Hitman: Plan B

[Negatempest]

Wait. Is IGN saying that hitting women in any circumstance is wrong or that violence with no meaning behind it is wrong? Either way, the guy must of hated Mortal Kombat.

 

[OtherSideofSky]

While it isn't "the worst thing to happen to women" in a game, I do think it does bring up a bit of an issue in games. Namely the whole; if we're going to have them kill women we might as well let them see their underwear first.

That's not completely bad on its own, but I doubt the guys 47 is going to kill are going to strip before they die.

Possibly not, but they're certainly going to strip afterwards if this is anything like any other Hitman game.

I don't know, the dude's killed enough people, male and female, that weren't in practical combat gear before now that I just can't see the outfits themselves as the issue they would be in the context of another game.

 

[foolish snails]

*sigh*
*swig*
squaring "profits" would actually decrease the actual profits. If you change the equation so (cheesecake+murder)²=profits, the profits would be much greater than the cheesecake and murder put into the equation, which is what I think you meant.

Unless you didn't mean that, in which case that is A LOT of cake and killing, especially for a game this size.

 

[Imp_Emissary]

While it isn't "the worst thing to happen to women" in a game, I do think it does bring up a bit of an issue in games. Namely the whole; if we're going to have them kill women we might as well let them see their underwear first.

That's not completely bad on its own, but I doubt the guys 47 is going to kill are going to strip before they die.

Possibly not, but they're certainly going to strip afterwards if this is anything like any other Hitman game.

I don't know, the dude's killed enough people, male and female, that weren't in practical combat gear before now that I just can't see the outfits themselves as the issue they would be in the context of another game.

That may be why I don't "get it". I haven't had the pleasure to play the Hitman games myself, so I am probably more "sensitive" to the wired stuff, but can even a veteran Hitman player explain the reasons for all that?

What I mean is; 1.The ladies are assassins, why draw attention to yourself especially when your target knows (or at least believes) you're coming after him? I don't just mean the "sexy" outfits either. I mean, when was the last time you saw even just 4 young nuns all in habits?

2.From what I can tell their plan was to just blow him up before they were even seen by him, so who was the show for? What would they have done if he did die, or just ran off insted of killing them? They would just look silly.

All that said, Hitman isn't the most serious game, and yes I know this is all just for good (albeit not very clean) fun.

Captcha: baked in a pie

....Plan C?

 

[theultimateend]

So it's misogynistic to kill women but mowing down legions of men in every game is ok? Fuck that person from IGN.

Good comic as usual.

There are only 2 obvious visual options for genders, it's only cool to beat or kill one of them.

Similarly there are quite a few races, but there is only one you can kill without it being racist. The only exception to this being when some particular terrorist or war group happens to all belong to a visually similar region of the world.

But more often than not, if you aren't killing white men you are some kind of hateful person.

"But dude, here are 20 examples to the contrary." Yes, I imagine it is difficult to find the exceptions in every game where the other 998 times you kill folks its white dudes .

I don't mind, it doesn't make my life different, but I find it a bit silly.

*Snip*

Everything in this post about martial arts and realistic outfits I am for.

Doesn't really change much in games but I sometimes find that G Strings break my immersion in combat.

I'm sorta liberal about sexuality since I think we put sexuality and nudity too high on a pedestal, but it does come across as silly at the very least.

For starters, they can get caught on things - your enemy could use them as a handhold. You're literally wearing nets, plenty of grab spots. Plus, there is simply no reason to wear them. There is no benefit. Eh don't provide warmth, or make you more slippery, or anything practical.

I never knew this, I figured they provided some kind of heat retention. I guess it makes sense that they don't given the design. Now I feel stupid.

 

[Animyr]

The incredible graphics and the fact that the Nuns actually land several hits on 47 (ie it's a fight, not a slaughter) made me like the trailer. The stripper costumes were a bit much though. Who thought they should equip their assassin team with platform shoes and makeup?

 

[OtherSideofSky]

While it isn't "the worst thing to happen to women" in a game, I do think it does bring up a bit of an issue in games. Namely the whole; if we're going to have them kill women we might as well let them see their underwear first.

