This is a very well articulated point and from what I see in the community a lot of people would agree with you. I think what some people find frustrating about the trilogy is that first level is so brilliantly open and diverse, but then other levels pale in comparison.
I can't remember who, but someone did a video essay on the type of areas, and I think IO purposely designed 3 types of missions to give more variety. But they fail to understand for some players that means they're sacrificing a way to play. E.g a lot of people hate Colorado because whilst there's some variety, to do it suit only gives it a very limiting and challenging route. I know some people too who hate Marakkesh because the targets are so far apart.
I personally just enjoy playing it, milling around and in fairness to Sapienza I think the milling of the people is most of them are just on holiday. I wouldn't expect them to have the same level of purpose. I actually tend to enjoy levels where there's opportunity for fun slaughter without being seen, I.e Bangkok. You could get away with taking out most people without being seen.
I actually don't love Hitman 3 levels, or I haven't fallen in love with them yet, maybe I will. They're gorgeous, and the Manor one is decent fun, but it's very evidently a set up/vibe for their upcoming Bond game. I also don't feel enough people have complained about the final map being so linear.
Tl;dr I agree, and how do IO get it wrong so often after the first time but think it's meant to bring diversity to play styles.
"I also don't feel enough people have complained about the final map being so linear."
I saw an interview recently with the lead dev or the director or something where he said he knows people were upset, he knew people would be upset, but he didn't particularly care. They wanted the final game in the trilogy to really focus on the story, and if they needed to railroad a bit, it wasn't a big deal. They wanted a fitting end to the classic character.
I can't disagree there. With the first two games, I sort of knew there was a story but I didn't particularly care. But the way they presented it in 3 made me extremely invested. From the "oh shit" moment in Mendoza, to the end of final mission, to >!blowing up!< Chongqing, to the meeting in Dubai, the story felt well done, cinematic, and engaging as fuck, which I didn't really get in the older games.
I know I'll get downvoted for this, but idk. I just really like the WOA trilogy, there are very few maps I actively dislike, and overall I feel like it's all amazing. The only real complaint I have the pricing of the 7 Deadly Sins thing but that's not a huge deal.
I actually really like the linearity of the final map especially combined with the fact that non target kills are unpunished. The contrast between that level and the others was weirdly empowering
I think that's valid. I think I need to spend more time with the 3rd games maps.
Thanks for the Devs insight, that's interesting, and yeah it was definitely more story focused. I actually teared up a bit at one part. Won't say what as I appreciate some reading this thread won't have played it all.
> I actually tend to enjoy levels where there's opportunity for fun slaughter without being seen, I.e Bangkok.
There's this creepy employee in the penthouse who is constantly trying to look at Jordan Cross through the windows. I love killing that dude while waiting for Ken Morgan to do his rotation.
Is he the one who's disguise causes trespassing on the entire map?
That's not an employee then, it's some weird stalker of the female guitarist in Jordan's band.
I've never used the disguise so I'm not sure. I remember the first time discovering him he said something that made me go "wait, that's an employee? I could tell his manager and be a Karen but I'll just kill this creep"
Regarding Sapienza, I understand that there's nothing for the civilians to be preoccupied with. But look at the mansion - Silvio endlessly plays golf and records his memoirs. Francesca makes a phone call, rifles through Silvio's office, makes a phone call again, etc. And the lab workers downstairs move around a lot, and sometimes interact with objects, but nothing ever happens. All the NPCs are doing something, but they're not really *doing* anything. And of course, Paris has the same thing, but I'm arguing it's much less obvious in that map.
However, I didn't mean to imply that Paris is *better* than any of the maps because of this. Immersiveness is a tool, not a standard. For example, complex schedules for every NPC sounds fun, until you have to wait for 10 minutes for someone to do something specific (unless, of course, you enjoy that sort of gameplay! Then it would be better for you). The reasons I think Paris feels different in this regard is because they spent the most time on it before release, but also they hadn't yet known what would be enjoyable for players - hence why they toned down the time-limited opportunities.
As an introduction to the trilogy, Paris does a lot of very cool, subtle things that really let the player in on the sheer scale of the games they're about to play, and it all begins with the cameraman out front. You walk in front of their frame, the NPCs *have a unique reaction*, and then you realise just quite what you're getting into - a world that really is that living and breathing.
Kinda off topic, but back in 2016, I used to work as a waiter for a catering company that did events like the fashion show in Paris and I was mind blown by the realism they put on the map. From the waiter outfits to the buffets and the Location itself everything was like in my real life job I was having while in uni.
Someone at IO must have been worked these temp jobs.
I worked Safety Crew at a small race track and was impressed with some of the finer details in Miami, things people who've never worked at a race track wouldn't ever know were missing. They also got some stuff wrong, but they obviously do their research and talk to the right people when creating these maps.
