- 'Watch Dogs' adds real guilt to fake killing
i mean, i'm excited for this game and i'm glad they added a bit more to the NPCs, but this just screams delusional/marketer. he literally seems so obsessed with the thought of NPCs having traits that it seems like a ubiosoft employee himself wrote the article (wouldn't be surprised). "morality isn't a minigame", like dude.. the npcs 'depth' is just a name and a couple of randomly generated values. i doubt they even have a script to 'go home at some point' and 'have their normal lives'.
i really hate pipe-dream obsessive hype, because people crack up the game to be more than it is. will it be cool dealing with scenarios differently, like choosing to save some people and kill others? yes. is it nice that each NPC has a name and a line of backstory? sure. but don't stretch it to the point of basing 3/4 of your 'guilt' on wild imagination about things that aren't even implemented into the game. and then he got to the part where he'll unplug his internet because actually having to fight other players will break apart his delusional fantasy. >_>
i could understand if the NPCs actually had families, they had backstories and a detailed history, and killing them actually had an influence on others (dwarf fortress), but they literally don't have anything going for them. the entire article praises and glorifies the game as some kind of moral simulator, but half the article is about his assumptions, not even about content in the game itself. that's why i don't find it hard to believe that he got paid to write that. that or he's some kind of moral/cyber rights activist (wouldn't be surprised be that either, after the paragraph on cyber privacy).
still looking forward to the game though. i hope it's fun!
