My view on IOI changed after the documentary

So funny when people find out how MUCH effort is put into game development.


Well SE had a plan to ensure that it was worth their while to ensure IO lived on - the documentary confirmed that they still have some sort of financial stake in IO.

1 Like

And that is also smart thinking! Never burn those bridges people. You just never know.

I mean, look, the fact SE still wants “one foot in that door” shows you what they really thought of IOI and HITMAN. This wasn’t a case of “goodbye and good riddance.” They simplified down the product offering, phased out episodes, then sat in with WB and the rest is (recent) history.

SE and IOI admit that selling HITMAN 2016 as episodic was tough, but as Matsuda himself said - he loved playing the game. It was just about finding how to work it. And now with all the recent developments, IOI back on its feet… new studio humming in Sweden and now we know that IOI have both WB and Square Enix on its side…

One day we may all look at the “Squeexit” as the best thing to happen to IOI. :slight_smile:


Which is why it’s so bizarre that they’re considering going back to that model for HITMAN 3. Sure the world is more accepting of the model now than it was in 2015/2016, but considering returning to something that almost did the company in is just… odd.

1 Like

Well now there’s a third man on the team… WB Games are pretty good at Marketing.

Did they talk about how they would try to do it this time?

What I found crazy is how the episodic idea was reasonable and yet fatal. But then just making the intro pack free, which would have even work within the episodic idea, generated a huge income.

I don’t want to open the what-if door, but maybe everything had worked out if the ICA facility missions were free since the beginning.


I dunno. There was and still is a lot of stigma around episodic content especially since the closure of Telltale which has been ascribed to their episodic content model (I have no clue if it is the truth most likely isn’t the whole truth). It is much easier to make a good short game that is complete (baring DLC content naturally) and bank on that.


Also if the ICA facility was free back then and they still had these problems, they would not have had the trump card anymore.

1 Like

I’d welcome a return to an episodic release, honestly. That’s purely from the point of view of a player, though.


I’m glad someone else enjoyed the episodic system! It gave me time to obsessively play each level without feeling some burning need to move onto the next one, because the next one wasn’t there yet! :stuck_out_tongue:


I think within IOI and within that circle of fans that trust IOI (basically everybody on HMF) episodic was “reasonable”.

But I think in a world of “I funded this kickstarter game and the dev never finished and my money’s gone”… The moment someone tells a room of strangers that they want your money and they give you a bit of something and a promise to make more… That’s not the way to do it.

I give you an example. I had a pretty heated multi-day discussion once with an associate of a big AAA film director. This big shot director was upset with the studio system so he wanted to make crowd sourced blockbuster films.

I said: “Cool. How does he want to do it?” The answer was: “He’s going to get money from the fans (X Hundred Thousand Dollars) and when he’s done he will give them the movie.”

Me: “So… he’s making a Kickstarter?”

A: “Nope! No third parties on this one. We have a site and people just donate directly.”

Me: “Mmmm… So no controls?”

A: “We’re making a bid for our freedom!”

Me: “So… what do the fans get in the meantime?”

A: “Nothing. Oh we have a short film concept of the film. They can have that.”

Me: “Well that’s not going to work.”

A: “Why not? They love this guy! They trust him!”

Me: “They’re getting nothing! You’re charging them for for… nothing! The short film was pre made! You take people’s money and they at least get a say in what gets into the movie.”

A: “That’s Studio Producer bullshit. There will be none of that. He has 100% control!”

Me: “Just 0% of the funding. You know how disrespectful that can be to fans? You’re taking their money and it’s just bye-bye now I’m gonna do whatever I want!”

A: “Look. He’s got this. We’re making the movie!”

Me: “Not if nobody gives the money!”

And it went on like that… Long story short. It failed and he had to give back everybody’s money back. “The fans didn’t get behind my strategy blah blah”.

But at least the guy I talked to is still my friend. :slight_smile:


This is true, which is why I think giving two options is the right way to go:

  1. Pay for the game upfront and get the levels as they’re released
  2. Pay for levels as they come out, one at a time.

Best of both worlds :slight_smile:


I much prefer a full game. What IO need to do is find in-game ways of enticing newcomers into replaying levels, engaging in creator content and finding ways to keep them coming back even before the game hits the stands.


That director also put like two concepts up and made the fanbase vote… it was a close run poll which basically guaranteed about 50% of the fanbase would not fund the movie.

There was also a third concept but it was not made part of the poll which upset another group. Why not? Cause he didn’t want to do that one. These things became the source of our arguments. Hahaha. :stuck_out_tongue:

1 Like

In terms of replayability, I think they’re doing pretty well. Challenges, mission stories, escalations, Elusive Targets (or whatever the new version is called), featured contracts, contract creation and Ghost Mode (for certain levels) are all pretty good for replayability, IMO.

Yeah, that seems like a bad idea. :stuck_out_tongue:

1 Like

I mean, that was a disaster waiting to happen. What a terrible idea.


PAYDAY 2 has an interesting way of doing this.

  1. The missions flit in and out of your map simulating what is available on the market so you can’t just “Do World of Tomorrow 20 times”. The missions also spawn with different difficulty levels and so on.

  2. You can use in-game money to “buy” a contract to play what you want but it’s very expensive.

HITMAN could probably do something like this where the missions flit in and out and have like random bonus or achievements with a twist so you see it pop up and like… “Oh cool! Showstopper + a Challenge to do it with only 1 disguise change to earn an extra 200k Merces!”

Something like that.


To us? Yes. But my point is we need people playing this game and we need to make sure this is a game is presented to a new audience as one they can replay instead of tossing aside when it is done and whining that it is “too short”. Nothing is worse than a gameplay based game that is short. Brevity is fine other forms of games but not games as heavily gameplay oriented as Hitman


Contracts Mode will help but this current version is missing the Market and Arsenal aspect from ABSOLUTION.

They bring that back plus the idea that you can get a bit of pot luck from contracts + a twist for extra money… that will be fun for days. :slight_smile:

1 Like