Tom Clancy's The Division reveals a brand new trailer showing off the story of the Dark Zone and all factions revealed so far.
Yawn, lost all interest in this game, glad i found out before shelling money though.
Glad you posted a comment that nobody cares about.
I swear, if this is about the downgrade crap, none of you who complain understand how the development of a video game works.
@KarmaV12 Please with your knowledge of such things, explain to us how game development works. Then why don't you also explain your beliefs on why the shift in direction to promote inaccurate footage is now suddenly acceptable & why developers/publishers now think it's ok to do this & follow it up by NOT allowing journalists/reviewers to reveal the truth until after the game has released to the public. We're all waiting for an interesting comment from you....
Gonna keep this short and sweet. A game that is 3 years away should not be shown. Every game should be shown just like Fallout 4 because that is when you are certain that it's the final product. A game that is 3 years away uses very few resources. And when a company is going to show the game, they push all the resources into that one fraction of the game they are showing. Meaning there are better textures and lighting and what not. Now when the game is expanding in development and more are is being created, that calls for more resources, so they must go back and take out detail from the part of the game that was shown. Meaning the part that was shown decreases in detail and makes the whole internet crap themselves when they compare a build of a "game" from 2 years ago, to a game that is much more broad in size today. If you went to the Ubi studio and looked at that game environment in 2013, you wouldn't have seen squat apart from what we were shown from the gameplay demo. You go now, you will see a nearly finished game with less detail. Is it wrong that they show us these games and, what people think, try to "deceive us"? Yes it is. Do I disagree with the fact that Ubisoft needs to cut back and stop showing games 3 years early? No. A game should be shown a few months ahead of release, just like the old days. But the fact that people keep pouncing Ubisoft and saying they make crappy games is BS. They make the most far fetched and appealing games to gamers. There is a reason that the "sh**ty looking games" they ship out each year sells over 5 million each. The internet cares too much about visuals when a few years ago nobody can even dream of a game looking this detailed. So there you are @1nsomniac, there is my reasoning and opinion. Please don't respond unless you have something useful to put towards the debate.
"Every game should be shown just like Fallout 4 because that is when you are certain that it's the final product." LMFAO! No bud. This is a new IP, they need time to market and its an MMO, they are not only very costly, they also take a long time to create. They need to gauge interest vs try to get interests in 6 months for a mulit million costing gaming. Fallout is an established IP, they very much can do a 6 month marketing window, but when Fallout 3 was being shown as Fallout 3 is a REBOOT of the Fallout series, it was a year and a half after it was announced to release. Teased in 2007, released fall 2008. If its established and the publisher has enough money and faith that it can sell with very little marketing, sure, but if its very, very costly, a new IP, I'm sorry but it needs proper marketing and time for folks to talk about weather they want it or not, they need time to generate interest. Who the hell isn't buying The Division purely based on the wait? The reality is, this is helping even those that are NOT BUYING IT as the more they see of it, the better they can even determine if they want it or not. Showing very little of it, coming out in 6 months etc doesn't make sense and is actually a bad way to show off a new IP as many might be buying it based on what they THINK it is vs what it actually is. With the time they've had, I've seen it enough to say I won't buy it for many reasons, I don't see many interiors, its not really known just how large the city is, not many examples of quest etc. I liked what I saw the first time just based on it was an unknown concept, I get more of what it is and now don't want it. That isn't NOT HOW YOU CONDUCT PROPER BUSINESS! Soooo I'm buying it based on a quick, assumed glimpse? Or am I buying it based on a long marketing campaign? Some games can do a 6 month to a year marketing and thats fine, but others need a bit more time and thats fine too. Its not a one size fits all.
Lol. Well said Bubz for your last comment. You handled that pretty well.
@Edmix So you are saying that Ubisoft is right in showing The Division 3 years before release? I understand that they had no intentions or thoughts that they would be delaying it 2 years in order to complete it thoroughly. But I see people claiming that companies shouldn't be showing games so early because then it leads to the gamers claiming the game looks like complete crap compared to the first showing. Which is usually true, but people don't understand the process. And I hate for people to just turn on gaming companies and devs like they do when it comes to this. Now I admit, I was wrong in stating that EVERY game should be revealed the way Fallout was. I do admit that and you are correct in your argument. In a new IP, one needs to show off the basis of the game, need to go a bit more in depth than say a Call of Duty or Assassin's Creed and other yearly releases. But it is this game in particular that takes all the damage when it comes to that debate between showing a game to early and right on time because they never planned for it to be delayed this long. This thing was suppose to launch early 2014 (?) or early 2015 but they realized that they need to do more work to expand the experience. And I respect them a ton for that because it takes a lot of money and effort to push back a date. All in all, you are right about what you said. Certain games, especially one of this size and diversity, need to be explained and shown off in order for people to even grasp the basic concept of the game. Hell, 3 years after reveal and they just showed off the dark zone which a lot of people still don't understand. Cheers mate! Thanks for re-directing me and clearing me up on that. Edit: Added last sentence of 1st paragraph
I wanted to watch the trailer but the guy speaking has the most irritating voice I have ever heard. I can't watch it because if I do his voice annoys me to the point of wanting to kill people (I have certain "issues", I know). O.T. I do hope this title turns out well. I (like most) was really excited by the initial reveal, but my interest has waned somewhat since the subsequent trailers (for obvious reasons).