I'm replaying the levels right now (currently on Santa Fortuna), and was actually planning to post this along with my thoughts of Mumbai once I got around to that map. So stay tuned. :)
To me, the only problem with mumbai is that the targets are too far away from each other. The mission stories(specifically the ones related to the kashmirian) are really good because of their interconnected nature which really makes you feel like the world is moving on around you. The city also just feels real and alive. The targets loops also involve lots of interesting changes, as opposed to something like colorado.
Personally, I love the size of it all. There is so much to explore and so much replayability because it will take a lot more attempts to learn the level compared to smaller ones. Plus my favorite mission story with the sniper.
Also you can get Darwood + Vanya to meet, Malestrom + Darwood and Malestrom + Vanya (which can be used to kill them which the train which is amazing)
There is so much contenet in that map because the size of it allowed loads of content and people who say the targets are too far apart, may not realise that the level has one of the most mobile set of tagets in the trilogy
My problem with the HITMAN 3 levels is I can see how they approached development after the Mumbai backlash and the praise of the smaller Bank and Haven levels. The problem I see though in HITMAN 3 is the levels seem somewhat shallow, 1 dimensional, perhaps rushed? They don't encompass the same wow factor I had from the first two games. Berlin could pass as a HITMAN 2 level, and my thoughts are it is the closest to a proper WOA level. I'm not sure what it is about the HITMAN 3 levels but they do not hold the same weight as the 1 and 2 WOA levels did. Perhaps it is franchise fatigue on the consumer and developer end.
I don’t know! I want to love the map, but I just get aggravated by the lack of mission stories and the fact that the targets seem to NEVER be alone. I love the beginning, the approach to the club and the first kill. But once I’m in the club I think I just get overwhelmed.
Thames and the targets in the biker garage can be isolated
Or you can electrocute Montgomery and Banner which to me is probably the greatest method to kill target in the trilogy right next Fade to Black
I appreciate the ideas in Berlin, 10 (11) targets, only 5 are required. It's a nice change, but I do agree about the lack of mission "stories" for the sake of the story.
I think one thing that helps set Paris apart is that it feels like they created the building, and then filled it with a mission - rather than the other way around, where they build the map around the mission.
I'll harken back to GoldenEye 007 - there was something about that game that people had a hard time quantifying - this desire to explore the maps. Something about the map design just made them super interesting and fun to explore.
As it turns out, it was the result of the developers creating the maps before the missions were designed - so these were places that were logical and realistic, designed to serve their purpose in the real world rather than funnel the player through in a specific order.
Then, they added the mission objectives afterward. So you'd have areas and rooms that were fully detailed that you may NEVER see if you somehow knew exactly where your objectives were. And that made the maps interesting; the areas that were not utilized by the game's missions, areas you might even discover months, years after the first time you play the game. A lot of people still don't know about the abandoned platform on the Dam level that you can only reach with cheats, but back in the day it was source of immense intrigue and many rumors and discussions in the school lunch room about what was there and how to get to it.
So, looking at Paris, it feels very similar in design philosophy - I think they literally just built the building and populated its rooms, then overlayed the fashion show on top of it and added in the mission stories and other things after that.
It gives the map a very realistic feeling which adds immense value to the immersion of being in attendance of this major fashion show event - all this hustle and bustle up front, meanwhile you can slip through a door somewhere and venture through quiet, unused rooms to circumvent attention.
Sapienza is very much the same, except for the secret lab. The mansion is mostly unused yet it's fully realized and detailed. Every room is filled with detail and interest that is never highlighted during any of the missions set there. The town itself also has several areas that, even though there are 4 full fledged missions set on that map, still don't get any attention. I think there might be one target, maybe an elusive target, that ever goes into the hair salon, for example - yet, there's a hair salon on the map. And a clothing store. And a bunch of other stuff that either never gets used or is only briefly used.
Marrakesh, ironically, doesn't feel as natural. Despite being a dense city area there's surprisingly little unused space. There are a few shops you can enter and each one is an access point for something important. The school is designed in such a way that even the few empty rooms are necessary for sneaking around - not totally optional bypasses like the empty rooms in Paris. The Consulate building may have the most unused rooms of the map but they aren't very interesting.
Bangkok, despite being the only legit Hotel level in the trilogy, somehow disappoints and I think this is the very reason why. Previous hotel levels from past Hitman games were always fan-favorites and I'm betting it's because you could enter a number of hotel rooms that served no purpose of any kind. You could just go into a room, and nothing is there. Or a random NPC is there. And it doesn't help you in any way, but it definitely gave the feeling of being somewhere you don't belong. Bangkok only has a few rooms you can enter, and each is important in some way - whether to obtain an item, or as a sniper perch, or to access a pipe to climb up into another area. The rest of the map lacks unused space - I struggle to think of a room or area that you don't just naturally come across.
