I can accept that. I believe that's what actually happened - that they didn't even think about it until they were asked.

Accepting your stance that this is all redone animation, I have no problem at all with them not implementing female characters. I understand things get cut and why they get cut. The issue still stands that this wouldn't be as much extra work as they claimed it would be (even if it's all redone animations - read…

How do they not appear to be covering it up? They're using an excuse that isn't valid, therein their real reasoning is likely not acceptable to consumers. It's likely they used the excuse to cover up the fact that they never even thought about having female characters implemented in the first place. But instead of…

You're missing the point. He wasn't calling them out for not having a female character, he was calling their bullshit cover up of why they didn't have a female.

I'm not basing it on my own experience but the experience of a developer from Naughty Dog. This isn't some random person saying they're lying, this is a developer who does the exact same type of work calling them out. Not only another developer, but one who worked specifically on the AC franchise.

Is it just me, or does the shirt vaguely resemble the pajamas you get for Link in Wind Waker?

They don't have time to implement something into their primary franchise that is well established and sells millions of copies every year that a respected developer suggested would take a day's worth of work to complete? I'm sorry, but I don't believe them and think they're just trying to cover their asses.

The reason I believe that they're lying is not only because the excuse was negated by a respected developer, but we're talking about their major franchise that gets practically as much production money as it needs to do whatever it wants at this point.

I take issue with it because a developer of a respected publisher basically negated their excuse, making it seem as though Ubisoft is merely trying to cover up that they had no intention to have female characters available. Not having female characters is fine, but don't lie about it to cover your ass without at least…

The thing is that the gender issue isn't the entire concern here. The main concern should be that their excuse for not doing it was simply it's too hard/expensive. For a triple-A game franchise that is well established and that already produced games of said franchise including female assets that's either a pathetic…

That's inaccurate on multiple levels though. You may think it's a valid reason, but a lot of people don't, especially when the series is making routine yearly installments with a ridiculous amount of money being poured into them, meanwhile using old male animation assets.

I've got a couple issues with this whole thing. Firstly, it feels like they've already given up on developing the touch screen being what differentiates their games from other consoles. We literally heard nothing about the touch screen with the new games that would make it worth the cost of buying it. A year ago it…

Whether or not something was a bad decision doesn't dictate whether it's a risk or not.

Your comparison of WD to the initial release of AC resonates with me because the hype that most people had for WD I had for AC and was so let down by it that I literally haven't played any of the other sequels. I have several concerns with WD however, that translate to it not being a successful franchise if they…

Why focus on the fact that the final objective is the same? Because it shows how fundamentally similar that part of the game is similar to another game. It's not just the final objective either, but how you get there as well. But the final objective is the main talking point here because when you realize that both…

Oh I'm sure they're intentional. Of course they purposely designed the game the way that they did. Sharing designs is one thing though, sharing old designs from a franchise who is starting to become criticized for using the same designs constantly (AC) and putting them into a "new IP" and thinking people will overlook…

Ignoring the first/third person aspects, the gameplay similarities are still there regardless of what perspective you play them in. But the framework, as you say, is where the problem exists here with the similarities. The unlocking of side quests for instance, is all the same relative framework and should be…

The question is where do we draw the line of the similarities in game design and their criticism. You bring up criticism of major triple-A games (such as CoD and Battlefield I presume) whose game play is exactly the same, but because these Ubisoft games have different stories and characters it's alright for them to…

You're right in saying that re-skinned is over simplifying it, but there's no doubt that these games have so much in common that it's hard to commend Ubisoft for their new "IP" in Watch Dogs. Especially when those similarities are to the point of the games being so recognizable as Ubisoft games.

The DSI DLC was developed along side the release of DSI on PC, which only began development well after a consumer petition requesting that they port the game to PC was made after the initial release of the game. So using that as a comparison tool isn't valid.