Why do people think that they can't continue from the good ending. It ended with a lightning bolt in the shape of a question mark so obviously they have plans for that ending and Sucker Punch always go with the good ending, being bad in the game is just a choice but the story is all about Cole being a hero not a villain.
I think some conduits, the strong ones would of survived at the end so Cole and Kuo would still be around. As for Nix...I really don't care to be honest.
Thing which I don't get though....did Cole really defeat the actual Beast. If John was the Beast then future Cole, Kesler, would of killed John when he was working for him.
Yeah I honestly don't get why everyone assumes that a 3rd game can't happen. Like you said the good end has the ? during the quick little lighting flash so they clearly left it open. But they could also go in a different direction and perhaps make the game as if Cole was the bad guy and was trying to redeem himself for what happened at the end of Infamous 2.
Either way Infamous 2 is one of my favorite games of all time(in my top 5) and I would LOVE to see another game in the series and having it next gen would be just that much sweeter.
Because we have 2 totally different endings. Sure Cole could survive but all other conduits are dead. In bad end he is literally OP with an army of conduits.
Not to mention it would ruin the whole moral blue/red thing it has goind on. Forcing player to make a pre made choice before the game even starts. Good guy start or bad guy start? And For bad end Beast Cole would have to be nerfed again, it would be a really bad diea to start OP in bad and not good. And nerfing Beast Cole would just sound like some bullshit talk since something similar already happened when the Beast zapped Coles powers at the start of inFamous 2.
I love inFamous as much as the next guy. But inFamous 3 simply can not happen in not way that would remain canon as well as keep the originals moral choice system (as imperfect as it is to some)
infamous 3 would be cool, but the only thing about the good ending is that every conduit is dead, and if the lightning bolt only hit cole and hes now alive, who is he gonna fight that would be interesting,and nix and kuo are both dead so i really dont know.
of course theres always someone to fight but if coles the only conduit to me its just boring to see him fighting normal humans with guns and technology, the only way i see the good ending happening is that the conduits didnt actually die but are actually thrown into a hybernation state that makes it seem as if there dead and they all begin to wake up, including the return of the beast, only hes much more powerful and is bloodthirsty to kill cole now.
He probably wouldn't be the only conduit. If he survived, why couldn't others? I'm sure Cole and his group weren't the only conduits that knew about that device..
actually kuo was a conduit from the start the experiment just sped up the process like how the ray sphere gave cole his powers much earlier than he should have, but as i said before maybe they arent dead but are in a hybernation state where they just seem dead, it s been in a few comics if im not mistaken.
all in all if infamous 3 is to be made then the best scenario is that it has 2 completly different sories one where good cole and the other conduits arent actually dead as stated before with an even stronger beast, and evil cole is trying to fully take over the world with a new conduit trying to stop him.
Well we don't know if Kuo was an actually conduit, it's never actually mentioned
However they say something in the rescue mission it is said her blood was replaced with some liquid and then later Nix mocks her by saying something like "Are you mad they made you into a monster". So we don't know if she was one or not but in my opinion if they replaced her blood then she was made into one unlike Nix and Cole
If the game has two stories it means that which ever one you've went for is going to have a short campaign. They may aswell pick a side because that idea wouldn't work in the long run, it's clear that they will go for the good ending because least then you can decide to go bad again by player choice in iF3
If you follow the stereotypical comic book story rules then seldom are major characters permanently dead, and there's always another bad guy waiting in the wings.
infamous was one of the best games this gen in my opinion, it would be nice to see an entirely new story line with a new character with awesome powers though.
No way. The evil ending would be so much better. Fight for dominance between the Conduits. They can bring everyone back including Transients,Ice Men,the Reapers and the First Sons.Cole and everyone he saved and them duking it out to see who dominates the planet. But I am also certain if they use the good ending that if Cole could survive to make another game you can be sure other Conduits could have survived as well.I mean what are the odds that the blast killed EVERY single Conduit in the world? Even if 1% still survived that is still enough to cause trouble.
Honestly, I wouldn't mind if Cole's story is completely over, and we are able to play as a new character, in a new setting, who got his/her powers in maybe a different way.
Cole cant be brought back. In good ending he is dead, bad ending he is OP.
Good ending all conduits are dead, bad ending theres a bloody army.
And forcing inFamous 3 to start from good or bad ending will out right kill the games moral system it has in place. Start with a pre made good or bad Cole. And Beast Cole would just have to be nerfed in a similar way like in inFamous 2 powers zapped by the Beast. If that happened twice people would call bullshit.
That would make the most sense. You decide at the start whether you want to be good or bad; during the course of the game, you can continue on your current path, or decide maybe it'd be better to try the other route.
