Hitman 5 !!!!

[GiantRaven]

And some better writing. The stories aren't bad for games, but:

Silent Assassin's... well, Silent Assassin's I quite enjoyed actually. But Contracts' was non-existent, and Blood Money's felt a little half-baked. I'm pretty sure the only way you knew what Burnt Face Man's actual motivation for hunting 47 was, was if you read his profile on the game's website.

I have the exact opposite opinion to you. I found Silent Assassin's story to be uninteresting (I don't even remember what it was about) but I loved Contracts' framework of a dying Hitman remembering past jobs as he struggled to stay alive. I found it to be more unique and memorable.

Different strokes of course, though. =)

 

[Woodsey]

And some better writing. The stories aren't bad for games, but:

Silent Assassin's... well, Silent Assassin's I quite enjoyed actually. But Contracts' was non-existent, and Blood Money's felt a little half-baked. I'm pretty sure the only way you knew what Burnt Face Man's actual motivation for hunting 47 was, was if you read his profile on the game's website.

I have the exact opposite opinion to you. I found Silent Assassin's story to be uninteresting (I don't even remember what it was about) but I loved Contracts' framework of a dying Hitman remembering past jobs as he struggled to stay alive. I found it to be more unique and memorable.

Different strokes of course, though. =)

But considering its kind of ret-conned in Blood Money, and that the entire game lacks coherency between missions, and the game starts in medias res, only to never get back to where it began, its quite frustrating I find.

I can't particularly remember what Silent Assassin's was about now, but I remember enjoying it more than the other two. I'm not really a fan of the whole clone thing. To be honest, I actually thought the film's orphan thing was more interesting, if a little clichéd.

It is just about the only good part of the film though, unless you're a little bit pissed when you watch it.

 

[GiantRaven]

But considering its kind of ret-conned in Blood Money, and that the entire game lacks coherency between missions, and the game starts in medias res, only to never get back to where it began, its quite frustrating I find.

Yeah, I can see why people would find that frustrating. It's right up my alley as a story though. I have a soft spot for stories that don't achieve anything and just show a small slice of life.

What was the retcon though? I don't recall that.

I can't particularly remember what Silent Assassin's was about now, but I remember enjoying it more than the other two. I'm not really a fan of the whole clone thing. To be honest, I actually thought the film's orphan thing was more interesting, if a little clichéd.

It is just about the only good part of the film though, unless you're a little bit pissed when you watch it.

Apart from the bit where 47 is suddenly revealed to carry around two swords on his back, I found the whole film incredibly entertaining. One of the best game movies imo.

 

[wrecker77]

I don't care how the game is. As long as I see more "How not to play Hitman" videos.

That being said, a better presented game. It all felt very stiff in the other installments. I understand thats the feel of the game, but I'd like to see a little experimenting, rather than just another Blood money, allthough I wouldnt hate that. And some kind of AC brotherhood stlye multiplayer. It fits so well.

Very excited. Also Kane and Lynch 2 wasn't that bad. I don't know if this thread will go down that road, but if it does. There you go. It was still bad, but if someone calls in the worst game of 2010, thats just ridiculous.

 

[DEAD34345]

I believe they should just scratch the series entirely and make a new, original IP that uses original mechanics instead of just milking the franchise for profit. Seriously, developers and publishers, WE'RE TIRED OF THE SAME SHIT BEING COPIED OVER AND OVER AGAIN. Care to innovate or should we get the torches and pitchforks?

No! NOT THIS!

I want Hitman: Blood Money a second time with no changes! Hell, I'll be happy even if they stick with the same levels, just change all the textures so we can trick ourselves into thinking it's something new.

They can't soil this chance! Hitman was perfect the 3rd time around (or whatever Blood Money was), no changes! No innovation!

 

[pyramid head grape]

I look forward to a new hitman game if possible.

