While the ending thing sounds all amazing at the end of the day it still seems to be ether ultra good or super evil. Is their a neutral where you can just kill the towering monster of the day and work tirelessly to make sure BOTH races live in peace?
Whoa. I just had my mind blown man. No other game has ever given me the choice between sacrificing myself or sacrificing others. We might be witnessing the birth of a new form of storytelling.
inFamous' good and evil moral system kind of made sense.
inFamous 2's doesn't. You aren't making good or evil choices in inFamous 2. It's more of...Order vs Chaos type thing.
(I realize that good and evil are 100% subjective, but it's generally considered that malicious = evil and benevolent = good.)
Anywho, I chose evil for my first playthrough. What they make you do to Zeke was awful, man. I almost couldn't go through with it.
Seieko Pherdo said:
While the ending thing sounds all amazing at the end of the day it still seems to be ether ultra good or super evil. Is their a neutral where you can just kill the towering monster of the day and work tirelessly to make sure BOTH races live in peace?
It wouldn't be possible. If you don't stop the Beast, then the Evil ending occurs regardless of whether Cole was physically there or not. If you do stop the Beast, then the Good ending's scenario inevitably happens because of what must be done to beat the Beast.
Besides, the 'Evil' ending isn't super evil. You save all of the Conduits who would have otherwise died from the Plague. Cole said that the chances for being a Conduit are 1/1000, so that's still a shitload of people.
Well that was 14 years ago, I was 2 back than, do the math. I'm fairly sure a large amount of the community has heard of this like some type of legend. But outta curiosity what was the choice
In regards to whether or not there could still be an inFamous 3... was I the only one paying attention to John White's/the Ray Sphere's conversation with Cole? He/It mentions that when the Ray Sphere went off in inFamous and John was torn apart, it rebuilt itself slowly, atom by atom, through an extreme act of concentration. Obviously, the process left the creature mentally unstable, but in effect over time it resurrected itself.
Seeing as it told Cole such a thing was possible, is it not feasible that the last thought that went through his head before his death was something along the lines of 'maybe if I just keep it together...'? In other words, if he knows that a powerful enough conduit could potentially bring himself back from the dead, wouldn't his final thoughts on dying have centered around trying to do the same?
... just a thought, but the one that made sense to me at the time.
Well that was 14 years ago, I was 2 back than, do the math. I'm fairly sure a large amount of the community has heard of this like some type of legend. But outta curiosity what was the choice
Warachia said:
It's funny, I look at the title and what people are touting as great storytelling, and can still think up at least five examples of stories in the past that did the same thing.
Although it is entertaining to watch, it's like watching somebody discover chocolate or sugar for the first time in their life.
Edit: As an example, you know what these kinds of extreme game endings remind me of the most? the ending to the first fable game.
That's Fable man, not really the greatest example of story telling. I guess its bigger in my opinion in how real it is. I mean with hese types of voices we're either in sci fi or fantasy, universe where logic has no say in things. It's a little more real I actually thought about whether the world would begetter if ram by meta humans or if hey should be extinct. I never felt much impact of my choices in games until this one, it was awesome.
In regards to whether or not there could still be an inFamous 3... was I the only one paying attention to John White's/the Ray Sphere's conversation with Cole? He/It mentions that when the Ray Sphere went off in inFamous and John was torn apart, it rebuilt itself slowly, atom by atom, through an extreme act of concentration. Obviously, the process left the creature mentally unstable, but in effect over time it resurrected itself.
Seeing as it told Cole such a thing was possible, is it not feasible that the last thought that went through his head before his death was something along the lines of 'maybe if I just keep it together...'? In other words, if he knows that a powerful enough conduit could potentially bring himself back from the dead, wouldn't his final thoughts on dying have centered around trying to do the same?
... just a thought, but the one that made sense to me at the time.
Yeah, he still has to get time travel powers, and what about the First Sons? This'd be a BS way to end things, I'm betting you're right, Cole's much more powerful than he was plus there was that bolt of lightning that hit the freighter at the end of the good ending. Maybe that was Cole focusing REALLY hard on extracting electricity that he actually drew a bolt of lightning from the air SO POWERFUL that it kickstarted his heart.
yeah eradication of a race has never been done before (rachni)
and sacrifice has never been done in a game before (kill the archdemon, kill yourself)
good guy turns out to be evil, evil guy turns out to be good at the same time (basically every rpg ever done)
infamous 2 was an epic game but the ending is not groundbreaking and it's not going to dethrone bioware its a fucking awesome ending but it's been done before as in way before fuck even beowulf did it hundreds of years ago.
In regards to whether or not there could still be an inFamous 3... was I the only one paying attention to John White's/the Ray Sphere's conversation with Cole? He/It mentions that when the Ray Sphere went off in inFamous and John was torn apart, it rebuilt itself slowly, atom by atom, through an extreme act of concentration. Obviously, the process left the creature mentally unstable, but in effect over time it resurrected itself.
Seeing as it told Cole such a thing was possible, is it not feasible that the last thought that went through his head before his death was something along the lines of 'maybe if I just keep it together...'? In other words, if he knows that a powerful enough conduit could potentially bring himself back from the dead, wouldn't his final thoughts on dying have centered around trying to do the same?
... just a thought, but the one that made sense to me at the time.
yeah eradication of a race has never been done before (rachni)
and sacrifice has never been done in a game before (kill the archdemon, kill yourself)
good guy turns out to be evil, evil guy turns out to be good at the same time (basically every rpg ever done)
infamous 2 was an epic game but the ending is not groundbreaking and it's not going to dethrone bioware its a fucking awesome ending but it's been done before as in way before fuck even beowulf did it hundreds of years ago.
