ezekielpacman
Member
Then this sequence from the infallible and utterly realistic BM will have you guffawing to your grave!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWj5SekFL1M#t=1m10s
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Hitman: Absolution |OT| Police do not suspect Blood Money is involved.
- Thread starter Interfectum
- Start date
Then this sequence from the infallible and utterly realistic BM will have you guffawing to your grave!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWj5SekFL1M#t=1m10s
To excuse the game - it seems the playthrough is done on easy.
MMaRsu
Member
But it was said that the AI in normal and up isn't increased, just that you get less ammo and enemies take more health and you die quicker right?
I'm not saying it makes me happy, but it's the way things are. I suppose I'm just able to understand and accept it. I'll still play the game, and there's a pretty high chance i'll enjoy the hell out of it. Could it be more? Certainly. Was it ever going to be? Doubtful.
Did you play Hitman 2? He clearly showed emotion towards Father Vittorio in that game.
Dyni Crippler
Member
Opinions are opinions, especially when the game is not out yet.
On the other hand, criticisms shouldn't be denied just because the game is not in your hands. From what I gathered the whole game is out there on Youtube, so you can judge it from what you see.
Ventilaator
Banned
Wow. If you can watch some of the videos that have been linked here and still claim that this is going to be a great Hitman game...you're weird.
My thinking was that I'm gonna get this game when it's cheaper, and they even managed to ruin that. That's impressive.
My thinking was that I'm gonna get this game when it's cheaper, and they even managed to ruin that. That's impressive.
Hitman Absolution was destined by the cosmos to resemble what we've seen happen to almost every older franchise this gen - heavily streamlined, shallower, flashier, and just all-around dumber in an effort to garner wider appeal. Nobody can say they're honestly surprised; it's just become the norm. I can't blame these devs and publishers anymore, either. Dumbing games down is probably an effective financial tactic, and most gamers nowadays seem to lack the patience for headier fare.
It may still end up worth checking out because it's a unique style of game. Not a lot of Hitman clones around. Much like with decently budgeted party-based RPGs, if you enjoy the genre, you generally have to take what you can get (till a superior developer decides to Kickstart something).
Don't forget pushing somebody into a foot of water or down a staircase means instant death. God, Blood Money could be really dumb.
-tetsuo-
Unlimited Capacity
That isn't even what happened.
ezekielpacman
Member
LeadenStride
Member
Plus that he took care of a rabbit, that would have been killed otherwise, as a kid.
Is it really the whole game or is it just the game played in a specific way on a specific difficulty"
NEOPARADIGM
Banned
And if the guard spotted him, it would be: How did that guard see him when he was clearly behind cover?!?!?!?!?!eleven
Dyni Crippler
Member
I don't think we should accept dumbing down games. I mean, I thought Human Revolution was pretty faithful to the original, although worse for design reasons. I wouldn't say it was dumbed down except for the one-hit takedown, and in fact I played it while thinking "Wow, this is the Deus Ex I've been waiting for". Sure there are not a lot of clones, but I'd rather have nothing than a mediocre version of it.
I turned the video off too fast. It was the last I saw.
Red Blaster
Member
da fuq
The entire plot of Hitman 2 consists of 47 tracking down and killing the people who kidnapped his mentor
MMaRsu
Member
Well true but only him. And yes I've played that game a few times
. From what I remember in the story of Hitman 2, 47 was retired and living in Vitorio's shack in the church right? I mean if he was looking out for him and helping him all this time, then I can accept that. But now it's some kind of dark turn in 47's life or whatever if we are supposed to believe that. Sure I havent seen much of the story but that is where it leads to. 47 on the run is not my kind of thing.
Seriously the best missions in this game are the big interactive sandbox missions with loads of ways to approach any situation and target. Sure the older games were clunky at times and the controls certainly weren't amazing but to take away that very natural sandbox structure and apply it to a very small scale sandbox structure ala Splinter Cell is not good.
Yes there do seem to be a few big sandbox levels, but shit man if they had just focused on putting together a good tight experience with loads of great big sandbox levels we would all be in heaven. Hitman BM was near perfect and an evolution would have made the game so much better than this new direction.
Yeah no shit sherlock I know that.
rosaceadude2112
Member
And Hitman 2 sucks.
Relaxed Muscle
Member
I watched some of the videos and as far I can see stealth is there, but instead of the open world playgrounds to commit our murders a major part of the game is focused in more linear sequences with with different objectives.
