Hitman: Contracts Review

By Kristan Reed Published 15 April, 2004

Baldies do it better? We slapped the PS2 version on and found out...

Version tested: PlayStation 2

As noble an intention as 'open-ended gameplay' is, Hitman: Contracts is both blessed and cursed by its refusal to lead the gamer by the hand. As good as it sounds on paper to give the player the freedom to attempt their objectives as they see fit, it's a hefty risk to leave people with a joypad in hand and a headful of ideas. But while Contracts takes time to appreciate, somehow it gets away with it. As much as it can come across as trying to be all things to all people, and less than the sum of its parts, Io succeeds by always remembering that games are supposed to be fun. Contracts is never less than fun, no matter how many times you tell yourself that it's neither the most convincing stealth experience nor the most clued-up action game. It's an odd blend, but like Peanut Butter and Jam on toast, somehow it works.

In the third part of the popular series, 47 wakes up trapped in a dingy hotel room, and Io tells the story of the bald assassin's plight via a series of often surreal flashbacks to justify why it is you've been hired to kill a succession of henchmen. Split into 12 'contracts' and set across distinct and often gorgeous locales (including Hong Kong, France, England and Russia), the game follows the template laid down by Silent Assassin in that you're given a few basic mission goals and left to your own devices as to how to achieve them.

A maze of possibilities

1

After the initially bizarre escape mission, the game quickly settles into the comfortable and predictable groove of taking out specific unsavoury gang members while acquiring objects along the way. But while the basic goals may be simplistic, the varieties of ways you can achieve your missions are almost mind-boggling.

Part of the success of Contracts is in its level design, which nearly always demands repeat exploration before all of its secrets come to the fore. Some of the very hardest levels actually turn out to be incredibly simple if you're prepared to take the time and effort to check out the map, investigate the clues offered (in the form of exclamation marks on the map) and work out what they're used for. Unlike, say, Splinter Cell, there's often little requirement to do everything in a prescribed fashion, and if you screw up you can still succeed - albeit with a whole pile of lead following in hot pursuit. As noble a game design decision as this may be, it leaves you forced, as with the previous games, to engage in a hefty bout of trial and error before you finally take the time to observe the movements of guards, and stop giving yourself away by marching around wielding your firearms screaming 'shoot me'.

However, thanks to some fairly slack lemming-like AI, picking off a huge crowd of enemies is never as hard as you suspect it will be. Once you're rumbled, the only tactics seemingly open to these drones is to come streaming towards you, and with some incredibly forgiving hit-zone collision detection and a generous degree of health, the chances of surviving are a lot higher than almost any game we've ever played. Seriously. Throw in seven instant saves per level and most of the 12 levels (on default Normal skill level) can be conquered in between half an hour and 90 minutes, which means that most of you will have polished this off over a weekend.

Work it out

2

But unlike most games around these days, part of Contract's charm is the replayability of some - but not all - levels. For example, one of the Hong Kong levels tasks 47 with causing the death of a Triad leader and making it look like the death was caused by a rival gang. Arguably the hardest level of the bunch, there are actually a least two (maybe three, this reviewer couldn't pull one of them all off) ways to succeed, and every single one feels like a triumph once you manage it. Another level even offers you the choice of fighting your way out of an apartment building swarming with SWAT teams or legging it from roof to roof - and it's all the better for offering you the choice.

Often you actually feel like throwing caution to the wind and killing everyone just to prove that you can; other times the thrill of the sneak seems like the more compelling option. It's very much up to you. If we were to side with one style over the other, it's true that Contracts feels at its most cohesive when it's forcing the player to think rather than allowing the player to simply run around shooting everyone. It seems a shame in a way that often the most efficient way of completing a level is to manage your save games wisely and just charge through each mission blasting everyone and keeping your distance. The upshot is that this approach means that you can effectively ignore all the cunning, sabotage, stealth kills and disguises available to you - i.e. all the bits that the game does really well.

Having said that, the fact that Contracts doesn't punish the player too hard for alerting guards and playing the Rambo mass murderer is something of a relief for the simple reason that the game would otherwise risk becoming ridiculously frustrating. Part of the fun, for many, may well be to charge through the game sightseeing, then pick from favourite 'contracts' and attempt to win the extra weaponry rewards - offered by completing each contract 'cleanly', with no blood on your hands and no-one the wiser to your presence. Regardless of your gaming preference though, it's a pleasant relief to be able to tackle a level via your own route, with your own weapons and choice of disguise (or not). No one's forcing you to do it either way. At the very least Io deserves praise for even attempting to pull off such a feat.

Rough cut

3

But as we touched on earlier, this mix and match approach would be so much better than it is if Io had managed to hone either element. Armed combat at the default difficulty level requires little to no skill to master, while the stealth side of the game often feels too restrictive to be as useful as it could be. While not wishing to make unfair comparisons, Splinter Cell gets it right by allowing you to lurk in the shadows and use sound to your advantage, while MGS gives the player an instant reference of the subject's field of vision (at least for the most part). In Contracts, unless you're lucky enough to be right behind a player and able to creep quietly enough (they're prone to turning around at the most inconvenient moments), your chances of garrotting or injecting an enemy are limited. Also, luring guards away from the areas they are guarding is next to impossible, meaning that a disguise is often the only option available to you. Much of the time you're basically working around the design limitations imposed, when logic suggests that the solution should be easier than cutting off the gas, poisoning the drinks and dressing up as a chef.

A minor gripe comes around the halfway point when it's apparent that the team basically ran out of ideas and decided to repeat entire levels wholesale. The first time it happens it feels a bit of a jolt - finding out that another level is entirely reused feels a little cheap. Sure, the scenario is somewhat different, but the point remains that you're only effectively seeing 10 levels, and some of the latter missions fall into a formulaic trap that hints that the project ran out of steam under pressure to release the game on time.

Onto more aesthetic matters, the detail level throughout the game never fails to impress, with some of the most subtle effects and intricate design yet seen on a PS2. What it lacks in texture detail it more than makes up for with sound architecture, and the presence of some beautiful post filter effects, which Io has reportedly managed to bring in thanks a refined, four-times-faster game engine. If the early part of the game doesn't impress dramatically, by the time you're wandering around the steam-laden streets of Hong Kong you definitely will be. Subtle effects such as post colour correction are especially noticeable as you emerge from a darkened area into the light, although it's worth noting that our review build still had a few very minor incidents of slowdown in the more ambitious sections.

