To be fair, you need a really high IQ to understand Blood Money. The racism is EXTREMELY subtle, and without a deep knowledge of 47’s psychology most of the stereotypes will go over a typical player’s head.
There’s also 47’s narcissistic outlook, which is woven into his characterisation. Take the quote “Gotta check you white bread!”, which is in itself a cryptic reference to Harper Lee’s To Kill a Mockingbird.
Oh how I laugh at the typical viewer’s ignorance watching IO’s brilliance unfold onscreen. And BTW, I do have a Skip Muldoon tatto :), but I only show it to ladies within my own rating (preferably professional) beforehand. Nothing personell.
Who said he did? These stereotypes are present throughout the first five games, and even the sixth game to a far lesser degree. Absolution had them because of the style of story being told, a Tarantino-esque road film turned into a video game, so why is it so shocking that the four games might have ulterior motives for using stereotypes, such as trying to tell the player something thematically or stylistically? I clearly said this is applicable to any Hitman game before. Also, even if it was only applicable to Blood Money, that game’s not allowed to have thematic content to explore as a work of artistic creation, something people worked on for months and years to suit their vision of what they wanted it to be at release?
47 is much more sociable than he ever was before, he actually speaks to people in levels, actually seems far more talkative and socially capable. In a lot of ways, his sociopathic tendencies are even more apparent with the sarcasm and sense of dark humor in this game. What I’m saying is that he has evolved with the games, just as the games have evolved with him. So much more can be achieved and relayed to the player now, that the old stereotypes won’t stand as strongly now. That doesn’t mean they aren’t still present, as tropes are common in all forms of storytelling, but they’re much more subtle now with the stereotypes.
Once again, the budget for these newer games is much greater than before. Absolution’s developers wanted to include stereotypes, as mentioned above, for stylistic reasons, but they didn’t have to include stereotypes, given the budget for that game. For the style they were going for, the stereotypes were there to meet a visual style. Over-the-top characters are in every game in this series, finally moving away from it now after Absolution, which was a wake up call for the developers in a variety of ways.
A stereotype is a flat, simplistic representation of any group of people, same as a complex human being like 47 seeing someone merely as a victim or himself just as a killer determined by design. The design of the game doesn’t grant 47 or the player time or any incentive to view them as anything more than the simple, narrow-minded way. A target is introduced and dies in the level he or she appears in. Now, you have characters like Jason Portman and Helmut Kruger, characters who seem to exist outside of the levels they’re in. Even Jordan Cross, among other targets like Silvio Caruso, has a life of his own outside of Club 27, simply through his music playing on the radio in Hokkaido. There are more opportunities to express new themes that couldn’t be delved into before because of technological limitations in gaming.
Okay, but this is a work of fiction, what you seem to be describing is a nonfiction account. There are differences between the two. There’s a lot of creativity that goes into fiction, liberties taken and such. If we relied only on “what we can do with what we are given” as you write, where we ground things so far into reality that they lack any intrigue or excitement, J.R. R. Tolkien’s fantasy The Lord of the Rings would be a snoozefest and nowhere near as influential as it has become. A writer of all people should understand this process isn’t as clear-cut or straightforward as what you’re describing.
Anything is possible, but this isn’t a minstrel show, something which is not a brilliant thing. This is a video game created by people decades after the civil rights and slavery events. It’s a different time, a group of different, better people, which the folks at Io are, and comes from a different place in the world. This is up for interpretation, as any good work of art is, whereas a minstrel show is not: trash masquerading as “art” for people who didn’t know any better. There’s a difference between media specifically intended to mock and insult particular groups of people and creators’ use of stereotypes toward a thematic end. The fact that we disagree on this game’s use of stereotypes proves my point. Should Mafia III dial back on the racial stereotypes, even if there is a point to it all that is against racism?
One might ask why you are trying to claim a professional killer’s mind views other people with the respect and dignity they deserve, rather than understanding that it’s wrong to see them solely as factors that impede or aid him in his efforts, in the ways outlined? Did we not just establish that 47 kills because it’s all he’s been designed to do, and that he would, by logic, see those around him as puzzle pieces in that violent act? That’s not a healthy, good way to see people, as objects to be manipulated, and the original games demonstrate why that stance is wrong.
The point is 47 does think this way, but it always prevents him from seeing the whole picture behind every story in every game. He is limited to this narrow-minded, wrongfully simplistic viewpoint so much so that he fails to realize when he’s been betrayed or been set up. He spends so much time viewing targets based on means that are readily identifiable, race, body shape, all these physical features that would help police locate a fugitive suspect, for example, etc, but these features don’t help him recognize that there are moral ambiguities and complexities involved with humans which his very limited viewpoint cannot explain or account for. 47 is betrayed because he doesn’t see the whole picture in Hitman 2.
