The Politics Of Hitman

White nationalism and fascism are bad, I think we can all agree on that. Could we get back to discussing the politics of Hitman please? Before the thread gets locked down?

Anyways, Blood Money’s plot had human cloning as an important policy in the US election. The whole cloning angle has pretty much been dropped in the two new games, as you have stuff like the Ortmeyer project being referred to as ‘genetic manipulation to create supersoldiers’ but without calling it clonning outright, or the doctors at Gama apparently not knowing about cloning in their analysis of 47 as a patient.

Cloning should be a relevant political issue in the Hitman world again. Make Cloning Great Again! A good way to start would be to mention it in those news broadcasts with acclaimed GNN reporter Pam Kingsley. GNN also mentioned a climate summit taking place in Sweden. Wouldn’t mind seeing Jin Po and his son Tren as targets there. The hits on Abiatti and Murillo were great, so I’m also looking forward to killing the Po’s.

1 Like

I hold the opinion that unless it is set up as inherently political than politics should stay out of it. The ICA is neutral and 47 is apathetic to the world. He lives only for a paycheck or the discovery of his identity. Putting politics where it does not belong is how we get shit like All-Star Batman & Robin.

I hope they make the Po family feel real instead of the farcical cartoons Abiatti and Murillo were.

Oh joy another thread to clean up several hundred posts from because people can’t help themselves.

So, while I do that, I feel it’s necessary to stress a few points:

  • 47 has literally always targeted people who are presented to him as bad guys - this is the standard for the sympathetic assassin type character and also not having your game become hate propaganda.
  • It also allows for more interesting level design since bad guys have no inherent limits on how they will defend themselves but good guys are dependent upon a system that also inherently protects the bad guys.
  • It is not possible to satirize without an agenda - satire is literally about creating something that showcases the fallacy of something in a way that can shame the supporters into changing things.
  • When accounts are created just to pick fights with people over “you probably think my politics are” then don’t reply to them, just flag them. Certainly do not humour them by playing devil’s advocate for them.
  • If you want to talk about something related, but essentially off topic - click the new thread button.

Also the games have always been incredibly political - so if you’re going to claim it’s “not ramming it down our throats” that’s either “I wasn’t paying attention” or “I agree and assumed everyone did”

Your cooperation is appreciated.


That’s fair enough – but IOI’s agenda can first and foremost be to entertain the player, and then the developers are free to exaggerate and poke fun at personalities from all strata of the social, political and entertainment spectrum; nobody is forcing them to focus entirely on a particular group that they dislike, i.e. to push a political agenda. That’s the point I was making above.

People of any political, or non-political, affiliation can be lampooned for comic effect. Just don’t turn the satire (or whatever you choose to call it) into a concentrated attack on one segment of the fanbase, because, if the gaming news of 2018 is anything to go by, the results won’t be pretty.

P.S. I’m not accusing IOI of having aggressively pushed a political agenda up to this point. If they had, I’m sure that players would be unhappier than they are and Youtubers like YongYea would already be all over them. I’m just speaking generally and asking that they maintain their laudable focus on putting the fans first.

P.P.S. I’ve made some pretty long comments to effectively ask IO to keep doing what they’re doing.

Time. Well. Spent. :smile:

That’s not even faintly accurate.

Every single Hitman game explores, by necessity:

  • The politics of vigilantism against criminals who have made themselves untouchable in society
  • The politics of how an organization that would do such a thing would operate
  • The politics of how other criminal organizations would operate

Codename 47’s politics included (among other things):

  • Exploitation of women in the sex trade (The Lee Hong Assassination)
  • Corruption of the police (The Massacre At Cheng Chau Fish Restaurant)
  • Exploitation and abuse of indigenous people (Find the U’wa Tribe)
  • The illegal drug trade, specifically cocaine from Columbia
  • The value of cooperative governing (The UN conference in Traditions of the Trade)
  • Nuclear arms trading and arms trading in general (Plutonium Runs Loose)
  • The rights of an individual compared to their “maker” (The Setup, Meet Your Brother)
  • Science ethics in general (The Core Plot)

Blood Money, the most “about cloning” one was inherently about:

  • The politics of trying to legislate and control science
  • Secret societies manipulating the public for personal gain

The idea that politics is not present in media such as game is a kind of anti-intellectualism that is generally used to try to silence discussion and criticism of media - so to silence the civilized conversation the forum is here to facilitate. I must therefore ask that it not continue.

That is not in any way shape or form what you said - it is some sort of strange statement implying some mysterious group forces IO Interactive to “do politics” and pretend that the creative staff at IO Interactive do not have their own political ideas and observations, or that the series as a whole has always had strong political themes.

This is a similar form of anti-intellectualism as above.

There is on such thing as a non-political person. No one is an island unto themselves, no person is divorced from humanity and hence no person can be non-political.

