The taste for the theatrical should extend to having the guards of you hideout wear silly clothes, not the hired assassins you send out into the streets.
Plausibility!!!
It's plausible that in the Yakuza mansion the guards are dressed in black and wear Samurai swords.
It's not plausible that they go out in public to kill people dressed like that.
It's plausible that all the rich men at the Melbourne Club are beating each other with leather whips. They don't do it in public though, they're respectable gentlemen.
The taste for the theatrical should extend to having the guards of you hideout wear silly clothes, not the hired assassins you send out into the streets.
Plausibility!!!
It's plausible that in the Yakuza mansion the guards are dressed in black and wear Samurai swords.
It's not plausible that they go out in public to kill people dressed like that.
It's plausible that all the rich men at the Melbourne Club are beating each other with leather whips. They don't do it in public though, they're respectable gentlemen.
Why isn't it plausible for them to go out like that? It's not like it's going to make any difference, they are already wielding rocket launchers and fancy automatic weapons. They were in vanilla nuns attire till they drew their guns. You don't even know the back story. Don't you even CARE!!!?! Doesn't it even pique your interest what kind of circumstances could lead to such an attempt on Agent 47's life, in that way??!?!
There is a difference between "High concept" and "Fantasy".
There is Face/Off or Jurassic Park or even Indiana Jones where concepts might not be realistic but otherwise events somewhat realistically happen around them.
(Note that this is the video game universe and in that Hitman is as realistic as Call of Duty 4)
And then there is Kill Bill or Charlie's Angels where realistic events get jettisoned for style.
Sexy nun hitsquad jettisoned realistic events for style. That wouldn't always be bad but we've had two games now (Contracts and Blood Money) where hyper-reality fiction trumpted the fantastical.
WHAT! It's got villains pulled straight out of the most Over-the-top comic books, it's got 500lbs sumo wrestlers who guard their boss dressed AS a sumo wrestler, it's BDSM clubs located underneath a meat-packing factory, it's "heaven and hell" nighclubs, it's a pornographers hedonistic party in his mountain mansion, it's assassinating larger than life rich Sheiks in a Vegas casino. The series is like James Bond, only the evil mirror universe bond where the hero is the villain with smatterings of goodness rather than the inverse.
What Hitman games have you played? If any???!?!
The term you don't address is "Self-censorship". They aren't changing this to be more true to the work that their fans have been following, but to cater to the people who have no understanding nor investment in the series who want it changed. The trailer is not inconsistent with what the fans of the series have come to expect, I don't mean in terms of misogyny but in terms of EVERYTHING AND ANYTHING being exploited to the extreme.
To answer your obnoxiously-toned question, I've played the first three Hitman games. It's been at least 3 years since the last one, but I have played them. Yes, No.1 had the heavyset body guard in a robe, but it's not like he was going around wearing nothing but the sumo wrestler diaper-thing and nothing else. It wasn't a BDSM club under a meat packing plant, it was a party being hosted AT a meat packing plant; odd location, yes, but believable since you need a large building to host a big party and using a building you own would save money. Heaven and hell night clubs, hedonistic parties and assassinating high-profile targets are all within the realms of plausibility.
Outside of 47's origin, the series largely doesn't rely on science fiction plot devices or cartoonishly over-the-top scenarios. Yes you'll find some elements here and there that are somewhat outlandish, but nothing so blatant to date (that I've heard of) as killer gimp nuns. You don't, for example, see 47 use nanomachines to create a disguise as a rodeo clown so he can strap a block of C4 to a bull and lead it up into the stands of a rodeo to blow up the entire VIP box on a hit on the Governor of Texas because he's really a space alien in disguise, and escape by farting a jet pack out of his @$$.
And no, I didn't address self-censorship because frankly I wasn't concerned with that aspect of this event. But if you -want- me to, fine. Yes, companies are getting into a bad habit of caving in every time someone complains about something in their games. That is a dangerous habit to get into because it jeopardizes creative integrity. But on the flip side, sometimes people have to admit when they've screwed up and been needlessly insulting or disrespectful. It's not censoring, self or otherwise, or oppressing people to expect them to show some respect and taste.