You can watch the video on mute........
The Dark Zone really has me interested. The seamless melding of Pvp and Pve is exactly what I've wanted for ages
Same. it seems that Ubi are focused on making The Division what we all had thought/hoped Destiny would have been. I just hope they don't police things too much and allow for interesting strategies. Joining groups and directing them to a bunch of friends waiting to ambush and loot sounds like the pvp experience I've been waiting a long time for.
Yeah and the fact that you can permanently lose your weapons etc, I love that. I wish that a game dev does perma death well. That's when the tension really strikes.
eh, seems like The Division tries to be Ghost Recon and DayZ at the same time but isn't as good as either. There's no way player interaction in the Dark Zone will be as exciting and fulfilling as it is in DayZ. Things wont be as dramatic and cinematic as they showed in their staged live demo with trained actors saying "Ah! You betrayed us! Damn youuu!". The Dark Zone will basically just be a deathmatch. Anyone who has played online survival games before knows this
You're right to an extent. Perma death would have solved that but alas, that's not the case :( Still, I am interested in seeing it in action.
Hopefully the fact that you can lose your weapon doesn't get abused by Ubisoft and shoehorned microtransactions. That could really mess with the flow of the game.
doesn't sound like there's anything else then that dark zone stuff. is it just a Call of Duty clone now? really not hope so..they started out saying its RPG game, with a lot to do if your not up for PVP and just want to get lost in the big city co-op with a friend, starting to have serious doubt about this game. show me the game world and tell me its an open world game with rpg stuff in it and i am on board again:)
This game is looking more and more a week version of the great Freedom Fighters.Ubi is not focusing the gameplay in a single mode and thats bad because most likely neither gameplay mode will satisfy me.PVP,CO-OP,SP,were do i get the complete experience the full story;not my type ...and i have to say that the game looks average at best. Online connection needed 24/7 to play...sorry but i got burn by this already!
Damn I loved Freedom Fighters!!! They could remaster THAT and I'd be all over it. It was such a welcome change and a bit ahead of it's time, IMO.
Have there been any videos showing off the social areas? Really looking forward to checking this out next year.
Same. I really want to see the base of operations at this point.
Their selling point was their dinamic world and stunning visuals, but now all that is gone so what is left ? A huge meh!!! Typical ubisoft
Lost interest! DOWNGRADE KING IS UBISOFT!
So damn excited for this game. Looking forward to the beta.
Robbie sounds like a church youth minister. A good guy, everyone likes him, but keep an eye on him around kids
Kinda like a warped version of Mr. Rodgers!!! I never trusted that dude either.
This game could have been great if it wasn't an mmo..
Yeah as soon as i found out that its not gonna have offline campaign story single-player mode i completely lost interest, shame to it really had great potential :[
If it wasn't for this guys voice...ugggh!
yeah, what accent is that? can't place it.
To every person complaining about downgrade. You don't know that yet. it probably is downgraded, but you don't know that. The gameplay shown was from a PS4. Ofcourse it's going to be gimped on console. This is a title that they showed off before the consoles were revealed. As it turns out, with this game and a couple of other games, the consoles weren't as powerful as devs predicted, so ofcourse they have to cut down grahpical features. 30 fps stable is way more important. They have to hit that on a specific hardware configuration in PS4 and XBONE. It's that simple. That's not downgrade, that's just optimization. Where the word 'downgrade' becomes meaningful is if they gimp the PC version too, taking out the options to scale up those features on high end PCs. Like Watchdogs not including dynamic headlight shadows when it easily could have. Until we see PC footage, we just don't know if that's happened (it probably has though). Also keep in mind that some grahpical changes will go across all platforms, simply because they aren't going to make the PC version that different from the console version. How much of it is because of "we're making one version so these changes are present across the board" (which is fine, as long as the PC port is a good port otherwise) How much of it is because of "We could leave these in the PC version, but we want it to look the same as consoles" (Retard Logic) Who knows ?
It's been downgraded but it still looks good enough to me.
Well a couple of the youtubers that I trust who played it recently said it looks fantastic and they basically said forget about the people screaming downgrade. It was running on XBOX One at E3 apparently. https://www.youtube.com/wat...
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.