I’m just going to jettison all pretense of cynical aloofness here and say it: It’s been a long, long time since I’ve wanted to play a game as badly as I want to play Watch Dogs.
Hollywood’s appetite for reboots is so insatiable that you can almost count the minutes between a franchise running out of steam and the announcement that it’s being revived. Spider-Man 3 sucked? Reboot the series! That Superman reboot didn’t work out? Just reboot it a second time! Christopher Nolan’s all done with Batman? Maybe he is, but we aren’t! Reboot!
Video game reboots used to be a relative rarity, but with Halo 4 marking the return of Master Chief and DMC: Devil May Cry giving the demon-slayer Dante new moves and a new haircut, it makes sense that video gamedom’s most famous heroine is being reinvented for a new decade.
The first time I played the seafaring segments of Assassin’s Creed III, I thought, “Wow, this looks really cool. But why would Ubisoft go to so much trouble to design all this naval warfare stuff? It seems like a lot of work for such a minor part of the game.”
I think we now have the answer.
Rockstar Games’ period crime thriller L.A. Noire wasn’t a perfect game, but it tried something interesting by requiring players to study the faces of in-game characters and determine if they were being honest or lying. This hinged on a new form of face-capture technology in which actors’ faces were filmed from various angles and recreated in stunningly realistic detail in the game.
But what happened when the actors muffed their lines?
This just in: video games are not historically accurate.
In an editorial that sparked a minor twitter firestorm Thursday, the Globe & Mail lashed out against Ubisoft Montreal’s action-adventure game Assassin’s Creed III, claiming the game “distorts history” by imagining a Native American hero who fights against the British redcoats during the American Revolution. That sound you hear are thousands of gamers’ palms simultaneously slapping against their faces.