I've understood so much that the 2.1-2.2 missions actually lead from cinematic 2.1 to 2.2 (not 2.3).
What I don't know, or don't remember: was it intended this way (according to "Paul Chadwick's interesting temporal sense") or was cinematic 2.2 somehow released after both mission subchapters? I had a tough time getting critical missions back then, and I know I couldn't get one for weeks sometimes.
On a related note, something I've oddly realized just now: the Assassin's first-person killer in 3.1.
It's generally assumed that it's a placeholder for a player role that was unsuccessfully planned to be in the cinematic; however, that's exactly how the attacker 2.2 looks -- a generic redpill RSI that could have been replaced with a specific player RSI at a later point. From all I can see in 3.1, it was definitely intended not to show the killer.
That well and truely qualifies this question as an "unresolved question".
What I don't know, or don't remember: was it intended this way (according to "Paul Chadwick's interesting temporal sense") or was cinematic 2.2 somehow released after both mission subchapters? I had a tough time getting critical missions back then, and I know I couldn't get one for weeks sometimes.
On a related note, something I've oddly realized just now: the Assassin's first-person killer in 3.1.
It's generally assumed that it's a placeholder for a player role that was unsuccessfully planned to be in the cinematic; however, that's exactly how the attacker 2.2 looks -- a generic redpill RSI that could have been replaced with a specific player RSI at a later point. From all I can see in 3.1, it was definitely intended not to show the killer.
That well and truely qualifies this question as an "unresolved question".