I am still failing to see the reason why people got worked into a hissyfit over the trailer
*insert generic rant about game and fictions not having an effect on the real world expect through very unhinged individuals who were crazy even before buying the game*
I've never been a big fan of the series myself (don't like the aiming controls ) but from what I gathered, people were pissed because a game that normally takes itself pretty seriously suddenly pit a cold-blooded assassin against a posse of rocket-weilding ninja hookers dressed as nuns. I doubt it was the "dressed as nuns" part that upset people the most, but rather the fact that the stoic Agent 47 was fighting a group of "rocket-weilding ninja hookers".
Lara pissed people off because this new game is an origin story, and the HR guy made the mistake of implying that Lara's tough, individualist demeanor stemmed from an attempted rape. That follows on from what I was just saying about how "tough" women in stories tend to have been raped in the past and "that's why they're tough". That kind of thing never happens to explain why a man is tough.
The "rape made them tough" is 100% ENTIRELY MADE UP by the very critics OF the idea.
They make up the idea and then say they object to it when that was NEVER anyone's idea. No one ever said "Entirely because she was raped, that made her a badass... like spiderman's spider bite".
Nope. Characters enduring suffering has always been used as an EXAMPLE of how badass they are, it's not even a trope, it's a fundamental tenement of storytelling.
If John Rambo had had a comfortable life filling out tax returns and dying of old age, how would you know he was a badass? No. He is shown in a prison camp being sliced up and electrocuted and broken down to almost nothing, that doesn't make him badass, but rising up again does. Ditto for Casino Royale.
Was John Rambo and James Bond raped early in their life? No? Typical. For male characters, it is either assumed they are badass by nature (James Bond), or that if they had an obstacle to overcome in the past (Rambo), that obstacle is hardly ever rape. For women, rape is a far more "popular" choice of obstacle. Whilst no writer openly claims that "WOMEN MUST BE RAPED TO BE STRONG!!", rape happens so often in stories, people have noticed the trend and the unfortunate implications of it showing up so regularly.
I never heard anyone calling for a boycott of Deliverance or The Shawshank Redemption for the attempted or actual rape of the main character in those films. I wonder what difference it makes that they were men being raped?
Most stories don't get boycotted for containing rape, which is just as well, considering how often attempted rape comes up in them. That said, I'm not surprised people have finally gotten fed up of how frequently female rape appears. Male rape doesn't happen very often in drama, so I suppose when it does, it feels like the issue is being treated with care and restraint. But for women in fiction, it happens so often that it has become a throw in detail for female characters, used by lazy writers to immediately put a woman in peril, establish a villain, or explain why a woman has become so tough. This is why you don't get boycotts over male rape. Speaking of which, are you suggesting people shouldn't have a problem with female rape portrayals? Coz' I can't figure out where you are coming from.
Listing a few examples of strong women who weren't raped doesn't disprove my argument that tough women tend to get raped. Spend more time looking up the rape tropes. It'll save me the trouble of having to list how often rape is used in character development.
There is a difference between "High concept" and "Fantasy".
There is Face/Off or Jurassic Park or even Indiana Jones where concepts might not be realistic but otherwise events somewhat realistically happen around them.
(Note that this is the video game universe and in that Hitman is as realistic as Call of Duty 4)
And then there is Kill Bill or Charlie's Angels where realistic events get jettisoned for style.
Sexy nun hitsquad jettisoned realistic events for style. That wouldn't always be bad but we've had two games now (Contracts and Blood Money) where hyper-reality fiction trumpted the fantastical.
Hitman is like Kill Bill or Charlie's Angles. The Ninja palace. That's like something right you'd see in a Kill Bill film.
"Blood Money... hyper-reality fiction"
Of blood money, with the funeral scene at the end... with the feeding people to gaters... dropping chandeliers on people's heads... random hoedowns at a wedding...
TAdamson said:
Treblaine said:
Doesn't it even pique your interest what kind of circumstances could lead to such an attempt on Agent 47's life, in that way??!?!
That's not a DEFINING element of nunsploitation. It doesn't HAVE to be set in Europe.
Nunsploitation is entirely about (people dressed as) nuns doing what nuns wouldn't do, like being overtly sexual and wield big ass weapons and killing people. Films do this. But you act like games can't, even for a film that advertises a game.
WHAT! It's got villains pulled straight out of the most Over-the-top comic books, it's got 500lbs sumo wrestlers who guard their boss dressed AS a sumo wrestler, it's BDSM clubs located underneath a meat-packing factory, it's "heaven and hell" nighclubs, it's a pornographers hedonistic party in his mountain mansion, it's assassinating larger than life rich Sheiks in a Vegas casino. The series is like James Bond, only the evil mirror universe bond where the hero is the villain with smatterings of goodness rather than the inverse.
