The Money System (that never came to be)

Stopped reading here. Because HITMAN’s release was ~2.746 years ago.


Golgo 13 is ridiculous, I mean …its good manga but
It has many unrealistic scenes to compare with the Hitman series.
Of course the Hitman series is not very realistic either, but I do not think 47 could jump from a high-rise building and hit a target with a pistol while he is falling and land safely in the pool

Honestly, of all the games out there with microtransactions, Hitman is one of few where it would make sense and not feel out of place. You can’t really have unfair advantage and people seem to like new outfits and stuff, plus it would be additional income for the company.
RB Six Siege would be a good comparison.

1 Like

47’s brand of superhuman focus isn’t really the sharp shooting under ridiculous circumstances, though a few items like sniping Silvio via his giant telescope and shooting his plane out of the air with an antique cannon are very in Golgo-ish.

To give the player more options, 47’s brand of inhuman achievement is his disguise ability, extensive knowledge of all things related to murder and unbreakable confidence doing things that a regular person might be nervous about (walking the catwalk, preparing and serving poison fugu sushi, playing an audition set as a famous indie drummer, disarming a nuclear bomb, etc)

You read Golgo 13 to see what convoluted display of skill or determination he’ll use to defeat someone’s over the top protection - you play the opportunities in Hitman to find outlandish ways for 47 to manipulate the world into letting him kill someone. It’s all about, nudging people to do what he wants (as he says himself).

The Mumbai mission even makes a point that that a lesser assassin would use a tripod and equipment he doesn’t know how to calibrate to make a shot that 47 could do with a basic sniper rifle and no other preparation - or 47 can just calibrate his sights and manipulate events to give the lesser assassin the opportunity to “prove” himself…

Please no. Thank God IOI deleted buying system.

What classes as “didn’t do well”? In comparison to? Newer Hitmans? There are more gamers than ever, audience are growing. Who’s to say if HBM were too have been realised new today, that it wouldn’t have gotten as many as H2. We can argue that Hitman simply “doesn’t do well” in comparison to other AAA games then.

How does attachments and customisation restrict finding challenges and glitches etc? Players can simply change their weapons to the “default” attributes that would then be no different to here and now. Hell, you could have loads more different weapon runs with different versions.

And we see this taking place in Contracts Mode. IO make a lot of NPCs have pathing and independence that makes them cross points of interest (chandelier, speakers etc). Attachments add tools to the sandbox, it’s more along the lines of items like audio distractions and phones. There’s not an ideal place engineered to use these items but can manipulate the environment and AI when the player sees fit.

I’ve not played CV myself but from what I gather from your linked video, CV1 is designed to not have players rush the game or they will die. The guy didn’t go into detail over this much but does the game actually detect this or is it like The Impossible Game where there’s just so many enemies, that the player most likely die from it if they don’t take it slow. If it’s the former, doesn’t that restrict players who want to go fast and if the latter, players could speedrun it when they learn the level.

As for CV2 the collect hearts (which I think is the main point you wanted me to watch). This is down to the grind that developers artificially do. In GTA Online, the premise of doing missions, earning cash and using said cash to buy whatever in the game is awesome. The rate of getting to the items is the issue. The issue with the video is that the devs of CV2 made it an 4 hour grind. It also depends on the type of player, there’s loads of RPG,MMO players that love that grind business.

Yes but people are all different, just like people have different learning curves. There’s no set amount of multitasking for a person, their limit is different. Like my runs on MGS involved a multitude of multitasking and forward thinking, which another may simply can’t do and vice versa. Developers have a hard time indeed as they need to put themselves in the player’s shoes and try to think of every different possibility which is effectively impossible to do without said users. The money system still doesn’t intrude these factors, especially when decision making of purchasing a weapon would be outside the game, and in the menu area. Does one find it overwhelming making a purchase in Mumbia, India? Highly doubtful.

Yes and they are very well done IMO. There’s a balance of game heuristics and realism that is taken in concern for the players and game design. And what feels “too restrictive” is reserved for higher difficulties (super enforcers). Personally, I dislike the super enforcers as they shouldn’t really be suspicious of a person. If the game had notoriety, then I would love the enforcers as that would be a result of player input that caused the next mission to have such mechanics.

The mechanics the current items have wouldn’t change due to a money system as they are two different areas. Adding an integer/float for design and purpose would not change what the items does. Customisation, well then that’s the features that need to be investigated further for the balance/realism. Hitman is PvE, balancing doesn’t need to be perfect, Hence flying briefcase.

Wouldn’t be the exact same now with testing different runs and methods? If you’re trying to find the perfect of anything, it’ll be trial and error. I would argue that it’s not a tiny demographic that would like to see this back as this forum isn’t the playerbase. It’s a feature that is constantly hinted and teased at us from screens, cinematics and even descriptions like the Jaeger “allowing extensive customisation”.

Another good example would be Treyarch and the zombies mode. Certain zombies players were asking for the missing perks back Juggernog (More Health) and Speed Cola (Faster Reloading). Half of the player base are zombies players and even less were asking for this changes. Few weeks later, they came back. These are mechanics too, mechanics that Treyarch at first said “design clashes with the new perks”.

I think this is where the PC version vs Console may need to differ then. I don’t want pinpoint aim (other than scopes) but I would like to be able to not have the spread just go everywhere as if it’s 47’s first time shooting an assault rifle. Anything automatic in 2016 just spray width ways more than vertical where I’d rather recoil. Going back to BM, the accuracy is great and it creates artificial recoil and spread with the crosshair moving rather than a parameter range increasing vastly. I enjoy H2 parameters, because 47 can actually aim with automatic.

