186 replies to this topic

[Watson]

BTW talking about the old maps. Are you seriously suggesting that you could not make a a perfect route to the target JUST BY STUDYING THE MOVEMENTS? Because it could of easily been done at the beginning of each mission. Yes it is still up to the player to execute it, BUT they destroyed the discovery part. There was no searching for the target and identifying, no finding hidden routes and no surprises. Why? Because they were all listed in the maps.

Believe me, there are plenty of surprises and interesting things I found out on missions with the map. As for the map showing hidden passages, I understand how the element of discovering that hidden passage could be tainted, but in reality how many missions have secret passages in the Hitman games? Off the top of my head I can name Lee Hong's Assassination (the 'dungeon' area where Smith is kept) and Beldingford Manor. For me, the map is something that actually makes me want to go and explore it. I see a room on the map, I haven't been there before and I look around and take in the atmosphere and there's nothing wrong with that, is there? Just because I can see a room here and there does not mean my sense of exploration or discovery is changed, quite the opposite. I want to go and take a look and explore all the ‘nooks and crannies’ of the schematic given to me.

Again displaying only the target is still too much help because there was no identifying and figuring out of the target and where he might be. Also the guards were easy to deal with in those games.

Knowing where the target is was certainly not damaging to the games, after all isn't it about how you get to him/her that really matters? (and didn't the maps help you with that? depending on how you used them, of course) Targets in Hitman in most cases stayed in one room or moved from one room to another and back, they were on a set path that repeats itself. The target icon was only an indicator so you know where to find and assassinate your target. Let's put it this way, if the mission briefing had said "47, Diana here... the Meat King is known to lie in bed and watch his parties from a room just above the dance floor on level 2 of the slaughterhouse" you'd have your problem solved and you'd need no target 'dot'. So if there is a dot showing where your target is, why not just assume that it’s known where that person is. It’s always a bit of a stretch of reality, but was it really that destructive to the mission?

But isn't that what makes games fun? The learning curve?

What is Absolution trying to do? They are clearly trying to make the learning curve less tricky to conquer and less demanding because the developers have themselves indicated that past games could be difficult and challenging for some people. This is probably why Absolution is being made to accommodate a greater variety of gameplay styles and handle them better. It’s clearly a game built to accommodate a bigger demographic of players.

The maps just made it way less steep and also made it easier overall.

Say that to a 14-year old who's just bought a copy of Silent Assassin.

Study them carefully and you will see that there will always be a perfect UNGUARDED path. And by unguarded, I really mean unguarded. Also, if you keep a distance, they will never run at you nor suspect of you. If you exploit these, you will realise how easy they were to deal with.

In BM, they reduced the unguarded area, but the guards were still easy to deal with, especially, by making them turn so that you go from behind them (same applies to Hitman contracts).

You are saying this from experience as a long time player of the Hitman games. Again, say that to a 14-year old who's just bought a copy of Silent Assassin.

...and with instinct, you will have to observe the area and be closer to the action for you to see these point of interests.

And how is instinct more realistic than the maps?
Let me explain. The maps do not exist in real life. However human instinct does.
Yes, it may be a bit exaggerated in Absolution, however, when you are extremely good at something, you can see stuff that others won't see and the whole idea behind it is that we are playing from 47's mind. And with his vast amount of experience, he can predict certain stuff, just from his experience alone. So it isn't that UNREALISTIC WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT IT.

Here is something (very) interesting: At the moment, looking at the library level, Instinct has a huge range right? You can pretty much see every NPC wherever they are. So couldn't you say this is exactly like the map on the easiest difficulties, which just like Instinct in its current form, shows you all (or almost all) NPCs. Quite obviously you don't have to be 'close' to the action with Instinct (in it's current form) since you can see the NPCs through walls very (very) far away.

BUT ALL IN ALL, I HAVE TO PLAY IT TO FIND OUT.

Exactly. I have previously indicated that I can understand why the map may possibly have been removed from Absolution (but, at this moment I don’t see why including a basic schematic would hurt my gameplay experience), what I don't understand though is why must the maps from the previous games be presented as something that was damaging or detrimental that made the games 'too easy'. They worked in their own way and were entirely dependent on player choice.

Edited by Watson, 21 October 2011 - 04:26 AM.

[Cold Shadow]

@Watson. I never said I didn't want any maps what so ever. Just that I can do without them because with some thinking you can pull it off. The only map I can see that won't show too much is just a very basic design of the area consisting of lines. That's all.

Knowing where the target is was certainly not damaging to the games, after all isn't it about how you get to him/her that really matters? (and didn't the maps help you with that? depending on how you used them, of course) Targets in Hitman in most cases stayed in one room or moved from one room to another and back, they were on a set path that repeats itself. The target icon was only an indicator so you know where to find and assassinate your target. Let's put it this way, if the mission briefing had said "47, Diana here... the Meat King is known to lie in bed and watch his parties from a room just above the dance floor on level 2 of the slaughterhouse" you'd have your problem solved and you'd need no target 'dot'. So if there is a dot showing where your target is, why not just assume that it’s known where that person is. It’s always a bit of a stretch of reality, but was it really that destructive to the mission?

I never said it was damaging, but it certainly made it a hell of alot easier since you do not have to work out where the target is and where he might be headed. I want to be able to do that myself, instead of being provided with the exact location on my map, at the beginning of the mission, even if the target is far away.