Lampooning is political, by it’s very nature. National Lampoon’s Christmas Vacation begins with a harsh opening about the fallacy of prioritizing symbolism over actual family bonding and the idea that certain traditions like going out for The Perfect Christmas Tree are inherently good traditions. That’s a political statement, both against the act itself and the wider assumption that traditions are inherently good.

The only way people can see it as “non-political” is when they and their political stance are sufficiently protected that they need never worry further attacks of a more direct and potentially violent nature.

If you don’t want to learn what words mean I suggest you refrain from using them, that way you can avoid the issue above.

This idea that developers have to “not upset their fans” seems to always be very once sided, because it’s spread by a particular group.

Kingdom Come: Deliverance devs have outright attacked people who are fans of historical settings and happen to also consider it important to acknowledge that brown people have always been in Europe, this made it popular with people who are not fans of historical accuracy but are fans of the fantasy of White Europe and claiming that is “realistic”. The “don’t upset the fans” crowd love it because it upsets people they don’t like.

God of War did a complete turn around on many aspects of the game, changing Kratos from an emotionally stunted avatar of destruction and conquest to a morally conflicted father trying to find a way to help the next generation and outgrow the ills he learned from the generation before. It sold like hotcakes.

Far Cry 5 shifting the political landscape to the USA and promising to explore what’s so wrong there led to a massive backlash from people who didn’t want their homeland’s injustices and ignorances showcased - it sold like hotcakes. The “fans” just went to pretending they were upset anyway.

Bioware made loud statements early on that people who didn’t think women could be heroic, or people who didn’t think that LGBT people deserved relationships would be continually disappointed by their games and have leaned into that with every game - building it up from a small studio to a giant one.

This nonsense that game developers should never upset anyone, particularly say a relatively small but extremely loud group who demand that they upset everyone else (ie fascists) is a myth that is largely spread by people who want to use it as a club to force developers to do what they want.

Well what they’re doing is making the games intensely political in a way I guarantee will make various people uncomfortable once they realise that’s what’s going on… so which is it?


11 posts were merged into an existing topic: Civilized Conversation: A Primer

10 posts were split from this topic as part of general tidy up.

cassidy invaded the privacy of the citizens of whittleton creek, and worked for the loominaty (providence). he’s pretty bad.


Dude it is a WASPy neighbourhood those people are always peeking over the shrubs or rooting through the open houses. Cassidy is just that idea on steroids.

doesn’t make him less of a dick

1 Like

Well of course he is a dick but being a dick doesn’t make him evil.Working for the Illuminatish does, even then they are a grey are with some shades of black to keep us guessing. He thinks he is still doing his secret service job. It is quite clear he never got over being laid off after the Morris incident. I like that about Nolan, it is like what MacArthur said “Old soldiers never die they just fade away”.

If you read his bio: He’s pretty evil - he only spent five years working in Secret Service (then got fired 'cause of 47… lol) but then spent a lot more time working for a South American cartel instead.

Now he’s back in suburbia pretending to be stand up guy and bragging about his time in the academy etc while knowingly protecting a major asset for the people who puppeteer the world - who was a long time enemy of the USA.

And the part that annoys him is having to put up with Evil Grandpa chastising him.


Yep I stated that his service with providence is evil and his work with Moreno cartel was a part of it. Since it is implied before and then later confirmed that the Moreno cartel was a Providence outfit.

He hath been summoned!

You’re assigning motive to my arguments, just like how Quinn did, and in an equally false manner. I’m not sexist because I don’t want Diana to talk so much. I’m not looking to seem edgy by supporting the idea of 47 going after innocent targets. I’m not trying to stifle discussion by referring to the one clear-cut time a Hitman game was about politics in the strictest sense of the word. Just because, as your retort clearly shows, you are also a proponent of the “politics is everything” idea, you seem to have the idea you can call my remark anti-intellectual, which to me sounds like a thin-layered way to call me either stupid or a bad person with an agenda to keep the conversation on an intellectually low level. While I’d like to think both claims are false, your accusation limits my choice quite effectively to these two. Nothing about that kind of subtle name calling in the forum guidelines I imagine?

The comment you quoted was a tongue-in-cheek reference to the one time politics in its most common form, to me and to many, was represented in the game, that form being elections, the thing bringing politics closer to the people. If you see politics in the rescue of a Chinese prostitute or the recovery of a golden idol or want to perform other such acrobatics during your dance please be my guest. I will not try to stifle you as you just did by telling me to GTFO, with such grandeur.

I’ve even asked Quinn, in an earlier stage of this topic, how the idea of having innocent targets in Hitman lore would equal an “alt-right simulation”. Unfortunately this was not addressed.

I’d also like to add that I can’t have been the only one to note at which points the debate became less civilized, even though you insist I’ve been trying to silence a civilized debate. Telling someone to fuck off is not civilized. It’s funny how you didn’t choose to quote that but instead picked a harmless joke. Politics, I guess?