Because of his professional blindness, believing clients can only give him work, he doesn’t realize Sergei is actually working against him, same with Ortmeyer in the first game. Why does he kill the inspector in Contracts? Because he jeopardizes his work, so he’s essentially a witness, someone who knows too much. His motivations or reasons don’t matter to him or to the player in the moment. It’s when you look back and think about what the inspector’s reasons were that you begin to see the weaknesses and injustices in 47’s perceptions of the world around him, and why treating other people like this is wrong.
In Blood Money, Cayne is murdered, his poor development not only resembles the poor development of every target, but 47’s lack of knowledge concerning him. 47 doesn’t even know him, and we players don’t know him either. But we kill all of them, because they’re witnesses, and that’s what the game asks him and the players assuming control of him to do. That should make us uncomfortable, the fact that 47 goes from this cool, level-headed killer only taking care of targets as cleanly as possible to a violent, chaotic killing spree, with no planning or style, something that happens in SA as well for different reasons. As a result, I think these stereotypes remind us why it’s not good to view people only through them. They don’t help us see the big picture in any aspect of life or other people, we’re depriving ourselves of the true story going on behind the scenes, just like 47 is, and that’s what I interpret the games, forgetting about the developers entirely, are really saying is problematic in the world.
There are no themes in Blood Money, if there are they are underwritten or shoved blatantly in your face. The stereotypes were because the writers didn’t know enough about who they were writing
Yes I agree without 100 percent here, we finally see the ripples from the impact so to speak.
I was talking about historical fiction or drama/thriller, fantasy is called fantasy for a reason. I could make up any old shit and publish it. By the wat the Lord of the Rings was influenced greatly by Tolkien’s Anglican beliefs, experience in WW1, his childhood in South Africa and the books he read as a kid
That is not a theme, that is just abysmal writing. Even if you don’t flesh out a villain, you NEED to give him a PRESENCE, GLaDOS and Handsome Jack develop little but we remember them because they have personality, Cayne just sat in a wheelchair and handed out dossiers like he was a filing cabinet. People like Frank Tenpenny from GTA:SA also have little development but they impact the story.
You are quite right, if anyone wants to continue this further feel free to start a new topic. At this point I feel as though I am repeating myself. Until then we shall await the new HITMAN showing at Africa ComicCon or the events at Tokyo Gameshow
Sounds like you just gave the correct explanation for why they feel connected: because they are. But again, I dont see ETHER connected with terrorism, and that ‘not a stretch’ is an assumtpion and assumes facts for the sake of its own argument.
What. So the property labeled ‘Villa Coruso’ feels unrealated to the man who owns it, Silvio Coruso? Soders ailing medical state feels unrelated to the fact that hes in a hospital? The former criminal turned fashion mogul doesnt feel connected to a fashion show?
This argument especially irks me in regards to Paris. If you follow Victor, you see a man who is trying to be something he is ultimately not: legitimate. Getting caught up with Sado or the food options, mingling with guests, and dealing with things that cost money because as the breifing says, he is merely the money man. Cut to his wife in a quiter, more serious venue, making sure everything runs smoothly, running an auction, even menipulating the guests below, planning infiltrations for spies, because as the breifing says, she is the real brains of the operation. Those characters are actively connected with the place they are in.
The Paris targets are married, the Sapienza targets are spying on or activly planning to kill the other, the Merrackech targets are plotting and funding a coup together, the Bangkok targets are a defendent from a murder trial and their lawyer, Colorado are all elite memeber of a militia and work together, and Hokkaido has two targrts preparing to make a deal that has been in the works. I fail to see how any of these targets are unrelated.
Your interpretation is that there are no themes in Blood Money, and that’s fine. What we feel about the games’ themes and what is actually present are two separate things entirely, so one can see things either way and defend it just as much.
Thanks for the clarification, I wasn’t sure if you were referring to fiction still, and sure, you could make up anything and publish it, but as you rightly said, LoTR was still based on something from his real experiences and beliefs, so it’s not entirely make-believe, yet it is fantastical in more ways than one could expect. It’s a fusion of imagination and reality, which is part of what makes these things interesting to read and watch and play, at least for me.
If you’re going to take only part of what I said, then yes, I’d agree that it is a clear case of abysmal writing and not playing into any greater theme. Again, that’s simply my interpretation, which has nothing to do with my judgment of the material. Could it be better written? Hell yes, but I prefer to analyze what I’ve been given and not worry as much about what could have been.
We’ll continue this discussion elsewhere in another thread if the need arises. I really don’t have much more to say about it already that hasn’t already been said countless times.
There is a brief presentation being made by IO at a ComicCon in Africa. I think that @Calvicius is extrapolating from the brevity of the presentation (30 minutes) and the fact that a marketing employee is hosting the session.