 

[BreakfastMan]

Well, bigger, more open levels would be nice. I actually want the "make it look like an accident" thing explored more in-depth. It was a great mechanic and done pretty well in Blood Money, but it could be better (more options, more complicated set-ups, stuff like that). Some better A.I. would be nice. Co-op could be fun as well. I would like a better story to tie the missions together. Oh, more options on how to hide bodies would be nice as well. Beyond that, I do not know. Blood Money was nearly perfect in my book, so there is very little that needed to be improved.

 

[baddude1337]

Better controls. I know they don't want you to go all o ut and run and gun but the controls have always been kinda stiff. I would like even bigger, more epic scale levels with loads of ways to take out a single target.

Also, how about a customizable agent? I always found it weird nobody seemed to get suspicious of a guy with a bar code on his head...

 

[EllEzDee]

Better AI, that's it really. The Hitman games have always been fantastic, but the AI is usually a bit daft, like with every single game that exists to date.
Oh, wait. Make it so i have a use for my money, and make it so that i have a reason to buy the weapon upgrades. Silencer 1 and silenced rounds = all you need in the game to pop 'em in the head silently.

 

[Freechoice]

"IO Interactive (commonly abbreviated to IOI) is a Danish video game developer currently owned by Square Enix"

It's screwed.

 

[Serenegoose]

I'd like more flexibility on how you finish a mission and less judgment on how you do it. The thing that irks me about a hitman game is that there's always a 'right way' to do a mission and you're punished for going off of that. This really seals hitman into being a puzzle game rather than an interesting assassination game, because your agency (as a player, not 'the agency') is lessened by the fact that you'll be punished for doing something -your- way.

 

[AndyFromMonday]

Fuck that. Hitman's essentially the only series of its kind. They're hardly milking it, yes there have been 4 games so far, but the last one came out 5 years ago. Not exactly wanking the series dry, are they?

So what, if enough time passes it's no longer attempting to milk it it's just plain "OK"? Bullshit. They made 4 goddamn games. They milked the series dry and now they're trying to do it again. Still, that's not my point. My point is that developers and publishers should focus more on releasing innovative games rather than making sequels to already existing franchises. How many innovative game have we seen this year? In fact, scratch that. How many original IP's have we seen in the past 2 years? Scratch that as well. How many original IP's have been announced and are slated for release in the future?

Do you see a pattern here? Most of the major games released in the past year and this year have been sequels to already existing games. The industry is getting STALE. I have no problem with making a sequel to improve on an already great idea but stop there for fucks sake. Nowadays you have an original idea once every full moon and if it does good then you're in for another 5 or 6 sequels. Sequels are great when they improve by a mile the original idea but the moment sequels trump original Ip's with innovative ideas means there's a problem. As it stands, this is happening and I have a problem with that. More people should. More people should demand innovation. More people should demand original games. Unfortunately, most people don't.

 

[maninahat]

And some better writing. The stories aren't bad for games, but:

Silent Assassin's... well, Silent Assassin's I quite enjoyed actually. But Contracts' was non-existent, and Blood Money's felt a little half-baked. I'm pretty sure the only way you knew what Burnt Face Man's actual motivation for hunting 47 was, was if you read his profile on the game's website.

I kind of agree, but one thing I liked about Blood Money in the first place was that you weren't really given a story or a reason behind killing most of the targets; after a while, you start to see how some are relevant to an overarching conspiracy you are deliberately not being let in on. Sort of like how a real deniable asset has to operate; unaware of the bigger picture, and only able to figure out so much based on their limited part in the grand scheme.

 

[Vrach]

I believe they should just scratch the series entirely and make a new, original IP that uses original mechanics instead of just milking the franchise for profit. Seriously, developers and publishers, WE'RE TIRED OF THE SAME SHIT BEING COPIED OVER AND OVER AGAIN. Care to innovate or should we get the torches and pitchforks?

Yeah...

Fuck that. Hitman's essentially the only series of its kind. They're hardly milking it, yes there have been 4 games so far, but the last one came out 5 years ago. Not exactly wanking the series dry, are they?

