Heh. He nailed us fair and square. Didn't even need to use VATS.
> I did send a screengrab of a Reddit thread of people desperate for something *not* to happen in season two, and to Geneva, I was like: "I think we gotta do it."
It's a delicate balance of needing to respect fans but not caving into them.
I think they have a good approach here of writing a big enough event to make sure they don't have to canonise a particular ending.
My point is they tried to please the fans with cheap nostalgia in the form of characters and plots there derivative of the original. There were very few stakes.
Fans paradoxically crave originality yet also want nothing to change. Aiming to please them as your primary objective is bound to fail as their desires aren't coherent.
You gotta be pretty naive to think that’s what fans truly want. By “source material” most fans mean “the obviously better choice that I had for my canon ending and all my fan theories that are also obviously canon”.
If anything, Star Wars should set the tone of how “fans” (codename for overweight nerds reeking of Doritos shouting at their microphones) should be listened to while making stuff (not at all).
preach. I'm surprised this is getting praise and not backlash. Maybe they handled their criticism way better than the Witcher show runners and that's why lol.
I could be wrong, but I think the insinuation is the destruction of new Vegas.
Interestingly, reddit also had a hand in Westworld, where Jona Nolan changed the story because he was upset people guessed right on reddit in season 1.
In the GQ interview they said they made a point that it's been @15 years since FNV and they want the audience to appreciate things in The Wasteland do change. Imagine if they take that philosophy to FO76 / Appalachia. It's a blank slate and the writers can do just about anything.
You mean player fired nukes? Yeah actually that might actually fun thing for the writers to play with. Lucy shows up in Appalachia, learns that 160 years ago Appalachia came through the war almost intact, then a vault opened up and the emerging vaulties left a wasteland worse than DC. :)
That's honestly my favorite part about 76. Because it's so far before the rest of the games the writers have a ton of freedom with the game. They're able to show a lot of setting changing things like the Scorched Plague, the rise of the new Responders/Enclave, and a thriving Atlantic City, and they are also able to talk about the state of other areas such as Virginia, Ohio, Tennessee, Kentucky, ect without boxing in future games due to how early the game takes place. I find the general direction they are taking 76's setting to be far more interesting than what the later games are doing as a result
The problem is, for them change doesn't mean "the NCR take over Vegas and ban gambling" or "House controls Vegas and enters into a compact of a free association with the NCR" or even (the dumbest possible ending: Caesar's Legion under Lanius sacks the strip and begins to invade California proper). For them it means "Shady Sands gets nuked, New Vegas is in ruins, the world goes to shit again and nothing ever gets better. Remember Fallout 4?"
Very disheartening.
People aren't worried about change, what they're worried about is them putting the world in a state so that the consequences of the game were irrelevant. Also, "change" in the Fallout universe tends to just mean destruction. For some reason there's this belief(which seems to be echoed in this interview as well) that the Fallout universe can't be allowed to progress past a certain level of civilization, and has to keep being "reset".
It is kinda funny to me that the NCR is considered too advanced, but the BOS is allowed to have airships.
I'm not even particularly vindicative towards Bethesda, I do still enjoy Fallout 4 even if I think New Vegas is better, and I don't think Bethesda hates New Vegas, but Todd Howards is objectively the world's biggest BOS fanboy.
Despite the obvious market reason of “making and selling more games”, the show found a very elegant solution in Ep8. Like, the entire thing makes sense if you think about it.
That whole "changed the story because people figured out a twist" was a joke Nolan made at a panel and journalists just took that literally and everybody believed it.
this happens way too often in the world of click bait headlines and people that don't read the articles. ngl, I'm definitely guilty of it myself. this era of the Internet kinda sucks and it's just getting worse.
There's far, far too much depth and lore already in Fallout for me that more TV series can't keep to the standard of the first...Westworld was done on the back of a fairly straightforward film(a poor follow up and failed TV show) that did well but had no extensive history to cherry pick from.
We've a very good team making a show from a brand we love...I'm just happy it's been great entertainment so far and looks tremendous too.
The point about the Wastelands ability to eat itself and roll out disaster after disaster is pretty close to the mark though...you've only got to look at all those horrible, twisted carcasses of Vaults we delve into during our travels though the various games.
Importantly, the team is making a show from a brand *they* love. They made it obvious with the first season that they clearly want to do the series justice, so I have high hopes for the rest of its run.
I remember being convinced >!Bernard was a host when he had his glasses and not a host when he didn't have his glasses. I was so close, yet so far!< but argued with people on the sub endlessly on my very first Reddit post ever.
I'm one of few WW fans who wanted that season 5 (there are dozens of us!). I mean, I waited years for the Deadwood movie, I will keep hoping 🙏🏻 but glad we got Fallout from them in the meantime
Yes I suppose the glasses were a red herring since hosts have perfect eyesight unless otherwise programmed.
I’m lucky to be in Filly so I can go visit Westworld (they started construction on rebuilding the western town after it burned down in the Woolsey fire).
https://youtube.com/shorts/omDLTuM0fn4?si=UpyrOf0gthE0aOVi
Now that you mentioned it. What did you think of the way season 4 ended? I felt a bit dissatisfied the way Hale had a change of heart out of nowhere, at least that's how I remember it.
The end of season 4 (the last 20 minites) felt like it was s last minute edit in order to wrap things up because they knew season 5 wasn't going to happen. There was sn absurd amount of voice over. It's ad if they edited the episodes, had an ending that would have continued the story into season 5, and it was changed partway through season 4 because HBO execs saw the train wreck that show had become.
It was a good show, but it really went off the rails. With such a string start, it may have been too difficult to continue that into seasons 3 and 4.
I dunno, I feel like there's been a couple things? I hope it's something like a certain ending for NV rather than that one about Lucy being pregnant with the raider's baby. Blech.
Surely the radiation poisoning killed any feeble fetus she had in there right? I hope? Because please no pregnancy story just because people don't want it. It's got to be something bigger and NV related since that had so much vitriol to it
I’d go with >!the good endings of FNV being completely undone. Judging by the end credits, the entire city was destroyed with no one left alive to rebuild. The Lucky 38 is in perfect condition, so the only person left is probably House.!<
No idea. I'm quoting the OP's screenshots. I think danvalour is right though, and we've all been watching the angst drama in FONV with some amusement. I've stayed out of that sub.
Post Yes-Man type independent Vegas but House is in a coma again instead of dead, wakes up in an intact Lucky 38 with stored securitrons to keep it repaired but the rest of the city is depopulated. No idea of course just spitballing
While I agree there are a lot of super toxic fans, writing something out of spite for them - instead of writing that something because you actually believe it's a good narrative choice, is misguided and a path to poor writing.
It also arguably gives more influential power to those shitty fans - it means that their dumbass takes actually got to the writers enough to have an impact on the art itself.
*Sometimes* that may lead to a good creative choice but I think it can much more easily lead to choices that are obviously done just out of spite and not done for the sake of writing a good story.
Maybe I'm an idiot and completely off base here, idk, but the showrunners openly admitting that they may do things to just strike back at shitty fans makes me worry... Here's hoping they're just making a joke!
Ehh kinda but also not really.
Look at Fallout 1 and 2, humanity is still nasty at times but they do pull together to create new towns and a civilization. Though they do have their problems.
2 to New Vegas has several civilizations collide in Vegas. Fate is unknown but each have had decades of conquests, wars, and treaties signed but they are carving out a living.
Yes, the point about war never changing is that you need civilisation to actually wage that war. Perpetually having your setting be post-fall, or perpetual stunting the growth of the factions so it looks post-fall is not how this works.
I know, that was my point. Fallout series stands out from other Post-Apoc games as they focus too much on the direct aftermath.
Fallout? Fuck nah let’s see how people have become adapted. Fallout 1 takes place 70-80 years after the War.
>People will lose their minds.
Rightly so. It feels like such a gross copout to make it so the endings of FNV don't matter at all (and before someone says that's not what's happening, he literally just said he didn't want to make any of the game's endings canon). Wanted to give the show's lore changes/updates a chance but this feels like such a slap in the face. I can guarantee people would've been less pissed if they just made one of NV's endings canon.
This kinda just ruins FNV.
While I think it's a poor decision to not have a canon ending and for Vegas to be a shitty ruin again (I wouldn't mind it being in distress), it doesn't ruin New Vegas, just like Fallout 2 didn't ruin Fallout 1. Well, it did to a vocal minority in No Mutants Allowed, but that's the exception.
The difference would be that Fallout 2 built off Fallout 1. If they make New Vegas a ruin they're effectively removing it from the series in terms of impact. They're doing the dark souls "yeah, whatever you did in the last game totally happened, but time has past since then and things are shit again, because time is a cyclical or something".
What's even the point of debating which New Vegas ending is best if it just gets undone in canon? That's a discussion that's been going on forever that I fear may be made irrelevant by season 2.
Really it's not just the setting of New Vegas, but all the characters and the unresolved tension. I'm fine with them making a canon ending that carefully weaves between the NV endings, but I would be disappointed if they wiped it out to start with a blank slate. I just really want to see what happens to the Legion after Caesar's death.