Silent running

4

In-keeping with the other titles in the series, the animation is somewhat stylised and open to criticism, particularly for the odd quirk that leaves 47 looking more like a wobbly-legged puppet than a cold-eyed killer. Io seems more than capable of ramming the game chock full of excellent death animations and well defined characters with bags of charm, but making them run convincingly seems to be a task too far once again. If you happen to change direction repeatedly, 47 slides haplessly, and the overall feel is that you're gliding along rather than actually running. But if it feels all a bit odd to begin with, the reality is you don't really care for too long and the more you play the game, the more you appreciate the ability to instantly flick between first and third-person viewpoints. For the most part, the game works exceptionally well in either mode, although it's fair to say that the sniper rifle and night vision goggles could have been better implemented, as they tend to act as more of a hindrance than a help.

Audio-wise, Contracts follows the series tradition of employing the considerable talents of Jespar Kyd, who has yet again conjured an exceptional soundtrack that for the most part is an unobtrusive backdrop to the already dark and moody ambience on show elsewhere. Especially impressive is the way that room-based music pans in and out of the speakers depending on where you're positioned. Meanwhile the voiceovers are generally of a high class in the impressively stylish cut-scenes, but tend to stray into parody territory in almost every worldwide setting (note the Clouseau-esque Frenchmen on the last level for starters).

All told, Contracts is a game that's almost always enjoyable thanks to the freedom it grants the player. Also, with its more forgiving default skill level it's less likely to induce those settee-smashing moments that other sneaky games seem to revel in. With this in mind though, the more seasoned hitmen out there would definitely feel less inclined to moan about dumb AI and unrealistic health levels by heading straight for the Expert level - although reducing the save count to two per level is bound to cause a few headaches.

Solid evolution

But with only a few relatively minor tweaks such as a few new weapons, moves and animations, its fair to say that Contracts is a solid evolution of the series rather than the dramatic improvement version two was over the original. If you're a gamer that embraces the open-ended trial-and-error gameplay, and don't mind that it's neither the best example of stealth nor action gameplay, then this will serve you well. But as entertaining as Contracts undoubtedly is, there's still plenty of room for improvement before Io nails this compelling pot pourri of gaming styles.

7 / 10

Read the Eurogamer.net scoring policy
Picture of Kristan.

About Kristan Reed

Kristan is a former editor of Eurogamer, dad, Stone Roses bore and Norwich City supporter who sometimes mutters optimistically about Team Silent getting back together.

Read more articles from Kristan by visiting the Kristan Reed archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (111) Latest comment 8 years ago

Comments for this article are now closed, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • Rankin #1 8 years ago

    Looks great. The last one was great too.

  • Nuttah #2 8 years ago

    meh.. and meh

  • templar-wizard #3 8 years ago

    Nice one K-man. a great review.

    where is your god now mikeD? ;)
    but seriously, i am sure this will turn out to be another winner for IO.
    any level in the game you feel will get it torn of the shelves again Kristan?

  • bungalooBunny #4 8 years ago

    Hmmm.. wasn't very convinced with Hitman 2. although I finished it. The first one was better but it seems they haven't evolved nor looked at the competetion.

    Am definitely going to wait for a price drop or platinum..

  • krudster #5 8 years ago

    No, there's literally nothing remotely controversial I can think of this time.
    Let's look at the scenarios...
    Mental hospital - maybe
    Romanian slaughterhouse - kinky fetish masks and dismembered humans - nice!
    Siberian sub - nuclear bomb, but unlikely to ruffle anyone
    English manor - hmm, suffocating women might interest the Daily Mail
    Port - Killing biker gangs - pah
    Hong Kong - tame tame, but sniper opportunities
    France - murdering SWAT teams sound controversial?
    You can electrocute a reporter for fun too, and shoot semi naked hookers, but it's all pretty standard stuff. It mentions impaling in the press materials, but I never came across that manoevre.

  • WoodenSpoon #6 8 years ago

    Are there any levels that stand out as much worse then the rest?

    Hitman 2 had Japan. That was shit.
    Edited by WoodenSpoon at 03/08/05 @ 00:25

  • krudster #7 8 years ago

    I wasn't too impressed with the Siberian level (third)...not least for the fact that it had a massive bug in it relating to the non appearance of a rad suit. The very first level seems a little odd and the game doesn't really teach you how to play it, which newcomers will find offputting. Things improve rapidly - liked level 2, and most of them after that.

  • caligari #8 8 years ago

    Good work Krudster...I just hope you didn't post this up after giving in to those whining *spit* about the 'late' Midway Classics review.

    As for the Hitman series, I was a fan of the sequel (agree about the crappy Japan levels though), so this goes onto the ‘maybe’ list, ready for the next chunk of mah Student Loan. OH, and I sucked when it came to using that ‘choke wire’. It just wasn’t as satisfying as the *fud fud* of a Silenced Pistol into the back of an unsuspecting skull.

    Okay, I was going to say something else about GUNS, but I’ve been distracted by a bad Jerry Springer re-run. COME ON. It was either THIS or Hollyoaks. Or is The Simpsons on now?

    Anyway…

  • krudster #9 8 years ago

    Go for the simpsons...

    Heh, no this was going up regardless of the midway whinges, but the logic was to finish the last couple of levels this morning before writing it. I could have written a review based on up to level 10, but wanted to see how it panned out before i let rip. Judging by gamerankings, there isn't one up anywhere else.

  • MikeD #10 8 years ago

    Don't be a tard Templar. I don't complain about your pet peeves, do I now?

    And no, the review doesn't suggest to me that this is a direction I like these games going. It sounds like a half sneak half action game, with some illogical design decisions.

    The first game for me was a great game were you actually played a hitman. You were in an area, you could walk around, scope it out and decide which way you could best start. Hitman 2 (and apparently 3) are much more lineair, scripted and much less have that feel of reality. The enemy bosses are campy cartoon creations.

    Also the graphics are held back immensely by the fact that Eidos wants IO to develop for ps2, whereas the forst game was foremost a pc game.

    I'm sure it'll be a success, but the charm of the original hitman seems forever lost.

  • Clive_Dunn #11 8 years ago

    MikeD doesn't like the direction the game is going.

    /world ends.

  • MikeD #12 8 years ago

    Fuck off clive.

    Of course the world doesn't end. I never stated that my opinion was fact. It is just my opinion.

    You enjoy the game, fine! Great even. That doesn't mean I'm not allowed to dislike it, right?

    Edited by MikeD at 15/04/04 @ 20:53

  • Clive_Dunn #13 8 years ago

    Well it was just my opinion as well.....