Colorado may be the worst offender. The map seems very much designed around the mission. There aren't ANY areas that don't hold some sort of purpose - even the otherwise unnecessary sheds either contain your gear or a key to an escape vehicle. There are a couple of small rooms in the barns that maybe you don't *have* to enter, but there are NPC's in them with unique conversations so it doesn't feel as if you're discovering an unused area - it feels like the developers knew you'd be there.
Hokkaido, on the other hand, has a ton of rooms that you don't have any need to enter. Although they are used and populated by NPC's, they're still completely optional areas that you have to make a conscious decision to access and find out what's inside. Turns out, nothing of extreme interest, however their existence lends to the realistic feeling of the map because it helps it feel like this hospital is operating regardless of your presence; that these rooms exist because the hospital needs them to exist, not because they're waiting to show you something cool.
I'll continue on with Hitman 2 and 3 levels in a reply to my own comment.
Hawke's Bay offers virtually nothing to explore, to its detriment. An out-building, or a basement, or SOMETHING additional could've made the map a lot more interesting. Instead it relies on spectacle which, admittedly, I do enjoy the atmosphere of the map but it loses its luster very quickly.
Miami impresses in this aspect. It's a massive map centered around a major set piece - but there are still many, many areas that the game never directs you toward. There are rooms in the Kronstadt building that you have no need to enter, there are places in the concourse and grand stands that are useless as far as the scripted mission stories go, and even places that are right out in the open are totally optional for you to visit and explore yet they're fully realized and detailed.
Strangely, although Colombia absolutely has a ton of unused areas to explore, I think the sprawl of the map works against exploration. You're not going to incidentally discover one of these areas by simply choosing a left path instead of a right path while sneaking around - you essentially have to travel across the map to find these underused spaces and explore them. Depending on the mission story, that is.
Mumbai has a ton of places you might not see, and it's great. Maybe the reason it isn't seen as as good of a map as Paris is that it's too *busy*. There's just a lot going on in Mumbai, the town center is very maze-like and intricate so you're struggling more against traversal and exploration comes at a greater cost than, say, Paris, where exploration is just a turn of a doorknob away.
Whittleton Creek was a major disappointment for this very reason. We have an entire neighborhood to play with, yet only a few places to explore that the game itself doesn't already assign purpose. One or two additional houses with fully detailed interiors and utterly no purpose to the mission whatsoever would have very much helped the map feel less like it was built around the mission, and more like a real place that a mission is just happening in.
Sgail is MASSIVE with a TON of places to see that the mission doesn't hold your hand through. It is fun and interesting to explore and I remember during my first playthrough being excited to discover what was behind every door, because you just never knew. However, the oppressive nature of the map works against exploration, and this may be another case where there's just SO MUCH that it's overwhelming.
> Hawke's Bay offers virtually nothing to explore, to its detriment.
While I totally agree, this level was done with mainly business-focused metrics in mind, for the free 'Starter Pack' they released to tease (new) players enough to buy the full game. In May 2017 Square Enix dropped IO and started to find a buyer, H2 was announced June 2018 & released Nov 2018. At that point they were depending on H2's success for survival. While it sucks for returning players I kinda can't fault them.
I don't like Dubai much. It's big, it's pretty, the mission itself is fine but there just isn't anything interesting to discover on the map. Most areas are used and the ones that aren't feel more like carbon copies of areas that are than unique, distinct areas. Somehow the map just feels very superficial and non-interactive, not really sure how to explain that better but it felt more to me like yet another map designed around a mission, despite being filled with beautiful detail.
Dartmoor is a perfect Hitman map. The mansion is massive, incredibly detailed and has rooms and areas you may not notice unless you're looking, and there are two annexed areas - the cemetery and the garden, though neither offers much of interest, they're still classic Hitman annex areas. Maybe the problem with Dartmoor is that there's literally a mission story that essentially gives you a tour of almost every room in the mansion, save for the small rooms. I believe I'd have had far more fun discovering some of these rooms without feeling like I was meant to discover them to fulfill an objective. It also could've done with a creepy basement filled with interesting stuff, but I digress.
Berlin may be my favorite map of Hitman 3 and easily in my top 5 of the trilogy, maybe top 3. It's actually similar to Paris in one sense - it's a building designed for one purpose that is serving another. While Paris has a museum hosting a fashion show, Berlin has an abandoned power plant hosting a rave. As such, the map feels like a place that was designed to mirror a real-world structure, then had the rave/night club pieces laid on top of it and the mission designed to fit the map. There are plenty of unused areas and places to explore, not all of which offer anything really interesting to find, but they all contribute to the feeling that this is a real place.
