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.
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.
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.
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.
Grand Theft Auto
Metal Gear Solid
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).
While I’d like to be able to lock certain loadout slots, this would not solve everything.
For example this contract:
To enforce being unable to equip guard outfits, “No Disguise Changes” was the right choice. Now one can use any starting spot. If @Dtrizzles’ and your suggestion would be ingame, you could only enforce a specific starting disguise. That would limit which starting location you can use and still requires “No Disguise Changes” to keep you off guard disguises.
Giving the option to come with non-suits that are not present in the undercover-starting-locations would need a complication that specifically stops you from doing this.
As in certain starting positions offer certain outfits. I would say a workaround would allow the player to spawn from any location in the forced outfit. Shouldn’t affect the animation in spawn though it’ll look unusual like when you could rake the leaves in any outfit lol
If you start a disguise stuck contract, I would assume you couldn’t select any outfit in the planning screen anyways
Exactly what I just said. If you looked at Silent Assassin it was a simple concept with a lot of potential for expansion and mastery, the gear all looked pretty assassin-ish and if you saw a friend playing it then odds were they spending their time frantically invested in trying not to get caught, or intently focused on executing their master plan. You might also have seen them go to their garden shed and grab some guns off the wall. It was a unique gaming experience.
If you saw a friend playing Blood Money then you could very well have seen them scrolling through miles of equipment upgrades that didn’t mean that much, then run in and shoot their way through a level and run out. That basically made it a substandard third person shooter.
I have no idea what you are trying to say here other than you think a money system would somehow drive Warner Brothers to give Hitman 3 a billion dollar marketing budget that means you literally cannot set foot into any city with a games shop without being exposed to the posters three times.
That is not going to happen.
There are no speed running trophies. Playing through the game to get all the trophies is not speed running unless you’re doing it over and over to get some sort of “all trophies speed run” in which case you’re still not doing it the first time you play the game, because in order to speed run you need to have a plan to utilise shortcuts and mechanics for a fastest time.
You’re now posting nonsense and still haven’t thought of a way in which the money system would help the game.
That’s a pretty good indicator it would not be fun or worth the development time.
Because making satisfying contracts is hard due to the limitations inherent in the system and strong likelihood that what you find to be a satisfying challenge will be a hilariously easy to defeat in a quarter the time to someone who has played more of the game and learned more mechanics.
Now the cost of failure with that in Contracts mode is nobody plays your contract, your contract never gets featured and nothing happens. The cost of failure with that in the main missions is people finish the game overnight, return it for a refund - tell their friends not to bother paying full price for it and then people see a band new game cluttering up the 2nd hand section of a games shop and decide it’s not worth paying full price for so sales plummet.
Then you don’t get any more games made.
And in those 99% of games “upgrade/skills/money/currency” system is functionally the same Hitman’s unlock system (using xp) but works because in those 99% of games the player has either a linear progression through the game (God of War, sorry Dad of Boy) or are massive open world approach where you essentially are just spending time in the immersion (GTA V, Fallout 76, etc).
Hitman is neither of those things, advocating that it should have a feature because other games do is like advocating that Madden should have weapon upgrades, love interests and battle royale mode. It also doesn’t have the other mechanics that tend to drive a money system - 47 doesn’t need to buy ammo, body armour and health kits because he’s refreshed at the start of every mission.
It’s also extremely generous to call a lot of these systems a customization system… Far Cry 5’s system is pretty much a joke where your only real options are what kind of sights do you want (which somehow effect the performance of the weapon) and if you want a round or square silencer. Most of the choices are pretty much so obvious they may as well be made for you - the main point is just to make you less likely to switch to the enemies weapons as they’ll be less upgraded… most of the time.
Yes it was a very transparent skinnerbox game where they were hoping FOMO would drive people to spend money in the online store so they could find out what’s next without grinding until they had no consciousness left. It got a grand total of 210 “mixed” reviews on Steam and 2/3 curators who commented on it did not recommend it.
So thank you for confirming my point.
On the very next level… Hokkaido, the level where all the doors are keycard locked but the keycard is your outfit - so if you want to go somewhere that your disguise can’t go you need to either find an alternative route or have a keycard scrambler?
You can also then take the keycard scrambler and go back to Sapienza and Marrakesh and use it to do things a new way if you want, even though keycards are a much, much, much smaller part of that level.
What would not make for satisfaction is if you bought them for Sapienza thinking you’d get a huge amount of value out of them… then found it had less use in Marrakesh, and even less use in Colorado. That’d be annoying, because it’d be essentially the game having tricked you into a bad decision.
Because you just confirmed that there would be no significant time and effort involved - apparently you’re envisioning a game where it fucking rains cash, so there is no real pressure to focus on good decisions in purchasing and you’ll end up with a pocket sniper by default if you play and just upgrade your pistol (and why not… it’s the default equipment item after all)
Literally any that puts your target is a position to be sniped, like Silvio’s telescope, the fireworks in Paris, etc. Also you literally advocated further up the topic that there should situations where there’s a prime sniping opportunity, but only if you’ve upgraded enough.
A large part of this is you don’t seem to have any particular view on what this system will be other than “good” so you keep making contradictory proposals and forgetting what you’ve already proposed - leading you to repeat the same points that’ve been addressed over and over as though they were flawless proposals and respond with “I don’t know” when asked how they work.
Does wall thickness effect it? Can I snipe through this wall with a buttress? Will the table stop this shot? What about the decorative cabinet? What about a door?
