308 replies to this topic

[sgg847]

I'm not enticed to give IO any more of my money. Even if Bateson was in this game, I'd doubt them highly. There's so many red herrings and red flags around Absolution that no matter what media blitz IO manage to pull off - they will have a hard time convincing a certain percentage of the long-time fans.... or people who aren't impressed by fancy graphics and few new gimmicky additions. Some of us just want to see the things we associate with this series: stealth, disguises, non-lethal kills plus keeping things silent and clean. Things IO, so far, hasn't bothered to discuss or to disclose in the unveilings so far.

You don't, but other 99% do and you cannot imagine how big this 99%. Primitive rule of any PR is interaction with senses and do not touch brains. Crowd has no brains! Personally I don't think that exist some type of a superb PR and all depends on how much money you have in a bank. If IOI had enough money then they would had covered this world with posters of HA or at least would had created several cinematic trailers which demonstrate feature of HA and showed them step by step during PR campaign. But instead they shows a part of the game and thereby opening the veil of secrecy. This way also acceptable but it is not interesting.

[Keyser Soze]

That actually turned out to be VERY fitting for the character. Notice how it's one of most of long time Hitman players favorite pieces of dialog in the entire series.

I always thought the reason that line was so often quoted around here is because it sounded ridiculous and, by extension, was hilarious. Not because it fit the character...

[JaRDoS]

Whether it was appropriate to the character or not the line was rather incongruous with the scenario as the gameplay was putting it - 47 disguising himself by stealing other people's clothes and then talking so rigidly that it couldn't help but attract suspicion did not really fit with the idea of a super assassin. It amuses us because it breaks the suspension of disbelief and shows us just how absurd that particular set-up really is.

By Silent Assassin they'd given up on him talking like a robot and instead began with him making emotional speeches in the opening sequence - and gotten Diana to do most of the talking. Now they've got him voiced by a different actor with a different type of voice - it's quite possible they have a reason for selecting that type of voice and frankly it's better they get a new voice than try to use a sound-alike.

[miyamoto]

Whether it was appropriate to the character or not the line was rather incongruous with the scenario as the gameplay was putting it - 47 disguising himself by stealing other people's clothes and then talking so rigidly that it couldn't help but attract suspicion did not really fit with the idea of a super assassin. It amuses us because it breaks the suspension of disbelief and shows us just how absurd that particular set-up really is.

By Silent Assassin they'd given up on him talking like a robot and instead began with him making emotional speeches in the opening sequence - and gotten Diana to do most of the talking. Now they've got him voiced by a different actor with a different type of voice - it's quite possible they have a reason for selecting that type of voice and frankly it's better they get a new voice than try to use a sound-alike.

All good points.

[Watson]

Now they've got him voiced by a different actor with a different type of voice - it's quite possible they have a reason for selecting that type of voice and frankly it's better they get a new voice than try to use a sound-alike.

I think the main point is: why replace Bateson at all? Is there anyone on this forum (which represents a significant portion of the Hitman fanbase) who wanted Bateson to go? I don't think so. Of course, there must be reasons behind Bateson’s non-involvement in this game, but the handling of the situation itself and the complete lack of communication on a matter that's important to many people does absolutely nothing to help. Casting an American actor as 47 with a clearly different voice will only make parts of this game unfamiliar and strange, I'm sure we'll get used to it, but it's appearing to be symbolic of the changes Absolution has embarked on. A number of these changes are looking rather good and exciting, but some are worrying.

Bateson did a good job as 47 in all the games, why change something that worked?

Edited by Watson, 10 September 2011 - 10:46 PM.

[MrPistolLaw]

I don't attribute my enjoyment of them specifically because David does the voice. I like that David does the voice, but realistically I play the games because I enjoy doing the hits and fooling around in the world of Hitman. A reboot with a different voice is as plausible to me as the shift in actors in Bond, the reboots that Marvel and DC comics do, etc.

Best not to get to dramatic at this point. That's all I'm saying.

Hi JaRDoS! I'm with you when you say you don't play the Hitman games because of David's voice. I don't either. However, after playing the games and spending countless hours with the game, David's voice has grown to become a HUGE part of the Hitman world.

To have him absent without explanation is not only an insult to the fans, but a tremendous loss and blow to the franchise. I miss VM and Jesper Kyd, but feel more of a loss when the main character that I have come to play as has lost his voice.