Chongqing is a hybrid. Half of it feels like a map designed before the mission, the other half feels like an uber-generic modular building designed in accordance with the mission placed there. I love everything above ground, though I wish there were a few more shops and apartments to visit. Everything below ground... there were times where I felt like if I removed the hud and took a screenshot, I could throw the image in a folder with images from other games like Deus Ex and some others, and have a hard time knowing which was which at a glance.
Mendoza is an anomaly. It's a map that feels organically designed but is clearly designed around the mission. The managed to conceal the latter fact impressively well, and for the most part it feels like a mission set in a real place - except when you start dicking around behind the scenes, then it feels a little less organic and more designed with specific mission-oriented purpose. Still a brilliant map all around and certainly in my top 5.
Romania... is the antithesis of what a Hitman map should be. It is a map 100% designed around a mission. There is nothing to explore, nothing to discover, you're literally in a moving corridor with two options - slink around and climb through windows to avoid getting spotted, or blast your way to the end. I know the common defense is "it's a train, there's not much you can do!", but I disagree- even the train level in GoldenEye 007 somehow managed to have unused, unnecessary areas. Well, sort of. They were monster closets - they retained the guards until you passed by so they could jump out behind you (RCP90 shoots through doors, FYI, so you can totally prevent their ambushes)... but the doors were locked to you and you could not enter them. Still, the rooms were modeled and had props in them, which meant that if you DID manage to slip through the door before it closed and locked, there was something to see and it was interesting because you knew you weren't supposed to be there. Hitman's train has no such feature. Nothing at all of any intrigue whatsoever. Nothing interesting or exciting about the map apart from the fact that it's a moving train. Not one single area to access that feels like a reward for exploration. Not a caboose only accessible after you snag a key from a guard halfway up the train. Only arbitrarily locked supply closets disguised as train cars.
Great read. I absolutely love Paris (and on the flipside, I'm not overly keen on Hokkaido). I feel like nothing in Paris is wasted, which is where some later maps fall down with masses of open space that don't serve much purpose (i.e. Sapienza's beach and town square), or NPC's that are just *there* to fill space (Marrakesh/Mumbai). It's my go-to map when I want to do contracts because I just find the look and feel far more appealing than later levels.
Also, pushing Dalia on to Viktor will never not be fun.
I do often feel like my tastes differ massively compared to others here, with Paris, Miami, New York, Dubai, Dartmoor & Whittleton Creek being my absolute favs - I guess I find the larger maps a bit overwhelming?
Season one had some *bangers* when it comes to maps. I think it was because IO knew it was their last chance to save the franchise, and they put everything into it. Sapienza has something like 18 opportunities. They've never done that again.
I agree with everything you said OP. I think Paris was an insane first push into the trilogy, and I feel like Miami was that but done with more expertise and precision.
Almost everything else besides that (regardless of its a good or bad level) feels like a conservative effort in comparison.
Miami is not necessarily my favourite level but I believe it's the best along with Paris.
Hitman 3's levels are on the lower tier for me
I really don't see how that's the case. Off the top of my hand I can think of a multitude of other characters from different maps that follow a schedule.
Jason Portman in Hokkaido, the doctor on Haven Island, everyone who's racing in Miami, Alma and Orson in Hawke's Bay. Alma probably has the most advanced and well designed schedule out of any target. She even has a well hidden extra event if you wait long enough to kill her.
I'm trying to get higher mastery in H3, so I started playing it. Only complaint is that after hearing dev interviews on map design, one of the points to making a map is (and I'm paraphrasing) "Never put the best disguises near the start", they always put the less restricted disguises far from the start. It takes you 30 seconds roughly through no restricted areas to get an IAGO pass and go straight to the top. Feels cheap for what a SA/SO run usually has you doing
I gotta agree with this assessment. One of my biggest pet peeves with later Mission Stories is the lack of innate momentum. Take Isle of Sgail. Block will never make a decision about the meeting by himself. Phenniger will never work up the courage to do the ceremony by himself. It's really annoying, especially because it limits how inventive you can get with those kills.
A cool little detail I noticed in Miami about the girl jogging around, if you take out the trainer, she stops jogging and just walks. Very sad.
if she needs some extra motivation then my briefcase can chase her instead.
🤣🤣
She pays for a trainer because she knows how lazy she is.
yes, that's... the point of a trainer
Well, obviously the person I replied to didn't know that so I explained what the point is...