See these are all things people like to experiment with and get the hang of - which many people claim makes the game fun and interesting to explore. You know… the point of the game?
How is that made better by only having two bullets?
I’m really happy for you and I’m going to let you finish, but Contracts was the worst performing Hitman game of all time according to the market and both it and Silent Assassin used the unlock system linked only to Silent Assassin ratings with no money system.
I’m a veteran player and I’m not insulted in the slightest, perhaps this will go better if you speak for yourself rather than propose you speak for all players.
There is an AR type in the ICA loadout, AK types carried by appropriate guards, bullpups in the ICA loadout (which you referred to as AR types for reasons that suggest you haven’t even actually looked at the loadouts). Why would they include a heavy support weapon such as an M60 or a minigun?
Does 47 have a squad protecting him while he lays down suppressing fire? Is he on guard duty where he expects to have to repel an incoming squad while the rest of the soldiers arrive?
No, it’s like those weapons would be completely inappropriate to the character and theme of the current games, and were only included in previous games because they were going for a more cartoony over the top action approach.
Perhaps you should actually look at what the game is before proposing changes.
Because the accidental deaths are linked to stories and hence, inherently story driven and more memorable than “I upped by ballistic coefficient, then had the foregrip adjusted and hair-trigger applied so I could shoot from another twenty yards away”
Because the KAI mainframe provides a satisfying story arc whereby 47 is using the AI that is intended to heal Soders and prevent 47 from having access to him as the instrument of Soders’ death - a move that is both poetic and would create additional problems for Providence as it would heavily impact the credibility of their prestigious medical facility.
In which you still have not addressed the point in the third sentence in my reply.
They absolutely will be - as per the point that you failed to address.
Currently the straight forward way to unlock is to explore further options - do some stories, go for some challenges, etc. That drives engagement. However, if the straight forward way was just to play over and over, that’s what players would do - then they’d get bored, angry and blame the game.
This is confirmed by numerous game developers doing testing of development of numerous games. Why do you think you know more than actual game developers?
Because the goal of the game is to provide satisfying challenges for the player to succeed at - if they become childishly easy that it’s not satisfying (particularly if say you unlock gear in Professional level then use it to piss all over Master level). That’s pretty basic game design right there.
Also, in 99% of cases where game developers nerf gear in a patch people lose their shit and complain about how previous great actions are invalidated, the game sucks because they can’t do y any more, etc. Why do you want IO to be subject to this abuse?
I think the game you want is Garry’s Mod.
So if I go to Contracts mode and I don’t have the loadout… I can’t play so have to grind to 100% just to be able to confidently browse Contracts? Or I get the loadout even if I have never played any missions - then get pissed off that I can’t have it when I play my first one? These are all behaviours that make people pissed off at mobile games because they really only serve to push grinding (and invariably, microtransactions).
Also you’d very quickly wind up with the contracts being flooded with “x contract, but with a 5cm shorter barrel” “x contract with with a 2X scope” “x contract but with slow pull trigger”
That makes no sense since the UI/UX for a customisation screen depends entirely on the options, and so would require them to spend hundreds of hours designing it around the options incorporated and the likelihood of people using them - it would also have to be consistent with the UI style of the main game, which is contradictory given that it is based on simple button options - not on intense customisation options.
No. Again, you’re cutting off responses because the rest is inconvenient. A poll would be nonsensical because:
It would only account for a tiny sample of players who you pitched it to assuming you knew the outcome in advance
It would not account for the reality of the outcome, rather than the fantasy you pitch in the poll
Most people voting would have no real idea what they were voting on
In short: No volume of ignorance is actually superior to real information via discovery and discussion - that’s why games are developed by professionals making difficult decisions instead of by frantic chasing of approval by trying to copy ever feature of popular games and give every demanding “fan” what they want.
Except of course, for Duke Nukem Forever
So basically this thread is you asking for the Hitman games to turn into Duke Nukem Forever. That’s the game you’re putting as a pinnacle of game development.
I already addressed this further up the topic, and in the linked topic about Blood Money - but more does not by default equal better. More only equals better if it builds upon what is already good and adds real value to the game.
This is why the job of Editor exists. This is why people praise “really tight stories”. This is why short stories and short films exist, this is why mysterious endings to stories are a thing.
It’s why nobody copied the option from Codename 47 where you can dual wield by picking out one pistol then another in live time. It’s why nobody copied the option in Blood Money where you can surrender your weapon at a frisk. It’s why nobody copied the option to pick up a turd out of the toilet and throw it around out of Duke Nukem 3D. It’s why people want Half-Life 3 instead of just playing Garry’s Mod, it’s why people loved Thief and Thief 2, it’s why the Dishonoured games exist, it’s why indie games that offer a simple experience shoot to the top ahead of their more complicated mainstream peers.
It’s also far from the only series where fans react positively to removal of features. Biowares (immensely successful) RPGs have chopped back on mechanics and minigames ruthlessly over the years in response to people pointing out they added nothing and felt like they were only there because video games. (Dungeons and Dragons has done the same thing) The Fallout series has greatly simplified over time to give people more of what they say they love (exploring a wasteland, murder, etc)
In these cases, and in Hitman’s - the removal of the dead wood features allows for more focus on the core gameplay and the inclusion of new features that enhance that gameplay. Now we have instinct mode and take cover buttons, it would be utterly ridiculous to resume the awkward lean feature from Codename 47.
