PDA

View Full Version : thinking of getting into hitman



weaponx
16th Dec 2004, 09:32
hey i was thinking of getting into the hitman series but i dont know witch game to get into the series with so any sagestions :confused:

weaponx
18th Dec 2004, 01:20
i guess no:(

Xcom
13th Jan 2005, 16:58
This is rather strange question. It seems obvious (to me) that you should get into the series starting with the FIRST game -- Hitman: Codename 47. :)

weaponx
22nd Jan 2005, 19:38
ok thanx Xcom as soon as i pay back my bro ill go & get it

yubetcha
24th Jan 2005, 17:30
I didn't buy the first Hitman, because I read that you couldn't save in the game. True? If so, the second game is much improved. Be careful, though. On the first mission, I saved often. I didn't know that you only had a certain number of saves to use, and then you couldn't save any more.

Xcom
25th Jan 2005, 11:02
True, you couldn't save in the 1st one but that game had also many good things by comparison to 2nd one.

First of all, it set the story and the character in motion. You could buy weapons instead of just "finding" them; the system I heard the are going to revert to in the future game. You could hold dual guns independently which was very cool. Now, you also have dual guns but those are technically ONE object; in C47 you could hold Desert Eagle in one hand and Beretta in the other, for example. Lastly, the first game had bullet holes on bodies, a feature that was liked by many blood-thirsty assassins among us :D, and which has strangly disappeared from other games. (maybe because of some rating issues, I don't know).

So, I'd still say if you haven't played hitman and want to, start with the 1st. Besides, by now it should cost a few peanuts. However, if you played Silent Assassin, playing the original now may be somewhat troublesome (given save issues and unusual camera)

DarkShadow700
27th Jan 2005, 23:18
Do what I do when I is'nt sure. Toss a coin :D

yubetcha
31st Jan 2005, 19:02
True, you couldn't save in the 1st one but that game had also many good things by comparison to 2nd one.

First of all, it set the story and the character in motion. You could buy weapons instead of just "finding" them; the system I heard the are going to revert to in the future game. You could hold dual guns independently which was very cool. Now, you also have dual guns but those are technically ONE object;



Oh yeah! The camera was another thing I read about that I didn't like.
BTW, I have found that in the second game, you can hold two guns as well. For instance, while holding a sniper rifle, I tried to pick up an SMG. Plop, the sniper rifle dropped. So I picked it up, this time without dropping the SMG. the sniper rifle was in my right hand, and the SMG was in my left. Also, last night I was able to hold two pistols at the same time. One was a deagle, and the other was a 9 MM. Both were pointed out away from me, unlike the rifles, which I was holding in my left hand downward. I know that I was still holding it, because it moved when I did.
BTW, I probably wouldn't buy the first game, but I liked the second one so much that I am considering buying the third. Redemption at Gontranno is one of my favorites. I keep playing that one over and over again, because it is a real challenge.

Xcom
4th Feb 2005, 12:25
BTW, I probably wouldn't buy the first game, but I liked the second one so much that I am considering buying the third.

Yes, that would be a good choice, since the 3rd game contains many levels from the 1st game.