IO Refuses To Be "Dictated To" by Fans

[00slash00]

i agree with their point but "we wont be dictated to by fans," was extremely poorly worded. ive never been a fan of the hitman games (played the first, didnt like it, end of story) but having paths to follow does seem like kind of a dumb idea for this type of game. however, while fan input should certainly be considered, if we want to think of games as art, we have to allow developers to do what they think is right sometimes. i mean this is general, not specifically here, since it seems rather obvious that this decision was made more for financial reasons than creative ones

also, it would probably be beneficial to everyones sanity if gamers would wait til a game is released before making up their minds about it

 

[TheDooD]

It's like the fans don't trust the actual developers to handle the game, and that's kind of sad I think.

Why would they? So many developers are so concerned with making their games "appeal to a wider audience" that the games simply devolve into something that the original fans don't want to play, and the supposed "new audience" still has no interest in because what the game has now become is something they've seen done better, elsewhere.

That's the irony of "dumbing it down". They basically say fuck you original fans that made this new game possible. We're gonna appeal to people that never gave a shit about our game in the first place and somehow we're gonna make more money.

This is a reason why I think quite a few public relations people should be fired. Unless they truly understand how gamers think and not kissing the ass of faceless stock holders. It's getting proven more and more that dumbing down a product for a wider audience it kinda backfires. You pissed off original fans and new people still have no idea whats going on. It's better to keep original fans that'll encourage newer fans then having less of both.

Agreed, and I think its especially necessary for studios that could be somewhat considered critical darlings, even if their games aren't the bestsellers. If you fall from grace in that regard then you can quite easily be wiped off the map.

This sheer obsession with having everyone like everything is just silly. Its why we have genres in the first place.

If they appealed to every one we wouldn't be here right now. It's extremely silly to every try to appeal to everyone, games became popular because of word of mouth from other gamers. gamers allowing their friends to borrow the game and like it. A quality game that gets the fans, money and respect from everybody, that what people wanr. Not make a game because a select few can't understand basic problem solving that was evident in pass games.

I loved how in Hitman series there was direct route to kill some targets. Yet you can get REALLY fancy with your approach. I was expecting that with current tech that players can get really inventive with their killing tactics. Really troll the guards, your marks and make every death look like an accident. With refined shooting controls if all that gone to hell you'll have impressive fire fights. I'll be cool if they made an "hardcore" mode where they remove the highlighting for the old map and worked with current difficulties I'll be 100% fine with that.

 

[Jumplion]

That's a good point about that faux-freedom that Hitman had, I'm playing through Blood Money right now, and while it is a ton of fun (it really is, pick it up now), I often find myself playing and replaying the level just to find out which route leads to what. The first time on a level can be overwhelming to those not familiar with the layout or the position of guards.

That's kind of the best part of the game to me. Exploring a dozen different routes and trying different options. A couple of the levels were kind of frustrating, but whatever. In the end, it felt rewarding.

While that is a fair point, I will say that if you don't know what you're doing from the get go, it is a lot of trial and error and getting stuck at certain points, which at times do get more than a little frustrating. It was rewarding because you found the most efficient route, not because you found out how to make it through (to me, anyways). By all means, still a great game, a barrel of monkeys as Yahtzee said.

And to me, it always felt like there was one "true" way to go through it, and any other way is a failure. Like, there's only one true way to get the "Silent Assassin" rating rather than trying to find out how you can do it yourself.

He DID have an obligation to his fan and he FAILED to make a good movie. His fans made his fortune and are going to be his main customer for this work.

The only obligation he had was to make a good movie. He failed to do so, thereby failing his fans in the process. If it was a good movie, fans would be honored because it was a good movie for the franchise, not because Lucas catered to them.

I am NOT a DMC fanboy. That is the most petty bitching I have ever heard, the gameplay is all right on the money it is just that he has the wrong hair colour. DO NOT try to say my intemperance is entirely superficial it is the precise opposite circumstances. This game is trying to superficially act like a Hitman game but underneath it just wants to be Splinter Cell Conviction or some new predatory stealth game.