That wasn’t how it worked in Blood Money - you got to earn stuff as the game told you you could and the look and feel options were inherently linked to the performance - so really if you want the weapon to work how you want to you’re still locked into a look and feel. This doesn’t even really explain why it’d be fun, since in Hitman you usually keep your weapons hidden most of the time… and you’re already fucking it up.
Opportunity to bypass the satisfyiing challenge angle of a situation and just exploit that the level design couldn’t account for it… I mean why not just have a Killswitch item that makes the targets drop down dead of “accident” when activated? Wouldn’t that option be the most fun?
Also regarding stories, that was your proposal - as above.
Okay cool, if it’s that easy why don’t you just build a mod and show them how much better it’d be? All this stuff is easy and already in the game right? You shouldn’t need more than… two weeks to do it?
12% of say… three million people is 360,000 players who continue to drive engagement and discussion while also finding interesting opportunities on maps and with the equipment available (only possible due to the limited equipment).
Compare that with say 4.4% of people who completed all the opportunities in the Showstopper and it seems pretty clear that Contracts mode is more fun and popular that the grinding that would be required for a money system to function.
Also keep in mind that the achievement stats are offset by them offering the training missions for free on both games… so we’re quite possibly looking at a much higher ratio of players enjoying Contracts mode… who still don’t want to grind for grindings sake so would not benefit from a money system.
I agree. And I support this so much. The key word you said… could. Option. Choice. You also can play it like a stealth game, you could role play, speed run, you could turn it into a FPS if you very wanted. That is one of the unique things about Hitman. Not only the game gave you a storyline, environments and general game stuff; it also gave you that playground of “do whatever the fuck you want, have fun” style about it. I would disagree that the equipment upgrades didn’t do anything as they were handy especially in Amendment.
That the predecessors actually dictate the next entry’s sales. If you watch a movie series and the last one is dog shit, is that going to make people jump up for the next one? No. If it’s brilliant, then will they? Of course. (Red Dead/GTA). Fallout as a franchise and I would say BF too, will be seen as sceptical in its next entry. despite it being brilliant, it won’t get the sales it could have done if the previous was great. Look at COD sales, every year it was dropping, why? Only this year it rose due to the competition being so shit that the audience went to them.
Hitman sales are down 90% from Absolution.
Money system isn’t going to overhaul the audience, I never said it would. Simply going “oh this game is great because it earned X amount of sales” day 1 is simply not true. Look at COD Blops 4 currently and RDRO general attitude to it (not very good).
Marketing is a big part of getting the audience to notice the game yes? Not sure why you need a ridiculous amount, just enough to reach the audience. A general retailer had 3 or 4 posters + standee for Hitman 2 advertisement. Better than Hitman 1, amount of people who had zero knowledge that it was out, was unbelievable. And that lead to the “oh let me take a look at the game oh episodic, yeah fuck off”.
Actually there is lol. I’m currently 10th for Hitman Absolution. (Pic is H1). Notice “fastest” And you can’t utilise shortcuts in a trophy run because? lol. Some people learn the game or make a run on another account or simply adapt to the game.
Then you’ve been choosing to ignore all my posts and everyone else who has written. (I noticed a lot of topics regarding this lately FYI).
Tell me why destructible environments are a good or bad thing in Hitman? How can I answer a question about a feature that doesn’t contain said feature. As I said, I am more than happy to have these decisions in front of me if the feature was there.
All 12% of them? lol
As opposed to your contract gets featured and people want to play it? Yet to play a featured contract. (Unless there was a trophy, can’t remember if there is, if so then yeah once) Not interested.
We’re not talking about the main missions, I’m sure they hold up on their own. As part of the game you get Contracts Mode (and SA and GM) too. So you’re saying contracts is irrelevant if it were to flop hard? Does that warrant it to be not at least have the freedom as Absolution in the options?
Right at its core, they are all indeed similar. Earn integer to reach target. But that’s where it ends. You can get various different upgrades that you choose to upgrade when you want, providing you have the valid amount.
God of War - It has loads of equipment and weapons that you can upgrade using XP and HS which can unlock new abilities and fight moves. It also adds different layers of challenge as the player can increase/decrease stats via the system. I could even argue that this actually restricts the player from areas of the map to enforce replayability. (fire chains to burn vines). These items aren't even available to purchase until you reach a certain point in the story.
GTA V - This is the ideal system I would like to see in Hitman. You do objectives/missions/play the game and earn money, then have a vast range of vehicles, weapons, clothing, houses etc you buy whatever you want. Simple as that. It also has a levelling system that you unlock stuff (not lately). It is now replaced with discounted prices if you play the corresponding content (like IOI have done with packs)
Fallout 76 - You actively search and "grind" loot out in the wasteland to re-purpose into something you want from a huge collection of blueprints. You can use the junk into ammo, armours, weapons and other items. It also has a levelling system that you gain a point to add to upgrade your stats and give you perks
Madden isn’t a shooter so why would it have weapon upgrades but it does have upgrades and currency - Upgrade Tokens and XP points. As well in UT, you can upgrade (a select amount of players) through training and XP points which will make their stats change and perform better. Then they have a chemistry system like FIFA’s I imagine.
Why not? I think it would be a great addition. Notoriety too, was one of the best things, so cool.
At least it gives the player the choice to decide what they want. There will always be a meta in every game that doesn’t mean the others won’t be used, especially in PvE/SP. If that’s the case, why not get rid of all the other weapons on COD MW2 and use UMP45 and ACR. Choice. I was an MG4 guy 100% accuracy with grip, zero recoil.