I can see why some people are worried, but dosn't mean that the game is bad... (thought there's some things to worry on the footage I saw)
I can see why some people are worried, but dosn't mean that the game is bad... (thought there's some things to worry on the footage I saw)
Dyni Crippler
Member
It doesn't *suck*... it's just worse than the two that came after.
Oh, wait, you meant plot-wise? Yeah, it sucks.
MMaRsu
Member
It doesn't mean the game is bad it means it's a bad hitman game.
I get that. I just see where the industry is right now, and how damn hard it is to make a profit on a title at the moment.
I think Square Enix/Eidos as a publisher has done a lot right so far this generation. They allowed the extra time to be given to Deus Ex that it deserved, and the game turned out great. They have avoided throwing out another Just Cause as a money grab (I worked on the floor below Avalanche Studios in New York for the first part of this year, and they didn't seem ready to announce anything for awhile), helped rescue Sleeping Dogs, and you know, Tomb Raider looks like it could be neat. I think IO and Eidos know what they're doing, and deserve a little bit of slack here.
I just feel like there are companies and reboots that much more deserve the anger thrown towards it.
Oh, I get it. A lot of you guys aren't Hitman fans, you're Blood Money fans. Makes sense now.
What the shit am I looking at? I thought the brick on head stuff was already bad.
I accept it because it isn't going to change when it comes to AAA games. As budgets keep increasing, creativity and risks will stagnate as publishers will refuse to finance anything that isn't a supposed "sure thing" (which also means fewer new IPs). And I think gamers have slowly become socialized into wanting easier, less complex games, so when one does come along that bucks the trend, many would rather it be just like the others (see: Dark Souls easy mode thread).
It's the reason I love Kickstarter so much. This generation would be a lost cause without 1) Kickstarter and 2) indie developers in general doing their thing.
I think that 12 missions (out of 20) are up on YouTube. The guy is uploading quickly, so the rest should be up pretty soon.
However, it appears that some of the posters in this thread are judging the game based on a few clips that RevDM has cherry picked from the videos.
I would take more people in this thread seriously if they actually watched some of the damn videos, and then gave their opinion.
rosaceadude2112
Member
Contracts is sick.
ezekielpacman
Member
Yep.
Dyni Crippler
Member
Oh, I agree. But again, just because there's worse I don't think we should accept what looks like a mediocre game by itself, let alone a BAD Hitman.
Don't get me wrong, I'd LOVE the game to turn out good, I'd bee dying to play a new Hitman since I refinished Contracts last year, but... yeah.
I love Hitman, although I never had the balls to finish Codename 47. It's the kind of series that got better from chapter to chapter, with BM being the best one. SA was just too anchored to the trial-and-error mechanic.
Hey, it's your money and you decide what to do with it. Personally, though, I'd rather suffer the lack of a new Hitman to play than just "give up". Not as in "Oh yeah, I'm gonna make a BIG difference by not buying the game!" I just don't think I'd enjoy a game like this knowing there's so much better around.
I watched a fair bit of one of the videos, and came up disappointed. Everything I feared became true. I already mentioned this in the other posts.
You see, it's not about using it for attacking. In Blood Money he used it for melee kills, which is fine. It was about the AI not noticing, that it got hit by it. I mean not looking to the direction, where it came from. The difficulty menu doesn't list "improved AI", it just lists "AI reacts FASTER". Which means the AI will react exactly this way all the time.
LeadenStride
Member
I think this has been quite clear for some time. Even if they call aspects of Absolution shit, that weren't any better in BM.
I feel like this game is very likely going to be harder than blood money, especially taking purist into account. That's why I'm not judging based off early videos of some random guy playing, Absolution seems to skirt on the line of streamlining but has a lot of customization within. Instict has a lot of toggles and is the most obvious one, and seeing someone predict guard paths on normal vs. not being able to use anything but blending on a higher difficulty will make for a very different playthrough.
My favorite is actually Hitman 2 overall. And I played Blood Money first. I still have Contracts to finish, as I'm only half through, but it's on CD Rom and it's bugged out to where I can't adjust the resolution. So it's a test of patience and frustration just to get to the start screen.
rosaceadude2112
Member
Blood Money actually has fantastic level design and well thought out mechanics. The more you know.
LeadenStride
Member
I know, but some are shitting on the AI for example.
Dyni Crippler
Member
I honestly don't get what's wrong with loving Blood Money.
Also, BM made up for that with an actually competent disguise system and a great choice of levels.
