I loved the story overall and thought the final mission was brilliant as an ending to the trilogy but one thing I was hoping was that Lucas Grey would turn on us in some way and he would be the final target. I think it would’ve been a great throwback to the old games where 47 has to fight the 48 series during Codename 47 or Agent 17 in Silent Assassin or battle Mark Parchezzi III in Blood Money. This game has so many throwbacks and inspirations from the old games so I thought this one would’ve been great too.
I kind of found that the Constant felt more like a second tier bad guy who is presented to us as the main threat but is then revealed to be merely a puppet. The fact that we cornered him like a rat and frog marched him away in Hitman 2 made it feel even more so. Lucas Grey however seemed to be as much of a match to 47 as you can get so it and even though I really liked him as an ally I thought it would’ve been really interesting to go against him. I was always convinced this was going to happen in some way until of course he dies.
After these previous encounters from the old games I mentioned I always kind of had a fantasy in my head that we would get a level where 47 would face off against another deadly assassin in a true boss style battle but done in a fashion which fits into the game of course. A level where no matter how we tried to approach him he would be ready for us in the same way. If we try to snipe him he would be ready with his sniper rifle shooting back at us, if we tried to get in close he would hear us, distractions would only cause him to laugh and realise what we are up to, his aim would be deadly with pistols at short range…you get the picture.
To be honest it’s exactly where I thought the plot was going to go when I envisioned H3 in my head. But am I disappointed it didn’t end up like that? No, not at all. While I think it is heartbreaking we didn’t as much time with Grey as I might have want, I am delighted he remained so true to 47, a real brother. The writers chose a story and executed it, in my opinion, perfectly. I can say I’ve found the story of the other games interesting, but this is the only one that touched me
Also it’s good to remember that often the plot for something you cook up in your head is going to be what appeals most to you. So don’t be let down if the real one can’t live up to it
Very true. Grey was a brilliant character. One thing I would’ve loved was a mission where 47 and Grey worked together within the map itself similar to the way Dianna was involved in Argentina. Nothing extreme like him and 47 fighting alongside each other. Just something similar to what we do in Argentina where Grey is in like a hidden sniper spot somewhere and we lure a target so that he can get a shot on them as a mission story.
I think he was very intriguing. Someone capable of that kind of coldness turning out to be someone who also wanted his brother to be free and fulfilled, who would be so terrified of becoming a puppet again that he would rather die? That’s an interesting dichotomy.
And that little chuckle when the herald asks if he has any family. Come on, that was a nice touch.
I really liked Grey in this, I think he got a good end. In a way, what makes him different from all the targets in Hitman is that he had the integrity to shoot himself, he wasn’t going to betray 47 or himself.
They basically used Grey, and the downfall of the Partners in an effort to boost Arthur Edwards’ “Bad Guy Stock Rating”.
To me the saving grace of the plot is more that Diana was able to boost her own “Ice Queen” stock. I felt that to some extent the things she engaged in were plausible and that once Grey got taken out, she had to find a way to continue her plans.
If you think about it, this is really her story.
I wish there was more clarity though about what happens in the end. The simplest explanation is that the World of Assassination became decentralized following the collapse of its two most powerful organizations: Providence, and the ICA. Not to mention along the way the big hit taken by IAGO, etc.
It’s interesting. For non-Hitman fans, I’m not sure many really knew who Diana Burnwood is. I think Hitman’s iconography has always been with 47 and his suit, maybe the famous logo. Kindof hope Diana moves up in the world as a more famous part of the Hitman franchise after Hitman III, since it is arguably her story in a way. Her part in Medonza and her stabbing Yates in that mission story, I kindof if a lot of gamers will remember that as her badass moment.
In a thread in the old forum, there were some who felt that Diana would need to “get in the field, get her hands dirty”. And I was initially opposed to the idea.
But it does work better once Grey is gone. Grey’s death represents the technical disintegration of Grey’s faction. Diana and 47 then have to carry on. In fact, for a time it appears Diana just carries on her own and 47 is left in the dark about what she’s planning in detail.
As it was with BLOOD MONEY, it’s Diana who devises the plan to slip 47 into the enemy’s arms - so he can kill them.
