is gonna piss me off if it turns out that the base pay is still tied to completed objectives, making the statement of it being the base payout a lie if two objectives conflict and one can’t be completed. If it’s just referring to the fact that if you don’t have the tool with you to complete an objective then you can’t do it, as this part seems to suggest,
that’s one thing, I can live with that. If they’re giving a heads up that conflicting objectives will still be present, and more importantly, will still affect whether or not you can collect the amount of Merces the contract says is the payout, then that’s gonna be a problem, one that they’re likely to hear about from many people, and will hopefully be smart enough to update and correct down the road.
Except that it’s not up to us to control the missions and the objectives. We don’t know what objectives will be assigned per mission, only a list of possible ones, with no clue as to what combination they’ll be in. And once we select one, we can’t back out of it without aborting. We don’t select what objectives will be there, or know which ones will be until we select a map, and aborting that contract and picking another won’t help because that one may select contradicting objectives as well.
It’s completely untrue that that is in our hands. Some of those conflicting objectives can’t be dealt with simply by having the right tool; many of them need more than one target in order to complete. Ones that list two different kills on a one target map are something completely beyond our control, and by the time we know that’s the objective, we’ve already picked, so it’s not even a case of us having chosen poorly.
And when I said location, gameplay objectives and syndicate backstory were what I guessed players based syndicate choice on, and those are the three that IO also wrote
Though they left out the 4th: Eenie Meenie Miney Moe
Sometimes you don’t have the gear for certain objectives, or even syndicates. This means you can accept a small payout or you have to go to some other location first, to obtain what you need. That is cool to me, because I have to think for a bit. The next thing is, if there are contradicting objectives on a mission, I still have to weigh which one of them will pay more, which one is the most risky/possible, which one do I have the gear for, etc. And then, I have to think again. At some point, I just noticed that I was actually doing planning in the safehouse, which only played into the whole assassin-fantasy for me.
Yes, and I get that scenario. That’s not the issue for me. The issue for me is that each contract lists a payout amount. That amount is not automatic; you have to complete the objectives to get that payment. If you are lacking a weapon needed to complete one of them, you get paid less. Cool, totally respect that.
However, say you’re doing an assassination syndicate, which usually has firearm kills assigned, and you’re in the showdown stage, and two of the objectives conflict: one says silenced pistol kill, and one says sniper rifle kill. There is one target; no matter what kind of preparations you do, no matter what gear you have, getting the full payout on this mission is completely impossible due to something that is entirely beyond your control and which you can do nothing about, and did not know was coming until you got to this showdown match. That is a horribly unfair situation and unacceptable.
Now, if we’re getting that base payout anyway in the release version (unlike the CTT), and all objective completion is merely bonus pay, that’s fine. But, there’s no indication that is the case and the language used in this article indicates that it has not changed from the test version. So players will be denied full completion and the advertised payment amount due to factors that they can do nothing about regardless of any amount of preparation. Bullshit.
They could edit the payout indicator to show the highest possible amount, instead of just adding them all up. It doesn’t really matter that much to me, but I’m totally on board with that.
Ha. After tirelessly defending IOs decisions on here for weeks, it’s good to see that my argumentation was exactly in line with theirs. Not claiming it was the other way around, and they got their reasoning from me… but a win is a win
One more thing. When some objectives are impossible to you, it’s kind of like when you were playing an old RPG and you would encounter some creature that was too hard for you to kill at your level. It’s frustrating, but it also just reminds you what a badass you can become if you keep progressing. And it makes it all the more satisfying when you get there.
So in Hitman terms, when your hideout is filled up with weapons and gear, more stuff is possible to you. I made it to about Mastery 25 in the demo, and I still had lots of stuff I couldn’t really complete yet.
Even that, even setting aside the issue of pay, which is still important, there should not be a scenario where two objectives are impossible to do in the same mission. Lacking proper items, sure, that’s fine, but there should not be a situation where two different kill requirements are set on the same one-target mission. No amount of leveling up or better preparation fixes that. That’s my issue; the scenarios where what we do to better ourselves does not fix the issue. The ones where you can only do one or the other no matter what and must accept one objective being read as failed as a consequence. That should not be a thing for this type of gameplay.
As said, that means I have to choose between the contradicting objectives:
But yeah, as someone who cares about immersion, story, and the Hitman-universe, I see where you are coming from. I can see how this is annoying if you wanna have keep the “47 is flawless” aspect of the fantasy going. And contradicting objectives don’t really make sense within a real contract from a client. But this mode is just very gamey to me overall. I accept some cognitive dissonance here, and if I get that feel of Hitman-immersion, that’s good enough for me. Making it all fit is just a lost cause for me.
