After the rollicking start to the World of Assassination Trilogy, Hitman 2.... also exists!
That's not a fair statement at all really. Hitman 2 is an excellent successor to what Hitman 2016 started. The fun filled antics of the Hitman franchise continue with some great ideas. The sheer scope of ways you can fuck around with people, the mayhem you can cause, the murders you can create... its truly masterful. The gameplay and UI are even improved upon, with subtle changes used to make a smoother experience.
Still, it was hard not to get a sense of something being... off, this time around. The strength of Hitman 2016 is that, while the serious spy plot does exist, its cultivated in service to the maps the devs want you to run around in. And I do think that thesis still holds true... for the most part. To propel its story forward, the game occasionally gives you a secondary task beyond murdering a few people. Gather some intel, steal some evidence. That small gameplay change ends up drastically changing some of the freedom of the overall experience. Its particularly damning in the Whittleton Creek level, forcing you to scour the map for three pieces of information for some reason or another. Those secondary objectives existed in the first game too, but its so much more egregious in this version.
The plot itself also intrudes itself in ways harder to define. Part of what makes modern Hitman work so much is the joy of killing some terrible rich people. That joy is still there, but it starts to lean on the weird quasi-racist angles of targets present in the 00s games. Drug lords and pirates just feel... less justified, in a way. The evil billionaire secret society is the obvious villain they've set up for two games. Spending half the game cooperating with Providence and killing all the people supporting your obvious future ally feels sort of like I'm being given the runaround. It also makes Lucas Grey, a character who I'm supposed to be excited to partner with, kind of look like an asshole! He's incredibly willing to toss aside his loyal lieutenants just for the sake of being besties with 47 again. But because all the targets are still awful dipshits, it also makes him look scummy for teaming up with these kinds of people to begin with. Its really mixed messaging and it hurts the story they're trying to invest players in.
Finally, the levels themselves. I'm less confident in this argument but I've reached a conclusion: I think a lot of levels feel less personal than before. In the first game, it truly felt the maps reflected the people you wanted to kill. Dalia and Viktor's fashion runaway. Silvio Caruso hiding from the bright world outside in his dreary, crumbling manor. Zaydan and Strandburg attempting to use their power to control and manipulate a whole country, as the crowds demand to see them punished. They were hyper realized, informing you about the state of the world and how your targets make it worse.
Hitman 2 doesn't seem to have that kind of same character work in its level design. A master rival assassin lives in... a house! A race track and a tech expo are connected to each other and holding events at the same day, I guess. The drug cartel stuff. This is all fairly nitpicky details and its possible I'm looking for justifications for my frustration. I do think the second half of levels are far more coherent. The Mumbai level gets you a sense of how a local community is supported and/or harmed by the intents of the local crime heads. Whittleton Creek gives you a strong set-up of the quiet nightmare of American suburbia and how both normal people and Soviet defectors try to manage their daily lives. The Ark Society creates a secluded island where all the rich morons hoping to wait out the apocalypse gather. That design ethos still exists! It just didn't feel like that push-pull of character vs. world was quite functioning as it should.
All this rambling aside: its Hitman. I love Hitman. I can be vaguely frustrated, but I'm always gonna give it up for Hitman. Respect the name.
That's not a fair statement at all really. Hitman 2 is an excellent successor to what Hitman 2016 started. The fun filled antics of the Hitman franchise continue with some great ideas. The sheer scope of ways you can fuck around with people, the mayhem you can cause, the murders you can create... its truly masterful. The gameplay and UI are even improved upon, with subtle changes used to make a smoother experience.
Still, it was hard not to get a sense of something being... off, this time around. The strength of Hitman 2016 is that, while the serious spy plot does exist, its cultivated in service to the maps the devs want you to run around in. And I do think that thesis still holds true... for the most part. To propel its story forward, the game occasionally gives you a secondary task beyond murdering a few people. Gather some intel, steal some evidence. That small gameplay change ends up drastically changing some of the freedom of the overall experience. Its particularly damning in the Whittleton Creek level, forcing you to scour the map for three pieces of information for some reason or another. Those secondary objectives existed in the first game too, but its so much more egregious in this version.