That's not completely bad on its own, but I doubt the guys 47 is going to kill are going to strip before they die.

Possibly not, but they're certainly going to strip afterwards if this is anything like any other Hitman game.

I don't know, the dude's killed enough people, male and female, that weren't in practical combat gear before now that I just can't see the outfits themselves as the issue they would be in the context of another game.

That may be why I don't "get it". I haven't had the pleasure to play the Hitman games myself, so I am probably more "sensitive" to the wired stuff, but can even a veteran Hitman player explain the reasons for all that?

What I mean is; 1.The ladies are assassins, why draw attention to yourself especially when your target knows (or at least believes) you're coming after him? I don't just mean the "sexy" outfits either. I mean, when was the last time you saw even just 4 young nuns all in habits?

2.From what I can tell their plan was to just blow him up before they were even seen by him, so who was the show for? What would they have done if he did die, or just ran off insted of killing them? They would just look silly.

All that said, Hitman isn't the most serious game, and yes I know this is all just for good (albeit not very clean) fun.

Captcha: baked in a pie

....Plan C?

Oh, there's no question the trailer is really stupid and pretty sleazily exploitative, I was just pointing out that 47 is famous for stripping his male enemies down to their underwear and putting on their clothes as a disguise, a mechanic which has been the butt of many jokes over the years.

The scenario portrayed in the trailer is totally out of keeping with what previous Hitman games were actually about (they're more like puzzle games about murder than action games) and the previous games would actually have docked you quite a lot of points for the actions on display here. As someone who liked the previous games, I won't be buying this one if this trailer represents it at all accurately.

I think a bigger reason I'm less sensitive to this stuff is cultural. I'm currently living in Japan and only about half of the media I consume is in English, so I'm used to male characters being sexualized to attract female viewers being as prevalent as the reverse. The English speaking world has a serious problem with pretending that female sexuality doesn't exist, an attitude maintained by groups who benefit from using that idea to shame male sexuality. Think about it: You can find a wall of pornography produced by and for women in just about any supermarket in the US, but when was the last time you heard anyone acknowledge it in a debate on pornography? Similarly, sexualized portrayals of men are consistently branded homoerotic as opposed to simply erotic, but have you ever heard anyone describe an image of lesbians in those terms? The groups who claim to be fighting this attitude are going nowhere fast because most of them have internalized the passive female/active male dichotomy into their "progressive" positions, and are thus only capable of attacking superficial manifestations of the real problem.

Honestly, I don't see that sort of thing going away until more women abandon antiquated strains of socialized sex-negativism (the modern one-sided sex-negativity which often masquerades as "sex-positive" is still sex-negativism) and publicly embrace their own sexual agency.

 

[Imp_Emissary]

That may be why I don't "get it". I haven't had the pleasure to play the Hitman games myself, so I am probably more "sensitive" to the wired stuff, but can even a veteran Hitman player explain the reasons for all that?

What I mean is; 1.The ladies are assassins, why draw attention to yourself especially when your target knows (or at least believes) you're coming after him? I don't just mean the "sexy" outfits either. I mean, when was the last time you saw even just 4 young nuns all in habits?

2.From what I can tell their plan was to just blow him up before they were even seen by him, so who was the show for? What would they have done if he did die, or just ran off insted of killing them? They would just look silly.

All that said, Hitman isn't the most serious game, and yes I know this is all just for good (albeit not very clean) fun.

Captcha: baked in a pie

....Plan C?

Oh, there's no question the trailer is really stupid and pretty sleazily exploitative, I was just pointing out that 47 is famous for stripping his male enemies down to their underwear and putting on their clothes as a disguise, a mechanic which has been the butt of many jokes over the years.

The scenario portrayed in the trailer is totally out of keeping with what previous Hitman games were actually about (they're more like puzzle games about murder than action games) and the previous games would actually have docked you quite a lot of points for the actions on display here. As someone who liked the previous games, I won't be buying this one if this trailer represents it at all accurately.

