I included the entire panel for context – something that is sorely missing in your arguments. Cropping the gun out would have been disingenuous, I’m sure you’ll agree. In fact, her having the gun just goes to show how unnecessary and unrealistic that kick actually is – she already had the gun to his face and then stepped back for a high kick. But as I’ve already stated multiple times, I was not talking about the gun. There are no moving goal posts here.
As I used to be a 14 year old girl myself, I can assure you that your assertion here is false.
It’s also in the Absolution game. That’s why I have mentioned it when referencing previous lore.
A hat tip is something like 47 using the name Tobias Rieper in H6 as a nod to C47. A hat tip is not the same as a plot point or characteristic, such as 47 being a clone.
The fanbase is not limited to this forum. I’ve read a few conversations on this particular point in the games. I’m not sure why you’re so quick to deny that any possible conversations on the previous lore could have taken place under your watch, when you don’t seem to like the lore that much anyway.
You’re assuming things again. This is still your headcanon. Also, your timeline is the same as mine except you got the year for H6 wrong.
You do know that test tube babies aren’t clones, right?
So you agree that Absolution followed the same protocol as C47 then?
I haven’t lied anywhere.
No, I am saying that the comic is terrible and said it being a cash-grab could be a possible explanation for this. However, other cash-grabs have been excellent, so whether it is or isn’t is moot, really.
Whose idea is that? The IO team themselves stated that even C47 itself was simply about being “cool” rather than telling a story. Has anyone ever talked about the Hitman games as plot masterpieces? From what I’ve read, people who like the lore think it’s interesting. The comic, on the other hand, is pretty boring and bland. You seem to reach for hyperbole in order to make your point – that for the comic to be shit, the game lore must have been glorious and flawless. This is untrue, and a poor attempt to detract from my points.
It comes down to this – do you think the story in the comics is good? I think the story in the comics is bad. Do you think the comic story is a good fit for Hitman? I think it is a bad fit for Hitman. Do you think the story makes sense as a link to the existing lore? I think it does not make sense and does not serve as a link to the existing lore – so perhaps it is an attempt at a reboot.
I’ve made this as clear as possible for you. If you think the comic is not inconsistent, if you think it is not riddled with plot holes and clichés, if you don’t think the action is over the top – then that is your opinion. I, too, am entitled to my opinion. In my opinion, it is poorly written and certainly sloppy with regard to mistakes in the writing.
Seeing as you’re not a big fan of the Hitman lore already, then I’m not sure why it hurts you so much that people don’t think the comic does justice to the lore.
That doesn’t add up: The context of the previous panel is she is threatening him with the gun, possibly standing over him already (the cropping is too close) and then kicks him in the face because she wants to hurt him. How is this outside the physical capabilities of a regular able bodied fourteen year old girl who may or may not have done any number of sports, martial arts, etc?
You never actually explained what your objection was, just that you felt it was somehow unacceptably badass of her to do it.
Yes, I know what a hat tip is. My personal favourite hat tip is how Don Fernando Delgado is wearing the same outfit as Pablo Ochoa, it’s subtle and it made me happy.
That’s the sort of thing IO-Interactive do from game to game, and always have since Hitman had a second game - they don’t focus on long term continuity.
They don’t even focus on short term continuity in most games.
Because this forum has twice been the official unofficial forum, and I’ve kept any eye on the “other forum” that was around at the time as well, etc. I’m sure there are some fans who discuss this, but some fans is not “the fandom” any more than my crazy uncle who thinks he’s going to be made a saint when he dies is “Australians”.
How the Asylum was left untouched for years despite the events that took place in it was not a wide and common topic of wonder for the fandom in general, if you said the topic of who is Mystery Man or why the fuck does 47 keep going back to work for the ICA, that would make sense. (Personally I don’t care about either, but I know a lot of people do).
My timeline is an accurate list of events that includes all the contradictions that you claim are not present. Also I’m not seeing any basis to challenge the headcanon other than it contradicts yours.
See this is how “weight of evidence” works in situations where there is not a legal requirement for an assumption. You propose your hypothesis, and the reasons behind it. Other people propose their hypothesis and their reasons. It can result in innumerable interpretations, but essentially every interpretation should be able to account for others interpretations.
For example, the interpretation that in Blood Money the ICA answered to the Queen of Denmark was supported by Diana speaking to “your majesty” on a direct line without introduction or limitation, the office being in Copenhagen, the presence of a crown and the letters DK on the ICA logo:
Also just that IO-Interactive is from Denmark so it’d be a fun thing for them.
The theory that she was talking to some other royalty and openly talking about the status of the company and the attempt to locate 47 is somewhat flawed given that the ICA has always been extremely secretive. “Secrets are our stock and trade.”
In polite conversation, you would propose information to address this.
I do, and I also know:
They aren’t grown in test tubes, they’re grown inside of a uterus
The Hitmanverse uses the term “clone” rather loosely to describe anyone who is a manufactured person (47, for example, the Parchezzis, for another example)
It is explicitly stated in Hitman: Blood Money that only Ort-Meyer was capable of manufacturing fully functional humans. It’s such an insurmountable challenge they waged a prolonged war with the ICA just to get access to 47’s bone marrow.
Fast forward: The ICA has exceeded his work, the product looks like a normal human girl (with hair!) and added a USB stick that can be used as a control device… no big deal apparently
So you proposed from complete ignorance that it was a cash-grab to justify it even though it would be irrelevant whether it was one way or the other?
Yes, people who like “the lore” do in fact, like “the lore”. The level of accuracy and basis behind the lore varies wildly. Personally I find the shifts in the lore and the different versions of the universe and varying qualities in the different worlds, hence I have no attachment to continuity between products. That was made clear when they released Silent Assassin.
Oh cool we can talk about the comic finally!
I think the comic is about what I would expect for an independent studio creating a support comic for a long running series that has been wildly contradictory since the second game was released, to elaborate.
The basic plot structuring is pretty solid in terms of structuring cause/effect, progression, etc. however it does feel like there’s too much being thrown at the read too fast. Possibly there was a dramatic overestimation of how much information could be conveyed within any given chapter/issue.
I feel Diana’s arc would have been ultimately more satisfying if we’d met her family, seen their original feud with Blue Seed, etc then seen how much the explosion took them by surprise etc. I also feel that the problem with the whole becoming dangerous for revenge thing works better for a lone vigilante type than a mastermind type.
Fit for Hitman
I think it’s a reasonably good fit for HITMAN, and that it’s departure from some of the conventions of the earlier games and products is probably for the best. The idea of Ort-Meyer as a Heroic Antagonist (in the romantic sense) doesn’t fit so well with modern sensibilities, the project is now something we would associate with grey area oligarchs acting through shady corporations rather thaa lone scientist going it on his own.
Likewise Hitman has changed a lot since Codename 47 which had very limited manipulation options and only one “accident” kill. For the most part it it made sense in C47 he was a super assassin due to being a sharpshooter, harder than a coffin nail and able to use some rudimentary disguises. Largely they wanted to recreate assassination scenarios from directors John Woo, Luc Besson, Bryan Singer, John Frankenheimer, Michael Mann and Brian De Palma.
