Game News Fallout: New Vegas - Steel be with You

[Jason]

Tags: Fallout: New Vegas; Obsidian Entertainment

<p>In a <a href="http://www.gametrailers.com/episode/gametrailers-tv/98&amp;ch=1&amp;sd=0?ep=98&amp;ch=1&amp;sd=0" target="_blank">video interview</a> on GT TV, Josh Sawyer revealed that the Brotherhood of Steel will have a supporting role in <strong>Fallout: New Vegas</strong>.</p>
<blockquote>Over time, the Brotherhood has been at war with the New California Republic. After the end of Fallout 2, they basically got into conflict with NCR over control of technology, mostly energy weapons, cause that's one of the main purposes of the Brotherhood, to control that technology. NCR didn't want to hand it over so they went to war. So by the time you start playing Fallout: New Vegas, the Brotherhood is really a pretty small faction compared to the NCR, so they're not a group that you see initially in the game, you hear rumors about them. Eventually most players will have to deal with them.</blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Spotted at: <a href="http://planetfallout.gamespy.com/articles/news/1778/The-BOS-Are-Back">Planet Fallout</a></p>

 

[Melcar]

Heh, BROtherhood.

 

[Fat Dragon]

Whatever happened to the Brotherhood wanting to "wisely remain out of the power structure"? They used to be cool, thanks for fucking them up, Beth and Obsidian.

 

[Melcar]

I remember reading about the whole Brotherhood vs. NCR bit way before Beth/Obs. came into the picture. Could be remembering wrong though.

 

[Radisshu]

Yeah, wasn't that conflict a part of the Van Buren storyline?

 

[Lexx]

Yes it was. We know about all this since many years.

 

[.Sigurd]

Yeah, wasn't that conflict a part of the Van Buren storyline?

Caesar's Legion and NCR Vs Brotherhood was intended to be part of the Van Buren storyline.

 

[Multi-headed Cow]

So why wasn't the brotherhood laying the smack down on San Francisco? They obviously knew there was technology there since they had an outpost, but they weren't fighting them for it.

 

[sportforredneck]

OH MY GOD OBSIDIBETH FUCKED IT UP OH WAIT IT WAS BLACK ISLE'S IDEA ITS AN AWESOME PLAN HERP DERP

 

[Fat Dragon]

Van Buren was also heavily criticized for being inconsistent with the setting during its development. There were a lot of people that laid into Sawyer and others over it back when the Black Isle forums were around.

 

[.Sigurd]

So why wasn't the brotherhood laying the smack down on San Francisco? They obviously knew there was technology there since they had an outpost, but they weren't fighting them for it.

Maybe they already have too much trouble back home (NCR is their neighbor not too far to the south) to simple send some more soldiers.

 

[.Sigurd]

Van Buren was also heavily criticized for being inconsistent with the setting during its development. There were a lot of people that laid into Sawyer and others over it back when the Black Isle forums were around.

What was the problem with the setting?

 

[Roguey]

What was the problem with the setting?

The point, in case zealots ever want to accept it, is that your tastes are not the only tastes in the world. Really, I know this may be hard to believe, but if you like playing a turn-based game set in three counties of Utah in 2242, and you like miniguns but don't like lasers, and you like the ratio of combat to dialogue to be about 4:1, and you like cars that look more like Buicks than Pontiacs, and you think 50s-style monsters are okay but 50s-style aliens aren't, and you think Max's jacket from Mad Max is okay but the football pad armour isn't, and you don't like it when italics are used in dialogue but you do like it when boldface is used, and you want it to be longer than 100 hours but no longer than 120 hours, and like games to be non-linear but only to a point, and like big cities, but only two because four is too much BUT HEY NOT THAT ONE, and you like the desert but don't mind a little grass BUT HEY NOT THAT MUCH BECAUSE IT'S NOT FALLOUT...I am terribly, terribly sorry, because we are not going to make a game just for you. We're not trying to make a game for everyone. Really, we aren't. But we're not making a game just for you and ten other angry guys with tastes that are narrower than a hallway in a camp of pygmy dwarves.

I wish he still had wall-of-text meltdowns like those, they're enjoyable to read. Calm people who take it easy are no fun.