It what you do with it. Compare Splinter Cell Blacklist with GTA Online. Exactly the same method to gain upgrades. One chucks money at you and the other makes you grind. Also Deus Ex failed because I completed it with the given cards. So GG
What if I didn’t like Colorado and only wanted to play it a few times? Well fuck you, grind away on something you dislike because you want an item that you want in another level.
Say that to people who dislike Colorado. This system forces certain levels to be equally grinded. There is actually a compromise as @NiNo said:
My addition would be to have the items unlockable as is but also allow the player to purchase it (In game money of course) if they want to instead of grinding for it in a place they really don’t want to be. So any player’s effort are fairly rewarded despite if you’re earning it in the level it can be unlocked (for free) or playing other levels and buying it. Another reason for money system.
How does not grinding for months for some cash, equate to “fucking rains cash”? It’s called balance. I think the current rate of grind for the XP is fair so why not have it at that speed. Even Absolution had heftier targets to grind for, but that’s probably the result of a small amount of items to unlock.
In which I already stated that you can still do, just not perfect. Yes I am repeating myself because you keep ignoring half my post and then saying “You haven’t said anything”. Nothing is impossible, upgrades allow more freedom and for the more casual player, an easier experience to pull off stuff.
What does IOI allow? But if they went into that much detail, what it lean into annoyance? I personally wouldn’t mind thickness. That’s quite awesome if you have different ammunition. Material would be a better way of doing it, wooden doors could be shot through, metal one require AP rounds etc.
It’s made better as these bullets would otherwise be OP if they perform like Jaeger Lancer mechanics. If they don’t penetrate the centre of the earth, then I’m sure there would be no reason to add more. It’s trial and error after all.
Your point? That means I shouldn’t enjoy it? It was fun I could piss about. Does that mean Money system improved sales? lol BM started the restricted amount of items in your loadout. (I dunno about C47)
Might want to read this:
Gee I wonder…
Hitman has always had “out there” unconventional weapons (among other things). Like these topics.
Did 47 lay down suppressing fire in Contracts or SA? I could go to the Seafood Massacre and actually roll up with a minigun (the backwards strat ofcourse) and cause exactly what it says on the tin. Because I can. I’m not going “HITMAN stops me from causing massacres”, it restricts the tools I have in comparison to the predecessors.
Is this theme James Bond spy because it nails it currently. And if go loud I don’t feel like I’m a Hitman going load I feel like James Bond gone Johnny English.
You were talking about mechanics and end results under “complexity and negativity” not purposely designed vs player make belief runs. You could say the same for every opportunity then. So if there’s a story behind it, and it gives you the guide, we can have the most complex thing but if it’s something that allows the player to create nah too complex to do. What? What does a story arc have in common with “negativity” or do you need a written script to warrant you to do complex decisions?
I have 0 clue on what Heist is, I haven’t seen nor played it. Once again I cannot answer questions to something I have I haven’t experienced or know the whole context of. Was the game too easy? And wanted to get it done. Was the game a grind? That players had to grind min time/$. Was the other part of the game boring? That players had zero interest in other content like we see with Contracts.
I said there will always by people who grind man time/max $. If you’re finding out everyone’s doing it. Clearly there’s something wrong. It is still their choice to do so though.
Actually it’s by clicking Stories Opportunities and following an in-game walkthrough by default. So far I’ve been told where to go, who to kill, what to do. This all wouldn’t change through money system either, it’s literally the substitute to the XP. You get XP fine from the stories, why not money? You can currently grind money by playing over and over. What’s the difference? Other than having a fully fledged optional system for the player to spend the rewarded efforts on of course.
Such as? People getting angry because they can’t hack the game happens all the time. That’s why we have difficulty levels. Options that the plays can choose to appeal to them. And why are you putting words in my mouth? “…perhaps this will go better if you speak for yourself rather than propose you speak for all players.”
I always get my Suit Only challenge when I do my “there’s no witnesses if there’s no people to witness” playthrough. Would you say that’s deserved? I got seen, went loud, alerted the map. Did pretty much everything opposite to 47, So easy. You can just pop off the targets in your suit and it works. I still met the requirements. Why not make challenges towards the money system?
Master Level adds that layer of difficulty to the mechanics laid before you. You get the master enforcers, perhaps you get less ammo. Maybe AI actually changed, what if the materials of the environment changed? This creates different obstacles, warranting new paths and strategies to solve.
You pull a R*. You call it BETA mechanics and subject to change in the future. People can’t complain. Although they do anyways. IOI have stuck to their guns before, don’t see why they wouldn’t now.
Gmod gives plenty of options Uh huh. This is where I would post you a screen of trophies but…
You can borrow loadout for a small charge or even free, doesn’t matter. It won’t be to keep. Your other point is artificial grind that the developers use to create a source of income. RDRO being the latest abuser.
And yeah, I mean we’ve got a flood of ICA contracts already to kill that first guard at the barrier all with the same shit. ICA19, Tactical Outfit. (Any) (Any).
The layout is already there. with the left to right 2 row squares. You add in a 3D Viewer for the models. They have ticks (bools) on settings and Contract Filters. Before you ask, since Absolution had it, it is possible on Glacier has seen. And that was online.
I’ve always said HMF isn’t the playerbase. But it still give an equal chance from general players who play the game, their unbiased decision.
What reality? That people want it or not?
Do you want customisation in Hitman 2? HMF members aren’t stupid.
Also to your reply:
Clearly not demanding here, simply making a case for the missing feature long with many others.
Not sure why you quoted “fan”.
In which customisation did. For the points I’ve said.
XIII allowed multi weapon shooting. And Punisher the game.
