Infamous 2's new cole = nathan drake...

[Hiphophippo]

I just got my Game Informer and I really don't like Cole's new look, it's like they sucked out what little personality he had and turned him into every generic-looking game character that came before him. I think it's a stupid decision on Sucker Punch's part.

Interestingly, I feel the exact opposite. The original Cole (and I do love the game, mind you) was so cookie cutter, angsty and brooding to me. Felt like every other dime a dozen action characters. Nathan might be normal to most people, but at least he had character.

I approve of this direction.

 

[RatRace123]

I don't see the problem a lot of people seemed to have with him in inFAMOUS 1. They said he was too bland and gruff, but I actually thought he was pretty iconic. He was also one of the rare characters that could be badass whether he was good or evil. Plus his look and voice allowed you to actually believe he could be good or evil. The new redesign, I don't get that same feeling.

They took an awesome character and turned him into a douchey Abercrombie and Fitch model. Sad, sad thing. I liked Drake, though. Again I don't really get a Drake vibe from new Cole as much as I get a... Tool vibe.

 

[Nedoras]

I just saw the trailer and I must say, they really changed him. He doesn't even remotely resemble how he looked in the first game. From what they say, they also changed his personality quite a bit as well. I don't mind a bit of change, but I think they may have changed him a bit too much.

 

[Enigma6667]

I don't like Cole's new look, but I don't really mind Nate's personality that much. Sure the wise-cracking got a bit much in certain segments, but it wasn't enough to make me strangle myself, because there were at least a few lines that garnered a chuckle or two from me.

However, I absolutely hate Cole's new design. Jewelery and designer clothes? The fuck?

 

[FieryTrainwreck]

Yahtzee? Is that you? Oh, wait, sorry... I just get confused when I see people forming their opinions based on something Yahtzee said.

I addressed this in the very first post. Accept the fact that people sometimes agree with Yahtzee. I hate Joss Whedon. I hate Nathan Drake. I hate unrealistically shiny and perfect characters with cliched one-liners for every conceivable circumstance. You can like these things all you want, but that doesn't make you right. I'm not objectively right either, but I think we can all agree that homogenization is a bad thing. Even if you're not crazy about Cole, isn't it nice that he's not actually Nathan Drake? Shouldn't we encourage and enjoy some variety of character in gaming? Instead we're seeing yet another generic and soulless product of focus testing. Sorry, that sucks.

Nathan Drake is a good character. Great? No. He's cocky, arrogant, but still fucks up from time to time and in the end when it comes down to business, the wise cracking ends and he puts himself on the line to do the right thing. He's not a particularly deep character, but a typical action/adventure character - and that's all he needs to be.

Why is that all he needs to be? Why can't he be atypical - you know, interesting, compelling, unique? The thing that's so frustrating about a major release sticking to stereotypes is that those stereotypes were once original - and their originality is a huge part of what made them so successful. Trying to copy that success by doing the exact same thing isn't just lame - it's a bad idea. This is something television figured out, which is why you find much better stuff at home on the couch than you do in the theater. Gaming has always aped film, and we're seeing some of the worst byproducts of that fixation in the new Cole.

 

[therandombear]

I liked Cole's gritty voice and apperance it fitted him after what had happened to him.
I can understand that his hair grew out again between the games, and that he got some new threads, but his voice is a no no, doesn't fit, at all.

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

I agree with you that nathan drake is a terrible character because he was made to be as 'perfect' as possible. but TBH, i hated how cole looked in the first game and i'm happy that they made him look a little bit more vibrant in inFamous 2.

Yahtzee? Is that you? Oh, wait, sorry... I just get confused when I see people forming their opinions based on something Yahtzee said.

Nathan Drake is a good character. Great? No. He's cocky, arrogant, but still fucks up from time to time and in the end when it comes down to business, the wise cracking ends and he puts himself on the line to do the right thing. He's not a particularly deep character, but a typical action/adventure character - and that's all he needs to be.

'

you beat me to it.

i was gonna say this exactly, cookie to you.

however, i think it is dumb they changed cole like that from the first game, thats just dumb

Yahtzee? Is that you? Oh, wait, sorry... I just get confused when I see people forming their opinions based on something Yahtzee said.

