I can respect that, and I know you’re not actually arguing against me on this, per se. But, for my sensibilities, the fact is that the game shows you that objective as failed if you don’t do it. Whether it’s true or not, it shows it to you, it counts it as that. I never want to see a mark of failure when playing this game. If it’s a mistake I made, I’ll go back and try again, and do better this time. But this system they’re using to generate conflicting objectives is literally rigging it against you so that a failure will happen no matter what you do if those objectives conflict, and that’s just such an insult to someone who plays the game the way I do and has the priorities that I have. And I know I’m not alone in this sentiment.
2 Likes
You keep bringing up your inability to settle with “failure” or “mistakes” with Hitman, but I gotta remind you that that level of thinking is fundamentally incompatible with the nature of a roguelike – what Freelancer is aiming to replicate.
You need to accept that such “failures” or other set-backs are inherently built into the mode’s systems to keep you from being on-top 100% of the time, or being able to master and perfect your playstyle completely.
It’s probably very hard for you to break away from that mindset or accept things beyond your control, based on how you play, but that’s the nature of the game-mode here, one whose main goal should always be to escape the level unharmed, or at most killing the targets in SA rank.
Merces are just a way to purchase things to make it a bit easier to get Silent Assassin, but not required to “complete” Freelancer
4 Likes
I can settle with it, when it’s my fault it happened. When it happens because the system has generated objectives that inherently can’t all be done, that’s a flawed system. That is making a scenario where the player is destined to fail something no matter what choices they make or actions they take. And if that is in this mode because it’s trying to be roguelike, then roguelike is a flawed system. I cannot imagine a game designer so cynical as to make a system that will randomly throw objectives together, see that some are thrown together in such a way that if the player were to complete any of them, at least one other would automatically register as failed, and think that that’s exactly what they wanted it to do.
Whether it’s trying to emulate roguelike or not, is it really such a break of their vision to simply make it so that there are not conflicting kill requirements that cancel one another out? All the other conflicting objective scenarios I have seen or can envision can be overcome with time, practice, and building up the player’s inventory, but that one, double kill requirements on a single-target map, is one that is rigged against the player. That one single scenario can’t be purged from this and not keep their vision whole?
Sounds like how you want to play isn’t compatible with what the mode is then. Have you considered simply not playing it then?
2 Likes
Why should I not play it because of a literal error of logic inherent to the mode that can be programmed out of it? I’m not the only one who’s going to raise issues with this, and I don’t even mean just here on the forum; this issue was pointed out in a published article that reviewed the CTT. Players outside of the forum who haven’t played it and don’t engage in discussions on here are being made aware that this particular contradiction exists. IOI is going to have to address that at some point. The other scenarios that don’t guarantee all objectives will be complete can be justified; this one that exists because of a program dropping conflicting objectives cannot. That’s the issue.
1 Like
Or change the way you look at it. If one objective is to eliminate by poison for 10 M and the other is eliminate by gun shot for 5 M then the client says hey shoot him and I’ll pay you, but if it’s untraceable I’ll double it. It’s not so much two objectives as it is an option for 47.
It just was coded in a simpler manner than how I wrote it.
3 Likes
But the other option will read as a fail. It won’t just disappear; it will be a failed objective. Why do we have to let the game tell us we failed one of these options, no matter which one we choose, when it is not our fault that only one can be done? It’s one thing if we choose not to follow the objective at all; it’s another when we are trying to actually follow them, one simply can’t be done.
No they don’t. If they determine that this is only an issue for a very minute selection of players, they may never acknowledge it. Let alone do anything about it.
2 Likes
That’s the thing; I don’t think this will remain an issue for a small number. At first it won’t be a big deal, people will be too busy exploring the new mode. But more and more are going to come across this and it’s going to get brought up more and more as people get their groove on and realize they can’t get around this.
Especially since it won’t happen every time. Players will enjoy it when they can get full completion on a mission, and then get aggravated when this scenario crops up and wonder why they can do so many with full completion, but are stuck having to sacrifice an objective when this conflict of objectives comes up.
Most people won’t care because it doesn’t happen consistently on every mission. Hell, it doesn’t even happen that often. At most, more people will find it as a very mild annoyance that makes them think “that’s annoying” when it happens but they do nothing else beyond that - but not to the point where they will be talking about it constantly like you do.
1 Like
Reread my previous post. I was editing it while you were typing to account for exactly hat you said here.
Does the results screen actually say “failed” for objectives you didn’t do? If there’s only a red X, that isn’t synonymous with “failed”, necessarily. Unless the game literally displays a message saying “YOU FAILED”, you can interpret that as a failure OR you can interpret that as a thing you chose not do do.
I understand the difference between having a choice and not (i.e., forced to leave an objective uncompleted), but it’s semantics. I really feel like this is one you’re going to have to let go. Maybe enough people will complain about it and IOI will change their programming, but if you just take this forum as a sample size, I don’t see a large enough percentage citing it as a game-breaking problem for IOI to do anything about it.
Even if it does say failed. You say I failed to shoot, oh look! It’s bc I successfully poisoned.
I agree with @Heisenberg that it doesn’t make total sense, but often things don’t. This is one of those times.
2 Likes
For what it’s worth, I also agree that it does not make sense to present two conflicting objectives to the player and imply that they should be able to do both of them. The ONLY point I disagree with in all of this is that IOI must fix it. I can rationalize everything else into insignificance.
2 Likes
If IOI had to deal with the electrocution phone and molotov because they were overpowered and “broke” the game, then they have to deal with this, which creates an actual break in the game. The fact that it is one minor detail change that would otherwise not affect their intended result is what gets me on the level of resistance to this idea.
3 Likes
Of course, I never said that never happened. I never denied that this was a possiblity.
Clearly, they don’t want to and it’s something they want for the mode, as they have now called it intended behaviour. They technically have dealt with it, by addressing it, and calling it something that was intended and not accidental (a bug). They’re just going to go with the narrative that “Freelancer is meant to be punishing”, “it’s not meant to be smooth sailing all the time”, etc.
They clearly want this to stay otherwise they wouldn’t have published a whole article to basically address this one thing and attach a “launch” cinematic with it.
4 Likes
Or they just don’t want to bother dealing with the one random scenario that comes up that contradicts the rest of the wording in that article, that the player had control and preparation and consideration of the mission you’re going to take is needed to achieve success, despite this scenario being unbeatable regardless of any of that.
1 Like
Giving you mutually exclusive objectives is competely unrelated to difficulty. It’s an irritation.
Ultimately though, how hard IOI sticks to the current narrative is going to depend on how many bug report tickets their support team, reddit and this forum are on the receiving end of.
4 Likes
Got a question for y’all:
January 26 arrives, you download the patch, after waiting a few hours for the usual server maintenance you’re finally able to access Freelancer. How long are you planning to play the mode in your first session in the full version?
- 1-2 Hours
- 3-4 Hours
- 5-6 Hours
- 7-8 Hours
- More than 8 Hours
0 voters
7 Likes
I’m going with 1-2 hours because I won’t be able to access it until I get home from work, and I only plan on completing the first contract of the campaign that has 3 maps, so I’m able to get to bed at a reasonable hour for work the next day. However, after that day, I’m off the next week, so I’ll be throwing myself into Freelancer fully by the very next evening.
6 Likes