Wow, missed this in his bio. Guess Graves is the only real ‘innocent’ target we’ve got recently, and people have argued above that she deserved it for fighting with the militia (but I still think she’s just misguided, and definitely the most morally ‘clean’ target we’ve had).

One thing I’ve not seen mentioned is that Freedom Fighters (Colorado) was pretty hard on satirizing left wing/antifa/etc politics and groups. That’s merely an observation; both sides of the political spectrum have fun poked at them.


Really? I felt they were apolitical and were just a parody of domestic terrorist and their methods in general.

I don’t really think it is, to be honest. Sean Rose is the only one who is distinctly left wing and it’s barely even mentioned in the actual mission, with most of his character being focused around his OCD. There’s also a fair amount of satirising of right wing groups in dialogue between the soldiers.

1 Like

I’m pointing the overall outcome of a common claim. You’re now trying to change the topic from that discussion to talk about yourself and your “motives” (an inherently unknowable concept)

See this kind of thing is the same kind of derail, rather than talk about the politics of how people view and talk about Diana - you want to change the topic to are you sexist or not? The answer is: Irrelevant, the conversation is not about you.

It’s not even close to being “the one clear-cut time” given that 47 has:

  • Prevented the use of a bio-weapon on a UN convention (Codename 47)
  • Assassinated a political assassin, and a general, inside of an embassy (Silent Assassin)
  • Assassinated a cult leader who maintains total control of an area (Silent Assassin)
  • Assassinated a warlord under UN watch (Silent Assassin)
  • Covered up the indiscretion of a senator’s son (Blood Money)
  • Prevented an assassination at a political rally (Blood Money)
  • Assassinated the Vice President of the USA, while preventing the assassination of the President of the USA (Blood Money)
  • Killed a megachurch owner and a presidential candidate (The Damnation novel)
  • Inadvertently led to the razing of a small town in the USA (Absolution)
  • Prevented the sale of a NOC list at the behest of MI-6 (HITMAN)
  • Prevented a military coup in Morocco (HITMAN)
  • Murdered the key lieutenants in an anti-corporation, anti-oligarchy militia (HITMAN & HITMAN 2)

That’s a lot of “politics” straight away, before we get into what saying “the politics of” is actually saying.

Surprising then, that you do not simply post that you meant it as a joke and want to move on - particularly given you can doubtlessly see that I just had to prune 300+ posts of various derailing nonsense, impeding the people who’d want to have some actual discussion over the topic you’re not interested in.

But wait, you are interested in it - probably would have been good not to participate in the derail then!

Though I’m not sure why you’d even bother asking about that given the alt-right support of say, the game Hatred (specifically about killing innocent people) and the many, many other conversations on that topic that you probably have seen over the years on the forum.

Particularly the obvious one I mentioned above, in that “innocent” targets reflect killing innocent people who simply depend on the police and nobody else to protect them, since they are not participating in exchange of violence. The threat of doing this to innocent people is a common tactic by the alt-right (as well as for example, The Golden One’s tendency to stream Skyrim and declare the people he’s killing are “feminists”, “marxists”, “frankfurt school student”, etc).

See how interesting the discussion actually is when it’s not being derailed?

I dunno, I just had a civilized conversation with a mutually friendly ending with someone who told me to “fuck off” - tell you what’s really not civilized though: People registering accounts on the forum specifically so they can derail threads with white nationalist bullet points, to antagonise people and make them feel unwelcome on this forum in complete contradiction to the forum guidelines.

That’s so uncivilized I can totally see why people tell them to fuck off.

But this is particularly funny following you posting a wall of text to assure you’re not sexist/etc but want no consideration or nuance in the assessment of someone else’s post.

Graves is an interesting one politically since she represents a sort of turncoat who could be read a number of ways:

  • A defector from law enforcement to help out an militia full of murderers
  • Someone who realized her work was being used for the benefit of Providence (ie covert terrorism)
  • Someone who also immediately decided to start trusting an extremely radical leader with no real background to assure than he could be trusted

They’re actually pretty well written and laid out in that if you take the initial briefing at face value they are easy to mistake for what we normally think of when we hear about militias on farms (libertarian gun nuts wanting to shoot anyone who isn’t them) - only lead by a serial bomber who happens to be an environmental terrorist.

However if you wander around and eavesdrop, you can overhear a few things like the guards talking about how whenever they have the choice, they work for a good cause (“righteous money just sits in my pocket better”), how The Boss isn’t a monster but sometimes he needs a monster (hence why he has Rose in charge), that can give you a much different view of them by the time you’re stepping over their cold bodies to get into the shelter.


I am all too aware of this fact, but they are still inherently apolitical. While the individual members might have a political bias that made them join they all share one common goal. Get rid of the secret society that secretly runs the world.