Your words are certainly reminisce of the inflammatory words of DMC fans. You have even less empirical evidence than the DMC fans and you are already making broad accusations of a game that hasn't even shown a full game clip. Your CAPITAL LETTERS and extra, pun.ct!uat!on certainly don't help?!!?! the hysterical tone I get from you.

Yes, I can deduce that. IO have had a god damn media blow out, and not just on the internet but in Magazine articles, all you have to say is contrarian "you can't be 100% sure". Well I've seen NO evidence they are staying true to what actually made Hitman such an important series.

I am being contrarian because we don't have a good sum of evidence, regardless of what you conclude from the get go. We know general ideas from a demo shown behind curtains with snippets of gameplay from the first level of the game in what is most likely an alpha build. The first level for Blood Money didn't really set that good of a precedent, with explosions and gunfights peppering it to get an idea for the mechanics.

Good rule of thumb for me when judging a game is waiting for a good sum of game clips or a substantive walkthrough of two or three different levels or locales. Gives a good gist and helps me see if I'd be interested in it or not.

That is ridiculous logic that defies all critical thought into what games we buy. So I can't truly say a game is not worth buying or not worth playing until I ave bought it and played it!??!

WHAT!

WHAT INDEED!!! Additional punctuation helps your point?!!?

You can't say a game is terrible when all you have to go by are hyped up reports with no solid empirical evidence of said suckage.

If you don't want to buy the new Hitman game because it "doesn't look like the type of Hitman game I want", then don't buy it, simple as that.

 

[Vibhor]

Simple fact is devs actually have experience in making games - fans usually don't. What some guy thinks might be good idea, the market may just as well deem as worst game play element ever and that's not a risk big titles can afford to take

Let me tell you, these are the same guys that made Kane and lynch. How do you feel about their experience now?

 

[Treblaine]

That's the irony of "dumbing it down". They basically say fuck you original fans that made this new game possible. We're gonna appeal to people that never gave a shit about our game in the first place and somehow we're gonna make more money.

Call me cynical but I am worried that Hitman DOES have a dumbed down appeal but in the worst possible way;

Looks like a badass, no?

The sharp Italian suit, blood red tie and twin chrome plated pistols - classic 1911 designs, with striking bald appearance and features. He looks really cool to play but unfortunately for many those twin silverballer pistols are not your main weapon. No, your main weapons is your cunning.

And from these forums it's clear that pissed off a lot of people, that it was a game about finesse, patience and planning. That the focus was not on gunplay and taking down every guard in your path but depending on disguise, trickery and ingenious deception.

Hitman played like a heist game, only you weren't stealing gold, you were delivering lead. Or manufacturing an "unfortunate accident".

That's why I think they are doing this, they are whoring out Agent 47 so be another predatory stealth wreaking machine. To appeal to all those people who tried Hitman because it had a badass looking protagonist but then threw the controller down in frustration because it asked them to be patient and plan a strategy.

Absolution seems to be dumbed down for them. Maybe if all along Agent 47 had looked a bit dorkier, a bit more like Gordon Freeman who you'd expect to depend more on brains than brawn. Then maybe he wouldn't have been used like a stud.

It makes more sense than XCOM. That is literally JUST THE NAME, nothing else is carried over apart from the extremely broad idea of aliens invading which hundreds of other games have done.

 

[Jake Martinez]

The comments are specifically aimed at the difficulty level in the new hitman game, don't believe that they are in any other context and they are being used to justify their attempt to make Hitman more "accessable" (read: easy) so that any moron can pick it up at Wall-mart and play it without too much difficulty, otherwise they won't make as much money as they possibly could.

This is the trade off of gaming going "main stream" - everyone is catering to the lowest common denominator because it's not enough to ship 1 million units of a game anymore, you now need to ship 10 million or you close down your studio.

 

[Jumplion]

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

Yeah, not like the DMC fans at all. Totally unfair for me to compare you to them, as you don't seem to use hysterical vocabulary to state that this one particular game (of which at best would be a slight blemish if bad) would ruin a franchise.

Actually quite poignant.