What Hitman games have you played? If any???!?!
The term you don't address is "Self-censorship". They aren't changing this to be more true to the work that their fans have been following, but to cater to the people who have no understanding nor investment in the series who want it changed. The trailer is not inconsistent with what the fans of the series have come to expect, I don't mean in terms of misogyny but in terms of EVERYTHING AND ANYTHING being exploited to the extreme.
To answer your obnoxiously-toned question, I've played the first three Hitman games. It's been at least 3 years since the last one, but I have played them. Yes, No.1 had the heavyset body guard in a robe, but it's not like he was going around wearing nothing but the sumo wrestler diaper-thing and nothing else. It wasn't a BDSM club under a meat packing plant, it was a party being hosted AT a meat packing plant; odd location, yes, but believable since you need a large building to host a big party and using a building you own would save money. Heaven and hell night clubs, hedonistic parties and assassinating high-profile targets are all within the realms of plausibility.
Outside of 47's origin, the series largely doesn't rely on science fiction plot devices or cartoonishly over-the-top scenarios. Yes you'll find some elements here and there that are somewhat outlandish, but nothing so blatant to date (that I've heard of) as killer gimp nuns. You don't, for example, see 47 use nanomachines to create a disguise as a rodeo clown so he can strap a block of C4 to a bull and lead it up into the stands of a rodeo to blow up the entire VIP box on a hit on the Governor of Texas because he's really a space alien in disguise, and escape by farting a jet pack out of his @$$.
And no, I didn't address self-censorship because frankly I wasn't concerned with that aspect of this event. But if you -want- me to, fine. Yes, companies are getting into a bad habit of caving in every time someone complains about something in their games. That is a dangerous habit to get into because it jeopardizes creative integrity. But on the flip side, sometimes people have to admit when they've screwed up and been needlessly insulting or disrespectful. It's not censoring, self or otherwise, or oppressing people to expect them to show some respect and taste.
First three games, so you haven't played Blood Money. Which is a shame as it's a great game and is quite relevant as the latest instalment.
You could stop trying to make all the insane and ludicrous scenarios and characters of Hitman seem normal and typical, you wouldn't accept that about the sexy nun outfits, I don't accept your excuses. You admit there are some outlandish elements, the sexy nuns would just be another example.
to create a disguise as a rodeo clown so he can strap a block of C4 to a bull and lead it up into the stands of a rodeo to blow up the entire VIP box on a hit on the Governor of Texas
This is a game about MURDERING PEOPLE and this is the game where respect and taste are important. Again, modern western soiety is going down the sinkhole because we are more freaked out by some women in miniskirts than innocent people being brutually and sadistically murdered (fictionally) as our entertainment. Not that I have a problem with that, but if you don't have a problem with that... then why freak out about a skirt?
Was John Rambo and James Bond raped early in their life? No? Typical. For male characters, it is either assumed they are badass by nature (James Bond), or that if they had an obstacle to overcome in the past (Rambo), that obstacle is hardly ever rape. For women, rape is a far more "popular" choice of obstacle. Whilst no writer openly claims that "WOMEN MUST BE RAPED TO BE STRONG!!", rape happens so often in stories, people have noticed the trend and the unfortunate implications of it showing up so regularly.
I never heard anyone calling for a boycott of Deliverance or The Shawshank Redemption for the attempted or actual rape of the main character in those films. I wonder what difference it makes that they were men being raped?
Most stories don't get boycotted for containing rape, which is just as well, considering how often attempted rape comes up in them. That said, I'm not surprised people have finally gotten fed up of how frequently female rape appears. Male rape doesn't happen very often in drama, so I suppose when it does, it feels like the issue is being treated with care and restraint. But for women in fiction, it happens so often that it has become a throw in detail for female characters, used by lazy writers to immediately put a woman in peril, establish a villain, or explain why a woman has become so tough. This is why you don't get boycotts over male rape. Speaking of which, are you suggesting people shouldn't have a problem with female rape portrayals? Coz' I can't figure out where you are coming from.
Listing a few examples of strong women who weren't raped doesn't disprove my argument that tough women tend to get raped. Spend more time looking up the rape tropes. It'll save me the trouble of having to list how often rape is used in character development.
OK, now you are complaining about characters NOT being raped. When you see a male character get raped do you go "YES! Now lets hope all the male characters get raped".