    However the facts would suggest Hitman 1 sold fuck all, whereas Hitman 2 sold millions.

    So I'm guessing that perhaps the majority of people think its a console game ?

  • krudster #14 8 years ago

    That is true. Rightly or wrongly, the PC original sold so badly I'm amazed it ever made it to a sequel.

  • MikeD #15 8 years ago

    Didn't see you state any opinion Clive.


    Hitman 2 was marketed better, is one reason. It was available on more platforms is another reason. I never said it was a pc game, I said the development of the original was for PC and the second and third for ps2, holding back the graphics. I would rather have Farcry-like graphics in the game.

    But that is something I can live with, the other opinions I stated are why i think the game is just less fun.

  • templar-wizard #16 8 years ago

    MikeD, the smiley implied humour you rapist.
    you seriously need to wind down.

    and leave Clive alone, he wasnt being mean.


    edit: be-ing
    edit2: learn to fucking type
    Edited by templar-wizard at 15/04/04 @ 21:06

  • MikeD #17 8 years ago

    I'm sorry templar. I get attacked too often on the frontpage to assume a remark as: 'where is your god' is meant as amusement for me or as stabbing fun at me.
    To be honest it still sounds like the latter, because I hadn't actually replied yet, nor had I been exactly prevalent in any Hitman 3 discussions yet.

    Remember this, I do not hate Eidos themselves. I'm sure there work many fine people, and I love the legavy of kain series (for example). I just think that at the moment they are fucking up most of their i.p. A bit like fallout 3 being cancelled, and interplay making those action fallout games. I can't appreciate that either.

    Maybe I do need to wind down, but a bit of respect for my opinion would also be appreciated. I never pretend that it's more than opinion.

  • krudster #18 8 years ago

    I think Contracts is precisely what you want it to be. Io hasn't really made one thing or the other, but if all you want to do is sneak, then that's catered for. All out action? That too. Bit of both? Same again. It's just neither element works perhaps as well as you might expect.

  • templar-wizard #19 8 years ago

    i do not deny you your opinion. far from it. and the reason as to why i put your name in my comment was that we had already discussed H3 in the forum and i guessed you would be in the comments section with your opinion.

    its called 'a gentle ribbing'.
    the smiley and 'but seriously' should have guided you...

    btw> what are my pet peeves
    :/

    ;)

  • Clive_Dunn #20 8 years ago

    I don't seem to remember Hitman 2 being marketed any more than Hitman 1.

    I would contend that if Hitman 1 had come out on console it wouldn't have sold a unit, personally I found the thing bloody unplayable unless you had the patience of a saint. It had something though, never quite sure what it was - I suppose being a hitman is cool and that carried the game to a certain extent.

    With regard to your PC is better argument, fair enough PC graphics are better - I'm a graphics whore as well. However simple logic would suggest that if Hitman 1 was, in your opinion, good and sold nothing then a PC only version of Hitman 2 would, even if good, still have sold nothing.
    Edited by Clive_Dunn at 16/04/04 @ 09:37

  • krudster #21 8 years ago

    hitman 2 only sold when it went to budget...go figure

  • Pirotic #22 8 years ago

    I got hitman 2 for free with my xbox, its pretty decent in short dosages - not as terrible as most people make out, the ragdoll physics and clothes stealing had many comical results :D

  • MikeD #23 8 years ago

    Dunno what your pet peeves are templar :-)

    Sorry for the overreaction guys, just that last time I said something negative about, i think, Thief 3, I truly got laid into.

    Nah, krudster, I don't want sneaking. Well, not sneaking in a splinter cell way. Hitman 1 you had to be silent and inconspicuous, sure. but it wasn't about sneaking. It was about doing the job the best way possible. I loved that you could walk around, completely scope a map out and see what the possibilities are. You also had no real radar or such unrealistic things. No saves, it was ice and hard.

    Hitman 2 you got dumped somewhere, heard from 'Diana' How to proceed, and only had very limited options. And normal difficulty was just too fecking easy. I playued that at the hardest difficulty from the beginning just to get that hitman 1 feel a bit.

    Though is a demo of this coming? Because IO is still talented and hitman 2 did have some brilliant maps. Just also a bunch of pap ones.
    Edited by MikeD at 15/04/04 @ 22:29

  • JC #24 8 years ago

    What?

  • Abscido #25 8 years ago

    You're strange, Comme.


    Nice review Kristan - sounds exactly like my thoughts on the second game. It's a pity they don't have proper briefings before each level, showing guard patrols and stuff; that might ease the 'trial and error' frustration.

  • bungalooBunny #26 8 years ago

    It's a bit hard to BLEND IN when even if you change clothes guards always spot you. Also how come you don't get to wear a wig? That bald head is far too suspicious.. :)

    And you DO SNEAK, say when you want to kill someone with the fibre-wire, although due the shitty AI/design that's quite hard to do since most guards seem to be radar-enabled.

    The review is right: It's still a stealth game and compared to more recent games (MGS2,SC) the gameplay is just not as well executed. In Hitman 2 I ended up slaughtering most guards cos the 'blending in' wasn't really rewarding in most cases.

  • urizen #27 8 years ago

    can someone - i.e Krudster - fill us in a little more on the end of level ratings set up. Is it basically the same as Hitman 2? Am I likely to get anally obsessed and infuriated by only killing the target / being spotted once etc if I want Silent Assassin?

    Personally, I found the gung-ho approach in Hitman 2 pretty weak for reasons that you mention are back in the new one - shockingly generous collison detection, thick as pig-shit AI. Here was me thinking they might improve that.

    Yes, the Japan levels were crap.

  • krudster #28 8 years ago

    Oh yes, end of level stuff: tons of stats for the anally retentive (head shots, bullets fired, time taken, blah), and lots of ratings to aim for. Silent Assassin earns you rewards, whereas Mass Murderer doesn't.

  • Dizzy #29 8 years ago

    Good review...

    7? I expected more from this. I guess I will have to wait for some more reviews or a demo before I dive in. Looks like they missed the chance to include some cool new multiplayer hitman mode on Live like SC did. Now that would have been cool.

    I guess I will have to get TOCA2 instead :)

  • norris #30 8 years ago

    p

  • renzo #31 8 years ago

    Somehow I don't see how a 'multiplayer hitman mode' would work. You don't want this turning into a Banderas/Stallone 'Assassins' farce now do you? ;)

  • Clive_Dunn #32 8 years ago

    Think that SC:pT has shown you don't necessarily need to have 16 players to make a good multiplayer game.

