It’s the only one I’ve ever been able to think of that fits. Theres the reasons I listed, as well as Edwards’s comments throughout the trilogy: “Partners, then?”, “Partners no more, then,” as foreshadowing of the final chapter all along. It makes sense in context, and as Hitman 3 is clearly an entry that someone would need to understand follows two others, I don’t think it would be an issue to label it as such. If someone is confused by the title, welcome to the Hitman series for the first time, you clearly don’t understand what this title means, try starting at the beginning and work your way forward.
The only other one that even kinda comes close is Untouchable, but that doesn’t really capture what takes place across the game or the trilogy like the emphasis on partnership for the third game. Untouchable fits better as a descriptor for the e tire trilogy.
yeah, i get your reasoning. i just don’t think it is a very appealing or evocative title. it also happens to be unintentionally misleading, which makes it a ‘bad’ title.
i would suggest that if someone is unintentionally confused by a title, the first move isn’t to get defensive and blame the audience. instead, you change the title.
As per usual, I can see it either way. If I knew nothing about the plot of the World of Assassination trilogy, I would probably think that “Partners” means either that 47 is taking on a partner or I would be playing with a partner. I can’t even necessarily say that I would think Grey was the so-called “Partner” as I already stated as a given that I wouldn’t know anything about the plot of the first two games.
Knowing the plot of the first and second games in that trilogy, I would know that “Partners” is a reference to the people in the game and their role. I don’t think that anyone who actually knew the plots of the games could misconstrue the word Partner as a suggestion of co-op though (especially given that the co-op mode of the trilogy would already have been introduced in the previous title).
‘partners’ literally means ‘a pair of people engaged in the same activity’. if you put that in a video game title, i reckon some people will - quite fairly, i think - assume co-op of some kind, regardless of its relationship to the plot.
again, this is all hypothetical. you call it what you like, i’m literally ‘just sayin’.
47 is sneaking into the stronghold of a target that is about to commit some cataclysmic action that’s gonna do a lot of damage and kill a lot of people. He’s expecting 47, because he knows who the client is and that they put up the contract on him. He’s alone in the room, but he’s got 47 dead to rights, pointing a shotgun at his chest, almost touching him with it but not quite, while 47’s got his hands raised, his face calm and unconcerned. The target is utterly dedicated to carrying out his plan, admits that nothing will convince him to stand down, and says: “only death will stop me.” 47 says something in response, then quickly disarms him of the shotgun, hits him in the side of the head with it and knocks him on his back, then shoots him in the face.
in H2 he did, quite a bit. he has a great one when Sierra Knox is being poisoned. she asks, “wait, belladonna? isn’t that poisonous? should i be concerned?” he replies calmly… “I’m not.” heheh. though maybe that doesn’t qualify as a one liner idk.
A lot of what 47 says in game dialog is either an outright pun or at least a sly wink to one. “It’s To Die For”, his whole tour of the Schmidt house in Whittleton Creek, his dialog with Vanya Shah as the foreman, and many others are all clearly meant to be funny (to the players at least). He may not intentionally be cracking jokes, but his “clever” murder puns and references are all intentionally delivered that way.
And let’s not forget the one time in the entire franchise when 47 made a quip for absolutely no reason. He wasn’t responding sarcastically to something someone else said, there’s no indication Diana was listening in, so it wasn’t for her benefit; 47 just up and made a joke, unprompted, for literally no reason except his own amusement. It was in Santa Fortuna, when Jorge Franco is on the edge of the waterfall and 47 taps him on the shoulder, and we get the absolute gem of: “Dr. Livingston? Excuse me…” before he pushes him off the edge. 47 was actually enjoying his work so much at that moment that he made a joke for no one’s benefit but himself. That was the most character development he ever had (or needed).
Even though hitman 2 2018 is my favorite hitman game i purposely ignore the writing, as the constant joking and see through death one liners ruin 47 for me
I always wondered about that. That conversation served no purpose, as 47 didn’t take any recordings of Jordan’s confession back with him to give to the clients. So why did he corner and confront Jordan like that? I see two possible reasons. Either he was just curious, and wanted to hear what Jordan had to say for himself. Or, the other option: is it possible 47 got some kind of enjoyment out of putting him on the spot like that? 47’s not sadistic, but did he take some kind of psychological satisfaction, or even pleasure, in toying with Jordan like a cat that has a mouse by the tail? It’s an interesting thing to consider.
