• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.

What do you think is the best Watch Dogs game? (pick the 1 or 2 games you think are the best)

  • Watch Dogs (2014)

    Votes: 81 23.2%
  • Watch Dogs 2 (2016)

    Votes: 190 54.4%
  • Watch Dogs Legion (2020)

    Votes: 24 6.9%
  • I've not played all 3 yet

    Votes: 76 21.8%

  • Total voters
    349

Mesoian

▲ Legend ▲
Member
Oct 28, 2017
26,431
Its easily 2.

It has some tonal issues, especially as per the robinhood nature of the group juxtaposed against 3d printing ak47s, but it has the strongest store and the most well rounded world considering a cyberpunk plot in a not-too-distant-future setting.

I haven't finished 3 yet, but its failing on its narrative promises.

1 is just junky.
 

LetalisAmare

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,954
The first one. I didnt like the second all that much mainly due to the god awful cast of idiots except Horatio, he's awesome. I enjoyed Legion more than the second.

The first still has the best gunplay.
 

Zen_Master

Member
Nov 15, 2020
279
2 had potential but the story never quite gets there, it feels like a mish mash of good ideas and plot points that kinda fall flat mid game. It has good moments though and the world is enjoyable, plus the game doesn't take itself too seriously compared to 1. I haven't picked up Legion yet so voted for the last option, but out of 1-2, 2 takes the cake.
 

TickleMeElbow

Member
Oct 31, 2017
2,668
Watch Dogs 2 is a low-key masterpiece imo.

The story itself is kinda dumb, however the actual main missions were fun as fuck to play through. Loved using all the tools and hacking abilities to stealth my way through.

The city is beautifully designed, and only rivaled by GTA 4 and 5's Liberty City and Los Santos imo. WD2 even beats them in some areas such as npc behaviors.

I personally liked the "hipster" characters, as I thought they fit well with the setting. Plus the acting was top notch. A lot of people thought they were goofy, but I saw them as mostly inexperienced, somewhat naive, and idealistic. Like....a bunch of young people! I can see these characters maturing with age, looking back at their early years in DeadSec with both "good ol' days" fondness, and "oh God we were so young and cringey back then haha" embarrassment. Only character I was annoyed by was Wrench.

It's also the only open world game other than MGS V where I played mostly non-lethal, not because you get penalized for killing (like in MGS5), but rather it didn't feel right for the protagonist to kill. Good thing the game provides you with all the tools (taser, electric bombs, hacking, non-lethal assault rifle, etc) to accomplish this. Looking back it would've been better if they penalied you in some way for killing (for example you lose "likes" for killing too much), since I've seen a lot of people complain about how it doesn't make sense for Marcus to kill so many people (like yeah, that's why you can clear every mission non-lethally, but whatever).

9/10 game for me.
 

nihilence

nøthing but silence
Moderator
Oct 25, 2017
15,906
From 'quake area to big OH.
I like the characters of the first 2, but the tone change from title to title was wild.

First felt dark and gritty, leaning towards lethal.
Second felt zany and more leaning toward non lethal.

The third one so far is okay. But unless you freshly get a good recruit that you like, it's hard to connect.

The mains in 1 & 2 were real and developed. In Legion they are generated, so your experience may vary. Only the support and antagonist are written.
 

HBK

Member
Oct 30, 2017
7,972
Weird to see so many people preferring 2 over 1. 2 was a cookie-cutter Ubisoft game. At least 1 tried some stuff, even if it went places.

I don't even like 1 that much, but 2 was a load of meh.
 

bushmonkey

Member
Oct 29, 2017
5,599
Legion is fine and I'm enjoying London but the story is terrible and there just isn't any personality to it which is a shame after Watch dogs 2.
 

flaxknuckles

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,302
Weird to see so many people preferring 2 over 1. 2 was a cookie-cutter Ubisoft game. At least 1 tried some stuff, even if it went places.

I don't even like 1 that much, but 2 was a load of meh.
Watch Dogs 1 was literally a cookie cutter Ubisoft game. It had all the usual stuff like crafting, loads of icons everywhere, and towers all over the map. Watch Dogs 2 actually differentiates itself from your average Ubisoft game with more focus on exploration (collectible and side mission icons don't appear on map until you get close to them), non-gritty protagonist, and an incredibly lively and reactive world.
 
Oct 27, 2017
1,046
That poll tells the story. Watch Dogs 2 turned a few people off because it was a big departure from the tone of the original game, but as an overall package it was solid, varied and a smart, playful sandbox.

It's staggering to me that Ubisoft were comfortable losing so many of those gameplay elements from the second game just to hone in on the "play as anyone" concept of Legion. The caricature-level depiction of Londoners isn't funny, and the combination of script and voicework make it difficult to connect with any of my playable characters.
 

Lowrys

Member
Oct 25, 2017
12,341
London
1 is good, 2 is great, and 3 is fucking broken, and also stripped out nearly all of the dynamic world stuff that made 2 even more special.