to force the player to sit through their cheesy dialogue. :|

  20. Shooop says:

    Notice he didn’t directly answer the question about the sudden shootout and instead went on about what you could do before it.

    Sounds to me like just another funnel trick game. It offers you a few ways to get somewhere the devs want, and then linearity takes over.


    And right under that particularly disappointing answer there was another, much, much more optimistic one I managed to skip right over.

    If they manage to keep as many choices like that through the entire game and not just select sections it should be big.

    • Knightley4 says:

      Well, after that he said about “collateral damage” thing . That means, there should be other ways. Of course at the end you should kill that guy, it’s an action game, after all.

      • Shooop says:

        Idiotically enough I managed to skip right over that part.

        Reading that bit pleases me. But will it apply to the game as a whole or just a few sections? I’ll be watching this game with a good deal of interest now.

    • NyuBomber says:

      So you missed the part where he said “Or maybe I could have taken a different approach. Maybe I could’ve followed the guy to the park and then taken him out much more subtly than just starting a firefight,” then?

      • Shooop says:

        Actually I did.

        Scanning articles ≠ reading.

        In that case, this game becomes much more interesting again. Now if that approach carries all the way through the entire game instead of only a few select areas it’s a surefire winner.

        • NyuBomber says:

          It’s definitely high on my watch (dog) list, hopefully it executes to satisfaction!

  21. BreadBitten says:

    I have a sinking feeling that Ubisoft are going to see the game’s convergence of single and multiplayer as an excuse to shove their terribad DRM into the game…

    • PodX140 says:

      Honestly though? If the game mechanic works as it’s described in the interview, I wouldn’t even mind, and I freaking abhore the DRM. If it’s seriously seamless interaction when in “online mode”, I seriously would not mind the online requirement.

    • StarkeRealm says:

      Yeah, that’s my concern too. But beyond that, this is the first title in a while I’m actually excited over, so there is that.

    • somini says:

      Hopefully they will learn from Blizzard and have ways to play offline. If not I’m not buying.

    • KenTWOu says:

      BreadBitten, you’re a slow poke. Ubisoft already forgot about always online DRM.

      • BreadBitten says:

        If memory serves Ubisoft never really said anything about abandoning their online-only DRM, rather they said they would use it in a case-by-case basis and I don’t see any other cases that would seem more important to prioritize than protecting a new, potentially risky IP.

  22. Shantara says:

    So… Any chance this game would be released before 2015?

  23. sinister agent says:

    Quietly hoping there’s an alarm in there somewhere that hollers “You have…. HAQORS!”.

    Sounds promising. I like some of the ideas they seem to be looking into. Here’s hoping that’s it’s not all put under too much pressure to be hammered into the same old shapes as usual.

  24. Sparkasaurusmex says:

    It isn’t just because this game seems so great that this interview seems so great.
    Excited for the game. Very happy about the questions asked and I love the tone of Mr. Guay.

  25. The First Door says:

    The more I read about this game, the more excited I am by it! If they deliver even some of this promise I suspect I’ll still be excited by it.

    The best part about this interview is it made me think they might deliver something like an open world Uplink. Being able to hack bank accounts to afford better equipment or influence the stock market like you could in Uplink would be even more brilliant if you could go to the financial district and watch the stock prices change there.

  26. Fox89 says:

    “Or maybe I could have taken a different approach. Maybe I could’ve followed the guy to the park and then taken him out much more subtly than just starting a firefight.”

    THIS was what I wanted to hear. The implication of this seems to be “we only showed you one way of taking your target out. But in reality there were actually lots of different ways of doing it. In other words, it isn’t a set, scripted event”.


  27. Surlywombat says:

    Am I correct that they haven’t announced the platforms for this yet? Really scared that one of the next gen consoles is going to grab this as a launch exclusive.

  28. guipit says:

    Nathan should’ve asked if you can assassinate any target without firing a gun.

  29. karthink says:

    ” Otherwise, I wouldn’t have felt right about thanking you for your time.”

    Did you actually say this? Good heavens.

    • LionsPhil says:

      It’s a bit of a rude interview really, isn’t it? Playing a bit hardball is all well and good, but that “magical Hollywood hacker Jedi” was a touch uncouth, and did seem to rattle poor Mr. Guay. Goodness forbid that in a world of regenerating health cover systems, a hacking game might bend reality a bit for the sake of fun game dynamics.

      • karthink says:

        Yeah. It’s just… rude. That jab at the end will not endear RPS to Guay.

  30. LionsPhil says:

    You saw how he got into the [art show] center by doing something very subtle – hacking the system. He could’ve also stealthed in through a back door or barged in through the front.


    Maybe I could’ve followed the guy to the park and then taken him out much more subtly than just starting a firefight.

    Yeah, we’re running on PC at E3.

    I wonder if any of the devs read the comments here about that crash after the trailer and grinned like loons.

    They sure are promising the world. I really hope they can pull this off, and nothing conspires to trip them up at it (like, say, random acts of publishers).

  31. wodin says:

    I like the look of it. Fingers crossed. If it plays out like they want it too then it will be a winner.

  32. orionstar says:

    I was sold on the overcoat.

    Oh yeah, the whole bit about alternate ways to achieve your missions and crap. But that overcoat!

  33. yrrnn says:

    This sounds very much like a game concept I’ve been wanting to see for a long time, with the added benefit of having multiple people’s ideas in it.

    A third(an option for first person is cool too) person action-adventure game set in a GTA/Elder Scrolls style realistic modern-day open world that feels very much alive(although in my head it was not set in a city but rather something larger and more rural like the deep south with a few townships), with a somewhat rpg style quest system and inventory(that is, you can pick up stuff you find in the world, and choose what equipment you want to carry), and Hitman-style smaller sandbox encounters within the larger sandbox. And because of the nature of these sandbox encounters, you have plenty of choices as to how to handle them, therefore meaning gunplay is not necessarily the central mechanic of the game, unless you want it to be.

    I’d also kind of figured that the easiest way to do a game like this is to play some sort of regular-Joe-turned-hitman, with most “missions” involving figuring out a way to kill a target.

    So yeah, this is looking like the kind of game I will definitely want to play.

  34. The Random One says:

    Gotta love how Ubi keeps releasing things that criticize itself. First Deus Ex Human Resources which essentially said “it’s dangerous to allow corporations to have unlimited access to your stuff”, kind of like their DRM. (One day I’ll write a book or design a game or whatever that’ll explore the deep end on what might happen if we have DRM on our actual limbs, like in DXHR.) And now this. Ubi’s executives are either pretty cool or pretty dumb – probably a healthy mix of both.

  35. Emeraude says:

    Fascinating game project. Totally riding the zeitgeist too.Ubi continues to be one the studios I’m the most conflicted about. Too bad about the shooting though – the interview being a positive point on that matter I guess.

    Rayman Origins bought many points from me though.

    Can’t wait to see ow this develops. Anyone else thought of Gunpoint ?

  36. Fuz says:

    I really, REALLY hate the camera on the side of the character. Always gives me the impression of having my barycentre shifted.
    I really hope they will put a center camera or I won’t buy this.
    Shame, because apart from that looks really promising.