Having a tricked out weapon wouldn’t make 47 any less of a badass. His tools only further his skill (helps player). There’s nothing with you taking off all the items to the WA2000 and still receiving the same feeling, if not more as you restricted yourself to less.

Obviously, I don’t expect the wackiness of ricocheting bullets off violins (would be a funny Easter Egg though playing Ave Maria). But customisation doesn’t make 47 good, but furthers his abilities through the player. The same way, Red Dead Redemption wants the player to make them feel satisfaction by killing multiple enemies at once. A player cannot typically do this so Dead Eye slow motion is added to allow the player to target and shoot the enemies and then the game will go back to real time.

Yeah sure. I’d like that. Providing the mechanics existing aren’t affected negatively, why not add different states of poison. I mean putting lethal tablets in an air vent or fumigator does look a bit silly. It’s that balance of player heuristics to realism.

Why would you bother with worse lockpicks? Maybe they are better for something else (unnoticeable) or you simply want to challenge yourself.

I do. Seriously, reading that sounded so awesome. Player freedom to mess about in the sandbox we have. These maps have so much vibrant options going on around them. The tools we have are reskins and have definite abilities which are typically the same.

Which needn’t to be grindy. That’s devs using the mechanic to create grind artificially, not the mechanic itself. Payday is a good example where you’re thrown money to buy stuff but there’s loads of stuff to purchase.

Not to you but to casual consumers, who don’t want to/can’t able to do things. Does that make the item less rewarding? Depends on the player. If you actually do objectives and challenges, you would get a lot more cash as an incentive for you to get items.

Right, but how did you pull it off on your first try. Elaborate?

I’m saying that is it not the consumers fault.

At what point do we write every missing feature in a successor, a “money issue”? GTAV is miss a lot of it’s foundations, do we say it was money? It could be director choice, even they could have forgot. We can’t say exactly what it is but whatever the reason, it’s not the consumer’s fault. You’ll find consumers and exec/shareholders look at the same thing - hard numbers. Also why some games go a miss unfortunately.

People above seem to like the concepts of customisation

People were extremely interested in different items and scopes on weapons

People’s disapproval of the content being lacklaster, lack of player’s choice.

As I said earlier, HMF isn’t the be all and end all of the playerbase though. H2 still follows the same foundations as 2016 and these mechanics are still not here so it is fair to say the people who disliked it then, will here too.

Which is subjective as the evidence above shows otherwise as well as the mechanical changes, you and I have discussed on how in fact it makes a difference to Hitman.

[quote=“Jarbinger, post:389, topic:28980”]
What you wanted to do was speak for the general public and be treated as the general public, while trying to take the role of critic and commentator. That comes with additional responsibilities

Lol no. You’re assuming. I am indeed part of the general public, not a critic or commentator for anything. I am critical but I speak for myself and I can speak as a member of the public and general consumer as I am one. My source of general consumers and their way of thinking is from working with them and their mentality for years, that is not to say I am putting words in their mouths but to describe a general attitude towards the media of wants in my experience.

Needing to find the right kind of emetic poison would be horrible. Now, you come across to some emetic poison. If there were several kinds you might have to go to the other side of the map to get it. Or you waste a loadout slot for what exists plenty on the map, but not in the right form.

Big do-not-want from me.


And that’s okay. To me, I find that really intriguing. I would say there should be items that mix. So tablets and syringe can both poison drinks. Powder for air vents and maybe a make up/ cooking. Etc. Doesn’t have to be exact. And this could be in higher difficulties as it adds that extra layer of challenge. No different to how items get removed/changed.

Legitimately, Hitman is the only franchise I’ve seen so far whose fans advocate for LESS content and features (which were in previous fan favourite entries, no less)


Well maybe if the system was necessary in this game or even well balanced in the old games there will be a return to the money system. The problem is no one here agrees on any one way.

Sales in comparison to Silent Assassin, Contracts and Blood Money together sold less than Silent Assassin. (Check slide 16)

It doesn’t, it’s simply unlikely to have any benefit to speed runners at all, and what “benefit” it had would be tedious at best. Watch Kotti’s Blood Money speed run:

The items of equipment he (ab)uses most are the coin and the explosives. When he does shoot someone, it’s with the Silverballer and a pretty standard shot (except for the hot tub shot that requires a scope to aim up that high, and the hilarious shooting Eve through a door), and often point blank. The benefits are minimal, particularly compared to the more entertaining aspects such as the hilarious manipulation of the AI.

Nobody wants to be the speed runner who found the optimum shotgun configuration to shave off half a second, they want to be the speed runner who found the exact angle to throw a fire extingusher that’s about to explode so it does a weird clipping bounce ends up killing a target but no civilians.

In the thousands of contracts that nobody plays?

CV was designed to be played in a linear manner, so because the designers always knew what angle you’d be coming from and what gear you’d have, they were able to build challenges around that and ensure that there was consistent challenge. CV2 was designed to have the player do a lot of busy work, walking back and forward, so the developers couldn’t account for direction or equipment - hence a lot of it is quite generic and just drags on.

Why? Is it going to matter or not? If I’m playing through the first time and I want to work out what to spend my money on before I start the new level, shouldn’t I feel it matters? How am I supposed to make a decision if I have dozens of options? Do I need range? Do I need penetration? Stopping power? What if I spend the money and then find I could have sourced a better weapon on site?

Either the money matters, or it doesn’t - if it doesn’t matter then it doesn’t warrant the development, and if it does matter then you have to consider it can mess with players heads and give them anxiety.

Then why bother? Either it matters, and it would change things, or it doesn’t.

The flying briefcase is pretty much a non-issue because it doesn’t effect what you can do in game terms - you can throw items while carrying the briefcase and while it’s hilarious to watch - it doesn’t have any advantage over other thrown items. Nobody is going to factor it into their strategy.

