Rumor: Hitman Dev Axes Staff, Kills Project [UPDATED]

[Woodsey]

If Hitman 5 is dead whilst they shoved out Kane and f*cking Lynch I will rage.

It's funny that because it took until Blood Money for IO to realise people wanted Hitman for the stealth-murder simulation, whilst earlier ones contained too much running and gunning as a necessity and people hated it.

Sorry, but have you even played the other games?

Yes, what makes you think I haven't?

Because I stealth'd all the way through Silent Assassin and Contracts, and like someone else said the majority of Codename 47 is still stealth.

 

[Sonicron]

... Wonderful.

IO, let me make this abundantly clear: Either drop Kane & Lynch (and any crap even remotely related to that accursed franchise) and go back to making games that we actually want, or go die in a fire. All of you.

 

[shemoanscazrex3]

I guess this is what happens when you release a buggy ass sequel that no one wanted. After all those gun fights you give me dogs? How hysterical

 

[Arec Balrin]

If Hitman 5 is dead whilst they shoved out Kane and f*cking Lynch I will rage.

It's funny that because it took until Blood Money for IO to realise people wanted Hitman for the stealth-murder simulation, whilst earlier ones contained too much running and gunning as a necessity and people hated it.

Sorry, but have you even played the other games?

Yes, what makes you think I haven't?

Because I stealth'd all the way through Silent Assassin and Contracts, and like someone else said the majority of Codename 47 is still stealth.

So without seeing the disparity between Codename 47 and Blood Money, you have no frame of reference to judge those two in the middle. I do. Your informant is wrong: half the levels in the first game contain unavoidable combat and all of the major target missions are traditional 'boss fights'. My memory of Silent Assassin is that the very first level is a shoot-out, the Russian levels mostly avoid it but then after the first initial promising Japanese one you're assaulting a castle and it's pretty much closer to Goldeneye than Hitman. Contracts to my memory also has mandatory 'boss fight' style shootouts.

 

[Sir-jackington]

AWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW! bad people

 

[Woodsey]

If Hitman 5 is dead whilst they shoved out Kane and f*cking Lynch I will rage.

It's funny that because it took until Blood Money for IO to realise people wanted Hitman for the stealth-murder simulation, whilst earlier ones contained too much running and gunning as a necessity and people hated it.

Sorry, but have you even played the other games?

Yes, what makes you think I haven't?

Because I stealth'd all the way through Silent Assassin and Contracts, and like someone else said the majority of Codename 47 is still stealth.

So without seeing the disparity between Codename 47 and Blood Money, you have no frame of reference to judge those two in the middle. I do. Your informant is wrong: half the levels in the first game contain unavoidable combat and all of the major target missions are traditional 'boss fights'. My memory of Silent Assassin is that the very first level is a shoot-out, the Russian levels mostly avoid it but then after the first initial promising Japanese one you're assaulting a castle and it's pretty much closer to Goldeneye than Hitman. Contracts to my memory also has mandatory 'boss fight' style shootouts.

I've played 2 of the 3 games we're talking about, neither of those 2 force shoot outs - so yes, I can make perfectly valid comments about them (especially since my memory is working).

*goes in for the low blow*

If you found it too difficult to not just shoot everything in sight then that's to do with you, not the game.

 

[JourneyThroughHell]

You tried making a sequel to a game that was only famous for its controversy with Gamespot. Thats all it was really known for. It did have a pretty interesting multiplayer component, but was otherwise mediocre.

What the fuck did you think would happen when you released a sequel to a game who's only claim to fame was that it got Gerstmann fired?

Yeah, pretty much have to agree here. And I liked Kane & Lynch. Both of them.

Since the news happen to be true (about the firings, not the cancellations), all I can say is that this was a pretty obvious outcome. You made a sequel to a game not that many people liked and barely changed anything.

Sorry, guys, all your fault, and if Hitman 5 collapses, that'll probably be for the better due to you shoving it off into the background.

 

[Soviet Steve]

Sad to see that I can't give my money to fellow Danes, oh well, hopefully their "Fred Phelps and Joseph Stalin go murder some kittens or whatever" series does horribly enough to kill the company.

 

[Enemy Of The State]

Rumor: Hitman Dev Kills Staff, Axes Project

 

[Arec Balrin]

If Hitman 5 is dead whilst they shoved out Kane and f*cking Lynch I will rage.

It's funny that because it took until Blood Money for IO to realise people wanted Hitman for the stealth-murder simulation, whilst earlier ones contained too much running and gunning as a necessity and people hated it.

Sorry, but have you even played the other games?

Yes, what makes you think I haven't?

Because I stealth'd all the way through Silent Assassin and Contracts, and like someone else said the majority of Codename 47 is still stealth.