Oh, by the way... Lara didn't get raped either. Some thug got frisky and she kicked his ass. That. Is. IT!
It's not like this is the first time we've seen Lara in this situation:
I said it before and I'll say it again. The people complaining are NOT Tomb Raider fans, they are passing bystanders with no understanding nor invested interest in the characters nor narrative.
Rape happens so often because so often thugs ARE RAPISTS! They are the type of thugs overdosing in testosterone, dumb and sexually hyperactive. It isn't the writer that is misogynist, it is the nature of criminal scum and out of control men high on power.
Yeah, Pulp Fiction really showed care and restraint, Deliverance too with lines like "squeal like a piggie!" repeated throughout the scene.
It's not lazy writing. That's like saying having the villain murder people is lazy writing. How are you qualified to say what is lazy writing, what books have you written? What published literary critiques have you made?
I'm saying if you don't have a problem with male rape you shouldn't have a problem with female rape. Otherwise you'd be a hypocrite.
Male rape is ACTUALLY common for one main reason, men are over-represented in films, especially in leading roles and rape is a compelling thing to drive narrative, not a lazy cliche. A poorly compelling narrative would be something like "I have to go to the shops to buy food because I have nothing to eat for supper".
The examples I list are major action heroines where rape is not a factor. Your theory is worthless, that just over-reacts to any rape anywhere where is isn't men being raped.
OK, now you are complaining about characters NOT being raped. When you see a male character get raped do you go "YES! Now lets hope all the male characters get raped".
I heard it described as an "attempted rape" (the infamous words of the studio's producer). In the trailer, the suggestion of an attempted rape is fairly clear. "Someone getting frisky" is not how I would describe sexual molestation of any kind.
I said it before and I'll say it again. The people complaining are NOT Tomb Raider fans, they are passing bystanders with no understanding nor invested interest in the characters nor narrative.
Does this huge, blanket assumption cover all the escapists? And me?
Rape happens so often because so often thugs ARE RAPISTS! They are the type of thugs overdosing in testosterone, dumb and sexually hyperactive. It isn't the writer that is misogynist, it is the nature of criminal scum and out of control men high on power.
Thugs or villains do not need to be written as rapists to make them come across as unpleasant or villainous. It's quite easy to communicate how brutish an antagonist is without resorting to it, like in Arkham Asylum. But many writers still like to go for the easiest way to invoke a gut response: make the villain a rapist.
It's not lazy writing. That's like saying having the villain murder people is lazy writing. How are you qualified to say what is lazy writing, what books have you written? What published literary critiques have you made?
Even though I have [http://www.2shared.com/document/G5R2FRC3/Tokyo_Notes.html] had literary criticism published, and that I can assure you I have a fairly hefty background in the subject, it is totally irrelevant. Lazy writing is simply when one uses cheap or exploitative devices to convey something, instead of relying on something more original or organic to the story. Revealing a character to be a rapist, apropos of nothing, is right up there with "we know they're villains because they're Nazi's/Arabs/Commies" in terms of lazy writing.
Incidentally, this is why Deliverance does a good job of handling the subject of rape; it isn't just thrown in to make the hillbillies seem extra evil. The entire story is centred around the rape, and the protagonist's response to it. That's the difference between sensibly approaching a serious issue, and exploiting it for the sake of a five minute action sequence. As for Pulp Fiction, well, it is in a movie called "Pulp Fiction", the entire premise of which is to celebrate trashy, exploitative schlock stories.
I'm saying if you don't have a problem with male rape you shouldn't have a problem with female rape. Otherwise you'd be a hypocrite.
I never said I was fine with male rape, and neither did anyone commenting on the Lara Croft controversy. There is this strange assumption going around that because people ommit to mention male issues any time they want to discuss female issues, they must not give a shit about men. We shouldn't have to qualify every criticism we make of female depictions with "oh, and its bad that men get raped too". Of course its bad, but it is irrelevant to the particular discussion about Miss Croft.
The examples I list are major action heroines where rape is not a factor. Your theory is worthless, that just over-reacts to any rape anywhere where is isn't men being raped.
The examples you gave are not representative of all action heroines ever written. Besides, Ripley was totally fighting off rapist aliens throughout the entire alien franchise. But that's okay - that's one of the few times where rape makes sense in the context, and is organic to the story.