The silverballer with the scope did effect strategy because it meant you could get benefits of sniper rifles without some of the drawback, making the sniper rifle redundant in many cases.

No, that’s what the Stories are there for, that’s what the Intel is there for. That’s why they link together to ensure you have a lot of options teased into your imagination.

Spoilers for Miami: If I wander around someone will mention that Sierra is going to get a revitalization treatment - that sets up that I can poison her treatment and kill her, then when I go there it sets up that I can get the doctor to administer the poison and if I listen in on that conversation it sets up that she’s also planning on getting shitfaced so I poison her drinks and find other options there.

That kind of thing again drives engagement and gives the player an interesting lead to follow and play with.

Turning up with my sniper rifle to find out that the scope is just a bit too shit (because I didn’t spend enough on it) to hit my target, or that the windows are a bit too thick for the ammo to penetrate at this range (because I didn’t spend enough on it), or that 47’s hands are too shakey until I buy a tripod doesn’t not stimulate - it just basically says “fuck you, you didn’t grind enough”

It’s like most of the weapons are variants on the same items, just like in real life - yet nobody complains their local rifle club is bullshit because they don’t have a gunsmith available to customize day to day.

I was able to get the same grouping on PS4.

This has literally nothing to do with anything - we started talking about is 47 a great marksman, and if so why does he need to upgrade a sniper rifle’s scope to shoot at 200m when a standard military marksman can shoot at better 500m with open sights on a standard M4.

47 is clearly capable of superhuman marksmanship based off his pistol shooting skills.

Furthermore… I don’t see how the Assault Rifle fire is that bad of full auto.

I mean the submachineguns get a lot of horizontal action when you go full auto, but that’s understandable given they have relatively little mass and so the increasing attempts to correct after recoil will make things go off target. Plus you rarely have cause to go full auto for prolonged periods.

Well if you used the uncustomised WA2000 in Blood Money, 47 comes across as grossly incompetent as a shooter… to the extent it must be his first time with a rifle and he must be drunk. If the WA2000 was fully servicable as a sniper rifle from word go, there’d be no reason to upgrade it in Blood Money since a 2x scope and a regular silencer were more than adequet for shooting from one side of any map to the other.

If you force the player to buy a tricked out rig to make a shot reliably, it’s the rig that makes the shot.
If you don’t make it necessary, then it all the upgrades are essentially just conveniences that cheapen things.

There is no way that they could not be affected negatively. You would no longer be able to source the rat poison in Paris because it wouldn’t be an alcohol compatible emetic, and both Dahlia and Viktor are only drinking alcoholic, and it’d be suspicious on the guards’ sushi. You’d have to forgo the poison options until you saved up to have one go.

That doesn’t make the game feel fun and exploratory, that makes it feel tightly constrained and limiting.

Same reason you’d use an uncustomized rifle, to challenge yourself and you want to. See how little sense it makes?

Payday is a game where literally all you do is shoot cops for an hour at a time, the only reason to upgrade stuff is aesthetics and to kill the cops faster.

But I don’t get cash by doing the objectives and challenges, I get it from doing everything. Playing Hawke’s Bay over and over the same way grinds me the cash faster. This is why the creator of Heist added the day limit, because when he didn’t have it he found players wouldn’t challenge themselves and explore the content, they’d just grab the easy loot and go over and over.

I wandered around, then went downstairs and stole the waiter outfit - looked around until I came back up and then I found some rat poison and and the cocktail recipe, poisoned Viktor and then drowned him in a toilet. Then I switched to a tech disguise… then switched to a auction staff disguise and went and poisoned Dahlia’s drink… then I found I couldn’t get into the bathroom without messing up so I stood on the balcony, waited for her to go to her drink again and shot her in the head from out of sight and ran away like a hero.

Which means on my first try I implemented multiple disguises, and got a perfect unnoticed kill with an easy body hide, and would have gotten a second if I’d had a little more patience. That was using just skills I picked up in basic training and a little messing around to get what was a very satisfyingly sophisticated hit.

Then go be a good consumer and just give the game a positive review and wait patiently for the next one.

Nobody proposed that, you’re now proposing it because you’re proposed what can only be an grotesquely expensive feature that will appeal to a very small demographic (who bought the game anyone) and now dont’ want to accept that it’s an irrational proposal.

Liking the concept and the fantasy are entirely different to liking the reality - an important job of every creative team is to protect the audience from disillusionment and not expose them to the things that are only good in concept and fantasy. That’s why movies, comics and novels have editors, why artists do test sketches and why developers scrap content.

Nope, you became one the moment you decided to participate in this thread.

So are you qualified to know something or not? Because plenty of people think they’re experts on what consumers want purely because they like talking with people they agree with (about what they want). Actually understanding what they want, and the difference between what they actually want and what they think they want… that’s some pretty complex stuff.

1 Like

I think I haven’t seen single largest post lengthier than some of replies in this topic.
Can we declare a winner?

1 Like

How about 47 gets paid in candy?

1 Like

One word:

I just started playing this game for the first time and the progression system is absolutely suitable for Hitman. Hitman could copy the exact same system!

The way they managed the unlocks and upgrades is very well balanced. The inclusion of a gamble feauture counters the situation for when you have too much money. They have microtransactions done right, and even included steams community market place, where you can sell or exchange your skins etc with other players.

EDIT: The similarities of this game with HITMAN is just fukin crazy! There is even a hideout/safehouse where you can test weapons, change masks/outfits, test new gear and check cash etc. I’m telling you guys Payday2 is a great example in many ways.


