[Serious - TW: Sexual Assault] Conor McGregor (The Disruptor) verdict and presence in the game

Hitman: World of Assassination
129

@wincenworks pretty much already explained what I was going to say on the matter, twice, but two quick things since you were speaking to me directly:

A) Yes, it absolutely is for the reasons already pointed out, and B) I have a degree in criminal justice, knowing the differences between criminal guilt and civil liability is literally something I paid to be educated in, so I know what I’m talking about when I tell you being found either guilty or liable in either criminal or civil court is basically a confirmation that the party in question did the deed. Being “guilty” is a legal term; it is not the same as saying that the person definitely did the deed.

And right here is the underlying problem with your argument. It does not matter, at all, what you believe. You can certainly believe what you wish, of course, but that has no meaning and no effect on this subject. McGregor was found liable: fact. People can assume, based on that, that even if he’s never found guilty of the crime, it’s practically a confirmation that he did it: fact. Anyone supporting him, especially financially, can have their own reputations affected by a disapproving public: fact. Taking those three facts into consideration, IOI decided to pull the plug and ditch their deal with him before they are seen as supporting someone who, at the very least, is now confirmed to have at least physically harmed another person. Whether you think people are being fair in how they’re reacting to that is irrelevant. These reactions are based off of something that a jury has now confirmed, not based on people just choosing to believe whether or not it happened.

And again, if you already have the content, then at least for now since the Arcade contract is still there, you are not affected by this decision. So why you’re acting so upset, as if something precious is being taken away from you, is baffling.

7 Likes
130

Glad to see IO have taken action. Thank you everyone who voiced their concerns on here and elsewhere to encourage a swift response. I didn’t buy the Disruptor pack and I’m not particularly bothered about missing any of this ‘content’. I just hope I won’t be permanently locked out of having 100% challenge completion in the game as a result?!

7 Likes
131

I’m sure IOI will take steps to remove those challenges from the game, or just automatically grant them to any players that don’t have them, in order to compensate those who miss 100% completion by not accessing content that they aren’t even offering anymore. It’ll take time, but there’s a good chance that will happen.

5 Likes
132

McGregor might not have been found guilty in a criminal court HOWEVER he was convicted in a civil court which leveled a successful crippling lawsuit against him of a quarter million Euros. For this reason alone it makes sense to remove his DLC from the store as it ensures IOI won’t be helping him with his well deserved financial crisis.

133

Dude’s a billionaire, I’m pretty sure. 1/4 Mil is not a lot to him.

1 Like
134

Depends on if he’s a billionaire because of assets or not. If he’s cash poor, this would be a relatively big hit, requiring him to sell some assets to make up the difference. Not to mention whatever hit he might take to his reputation. Know it won’t do much here in the US, but don’t know how the social perception is in his home country on that sort of thing.

135

Even though I’ve bought this DLC, I’m fine with the removal of the related contents. I know that these contents are still available for those who have purchased the DLC earlier, but if they are entirely removed from the game, I’m OK. But I understand that the fact it was a paid DLC, it raises some concerns about its removal…
The mission itself is, IMO, a great mission, with a new strategy. But all the sh*** this guy has done can’t be hidden.
I acknowledge that IOI’s fast response is a step forward in the good direction… But IMO, it’s not sufficient.

I do hope that, one day, any allusion to that guy will be completely removed from this game. Alter the character, develop a new model unrelated to him, re-record the voicelines, change the name… The mission story can be the same, but with no link at all with this guy.

On a last note, my main concern is the deal IOI has concluded with this guy prior to the verdict. A long list of controversies is glued to this guy. IOI can’t say afterwards: “We have done a mistake, we didn’t know this guy was quite problematic”. I personally don’t understand why such deal was contracted.

3 Likes
136

Exactly. The presence of a Vip as a target is only marketing. Changing the model is a good solution to respect who paid the Dlc, who worked on that Dlc and to offer a funny content without any reference to McGregor. To be honest, who cares about him? I care only content

7 Likes
137

I think in the future IOI will need to add a few terms to the fine print where the player must consent to permanent loss of access in the event of a disassociation/delisting. Another option may be to put a delay of 72 hours on future purchases so that people can’t just preemptively buy a DLC when they feel a delist is imminent like just after a guilty verdict.

1 Like
138

You’ve suggested this twice now, and they’re both unwieldly ideas, not to mention impossible to implement on all stores.

Adding something to the fine print will just be ignored by players. This will solve nothing.

Adding an escrow period between purchases is just not how stores work, in fact, this might break consumer laws in some regions because you’re not giving them the thing they paid for in a reasonable timeframe.

4 Likes
139

image
image628×320 48.2 KB

Major retailers in UK and Ireland pull products associated with Conor McGregor (msn.com)

Tesco, Musgrave, Costcutter and several more have stopped selling alcoholic beverages associated with Conor, notably “Proper No Twelve Whiskey”.

Oh, and Hitman is mentioned in the Article too!

Not something I expected to see.

17 Likes
140

My thoughts on the matter exactly.

Just remove everything.

4 Likes
141

Best IOI can do is follow cases very closely and be ready to delist the instant a guilty verdict is declared so nobody has a chance to buy before it’s too late?

