Freelancer - General Discussion

Hitman: World of Assassination Freelancer
4845

You seem to take issue with just two elements here.

  1. You seem to think that the objectives are not optional because you didn’t choose them. Are you suggesting that something cannot be optional if you had no say in it? If your wife asks you to pick up dinner and gives you money specifically for that purpose, and then as you are pulling up the restaurant says, “and if you want, grab yourself some dessert too”, is that an optional thing? Do you feel like you are now required to get dessert because you didn’t think of it? To me, this is exactly the same thing.

  2. You also take issue with the idea that the payout is less if you don’t do them. You have said over and over that the “total amount of the contract is the base pay plus successfully completing the objectives requested in the contract”. You cannot separate the amount you personally earn upon completion with the original payout of the contract. I don’t know why this is, but you cannot do it.

If I tell you I will pay you 50 dollars for mowing my lawn, and then you mow my lawn and I pay you 50 dollars, presumably you’d be OK with this (assuming you are in the business of mowing lawns in the first place, obviously).

Now if I tell you I will pay 50 dollars for mowing my lawn, and I also tell you that if you want to earn an extra ten dollars you can also spray for weeds after the fact, is that weed spraying mandatory? If you only mow the lawn and don’t spray, am I penalizing you by not giving you the extra 10 bucks?

4846

There are plenty of contracts and escalations that include extra objectives, and if you want to “do everything right” (meaning getting 5 stars), you’ll need to get SA while following all these objectives. It’s not like Freelancer suddenly made the core Hitman gameplay totally different, objectives have been present since H1.

If it made no difference then there would be no point in including them in the first place. They’re here to give the players options and to encourage them to try certain strategies they might not have used otherwise.

If you don’t choose a prestige objective or don’t do it you lose the amount of money it would have provided you, the same way that you lose the amount of money the other 3 provide if you fail or don’t do them. They’re all technically extra bonuses that reward players for doing certain things, instead of penalizing them if they don’t. You only get “penalties” in Freelancer if you get killed, let a leader escape or leave a mission without killing all targets. The first two penalize you by ending the campaign and the third one penalizes you by alerting other levels. Getting less money is not a penalty, it’s a bonus you can fail to get if you don’t do certain specific actions (and in the same way, safes and couriers also are).

4847

In your example, that extra for spraying the weeds, is the prestige objective. Your initial offer of 50 bucks to mow the lawn is the initial contract, and to be an accurate example, you’d require me to mow in a north-to-south motion instead of east-to-west or randomly, to do the edging counterclockwise around the yard instead of clockwise, and to use a push mower instead of a gas-powered one. To not do any of these things, while still mowing the lawn as agreed, would see the deduction of 10 dollars from the total of 50 as you originally offered. So as long as I mow your lawn, I walk away with 20, period, I can walk away with 30, 40, or all 50, and if I spray for weeds, get an extra 10 for a total of 60. That would be a proper example for comparison.

Therefore, in answer to your question, no, you are not penalizing me by not giving me the extra 10, because I did not agree to add it to the work load. The other things, however, are part of the 50 dollar deal, and result in a loss, not a gain nor an amount that stays the same, if I should choose not yo do them. Plus, you now spread the word that I don’t cut the lawn in the manner that my clients would like and just do it however I feel like, decreasing my chances of maintaining a respectable clientele.

You’re not gonna convince me that it is not the case, man, because to someone of my game playing sensibilities, it is a penalty. I’ve explained why in exhaustive detail. But, I’m beginning to detect a bit of karma working against me here, since I spent ages arguing against the removal of items from the game with the position that you could just choose to not use them. And while it’s not a direct, accurate or proper comparison, in essence, I’m now arguing against the argument I previously used. So put a dunce cap on me, I guess.

It is not part of the original contract, and it is at your discretion, not the game’s, to engage or not engage with it if you so choose and it does not give you a fail result for not pursuing it, so it is not the same.

1 Like
4848

No there is no deduction from the $50. You still get that from mowing the lawn. A deduction would be getting $40 and THAT would be a penalty and a NON OPTIONAL objective but that’s not happening. The bonus is getting $60, $10 MORE.

You are the one thinking counterclockwise.

1 Like
4849

And you’re not thinking correctly at all. I said already, the lawn example was not a proper example. The additional ways he wanted the task done that I added into the picture would be part of the total offered amount, but on the condition that it be done in the ways specified; otherwise, amounts from the total offered would not be given as a result. In other words, those would be the optional objectives found as a part of the initial job offered. Offering to add more on top of the initial total would be adding a prestige: an additional amount for additional work that was not part of the initial offer. Basically, that example is exactly how I think Freelancer should have been: a flat offered amount to just do however, and then an additional amount offered that I could choose to add on top of that if I thought I could do it or wanted to, but that if I should decline and not make part of my workload, I still make the total 50. No special conditions that, while optional, affect that total amount of 50 that had been offered up.

4850

Dude. My gosh it would only be a penalty if they took money away for not completing the Optional objectives. i’ll grant that it saying “failed” is misleading, since it is impossible to “fail” something a person never did in the first place. It should say “incomplete” or something like that.

1 Like
4851

It is taking money away: the sum total of the contract is the “base” and the amount in the objectives. The total is split up among them; unlike regular contracts in the base game where 47 gets paid the total regardless of what he does and only gets deductions if he fucks up and leaves witnesses or some shit, the contracts in Freelancer don’t give out the full amount regardless, you have to do special shit to get it. You don’t do them, you don’t get the total amount actually being offered. They may not be taking it from you, but they are withholding it from you pending special actions taken or avoided. You go into the mission with the total amount of the mission set, from the moment you accept it; the “base” and the amounts assigned to the objectives. You don’t get to choose them, they are chosen for you, and are tied to the amount you are going for. That’s the contract amount. It’s not extra, it’s not a bonus; it is you agreeing to take up the contract and fulfill the specified actions if you want the total amount being offered. You don’t do it, you don’t get the total amount, you get a lowered amount, and it goes down as you having failed that special task.