This is very interesting. C47 will be less due to PC only but why do you think H:SA sold the most? Contracts didn’t have a money system or customisation (but a load of variants and types) yet still was less then both HBM and H:SA. The correlation of one mechanic dictating the whole point of sales cannot be made here due that reason. These were also within a 4 year period, not much general audience growth. Comparing the audience growth to 2016/2018 vs 2006 however would be interesting actually. To see how many “new” players have jumped into the game franchise despite less mechanics.

He still bought upgrades during the video even though he said “I probably won’t need them” he still chose to do so. Meaning they must be of some use to go do so. Also when you play the game soooo much that you study every mechanic to exploit, of course you might end up not needing to use intended features of the game. When I play Fallout 76, I use the infinite weight exploit to circumvent the weight limit that is placed on my person and inventory and ignore the box that is intended to store items (since it’s tiny).

Would this video be possible to do when you first play this game? Yeah. Would players know to do this on their first try? No, very unlikely. This is from hours of testing (which you dislike) of in game mechanics to see what you can do.

Why not? One is simply finding the best loadout as designed by the game and the other is getting a lucky glitch.

And why would that be? It offers nothing more in the terms of player items sandbox, unlike Absolution, allowing you to do a lot more than the story mode. I know in my case that I don’t play Contracts Mode because it gives me nothing to mess about with.

Hitman isn’t linear though, yet gives us the same response of certain equipment to create challenge. Hitman doesn’t need to make the player to grind for money, it would go the rate as the current XP does.

These are the questions the player should think about when making decisions. Just like when you decide to bring items into the map. You don;t know if you need it. We don’t know if there’s a keycard lock or not. This is where replayability comes into play - you return to the level with the previous knowledge and can then purchase/bring in items that will be useful to yourself. It will matter as you earned to afford the item that will make you do what you want to do in the level.

LOL how does money create anxiety? :joy: Real life must be a nightmare. It’s not like you won’t ever get to pick the other options, you’ll create options for the play to choose what they want if they feel like they want it instead of being forced through multiple different unlocks before getting to the item they actually want.

Let’s say for argument’s sake, that level 1 to 2 is 5000 XP and grants you a bomb. You complete the mission solely and at the end, you get 6000 XP. You would get from 1 to 2 and the bomb. Why can’t the said mission completion give $6000 and then price the bomb at $5000 along with other items? It gives the exact same amount of progression, while having other items priced so I can choose what I want.

You can do this anyways, even in your paris screenshots, you’re effectively sniping with the silverballer. This is where range and drop off applies. At the moment, any gun can shoot at any range with the damage multiplier decreasing. You shouldn’t be able to snipe with your 45 randomly. That doesn’t mean that you can’t add attachments to create a little bit more distance to make the shot. There could be a super long slide (as silly as it may be) that would negate a sniper but then that would cost a lot of money to balance the ability to have said pocket sniper. And if you can’t afford it, you have a briefcase with a sniper. Choices.

How does attachments and money compromise the stories and how they play out? The information will still be there.

These are options that should not be dictated by the game but allows it. Let’s look at the Jaeger Lancer Wall bangs. This could have easily been a customisable bullet feature that allowed the player to have 1 or 2 bullets that shoot through walls. I’m not expecting to be restricted to stories work, everything for them should be available in the map. The choices and decisions of the player’s and mentality could be furthered with the items you quoted above. If you can cater for the negativity of the lower tiered upgrade, why not? Upgrading only makes the shots easier for the player. Play more, the easier you can pull it off, not from impossible to possible.

But how many different platforms of guns are there in real life? They don’t all use an AR platform. which basically is in 2016 Hitman and 99% of H2. 47 has the ICA, which has resources beyond imaginable. Kruger Schmidt is the gunsmith that made the customisation possible. I’m not expecting to have 47 go to a place to build a weapon and wait for it to be delivered to a place where you’re going (although I would like that), having a customisation screen in the Planning section does the job.

This was applying too 2016, not H2.

I wasn’t disagreeing, they improved the accuarcy of 47 in H2. And I think it’s okay IMO.

This is where you get the right balance, 47 doesn’t need to be a mess at shooting, just not perfect, if the player can cope with the negativity, it should be fine. As we see 47 always using the 4x scope on WA2000 so that would be the consensus of pinpoint aiming. If you feel the shot is cheap, take the stuff off. I do this a lot in Splinter Cell Blacklist. You can get pinpoint aim with the certain loadout but I can challenge myself with different stuff.

Nothing stopping adding the different poisons into the level too. You could have multiple different states of poison be able to affect the items. Syringe, tablets would bother work in drinks.

That was a rhetorical question. That was my quote. And that was the answer, challenge. Options. Choice. Pros and Cons over each other.

I stealth 99% of my heists. A lot more tense and rewarding. The bit I emboldened is the exact reason why, purpose and/or design choices by the player. Drum mags FTW

Correct but different amounts. Then it’ll be the time to $ ratio and if a player wants to grind, that’s their choice. Doesn’t affect you. As long as playing the game standard, actively seeking out challenges give you enough incentive, I do not see the issue.

Right, and that’s very cool. You genuinely improvised as it’s your first influx to information from the whole level design. And the main thing is that this was done from nothing, just you and your personal decisions and improvisation. This can still be done (other than previous knowledge) if you simply de-equip everything. Having the choice to then carry in an M60, fully stocked out to the party doesn’t mean you can’t do what you did again.

Like they did Fallout 76 and Battlefield V and Just Cause 4?

And you know it’s really costly? Who knows how long or costly it is. Your argument against this is indeed money and budgets so what stops you or anyone simply saying that to any game? I could say HBM did it but I have no evidence of costs or time for the feature. Same applies to anyone who disagrees with the feature under “budget”.