What is Absolution trying to do? They are clearly trying to make the learning curve less tricky to conquer and less demanding because the developers have themselves indicated that past games could be difficult and challenging for some people. This is probably why Absolution is being made to accommodate a greater variety of gameplay styles and handle them better. It’s clearly a game built to accommodate a bigger demographic of players.

I never said, that Absolution will be harder. I have to play it to find out.

You are saying this from experience as a long time player of the Hitman games. Again, say that to a 14-year old who's just bought a copy of Silent Assassin.

14 year olds shouldn't be playing Hitman, but since you brought it up I might aswell comment.
The purpose of each game is to learn how it works (the learning curve) and once you master how the AI works, you will basically master the game. Silent Assassins is very overrated in terms of difficulty because it was very easy to complete. I could tell you the same things that I wrote in the previous post about unguarded area after a few weeks with Silent assassin. Thing is that some people, just love to rush through the games without thinking and usually when you think and be patient, you will realize how easy it was. Every game, no matter how easy it is, will be a bit hard to get used to in the beginning afterall.

Here is something (very) interesting: At the moment, looking at the library level, Instinct has a huge range right? You can pretty much see every NPC wherever they are. So couldn't you say this is exactly like the map on the easiest difficulties, which just like Instinct in its current form, shows you all (or almost all) NPCs. Quite obviously you don't have to be 'close' to the action with Instinct (in it's current form) since you can see the NPCs through walls very (very) far away.

True, however you have to realize that if you turn off instinct you will still the those guards so it wasn't exactly unlimited as you can see them without instinct. With the maps at lower levels, you could see everything, even when you can't see it with your eyes. And yes, looking through walls. This is something I still have to test yet. But I need way more videos to do so and to be even more fair, I need to play it to comment about it.

[Choronzon]

And how is instinct more realistic than the maps? Let me explain. The maps do not exist in real life. However human instinct does.

Maps (in various forms) do exist in real life. I'll agree that the thermal imaging/tagging and real-time movement is more than far-fetched and not entirely technologically plausible, but other than that - the maps are fairly realistic. Don't kid yourself. We have plenty of satellites orbiting our planet. These are all producing various forms of imagery that is widely used in industry, the military, transport, agriculture, disaster management and intelligence gathering.

Take a look at the Wikipedia entry for satellite imagery. Your GPS works with electronic maps, the location off your cellphone is based upon the closest antenna from where your particular signal originates. Maps are everywhere and used in varying capacity in sometimes very mundane applications.

Edited by Choronzon, 21 October 2011 - 06:06 AM.

[Black glasses]

BTW talking about the old maps. Are you seriously suggesting that you could not make a a perfect route to the target JUST BY STUDYING THE MOVEMENTS? Because it could of easily been done at the beginning of each mission. Yes it is still up to the player to execute it, BUT they destroyed the discovery part. There was no searching for the target and identifying, no finding hidden routes and no surprises. Why? Because they were all listed in the maps.

It was never possible to perfectly plan your moves on higher difficulties, especially on Pro. It only showed your target (I agree, the highest difficulty should have removed the target too, you should have acquired information about his location in other ways). So if I only see the target on the map, how can I make a perfect route to the target with that amount of information? Let me see, a quick example: Bjarkhov Bomb. "Hey, there's the target walking alone next to the plane, I'll just run to him and shoot him. Whoops." Or Shogun Showdown: you must observe with nothing but your eyes and ears to get to the target. You couldn't really plan it in great detail. Sure, you could think "I'll just go from floor 1 to floor 8 (or whatever floor he was in) and kill him" but you had to improvise when you were going there.

Even if everything would have been shown on the map on every difficulty setting, no one was forcing to use it. It's like having an elevator in a building; you can say "Hah, I don't need elevators, I will use the stairs, that will keep me fit. They should remove the elevator completely." But then there are old people and disabled people, who want and basically have to use it. Bad metaphor, I know, but I hope you get the point. Just because you don't need it, others could. Same goes with manual saving, others like it and others don't. Now I've read the Thief forums. The Thief games have apparently always had unlimited manual saves. But the toughest of the tough have decided not to save at all once inside a level. You just need to have some control over yourself, and you can add the challenge to yourself by not saving. But just because some people like to play without saves, that doesn't mean there should be no saves, especially on lower difficulty levels.

I would consider myself being an average player: I had a lot of troubles in Silent assassin, even completing the missions alive. A couple I managed to SA, but the rest... It didn't take me long before I just invisibilitymoded my way through the Japan levels. I'm playing Hitman goddamit, not Adventures on the Arctic or some Indiana Jones. The levels weren't just frustrating, they didn't even include killing! Of course it shows how hard is it to get to the Shogun, but I didn't like them.
But anyway, I have mostly played my games on Normal. The saves should be there on that difficulty setting. If I fail and die, I don't want to start all over again. Tubeway Torpedo (SA'd on my second try, realized the way but took me half an hour just to get to the truck with the equipment) was difficult enough with 7 (+1) saves, so I couldn't even imagine playing it with no saves. Of course Absolution will be different, but still, it's better to have saves than not to have them.

