IO Refuses To Be "Dictated To" by Fans

[UnderCoverGuest]

If I like it, I'll buy it.

That's been my motto for most new games lately. Unfortunately, most new games aren't all that appealing to me for the most part. Looking to the next Hitman though--bought all the games, played all the games, enjoyed all the games, still haven't cheatlessly beaten all the games, but they're brilliantly done. I didn't like Blood Money as much with it's vanity mode camera--I prefer the original where turning left and right made Agent 47 look and face left or right, etcetera--and I especially like Silent Assassin and Contracts because of FIRST PERSON!!! FIRST PERSON, DAMN IT!

But despite that, Blood Money brought some wonderful new abilities into the world of digital modern assassination, and it was always a thrill and a challenge to complete a mission. The feeling of success was so satisfying however--after all, it's free form nature in a small open area was one of it's most challenging concepts. You had to be smart and time everything right in order to get through a mission unscathed or undetected. The feeling of euphoria I felt after walking away with a Silent Assassin rating was tremendous, if only because I knew everything I did I did myself, with little to no input whatsoever from my difficulty setting's 'auto-helping' features.

As long as there is a way to disable such help for the experienced players, and a way to enable it for rookie or casual players, I'll definitely look forward to investigating this new Hitman game.

As for the whole 'dictated to by fans' thing, it's understandable. Yet, it also sounds like your boss at work, looking at you and saying, "Hey, who's the manager here, you or me." It doesn't sound that nice when they say it, despite the credentials they possess. Take our opinion as gamers for what it's worth Edios, but you know who your consumer base is.

 

[StriderShinryu]

I agree with the idea in principle, but maybe not in so much as the example given. Developers should be true to the series they are working in to some extent, but they really do need to make the game they want to make. There are definitely far too many "fans" out there that live in the belief where once they've spent $60 on a series they have somehow put a down payment on deciding how the rest of the games have to be made. When you are buying a game, you are only buying that game, you're not buying every game that will ever be created under that name. Buy a game to reward the developers for that specific creation and, if you don't like it, don't buy it. There's far far too many sources of information on games these days to exclaim you went into a purchase blind and were somehow tricked.

Now, to the exact example given in this article. Personally, I have always found the exploration and freedom in the typical Hitman game to be pretty much the core of the experience. It's been a type of sandbox stealth where the freedom you are giving can definitely be both frustrating and extremely rewarding. There have always been alternate stealth games like Splinter Cell and MGS where you're given one or two paths and everything relies purely on execution of the meager options given to you. Hitman is, at it's core, the antithesis of that. It's not always as demanding execution wise, but you're given far more choices.

 

[NotSoLoneWanderer]

just make it optional or something

 

[dibblywibbles]

I think fans do whine too much. but I think the most vocal gamers are kinda whiny to begin with. if I like it, I'll play it and keep playing it. If I don't... well you don't get my money. the thing I hate the most about the whiners is when they talk about balance without realizing maybe, just maybe you suck at the game that is "unbalanced". if a game is good you'll play it regardless(then most likely whine about the one thing that would have made the game sooooo much better). I let developers do what they do best so hopefully in turn I can do what I enjoy, which is playing games.

 

[Nico4]

Could they not just do an Assassin's Creed (first game that sprang to mind) and put in an option in the option menu to turn off the extra HUD help? That way everybody wins.

Well I did hear that on Silent Assassin, the HUD's will be turned off.

Actually, this seems fine. I understand they have to keep fans happy, but I also understand they don't have to follow them 100% either.

 

[LordDPS]

I think you have to look objectively at the fans opinion don't do what Blizzard and Bioware are doing and listen to the whiners. Look at what your fans are saying and think "will that really work"

 

[Corven]

I'm reading about this mode but what I haven't read is that the player is forced to use it. Sure it seems to be like the detective mode in that batman game, but you know what, I never used it in that game and you know what else surprise surprise I won't use it in hitman either just to give the game a little more difficulty.

I just find it silly that people will actually refuse to buy this game because an optional feature was added that will help some people but anyone else who wants to challenge themselves will never bother to us it in the first place.