They drop attention to detail these days. That’s why RDR has made such a big impact on the tiny things it’s world offers. It brings out the game a lot. Diving to the side makes that side covered in the material to dived in. Depending on where you are in side missions dictates different dialogue, depending on who you are and when. These things are awesome but tiny in the grand plans of everything. Including the ones you posted.
Are we going to ignore Mass Effect 4? And I can’t say much about Anthem (for NDA reasons) but they seem to be a lot bigger on mechanics wise. People prefer F3 and NV over 4 though, so that shows it can’t be doing it justice. One big example was the lack of ability to kill main character NPCs, because the way they designed the game story arc, they had to take away death for certain NPCs, resulting in the lack of immersion and punishment that Fallout usually gave.
Cover has replaced leaning (although wouldn’t mind that too). It’s an upgrade to say. Human shields, plate holding, dual weapons, money system, customisation is removed. Less. How does seeing through walls substitute any of the missing features? (unless you could have bought Thermal googles I suppose)
Yeah, certain levels did unlock stuff, that’s right. So you couldn’t have an M4 drum mag after the first mission. So a level lock could provide useful but where these later Hitmans are more explorable and have basically something of everything in majority of its levels, (card reader) you could purchase something without it being directly pointless for use.
How can you dictate “fun”? I found it fun, blasting the heaven and hell parties with my Fully customised M4. You don’t have to see why it would be fun.
That’ll be poison.
If you’re going to resort to this, why bother engaging in a conversation? If you look at the item before you, you will find that weapons’s “skills” behave upon their perks. Perks that cross over multiple weapons in a mix and match fashion.
Which is part of the issue I’m trying to say lol.
Could argue that one’s less of a effort to grind?
It does have to be the case. Would you say the current XP is grind worthy. Is getting to Mastery 20 a grind? If no then money would be at that level.
You wrote 4 years ago:
And here we are with pale imitations for 3 years nearly, only separated by their few attributes. As this is 4 years ago, I will give you a chance to reply if you agree with your previous self. But from this discussion, I think you have changed your tone. So do you know what you want? With customisation that actually made weapons different to one another, wouldn’t you be for such an option?
Not really - Far Cry 3 onward, Deus Ex, Assassin’s Creed, Dishonored, Metal Gear Solid V, the list goes on. What was actually unique about Hitman prior to that was it was geared towards a particular pace of gameplay and particular set of pressures on the player. You could try to do whatever you wanted, but mass murders always felt transgressive because they felt against the grain of the game’s goals (much like being a jerk in a game trying to make you a hero).
That went out the window in Blood Money because there was literally too much emphasis on “do what you want”, plenty of people played it like a shooter and got bored quickly, plenty of other people looked at it and went “there are other games doing better stuff”. I have a whole thread about all the problems with Blood Money, there are many and most of them stem from trying to be everything to everyone.
Unlikely since Hitman’s biggest sales spikes occured when they heavily distanced themselves from their predecessors (Silent Assassin and Absolution) and have slumped when they tried to emulate them (Contracts, Blood Money, HITMAN 2). There is no simple formula to what drives sales for a game with a less than titanic marketing budget.
For games with titanic marketing budgets, they will achieve market dominance simply by media saturation - everyone will want to play it because everyone feels it’s what people are playing. That’s what worked for Overwatch, it’s what worked for GTA V, it’s what’s working for Fortnite.
They’re all okay games, but what drives theirs sales is the publisher can afford to own a media presence that makes people inherently conscious of them at all times. HITMAN 2 hasn’t had that, and I’m not convinced it’s gotten a bigger campaign than HITMAN (2016) given for that one they were throwing literally everything at it - including the “live action hitman” game they invited YouTube influencers to play.
Yet the sales of HITMAN (2016) warranted the creation of HITMAN 2, without the episodic content barriers and with the additional good will of if you buy HITMAN 2 you can get the previous games levels into it and thus get even more gameplay.
There are clearly a lot more complex ideas going on here than a money system that still would serve no purpose.
That’s still not a speed running trophy, that’s a timing on a trophy - which, sure, means you finished fast but doesn’t really mean anything else because aside from the obvious issues (ie how is someone who gets the day later due to region locking or download speeds supposed to compete?) there’s the issue that it doesn’t confirm any specifics.
You could blaze through Blood Money by just running and gunning and unlock the trophy for finishing it - a point which did lead to a lot of people not wanting to play it - is that a “speed run” or just rushing through it?
So you derail to talk about that and still avoid coming up with a way the money system would be fun? Because if I went into that it’d be a multi-page essay and frankly, you’re not paying me for it so I’m not sure why you feel I’m supposed to explain every aspect of game design because you just want to say “This is fuN!” and have it go unchallenged.
I feel like I covered something about this…
Again, I feel you’re doing a lot of this.
Yet to play GTA V but I hear plenty of kids are. Currently there’s like, 1.7% have the achievement for it in Hitman 2, so if it’s sold a mere one million copies that’s seventeen thousand people. You know, if I got five thousand views on an Instagram post - I’d be pretty happy. Same if I posted a video on YouTube and I got five thousand views.
So you’re proposing a weapon upgrade system that would not work in the main missions, so what only in Contracts mode? That you just mocked for only 12% of players playing?
This is because in Dad of Boy, you need more and more powerful weapons to fight the more and more powerful enemies as Kratos regains his godlike power and triumphs over more epic challenges. The game is pretty much fighting and jumping puzzles, with more of the former than the latter - so the player will spend huge amounts of time using these weapons and abilities - thus getting a predictable amount of satisfaction out of them.