Wait they didn't have any backstory planned until people started getting pissed? They actually were just there to be hot? Fuck this, I never thought I would say this but their stupidity has actually put me off buying the game. If they couldn't see this coming there might be problems in the gameplay department that they wont see coming until everyone's like "X is the worst gameplay mechanic ever" or "I can't believe they thought X was a good idea". That might sound petty, and maybe it is but this is just pure fucking idiocy to have not even considered giving them a backstory.
"Need"???!?? Who writes by such as strict criteria that nothing ever happens unless it is strictly needed. It makes everything totally predictable, boring and cliched.
You seem to have missed the point I made, the antagonist weren't made rapist to make them evil, it is BECAUSE they are violent anti-social thugs that such things you'd naturally expect from such characters. This is what SO OFTEN happens when you have violent men with guns who aren't accountable to any law or societal norms who capture women, you are surprised and see it out of character that these people already guilty of kidnapping and murder - just ONE of them might attempt rape?!?!?!
As for Pulp Fiction, well, it is in a movie called "Pulp Fiction", the entire premise of which is to celebrate trashy, exploitative schlock stories.
That's Hitman as well. What, did you think this was trying to be the Citizen Kane of video games? It has a sequence where you set a woman on fire and she jumps into a huge shark tank to extinguish the flames only to be eaten by the shark in front of a crowd who cheer thinking it is all part of the act.
We shouldn't have to qualify every criticism we make of female depictions with "oh, and its bad that men get raped too". Of course its bad, but it is irrelevant to the particular discussion about Miss Croft.
Well it's telling that there are no discussion ANYWHERE saying male-rape shouldn't appear in those films - of which there are many many examples - yet even the suggestion of an attempt in a trailer... suddenly for a whole month the entire Escapist forums complain about that above all else and there are petitions and threats of boycotts.
The examples you gave are not representative of all action heroines ever written. Besides, Ripley was totally fighting off rapist aliens throughout the entire alien franchise. But that's okay - that's one of the few times where rape makes sense in the context, and is organic to the story.
No, but it is representative of how your theory doesn't stand up to the facts. Your theory isn't that it ever happens, but that is almost always happens to female protagonists.
It's a stretch to call the Aliens rapists (in which case all the males were in a equal danger) but seeing where you are coming from you say this makes sense and is "organic" with the story. Who knows what you mean by organic, natural? It's not clear. But you approve. Yet the idea of one murderous thug might try to have sex with with a female captive against her will, suddenly that just doesn't make any sense in the context.
I mean what is the freaking context for Deliverance? Hillbillies just walk up and suddenly hold them at gun point and rape them. Completely unexpected.
You seem to have missed the point I made, the antagonist weren't made rapist to make them evil, it is BECAUSE they are violent anti-social thugs that such things you'd naturally expect from such characters.
Their criminal behaviour makes them plausible rapists, but that doesn't mean a writer should make them into rapists. Nor does it really excuse the writer when they do.
As for Pulp Fiction, well, it is in a movie called "Pulp Fiction", the entire premise of which is to celebrate trashy, exploitative schlock stories.
That's Hitman as well. What, did you think this was trying to be the Citizen Kane of video games? It has a sequence where you set a woman on fire and she jumps into a huge shark tank to extinguish the flames only to be eaten by the shark in front of a crowd who cheer thinking it is all part of the act.
I don't think so. Hitman makes no effort to be realistic, or even the slightest bit sensible, but unlike Pulp Fiction, it isn't really intended as celebration of tacky story telling. Its colourful, larger than life situations are there to encourage a player to approach a situation with creativity, and feel appropriately detatched when committing a murder.
The issue I have with the nuns is that despite Hitman's tendency towards goofy, silly characters, the nuns feel totally inappropriate. Hitman games have always had skimpy, fetishised females, but the difference is that those girls were never meant to be sexy - a woman in a bdsm outfit, dancing before a greasy, corpulant pervert in a blood soaked slaughterhouse is not supposed to be sexy. It's supposed to be ugly and grotesque. Agent 47 is an asexual clone who not only dislikes sex, but is repulsed by the concept, and the designers cleverly reinforce 47's perspective through the female character designs; they make the player feel just as repulsed as 47.
So the trailer doesn't work, because the fetish nuns actually are sexy. It totally clashes with what was previously established in the games. Hitman games always objectified people, but it made them into hate objects, not sex objects. Some might not see how that makes a difference, but it basically changes the focus of the game. It takes us away from Hitman's previous efforts to put us inside the head of 47, and instead starts selling itself on adolescent sex appeal.
