Reistance v. Founders (Security)

(Seyu) #1

A discussion on the reasons you lean towards any of the two factions.

The Resistance has an egalitarian agenda, the guests may owe their lives to the founders but that can not justify their being treated as second class citizens. Why should an individual’s utility decide his worth?

From the opposite front it may argued that it’s impossible to abide to societal ethics on a sinking ship and the Ark being a private enterprise is not obligated to follow them. The guests are a liability and thus should be treated as such.

(Weapuh) #2

Well in reality the resistance kinda ARE second class citizens, I understood it that the founders were taking much more than their fair share of provisions with disregard to the refugees, maybe they’re actually giving all that they can? It’s still not enough though. Maybe neither are in the wrong?

(Seyu) #3

Probably, but that’s the boring theory.

(Twistedpandora) #4

when i first saw brink in eurogamer 2009 thats how it was described, the Security where just trying to maintain order and speak stuff about fairly but the resistance was still not getting enough both sides where in the right sort off. how every ill me steal all in need playing as resistance. :smiley:

(tokamak) #5

Security are not the founders, they’re the descendants of the guns hired by the descendants of the founders.

(Seyu) #6

Yes, I know, but the Security themselves don’t have much of an idealogy other than ‘just following orders’. So, it’s better to discuss those who they represent.

(tokamak) #7

Right, to me Brink’s story is a reworking of the Little Red Hen fable.

(TAPETRVE) #8

I guess the big problem is The Ark itself, or rather, the fact it is called “ark”. Such a name attracts refugees like a moist turd attracts flies. Not a good move, when the idea is actually to save the high and mighty while the “lowlives” are supposed to drown and make way for the “worthy”. Rapture (BioShock) comes to mind.

Anyway, I’ll decide when the game has arrived. For once, I kinda like both sides equally.

(Seyu) #9

The question is, what if the other animals would have starved to death otherwise? Would it still be right for the hen not to share?
Also, unlike the story, we can’t say the guests ever had the opportunity to contribute to the construction of the Ark.

(tokamak) #10

That was not the ideology, the ark was build as a prototype for technology and ideology to be spread wide. But as you can see around you now, there’s very little political will so these kind of projects can only be done by rich philantropes.

These ‘lowlives’ never voted for a political climate that was able to either mitigate or adapt to climate change, and now they want a piece.

If Nader was president there probably would be at least several arks floating in the pacific and similar feats of durable development elsewhere. Everyone has an opportunity to contribute by voting.

(Shadowcat) #11

I think the issue with picking a side is going to be that both sides have a good point. The fact that the information given to both sides is different means that both sides are generally correct.

In container city, the player is told that Security are going in to secure a dirty bomb that the resistance are making. Its easy to support this mission, and if this were the case it would be hard to support the resistance.

The Resistance are told that they need to protect a vaccine from the securty, who are going to try to take it even though the resistance developed it and need it more. If this is the truth, than its very easy to agree with the resistance, and hard to defend the security actions.

The missions are black and white, but both sides are told information that puts them on the moral high ground. Either both sides are going to be shown to be lying, or neither side is.

That being said, I personally support the security ideology more, they are just trying to protect the ark, and are doing what they have to. I cant support the leader’s choices, but that’s not the fault of the police.

I have trouble putting myself in the mindset of an armed rebellion. If you’re alive, its hard to complain about the people who are keeping you alive, and even worse to demand more at gunpoint. I’m sure that SD will do a fine job of storytelling such that less drastic options just weren’t available anymore, but I still don’t like the ideology.

(tokamak) #12

That’s just relativism. It makes both sides equally wrong rather than equally correct.

(Shadowcat) #13

So stopping rebels from using a dirty bomb is wrong?

Stopping para-military from pointlessly stealing a vaccine that the citizens made on their own is wrong?

(LyndonL) #14

I’m getting an overwhelming sense of deja vu atm…

http://www.splashdamage.com/forums/showthread.php?t=18086
http://www.splashdamage.com/forums/showthread.php?t=18951
http://www.splashdamage.com/forums/showthread.php?t=23248
http://www.splashdamage.com/forums/showthread.php?t=23344

That’s just what 10 seconds of searching brings. :slight_smile:

(tokamak) #15

[QUOTE=Shadowcat;281790]So stopping rebels from using a dirty bomb is wrong?

Stopping para-military from pointlessly stealing a vaccine that the citizens made on their own is wrong?[/QUOTE]

If it’s not a dirty bomb respectively a vaccine then yes it’s wrong. Militant religious fanatics would be totally in their right to make sure as many people go to heaven, if it actually existed, but it doesn’t so they’re needlessly causing all kinds of suffering so they’re in the wrong.

(Herandar) #16

Fascists have sharper uniforms. Hugo Boss!

(system) #17

Oh great, let’s fight over some fictional characters and factions now. Why in the world would you want to play with only one side? Is the game half price that way?

I don’t give a poop about story, gameplay comes first and that’s the only thing that will keep me playing the game.

(LyndonL) #18

If you stand very still, you can hear a bongoboy’s tear drops. :frowning:

(Herandar) #19

No one said anything about not playing with both factions. Don’t be bitter because you can’t enjoy the story.

(hamstein) #20

Why in the world would you want to play with only one side? Is the game half price that way?

I hate people like this, people who just have to accuse other people of anything they can think of, in my school these people are the ones with no friends; you don’t have to wonder why.

But to answer your question, I think it’s more about who you “support” or who you “favor” not who you will only play as. I personally like Security because I’'d rather maintain order than fight it, just how I roll.