Out of curiosity, why do you prefer H2?
ezekielpacman
Member
But dude even you said yourself that the AI was on easy! And if you carry on watching that BM clip he uses coins to an equally absurd effect. It is a funny clip for sure, but not an anomaly for the series' AI.
Mr.Monitor
Member
I have to admit, that PC Gamer review slowed down my hype train quite a bit. Still, I think that there might be some bullshitting going on on both sides of the fence.
After reading the PC Gamer review a few times, it sounds to me like the reviewer was either exaggerating on many points or skewing information to support a predetermined conclusion.
Regarding two specific points, PC performance and "cutscene" assassinations, I've yet to see any other source complain about performance (He mentions they're using machines that can run Skyrim at one point. Just by looking at the two I think it's obvious that Absolution would require a more robust machine.), and if 10% of the game's assassinations are cutscenes like I recall him mentioning, that would only equate to a single cutscene assassination if the game has a meager ten targets. He says that 64% of the game involves getting to doors, so by his math I'd say that 10 assassinations is generous. I personally expect somewhere in the area of 12-15 assassinations spread across the 20 missions, which means I should still only expect one or two cutscene assassinations. I don't expect an assassination every mission, because five or six "padding" missions to move the story forward and break up assassinations sounds about right. Even if all 20 missions have an assassination, that would still mean only two assassinations take place in a cutscene. Given this, it seems more than a little ridiculous that he'd complain as much as he did about this point, especially since much of the score seems to be based on this point.
Most of his other complaints seem off base as well, given a bit of thought. I don't ever recall compelling stories or sophisticated AI in the Hitman games, the art style seems consistent with what's already been established by previous games, and there seems to be a clear score system in place that discourages unnecessary violence. As for weapons not carrying over, Agent 47 no longer has ICA support, so I feel it's justified that he wouldn't have a massive arsenal of equipment to choose from at the start of each mission. One of the trailers showed that 47's stockpile is basically just the trunk of his car. The checkpoint system sounds like a valid complaint, but it's been mentioned that checkpoints only exist on easy or normal. His complaint about door objectives would be the most condemning if it didn't also sound fishy; I wonder if he's counting overall mission objectives or "level" objectives. Someone mentioned that the game is split into ~50 "levels" split across the 20 missions, so it seems to me that a good number of those "levels" would involve actually getting to the area your target is in. If each of the 20 missions ends in an assassination, and the rest of the level is getting to the area where your target is, then 20/50 "levels" would have assassination objectives. This would mean that 40% of the objectives are assassination objectives and 60% are "door" objectives, given that you count objectives for each "level" and there's an assassination each mission. His numbers are oddly close to this. To me, it sounds like he's complaining more about what the objectives literally say than what you're actually doing each mission. You have to get to your target somehow. Finally, I don't feel I can say anything about his comments on level design other than others have mentioned that while levels are smaller, they're more detailed; a fair compromise in my book.
From my perspective, the review seems like it could be the product of some pretty harsh bias. I feel it's likely that the reviewer couldn't get past his personal expectations and scored the game poorly as a result. Most of the numbers he based his review on seem irrelevant or misguided, and he does little to convince me that the complaints he expresses really are what he claims them to be.
On the contrary, I'm still a bit skeptical of a lot of the information coming out contradicting the review; a lot of it seems to either be too good to be true or from questionable sources. It's still possible that the PC Gamer review is completely valid and I'm underestimating the severity of the alleged issues due to the fact that I only know what pre-release media has shown me. Either way, I'll find out for myself whether or not the game is good in a week.
After reading the PC Gamer review a few times, it sounds to me like the reviewer was either exaggerating on many points or skewing information to support a predetermined conclusion.
Regarding two specific points, PC performance and "cutscene" assassinations, I've yet to see any other source complain about performance (He mentions they're using machines that can run Skyrim at one point. Just by looking at the two I think it's obvious that Absolution would require a more robust machine.), and if 10% of the game's assassinations are cutscenes like I recall him mentioning, that would only equate to a single cutscene assassination if the game has a meager ten targets. He says that 64% of the game involves getting to doors, so by his math I'd say that 10 assassinations is generous. I personally expect somewhere in the area of 12-15 assassinations spread across the 20 missions, which means I should still only expect one or two cutscene assassinations. I don't expect an assassination every mission, because five or six "padding" missions to move the story forward and break up assassinations sounds about right. Even if all 20 missions have an assassination, that would still mean only two assassinations take place in a cutscene. Given this, it seems more than a little ridiculous that he'd complain as much as he did about this point, especially since much of the score seems to be based on this point.
