I was just watching http://www.splashdamage.com/node/680 and something that's been bothering clicked into place for me.

The ark was designed to hold 5,000 people in a thriving society, but now holds over 50,000. Despite this, though, every area and the environment of the ark in general is just deserted. Now, this can be explained in part by saying we only see the combat areas and never the residential places and stuff like that, but that isn't going to cut it altogether. Of the 50,000, I think under 10,000 are going to be soldiers, and probably not even close to that. So that leaves 40,000 residents unaccounted for on a large but not massive structure, and most of those probably staying with the resistance.

I really think it would help the atmosphere of the game in general if the developers added refugees living in poverty on just about all the maps. Small families living in dark corners, scavengers scrounging across the maps, etc. You don't need a ton of people to make it authentic in the slightest, but people in general will spread and cover and inhabit every inch of a given space.

I do think I've heard a little bit about something like this, medics getting missions to escort innocents out of the area and such, but from what I've seen and heard and all, it so far seems like the ark is going to look pretty much desolate and deserted. And this bothers me.

Good Point, but remember that refugees make up most that amount, and they came in on boats, so i assume that they went back to them as they are safer than the city. And the civilians will have escaped the warzon before it started and fled to other areas.

Hopefully their will be a lot of escort civilian missions to keep you happy and to change the pace of the game.

Put it this way, if you're a civilian, and there's a war on, you're either going to be picking up a gun and joining in, or staying the hell out of the way and sitting indoors. The refugees live in the containers meant for supplies, so there's space for everyone, just not space for everyone to live comfortably. The escort missions are just those unfortunate enough to still be in the battlefield when the battle starts.

This is what I was trying to get at. Yes, the vast majority of people will be back where it's safe. People are stupid, but most not excessively.

My point is that there will be some there. And not all of them will be escorted out; there will be civilian casualties, I have no doubt. There will be people that aren't content with staying where they're told, where it's "safe." There will be people who want to care for themselves, not depending on others. Many of those will be the Resistance soldiers, but there will also be some of those who dislike/abhor violence or find something wrong with the cause. And some of those will have families they will take with them.

The entire population of the ark is not going to be cramped into two residential sections, one for each side. That's what I'm trying to make clear here.

Well that's the case in any war, yet in other FPSs there's no civilians running around, the fact that there are escort civilian missions means that at least SD thought about this rather than completely dismissing the fact like other game developers, you have a valid point, but making civilian AI would take a hell of a lot of time, which is something SD don't have a lot of as the release date's already been pushed back. I'm happy with the escort civilian missions, at least it's a sign that SD have taken in all factors of the situation on the Ark.

Although I would love to see a mission where the Resistance has to escort a bunch of preachers in the middle of the map to a safe location before the Security arrest them.

it's still in alpha, i would expect putting civies in the maps isn't high on the priority list.

Alphas where they make stuff, Betas where they test stuff and fix stuff, then it's released, if the were going to add civilians it would be done by now, or soon. I doubt we'll see them, which is no biggie in my eyes.

yeah, i agree. i dont think you'll find civilians in the mpas. probably the cutscenes, but if you put them in map,s then thats just asking for people to shoot them lol

since there's an escort civilians objective, i'd say there's a probability shooting them would be a objective for the opposite team

Unless of course if the civilian AI is an idiot and gets they get themselves killed all the time. In that case escort missions will svck

I do hope you guys realize most of the early game photos were scenery shots to show off the environment... i mean seriously, why would they waste time putting in hordes of civilians which would obviously be there in the real world, but do little other then to clutter up the panoramic shots. Also, when shooting starts, most places clear out real fast.

not the kinda game BRINK is, and also not the kinda thing you want in scenery shots.

Neither side wants dead civilians on their hands.

if they were 2 do civi mission like the resistance could get the poor out of the battle feild while the security works on getting scientist out off office areas and stuff because not all of this is going to be the security closing in on the resistance both sides would gain ground back and forth so this would make neither the security or resistance civies safe and give both sides something to do in the mean time

i really could care a less about wht they do with the civies i just dont wnt to much time wherre nothing seems to be happening

it would be cool if they added civillians. i love it when they ad in the occasional 3rd party into the game

security believes they are the good guys.
so they will not kill civilians, as that is something bad guys would do.

resistance believes they are the good guys.
so they will not kill civilians, as that is something bad guys would do.