but i didn’t speak about McGregor specific. Anyway why we trying to play with words here? my point is Celebrities tend to get into some stupid, criminal stuff and that’s why i don’t like them to be in video games. There.
1 Like
A) That’s what this thread is about, so although you didn’t mention him specifically, it is by implication about him. B) A celebrity simply doing something “stupid” isn’t going to cause IOI and other companies to do this. “Stupid” things would be cheating on a spouse, getting into a fight with another person in public, tax fraud, slandering someone, things like that. Acts that lead to termination of business arrangements with celebrities to avoid public backlash are typically something severe, like a sexual assault, a murder, a hit-and-run DUI, participating in the Jan 6th capital riot, etc,. Those kinds of things would lead to a result like this. Things of that nature are not “stupid”; they are serious offenses.
4 Likes
I know what you mean, and I’m not trying to call you out specifically or personally.
But I am using your specific diction there to make a more general point about how words matter, especially in contexts like this when talking about serious crimes that hurt innocents.
I agree that celebrities in games, or cameos as a whole, are a gimmick. They’re often a profitable gimmick, so I comprehend a corporation’s motivation.
People, often, suck. Let’s all give one other the benefit of the doubt, but let’s also call one another out when necessary.
4 Likes
Like the late, great George Carlin said, we think in terms of language, and so the quality of our thoughts can only be as good as the quality of our language. So words, and the specific ways we use them, are crucial. Semantics matter.
2 Likes
Okay, I’ve been holding onto this for a few days now, but this idea of celebrities being focused as a problematic inclusion in case they do something stupid IRL isn’t unique to celebrities. Anyone who has collaborated, made the game what it is, or even voiced a recent character, is subject to the same critical lens we give celebs, but this is hardly brought up. It’s just that celebrities, being the ones with the most fame, get the most heat and the most attention. Which makes sense, given they are the focus and people are naturally drawn to talk about them more.
For someone like Conor, we know he’s a dick, (only IO didn’t for some reason, or they deliberately ignored it), but for someone like Yuri Lowenthal, Jonny Cruz, Naoko Mori, Colleen 'O Shaunessey, or however many VA’s we’ve had or do have, they seem to not be studied as hard by us fans. They are famous in their own right, and should not be ignored in this discussion I feel.
There’s also a concept in some media called a “purity contract” (basically telling actors to be on their best behaviour in public to enforce a specific brand amongst its audience; usually applied to child and teen actors), which is also quite interesting.
Point is, Celebrities are not the problem, it’s all a probability and numbers game when you have so much talent in one project that someone might do something stupid. It is not a guarantee either, and I’d like to believe most people in Hollywood are at least decent people.
3 Likes
Using real famous people isn’t wrong, but it can lead to these kinds of issues, and you need to be aware of that. Caution is necessary. I’ve often appreciated real actors in video games, like Kevin Spacey or Willem Dafoe, but does a game like Hitman really need them? Who buys the game just because McGregor is in it? Or The Drop (I can’t remember that guy’s real name)? Or even Sean Bean and Gary Busey?
Wouldn’t it be better to use fictional characters and avoid any potential trouble?
3 Likes
Conor was already playing a fictional character, albeit clearly an expy based on him. It’s why people have been suggesting to un-person him with somebody else as his name isn’t mentioned.
Part of the appeal of “real” celebrities is playing off of what makes them famous. Gary Busey is a looney, Sean Bean dies all the time and once played traitorous agent, Dmitri Vegas a DJ, Conor a UFC Fighter.
Willem Dafoe
What game has he been in? I can’t for the life of me work that out.
Also, Kevin Spacey was playing a fictional character in COD:AW last I checked.
1 Like
Beyond: Two souls. A great game
2 Likes
That…actually makes a lot of sense for Willem to be in. Good to know.
1 Like
Anyway, instead of Celebrity Elusive Targets, I propose a new format: the Hitmanforum Elusive Targets. The important thing is that we behave well, though 
3 Likes
Debatable, but I see where you’re going with it. My title would be The Insufferable.
3 Likes
Hey, I do youtube voice-over as a living. IO, Hit me up!
2 Likes
The most awesome turn would be to have @Dribbleondo as an Elusive Target, and use the ICA Electrocution Phone. Can be called: The Balance.