See, this is why I've learned to not get too attached to any franchise.

 

[Treblaine]

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

Yeah, not like the DMC fans at all. Totally unfair for me to compare you to them, as you don't seem to use hysterical vocabulary to state that this one particular game (of which at best would be a slight blemish if bad) would ruin a franchise.

Actually quite poignant.

See, this is why I've learned to not get too attached to any franchise.

That's nonsense.

Dante having black hair doesn't change anything, it's still the same over-the-top demon slashing gameplay and it is hardly the only game where you get to do things like that.

Your ad hominem attacks are getting more and more desperate.

You REFUSE to talk about the substance of my argument, only superficial comparisons to other trivial arguments.

 

[Treblaine]

He DID have an obligation to his fan and he FAILED to make a good movie. His fans made his fortune and are going to be his main customer for this work.

The only obligation he had was to make a good movie. He failed to do so, thereby failing his fans in the process. If it was a good movie, fans would be honored because it was a good movie for the franchise, not because Lucas catered to them.

I am NOT a DMC fanboy. That is the most petty bitching I have ever heard, the gameplay is all right on the money it is just that he has the wrong hair colour. DO NOT try to say my intemperance is entirely superficial it is the precise opposite circumstances. This game is trying to superficially act like a Hitman game but underneath it just wants to be Splinter Cell Conviction or some new predatory stealth game.

Your words are certainly reminisce of the inflammatory words of DMC fans. You have even less empirical evidence than the DMC fans and you are already making broad accusations of a game that hasn't even shown a full game clip. Your CAPITAL LETTERS and extra, pun.ct!uat!on certainly don't help?!!?! the hysterical tone I get from you.

Yes, I can deduce that. IO have had a god damn media blow out, and not just on the internet but in Magazine articles, all you have to say is contrarian "you can't be 100% sure". Well I've seen NO evidence they are staying true to what actually made Hitman such an important series.

I am being contrarian because we don't have a good sum of evidence, regardless of what you conclude from the get go. We know general ideas from a demo shown behind curtains with snippets of gameplay from the first level of the game in what is most likely an alpha build. The first level for Blood Money didn't really set that good of a precedent, with explosions and gunfights peppering it to get an idea for the mechanics.

Good rule of thumb for me when judging a game is waiting for a good sum of game clips or a substantive walkthrough of two or three different levels or locales. Gives a good gist and helps me see if I'd be interested in it or not.

That is ridiculous logic that defies all critical thought into what games we buy. So I can't truly say a game is not worth buying or not worth playing until I ave bought it and played it!??!

WHAT!

WHAT INDEED!!! Additional punctuation helps your point?!!?

You can't say a game is terrible when all you have to go by are hyped up reports with no solid empirical evidence of said suckage.

If you don't want to buy the new Hitman game because it "doesn't look like the type of Hitman game I want", then don't buy it, simple as that.

Reminiscent of DMC fans? You are clearly judging by appearance and not giving due consideration to the content of my argument.

I capitalise and use exclamation for emphasis. Dismiss me as hysterical if you feel that is what you need to say to ignore me but I AM emphatic on this issue.

"We know general ideas"

Which is very much what I am arguing. The elements that have been confirmed.

"The first level for Blood Money didn't really set that good of a precedent, with explosions and gunfights peppering it to get an idea for the mechanics."

Uhhh, Blood Money? First Level? You mean the tutorial level Death of a Showman? Peppering it? That is a gross mis-categorisation and you know it. The emphasis THROUGHOUT is on deception, planning and passing without a trace.

So in summary your counter-"argument" is:

-I dare to complain. Some people complain unjustifiably, I must be like them
-I don't know enough about the game for the slightest criticism, even though they are marketing the game
-If I don't like the game I should simply shut up and not buy it

 

[Something Amyss]

While that is a fair point, I will say that if you don't know what you're doing from the get go, it is a lot of trial and error and getting stuck at certain points, which at times do get more than a little frustrating. It was rewarding because you found the most efficient route, not because you found out how to make it through (to me, anyways). By all means, still a great game, a barrel of monkeys as Yahtzee said.

