Why the security is not as bad as they seem

(Ajax's Spear) #21

[QUOTE=H0RSE;260672]On the same note, I have seen people side with Security, because on the outside, they are textbook “good guys.” Kind of like WoW - without delving into the story, The Alliance is regarded as the “the good guys,” because orcs and trolls and undead are “evil.” In Brink’s case, the Security are the good guys, because gangs, hooligans wearing ripped up clothes are “bad.” I have also seen people say don’t want to play Resistance, simply because Security has cooler looking clothes.

I’m just saying that Resistance is being just as overlooked as Security.[/QUOTE]

I understand where you’re coming from, and I see it as well, but nowhere near as much as the scenario I explained earlier. Just my personal experience. I honestly hope you’re right because at least then it would create some balance.

I’m really a little bit bummed that as many people are so automatically dead-set in either direction. And it’s not just factions either; they’re swearing off every other body type and class and weapon, too. The game isn’t even out yet, you know? I mean, I suppose if you want to limit how much content you’re going to be exploring in the game, that’s fine and all, I have no interest in telling people how to enjoy things… but for some reason it sort of bums me out.

(tokamak) #22

Some people just anticipate and know what they want and how they’re going to specialise it. When you go all directions for variety sake you end up with something mediocre in the middle.

It’s not like I’m unexperienced, I have tons of FPS hours under my belt.

(Ajax's Spear) #23

[QUOTE=tokamak;260675]Some people just anticipate and know what they want and how they’re going to specialise it. When you go all directions for variety sake you end up with something mediocre in the middle.

It’s not like I’m unexperienced, I have tons of FPS hours under my belt.[/QUOTE]

You don’t have to be a jack of all trades with one character. Obviously that would likely pale in comparison to specializing in a certain area. But you have 16 character slots to fill. Some of these guys are acting like they’re making one char and that’s that. I just don’t get it.

(DarkangelUK) #24

Maybe they don’t get why you need to fill all 16 slots. At the end of the day it’s their choice, seems people are being judged for going in a direction they want to, rather then the one they seem to be told to go in… I respect that more.

(Ajax's Spear) #25

I didn’t make one single judgment. I said I didn’t understand it. If you take the time to go back and read, I make it very clear that I have no interest in telling people how to enjoy the game. Save your passive aggressive attitude for someone that will actually be impressed by it.

(DarkangelUK) #26

That’s a judgement right there m8, maybe read your own comments back to yourself before jumping on a false offensive. The fact is, people play how they want to play, and you reduced it to simply calling them ‘kids’ for not understanding… yeah… passive aggressive. You hid it well… just not well enough.

(Senyin) #27

We will all start of as mediums anyway.
I prefer skinny/resistance but ofcourse I am eager to play security as well and other bodytypes.
Why rob myself of that experience and maybe a mind changing one. . .
But to each their own :slight_smile:

(Ajax's Spear) #28

That was an anecdotal observation, not a judgment. Merely reporting on your experience is not equivalent to is/ought statements. Try harder, son.

(DarkangelUK) #29

“only kids pick resistance because they’re rebelling against authority”

That’s a generalization you’ve made while judging peoples choices from this forum.

And going by that reply, you do it quite a lot because someone disagreed with you… did you assume I was young and rebelling as well… son? You’re the stereotypical ‘passive aggressive’ that lowers yourself to ‘kiddy calling’ because your views were questioned. Grow up m8

(Ajax's Spear) #30

[QUOTE=DarkangelUK;260733]“only kids pick resistance because they’re rebelling against authority”

That’s a generalization you’ve made while judging peoples choices from this forum.

And going by that reply, you do it quite a lot because someone disagreed with you… did you assume I was young and rebelling as well… son? You’re the stereotypical ‘passive aggressive’ that lowers yourself to ‘kiddy calling’ because your views were questioned. Grow up m8[/QUOTE]

Except that isn’t what I said. In fact in the very next breath I very explicitly said “Not that there’s some issue with that, and not that everyone who supports the resistance over the security is doing so for those reasons…” but you conveniently left that out to make your non-point.

Also, “son” is typical American slang, and is used regardless of age. I was having a conversation with some other folks. If you’d like to participate in that, I’d welcome it. If you want to continue you being a needless dick, I’m just going to ignore you.

(DarkangelUK) #31

“I think all Americans are fat and eat too much… not that there’s anything wrong with that”

You think me putting that on the end makes my view ok? I left it out because it’s a meaningless statement tacked on at the end to hide your ‘passive aggressive’ views… I told you you hid it well, just not well enough.

You can’t understand why they would want to go in that direction because of your self centred view, and reduced to calling them kids rebelling against authority. And there in lies my problem, of the many MANY reasons why people would choose Resistance over Security, you made a sweeping statement about the age and attitude of those users, and then jaw drop gfaw as to why people don’t play the way you think it should be played. It was a cheap shot and completely uncalled for… there was no need to be a dick about it.

