Alright, let’s dive into Watch_Dogs, the game that had all the potential to be a digital-age masterpiece but somehow tripped over its own USB cord. I’m talking about a game with a concept so cool it made me want to throw money at Ubisoft without a second thought. Yet here I am, still trying to figure out whether I love it, hate it, or just enjoy torturing myself with it.
The Concept: Hacker Vigilante Fantasy
Let’s start with the good stuff, shall we? The concept of Watch_Dogs is freaking awesome. You play as Aiden Pearce, a hacker vigilante who can control Chicago’s entire infrastructure with a flick of his smartphone. Need to blackout an entire city block? Done. Want to steal someone’s bank info while walking past them? Easy. The idea of blending open-world chaos with high-tech hacking is like the love child of Grand Theft Auto and The Matrix. It’s slick, it’s edgy, and it’s everything my inner tech geek dreamed of.
But here’s the thing: much like your ex who promises they’ve changed, the game doesn’t quite live up to the fantasy. Sure, you can hack cameras, traffic lights, and the odd ATM, but after a while, it starts feeling less like digital wizardry and more like pressing the same three buttons in slightly different ways. The magic wears off, and you’re left wondering if the game should’ve been titled Watch_Hacks because you end up feeling like a cheap trickster rather than a digital god.
The World: A Glorified Sandbox
Chicago in Watch_Dogs is beautifully crafted—a sprawling urban jungle begging to be explored. The streets are filled with pedestrians who all have little digital bios that you can creep on because why not? The city has its own personality, with dark alleys, busy streets, and plenty of opportunities for vehicular mayhem.
But—because there’s always a but—it’s kind of like when you buy a shiny new gadget, only to realize that once you’ve gotten over the initial excitement, there’s not much to do with it. The city is huge, yes, but it feels strangely empty at times. It’s a sandbox, but without enough toys to keep me entertained. It reminds me of the first Assassin’s Creed game—gorgeous world, groundbreaking concept, but after a few hours, you’re left wondering why you’re running around doing the same damn thing over and over.
The Gameplay: Repetitive Hacks and Shootouts
Let’s talk gameplay. It’s supposed to be a mix of stealth, action, and hacking. And in theory, it works. You’re sneaking around, hacking cameras, setting up traps, and then taking down enemies with your phone like some kind of digital ninja. But in practice? Well, let’s just say that after the novelty wears off, you realize you’re doing the same thing. Every. Single. Mission.
The missions start blending into one another. Drive here, hack this, shoot those guys, escape the cops, rinse, repeat. The stealth options are there, but half the time it’s easier to just go full Grand Theft Auto and mow down anyone in your way. And don’t get me started on the shootouts. The gunplay is decent, but it’s nothing special. It feels like the game is trying to be too many things at once—a stealth game, an action game, a driving game, a hacking game—and ends up being a jack of all trades, master of none.
Aiden Pearce: The World’s Most Boring Vigilante
Now let’s talk about our protagonist, Aiden Pearce, the man with the most monotone voice and bland personality in gaming. He’s supposed to be a tortured soul, seeking revenge for the death of his niece. And while I get that grief isn’t exactly a barrel of laughs, Aiden’s one-dimensional brooding makes him about as exciting as a damp towel. I was hoping for a character with depth, someone who would make me care about his quest. Instead, I got a guy who’s basically discount Batman without the charm, the gadgets, or the cool outfit.
It’s a shame because the story had potential. The whole “tech is the new weapon” angle is intriguing, but it’s hard to stay invested when the guy wielding that weapon is as compelling as a cardboard cutout. Even the side characters, who are supposed to add some spice to the narrative, fall flat. They’re just there, serving their purpose without leaving much of an impression.
Why I Haven’t Finished It Yet
Here’s the kicker—I haven’t even finished Watch_Dogs yet! Not because it’s a bad game, but because it’s one of those games that you keep coming back to, hoping that maybe, just maybe, it’ll finally live up to your expectations. It’s like a book you start reading and keep putting down, not because you don’t like it, but because you’re waiting for that one chapter where everything clicks.
I’m still waiting for that chapter.
There are moments where the game shines—those rare instances when all the elements come together, and you feel like a true hacker vigilante. But those moments are few and far between. Most of the time, it’s just a grind, a series of repetitive missions strung together by a story that never quite hits its stride.
The Verdict: Love/Hate Relationship
So, where does that leave me? Do I love Watch_Dogs? Do I hate it? Honestly, it’s a bit of both. I love the concept, the world, the idea of being a hacker with the city at my fingertips. But I hate that it doesn’t fully deliver on that promise. It’s a game that could have been great but instead settles for being just okay.
Much like the first Assassin’s Creed game, Watch_Dogs feels like a prototype, a glimpse of what could be. It’s a game that’s more about potential than execution, more about ideas than delivery. And while I’m still holding out hope that one day I’ll finish it and find that it all comes together in the end, I’m not holding my breath.
In the end, Watch_Dogs is a game that I can’t fully recommend, but I also can’t fully dismiss. It’s frustrating, it’s repetitive, it’s a bit of a letdown, but it’s also fascinating, innovative, and just intriguing enough to keep me coming back for more. If you’re a fan of open-world games with a tech twist, give it a try. Just don’t be surprised if you find yourself stuck in the same love/hate relationship that I’m in.
Stay snarky,
~Rita 🖤