Hitman is a strategic game where the player solves puzzles to get targets to do what they want, then exploits it with the tool for the situation. Since Blood Money, guns have been a sub-standard item in the toolbox compared to thrown weapons, distractions, explosives, poison, etc. Making the GoW system work with it would require throwing… pretty much all of that out.
Unsurprising since it is the most lavishly expensive to produce and only really sustainable if your publisher gives you a staggering art budget. In GTA V it is also driven by the ensemble’s (the main cast, plus the online PC) development and that it feeds into a microtransaction system. It was also only affordable because R* knew they’d sell staggering numbers of copies and so get their money back (also they exploit their US staff to get the content cheaper).
Even if IO Interactive had this budget it would still fundamentally hit the flaw that it runs directly against 47’s character - he has a set style, lifestyle, etc and he’s at the peak of it when the game begins.
You use the system from Fallout 4, another giant open world game that was about the experience of finding something broken and not necessarily breaking it but using it to make something beautiful (as a certain ghoul explained in Fallout 3). This again, runs against the feel that 47 begins as a top assassin and instead makes him into… well Subject 6.
I would totally play a Subject 6 game - but it wouldn’t be the same as playing a Hitman game that stars 47, so this approach would require… overhauling the entire game to include… a money system (that doesn’t really make sense since Subject 6 continues being a scrappy improvisor even after stealing three billion from Thomas Cross)
Because it would require a complete overhaul of the game and take away the factors that make it unique and interesting to play. Having to buy items from a fund every time either adds pointless busy work (if you have tons of cash) or discourages experimentation (every play has to bring in more cash than you spend) or makes it feel “done” once you get a perfect SO/SA. C47 had literally all of these problems - that’s probably why Silent Assassin switched to a collect as you go system.
Not really, it tells them that what they want is upgraded ammo capacity, a silencer (if available), one of two scopes if it’s a short range weapon, one of another two scopes if mid range and one scope if it’s long range. The only choices are purely cosmetic and overdone (ie the silencer shape, and the skin).
In a game where I’m supposed to choose my identity, it feels a very begrudging option and in Hitman it would be even worse because 47 isn’t supposed to be my random self-insert, he’s supposed to be a refined super assassin with his own personality, style, etc. Your choices in the loadout are somewhat akin to John Wick’s preparation - there are options but they’re expertly selected in advance:
I’m pretty sure it failed because there was nothing compelling about it - rather it was a test to see if they could get decent returns on a relatively low expense product that road on the coattails of a major product (which also under performed).
Then you’re probably going to have bigger problems then the lack of a money system - if your objection hinges on the players don’t like the game then there’s very little you can do other than make a different game.
This makes no sense since it assumes some sort of specialist, theoretical group who will:
Hate Colorado and never want to play it more than once or twice
Love the rest of the game and want to grind the SHIT out of it
Either just happen to buy equipment at the right time, or be immune to buyer’s remorse
Apparently be okay with all the other limitations and oddities of Hokkaido, despite hating Colorado so much they don’t want to unlock things
This isn’t based on any sort of rational analysis of information (like for example, the information from the creator of Heist - along with other games), but rather an imaginary group. The levels are designed to reward exploration, push engagement and give the player a sense of satisfaction through achievement and discovery of content.
If you make all that optional for a money system then you’ve devalued the core of the design team’s work for a mechanic that doesn’t really add anything.
So your proposal is to increase satisfaction by diminishing the sense of accomplishment when you actually unlock something rather than use the cheap method? This again creates the problem where the game encourages and rewards skinner box behavior thus wearing players down and diminishing all the work making the game push engagement with the levels.
This is, in fact, a reason against the money system.
That don’t make no sense - the XP system isn’t a money system, there’s no price. Things unlock at level XP but that’s driven by the exploration system that rewards you for playing the level different ways and accomplishing challenges - so your theoretical “Hates Colorado” player can still easily get railroaded into playing a shitload of Colorado to get cash.
If it works off a more general system, then it will be raining cash because players will be able to grind it up quick by SA/SO’ing Hawkes Bay over and over and over and over.
This goes back to the “why bother” aspect - why should I go back and do the level and sniping over and over if the changes are minor improvements to my sniper experience and it feeling less like 47 is drunk when he’s sniping? I play the game to feel like a super assassin, not like a petty thug.
I honestly haven’t played with the Wallbanger enough to learn all the does and don’ts, but I’ve played with the regular sniper rifles enough to know there’s some oddities and that it’s worthwhile to learn what the bullets will and won’t go through so you can account for obstacles etc. I did that primarily by playing around with full clips and then loading the save, something that would be tedious beyond fuck if I had to do it two bullets at a time.
This “just take one or two bullets” only makes sense in a scenario where the player has already obtained expertise and will only need one or two bullets - at which point they can get the same satisfaction by challenging themselves to do it with one shot. The ammunition limit in Sniper Assassin mode works because sniping is your only means of engaging and there are many targets… so many targets.
That it obviously did not have the appeal to drive sales and be the core appeal to people. I like plinking in all shooters that have destructible scenery/bullet decals. I find a zero stress situation and try to shoot tight groups from as far as possible with different weapons etc.
It’s fun for me, but it’s really relevant to the mainstream enjoyment of those games - it’s just a thing I like so I don’t consider it to be a worthwhile argument as to why better plinking scenery is important/worth time etc. Consider this an invitation to think about those kinds of things before posting.
