Fallout Should the Fallout world become more civilized?

[laclongquan]

Fallout: New York can be pretty interesting side-quel.

 

[Turtle-Zone 3000]

Here's another point, do they desire continuity? I guess they do which is why someone like Avellone was to push a reset button and still call it Fallout?
If you wipe want to wipe the slate clean with barely any service to the older games why not create a different universe?

 

[ThoseDeafMutes]

Well, if they want to keep pushing the timeline forwards, yes. But there's no need to do that when they can set a fallout game at any particular time they want. There's also the entire rest of Earth that they can explore if they run out of ideas in America.

 

[duanth123]

who gives a shit

LoversLab.

Won't anyone think of the perverts?

 

[laclongquan]

The entire North America is there for the setting, it's not like they have to change to Europe or elsewhere if they want some thing new.

If they want something new, the massive river of Mississipi, the inland sea Great Lake, the Southeast border with Mexico can all present interesting new setting.

 

[Sykar]

I would like to see a Fallout game or another postapocalyptic only few years to maybe two decades after the war were you struggle heavily finding clean sources of food and water and good weapons are REALLY rare. Furthermore a society which does not even have a currency and merely barters for everything and where technology is not only hard to come by but also hard to maintain.

As a twist for the new game, the civilzation which fell was much more advanced than our current one.

 

[Black Angel]

I would like to see a Fallout game or another postapocalyptic only few years to maybe two decades after the war were you struggle heavily finding clean sources of food and water and good weapons are REALLY rare. Furthermore a society which does not even have a currency and merely barters for everything and where technology is not only hard to come by but also hard to maintain.

As a twist for the new game, the civilzation which fell was much more advanced than our current one.

Iirc, this is intially what those guys at Bethderpda aimed to make Fallout 3 (~20 years after the Great War), but instead have they set the game at 200 years later, and still they derped so hard, Little Lamplight isn't even clear on how long those brats been doing whatever the fuck they were doing.

I can't seem to remember where they state this, or if somebody figured this out, though. I can only remember getting this info at NMA.

 

[Sykar]

I would like to see a Fallout game or another postapocalyptic only few years to maybe two decades after the war were you struggle heavily finding clean sources of food and water and good weapons are REALLY rare. Furthermore a society which does not even have a currency and merely barters for everything and where technology is not only hard to come by but also hard to maintain.

As a twist for the new game, the civilzation which fell was much more advanced than our current one.

Iirc, this is intially what those guys at Bethderpda aimed to make Fallout 3 (~20 years after the Great War), but instead have they set the game at 200 years later, and still they derped so hard, Little Lamplight isn't even clear on how long those brats been doing whatever the fuck they were doing.

I can't seem to remember where they state this, or if somebody figured this out, though. I can only remember getting this info at NMA.

Well that is because Bethderp has not been able to make a decent game since Morrowind.

 

[Infinitron]

Iirc, this is intially what those guys at Bethderpda aimed to make Fallout 3 (~20 years after the Great War)

I think this is just a popular "head canon", not something that's actually been confirmed.

 

[typical user]

I chose no because Fallout is postnuclear experience. If humanity was to get up from it's knees then the game would turn into GTA. I mean I don't have anything against post-game slideshows depicting that this town or that region become stable what I think should be avoided is to make it an actual exposition. I was interested in fighting mutated creatures, learning about new societies or exploring ruins of old world, learning how corrupt US goverment once was and how that conflict didn't have any good side. You can't have those things in civilized areas unless they are young and not primary focus of the game like NCR in Fo2 or FoNV.

The series starts in 2171, Fo2 takes place in 2242, New Vegas in 2280ish. There isn't much between those time frames. I would like to see California before 2171 or during Nuclear Winter or see state of Texas, Oregon or Washington. Of course I don't want Bethesda to have anything to do with series anymore, they did enough damage it's pretty obvious not everyone treats Fo3 or Fo4 as main part of the series rather spin-offs but numbers in titles still hurt.