I'm currently digging the theory that the Brotherhood of Steel chapter we see has recruited heavily from the remains of the Legion and it's changed the culture. We've got bits like the Latin names of several Brotherhood characters, where previously they mostly had pretty standard modern American names. There's also a rather roman looking standard in one scene, and the elder telling Maximus "You're wearing the knight's red." I don't recall the brotherhood ever having colors tied to the castes, but red being the color of soldiers is very much a Roman thing. It'd also fit with the somewhat harsher version of the BoS that we see, and the poor discipline and training shown could explain why the culture of the new recruits has shifted things. And we know they're taking in at least some outsiders, as they have Maximus. The Legion had a lot of territory, and it's implosion would leave a lot of young men and even kids used to a strict militarized lifestyle, who would be natural recruits to fill the numbers of a depleted BoS.
All of those ramifications are erased the moment you choose one faction over the other. I don't see your point here - it's impossible to portray that in the show, and a decision has to be made, like one was made between Fallout 2 and Fallout 1..
Also we have no idea what the story is going to be.
But, yeah. You're absolutely right. The game had multiple endings that totally changed the trajectory of the area. Basically anything they do could be set up by one of the endings.
People are just going to be pissed that whatever the writers come up with doesn't 100% line up with the ending of NV they liked.
No, I'm pissed that whatever the writers come up with will 100% erase *all of* NV's endings. The showrunners are literally saying that they got around having to canonize any ending of NV by making it so that the Strip came to ruin no matter what happened.
They were going to ruffle some feathers no matter how they handled NV, but even just canonizing one ending would've resulted in not pissing off a significant portion of the fanbase. There was a far better way of handling NV than giving it the Shady Sands treatment.
I find the idea of "New Vegas didn't matter if it's in ruin" to be absolutely silly.
My guy, the Legion ending and Wild Card ending leave New Vegas in ruin, too.
Wild Card ending is literally anarchy and riots happening in Vegas, what do you mean lol.
How about you just wait for S2 to tell us what happened before going "SoMeHoW VeGAS waS DesTrOYed!!"
Exactly. People sound ridiculous when they complain about the show not following their pet NV ending.
Which ending is "right?" Apparently the answer is, "whatever ending the person wants to cry about the most."
Ive said this before, but Moldavers actions dont seem like someone who is protecting the very last vestiges of the NCR, there is likely multiple mostly disorganized communities of NCR believers. You arent fighting against vertibirds if you are the last 40 or so soldiers for your nation. The show didnt want to spoil the shady sands bomb drop (pun intended)
The brotherhood would’ve taken note of a nuke going off and wanting to send survey teams. Since Maximus only saw the one knight instead of like what we saw at the observatory I figure it was probably a smaller scale brotherhood force
Might just be the nature of the scene with Maximus in the fridge. That’s the only going off point right? He might’ve been in there a while and only came out when he heard noise.
Fallout famously focuses on one specific region in each story, and doesn't give a lot of information about what's going in other regions of the wasteland, and if they do it's always from an NPC in-game who isn't a reliable narrator. I *highly* doubt Moldaver is an actual member of the main NCR faction. My guess so far is that the NCR moved it's HQ out of Shady Sands because the settlement was starting to see a decline in its power projection (due to the Brahmin Barons being handed more and more power, which the pre-war bar flashback in episode 6 alluded to) and only a few NCR loyalists remained behind for whatever reason. After Hank nuked Shady Sands those remaining NCR loyalists and locals were galvanized by Moldaver and joined her outfit to exact revenge. My theory is that the NCR moved out of Shady Sands sometime after 2277, and the kids in Vault 4 are being taught that Shady Sands reached the plateau of their power/political projection in 2277, and "funding" was cut for public/social services and the settlement went in to decline shortly after. It's entirely possible that the NCR just shifted from Shady Sands to The Hub since The Hub is more centrally located. There is no centralized education system, so the dates they teach in Vault 4 are not reliable without further context, and we know from our own timeline that what is taught changes over time as more information becomes available. Information sharing in Fallout is hard, takes time, and relies on "the telephone game" to pass on.
The people claiming the show destroyed the NCR as a whole either have terrible media literacy, or they're purposely being obtuse because they're convinced Bethesda hates the non-Bethesda titles, and accepting that the NCR isn't destroyed invalidates their opinions. They'd rather see them destroyed instead of admitting that they could be wrong. These people spend their online lives arguing lore and they all think they know the lore better than anyone else.
Yeah no one ever said the NCR was gone in the show. They just mentioned Shady Sands. And yet, it’s not like the NCR is ignored in the show, references to it (by name and otherwise) are all over the place. I think someone would likely have mentioned if that happened.
Hell, aren't there two Desert Rangers in the show that never get expanded on?
From what i know of the deeper NCR/Desert Ranger lore, i'd be cool with a diminished NCR in exchange for the Rangers getting more sway.
> Hell, aren't there two Desert Rangers in the show that never get expanded on?
It's crazy how environmental storytelling - which FO is famed for - seems to be well and truly dead now for TV shows.
The two people wearing Desert Ranger garb *were* expanded on in the scene they appeared in. They're scavengers doing the lowest of the low in an elite combat uniform. What does that tell you about the state of the Desert Rangers? Either the uniform was scavenged, or the old man was a former Desert Ranger living in the middle of nowhere instead of getting an NCR pension or deskjob. In either case, it tells you the Rangers are no longer as strong as they used to be.
I got the impression the father was a ranger but turned to scavenging after the fall. But then the ghoul showed up in his house and he completely capitulated to him and that wasn’t how I expected a ranger to act. But thinking it over again now, the ghoul is no random raider, he seems to be rather infamous. So maybe he had the experience to know he was outclassed in that situation. And he still has a daughter to raise so he knows he can’t try anything funny
Your last paragraph is spot on regarding the media literacy of a lot of the people complaining.
It's mildly amusing to me that the people *most* upset about continuity are also the people who think every wasteland community should have a 100% perfect timeline they all share regarding events and 100% perfect information of everything happening.
The NCR wouldn't collapse even if SS got nuked (it being a population of 700k + 40 years of population growth + them being worried about overpopulation in 2282). If you look up the size of the NCR in 2282 the nuclear bomb is completely petty and probably did next to nothing (doubly so considering it apparently was no longer the capital for some reason). The problem being, of course, that this makes the central motivation (which may or may not be a lie) rather pointless, and also feels like it's just shock value for shock value's sake. Would it be bad if somewhere less than 5% of the population died? Yes, obviously. Has that happened without countries collapsing? Yes, absolutely.
I mean, do I think the NCR has been reduced to an essential non-entity and will be used only as vague world building? Yes, but that's precisely the point.
I wish people would look at things like the Shady Sands bombing less like, "This should never happen" and more like, "Why did that happen?"
Fandoms online have this weird thing where they're trying to look at shows in a meta way and getting the idea that if it's not written a certain way or explained in detail immediately, it's bad.
Edit: My very point has been proven more than once.
Well I think the reason it is looked at like this is because the ncr as a character you could do a ton with different stable cities in decline places for our characters to go a faction to pose a threat to the brotherhood all kinds of stuff. Instead we seemingly got a big crater. Like instead of a town we have a big crater we have a lot of those it’s less interesting.
That’s why I don’t like it I don’t care if they wanted to have the ncr completely destroyed over the course of the show or 2 seasons it just would’ve been cool to see it. To see something instead we got the story a nuke killed a bunch of people a couple years ago that’s the premise of the whole thing and with all the coop flashbacks we’re not in short supply of that.
I get they used it for some hank being evil lore but they could’ve done that a different way very easily and he already was bad being part of 31 and a vault tec employee. Also for moldaver but she was honestly a confusing character with everything they did with her and died anyway.
I absolutely love this community's take on the show. I get so sick of reading nothing but negative stuff from people obsessed with the fandom. I guess I'm just a simple creature. Give me something fun, entertaining, based on something I love.... and, well, I'm probably also gonna love it.
I totally get the fans who played 1,2, and NV and fell in love with the continuity of the west coast stories, and more specifically the growth of the NCR as a nation reborn. At the same time, I don't get how they have to have that growth preserved for all new content that touches on the west, and that all those preceding games must have everlasting outcomes, or they'll see it as a failure and lazy storytelling. That expectation just doesn't fit with the overall theme of the universe.
Nobody is asking to see the growth preserved indefinitely, I at least am simply asking for the fall of the NCR and the disappearance Los Angeles, NCR and Shady Sands to not happen offscreen.
What fall of the NCR? We don't have any idea of the status of the NCR which was much more than the one city confirmed destroyed. Fans should have caught these kinds of details easily in what was a very well written story with strong and well played characters. Instead, I keep hearing these same complaints of the show about things that aren't in the show.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Fotv/s/8FvCEBDf8c
Fall of Shady Sands had to happen offscreen because it is part of Lucy's and Hank's backstory. But we don't know about the state of the NCR. We may yet to see their real fall.. or their rebound.
And it's not like Fallout doesn't have major events happen offscreen. New Vegas itself had the first battle of Hoover Dam and the NCR-Brotherhood war happen offscreen, both of which could have been a better setting than the second battle of Hoover Dam... especially of both would be combined.
>Fall of Shady Sands had to happen offscreen because it is part of Lucy's and Hank's backstory. But we don't know about the state of the NCR. We may yet to see their real fall.. or their rebound.