4852

It’s not “taking” money away from you. If it did, it would subtract the value of the Optional objective from the player’s current Freelancer wallet balance. And it does not do that. Thus it is not “taking” anything. You are simply not getting “extra” money. Nothing is being taken.

1 Like
4853

Read what I said again.

4854

:roll_eyes:

20 pedants pedanting

2 Likes
4855

IMG_2408

Keep doing this then, I guess.

4856

You keep making the fallacy that because you said it, it’s inherently true and valid. We did read what you said and we disagree with it. Failing to do optional objectives does not take money away from you regardless of how much you want that to be a thing.

3 Likes
4857

Just because a single individual believes something does not mean that it is the truth. If that was the case, then the earth would be flat, aliens would have built the pyramids and Donald Trump would be dictator for life.

And on this, I am no longer going to engage with this conversation. You can believe what you want to believe, but know it’s not the truth.

4858

Apparently not, because not only did I explain the whole thing exhaustively of how what I’m saying is the case, I also said, specifically, that it might not take away from you, but it does withhold it from you, and I was careful to phrase it that way. Taking away from what you have, and withholding what you could have had, are both considered forms of penalty, period.

Don’t believe me? Here’s a quote from Penalties: Punishments, Prices, or Rewards? by Robert Blecker in New York Law School Law review, from the third paragraph of the introduction:

“Some penalties do not fall neatly into the category of price or punishment. The simple dichotomy between priced options and pure punishments turns out to be a continuum: At one end, a penalty has no discouragement or disapproval attaching and operates purely as a price—a known cost of deliberately exercising an option. At a neighboring point, a penalty can act as a deduction for an imperfection that automatically reduces a score, diminishes a reward, or adds a burden.”

And here’s the link to it to see for yourselves. chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1013&context=nyls_law_review

So the definition you guys are using of what you are considering a penalty in this case is narrow, inadequate, and I’ve demonstrated such.

Here’s four single individuals who believed a certain thing and no one else did, then it turned out to be true, if you really want to stick with that thought process. Only four, mind you, in a sea of countless such individuals. Majority thought isn’t always the correct one, either, you know. If that were the case, there’d probably still be slavery and fewer rights for women and such things.

4 Scientists That Were Disregarded During Their Time | Technology Networks.

Very interesting choice of words, considering how adamantly you’re arguing with me.

4859

Indeed!

4860

Yeah, I don’t know what it is, but I’m getting more worked up over this than I expected to. Need to calm down, I’m not in a fucking debate class.

4861

English is a very complex and beautiful language. Sometimes it’s important to not get lost in the details.

4862

Once again may I remind you that Lore =/= Mechanics.

47 might have been paid for the contracts he did for the ICA, but the player doesn’t get anything from completing a contract by fulfilling all objectives rather than chucking a few ducks at the targets and calling it a day, aside from the satisfaction of having played a fun contract (that is, if the contract was actually fun and not a horrible one).

Besides, we don’t know the complete details of how his ICA contracts went, and I don’t think you would say that Contracts mode is the exact recreation of that down to the smallest details, because he certainly didn’t kill Caruso a hundred times just because there are hundreds of contracts available with him as a target. It’s just the lore-bit “47 did contract work for the ICA” turned into a video game mode, just like Freelancer is the lore-bit “47 did some freelance work after taking down Providence” turned into one as well.

Therefore, it seems pretty farfetched to consider the objectives in Freelancer as anything but a game mechanic. I doubt 47’s actual freelance work involved gunning down a few guards here and there while hiding periodically in a closet to make some extra bucks, just like it’s doubtful most of his ICA contracts were something along the lines of “dress as a mascot and kill all targets with ducks in less than 5 minutes or you won’t get paid”.

Okay, let’s say getting less merces by not completing all objectives was actually envisioned by IOI as a penalty and not just a way to diversify gameplay. Why should this specific one be worse than losing your equipment upon death? Failing the campaign upon letting the leader escape? Should these ones also be removed? Why not let 47 be invincible and give him infinite ammo while we’re at it?

Penalties unleashed upon the player when they mess up are an essential component of most skill-based video games. Maybe you want Hitman to turn into a walking simulator?

4863

This is probably where you and I fundamentally disagree. I don’t consider withholding something you could have had to be penalty. If I have five dollars in my pocket and you wave a dollar at me and then say you were going to give it to me but you decided not to, I don’t feel like that is a punishment or penalty.

4864

Alright, now you’re onto something that makes me think more in-depth about my position on the matter. Yes, I would rather have it like that; I essentially envisioned Freelancer as a self-resetting Contracts mode, like I said in the other thread, and was fiercely disappointed when the freedom of play I looked forward to with that idea, based on the initial introduction video to the mode, was stripped away because of the inclusion of the objectives. Suffice to say, I’m adult enough to admit that I’ve not exactly taken it well, my enjoyment of the mode in spite of that aside.

Well, it wouldn’t be under those conditions; that’d just be me being a dick. If I said I’d give you the dollar, but you had to go ring someone’s bell first, and not only that, you had to hit the button three times so it would ring in close succession for the person inside, but you only ring it once and run away, and I decide I won’t give you the dollar because, although you did what I asked, you didn’t to it in the way I asked, that would be me withholding from you as a penalty. You did an extra task you didn’t have to do, for promise of reward, but because one detail of the agreement was not adhered to, you did not get what you were wanting to get, and just expended your energy for far more than what it was worth.