I mean people are liking the reality of these concepts and the reality of the features in HBM and HA. We could simply ask the people who liked these concepts if they wanted customisation…

I’m one man and his thoughts. Sure I’m critiquing the game upon facts of what is there and/or not but that doesn’t stop me being a member of the public or a consumer as anyone else who buys the game. A consumer doesn’t thumbs up and goes with the flow - that’s a sheep. I don’t get any special treatment by the industry, I buy all my games. I just say what I think.

I simply gave my reasoning and source for general consumers and their thought process upon a period of 5 years more or less. When you see a correlation of the people who majority have no idea for starters and people who don’t care. People care about their wallets (understandable) and often enquire why certain versions/ or whole games are valued by said company but don’t offer as much. And for the record I have used this “Sometimes it’s development costs that dictate, hence MTXs and Seasons passes or cut content”. And I’ll get something along the lines of “so” “but I still have to pay for the rest?” “Maybe they should do their finances better” “what’s that got to do with me”.

So when I consistently get this attitude, it’s either I’m super unlucky or that is the general mentality of an average (but not all) consumer.

I wish that was the case…

It was very straight forward and had a satisfying learning curve - you’re the dude, your job is to kill people, here’s a gun, some chloroform and a piano wire. Easy to learn, years to master.

He also does the “hitman dance” of making 47 swivel on the spot at every chance he gets, and took the master key in his Dark Souls speed run even though he wasn’t going to use it. He just likes having stuff.

Nobody speed runs on their first play of the game.

Nobody considers those kinds of glitches to be “lucky”. They’re the work of lots of people trying creative approaches to the engine and mechanics until they perfect a reliable technique. Part of the reason speed running has really taken off over the years is it’s a community activity - people go to the community to talk about different types of strategies, exploits, etc. Some people take up learning how to datamine and mod games just to better understand the default game. Working out the “best” gun is doing some math.

I feel if you read the whole sentence you would have seen that linearity wasn’t the point, the design aspects were.

More to the point these are question people proposing changes to the game should ask themselves.

Also if you can’t work out why most Contracts go mostly ignored then I’m not sure how you expect anyone to take your claims of understanding consumers seriously. They’re fan produced missions with the most absolute minimal entry to providing them, using a map that wasn’t built around that particular contract and often by people who’ve only just started leaning the game so have no idea of how various mechanics and rules can be manipulated.

Believe it or not, level design, mechanic design and writing all go together to make the main missions a fulfilling experience.

Money creates anxiety in real life and in games for the simple reason it’s a one way decision. Once I spend my money on a new video game, or a new suit, or lap dance - I can’t unspend it. If I don’t spend it, then I can be having fear of missing out (FOMO) about what I could have had if I did spend it.

Well let’s see… off the top of my head:

  • No way to guarantee you’ll buy the bomb, or even that you’ll buy a useful item for your next mission - what if I buy a passcard scrambler when they won’t be used for another three missions?
  • What about if I play the mission five ways (all no extra equipment) and then go in - am I still going to want that bomb? What if I buy a more expensive bomb and it sucks because I was expected to start with the beginner bomb?
  • If there’s pretty much everything for sale, and I can keep getting money, what’s to dissuade a player who likes to be prepared from playing the same mission over and over to get the funds to buy literally everything on the first map?
  • What if I just happen to buy the weapon on a map that’s not real good for it - how is the game supposed to make me aware of it’s potential? (You can do that easy with the unlock system)

In short - there are a lot of things that the development team doubtlessly considered.

“You shouldn’t be able to do the thing, but the scope should make it easier to do the thing.” is the most baffling explanation of why we would make a money system. The pistols are not sniper material, but they would be if could give them magnum powered wall-piercing ammunition, a 4x scope and a buttstock to reduce recoil.

How much money it’s going to cost doesn’t matter, because you’re going to get the money just from playing so inevitably you’re going to have the money to buy the ridiculous things - especially if the rest of the weapons are extremely limited in their applications (ala the Blood Money problem)

How is that going to work when it relies upon a weapon configuration?

Diana: “47, from this balcony your pistol is unable to hit him - but it could be if you restart then get the barrel extension, magnum ammo, a scope and enhanced grip, alternatively you can restart and bring a battle rifle refitted for…”
47: “Thanks Diana… but how about something I can do now?”
Diana: “47, you’re supposed to enjoy replaying these missions… and the gunshop.”

That is a terrible idea since it would mean you’d have to do numerous restarts to get the hang of how the wall penetration works, which walls it works on, etc. That or you’d have to save scum like crazy. The only way it’d help is if you were going out with a “kitchen sink” loadout to allow you every possible option, which makes you feel less like a professional assassin on a job and more like a generic adventurer.

Do you have an idea how many weapons in real life are based of Colt’s military configurations? The 1911 has been cloned by more companies than can be counted (47’s originals were AMT Hardballers) and most automatic handguns are variants on the core design. Secondly - uh, no, the ICA’s default is the TAC-4 is a really chunky bullpup that is really the opposite of the AR framework.

Why should a player want to add needless complexity and negativity into a game just so they can go to more work to enjoy the game? That doesn’t make any sense. The game is supposed to be fun - not supposed to be a generic spam of buzzwords that don’t actually make for fun.

Again, if you actually read the entire paragraphs of my response instead of pretending the bit talking about how game designers notice tendencies and hence have to adjust their games to guide people to having the most fun, you’ll get a lot more value out of the thread.

Or simply: I don’t want to have to do a in depth analysis of what’s the most fun way to play this game, then do an in depth analysis of all my options at the end of every level - I want to play the game and have fun, that’s why the current game includes progressing unlockables, stories, intel, etc.

It’s pretty basic game design and project management - anything you do that interfers with the core mechanics of a product is going to need in depth testing, the bigger the product the more testing that is going to require since you can’t just assume that the design team will foresee every issue.

