What makes a good target?

I’ve seen a few of these pertaining to creating a contract… but lets include it all. What makes a target that much more likable to kill? What separates Vinnie Sinistra from, say, Skip Muldoon (Wish I were sorry for the BM reference)?

I’m genuinely asking here, as I don’t know the answer. My favorite currently is Rangan in Mumbai, but there are a lot of factors to account for.

A) is time, he won’t last as long as the flavor of the week

B) my ethinicity is from India, so I’m partial to that map

C) he’s such an ass, only Dino Bosco pars him on this scale.

So, my conclusion is that its very subjective. Are there any traits that (objectively) make a target a good one?Just wondering HMF thoughts. This question applies to contracts mode as well.

1 Like

Something important about a target for me is contrast to the other target. Sure, a lot of targets are similar to the other, like being in the same profession, but there’s always a personality trait or two that differentiates them from the other.

Viktor Novikov and Dalia Margolis, heads of Sanguine and the secret ringleaders of IAGO. Quite the resumés. They’re both mad classy and have improper accents for a Russian and an Israeli.

Difference is while Viktor Novikov is passionate about Sanguine, Dalia Margolis couldn’t care less. He wants out of the business soon, she doesn’t. He’s more liable to lose his temper and make bad decisions than her. Dalia’s reputation as the true head of IAGO is fitting; she’s running the auction upstairs, talking with the patrons and inducting new spies into the business.

Dr Silvio Caruso and Dr Francesca De Santis, the hot but troubled and immoral Italian scientists creating a dangerous bioweapon. Caruso’s a rich nobleman, De Santis’s an upper-middle class Ether executive. Caruso is a nervous wreck, De Santis is cool and calculated, not even panicking when she learns Caruso wants to kill her. Caruso wants the virus to exact revenge against his childhood bullies, De Santis just wants to get a head up in the corporate world. This contrasts one target from another and makes them both more interesting.

That is why they’re much better targets collectively than the ones in The Ark Society.

The Ark Society is a great mission with a badass atmosphere and epic kills, but the targets leave a lot to be desired. The Washington twins aren’t as fun as they’re practically the same as each other. They look different, and Zoe’s more of a spokeswoman and Sophia handles the business aspects, but in the end, they’re practically the same person. You could swap them in each other’s roles or even take Zoe out of the story and nothing would change. They’re so bland.


I noticed a recurring theme with Hitman targets: there’s usually a Leisure target, that mostly chooses to relax and have fun, and a Business target, who takes care of the dirty work. Not like Leisure targets have no formal meetings or Business targets have no opportunities to unwind, but it’s just a distinction.

Leisure Targets: Viktor Novikov, Silvio Caruso, Claus Hugo Strandberg, Jordan Cross, Yuki Yamazaki, Alma Reynard, Sierra Knox, Rico Delgado, Dawood Rangan, Janus.

Business Targets: Dalia Margolis, Francesca De Santis, General Zaydan, Ken Morgan, Colorado targets, Robert Knox, Andrea Martinez, Jorge Franco, Vanya Shah, Nolan Cassidy.


I think a good target is someone who has a good backstory, with little side conversations you can pick up to give you more information on them. Another aspect of a good target is a good location, I’d say. The location needs to suit the target.


I think that there needs to be these things for a target to be good.

  1. Backstory is key, they need to have there character developed in the bio well. IO shouldn’t skimp on details unless the targets are ghosts.

  2. Interaction is key, the conversations they have with others or even to themselves are also what I look for. They need to reveal that which is not in the bio or is not thoroughly stated in the biography.

  3. Acting, a no brainer. Need to have not only the line delivery they really need to impart personality when they talk. There is also physical element. How they walk, pose and interact with other people and objects

  4. Location, a brainer. Few people consider how much IO have really been tying the characters to locations and basing designs around them but I have. Places like Mumbai, Sapienza or even Marrakesh do this well.

  5. Physical appearance is also important in characters. every little scar, burn or even wrinkle can convey a story and show character traits. But they simply can be there because they are cool that is cliche and I wish they would stop doing that in other things.


Like Klaas Teller’s tattoos, right?

OK so I am going to go over the characters using my criteria I will make a post per level. Hopefully it keeps the thread relevant and bumped up often.

Sierra Knox

Sierra has a nice backstory that establishes her character and her wreckless behaviour well. It explains her aggression, her wild behaviour and relationship with her father. Details about her hyper-competitive behaviour are apparent and help flesh out things like Theirry Durant (the backup driver) or the Kowoon-Kronstadt Rivalry

Her interactions with Lee or Fort-Lee Seven, the medic or medic 37, her lawyer and the blackmailer help serve to highlight her emotional issues and father issues.

Sierra is portrayed with all the arrogance, competitiveness and seriousness that is common with CFOs and iceskaters. It brings out the business side of her that is seen on the posters in the expo hall. She also is not even referred to filial on those posters.

Since Sierra is a public person in a public area there is not as strong a thematic tie. But seeing Sierra merch and posters made by fans helps show she has made a mark on the level

Her physical appearance is interesting in that she is one of the few characters that are female but have masculine features. Most likely due to being in a man’s world. But she also has masculine or at least neutral physical appearance since she is wearing her body suit.