It's big because it brushes close to reality, this has some of the closest to reality logic a comic book-type universe can have. You spend the whole game saving people and you can't really sympathize with giant bugs. Yeah the whole archdemon Hero combo death is big but you can't sympathize with it. It's good because its close to reality. And the whole good guy is evil isn't like,"A-ha! It was I all along!" it was a true betrayal, the girl you team up with on all the good missions is evil and the girl you team up with on all the bad missions is good.
Whoa. I just had my mind blown man. No other game has ever given me the choice between sacrificing myself or sacrificing others. We might be witnessing the birth of a new form of storytelling.
Whoa. I just had my mind blown man. No other game has ever given me the choice between sacrificing myself or sacrificing others. We might be witnessing the birth of a new form of storytelling.
...that sounds pretty typical for videogame writing. The whole good guy-bad guy reversal twist is certainly nothing new, which is not to say there's anything wrong with it, but countless games have done the same thing (including almost every Bioware RPG).
The only difference between what you've described and typical video game writing is that they just put it on a larger scale. Once again, Bioware (and other studios) do this all the time because scale is an easy way to make writing seem better and give more impact to decisions.
But the actual decision you described is still the black and white forced binary choice decisions of almost every modern RPG - all they did was add drawbacks to each side of the decision. The decision still presents an obvious "good" and a clear "evil" choice. All you really end up doing is deciding whether you're playing a good guy or a bad guy, the actual terms of the choice remain largely inconsequential.
I completely agree. It's just another sereis of binary choices that are present in most rpg's, (nor is the whole sacrifice thing or the inversed character expectations particularly novel) just on a larger than usual scale.
The use of a karma system locks you into playing a role of 'good' or 'evil' as that's how your playing the game with that run-through. This is why i think games which lack karma systems are superior in terms or moral choices and allow better 'rpging'. The Witcher (the first one at least, havn't palyed the second yet) is a great example of this as every choice you make has a consequence and will effect the game and other characters. However they are never presented in morally opposite terms, its all a grey area and you as Geralt chose what you think is right, not knowing what the long term consequences will be.
Dude are you trolling or what? Bioware still is the king of writing in games. Also Bethesda beat infamous with the choice of sacing yourself or sacing someone else. It was called Fallout3.
I honestly do now know how you think a 'good' vs 'evil' mechanic morality based system is anywhere near the zenith of the potential for morality in games. A truly great morality system would not even bother with arbitrary terms like 'good' or 'evil'. It would just have choices and you would have to deal with the consequences of them like life.
The ending was great, but what made it unique was that you participated. Lots of other games would have the whole damn ending be a cutscene, but you had to manually activate the RFI--or if evil, kill Zeke yourself.
By no means Bioware-crushing, but these little touches really do count.
Whoa. I just had my mind blown man. No other game has ever given me the choice between sacrificing myself or sacrificing others. We might be witnessing the birth of a new form of storytelling.
My thoughts exactly. Sucker Punch has not done anything new, and the only reason it looks like they did so well with inFamous 2 is because inFamous 1 set the bar so low with its awful choices and choice outcomes. Anything that's not as extremely stupid as...
Your girlfriend is hanging from one building, and 6 random doctors are hanging from another. They will all soon fall. Who do you save?
Save the 6 doctors = Your girlfriend falls and dies.
Save your girlfriend = The bad guy totally knew you would do that, and thus lied to you and put your girlfriend in with the 6 doctors, so you just saved some random person and your girlfriend falls and dies.
Yes, their very poor plot is so linear that they make the game look even more stupid by ruining the one decent moral dilemma that the game had with those utterly awful choice outcomes because it's just that important to their stupid plot that the girlfriend dies. Maybe next time don't put the choice in at all if she's required to die.
looks like quality writing by comparison.
When you compare it to other games and other works of fiction, it's just another cliche (or trope, whatever is more appropriate here). Not that using those are always a bad thing, but they shouldn't be celebrated as the pinnacle of storytelling either.
TC, thanks for that series of laughs I got when you said that Sucker Punch wrote a better game than BioWare because of a common trope. I needed that, so sincerely, thank you. To to seriously respond to that, they should try writing some decent characters as well. Another reason why the inFamous plot was so bad is that they just plop in all these random characters and expect us to magically care because they assign roles like "Cole's best friend" and "Cole's love interest". How can I take Cole seriously when he's so upset that Trish doesn't like him anymore? All the game showed us was a unreasonable, snotty woman who only bothered with Cole when she needed something, and it expects me feel the same hurt Cole feels and care about her? Please. And then there was Cole himself, who also had just about no character. Even the various moral differences for Cole were just "extra whiny douchebag" and "whiny douchebag with a gravely voice and oil on his head."
And from what I hear, inFamous 2 does not do any better in that department, so that alone means to me that they didn't get anywhere near to writing as well as BioWare does.
OutrageousEmu said:
Kahunaburger said:
Whoa. I just had my mind blown man. No other game has ever given me the choice between sacrificing myself or sacrificing others. We might be witnessing the birth of a new form of storytelling.
There's a little bit more to it than that. The choice isn't solely self sacrifice, you have to kill, from a rough estimate, roughly 3% of the population of the entire planet, Cole being among them. Its also never garunteed it would save them, so you could have sacrificed yourself for nothing, letting the rest of the population die and essentially killing the only people who could have survived.
That does little to change the fact that it's a trope and should not be celebrated as some brand new awesome plot that we've never seen before and massive kudos to Sucker Punch for being so original. It's still your typical "needs of the many VS needs of the few" choice, killing 3% of the planet's population or killing 97% of the earth's population.
Whoa. I just had my mind blown man. No other game has ever given me the choice between sacrificing myself or sacrificing others. We might be witnessing the birth of a new form of storytelling.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