That means if you introduce a new weapon mod in the game, you need to test in isolation:

  • That each individual aspect works properly under all circumstances that can apply (eg the sound radius works, the range is correct, the accuracy is correct)
  • That each individual aspect doesn’t malfunction in some way (eg the sound seems loud to the player but doesn’t travel far in game, the range isn’t counter intuitive due to the crosshairs, the accuracy isn’t gameable to get greater accuracy)
  • That all the animations seem to fit and none of them cause unacceptable clipping or rigging disasters

Then, for each level you need to test:

  • How this mod effects all the existing challenges (eg does it let you cheap snipe by being too quiet and easily concealable?)
  • How this mod interacts with other mods (eg does a default silverballer with this scope shoot fine, but become more powerful than a sniper rifle when given a particular ammo and barrel?)
  • How this mod effects stories and the general validity of the security (eg does this silenceable wall piercing pistol ammo mean that the bulletproof glass becomes a joke and the target is exposed from basically every angle - thus rendering the challenging to reach sniper nests pointless?)
  • How does this mod effect other, indirect strategies and opportunities (eg does this explosive bullet let me launch fire extinguishers by shooting next to them, thus creating long distance accident kills?)
  • How does this effect other modes of play like Contracts? (eg does this mean certain contracts will only be doable with certain mod combinations, and the only way to work it out will be to replay them over and over until you figure it out?)

That makes for hours and hours of testing on literally every map, on top of the hours of design time, revision time, etc. Then you’ve got to work in the User Interface and User eXperience - particularly since this is supposed to be some big variety and hence super complicated modification system to drive the money system.

No, because that would be ridiculous and depending upon the survivor fallacy to falsify appeal. “Let’s talk to people who already say they like the thing, then ask them if they think they’d like the thing” is the kind of nonsense that resulted in Duke Nukem: Forever

It’s also largely what led to Blood Money being less appealing - it was a title that was designed largely around what people thought would be cool, but ultimately provided very little satisfaction because there were too many bits and too little direction for most players (including a lot of long term Hitman players, who left after Blood Money).

A better approach might be to consider:

  • “Why would this be fun?” is an important question
  • “How would this mess with the existing design?” is also an important question
  • “Is this idea actually doable or just an unworkable fantasy?” is also an important question
  • “Is it possible it’d be more fun without it?” is also an important question

No, you repeatedly stated you think a thing would be good because of buzzwords, and when asked to expand further tried to avoid the topics, shift buzzwords and then say that reasoning wasn’t your problem - it’s the responsibility of the developers (somehow) to make your dreams viable.

Aside from this creating a zero contribution to the forum, this also creates problems in that consumers who start to think this is reasonable start exponentially increasing their expectations and demands (my personal favourite being the guy who insisted IO Interactive owed him a free DLC for Absolution that would be basically Blood Money 2.0) rather than developing any sense of actual appreciation.

Plenty of games succeed because they take a different direction, Hitman succeeded initially because instead of trying to be another fast paced third person shooter - they developed a slower, more tactical game that encourages players to plan out creative approaches for their own satisfaction. That was good. The series went down in popularity when they tried to load on every possible option in Blood Money.

These are complex ideas and trying to reduce them down to "well I think it’d be good value for money because an unrelated title has it’ and then insisting anything to the contrary is ridiculous or not your problem or that development costs aren’t real doesn’t contribute anything to the conversation.

Announcing that a generic concept would be fun is easy, it’s the actual execution of the idea that’s tricky and full of perils and pitfalls. If an idea can’t even move past an early concept without people going “well, it’s someone else’s job to work out cheap and excellent execution” then it’s a pretty good sign it’s not a great idea.

i know all those Things from my reallife and those are terrible, but i never expierenced them in Games, especially not FOMO because unlike reallife you just can start over or try different things during your next Playtrough. The only Issue i have with the Moneysystem in Codename 47 and Blood Money is that you make too much Money / Items arent expensive enough, to be relevant or force you to need to manage your Account.



it is.


One thing I am curious about is why they took the ability to use any disguise in contracts mode. That is one thing Absolution made spot on, bringing really cool disguises like Wade’s goon or Blackwater Elite to other levels and making contracts was really fun. Not sure why they took that out.

1 Like

Offering not every disguise allows to set up complications that were easy to bypass otherwise. Also this way you can start with what you have right away.

Okay so we can deduce that it appeals to the casual audience more? You have to take in mind that this would be the first ever time, a console player would get to experience Hitman (myself included). A larger audience to sell to, also this audience would be trying it, not knowing if they like it or not but by then are already a figure in the sales. So we need to look at the successor to see the effects of the predecessor. And contracts could be the example of the player dropoff since they never got to even experience Contracts mechanics so something on H2/C47 could have caused the player drop. Maybe it was too hard? Or too easy? Too long? Too bland? Some people dislike having to start into a franchise/series half way through.

It’s the same reason GTA V isn’t the reason it attained 1 billion in 3 days. GTA IV and before earned that for GTA V.

As for easy or hard, this leads back to different players learning curves, everyone is different and it’s very hard to cater for everyone’s personal understanding. (hence difficulties and additional layers of challenges through integers and other mechanics.) To me, easy can equal boring, if I can learn the designed mechanics fast, then in that time another person is still getting to grips of the game, I’m bored and done with it. Hence why I like additional stuff to do and to keep me on the game. Hence mechanics such as customisation would keep me messing about with my design choices as MGSV did for hours to continue. All optional, might I add.

Okay and that’s cool. It’s optional, it features that are there not to be used by everyone but for everyone. The muscle memory says a lot though.

My trophies would disagree lol. On a serious note, yes that’s cool but does the game force you to do take it slow? No. Only due to the lack of information, we have to try to understand the level and we slow ourselves down. Someone could still speed run their first time. This leads to the trail and error of testing to attain the best method, as customisation would also offer.

