So… you didn’t play a Freelancer? That explain why you don’t understand why I don’t want to silent assassin should give higher reward. You’ll play - then you’ll understand it It’s just DONT WORK in this mode because of randomness of everything. Then you’ll be complain very offen that “FUUU THIS MODE IS BROKEN, I CANT GET SA” etc. When you feel how Freelancer is build thet you realise that Silent Assassin is not a true difficulty and goal of this mode…
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.
You’re using the word should a lot when it does not fit with your idea of Hitman. But it is not universal at all. It’s about your very specific conception of the game.
Because then it’s 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 doesn’t matter if you can’t 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.
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 shouldconsistently be the most optimal route for progression. This is series tradition.
A “full payout” 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
(~ = “approximately”/“roughly”)
Silent Assassin would no longer be a prestige objective, but a default objective of all campaigns, naturally.
No need for stupid “syndicate types”. 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 that’s why the different types even exist, since all it does is change the pool of objectives that the game will pull from. If you’re a player that likes a specific way of playing, you don’t 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 don’t 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 “right” 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.
The syndicate types are perfect; you are simply choosing what sort of objectives you’d like to be given in order to receive rewards, or you can pick Sick Games if you want random themes.
Again, you’re missing it. This isn’t 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, let’s 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; it’s 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 you’re 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 I’m 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 that’s not true, and this is without even involving prestiges in the mix. Ergo, the stated 20 payout is false; it’s a red herring for anyone who goes in thinking they can collect it, but it’s 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 can’t get the amount shown as the maximum feels misleading, it’s 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 can’t, so why does it even say that amount?
Do you now see why this is an issue? It doesn’t matter if it forces you to plan or make choices, it’s 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 do see your point more clearly, yes. And there are definitely others asking for this to be changed. I don’t 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.
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 isn’t 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 “right” way to play the game and has been series tradition for the bulk of the Hitman franchise’s lifetime. There are of course subjective approaches to play, yes, and they should be rewarded; I’ve no problem with that.
But Silent Assassin is indeed the most “right” way to play Hitman and should always be rewarded as such, especially since it requires more relative finesse.
As far as I’m aware, the lion’s share of the side objectives in general are “loud” (as opposed to “Silent Assassin”-ish) anyhow. And they’re RNG, so it’s not like you’re specifically choosing unique objectives. So, just group all of them together and randomly select three or so for “loud” players and include Silent Assassin as an objective for more “quiet” players.
Seems a more straightforward approach than “syndicate types”.
“Syndicate types” seem to overall offer an illusion of choice where there really isn’t all that much.
They’re both cheesy as all hell and likely won’t be so easily achievable in Freelancer, so I don’t understand the relevance. Those with the skill and know-how of the underlying “meta” of any game will always be able to pull off shit like that.
“Loud” is merely used in contrast to a more “quiet”, typical Silent Assassin approach, not to be taken literally, hence the quote marks (of course, you can still be literally loud and get SA).
And I’m think that best reward should be for meet all objectives. Client won’t pay you for being Silent Assassin but to do specific what he want. If he wants to a public execution - then payment should be for that, if he wants to 47 be silent assassin then you’ll have a specific objective and payment for that. Freelancer is some kind of Career and you as assassin want to get a payment - depent what client needs (objectives).
Silent Assassin is a “style” of 47, but not the goal it self and I don’t see why it should be payed more. You might have more experience for that, but not the payment. And another reward for being silent assassin is that you won’t alert location, so next time when you’ll go there - there won’t be more guards, enfoncers and cameras. This is a REWARD for being SILENT ASSASSIN.
I’m the client - I want to you kill that target in front of everyone with an explosive because my doughter was killed that way because of that bastard. I want to see how this scumbag die and I don’t care if you’ll be spotted or not, you probably will have problems afterwards but is all up to you! - Meet my requiments and I will reward you handsomely. Call me when it’s done.
That’s not the case at all. There’s only a handful of objectives that aren’t able to be done silently if you’re not lucky to get three guards as targets, namely the “kill 3 guards with a shotgun/assault rifle/SMG/sniper rifle” and the collateral kills that require two kills within one second with an explosion/accident/firearm (though I guess you could attempt to complete these with two targets, though the chances of getting two targets in one area is quite small).
The rest of them, which is by far the vast majority, are definitely possible silently - ie silenced pistol kill, use poison, poison a guard (use emetic or sedative), pacify guards, melee kill, no bodies found, don’t get caught on camera, use a dart gun, unsilenced pistol kill, destroy a camera recorder, don’t unlock doors, explosive kill etc.
Honestly I’ve seen many roguelikes where the “basic standards” were a lot worse than what we got in Freelancer lol. That kind of stuff happens when you deal with randomly generated content (and there’s still hope IOI will manage to improve how objectives are generated). At least there’s still a way to complete the missions and gain money even with conflicting objectives, and we’re not stuck with, like, having to complete the missions with only crystal balls and proximity explosives because of bad RNG :x
Tell me you didn’t play it without telling me you didn’t play it.
There are a whole bunch of neutral objectives that ask you to kill them in a certain manner which in no way contravene SA. Then there are pure stealth ones like hiding target bodies or only killing targets.
There are only a few non-stealth objectives; killing guards with some variety of weapon. The collateral kill objective is a little bit of a grey area - if you’re really dedicated, the collateral can be another target, providing the map has two or more to kill.
No duckin way, not with this randomness of targets location. There is a tiny gap between “you may” and “Impossible”. It depends on pure luck, but chances are very low.
Then whoever came up with the whole idea without creating failsafes for randomly generated anything that conflicts was not thinking clearly. IOI wants this to be random, fine, but there should still be limits in place that keep that from becoming problematic.
This, plus the fact that you’ll always have the same 8 Syndicate types on hand when completing/failing a campaign. If you want to have an easier, traditional Silent Assassin, avoid the syndicates based around Loud weapons, Collareral Kills, Guard Kills, etc.
It’s specifically why you’re given a list of the possible Merces objectives.
The “downside” is that you have to be lucky with what locations get re-rolled and what targets you might get if you want variety or an easy time – but that’s the whole point of the mode.
Well I’m sorry to say but that’s too bad.
You’ll have better luck with the next mission, or maybe the one after that. It’s not like not getting the full payout on every single mission is going to lock you out of anything.
I’ve reflected on why there can be objectives that conflict like that, and it’s to nudge the player in different ways to change their playstyle, making riskier moves that could lead to death.
It’s unfortunate if you get a bad combination of objectives, but the mode is infinite, so if you can’t get a full payout on one mission, I don’t think it’s that big of an issue.
Now THIS is the correct answer. If only the game could count up instead of down for your Merces payout it would feel more satisfying and true to your current strategy, rather than a possible/impossible full payout.
It’s just DONT WORK in this mode because of randomness of everything. Then you’ll be complain very offen that “FUUU THIS MODE IS BROKEN, I CANT GET SA” etc. When you feel how Freelancer is build thet you realise that Silent Assassin is not a true difficulty and goal of this mode…