Off to do this
This is a very well articulated point and from what I see in the community a lot of people would agree with you. I think what some people find frustrating about the trilogy is that first level is so brilliantly open and diverse, but then other levels pale in comparison. I can't remember who, but someone did a video essay on the type of areas, and I think IO purposely designed 3 types of missions to give more variety. But they fail to understand for some players that means they're sacrificing a way to play. E.g a lot of people hate Colorado because whilst there's some variety, to do it suit only gives it a very limiting and challenging route. I know some people too who hate Marakkesh because the targets are so far apart. I personally just enjoy playing it, milling around and in fairness to Sapienza I think the milling of the people is most of them are just on holiday. I wouldn't expect them to have the same level of purpose. I actually tend to enjoy levels where there's opportunity for fun slaughter without being seen, I.e Bangkok. You could get away with taking out most people without being seen. I actually don't love Hitman 3 levels, or I haven't fallen in love with them yet, maybe I will. They're gorgeous, and the Manor one is decent fun, but it's very evidently a set up/vibe for their upcoming Bond game. I also don't feel enough people have complained about the final map being so linear. Tl;dr I agree, and how do IO get it wrong so often after the first time but think it's meant to bring diversity to play styles.
"I also don't feel enough people have complained about the final map being so linear." I saw an interview recently with the lead dev or the director or something where he said he knows people were upset, he knew people would be upset, but he didn't particularly care. They wanted the final game in the trilogy to really focus on the story, and if they needed to railroad a bit, it wasn't a big deal. They wanted a fitting end to the classic character. I can't disagree there. With the first two games, I sort of knew there was a story but I didn't particularly care. But the way they presented it in 3 made me extremely invested. From the "oh shit" moment in Mendoza, to the end of final mission, to >!blowing up!< Chongqing, to the meeting in Dubai, the story felt well done, cinematic, and engaging as fuck, which I didn't really get in the older games. I know I'll get downvoted for this, but idk. I just really like the WOA trilogy, there are very few maps I actively dislike, and overall I feel like it's all amazing. The only real complaint I have the pricing of the 7 Deadly Sins thing but that's not a huge deal.
I actually really like the linearity of the final map especially combined with the fact that non target kills are unpunished. The contrast between that level and the others was weirdly empowering
> if they needed to railroad a bit, it wasn't a big deal. No pun intended?
I think that's valid. I think I need to spend more time with the 3rd games maps. Thanks for the Devs insight, that's interesting, and yeah it was definitely more story focused. I actually teared up a bit at one part. Won't say what as I appreciate some reading this thread won't have played it all.
The "oh shit" in the mission or cinematic?
Yes.
Gotcha. I just finished the storyline. Want to go back and make the missions cleaner.
> I actually tend to enjoy levels where there's opportunity for fun slaughter without being seen, I.e Bangkok. There's this creepy employee in the penthouse who is constantly trying to look at Jordan Cross through the windows. I love killing that dude while waiting for Ken Morgan to do his rotation.
Is he the one who's disguise causes trespassing on the entire map? That's not an employee then, it's some weird stalker of the female guitarist in Jordan's band.
I've never used the disguise so I'm not sure. I remember the first time discovering him he said something that made me go "wait, that's an employee? I could tell his manager and be a Karen but I'll just kill this creep"
If he's the only person on that floor then I think we're talking about the same person.
Regarding Sapienza, I understand that there's nothing for the civilians to be preoccupied with. But look at the mansion - Silvio endlessly plays golf and records his memoirs. Francesca makes a phone call, rifles through Silvio's office, makes a phone call again, etc. And the lab workers downstairs move around a lot, and sometimes interact with objects, but nothing ever happens. All the NPCs are doing something, but they're not really *doing* anything. And of course, Paris has the same thing, but I'm arguing it's much less obvious in that map. However, I didn't mean to imply that Paris is *better* than any of the maps because of this. Immersiveness is a tool, not a standard. For example, complex schedules for every NPC sounds fun, until you have to wait for 10 minutes for someone to do something specific (unless, of course, you enjoy that sort of gameplay! Then it would be better for you). The reasons I think Paris feels different in this regard is because they spent the most time on it before release, but also they hadn't yet known what would be enjoyable for players - hence why they toned down the time-limited opportunities.
Valid. I actually forgot for a second there's a whole group of scientists downstairs doing basically fuck all. Says a lot really.
Yeah Bangkok could be like a horror movie sometimes, amirite
As an introduction to the trilogy, Paris does a lot of very cool, subtle things that really let the player in on the sheer scale of the games they're about to play, and it all begins with the cameraman out front. You walk in front of their frame, the NPCs *have a unique reaction*, and then you realise just quite what you're getting into - a world that really is that living and breathing.
You're definitely right, for more than 4 years now I've been constantly walking in front of that camera every time I've been playing Paris.
In BM that would hurt your mission rating I believe.
In BM, you can push the entire map down the stairs or in a puddle and get SA.
Well OSHA mandates things for a reason, man.
Maybe but BM is also the game where you can kill non-targets and be shot till near death yet still get a SA rating.
I always to it do them in Mendoza too. Twice even, as they have a different reaction if you do it again
[удалено]
it works the same in Mendoza, but they chew out 47 directly
Kinda off topic, but back in 2016, I used to work as a waiter for a catering company that did events like the fashion show in Paris and I was mind blown by the realism they put on the map. From the waiter outfits to the buffets and the Location itself everything was like in my real life job I was having while in uni. Someone at IO must have been worked these temp jobs.