The way you described it, was a throw from a Fire Extinguisher that clipped the map in a certain way. As if it glitched in the geometry or something. If it’s RNG chance, isn’t that lucky? Wouldn’t the community be discussing different loadouts too? Also speedrunning is just a pastime for games as a whole rather than a Hitman only thing that needs to be tailored too.

…right? And customisation and money changes this how? Same XP could be earned in money, player gets the same progression with the additional feature.

I have and I can’t answer the questions directly without the feature being there to warrant these decisions. Why do I need to ask “Do I need range” when I stand at the top of Mumbai and shoot across map with my pistol lol. 3 magazines later might I add. If you’re asking if I would like to approach these questions in the game, then yes I would a lot. I want to be in the position of having my own choices when equipping a weapon, controlled by myself, not dictated by a cross mix and match. Can have the HWK21 Covert Standard? Nope. Unless you want a ghastly extended mag. Can I equip the osprey silencer on my ICA19? Nah you’re alright. Can I use subsonic rounds in my Mac11? You get the point.

If balancing is your main issue, the first step to implement this is by allowing each of the current perks that are currently already in game to be attached to each weapon. These are all in game attributes that currently work engine wise. Subsonic loud pistol and silenced pistol would achieve both in game advantages while appealing to aesthetic purposes without forcing a player to choose. Add both and it would be Kruguermier quiet but with other weapons.

Easy peasy contracts. Why make a elaborate contract when you can play the same ICA contract kill the first guard from spawn 10 times. Less than 12% of Hitman players on PS4 have even finished 10 contracts. Clearly it’s not attracting the audience. Why are people making easy trophy contracts? Because they are there just for the trophy? Perhaps for a percentage of the 12% who have done it. Maybe they want to get this game mode over and done with? So far 88% can’t even care to do 10 of them. So what ever it is currently offering is not good for the majority of the playerbase here.

Of course Story contracts are going to be more indepth, until we ever get a fully fledged AI manipulator, trap creator, the main targets will be better, not disagreeing. What I’m getting at is that Contracts doesn’t offer anything more in 2016/H2 for players who like the sandbox messing about. There’s nothing for myself (other than the trophies) to go and play Contracts. Absolution offered a player like myself a lot more to extend play time and testing and general messing about, eventhough I probably spent more time on Contracts, not playing the actual contracts, the features it offered, did keep me playing.

There’s not one or the other here. The only choice is when you only have enough for one which you can simply earn more money to then get the other item. If purchasing items is a troubling thought, they won’t be playing any games lol. 99% of major games have some kind of upgrade/skills/money/currency system.

Have you played Deus Ex: The Breach, where you would get a certain amount of given RNG skill cards that were eventually necessary in order to maintain the difficulty of higher levels to even be possible to finish. These cards were also an one time use whether you completed that level or not. And if you ran out of cards to cater for the mission, fuck you go buy some more from our store or deal with the impossible. (Yeah players would have a meltdown on that if they think general money progression is mentally troubling lol).

You would currently find items that can be unlocked on other missions that are more useful on other missions already. You unlock the keycard scrambler on Colorado Level 15 I think and now Colorado Mission stories. Where on that level is it useful? It would been useful in Sapienza months ago. I had to wait months for an item that would have created an effect for a map.

Unless it’s going to take me months for me to earn items, I’m positive these decisions are negligible. Nothing stopping you from playing the map once and recon in advance the obstacles ahead then purchasing the item to get past said obstacles. Already you have no choice but to be put in the scenario you described if you don’t grind the XP for the specific level.

Do you need the bomb? Tell me? Paris you could use a bomb on the chandelier or a crowbar or grab the one in map. Maybe you want to save time so you decide to purchase one. This is why choices are good. If a player wishes to grind their life on the same mission for max $ to time, so what. How does that affect you? It doesn’t. It only disqualifies that player’s argument for “no content” if they chose not to play other missions. Do remember, not everyone enjoys every mission equally. The game is tailored for the play to grind an equal amount of XP on each mission. This can lead to players disliking the game as they are now doing something they don’t really want to, purely for the items.

That. If you earned enough to create a pocket sniper, why shouldn’t they be rewarded for their time and effort to to create such weapon that they desire? The money system connects with the customisations and suits and stuff. But of course this could be implemented without money too.

Depending on their application, can dictate the value of the upgrade. And yes just like you’re inevitably will have everything in this game, with loads of wasted XP points towards a levelling meter that does what? This is where BM was limited, it was limited I agree. Hence why it would be nice to see “extensive customisation” here, especially when there are attributes for weapons currently programmed here.

What mission story relies on your weapon? Nothing changes in that department. Only challenges may be inaccessible unless you get a better weapon. Same reason the game game forces you to quit and go grind another mission so you can go back and open a keycard lock…

You aim and shoot… Just through a layer of geometry. What’s there to get the hang of? It’s even easier with the ability to see through walls and slow-mo. The “kitchen sink” used to be one of my favourite piss about playthroughs on Contracts and H2.

Obviously and the weapons in H2 are all the same, even not talking about MKII (which is a joke might I add and an insult to veteran players). There are countless variants of weapons out there AR, AK, Bullpup, where’s the M60 and miniguns? but we have the same old shit, just with a different sight or camo or now a pink 2. Which other games chuck out there as a simple option. Even the tutorial information box showed a tricked out Fusil which looked awesome.

Why should we bother making elaborate accidental deaths if I can crouch inject a emetic syringe and drown them or blow them up? In that case, the ability of chandeliers to dropped or shooting through a telescope or shooting a bell to bait someone. Why would I go through all that effort, risking myself getting into KAI mainframe if I can shoot Soders? There is a lot of complexity and negativity that would result in me dying and having to repeat the whole mission so why do it?