Modern interpretations of assassins tend to favour professionals like mix of secret agents, forensic manipulators, etc. 47’s iconic hits now more resemble scenes from The Mechanic (1972): elaborate planning with very precise manipulations or strategic violence. Essentially 47 has shifted from being an action hero to being a versatile assassin (mostly because the system allows us to), and that sort of things tends to suggest practice/experience.
Links to the existing lore
It doesn’t fit with the details and minutia but it fits with the core premise. 47 is the ultimate assassin, manufactured by a ruthless scientist who has nothing but contempt for society and then finds himself unable to control his creation… basically the Frankenstein thing but with an assassin twist.
Ever since Silent Assassin I’ve treated basically every Hitman game/property as a kind of reboot, because they essentially have been. Silent Assassin reinvented the approach, the ICA’s standards, etc so why shouldn’t everthing else? Sure it’s fun to be able to point out that 47 got his first kiss from Lei Ling, or inadvertently told the truth during his meeting in The Massacre Cheung Chau Fish Restaurant when he refers to his “father” being a close associate of Lee Hong, but ultimately it doesn’t affect the core experience.
The original lore was hashed out focusing primarily on the Rule of Cool and never intended for a prolonged campaign, rather it was just about establishing a character, a play style and making a successful game. Each new iteration of the lore has similarly been created to serve the game, and ultimately the player in that individual instance.
This new approach of doing a single plot over seasons (and meaning it this time) means they are having to do a lot more planning and infrastructure building to support the story and the characters, to that end it makes sense they need to replace a few things. You wouldn’t try to build a six story building on a foundation made for a cheap house, you don’t try to do the same with the story that’s meant to go for multiple seasons.
As such, it is not consistent with previous Hitman games - but it’s consistent with the current games and that is both more important and more interesting.
Absolution’s profile for Diana was cliche nonsense that fitted in with it’s grindhouse sensibilities but wouldn’t make sense in the espionage aesthetic of HITMAN, after all if Diana is proper blue blood in the modern day then she’s a liability to the ICA’s secrecy. She will have family, extended family etc who will want to keep track of everything she’s doing, expect her to show up to parties and talk about what she’s accomplished etc.
Having her be a middle class orphan with ambition and ruthlessness makes her more akin to the type of people who we expect espionage organisations to recruit. When you want to keep secrets its good to recruit people who won’t be missed, have no roots and no loyalties to others. If you recruit them early enough then paying for a full ticket through finishing school then Oxford or Yale is a relatively small price for someone who can be trusted with secrets worth countless millions.
Less “My Fair Lady” and more Le Femme Nikita (1990).
I am a fan of Hitman lore, particularly how it reinvents itself and has adapted from game to game.
I’m not sure that is a hat tip. They both wear suits and color scheme is similar (although the shade of pink is vastly different), yes. However, it could be a coincidence. Or they might as well both be hat tips to Manny Ribera from Scarface, who knows? Here’s some pictures of reference:
Buddy, you’ve been the one trying to detract from my arguments about the comic by jumping from point to point. But if it helps you to be sarcastic in your responses, that’s your own problem.
It is badass for a 14 year old girl to takedown 3 thugs in an alley without so much as breaking a sweat, and it is badass for a 14 year old girl to break into an office to drop kick a guy in the face. How can you say that it’s not? That is my objection.
The file is in the Absolution game in the intro cutscene, when 47 is explaining what Diana did and how they “had trust” but she betrayed the Agency.
Okay, good. Then you can stop pretending it’s something used to reinvent every production.
Indeed there are.
Actually, I forgot to mention: why do you think Diana went from her 20s to her 40s in the space of one year, when H6 spans 1999 – 2019? Because that’s the only game timeline issue you brought up that is a contradiction, and you’re not even right about it.
So, why haven’t you? You’ve claimed that Diana inherited the top position at the ICA, but that she also reports to the Queen of Denmark. The most likely interpretation for this is that the ICA has a HQ in Denmark – perhaps even their main HQ. Diana refers to all their operations being online again, which suggests she is not alone. The ICA has long been international (it’s in their name) so they must be in regular contact with many governments. And, the info in Absolution suggests she was instrumental in helping the ICA to rebuild. So far, still no contradictions. Especially as BM ended in 2006 and Absolution is around 2012, so there was time to rebuild the Agency again.
But Hitman explicitly states that 47 and the Parchezzis are clones. It’s never been stated (to my knowledge) that Victoria was a clone – especially as a lot of OM’s research was apparently lost. She was a standalone experiment. Otherwise, where are the other clones of her?
The comic is supposed to expand on the lore. As it is instead making contradictions and mistakes and is being partly created by people who are not very familiar with the Hitman games, I suggested a reason for this is that the main purpose of the comic is to inject cash into S2 production. However, through our discussion, you pointed out that Contracts was made for the same reason, and I pointed out that Witcher 3 was made for the same reason, and those were both some great games – so even if the comic is a cash grab, it’s not an excuse for it being sloppy.
You could just scroll up to re-read my replies.
Well, isn’t that exactly why we are disagreeing? Hence why I don’t understand this bugging you so much, as you don’t care much for the lore anyway?
Once again, your argument hinges on “Hitman games contradict each other, so the comic can too!” But as we’ve seen, the Hitman games do not contradict each other.
Yes, pacing is erratic. Especially as we jump from 1985 to 1989 between the first and second issue, despite the fact that Diana is in the same clothes and says she has been with Savi for only 2 weeks. And she ages retroactively. Mistakes galore.
So you agree with me here as well.
Doesn’t this sound more and more like a reboot? At least you know it doesn’t fit with the previous lore. That’s not a problem for you, because you don’t like the previous lore. Other people do. It would appear that you actually agree with me after all, so I don’t know why you’ve been arguing with me for this long.
FYI to all – has anyone seen this interview before?
Apparently it was out in Aug 2017, but I’d not seen it until now. I’m not sure how much I trust Newsarama as a source, seeing as there are a few typos in the article. However, what I read pretty much summed up a few fears about the story. For example:
“I keyed in on Diana Burnwood as a kind of parallel to 47.”
Diana’s comic backstory is confirmed to have been written as a parallel to 47. No interesting contrast or juxtaposition here.
“He went from an unwilling participant to an almost fanatic”
– would anyone here describe Agent 47 as a fanatical killer?
“Agent 47 is part of the Institute of Human Betterment, a place just as menacing as it sounds. He was raised there, along with other members of his program, all of them tweaked by chemical and psychological means to be the ideal peak humans. Because that’s what you need in a murderer.”
“They’re both members of the same program at the Institute and were both raised there at the same time, so they bonded to one another.”
“All these subjects, like 47, are weapons that the Institute lends out to the shadowy organization behind it - Providence - to take care of problems they’re having.”
I really hope I’m wrong about this, but – by stating that they are subjects in a program, it sounds to me like they’re not supposed to be clones anymore. It would explain how 6 is supposed to be 47’s brother even though he doesn’t look like him. But if they change the fact that 47 is a clone… wow. That’s a core concept. I hope that’s not what’s meant here.
Interesting that Sebela states that Ort-Meyer is actually lending out the subjects. That’s a stark contradiction to C47. By saying Providence is “behind it”, does that mean that Providence is funding the Institute, or does it also mean that Providence had the idea in the first place? Goodbye, Five Fathers?
“What we’re doing is tracking her journey between the 14-year-old looking for vengeance and the grown woman doing a job exacting other peoples’ revenge.”