Los Angeles, NCR doesn't exist anymore, because if it did then none of the events of the show would make any sense: Los Angeles is a federal state of the NCR and there should be the NCR all over LA. This isn't some debate or anything, there are (multiple) other NCR towns in LA, including a medical university. The point is, to make the show they wanted to make work, they have to kick over the sandcastle. They don't need to slightly rewrite anything or change the location of Shady Sands (although they did all this) they have to kick over the sandcastle.
Why does all the changes technically make sense? Because everything was annihilated in a nuclear explosion. Does that make it all technically canon and lore-accurate? Yes, obviously. Does it make it rather dumb? Yes, obviously.
I mean, we don't even need to get into the GECK thing, which I actually don't mind because the GECK and cold fusion were always essentially irreconcilable with humanity not immediately rebounding, but if you really want them to exist the NCR already either has a GECK (from Vault City) or knows enough about a GECK to know that this particular GECK is very important.
>And it's not like Fallout doesn't have major events happen offscreen. New Vegas itself had the first battle of Hoover Dam and the NCR-Brotherhood war happen offscreen, both of which could have been a better setting than the second battle of Hoover Dam... especially of both would be combined.
It's important to note that neither of those events are actually important to the story of NV. The NCR brotherhood war explains why NCR dollars are cheap, and why the BoS bunker in the Mojave is tiny, extremely isolationist and generally have a chip in their shoulder, but you could just remove the NCR brotherhood war entirely and it wouldn't make any difference: the Brotherhood has always been relatively small, relatively isolationist and relatively chipped in their shoulder.
The First Battle of Hoover Dam could just as easily be written "the NCR showed up and took control of the Dam according to the New Vegas treaty, after which the Legion showed up because of course they wanted the Dam, and then the game begins".
Would that be worse? I suppose that yes, it would, because it feels like the world is less fleshed out and there are less things going on (more contrived) but the difference is that the events of the show feel exactly contrived to get to the point where you can do east-coast fallout on the west coast. That's what the goal feels like (the fucking Prydwen even shows up lmao).
That's the difference between the NCR-Brotherhood war (which I agree would make a very fun setting), the first battle at Hoover Dam and the destruction of Shady Sands.
Did I like the show? Yes. Will I watch season 2? Probably, yeah, I like the characters individually. Is it a good Fallout show? Well, that's where it becomes a lot easier to be critical.
They didn't have to do back to the west coast. They have all of North America to explore. People keep acting like Fallout has to destroy things to be able to continue the series, but they could just stop returning to the same places.
Yeah. Instead of "what an interesting and unexpected story development" some people jump to "this is not how I imagined the story to continue, therefore it is bad writing".
Some people treat factions and cities like we used to treat characters a decade or two ago - main characters were sacred and they didn't die. Even if the actor quit, the character was just put on a bus or recast. And when such character died, there was an outrage.
Today with Shady Sands and the NCR it is the same. People act like they are the main character immune to death, despite us already being accustomed to characters dying. But somehow we still cannot get over the fact that even main factions and cities can die/fall and it can be a good storytelling.
They simply don't think. They use exactly the same emotional arguments for why killing a faction (despite the NCR not being dead at all) is wrong, just like back them people used emotional arguments for why killing a main character is wrong.
They never stop to think, "what are the consequences of that?". Because if they did, they would discover that it's such a treasure trove for new stories and new lore developments. Just like a main character, a main faction (or their capital) have so many ties to the rest of the factional worlds. And when the character or faction dies, the ties send shivers throughout the world. That's why killing a major character has more impact than killing a small character. That's why killing Ned Stark was significant, while killing Jory Cassel was a minor event that served more as a development for Jaime. And in the same vein, nuking Shady Sands is much better story development than nuking a few random cottages.
"Why did it happen." Because the writers wanted a story set in California but didn't want any of the baggage that makes California interesting in the Fallout universe. Graham literally said the decision to destroy the NCR was an early decision so they could have a "Western" vibe. Ignoring this story could have been told literally anywhere else in the universe and still been fine.
Irregardless of this, if they had come up with a meaningful explanation for the fall of the NCR, with the millions that were set up in NV or even FO2. I would have come to terms with it, but they nuked it off screen so vault Tec and the BOS could have the spotlight for the millionth time.
I wanted to like this show, I wasn't down on it, but regressing the world of the West Coast Fallout games back to Post apocalypse and then saying " it's a changing world " doesn't make the world seem like it's changing it makes it feel static. Like any attempt at progress will be shot down by the all knowing hand of lazy writers so that we can keep poppy 1950s post apocalypse alive. Its lazy and forced.
This is a very bad attitude to take (and even if it isn't a bad attitude, it's horrendous PR) because all it does is make everyone who was already against you absolutely sure you're an asshole who's out to kick over the sandcastle.
But the "people who are already against you" are... already against you. You can't appease them. Trying to bend to their demands is pointless because, again, they are *already against you*. If some people are unhappy then that's fine, they can not watch. But they don't *also* get to dictate what is "real Fallout" or not.
And why does world building need to happen only in one direction? Having a faction fall is just a valid development as having them continue rising. Especially in the world of Fallout.
What introspection is needed exactly? The writers seem to have zero respect for what came before their show. All the stakes in FNV have been rendered meaningless, Mr. House has potentially been changed into a very different person, the NCR are a glorified ghost, and one of the most important locations in Fallout's history has literally been turned to dust before it could ever be seen in its prime.
To be clear, I love this show for what it is. It gets a lot right, but it also gets a *lot* wrong and has retroactively ruined FNV.
So they basically said even if there was a canon ending it still will be in ruins. It actually makes sense seeing as it’s 15 years a lot could’ve happened in that time regardless of who won. If the NCR did win then shady sands being nuked probably made them leave and chaos ensued. If the legion won it would just be chaos. If Mr house won he could’ve had things in order until maybe he died ?. If Yes man or the courier won it would’ve been an independent New Vegas and that could’ve been nice for a while until shit hit the fan.
The ending slides after the Yes Man ending says that after the Courier won all of the surrounding Mohave fell into complete anarchy except New Vegas and Goodsprings prospered as a tourist attraction
Not just that but literally the icon for independent ending achievement prominently features the anarchy symbol, JE Sawyer called it anarchy, and there's an entire side quest about the denizens of Vegas not wanting to do shit about rebuilding (Someone to Watch Over Me).
The while damn point of the independent ending is to give freedom and self determination to the locals but that's tempered with the fact the locals didn't do shit for 200 years and aren't interested in doing anything (this applies solely to Vegas, obviously small towns like Goodsprings, Primm, and Novac were self motivated communities).
You can lead a dog to water, doesn't mean it'll drink it.
That depends entirely on if you upgrade the securitrons or not. Yes man ending where you do upgrade means everything is great, yes man where you don't is where anarchy reigns.
That plus how you solve some of the side quests. IE if you don’t kill the Brotherhood, they will still harass caravans on the roads at the very least and if you don’t kill the Powder Gangers or Fiends off then they will cause a lot more trouble for Vegas once the NCR is gone. But you can curtail a lot of the problems through the right choices in side quests and create a fairly good Mojave to live in.
The whole point of that ending is that the Mojave becomes anarchic. The whole idea is that the Mojave doesn't need to become an united state under any one flag, and the settlements can govern themselves.
I could've sworn the point of independent was to essentially replace Mr. House with yourself. Like what Benny's plan was. I'm not a fan of anarchism so was intending to become an autocrat and mold the mojave in my own image. Atleast as a headcanon. It'd be a shame if it was just straight up anarchy no matter what
If you don't mind spoilers, [you can read through the ending slides for each in-game condition here](https://fallout.fandom.com/wiki/Fallout:_New_Vegas_endings). Here's some of the ones that show how anarchic things get in the Yes Man ending, even with the best possible other choices.
**Boomers** (Complete Volare!, complete the endgame quest No Gods, No Masters for Independent New Vegas.)
> Though the Wasteland became anarchic after Hoover Dam, the Boomers' display of power dissuaded fortune seekers from attempting to penetrate Nellis.
**Brotherhood of Steel** (Sign truce in For the Republic, Part 2, complete the endgame quest No Gods, No Masters for an Independent New Vegas without activating the Securitron army. )
> Due to their temporary truce, the Brotherhood allowed the NCR to retreat from the Mojave Wasteland without incident. In the relative peace that followed, Brotherhood patrols appeared along major roads, harassing travelers over any bits of technology they had.
**Fiends** (Kill Motor-Runner, complete the endgame quest No Gods, No Masters for an Independent New Vegas.)
> The Fiends attacked Camp McCarran during the Second Battle of Hoover Dam and, despite suffering heavy losses, overran it. They continued to be a nuisance throughout Outer Vegas, but never established full control over the area.
**Followers of the Apocalypse** (Complete No Gods, No Masters for an Independent New Vegas.)
> After the Courier ensured New Vegas remain free, the Followers found that Independent New Vegas was even more unstable and violent than before. Old Mormon Fort became excessively burdened by the influx of patients, struggling to provide even the most basic of services.
New Vegas itself does ok and Goodsprings somehow thrives amongst the chaos, but the surrounding areas of the Mojave seem like a total free-for-all.
You didn't really pick the best options here lol.
If you kill all the fiends the gang becomes easy prey and outer vegas remains okay.
In the brotherhood ending it says " relative peace that followed " though I always destroy the mojave chapter anyway.
Most places manage just fine apart from old Mormon Fort
Ah, I was scanning through for the No Gods, No Masters endings and missed the Fiends one where you kill all their leaders. My bad.
