The Money System (that never came to be)


Does anyone remember the old Hitman Contracts slogan?
When you kill for money, there are no rules


I wouldn’t look at it that way. It should have both. Suits and weapon customs, some are purchaseable with money, some are unlockable with specific tasks or challenges. I even can imagine microtransactions for this game, which I wouldn’t mind if done right


Sure, I feel that it would make the game better as for one it has been tested in previous HItmans and did nothing to compromise the game but to add freedom and creativity to the player’s needs. It also acts as another difficulty system at any time you can make the gun harder to use. It would also make the UI a lot cleaner than it currently is with all these variants. And the glory of customisation, you can simply make the weapons that were originally placed in the game by IOI.

It’s about completing the mission/game/content in a certain way the fastest. This opens a multitude of variants (especially in Hitman) to try to find a path that will complete the tasks the fastest. Obviously it depends on the attachments IO would implement but they could indeed shorten a run. Maybe there’s a point that the Krugermeier doesn’t have enough ammo in it’s magazine and requires a reload in the run. A longer mag could shave seconds off. Hypothetically of course but that is the glory of trail and error.

Why would it be impossible? That is down to the player to learn to pull off such mechanics. If it wasn’t for the companion app on MGSV, I wouldn’t have gotten top speedruns on all the missions. While I’m running, shooting, sneaking, dodging, I am also tapping on my tablet at the correct time to call in the extraction helicopter, and tagging guards as it saves so much time than stopping in game and calling it in a menu.There are some amazing things people create across all games, the bigger the sandbox, the more the games says “yes” to the player. Adding in gun customisation is really a substitute to all the variants and allow us to mix and match.

I would argue that H2016 accuracy is appalling with the spread of the crosshairs. The player shouldn’t be denied the shot with any weapon (obviously not pistols/smgs) and be able to still get a shot off on the target. The addition of attachments allows the player to take the shot easier, hence aim sway, bullet drop off etc.

Miltary marksman would have attachments, and 47 always had attachments on his sniper WA2000 has always had a scope.

But then you said:

So what do you want? A shot that only a few can do and player’s get pissed or a shot that everyone can do and you don’t feel like a badass.

Honestly I wouldn’t mind that, being able to create your own poisons change the way the AI act. Upgrading lockpicks would work like BM, faster lockpicking. I remember times when I used to get caught, but when I went back with the upgrade, no need to wait for the guard patrol.

Like every other game with weapon stats, change the accuracy, damage, range etc. I’d imagine you’d have the stats on the planning section, and possibly in the inventory. It’s not like you’re going to forget what you gun is like if you made it that way.

I can’t remember lol. I dislike Escalations as they require me to grind the same thing 5 times. I would like them better if I could do level 5 straight off the bat.

That could be said for a lot of things. Some people disliked Professional Mode but “had” to for the unlocks. Some people dislike the challenges forcing you to play in a specific way to get items. I don’t like grinding Escalations for an item. Money could be earned with everything so anyone can do things they enjoy without feeling forced to and still earn progression to their desired item.

This would be IO decisions of course but I would suggest everything would give you money. Have a first time bonus to entice players to try everything. But they can go do anything, challenges, escalations, SA, SO, Mission Stories, evidence. Maybe random money cases/safes. Bring items out of the map to sell on a black market.

“Pride and sense of accomplishment” - EA

You aren’t expected to pull off elaborate assassinations on your first try, hence why the game enforces repetition and locks away your inventory for the first time in many locations. And doesn’t allow you to spawn anywhere straight away until you play it a bit. Contracts mode allows you just up and leave though. When you unlock the spawn, and drop off, you can pop in and out.

In which is pissing off the consumers getting an half made product (see BFV) and fake bright unrealistic cosmetics that appeals to kids and whales (COD). Hitman has done well to steer clear from that bollocks. Many people are getting angry over the new addition of Early Access for higher editions which Hitman did do. What I’m saying is that a customer looks at 2 games and sees the hard price of both games. Maybe due to development cost or whatever, one game has less base content and the rest is locked behind microtransactions. That customer is going to care about the content to value rather than the reasoning behind it.

