JP*wasteland.soldier wrote:Doesn't PR sort of demand "good" and "bad" guys? You can't have two "good guys" fighting, no? So wouldn't any new faction involve a placement as "good" or "bad"?
To use non-contemporary examples (to avoid ANY possibility of people taking sides and having some kinda cow over who were the goodies and who were the baddies):
I'm pretty sure that both Cromwell's New Model Army and Charles I's Cavaliers both thought they were fighting a Just Cause (i.e.: the good guys).
Likewise, I suspect that both Napoleon's Imperial Guard and Wellington's Household Cavalry thought they were on the Right Side at Waterloo.
I'm almost certain that the Confederate states and the North both though they were fighting on the Good Side.
Warning: WW2 reference. Only read if you can read something regarding WW2 and not want to engage upon a massive and ridiculous debate over Facism/Stalinism/WhateverElseIsm:
And finally; Hitler claimed he was righting the injustices inflicted upon Germany at Versaille a decade and a bit earlier, whilst Stalin's Red Army were fighting a facist invader who'd broken a peace treaty made only a few years earlier...
Point being, in ideological terms the vast majority of wars are identical. Both sets of protagnosits are firmly in the belief that THEY are the ones fighting for honour/liberty/justice/truth/god/the last rolo. Even if that's not the case at the begining of the conflict, it usually is a short while after hostilities begin.
"Good guys" comes purely from one's viewpoint. The goodies in a Western film, (in their hayday), were traditionally the hard-working frontiermen being molested by the local inhabitants. Of course, the majority of people now would be likely to support the view that the frontiersmen were enroaching upon land that had belonged to the local people since time immorial.
Possibly the reason films such as Once Upon a Time in the West have lasted as iconic westerns whilst films depicting "Cowboys vs Indians" scenarios have become dated could be construed as a demonstration of this. In OUATITW, the villian is a businessmen determined to drive his railroad through land come hell or high water; a sentiment that we can still relate to nowdays. Also of course, it's because it's a damn good film. Mmmm, dusters.
Edit: Added Quote box around the spoiler-style text.
More of a PR style. 
Although on second thoughts, it probably wouldn´t be that good actually. 