And to me, it always felt like there was one "true" way to go through it, and any other way is a failure. Like, there's only one true way to get the "Silent Assassin" rating rather than trying to find out how you can do it yourself.

It's hard to prove or disprove that last point, but you might be right.

I usually didn't go for the most efficient route, but the most interesting one. It was an option, though your rating could be hurt by it. Then again, ratings in a freeform game, even one with only the illusions of freedom (which most games will have by necessity) will always be at least slightly arbitrary or slightly dictatorial.

Certainly, there has to be some sort of happy medium. The best I've seen so far is make the help "optional" in some fashion.

Then again, I doubt this will ruin the game for me and in the end, I'll buy or pass on the overall merits. I personally found the frustration worth it in the end, because it felt like I'd really accomplished something, as opposed to many of the games which were all "go here" and "shoot this."

 

[Sylveria]

There's a difference between being willing to listen to the fans, saying "We appreciate your suggestions, but we know we can't please everyone, but we'll do the best way can to make a quality product," and taking the Ninja Theory stance which is "Lawl we know whats cool, you don't, STFU and buy our game."

 

[boyvirgo666]

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.

On the broader issue: I'm actually agreeing with them. I've played a lot of the games people have accused developers of "dumb-ing down" and preferred them to the originals due the ease of access (is that the phrase I'm after there?) features making them more fun to pick up and play.

Im one of those troglodytes that thinks this UI would make the game too easy and i agree with you. My brother hated hitman because it was too hard to figure out where you could or should go. Iv seen both sides of this coin and i agree with the dev. But an option to turn it off would make everyone happy. Though i dont see it as a huge issue for the game period and would still buy it.

 

[Jumplion]

That's nonsense.

Dante having black hair doesn't change anything, it's still the same over-the-top demon slashing gameplay and it is hardly the only game where you get to do things like that.

Your ad hominem attacks are getting more and more desperate.

You REFUSE to talk about the substance of my argument, only superficial comparisons to other trivial arguments.

Do you even know the DMC arguments? Dante's now half-Angel half-Demon, he's an angsty emo tween, he looks more serious than lightheaerted, the combat looks slower, it has slomo-sections ruining the flow, the levels look more open like in DMC2 (the apparent "bad" one in the series), 30 frames per second!, his weapons are bland, it's not a goofy story anymore, it has no style, all that good, stupid stuff.

At least these arguments are based off of two or three trailers, we have not seen 1 in-game trailer that would give us a gist as to how the things in this Hitman game would be implemented.

Reminiscent of DMC fans? You are clearly judging by appearance and not giving due consideration to the content of my argument.

I have, and I find said content reminisce of DMC fans. Same broad speculation, same exaggerated tone, same stuff about it "ruining" the franchise, etc...

I capitalize and use exclamation for emphasis. Dismiss me as hysterical if you feel that is what you need to say to ignore me but I AM emphatic on this issue.

Italics and bold are your friend. CAPITALIZED LETTERS and unnecessary punctuation!!?! make you look crazy. I expect better from you, as I do respect you as an intelligent person. Act like one.

"We know general ideas"

Which is very much what I am arguing. The elements that have been confirmed.

We have yet to see any of said elements truly integrated into gameplay. The Hitman games aren't exactly the best games to demo for an excitable crowd, some immediate action may be necessary to grab their attention.

Uhhh, Blood Money? First Level? You mean the tutorial level Death of a Showman? Peppering it? That is a gross mis-categorisation and you know it. The emphasis THROUGHOUT is on deception, planning and passing without a trace.