With watching the trailer intro briefing thingy ma bobby twice now and all, i noticed the music a bit more and was wondering if anyone has just the music available like anywhere? Or if someone can, could they do so?
Thanks in advance to anyone who actually just read that
I remember when people were complaining that you sometimes weren’t able to complete certain objectives at times, to the degree that people thought it was an oversight, and I was like “that’s the point, lol.” I don’t expect a truly randomized roguelike to have any constraints, and you should have to choose which objective to complete based on equipment, ability, and preference, glad to see IOI know what they’re doing on that front at least.
At the end of the day, it’s a game, it’s not meant to be realistic (and if you think it should, then there’s a long rabbit hole of stuff that I can point out to ruin it for you), it’s meant to be be balanced towards fun and replayability.
P.S. There should be a base payout regardless of “optional” objectives being completed or not.
Yeah, I guess we’ve all got to live with that now. Ah well, but like any roguelike, you’re always gonna be subservient to the dice rolls.
If we’re getting this promo piece this week, I wonder if we might finally get the Road to Freelancer feedback next week
I just, at the very least, want to know if they’ve changed the “Payout” HUD to at least say “Maximum Payout” or something, because here it doesn’t seem like the way we earn money has changed much.
Oh, and hopefully increased prices on some of the small items (5 Merces is nothing) and reduced prices on major items (over 230 for something is criminal)
He’s referring to the Chongqing ICA Facility video, which shows off many of the targets from WoA, and acts like a canonical list of hits, despite being strange in of itself. From the TV Tropes page of Hitman 3
There’s also the weird continuity issue of Alexander Kovak being mentioned in Mendoza in the context of being a sanctioned target, which is incorrect as he was the contractor, not a target (Tamara was explicitly talking about targets, not contractors; plus his fate had already been resolved at the start of Hawkes Bay as he was sent to prison for being an idiot for converting the Shamal casino score into Bitcoin).
Oh, and Vera San Martin being mentioned in Mendoza. That also annoys me as they were mentioned in Hawkes Bay as being assassinated by Grey.
Most of which has already been addressed in posts past, and will do so again here along with those not yet brought up.
A combination of gameplay limitations and these locations being hotbeds of criminal activity over the years because of the concentration of Providence or other organized crime groups on them, so people would be putting up hits for the targets that hang out in these locations regularly.
Gameplay limitation, as mentioned above. Does not ruin immersion anywhere on the level of forcing a player to accept a notice of failure at the end of the mission due to circumstances beyond their control.
Another gameplay limitation, and as mentioned in the past, we are meant to ignore the presence of these targets and imagine them as just being other random NPCs. A far shorter order than requiring players to imagine that they completed all objectives when they didn’t and it directly affects their score and record.
Addressed in Diana’s presentation video: the clients are putting up contracts on the organizations, which would include places they operate, and she is watching their online presence and social profiles to pinpoint low-level, less cautious members of the syndicates, and see how their deaths affect the activity of the others.
The bosses of organized crime would logically have doubles and people paid to look for potential threats to preemptively kill off.
The real world equivalent to the in-game currency is unknown, so we have no way of determining if the prices for items in the game is reasonable or not. The fact that items can be found at times on-site, and that the suppliers can pretty much charge whatever they want anyway, makes this aspect of the game annoying, but not unrealistic. You wouldn’t exactly expect to get a handgun on the street for $20 cash, and if you do, that person clearly doesn’t care about the risk to reward ratio when considering the authorities may come asking them questions about selling someone a gun.
Vidal doesn’t really specify Kovak as a target, she simply asks Diana if Kovak was also her. This could be in a different context, such as asking if she was the one who took his infamous contract that killed the other Yardbirds at a wedding and landed Kovak in the slammer when he tried to convert the legendary loot.
@Dribbleondo and I rarely agree on things, but whooo boy, when we do…
Considering the context was “what sanctioned targets 47 and Diana are responsible for”, and the conversation is talking about 47’s sanctioned targets, not their contractors. It’d be correct for Tamara to mention the other yardbirds (Doris, Dorian, Guillame), but that’s not what she says. Everyone else in that and later conversations were targets in various ways (she even mentions Nikolai Kamarov’s locked-room mystery whom Grey killed before Paris). So yeah, definitely a continuity mistake.
We disagree so much that you’re one of two people on my muted list, so enjoy that honour. I don’t take muting-of-people lightly either.