 

[Mister Arkham]

Well, the Brotherhood in Fallout 2 wasn't exactly the way they were in the first game either. Organizations change with their leadership. A shift in morality or agenda is not just something that MIGHT happen over a hundred and fifty years, it's something that is LIKELY to happen, and multiple times at that. Just look at the modern political climate and then at where we were fifty or a hundred years ago for proof enough of that.

I'll not say that the changes will be good until I actually know what they are and how they came about, because just about anything else is blind reactionism. The game is a fucking sequel. Things are supposed to change from one title to the other because if they didn't then you'd just be releasing the same game over and over. As long is there is a sound logic behind the shift and a rationale behind the history, then I can be happy with it.

 

[Secretninja]

That post is way to logical for the codex.

 

[Melcar]

We want Fallout 1.5

 

[sportforredneck]

I would think that the people who created the games would know more about consistency than fanboys. I mean, they are creators after all, hell even people who come along later would still be better off than fanboys. Note that Bethesda allegedly claimed to be fans of the original Fallouts, hence why their knowledge of the game world seemed to be shit.

 

[Melcar]

When it comes down to it, I don't think devs. care that much for consistency in the lore. We have seen time and time again how people are willing to butt rape their own franchises for the sake of the day's cool feature or to make it more accessible to others outside of their core fanbase. They make games that people are willing to play, and for that you need to change shit around once in a while.

 

[sportforredneck]

Well the writingfags who work on things probably care more than the gameplay designers. Gameplay designers would outweight the writingfags obviously.

 

[someone else]

Fallout fans still lose in canon-rage to Star Wars fans.

 

[MetalCraze]

OMG BETHESDA IS RAPING MY CANO... Oh wait it's Obsidian? Yay Obsidian brings originality and good writing into Fallout once again!

 

[Jaesun]

I don't get it. What's the big fucking deal?

 

[Drakron]

I don't get it. What's the big fucking deal?

None.

NCR is the just like the SCIENCE! vs FEV and a lot of idiotic arguments of what is Fallout.

This is hardly the first time bumbasses complain about the BoS, Tactics had the same complains despite being OBVIOUS they were NOT following the West Coast doctrine out of necessity and became something else.

 

[Konjad]

OH MY GOD OBSIDIBETH FUCKED IT UP OH WAIT IT WAS BLACK ISLE'S IDEA ITS AN AWESOME PLAN HERP DERP

nO one is perfect, even you, bro

 

[ironyuri]

What was the problem with the setting?

The point, in case zealots ever want to accept it, is that your tastes are not the only tastes in the world. Really, I know this may be hard to believe, but if you like playing a turn-based game set in three counties of Utah in 2242, and you like miniguns but don't like lasers, and you like the ratio of combat to dialogue to be about 4:1, and you like cars that look more like Buicks than Pontiacs, and you think 50s-style monsters are okay but 50s-style aliens aren't, and you think Max's jacket from Mad Max is okay but the football pad armour isn't, and you don't like it when italics are used in dialogue but you do like it when boldface is used, and you want it to be longer than 100 hours but no longer than 120 hours, and like games to be non-linear but only to a point, and like big cities, but only two because four is too much BUT HEY NOT THAT ONE, and you like the desert but don't mind a little grass BUT HEY NOT THAT MUCH BECAUSE IT'S NOT FALLOUT...I am terribly, terribly sorry, because we are not going to make a game just for you. We're not trying to make a game for everyone. Really, we aren't. But we're not making a game just for you and ten other angry guys with tastes that are narrower than a hallway in a camp of pygmy dwarves.

I wish he still had wall-of-text meltdowns like those, they're enjoyable to read. Calm people who take it easy are no fun.

I'm stealing that quote.

Has anyone ever considered that the Brotherhood in the original Fallout was somewhat illogical and inconsistent? An organisation set up by the families of the Mariposa military base who, instead of taking the symology of the United States Military, decided they'd be "Paladins, scribes and knights".... right. And they'd collect technology, but not to share it with the Wastelanders who'd need it most.

The Brotherhood that Sawyer is talking about for F:NV is consistent to that effect, they're warring NCR to reclaim technology and to prevent its spread. But really, are they fucking luddites?

 

[StrangeCase]

So why wasn't the brotherhood laying the smack down on San Francisco? They obviously knew there was technology there since they had an outpost, but they weren't fighting them for it.

Didn't the guy in San Francisco say that the Brotherhood was on the decline? Really low numbers and influence and whatnot? Been a while since I played.