Shooter Hitman: Absolution - the craggy thread

[Smitty]

You are judging them by 2005/6 PS2 models and not games today right? Because the latter would be pretty fucking stupid

Do you think I give a toss that the game was ported over? Is that my fault? Does that somehow magically change the quality of the models?

The reason is irrelevent: they were middling models for the time they were released.

It's not my fault they shat out a tarted up PS2 port.

[Uzi]

Do you think I give a toss that the game was ported over? Is that my fault? Does that somehow magically change the quality of the models?

The reason is irrelevent: they were middling models for the time they were released.

It's not my fault they shat out a tarted up PS2 port.

Whether you give a toss or not is irrelevant, the fact is that is what the game was as a lot of early next gen titles were (upscaled ports of PS2/Xbox games). You can't change that so you take them as they are.

[Sergeant Squid]

Dry your eyes mate.

[Smitty]

Whether you give a toss or not is irrelevant, the fact is that is what the game was as a lot of early next gen titles were (upscaled ports of PS2/Xbox games). You can't change that so you take them as they are.

You're quite right it's irrelevent, what's relevant is that they shat out a tarted-up PS2 game, I don't give a monkeys about the excuses you or they want to make about it.

Would it be too much to ask a new title on a new console is actually made for that console?

To answer your question very specifically, I was judging them by what I thought of them at the time ''fuck me these are some ropey models''.

[Uzi]

You're quite right it's irrelevent, what's relevant is that they shat out a tarted-up PS2 game, I don't give a monkeys about the excuses you or they want to make about it.

Would it be too much to ask a new title on a new console is actually made for that console?

To answer your question very specifically, I was judging them by what I thought of them at the time ''fuck me these are some ropey models''.

Tart shat monkeys!!!!

A new title specifically made for HD consoles? Why that might be coming. The point was if you go back and look at similar ported up or PS2 games from the same year/gen of release the models would prob look just as ropey to you in a lot of titles.

[Smitty]

you have to remember Smitty, most people don't get THAT annoyed at the little things like you do (yes I know to you they're not little things considering the F3AR thread)

I don't think twitchY and inconsistent AI is a small thing, personally. Getting discovered for reasons you can't fathom is very irritating. The 'rules' of Hitman always seem vague to me. I never now wether I'm far away enough not to be seen or whatver, lots of stuff like that. I think it all needs re-thinking.

The visuals and physics, are less important, although both really add to a sense of place. Particularly on the animation and physics front, it can be just be really jarring. Ostensibly Hitman is a realistic game, and you get pulled out of that by people somesaulting across the room when you shoot them, or a really terrible animation.

I actually speak from a place of vaguely admiring the series from afar, but being frustrated by it's limitation and aforementioned presentational issues.

Hitman has quite closed environments, I think within those fixed spaces everything should be properly modelled, and should behave very true to life. It would serve to make it so much better.

[hanzo]

I agree. There's definitely room for improvement.

[Uzi]

I don't think twitchY and inconsistent AI is a small thing, personally. Getting discovered for reasons you can't fathom is very irritating. The 'rules' of Hitman always seem vague to me. I never now wether I'm far away enough not to be seen or whatver, lots of stuff like that. I think it all needs re-thinking.

The visuals and physics, are less important, although both really add to a sense of place. Particularly on the animation and physics front, it can be just be really jarring. Ostensibly Hitman is a realistic game, and you get pulled out of that by people somesaulting across the room when you shoot them, or a really terrible animation.

I actually speak from a place of vaguely admiring the series from afar, but being frustrated by it's limitation and aforementioned presentational issues.

Hitman has quite closed environments, I think within those fixed spaces everything should be properly modelled, and should behave very true to life. It would serve to make it so much better.

I should have taken the AI bit in your quote out as I agree with that, the physics and stuff were just 2005ish ragdolls etc that I either seemed used to or didn't bother me. I know its a realistic game but keeping in mind the limits of the tech and the type of game it was you make exceptions (while putting them aside for improvement in future of course) for the more ambitious stuff it achieves.

Rest assured, I guess these are key things that will be addressed in a 2010 sequel, but to be able to enjoy Blood Money today you have to turn these things off and remember it was from a different time of tech. I know this because I convinced my friend recently to play it this year and the older tech put him off somewhat until I told him to ignore that stuff and just get to the meat of the game which is by the time you finish the opera mission properly

[Majora]

Shooting people? You're doing it wrong.

I hope Smitty isn't as hypocritical as I think he is and welcomes me posting 10 times in an hour in the Dead Space 2 thread about how I hope the devs raise their game from the derivative original.

At the end of the day I take Hitman in the same way I take Fallout 3 or GTA or other 'open' games. You can't judge in the same way you judge linear, scripted monster closet shooting games. You accept that scale or freedom or lots of different permutations of events may occasionally cause the game to go a bit funny but put up with it because of the ambition. And the AI in blood money isn't that inconsistent really. I won't say it never goes wrong but behave like you would expect in real life, wear the appropriate disguises and don't try to play it like Splinter Cell and you should have very few issues.