Go into the maps in H2 or 3. H2 especially. Study them carefully and you will see that there will always be a perfect UNGUARDED path. And by unguarded, I really mean unguarded. Also, if you keep a distance, they will never run at you nor suspect of you. If you exploit these, you will realise how easy they were to deal with.

The guards were not shown in Pro difficulty. Since you're so good with the games, I'm assuming you are playing on Pro, right? If you really are, then why should you limit the tools on the lower difficulties? The lower difficulties are made for people who aren't as good as you claim to be. You play it on easy or normal to get a relatively easy game. And you play on hard/pro to get a challenge. Why should you make the easier difficulties harder? So that people who have never played Hitman before would get their asses kicked immediately? So they couldn't have a fun game?
And yes, it's common knowledge that the AI in Hitman has never been that good. Hopefully Absolution will fix this.

As for instinct.
My point is that instinct will promote more discovery than the maps. Why?
Because with the maps, you had the points of interest, passages and the target at your disposal from the beginning of the mission, and with instinct, you will have to observe the area and be closer to the action for you to see these point of interests.

But with a map, you only knew the general location where the target/NPC/point of interest was. With the use of Instinct, you will see the exact locations immediately, reducing the amount of observation needed. And hey, Rendezvous in Rotterdam with a map and with Insinct: with a map you never knew you could poison the ink used to make tattoos for the leader/target, let alone where the poison was. But with Insinct, the ink would be highlighted and the rat poison hidden in the alley would be highlighted too. It took me a long while before I even found out you could poison the ink (although the option "poison ink" even if I didn't have any poison helped a bit) and even longer before I found the poison itself. I'm not sure if I even found it out myself, or did I read about it here. Now which promotes more discovery?

And how is instinct more realistic than the maps?
Let me explain. The maps do not exist in real life. However human instinct does.
Yes, it may be a bit exaggerated in Absolution, however, when you are extremely good at something, you can see stuff that others won't see and the whole idea behind it is that we are playing from 47's mind. And with his vast amount of experience, he can predict certain stuff, just from his experience alone. So it isn't that UNREALISTIC WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT IT.

Maps don't exist? I assume you mean maps that show your location and the locations of other people. A basic GPS device, even a cell phone knows where it is. And as someone suggested before me somewhere, maybe ICA has thermal imaging satellites over the location or something? Of course it's ridiculous they can identify enemies, civilans, policemen and targets.

Oh yes, human instinct exists in some nature (but let's not argue about it here), and it's "realistic" in some way when it shows how 47 sees and hears the world around him. I can understand that after a decade (?) of training and dozens of missions, 47 can pretty much know what the person behind him is doing, and if someone is walking behind a door. And he can identify who's a policeman, who's a civilian etc.
But then, somehow, he can "see" in a 50 meter radius around him with Insinct, even if there are many walls and other obstacles in between, and probably with a lot of noise around him. That's when it gets ridiculous, and shows it's just a copy of Assassin's Creed's Eagle Vision or Conviction's sonar goggles. Sonar I can get. Eagle vision I can get, he's inside a computer simulation so there are ways for that, I guess it's a hack or something. And Batman has his "Detective mode" which is just as weird as Instinct, but I think it's actually a gadget and not a skill, which would suit Batman well. And now 47 has his "own" "Instinct" (Lara Croft will get her own "Intuition" in the next game, which is, once again, a copy from the popular x-ray mode), which does't work realistically. Sam's goggles are done with technology, Altair's eagle vision is a computer hack, Batman's vision is done with technology, but 47's x-ray is explained just with his skills. I understand that none of these characters is that realistic, but Hitman is supposed to be pretty realistic, despite having cloning (which can be done) and crazy scientists in its basic plot.

I would say, reduce the radius at least a bit, or make it fade a bit with every wall it goes through.

BUT ALL IN ALL, I HAVE TO PLAY IT TO FIND OUT.

So do I. But it's better to play it safe and give manual saves and map: the people who want to use them can use them, and people who don't, don't have to. But if neither of them exist, half (or actually about 75% according to the poll) of the players (of course about 40 Hitmanforumers don't represent all the customers, but let's say it's fifty-fifty) will be happy, whereas the rest will be unhappy.


One pretty unrelated thing I have noticed: the highest moderators always seem to agree on whatever the developers do. On the EA UK Battefield 3 forum, the admin is always defending DICE, and here JarDoS is defending IO with his votes. Or maybe it's just a coincidence.

Edited by Black glasses, 21 October 2011 - 06:01 AM.

[Keyser Soze]

Wow, you guys are off the rails

@ secret passages - The door to the balcony in ITAP wasn't on the map... I can't even count how many threads were flying around about "how do i git on blcny!!!11 pls hlp, red all treds here still cant fnd it :cry: :cry: :cry:"

And do you really think that 'Instict' isn't going to show you any 'secret' locations with firey highlights?

Edited by Keyser Soze, 21 October 2011 - 07:50 AM.

[Agent_88]

And do you really think that 'Instict' isn't going to show you any 'secret' locations with firey highlights?

No man! don't say it even as a joke !! damn that Instinct I hate it.

[Cold Shadow]

Maps (in various forms) do exist in real life. I'll agree that the thermal imaging/tagging and real-time movement is more than far-fetched and not entirely technologically plausible, but other than that - the maps are fairly realistic. Don't kid yourself. We have plenty of satellites orbiting our planet. These are all producing various forms of imagery that is widely used in industry, the military, transport, agriculture, disaster management and intelligence gathering.