This confirms a lot of my problems with Diana’s new backstory. As I said before:
Sebela seems to say that the ICA takes on contracts for revenge, but that’s only true some of the time – like Death of a Showman. Oftentimes, a lot of targets in Hitman are simply targets because someone needs them out of the way. 47 and Diana are not in the business of killing people for revenge, they are in the business of killing people based on a contract.
Also, a tidbit on S2:
“we’re also working in tandem with the writers and developers on the next season of the game, so we’re trying to work things out to make sure no one steps on anyone else’s toes”
Pablo Ochoa was definitely a reference to Scarface, Codename 47 is basically a giant pile of movie references mashed together. Don Delgado doesn’t have any of the other references to Scarface (“Say hello to my little friend.”, a giant pile of cocaine, etc) but does have enough similarities to Say Hello To My Little friend that I have a theory that it started development as the Contracts version of the level - but they eventually reworked it into the Blood Money level we know today.
It doesn’t need to be disregarded, see the previously linked video with the creators talking about freedom to change the material. I also never said it wasn’t canon, I said it was not “original lore” as part of the bigger conversation on how Hitman lore has always changed from game to game.
Literally every conceivable topic gets raised and has some discussion if you want to set the bar low enough, it does not make it true to say “the fandom” discussed it though. See earlier statement about how the views of my uncle (and his circle of friends who support this) and how absurd it would be to as “Australians believe they are going to be Catholic Saints”
Or like saying that the Fandom has long wondered if Rex Stanton is the Johnny Fountain of the Delgados based off the photo in Fernando’s study. Or saying that the fandom has speculated and discussed the basis behind the cheering FBI agents in the A New Life easter egg (Can you explicitly prove they haven’t?)
See earlier point about super assassins and helpless damsels. Diana’s badassery occurs when she has actively worked to create a scenario where she has a distinct advantage on her opponents. That’s not unreasonable that she gets the advantage in that scenario, nor unreasonable that she’s ruthless and brutal given she’s still emotionally messed up from the incident and not really giving a shit about anyone weeks later.
That’s reasonably consistent with a persona who becomes an ICA Handler, ie makes a living analyzing situations and scenarios so she can provide relevant intelligence and equipment for her agent - allowing him to make the most out of an opportunity.
People Diana gets the jump on in the comic (to date): a paramedic when she first comes to and can’t control her rage, two absolute bottom tier goons who’s employer considers utterly disposable (the third runs like a coward), an unarmed business man who doesn’t get his hands dirty
They are really the lowest tier on the criminal pyramid, and their employer does not give a shit about about them being roughed up a bit by a teenage girl. She then promptly puts Diana in her place by showing her that she is inexperienced and has a long way to go:
Then later, Diana fights the same three goons with the tables turned - and this is how it goes:
Diana is not an assassin, she’s not even a decent combatant, she’s just willing to hurt people when she thinks it will get her closer to her goal, rather cunning and reckless (she’s still a little reckless in the games). She also is quite willing to bounce back, which is quite consistent with her profile in Absolution if you ignore all the blue blood nonsense.
We’ll find out in later issues when Diana manages to kill her empathy enough to pull the trigger, and under what circumstances.
Because I remember what she looked like in the shower in Absolution.
I did, you responded and haven’t addressed the ICA logo, why a monarch would call Diana directly (particularly if all their resources are back online), why the logo coincides with the location or who can Diana be reporting to within the ICA when she outlived everyone else.
Not only are you insisting that no one else can read implications, but you’re also now insisting that major pieces of lore have to be disregarded if they raise the possibility of the games being inconsistent.
See, to actually show things you need to show them and have explanations for them - not just go “um, someone agrees with me so you guys are wrong, very wrong unless you can find where it says explicitly otherwise at which point I will demand more evidence.”
Where is it explicitly stated she is a stand alone experiment? Why do you think that’s credible? Because you decide it? Again, this is how the weight of evidence works.
It is explicitly shown that Ort-Meyer, who was so far ahead in the field of building super soldiers that nobody can match him even years later, went through many, many iterations - because that’s how both science and building things works.
So, to propose that Victoria was manufactured first time means you should, if you want this to be taken seriously - drop the “its not explicitly stated I’m wrong” and perhaps look to see if there is any evidence to support your assumption:
If Victoria was not manufactured, like 47 was, then why is he so sympathetic to her and what was her life before that?
Does Victoria have any signs of a family, concern for them, mention of them, even a belief that she should have one?
How did the ICA labs make such a massive leap forward in genetic manipulation technology in a single iteration?
Why would Diana be so horrified at the ICA doing this if they managed to do it in a single iteration and only harmed literally one girl?
Who is this super genius that can leapfrog Ort-Meyer in one go and why are they never mentioned?
Again, it’s not really “lore” if you just decide something then insist that it’s indisputable until someone points out it’s “explicitly stated” otherwise. They only have so much time in the game and so they edit out everything that isn’t critical, and also tell a lot by implication because it’s incredibly boring if they just explicitly state literally everything (“Yes, yes, Diana does poop.”).
And see above, if you go with “no explicitly stated” you can claim pretty much anything is canon, particularly if you’re aware of the Evil Demon.
It’s already been pointed out that the best case scenario for the comic won’t inject any noteworthy amount of cash into the production, they’ll in fact be lucky if it makes back the expense of the staff having work with the comic creators to get it as well as it did. That should signal to you that you might want to check your assumptions rather than double down on them.
Furthermore I’m still waiting for you to provide an actual explanation of how the Witcher 3 was a cash grab.
Pretty simple: Enjoying the Hitman lore requires accepting it will change, there will be mistakes, corrections, retcons, etc The lore exists to serve the games and so the lore will be changed in order to serve the current game (whatever game that may be) - this is something IO-Interactive has always been pretty up front about.
Your attempt to assess the comic primarily by it’s doing this is and not doing the opposite (ie slavishly adhering to a particular interpretation of lore and focusing fan service to people who like that lore) is very non-productive and part of a larger problem in the Hitman fandom in general. People getting angry at IO-Interactive for not making their “dream” product regardless of how unreasonable it is.
Furthermore the lore is actually a lot more interesting if you actually look at… .all of the lore. That means all the mistakes, contradictions, variants, potential interpretations and you consider influences from outside the material etc. For example the ICA communicating only via email in Codename 47 was probably due to IO-Interactive being a tiny studio, and not having the budget for extensive voice acting but it was probably also in part inspired by Assassins (1995) where the handler for the assassins communicates entirely by electronic means and responds to swearing with “That was no way to talk to a lady.” then is later revealed to be an old dude who was a former assassin himself.
The potential for that kind of reveal regarding Diana disappeared in Silent Assassin when started reading our briefings to us and being cordial and a lot more involved in the actual hits (The St Petersberg Stakeout). She became a much more serious version of Minnie from Gross Point Blank, 47 became more of a John Woo type with 2 Silverballers and the ICA completely (but without explicitly saying so) retconned their standards. The game also pretended that 47 finished C47 with a staggering amount of money instead of whatever he hadn’t spent (which even if you did flawlessly was not that much for the world he operates in)
Big changes, big reasons for them - a bunch of people had shit fits and left, so they’re not around to discuss it any more but a bunch of people accepted it. The game also had the ridiculous plothole of the Asylum being untouched, Lei Ling was horrifyingly recharacterized and the Jade Dragon showed up in Charlie Sidjan’s apartment for no real reason other than fan service. Smith changed from a hard as nails but not quite up to 47’s level agent to a comic relief alcoholic. Not so good reason for these changes, they just wanted to for convenience or whatever.
