I said what I thought, and you shared what you think. We don’t agree, so there’s no point in continuing the discussion.
A Blast From The Past
A highly requested community feature now finds its way into HITMAN World of Assassination: There is now an option to change what music you hear on the main menu. You can choose between HITMAN 3 (2021), HITMAN 2 (2018), and HITMAN (2016) – all composed by Niels Bye Nielsen.
That’s really cool! It would be nice if they also added an option to change the appearance of the entire menu, like in the previous editions.
The Bowtie Duck June 5th - June 10th
A rubber duck with a charming disposition. When an enthralled target picks it up, they’ll become easily traceable in any crowd.
Unlock method: Have IOI Account and watch “007 First Light” on Twitch
Link your Twitch account to your IOI Account to unlock this brand-new item. For a reminder on how to earn this reward:
• Link your IOI Account to your Twitch account.
• Watch a cumulative 60 minutes of 007 First Light on Twitch between respective time frames of the chosen drops (see above).
• Any streamer playing under the HITMAN World of Assassination category on Twitch is eligible for Twitch Drops.
Can someone explain me what I need to do? I’m not a Twitch guy, don’t even know which Twitch i need to watch.
Yeah, I’m just waiting for someone to accuse me of racism just because I don’t want to buy a DLC with a “black” character. I find that interesting too. But I already explained the real reason, and it’s actually very pragmatic.
This is definitely not what you’re getting at and it’s not the reason I’m unhappy either I think having wiz kahlifa in the game was an amazing opportunity for him and io but I personally think they’ve done him a disservice he should’ve had his own new unique mission in his fighting or music
You can’t accept that someone has a different point of view, so you have to provoke me I’m not going to get into this debate with your. I’ve already explained my position, and I don’t see any reason to justify it further. Have a nice day.
You know putting emphasis and acknowledging an individuals skin color isn’t really supporting your whole I’m not racist thing. Not that I’m accusing you of anything, but if you’re gonna argue why you aren’t gonna purchase a DLC pack maybe not throw around rhetoric that would implicate you and say something more akin to not wanting to support a DLC Pack cause it’s a slap dash reskin of a previous Elusive Target.
I did it deliberately as a form of sarcasm, referring to the fact that back when I defended my stance on whether The Disruptor should be removed, I was accused of promoting sexual assault. So now I assume someone might come up with the idea that since I don’t want to buy the current DLC because I’d have to pay twice for something I theoretically already own, it must mean I’m racist because I don’t like a Black character.
It’s absurd, I know - but that’s often the kind of logic used when accusations are made against people who simply have a different opinion.
Sorry for my sarcasm, but that’s just in my nature - there are no bad intentions behind it.
I didn’t understand what he meant at first either, but now it clicked for me that it’s some kind of local slang - ‘SA Someone.’ I assume it’s meant as a metaphor for silencing someone without giving them a chance to respond. Without leaving a trace on the forum.
So I completely misunderstood the meaning and context My bad. But honestly, why not use slang like ‘SA someone’ to emphasize that somebody absolutely destroyed another person in an argument
For me, debating “SA” on a forum about Hitman is a pointless discussion, because that’s what courts and the legal system are for - to judge him, not “Cancel Culture.” So if someone feels the need to discuss it, I believe they should direct that energy toward the proper authorities instead of venting at digital content featuring the likeness of some guy who has been accused of “SA.”
Damn you could design a whole batch of contracts around that.
I also like the boom box behaving like the H2016 Radio you can find in Paris and Sapienza. I am not sure how useful it is but it is something new.
I swear that would have been super useful for some of my elusive target videos where I had to use unlocked Ansel to check if the distant target is where I want them to be.
Regarding the ET in Sgail, I think they pretty much did what was possible to address delisted content being unavailable. It is a shame the suit(s ?) still cannot be unlocked. I can also see it is a bit sad Disruptor owners have to pay for the mission again with little gain, but then again they already have a nearly identical mission in their game to play anytime. If I owned the Disruptor, I would also not pay this new ET again.