Take a look at the Wikipedia entry for satellite imagery. Your GPS works with electronic maps, the location off your cellphone is based upon the closest antenna from where your particular signal originates. Maps are everywhere and used in varying capacity in sometimes very mundane applications.

I was talking about the maps from the previous games where it shows you every movement and defines them too. I was talking about the amount of stuff ta they show, not the design of the maps.

It was never possible to perfectly plan your moves on higher difficulties, especially on Pro. It only showed your target (I agree, the highest difficulty should have removed the target too, you should have acquired information about his location in other ways). So if I only see the target on the map, how can I make a perfect route to the target with that amount of information? Let me see, a quick example: Bjarkhov Bomb. "Hey, there's the target walking alone next to the plane, I'll just run to him and shoot him. Whoops." Or Shogun Showdown: you must observe with nothing but your eyes and ears to get to the target. You couldn't really plan it in great detail. Sure, you could think "I'll just go from floor 1 to floor 8 (or whatever floor he was in) and kill him" but you had to improvise when you were going there.

It was always possible to plan using only the map on higher difficulties. Usually, you start a game on a lower difficulty just to get a feel of it and since the AI was easy to deal with in the past, you will have a general idea of how to avoid them. So when you play on pro, it doesn't matter that there will be guards, because you would know how to deal with them. I still think that the map (if it will return) has to be just basic lines and shapes o the area. It would be much better to have only clues about the target and a photo and then you have to find him yourself. It would be more challenging and much more realistic and at the same it it would be more fun.

Even if everything would have been shown on the map on every difficulty setting, no one was forcing to use it. It's like having an elevator in a building; you can say "Hah, I don't need elevators, I will use the stairs, that will keep me fit. They should remove the elevator completely." But then there are old people and disabled people, who want and basically have to use it. Bad metaphor, I know, but I hope you get the point. Just because you don't need it, others could. Same goes with manual saving, others like it and others don't. Now I've read the Thief forums. The Thief games have apparently always had unlimited manual saves. But the toughest of the tough have decided not to save at all once inside a level. You just need to have some control over yourself, and you can add the challenge to yourself by not saving. But just because some people like to play without saves, that doesn't mean there should be no saves, especially on lower difficulty levels.

I never disagreed. However, when you have something as helpful as the map (in the previous games) in a press of a button, you will use it no matter how hard you try.

I would consider myself being an average player: I had a lot of troubles in Silent assassin, even completing the missions alive. A couple I managed to SA, but the rest... It didn't take me long before I just invisibilitymoded my way through the Japan levels. I'm playing Hitman goddamit, not Adventures on the Arctic or some Indiana Jones. The levels weren't just frustrating, they didn't even include killing! Of course it shows how hard is it to get to the Shogun, but I didn't like them.
But anyway, I have mostly played my games on Normal. The saves should be there on that difficulty setting. If I fail and die, I don't want to start all over again. Tubeway Torpedo (SA'd on my second try, realized the way but took me half an hour just to get to the truck with the equipment) was difficult enough with 7 (+1) saves, so I couldn't even imagine playing it with no saves. Of course Absolution will be different, but still, it's better to have saves than not to have them.

I never commented about the saves. They should have been kept, it wasn't causing any harm TBH. BTW, the Japan level are glitched to begin with.

The guards were not shown in Pro difficulty. Since you're so good with the games, I'm assuming you are playing on Pro, right? If you really are, then why should you limit the tools on the lower difficulties? The lower difficulties are made for people who aren't as good as you claim to be. You play it on easy or normal to get a relatively easy game. And you play on hard/pro to get a challenge. Why should you make the easier difficulties harder? So that people who have never played Hitman before would get their asses kicked immediately? So they couldn't have a fun game?
And yes, it's common knowledge that the AI in Hitman has never been that good. Hopefully Absolution will fix this.

When I want to challenge myself, I play on pro and suit only aiming for SA. That was the only time when it was really challenging and it was really fun BTW. I agree about the help stuff. I never disagreed with that. Even I need help when starting a new game. But we know so little of Absolution right now. Maybe instinct will have more helping features on lower difficulties.

But with a map, you only knew the general location where the target/NPC/point of interest was. With the use of Instinct, you will see the exact locations immediately, reducing the amount of observation needed. And hey, Rendezvous in Rotterdam with a map and with Insinct: with a map you never knew you could poison the ink used to make tattoos for the leader/target, let alone where the poison was. But with Insinct, the ink would be highlighted and the rat poison hidden in the alley would be highlighted too. It took me a long while before I even found out you could poison the ink (although the option "poison ink" even if I didn't have any poison helped a bit) and even longer before I found the poison itself. I'm not sure if I even found it out myself, or did I read about it here. Now which promotes more discovery?

That's just 1 example. However with instinct, you will still have to be on the upper floor area for you to see the ink to poison it. You cannot for example be in the basement and see what's happening on the upper floors. That was my point about instinct promoting more discovery and investigation.

Maps don't exist? I assume you mean maps that show your location and the locations of other people. A basic GPS device, even a cell phone knows where it is. And as someone suggested before me somewhere, maybe ICA has thermal imaging satellites over the location or something? Of course it's ridiculous they can identify enemies, civilans, policemen and targets.