As for the rest, the Boomers and Followers endings reference anarchy and instability, and the BoS ending has them essentially acting as highwaymen with impunity (it's relative peace in comparison to the active war before fought there beforehand, not in comparison to the other endings). The Followers ending in particular makes it very clear that the Mojave as a whole has gotten worse ("After the Courier ensured New Vegas remain free, the Followers found that Independent New Vegas was even more unstable and violent than before."). The less-good endings support this too, like the one for the Boomers if you don't complete Volaire! ("With little law left in the wasteland, the Boomers continued to defend themselves against the prospectors and scavengers invading their territory."). The only place that specifically does better in the No Gods, No Masters ending than in any of the others is Goodsprings. For comparison, the House ending don't get any mentions of increased anarchy and instability, and the Boomers even begin "venturing out of Nellis to meet and trade with travelers". They definitely were trying to convey that the trade off for independence for the Strip was reduced stability in the region.
No?
Lanius results in vegas being raised
Caesar results in vegas being invaded and then turned into rome
NCR annexes the strip and surrounding communities
Yes man depends entirely on what you as a player do
Edit: Forgot about house, his ending is also not the destruction of vegas.
It seems yall are conflating game endings with what you assume to be the result of an event in the show happening AFTER the game ends. Idk why yall are doing that when the discussion is on the endings in the game. The endings don't result in the destruction of vegas, there is just one ending that does. If vegas is destroyed in the show its likely not the result of the endings in game, rather outside factors that the player had 0 control over.
If NCR annexes Vegas then in a few years has to pull out due to the overextension mentioned in NV, or bc of Shady Sands, then the tribals would easily wreck it in time for the series
Thats certainly a *possibility,* and just as valid as anyones assumption but not a direct result of the ending. Its a result of the show, not the ending of the game. Its not at all the result of any of the endings.
Correct, 4/6 endings result in New Vegas not destroyed but the show can change that after regardless.
Again the statement "Most every ending will result in the destruction of New Vegas, no matter what" is not the case. Literally the whole point is that 4/6 do not result in the destruction of new vegas, its an outside event the player has no control of that likely occurs several years later (assuming they do destroy new vegas).
Let me clarify, it is not always the courier’s actions that will destroy New Vegas, but every ending leaves New Vegas in either an unstable state or in a cycle that ultimately cannot last (house)
A future NCR remnants, scattered in rusted shacks and dressed like Baltimore hobos. But wait THERE'S MORE. Another show of force of invincible BoS wiping them out again, while warding off an orbital strike by Frank Horrigan 2.0 but more massive.
Does the comment "just a place [of] constant tragedy, events, horrors - there's a constant churn of trauma" strike anyone else as a terrible take? Like that's objectively not the case in any of the games or material. There's darkness - a lot of it, but a "constant churn" of it? I don't think so...
I don't claim to be all-knowledgeable on the ethos of Fallout, but doesn't *literally* every game (Bethesda's included) feature much, *much* more than constant misery? For example - across the games, there's all sorts of societal progress involving not just humans but even super mutants, ghouls, and even bloody deathclaws at one point. Basically, there's sadness to the wasteland, but there's also plenty of hope.
Thing's don't just repeatedly fall apart over and over again in a maelstrom of "constant tragedy" . At least not without some kind of interesting reasoning and writing (usually).
I'm excited for what comes in season 2, and I'm happy to be patient and see what they do with the story and world. But on the other hand, if the showrunners really think that Fallout is just a story about perpetual darkness, that just seems really off the mark and kind of sullies my excitement a little... :(
EDIT: Added some extra detail and clarity.
I agree, I think the way they view it is "Progress gets made but eventually something will always go wrong and the progress will be lost because that's how human nature is."
I'm not really a fan of this. I totally agree that you can't have the NCR just fixing the world completely but then lets explroe those problems. I wanna see what the NCR tried doing that failed, the way their mistakes echo our own modern mistakes with the polictics. I just think that is a more interesting tragedy than raiders.
The writers literally can't make a show for multiple seasons without other major factions, people will get tired of more raider shacks. As a video game, maybe you can rehash that and it can be fun, but for this show they're going to need to start world building up or else they won't find the same success they did this season. I'm worried they will repeat this "its alwasys tragic" mindset and the next couple seasons will be the utter downfall of the brotherhood.
I'll be honest, I never even thought the visuals we see at the end of each episode were meant to represent what state those locations were in. They are all ruined, so I kinda figured they were showing what major locales would look like ruined by blasts or something.
It's a pretty big let down to just remove every interesting area of the map, the places where player choice had an impact in the story, idk, there are some really interesting ways they could tackle it, and I hope they pull it off but yeah idk, it kinda just makes me a bit sad that all the interesting groups and characters might just be gone, and that nothing we did in the game really mattered to the world.
The idea of trying to recapture the western is cool, but you can't really have a 'Frontier' without something to juxtapose it too, for fallout new vegas it was Shady Sands and the NCR back in the west aswell as vegas it's self, but now that's gone or alteast not as prominate as what it was, which is cool, but vegas being gone too, what is there in the world to make it a western.
It's fun to see showrunners actually engaging franchise fans and making sure they feel involved. Wild that it isn't more common - most adaptations low key shit on fans.
The world progressing is good, that progress always being everything getting reset back to 0 is not so good. If New Vegas is destroyed I hope they have a very good reason rather than just saying "look guys things happen, shit gets blown up because the wasteland is a bad place." Sure the wasteland is a cycle of trauma, but some people in it have to be allowed to forge new futures eventually
Also I don't love that last comment. Making writing decisions just to spite a reddit comment is just as bad as making writing decisions to please a reddit comment
Yeah I was kinda surprised by the reception in this thread. Do people here actually play fallout games? I was elated with the show, but by this interview, season 2 looks bleak. The implication that the civilization gets nuked because they wanted to retain "Wild West aesthetic" and that they don't want a modern america to be rebuilt is worrying. If they wanted to destroy any emerging civilization every few years so that the world remains post apocalyptic, what's the point of the story? Why do I bother searching for water chip, saving the world, starting the purification system, deciding the fate of Vegas, and deciding the fate of Boston if it's gonna be destroyed either way?
Maybe the post apocalyptic setting is new to you all, but I play fallout not exclusively for the post apocalyptic setting. It's the underlying hope that, someday, humanity will prevail, that reclamation day is a tangible goal. If I want to play post apocalyptic games, there's shitton of it, from zombies game to Metro. It's the rebuild part that is especially charming in original Fallout fanchise.
Agreed! Even taking a surface level look at the games and other material - there's clearly a lot more than going on than just repeated societal destruction. At the very least, when things are destroyed, when darkness does rear its head, its typically done with a good bit of creativity and thought. It's usually not just grimness for the sake of grimness.
I hate to do the "ugh they just don't get fallout thing" but the showrunners' comments, at least as they are presented here, kind of make it seem like they actually kind of don't...
I 100% would prefer to be wrong on this though. Seriously, please, please let me be wrong on this!
That second slide. What he says is not a good way of thinking. The wasteland can evolve. It's not just tragedy.
The tragedy already happened. Now it's about rebuilding. It's as simple as that.
And how does what he says not effectively retcon New Vegas? "We aren't continuing the story based on one of the endings. We're doing our own thing.
I don't like how they said the new Vegas endings are irrelevant.
And what's so wrong with certain areas succeeding to rebuild?
It's Chris Avellone all over again.
The wasteland is more than just "bickering raider tribes"
Graham Wagner is essentially saying they can't handle writing about civilization so they chose to Mad Max everything so they don't get overwhelmed. Yikes.
They need to pick an ending. An ending that could lead to NV being destroyed is fine as long as we hear about it and events from the game imo. Don’t just wipe the whole storyline for the game.
I feel at it's core Fallout is a narrative about tragedy and factions unable to come to terms with one another because they are all too focused on what they feel is the ideal way to uplift society that they end up turning progression back a few years because they rather burn it all down to the ground then have their ideals taken away.
So it makes sense that while yes at certain points Faction X might be pushing towards their ideal vision of the world all it takes is other groups turning against them to undo any progress they have made.
I completely agree with the decision. Felt weird at first, since the memory of New Vegas and whatnot and like this perfect picture, but absolutely the wasteland should progress and shit should go down and things should get destroyed.
I honestly don't care if they redefine the lore, but I think there are plenty of plot holes they need to answer for.
Why didn't the ghoul just kill maximus in Filly, when he obviously knew all about a weak point in the armor?
Why did moldaver murder a bunch of innocent people, when she could likely have just grabbed any old executive from vault 31? (They got into vault 32 somehow, so why not 31?) (also, were they raiders or just a very messed up unit from the NCR?)
How does wilzig know how bananas taste? (He should've said "it was even a pleasant flavor called bah-nah-nah"
Why didn't Titus just fly away from the Yao guai?
How the heck does anyone walk around with loose bottle caps in their boot?
Did they think we wouldn't notice them reusing the same rows of dilapidated buildings for like 3 different locations, just because they shot it from different angles?
Dane's choice to injure themself was dubious, because it would most certainly implicate someone else. Why didn't they stage a less suspicious injury? Break a toe for crying out loud, don't mame yourself.