They have no choice but to sell the base game at a certain price as you said. Then they work out the estimated sales via preorders and other stats, establish a margin and deductions, fees and calculate the dev budget to work with to enforce that margin.

That doesn’t mean that I shouldn’t enquire way a previous feature isn’t here. Or we should simply say to everything a game is missing or changed under “budget issues”. In which isn’t mine or yours issue but the studio and publishers when it comes to behind the scenes funding. If people find that the movie is shit, is it fine to say “they had a certain budget”? People don’t like Fallout 76 with missing features, should people say “Todd ran out of money”?

Refer to point above, simply stating “money issues” when we don’t even know that is the case, is simply not knowing what you’re talking about.

I’m talking about general public. As I said, I am happy to discuss all possibilities but general public consumers aren’t nor need to be thinking about said issues as it’s none of our faults. IO lost half the studio team when split from Squeenix, I know that, most casual consumers don’t.

Okay, I notified of the buggy trophies, they acknowledged the issues and the evidence I gave them and have confirmed to fix them.

Changing integers lol. If we look at their track record, you can see the shit they were trying to pull. And further evidence shows this as they have nerfed the only decent way to earn cash in the game. They have done this.

Not rather other games but predecessors and it worked. And clearly I’m not the only one here who wants it back. Along other customisation options.

When the same franchise removes features from its successor, it’s very fair to make a comparison.

Why can’t I talk about general public?

They are great addition and customisation wouldn’t compromise this. It may make them more viable. Why would the customisation be ignored? Do you select different weapons in planning? If so, then you would use it.

Not when they are practically the same. Give me a SPAS 12 that I can chuck a drum mag, EXP rounds, silencer, laser sight. Watch me waltz up to the castle door to say hi.

I loved this part. I used to create my own stories with my outfits and weapons. Agency soldier was my favourite outfits and pretend to do hostage rescues lol


The other Hitman’s that didn’t do as well? Blood Money was a lukewarm reception and Absolution’s Contracts mode hasn’t been enough to warrant keeping the servers going.

Yes - that I know. However I don’t think that they want the game engineered to make it easy for them, I think they get the satisfaction out of problem solving and finding ways to manipulate the game into giving them what they want. Hence why the high profile runs tend to involve glitches, exploits and counter-intuitive strategies.

They want the challenge.

Because level design requires being able to account for variables and provide satisfying challenges regardless of the player choices. Egoraptor has a video on how having to build levels to go both ways meant Castlevania 2 didn’t have the the same tight, satisfying designs as Castlevania 1. Blood Money had obvious problems in design.

Human minds can only process so much information at a time, whether they’re a player or a designer, so the more factors that a designer has to keep in mind the more opportunities for errors (and for those errors to pass through quality control). That’s been a constant in video games and pen and paper roleplaying games, 3rd Edition Dungeons and Dragons had at one point a magazine column, a weekly chat and a monthly publication of erratta to try to fix the problems that were creeping into the system… and eventually it just collapsed and they went a different direction with Fourth Edition.

Hitman maps currently work because there are some inherent limitations on the player - such as if you want a weapon you can snipe with you need to transport it without being seen, in a briefcase or with the aid of a disguise. That means that blind spots are relatively minor since you have to get to the blind spot, that changes if you can carry a concealable, undetectable silenced pistol with a scope on it - then suddenly a blindspot means you can easily exploit it.

If there are definite sound distances, the designers can use them in controlling how prevalent locations for silenced shooting are - but if they’re a nebulous range depending on three to four factors then it becomes difficult for the designers to work out the likelihood of an area being viable and even more difficult for a player who hasn’t invested hours into researching every aspect of the weapons customising.

That means you’re investing hundreds of hours of work in preventing a tiny demographic who will find all that research and experimentation from breaking the game, while most of your players just use the defaults or forgo weapons anyway.

I strongly disagree:

A shot that is badass because I worked out the setup and then 47 pulled it off because he’s an amazing assassin.

Not one that I set up and then a custom rig up rifle did with 47 being the avatar of pulling the trigger.

