There is no design. The game randomly selects from a pool of objectives and prestige objectives, if they conflict, tough shit.
Given that there is an achievement for obtaining the maximum payout of 75 Merces, which requires the 3x 15 Merces objectives + 30 Merces prestige objective, clearly there is no intention for the prestige objective to replace a regular one.
But again, it comes down to the players level of intelligence. If they have an objective that requires them to kill three guards and they choose the Silent Assassin PO, that player is stupid if they want to get the maximum payout. They had two other options to choose from and didnât take it.
It is a player-created problem.
No, it doesnât come down to the playerâs level of intelligence.
The game rolls 3 choices. You donât just get to pick whatever prestige objective you want.
If one or more of those choices are bogus, you donât really have 3 choices. Nobody purchased Hitman to engage in an RNG attention/hold the camera still/idiot test.
I had a thread along the same lines, though more vague, this was the type of idea I was alluding to. Most people didnât seem into it. But this is a pretty cool idea. I even wouldnât mind paying for it. Iâm ok with IO finding a way to monetize the mode, since weâre already getting so much for free.
No, should not be and should not be. Why the hell would you want to play a game that sometimes has a set up where itâs not possible for you to achieve the maximum score no matter what you do because of conflicting objectives? Why would you want such a thing? Itâs absolutely nonsensical. Itâs one thing if it is possible and you simply fuck up and lose it; no problem with that, and most of the time thatâs what these missions are giving. But the ones that conflict, no; that should not be a thing. By video game logic itself, never mind Hitman logic, thatâs just stupid.
Iâm not saying SA has to be done. Iâm saying SA should be the highest reward. If you manage to get a target in a crowd and all you have is a banana, so be it. You likely wonât get SA. But of you can figure out how, then THATâS where the reward should be highest. Has nothing to do with making this mode around SA. Itâs about reward. Challenge. And being rewarded for such challenge. If you kill 5 guards and the target in front of everyone, that should not count as more money than someone who kills all 5 guards and the target within the SA parameters to get SA.
Thatâs my point. Iâm not saying SA should be their only objective. Iâm saying it should be the highest reward.
Another question, when preparing for a mission, how many items can we take? Letâs say I have pretty much everything, can I take everything? Our only 5 items?
Whatâs the exact thing?
You have a âcarrying capacityâ (which increases as you complete missions) and each item takes a certain amount of capacity. Some other rules apply (you canât take 3 assault rifles for example, as you would need 2 briefcases for that) but thatâs basically the only limit on what you can carry.
hehe at least one thing where we can agree 
So⌠you didnât play a Freelancer? That explain why you donât understand why I donât want to silent assassin should give higher reward. Youâll play - then youâll understand it 
Itâs just DONT WORK in this mode because of randomness of everything. Then youâll be complain very offen that âFUUU THIS MODE IS BROKEN, I CANT GET SAâ etc. When you feel how Freelancer is build thet you realise that Silent Assassin is not a true difficulty and goal of this modeâŚ
But back to your quesion. It depends on your progress. Every item have capacility, the higher quality of item the less it take place in eqipment. At start I guess you have 5 capacylity for equimnent (i dont remember). But after time you unlock more (12 was max in beta test I guess). Common sniper rifle take 5 slots, but epic version only 3 etc.
when you exceed capacility - you canât start the mission.
Youâre using the word should a lot when it does not fit with your idea of Hitman. But it is not universal at all. Itâs about your very specific conception of the game.
Because then itâs on you to put it together. You can play around with combinations of different missions and different Prestige Objectives. And when you finally make the choice, it doesnât matter if you canât get all the objectives, and even less if a base payout is introduced. It just forces you to make some choices. Constraints fosters creativity. And IO seem to agree.
Your language btw, are you ok?
Let there be several loud-ish side objectives for players who want to play that way, so that they may consistently earn a reasonable amount of Merces without being forced into a Silent Assassin play style. Of course, such loud-ish objectives should never conflict with one another.
But then Silent Assassin should be an objective present in all campaigns, one which rewards the greatest Merces per objective by virtue of requiring the most relative skill and finesse.
Ultimately, Silent Assassin should consistently be the most optimal route for progression. This is series tradition.
A âfull payoutâ would obviously not be the goal.
For some value X:
Sum of several loud-ish side objectives = X Merces
Single Silent Assassin objective/rank = X Merces
Total (average) payout = ~X Merces + Base payout + Optional prestige objective
(~ = âapproximatelyâ/âroughlyâ)
Silent Assassin would no longer be a prestige objective, but a default objective of all campaigns, naturally.
No need for stupid âsyndicate typesâ. Play whichever campaign you like whichever way you like.
Perfectly balanced, as all things should be. Everyone is happy.
Dedicated stealth players being dissuaded from entire syndicate campaigns of choice that conflict with their play style is stoopid. I repeat, STOOOPID. The same is true for louder players.
Ideally, we all should be able to play whatever campaign we damn well please however we damn well please while still being able to earn a reasonable amount of Merces.