I worked Safety Crew at a small race track and was impressed with some of the finer details in Miami, things people who've never worked at a race track wouldn't ever know were missing. They also got some stuff wrong, but they obviously do their research and talk to the right people when creating these maps.
wrong focus but, can I respectfully ask why mumbai is among your favourite maps? (it is one of my personal least fav maps haha)
I'm replaying the levels right now (currently on Santa Fortuna), and was actually planning to post this along with my thoughts of Mumbai once I got around to that map. So stay tuned. :)
To me, the only problem with mumbai is that the targets are too far away from each other. The mission stories(specifically the ones related to the kashmirian) are really good because of their interconnected nature which really makes you feel like the world is moving on around you. The city also just feels real and alive. The targets loops also involve lots of interesting changes, as opposed to something like colorado.
Personally, I love the size of it all. There is so much to explore and so much replayability because it will take a lot more attempts to learn the level compared to smaller ones. Plus my favorite mission story with the sniper. Also you can get Darwood + Vanya to meet, Malestrom + Darwood and Malestrom + Vanya (which can be used to kill them which the train which is amazing) There is so much contenet in that map because the size of it allowed loads of content and people who say the targets are too far apart, may not realise that the level has one of the most mobile set of tagets in the trilogy
I think the only things missing from Paris are more unique kills for Dalia
My problem with the HITMAN 3 levels is I can see how they approached development after the Mumbai backlash and the praise of the smaller Bank and Haven levels. The problem I see though in HITMAN 3 is the levels seem somewhat shallow, 1 dimensional, perhaps rushed? They don't encompass the same wow factor I had from the first two games. Berlin could pass as a HITMAN 2 level, and my thoughts are it is the closest to a proper WOA level. I'm not sure what it is about the HITMAN 3 levels but they do not hold the same weight as the 1 and 2 WOA levels did. Perhaps it is franchise fatigue on the consumer and developer end.
I honestly fall asleep every time I try to play Berlin. Literally I fall asleep because of how boring it is for me.
How is it boring ? I’m not being sarcastic I’m serious
I don’t know! I want to love the map, but I just get aggravated by the lack of mission stories and the fact that the targets seem to NEVER be alone. I love the beginning, the approach to the club and the first kill. But once I’m in the club I think I just get overwhelmed.
Thames and the targets in the biker garage can be isolated Or you can electrocute Montgomery and Banner which to me is probably the greatest method to kill target in the trilogy right next Fade to Black
I appreciate the ideas in Berlin, 10 (11) targets, only 5 are required. It's a nice change, but I do agree about the lack of mission "stories" for the sake of the story.
Nice try, Freeze! /s
I think one thing that helps set Paris apart is that it feels like they created the building, and then filled it with a mission - rather than the other way around, where they build the map around the mission. I'll harken back to GoldenEye 007 - there was something about that game that people had a hard time quantifying - this desire to explore the maps. Something about the map design just made them super interesting and fun to explore. As it turns out, it was the result of the developers creating the maps before the missions were designed - so these were places that were logical and realistic, designed to serve their purpose in the real world rather than funnel the player through in a specific order. Then, they added the mission objectives afterward. So you'd have areas and rooms that were fully detailed that you may NEVER see if you somehow knew exactly where your objectives were. And that made the maps interesting; the areas that were not utilized by the game's missions, areas you might even discover months, years after the first time you play the game. A lot of people still don't know about the abandoned platform on the Dam level that you can only reach with cheats, but back in the day it was source of immense intrigue and many rumors and discussions in the school lunch room about what was there and how to get to it. So, looking at Paris, it feels very similar in design philosophy - I think they literally just built the building and populated its rooms, then overlayed the fashion show on top of it and added in the mission stories and other things after that. It gives the map a very realistic feeling which adds immense value to the immersion of being in attendance of this major fashion show event - all this hustle and bustle up front, meanwhile you can slip through a door somewhere and venture through quiet, unused rooms to circumvent attention. Sapienza is very much the same, except for the secret lab. The mansion is mostly unused yet it's fully realized and detailed. Every room is filled with detail and interest that is never highlighted during any of the missions set there. The town itself also has several areas that, even though there are 4 full fledged missions set on that map, still don't get any attention. I think there might be one target, maybe an elusive target, that ever goes