Most of his other complaints seem off base as well, given a bit of thought. I don't ever recall compelling stories or sophisticated AI in the Hitman games, the art style seems consistent with what's already been established by previous games, and there seems to be a clear score system in place that discourages unnecessary violence. As for weapons not carrying over, Agent 47 no longer has ICA support, so I feel it's justified that he wouldn't have a massive arsenal of equipment to choose from at the start of each mission. One of the trailers showed that 47's stockpile is basically just the trunk of his car. The checkpoint system sounds like a valid complaint, but it's been mentioned that checkpoints only exist on easy or normal. His complaint about door objectives would be the most condemning if it didn't also sound fishy; I wonder if he's counting overall mission objectives or "level" objectives. Someone mentioned that the game is split into ~50 "levels" split across the 20 missions, so it seems to me that a good number of those "levels" would involve actually getting to the area your target is in. If each of the 20 missions ends in an assassination, and the rest of the level is getting to the area where your target is, then 20/50 "levels" would have assassination objectives. This would mean that 40% of the objectives are assassination objectives and 60% are "door" objectives, given that you count objectives for each "level" and there's an assassination each mission. His numbers are oddly close to this. To me, it sounds like he's complaining more about what the objectives literally say than what you're actually doing each mission. You have to get to your target somehow. Finally, I don't feel I can say anything about his comments on level design other than others have mentioned that while levels are smaller, they're more detailed; a fair compromise in my book.
From my perspective, the review seems like it could be the product of some pretty harsh bias. I feel it's likely that the reviewer couldn't get past his personal expectations and scored the game poorly as a result. Most of the numbers he based his review on seem irrelevant or misguided, and he does little to convince me that the complaints he expresses really are what he claims them to be.
On the contrary, I'm still a bit skeptical of a lot of the information coming out contradicting the review; a lot of it seems to either be too good to be true or from questionable sources. It's still possible that the PC Gamer review is completely valid and I'm underestimating the severity of the alleged issues due to the fact that I only know what pre-release media has shown me. Either way, I'll find out for myself whether or not the game is good in a week.
In blood money you can do the same thing. Throw a weapon at someone, see how they react. AI was incredibly exploitable and fucking idiotic.
You can literally go into A Vintage Year, run into the wine cellar and throw a coin at the target. Run away and he chases you around the entire level until you stop, just to stand there and stare at you. You have INFINITE coins and they make the AI do hilariously stupid stuff. You can break the game with it.
Dyni Crippler
Member
You could say the same of basically every stealth game ever. Thing is, others make up for it. This doesn't seem to.
I'm only saying this because people are jumping on absolution AI based off that fire extinguisher clip.
It makes sense that the game that damn near perfected the formula has the most followers.
When you feel that way about something you generally don't want future games to regress, whether it's by going back to what some of the older stuff did or trying new stuff that seems dumbed down or streamlined. I like the older games, or liked I should say (1 is pretty bad now and 2 is kinda meh now) but it was never a truly great series until BM. Yeah you can say it streamlined a bit but there's a difference between light and positive streamlining and making something like Skyrim. All the right notes and keys were hit on BM and the level design was masterful.
My only significant problem with Blood Money is that once you got your hands on a guard/FBI costume, achieving a Silent Assassin rating became extremely straightforward. A large number of the missions gave you access to these disguises really easily.
The game was far too easy. Still absolutely loved it, though.
The game was far too easy. Still absolutely loved it, though.
So, does anyone know why Normal is part of the Enhanced setting for the game? Is it because
It makes Expert look like "Normal" for the Professional bracket.
apparently you can regenerate health? I noticed this during the King of Chinatown mission I saw, and the guy was recovering health while hiding.
It makes Expert look like "Normal" for the Professional bracket.
Remember when in A New Life, ICA gave you $20,000 for successfully sedating the clown and taking his costume? That's because it didn't happen. It makes no sense. Why should you get money for disabling a security alarm? Why should that even be an objective? In practically every mission, some shit has to be stirred up. It's not possible to just walk in and walk out and no one know wtf just happened.
LeadenStride
Member
I start to really like you. Hitman 2 is my favorite too, although it was also my first Hitman game. Shame about Contracts, it's excellent, but it appears there are often technical issues with it. I had it on CD once as well, but it became unplayable so I had to buy it again.
Dyni Crippler
Member
Well, from what I heard from my friends who tried it, it is a quite dumb AI, yeah.
Still, this is basically a given in stealth games. It's not my main problem with it.