 

[Corven]

just make it optional or something

From the info available it is optional, as in it is a toggle-able ability that you can turn on and off like batman's detective vision from arkham asylum.

 

[RA92]

I already lost hope on the AAA model of trying to appeal to 'the wider demography' a long time ago, so nothing much to say here.

But why not do that, I mean the money of whiny hardcore gamers who moan about things like this is worth the same as anyone elses money so why would they not,as a business, just ignore this loud minority and go after the majority or the 'the wider demography' as you put it.

Because running game development 'like a business' usually ends up with dilution of a brand and alienation of its player base in the long term?

You want an example of good development practice? See how Valve is doing it with CS:GO. Before even releasing the beta, they brought in seasoned CSS pros for <url=http://www.eseanews.com/index.php?s=news&d=comments&id=9969>valuable feedback on weapon balance and economy.

 

[numbersix1979]

Is there really no room anymore for anything that doesn't appeal to everyone?

Apparently not. It seems like, with the terrible third party support of consoles and 'go for broke' mentality of high-end publishers, mainstream appeal is pretty much the only thing most of the people responsible for games have left.

Then again, it might not be such a bad thing. Take, for example, the old Star Trek TV show versus the new Star Trek film series. Niche versus mainstream appeal, to the Nth degree. But think about it this way: each can approach different subject matter more creatively. One has the ability to be a heady deconstructive sci-fi, while the other can be a pulse-pounding action thriller with sci-fi overtones. Neither is objectively 'better' than the other. One just has to make their choice.

In the case of Hitman though, I would like to point out that the last brilliant idea Io had was to shelve Absolution for years and put out Kane and Lynch: Dog Days. That's unforgivable enough, but also: Were's that Freedom Fighters sequel you promised, fellas? It's been a good long time for that, too. My humble suggestion is to either come up with some new IP or make a FF sequel in 2014 instead of Kane and Lynch 3.

 

[M920CAIN]

This is probably what happens when developers have big budgets? they're overconfident?

 

[Treblaine]

(The Hitman Series) was getting kind of stagnant

Yeah, I can see we aren't going to agree on anything if you are coming to this with THAT opinion.

I mean Jesus Christ, no one else was doing anything even remotely like the Hitman series and Blood Money was damn near perfect. It was peaking and promised so much more. Then they dropped it for Kane & Lynch? TWO Kane & Lynch games? Didn't come back to it for SIX YEARS!

Did they try something NEW in the time? Really new, that no one had done before? No. They did a horrifically grim-dark gears of war clone. It was just a dumb shooter. No planning, no strategy or pacing, just a load of people endlessly swearing like it is some sort of punctuation. It's a game with no class, no panache, no structure. No sense of achievement.

"Mario RPG"

Mario RPG didn't kill Mario the platfomer. This will kill Hitman as we know it.

This isn't an experiment, this is a sell out. And I'd ask that you respect my opinions on this not dismiss them as as "nerdrage temper tantum" or worse, demand that I be silenced for the good of the industry. As if because they worked so hard ripping off other works rather than expanding on their own unique idea that is practically its own genre.

They are in a better position than anyone else and the are squandering it, while everyone else is rightfully giving them the chance and they seem to be blowing it to do the same kind of game as everyone else...

I'm all in favour of rip-offs. But it's clear they aren't very good at it, they ripped off gears of war with Kane & lynch and it was a disaster that they felt the need to do twice.

"We probably jumped the shark"

I don't care what "we" or anyone else did, I'm not calling for a boycott, I'm call for people to not delude themselves that this is what the fans want. By all means buy it if you REALLY want this stuff. But don't buy it for what you HOPE it is.

This is the discussion I'm having with everyone here.

Hitman Absolution is on my "games to watch list" but I am disappointed and so should you all.

Games like Blood Money were special. They had such satisfying challenged that rewarded imagination and persistence.

And they seem to be giving up on rewarding the player being imaginative. No where near enough games do.