The plot itself also intrudes itself in ways harder to define. Part of what makes modern Hitman work so much is the joy of killing some terrible rich people. That joy is still there, but it starts to lean on the weird quasi-racist angles of targets present in the 00s games. Drug lords and pirates just feel... less justified, in a way. The evil billionaire secret society is the obvious villain they've set up for two games. Spending half the game cooperating with Providence and killing all the people supporting your obvious future ally feels sort of like I'm being given the runaround. It also makes Lucas Grey, a character who I'm supposed to be excited to partner with, kind of look like an asshole! He's incredibly willing to toss aside his loyal lieutenants just for the sake of being besties with 47 again. But because all the targets are still awful dipshits, it also makes him look scummy for teaming up with these kinds of people to begin with. Its really mixed messaging and it hurts the story they're trying to invest players in.
Finally, the levels themselves. I'm less confident in this argument but I've reached a conclusion: I think a lot of levels feel less personal than before. In the first game, it truly felt the maps reflected the people you wanted to kill. Dalia and Viktor's fashion runaway. Silvio Caruso hiding from the bright world outside in his dreary, crumbling manor. Zaydan and Strandburg attempting to use their power to control and manipulate a whole country, as the crowds demand to see them punished. They were hyper realized, informing you about the state of the world and how your targets make it worse.
Hitman 2 doesn't seem to have that kind of same character work in its level design. A master rival assassin lives in... a house! A race track and a tech expo are connected to each other and holding events at the same day, I guess. The drug cartel stuff. This is all fairly nitpicky details and its possible I'm looking for justifications for my frustration. I do think the second half of levels are far more coherent. The Mumbai level gets you a sense of how a local community is supported and/or harmed by the intents of the local crime heads. Whittleton Creek gives you a strong set-up of the quiet nightmare of American suburbia and how both normal people and Soviet defectors try to manage their daily lives. The Ark Society creates a secluded island where all the rich morons hoping to wait out the apocalypse gather. That design ethos still exists! It just didn't feel like that push-pull of character vs. world was quite functioning as it should.
All this rambling aside: its Hitman. I love Hitman. I can be vaguely frustrated, but I'm always gonna give it up for Hitman. Respect the name.
3 Comments
As somebody whos recently finished all three Hitman games via the Hitman trilogy set, theres bits I agree, bits I certainly dont. As a rule, i'll be honest, ive never found the core story of Hitman to be all that interesting. Its very American-TV where theres conspiracy group amidst conspiracy group and who the good conspiracy is or the bad conspiracy is seems to flip on a dime.
The levels though are odd. All three, because of their very episodic nature, have levels that shine wonderfully and for me Hitman 2 does have the better hit/miss ratio and I do agree that the Drag Cartel level isnt that great though thankfully Hitman 2's lowest point with that is still much higher than Hitman 1 low points (I dont think i'll ever like the Marrakesh level and Bangkok will always be super boring and Colorado will always be a sea of dirt).
For me Hitman is always at its best with the detail, the choices and the potential for dark comedy. Everyone goes on about Whittleton Creek but I have to highlight it for some really funny moments such as touring the house or following a couple rummaging around the party house, trying to speculate as to who the owners could be. I get the complains about secondary objectives though. Even in my most beloved Hitman 1 level (Sapienza) I would have fun with the main objective kills but then REALLY drag my feet to do the last bit.
The levels though are odd. All three, because of their very episodic nature, have levels that shine wonderfully and for me Hitman 2 does have the better hit/miss ratio and I do agree that the Drag Cartel level isnt that great though thankfully Hitman 2's lowest point with that is still much higher than Hitman 1 low points (I dont think i'll ever like the Marrakesh level and Bangkok will always be super boring and Colorado will always be a sea of dirt).
For me Hitman is always at its best with the detail, the choices and the potential for dark comedy. Everyone goes on about Whittleton Creek but I have to highlight it for some really funny moments such as touring the house or following a couple rummaging around the party house, trying to speculate as to who the owners could be. I get the complains about secondary objectives though. Even in my most beloved Hitman 1 level (Sapienza) I would have fun with the main objective kills but then REALLY drag my feet to do the last bit.
Oh yeah, like, my story problems come with the caveat that I'm not exactly expecting the story to be... compelling? It needs to be a lower priority compared to the level design. When that divide starts to muddle, it gets a little irritating for me.
Colorado is just awful, no arguments here. The second half of the first game's levels are generally weaker than the first half, but I think this game has the reverse problem, at least for me.
Colorado is just awful, no arguments here. The second half of the first game's levels are generally weaker than the first half, but I think this game has the reverse problem, at least for me.
Nerdietalk
2 years ago
The drug cartel level is still very bad.