User blog comment:Samurai96/Nathan Drake vs Indiana Jones/@comment-143604-20120412013534

Drayco90's Edgy Edges of Edginess


 * Close Range- Drake. The Wes-44 is a ridiculous hand-cannon of a revolver, and against an unarmored enemy, it's a one-shot kill. Indy's two favorite guys, Smith and Wesson, may make a reliable and powerful firearm, but the Wes-44 is like any other revolver on steroids. Also- Why does Drake pack Sully's signature weapon instead of his own? That doesn't make any sense, really- the 92FS-9mm Handgun is THE iconic weapon of Nathan Drake, and it should be in his arsenal at all times.


 * Mid-Range- Indiana Jones. The MP 40 has much greater range and accuracy the Micro-9mm, which is effectivly a close-range weapon for burst fire purposes, and not really all that useful there either. The MP 40 is a far more diverse weapon with many more options and tactical advantages.


 * Long Range- Nathan Drake. The M1 Carbine seems to be a longer ranged weapon with more accuracy, but it's slower rate of fire, less ammunition and less variety simply doesn't compare with the AK-47- one of the single most diverse weapons ever created. The AK can easily overwhelm the M1 from most ranges, and in the ruins that this fight is taking place in, and Drake's affinity for cover, the M1 won't be nearly as devestating, while the AK is powerful enough to tear through the enviroment. It won't matter if Indy has a more accurate gun if he doesn't have a chance to pull the trigger.


 * Explosive Weapon- Nathan Drake. Drake has spent plenty of time dealing with men carrying RPGs, and he definitly knows how to dodge and take advantage of their users to the fullest capacity. The M79 is faster, and can bounce, despite not being as long a range weapon, Indy won't be as prepared to deal with it. Also- why the hell use the M79, which was in one or two levels in a rail-shooter mini-game in the fist game, but not use the M32-Hammer, his main explosive weapon in the second and third games. Or even better- why not use one of the only weapons he carries in all games at all times- the trusty Mk-NDI grenades? Does not make sense.


 * Deadliest Warrior- Nathan Drake. He's got far more experience; sure Indy fought in WW2, but Drake spends every single day fighting legions of mercenaries and pirates. He shows far more awarness in battle- he regularly takes cover, uses strategies and has to fight for every step of every journey. Indiana Jones? He's an archeologist first, an action hero second, and a teacher third- he doesn't spend anywhere near the amount of time fighting as Drake does, and most of the time he does, he either gets his ass kicked in a melee fight until the enviroment saves him, he lucks out, he does some wacky hijinks with Sean Connery to crash a plane, or he captured. Drake has fought hordes of enemies without ever even recieving a single bullet wound (unless you want to count him blowing up that train on the mountains in Tibet), simply because of his luck, tactical skill, firefight ability and fantastic improv- and he's even gone toe-to-toe with crazy-ass fire blasting Djinn (maybe, possibly- Uncharted 3's story was shit), superhuman guardians from Shambala and the Zombie-like monsters of El Dorado. Indy occasionally wins by bringing a gun to a knife fight and by getting lucky. Now, don't get me wrong- I love the Indy movies, but Drake outclasses his inspiration in nearly every single way. From physical ability, to experience to firearm skill.

Also- what's up with these arsenals? No bullwhip? No 92FS-9mm or Dragon Sniper or any of Moss-12 or any of his other iconic gear? Indy is effectivly crippled without his whip, and Drake's using a bunch of minor guns that occasionally pop up every few levels or so.