34 posts
• Page 2 of 2 • 1, 2
what do you think about the morality of ether faction
» Sun Aug 08, 2010 6:42 pm
-
Kira! :))) - Posts: 3496
- Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 1:07 pm
» Sun Aug 08, 2010 4:38 pm
bliviongate: Frankly a Ark with the resources for 5,000 now supporting 50,000 something gotta give.
-
Niisha - Posts: 3393
- Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2006 2:54 am
» Sun Aug 08, 2010 6:57 pm
Wow, everybody wants to work for Security oppressors. Oh well, that'll just be more kills for me then. :toughninja:
-
Chris Cross Cabaret Man - Posts: 3301
- Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2007 11:33 pm
» Sun Aug 08, 2010 9:01 pm
Kill them all for God will know his own. bliviongate:
Frankly a Ark with the resources for 5,000 now supporting 50,000 something gotta give.
bliviongate: Frankly a Ark with the resources for 5,000 now supporting 50,000 something gotta give.
Yeah, find a new place to live, or at least a new source of resources.
-
Chase McAbee - Posts: 3315
- Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2007 5:59 am
» Mon Aug 09, 2010 2:25 am
Wow, everybody wants to work for Security oppressors. Oh well, that'll just be more kills for me then. :toughninja:
In one video, I saw the rebels trying to blow up a nuclear reactor, on the ship, in an attempt to make the ship unlivable so that people will be forced to evacuate. And it was during the rebels playthrough.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=daFJGJ2tCDM&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HPRWvbWzV-k&feature=related
They are literally trying to prevent anyone from living on the Ark to force the Security to try to make contact with the outside world. That is so blatantly idiotic, psychotic, and sociopathic, that you simply cannot defend it. They do no know if there is any more people out there, whether or not the security is being honest when they say they can't contact anyone. They are taking the chance that the last of the human race will die. On top of which, while the resistance have a right to leave the Ark if they feel like it, they have no right to prevent others from living on the Ark.
The act of detonating a nuclear explosion/causing a nuclear meltdown on the Ark simply cannot be morally defended, period. And this happens during the Rebel's playthrough.
-
Blessed DIVA - Posts: 3408
- Joined: Thu Jul 13, 2006 12:09 am
» Mon Aug 09, 2010 6:30 am
In one video, I saw the rebels trying to blow up a nuclear reactor, on the ship, in an attempt to make the ship unlivable so that people will be forced to evacuate. And it was during the rebels playthrough. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HPRWvbWzV-k&feature=related
They are literally trying to prevent anyone from living on the Ark to force the Security to try to make contact with the outside world. That is so blatantly idiotic, psychotic, and sociopathic, that you simply cannot defend it. They do no know where or not there is any more world out there, whether or not the security is being honest when they say they can't contact anyone. They are taking the chance that the last of the human race will die. On top of which, while the resistance have a right to leave the Ark if they feel like it, they have no right to prevent others from living on the Ark.
The act of detonating a nuclear explosion on the Ark simply cannot be morally defended, period. And this happens during the Rebel's playthrough.
They are literally trying to prevent anyone from living on the Ark to force the Security to try to make contact with the outside world. That is so blatantly idiotic, psychotic, and sociopathic, that you simply cannot defend it. They do no know where or not there is any more world out there, whether or not the security is being honest when they say they can't contact anyone. They are taking the chance that the last of the human race will die. On top of which, while the resistance have a right to leave the Ark if they feel like it, they have no right to prevent others from living on the Ark.
The act of detonating a nuclear explosion on the Ark simply cannot be morally defended, period. And this happens during the Rebel's playthrough.
That reactor mission is a bonus "what if" scenario map you get for completing the Resistance campaign. It has nothing to do with the original story, nor does it reflect the intentions of the Resistance.
-
Kaylee Campbell - Posts: 3463
- Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 11:17 am
» Sun Aug 08, 2010 8:12 pm
In one video, I saw the rebels trying to blow up a nuclear reactor, on the ship, in an attempt to make the ship unlivable so that people will be forced to evacuate. And it was during the rebels playthrough. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HPRWvbWzV-k&feature=related
They are literally trying to prevent anyone from living on the Ark to force the Security to try to make contact with the outside world. That is so blatantly idiotic, psychotic, and sociopathic, that you simply cannot defend it. They do no know where or not there is any more world out there, whether or not the security is being honest when they say they can't contact anyone. They are taking the chance that the last of the human race will die. On top of which, while the resistance have a right to leave the Ark if they feel like it, they have no right to prevent others from living on the Ark.
The act of detonating a nuclear explosion on the Ark simply cannot be morally defended, period. And this happens during the Rebel's playthrough.
They are literally trying to prevent anyone from living on the Ark to force the Security to try to make contact with the outside world. That is so blatantly idiotic, psychotic, and sociopathic, that you simply cannot defend it. They do no know where or not there is any more world out there, whether or not the security is being honest when they say they can't contact anyone. They are taking the chance that the last of the human race will die. On top of which, while the resistance have a right to leave the Ark if they feel like it, they have no right to prevent others from living on the Ark.
The act of detonating a nuclear explosion on the Ark simply cannot be morally defended, period. And this happens during the Rebel's playthrough.
As was pointed out to me by Capt. Awesome (Much more useful than his nemesis Capt. Obvious) that map is a "what if" scenario, and is not a representation of most of the resistance, but of a madman who wants to go through the threat that was made. If you have seen the movie "The Rock", it's very similar.
-
Chelsea Head - Posts: 3433
- Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2007 6:38 am
» Sun Aug 08, 2010 10:14 pm
As was pointed out to me by Capt. Awesome (Much more useful than his nemesis Capt. Obvious) that map is a "what if" scenario, and is not a representation of most of the resistance, but of a madman who wants to go through the threat that was made. If you have seen the movie "The Rock", it's very similar.
It's like The Rock, if Ed Harris didn't have a conscience
-
Emma Copeland - Posts: 3383
- Joined: Sat Jul 01, 2006 12:37 am
» Mon Aug 09, 2010 5:26 am
The game is designed so that neither side is good or bad, that's something SD wanted. Both sides are doing what they think is RIGHT, which is admirable, but still different than "good and bad".
If you did a little research into the game, it turns out that there are actually two separate story lines. For example, in container city, Security will be trying to secure a dirty bomb that the resistance is making, but when you play on the resistance side, the mission will be to defend a vaccine. If both sides weren't fighting for what they thought was right before, then the divergent story line will make sure of it.
If you did a little research into the game, it turns out that there are actually two separate story lines. For example, in container city, Security will be trying to secure a dirty bomb that the resistance is making, but when you play on the resistance side, the mission will be to defend a vaccine. If both sides weren't fighting for what they thought was right before, then the divergent story line will make sure of it.
Good man, you get it, most don't
-
Bedford White - Posts: 3307
- Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2007 2:09 am
34 posts
• Page 2 of 2 • 1, 2