You mentioned Bond recasting. This is a valid example and it's perfectly understandable why the role of 007 was recast. But would it have made any sense if everytime the studio kept Sean Connery but redubbed his voice to the "new" actor? In other words, Connery would film all of his scenes, but for each line his character would speak, the audience would hear either Daniel Craig, Pierce Browsnan, Timothy Dalton or Roger Moore's voice.

[Confidential]

47 is not Bateson.

47 is a timeless character like Bond.

Bateson's voice is too precious...

This new voice is great!

[JaRDoS]

Bateson did a good job as 47 in all the games, why change something that worked?

Given that there has been no response from IOI to full scale rioting we can safely assume it was a business decision that the creative department had no say in.

We will, in all likelihood, not be told the reasons for Bateson's removal due them being:
* Linked to other companies which will be sensitive about their image
* Linked to contract law, which is really, really boring
* Unlikely to make anyone happier for knowing them

It's an unpopular decision and nobody from creative has come forward to announce it as part of their vision, so it was made either deliberately or accidentally by the business folks. There is no advantage to them telling us why Bateson isn't coming back.

Maybe he did upset someone who signs the cheques. Maybe hiring him would breach a contract or create a conflict of interest. We don't know and I can say with 95% certainty you would not be happier knowing and knowing why would not change the game.

[Watson]

Given that there has been no response from IOI to full scale rioting we can safely assume it was a business decision that the creative department had no say in.

We will, in all likelihood, not be told the reasons for Bateson's removal due them being:
* Linked to other companies which will be sensitive about their image
* Linked to contract law, which is really, really boring
* Unlikely to make anyone happier for knowing them

It's an unpopular decision and nobody from creative has come forward to announce it as part of their vision, so it was made either deliberately or accidentally by the business folks. There is no advantage to them telling us why Bateson isn't coming back.

Maybe he did upset someone who signs the cheques. Maybe hiring him would breach a contract or create a conflict of interest. We don't know and I can say with 95% certainty you would not be happier knowing and knowing why would not change the game.

It's completely understandable that certain things cannot be said, however the problem is that nothing has been in general. Knowing why won't change the game, but it's much better to simply hear that "Bateson's not in because his contract did not allow it” than “no comment". I think many people will accept this and just move on with the game and play it. Sure, it won't be exactly the same without Bateson, but it's a question of decent communication on issues which people actually care about.

There's been a bit of talk about the James Bond franchise and the change in actors playing 007. They're all interesting points, however it's important to note that in most cases we knew why the actors departed. Let's not forget a number retired from the role because of their age (e.g. Moore was 58 when he filmed his last Bond film, A View to A Kill).

I'm still going to buy, play and hopefully enjoy Absolution, that's not exactly the point when it comes to Bateson's absence, it's one of the biggest changes to the game and changes should be explained at least a little bit more than the current "no comment" situation with Bateson/McKee. What really worries me is that both veteran Hitman actors seem to have no idea of what's going on - according to their correspondence with some of this forum's members. So it's also an issue concerning the strange treatement of both Bateson and McKee.

Expanding a bit more on this general response of "no comment" would really help the fanbase accept the change and not speculate over it.

Edited by Watson, 11 September 2011 - 12:14 AM.

[Choronzon]

47 is not Bateson.

This is where you are mistaken. The character model for agent 47 was rendered after David Bateson's likeness. So, no matter how you twist or turn it, 47 (in one way or the other) is David Bateson.

47 is a timeless character like Bond.

Hitman (as a game series) is barely around for a decade. Hardly timeless as such. The game is only on to its fifth installment, while Bond is on to its 22nd-23th motion picture. Hardly a valid comparison.

Bateson's voice is too precious...

You're sounding too much like Gollum here.

This new voice is great!

To each his own, I suppose. Tastes differ.

[Choronzon]

I don't really think you can accuse the Bond movies of having "series" fatigue when the first Daniel Craig movie, Casino Royale, was a modernisation of the first Ian Fleming story, Casino Royale. Moreover, whether they're as Fleming would have intended, or whether the Hitman games have jumped the shark is entirely subjective. If you ask me the writing in Hitman has suffered sequelitis and and series since it's first sequel - I still enjoy the subsequent games and find them much more playable than Codename 47.