^This, they're not pulling a CoD with a title every year and the franchise is truly unique. Hitman is the single surviving stealth franchise at the moment of it's kind. Assassin's Creed uses a completely different system and Splinter Cell stopped being a stealth franchise some 2 installments ago. Alpha Protocol would be somewhat in the same venue (although still vastly different), but even that's been scrapped (*mumbles* fucking reviewers)

OT: A good story would be the primary concern, the last game was just a rehash (a fun one, but still a rehash). I really liked the way Contracts was done, but considering the last two games used the "flashbacks" thing, they should probably stay away from that idea this time around.

Blood Money weapon system worked really well. I'd like to see something similar. Not saying the same thing, but I want to have the ability to choose my weapons loadout. The ability to modify weapons on the go Crysis-style would also be very much welcome (although done in a somewhat more realistic fashion)

The more ways to kill people, the better. But that's not something I found lacking in previous games, so not really concerned about it.

The notoriety system... I liked the way Blood Money handled it, the carryover part that is. I'm sure it can be improved and I'd like to see something different as long as it worked, but something similar would do it for me. I liked the newspapers thing at the end, if they could make it less formulaic, I'd love to see it make a comeback.

The detection system is a big concern imo. Blood Money had it alright, back in Contracts it was downright fucking awful. I've played the game relatively recently and walking next to someone in a disguise when there's no possible way to go around them blowing your cover is utter fucking bullshit. Some more intelligent AI could really do the trick here, but it needs to make sense.

 

[distended]

Don't find myself caring, never enjoyed the series /endopinion

Then, all respect due, why are you even here commenting? There is 0% point in your post. At least say something useful/thought-provoking

Thank you.

OT: I want more opportunity to use weapons without being penalized. I'm running around with a fully modded handgun that probably cost at least several grand, and I'm discouraged from using it as anything more than a heavy, blunt object when pistol-whipping someone. A rock would actually be more useful because you can throw it at someone.

Also, I don't usually lead the realism parade, but the Mardi Gras mission always annoyed me. Your only lead to an enemy hideout is a courier (supposedly dressed like a crow but looking much like a chicken) whom you're following, yet the ideal playthrough of the level consists of you knocking him out before he reaches his destination. This is doable because the hideout is always in the same place, and even if it weren't, it would be easy to find cause there's a bunch of chicken/crows hanging around outside of it. Realistically though, you wouldn't know where the hideout is and you wouldn't be able to bank on chickens hanging around outside the hideout, and even if you could, the mission is basically timed, so you wouldn't really be at liberty to traipse around the streets looking for it.

I agree with keeping the civilian mission types, as opposed to the more spy-oriented ones.

 

[timeadept]

I believe they should just scratch the series entirely and make a new, original IP that uses original mechanics instead of just milking the franchise for profit. Seriously, developers and publishers, WE'RE TIRED OF THE SAME SHIT BEING COPIED OVER AND OVER AGAIN. Care to innovate or should we get the torches and pitchforks?

????????????????????

Make a new game, that ditches the name, but uses the same mechanics...?

This is a completely ridiculous concept from a marketing and a game making standpoint and i don't understand how or why you're complaining.

If they're making a game using the same mechanics as one of your older games then as far as i'm concerned, it's the same game. The only difference between the two would be the history and setting, as well as new mechanics that could just as easily appear in a sequel. So, in other words, the only difference would be aesthetics and a chance for a fresh story, or not. I just don't consider innovation to be a new coat of paint.

Then you've gone and made this "new" game, using old mechanics that now has no brand recognition. Fans won't know to look out for it and so you're throwing away a large chunk of your target audience and hoping that they figure out what's going on and buy the new game.

If a sequel is done right, then it's not the same game with new levels. The sequel should introduce new mechanics or make other significant changes to the game. All developers don't feel the same way i do about this, but some do. In any case, theres no guarantee or hint either way that IO Interactive is making a clone or advancing the game. (and when i say clone i mean that they're making what was essentially an older version of the game but with new levels).

 

[AndyFromMonday]

Make a new game, that ditches the name, but uses the same mechanics...?

When did I ever say that in my comment?