Well it's telling that there are no discussion ANYWHERE saying male-rape shouldn't appear in those films - of which there are many many examples - yet even the suggestion of an attempt in a trailer... suddenly for a whole month the entire Escapist forums complain about that above all else and there are petitions and threats of boycotts.
You are free to have that discussion whenever you like, though preferably in it's own thread. If you want a specific, professional website that looks at negative male portrayals, I heartily recommend this one [http://goodmenproject.com/category/noseriouslywhatabouttehmenz/]. Sadly, people only ever seem to bring up the issue of male rape when they want to complain about discussions of female rape. That reeks of insincerity - they don't actually want to discuss male rape, they just want to use it as a means to discredit other conversations they'd rather not hear.
No, but it is representative of how your theory doesn't stand up to the facts. Your theory isn't that it ever happens, but that is almost always happens to female protagonists.
Actually, what I said was "tends to happen". "Tends" doesn't mean "almost always", it means "prone", or "frequently".
It's a stretch to call the Aliens rapists (in which case all the males were in a equal danger) but seeing where you are coming from you say this makes sense and is "organic" with the story. Who knows what you mean by organic, natural? It's not clear. But you approve. Yet the idea of one murderous thug might try to have sex with with a female captive against her will, suddenly that just doesn't make any sense in the context.
I mean organic, in that relation between rape and the aliens is inherent in the way the story is told. The aliens attack people with a giant cock shaped tongue, and their primary objective is to impregnate people with face hugger, felatio crabs. The art design consists almost entirely of penis, vagina and sex imagery (seriously, google "Giger Alien Art Design"). In Alien, everything is built around the premise of sexual violation.
In Deliverance, the rape provides the context and the entire premise of the story. The rape starts off the plot, and the rest of the film is about how the men are running for their lives, trying to defend themselves, escape, and get back at the rapists. In both Deliverance and Alien, rape is integral to the story being told, and as such, it gets given an appropriate degree of gravitas.
In The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, Lizbeth's guardian blackmails her into having sex with him. This happens out of the blue, and has no actual bearing on the main plot (which is a murder mystery). Once the rape is dealt with five minutes later, the rapist and the situation is never reflected upon again. The rape is simply used to establish Lizbeth's character as a psychologically broken, but ultimately powerful woman who hates rapists. Apparently, the only way the writer could establish a broken, strong woman was to have Lizbeth get raped, and then have her own back in the next scene. That is cheap writing. Perhaps not the most crass example, but a fairly recent one that demonstrates the "raped to be strong" issue.
That's not a DEFINING element of nunsploitation. It doesn't HAVE to be set in Europe.
Nunsploitation is entirely about (people dressed as) nuns doing what nuns wouldn't do, like being overtly sexual and wield big ass weapons and killing people. Films do this. But you act like games can't, even for a film that advertises a game.
I have utterly destroyed your claim that nunsploitation is "americana" and that it normally involves weapons. It usually involves bondage. Your version of nunsploitation seems to be based on one shitty Rodriguez film
I have utterly destroyed you claim that ninjas never existed as presented. Plenty of ninjas used katana and depictions of ninjas wearing black clothing go bat to the 19th century.
And you claim that people wearing "big bird" costumes DURING A CARNIVAL is as unrealistic as bondage-nuns at a shitty motel destroys itself.
Basically my argument is this:
You can be as ridiculous as you want but it must make sense in some way.
Big bird costumes at a carnival ARE FINE.
Ninja and sumo wrestlers in a yakuza mansion ARE FINE.
People dressing en-masse in ridiculous costumes to kill a guy in a dodgy motel IS NOT FINE.
It breaks through the point where I'm willing to suspend disbelief. Its obvious that the creators put it in purely because it looked cool without caring if it made sense.
And yes Hitman IS as realistic as Call of Duty. Call of Duty being about as realistic as a late 90s Bond film. AKA fucking ridiculous.
Let me guess. This does not set back the medium by a century, right? Because artistic vision doesn't exist when it's about anything that could be interpreted as sexist...?
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
) but from what I gathered, people were pissed because a game that normally takes itself pretty seriously suddenly pit a cold-blooded assassin against a posse of rocket-weilding ninja hookers dressed as nuns. I doubt it was the "dressed as nuns" part that upset people the most, but rather the fact that the stoic Agent 47 was fighting a group of "rocket-weilding ninja hookers".