    How about 4 "bodyguards" vs 1 Hitman ? As bodyguards you need to protect VIP, hitman needs to kill him etc etc.

  • Dizzy #33 8 years ago

    >Somehow I don't see how a 'multiplayer hitman mode' would work

    That's the whole point. They need to come up with an original online mode, just like SC:pT did. It is not our job to think of stuff ;) Let the IO guys do it! Like I said, they missed an opportunity here. I am sure it would have sold like crazy if they had this right now (well it still might sell like crazy of course).

  • renzo #34 8 years ago

    "How about 4 "bodyguards" vs 1 Hitman ? As bodyguards you need to protect VIP, hitman needs to kill him etc etc."

    Hmm... nice idea. Obviously, a hitman vs. hitman multiplayer mode wouldn't really work too well, so they'd have to get creative. And they'd have to allow you to choose someone other than a sinister looking bald man.

    "It is not our job to think of stuff"

    True... but it's fun. :)

  • MikeD #35 8 years ago

    Actually on this point I think Eidos is doing well. It seems every Xbox gamer is now screaming for multiplayer in each game.
    These games are single player. That it worked for splinter cell doesn't mean each game can work in multiplayer, but it especiall doesn't mean each gae should have multiplayer. Otherwise console gaming will get into that awkward and bad position where, if you don't add multiplayer, people won't buy the game. As you see in the pc world (though there people buy the multiplayer games because piracy does not work on them).

    Besides, if they had to add multiplayer the game probably would have been even more rushed (as is pointed out in above review).

  • WoodenSpoon #36 8 years ago

    If the Hitman was to actually look like a Bodyguard when he dressed up, then it should work. Maybe very easy for the Bodyguards though, depending on how good communication is, i.e.

    "Are you in the room with me?"

    "No"

    *Bang*

    "Got him" etc...

    Might get this when I have more money.

  • CyberClaw #37 8 years ago

    Can someone tell me if the Sniper Suitbag is back? In Hitman 1 you could put your sniper inside a non-suspicious suitbag. But in Hitman 2 you were forced to carry the sniper in your arms.
    How is it in Hitman 3?

  • Thamuhacha #38 8 years ago

    hitman 2 only sold when it went to budget...go figure

    Only true in the UK. Shifted shedloads in the US and elsewhere.

    And it made it to a sequel because the concept of being a hitman is too cool to give up on. If we saw the "obviously talented developer who will get it right with more time and money" approach rather than the "they ballsed up, let's close them down" approach, I would be happier.

    Mike D - this is really starting to look a bit anti-Eidos ... no matter what you say.

  • krudster #39 8 years ago

    There's a suitcase for the sniper rifle.

  • WoodenSpoon #40 8 years ago

    Yay!

  • Taximan #41 8 years ago

    Did any of Freedom Fighter's relatively smart AI make it? Or is the straight out combat even a bit similar?

    The final Japanese Castle interior mission in Hitman 2 was quite fun in my opinion. Pity about the buggy tunnel mission... Loved the St. Petersburg missions and the Petronas Towers missions though.

  • marilena #42 8 years ago

    I have to say, I'm also one of the people that thought the first game was better. The second one was the result of some compromises and a more mainstream approach, while the first was quite original. To this day I think that was the best third person perspective camera ever created. And it offered a more real sort of freedom, while the second only offered choices.

  • WoodenSpoon #43 8 years ago

    I think my fave mission on the second one was the one in the hospital on the Island, where you had to kill the woman.

    I liked one of the first missions in the original, the one out of the Godfather where you come out of the bathroom and blow the people in the seats away.

  • MikeD #44 8 years ago

    No it doesn't thamahucha.

    And even if, so fucking what?

    Loads of people hate EA, nobody complains about that.

    Plus, you'lls ee my last point in this comments section I praised Eidos for not adding multiplayer to games rather unsuited for it just to get more sales. That it appears rushed i took straigh out of the above review.

  • MikeD #45 8 years ago

    Wait a minute? wat just a fecking minute?

    Are you Nick robinson of Eidos (o.k and other developer/publisher) fame?

    Ha, you can't be serious. That's the second time someone from Eidos comes here and says I am anti-Eidos instead of replying to my arguments for liking or disliking a game normally.

    Edit: you dont see me slamming Championship manager, or the legacy of Kain or Commandos, Nick. I just hate Eidos ruining (not hate eidos, 'hate eidos ruining' see?) deus ex, Hitman, and quite possibly Thief (for me, like I said before it's all opinion). That those seem to be in the news more isn't exactly my fault.
    Edited by MikeD at 16/04/04 @ 13:44

  • urizen #46 8 years ago

    Don't want to get too tangential, but someone mentioned Freedom Fighters.

    Is it true that it sold badly? Why's that, then? Wasn't it pretty damn good, and mainstream(-ish)?

  • marilena #47 8 years ago

    It wasn't that good (Freedom Fighters, I mean). And it was damn short too.

  • MikeD #48 8 years ago

    I liked freedom fighters.

    It was pretty cheap on the cube too.

  • urizen #49 8 years ago

    Lordy, rumbled!

    Show your true face, Nick Robinson, you dastardly cur.

    Good work, MikeD.

  • marilena #50 8 years ago

    I just thought the AI was hugely overrated. And the lack of precision from the firearms was very annoying, especially that nothing else in the game was realistic (not even the damage, wich made some battles absolutely ridiculous).

    It wasn't bad, mind you. The atmosphere was great, it really loked like a huge town had been transformed into an warzone. But, to be honest, I wasn't very fond of the story either. Americans saving the world and all that...

  • Clive_Dunn #51 8 years ago

    Nick Robinson ? Famous ? My arse.

  • MikeD #52 8 years ago

    Never said he was, clive. I said 'of Eidos fame'. As in: he works/worked for them. Or works for a company that got published by them

  • Thamuhacha #53 8 years ago

    >Are you Nick robinson of Eidos (o.k and other developer/publisher) fame?

    Yep. Never claimed not to be.

    I stopped working at Eidos quite a few months ago now though.

    And have always taken great care to be as careful as possible when commenting on any games connected to companies I have / do work for.
    Our discussions on Thief and Deus Ex have been pretty good fun, and I would never go on a site like this in order to try and generate support for a company.

    >Show your true face, Nick Robinson, you dastardly cur.

    Ok. See above.

    >Nick Robinson ? Famous ? My arse.

    Probably not. Although it might actually be a new dawn for English cricket this time around.

