|
dstrope15's HITMAN (XBONE)
|
| [September 25, 2018 12:32:05 AM]
|
I played a lot more Hitman today, experimenting with various ways to complete the first episode. The game does a fantastic job of providing the player with a plethora of options for completing each mission without feeling overly guided and still allowing for improvisation. It also does a phenomenal job of fostering replayability by unlocking more gadgets, spawn points, etc. the player can bring with them at the start of the level as the player completes more challenges. Even with opportunities turned off, which I would recommend, the game does a fantastic job making an observant player aware of the various possibilities while still leaving the player to figure out how to complete said possibility.
Playing the game for the purposes of this class made me aware of something that I had never thought of before when playing a Hitman game that I wish had been included here. Hitman games, this one being no exception as far as I’ve gotten, always seem to feel the need to make sure the player knows what a terrible human being their target is via a pregame briefing and events throughout the mission. I think it would be much more interesting, however, if the game presented you with a target who was neutral or benevolent, forcing the player into a moral dilemma while they’re forced to take out someone they don’t want to because it is part of a hitman’s job. I think this would be a lot more interesting from a story and gameplay perspective than having a bunch of targets you don’t even think twice about taking out.
At least with previous Hitman games, such as Hitman: Blood Money, there was a really dirty and uncomfortable atmosphere to that game. You saw some terrible things in that game that really motivated you to take out early targets. When you get to your first target, you tell him you are there to kill him, as per the request of your client, and he begs for mercy. It creates an interesting, temporary moral dilemma before you remember all the awful things this person has done and you have witnessed being done on their accord, and you complete the job. This new game feels clean by comparison. There are nefarious deeds you can overhear, but likely in part thanks to its setting in a public venue, you never witness anything too upsetting, removing some of that personal drive to complete the contract on the player’s end, even though they control an apathetic hitman that doesn’t care either way.
The closest this game gets to something like this is when a character panics and asks you to stop or mentions they have a family while you’re chocking them out. This does a good job creating a temporary moment of guilt, at least until players that chose to do so remember that they only knocked that person unconscious and they’ll wake up fine and all guilt goes away pretty quick. That said, the game’s emphasis on a nonlethal approach for non-targets is appreciated. Aside from making sense for a true master assassin to want to leave as little of a footprint as possible and only taking out targets, it also adds an appreciated gameplay benefit. Taking characters out nonlethally takes longer, and thus is more difficult, but such difficulty is rewarded with a higher score. It adds an interesting dilemma for players choosing whether they want to take a lethal or nonlethal route. It is also a pretty interesting example of a game about unethical characters and deeds still having a hard-coded morality system.
All things considered, I had a fantastic time with the new Hitman game and look forward to completing it in my free time. While it may be missing some of the grungy atmosphere from the series’ best offering, Hitman: Blood Money, it marks a triumphant return to the series sandbox level design that made the series’ best the best in a manner that may even trump all previous entries in the series. While the game still seems to be focusing primarily on gameplay over story, likely a response to the series’ last offering, Hitman: Absolution, which was the odd child of the series, I still have hope something will happen with the narrative given some interesting setup in the opening hours. At the very least, I’m sure combing through each level trying to complete all the various challenges will remain engaging throughout, even if it does miss out on the potential for some interesting moral dilemmas. I think I may still prefer Blood Money thus far for its atmosphere and character moments, but this is definitely a fantastic entry into the franchise with some truly exemplary gameplay
read comments (1)  -
add a comment 
|
| [September 23, 2018 07:57:32 PM]
|
I continued playing Hitman today, but rather than progressing the story like I had planned to, I actually wound up exploring the user generated content, which presented some interesting moral dilemmas. In yet another bid to add to Hitman’s replayability, the game includes the ability for players to create their own contracts and submit them for other people to try and complete and get the best score on. When creating a contract, the player gets to decide who the targets will be and can also force the player to complete said contract in a certain outfit and/or with a certain weapon.
The moral conflict comes into play once the player realizes they can not only tag known criminals for assassination, including those not originally part of the contract, but a number of seeming innocent civilians and workers. Whereas the campaign gives you a briefing before every mission explaining all of the terrible things the target(s) have done to warrant an assassination contract, not such justification is offered for player created contracts. You can be required to take out the bartender for no further reason than because another player told you to do so. In many ways, this actually feels like a more authentic portrayal of a hitman’s job. No fancy organization telling you to kill all these awful people who arguably deserve their fate. Just an anonymous person telling you to kill some person because they want you to. This in turn, however, raises the question of whether Hitman’s allowing player’s to select seemingly innocent people for assassination is morally justified because it is an accurate representation of a hitman’s job. Or is it perhaps justified in that it is all in the name of player choice and other players are not required to complete the contracts to complete the game?
I had a great time with my second day of Hitman. The game has really started to open up and embrace the sandbox roots of the franchise. In addition, the inclusion of the contracts mode is both a fun diversion and presents an interesting moral dilemma to examine for the purposes of this class. I remain interested to see if the story goes in an interesting direction in terms of its portrayal of a Hitman, or if it goes anywhere at all beyond supplying reasons to sneak about and perform assassinations in a variety of impressive levels with a tantalizing number of options for completion.
add a comment
|
| [September 21, 2018 11:51:46 PM]
|
I started Hitman today and complete the first two training missions. I found them to be overly guided, especially for a Hitman game, but it did a good job kind of showing off how the game works and some of the possibilities, and the missions open up a lot more to play like regular, albeit more condensed, Hitman levels upon a second playthrough. I thought it was interesting starting a Hitman game out without having the player actually killing, as both training missions are simulated scenarios and don’t actually involve any casualties. Not to say that there aren’t interesting ethical issues to examine within these opening hours.
The game makes a big deal within its brief cutscenes of Agent 47 being a completely emotionless, brutally efficient killing machine, to the point where he intimidates some of his potential employers. Does taking the uncomfortable emotions and moral dilemma out of violence and casting the player as a complete sociopath with no trouble killing make it more problematic and less morally responsible than a realistic portrayal of violence within the media? Does having violence for entertainments sake without also showing the harsh and upsetting realities of violence put it more in the wrong than similar games that show the darker side of violence? The game also gives you a plethora of ways in which you can take out your target. While this makes the game more engaging and entertaining to play overall and adds to the replayability, it also really gets the player involved in the process of the violence and how they want to go about. Where violence is no longer portrayed as something necessary for the greater good, like a military shooter, is it ethical for the game to get the player so involved in the process of murder.
Overall, I had a decent time with Hitman’s introduction, but as a fan of previous games, I am definitely looking forward to getting into the more meaty, open ended levels that makes Hitman what it is. I will also be interested to see if the story goes anywhere interesting, as it seems to be trying to set certain plot points up while still letting the gameplay be the focus.
This entry has been edited 1 time. It was last edited on Sep 25th, 2018 at 00:34:00.
add a comment
|
|
|
 |
dstrope15's HITMAN (XBONE)
|
|
Current Status: Playing
GameLog started on: Friday 21 September, 2018
|
|