When you look at this sort of breakdown you can look at all kinds of things, like the ending of Contracts vs the ending of Club 27. 47 and Diana meet in person, this time it’s an airport instead of a plane, they use all the cinematography opportunities this affords, and it’s to provide a plot hook - but without a last minute reminder 47 is supposed to be after money etc. Same basic concept, but different options allow a very different execution.
The comic is not so well executed - but that’s likely more due to things like lack of experience, lack of budget and it being a secondary product rather than a central one. The early games were clumsy, there’s no reason not to expect the comics to be clumsy - particularly when they come from an indie studio. Still works as a means to communicate updates to the lore to people who are interested enough to buy it.
I do like the previous lore, but I also realize that it was a product of it’s time, not perfect and that IO-Interactive have always taken the approach that the current game is the top priority (which makes perfect sense from both a creative and commercial perspective). so I agree with them they need to be allowed to make changes in the service of that.
That’s um… not what that term means. Parallel is, in fact, very helpful for contrast and juxtaposition.
I’d say he has a fanatical dedication to his work, which is what they were saying.
Or alternatively, 47 is a clone and 6 is not - just like Judge Dread. There’s a lot of possibilities.
He doesn’t say that they only take them on for revenge, just that it’ll be a major factor in her motivation/focus in the sense of linking it to her plot arc.
Again, if you take the weight of evidence approach rather than “everything is x until I decide different” things become a lot more interesting - in the games and in the discussion.
Never saw this interview until now, but it tells us what we already know now.I still don’t like this comic but as far as Htiman stories go it, might be the best out of the worse. (The worse being God-Damnation.)
Not impossible but maybe too expensive for IOI at the time.
As I’ve said before, what’s unreasonable is the over the top, kick ass teenage girl. She wasn’t ready for the “lesson” from Savi, and she gets her ass kicked. But she was ready for the alley and has zero problems – not because this is realistic for an untrained 14 year old, but because it looks cool for the comic. The action here is over the top for entertainment purposes only, using the played out trope of vengeful orphan for Diana, who had so much more potential for an interesting backstory.
Not when you contrast her game motivations with her comic motivations. It is so very unlikely that a person who lost everything to contract killers would then be a handler for a contract killer (not to mention it’s the same contract killer!)
Telling Diana’s life story as a parallel to 47’s life takes away an awful lot of what made them different and interesting, and that’s not even touching upon the fact that their lives have now been intertwined from the very beginning.
She was 39 in Absolution, making her 46/47 in 2019. What’s wrong with that?
I did already – you might want to re-read my reply. I’ll quote myself instead of repeating:
Direct quote: “Almost all of our resources are online again.”
Diana also says she doesn’t know where 47 is. Is she lying? She tells 47 they’re the only ones left while she is trying to get him to see the urgency of the situation. Is she lying? She tells Cayne that she’s never killed a man before. Is she lying? Diana has shown herself to be an excellent liar. However, based on what she says to the “majesty” she is definitely not on her own.
None of this makes BM or Absolution contradict the other games, so I don’t know where you’re going with this.
It’s made very clear in Absolution that Victoria was manufactured. It’s even in the cutscene you linked. But as we have already established, being manufactured is not the same as being cloned. Also, if you re-read my replies, I very clearly said that Victoria is not a clone to my knowledge. We probably won’t ever find out if she was a clone, but as 47 destroyed the research that went into making her, there probably aren’t any other versions of Victoria out there. Who knows? But literally none of that contradicts the previous games either, which I think is the point you were trying to make.
Seeing as Victoria was Travis’ project, who knows? Just look at the experiments on Dexter’s Sanchez. Absolution shows us that ICA management were not aware of the programme. Even if we use your logic and say that they were, I still don’t see contradictions here. The ICA may have been digging into Ort-Meyer’s past experiments since the Asylum was discovered in C47. Who knows? It’s still not a contradiction.
It’s been speculated by some fans (am I allowed to say that?) that Diana cares about Victoria because she is reminded of 47 and what he went through. Diana does say that she knew 47 would “understand” and “do not let her turn into you” so she must know that Travis intended for Victoria to become a super assassin to rival 47’s skills, if not even replace him.
Ashford is amazed by how perfect Victoria is, although how perfect she is can definitely be argued as she relies on a radioactive flash drive to even walk a few feet. The character of Victoria is so terribly flawed that I’ve written essays in other threads about it. Seeing as she can’t do much on her own without her magic stick, it’s fair to say that whoever is behind her creation did not reach Ort-Meyer’s standards. Besides which, Absolution’s story is just plain terrible.
I’m not sure what you mean by this. The lore are the stories we have, from C47 to H6. This is the game lore. I’m not deciding anything – the stories of the games are the lore.
That’s terribly disappointing. So you think that the money the comic makes won’t even be of benefit to S2? If in that case, the whole point of the comic truly was to re-align and re-write the lore, I really wish they had given it to someone who knew the games.
Unfortunately – and I know this is going to be a shitty answer – but I’m not really in a position to talk more about that other than to say that one of my friends was a dev with CD Projekt. Again, I know that’s a shitty response, but it’s not really relevant to what we’re talking about now anyway as you don’t think the comic was a cash-grab to begin with.
But isn’t that a reboot? If it’s a reboot, then changing the lore is not a problem at all. If it’s a reboot, then my complaints would no longer be about inconsistencies with previous lore (although I would still complain that the story is bad).
You know, it’s funny that you mention that, because Sebela did say that he wants to try to please hardcore fans. Oh well.
You keep going back to this “it’s unreasonable” argument, but I really don’t agree. I agree that it would be unreasonable to tell a creator how to make their product. However, it’s not unreasonable to expect the comic to tie in with the game lore, as that is the reason the comic is being written. Having expectations and having standards are not unreasonable – otherwise there would be no such thing as a critique.
But I have. The points you’re making (such as emails versus phone calls) – none of those are contradictions. I’ve addressed this previously. For example, H6 is supposed to be a spy thriller in tone, which is vastly different to Absolution’s grindhouse. But H6 does not contradict Absolution, you see?
Oh, the games have a lot of fan service – I don’t think anyone would deny that? Still no contradictions though.
Yeah, that was sad. Do you think the torture broke him? Or they wanted him to be the comic relief, as you suggested? Honestly, if he’s that crap at his job I’m surprised the CIA hasn’t fired him by now. Although he did single-handedly manage to get 47 on board during BM, so maybe they cut him some slack. Still no contradictions though.
True, and I love both of these scenes. I thought H6’s cutscenes were absolutely fantastic, to be honest. I also like how 47 and Diana are facing away from each other so an observer cannot immediately make a link between them, which is a nice comment on 47’s line from BM about it being dangerous to meet in person. Still no contradictions though.
Whose lack of experience? Do you mean lack of comic experience? Or do you mean Sebela’s lack of Hitman game experience?
Again, I’d have no problems with changes if a reboot was on the table. But IO stated that there is no reboot, and even used the legacy cinematic to tie all the games together in a neat line.
Parallel: “a way in which separate things or people are similar to each other”.
