Watch_Dogs 2 is a mixed bag for me. I get why people like it so much. Technically, it's a really good game and clearly more improved than its predecessor. However, I liked the first game much, much more. There are a few reasons for this:

-> I think the first game had a much more coherent and a lot darker story (I love dark stories). I might get hate for this but I loved Aiden Pearce a lot more than Marcus. For me, Aiden was a PTSD-ridden anti-hero who would do anything for the family that is left to him. Everyone calls him bland and I agree with it to an extent. But compared to Marcus, Aiden is an epic hero. Marcus is nobody. He's a hipster and ostensibly a humanist but he has no problems using terrorism to achieve his goals and killing tons of innocent people in the process. He (and DedSec) preaches unity, solidarity and peace, yet they are not above causing mass havoc. They protect the weak by brutally punishing the expendable minions of "big corporate." And they don't even have a proper story and pacing while doing it. What I'm saying is, it lacks soul. In the first game, when our ex-partner kidnaps our sister, Aiden goes "rip and tear" mode. Here, one of the most important members of DedSec SF dies, and they start cracking jokes in a cutscene 10 minutes later.

-> Apart from the bad story, the protagonist and his group is so cringeworthy that I clenched my butt from third-person embarassment in some cutscenes. It feels like a bunch of 50 year old, technologically illiterate people gathered in a meeting room, googled "what's the current trend among teenagers" and then packed in every single cliche and meme they could find in the game. Watch_Dogs 2 tries so ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ hard to be cool that it hurts to witness it.

-> The city, although much larger than Chicago, felt rather hollow. Chicago felt alive, like the city keeps on going even when you're not playing. San Francisco feels almost dead compared to it.

-> The mini-quests and collectibles in the first game were better than here. I loved the mini-quests' storyline (dunno why people criticized them so much) and most of the collectibles unlocked cool bits of lore. Here, each individual quest is much longer but they don't have an overarching story like the first game. You just finish the quest and that's it. It doesn't unlock any following quests or lore tidbits.

-> I don't know about the technical details (maybe the number is the same) but I think the first game had a lot wider weapon variety. In Watch_Dogs 2, I finished the game using only 2-3 weapons.

-> I think one of the most iconic ability in the first game, cutting down the power to an entire section of the city, is so underwhelming here. It unlocks quite down in the skill tree, and it's massively underwhelming. It was so cool in the first game.

-> The voice-acting was a whole lot better and consistent in its quality in the first game. In Watch_Dogs 2, only Marcus and Wrench has consistently top-notch voice-acting throughout the game.

Now, I need to be honest. Doesn't this game has any positives? Of course it does:

+ The soundtrack is mind-blowing. In some missions, the songs fit the mood so perfectly that you feel as if the mission was based on the music, not vice-versa.

+ The graphics are very impressive. The facial graphics still look insane even in 2019. The post-processing effects are also spectacular.

+ Most importantly, the game is fun. I was almost never bored, and even though I was never truly invested in the game's story, the gameplay entertained me well enough.

In conclusion, I recommend this game, but I need to say that it was a huge disappointment for me coming from Watch_Dogs. It's definitely a good game, just not a good Watch_Dogs game (at least this wasn't what I expected).

Watch_Dogs 2 is a mixed bag for me. I get why people like it so much. Technically, it's a really good game and clearly more improved than its predecessor. However, I liked the first game much, much more. There are a few reasons for this: -> I think the first game had a much more coherent and a lot darker story (I love dark stories). I might get hate for this but I loved Aiden Pearce a lot more than Marcus. For me, Aiden was a PTSD-ridden anti-hero who would do anything for the family that is left to him. Everyone calls him bland and I agree with it to an extent. But compared to Marcus, Aiden is an epic hero. Marcus is nobody. He's a hipster and ostensibly a humanist but he has no problems using terrorism to achieve his goals and killing tons of innocent people in the process. He (and DedSec) preaches unity, solidarity and peace, yet they are not above causing mass havoc. They protect the weak by brutally punishing the expendable minions of "big corporate." And they don't even have a proper story and pacing while doing it. What I'm saying is, it lacks soul. [spoiler]In the first game, when our ex-partner kidnaps our sister, Aiden goes "rip and tear" mode. Here, one of the most important members of DedSec SF dies, and they start cracking jokes in a cutscene 10 minutes later.[/spoiler] -> Apart from the bad story, the protagonist and his group is so cringeworthy that I clenched my butt from third-person embarassment in some cutscenes. It feels like a bunch of 50 year old, technologically illiterate people gathered in a meeting room, googled "what's the current trend among teenagers" and then packed in every single cliche and meme they could find in the game. Watch_Dogs 2 tries so goddamn hard to be cool that it hurts to witness it. -> The city, although much larger than Chicago, felt rather hollow. Chicago felt alive, like the city keeps on going even when you're not playing. San Francisco feels almost dead compared to it. -> The mini-quests and collectibles in the first game were better than here. I loved the mini-quests' storyline (dunno why people criticized them so much) and most of the collectibles unlocked cool bits of lore. Here, each individual quest is much longer but they don't have an overarching story like the first game. You just finish the quest and that's it. It doesn't unlock any following quests or lore tidbits. -> I don't know about the technical details (maybe the number is the same) but I think the first game had a lot wider weapon variety. In Watch_Dogs 2, I finished the game using only 2-3 weapons. -> I think one of the most iconic ability in the first game, cutting down the power to an entire section of the city, is so underwhelming here. It unlocks quite down in the skill tree, and it's massively underwhelming. It was so cool in the first game. -> The voice-acting was a whole lot better and consistent in its quality in the first game. In Watch_Dogs 2, only Marcus and Wrench has consistently top-notch voice-acting throughout the game. Now, I need to be honest. Doesn't this game has any positives? Of course it does: + The soundtrack is mind-blowing. In some missions, the songs fit the mood so perfectly that you feel as if the mission was based on the music, not vice-versa. + The graphics are very impressive. The facial graphics still look insane even in 2019. The post-processing effects are also spectacular. + Most importantly, the game is fun. I was almost never bored, and even though I was never truly invested in the game's story, the gameplay entertained me well enough. In conclusion, I recommend this game, but I need to say that it was a huge disappointment for me coming from Watch_Dogs. It's definitely a good game, just not a good Watch_Dogs game (at least this wasn't what I expected).