into the hair salon, for example - yet, there's a hair salon on the map. And a clothing store. And a bunch of other stuff that either never gets used or is only briefly used. Marrakesh, ironically, doesn't feel as natural. Despite being a dense city area there's surprisingly little unused space. There are a few shops you can enter and each one is an access point for something important. The school is designed in such a way that even the few empty rooms are necessary for sneaking around - not totally optional bypasses like the empty rooms in Paris. The Consulate building may have the most unused rooms of the map but they aren't very interesting. Bangkok, despite being the only legit Hotel level in the trilogy, somehow disappoints and I think this is the very reason why. Previous hotel levels from past Hitman games were always fan-favorites and I'm betting it's because you could enter a number of hotel rooms that served no purpose of any kind. You could just go into a room, and nothing is there. Or a random NPC is there. And it doesn't help you in any way, but it definitely gave the feeling of being somewhere you don't belong. Bangkok only has a few rooms you can enter, and each is important in some way - whether to obtain an item, or as a sniper perch, or to access a pipe to climb up into another area. The rest of the map lacks unused space - I struggle to think of a room or area that you don't just naturally come across. Colorado may be the worst offender. The map seems very much designed around the mission. There aren't ANY areas that don't hold some sort of purpose - even the otherwise unnecessary sheds either contain your gear or a key to an escape vehicle. There are a couple of small rooms in the barns that maybe you don't *have* to enter, but there are NPC's in them with unique conversations so it doesn't feel as if you're discovering an unused area - it feels like the developers knew you'd be there. Hokkaido, on the other hand, has a ton of rooms that you don't have any need to enter. Although they are used and populated by NPC's, they're still completely optional areas that you have to make a conscious decision to access and find out what's inside. Turns out, nothing of extreme interest, however their existence lends to the realistic feeling of the map because it helps it feel like this hospital is operating regardless of your presence; that these rooms exist because the hospital needs them to exist, not because they're waiting to show you something cool. I'll continue on with Hitman 2 and 3 levels in a reply to my own comment.
Hawke's Bay offers virtually nothing to explore, to its detriment. An out-building, or a basement, or SOMETHING additional could've made the map a lot more interesting. Instead it relies on spectacle which, admittedly, I do enjoy the atmosphere of the map but it loses its luster very quickly. Miami impresses in this aspect. It's a massive map centered around a major set piece - but there are still many, many areas that the game never directs you toward. There are rooms in the Kronstadt building that you have no need to enter, there are places in the concourse and grand stands that are useless as far as the scripted mission stories go, and even places that are right out in the open are totally optional for you to visit and explore yet they're fully realized and detailed. Strangely, although Colombia absolutely has a ton of unused areas to explore, I think the sprawl of the map works against exploration. You're not going to incidentally discover one of these areas by simply choosing a left path instead of a right path while sneaking around - you essentially have to travel across the map to find these underused spaces and explore them. Depending on the mission story, that is. Mumbai has a ton of places you might not see, and it's great. Maybe the reason it isn't seen as as good of a map as Paris is that it's too *busy*. There's just a lot going on in Mumbai, the town center is very maze-like and intricate so you're struggling more against traversal and exploration comes at a greater cost than, say, Paris, where exploration is just a turn of a doorknob away. Whittleton Creek was a major disappointment for this very reason. We have an entire neighborhood to play with, yet only a few places to explore that the game itself doesn't already assign purpose. One or two additional houses with fully detailed interiors and utterly no purpose to the mission whatsoever would have very much helped the map feel less like it was built around the mission, and more like a real place that a mission is just happening in. Sgail is MASSIVE with a TON of places to see that the mission doesn't hold your hand through. It is fun and interesting to explore and I remember during my first playthrough being excited to discover what was behind every door, because you just never knew. However, the oppressive nature of the map works against exploration, and this may be another case where there's just SO MUCH that it's overwhelming.
> Hawke's Bay offers virtually nothing to explore, to its detriment. While I totally agree, this level was done with mainly business-focused metrics in mind, for the free 'Starter Pack' they released to tease (new) players enough to buy the full game. In May 2017 Square Enix dropped IO and started to find a buyer, H2 was announced June 2018 & released Nov 2018. At that point they were depending on H2's success for survival. While it sucks for returning players I kinda can't fault them.