A parallel narrative, when two stories run in parallel, is when they are connected. They could be connected by a character, or events. In this case, Diana and 47’s stories run in parallel because they are connected by a theme, the theme being assassination. This is the same as a parallel plot, for example.
If you wanted to juxtapose, you’d go for something like a dual narrative – which, to be fair, can also be used to draw parallels, but more often it’s used to highlight differences. But it’s clear in the comics that 47 and Diana’s stories are connected, and Sebela says it himself in that interview.
I hope so. I’d hate to see that bit of lore re-written too.
He does say that Diana chooses the hits that 47 takes, and that Diana in the games is “doing a job of exacting other people’s revenge”. Are you assuming that he means only sometimes? Maybe. Do you think Diana makes sure that none of the targets have children before she sends 47 out? Maybe. Or do you think she doesn’t care? Because game Diana doesn’t care, but comic Diana should care.
I agree – Damnation made 47’s character so very, very strange. And addicted to pain killers?
Off the topic, I thought that was a pretty interesting concept, 47 getting addicted to Blood Money’s painkillers. I felt this was a great idea and attempt to show, even JUST a minuscule human side to 47, and that’s all we really need to be honest.
Not too overboard like Absolution, anyway. It was done very awkwardly, but I know it could’ve been done pretty good.
The Hitman series is…still a work in progress. They’re still trying figure out the characters even now, so I kind of understand why the writers went that route. Don’t approve of the result but I think I get it.
Do you mean for Damnation? As Raymond Benson was a James Bond writer, I assumed he kept the same style.
If you mean the comic, yeah I have no problem changing lore if it’s a reboot, but I agree that I’d like it to be done well too.
I don’t know, I thought it made him too much of a Max Payne character, which is why I think they decided to cut the drinking/suicide scene from Absolution because it was just too much. Plus those Damnation internal monologues… omg.
The comic, the novels, the games…pretty much all of them. The series more or less started on the “rule of cool” to begin with. I don’t think they really knew where they wanted to go with it exactly. But as it goes on and on, they are trying to develop a better structure and story for it and unfortunately, they will drop the ball trying to figure it out. Just hope it doesn’t happen too often.
Oh, totally. Like you said, the first game was just to be cool. 47 only had a barcode to look cool. They even wanted him to have hair, but it didn’t work. But, I am hopeful that the games will continue to be good. Absolution definitely dropped the ball with storytelling, but I thought H6 did a good job.
wow, This just baffles my mind. How drastically they changed the core characters in this new story. Looks like as if they ignored hell alot, just to fit in with their bond vibe.
Getting headaches reading this.
See this is not actually an explanation - it’s just you trying to state your opinion as fact and expect me to agree with you. That’s not conversation and if it’s your only interest in the thread then you shouldn’t be posting here.
That’s unlikely gives it more potential to be interesting and provides an interesting challenge for the writer, though to be honest it doesn’t even seem that unlikely. Diana could take the event as a personal slight against her by the world, or as a lesson from the world about how it works. Many people who suffer tragedies go on to inflict them on others.
How? Diana’s never claimed to have had an easy life, nor to never have killed anyone or hurt anyone. Her history is largely a bunch of unreliable ICA files that mostly blacked out.
She looked 27, which would have been the correct age for Codename 47 but a little old to be beginning her career as Handler. Except in concept art, where she looked 39 but with dark hair. So it’s wildly inconsistent internally and externally.
Yes, she doesn’t need to be on her own if she has subordinates. If she’s not the top spot in the ICA, then she shouldn’t be talking to “your majesty” because that’s someone else’s job. That’s pretty basic right there, if everyone gets to talk to anyone the ICA does business with then secrecy flies out the window. Furthermore, how exactly does Diana “lie” to the Franchise about them wiping out the ICA?
Also why are they branded as the property of the Royal Family of Denmark?
Also glad to see you coming around to the “Diana has probably killed” side.
No, I covered that above: In the Hitmanverse they refer to manufactured people as “clones” even if they’re not an actual clone of an actual person. 47 is not a clone, nor is 17, but they are referred to as “clones” because we do not have a short term that is easily parsed for “artificially manufactured human” which is not at all a “test tube baby” as you originally proposed. Again, this boils down to your obsession with the idea your preferred interpretation is a sacred text that should never be questioned - not even by the source material.
Nope, if I have to explain everything - so do you.
A clearly mutated man who was ultimately still no match for 47 despite how much he was deformed.
It’s absolutely a contradiction if you actually pay attention to the source material.
Ort-Meyer’s research was unmatchable - the Franchise coveted it badly they went to war and ripped ICA apart looking for the key component(s) they were missing and ultimately grabbed Diana to make her turn on 47 so they could grab a bone marrow sample and destroy the rest of him.
Now Travis shows up with technology that shits all over Ort-Meyer’s greatest achievements and literally nobody cares, it’s just a thing he managed to do with so little resources that he could allegedly sneak it under ICA management’s role (and Diana was somehow unable to bring it to their attention, even though she gets direct calls from the Queen of Denmark).
If you applied the same expectations of consistency of “keeping things special” to his premise as you want to apply to the comic then this is, technically speaking a plothole the size of Texas that pisses all over the core concept of 47’s origin, the main plot line of Blood Money and Contracts. Nobody gets upset though 'cause it was pretty clear from the get go that Absolution was a grindhouse adventure that was not to be taken terribly seriously from a continuity/writing perspective.
You can just say “I speculate” or “Maybe”, but that’s fine. Why should Diana care about Victoria because of that? 47 and Diana are coworkers, not family - she also didn’t recruit 47 in until the ICA sent him to kill her, even though she has him on speed-dial so to speak.
If you take the Blade Runner stance, it’s actually a benefit since it provides another means of control during training - which is kind of handy if you’re dealing with a killing machine of immense skill and intelligence. Otherwise there’s no reason they couldn’t just implant the thing in her.
Lore is not Law. Lore is not magical sacred text. Lore comes from stories told, stories are told using many tools which include reader interpretation, storytelling by implication, storytelling by omission, etc. This is most obvious in games that revel in this (Dark Soul with it’s mysteries lost in time, Mass Effect with its branching possibilities) but applies to straight forward games like Hitman.
Until Silent Assassin came out, nobody could confirm if Diana Burnwood was actually a woman. Until Contracts came out, nobody knew anything about her appearance (when we saw her hands). Since there was never a proper follow up we will never find out whether Albert Fournier was actually a member of The Franchise or a pawn, whether Diana was actually caught by the Franchise or whether she deliberately offered herself to capture so she could weaponize 47, etc.
We know that Blood Money never accounted for 47 receiving a truly staggering amount of money under his seat after Curtain Down, so that creates a grey area. We don’t have an answer to what became of Victoria (is she living with Diana, did she go off to become a vigilante, etc). Similarly we don’t know what become of Lee Hong’s empire, who the Mystery Man is, where the nuke from Plutonium Runs Loose finally ended up (in C47, not that contradictory version in Contracts), etc.
On top of this, there are matters of interpretation and belief: Is the ICA owned by the Royal Family of Denmark? Was this an idea that IO-Interactive played with and then discarded? Was A Vintage Year originally a version of Say Hello To My Little friends then repurposed for Blood Money?
