They make them so microscopic now though we wouldn’t even see it
Idk it may just be me but, I’d rather see 47 with a phone in 2019 to communicate, rather than just have it how it is now where Diana can just witness everything without an explanation.
I seriously HOPE in H2, Diana don’t do this “THAT is (your target here)” Bullshit again
We don’t need confirmation we know what the damn target looks like, we have a photo literally every contract haha
Thermal imaging on a satellite can, that’s how they detected Delgado’s underground drug lab. But I do get what you mean, it’s doubtful they could get the kind of information she seems to have, just from a sat feed.
Diana seems to be more of an all-seeing voice over at the moment, kind of like divine Provid- …
I’m just not really sure why its such a big deal that Diana can initiate conversation as if she’s actually there. Like, I never saw people complain about this sort of thing with MGSV, where Ocelot, Kaz, and other characters all talk to Snake perfectly aware of what is going on at all times. I complete the mission, I hear the diologue, it just doesnt irk me. Its simple and straightforward.
Same thing with the breifings. Why sacrifice something that looks cool and asthetically pleasing because it just has to be on 47’s laptop?
But we’re talking about Hitman… and how it’s always been, prior. I understand this is just nitpicking, but it can be rather annoying at times.
I do like the briefings though, I just liked it more when it was just Diana talking and we had a photo and target information and sometimes spy footage (Hitman 2: Silent Assassin) it felt more… “Hitman” like (the profession, not the actual game) lol
- Mission Details
- Target Photo/Information
Boom! Let’s get em!!
Yeah, you are right, I know where talking about Hitman, its just…but… okay how do I say this. Obviously, MGSV allows you to suspend disbelief a lot more, because that series has all kinds of crazy shit going on.
But I would apply the same logic to Hitman, regardless of prior convention. I mean we have a clone assassin, paired target kills are just always ‘accidents’ or ‘unsolved’ no matter how suspicious, I mean I’m already suspending a lot fo disbelief already, right? So for me its just always amusing when this topic gets its own post, because its like the bottom of unlrealistic things that can be easily explained away as an earpiece and micro-camera along with the ICA’s servaillance technology that we’ve seen in Colorado.
But heck I nitpick on here all the time. But is a topic about personal preference so theres really no use thinking I should die on this hill haha. I do wish for a ‘mute diana’ ‘realistic breifings’ option for you in the future though (no sarcasm).
I always felt the briefings in Silent Assassin were lackluster. A few lines of dialogue, a few photos and maybe a short video if we we’re lucky. We also never learnt much about the targets. Just a name and picture. It’s more realistic (an assassin doesn’t need to know the backstory of histarget), but it also made the targets less interesting.
i too want mute Diana -when she sayd in each mission: that is… (Novikov, Zaidan, Knox) yes we not blind and i see our target and we don’t need to be reminded of her every time.
But no, you are not wrong. Hitman does have a lot of “unrealistic” aspects to it, but honestly that’s with every game. It’s a game, not real life.
The cloning part should be bizarre. But the briefings and communications between 47 and Diana? Even for a game that should be somewhat realistic.
We can agree to disagree, no worries. I’m not trying to convince anyone here. Just what I think, personally is all.
I like the fact that targets have backstory. It may not be necessary but it makes them more interesting when they have it.
A briefing, target photo, target bio and specifics and mission details made it feel more professional (imo)
@Pitman very true! I wish there was more info on Hitman 2’s targets, it’s a shame there wasn’t.
unfortunately, I think she will still be doing that. That’s the worst bit for me, as well as what Op says about her over-explaining. I turned off some stuff last time I played and she seems to talk about the opportunities less but I find it jarring when shes’ suggesting the most obvious idea in the most smug voice like its a really hot tip, I get its for the casual player, but still.
Yeah… I miss the subtle Diana.
This one practically TELLS you what to do, then congratulates you when you “figure it out.”
It’s like a mother talking to her three year old lmao
Not sure if this has already been suggested as I haven’t read the entire thread. But a solution would be to allow players to set the frequency of her commentary in the settings. Kind of like Opportunities. Beginners could have the handholding dialogue active, intermediate players could have limited commentary, and for advanced players, like yours truly , turn the commentary off all together (except for introductory briefing and/or any important events such as when Silvio Caruso escaping the map in the seaplane). I must admit, when you have played Paris for the 500th time and she says, ‘That is Viktor Novikov…’, it does get a bit tiring. It would be nice to have the option to turn that aspect of her commentary off. Especially with the omniscient delivery. How the hell does she talk to him anyway? 47 isn’t wearing an ear piece like in Absolution (which I never liked anyway - highly conspicuous). Maybe he has a microscopic audio implant inside his ear lol.
we should have more options to turn off certain types of voicelines, anyway. things like npc dialogue, diana dialogue, etc. should all be options in the settings
We need more Diana and we need less Diana!
So if IO give us an option to mute Diana in the next one what are we going to complain about next? (Also I like the new briefings, feel much more human that the stodgy old ones that sound clinical and lifeless)
“That is Sierra Knox. Reckless daredevil with a violent temper.”
“That is Robert Knox. Genious inventor, black market weapons dealer and Providence defector.”
According to the Gamescom… Fat chance this will happen.
I personally loved Diana in the last game. If the intention was to make players feel like they had an in world reason as to why they are sure to spot a target when they walk past them, don’t miss basic things in a level and have a bit of clarity about an opportunity you are tracking each step (all without a bunch of on screen text!) then I’d say they succeeded.
Being dropped in to a giant map, with possibily hundreds of options and routes to take, I thought it felt great to have a little voice occasionally pop in. There to remind you that you weren’t complete alone in this massive undertaking in an even more massive level space.
Sort of like a little tool tip but instead of popping up when you aren’t progressing she comes in with little bits when you are making progress. Letting you that you are succeeding or progressing and in what specific ways.
It’s not always occasional though - particularly with Sniper Assassin.
‘Out of sight. Out of mind.’ ‘Out of sight. Out of mind.’ ‘Out of sight. Out of mind.’
As someone pointed out earlier, it can sometimes be annoying. Particularly when she speaks over interesting/important dialogue or introduces a target for the 10,000th time. It’d be cool to be able to determine the frequency of her dialogue. Despite this, her presence is definitely appreciated.
Well that’s literally what they are.
But we don’t need to told that,almost all that info comes from the briefing and the in-mission dialogue