(Ajax's Spear) #32

[QUOTE=DarkangelUK;260742]“I think all Americans are fat and eat too much… not that there’s anything wrong with that”

You think me putting that on the end makes my view ok? I left it out because it’s a meaningless statement tacked on at the end to hide your ‘passive aggressive’ views… I told you you hid it well, just not well enough.[/quote]

Aaaaand again, I didn’t say “I think everyone who is picking resistance exclusively are a bunch of kids,” and you are also, once again leaving out this qualifying statement: “and not that everyone who supports the resistance over the security is doing so for those reasons,” because it is, once again, inconvenient to your non-point.

So your example and analogy are fail, therefore the rest of your post is fail, therefore I am not wasting any more of my limited attention span on you. Have a nice day.

(DarkangelUK) #33

No problem, glad we agreed on where you believe you stand… right in the centre with the world revolving around you. You have a nice day too m8 :slight_smile:

(DarkangelUK) #34

C-c-c-c-combo post!

I suppose I should stop ‘being a dick’ per se and actually lend to the thread.

The main reason for any choice of faction for me is purely based on map and objective. I prefer to attack than defend, so will float towards that for selfish reasons. As for the factions themselves, I prefer the colour pallet and widely diverse outfits the Resistance have at their disposal. The screenshot of the chap that had the Predator-esque look about it convinced me that was the way to go (big Predator fan). As for moral reasons? I think i’ll need to wait for the game to decide that!

(BioSnark) #35

Why the security is as bad as they seem:

security = generic body armor… resistance = style.

(Seyu) #36

[QUOTE=tokamak;260675]Some people just anticipate and know what they want and how they’re going to specialise it. When you go all directions for variety sake you end up with something mediocre in the middle.
[/QUOTE]

That makes sense from a gameplay perspective but don’t you think it’s best to look at the story/setting from all possible angles to appreciate it best?

‘‘It’s not like I’m unexperienced, I have tons of FPS hours under my belt.’’
lol, what has that gotta do with anything?

(tokamak) #37

With the gameplay perspective, like you said.

As for the story, Brink clearly is a modern take on the old little red hen fable.
These fellows constructed a durable paradise in an effort to innovate society. Would everyone have shown a similar motivation and passion to deal with the climate change problem then there wouldn’t be a problem on the ark in the first place. These Resistance guys should be glad they’re still floating and quit being spoiled kids.

Obviously there’s no point in restricting yourself to playing one side, that ends you up with half the game. However, I don’t need to ideologically agree with one side in order to play it. I don’t think Nazis and Strogg have a valid take on the matter either.

(Herandar) #38

Really? I only use it with people about a generation younger than me. Or my son. On the rare occasions when I have used it in the past with someone my age, it was usually ironic or sarcastic, or a joke.

I can’t believe that you’d call your father’s friends ‘son’.

(.Chris.) #39

I’m glad that I’ll play stopwatch.

(Seyu) #40

[QUOTE=tokamak;260893]With the gameplay perspective, like you said.

As for the story, Brink clearly is a modern take on the old little red hen fable.
These fellows constructed a durable paradise in an effort to innovate society. Would everyone have shown a similar motivation and passion to deal with the climate change problem then there wouldn’t be a problem on the ark in the first place. These Resistance guys should be glad they’re still floating and quit being spoiled kids.

Obviously there’s no point in restricting yourself to playing one side, that ends you up with half the game. However, I don’t need to ideologically agree with one side in order to play it. I don’t think Nazis and Strogg have a valid take on the matter either.[/QUOTE]

I don’t agree with the little red hen analogy, the guests on the ark never had a choice.

How can one expect the poor to worry about things like climate change and global warming when they have to deal with more pressing matters on a day to day basis? Getting concerned about polar bears is the pastime of the rich. The Ark seems to me a display of vanity for the rich of the world. An opportunity they thought was worthy of indulging in, given how it is the film-stars and the others of the superclass who made a rush for it.

The survivors could either come over to the Ark or continue to drift at sea, not much of a choice. The misfortune of the guests to be stuck on the Ark does not justify social apartheid. Isn’t this one of the reasons for the Egyptian uprising or the pathetic condition of the poor in countries like Brazil? When you ghettoize a community, you take away all opportunities it would have had for upliftment. I think it’s ironic how the Ark, constructed for the betterment of the world, now breeds social injustice. The situation may actually be due to lack of far-sightedness on the founders’ part who perhaps did not view the guests becoming permanent denizens of the Ark(not that there was an alternative) and thus did not allocate them sufficient resources.

Like I said, just because the guests do not own a stake in the Ark does not make them deserving of perpetual poverty and oppression. A real world example would be Sarkozy’s crackdown on the Roma people, they may be illegal immigrants but that does not justify violations of human rights.

The movie District 9 deals with similar issues.

And, of course it isn’t necessary to remain ideologically neutral, part of the enjoyment will come from having a side to root for. Though it’s worth looking at both sides of the coin, if only to better know how to counter the other.