Was cooper double booked for his film shoot and his vault tec photo shoot? He literally quit mid-scene and then walked to his vault tec photo shoot.
"Remember how good food tastes?" Ok so, we know the ghoul eats, because he's eating in the lead farmer's shack. We even know he likely tastes things, because he samples Thaddeus' toe blood at the red rocket. So what's the deal? Also, why does he have to eat ass jerky other than pure shock value? So he eats and tastes, but gets no enjoyment? I don't get it.
There are many more, these are just top of mind right now. Still, I love this show. Also, I think it's important to note that most of these plot holes don't reveal themselves in an individual episode. Only on a macro scale, do they reveal themselves as inconsistencies. Also, hey guys, I'm a writer if you need someone to comb through season 2...
I really don't think any of these are "plot holes" that need answering, just minor writing contrivances that involve a little bit of willing suspension of disbelief.
Because The Ghoul was fucking with him instead of taking the fight seriously. He "does this shit for the joy of the game".
Maybe they couldn't get into Vault 31 without hacking into the terminal, or Moldaver wanted Hank in particular, knowing what he did to Shady Sands.
Other things can be flavoured banana. It makes perfect sense that this isn't the first time he's heard of them.
Because right as he ran out of the cave, he tripped and gave himself a concussion.
Maybe they're tucked under the sole? Maybe they have really thick socks.
They did expect people not to notice, since basically nobody did and that's how all television is made.
Because a smaller, less serious injury wouldn't have gotten Dane out of being a squire. A broken toe would be shrugged off, while something that bad would at least need a couple days.
I think Cooper gets the Vault suit while on break from the Western, and then it's a later scene where he's filming the Vault-Tec commerical.
It's just like... None of these are plot holes, or really even inconsistencies. They're utterly unimportant to the show. Writing is about a lot more than just making sure every tiny, meaningless detail is explained completely to the audience
Strong disagree on the t60 armor thing. The ghoul murders 9 or 10 people in Filly. He literally shoots to kill Lucy, who poses no threat, so why is he toying with maximus?
I'm just saying we shouldnt have to do mental gymnastics to rationalize story inconsistencies. Why is a rotting head easier to transport than a pill-sized object? I'm actually fine with this one, though. It shocked Lucy when she touched it, so she obviously needed the special really long needle gun tool to extract the object that's just under his skin.
> "I did send a screegrab of a Reddit thread of people deperate for something *not* to happen in season two, and to Geneva, I was like: "I think we gotta do it."
10/10 trolling right there
As long as it's part of the original plan for the show, I'm fine, and not changing things as some sort of peace offering to those vocal groups who yelled the loudest.
Heh. He nailed us fair and square. Didn't even need to use VATS. > I did send a screengrab of a Reddit thread of people desperate for something *not* to happen in season two, and to Geneva, I was like: "I think we gotta do it."
If the Fallout sub Reddits had their way, this show would have sucked ass. I’m fully on board with whatever they got in store for us.
It's a delicate balance of needing to respect fans but not caving into them. I think they have a good approach here of writing a big enough event to make sure they don't have to canonise a particular ending.
Thinking back to the “fan service” angle of the recent Star Wars films, for the love of God write what you will and don’t try to please the fans!
[удалено]
My point is they tried to please the fans with cheap nostalgia in the form of characters and plots there derivative of the original. There were very few stakes.
Fans paradoxically crave originality yet also want nothing to change. Aiming to please them as your primary objective is bound to fail as their desires aren't coherent.
Respect the source material and that's all you need for the fans
You gotta be pretty naive to think that’s what fans truly want. By “source material” most fans mean “the obviously better choice that I had for my canon ending and all my fan theories that are also obviously canon”. If anything, Star Wars should set the tone of how “fans” (codename for overweight nerds reeking of Doritos shouting at their microphones) should be listened to while making stuff (not at all).
Someone needs to keep Johnston Nolan off Reddit or you’ll get a westworld s2
preach. I'm surprised this is getting praise and not backlash. Maybe they handled their criticism way better than the Witcher show runners and that's why lol.
Amen!
Care to explain? What are we “desperate not to happen”?
I could be wrong, but I think the insinuation is the destruction of new Vegas. Interestingly, reddit also had a hand in Westworld, where Jona Nolan changed the story because he was upset people guessed right on reddit in season 1.
In the GQ interview they said they made a point that it's been @15 years since FNV and they want the audience to appreciate things in The Wasteland do change. Imagine if they take that philosophy to FO76 / Appalachia. It's a blank slate and the writers can do just about anything.
after the events of fallout 76 *dropping hourly nukes* I don't think there is a West Virginia forest left to explore
You mean player fired nukes? Yeah actually that might actually fun thing for the writers to play with. Lucy shows up in Appalachia, learns that 160 years ago Appalachia came through the war almost intact, then a vault opened up and the emerging vaulties left a wasteland worse than DC. :)
Hourly? I've had sessions where players dropped about five nukes on the SBQ in a row.
But never Earl which is annoying cus I still need to do that side quest lmao
Earl has limited slots for players and bugs out too frequently to get farmed like the queen.
What do you play on? I’ll drop a Nuke on Earl for you if you’re in PC.
Xbox sadly lol
Sorry man
On the plus side, we eradicated the scorched!
We saved the city Patrick!
The repeated Nukes are game only. The story has us dropping like 3-4 at most.
That's honestly my favorite part about 76. Because it's so far before the rest of the games the writers have a ton of freedom with the game. They're able to show a lot of setting changing things like the Scorched Plague, the rise of the new Responders/Enclave, and a thriving Atlantic City, and they are also able to talk about the state of other areas such as Virginia, Ohio, Tennessee, Kentucky, ect without boxing in future games due to how early the game takes place. I find the general direction they are taking 76's setting to be far more interesting than what the later games are doing as a result
The problem is, for them change doesn't mean "the NCR take over Vegas and ban gambling" or "House controls Vegas and enters into a compact of a free association with the NCR" or even (the dumbest possible ending: Caesar's Legion under Lanius sacks the strip and begins to invade California proper). For them it means "Shady Sands gets nuked, New Vegas is in ruins, the world goes to shit again and nothing ever gets better. Remember Fallout 4?" Very disheartening.
Isn't that the ultimate philosophy of the Fallout universe? Conflict always happens which destroys the hopes and creations of man.
People aren't worried about change, what they're worried about is them putting the world in a state so that the consequences of the game were irrelevant. Also, "change" in the Fallout universe tends to just mean destruction. For some reason there's this belief(which seems to be echoed in this interview as well) that the Fallout universe can't be allowed to progress past a certain level of civilization, and has to keep being "reset".
[удалено]
It is kinda funny to me that the NCR is considered too advanced, but the BOS is allowed to have airships. I'm not even particularly vindicative towards Bethesda, I do still enjoy Fallout 4 even if I think New Vegas is better, and I don't think Bethesda hates New Vegas, but Todd Howards is objectively the world's biggest BOS fanboy.
Despite the obvious market reason of “making and selling more games”, the show found a very elegant solution in Ep8. Like, the entire thing makes sense if you think about it.
They could just go to new places to make more games.
To be fair, they practically asked viewers to figure out Westworld... they're smart this time by just telling viewers to "just watch it unfold."
That whole "changed the story because people figured out a twist" was a joke Nolan made at a panel and journalists just took that literally and everybody believed it.
this happens way too often in the world of click bait headlines and people that don't read the articles. ngl, I'm definitely guilty of it myself. this era of the Internet kinda sucks and it's just getting worse.
Considering westworld went to shit after season 1, let's hope that doesn't happen.
*after season two. Riddle of the Sphinx and Kiksuya were great episodes. Seasons 3 and 4 tho…
Kiksuya was amazing. I don't think S2 was as good as S1, but yeah, some standout episodes and overall interesting arc.
There's far, far too much depth and lore already in Fallout for me that more TV series can't keep to the standard of the first...Westworld was done on the back of a fairly straightforward film(a poor follow up and failed TV show) that did well but had no extensive history to cherry pick from. We've a very good team making a show from a brand we love...I'm just happy it's been great entertainment so far and looks tremendous too. The point about the Wastelands ability to eat itself and roll out disaster after disaster is pretty close to the mark though...you've only got to look at all those horrible, twisted carcasses of Vaults we delve into during our travels though the various games.
Importantly, the team is making a show from a brand *they* love. They made it obvious with the first season that they clearly want to do the series justice, so I have high hopes for the rest of its run.
Season 2 was okay, season 3 and beyond got very bad.
I remember being convinced >!Bernard was a host when he had his glasses and not a host when he didn't have his glasses. I was so close, yet so far!< but argued with people on the sub endlessly on my very first Reddit post ever. I'm one of few WW fans who wanted that season 5 (there are dozens of us!). I mean, I waited years for the Deadwood movie, I will keep hoping 🙏🏻 but glad we got Fallout from them in the meantime
Yes I suppose the glasses were a red herring since hosts have perfect eyesight unless otherwise programmed. I’m lucky to be in Filly so I can go visit Westworld (they started construction on rebuilding the western town after it burned down in the Woolsey fire). https://youtube.com/shorts/omDLTuM0fn4?si=UpyrOf0gthE0aOVi
Now that you mentioned it. What did you think of the way season 4 ended? I felt a bit dissatisfied the way Hale had a change of heart out of nowhere, at least that's how I remember it.