I think a bigger reason I'm less sensitive to this stuff is cultural. I'm currently living in Japan and only about half of the media I consume is in English, so I'm used to male characters being sexualized to attract female viewers being as prevalent as the reverse. The English speaking world has a serious problem with pretending that female sexuality doesn't exist, an attitude maintained by groups who benefit from using that idea to shame male sexuality. Think about it: You can find a wall of pornography produced by and for women in just about any supermarket in the US, but when was the last time you heard anyone acknowledge it in a debate on pornography? Similarly, sexualized portrayals of men are consistently branded homoerotic as opposed to simply erotic, but have you ever heard anyone describe an image of lesbians in those terms? The groups who claim to be fighting this attitude are going nowhere fast because most of them have internalized the passive female/active male dichotomy into their "progressive" positions, and are thus only capable of attacking superficial manifestations of the real problem.

Honestly, I don't see that sort of thing going away until more women abandon antiquated strains of socialized sex-negativism (the modern one-sided sex-negativity which often masquerades as "sex-positive" is still sex-negativism) and publicly embrace their own sexual agency.

Well I think it may take a bit more than just a lot of women changing their minds about sex to change marketing trends. I mean women have already "changed their minds about sex" for a long time by now, and people know it. As you said; women are already making their own porn. I think the bigger issue is how nobody wants to change the "main target" in marketing even though it isn't (and for a long while hasn't been) just men looking to buy junk that isn't really needed. By that I mean even though things have and are continuing to change, people are content to keep the marketing the way it is, because hey, it still works.

Also, I did know about 47's habit of taking his enemies clothes to use as a disguise. I was just afraid to attempt to spell disguise. (I hate spelling)

Hmmm....Actually maybe that's why they sent girl assassins dressed like that.

 

[Erttheking]

Ahhahahahaha...ah, it's funny cuz the women in the new Hitman trailer don't wear very much clothes.

 

[OtherSideofSky]

That may be why I don't "get it". I haven't had the pleasure to play the Hitman games myself, so I am probably more "sensitive" to the wired stuff, but can even a veteran Hitman player explain the reasons for all that?

What I mean is; 1.The ladies are assassins, why draw attention to yourself especially when your target knows (or at least believes) you're coming after him? I don't just mean the "sexy" outfits either. I mean, when was the last time you saw even just 4 young nuns all in habits?

2.From what I can tell their plan was to just blow him up before they were even seen by him, so who was the show for? What would they have done if he did die, or just ran off insted of killing them? They would just look silly.

All that said, Hitman isn't the most serious game, and yes I know this is all just for good (albeit not very clean) fun.

Captcha: baked in a pie

....Plan C?

Oh, there's no question the trailer is really stupid and pretty sleazily exploitative, I was just pointing out that 47 is famous for stripping his male enemies down to their underwear and putting on their clothes as a disguise, a mechanic which has been the butt of many jokes over the years.

The scenario portrayed in the trailer is totally out of keeping with what previous Hitman games were actually about (they're more like puzzle games about murder than action games) and the previous games would actually have docked you quite a lot of points for the actions on display here. As someone who liked the previous games, I won't be buying this one if this trailer represents it at all accurately.

I think a bigger reason I'm less sensitive to this stuff is cultural. I'm currently living in Japan and only about half of the media I consume is in English, so I'm used to male characters being sexualized to attract female viewers being as prevalent as the reverse. The English speaking world has a serious problem with pretending that female sexuality doesn't exist, an attitude maintained by groups who benefit from using that idea to shame male sexuality. Think about it: You can find a wall of pornography produced by and for women in just about any supermarket in the US, but when was the last time you heard anyone acknowledge it in a debate on pornography? Similarly, sexualized portrayals of men are consistently branded homoerotic as opposed to simply erotic, but have you ever heard anyone describe an image of lesbians in those terms? The groups who claim to be fighting this attitude are going nowhere fast because most of them have internalized the passive female/active male dichotomy into their "progressive" positions, and are thus only capable of attacking superficial manifestations of the real problem.

Honestly, I don't see that sort of thing going away until more women abandon antiquated strains of socialized sex-negativism (the modern one-sided sex-negativity which often masquerades as "sex-positive" is still sex-negativism) and publicly embrace their own sexual agency.