On top of this, there is the batshit stuff. Why are there Christmas puddings at the tables in A Vintage Year? Did Vinnie even have kids? Was that panty-sniffing FBI guy a pedophile? Are the joke articles in Blood Money supposed to be reflective of the world of Hitman or were they just tossed in there? Is there really nobody on the streets of Hong Kong? Did Lei Ling completely reinvent herself between C47 and Silent Assassin? Is nobody ever going to notice the barcode?
What this creates is situation where everything has varying levels of ambiguity and interpretation. Thus the lore is not so much a thing carved in stone, but rather a general interpretation based off facts found in items and the weight assigned to facts. For example, I may disregard the Christmas cakes in A Vintage Year as a production error, assume that the size of the cocaine lab was a concession due to resources and assume that the depiction of the Delgados in HITMAN is accurate, but that Blood Money wasn’t capable of showing it at the time.
Someone else may come to the same conclusion, but take the line about “the insane one” to suggest that the Delgados have a history of eccentricity, therefore they were serving Christmas cakes for their own eccentric reasons and that the cocaine lab was for their top 1% of customers, with other labs spread out throughout Chile for the minions.
Someone else may ignore the Christmas cakes, assume the lab was accurate and the limit of the Delgados enterprise - 47 was sent there for revenge reasons rather than business, and that HITMAN just reinvented them from scratch. All three are solid options.
No worries. I wouldn’t want anyone to get in trouble over their NDA.
Either HITMAN is a soft reboot or the lore was never very stable in the first place. They’re both solid options. If it’s a reboot then I would consider Silent Assassin and Absolution to also be reboots.
The declaration of a reboot isn’t always a necessity, unless it’s really, really blatant (for example at the end of the first novel of A House of Cards, the main character committed suicide when confronted - so for him to continue in the second novel the author obviously had to clarify he’d changed his mind on that). Nor is it really a free pass to go nuts.
Hitman is a brand, and a brand is a promise. No amount of stressing “it’s a reboot” would convince me to support a (non-parody) Hitman game where the main character is still called 47 but is a young kid with blond hair who travels from club to club dropping hit tracks while trying to avoid anyone discovering he’s actually under eighteen (and therefore not legally a man). I might like the game, but I wouldn’t take it seriously if they told me it’s a canon part of the series.
Likewise I didn’t really need them to announce that Silent Assassin was a reboot for me, because it was pretty clear in the first ten minutes of demo gameplay that everything had changed. Same with Absolution.
This is part of the challenge of long running series: The sensibilities of seventeen years ago are very different to those today.
If I want to watch Ronin (1998) I have to load it up on DVD or Bluray… like it’s the 1800’s or something. Do kids even know who Charles Bronson is these days? Can you believe the same Leon: The Professional and The Transporter 3 both have Luc Besson as a writer? How far has Duke Nukem fallen in the public eye?
On top of that, fans age as the series ages. When I first got into Hitman I had just turned 20, wanted to be an edgelord and didn’t know shit about narrative structuring, other works, political history, etc. So to me Codename 47 seemed pretty shit hot, and I was kind of disappoint Charlie Sidjan’s bodyguards had their tops on while hanging out in his hot tub. These days I’m aware of a lot more issues, it takes a lot more to impress me story wise and I eye roll at gratuity.
Obviously some of the fandom doesn’t want anything to change, or at least not chance since their favorite title, but generally speaking the wider audiences change with the times and if you’re going to make a game that has to sell millions of copies over seasonal release and deal with the current variety of games journalism and critique. Nobody would take a Hitman game that had the old issue of 47 being unable to step up onto a sidewalk if the gutter is to deep, they’re not going take it seriously if it takes the old lore too seriously.
At this point with media and marketing, he’s basically obligated to say that whether he believes it or not. This is because generally nobody has any faith in any product that is not supposed to be good to the “hardcore” fanbase, regardless of how ridiculous it’d be.
Realistically this is a difficult statement to qualify, I mean how do you even qualify a hardcore fan? Does my being a member and moderator on this forum automatically qualify me as one? If so, how does one reconcile that I don’t like Contracts while many people who are otherwise “hardcore fans” do? How does one set a line on who is an isn’t in even simpler terms? Can you be a hardcore fan if you joined at Silent Assassin? Contracts? Blood Money? Absolution? HITMAN? Does it matter if you went back and played the games earlier?
It’s basically all a mess and basically him saying “I want to do a good job.”
Personally I think that they decided that the game needed some comic relief (basically every game but Contracts has had that) so that it didn’t get too dark and monotone - because if he’d come out of events that messed up he would have been given a not-generous pension or sent to do data entry at the CIA.
All of the above really. In order to completely avoid the inexperience issue:
The combination of IO-Interactive having someone on the game writing team who had also significant experience writing comics, AND Dynamite Entertainment having an available writer who was also a hardcore Hitman fan.
Enough time and money where they could afford a lot of conferencing where both parties could explain their view, then go away and reassess and come back with proposals.
Neither of which is realistically likely.
Yes that is, but there is still hefty Juxtaposition: Diana enters the World of Assassination when it destroys her family and leaves her without guidance or support, she becomes “herself” by finding guidance and support. 47 is brought into the World of Assassination with an excess of guidance and support, he becomes “himself” by rebelling against this.
It is not the same Juxtaposition as one would draw based off the summary in Absolution’s version, but it is still a juxtaposition with a lot of contrasts etc. Including perhaps the most important one: Diana chose this life, 47 did not get any choice in it.
I feel that Diana’s job, by necessity and like all other jobs, involves a lot of other stuff. Meetings with peers, meetings with superiors, typing up reports, quality checking work, etc. However, I also feel that “revenge” factors into most of the jobs the ICA takes to varying degrees. There are pure revenge jobs, like Club 27 & The Sarajevo Six, and there are “this is mostly business” jobs like A Gilded Cage & The Showstopper, and there are the odd jobs like World of Tomorrow.
Generally speaking, you don’t shell out the kind of money it takes to get Diana’s attention unless you’re very, very motivated and your target is very, very hard to touch.
The comic Diana may very well not care either: After all her parents weren’t untouchables like the ICA’s targets, they were regular people who had an understandable grievance with a corporation; and Diana seems very comfortable with the notion that if you live by the sword, you die by the sword. On top of that, comic Diana doesn’t focus her hate at the individuals who planted the bomb, she focuses her hate at the people who made the decision to remove her family.
So it’s not really a matter of worrying about do the targets have children (certainly didn’t help Vinnie), but rather is the job going to be done professionally. No messy car bombs that inflict collateral damage everywhere and leave shattered children waiting to be exploited. No contracts against people who are just suing a company over a valid grievance. No taking sides in wars, enabling global destabilization, etc.
Power. Consequences. Which is pretty much in line with fluff text in the original Codename 47 manual.
It’s understandably to have a reflex assumption that losing her family in a tragedy to criminals would make Diana become like Batman, but this kind of back story also extends to The Punisher, Elektra, and an endless number of other revenge driven personality types.
My personal hope is they will leave establishing that Diana concludes that the world requires order and rules, but not society’s rules and not the criminal elite’s rules - different rules. The basis of their partnership then becomes they 47 and Diana’s rules overlap enough that they trust one another’s judgement on all the important issues, and so are essentially back-to-back against the world at all times - even while taking very different approaches and philosophical routes to reach their rule books.
That allows for a lot of drama, intrigue, interesting scenarios, additional characters etc without compromising the core points of the relationship.