I won’t hand out numerical ratings since I loathe them and already have reactions down.

Robert Knox

Knox has a backstory so deep it was pumped into an ET. It defies the typical tech industry narrative of “the garage that started it all” and shows what happens when your ideas are good but you have the personality of a brick wall. Elon Musk parody, no far to mean and lacking in structuring?. His monopolisation and bully tactics are an exaggeration of the actions of Bill Gates in the 90s. It helps flesh out just how much he has influenced his daughter as well especially his racing career and seeing his old face.

His interactions are limited but the way he runs down PALLAS with Ted Mendez is a most likely a parody of Steve Jobs and his personalised manner of displaying technology. His private conversations help elaborate more on his tech, ambitions after AI and in general.

He is well acted he definitely has the personality of your typical tech guru and it makes for a jarring kill-bot presentation. He does gesticulations common with tech presentations

Location is a stand out for me. His ambition to replace humanity with robots stretches to the actual expo building how the exhibition space no consumes the original aquarium the building originally was. It has the metal, plastic, super concrete that reflects dehumanisation of technology. The bold red white and black colouration mocks 47 since Kronstadt make perfect killing ,machines. It is a little bubble he has placed himself in matching his ego. With a little nook with his old memories of racing.

His physical appearence has little references to enemy of humanity Mark Zuckerberg in his hair, his turtleneck is reference to Apple CEO Steve Jobs (well former CEO) and his scar might be a call back to Cayne. It is a reference to his days as a chemist, as a man of science and how he lost a little big of himself in doing so. It represents the dark side of him that no one else knows exists.

Overall Knox was my favourite Miami character and one of my favourites in the game.


Not like that that falls under the second half of option five! He is the reporter and whistleblower with the world’s most conspicuous name. I have never seen someone with a literal backstory

But he got the tattoos because he was undercover in a gang, and he would look better to the gang with those tattoos, iirc?

1 Like

Having an interesting background.
Not being totally scripted. Useful routines.
Being able to defend themselves.

Definitely the backstory and the overall feel. I liked Sarajevo 6 in the terms of their backgrounds, not so much their assassinations.

I preferred elusives like The Prince or Black Hat to let’s says The Broker or The Food Critic (really?).

I wonder how we got from people-hunting lords, porn tycoons, child traffickers, and drug lords (who require to be shot multiple times before they go down) to scientists, formula racing drivers, bankers, rock stars, media sensations and food critics :slight_smile:

1 Like

Ah fuck I forgot New Zealand.

Alma Reynard

I love how Alma has a tie to one of the prior targets in the game (Australian eco-terrorist Sean Rose who died in a fatal battering ram accident), I love how there is a secret conversation she has with her sister that develops her and her twisted family. The level investigates her tactics and lampoons 47’s own tactics of infiltration.

As for interation. Her interactions with Sean Lite will not be forgotten for a long time. After think she would be some hard-ass target like Pavarti we get someone with some humour and life. Also her interactions with Orson jar with those with Donovan and her bizarre scheme.

Her acting is brilliant there is a way that the actress reads her lines is phenomenal, the way she twists the playful nature of her lines into more serious dialogue is fantastic. There is nothing much to her physical movements since she is the more normal type of target.

Her house has a bright airy and open space that is actually in fact decorated with modern macarbe art work reflecting Reynard’s methods and her impulsive flightiness.

There is nothing overt about her physical appearance other than the fact that we see a little more of where they were just by their fancy dress. Oh sidebar I appreciate how Orson has a huge scar across his abdomen.

Reynard is what makes up for the level for me, one of those targets I find so well developed I have qualms with killing them like Caruso, Cross or even Rose.


I don’t know man: ask the guy giving weapons to a North Korean dictator,the drug lord who feeds his enemies to a hippo,the crime lord who has tailors murdered for not reaching her expectations,the movie producer who threatens an actress’ career when she won’t sleep with him and threatens the life of a dancer who upstaged him and the two women who believe only the rich deserve a chance to survive the apocalypse


A good Target has a fleshed out Backstory, interesting Character Traits and a good build up.
Thats the Reason why the Targets in Codename 47 and Silent Assassin are so memorable, many of them have 2 or 3 “Transition“ Levels, like Lee Hong, Pablo Ochoa, Hayamoto and Deewanna Jiia - that gives you a better feeling of how Powerful those People are - unlike the ones from BM and Absolution, who are all one and done Deals. if anything, you read two sentences in the briefing about them, kill them and forget them, like Dom Osmond and Dr Green.


Dude are you ever going to forget Wade or Blake Dexter anytime soon? I guarantee you have not forgotten them


no, i wont forget them, but for all the wrong reasons. :wink:


Ah but you still remember them! So IO wins again. Also you remember Dom Osmond and Dr Green but neither of us remember his first name.

EDIT: I looked it up it was Marcus, I though Raymond but that is Dr. Valentine (The black one with the baldness)


What makes a target good is his route, his triggers and the amount of killing opportunities.

That is all that really matters.

1 Like

I knew I forgot something, but I think the quality, uniqueness or violence of a kill is far important than quantity

1 Like

Better? Or more important? I disagree either way