I think it’s quite possible that most of the accident kills that 47 pulls off are believed by others to be intentional murder, but they cannot be proved to be such and there is no suspect to pin the murder on. The targets are generally people who have legitimate targets on their backs. Their deaths can hardly be surprising.
Yeah, but that’s conspiracy theory stuff that happens for every event that happens, no matter what. It’s what law enforcement says and believes of the cases that matters to 47 and the ICA, as well as what the preferences of the client are. For example, Cobb is believed to have been deliberately killed, despite no evidence of any sort being found to say one way or another, per Grey’s intention, so it was ruled an accident. Sure, it turned out to actually be true, but the people spouting about that have nothing to base it on.
It’s not “impossible things,” just actual events/ people that are connected through visual metaphor.
Yes, Agent 47 never saw The Partners at the bank. But he did meet all of them. And they discovered them through the bank, a place he has also been. In this case, visually/ literally putting them together speaks to the more figurative connection they have.
Lucas Grey being on the Catwalk is not implying he was actually there, but instead is using visual metaphor to imply his connection to the mission as the Shadow Client.
47 never actually saw Lucas Grey in a coffin, but he did see Janus’ coffin on the Isle of Sgail. Janus was a key figure to 47 and Grey’s connected past. The death of Janus was cathartic for Grey, and potentially for 47 as well (it’s heavily suggested that 47 remembers his past after the Ether Antidote). With Grey in Janus’ coffin, we have a metaphorical visualization of the literal connection between the lives and deaths of Janus and Grey.
Within the sequence, Agent 47 seems to believe Diana really betrayed him, and that she chose power. Lucas Grey, now deceased, convinces him otherwise. This isn’t because Lucas Grey literally convinced him, but is a sign that 47 is using his memory of Grey as a voice of reason.
“Impossible” in the exact way they are portrayed, yes, and you say as much in your reply.
And that was my entire point. You say that all of those images are the combination in 47’s mind of people, places and events but none of them are literally as shown - they’re metaphors and visualizations of connections.
That all implies that the light rig too is not meant to be taken literally as shown. It is also a metaphor for (probably) a lifetime of accidents and murders.
Being a Paris frantic i can confirm that he is mentioned, along with Strandburg by 2 female NPCs right next to the little shed and Waiter starting location. Though i don’t know if it is random what one’s you get as i never stick around
Yeah, what @Dribbleondo said applies in this case; it’s just an Easter egg to raise the eyebrows of players listening in, just like Diana saying in Mendoza that Blake Dexter was a parallel universe. It’s not serious conversation meant to show what the actual outcome of things are. Plus, let’s not forget that what is released to the public in the Hitman universe is often misleading to avoid embarrassing the memories of certain targets; Rico Delgado’s bio says that his uncle Fernando died in an accident and that that’s the official record, despite the legacy trailer showing 47 strangling him with the fiber wire. One of these portrayals of what happened is false, or they both are. IOI contradict themselves constantly, and it is my belief that they do this deliberately to keep fans guessing and avoid a canon scenario to any individual target’s kill, except for super important ones like Ort-Meyer and Sergei and such.
So those two NPCs talking about the light rig falling on Novikov could easily be just them listening to rumors and gossip, or perhaps that was even the official story told even though it’s not what really happened. In fact, given what those two guards were talking about in Paris, it’s not out of the question to think that the light rig eventually did fall on the stage after 47 had already left, and when Novikov was later found dead, the two stories mixed due to word of mouth gossip and people started thinking Novikov was also killed in the collapse when neither he nor 47 were involved at all.
2 Likes
Ah, so for clarification:
Nearly every “thing” (people and places), in isolation, is not impossible (i.e. we are not shown individual impossible things, like a hypercube or endless looping stairs or cold fire).
The greatest piece of truly impossible imagery is the ocean of blood. This is a surreal depiction of something that did not occur within 47’s history.
A lesser secondary piece: while 47 has seen Diana dance, he hasn’t seen The Constant dance. While The Constant might not Dance with Diana, the act of The Constant dancing is not itself “impossible.”
All other things, in isolation, are real people and places from 47’s history.
My previous example was:
47 actually met The Partners, but never all together. 47 actually went to New York, but never saw them there.