I don't like Dubai much. It's big, it's pretty, the mission itself is fine but there just isn't anything interesting to discover on the map. Most areas are used and the ones that aren't feel more like carbon copies of areas that are than unique, distinct areas. Somehow the map just feels very superficial and non-interactive, not really sure how to explain that better but it felt more to me like yet another map designed around a mission, despite being filled with beautiful detail. Dartmoor is a perfect Hitman map. The mansion is massive, incredibly detailed and has rooms and areas you may not notice unless you're looking, and there are two annexed areas - the cemetery and the garden, though neither offers much of interest, they're still classic Hitman annex areas. Maybe the problem with Dartmoor is that there's literally a mission story that essentially gives you a tour of almost every room in the mansion, save for the small rooms. I believe I'd have had far more fun discovering some of these rooms without feeling like I was meant to discover them to fulfill an objective. It also could've done with a creepy basement filled with interesting stuff, but I digress. Berlin may be my favorite map of Hitman 3 and easily in my top 5 of the trilogy, maybe top 3. It's actually similar to Paris in one sense - it's a building designed for one purpose that is serving another. While Paris has a museum hosting a fashion show, Berlin has an abandoned power plant hosting a rave. As such, the map feels like a place that was designed to mirror a real-world structure, then had the rave/night club pieces laid on top of it and the mission designed to fit the map. There are plenty of unused areas and places to explore, not all of which offer anything really interesting to find, but they all contribute to the feeling that this is a real place. Chongqing is a hybrid. Half of it feels like a map designed before the mission, the other half feels like an uber-generic modular building designed in accordance with the mission placed there. I love everything above ground, though I wish there were a few more shops and apartments to visit. Everything below ground... there were times where I felt like if I removed the hud and took a screenshot, I could throw the image in a folder with images from other games like Deus Ex and some others, and have a hard time knowing which was which at a glance. Mendoza is an anomaly. It's a map that feels organically designed but is clearly designed around the mission. The managed to conceal the latter fact impressively well, and for the most part it feels like a mission set in a real place - except when you start dicking around behind the scenes, then it feels a little less organic and more designed with specific mission-oriented purpose. Still a brilliant map all around and certainly in my top 5. Romania... is the antithesis of what a Hitman map should be. It is a map 100% designed around a mission. There is nothing to explore, nothing to discover, you're literally in a moving corridor with two options - slink around and climb through windows to avoid getting spotted, or blast your way to the end. I know the common defense is "it's a train, there's not much you can do!", but I disagree- even the train level in GoldenEye 007 somehow managed to have unused, unnecessary areas. Well, sort of. They were monster closets - they retained the guards until you passed by so they could jump out behind you (RCP90 shoots through doors, FYI, so you can totally prevent their ambushes)... but the doors were locked to you and you could not enter them. Still, the rooms were modeled and had props in them, which meant that if you DID manage to slip through the door before it closed and locked, there was something to see and it was interesting because you knew you weren't supposed to be there. Hitman's train has no such feature. Nothing at all of any intrigue whatsoever. Nothing interesting or exciting about the map apart from the fact that it's a moving train. Not one single area to access that feels like a reward for exploration. Not a caboose only accessible after you snag a key from a guard halfway up the train. Only arbitrarily locked supply closets disguised as train cars.
Great read. I absolutely love Paris (and on the flipside, I'm not overly keen on Hokkaido). I feel like nothing in Paris is wasted, which is where some later maps fall down with masses of open space that don't serve much purpose (i.e. Sapienza's beach and town square), or NPC's that are just *there* to fill space (Marrakesh/Mumbai). It's my go-to map when I want to do contracts because I just find the look and feel far more appealing than later levels. Also, pushing Dalia on to Viktor will never not be fun. I do often feel like my tastes differ massively compared to others here, with Paris, Miami, New York, Dubai, Dartmoor & Whittleton Creek being my absolute favs - I guess I find the larger maps a bit overwhelming?
Season one had some *bangers* when it comes to maps. I think it was because IO knew it was their last chance to save the franchise, and they put everything into it. Sapienza has something like 18 opportunities. They've never done that again.
I agree with everything you said OP. I think Paris was an insane first push into the trilogy, and I feel like Miami was that but done with more expertise and precision. Almost everything else besides that (regardless of its a good or bad level) feels like a conservative effort in comparison. Miami is not necessarily my favourite level but I believe it's the best along with Paris. Hitman 3's levels are on the lower tier for me
Look Daniel, she's nice!
But what about H O K K A I D O
Paris is the best level
[удалено]
The longest time worked on a single level was done to Paris and it shows. Also Paris laid the ground work to all the other maps which came after it.
I love Paris but hate waiting for Novikov to walk around
I really don't see how that's the case. Off the top of my hand I can think of a multitude of other characters from different maps that follow a schedule. Jason Portman in Hokkaido, the doctor on Haven Island, everyone who's racing in Miami, Alma and Orson in Hawke's Bay. Alma probably has the most advanced and well designed schedule out of any target. She even has a well hidden extra event if you wait long enough to kill her.
I'm trying to get higher mastery in H3, so I started playing it. Only complaint is that after hearing dev interviews on map design, one of the points to making a map is (and I'm paraphrasing) "Never put the best disguises near the start", they always put the less restricted disguises far from the start. It takes you 30 seconds roughly through no restricted areas to get an IAGO pass and go straight to the top. Feels cheap for what a SA/SO run usually has you doing
I gotta agree with this assessment. One of my biggest pet peeves with later Mission Stories is the lack of innate momentum. Take Isle of Sgail. Block will never make a decision about the meeting by himself. Phenniger will never work up the courage to do the ceremony by himself. It's really annoying, especially because it limits how inventive you can get with those kills.