I addressed this in the very first post. Accept the fact that people sometimes agree with Yahtzee. I hate Joss Whedon. I hate Nathan Drake. I hate unrealistically shiny and perfect characters with cliched one-liners for every conceivable circumstance. You can like these things all you want, but that doesn't make you right. I'm not objectively right either, but I think we can all agree that homogenization is a bad thing. Even if you're not crazy about Cole, isn't it nice that he's not actually Nathan Drake? Shouldn't we encourage and enjoy some variety of character in gaming? Instead we're seeing yet another generic and soulless product of focus testing. Sorry, that sucks.

and odd enough that people seem to spew the rage out of there mouth AFTER yahtzee says it..

unrealistically shiny and perfect? he gets raped on quite a few times in the games, and he even realizes it so no hes not a perfect character, no where near it. and unrealistic? i know at least 10 people off the top of my head that act quite similar to him other than that they wouldn't be crazy enough to go on a action adventure like he does for treasure.

and while yeah variety is nice, obviously your greatly outnumbered in people liking the role of nathan drake, especially when that role fit the game oh so well, so why wouldn't they put more types like him in games? you can only have so many different personalities before you overlap, however i will agree that they should have kept cole the same for the second game.

Why is that all he needs to be? Why can't he be atypical - you know, interesting, compelling, unique? The thing that's so frustrating about a major release sticking to stereotypes is that those stereotypes were once original - and their originality is a huge part of what made them so successful. Trying to copy that success by doing the exact same thing isn't just lame - it's a bad idea. This is something television figured out, which is why you find much better stuff at home on the couch than you do in the theater. Gaming has always aped film, and we're seeing some of the worst byproducts of that fixation in the new Cole.

he actually is a decent character, and there are hundreds, and i mean by the hundreds of games where the character is nothing in either of those 3 categories that you mentioned compared to nathan drake, in the game he has a goal, i've yet to see a treasure hunting game besides possibly tomb raider and the like that are anything like it really, so i really dont think that its an uninteresting character/game/plot, and everything now a days is just rehashing old stuff into smoother more modern new stuff, so you can't really say "MAKE SOMETHINGZ NEW!" when more then likely that character has been done before.

wait what movies and tv shows are you watching? tv has some good stuff yes, but some of it is rehash after rehash of the same old shit and most actors are NOT up to par, hell when tv does come up with a good actor/person, they always move onto movies, due to its a higher league of acting.

of course this is all just my own opinion, but why are you bringing down drake so much with your complaint about cole?

 

[Jumplion]

I think you'll be happy to know that,

this design is not permanent. It is still a work in progress.

http://kotaku.com/5567114/infamous-2-brings-lightning+spewing-tornadoes-to-the-big-easy

"MacGrath does look and sound quite different than the original game. Both are deliberate. His appearance is still a work in progress, his voice is not."

Interesting tid-bit though, turns out that the voice actor's voice got more gruff as development for InFamous 1 was going along, hence the gravely voice.

 

[Mr. Grey]

Apparently it's not permanent... yet. That's good in my book, who wants nachos?

But I'm pissed that Sucker Punch is taking that route with Cole. Cole should be gravely, he should be pissed off, he should be (to use a word I hate to use when describing things I like) dark! He lives in a dark world filled with hunger, suffering, and super-powered villains trying to rule the world.

Good point.

Consider...

Spoiler

he unwittingly blew up tons of people and lost the woman he loved only to find out that the man who was responsible was fucking him. How does a series of such traumatic events turn a hard-boiled, gravely, victim of circumstance into a wise-cracking pretty boy dick head?

Spoiler: Regarding the spoiler...

... it's called Reverse Psychology, now his psychological makeup has been reversed as he's adapted a new personality that's entirely contrast to who he was. Question answered.

[sub]Yes, I'm joking, but it is scary that it makes some sense.[/sub]

 

[PeterDawson]

While I'm a massive fan of Nathan Drake, though I won't bother explaining why because I REALLY don't want to be an instigator, I am banging my head at this. Cole was still a well-defined character in his own right, and they're treating him like what they should be doing to Alex Mercer if they make a Prototype sequel, IE changing him so he's more interesting. Even worse will be if they get Nolan North to do the voice as while he's a pretty solid voice actor he tends to use what seems to be his normal voice so much that methinks he's getting over-saturated. I mean, Uncharted, Assassin's Creed, Dark Void, Prince of Persia, Resonance of Fate... and really, only the first two made good use as the first one was well-scripted and allowed for decent ad-libs (Kick you to sleep!) and the second Desmond tries to pull out the charm but is frequently told to shut up and such, thus there were some visible differences.

So yeah, they're making the same damn mistake all media makes and following the leader. One of these years people will stop trying to follow trends and constantly trying to make new ones, which means we'll actually get more decent unique games for a freaking change. The fact that the last two game of the years (in my book anyhow, which were Fallout 3 and Uncharted 2 respectively) have been sequels, granted strong ones, annoys the crap out of me.

 

[FieryTrainwreck]

and odd enough that people seem to spew the rage out of there mouth AFTER yahtzee says it..