  • Clive_Dunn #54 8 years ago

    Yep, although one suspects the new dawn will be curtailed when any of the Aussies, Indians, or Pakistani's get hold of us.

    Great to see Freddie finally coming of age though.

  • MikeD #55 8 years ago

    No, I didn't want to accuse you of supprt sales mongering, don't worry ;-)

    It's just that I am not as anti-Eidos as it may appear. I just don't like the way they are taking these (thief, deus ex, hitman) 'pc' games and turned them into other games. A mix of marilena's and Rainer's comments above basically summarise my opinions about the game.

    Where do you work now, if I may ask?



    Btw, Rainer, some good points. Not sure if I would blame it on the console, but rather just the direction the developers have taken the game.

    edit:

    /realises that is exactly what Rainer is saying

    /hangs self
    Edited by MikeD at 16/04/04 @ 14:25

  • Thamuhacha #56 8 years ago

    /cuts MikeD down

    Doing some freelance web design stuff (nothing complex) and actually playing some games for a change :-)

    >No, I didn't want to accuse you of supprt sales mongering, don't worry ;-)

    Don't get carried away! I only said i wouldn't do it on EG :-)

    Clive - Freddie is getting better and better, although I am still worried about our batting (bar the increasingly likely to retire Butcher and Thorpe). Nice to Vaughny get some runs but on that pitch I could have got into ... oooh, double figures.

    Edit:

    Also agree strongly with Rainier. But that is with my gamer hat on. My publisher/developer hat says flog as many as you can. And I still maintain that the changes made to some, previously PC only, brands are entirely justified. Obviously we will all disagree to a certain extent, but the figures show that the majority of PC only games don't make money. And that 15 year olds in wisconsin with PS2s and Xboxes are a profitable route. Dammit.
    Edited by Thamuhacha at 16/04/04 @ 14:36

  • MikeD #57 8 years ago

    But if they had released Hitman 2 for consoles, but have it more in the vein of hitman 1, wouldn't it have sold as well?

    I am not a platform egotist, especially not in the case of hitman, a game that can work very well on console (though I prefer playing on pc). it's just the whole 'consoles need simpler, more standard' games that bugs me. Has a publisher actually tried keeping the concept 'adult' and selling it on consoles?

  • marilena #58 8 years ago

    Lots of god points, Rainer. I had almost forgotten the redemption thing. Why they had to turn him into a good guy is beyond me.

  • Thamuhacha #59 8 years ago

    >Has a publisher actually tried keeping the concept 'adult' and selling it on consoles?

    Does 6 million + copies of GTA count?

  • Clive_Dunn #60 8 years ago

    One of the few things I've learnt over the past few years is that I'm not always the target audience for things that are made, whether it be computer games, music, films, television etc.

    That doesn't stop me having an opinion on them ( Blazin' Squad, wtf ?? ) but it tempers my propensity to spout off at how crap / brilliant "WWF Scalded Ringpiece 4" is / was / might be. And that's where I am with Hitman, personally I thought version 1 was cool. Flawed but majestic, I wanted it to be brilliant but in the end it just didn't quite work for me.

    I played the sequel for ohhh ,about an hour, before realising it was a very different game and one that I personally didn't like. However millions of people did like it, which was approximately millions-10 more people than liked or bought the first one. I'm not egotistical enough to think my opinion outweighs the millions of people who did like it. Unless any of those millions think Medal of Honour is a good FPS, in which case they are discounted.

    I still stand by my earlier comment, in my opinion if Hitman 1 had been ported to console it would have been a disaster. If Hitman 2 was a PC only, niche market hardcore assassination-simulator ( as-sim ? ) it would never have been made as no-one bought the first one.

    And where exactly did you want the franchise to go ?

  • MikeD #61 8 years ago

    Nope :-)

    See, that is a whole different thing. Even though there are adult things in there it's not in the same way as Rainer meant it.

    GTA is really lightweight really, compared to Hitman 1. And Manhunt may not be lightweight, it isn't a very good game either (imo).

    Also, if that were true other publishers would follow suit, right?

  • ssuellid #62 8 years ago

    I think the 'adult' games have been cleaned up for the mainstream market - not to suit a platform.

  • MikeD #63 8 years ago

    But it's the audience that plays console games, which is why they are intertwined ssuelid

    disclaimer: By no means do I suggest that all console gamers are the same, this site and forum laone are proof enough that there are plenty of intelligent console gamers that want deeo games and aren't afraid of adult themes, or smaller games.

    /dons flame retardent suit despite disclaimer :-)

  • ssuellid #64 8 years ago

    MikeD, that does not explain it. Even the the PC only games have been generally dumbed down - they are aiming for a wider market.

  • MikeD #65 8 years ago

    What pc-only games are you referring to?

  • ssuellid #66 8 years ago

    I've borrowed your sweeping generalisation brush.

  • renzo #67 8 years ago

    /grabs sweeping generalisation brush

    With the PC market being dominated by FPSs, I'd say the market has been dumbed-down for a long time now.

  • marilena #68 8 years ago

    Deus Ex sold less than Red Faction? I'm speechless (almost).

    I'd just like to point out that, while it does have mature content, GTA 3 had a great success with teens/kids. I don't want to cheapen it, but it's exactly the kind of thing that appeals to this category. And the rating certainly didn't stop the game from reaching them.

  • Clive_Dunn #69 8 years ago

    Rainer - Really good post, asking a lot of searching questions. I'm afraid I haven't got time at the moment to compose a reply that does you justice, it'll have to wait until I get home.

    Just a quick note for the people that seem to think GTA3 was a "mature" game. GTA3 was completely a kids game, it used its adult themes ( prostitutes / running people over etc ) specifically to appeal to this teen market. In fact they did this with GTA1 as well with similar results.

    But if you look at the gameplay ( and at the end of the day its all about gameplay ), the GTA series is a quick fix action driver / shooter. Pick up that game and you can have fun within 1 minute of starting your first game. Compare that with Hitman 1, or any other reasonably complex game that takes time to get in to, ( ie one you have to read the manual or spend an hour working out the basics of the game ), and you have the starting point to understand the differences between the average PS2 owner and the average hardcore PC gamer.

    I like to think about my gaming, I like spending hours working out exactly the best way to attack a problem in a game. I get more reward when a beautiful plan comes together than I do from a reaction time kill in an FPS.

    But I'm in the minority, and I know that. And Rainer is correct, the people on this site are in the minority.

