Should I Give Electricity to PK or Survivors in Dying Light 2?
As an experienced Dying Light 2 player with over 100 hours across multiple playthroughs, my recommendation is to assign control of the electrical station to the Survivors faction whenever given the choice.
However, I realize some players may prefer boosting Peacekeepers for the combat perks or simply enjoy their authoritarian approach. So in the end, neither option is explicitly "right" or "wrong" ― but prioritizing the Survivors leads to the most ethical outcome in my judgement.
Let‘s closely examine the risks and rewards of supporting both factions to help inform your decision.
Weighing the Peacekeepers‘ Allure
The militant Peacekeepers present themselves as the iron-fisted protectors of The City‘s citizens. And aligning with them can provide formidable bonuses to your own combat prowess:
- Gain access to exclusive gear like auto-targeting Sentry Turrets, immobilizing Car Traps, and the brutally efficient PK Crossbow weapon.
- Unlock new Crafting Blueprints to engineer electrical and chemical traps.
- Receive combat assistance from PK forces when assaulted by infected or bandits in their controlled zones.
- Garnish Aiden‘s persona as a ruthless renegade willing to achieve goals through force.
Their promises of security and power can certainly be tempting. However, the PK‘s ends-justify-the-means philosophy begins to unravel when examined more closely.
The Hidden Dangers of PK Support
While I initially admired the Peacekeepers‘ "tough on crime" bravado in clearing out infected hordes, providing them unchecked power over resources indirectly enables oppression against more vulnerable survivor groups.
- At one stage in the story, the PK launch an unprovoked, savage offensive on the Survivor-run Bazaar regardless of your alignment, leaving dozens dead or displaced from their homes.
- Dialogue options allowing you to confront PK leadership over this massacre are lacking.
- Later in the game, Sophie ― a Bazaar attack survivor ― directly blames you for enabling the PK‘s rise to power. This vital faction rapport becomes permanently damaged.
I realized then that the Peacekeepers‘ authoritarian presence ultimately only breeds more violence rather than stability. Their dazzling weapons had blinded me to the simmering tyranny enabled by my support.
Supporting the Survivors ― The Ethical Choice
Conversely, the grassroots network known as the Survivors operates an egalitarian, inclusive community at the Bazaar commercial hub. They coordinate essential services like food distribution, plumbing, and even recreational spaces like bars and betting parlors ― all for the City‘s average citizens without restriction.
However, the Survivors lack the combat manpower or weaponry to defend themselves should the balance of faction power begin shifting against their interests.
By directing the flow of resources ― like water, electricity, and district zones ― towards Survivor control instead, you enable their communities best chance at stability and self-determination while inhibiting the PK‘s attempts at unilateral control.
While the Survivors may not offer exotic loot or weaponry for your efforts, preserving their autonomy leads to a more ethical outcome overall and avoids needless bloodshed against innocents should power dynamics tip too far in the PK‘s favor later on.
Plus, ensuring Survivor zones retain access to vital utilities can incentivize you developing a positive rapport with their leadership over time ― especially with the influential Sophie. I‘ve found keeping both her and the Bazaar inhabitants on your good side through consistent support pays off in various rewarding ways as you advance the main story.
Impact of Faction Alignments on Endings
Before deciding which faction to support however, I should reiterate that these resource allocation decisions have zero influence over unlocking any of Dying Light 2‘s multiple main story endings. Feel free to mix and match assignments between factions based on personal preference without worrying about accidentally locking in an unsatisfying finale.
Think of these dilemmas less like permanent alliance choices and more akin to short term, zone-specific trade-offs to your immediate advantages. For example:
| Faction | Sample Rewards | Risk Example |
|---|---|---|
| PK | Crossbow, Car Traps | Enable future Survivor slaughter by PK |
| Survivors | Sophie rapport, Bazaar access | Temporary loss of powerful PK weapon rewards |
My own approach is maintaining a balanced resource distribution to keep both factions content enough where possible, but prioritizing the Survivors when forced to make a hard choice over a critical asset like an electrical substation. This ethical calculus is further detailed next.
My Reasoning for Recommending the Survivors
Based on the above analysis of each faction‘s ideological approaches, surrounding context in the game‘s story, and potential outcomes from supporting one side over the other, I believe directing electricity access to the Survivors rather than Peacekeepers leads to the most ethical outcome.
The Survivors operate an objectively more inclusive governing model that peacefully coexists with average City inhabitants. Conversely, the Peacekeepers‘ authoritarian presence breeds oppression and conflict inevitably.
While surging the PK‘s rising influence could benefit your own combat lethality temporarily, indirectly enabling their unchecked power risks catalyzing catastrophic violence against vulnerable communities down the road ― violence that stains your hands as well for serving as their enabler.
Maintaining the Survivors‘ autonomy over resources however empowers their communities with self-determination and stability against external threats. And keeping their leadership amicable towards you through consistent support provides its own valuable reputational dividends as the story progresses.
Of course, players who prioritize personal combat efficiency over ethical considerations may still prefer aligning with the Peacekeepers regardless for the devastating weaponry. And that playstyle is logically consistent too.
But in my judgement, the Survivors‘ welfare should be placed first when deciding resource distribution between factions. Their communities better represent the average struggling citizen just trying to survive day to day in The City‘s harsh landscape. Supporting their access to critical resources offers the best chance for sustainable stability.
The Peacekeepers‘ vision of order through force risks oppressing the very people they claim to protect long-term. Their weapons of war hold little value without ethical responsibility.
In Conclusion…
When finally confronted on whether to assign the electrical station‘s invaluable power supply to either the authoritarian Peacekeepers or the populist Survivors faction, I firmly recommend directing electricity access to the more inclusive Survivors.
Not only because it‘s the ethical thing to do, but also to avoid inadvertently enabling PK oppression that could lead to violence against innocents downstream. Maintaining Survivor autonomy and rapport makes for a reliably rewarding long-term strategy as well.
However, players who favor the Peacekeepers‘ brand of strength above all else can still viably side with them for combat perks. Just beware the logical ends such an ideology can enable if left unchecked with too much power.
In the end, neither faction option is explicitly "right" or "doomsday wrong" per se. But I‘ve found consistently upholding the Survivors‘ welfare and stability leads to the most ethical outcome while progressing Dying Light 2‘s thrilling campaign.
Let me know your own thoughts on faction alignments below! I‘m open to respectfully debating perspectives on this complex dynamic within the game‘s morally gray world.