Exactly. I meant to say maps from the previous games.


About instinct. I agree that maybe the distance he can see is a bit too much. However, maybe on the highest difficulty, everything will be reduced. Hopefully, it is a flexible enough feature to accommodate every difficulty level.

[Keyser Soze]

Usually, you start a game on a lower difficulty just to get a feel of it

Maybe you do.

and since the AI was easy to deal with in the past, you will have a general idea of how to avoid them.

Blood Money AI was easy, much more difficult the farther back you go.

I never disagreed. However, when you have something as helpful as the map (in the previous games) in a press of a button, you will use it no matter how hard you try.

True, but playing only on Pro reduces the dependancy. Besides, the exact same sentiment applies to Instinct.

[Cold Shadow]

^The AI was so easy to deal with in every game. In BM it seemed easier, but there were much less unguarded areas unlike in H2 and 3. In H2 especially, there were many unguarded areas and will always lead to a perfect path to the target.

Anathema for example. Go from the basement, go into the corridor, no guards up to this point (because the guard that walks outside is easy to sedate). Trick the guard above you (the one facing the stairs, to make him look opposite of the stairs) by making him turn with your footsteps (was pretty easy to do this and trick the guards and works in many cases), sedate the guard near the stairs, go walk in that path that leads to the rooftop and the boss and kill him. Very easy to do and no guards in your way. Even suit only is very easy with this method.

This was just 1 example, but my point is that once you know the location of the guards, H2 and 3 were very, very easy to dodge them. I hope Absolution makes the AI as good as they're saying.

Edited by Cold Shadow, 22 October 2011 - 01:34 AM.

[Keyser Soze]

Let's try to keep some perspective here. Of course the AI is easy to deal with after you know every move they're going to make. By then the map, with or without all the bling, is a mute point anyway

[Watson]

@Watson. I never said I didn't want any maps what so ever.
I never said it was damaging, but it certainly made it a hell of alot easier since you do not have to work out where the target is and where he might be headed. I want to be able to do that myself, instead of being provided with the exact location on my map, at the beginning of the mission, even if the target is far away.
I never said, that Absolution will be harder. I have to play it to find out.

I realise what you mean, I don’t believe I implied you particularly wanted ‘no maps’ however most of your concerns about the map deal with the fact that you believe it gave too much information, even on the hardest difficulties.

In general, you have noticeably signified that the maps made things ‘too easy’ and consequently they were damaging to some elements of gameplay, examples of which you have previously mentioned.

I didn’t mean to indicate you think Absolution will be 'harder' if that's what you think, but when it comes to the learning cure you must admit that it was considerably harder in the past games that it appears to be in Absolution (from the news before us), since this new title in the series is clearly aiming to handle a boarder range of gameplay styles better than before.

14 year olds shouldn't be playing Hitman

I merely brought that up due to the fact that for a first time player who has not spent years dissecting a mission and pulling it apart, it’s not always that easy with the map. The map is no one-way ticket to achieving Silent Assassin. One’s success in the game is not just dependant on the map, the map is a tool that can help, but by no means does it ‘hold your hand’ and tell you what to do and where to go. Those decisions are made by the player and they are not always grounded in what one observes using the map.

The purpose of each game is to learn how it works (the learning curve) and once you master how the AI works, you will basically master the game.

That is one way of putting it, but mastering the AI is different and dependant on the individual. You are speaking from your own experience and you simply cannot apply this to everyone. If one masters the AI you are still not guaranteed a successful mission. Games like Hitman 2, even to long time players of the series can still be challenging. If they didn’t there would be little fun in replaying the game if it’s all that easy and clear-cut.

There are plenty of complex and large missions, which are without doubt composed with the core elements of the Hitman experience and that experience is one not solely based on the map, the AI or the location/layout of the mission, but about the individual choice that the games offers you.

Silent Assassins is very overrated in terms of difficulty because it was very easy to complete.

That’s your personal view. After 9 years I’m sure that many long time players of Hitman could say that many ‘old’ missions can be easy and simple. I’m sure a professional tennis player will say that it’s not that difficult to play a good match of tennis and defeat a novice opponent. It all comes down to experience. While I’ve played Hitman 2 many times and completed the game will all missions ranked Silent Assassin, by no means was achieving that ‘too easy’ or without challenge.

... you have to realize that if you turn off instinct you will still the those guards so it wasn't exactly unlimited as you can see them without instinct. With the maps at lower levels, you could see everything, even when you can't see it with your eyes.

I don’t believe without Instinct you can see all guards/police with your ‘bare eyes’ anyway. Clearly there were guards being ‘lit up’ with Instinct that were many rooms away on different elevations. You say that with the maps you could see ‘everything’, now with Instinct you can see ‘everything' as well, even if those things are very far away.

@ secret passages - The door to the balcony in ITAP wasn't on the map... I can't even count how many threads were flying around about "how do i git on blcny!!!11 pls hlp, red all treds here still cant fnd it :cry: :cry: :cry:"
And do you really think that 'Instict' isn't going to show you any 'secret' locations with firey highlights?

There's no doubt that Instinct (-vision) is something that’s meant to lay many things out for the player – all at once as it seems. I really find that the map actually encouraged exploration, with Instinct I’m not so sure, people may think ‘...oh, nothing lights up in that area with my Instinct so I won’t go and explore that part’.