Lets see, on my first playthrough, knowing nothing of the game, I had to break down a door and shoot a few thugs, explode a chandelier to make it fall, suffocate some enemies in the way, all in a very linear fashion from one room to another. Unless you played the game and know it in and out, it'd doubtful that the first level delves into what Blood Money is really about. Deus Ex's first level comes to mind, not a very accurate portrayal of the whole game (or so I'm told)

So in summary your counter-"argument" is:

-I dare to complain. Some people complain unjustifiably, I must be like them
-I don't know enough about the game for the slightest criticism, even though they are marketing the game
-If I don't like the game I should simply shut up and not buy it

-Complaining implies childish entitlement. Express your skepticism, be cautious, and keep a close eye on it
-Yeah, we don't know enough to really make any sort of judgement dealing with the entire game and its suckage factor. "Marketing" be damned.
-If you don't think this game will appeal to your inner Hitman, then don't buy it. If you don't want to buy it because you feel it doesn't stay true to the Hitman way, don't buy it. If in any way you believe that this game won't satisfy you, don't buy it. But that's getting ahead of ourselves, considering that we still have no solid, empirical data for us to look at.

It's okay to be worried over a game's direction. Talk about it, discuss it, maybe try to understand why they are doing it in the first place. Agree or disagree with the direction, by all means. A silly thing to do, instead, would be to spout out such gems as "That's why I think they are doing this, they are whoring out Agent 47 so be another predatory stealth wreaking machine" and "This will kill Hitman as we know it" and "Now it is turning into a homicidal Arkham Asylum rip off" and "Even though if fucks over the fans that are the only reason the franchise ever got to 4 games." Can you seriously not see how comments like these make you look way too sensitive about this whole thing?

 

[robert022614]

I agree that fans shouldn't dictate a games directions, but to say it to their face and in a way making those "super fans" seem way too unimportant in a ploy to reach a broader audience aka "dumbing down" the game is not the way to go either.

It is one of those shut up unless you got something nice to say type things. If you bad mouth your customers even if you are right you are going to lose some of those customers while not necessarily making the same amount of new ones who are "inspired" by your willingness to stand up to those bullies who have ideas and love your game.

In the end every company does what they want. Sometimes fans can demand what they want and have it put in. A majority of the time developers are pressured into making what will sell the most and to the biggest audience. It is not a good idea to try to be a champion of the latter.

 

[Treblaine]

I can't believe you are complaining the tutorial level is too linear, and worse judging the entire game by that. I don't know what you are playing with on that.

Agree or disagree with the direction, by all means. A silly thing to do, instead, would be to spout out such gems as:
-"That's why I think they are doing this, they are whoring out Agent 47 so be another predatory stealth wreaking machine"
-"This will kill Hitman as we know it"
-"Now it is turning into a homicidal Arkham Asylum rip off"
-"Even though if fucks over the fans that are the only reason the franchise ever got to 4 games."

Can you seriously not see how comments like these make you look way too sensitive about this whole thing?

What is the problem with those "gems"? Are they not deferential enough to the can-do-no-wrong developers of the Kane & Lynch games?

DO YOU think that Hitman is being turned into a predatory stealth game? If you think it isn't then EXPLAIN yourself with evidence, don't just pout that "it's too early to call"

Considering IO's recent track record do you really think (considering this goes all predatory stealth) that we will return to the traceless-assassination type of gameplay?

Do you really think that all this hype for Hitman Absolution was created by people who did not play and love the previous Hitman games?

If you really thing it it too early to talk about Hitman Absolution, what the hell are you doing on this thread?

 

[Treblaine]

I agree, Blood Money was damn near perfect. Very close to Contracts but at the same time a great step forward in design and storytelling (I actually felt Contracts was a step back since Hitman 2).

So that's why I'm fine with them taking a break there.

Look, not every great game needs a sequel. Blood Money felt like Legacy of Kain Defiance, a good point to leave the franchise, at least for a good long while, both mechanically and narratively. I don't like the notion that developers who strike gold should not try to risk it with new IP, and even though K&L wasn't a good game, I was glad they could give it their best shot. It can't be easy for a talented group of people to be forced to crunch out the same game non stop for a decade.

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

Let me put something forward to you:

They have every right to kill Hitman as we know it if they want to.

Hitman is their baby, not yours or mine. They may be making it for us to enjoy, but they're not making it at our behest. We don't own it just because we played it.

You call it a sellout, but after reading the original article I'm not so sure. And, frankly, you know what is *definitely* a sellout? Having moved on and then coming back to Hitman instead of doing something else because fans are clamoring for it. That's pretty sellout-ish right there.