[Smitty]

I hope Smitty isn't as hypocritical as I think he is and welcomes me posting 10 times in an hour in the Dead Space 2 thread about how I hope the devs raise their game from the derivative original.

Oh yeah, Dead Space was shoddy as hell. They just shat that one out and made the best game of 2008.

Terrible.

[Wiper]

Oh yeah, Dead Space was shoddy as hell. They just shat that one out and made the best game of 2008.

Terrible.

rllmukforum disagrees

Of course, rllmukforum has repeatedly shown its utter lack of taste as a whole, so that's probably not a particularly good put down...

Edit: in fact, a better response is simply to state the fact that World of Goo came out that year, which automatically makes your statement invalid.

[Smitty]

rllmukforum disagrees

Of course, rllmukforum has repeatedly shown its utter lack of taste as a whole, so that's probably not a particularly good put down...

Edit: in fact, a better response is simply to state the fact that World of Goo came out that year, which automatically makes your statement invalid.

In my opinion, obviously.

[Smitty]

You can't judge in the same way you judge linear, scripted monster closet shooting games.

I can judge them however I want, and do you think that is the only game i've ever really liked?

[Wiper]

*whistles*

So, that Hitman, eh? Hope that the new one lives up to Blood Money! (Hell, if it does to Blood Money what Blood Money did for the series as a whole, then we'll be in for game of the year material. Well, we would be if Mass Effect 2 hadn't already gone and stolen that prize)

[CarloOos]

Oh yeah, Dead Space Bloody Money was shoddy as hell. They just shat that one out and made the best game of 2008 2005.

Terrible.

Yes?

[Smitty]

Hmmm I see your point.

Well if people wouldn't take it on to irrelevent subjects like how 'derivative' Dead Space is, I wouldn't go down that route, would I?

I was fine with talking about Hitman and solely about Hitman.

[Wiper]

Actually, I'd not noticed Majora's post (or, to be more precise, failed to read the final paragraph. Um) on the way he views Hitman. Not sure I agree with it.

Well, I do agree with the idea that approaching Hitman as a shooter is a sure way to be underwhelmed by it, but considering it in the same respect as an open world game? I'm not so sure. For me, it's a wonderful puzzle game with multiple approaches. Or, to put it another way: it's Deus Ex, minus the concentration on narrative and world-building, and instead focussed on open levels. That is to say, it's a deeply focussed game (unlike, say, a GTA), even as it gives you the freedom to choose your approach.

Er, which is to say: it doesn't benefit at all from an action-game "must kill everything" approach. Nor is it entirely suited to an open world game's "what can I get away with" mentality (though such experimentation can be fun in bursts, and is a good way to learn the levels. Rather, it's a game which is most fun when approached from the angle "how can I best achieve this task" - where 'best' can be substituted for 'most elegantly', 'most quickly', 'flashiest' or whatever the player wants. It's a subtle difference perhaps, but important!

[Majora]

I worded it a bit badly, when I say 'open' I don't necessarily mean in terms of scale, since obviously Hitman's levels are quite self-contained. I mean more games that aren't just walk down linear corridors and kill stuff. In those type of games it's much easier to polish everything to a shine because of the scripted way things pan out and limited ways to approach the scenarios beyond kill shit. When you get to the level of simulate a living city like GTA for example, you have to accept the likelihood of unexpected stuff happening increasing. With Hitman the complexity works in a different way in terms of the layering of events and actions. There's a lot of stuff going on under the hood to the point where I can forgive a rare hiccup when the AI stumbles after events x and y occur in area b while wearing disguise d after killing character m in manner d in area q. Consider the layering of consequences in each level and I don't think it's hard to understand the polish will not reach the level of corridor shooter 5.

[Isaac]

This entire thread is proof that you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink. That is to say that Smitty has played a fucking masterpiece, and yet every single time it's obvious from everything he's posted he's playing the game totally wrong.

Blood Money is a masterpiece. Fact.

[Space Renegade Ulala]

Oh god, the graphics, physics and animation of a 5 year old game loved and valued for its gameplay more than anything else aren't fucking stellar, release the fucking hounds.

[Monkeyboy]

To sum up, Smitty doesn't half talk a load of old shite.*

* Dead Space excluded.

[Smitty]

Oh god, the graphics, physics and animation of a 5 year old game loved and valued for its gameplay more than anything else aren't fucking stellar, release the fucking hounds.

Release the fucking hounds?

I don't get the intensity of this reaction.

[Smitty]

it's obvious from everything he's posted he's playing the game totally wrong.

Er, does how I play the game effect the physics, AI, animation and graphics?

Really, do you think this kind of response is proportional?