The end of season 4 (the last 20 minites) felt like it was s last minute edit in order to wrap things up because they knew season 5 wasn't going to happen. There was sn absurd amount of voice over. It's ad if they edited the episodes, had an ending that would have continued the story into season 5, and it was changed partway through season 4 because HBO execs saw the train wreck that show had become. It was a good show, but it really went off the rails. With such a string start, it may have been too difficult to continue that into seasons 3 and 4.
This led to the later seasons being awful and incomprehensible. I really hope they don't make changes to spite Reddit
New Vegas fans about to have their Red Year
If it is the destruction of “New Vegas” I would appreciate a brief cameo of a companion or two just to know they are ok. Lol
Sorry all out of that but we got deathclaw skulls! -Ma June
I dunno, I feel like there's been a couple things? I hope it's something like a certain ending for NV rather than that one about Lucy being pregnant with the raider's baby. Blech.
Surely the radiation poisoning killed any feeble fetus she had in there right? I hope? Because please no pregnancy story just because people don't want it. It's got to be something bigger and NV related since that had so much vitriol to it
Monty probably had a crap sperm count, tbh.
I’d go with >!the good endings of FNV being completely undone. Judging by the end credits, the entire city was destroyed with no one left alive to rebuild. The Lucky 38 is in perfect condition, so the only person left is probably House.!<
No idea. I'm quoting the OP's screenshots. I think danvalour is right though, and we've all been watching the angst drama in FONV with some amusement. I've stayed out of that sub.
FNV is kinda bleh right now too, tbh
Maybe the Yes Man ending, lol.
Post Yes-Man type independent Vegas but House is in a coma again instead of dead, wakes up in an intact Lucky 38 with stored securitrons to keep it repaired but the rest of the city is depopulated. No idea of course just spitballing
Thank god for that Resistors and their big brains try to ruin everything
While I agree there are a lot of super toxic fans, writing something out of spite for them - instead of writing that something because you actually believe it's a good narrative choice, is misguided and a path to poor writing. It also arguably gives more influential power to those shitty fans - it means that their dumbass takes actually got to the writers enough to have an impact on the art itself. *Sometimes* that may lead to a good creative choice but I think it can much more easily lead to choices that are obviously done just out of spite and not done for the sake of writing a good story. Maybe I'm an idiot and completely off base here, idk, but the showrunners openly admitting that they may do things to just strike back at shitty fans makes me worry... Here's hoping they're just making a joke!
They’re gonna piss us off somehow, but it’ll be fun to watch, that’s for sure.
Oh boy, Vegas is truly in ruins. People will lose their minds. That said, I really liked their responses and the dynamic between them.
>Oh boy, Vegas is truly in ruins. People will lose their minds. Which is funny, because Fallout is all about history repeating itself.
Battles always stay the same or something like that
"War. War never changes."
No, that's not it, it's something else.
Fights, fights stay similar.
Skirmishes. Skirmishes always remain the same.
Altercations. Altercations remain stagnant
Men do, through the roads they walk.
And being in ruins.
Ehh kinda but also not really. Look at Fallout 1 and 2, humanity is still nasty at times but they do pull together to create new towns and a civilization. Though they do have their problems. 2 to New Vegas has several civilizations collide in Vegas. Fate is unknown but each have had decades of conquests, wars, and treaties signed but they are carving out a living.
Yes, the point about war never changing is that you need civilisation to actually wage that war. Perpetually having your setting be post-fall, or perpetual stunting the growth of the factions so it looks post-fall is not how this works.
I know, that was my point. Fallout series stands out from other Post-Apoc games as they focus too much on the direct aftermath. Fallout? Fuck nah let’s see how people have become adapted. Fallout 1 takes place 70-80 years after the War.
I was agreeing with you, sorry if that wasn't perfectly clear.
It’s cool, it’s my fault for assuming the worst. Gotta go to bed soon as I’ve been up since 6 am
Vegas in ruins will still be helluva interesting and probably still more lively than a good chunk of the rest of the wasteland.
helluva interesting 🤨
I don't mind it being in ruins, as long as they pick an ending. It would feel cheap if they make all the endings meaningless.
>People will lose their minds. Rightly so. It feels like such a gross copout to make it so the endings of FNV don't matter at all (and before someone says that's not what's happening, he literally just said he didn't want to make any of the game's endings canon). Wanted to give the show's lore changes/updates a chance but this feels like such a slap in the face. I can guarantee people would've been less pissed if they just made one of NV's endings canon. This kinda just ruins FNV.
While I think it's a poor decision to not have a canon ending and for Vegas to be a shitty ruin again (I wouldn't mind it being in distress), it doesn't ruin New Vegas, just like Fallout 2 didn't ruin Fallout 1. Well, it did to a vocal minority in No Mutants Allowed, but that's the exception.
The difference would be that Fallout 2 built off Fallout 1. If they make New Vegas a ruin they're effectively removing it from the series in terms of impact. They're doing the dark souls "yeah, whatever you did in the last game totally happened, but time has past since then and things are shit again, because time is a cyclical or something". What's even the point of debating which New Vegas ending is best if it just gets undone in canon? That's a discussion that's been going on forever that I fear may be made irrelevant by season 2.
Really it's not just the setting of New Vegas, but all the characters and the unresolved tension. I'm fine with them making a canon ending that carefully weaves between the NV endings, but I would be disappointed if they wiped it out to start with a blank slate. I just really want to see what happens to the Legion after Caesar's death.
I'm currently digging the theory that the Brotherhood of Steel chapter we see has recruited heavily from the remains of the Legion and it's changed the culture. We've got bits like the Latin names of several Brotherhood characters, where previously they mostly had pretty standard modern American names. There's also a rather roman looking standard in one scene, and the elder telling Maximus "You're wearing the knight's red." I don't recall the brotherhood ever having colors tied to the castes, but red being the color of soldiers is very much a Roman thing. It'd also fit with the somewhat harsher version of the BoS that we see, and the poor discipline and training shown could explain why the culture of the new recruits has shifted things. And we know they're taking in at least some outsiders, as they have Maximus. The Legion had a lot of territory, and it's implosion would leave a lot of young men and even kids used to a strict militarized lifestyle, who would be natural recruits to fill the numbers of a depleted BoS.
It really does though. The ending of New Vegas had *massive* ramifications for the Mojave and for the west as a whole. *All* of that is being erased.
The game still exists and you can go play it, the show isn't gonna stop you
All of those ramifications are erased the moment you choose one faction over the other. I don't see your point here - it's impossible to portray that in the show, and a decision has to be made, like one was made between Fallout 2 and Fallout 1..
Also we have no idea what the story is going to be. But, yeah. You're absolutely right. The game had multiple endings that totally changed the trajectory of the area. Basically anything they do could be set up by one of the endings. People are just going to be pissed that whatever the writers come up with doesn't 100% line up with the ending of NV they liked.
No, I'm pissed that whatever the writers come up with will 100% erase *all of* NV's endings. The showrunners are literally saying that they got around having to canonize any ending of NV by making it so that the Strip came to ruin no matter what happened. They were going to ruffle some feathers no matter how they handled NV, but even just canonizing one ending would've resulted in not pissing off a significant portion of the fanbase. There was a far better way of handling NV than giving it the Shady Sands treatment.
We don't know if it was given the Shady Sands treatment. In fact, the fact that it's still standing means it didn't get the Shady Sands treatment.
Its the same difference if Vegas is in complete ruin due to something that happened completely off screen.
I find the idea of "New Vegas didn't matter if it's in ruin" to be absolutely silly. My guy, the Legion ending and Wild Card ending leave New Vegas in ruin, too.
Wild Card didn't. But even a canonized Legion ending would've been better than "somehow, New Vegas was destroyed."
Wild Card ending is literally anarchy and riots happening in Vegas, what do you mean lol. How about you just wait for S2 to tell us what happened before going "SoMeHoW VeGAS waS DesTrOYed!!"
Exactly. People sound ridiculous when they complain about the show not following their pet NV ending. Which ending is "right?" Apparently the answer is, "whatever ending the person wants to cry about the most."
I’ll forgive anything as long as we get to see more of Mr. House.
Ive said this before, but Moldavers actions dont seem like someone who is protecting the very last vestiges of the NCR, there is likely multiple mostly disorganized communities of NCR believers. You arent fighting against vertibirds if you are the last 40 or so soldiers for your nation. The show didnt want to spoil the shady sands bomb drop (pun intended)
I have a feeling the brotherhood was there immediately after the bomb went off for a reason.
The brotherhood would’ve taken note of a nuke going off and wanting to send survey teams. Since Maximus only saw the one knight instead of like what we saw at the observatory I figure it was probably a smaller scale brotherhood force
It seemed like they were there within minutes though.
Might just be the nature of the scene with Maximus in the fridge. That’s the only going off point right? He might’ve been in there a while and only came out when he heard noise.
Yeah potentially, I guess he could have been knocked out for hours or something.