There’s a popular Manga with a few movies and an anime series called Golgo 13 which is about a super assassin who generally kills his targets by improbable sniper shots. Sometimes he orders a custom rifle for a special job, but generally he uses the an M16 with a 12X scope but pulls off the shot because his talent is super-human - including doing things like ricocheting off a wave in a pool, shooting through the windows of a building to hit a target on the other side of the whole building, etc.

The creator loves guns, and will happily write about the specs and history of every single weapon until the end of time - but the thing that makes the stories cool is not hearing about how the ballistic coefficient and stopping power allowed it to ricochet off a concrete wall and still punch through a glass window before killing the guy, it’s idea of this guy who is focused and so committed he can pull off these impossible hits.

In the stories where his rig is heavily customized, it’s often in a way that’s wildly impractical (like where he gets hired to shoot a violin string) so wouldn’t really make sense for any other hit. There are numerous stories where the pivotal point is Golgo 13 using his M16 and revolver to defeat people with more technologically advanced weapons because they become over dependent upon their technology.

That’s where the satisfaction comes from - not just the idea that you can’t shoot that great, but if you spend a million dollars on a rifle then eventually you’ll be able to shoot good.

Oh no, what you’re advocating for is essentially:

  • Standard lockpick
  • High tension lockpick (doesn’t work on standard locks, but on more secure locks)
  • Mechanical lockpick (for some locks, also works on standard picks… so why bother with the standard?)
  • Slidebar (works on some locks, but not that many)
  • Specialist torque wrench (works with other picks)

And the only way you’d work out what you need is trial and error.

And for poisons you’re looking at:

  • Emetic (alcohol)
  • Emetic (water based)
  • Emetic (powder)
  • Emetic (capsul)
  • Emetic (syringe)
  • Emetic (spray)

If you try to use the water based in a strong alcoholic drink then it’ll ruin the drink and they won’t drink it, if you use the alcohol dissolving one in a non-alcoholic drink it won’t be absorbed when drunk and won’t have effect, if you try to use the powder in a clear drink it’ll be obvious and trigger an alert when they try to use it, the capsul is for putting tiny foods such as little cupcakes that are eaten more or less in one go - for donuts you’ll need power, the syringe is injected into people and the spray is applied to an item that will be applied to the face such as a hot towel (but not an clean wipe, where the alcohol will effect it)

Who really wants to keep all of that in mind? You just want a poison that makes them puke so you can drown them in the toilet.

Similarly, with a gun I don’t want something that has a particular muzzle velocity, ballistic coefficient, stopping power, etc I want something that makes them dead.

I have bad news for you about money based upgrade systems.

So you just bum around until the game lets you have content? How is that satisfying?

I think the game you want to play is Thief.

“Two targets. A highly public event. At first glance, an impossible task - then again I do know how you love a challenge 47.” - intro to the first full mission in HITMAN 2016.

No one said that, people pointed out your proposed feature would be prohibitively expensive to implement for pretty much no gain to anyone but a tiny demographic of players who are unlikely to appreciate it anyway (rather to complain the system is wrong or imbalanced etc). This was pointed out because of the factors of design time, debugging, playtesting, etc

You then announced that since cost was a factor that made it unreasonable, cost wasn’t your problem and you don’t want to know about it - now you’re trying to pretend that it’s a mystery how creating something that would exponentially complicate the mechanics of the game (which would in turn complicate the aspects of design, writing, etc) is “just money”.

See the biggest issue here is: It didn’t work. Nobody cared in practice.

Only if it’s otherwise the same as that precessor… which it is not. Also, if that feature was an important part of that precessor… which it was not.

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 - that’s why your doctor isn’t allowed to diagnose you and then announce “well the average patience doesn’t know the difference” if it turns out they negligently misdiagnosed you.


The game is still the same after 2.6 years. They don’t have people working on it, they don’t have :moneybag::moneybag: and probably they can’t even know how to program and fix things with the devs currently working with IOI after Square enix departure and job firings.

IOI wasn’t Rockstar games or Naughty Dog 2.6 years ago, imagine now…


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.


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.


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


How about 47 gets paid in candy?


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…