I did, and I voted no. Pretty much nobody in it is outraged about the recycling the weapons, the most popular posts are the ones proposing different indicators other than the pink stickers. Your claim it was an insult was pointless hyperbole and your attempt to double down on it suggest you’re not paying any attention to what others are actually discussing.
So maybe, take the time to make your own points.
C47 had one minigun in the underground lab (for if 48 was kicking your ass too much) and in the paramilitary infused jungle (for if the drug lord’s troops were kicking your ass too much) and the option to buy it if you had too much money in Plutonium Runs Loose (and the gangs were kicking your ass). The intro to it was a gun nerd’s wet dream going on about the features of conventional weapons such as the MP5, Ingram Uzi, Mossberg Persuader, M16A1, etc. The M60 was even more rarified than the minigun.
Silent Assassin had serial numbers filed off very conventional weapons with the oddest being 47’s silverballers (with the super recoil) and only a single support weapon, the M60.
Contracts (the worst performer) had a shitload of weapons that you had to unlock, and a minigun in the aslyum (due to C47) and one you could unlock appearing in the final mission. It was the final appearance of both the minigun and the M60 in the series - and was taking it’s queues from C47 in terms of scarcity.
Blood Money had no support weapons - you could trick out your M4 to be one with the drum barrels etc, but that was purely by upgrading and took quite a few levels to unlock everything. Since it was a unique weapon, it also meant you had an absurd advantage against enemies with their conventional weapons.
Absolution had the Ultramax in Birdie’s Gift (a novelty level for shooting stuff) and in Blackwater Park (presumably because they had to reuse it).
So um no, this is not a quintessential part of Hitman. It is, in fact, a part of Hitman that they moved further and further away from throughout the development of the series and was likely only included in the early games because they were still anxious about abandoning the 3rd person shooter trends.
Contracts and SA didn’t have an AI that supported to concept of suppressing fire, and SA tied with Absolution for least amount of heavy weapons. But you could still do massacres in them, all you need to do is use guns… it turns out military grade support weapons aren’t necessary to kill a lot of people.
The story arc creates the satisfying story for the player, whether they follow the prescribed opportunity or not. If I break into KAI using a scrambler or a bomb instead of while disguised as the director I am subverting their security and using the AI against Soders - I’m just doing it “my way”. It creates a particular arc of tension, highs and lows, options and decisions, etc.
If I snipe Yamazaki with the Jaeger Tiger from the path, then come back and do it with the Jaeger Wallbanger so I can kill her in the restaurant, then come back and do it with the Ghost rifle so I can zoom in and be quieter those are all the same basic story with no arcs: I brought a gun I had, and I shot her from the sniping spot.
I recently unlocked the Sniper Assassin challenge on Colorado and the AI bugs that make it super sensitive to sniping actually made it a lot more engaging and satisfying because in order to snipe all four targets without getting caught I had to shift positions and find unique opportunities in their routines. It was vastly more satisfying than sitting on top of the Water Tower and waiting - it could not have been improved by having a different looking rifle or a different scope, only by having different engagements.
The game is a standard 2-D thief type game where you break in and have to steal stuff - the creator originally wanted to give players the choice to steal at their own pace, but quickly discovered that without a limiting factor to motivate them (ie the number of heists they can pull) the vast majority of players simply went to grinding the easiest areas of the level. Not all, but the majority so something was clearly wrong.
By simply applying a rule there would only be x levels to gather y money, the system created pressure to get the most wealth a player could per level and that meant they were driven to explore further into the levels. It created a dramatic tension where now players were deciding if they wanted to risk their current horde, whether they wanted to try to over perform now and relax later, or try to do better next mission, etc.
That’s what happens when developers take it upon themselves to make a good game, rather than make a game that someone else has to find a way to make good. They limit options.
Limited options in Hitman has similarly driven this kind of tension. The Setup, St Petersberg Revisited, Hotel Terminus, Hokkaido, etc. It creates fun challenges for the player and rewards them for being resourceful, learning to get the best mileage out of equipment, where to source items from, etc.
The obvious being the XP system is a structured system that means all my unlocks are expertly chosen so they’ll escalate in usefulness and satisfaction rather than presenting a generic laundry list and expecting me to do that part of the game development for them.
Also it avoids the grind problem, drives engagement and makes it intuitive when I find there are challenges that come with special unlocks. I am so close to getting that all black suit and it’s great.
Sure, I mean it’s hard to survive that and plenty of the challenges cause collateral damage - so why not? By separating it from the other elements of the SA/SO it’s giving some novelty and options to the players who want that unlock, but don’t want to do the full SA/SO and providing more opportunities to get players invested in the challenges.
The real purpose of the challenges is not to create some sort of weird, enforced roleplaying scenario but to drive engagement and provide the player with reminders that there’s lots of options, lots of content and their playthrough is special and not “standard”.
So you’ll get pissed off that you don’t have stuff in the game that other people do - including some unique stuff that you can’t get because Elusive Targets etc and will associate Contracts mode with bragging and one upsmanship (hence also the “x contract but with y option”). That’s basically an invitation to pump your community full of toxicity.
HMF are generally very ignorant of a lot of realities of game design, misremember history of the series (like thinking Blood Money was an epic success rather than a lukewarm break even) and most importantly are not privy to the real questions because we do not have the inside story.
Do you want customization in Hitman 2, if it means that we will have to forgo a sweet DLC that shows off some currently untapped potential of the Mumbai level?
Do you want customization in Hitman 2, if it means that all the current speedruns, trophies, etc will all be essentially rendered meaningless?