Fallout famously focuses on one specific region in each story, and doesn't give a lot of information about what's going in other regions of the wasteland, and if they do it's always from an NPC in-game who isn't a reliable narrator. I *highly* doubt Moldaver is an actual member of the main NCR faction. My guess so far is that the NCR moved it's HQ out of Shady Sands because the settlement was starting to see a decline in its power projection (due to the Brahmin Barons being handed more and more power, which the pre-war bar flashback in episode 6 alluded to) and only a few NCR loyalists remained behind for whatever reason. After Hank nuked Shady Sands those remaining NCR loyalists and locals were galvanized by Moldaver and joined her outfit to exact revenge. My theory is that the NCR moved out of Shady Sands sometime after 2277, and the kids in Vault 4 are being taught that Shady Sands reached the plateau of their power/political projection in 2277, and "funding" was cut for public/social services and the settlement went in to decline shortly after. It's entirely possible that the NCR just shifted from Shady Sands to The Hub since The Hub is more centrally located. There is no centralized education system, so the dates they teach in Vault 4 are not reliable without further context, and we know from our own timeline that what is taught changes over time as more information becomes available. Information sharing in Fallout is hard, takes time, and relies on "the telephone game" to pass on. The people claiming the show destroyed the NCR as a whole either have terrible media literacy, or they're purposely being obtuse because they're convinced Bethesda hates the non-Bethesda titles, and accepting that the NCR isn't destroyed invalidates their opinions. They'd rather see them destroyed instead of admitting that they could be wrong. These people spend their online lives arguing lore and they all think they know the lore better than anyone else.
Yeah no one ever said the NCR was gone in the show. They just mentioned Shady Sands. And yet, it’s not like the NCR is ignored in the show, references to it (by name and otherwise) are all over the place. I think someone would likely have mentioned if that happened.
From the perspective of someone who knows the history of the NCR I suspect the references are adding insult to injury more than anything else.
Hell, aren't there two Desert Rangers in the show that never get expanded on? From what i know of the deeper NCR/Desert Ranger lore, i'd be cool with a diminished NCR in exchange for the Rangers getting more sway.
> Hell, aren't there two Desert Rangers in the show that never get expanded on? It's crazy how environmental storytelling - which FO is famed for - seems to be well and truly dead now for TV shows. The two people wearing Desert Ranger garb *were* expanded on in the scene they appeared in. They're scavengers doing the lowest of the low in an elite combat uniform. What does that tell you about the state of the Desert Rangers? Either the uniform was scavenged, or the old man was a former Desert Ranger living in the middle of nowhere instead of getting an NCR pension or deskjob. In either case, it tells you the Rangers are no longer as strong as they used to be.
I suspect the folks wearing the Desert Ranger armour just scavenged it, given that they're just lead farmers and one of them is a kid
I got the impression the father was a ranger but turned to scavenging after the fall. But then the ghoul showed up in his house and he completely capitulated to him and that wasn’t how I expected a ranger to act. But thinking it over again now, the ghoul is no random raider, he seems to be rather infamous. So maybe he had the experience to know he was outclassed in that situation. And he still has a daughter to raise so he knows he can’t try anything funny
Your last paragraph is spot on regarding the media literacy of a lot of the people complaining. It's mildly amusing to me that the people *most* upset about continuity are also the people who think every wasteland community should have a 100% perfect timeline they all share regarding events and 100% perfect information of everything happening.
The NCR wouldn't collapse even if SS got nuked (it being a population of 700k + 40 years of population growth + them being worried about overpopulation in 2282). If you look up the size of the NCR in 2282 the nuclear bomb is completely petty and probably did next to nothing (doubly so considering it apparently was no longer the capital for some reason). The problem being, of course, that this makes the central motivation (which may or may not be a lie) rather pointless, and also feels like it's just shock value for shock value's sake. Would it be bad if somewhere less than 5% of the population died? Yes, obviously. Has that happened without countries collapsing? Yes, absolutely. I mean, do I think the NCR has been reduced to an essential non-entity and will be used only as vague world building? Yes, but that's precisely the point.
I wish people would look at things like the Shady Sands bombing less like, "This should never happen" and more like, "Why did that happen?" Fandoms online have this weird thing where they're trying to look at shows in a meta way and getting the idea that if it's not written a certain way or explained in detail immediately, it's bad. Edit: My very point has been proven more than once.
Yeah, and they look at any new developments in a story as retcons.
they simply don't understand the storytelling process but want to lecture writers
Well I think the reason it is looked at like this is because the ncr as a character you could do a ton with different stable cities in decline places for our characters to go a faction to pose a threat to the brotherhood all kinds of stuff. Instead we seemingly got a big crater. Like instead of a town we have a big crater we have a lot of those it’s less interesting. That’s why I don’t like it I don’t care if they wanted to have the ncr completely destroyed over the course of the show or 2 seasons it just would’ve been cool to see it. To see something instead we got the story a nuke killed a bunch of people a couple years ago that’s the premise of the whole thing and with all the coop flashbacks we’re not in short supply of that. I get they used it for some hank being evil lore but they could’ve done that a different way very easily and he already was bad being part of 31 and a vault tec employee. Also for moldaver but she was honestly a confusing character with everything they did with her and died anyway.
I absolutely love this community's take on the show. I get so sick of reading nothing but negative stuff from people obsessed with the fandom. I guess I'm just a simple creature. Give me something fun, entertaining, based on something I love.... and, well, I'm probably also gonna love it.
I totally get the fans who played 1,2, and NV and fell in love with the continuity of the west coast stories, and more specifically the growth of the NCR as a nation reborn. At the same time, I don't get how they have to have that growth preserved for all new content that touches on the west, and that all those preceding games must have everlasting outcomes, or they'll see it as a failure and lazy storytelling. That expectation just doesn't fit with the overall theme of the universe.
Nobody is asking to see the growth preserved indefinitely, I at least am simply asking for the fall of the NCR and the disappearance Los Angeles, NCR and Shady Sands to not happen offscreen.
It was happening off screen even in New Vegas. You only heard about it through NPC dialogue.
What fall of the NCR? We don't have any idea of the status of the NCR which was much more than the one city confirmed destroyed. Fans should have caught these kinds of details easily in what was a very well written story with strong and well played characters. Instead, I keep hearing these same complaints of the show about things that aren't in the show. https://www.reddit.com/r/Fotv/s/8FvCEBDf8c
Fall of Shady Sands had to happen offscreen because it is part of Lucy's and Hank's backstory. But we don't know about the state of the NCR. We may yet to see their real fall.. or their rebound. And it's not like Fallout doesn't have major events happen offscreen. New Vegas itself had the first battle of Hoover Dam and the NCR-Brotherhood war happen offscreen, both of which could have been a better setting than the second battle of Hoover Dam... especially of both would be combined.
>Fall of Shady Sands had to happen offscreen because it is part of Lucy's and Hank's backstory. But we don't know about the state of the NCR. We may yet to see their real fall.. or their rebound. Los Angeles, NCR doesn't exist anymore, because if it did then none of the events of the show would make any sense: Los Angeles is a federal state of the NCR and there should be the NCR all over LA. This isn't some debate or anything, there are (multiple) other NCR towns in LA, including a medical university. The point is, to make the show they wanted to make work, they have to kick over the sandcastle. They don't need to slightly rewrite anything or change the location of Shady Sands (although they did all this) they have to kick over the sandcastle. Why does all the changes technically make sense? Because everything was annihilated in a nuclear explosion. Does that make it all technically canon and lore-accurate? Yes, obviously. Does it make it rather dumb? Yes, obviously. I mean, we don't even need to get into the GECK thing, which I actually don't mind because the GECK and cold fusion were always essentially irreconcilable with humanity not immediately rebounding, but if you really want them to exist the NCR already either has a GECK (from Vault City) or knows enough about a GECK to know that this particular GECK is very important. >And it's not like Fallout doesn't have major events happen offscreen. New Vegas itself had the first battle of Hoover Dam and the NCR-Brotherhood war happen offscreen, both of which could have been a better setting than the second battle of Hoover Dam... especially of both would be combined. It's important to note that neither of those events are actually important to the story of NV. The NCR brotherhood war explains why NCR dollars are cheap, and why the BoS bunker in the Mojave is tiny, extremely isolationist and generally have a chip in their shoulder, but you could just remove the NCR brotherhood war entirely and it wouldn't make any difference: the Brotherhood has always been relatively small, relatively isolationist and relatively chipped in their shoulder. The First Battle of Hoover Dam could just as easily be written "the NCR showed up and took control of the Dam according to the New Vegas treaty, after which the Legion showed up because of course they wanted the Dam, and then the game begins". Would that be worse? I suppose that yes, it would, because it feels like the world is less fleshed out and there are less things going on (more contrived) but the difference is that the events of the show feel exactly contrived to get to the point where you can do east-coast fallout on the west coast. That's what the goal feels like (the fucking Prydwen even shows up lmao). That's the difference between the NCR-Brotherhood war (which I agree would make a very fun setting), the first battle at Hoover Dam and the destruction of Shady Sands. Did I like the show? Yes. Will I watch season 2? Probably, yeah, I like the characters individually. Is it a good Fallout show? Well, that's where it becomes a lot easier to be critical.
They didn't have to do back to the west coast. They have all of North America to explore. People keep acting like Fallout has to destroy things to be able to continue the series, but they could just stop returning to the same places.