 

[Woodsey]

But considering its kind of ret-conned in Blood Money, and that the entire game lacks coherency between missions, and the game starts in medias res, only to never get back to where it began, its quite frustrating I find.

Yeah, I can see why people would find that frustrating. It's right up my alley as a story though. I have a soft spot for stories that don't achieve anything and just show a small slice of life.

What was the retcon though? I don't recall that.

I can't particularly remember what Silent Assassin's was about now, but I remember enjoying it more than the other two. I'm not really a fan of the whole clone thing. To be honest, I actually thought the film's orphan thing was more interesting, if a little clichéd.

It is just about the only good part of the film though, unless you're a little bit pissed when you watch it.

Apart from the bit where 47 is suddenly revealed to carry around two swords on his back, I found the whole film incredibly entertaining. One of the best game movies imo.

Well, the hit in Contracts that he gets shot on is the Opera mission in Blood Money, but there's only a very minor reference to it, and the details of the hit are change (and he's shot halfway through the mission, as opposed to after).

I did find it entertaining too, but its certainly not what I'd call good xD

Fuck that. Hitman's essentially the only series of its kind. They're hardly milking it, yes there have been 4 games so far, but the last one came out 5 years ago. Not exactly wanking the series dry, are they?

So what, if enough time passes it's no longer attempting to milk it it's just plain "OK"? Bullshit. They made 4 goddamn games. They milked the series dry and now they're trying to do it again. Still, that's not my point. My point is that developers and publishers should focus more on releasing innovative games rather than making sequels to already existing franchises. How many innovative game have we seen this year? In fact, scratch that. How many original IP's have we seen in the past 2 years? Scratch that as well. How many original IP's have been announced and are slated for release in the future?

Do you see a pattern here? Most of the major games released in the past year and this year have been sequels to already existing games. The industry is getting STALE. I have no problem with making a sequel to improve on an already great idea but stop there for fucks sake. Nowadays you have an original idea once every full moon and if it does good then you're in for another 5 or 6 sequels. Sequels are great when they improve by a mile the original idea but the moment sequels trump original Ip's with innovative ideas means there's a problem. As it stands, this is happening and I have a problem with that. More people should. More people should demand innovation. More people should demand original games. Unfortunately, most people don't.

I'm not going over this whole sequel = stale argument again with someone.

If we didn't have Hitman 1-3, we'd have never gotten the best of the bunch, which was Blood Money (an exceptionally well-regarded game). You know why? Because it sometimes takes a few goes to get it right. They've left enough time so that they can properly explore new avenues with the series, help it reach its full potential, etc. etc.

I get the feeling you haven't played them. Blood Money is very different to Contracts, and Contracts - whilst mechanically more similar - had a very different feeling to Silent Assassin.

 

[Terminal Blue]

To everyone complaining about milking..

There's no harm in remaking a franchise if you're constantly refining the experience. If they genuinely were releasing the same game over and over again then I'd agree, but every single game in the Hitman series has made its prequel seem virtually unplayable.

The Hitman series is pretty much the only 'disguise-em-up' stealth game worth a damn. For that alone, I'm very glad to hear it's getting a new instalment.

What I'd like to see. Less spazzy AI. Blood money was pretty good in this regard, but even then NPCs would occasionally go a bit loopy and not react very well to particular things. I realize that stealth games with routines and a high number of variables are difficult in this regard, but it could be better. This is not to say that the AI should necessarily be predictable, there's nothing like waiting agonizingly in a particular spot for someone to show up and hoping they haven't got suspicious and locked themselves in the bathroom, but it could do with being a little less random.

Less emphasis on trial and error. Rather than making us walk out to physically see if a guard is looking the right way, be fed a bullet sandwich and have to quickload, maybe provide some kind of tool for looking round corners (a mirror or a lean function) or even go the whole hog and have some kind of thermal optics or motion sensor.

And most importantly of all, keep the aesthetic. No matter how technically good it is, a Hitman game wouldn't be a Hitman game without lashings of black humour and sexy parties.