Poll: The Legacy of Cole MacGrath

[ejrocksthisworld]

WARNING: The following comments on this page will most likely contain spoilers as to the events of Infamous, Infamous 2 and the recently announced Second Son.

For those of you who are aware, InFamous: Second Son is the recently announced sequel to the hit Playstation Exclusive franchise: InFamous. It has come to my attention that, after viewing the player statistics of trophies collected, Sucker Punch made the call to follow the Good Karma storyline when approaching the future events of their upcoming title. That being said, (SPOILERS, GOOD KARMA ENDING) the fact that Conduits are still alive after the New Marais crisis, Cole's death and the now supposed deaths of every conduit on the planet is a tad alarming, seeing as though it portrayed the conduits as being wiped out in order to save humanity. I want to know you guys' thoughts as to this recent change. Was there a need for a sequel? Why even select a specific Karma ending to enter a sequel game? Why are conduits alive when they were supposedly exterminated?

Oh and here's a poll to see which ending you preferred for InFamous 2.

 

[Sniper Team 4]

No, there wasn't a need for a sequel. I agree with what Yahtzee said, in that he was proud that the developers had the nerve to end it with just two games. Well, that's out the window now.

As you pointed out, InFamous 2's good ending pretty much wrapped up the entire franchise. Okay, so there was that bolt of lightening at the end, but that could just be the atmosphere reacting to the body of the most powerful electric Conduit. The fact that there is going to be a third game diminishes that entire ending and forces me to wonder, "What was the point?" If the Conduits are still going to be around, even though the game itself said they all died, then why did Cole have to make the ultimate sacrifice? I'm sure they'll come up with some excuse to undercut their truly great ending, but I must admit that I am not looking forward to it.

The game itself also doesn't look too interesting to me. The teaser trailer we got looked like it had every cliche imaginable for the type of story they're going to tell. I'm rather tired of playing as a 'rebel' in a (not) perfect city, with dark streets, a 1984 feel to everything, and a government that's corrupted and only the rebel can stand up to it. Ten to one they give his personality the classic, "I'm a total jerk to everyone, but I have a soft spot and a heart of gold under all of it."

EDIT: In fact, now that I think about it, I think a game based on the BAD ending would have been more enjoyable. This time, instead of playing as a super powered human, you play as a regular human who is trying to save the last of the human race. How this would work against people with superpowers would clearly need some thinking, but I know it could be done. And if that doesn't work, how about play as a rogue Conduit. You've spent you entire life hiding your power because of how people would see you (thanks to Cole going around and murdering hundreds of thousands of people in a flash), but when the Conduit army starts to move on your city, you have to step up. Learn how to use your power, battle other Conduits, all the while you're forced to choose between saving normal humans (who now hate you and blame everything on you because they know you're one of them) and siding with Cole's army. I'd be more interested to play that game than the one they have in the works now.

 

[Daystar Clarion]

All conduits might have been killed at the same time as Cole.

It doesn't mean it totally wiped out the chances for future generations to become conduits.

 

[King of Asgaard]

Honestly, I much preferred the evil ending, because killing off the superior beings in the human race didn't sit well with me.
Altruism be damned, why should I sacrifice my life and great power, as well as the lives and powers of millions like me just to keep the status quo?
Surely progressing the evolution of the human race through the breeding of conduits would make for a much better ending than simply all the cool people die and all the boring people live.
Also, the final boss for the evil ending was a far more satisfying climax than the good ending.
"Half as long. Twice as bright."

Now on to the the ending.

All conduits might have been killed at the same time as Cole.

It doesn't mean it totally wiped out the chances for future generations to become conduits.

Yeah pretty much this, I doubt the Ray Sphere Inhibitor has the power to wipe out all potential conduits.

 

[Casual Shinji]

All conduits might have been killed at the same time as Cole.

It doesn't mean it totally wiped out the chances for future generations to become conduits.

It kinda does though. Not just all conduits, but everyone with the conduit gene croaks, meaning the gene disappears.

Both endings for inFamous 2 were meant as pretty much definitive; Either all humans die or all conduits die. And it was kind of refreshing to see a franchise not be a trilogy and just end at the second installment. It was nice while it lasted, I guess.

Anyway, I'll reserve judgment for Second Son till I see some gameplay, but I am a bit worried about what appears to be the lack of electric power. In the first two games it basically defined your means of travel and healing. And I still think it's one of the best excuses for a game character to not be able to swim, and therefor lock him in the gameworld. The electricity angle was cleverly used that way. Without it, I don't know if they can work around those same open world limitations without it seeming rather arbitrary.

 

[Catfood220]

It has come to my attention that, after viewing the player statistics of trophies collected, Sucker Punch made the call to follow the Good Karma storyline when approaching the future events of their upcoming title.