This one single problem with the comic is not my only problem with the comic, and not my only interest in the thread either. I would prefer to have a civilised discussion. I’ve already explained the problems with Diana’s portrayal at great length – to explain it yet again would just be repetitive.
By the way, you will hopefully recall that I already stated this is my opinion on the comic, and that you have your opinion on the comic
This could easily be a whole other discussion, but I assume in this instance you mean victims of personal tragedies, such as abuse or assault, as such people often internalise those experiences and repeat them in their own relationships. That really doesn’t work in Diana’s case, as her tragedy was a singular defining moment, caused by people we now see her seek active revenge against, so to turn around and then become the driving force of such tragedy for others means her character must have a change of motivations once again. Will we see this in the comic? You think it’s unlikely that Diana will be brought to that point, as do I, just based on what we’ve seen so far. But we still have four comic issues to go.
Well, she did actually, in Blood Money – but I’ve always assumed she was lying to Cayne as she lied to him about everything else.
Diana could easily have had trauma in her past – in fact, she clearly did have some trauma based on her previous backstory. Once again, you are reaching for hyperbole in an attempt to dismiss the argument. No one is saying that if Diana wasn’t an orphan, then her life must have been wonderful. As I’ve already discussed with regard to the lore in Absolution, there are many intriguing subtleties that could have made for great exploration as a contrast to 47’s life, instead of wiping the slate clean to make her a kickass orphan. I think that trope is pretty boring.
You can say she looked 27 in Absolution if you want, but she was 39. So… your opinion is moot here. She would have been 27 in the H6 Prologue, and her appearance fits that age range there.
Why would it be someone else’s job? Whoever the “majesty” is, they ask specifically about Agent 47. Diana is his handler.
Did I say she did?
They are? Do you mean the logo? I already suggested that the ICA could be headquartered in Denmark. I wouldn’t be surprised if they were founded there, seeing as they technically were founded there because of where IO are based! The ICA logo is clearly modelled after the MI5 logo, but while MI5 is British, the ICA has always been international.
I never said Diana had not killed before. It seems to me that you’re trying very hard to pretend my arguments are something they’re not.
Actually, you were the one who brought up test tube babies as you quoted Absolution, when Dexter tells Victoria they grew her “in a test tube” – and I stated that test tube babies are not the same as clones. I also said to you that we don’t know if Victoria is a clone, because we are not told that – but it’s a lot more likely that she isn’t. I don’t know what you’re gaining by replying to me if you’re not going to read my replies.
I’m not asking you to explain anything though? I’ve simply been stating why I think the comics are bad, and you’ve been going through every Hitman game since asking me to explain anything you think is a contradiction.
You really think so? This would require us to debate 47 versus Victoria. 47 doesn’t need a USB stick to stand up straight, so I think OM’s achievements are safe.
We all know Absolution’s story was terrible. It was a real missed opportunity as well. But it still doesn’t contradict the previous games. For example, plenty of people, including myself, were really disappointed that Diana had gone from this brilliant puppet master in BM to a sexy catalyst for 47 in Absolution. That was some terrible storytelling. I’m sure there was a collective sigh of relief when we saw that Diana in H6 had returned to form. So I’m not sure why you don’t understand that people would be disappointed by bad storytelling in the comic, as it is setting up the new lore for the upcoming season.
It’s made clear by BM at least that Diana cares about 47. It’s made clear in Absolution that 47 cares about Diana. And by H6, even Providence seems to be aware that “in his own special way, he cares about you. And vice versa.” So I don’t know why you’d have a problem with that.
I think you want to make this an Absolution discussion rather than a comic discussion? Maybe you think it would be easier, because we all agree that Absolution’s story was bad?
Oh, of course. That’s why outright contradictions are a problem in an attempt to align the lore, as it removes a lot of the possibilities and raises a lot of questions that might be difficult/impossible for IO to answer as they attempt to tie everything up in a neat bow. It’s one of the bigger problems the comic poses. That’s why I still think that a reboot would be the neatest way to achieve want they want to achieve – but perhaps they are worried about long-term fans being turned off by the concept of a reboot.
The interesting thing about this is that IO said more than once that H6 is definitely not a reboot. So they were blatant in their non-declaration, if you know what I mean. I thought that was a bit strange as it feels like a reboot is the intention with the comics.
I made a mistake actually, he said “diehard fans”. Still not something easy to qualify, but I think we can take it to mean he wanted long-term fans of Hitman to like the comic. Which was probably something he felt obligated to say, as he’s not a fan of Hitman himself, so how would he know what Hitman fans would want, like or expect?
It’s partly why I wonder why they’d choose to go the comic route at all, if such problems were foreseen.
That is something I have always liked about the differences between Diana and 47, and why Diana seems more amoral than 47 in a lot of ways as he is more trapped by circumstance than she is. It’s also why I thought her original backstory had potential for more meat, as Diana being thrust into the world of contract killers by having her parents taken out when she was a child makes it less of a choice, and more something she was forced to deal with.
Of course, she didn’t have to go looking for revenge – she chose to do that herself. But she was a victim of circumstance. I thought her other backstory made her character more interesting as she was not a victim like 47 – instead, perhaps even someone who was seduced by the power of the ICA, or someone who even saw them as honourable as per her speech in Absolution, or someone who had little regard for other people due to her own station in life, and had no problem stepping over them.
Actually, this is something I’ve wondered about. Do you think Cross would still have been a target even if it turned out that he didn’t kill Highmore? I think he would have been. I don’t think the ICA cares whether he was guilty or not, they were just getting paid. Same with The Sarajevo Six, in the end it’s Koyama who’s been ordering the hits as an elaborate redemptive suicide, and I don’t think the ICA care about that either. It seems the ICA don’t care much at all about the reason for a contract, unless it’s something that would knock them out of their neutral stance, which must be important as an international agency. It makes me wonder how they managed to pull off the Strandberg job, as surely murdering someone under embassy refuge is a bit political.
That was my concern too. Especially as it doesn’t seem that game Diana is driven by revenge at all.
It will be great if it gets to that point, but seeing as we can only base this on what we’ve seen so far – issues one and two – my expectations have been lowered. There have been too many mistakes and clichés so far for me to hope that the comics will become clever over the next 4 issues. I mean, they might? But it would be a drastic change. So far, I think it’s badly written, and it would be unusual to change tack at this point.
Well yes, given she was outright lying about having killed 47 - we can assume she was lying to her enemy in that case.
Protection of information, maintenance of relationships, compartmentalization of responsibilities, etc. The simplest being that when Diana is on the phone talking with third parties, she can’t be researching potential jobs, handling logistics for 47 and his gear, talking 47 through his new cover identity, etc.
On top of that, basic plausible deniability. If an ICA agent is caught, they have only the word of their handler what the real motivation behind the hit was. If the handler is caught, they have only the word of another cog in the machine and know nothing more than they need to. A handler who liaises with third parties directly, knows them by voice, was in a direct conversation with them, etc is a liability in the event of a job going sideways.
Remember, secrets are their stock and trade.
Yes. See the point of the crown and the UK on MI5’s logo is to state that they are in the service of Her Majesty, the Queen of England. Hence, “On Her Majesty’s Secret Service” and this delightful promo for the 2012 Olympics, featuring Daniel Craig and Elizabeth of Windsor:
The inclusion of the Eye of Providence, is a statement they are both Christian and knowledgeable. The I, O, I means IO-Interactive… because Codename 47 was never really meant to be read that deeply.