Well I think it may take a bit more than just a lot of women changing their minds about sex to change marketing trends. I mean women have already "changed their minds about sex" for a long time by now, and people know it. As you said; women are already making their own porn. I think the bigger issue is how nobody wants to change the "main target" in marketing even though it isn't (and for a long while hasn't been) just men looking to buy junk that isn't really needed. By that I mean even though things have and are continuing to change, people are content to keep the marketing the way it is, because hey, it still works.

Also, I did know about 47's habit of taking his enemies clothes to use as a disguise. I was just afraid to attempt to spell disguise. (I hate spelling)

Hmmm....Actually maybe that's why they sent girl assassins dressed like that.

It's not so much a case of "already" as it is one of "since widespread literacy and the emergence of entertainment media as a viable economic product". The problem is that no one wants to call pornography or sexual imagery targeted at women what they are. The result is that there are still a lot of men who believe most women are uninterested in such things and a lot of women who feel ashamed of enjoying them.

An interesting note about marketing is that, in the US, 65% of marketers are women and women account for around 70% of discretionary spending. Certain markets are slower than others, but the idea that no one is thinking of selling these things to women is flat out wrong. Even the motion picture industry, which often takes the brunt of criticism in these cases, has been producing major properties and entertainers appealing pretty much exclusively to women's sexual fantasies going back to at least the fifties. The problem is, when it comes time to talk about this stuff, everyone forgets any of that stuff ever existed. This stuff needs to be acknowledged before any real progress can be made, and women are really the only ones in a position to do that and make it stick. Of course, open debate on sexuality in the media consists almost entirely of criticizing and shaming people for it, so it's pretty easy to see why most women wouldn't want to put themselves out there for that.

I think the romantics have to take the blame for a lot of this shit. They're the ones who came forced the passive, pure, almost asexual ideal of femininity down everyone's throats. I don't think that's really been good for anyone, except the writers that made their careers on it.

I think that in this situation Occam's Razor tells us that the reason they're dressed like that is probably that the people making the trailer came up with a boring action concept and decided to throw in women in what are either stripper outfits or Halloween costumes (the two appear to be basically indistinguishable at this point) to distract people from everything else that's wrong with the trailer and get more attention. It lacks the strange almost-sincerity of a genuine exploitation film and while it doesn't make me think that the people making it hate women, it does make me think that they want to sell they're game to 14 year olds.

 

[rbstewart7263]

Kill a man: regular day at work.
Kill a women: WHAT THE FUCK IS GOING ON?! WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE?!?!?!?!

Why is this still a thing? =|

Also, great comic. I would love to play a game where mostly naked women with nipple tassels wielding uzis jump out of cakes and try to kill me.

Its a matter of context and empowerment/dis-empowerment really. A woman portrayed as a vicious gangland boss who has people killed on a whim? I don't think people will bat an eyelid at her being assassinated. And I don't have a problem fighting female enemies portrayed as capable fighters.

Fighting women who's defining characteristic is fetish gear? Thats a little uncomfortable. Why couldn't they be dressed in, say, mafia-esque black suits and shades? And that poster linked in the blurb, of the beautiful woman in a sexy outfit, and a 'pretty little headshot' combined with the subtitle of the advert is really not good.

I disagree with the idea that something as simple as having women in lingerie fighting is necessarily sexist thats being a bit too nitpicky. Ive noticed a growing trend of feminists requiring that all media portray women in a manner of which they like. "her shit covered up, her a smart and capable fighter" The idea that anything less than the most badass of chicks with no flaws as being sexist is unfair in itself and its important to note that they gave 47 quite the run for his money; They almost got him. As far far as there wardrobe ill agree not practical but then it doesnt escape the absurdity that the franchise is known for.

Had 47 dispatched them easily and then tusseled with say one grizzly faced man who was his match then this arguement would have merit.

Also of note its said that a man wearing a tuxedo to a woman is the same as lingerie to a man so the context of sexuality was rather equal throughout.