2 Likes
142

sorry for not being around here much but im back to give my 2cents: what IOI have did is the most logical decision from every perspective. From an ethical and moral perspective, we need to financially punish people who commit acts like rape in order to encourage better behavior in society. From a financial perspective, even if IOI is just looking out for their own reputation as a capitalist company they are completely in the right to want to wash their hands of a bad person. From an artistic perspective, the value of the art that the devs made in Conor’s name is tainted by his actions and thus they wont want to advertise that among some of their best work. So this is the smartest decision they couldve made

However, I’m not seeing people suggest removing the mission entirely, getting rid of all the content people paid for essentially punishing consumers for IOI’s ethical mishaps? Now that’s just ridiculous, you dont push that onto the consumer when it’s the fault of the company for doing that. It’s blatantly anti-consumer. Even if you refunded it, I still think that taking away 2 cosmetics, 5 safehouse items, 5 weapons and an entire mission away is something that essentially validates the critics of the live service model: you don’t own anything you buy in Hitman WoA

What if, in a nightmare scenario, the map designer of Sapienza is found guilty of rape? Silvio Caruso’s VA? 47’s VA? What happens then? What content then gets removed, and what stays? The whole of Sapienza? Just the voice performances of the accused? The whole game? I dont think it’s a good precedent to remove content for legacy owners, as supportive as I am of doing it for new owners. But again we only have this issue because IO were playing chicken with the courts, they knew of these accusations and still collabed with him. But what’s done is done, and now the question is that of preservation: Does it remain unlisted forever or does it get remade without McGregor?

My way I would solve this dilemma is by reskinning everything involved in the Disruptor pack, recasting him with another voice actor and then doing the same with The Wild Card and put that up as a DLC 2-pack, where the profits from the DLC are donated to women’s shelters. The voice actors I would pick would be RTGame for the Wild Card and Bigmooney for the Disruptor (have him be a Scottish fighter instead of an Irish one, to avoid any association even on an Expy level with McGregor). I would then hide the content starring McGregor from anyone other than legacy owners, so the Disruptor Arcade match doesnt even show up unless you own it. I would even have it so that maybe The Wild Card 2.0 and The Disruptor 2.0 have some continuity, where it’s Mooney and RT in the map of Wild Card, instead of Cole and Busey (nothing against Cole btw, I just imagine he wont be cheap to pay for). Then in part 2 of the Arcade you then kill Mooneyruptor

That way the content can languish in obscurity, unplayable to non-owners, but the spirit of the content can still exist. You can have the items, the cosmetics and the mission just without McGregor. You also dont have to double dip, as the DLC will also have The Wild Card available for the first time

8 Likes
143

I think you make some great points, Grim. Especially on the Sapienza example.

Also, BigMooney (or the voice actor who imitates him in the Miami Easter egg) would not only make for a good replacement in terms of characterization, but also because Isle of Sgàil is in Scotland.

Still, I’m wondering if maybe IOI can save money or resources by somehow incorporating the other intense fighter ET, Sully Bowden, aka “The Rage.” McGregor made us forget about him.

8 Likes
144

I’m quite surprised those UK brands were still invested in McGregor up until this point, considering how public some of those companies are…

2 Likes
145

You know how it goes; companies aren’t gonna want to separate themselves from potential money until there’s official confirmation that the person in question is a scumbag, and therefore a public relations disaster.

Then again, companies here in the US couldn’t move fast enough to drop Tiger Woods the minute the first accusations of infidelity hit the internet, so read into that what you will. :man_shrugging:

1 Like
146

To be honest, once the dust has settled a little, it is possible that IOI puts the items back up in a DLC pack on the store. I guess the Safehouse items were the hot tub and recording booth/fish tank for the Gym area, so they weren’t directly linked to McGregor and the suit/weapon items can just be reskinned and renamed. Let’s see what happens over the coming months :slightly_smiling_face:

Like I’ve posted above, it would be cool if the items were put back up on the store over the coming months, but the suit unlock and the weapon items were renamed and reskinned. The Safehouse decorations aren’t linked to him, so they wouldn’t be an issue returning. I think doing that would be the best move and the middle finger to McGregor :joy:

2 Likes
147

They’re the money pit and different equipment for the gym (body building stuff, punching bags, a shark wall deco and I think those wooden pole things for martial arts training?), you’re thinking of the Drop’s items.

I dunno if the gaudy fur suit can simply be renamed though, isn’t this based on something McGregor wore?

2 Likes
149

I don’t care about what’s happening around that guy; it shouldn’t have anything to do with the game. People paid for this content, I paid for it, and I want it in the game. I don’t understand any argument for why they removed all the content from the game. It’s understandable that they pulled it from sale, and that’s fine. But I paid for this content, and I want it, or I want a refund. The best solution would be to replace it with another model/name/voice but keep the content that people paid for not so long ago.

I’m especially annoyed by the morality paladins on this forum who dictate what others should believe or how they should think. If someone finds this situation immoral—fine, let them decide to distance themselves from it. But no one has the right to tell me what my morality should be or whether I should want to play this or not. To me, that’s immature. It’s just a game and has nothing to do with supporting some problematic celebrity.

If IOI wants to distance themselves from it, that’s their right—it’s their game. Let them remove the DLC from sale, but not from the game for those who already purchased it. That’s simply unfair.

Everyone should keep their morality to themselves and stop telling others what to do or think.

Restore the content or change the content or refund money.

3 Likes