I was talking about the maps from the previous games where it shows you every movement and defines them too.

The maps did not show you movement, if you chose to use a map that had all the NPCs on it then you had to use your own powers of observation to accurately work out where the NPCs were going. With Instinct you don’t have to do this, a flaming line appears and tells you all you need to know.

It was always possible to plan using only the map on higher difficulties.

It’s dependant on the map – and is there anything wrong with planning your mission? Do you really think someone like 47 just accepts a contract and walks in blindly and unprepared with no idea where he is or where he is going?

It would be much better to have only clues about the target and a photo and then you have to find him yourself. It would be more challenging and much more realistic and at the same it it would be more fun.

I have to admit that the way you didn’t know where the targets were in Murder of the Crows was rather fun. I agree with that. But, knowing where the target's at, is not something that causes a lot of concern for me, but if there’s a more 'creative way' to find your target I see no harm in it. I'm all for creativity in a mission.

However with instinct, you will still have to be on the upper floor area for you to see the ink to poison it. You cannot for example be in the basement and see what's happening on the upper floors.
...
Anathema for example. Go from the basement, go into the corridor, no guards up to this point (because the guard that walks outside is easy to sedate). Trick the guard above you (the one facing the stairs, to make him look opposite of the stairs) by making him turn with your footsteps (was pretty easy to do this and trick the guards and works in many cases), sedate the guard near the stairs, go walk in that path that leads to the rooftop and the boss and kill him. Very easy to do and no guards in your way. Even suit only is very easy with this method.

I believe that from the demo, the guards you see appear on various heights. Remember the ledges that light up in the library? they are clearly above 47 on a different height.

On Anathema: I don’t think you figured all this out on your first playthrough and surely not because you only looked at the map.

Edited by Watson, 22 October 2011 - 04:16 AM.

[Cold Shadow]

Let's try to keep some perspective here. Of course the AI is easy to deal with after you know every move they're going to make. By then the map, with or without all the bling, is a mute point anyway

Ofcourse, but my point is that the map made the learning curve less steep as it provided too much help.

I realise what you mean, I don’t believe I implied you particularly wanted ‘no maps’ however most of your concerns about the map deal with the fact that you believe it gave too much information, even on the hardest difficulties.

In general, you have noticeably signified that the maps made things ‘too easy’ and consequently they were damaging to some elements of gameplay, examples of which you have previously mentioned.

I didn’t mean to indicate you think Absolution will be 'harder' if that's what you think, but when it comes to the learning cure you must admit that it was considerably harder in the past games that it appears to be in Absolution (from the news before us), since this new title in the series is clearly aiming to handle a boarder range of gameplay styles better than before.

Not sure about Absolution. I need to play it.

I merely brought that up due to the fact that for a first time player who has not spent years dissecting a mission and pulling it apart, it’s not always that easy with the map. The map is no one-way ticket to achieving Silent Assassin. One’s success in the game is not just dependant on the map, the map is a tool that can help, but by no means does it ‘hold your hand’ and tell you what to do and where to go. Those decisions are made by the player and they are not always grounded in what one observes using the map.

Ofcourse, the map is not a guaranteed SA rating, it's still up to the player, but it still provided too much help in the sense that you could basically plan a whole route just by looking at the map. You won't have trouble finding the target either, as it was shown to you from the beginning, even if you are on the outside of the level, and the target is on the 3rd floor. There was no investigation to see where the target is. For me, that's a fun part, trying to decipher where the target is. But the map took that away.

You don't have to wonder about to study guard movements that much, because the map basically tells you aswell. That was my point. You do not have to be near the action, to witness the patterns and that is not good.

That is one way of putting it, but mastering the AI is different and dependant on the individual. You are speaking from your own experience and you simply cannot apply this to everyone. If one masters the AI you are still not guaranteed a successful mission. Games like Hitman 2, even to long time players of the series can still be challenging. If they didn’t there would be little fun in replaying the game if it’s all that easy and clear-cut.

There are plenty of complex and large missions, which are without doubt composed with the core elements of the Hitman experience and that experience is one not solely based on the map, the AI or the location/layout of the mission, but about the individual choice that the games offers you.

H2 was again VERY EASY. It is overrated in terms of difficulty. The only way for the game to be challenging is when attempting suit only Silent assassin missions.

Choices? Yes it did offer choice, BUT the AI is so predictable that it was still very easy to exploit. But the map map these exploits show much more. Why? Because you could clearly see the unguarded parts of the level from the beginning and you didn't have to find them yourself or by looking through your binoculars at a distance. The binoculars was also pretty much useless because of the map on easier levels. You may say, on pro? It's still easy because again, the AI was easy to exploit.

That’s your personal view. After 9 years I’m sure that many long time players of Hitman could say that many ‘old’ missions can be easy and simple. I’m sure a professional tennis player will say that it’s not that difficult to play a good match of tennis and defeat a novice opponent. It all comes down to experience. While I’ve played Hitman 2 many times and completed the game will all missions ranked Silent Assassin, by no means was achieving that ‘too easy’ or without challenge.

It is my view yes. But, ofcourse a new comer will not find it easy. It's again part of the learning curve, it's what makes games fun. However, my point is that the map in the older games helped too much, thus reducing that learning curve.