    Sorry, got carried away with that post. Was meant to be a quick "but GTA3 isn't an adult console game, its the most simple game out there" statement.

    All in my opinion of course.

  • MikeD #70 8 years ago

    I think we all can all agree on that clive :-)


    But, minorities aren't a bad thing. To elaborate on Rainer's hollywood comparison: the big companies/names there also make more hardcore films. Ben stiller and Adam Sandler make quirky movies like Zoolander and Punch Drunk love, besides their big box office hits. Many many more examples can be thought of in that way.

    Why are the big publishers (besides Ubisoft and perhaps Actvision) not marketing to different audiences. The industry is big enought to do that now. Sales records at www.justadventure.com prove that even a smalltime genre as adventures games makes money. Most games released in that niche end up with a profit. Same counts for hardcore rpg's.

    Why didn't Eidos make 2 different games of their series. A PC Deus Ex and a console one, like EA do with medal of honour. O.k. so medal of honour is a bigger name, but I'm sure they could have made a profit for both.

    At the moment we have people making great games, and thus creating great Intellectual property. But all publisher's seem to do with it is suck it dry with halfhearted sequels. EA seems to mostly rely on hollywood now to get their I.P.'s.

    I'd say a big change is needed in the way games are created, marketed and sold.

    edit: woo, need to do some proofreading :-)
    Edited by MikeD at 16/04/04 @ 16:51

  • ssuellid #71 8 years ago

    "Why didn't Eidos make 2 different games of their series. A PC Deus Ex and a console one, like EA do with medal of honour. O.k. so medal of honour is a bigger name, but I'm sure they could have made a profit for both. "

    Its got fuck all to do with dumbing down for consoles - its dumbing down for what the market wants to buy. The same has been happening on the console market - the original Tenchu on the PS1 was watered down in its sequels.


    Games are in general becoming more and more dumbed down. They want to target a large a market as possible and not very many developers are interested in niche markets.
    Edited by ssuellid at 16/04/04 @ 17:05

  • MikeD #72 8 years ago

    Like I said: that's just not true.

    The 2 are definitely intertwined since most developers think that you need to have a simpler game with more action fro consoles. You can't deny that completely.

    of course dumbing down of big games has happened over the entire spectrum of platforms. But it is a mindset of publishers.

  • ssuellid #73 8 years ago

    I totally disagree.

    Do you play any console games? Own a console?

    In fact the Consoles probably have a greater mature niche market support from japanese developers than the whole PC industry. You have shootemups, advanced beatemups, etc.

    Apart from identikit FPSs what has the PC industry given the hardcore mature market recently?

  • Thamuhacha #74 8 years ago

    >Apart from identikit FPSs what has the PC industry given the hardcore mature market recently?

    Well you could argue that titles like Neverwinter Nights and the MMORPG games are more appealing to mature audiences.

    However, I take your point - the concept that there is an "US" (playing things like the first Deus Ex on PC) and a "THEM" (playing Fifa 20xx on whatever console they got for Chrimbo) just isn't true. It's more complex, and publishers spend their lives trying to work out how to reach as many people as possible.

  • Clive_Dunn #75 8 years ago

    Personally I don't think games are being dumbed down.

    I do think its becoming more polarized though - today there are more complicated, deeper, more satisfying games than there were 15 years ago. But whereas the gamers of 15 years ago were a ( at least relatively ) homogenous group ( white, male, aged 14-25 ) today the industry is catering for a much more diverse target audience, and this means that the average gamer isn't as good as the gamer was 15 years ago. I'm not saying that reaction times or intelligence have declined or anything like that, remember its the average gamer.

    The role of a publisher / developer is to try and make the product appeal to its target audience as much as possible. 15 years ago you could get away with making a game hard because you knew that the relatively small niche you were aiming at was up to the challenge. You don't know that anymore, pitch the game for the top 10% of the game playing population and you risk pissing off the other 90%.

    MikeD - your point about adventure games is valid, but it all boils down to development costs. A lot of niche games do make a small profit, but only because of low costs, short turnaround times. If you only need to spend $0.5 million to develop the game, with expectations of selling 100k units then fine. But if you spend $5 million ( and that's a low figure for development costs these days ) and only sell 100k then its a disaster. Logic would suggest that if you are spending $5million in development that you need to sell to more people than your 100k niche = bring product out of niche = make it easier / more accessible. Which you'd say was dumbing down.

    Tough isn't it.

  • Thamuhacha #76 8 years ago

    You can say that again Mr Dunn.

  • MikeD #77 8 years ago

    Yeah but you guys take what i say and move it to the extreme.

    I mean things like Hitman 2 and 3 (obviously), Deus ex:iw

    Do you guys honestly think that if it had been on pc that they would have made the menu and ammo system like this (for example).

  • MikeD #78 8 years ago

    Clive, that's all fine and dandy. But I just gave adventure games as an example that even that smalles of niches can be profitable. Don't tell me the Deus ex, system shock niche is as small as that.



    edit: also I have never mentioned dumbing down yet. That's what other people come up with. I say they take games and completely change them in a direction/genre sometimes even.


    O.k. so i did say dumbing down just a few messages above. I'm sure that was just in reply :-).

    ....and yes it was in reply. phew.
    Edited by MikeD at 16/04/04 @ 18:03

  • Clive_Dunn #79 8 years ago

    And Nick, drop me an email if you fancy watching some cricket this year. Take a Friday off or something.

  • MikeD #80 8 years ago

    Btw, ssuelid. Saying all FPS games are identikit is the same as saying all Japanese rpg's are identikit.

    Sure the gameplay is in basis the same, but that's not saying much, is it now.

  • Clive_Dunn #81 8 years ago

    Mike - if you want to know how small the Deus / SS2 niche is just look at what happened to Looking Glass. You can't develop high quality, high budget, niche product anymore.

    Well you could, but its very, very risky.

  • Thamuhacha #82 8 years ago

    >And Nick, drop me an email if you fancy watching some cricket this year. Take a Friday off or something.

    I have every Friday free right now if I want. So it's a deal.

    Say Hi to Soph for me.

  • MikeD #83 8 years ago

    The niche can't be that small, otherwise Eidos wouldn't be using the good names games like Deus Ex and thief resulted in, right?

    If the first Deus Ex would have had the same marketing as the second got, and support of a console from the beginning I dare say it would have sold as well as the second.

    Or look at a game like anachronox. because of Daikatana's failure they didn't dare spend marketing money on it. Even I only got it when I saw it somewhere at budget price. Now I've already bought 3 copies, giving them to friends who all love it.