It feels like thatâs why the different types even exist, since all it does is change the pool of objectives that the game will pull from. If youâre a player that likes a specific way of playing, you donât miss out on anything gameplay-wise by only playing specific contracts.
You like playing silently, choose from these. If you like going loud, choose from those. If you donât care, then choose any. This is the perfect way of doing it because no player with a preferred style is disadvantaged.
The only reason anyone would want there to be a persistent reward for playing silently are those that think that their preferred method of silent is the ârightâ way to play the mode. Which is extremely arrogant that they want things twisted to work in their favour and disadvantage those with a different playstyle.
Did you play the CTT? It seems like you didnât.
The syndicate types are perfect; you are simply choosing what sort of objectives youâd like to be given in order to receive rewards, or you can pick Sick Games if you want random themes.
What does loud have anything to do with not achieving SA?
Doing this should not get me more reward
Than this
Again, youâre missing it. This isnât even about Hitman; this is about the lack of logic even by the basic standards of video game play.
But, again, we are talking about situations where no matter what you choose, you essentially lose the opportunity get the best score because of randomly selected objectives that conflict. That would be like saying a particular showdown has a payout of 20 Mercers, letâs say, and that is broken down as 5 if you kill the target with an unsilenced pistol, 5 if you kill the target with a sniper rifle, 5 for not getting spotted and 5 for only changing disguise once, ok? Now, you cannot kill the target of the showdown with both a pistol and a sniper rifle; itâs not possible within the game mechanic. So, you have to make a choice of which one to do.
Now, to you, this may seem cool, because youâre focusing on the path to take and you like that you have to make a decision, and the loss of some of the payout is just a consequence of that. However, to others, and I know Iâm not only speaking for myself here because many have brought it up since the CTT, the conflicting objectives means that you can never get the full 20 payout advertised on the contract no matter what choices you make going in. Even if you follow the objectives to the letter, you can only do 3 out of the 4, not all 4. So nobody can collect the 20; the max high score of that mission is unattainable by design.
The issue with this is that it says a payout of 20, but clearly thatâs not true, and this is without even involving prestiges in the mix. Ergo, the stated 20 payout is false; itâs a red herring for anyone who goes in thinking they can collect it, but itâs not possible to collect it. The mission should then state a max of 15 payout, because that is the maximum anyone can get under those conditions. You can choose which path you take to obtain that 15, sacrificing 5 by not doing one option, but gaining 5 by doing the other, and in completing the other two objectives, getting the maximum the mission allows you. That would be acceptable. But these situations of objectives that conflict to the point where you canât get the amount shown as the maximum feels misleading, itâs like setting a player up for failure. People who play to get the best outcome allowed will believe that they can achieve a 20 and then find that they canât, so why does it even say that amount?
Do you now see why this is an issue? It doesnât matter if it forces you to plan or make choices, itâs offering an outcome that it cannot fulfill. That is not how you make a game to be played, Hitman or otherwise. You do not offer a reward and then make a scenario where getting it is impossible, except as an unintentional bug or a blunder. IOI needs to fix this.
I hope they will improve the suspcets
And Add some more of them
I do see your point more clearly, yes. And there are definitely others asking for this to be changed. I donât see it as losing some reward, just choosing how to put together your payment. But I understand your case, I just disagree that it needs to be changed.
Well, thatâs good enough I guess.
I know this is currently being debated and thereâs people on both sides of the fence, but your point I totally agree with.
Iâm sure IOI will be taking all feedback on board, such as issues like this before the official launch anyway.
How true is this? What if I want to play a campaign in Berlin or Miami, but all available stealth campaigns exclude those locations? What if Silent Assassin isnât available as a prestige objective in a stealth campaign? Am I just shit out of luck?
How different are these non-stealth-oriented syndicate types from one another truly? Is their existence really warranted, or do they merely give a perception of granularity where there really is none?
Correct. It is in fact the canonically ârightâ way to play the game and has been series tradition for the bulk of the Hitman franchiseâs lifetime. There are of course subjective approaches to play, yes, and they should be rewarded; Iâve no problem with that.
But Silent Assassin is indeed the most ârightâ way to play Hitman and should always be rewarded as such, especially since it requires more relative finesse.
As far as Iâm aware, the lionâs share of the side objectives in general are âloudâ (as opposed to âSilent Assassinâ-ish) anyhow. And theyâre RNG, so itâs not like youâre specifically choosing unique objectives. So, just group all of them together and randomly select three or so for âloudâ players and include Silent Assassin as an objective for more âquietâ players.
Seems a more straightforward approach than âsyndicate typesâ.
âSyndicate typesâ seem to overall offer an illusion of choice where there really isnât all that much.
Theyâre both cheesy as all hell and likely wonât be so easily achievable in Freelancer, so I donât understand the relevance. Those with the skill and know-how of the underlying âmetaâ of any game will always be able to pull off shit like that.
âLoudâ is merely used in contrast to a more âquietâ, typical Silent Assassin approach, not to be taken literally, hence the quote marks (of course, you can still be literally loud and get SA).