While that isn’t too impressive in that it is a retread of BLOOD MONEY’s “Diana double-cross, not-a-double-cross” gag. It does work.
Grey was never that good for me at holding up the story. He was just too… “grey”… a savage killer with no problems about strapping people to chairs onto bombs… working with druglords and all that. It was hard to root for him. And I think the reason some people, including the OP, were half-thinking of Grey as a traitor is precisely because he’s shown many an unscrupulous color in his brief history within HITMAN across three games.
Diana was always the better pick of the two. I knew going into H3 that one of the two had to die. They chose the right one in the end.
Gotta disagree there. The fact that Grey would rather die than be captured and turned into a tool for Providence again was a tragic but fitting end to his story. As he said in the legacy voiceover, 47 was always the best, no one ever came close. That included him. He was smart and ruthless but he just got out manoeuvred.
She proved herself as a master strategist you mean.
I think that’s pretty clear. Power concentrated in organizations like that will have a net negative impact on the world so independents like Diana and 47 need to be there to keep them in check.
I completely agree. She was the one putting in the hard work behind the scenes to vet contracts, analyze targets and take care of everything 47 would need to do his end of the job. Mendozs proved that she is just as capable of handling herself in dangerous situations as anyone in the game.
I meant that stacking Lucas Grey’s Life on top of the “Cost of fighting against Arthur Edwards” was meant to up the stakes and make Edwards a real threat. As Edwards says as Grey dies: “And then, there were none.”
The effects are really scattered in multiple vectors following HITMAN 3.
Previously the powerful people of the world mostly coalesced into a single entity - Providence. They controlled everything or had an involvement in most things, including things as mundane as a vote to swap out coal for renewable energy.
That is, such organizations had both good and bad outcomes, although always to maintain their positions of power. As Edwards points out at the end of HITMAN 2016: “We are the lesser evil. This other person… wants chaos.” It is of course orderly as long as the same people are always calling the shots.
And if you are already among these people who call the shots you want to keep calling the shots forever.
The World of Assassination, in turn would have groups like Providence et al. as a market, both for buyers and for targets.
That was the status quo and now it’s gone. If the ICA had held standards before, without a centralized hand guiding who controls the killing hand, a group of privateers like 47 and Diana would rise up. They would be, say… “the killers with a set of standards”. But weapons makers, facilitators, and others who had been part of the ICA’s supply chain will now turn to anyone, including assassins with lower standards or fewer parameters to go about their business.
The destruction of Providence could also usher in an era of feudal style power struggles. The ending of HITMAN 3 features numerous leaders of industry and finance all mass-resigning - their heirs will be locked in a new power struggle.
So for 47 - and say his more villainous counterparts - there will be a lot of business. And business will be good.
It is possible we exchanged one Providence for many such factions, and the ICA, in turn, replaced with an even more unreadable market of assassin mercenaries.
There’s a couple talking near Diana’s table in Mendoza about how killing Rico, Andrea and Jorge led to Hector taking over and he’s been a disaster for the region, starting a war with the Morenos because he’s convinced that they’re responsible for their deaths. We see with the conversation with Cornelia that not every heir wants to inherit the bullshit power struggles that come along with being at the top. And Kronstadt was ready to hire an incorruptible outsider to take the company in a new direction. I think you’re right, there will be a lot of schisms and factions vying for control and with 47 and Diana, the best in the world, being allowed to pursue their own strict moral guidelines, it’ll be an interesting place.
47: The Best Assassin in the World - that itself opens a possibility!
In another discussion of possible story directions, I also felt that an interesting turn (HITMAN 4, 5, 6?) would be more about competition in the new “Wild West” style World of Assassination and the kind of “characters” it brings up.
We could have an arc (even smaller ones if need be, ala Sarajevo 6 or Patient Zero) where 47 is pitted against a “purist” who has disdain for assassins who are not “Natural Born Killers”… and may or may not be linked to 47’s past in a personal way.
So the plot is something of a different kind… more like THE SPECIALIST or ASSASSINS. 47 versus a guy who is basically like Storm Shadow or something - an extremely trained operator who wants to be Killer Number 1 in this brave new world.