As a cover shooter it's not bad. But as a complex, open-ended puzzle game (ie, Hitman), it's a failure. Also, the Hitman does very little in the way of conducting hits and mostly spending his time being Max Payne -- but that's a side issue.
Hitman games were never THAT open-ended to be honest -- there were a few ways in each mission that were clearly meant to be "official" ways to get your target. Your target would move around in a scripted circuit that would place him someplace where he could be hit in private, and the puzzle was trying to figure out how to get 47 into position. Only a few of the missions from the various games I would call really stand-out examples of what Hitman should be.
Absolutions isn't inconsistent as is the case with the previous Hitman games -- it's consistently a cover shooter with stealth mechanics, like MGS. Some missions are more pure in the cover shooter aspect than others, but most of them are essentially just that. If Max Payne had a stealth mechanic, you might as well have called it Hitman if Absolution is a "real" Hitman game.
Cover shooter? I rarely ever got into shootouts so I am not following you on this one. You can stealth your way through nearly every situation in this game. Some levels have the classic formula with a target, while others require you to evade enemies while using classic stealth tactics.
The difference is players who are used to cover shooters can play it that way if they don't like using stealth or restarting checkpoints if they have their cover blown. Blood Money's problem was that its shooting mechanics were so poor that it deterred anyone from wanting to use them. Hitman's are actually pretty decent for a stealth focused game.
| Hitman: Absolution | Splinter Cell: Blacklist | GTA V |
And Absolution is the exact opposite: the shooting mechanics are excellent, but the stealth features are so sloppy and poorly implemented, not to mention linear and overpopulated with countless moments where you have to sit and wait on conversations, they deter the player from wanting to play the way the series is traditionally played.
Blood Money's problem was that its shooting mechanics were so poor that it deterred anyone from wanting to use them. Hitman's are actually pretty decent for a stealth focused game.
Just my opinion, but I didn't care about shooting mechanics in Blood Money. I cared about taking out a target silently or making it look like an accident, not go in guns blazing unless I didn't care and wanted to have fun killing everyone.
Moss_27 posted...Blood Money's problem was that its shooting mechanics were so poor that it deterred anyone from wanting to use them. Hitman's are actually pretty decent for a stealth focused game.
this. Had one mission that i got silent assassin, the rest i managed to blow my cover and went ape**** bullet happy.
The R in my tag is apparently invisible in COD to everyone.
...you serious? this game is not bad as a cover shooter? what? have you even played any other cover shooters?
if this game was a straight up shooter, i wouldn't even touch it. i hate going on rampages in this game because the shooting controls are so poorly done. you cant blind fire with any semblance of accuracy, and when you zoom in to aim, your scroll speed is really damn slow. the point shooting is very nice though, ill give it that.
and you think this game is a failure as a complex open ended problem? have you even played THIS game? while not EVERY stage in this game may be amazingly complex, there are quite a few that are extremely complicated and open ended. i would say chinatown as an example, both the first and second times you visit (dunno if you visit it anymore, i'm only on the hunter and hunted). the first time, where you have 2 targets (the king and the dealer), there are numerous ways to take em out, as you can tell from the challenges. for the second time (where you have 3 targets) there are just as many, if not MORE ways to take them out. with so many different ways to take em out, i have to put in at least 3-4 playthroughs to do it all, which i dont mind at all in this game.
i disagree. with the addition of absolution, i now own & have played through all the games thus far, & can safely say that this is still hitman, dare I say an evolution of it.
is it different then say codename 47? "absolutely."
it is far less rigid (both graphically & mechanically) & it leaves a lot of room for improvisation. certainly much more replay value then ever seen previously.
its still hitman because the core tenants are still there; dark humor, multiple ways of performing the hit, disguises & stealth, even the subterfuge from bloody money (the gold coin)
absolution encourages you to try different things, through challenges & other various unlocks. variety.
the "MP" is really SP, with MP leaderboard competition equivalents.
$ earned translates across both games modes & that's handy. doesn't cost us anything additional either, but people lose sight of that juicy tidbit. (no additional dlc or online passes required, etc.)
there are things I don't care for, but they are more plot & character related than anything.
if you mean the core "action" mechanics are along the lines of splinter cell conviction, I would agree in that they kind of are.
the gaming industry is now big business. companies have to compete with one another, & that usually means drawing new players to their titles, usually by similar game mechanics.
I don't like it, but its the way it is, & it's not absolution's fault.