InFamous: Second Son - 10 Reasons It's Dividing Opinion

10. Pick 'N' Choose Morality

InFamous games are defined by the Good or Evil dichotomy. The clear, unambiguous choice of fighting the good fight or the down 'n' dirty whatever is needed to get the job done. If that means killing a few civilians along the way, well, it'll learn 'em to not get in the way. Some reviews argue the case that choosing whether to go evil or good has too little impact on game progression or abilities, that the InFamous world has a too defined, unambiguous world of right and wrong, good and evil, whereas 'real' life is a multitudinous world of countless shades of grey. There is legitimacy in the argument, but sometimes we just want to bask in the golden sunshine of our virtual virtue, or laugh like maniacs hitting the nitrous oxide. Despite criticism received in this regard, there are definite gameplay returns to the choices made. Walking (or flying) the 'good' path will reward your methods of dealing with enemies accordingly; non-lethal takedowns and rescuing citizens from various predicaments will quickly and repeatedly reward the player with iconic ultimate powers and your meritorious actions will subsequently make your abilities reflect this, way more than in previous games. Playing Second Son with a voluntary restraint on smashing up the beautifully rendered Seattle neighbourhood is more meaningful and ultimately more rewarding than doing so because it pays dividends with greater powers or a metaphorical pat on the back, and conversely being an out and out couldn't-care-less-get-outta-my-way psychopath rewards an exhilaration all the more impactful if you have previously played the 'good' route. Second Son was never going to satisfy those wishing for a deeper, profound look at morality, the choices for being good or evil are never motivated by anything deeper than 'this will rank up my karma', it is, as they say, what it is.