I want to know how they found that out when I guess a lot of people like me actually played both games twice to see both endings. Did they just look at which trophy people got first?

The game itself also doesn't look too interesting to me. The teaser trailer we got looked like it had every cliche imaginable for the type of story they're going to tell. I'm rather tired of playing as a 'rebel' in a (not) perfect city, with dark streets, a 1984 feel to everything, and a government that's corrupted and only the rebel can stand up to it. Ten to one they give his personality the classic, "I'm a total jerk to everyone, but I have a soft spot and a heart of gold under all of it."

I kinda hope that Zeke is involved in it somewhere. Like he realises that his best friends sacrifice was in vain and has dedicated his life to helping other conduits to do better things. Some of like Professor X's Mutant Acadamy. Like we see in the trailer, he is a jackass and just wrecking stuff because the government is cracking down on conduits. Maybe as he is trying to escape from that encounter, he runs into Zeke who offers him a better life for himself. You would then play the game in the usual iNfamous way. The good way you work with and help Zeke trying to prove that the conduits are not all bad, working with the goverment to bring down dangerous conduits and win respect for your cause. Or bad, you work with Zeke your own way spreading fear and destruction in your wake, working with dangerous conduits to further your own agenda. You could even extend the bit of the game where you work with other conduits like Nix or Quo. Maybe even form small teams of conduits to help you with your quest.

I am cautiously optimistic about this game, the iNfamous game have been 2 of my favourite games of this generation. I agree that the second game should have been the end of it. But if they are going to give us more, then bring it on.

Also, the final boss for the evil ending was a far more satisfying climax than the good ending.

I agree, for all the build up that The Beast got as being almost unstoppable, I found him to very easy to stop. Heck even in the first fight with him I was blowing chunks off of him until the game went "no, you must play the rest of the game before you find out The Beast is a big wuss". Nix and Zeke were a much better and moving challenge in the evil ending.

 

[Professor Lupin Madblood]

(SPOILERS, GOOD KARMA ENDING)

Spoiler: Fucking seriously?

Spoiler tags are like the first thing you learn on these forums. Honest to god.

As someone who absolutely adored the Infamous games, the announcement of Second Son was a sucker punch in the gut. The two games, though flawed, did an admirable job of creating a wholly new world and story, and wrapping it up nicely in two games.

What always stuck with me, though, was that they took the "one person's life must be shit in order for everyone else's life not to be shit" approach, which NEVER crops up in any fiction (superhero fiction especially), and was refreshing to see carried through to the end. The twist at the end of the original Infamous remains one of the best I've ever seen.

Second Son looks like it's going to take all the stuff that made the original Infamous games great (unique electric powers, good characters, strong narratives) and replace it with the always intellectual "GUBMINT TRYINA WATCH US, DAS BAD WE GOTA STOP UM" approach. The new Devil May Cry tried something similarly vulgar in tone, and failed spectacularly, so obviously that's what you want to copy, right?

 

[jdogtwodolla]

Why does Second Son even need to be in the same realm as the two prior? That seems a little restrictive, especially with how the good play through ended.

 

[Blaster]

I had actually hoped there would be a sequel, because I genuinely liked idea of there being multiple conduits, and therefore multiple stories to tell. I also hoped it would be based off the "bad" ending (since, in inFamous, Cole remarks that he was "a bit of a screw up before becoming a Conduit), where Conduits are roaming the world, freely.

To be honest, I'd play the game out of curiosity and respect for the original series. It would need quite a bit of work though, since the first two developed gameplay based on Cole's electrical powers.

 

[The_Echo]

As I recall, they made a point to tell the player that there wasn't a guarantee that all Conduits would be killed.

Why did they have to choose a specific ending to launch from? Well, because the endings are vastly different, that's why. Do you really think the government would be in the super-controlling state it's shown to be in the Second Son trailer if the Bad Karma ending followed through? 'Cause I don't.

Anyway, I'm incredibly excited for Second Son, because I loved inFAMOUS and I want to see how they follow it up. Yeah, it was cool that they had the nuts to 'end' a franchise at two games, but there are a lot of worse ways they could have continued it (I recall many people theorizing that the lightning bolt was supposed to revive Cole). And it's such a cool IP with so much potential beyond one character's story.

Sucker Punch hasn't made a bad game yet, I don't expect them to start now.

Second Son looks like it's going to take all the stuff that made the original Infamous games great (unique electric powers, good characters, strong narratives) and replace it with the always intellectual "GUBMINT TRYINA WATCH US, DAS BAD WE GOTA STOP UM" approach. The new Devil May Cry tried something similarly vulgar in tone, and failed spectacularly, so obviously that's what you want to copy, right?