6 Likes
i don’t know why im wasting my time on this but im not downplaying anything, again civil court means hes more likely to be guilty not that guilty, so its not a definitive yes, multiple people have been found guilty in civil court but not criminal court
1 Like
Yeah, you’re right, I didn’t noticed it 
But seems that was idea behind it, to move it from the sight. Quite pathetic move but well. I’m happy that they didn’t remove it. Thanks!
1 Like
yes OJ was found guilty in civil court meaning its more likely he did it than not did it, now im done with this thread because im just repeating myself and so is everyone else
1 Like
My two cents on this topic:
Damn the levels of bad optics on this. I’m shocked IO chose to re-run this ET on the same month as the real-life court proceedings on him were advancing. Were they somehow not aware of the bad optics that would stem from that?
Featuring this person in the first place was certainly a choice (as many players pointed out at the time), but re-running him at the same time as his decisive trial is just… crazy. I’m ALMOST inclined to say they were intentionally leaning on the controversy factor from it…
Just terrible PR optics all around, and an awful case of bad timing no matter how you slice it.
Regarding the in-game content: Its kind of a bummer to see the mission and its unlocks be lost forever if you didn’t purchase/play it in time, but promoting him in any way after the trial is just not the way. At least they recognized it and inmediately cut the ET short after that.
Delisting the mission and moving it to the end of the ETA tab are a step in the right direction I would say, but the items STILL remain in-game “as-is”. I have the Green Shorts suit in my inventory but I don’t care much about the themed MMA/McGregor branding it has. I hope IO changes the unlockables from this mission (the suits, safehouse decos, etc) to remove any references to McGregor and the MMA eventually, since they are permanently displayed in the player’s inventory so its just a constant reminder of a bad situation.
Give the suits a different color, change the design of the Green Shorts, change the items’ names, remove the Ireland flag on the kettleball item, that sort of change is what I’d like to see.
Regarding the mission itself: I’d support IO retooling this mission to make it available to general players again, by removing any likeness/reference to McGregor. Turning The Disruptor from a real-life convicted criminal into a generic fictional fighter from a fake wrestling federation is always an option. If they ever go that route it should not be paid content anymore, however, just a regular ET.
In-game, the target is only referred to by his nickname and they make a point that his true identity is not known at all (which is weird since the target is stated to be a famous in-game celebrity and he has visible tattoos that say “McGregor”). That presents an “easy” way to possibly re-release this mission in the future: IO can recast his actor and change his character model so its not McGregor anymore, since he’s not directly referred to as McGregor within the mission anyway.
It almost makes one wonder if the odd way IO presented this target in-game (how the mission deliberately omits the target’s true identity even though a) he’s clearly meant to be a fictionalized version of McGregor himself, b) he’s meant to be a famous worldwide-known celebrity within the game’s lore) was intentional , just in case McGregor ever broke contract and they needed to recast him. After all, the allegations have been public for many years by now, and IO certainly MUST have known about the risk factor of having him in-game and the possibility of having to backtrack on promoting him, if necessary.
In conclusion: This is just an unfortunate situation all around, could have easily been avoided too, but it is what it is at this point. I DO think some level of retooling is still in order after the delisting, even if they don’t plan to re-release the mission again. To see those items I already unlocked remain in the game without any changes, it’s just a bit tactless imo.
11 Likes
Over my dead bod- wait.
8 Likes
Honestly, well said. I had similar thoughts earlier about the whole no-name situation, and I came to a similar realisation as well.
I have a strong suspicion IO were capitalising on the case this past month; the timing is far too much of a coincidence in my opinion, and it was also kept off their main roadmap. I can’t prove it, but it wouldn’t surprise me.
1 Like
I mean part of me wants to agree, but also the character does have McGregor tattooed on his torso. Even though nobody supposedly knows his name
It feels more like what TVTropes calls Adam Westing where an actor plays an exaggerated version of themself.
That’s mostly just me nitpicking though. Don’t mind me too much :p
Wanted by the law for selling defective cell phones that were electrocuting consumers :p
Now this is the one bit of content removal I’d oppose. McGregor is terrible, but Ireland is pretty cool (and I don’t think McGregor is exactly popular there… certainly not among the Irish folks I’ve talked to)
5 Likes