Do you want customization in Hitman 2, but it’s going to be Far Cry 5 type rather GTA type?
That you can’t grasp what a widely open question it would be says a lot about this discussion.
Because I’ve lost count of the number of people who’ve bragged about what “fans” they are - then later confirmed they weren’t really, they just figure if they said they were they’d have more prestige and their words would be more important. I’ve also lost track of the number of people who claim they’re “fans” but consistently claim every game is “the worst ever” and they are done - day after day, week after week, year after year… never being done.
The term means pretty much… nothing - and that’s good really. It means it’s open to everyone and we shouldn’t think too much about people claiming they were superfans since Codename 47 or are the foremost lore experts, etc.
And Max Payne - but none quite like C47.
That’s because it’s staggeringly expensive to include, and has always been. You just remember things have more attention to detail because your imagination filled them in.
Well okay, if you want to drag it in as an example of a game where kitchen sink design created a lot of problems for players… you can… but that really only helps my point about pruning features.
Well for starters it means less pointless bullshit to learn (I’m still pretty sure I’m one of only ten people to use the surrender weapon option in Blood Money) and the limitations have driven more intense game design and better use of the budget.
Human shields was a heavily flawed mechanic that created this weird situation where somehow 47 can make anyone helpless by hugging them, and really just was a cheat version of choke and drag or distract and knockout. Ditching it saves on level design, animations, playtesting and puzzled commentary from new players and makes room for decoys, taser mines, etc.
Plate holding was replaced with 47 actually doing jobs like serving sushi, shaving people, etc.
Dual weapons is replaced with weapons actually working properly now so there’s little to no benefit of shooting two bullets at once, 47 now wields weapons and acts like a professional rather than a cartoon so has a closer to reality badassery.
Money system was replaced with the unlock system that is a more tailored and satisfying progression that encourages exploration and rewards engagement with the game.
Customization is replaced with weapon selections that are specialist and interesting in their own way, rather than having a few weapons that worked and 25 weapons that did not and were just decoration. It helps give the ICA an identity and the weapons have their own flavor. Expertly chosen.
So did I, but not fun enough I’d pay $50 for it, that was a side effect of the core options in the game. As mentioned I also find it fun to go plinking in shooter games, but I wouldn’t buy a version of Far Cry 5 with no enemies or NPCs. I enjoyed setting up fake crime scenes in Silent Assassin but wouldn’t buy a game where that’s the core engagement.
Likewise, I immensely enjoy this video - but don’t think every game should designed around this woman’s revenge fantasies against British Gas.
GTA V does work great for her revenge fantasies against British Gas, but that’s largely a side effect of all it’s other bits and pieces and not a core design consideration for R* to consider in future games.
It’s a technique known as satire. See you’re constantly stating that changes would be cheap and easy - so now I’ve asked you to do it yourself and you’re upset that I’m “resorting to this” because it’s highlighted the absurdity of that.
With any luck, this will highlight the absurdity of you then following up with claiming that various changes are “easy” without considering the 1,001 decisions that must be considered in design and how labor intensive testing is. You’ll perhaps consider that imagining something is easy, but the execution is very, very hard.
I don’t see I’ve changed my tone at all - I’ve even referenced the same stance above.
Weapon customization does inherently devalue the majority of the weapons because it leads to some weapons and configurations being the “best” and all others being inferior. That’s um, that’s why people do it in real life… it’s not an aesthetic thing, it’s to address a real world need.
The majority of weapons in Hitman are… dull, but now at least I only keep some particular ones rather than overloading my loadout with 19 kinds of pistol that are all waterpistols compared to my Silverballer - now I have a variety of looks for the my Silverballer and a couple of options. I have three sniper rifles, two are the default and one is an amazing piece I unlocked via a quite satisfying Escalation. If I want more types, I can go an unlock them.
The ICA now has a definite personality, a definite style - they have classic styles with pistols (favouring the 1911 makes) but more modern sensibilities when it comes to main weapons. They favour modern lines and polymer bodies with modular designs and subdued colours. These are people who prioritize efficiency, appreciate elegance and embrace innovation. They have their own sommelier.
Jee, guys! Could you make your posts just a little longer?
Actually, I would like to share a little story that perfectly demonstrates why current system is better than money. So, I really-really like Mumbai, but do not care for Santa Fortuna. But yesterday I had an idea: what if I could use an RFID triggered bomb to eliminate Maelstrom? Sounds cool. One problem though. I haven’t unlocked it, because I didn’t put too much time into Santa Fortuna.
At first I was frustrated. But then I thought, what the hell? I haven’t done the Submarine thing, and I neglected the Hippie and his souvenir. That should have been enough to get me my gear. But then a weird thing happened. I actually enjoyed that play through. It was the first time I completed Santa Fortuna without entering mansion grounds or coca fields. And I even found a small secret passage that connects tunnels to Delgado’s garage.
And the RFID tag thing didn’t work as I hopped it would. But I still enjoyed getting it. And my view of Santa Fortuna has improved. It may sound weird, but in this game about killing for money communist style rationing of unlocks works better than blood money capitalism.
Someone found something interesting in the game. I quote him :
It seems like IOI changed a couple of things backendwise and I’ve seen a couple of weird references to a Currency Balance, a RMT- and GamePrice of Items and an IsPurchaseable Flag.
Make of that what you will.
I think a money system would be good for if you leave a suit or piece of equipment behind you have to buy it back, giving you a reason to retrieve it. But having a money system in place may lead to using real money!