Delsin uses smoke powers, not electric ones. But the setting is that it's a post-Cole world, and the government's set up every precaution to keep Conduits under control (labeling them bioterrorists). Yeah, it doesn't feel quite as original as the premise of its predecessors, but I think it's a logical narrative move. And Sucker Punch are smart, so there's probably more to it.

Remember DmC (which was actually received rather well) was made by a different dev, whereas Second Son is the same people. I kind of feel like they'll know how to handle their own IP.

 

[Xonos]

I dunno guys, it looks okay to me. I see some people bash the originality of the story of this one, what with it seemingly being an orwellian police state + rebels = freedom fighting, but it's not like the originals concepts were that great. The first one was fine, but the second one basically boiled down too "find the Mcguffins and wish the bad guy away, ohh and the people who live here are racist murderers". Plus as was pointed out earlier, both the 1st and 2nd games were littered with plot twists, so I think it's to early to say this games story is going to be bad.

Frankly I'm looking forward to it, the smoke powers seems interesting, certainly a little more so than shooting lightning (which is awesome but not exactly rare), and I think it's generally to early to say anything about the quality of the story or the characters.

I think there's a lot more that can be done with this world, and if the creators of inFamous 1+2 have shown us anything, it's that they know how to handle it.

Ohh and regarding the good ending, I know it kinda sucks and kinda sorta invalidates Cole's sacrifice, but I chose the bad ending and I'm sticking with it, so noone is happy about it. That's a problem and they probably accidently wrote themselves into a corner, hopefully they have learned something and not make that same mistake again.

Besides I can put up with a "little" retcon in favor of a potentially great game, can't you?

 

[BrotherRool]

inFamous 2 was a stunning example of brilliant game design, story, pacing, mechanics. Everything about that game was raised practically to perfection, despite the concepts being nothing interesting by themselves. I'm going to trust these guys with another game.


I'd never play the evil ending though, it's impressive that they didn't shy away from the consequences at all, it's actually a testament to the game that I never want to do it. If they're going to base a game in the same universe, it pretty much has to be the good ending because it can act as reset button and the conduit thing can start again from scratch.

It would be interesting to have a game where everyone had powers and only a few mutant humans didn't, but it would change the power trip atmosphere.

Anyway I'm going to treat this game as a new continuity whatever happens. If in my head it's separate from 2 then it doesn't matter, and there's no real reason why I can't do that. Each game takes place in it's own unique space where I play through it and then they just share lore with each other. It makes sense because there's no logical reason why a new game being made should effect everything I've experienced with the 2nd

 

[Lethos]

Spoiler

Would be pretty awesome if Cole was revived by the lightning bolt at the end of inFamous 2 and was the final boss in this game.

Loved inFamous and inFamous 2, so I'm looking forward to it all the same.

 

[Kopikatsu]

Spoiler

Would be pretty awesome if Cole was revived by the lightning bolt at the end of inFamous 2 and was the final boss in this game.

Loved inFamous and inFamous 2, so I'm looking forward to it all the same.

Wouldn't that bring back the Prototype comparisons? 'Cause...yeah.

 

[go-10]

forgot his name but the last boss was future Cole in the first game, who's to say there aren't any other time traveling conduits out there

 

[Lethos]

Wouldn't that bring back the Prototype comparisons? 'Cause...yeah.

That slipped my mind actually. Never played Prototype.
From what I've read though, in Prototype 2 you're hunting the protagonist of the first game, right? Maybe Cole is hunting you instead?
Doesn't seem as nice idea now though

 

[JasonKaotic]

I thought they were both awesome in different ways. I suppose if I had to choose one or die I'd say the good ending, but otherwise I'd say I like them both the same.

Seriously dude, the bit in the bad ending with Zeke. That's probably the most powerful moment in any game I've ever played.
Although I -just- prefer the good ending as a whole.

 

[OniGamer2]

WARNING: The following comments on this page will most likely contain spoilers as to the events of Infamous, Infamous 2 and the recently announced Second Son.

For those of you who are aware, InFamous: Second Son is the recently announced sequel to the hit Playstation Exclusive franchise: InFamous. It has come to my attention that, after viewing the player statistics of trophies collected, Sucker Punch made the call to follow the Good Karma storyline when approaching the future events of their upcoming title. That being said, (SPOILERS, GOOD KARMA ENDING) the fact that Conduits are still alive after the New Marais crisis, Cole's death and the now supposed deaths of every conduit on the planet is a tad alarming, seeing as though it portrayed the conduits as being wiped out in order to save humanity. I want to know you guys' thoughts as to this recent change. Was there a need for a sequel? Why even select a specific Karma ending to enter a sequel game? Why are conduits alive when they were supposedly exterminated?

Oh and here's a poll to see which ending you preferred for InFamous 2.

Hey guys,
considering that i played as both hero and evil in inFamous 2 i would like to drive from my hero side and continue with the heroic behavior, in which case i believe there is need for a sequel.