Apply some common sense to the situation. Nathan Drake is a clear amalgamation of fantastically safe and likable traits into an eminently sellable product. Is it more likely that groupthink would encourage a person to like or dislike the character? If you're going to call someone out for copying another person's opinion, why can't he turn around and call you out for copying the opinion of seemingly everyone else? After all, it's more likely that you're being compelled to like the guy than I am being influenced to the contrary.

unrealistically shiny and perfect? he gets raped on quite a few times in the games, and he even realizes it so no hes not a perfect character, no where near it. and unrealistic? i know at least 10 people off the top of my head that act quite similar to him other than that they wouldn't be crazy enough to go on a action adventure like he does for treasure.

This is exactly what Yahtzee is talking about when he says the character is "Hollywood flawed"; he's not legitimately or tragically flawed in any way. He has all the safe and sympathetic shortcomings of a blockbuster hero, and that's boring to a lot of people. Notice I'm not saying he's a terrible character for everyone. He's not. A lot of people enjoy Nathan Drake. I don't, at all, and I can't fathom why others do. But I'm not calling for them to change him. I'm lamenting the fact that a character I do like is being changed to mimic one I detest. Objectively, can't you see why that's a bad thing? I wouldn't celebrate "Uncharted 3 featuring the solemn, thoughtful, introspective Nathan Drake" - especially if it were clearly a profit-driven calculation.

and while yeah variety is nice, obviously your greatly outnumbered in people liking the role of nathan drake, especially when that role fit the game oh so well, so why wouldn't they put more types like him in games? you can only have so many different personalities before you overlap, however i will agree that they should have kept cole the same for the second game.

Because Cole already had a personality. If it were a new character with a fresh back story, I'd have no reason to complain. I'd simply chalk it up as another game I probably can't stomach on account of intensely disliking the archetype. But I liked Cole. I liked how he stood out against the deluge of wise-cracking pretty boys, and they're slaughtering him to cater to a perceived demographic based on focus testing. You seem to be promoting the idea that there are objectively good characters as opposed to well-rounded or well-developed ones, and that it's perfectly fine for every protagonist to take on the same tacked on characteristics if that's what's popular with the majority.

he actually is a decent character, and there are hundreds, and i mean by the hundreds of games where the character is nothing in either of those 3 categories that you mentioned compared to nathan drake, in the game he has a goal, i've yet to see a treasure hunting game besides possibly tomb raider and the like that are anything like it really, so i really dont think that its an uninteresting character/game/plot, and everything now a days is just rehashing old stuff into smoother more modern new stuff, so you can't really say "MAKE SOMETHINGZ NEW!" when more then likely that character has been done before.

The point of the thread isn't to crucify Nathan Drake. I love doing so, but it's like arguing politics or religion - you'll have more fun if you're talking to people who agree with you. I just hate jarring changes to existing characters with obvious intent to cash in on other franchises. Reminds me of the second in the Prince of Persia series, where the Prince went brooding for no apparent reason.

wait what movies and tv shows are you watching? tv has some good stuff yes, but some of it is rehash after rehash of the same old shit and most actors are NOT up to par, hell when tv does come up with a good actor/person, they always move onto movies, due to its a higher league of acting.

Welcome to ten years ago? HBO changed the game with The Sopranos. Writers have far more creative control in television now, which is why shows like Breaking Bad, Dexter, Weeds, and The Wire are allowed to persist and evolve. Do they last forever? Not always. But it's pretty widely acknowledged that television is the more creative medium at present - which is why a lot of actors have migrated back from film. Of course, the relatively lower costs involved are a big part of the appeal, and that's what's creeping into gaming. I'm sure Infamous 2 is extremely expensive, so they'll do what they can to broaden appeal and generate more sales. I just think you can take it so far that no one relates to a character on any meaningful level.

 

[Julianking93]

I've already stated my opinions on that piece of shit character Nathan Drake so it should be pretty obvious that I'm fucking pissed that they changed his appearance in this one.

 

[FieryTrainwreck]

Apparently it's not permanent... yet. That's good in my book, who wants nachos?

But I'm pissed that Sucker Punch is taking that route with Cole. Cole should be gravely, he should be pissed off, he should be (to use a word I hate to use when describing things I like) dark! He lives in a dark world filled with hunger, suffering, and super-powered villains trying to rule the world.

Good point.

Consider...

Spoiler

he unwittingly blew up tons of people and lost the woman he loved only to find out that the man who was responsible was fucking him. How does a series of such traumatic events turn a hard-boiled, gravely, victim of circumstance into a wise-cracking pretty boy dick head?

Spoiler: Regarding the spoiler...

... it's called Reverse Psychology, now his psychological makeup has been reversed as he's adapted a new personality that's entirely contrast to who he was. Question answered.

[sub]Yes, I'm joking, but it is scary that it makes some sense.[/sub]

"I've tried everything! Psychology, reverse psychology..."