I don’t believe without Instinct you can see all guards/police with your ‘bare eyes’ anyway. Clearly there were guards being ‘lit up’ with Instinct that were many rooms away on different elevations. You say that with the maps you could see ‘everything’, now with Instinct you can see ‘everything' as well, even if those things are very far away.

I do not know how it'll work exactly, however you still have to be nearer to work your way in the area, using instinct. Just because you see a guard through a wall, it's not always clear to decipher where you may go while in instinct mode. But again, I need to see more of this to comment.

It’s dependant on the map – and is there anything wrong with planning your mission? Do you really think someone like 47 just accepts a contract and walks in blindly and unprepared with no idea where he is or where he is going?

There's nothing worn with planning, but come on, having everything on a map? Really?
You may plan, but to see guard patterns or guard routes, you can do what 47 did in ROTTERDAM. Go into a distant point or a place to study the area and the target's movements using long ranged binoculars. That's still planning, but in a more realistic way.

I have to admit that the way you didn’t know where the targets were in Murder of the Crows was rather fun. I agree with that. But, knowing where the target's at, is not something that causes a lot of concern for me, but if there’s a more 'creative way' to find your target I see no harm in it. I'm all for creativity in a mission.

Yeah, it's way more fun to see for yourself.

I believe that from the demo, the guards you see appear on various heights. Remember the ledges that light up in the library? they are clearly above 47 on a different height.

True but then again, in instinct mode, it's hard to see where you're going and where the guards are EXACTLY. But again, I have to see more of this. Maybe I'll agree that it'll show too much aswell.

On Anathema: I don’t think you figured all this out on your first playthrough and surely not because you only looked at the map.

On my first playthrough NO. But I was younger and didn't have this mindset that I have for games now.
However, the map already told me to go from the basement part because it was unguarded. So it was quite a big help because I didn't figure it out myself, the map did it for me because it's way easier to look at moving objects on a map

But again, I never said that the map was a guarantee, just that it made things alot easier.

[Black glasses]

If you think Hitman 2: Silent Assassin was very easy, then you are probably way above the average player. I can't even imagine what would be the game you consider even a bit difficult. From what I've heard, Dark Souls and Ninja Gaiden are extremely difficult games. You should try those, even if you think they are a piece of cake.
And just because you can play Hitman 2 on pro-suit only-blindfolded-hands tied behind back-upside down, it doesn't mean everyone can. I'm sure you are representing a minority here. The game shouldn't be extremely difficult (easy for you) nor should it be extremely easy. But the difficulty settings should provide an enjoyable experience for players of any kind. More on that later.

So you're saying the map made the learning curve less steep? How is that a bad thing? Again, I think you should have played on pro from the start and maybe you shouldn't have touched the map button at all. I didn't find my targets in Flatline thanks to the map, I found them because they looked so unique. But I did find the randomly-placed assassin in Murder of Crows using the map. And the vice president in the White House. I felt like I was cheating. Maybe the Purist mode will remove the target from the ma... Oh damnit, there is no map in Absolution.

I suggest again that there are difficulty options you can set yourself. Map on/off, target on map on/off, regenerative health on/off etc. This way I can get the game I want, you can get the game you want, and the kid who has never played Hitman before can play it the way he wants. Everyone's happy, no one loses. There was a thread about custom difficulty levels, but I don't think the devs noticed it. Couldn't someone tweet a dev about the custom diffiiculty thread(wherever that is), this thread, Bateson sound mod thread, and Small fixes thread (http://www.hitmanfor...62-small-fixes/) to make sure they know about these things we're discussing here?

Seriously, Cold Shadow, if you thought the map was so overpowered, why didn't you just stop using it? Using my elevator metaphor, you're using the elevator and in the same time agonizing "Damn, the stairs would be a healthier and safer option. Using the stairs would keep me fit, and stairs can't get stuck, they can't fall into the bottom of the elevator shaft.", while the old lady next to you is giving an evil look on you. "Don't you have any kind of self control, young man?" she says.
What I'm saying is that even though there is an option to do thing x, you don't necessarily have to. You don't have to use the elevator or the map. You just need some willpower to not use it. The same thing with saves (although this doesn't apply to you I think), if you want to add challenge, don't save at all. If you fail, keep going, if you die, restart level. Some people like using the map. So let's give them the option to use it.

[Cold Shadow]

^I am playing darks souls right now . And again, it's all about patience. I however agree with you. I just put too much thought into games and I am patient enough to learn the game. I understand that not everyone is of the same skill level in games. I totally do and I agree. Anyway, the way I see it is to include difficulty levels in Absolution that will suite everyone's tastes.

So you're saying the map made the learning curve less steep? How is that a bad thing?

Not exactly a bad thing, but it's less fun because basically, part of what makes a new game fun is to learn it's mechanics and the more time you spend learning about the game, the better the experience and the more you learn, the more time you put into a game. So basically what I am saying is that a steep learning curve (doesn't mean that the game will be hard btw) will in term give the game more playing time.

Though again, I totally agree that they should accommodate everyone.

Edited by Cold Shadow, 22 October 2011 - 10:03 AM.