    (well, o.k. besides Rainer, but I think he is not a RPG person).
    Edited by MikeD at 16/04/04 @ 22:06

  • Clive_Dunn #84 8 years ago

    In answer to Rainers post:

    1) I think there are two different issues here regarding sequels. First off Hitman 2 wasn't really a sequel to Hitman 1 in anything but name and central character. It was a vast lurch in a totally different direction gameplay wise. Did the game need to do that in order to be successful on the PS2 ? Yes I think it did. The average PS2 gamer ( imo ) needs instant action, more structured gameplay, instant rewards. Hitman 1 by its very definition couldn't offer that, it was a different type of game.

    With regard to your point on game sequels being diluted Hollywood style - yes of course this is a massive risk. Probably even more so as Hollywood rarely demands a film every Xmas year after year. Frankly with the exception of sports games sequels must be incredibly hard to do and still keep fresh - I can't really think of any that have managed to do it. Possibly the Final Fantasy series, but that does it by setting most games in a totally new world with a new storyline everytime.

    2) I think the cinema comparison is good, Hitman 1 was niche, as was Leon. Yes personally I'd rather be Luc Besson than Simon West. However it all boils down to cold hard cash. Frankly there is only one publisher than can afford to take huge risks and that, rather obviously, is EA. When you are sitting on $1/2 billion profits every year then it doesn't really matter if you invest $10million in a failed project. However a quick look at the other publishers, for example Ubisoft posted a loss in FY2003, Eidos posted a $15million profit, Activision $66 million profit. And they are some of the major players, from memory the likes of Midway and Acclaim where in a horrible financial position last year and I've got no idea how Atari / Infogrames are still going.

    With those figures in mind, ask the CEO of any major publisher if he'd rather emply an obscure but highly regarded director of a niche film to direct his next project, or someone that has brought in a number of Hollywood blockbusters. I think the analogy breaks down there somewhere but you get the point.

    Ultimately EA has the only long term stable portfolio of products. Every other publisher scrambles around inventing new IP, marketing it and hoping. 90% of it will fail. EA can bring out Madden 200x, Fifa 200x, NBA 200x etc etc, at the same point every year and be virtually guaranteed the same income as the previous year +5%. With those base revenues they can take a risk on a new franchise ( for example BF1942 ), spend $10 million on the development, $2 million on marketing. If it works great, if it fails move on. SCI can't afford to do that, neither can virtually every other publisher.

    So from where I'm sitting Eidos' decision to "dumb down" Hitman 2, turning it from a niche PC product into a mass market console game looks like a pretty good business decision. Sure it might upset a few gamers ( it upset me tbh ) but if it can keep the company going then can we say its wrong ? Of course we could say if Hitman 2 had failed then it would have been wrong, but then we are into DE:IW territory :)

    3) Publishers do need to think laterally, all too often they follow formulaic patterns of decision making that show little inspiration. But its not easy. To use your example, Eidos buy the rights to Hannibal Lecter and use him in a Hitman style game. I'd guess this game would be about planning to kill people in a fairly bloodthirsty manner ? Well we are now at the very least banned in the US and Germany, and its highly unlikely either Sony or Microsoft give us concept approval at all. Bugger.

    But I accept your point totally, more creativity is required. But I'm glad its not my job to provide it as its bloody difficult.

    Gaming more than anything is a tradeoff between vision and sales. Sometimes the games themselves are so visionary that the majority of people won't "get them" and they won't sell because of that. I can look at my games collection and see literally hundreds of games that I loved but few other people did ( for example just at the top of my pile now - Max Payne 2, H&D2, Combat Mission 2 ). If a publisher needs to release a mass volume title to be able to fund a poor selling work of art then so be it - I don't think its right for us to criticise them.

    Just my opinion of course.

  • MikeD #85 8 years ago

    Thecrip it's your fault entirely that good games are more and more rare. Warez for live. My god what a tard, if you can't figure that one out you are completely lost. (also warez does work on consoles, so to name that as an advantage of pc over console is pretty stupid).


    Clive, EA can take risks but they don't, on the contrary to movie companies. That's what bugs me, to be honest. That Eidos and other companies have to make money makes sense, even if I don't have to like it. But having the biggest company in the industry and not even trying (EA) is just plain rubbish.

    still I say Eidos could have had a team working on invisible war/hitman 3 and smaller teams working on pc sequels (a bit like activision do call of duty, or ubisoft now do farcry, or EA do MoH). Unfortunately the reason Eidos don't is made so clear by mr crip above me :-(
    Edited by MikeD at 19/04/04 @ 11:03

  • MikeD #86 8 years ago

    Menace a few years ago you would have been right.

    But ever since 2001 or so the ps2 has been at it's limit, especially in games that use an engine that has to work on all platforms.

  • Clive_Dunn #87 8 years ago

    MikeD - Of course EA take new product development risks, but because they have the established portfolio the risks are covered by the sequels / franchises.

    For example, BF1942. High risk product, PC only ( will move to console soon though ). Black and White 1/2 - again really a PC title, high development costs, long development period, high risk title. The Sims was another example, albeit one risk that paid off handsomely for them.

    Looking back a bit, EA lost millions on Majestic and even more on the whole EA.com mess. Some of the figures bandied around suggest that the amount EA lost on EA.com would have put any other publisher into receivership.

    Don't get me wrong, I don't love EA by any means. But they do introduce new IP, and often its very good new IP. Then of course they milk it to death shamelessly, but who wouldn't ?

  • MikeD #88 8 years ago

    hmm, yeah I suppose you're right.

    Hell, the Sims might even be seen as a risk project, it was a completely new thing when the first game was released. (though I think they denied Shafer the right to make it twice before they gave him the green light)

  • Thamuhacha #89 8 years ago

    >But ever since 2001 or so the ps2 has been at it's limit

    I think there's a wider point here. On the PS2, more often than not a developer will use a previous engine again, with only a small amount of improvements at best. This is because not that many people buying a mainstream PS2 game are bothered about new graphics if the "old" ones do the job. (Vice City and GTA3 spring to mind, as do Hitman Contracts and Hitman 2 ...)

    Some of the new things I have seen for PS2 (coming out later this year) really blew me away. Not in comparison to the Doom 3 / HL2's of this world of course, but there is some mileage in the PS2 yet ...

  • MikeD #90 8 years ago

    Heh, you could link me to some evidence of this fact menace :-). As someone said recently: You just pull stuff out of your arse and say it convincingly.