In isolation, they are not impossible visuals. However, once together, the scene becomes anachronistic, which is “impossible,” and therefore can be interpreted as figurative imagery.
Similarly:
If you remove Lucas Grey from the Light Rig scene, then there is no anachronism or “impossible visual,” and therefore no metaphor.
The light rig falling on Novikov could very well happen. It’s only when Lucas Grey is added that the scene exceeds reality. Since Grey being there would be anchronistic, it can be assumed that his depiction is the primary visual metaphor, referencing his connection to the event.
My greater point is:
Based on this consistent visual metaphor, the things that make nearly every set-piece “impossible” are anachronisms; e.g., people who never met, characters who are dead, events that occurred at different times.
From this consistent structure, there is no way to rule that the Light Rig crushing Novikov must also be metaphorical, because Novikov was in Paris with the Light Rig. Without Grey, there is no metaphor, and therefore the light rig cannot be ruled as strictly metaphorical too.
1 Like
I’d say 47 seeing this scene unfold from directly in front of Novikov, an angle he couldn’t have been at and therefore could not remember even if he did kill Novikov that way, lest he be crushed too, comes across as fairly metaphoric to me.
47 might as well be just blind and is led by the omnipotent third-person through his adventures.
1 Like
I would accept the argument that we cannot say that the light rig must be metaphorical (although I content that is strongly suggested) but we similarly cannot say that the light rig must be canonical. The evidence provided, such as it is, cannot be used to determine how Novikov died one way or another.
Therefore, any discussion about how Novikov died cannot use the dream sequence as evidence for or against.
This is probably the most fair and neutral stance any of us can take on the matter.
2 Likes
I entirely agree! 
I’m “fairly certain” an NPC says something like “Did you hear about the Sanguine boss crushed by a faulty light rig” or “crushed at his own fashion show”
However, as I currently cannot point to something specific (and could be misremembering information), it’s still in the air
Well, if you find that conversation, do bring it back and we should take a look/listen. Could change the argument if there is other evidence to consider.
I believe I already covered that possibility in regards to NPC chatter in my previous long post.
If it was the light rig, it happened in presence of like a hundret witnesses, recorded (see the NPCs near the cat walk with TV cameras) and probably streamed. If NPCs chat about this being the public story, it is also the actual story.
Though I see the possibility of the falling light rig and Novikov found dead elsewhere could happen and that gets mixed up. But I don’t think IO would include NPCs exposing lore that is untrue unless it is obviously untrue, like Fernando dying in an accident.
But, he could have died in an accident. That’s the thing; IOI contradicts themselves with past events, in a way that’s clearly them elbowing us in the ribs that they’re screwing with us.
If that conversation actually occurs in the game (I haven’t heard it so I’m not saying one way or another), there is probably enough evidence to say that if you, as a specific player, want to believe that’s how Novikov dies, you can support that. On the other hand, if you prefer to thing that he didn’t die that way, you’re supported to. There is no “canon” way that Novikov died given the disparity unless IOI add more information, which seems unlikely at this point.
3 Likes
Yup, that’s my ultimate stance: unless it directly conflicts with 47’s character (as the falling lights that kill a dozen people does), only major villains like Ort-Meyer and Dexter have canonical ways that they died, and the rest are whichever way you want… as long as it’s something 47 would actually do. Or perhaps, more accurately, not something he wouldn’t do.
2 Likes
I wandered around Bangkok Waiter starting location for a while, but couldn’t find any NPC that mentions both Novikov and Strandberg.
On Bangkok, there’s a couple that talks about Novikov possibly being killed by the Russian Mob or a Stalker. From the main entrance, this is to the right near a small lounge section. The woman is sitting (initially), and the man is standing.
For Strandberg, there are 2 guys that meet at the outdoor bar at the front and talk about Zaydan and Strandberg. One of them postulates that they were working together and trying to make the protestors attack the consulate so Zaydan could impose martial law.
They are right, but it shows that this information is not common public knowledge.
What this conversation confirms is that Strandberg does do the interview, which means Agent 47 must disguise as the Camera Man, as the other guy never shows. It doesn’t confirm that he is killed during the interview or has the moose dropped on him, as you can let the interview play out and kill him after.
As far as I know, there isn’t a single NPC that talks about both 
2 Likes