Anyway, the skull and crossbones in the middle can be read one of two ways, both of which create contradictions and problems.
They can be read as founded by a dead monarch, which combined with the DK would mean the ICA was founded by some King or Queen of Denmark in accordance with their vision/goal, but are no longer (at least officially) linked. In which case it’s difficult to read Diana calling anyone on the phone “Your majesty” other than the Queen of Denmark.
The skull and crossbones with the crowns signifies that the ICA are the killers of kings and queens, quite a bold statement to make but one appropriate to that of an assassination agency… except that it would mean that the literal last place on Earth that Diana should have an office is Copenhagen. When you call yourself a monarch killer and put some country’s stamp in there, you ready to start some shit.
Of course, it is extremely unlikely that IO-Interactive intended this in the original design of the logo. Codename 47 was made by the rule of cool. It’s more likely that during the making of Blood Money someone noticed what the logo actually says under a heraldic reading - and thought it would be cool if it turned out that the independent and politically neutral ICA turned out to be in the service of Margrethe II of Denmark.
Blood Money doesn’t do as well as they want, property gets shelved, time for Absolution comes out and they decide that since Margrethe II of Denmark is not exactly an international celebrity who everyone will recognize, it’s probably not worth getting her blessing to pursue this angle further; ICA becomes a massive PMC (since those are now a standard boogie man to use in modern settings).
Pretty sure that needing to keep a USB stick on you at all times is a hell of a lot better than standing out in any crowd (47) or having a combination of degenerative conditions and standing out in any crowd (the Parchezzis); particularly since the payoff is she gets all that strength, power, preprogrammed combat training, etc and still gets to look “normal”.
She wasn’t really thrust into it though, she was orphaned and had all the potential to make whatever life she wanted for herself. Sure her support network was shit, but she was old enough and capable enough she could work around that. She could have become a cop, she could have become a business woman, a trophy wife, a porn star, nobody was going to stop her. Instead she actively sought out someone in the criminal underworld to teach her how to hurt people.
Her backstory in the Absolution file reads like she just got into it because she was raised as a rich sociopath then took the highest paying job offer after college (and that would make the ICA so corporate and so boring)
Probably depends largely on the circumstances and the “heat” involved. After all, part of retribution kills or simply limiting yourself to killing bad people means few people hold it against you.
Had Cross been a beloved rock star and it was simply Jessica’s family didn’t want him touching their daughter, the ICA would probably consider it beneath them to get involved in a petty personal feud that would result in a massive manhunt.
Had it turned out Cross didn’t really kill her, she’d jumped to spite him over something (cheating on her, whatever) and there was still the general understanding it was his fault, then the ICA probably would have decided near enough was good enough. (Kind of like the Sensation)
I think the idea is that Strandberg was not an agent of Sweden’s government and largely not really beloved by his people, they were only giving him sanctuary on a temporary basis while they work out the legalities and formalities of handing him back over to government of Morocco (hence why Providence needed to enact a coup in order to ensure that doesn’t happen). Strandberg’s death therefore, becomes convenient not to investigate and to simply close up quickly as possible.
Well the alternative is both more expensive and less satisfying for creators and fans alike. Ordinarily on a project like this if they were going to do this kind of background work then the team would do it in a writing room, with a whiteboard, post-its, wikis, etc and then maybe dig out a bunch of it for an art book later if the game sells well enough.
This way IO-Interactive gets to use this as a way to put it out there, see what people think, see how the comic team interpret it, see how they like reading it in comic format six months after the idea, etc. If they really don’t like something, they address it in the game or just leave it behind (like the “your majesty” conversation) or reinvent it.
Plus it might even make enough for them to afford some dinners for when the team are working late, some drinks to celebrate going live and putting together another “making of” feature thing that hopefully won’t be iOS exclusive.
By that reasoning, it seems even less likely that Diana could have inherited the top position at the ICA and continue to act as 47’s handler. We could always assume, if this was true, that she decided to step down in order to remain as 47’s handler once she got hold of him again (that is, if she ever truly lost track of him). But, seeing how the ICA are international with many cogs in the wheel, it doesn’t seem likely that she suddenly became top dog within the Agency once the Franchise were finished.
Well now, this definitely is a perfect example of something that follows C47’s rule of cool. Having IOI in the logo especially is similar to those little acknowledgements or hat tips we talked about earlier. The logo was based on MI5’s but as I’ve already said, the ICA is an international agency, and always has been. MI5 is not international – but they have a cool logo. If IO had copied the design with the purpose of having the ICA in the service of the Queen of Denmark, then it’s doubtful the ICA would have been called the International Contract Agency at all, with ties to major governments across the world, and a strong stance on remaining neutral.
Now you have me hoping that’s true, because that’s kind of awesome even if it would be the most non-covert way to do business.
47, for the player, definitely requires our suspension of disbelief, because of course he stands out. But, in the world of the games, he is supposed to be the best at social stealth. He is supposed to blend in seamlessly with the people around him – even though they’re surprised in C47’s Hong Kong that a westerner was sent.
The whole USB stick for Victoria debate is kind of pointless because Absolution’s logic was so all over the place anyway, but one of the problems is that it didn’t even function as a control switch for her abilities – as in her speed, strength etc. Instead, it seemed to be the only thing between her functioning at all and falling into a coma. Then again, we see her contemplating throwing it over the balcony at the end of the game, so who knows what that thing really does. Victoria is wearing her USB stick when she’s alone with Dexter on the helipad, and she can’t do anything against him.
I have to disagree here. Diana was supposedly scouted by the ICA for a few years before recruitment, so something must have happened there to catch their eye. As for the ICA being corporate, I kind of always liked that idea. We hear the sounds of a running office behind Diana in Blood Money, they have nice, shiny buildings, even 47 wears his suit to work (although clearly that’s nothing to do with the ICA). This whole corporate image was such a sharp contrast to the dirty work of assassination, which was pretty cool, I thought. It also made it so clinical, in a way –
like it’s just another business. But, again, that’s my personal opinion. I really enjoy the concept of seeing how the world of assassination operates from both sides.
I don’t think the only alternative to a comic book would be an art book. We’ve seen novels and movies as unofficial tie-ins before – although they have been terrible as well. It seems that whenever someone hears “video game tie-in” they immediately jump to action and explosions as the only way to convey a story. I’m interested to see how the Hitman TV show will play out, even though at this stage it’s hard to know if IO will have any involvement in that at all other than to say “yeah, go ahead”.
Here’s hoping. If the schedule keeps going as it is, we won’t know how this wraps up until April. But I am curious to see how Sebela’s comment about not stepping on each other’s toes with regard to S2 development pans out for the game story.
Ain’t this crap bother anyone? If ica is such as the omnipotent organization as was described to us since h2sa why they could send any asian to hong kong or secario to columbia? It s not blending it is f… stickng out.
I guess social stealth means to be among people while stealth means to be invisible.
The same paradox i can find in bourne series. in the second movie he has to kill his first target in hotel and no one should know he was there. In the first movie Conklin says that we sent you to be invisible. Invisible means to rent a yacht as Kain, to live in France as Kain. I guess it is very invisible.