To relay to the player (just like dead eye) the abilities of the character you are effectively roleplaying as, the game needs to show the player the difference of the mechanics. So instinct and sneaking is one, it’s super easy to do in game and something IRL players can’t do, it’s part of 47’s traits. Sniping would be good but not pinpoint perfect which 47 can still be portayed to do. So you upgrade your weapons, which we know 47 to do, to achieve the perfect aim that 47 is now known to achieve and the mechanics in game allow this through upgrades. That doesn’t mean he’s shit, just not perfect. But the player can still get the shot, just not effortlessly.

Here it is:

This is my reply:

You will get more cash for challenges as an incentive. But yes you can get cash from completing the mission too. Different amounts. If you’re playing Hawke’s Bay over and over for money then they are a $ ratio and if a player wants to grind, that’s their choice. And doesn’t affect your progression at all. You can still play as you want, while not being forced to play anything you don’t want to. If the player wishes to not play content, that’s down the game.

…which are forced behind level walls, that’s enforces grind on a singular mission in order to use something on another level. Let’s the player’s choose. Stories, intel aren’t going to be affected.

  • All the above points I agree with fine, seems like the typical test processes. If you created and afford/earned the item to find a way to get a challenge, why not? Does it count as cheap? If so, IO can patch it after.
  • If you earned and created a pocket sniper? So? Where’s the imbalance? To whom? AI?
  • If you have a wall piercing pistol, the balance would be ammo amount but yeah if, I’ve afforded it, so what? Doesn’t mean I can do that with any other attachments. The sniper nests would be useful for angles of non wall piercing.
  • I would like to hope it would affect fire extinguishers like the chain explosions.
  • Contracts would have the loadout of the creator.

Start off with the current already implemented weapon mechanics, they are already in game and tested to work with the game. The UI/UX would be no different other than the planning/customisation screen.

A poll would be the fairest way. NO?

As I would use @ThievinStealbrg quote

Too many bits? Like what lol? Too much stuff to do? What? The game gave money for assassinations and you could choose up to 5 weapons to add customisation options and also upgrade equipment for 47. It was only 5 weapons I agree, but it was a start.

  • It would be fun, talking for myself as I get to design how I want my weapon to look and feel and achieve the sense that I am earning my stuff how I want to. I can decide for myself what I need to use and prioritise what equipment to unlock instead of the game dictating me how much I must grind and where I must grind to get the item I want. When I have my items I can then further play the game to earn attachments or other additional future items to my weapons and decide when I want to use them. Concept 5 is my favourite weapon now due to the concealable feature/glitch, would be nice to get subsonic rounds.

  • Stories will not be affected since certain triggers will need to be activated to progress that storyline/oppurtunity. Game breaking? Having a bullet to shoot through a million walls and the earth could be a bit too much. Having a bullet that penetrates exactly one layer adds another option to the player. Shooting round corners with a cornershot (to have pinpoint accuracy) isn’t game breaking as you would have lost SA being in said combat to use the item. Shooting around the corner across map sounds like a well pulled off shot IMO. As you would have made the shot without doing that and not aimed for that.

  • To be worked into the game? Well the features are already in game so fantasy is it not. Creating selectable options and a UI menu screen (which was done for contracts filter) doesn’t seem impossible if it’s been done. The only issue is how hard wired is the coding for the attributes for the weapons. Considering they are added to each weapon in a mix and match, seems like there are individual bools for them. That’s a guess though.

  • 88% of players who barely touched or not have touched Contracts says how much fun it currently is.

And what buzzwords would that might be huh? Games progress, games get bigger and better, the tools of the trade is just simply shit, it’s gone backwards. And lot of members here have made their voice clear about it too but let me guess, that’s “adding zero contribution to the forum and threads” right?. Was waiting for you to resort to that again before “toxic behaviour” despite clearly discussing the topic at hand and how it affects the customisation system and the game mechanics.

If expectations are problems, why bother creating any topic that aren’t sheeple ass-licking topics? How can you talk about missing features if you’re answer is “ungrateful”. Demanding is another topic and no one is here demanding, but there should not be anything wrong pointing out stuff. What if IO didn’t use the glacier engine? Are we ungrateful for saying it looks like PS2 graphics? It’s an expectation after all.

Right okay.

  • Grand Theft Auto
  • Metal Gear Solid
  • Far Cry
  • Homefront
  • Just Cause
  • Ghost Recon
  • Assassin’s Creed
  • Fallout
  • Tomb Raider
  • Red Dead
  • XCOM
  • Saints Row
  • Midnight Club
  • Dirt

I can’t think of anymore. Plenty of games. All take their own directions. All have different mixes of genres, environments, eras, camera perspectives, styles. All are franchises/series’. What’s so interesting here? Over time, all of them have implemented customisation and some form of money/skill system for the player to work towards. Away from the meat of the game and they all retain their foundations of what they stand for.

Why are so many games doing that? To make players grind? I can say in all these system, I have not grinded in their each respective economies. Does that mean every game has to implement it? Of course not; Detroit doesn’t need it.

But when the feature was in the franchise. Proven to fit in the game, only restricted by the lack of expansion (which you brought up), of course there’s going to be concerns when this game is going backwards in this department and other games are adding it and still selling well.

So the balls in your court, give me plenty of examples where customisation is “ridiculous” in current games other than is hyperbolic anxiety “what if” when you can clearly get everything lol. Too much content? Right.

There it is. sigh Coming from the moderator who liked a post that added genuinely nothing to this topic but a indirect insult.

Have the option to lock the items (Sticky loadout).

Just another missing feature…