does it actually matter? the point of the post was that the year 2 content made up for a lot of what year 1 was missing (longer more grindy content vs shorter denser missions), from that you can infer that it was likely in response to the reaction towards the year 1 content. i feel like that is fairly obvious, i feel like there were drastic differences in the types of content and the approach taken in releasing that content. the only thing i find regretful is using the word shortcomings if only because it turned people immediately defensive when what i was saying was actually perfectly reasonable
This is the last I’m going to say on this subject as it’s now gone on long enough overall, but
turned into
You almost got there.
so patronizing 
I just want to be the 47th comment.
4 Likes
It was an apology for killing off Grey so unnecessary
7 Likes
Well if that’s the case, it’s to apologize for the loss of the ICA as well. They’re the main reason why there’s a second target, after all.
3 Likes
If anything IOI should apologize for the ICA even having existed in the first place.
(I always found the concept completely ridiculous, mainly because if such a thing existed it would have been taken over by the US / USSR / Illuminati / Broken Lords or whatever very quickly.)
1 Like
Providence
Well to be fair it almost happened thanks to Soders, so I didn’t include Providence in my list of overpowered political powers™ :x
First of all, such organizations have actually existed in the real world, just not this far into modern times, as far as we know. Second, the ICA was just a branch off from MI5 that decided to go private. So unless you think existing intelligence agencies wouldn’t be capable of offering contracts to independent hitters to deal with their enemies, then the concept his far from ridiculous. The only part that’s not believable is that there would be so many paid assassins in the world who get regular work and succeed so frequently. Most assassins die in the attempt and high-profile one’s on a global basis rarely happen. It’s the agents that can be seen as ridiculous, not the agency.
1 Like
Which are you talking about? Assassins? Black Hand? All of the “assassin groups” I can dig up from history were politically affiliated and none were an organization of independent contract killers, if anything they operated more like terrorists.
By definition if an intelligence agency employs a network of assassins it’s not an independant entity (like the ICA is), since they’re affiliated to a nation or another similar group with lots of political power.
It’s not particularly unbelievable that there are lots of competent killers working for a particular organization (it’s not very different from, say, a PMC), but people like the analysts we can see in Chongqing are already stretching it. Can’t wait to see the job ads for these, “looking for someone to organize some files about people we intend to kill, being able to cook dumplings is a plus”.
To be fair, I think a post-launch Freelancer game mode was a welcomed surprise for everyone I believe and a fresh take for the franchise.
Ambrose Island, which is the subject of this thread, was a newly added map to the game post-launch, so I’m not sure how adding a new map to the game is something that has differed from the previous instalments? 
1 Like
Ghost Mode had so much potential, it felt like we played an unfinished game mode but it was still lots of fun, considering that if 2 experienced players got to play against each other, it would most likely end in a 4 points for each and the 5th to be the deciding one, lots of cons but overall that game mode needed more love and care, which as we can see, didn’t get.
1 Like
Don’t want to go too far with it and get too off topic, but here’s one example I know of.
They were not independant since they were working to further the ambitions of mobsters. My problem with the ICA isn’t that it’s an organization tasked with killing people, it’s that they’re unaffiliated and that somehow the big players leave them alone, while it makes no sense politically to do so (better to control it than to risk enemies controlling it). IIRC someone in Mendoza evens mentions this, so IOI’s aware of it.
The big players leave them alone because they A) owe them for all the favors, B) understand that ICA has the most dangerous people in the world on their payroll and don’t want to piss them off, and C) ICA usually doesn’t accept contracts against them, so they’re usually not a threat. All the major governments of the West, the ICA never goes after their people unless they put up the contract themselves on their own corrupt members (Martinez from Blood Money comes to mind). So, the powers that be, most of them, have no need to try to control this independent corporate entity that D) they don’t know how to find the leadership of anyway. The only reason Providence figured it out is because they are connected to literally everything.
A) They’re not above disregarding favors and loyalties when there’s profit to be made.
B) They wouldn’t need to piss them off to control them, as we saw with Soders.
C) They’re not just western governments, and whether one of their pawns was a target previously or not wouldn’t even be part of the equation, they’re generally more clever than Don Yates (all that wine really got to his head).
D) Fair point, although there are probably a lot of Providence lookalikes that would have the means to find them.
E) If they couldn’t control the ICA they’d have to destroy it before an enemy took control of it, which would be guaranteed to happen sooner or later. Such a tool is too powerful to be left to its own devices.
At least that’s what I’d do if I was playing a strategy game and the ICA was part of it.
I find the analysts to be the most plausible actually. I imagine recruitment being on a strictly P2P basis (i.e. someone from the ICA approaching the potential candidate with an offer), and as far as the nature of the work is concerned, I mean, that’s hardly out of the ordinary for several major intelligence agencies in the world.