[Smitty]

To sum up, Smitty doesn't half talk a load of old shite.*

Really? So there's no-one else here who agrees that Blood Money has problems in the areas I mentioned, or that the series as a whole has as yet failed to really live up to it's true potential (if for valid reasons IE hardware in the past)?

Have I, at any point, said Blood Money is a terrible game or not worth anyone's time?

[Mr. Gerbik]

What the fuck Smitty, I mean "has failed to live up to it's true potential"? Really? Blood Money one of the best games ever made, it's a genre unto its own, and one of the few truly unique experiences that you can find in this hobby of ours. Of course the fucking graphics or the fucking animations can be better, just like they can in Dead Space, or whichever the fuck game you care to mention. Even in fucking Crysis the fucking graphics could be better, and they will be thanks to the natural progression of increased computing power and shit. But dissing Blood Money because of some ropey animations is like berating Citizen Kane for not being in colour or in high def, i.e. completely missing the point and being purposefully blind to its relevant merits.

Edit: reading this back, I think I might come across a tad aggressive here. Nevertheless, try to consider the point I'm trying to make and take a step back and listen to yourself.

[Uzi]

Really? So there's no-one else here who agrees that Blood Money has problems in the areas I mentioned, or that the series as a whole has as yet failed to really live up to it's true potential (if for valid reasons IE hardware in the past)?

Have I, at any point, said Blood Money is a terrible game or not worth anyone's time?

I think you're streching what we meant to something else.

It is a game with a few issues, but it doesn't stop it being a fucking amazing game. There is nothing else like it, which gives it even more leeway with any flaws since there it is one of a kind.

What the fuck Smitty, I mean "has failed to live up to it's true potential"? Really? Blood Money one of the best games ever made, it's a genre unto its own, and one of the few truly unique experiences that you can find in this hobby of ours. Of course the fucking graphics or the fucking animations can be better, just like they can in Dead Space, or whichever the fuck game you care to mention. Even in fucking Crysis the fucking graphics could be better, and they will be thanks to the natural progression of increased computing power and shit. But dissing Blood Money because of some ropey animations is like berating Citizen Kane for not being in colour or in high def, i.e. completely missing the point and being purposefully blind to its relevant merits.

Edit: reading this back, I think I might come across a tad aggressive here. Nevertheless, try to consider the point I'm trying to make and take a step back and listen to yourself.

I loved how many times you said fucking there

[Smitty]

But dissing Blood Money because of some ropey animations is like berating Citizen Kane for not being in colour or in high def, i.e. completely missing the point and being purposefully blind to its relevant merits.

I'm criticising some aspects of the game. Why would I be 'purposefully' blind to its merits? What does that even mean? Why do people feel the need to just make shit up, can you really not accept that I have some problems with the AI, visuals etc?

Citizen Kane is being deployed now, are you serious? No, it's not like berating Citizen Kane for not being in colour, it's like criticising Citizen Kane because had some shonky camera work, or a some goofy scripting, y'know, some functional stuff and some presentational stuff.

[Mr. Gerbik]

I'm criticising some aspects of the game. Why would I be 'purposefully' blind to its merits? What does that even mean? Why do people feel the need to just make shit up, can you really not accept that I have some problems with the AI, visuals etc?

Citizen Kane is being deployed now, are you serious? No, it's not like berating Citizen Kane for not being in colour, it's like criticising Citizen Kane because had some shonky camera work, or a some goofy scripting, y'know, some functional stuff and some presentational stuff.

Of course I'm serious! That it is exactly like berating Citizen Kane for not being in colour is what I'm trying to get you to understand! It's one of the few games out there that truly does something unique and does it extremely well. Think about how petty you sound when you start mentioning animation and stuff.

Sigh.

[Vemsie]

I'm criticising some aspects of the game. Why would I be 'purposefully' blind to its merits? What does that even mean? Why do people feel the need to just make shit up, can you really not accept that I have some problems with the AI, visuals etc?

Citizen Kane is being deployed now, are you serious? No, it's not like berating Citizen Kane for not being in colour, it's like criticising Citizen Kane because had some shonky camera work, or a some goofy scripting, y'know, some functional stuff and some presentational stuff.

I think what it boils down to in the end it that what are apparently some fundamental flaws in your eyes are small niggles at best in the eyes of many others.

[Smitty]

I think you're streching what we meant to something else.

Really? What with people saying ''release the fucking hounds' and generally liberally sprinkling their sentences with 'fucking'?

What am I missing here? Is a this a sacred cow which can't be criticised, even when it's from somebody who thinks the games are good but is a bit frustrated by aspects of them?

Y'know what guys, have it your way. Blood Money was perfect, looked great, I wasn't really annoyed by the things I was annoyed by, and I hope, I demand, that Hitman 5 still has the same problems I've felt the series has had since the first game. I hope they don't sort those issues out, because the games are just fine as they are.

Maybe they can put even advertise it that way, as one of the bullet points on the back: ''features bafflingly and inexplicably dumb or super-human AI that will leave you confused and frustrated!''