I think accusing 007 of series' fatigue isn't that far from the truth, as it has a few distinct "eras"... Bear with me.

Sean Connery era
Many consider this the "classic" era and rightly so.

George Lazenby
The "forgotten" incarnation of Bond, but still well-liked by many.

Roger Moore era
The more "comedic" and light-hearted version of the character. Moonraker could easily be considered the series' first true low and most apparent sign of fatigue, a rushed production to cash in on George Lucas' Star Wars.

Timothy Dalton era
Probably the darkest portrayal of Bond (until then).

Pierce Brosnan era
The one that first "modernized" the series and brought it into current times, while keeping the themes of old. These set of films are good on their own, but miss that something the earlier incarnations had. Series' fatigue at work in Die Another Day... which was more of a gag-reel of "remember this?" moments and stupid visual gags than an actual honest attempt at moving forward with Bond mythos. An invisible car? A nemesis that changes face? Gadgets sell the movie, not the story/plot. Don't take my word for it, read The Agony Booth's recap of said film, in which they detail every snippet of these moments, catalogue and explain them to the more casual fans of the series.

Daniel Craig era
The second coming of Timothy Dalton, in my opinion. A more realistic, darker toned 007.

My point just is in various different eras of the Bond series (luckily not in all) there have been moments of series fatigue - fortunately, the producers were able to better themselves and learn from these mistakes.

Edited by Choronzon, 11 September 2011 - 02:22 AM.

[Confidential]

Yes they are bald...

You're sounding too much like Gollum here.

You will love me.

Edited by Confidential, 11 September 2011 - 02:21 AM.

[Choronzon]

Yes they are bald...

There's more to it than that, friend.

Source.
"In the Hitman game series, Bateson provided the voice and physical guide of Agent 47 and served as the character model in every entry in the series until the fifth game, Hitman: Absolution."

[Confidential]

The same ...

Just more details.

Edited by Confidential, 11 September 2011 - 02:39 AM.

[daniel.ben-noon]

Source.
"Bateson provided the voice and physical guide of Agent 47 and served as the character model in every entry in the series until the fifth game, Hitman: Absolution."

as wikipedia states on the topic of taking their site for facts - "Users should be aware that not all articles are of encyclopedic quality from the start: they may contain false or debatable information".

/daniel

[Watson]

as wikipedia states on the topic of taking their site for facts - "Users should be aware that not all articles are of encyclopedic quality from the start: they may contain false or debatable information".

/daniel

Well, I certanly won't be writing a thesis with Wikipedia as a primary source - or a source for anything at all in that matter. However, you can admit that there is a clear likeness between Bateson and 47 visually.

@Daniel: As G2 is your area of expertise, just how much will this engine 'transform' 47's appearance compared to the G1 engine?

[JaRDoS]

There's more to it than that, friend.

Source.
"In the Hitman game series, Bateson provided the voice and physical guide of Agent 47 and served as the character model in every entry in the series until the fifth game, Hitman: Absolution."

To elaborate further on Daniel's point:

David and 47 are both bald white men, beyond that it's what people want to see. I specifically remember interviews with David where he said he had nothing to do with the original game besides recording sound, and another (which sadly is no longer on the web) where someone from IOI said the image for 47 as inspired by a pizza delivery guy.

Three quick and obvious differences:
* David has a cleft chin, 47 does not.
* David has shallow set eyes and narrow brows, 47 has deep set eyes and luxurious brows (his only hair it seems)
* David curved cheekbones the curl in to his nose, 47 has blocky cheekbones that angle toward his mouth

People think David looks more like 47 than he does because he has the similar skin tone and distinctive lack of hair, their imagination blurs the rest of the details because David's voice is so strongly linked to the character.

[Keyser Soze]

Ugh.. politics.

[space_monkey]

@Daniel: As G2 is your area of expertise, just how much will this engine 'transform' 47's appearance compared to the G1 engine?

He probably doesn't have anything to do with modelling itself. Amount of polygons per character and them working fine is I guess what he's concerned

[Watson]

He probably doesn't have anything to do with modelling itself. Amount of polygons per character and them working fine is I guess what he's concerned

I'm guessing he knows about the G2 engine in general as well, I'm not expecting specifics.

Edited by Watson, 11 September 2011 - 03:53 AM.