So this:

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.

Doesn't really apply. Because, see, what I'm saying here is that Hitman doesn't need to be what the fans want.

To show some artistic integrity, Hitman should be what the artists making it want and then, hopefully, fans will like it because it makes sense and it's done well. And if they don't, then it's a shame and everybody should move on. Sure, it may be that there's a bunch of creators at IO shaking their heads and thinking they shouldn't cave in to market pressure, but in my experience, people like that tend to not go on the record to say "screw you, we're making what we think is right regardless of what you say". Again, if you don't like it, absolutely, step away, don't buy it, complain about it (once you know for a fact it's not good). What I'm saying here is that maybe that's a good thing, a valid outcome, if that's what the team is trying to do.

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

I will decide what I should be disappointed about, thank you very much, but I appreciate the candor.

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.

I don't want to spin this off in a discussion about games getting more linear, but... come on, really? In a world of LittleBigPlanet, Minecraft, Terraria, Portal, Saints Row, Red Faction, Red Dead Redemption and others imaginative gameplay is not rewarded enough in games? When I hear this argument it always feels to me that what it's really saying is that *every* game should be absolutely nonscripted, which is just not true.

And, regardless, this is not Hitman being a linear shooter now, this is Hitman choosing a different way to provide information it was already providing before through text or visual elements within the level. I do believe you're making a bigger deal of it than it is, based on what I've seen of the game so far. There's nothing in the materials they've put out that makes me believe the game will not "reward players for being imaginative" at all.

But that's a discussion about the facts, I'm more interested in putting forth that you really have no entitlement to the anger you're expressing right now. I find that to be a more interesting discussion than whether or not Hitman will be a cool game, which we will all find out in due time.

I can see what you mean.

The Hitman franchise probably should be laid to rest.

Which begs the question if they are going such a different direction, why are they using a franchise with so much baggage which should be laid to rest anyway? And apparently they aren't even rebooting it! Why not create a new IP? Well because they are milking old goodwill for a very different type of game and that does not seem like very good artistic integrity to me.

The crux of my arguments is that The hitman games were in a genre all of their own. They were stealth games but not like other stealth games where it wasn't about hiding behind corners or in the dark but hiding in plain sight with disguise and actions that make you blend in. It was a completely different kind of stealth, altogether. It was a different kind of feel you didn't feel like a commando striking from the shadows, you felt like an assassin from the James Bond movies, waltzing in with the perfect disguise and executing a deadly trap then just walking out of there.

And in the proceeding 5 years since Blood Money no one else has done anything like this. Everyone has done predatory stealth:
-Splinter Cell Conviction
-Batman Arkham Asylum
-Arkham City

I do NOT see the artistic integrity in giving up on the unique and amazing thing you do, to do the same as everyone else.

Even the X-ray mode is ripped from Batman AA and that's the one element I hear BAA dinged for, as it is an element that is used too much like a crutch.

And what do I mean by they reward your intelligence, as in distinct from Terrarria or Minecraft. Well those are blank canvass games, you have a very basic world and you build on it endlessly.

Now Hitman gave you a hugely complicated world, with a target that seems to be in an impenetrable fortress you can't possibly enter. Not until you really understand everything about the world, all the tricks and angles can you masterfully completley your objective and the amazingly subtle thing is how the music rewards being the islent assassin, killing no one but your target and leaving no trace.

Jesper Kyd was to Hitman as John Williams was to Indiana Jones, HE composed the musical queues throughout the game that was a pivotal reward mechanism.

"There's nothing in the materials they've put out that makes me believe the game will not "reward players for being imaginative" at all."

Except the highlighted special entrances and "pathways" literally guiding you exactly where you need to go. Very much appreciate it if I could turn this off but I worry when devs do this they have given up on subtle clues.

This is as bad - I think - as watching a movie for the first time with director's commentary. It's not about enjoying the immersive experience, it's about the creator going "oooh ohh, dont miss that great big and what's happening in this scene is he's mad, but she doesn't understand..."