 

[The Youth Counselor]

I'll repeat what I wrote before:

Most gamers aren't outraged over the gratuitous sex and violence (although many are upset over their mixing.)


Sure, the Hitman franchise has always had gratuitous sexualization.

However when it presented itself, it was proper and logical in setting and scenario. 47 had to eliminate someone who happens to run a brothel, frequent a stripclub, be a sexual sadist, attend a vegas show etc?

When 47 faced off against previous sexy vixens their attire made sense. In Silent Assassin Charlie Sidjan happened to be a horny rich prick who hired scantily clad women to guard him. In Blood Money's Dance with the Devil mission Eve and Vaana disguised themselves as showgirls to get close to 47.

Then there's this.

These women are walking in broad daylight in nun uniforms (which isn?t even an inconspicuous disguise, the point is to not stand out) before stripping down to the very tactical and practical choice of fetish gear and high heels. Then they blow up and shoot up the motel in broad daylight, in full view out in the open!

This is something I would expect from the likes of a Japanese developer or fighting and fantasy games. Hitman may have always had campy over the top moments but it?s always had one foot on the ground with realism or believability. This just makes no damn sense.

This was nothing more than an excuse to render and showcase hyper sexualized females and show them strangled, punched, stabbed. and blown away with big phallic guns. This isn't mature, just something to titillate immature teenage boys.

 

[rbstewart7263]

I'll repeat what I wrote before:

Most gamers aren't outraged over the gratuitous sex and violence (although many are upset over their mixing.)


Sure, the Hitman franchise has always had gratuitous sexualization.

However when it presented itself, it was proper and logical in setting and scenario. 47 had to eliminate someone who happens to run a brothel, frequent a stripclub, be a sexual sadist, attend a vegas show etc?

When 47 faced off against previous sexy vixens their attire made sense. In Silent Assassin Charlie Sidjan happened to be a horny rich prick who hired scantily clad women to guard him. In Blood Money's Dance with the Devil mission Eve and Vaana disguised themselves as showgirls to get close to 47.

Then there's this.

These women are walking in broad daylight in nun uniforms (which isn?t even an inconspicuous disguise, the point is to not stand out) before stripping down to the very tactical and practical choice of fetish gear and high heels. Then they blow up and shoot up the motel in broad daylight, in full view out in the open!

This is something I would expect from the likes of a Japanese developer or fighting and fantasy games. Hitman may have always had campy over the top moments but it?s always had one foot on the ground with realism or believability. This just makes no damn sense.

This was nothing more than an excuse to render and showcase hyper sexualized females and show them strangled, punched, stabbed. and blown away with big phallic guns. This isn't mature, just something to titillate immature teenage boys.

Its important to note that this is a trailer meant to grab someones attention. were it a commercial it would be interrupting my otherwise stellar evening of watching breaking bad and when the action is broken the commercial is at the disadvantage of getting my attention and getting me to buy the product. Yes the context of the previous games was more justified by a backstory(not hard to come up with if you want to you know give reason to charlie sidjans guards being in fetish gear)

Also of note were 47 a woman taking out six men in tuxedos would this have garnered the same unnecessary amount of analysis?
I think not I think it would probably be heralded for games "breaking stereotypes,empowering women"etc etc

Its as though feminists will only feel empowerment when men in general whether it be the media they engage in or the society they are surrounded by to completely disempower men altogether. To have posters, games, magazines featuring a man beaten and broken by a confident, realistically proportioned woman.


(Of note Women who are naturally thicker or curvacious seem to represent "male chauvinism" whilst women with even shoulders/ arm width; boobs and ass not too big but never too small represents the ideal physique for a woman. This pisses me off, Ive plenty of friends with a wonderful healthy physique that they inherited naturally through there genetics. To imply that there size d boobs and healthy midsections makes them incapable of being smart, of defending themselves??? To that I withhold my words of anger at those with such small minds.)

 

[mysecondlife]

"I'm sorry sir. The birthday cake stripper has failed as well."

"Oh well.. go with PLAN C"

capcha: baked in a pie

 

[Lord_Gremlin]

Thing is, I never gave a damn about Hitman. But that trailer got me interested - it's got same vibe as Quentin Tarantino movies. Which I love.