 

[4173]

"Blystad seems to be specifically referring to Hitman: Absolution's new navigation system, which highlights possible in-game routes with colored lines, a feature some fans argue, may make the game too easy. Blystad claims that the feature is necessary, and that the degree of player freedom in the original Hitman games wasn't readily apparent because of the game's breadth of options and unforgiving difficulty.

I would disagree - freedom is not necessarily about standing on a hill and being able to point out all your options straight away. There's a lot to be said for exploration, as well as plans that are completely improvised.

Crysis 2 practically destroyed the sense of freedom present in the first game by not only making levels much smaller, but by literally pointing out your set-piece options. OK, I'm aware of my options, but I don't feel as if I have freedom because I'm just choosing from 3 pre-fabricated options.

Yes, the other Hitman games had paths that were technically mapped out, but they were spread in such a way that you felt as if you were still simply being clever and combining all these elements together.

The game will be rated 18, make the most of that fact and build a game that's intelligent. Gamers have managed the past 30 years just fine without having to have lines drawn on the floor for them.

If that's considered "hardcore" now then its because developers have let gamers get lazy.

That's a thin line to straddle. Since, as you mention, the paths are technically mapped out, it can be a struggle for a player to decide if they are failing because of tatical/execution errors, or because they are trying to follow a path that doesn't exist and cannot work.

A toggled ability like this seems to me a fairly elegant solution to that problem.

 

[RA92]

I already lost hope on the AAA model of trying to appeal to 'the wider demography' a long time ago, so nothing much to say here.

But why not do that, I mean the money of whiny hardcore gamers who moan about things like this is worth the same as anyone elses money so why would they not,as a business, just ignore this loud minority and go after the majority or the 'the wider demography' as you put it.

Because running game development 'like a business' usually ends up with dilution of a brand and alienation of its player base in the long term?

You want an example of good development practice? See how Valve is doing it with CS:GO. Before even releasing the beta, they brought in seasoned CSS pros for <url=http://www.eseanews.com/index.php?s=news&d=comments&id=9969>valuable feedback on weapon balance and economy.

1. them why is activision so fucking rich I mean they basically run their business like I said?

2. The true seasoned CS pros are not what I would call "mentally stable" so much counter strike for over a decade has caused their minds to leave the wolrd of man, they see and speek only of headshots and AWPs now and I believe are alergic to noobs and sunlight

1. They're headed for market saturation. Guitar Hero died out, WoW subscriptions are falling, and CoD is headed the same way as WW2 FPS shooters. Did you see the crowd at the Gamescom CoD booth?

2. Great job at stereotyping, but that is a counter-argument how...?

 

[Treblaine]

1. them why is activision so fucking rich I mean they basically run their business like I said?

2. The true seasoned CS pros are not what I would call "mentally stable" so much counter strike for over a decade has caused their minds to leave the wolrd of man, they see and speek only of headshots and AWPs now and I believe are alergic to noobs and sunlight

1. luck, with the network effect

Look at all the other franchises that Activision has "managed":
-Guitar Hero = so dead it practically killed the entire music game genre
-True Crime
-DJ Hero
-Spider man video Games
-Blur

All run into the ground, COD is the only thing Activison has left.

They got lucky with Call of Duty 4 that had a REALLY good single player that got millions of people to go out and buy it, THEN it had a really good multiplayer, but most importantly, it had a leveling up system that slowly gave you new weapons and abilities which consumed far more of peoples time. It is quite MMO like gaining experience, only this "grinding" can be quite fun with the fringe benefit of more weapons and THEN there is the prestige mode.

So it formed a huge mass of gamers that was self-fulfilling with the "hmm my friends are playing COD" that they just had to release new games with marginal improvements in the multiplayer to expand this market share every year.

2. "The true seasoned CS pros are not what I would call "mentally stable" "

More stable than typical mic-spamming COD jock. I have heard the absolutely MOST DISGUSTING THINGS playing Call of Duty. Such a diatribe of racist and sexual... Jesus, I couldn't mute them quick enough I had to turn off the sound. I know they can tell that in lobbies you can't mute them they abuse that...

I take this as a desperate personal attack. You know that CS fans know their stuff, so you insult them in desperation.

Bravo. [/sarc]