[sgg847]

I want to ask one question those who play or have played in H2SA and HC on the consoles. Did you be happy when the developers had adjusted crouchsneak and walkrun on one stick and one left trigger in Hitman Contracts and used left trigger as the map? or controller layout in H2SA was better?

Edited by sgg847, 22 October 2011 - 10:53 AM.

[16-bit Irony]

So many words :dies:

[Keyser Soze]

LOL @ SA being 'very easy'. Retrospectively it's easy, of course, we've all put hundreds of hours into it and know it inside and out. I don't buy for a second that the first day you played SA your thoughts were 'easy'.

[Cold Shadow]

^NEITHER GAME IS EASY ON THE FIRST TRY. That's not the point.

The point is that the AI was so shallow and poorly placed, that with a few thoughts it could have easily been exploited.

[JaRDoS]

What I'm saying is that even though there is an option to do thing x, you don't necessarily have to. You don't have to use the elevator or the map. You just need some willpower to not use it. The same thing with saves (although this doesn't apply to you I think), if you want to add challenge, don't save at all. If you fail, keep going, if you die, restart level. Some people like using the map. So let's give them the option to use it.

What you seem to be unwilling to comprehend here is that games are not a fast food meal - you don't just mix and match options 'cause it takes five minutes to put together and will last thirty seconds. Games are carefully crafted masterpieces and the reason you don't see many games improved by a simple mod is because they've been carefully designed to use their alleged flaws.

The original Simon's Quest game had an intentional delay between when you hit the attack button and when Simon would start the whipping animation. There wasn't an option to remove this delay because the delay was actually part of what made the game fun. It reduced your ability to rapidly respond to enemy movements and made you have to plan your engagements (which was pretty awesome in a game where you had only attack and jump as your standard actions). Removing the delay wouldn't have just made it "a little easier" it would have completely shifted the game experience and taken away a lot of the feeling of vulnerability you feel due to the delay.

If there's no manual saves and if there's no map, there's probably a very good reason relating to the game experience. In this case, most likely for the very same reason as Simon's Quest - it makes you feel alone, isolated and vulnerable. Now even if you don't use the map or save feature, just knowing it's there actually dilutes that feeling a lot.

System Shock 2 and Bioshock are a good example of this. SS2 was ridiculously difficult because of such limited resources and your death not only cost resources but set you back quit a ways. Bioshock was a lot more generous and let you respawn as often as you liked - this made it a lot more playable but also took away the tension because after the first couple of times you died you realised it wasn't so bad and waves of enemies just meant longer delays if you messed up. We got some of this tension back in B2 where during harvesting you can't afford to die because you'll have to start the whole sodding process all over again but nothing in it was anywhere near as terrifying as the crazy monkeys from SS2 even if you were determined to play without dying 'cause you knew you were just making things more difficult than they had to be.

You really can't gauge a game's difficulty until it comes out and you try it for yourself, nor can you expect to speculate on what features are and aren't appropriate.

[Watson]

If there's no manual saves and if there's no map, there's probably a very good reason relating to the game experience. In this case, most likely for the very same reason as Simon's Quest - it makes you feel alone, isolated and vulnerable. Now even if you don't use the map or save feature, just knowing it's there actually dilutes that feeling a lot.

Obviously there is a reason why the game will have no maps (in any form) or manual saves, it was definitely not a blind decision to remove these features but one based around what is probably a question of necessity. So if there is no map and no manual saves in Absolution, obviously there's no necessity for them according to the developers, because if there was a need for them they would be in the game. Levels built up of sections divided by (mandatory) checkpoints is a likely reason why having a 'full map' from the start of a mission may have been out of the question, however there isn't even any schematic information on the mini-map, or a schematic 'ability' based on Instinct.

The optional maps and manual saves were considerably significant tools one could use while playing the game, quite clearly Absolution, by taking these tools away is instilling a sense of improvisation on behalf of the player, as you have little idea where you’re going during the mission. It seems to be a ‘step by step’ and ‘room by room’ approach, moving from one area to the other as seen in the demo. But at this current moment, if a simple schematic was built up based on 47's memory or shown on the mini-map I really see no harm that would come to one’s experience of the level. The music is tense, cinematic, the atmosphere is dark and gritty, you are clearly immersing yourself in the environment and there is a clear sense of tension here – 47 is a fugitive, however not all missions will be like this, IOI have conveyed that the demo level is not a reflection on the entire game. If the removal of the map could be justified with the particular element of instilling a sense of alert to the player (the feeling of being ‘alone’ without support), such a justification may only be based on what one saw in the library level, not the entire game, as there will be missions with settings which I assume will have different atmospheres that may not want to convey the ‘one the run’ ambiance of the library level.

It's also important to consider the fact that we are talking about a Hitman game here, if some of the changes are going to improve the Hitman experience, then they are obviously welcomed with a great deal of excitement. However, if there are more questionable changes that appear to be noteworthy in that we are seeing those particular things removed from the series for the first time, then it is completely valid to rationally discuss them and try to understand exactly why that happened. Without playing the game it is of course difficult to fully and adequately consider the impact the removal of the saves and map will have, I personally don't consider this a 'disaster' that has 'ruined' the game, however it's a sensible concern that may indicate the nature and direction Absolution is taking, particularly if we learn the reasons behind these changes. We are still unsure what those exact reasons are.

Edited by Watson, 23 October 2011 - 03:51 AM.