Gaming Hitman Beta Impressions

So it's going to be pants, then?

Every time I have ever seen a preview of a game and they raise complaints (even game breaking complaints) they are all still there alive and well when the game releases. In fact come to think of it I clearly remember reading an article on the previous Hitman that pointed out all of the things that should be changed to make it a better game, yet there it all was when the game released.

So I don't know whether to see this article as either the game being pimped shortly before release (to get every one reaching for their wallets) or, and I realise I am probably dreaming when I say this, they actually care about the games they are making and selling and want to improve it so that us, the end users, get the best possible experience for our money.

But I am dreaming, aren't I? because this industry really is all about money and no one actually cares about the quality of the titles they release or their reputation.

See now I thought Bethesda actually cared. I really did. I knew that Fallout 3 had its problems but it was so majestic I managed to look past the crashing and the bugging. Fast forward seven years and they basically "did a Valve" and had gone all quiet and secretive. I figured that they had basically ignored all of the pressure from eager gamers and had learnt a lesson with Fallout 3 that they probably wouldn't repeat. You know? like "did a Valve" and had hidden the game from pretty much every one making sure it was absolutely tip top perfect like Half Life 2 was.

Imagine my shock, then, that it was not only a "Gamedoesn't work" title but also as broken as a piece of white dog poo that had been dropped from a multi-storey car park.

So that was another dream shattered. Did I play it for 70 hours? yes. Did I enjoy it? hard to say. It was definitely a million miles from expectation. Just an extension of Fallout 3 with more quests and slightly better graphics. But certainly not Fallout 4.

Things have really changed in gaming over the past decade. And I think nearly all of those changes, one by one, are ruining gaming.

/miserable grumpy old sod mode off.

 

It might be pants, but I enjoyed it. I have some issues with the Oppertunities system that I hope get ironed out and while this won't happen on the next release (as it's less than a month away) it could happen with their further releases, far enough away that they'll likely be looking to take criticism and suggestions on board.

I also have concerns with the way it'll launch - chunk by chunk - but I'm willing to give it the benefit of the doubt. Small caveat here though is that I won't be paying for it, I'll very likely be given a copy for the purpose of reviewing it, so i would entirely suggest voting with your wallet if it's a thing that makes you uneasy. It's a very unusual way to release a game, but i'm hoping it works out.

 

It might be pants, but I enjoyed it. I have some issues with the Opportunities system that I hope get ironed out and while this won't happen on the next release (as it's less than a month away) it could happen with their further releases, far enough away that they'll likely be looking to take criticism and suggestions on board.

I also have concerns with the way it'll launch - chunk by chunk - but I'm willing to give it the benefit of the doubt. Small caveat here though is that I won't be paying for it, I'll very likely be given a copy for the purpose of reviewing it, so i would entirely suggest voting with your wallet if it's a thing that makes you uneasy. It's a very unusual way to release a game, but i'm hoping it works out.

 

The problem for me is that video game prices are rising. In most cases now they are matching console prices which I find odd, given there are no license fees involved with PC gaming. So I can only attribute that to more of the greed I was annoyed about in my previous post.

The chances are high that this game will be released for £40-£50. That's an awful lot of money for a game that is only "pants, but I enjoyed it".

Ah well, another crap PC game for lots of money.

 

I feel appalled by the idea of this being episodic, having to pay £40 upfront for the 'full experience' (not really full though is it, you still have to wait for the episodes!) or paying £11 for the starter pack, which contains 1 tutorial and the first level of the game. The problem there, is the remaining 6 releases will cost another 10-11 odd quid each, meaning that by the end of it, you have paid 70-77 quid for it!
I get why Squenix would would do this, the starter pack is a good way to see if you like the game (at least the parts they release), without risking spending 40 quid on a potato of a game but even that's a hard pill to swallow. And if people do like it, they will buy future episodes, so it's win win for them.

I have said this once and I will say it again, CD Project Red are more than capable of releasing a game, that works out of the box, is a fixed price for the whole experience and great quality, while leaving enough room for a mix of Free and Paid DLC. Why in the name of the many faced god do so many other companies do so poorly in comparison!?

JakeTucker, they are clearly not going to fix that issue with the triggers, it's too core to the experience they have created. I have no faith that Squeenix/IO even view it as an issue, even though, Gamesradar and many other previews have pointed it out already.I look forward to eating my virtual hat if I am wrong on that!

 

Have you seen the prices of the Fallout 4 DLC yet? £8 or so for a tiny basic mod and twenty pounds for the quest DLC.

https://bethesda.net/#en/events/gam...nd-workshop-far-harbor-and-more/2016/02/16/77

 

Wow that is hardcore, the Hearts of Stone DLC for the Witcher 3 was £6.89 for existing owners of TW3 and £7.99 for newer customers and added about 15 hours of extra, good quality gameplay.

