Player-Made Elusive Contracts (PS4)


Really fun mission, love the heist style objectives. Mission had a good flow to it, where all the objectives can follow a logical order and pattern to make for fun speed running.


Interesting how (based on the background of the score card) we all went for Caruso’s boat as the escape method. Great minds think alike?? :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:


Hey guys, loved this one…got spotted in the beginning but was fun to run out.


You’re up @Goldgun



Right here is my entry, this one is a bit of a puzzle,so don’t try and rush it too much.

The idea is that two people have tried to gain immortality by linking their souls together - as long as one is alive the other can’t die. For this reason they both have to die within a certain time frame (While it says 15 seconds in the briefing, it should actually be 30, so that people have a bit more of a chance at this.) If a target is knocked out, their soul will leave their body and find a new host, so knocking out either target is not allowed! A mysterious organisation that believe immortality is ethically wrong have contracted 47 to kill them (I’m hoping to do a bit of a series with targets who have all tried to become immortal in different ways.) As the organisation do not want to attract extra attention, they have offered a bonus for not using explosives to kill the targets. Using explosives is not an instant fail, but you get an extra 20,000 points if you don’t use them.


Kill both targets using any method or disguise.
Neither target can be knocked out at any point in the mission.
The targets must die within 30 seconds or each other (the briefing that says 15 seconds is wrong.)

Extra objective: (worth an extra 20,000 points) Do not use any explosives


SA, plus the 20k no-explosives bonus. Video blurred due to spoiler thumbnail

Edit: wait question, does using a breaching charge on a door count as using an explosive?


Well done! Interesting how you solved this, I had a slightly different way of doing this level in mind when I made this, so it was intresting seeing the way you did it. I guess the breaching charge technically does count as an explosive, but I don’t think it really gave you an advantage here so would be fine with you still getting the 20K bonus. But as it did technically break that optional rule, if other people have a problem with it, its up to them.


Breach charge is an explosive kill tho.


It wasn’t for the kill, I opened a door with it.


Ah. Still an explosive tho (wait nvm I didn’t read Goldgun’s post properly)


I’d have to say no bonus points. Door or not, you still used an “explosive”.

Wouldn’t you think so?


Yeah, I guess I was being a bit too lenient. Thinking about it now he did break a rule so it while it didn’t offer him much of an advantage it would be a bit unfair on anyone else who wants to take part to give him the 20,000 bonus. Still it was a good time, wouldn’t be surprised if he won anyway.


But in the briefing you state:

Based on that he didn’t break any rule.


So… an I use explosions for doors and stuff? @Goldgun


I say that explosives can be used, but not for killing people. Opening doors is fine.

While you may have missed thinking about explosives as a door-breach method when making the rules, you explicitly stated that the client’s wishes are as follows:

they have offered a bonus for not using explosives to kill the targets

So, it’s already been decided.


Glad to see people are still playing. It’s actually fun watching some of these videos without having played myself because I don’t know what to expect. Makes it more cinematic and/or comedic, depending on how the person’s run went. lol

Very creative contract idea, @Goldgun. Nice job.


Looking at it now I guess I was a bit confusing as the in game briefing and what I wrote on the forum are a bit different. I probably should have remade the contract writing an accruate breifing (but writing mission briefings of PS4 takes so long…) For fairness I’m going to say no explosives what so ever (if you want the 20K bonus,) so no breaching charges, extinguishers, propane etc, even if you are using them to open a door rather than kill a target.


That does not make any sense tbh.

Especially because this was the important part:

No one hears a bc opening a door. It does not attract extra attention. And lets be honest here, the only reason you put that restriction there was to avoid people just tossing a duckie at the hippie, making your contract far easier than you intended.


Well in the most recent briefing (the one I posted on this forum, rather than the one on the mission itself) I wrote “Do not use any explosives.” I think the most fair way to solve if people can use explosives or not is just to follow that to the letter and say they are not allowed. I’m sorry if you disagree, but that’s how I think this should be done to make the competition as fair as possible.

If you want an in universe explanation for why 47 can’t use a silent explosive, I would say that the organisation want to use any excuse to underpay 47, so if burn marks from an explosion were eventually found by CSI they would use that as an excuse to not pay him as he had technically broken a rule of the contract.


I’m not sure if you fully understand what i meant. You only put that restriction there to prevent tossing a duck, making your contract way easier than intended. You then linked that with the briefing, and the only motif the client had was:

You are not excluding crowbars either, which leaves evidence aswell.