    Thama, maybe so, but I haven't seen anything impressive yet. Neither GT4 nor Final fantasy XII could impress me graphically (looking past the fmv, of course)

  • Thamuhacha #91 8 years ago

    >maybe so, but I haven't seen anything impressive yet.

    Whether you will be impressed depends on what you are looking for. The PS2 will probably never be able to throw things like Far Cry / S.T.A.L.K.E.R around.

    Driv3r and the new Transformers game look pretty hot in motion though.

  • MikeD #92 8 years ago

    I'll keep an eye out for them.

  • Clive_Dunn #93 8 years ago

    I think that the PS2 product being released now looks significantly better than the PS2 product available around launch. As with any hardware format, the longer the devs have to get used it, the better the standard of graphics.

    /remembers fondly some of the latter Spectrum stuff when compared to the earlier games. Driller / Ant attack anyone ?

    However I think its all relative when you are talking about consoles. At the release of a console format I believe that the quality of the graphics will be at its peak relative to what the PC ( as the format with the best gfx ) is churning out. 4 years into the current cycle and the PS2 is looking pretty tired when compared to the likes of Far Cry. Incidentally I don't think the Xbox does yet, probably another 6/12 months away.

    Having said that though, I think that the PS2 has stood up pretty well when compared to the PS1. If you look at the PS1, then 4 years into the cycle the PC was releasing Half Life. 4 years into PS2 and its Far Cry - probably not ( relatively speaking ) as far ahead as HL was at its time.

    Although how much that is due to the paucity of PC development is open to debate. Or one look at Thacrips post should give a few hints as to why groundbreaking development on the PC isn't really happening anymore.

    "Warez4life" - is that a recommendation to the judge on potential sentences for stealing other peoples work ?

  • urizen #94 8 years ago

    Spectrum? Pah.

    Commodore 64 all the way.

    This is probably the sort of thing that's brought up all the time- I'm an incipient forum geek - but, what with the Bard's tale in development (and it sounds a bit like Baldur's Gate with a dire sense of humour), has my all time fave RPG in space ELITE ever been updated, or considered for one?

  • Clive_Dunn #95 8 years ago

    New Elite = X2.

  • urizen #96 8 years ago

    Thanks.

    Checked it out and looks quite tasty.

    Though I bet it doesn't play the Blue Danube Waltz when you dock.

  • Thamuhacha #97 8 years ago

    >New Elite = X2

    Not according to the EG review :-)

    >"Driv3r and the new Transformers game look pretty hot in motion though"

    MikeD - I'll keep an eye out for them.

    Disclaimer: Games mentioned might not actually be any good when released. But are pretty.

  • Clive_Dunn #98 8 years ago

    True, but I think EG gave it 8/10 ?

    Which makes it as good as Halo, apparently.

    /believes everything he reads.

  • Thamuhacha #99 8 years ago

    They gave it 5. Which makes it better than Angel of Darkness. But only just.

  • Clive_Dunn #100 8 years ago

    Oops my mistake.

    AoD in "only just worse than X2" shocker. Sounds like a marketing tag line to me.

  • Thamuhacha #101 8 years ago

    >Sounds like a marketing tag line to me.

    Oooh. You bitch.

  • MikeD #102 8 years ago

    Have you ever tried crouching and moving fast without making a sound? trust me, it can't be done.

  • MikeD #103 8 years ago

    Fair enough.

  • urizen #104 8 years ago

    can't answer the crouching dilemma...but presumably if he still runs like he's ice-skating, then he's still got crouching issues.

    I have just tried crouching / moving fast without making a sound, by the way, MikeD.

    You are correct.

    Next experiment - to loop back - playing AoD and enjoying it.

  • peejay #105 8 years ago

    hope they make it for PC because ps2 version is crap

  • WoodenSpoon #106 8 years ago

    lol.

  • deadlock #107 8 years ago

    MikeD:

    edit: also I have never mentioned dumbing down yet. That's what other people come up with. I say they take games and completely change them in a direction/genre sometimes even.

    So what you are saying is that you'd much prefer if people didn't bother trying to refine their franchises and just remade them over and over again? There's every possibility that IO could have taken Hitman in a direction that you would have liked and you wouldn't be involved in this conversation. It works both ways.

    Finally, I don't want to sound like an Eidos apologist, but I think it's very simplistic to blame them for 'destroying' Deus Ex et al. I mean, when DE:IW was released, pretty much every interview with Warren Spector had him mention that the universal ammo idea belonged to Ion Storm. He never gave the impression that it was something foisted upon them by Eidos.

    Also finally: saying that GTA wasn't an adult game because teenagers played it is stupid. By any definition, GTA3/VC dealt with adult themes and adult situations, but in a way that still made the games fun and didn't patronise the huge numbers of adult video game fans that bought it (who I would argue represented the majority).
    Edited by deadlock at 24/04/04 @ 13:35

  • AtomicBanana Verified Level Designer, Playground Games #108 8 years ago

    Gta 3 dealt with adult situations..... in the most childish way possible. It is no way an 'adult' game the way I see it.

  • MikeD #109 8 years ago

    @deadlock,

    it's funny that you address me, since at least half of the points you mention have been brought up by others. I never said GTA wasn't mature because it was played by teenagers. I said it wasn't a adult game, because even though there is some mature content in there it's all tongue in cheek, content, unlike the original hitman. Reread the posts carefully and you'lls ee that everyone agreed that GTA wasn't really on the same level as the original Hitman. As atomicbanana above me rightly states, as well.

    I never said I wanted people to make the same game over and over again, but they completely changed the whole concept to something more accessible that they now seem to be repeating over and over again. So they went from something very original and different to carbon copies of the same sneak-game.

    Secondly, I never said Eidos forced the ammo system on them, that was a bad choice by Harvey Smith, that Spector himself didn't much like. What Eidos did force upon them was the xbox, the timelimit and a set of certain demands of accessibility, which in the end made it just a enjoyable game whereas the first is a timeless (so far) classic.

    It's fun that you want to partake in the conversation, and I understand you didn't feel like studiously reading 80+ posts, but you'll find that most of your questions have been addressed and answered by me, Rainer and others.

    Let's now wait and see how well Hitman: Contracts does and speak again at hitman 4, already anounced for next year I might add (the carbon copy you seem so against).

  • WoodenSpoon #110 8 years ago

    The controls were much better suited to the PC then they were to consoles.

  • i am tom #111 8 years ago

    duh. that's because it's on the sold out label. they're 4.99 everywhere!