 

[Fairfax]

Interesting how Sawyer's view changed over the years. This is what he had to say about it in a 2006 Codex interview:

4. Moving on, next stop - Black Isle's Fallout 3, you are the lead designer again. What was your vision for the game? Where you were going to take the series and would your vision fit into the setting, the feel, the style of the first two games?

Not to speak too much for Chris Avellone, but we both agreed that Fallout 3 shouldn't feel like the world was really getting better. In fact, we wanted to make it feel like it was getting worse. Any infrastructure that groups like NCR had built up had become corrupted and was boiling with the nastier aspects of human social organization: tyranny, war, graft, intolerance -- all that good stuff.

NCR had been totally corrupted by the caravan houses. The Brotherhood of Steel was falling apart and rife with desperation and paranoia. A megalomaniacal tribal despot had risen from the ranks of the Followers of the Apocalypse. The Mormons of New Canaan were divided on issues of religious acceptance and racial biases. Even the remaining super mutants had to deal with a new problem: their impending extinction.

Would BIS' Fallout 3 have fit into the style of the first two? Sure! Yeah, it would have been great! Best ever! Of course I think it did, but I know a lot of people had big problems with the system changes I was making and with the inclusion of groups like the Mormons.

I guess he did make the NCR's infrastructure problematic in the end, but things didn't really get worse.

 

[pippin]

I think post nuclear is what makes the FO setting so dire. The atom bomb is like the ultimate apocalypse for the contemporary world, so you need a number of facts and circumstances to "build" the world. It's also stuck in the first world cold war experience, with the constant fear of an atomic bomb and etc. Mad Max happened because the world went through and oil crisis, and the fucking up was a slow process. The first movie still depicts a world that's more or less limping, but still standing. That "post apoc" instance is way more attractive than "x happened and deleted everything, also, monsters!" than the usual post nuclear settings offer.

 

[Stavrophore]

To people who voted "no", i assume you are fine with a people living 200 years in the same room, and not cleaning the FUCKING BIG ASS PILE OF GARBAGE RIGHT NEXT TO YOU, OR THAT FUCKING BROKEN CABINET. I would like to see a fallout setting in Europe, getting to know what happened in europe after the oil crisis and nuclear apocalypse. It would be very interesting, plus its always new fresh setting that can be exploited.

 

[Johannes]

Interesting how Sawyer's view changed over the years. This is what he had to say about it in a 2006 Codex interview:

4. Moving on, next stop - Black Isle's Fallout 3, you are the lead designer again. What was your vision for the game? Where you were going to take the series and would your vision fit into the setting, the feel, the style of the first two games?

Not to speak too much for Chris Avellone, but we both agreed that Fallout 3 shouldn't feel like the world was really getting better. In fact, we wanted to make it feel like it was getting worse. Any infrastructure that groups like NCR had built up had become corrupted and was boiling with the nastier aspects of human social organization: tyranny, war, graft, intolerance -- all that good stuff.

NCR had been totally corrupted by the caravan houses. The Brotherhood of Steel was falling apart and rife with desperation and paranoia. A megalomaniacal tribal despot had risen from the ranks of the Followers of the Apocalypse. The Mormons of New Canaan were divided on issues of religious acceptance and racial biases. Even the remaining super mutants had to deal with a new problem: their impending extinction.

Would BIS' Fallout 3 have fit into the style of the first two? Sure! Yeah, it would have been great! Best ever! Of course I think it did, but I know a lot of people had big problems with the system changes I was making and with the inclusion of groups like the Mormons.

I guess he did make the NCR's infrastructure problematic in the end, but things didn't really get worse.

That's how it should be. Society getting bigger and more complex as it rebuilds, but not better in any moral sense.

 

[typical user]

To people who voted "no", i assume you are fine with a people living 200 years in the same room, and not cleaning the FUCKING BIG ASS PILE OF GARBAGE RIGHT NEXT TO YOU, OR THAT FUCKING BROKEN CABINET. I would like to see a fallout setting in Europe, getting to know what happened in europe after the oil crisis and nuclear apocalypse. It would be very interesting, plus its always new fresh setting that can be exploited.

We discuss about Fallout not Elder Scrolls with guns.