Surely they should not straight up delete the Disruptor since there are people who specifically paid for the mission featuring this jerk. It would also be an argument people would use against always-online, taking away content after you bought it.
You are really not helping yourself with such statements. Nobody said that and now you made it a topic, making people wonder if that is actually a reason why you do not buy the DLC, even if it was just sarcasm. Sarcasm also is hard to get across with text only.
I would also like the topic on McGregor be dropped here. Please don’t make me clean up this thread you all.
Honestly I paid for the Disruptor and I’m a staunch proponent of game preservation… but I wouldn’t care at all if IOI removed the entire thing from the game files (especially now that there’s a “replacement” for most of the content). They’re probably not gonna do it since it would not achieve much when the whole thing can be added back with mods though.
No. That is some toxic manosphere rhetorical BS. You are not someone who simply has a different opinion. You are a bad faith actor making bad faith arguments.
Just because you say you are simply stating an opinion does not make it reality that you are simply stating an opinion. You are dropping in to a conversation about the consequences of real-world actions, presenting your premise as factual and logical, and then clutching your pearls whenever someone calls you out. You say something is not a big deal, then people respond by saying no it actually is a big deal, and then you go “but since it’s not a big deal you guys are attacking me and being absurd and illogical.”
You seem to care about preserving the reputation of a rapist very much.
For you. Except it’s not a pointless discussion for you, because you keep doing it.
The courts did judge him. Guilty. Of rape. Is that good enough for you, or do you want to respond with “well this is a video game not the real-world rape of an innocent person who will be forever traumatized by the actions of a rich and powerful man with legions of fans who would never abandon him even if he raped someone”?
It’s not your cute, quotation mark “cancel culture”. It’s fucking consequences. And until men like you learn that actions have consequences, it’s an uphill battle against roundabout “who me I didn’t do nothin’ wrong I’m just a guy saying things and you all can’t handle a little intelligent conversation you snowflakes” rhetoric like yours.
Conor McGregor is a rapist. He is other things too, but he is a rapist. Being a rapist got him fired from his job as an elusive target in a video game. Consequences. Instead of complaining that he should still be in the game, you should suffer the loss – maybe that will make you think about the consequences of actions.
This is literally the only thing I’m going to say on this topic (and go ahead and flag it as inappropriate if applicable).
Given the current political climate in the United States today, I wouldn’t go too far with the sexual assault discussion. Is it terrible and should this person be “cancelled”? Yes. It’s a crime and one that I, at least, think should be vilified and not glorified by inclusion in the game.
Let’s not forget though that there are about 80 million people over here who elected someone convicted of sexual assault to the Presidency… I have no idea who Shade or Dribbleondo or any of you are in real life (and I’m not asking), but you may be arguing about the importance of caring about sexual assault to people who have literally been told by their leader (who is currently being given gold statues of himself to stroke his ego) that sexual assault is “no big deal” and should be ignored. 80 million people looked at the records and collectively said “whatever”.
This isn’t…always online specific. Steam and other platforms are being criticised for this exact problem. Not sure of the connection there to be honest.
And I think developers have the right to fix their own mistakes. Saying they can’t ever change anything or remove anything they sell after they release it is problematic for multiple reasons. If a controversial celebrity was removed from the game, then I think that’d come under extreme circumstances. This would not be the status quo. Anyone affected could’ve got the new DLC for free, but IO didn’t do that. Lord knows why.
Instead, the company went for the most…profitable…route, instead of addressing the controversy in a timely manner, which would’ve satisfied most (or all) parties involved. Yes, the people who bought the original DLC would be annoyed, but it is much better for the brand image, and is way less controversial to remove someone like that and replace them with someone new that won’t cause a stink.
You literally just learned about “SA” generally standing for “sexual assault”, so take a wild guess…
Yes, please tell us more about where we should direct our energy. You seem to have a good sense of priorities, what with that notion that sexual assaults shouldn’t be discussed outside of courts or police stations, and that doing so merely fuels “cancel culture”, a “cancer” that you’re apparently dedicated to fighting.
I’m not going to get into this debate with your. I’ve already explained my position, and I don’t see any reason to justify it further. Have a nice day.