 

£20 for DLC? That's appalling. In the last 8 years I've not paid more than £12 for a game. And even then it was a bind whether to go for it or not (2 games cost me that much, both in Steam sales; SFIV and Shadow of Mordor, both of which have been worth it).

With regards to the Hitman episodic release, it didn't hurt Doom to release the 1st quarter of the game for free to get people hooked. If they believed in their project as much as Id did back then, they'd do something similar. WTF happened to demos anyway?

 

IIRC the most expensive quest DLC for Fallout 3 (and New Vegas) was £9.99. But £20? I usually get all of the latest games for £20 (just bought Star Wars Battlefront key for that).

Madness. Utter madness. So if they have say, five quest DLC that's £100 on top of the £100 I paid for the PB edition of Fallout 4.

£200. For a ferking video game.

 

Yes, it's very out of hand.
I was looking at the Attila total war steam page, there is £46 worth of DLC, most of it culture packs, AKA nations that would and should form part of the base game. But even the new campaigns are over priced at 10 quid a pop, given how much of the content in lazily recycled. If I pick them up, I tend to wait for -75-80% sales but even then it's questionable as to the value, given that some content has been blatantly cut for re-monitisation.

In fact, I tried to start a co-op campaign with a mate, when we were in the faction selection menu, at least 1/3rd of all factions were selectable but then you were warned these were DLC factions and the game could not be launched because I did not own them. Then why the hell show me them, is it that hard to omit them from selection like that? I really hate feeling that I have an inferior version of the game, something I am sure works to encourage people to buy said over priced DLC.

 

Worth pointing out the season pass for fallout is £24.99*.
Witcher 3 is £19.99.

So i'd hold the pitchforks for now, at least wait to for the release/reviews before judging value.

*according to the Bethesda blog, price will be rising after march 1st( if you buy it before this date you still get all the extra DLC for the lower price), but supposedly that is because they are making more DLC than originally planned.

Personally i put over 130 hours into fallout 4, so i have faith the DLC will be worth it, it certainty was in regards to fallout 3 and New Vegas.
Same with Witcher 3, as for Hitman, i'm far more skeptical and won't be touching it for now.

 

I don't think anyone is pitch forking, nor do we need reviews to tell us if we think something is good value for money or not. That all down to personal preference.

Also, Bethesda's reasoning, you will forgive my cynicism on that one...

RE the Witcher 3, I don't own the season pass, I just buy the content when released if I like the look of the price for what you get content wise. Personally, I just dislike seeing and endless stream of season passes being released, Tombraider, Rainbow 6 Siege, Anno 225, Fallout 4, even the Witcher 3 to name but a few.
Pay for the game, then pay 33-100% again for DLC, much of which has been blatantly held back for later sale. It leaves a bad taste.

 

I'm not saying reviews are some godly statement that have authority on what is value and what is not.
My point was simply, the DLC (story dlc) isn't out yet, we know virtually nothing about it. You should at least wait till you get more information before making judgement, either by playing it yourself or reading a review.

I'm fully aware there is some shitty business models out there in regards to DLC, my most recent experience being Arkham knight, the DLC for that game was a disaster and that was after the game launch which itself was a disaster.
So i can appreciate the cynicism, but i'm personally willing to give Bethesda some credit as the past DLC releases for the fallout franchise have been spot on.

As for the season pass, as far as i can see there is no need to buy it, you can pick and chose the individual DLC components as you do with Witcher.
Of course the other option is to just wait a while and buy it cheap during a steam sale.

 

Operation Anchorage - meh.
The Pitt - meh.
Broken Steel - fixed a broken game (having to go back after completing etc)
Point Lookout - the best DLC for FO3 IMO.
Mothership Zeta - awful.

Hardly a glowing endorsement, with most of them just about managing to score 60% by reviewers.

I know Fallout : New Vegas wasn't strictly theirs but there were things like Honest Hearts and Lonesome Road that they should have had some sort of control over. Instead both of those DLC were absolute stinkers.

 

Rainbow Six Siege's season pass is just cosmetic bonuses and early access. All maps and operators are free to everyone.

 

Fallout 3 I personally enjoyed all of them, exception being the pitt, I've still never got round to actually playing it. Some were certainty stronger than others, but i can't say i disliked any of them.
Though saying that i bought the game of the year edition for something like £10, so that was great value IMO. If I did pay £6.99 (i think that was the original cost per DLC) for operation anchorage I probably would of been a bit disappointed.

NV i enjoyed even more, old world blues being a highlight.
and this time i bought every DLC individually and i personally didn't feel short changed.

So again i'm prepared to give them a chance, will it pan out? maybe, maybe not.
But to be honest, if anyone is doubtful, just wait a while fallout games tend to depreciate pretty quickly.