The only issue I have with trailer is that Agent 47 didn't take enough damage. In final scene he should have been drenched in blood, with couple of knives stuck in his back and a bullet in his gut. That would make the trailer a perfect example of trash I like to watch.
Question is, is it anything like the game? I want a preview.

 

[Dr Jones]

So it's misogynistic to kill women but mowing down legions of men in every game is ok? Fuck that person from IGN.

Good comic as usual.

I would disagree with you, but Keza doesen't actually mention that this is only specific for a Hitman game. She just says that Hitman fans probably wouldn't be the audience for that kind of violence. But I would say, that mindlessly slaughtering sexy nuns in a Hitman game is just stupid, Hitman was never about over-exaggerated sexuality.

 

[kinapuffar]

Why can't it just be that 47 attacks the nuns because they open fire on him? Why must it be that he's attacking them because they're women?
Women are people too, just like if a man opens fire on you, you're completely entitled to kill him, the same goes for women. Equality goes both ways.
Enough of the femenazi victimization tactics please.

I have no problem with 47 killing women in this trailer. The problem I have with it is how it's not the Hitman I remember or want. It's not meticulous planning and executing. It's like splinter cell or any of these other pointless games I don't like.
I'm hoping they're just pandering to the ADHD generation. Because if the game is anything like this, I'm not buying it.

Again, the problem is the women are SEXUALISED. Show me a sequences where agent 47 brutalises and kills guys wearing posing pouches and thongs, with oiled muscles and chiseled, handsome features.

How about every male character in Hitman: Blood Money?
And the slaughter king in Contracts is wearing a thong, although I think no one was really pleased about that. xD
It's no secret that the hitman games sexualize women a lot. But the places 47's targets frequent sort of demand it. These are depraved people he's killing, and it shows in the people they surround themselves with. In any place where it's not appropriate, it's not featured.
Just look at blood money and the redneck wedding, or the mardi gras mission.

 

[Grey Day for Elcia]

Hot damn, that trailer was fucking wicked. Gotta love me some powerful, sexy peeps with guns from time to time. I may go buy a few of the better Hitman games now. I've always wanted to anyway and the story catch up should help.

I believe this is relevant:

 

[Toothache of Sauron]

«"There's no context, no mitigating circumstances - this is violence-porn, put together to look cool. Is that what people think gamers find cool? Breaking the noses of women in suspenders in slow motion? This trailer panders to violence-worship and misogynistic desires that have nothing to do with the game, and that surely don't exist in the minds of Hitman fans."»

Ok, we've seen this kind of stuff time and again, not just in videogames but also in films. But it's suddenly that now that they decide to make women the ones beat? (At least in the ad, I've not played this series nor I've watched any previous ads for this). Is that the equality between the sexes? That women can't be treated fully the same as men?

This is how much speaking of equality, but when we make a female version of a male one, it's always in the way "actually, we don't think a woman can't compare to a man". See Conan and "The red warrior". Conan fights against challenging enemies, some of whom are superior and he has to overcome adverse situations. Now in the other film, Red Sonja needs Conan to deal with any challenge for her and the only fight she can get in is against the main villain, who happens to be a villainess whose martial and magical powers are equivalent to that of limbless Tyrion Lannister's. So much for treating both sexes the same.

If the one who writes that would actually consider both sexes equal, (s)he wouldn't write that as (s)he wouldn't be writing that just because Mr Hitman's victims (wannabe murderers) happen to be women.

Now, there's only one point to think there could be a little justification to it: the leather tight outfits brothel style. If they had been men they would likely have worn something of military look?. Possibly. But I don't think it is (or rather necessarily is) a matter of if men not in Tifa's outfit without top, but more of considering the types imprint in popular imagination in the way of priest = peaceful man, nun = virgin woman. Therefore with men it would be priests that reveal under their tunic (I don't know the English for sotana) some army uniform and when they're women giving underneath the opposite to virgin - brothel worker.

I'm more against those who're fast to treat women as different in ANY way that someone who uses stereotypes or what he thinks it is in how he depicts a group of women.