So without seeing the disparity between Codename 47 and Blood Money, you have no frame of reference to judge those two in the middle. I do. Your informant is wrong: half the levels in the first game contain unavoidable combat and all of the major target missions are traditional 'boss fights'. My memory of Silent Assassin is that the very first level is a shoot-out, the Russian levels mostly avoid it but then after the first initial promising Japanese one you're assaulting a castle and it's pretty much closer to Goldeneye than Hitman. Contracts to my memory also has mandatory 'boss fight' style shootouts.

I've played 2 of the 3 games we're talking about, neither of those 2 force shoot outs - so yes, I can make perfectly valid comments about them (especially since my memory is working).

*goes in for the low blow*

If you found it too difficult to not just shoot everything in sight then that's to do with you, not the game.

Ok, then just try playing the first damn game and you'll notice the massive difference in mission design between Blood Money and the rest, which was my original point, ass-hat.

 

[Tilted_Logic]

I had no clue what Hitman 5 was, so this title really threw me off.

A game developer moonlighting as a hitman gets pissed at his work buddies and axes them to death, leading to the termination of the project. Scary?

 

[Cabelnet]

Ahem. According to Danish computer news site, Computerworld.dk, the axing was because of Microsoft pulling out of a project they had going with Io Interactive.

I quote and translate:
" Computerworld learns, that the direct cause for this round of job terminations was a larger game-project with IT-giant Microsoft, who pulled out of the project

It has not been possible to receive comments from Microsoft about the project"

Link for the adventures: http://www.computerworld.dk/art/111878?a=rss&i=0 (Danish ahead)

Always wasting my breath.

 

[Woodsey]

If Hitman 5 is dead whilst they shoved out Kane and f*cking Lynch I will rage.

It's funny that because it took until Blood Money for IO to realise people wanted Hitman for the stealth-murder simulation, whilst earlier ones contained too much running and gunning as a necessity and people hated it.

Sorry, but have you even played the other games?

Yes, what makes you think I haven't?

Because I stealth'd all the way through Silent Assassin and Contracts, and like someone else said the majority of Codename 47 is still stealth.

So without seeing the disparity between Codename 47 and Blood Money, you have no frame of reference to judge those two in the middle. I do. Your informant is wrong: half the levels in the first game contain unavoidable combat and all of the major target missions are traditional 'boss fights'. My memory of Silent Assassin is that the very first level is a shoot-out, the Russian levels mostly avoid it but then after the first initial promising Japanese one you're assaulting a castle and it's pretty much closer to Goldeneye than Hitman. Contracts to my memory also has mandatory 'boss fight' style shootouts.

I've played 2 of the 3 games we're talking about, neither of those 2 force shoot outs - so yes, I can make perfectly valid comments about them (especially since my memory is working).

*goes in for the low blow*

If you found it too difficult to not just shoot everything in sight then that's to do with you, not the game.

Ok, then just try playing the first damn game and you'll notice the massive difference in mission design between Blood Money and the rest, which was my original point, ass-hat.

This still makes no sense.

Why would I need to play Codename 47 to understand the differences between Silent Assassin and Bloody Money, or Contracts and Blood Money?

Blood Money takes place in more civilian areas with less guards, but the others are still stealth games.

 

[Arec Balrin]

Viewed in isolation, Blood Money can seem like Silent Assassin and Contracts except for the level design and controls, that's why I think you need to experience Codename 47 and all its faults. These faults are almost entirely repeated in games 2 and 3, only Blood Money is almost completely free of them.

I never said they weren't stealth games, but it's like comparing Star Fox with Microsoft Flight Simulator. One is so game-like and the other is more of a free-form set-piece with flexible but realistic rules. The Hitman series is a smooth transition from Goldeneye-type stealth to something more of a puzzle game with multiple paths, none of which are contrived. The Prince of Persia games in recent years went through the same process but backwards: Blood Money is Sands of Time and Codename 47 being the rebooted 'Prince of Persia' no one liked.

 

[SyphonX]

What kind of complex has IO been suffering from anyway? Did they have some sort of inferiority complex, being afraid they were a "one trick pony" studio with the Hitman franchise? So instead of continuing development on a guaranteed success and innovative platform, they decide to push out the completely unpleasant and lackluster Kane & Lynch sequel?

Eh.

Why couldn't they just do Hitman, honestly? The franchise has so much potential right now. Activision can run the same franchise forever, why can't IO do the same for a waay better franchise?

I remember when 47 (the character, bald guy) was a figure piece in gaming. Much like how we have Commander Shepard, Alistair and other characters silhouettes on magazines covers, as icons. 47 was there, along with Lara Croft and early Master Chief. Then, from out of nowhere, 47 just goes away, along with the franchise. Replaced by an exceptionally shitty movie, that is (quite amazingly I might add) getting a sequel.

So I'm going to have to sit around and have salt rubbed in my wounds, as the Hitman movie sequel releases, knowing full well there might never be another game.

I'll give credit to IO for branching out with Kane & Lynch, to try something new. It was new, though it wasn't received very well. Though I will fault them for essentially abandoning an excellent Hitman franchise while they greenlit the horrid K&L2.