On the good ending side, I don't recall if it's ALL Conduits, or ALL Conduits and POTENTIAL Conduits. If it's the latter, then there's plenty of potential for new allies and enemies. In the case of the former, there's always someone looking to turn something into a weapon.
The bad ending rather speaks for itself.
In any case, I certainly hope there's another one coming.
Well for the bad ending, I was thinking maybe some kind of rebellion would happen amongst the Conduits against Cole and that would be the start of where the bad ending left off. As for the good ending well, that could really go anywhere, pretty much like what you said.
...and its a single player game with Journey like mulitiplayer integration. So you're doing your own shit while others with special powers pop in and out as they are playing their own game, while if you play it offline it would just be bots.
another idea brought to you by beer...today's brew is Nostradamus
Hey, thats actually not bad. But the it would feel like some MMO dont you think? honestly i think if they made two seperate campaigns one for the good ending and one for the evil ending that would be more iteresting and even give the next game a longer playtime which i am sure many want.
Think i mentioned it before but i'd like to see a Highlander type multiplayer mode where you vs 60 or more people each with their own abilities, once you kill them you gain their abilities and can eventually become the king of superpowers.
Look I loved the inFamous series more than most of you. I got collector edition as well as purchased the comic books and several products. I guess you could say I am a fanboy.
But as much as I love it, the game can simply no longer continue with the endings it has. Ether it starts with good or bad ending, and ether one would ruin the games moral choice system in place.
Not to mention in 1 ending we have little to 0 renaming conduits and on the other one we have a freaking army. Gameplay, story, and missions would greatly be different. It would be like 2 games in 1 (as great as that sounds)
I think some conduits, the strong ones would of survived at the end so Cole and Kuo would still be around. As for Nix...I really don't care to be honest.
Thing which I don't get though....did Cole really defeat the actual Beast. If John was the Beast then future Cole, Kesler, would of killed John when he was working for him.
Either way Infamous 2 is one of my favorite games of all time(in my top 5) and I would LOVE to see another game in the series and having it next gen would be just that much sweeter.
I'm sure Kuo could of survived...it's there story afterall, just write it in.
Not to mention it would ruin the whole moral blue/red thing it has goind on. Forcing player to make a pre made choice before the game even starts. Good guy start or bad guy start? And For bad end Beast Cole would have to be nerfed again, it would be a really bad diea to start OP in bad and not good. And nerfing Beast Cole would just sound like some bullshit talk since something similar already happened when the Beast zapped Coles powers at the start of inFamous 2.
I love inFamous as much as the next guy. But inFamous 3 simply can not happen in not way that would remain canon as well as keep the originals moral choice system (as imperfect as it is to some)
Who isn't to say the Government isn't trying to make conduits as weapons and terrorist organizations get the same idea to create ones to take over
We don't know if every conduit is dead, if Cole survived maybe the stronger ones survived aswell making the natural conduits rare people.
all in all if infamous 3 is to be made then the best scenario is that it has 2 completly different sories one where good cole and the other conduits arent actually dead as stated before with an even stronger beast, and evil cole is trying to fully take over the world with a new conduit trying to stop him.
However they say something in the rescue mission it is said her blood was replaced with some liquid and then later Nix mocks her by saying something like "Are you mad they made you into a monster". So we don't know if she was one or not but in my opinion if they replaced her blood then she was made into one unlike Nix and Cole
If the game has two stories it means that which ever one you've went for is going to have a short campaign. They may aswell pick a side because that idea wouldn't work in the long run, it's clear that they will go for the good ending because least then you can decide to go bad again by player choice in iF3
Good ending all conduits are dead, bad ending theres a bloody army.
And forcing inFamous 3 to start from good or bad ending will out right kill the games moral system it has in place. Start with a pre made good or bad Cole. And Beast Cole would just have to be nerfed in a similar way like in inFamous 2 powers zapped by the Beast. If that happened twice people would call bullshit.
On the good ending side, I don't recall if it's ALL Conduits, or ALL Conduits and POTENTIAL Conduits. If it's the latter, then there's plenty of potential for new allies and enemies. In the case of the former, there's always someone looking to turn something into a weapon.
The bad ending rather speaks for itself.
In any case, I certainly hope there's another one coming.
But yeah I'm hoping just like you.
Infamous 3 follows the EVIL decision...
slight SPOILER
...and its a single player game with Journey like mulitiplayer integration. So you're doing your own shit while others with special powers pop in and out as they are playing their own game, while if you play it offline it would just be bots.
another idea brought to you by beer...today's brew is Nostradamus
But as much as I love it, the game can simply no longer continue with the endings it has. Ether it starts with good or bad ending, and ether one would ruin the games moral choice system in place.
Not to mention in 1 ending we have little to 0 renaming conduits and on the other one we have a freaking army. Gameplay, story, and missions would greatly be different. It would be like 2 games in 1 (as great as that sounds)