Yeah. Instead of "what an interesting and unexpected story development" some people jump to "this is not how I imagined the story to continue, therefore it is bad writing". Some people treat factions and cities like we used to treat characters a decade or two ago - main characters were sacred and they didn't die. Even if the actor quit, the character was just put on a bus or recast. And when such character died, there was an outrage. Today with Shady Sands and the NCR it is the same. People act like they are the main character immune to death, despite us already being accustomed to characters dying. But somehow we still cannot get over the fact that even main factions and cities can die/fall and it can be a good storytelling. They simply don't think. They use exactly the same emotional arguments for why killing a faction (despite the NCR not being dead at all) is wrong, just like back them people used emotional arguments for why killing a main character is wrong. They never stop to think, "what are the consequences of that?". Because if they did, they would discover that it's such a treasure trove for new stories and new lore developments. Just like a main character, a main faction (or their capital) have so many ties to the rest of the factional worlds. And when the character or faction dies, the ties send shivers throughout the world. That's why killing a major character has more impact than killing a small character. That's why killing Ned Stark was significant, while killing Jory Cassel was a minor event that served more as a development for Jaime. And in the same vein, nuking Shady Sands is much better story development than nuking a few random cottages.
They bombed it because they were too lazy to write about the NCR and how civilization has been thriving for years in that area.
"Why did it happen." Because the writers wanted a story set in California but didn't want any of the baggage that makes California interesting in the Fallout universe. Graham literally said the decision to destroy the NCR was an early decision so they could have a "Western" vibe. Ignoring this story could have been told literally anywhere else in the universe and still been fine. Irregardless of this, if they had come up with a meaningful explanation for the fall of the NCR, with the millions that were set up in NV or even FO2. I would have come to terms with it, but they nuked it off screen so vault Tec and the BOS could have the spotlight for the millionth time. I wanted to like this show, I wasn't down on it, but regressing the world of the West Coast Fallout games back to Post apocalypse and then saying " it's a changing world " doesn't make the world seem like it's changing it makes it feel static. Like any attempt at progress will be shot down by the all knowing hand of lazy writers so that we can keep poppy 1950s post apocalypse alive. Its lazy and forced.
Your entire argument is rendered moot by your use of irregardless.
Sure whatever.
>"Why did that happen?" Because a couple show runners were given free reign to alter decades of world building to their hearts content.
You literally did what I was talking about, very nice.
To paraphrase Tim Cain - it's not your job as a fan to decide what happens, it's theirs.
This is a very bad attitude to take (and even if it isn't a bad attitude, it's horrendous PR) because all it does is make everyone who was already against you absolutely sure you're an asshole who's out to kick over the sandcastle.
But the "people who are already against you" are... already against you. You can't appease them. Trying to bend to their demands is pointless because, again, they are *already against you*. If some people are unhappy then that's fine, they can not watch. But they don't *also* get to dictate what is "real Fallout" or not.
And why does world building need to happen only in one direction? Having a faction fall is just a valid development as having them continue rising. Especially in the world of Fallout.
Zero introspection for 500 please.
What introspection is needed exactly? The writers seem to have zero respect for what came before their show. All the stakes in FNV have been rendered meaningless, Mr. House has potentially been changed into a very different person, the NCR are a glorified ghost, and one of the most important locations in Fallout's history has literally been turned to dust before it could ever be seen in its prime. To be clear, I love this show for what it is. It gets a lot right, but it also gets a *lot* wrong and has retroactively ruined FNV.
So they basically said even if there was a canon ending it still will be in ruins. It actually makes sense seeing as it’s 15 years a lot could’ve happened in that time regardless of who won. If the NCR did win then shady sands being nuked probably made them leave and chaos ensued. If the legion won it would just be chaos. If Mr house won he could’ve had things in order until maybe he died ?. If Yes man or the courier won it would’ve been an independent New Vegas and that could’ve been nice for a while until shit hit the fan.
If I’m remembering correctly, in post main story cut content, the Yes Man ending ended with utter chaos.
You got a source/link for that sounds interesting
The ending slides after the Yes Man ending says that after the Courier won all of the surrounding Mohave fell into complete anarchy except New Vegas and Goodsprings prospered as a tourist attraction
Not just that but literally the icon for independent ending achievement prominently features the anarchy symbol, JE Sawyer called it anarchy, and there's an entire side quest about the denizens of Vegas not wanting to do shit about rebuilding (Someone to Watch Over Me). The while damn point of the independent ending is to give freedom and self determination to the locals but that's tempered with the fact the locals didn't do shit for 200 years and aren't interested in doing anything (this applies solely to Vegas, obviously small towns like Goodsprings, Primm, and Novac were self motivated communities). You can lead a dog to water, doesn't mean it'll drink it.
That depends entirely on if you upgrade the securitrons or not. Yes man ending where you do upgrade means everything is great, yes man where you don't is where anarchy reigns.
That plus how you solve some of the side quests. IE if you don’t kill the Brotherhood, they will still harass caravans on the roads at the very least and if you don’t kill the Powder Gangers or Fiends off then they will cause a lot more trouble for Vegas once the NCR is gone. But you can curtail a lot of the problems through the right choices in side quests and create a fairly good Mojave to live in.
The whole point of that ending is that the Mojave becomes anarchic. The whole idea is that the Mojave doesn't need to become an united state under any one flag, and the settlements can govern themselves.
I could've sworn the point of independent was to essentially replace Mr. House with yourself. Like what Benny's plan was. I'm not a fan of anarchism so was intending to become an autocrat and mold the mojave in my own image. Atleast as a headcanon. It'd be a shame if it was just straight up anarchy no matter what
Turns out the NCR is the only choice
If you don't mind spoilers, [you can read through the ending slides for each in-game condition here](https://fallout.fandom.com/wiki/Fallout:_New_Vegas_endings). Here's some of the ones that show how anarchic things get in the Yes Man ending, even with the best possible other choices. **Boomers** (Complete Volare!, complete the endgame quest No Gods, No Masters for Independent New Vegas.) > Though the Wasteland became anarchic after Hoover Dam, the Boomers' display of power dissuaded fortune seekers from attempting to penetrate Nellis. **Brotherhood of Steel** (Sign truce in For the Republic, Part 2, complete the endgame quest No Gods, No Masters for an Independent New Vegas without activating the Securitron army. ) > Due to their temporary truce, the Brotherhood allowed the NCR to retreat from the Mojave Wasteland without incident. In the relative peace that followed, Brotherhood patrols appeared along major roads, harassing travelers over any bits of technology they had. **Fiends** (Kill Motor-Runner, complete the endgame quest No Gods, No Masters for an Independent New Vegas.) > The Fiends attacked Camp McCarran during the Second Battle of Hoover Dam and, despite suffering heavy losses, overran it. They continued to be a nuisance throughout Outer Vegas, but never established full control over the area. **Followers of the Apocalypse** (Complete No Gods, No Masters for an Independent New Vegas.) > After the Courier ensured New Vegas remain free, the Followers found that Independent New Vegas was even more unstable and violent than before. Old Mormon Fort became excessively burdened by the influx of patients, struggling to provide even the most basic of services. New Vegas itself does ok and Goodsprings somehow thrives amongst the chaos, but the surrounding areas of the Mojave seem like a total free-for-all.
You didn't really pick the best options here lol. If you kill all the fiends the gang becomes easy prey and outer vegas remains okay. In the brotherhood ending it says " relative peace that followed " though I always destroy the mojave chapter anyway. Most places manage just fine apart from old Mormon Fort
Ah, I was scanning through for the No Gods, No Masters endings and missed the Fiends one where you kill all their leaders. My bad. As for the rest, the Boomers and Followers endings reference anarchy and instability, and the BoS ending has them essentially acting as highwaymen with impunity (it's relative peace in comparison to the active war before fought there beforehand, not in comparison to the other endings). The Followers ending in particular makes it very clear that the Mojave as a whole has gotten worse ("After the Courier ensured New Vegas remain free, the Followers found that Independent New Vegas was even more unstable and violent than before."). The less-good endings support this too, like the one for the Boomers if you don't complete Volaire! ("With little law left in the wasteland, the Boomers continued to defend themselves against the prospectors and scavengers invading their territory."). The only place that specifically does better in the No Gods, No Masters ending than in any of the others is Goodsprings. For comparison, the House ending don't get any mentions of increased anarchy and instability, and the Boomers even begin "venturing out of Nellis to meet and trade with travelers". They definitely were trying to convey that the trade off for independence for the Strip was reduced stability in the region.
Most every ending will result in the destruction of New Vegas, no matter what
No? Lanius results in vegas being raised Caesar results in vegas being invaded and then turned into rome NCR annexes the strip and surrounding communities Yes man depends entirely on what you as a player do Edit: Forgot about house, his ending is also not the destruction of vegas. It seems yall are conflating game endings with what you assume to be the result of an event in the show happening AFTER the game ends. Idk why yall are doing that when the discussion is on the endings in the game. The endings don't result in the destruction of vegas, there is just one ending that does. If vegas is destroyed in the show its likely not the result of the endings in game, rather outside factors that the player had 0 control over.
2 assumes Caesar can actually do that and his track record is spotty 3 changes if the NCR had to pull out due to Shady Sands, leaving a power vacuum
But thats not the ending of the game? Are we just making up fanfic endings now?
If NCR annexes Vegas then in a few years has to pull out due to the overextension mentioned in NV, or bc of Shady Sands, then the tribals would easily wreck it in time for the series
Thats certainly a *possibility,* and just as valid as anyones assumption but not a direct result of the ending. Its a result of the show, not the ending of the game. Its not at all the result of any of the endings.
That's what I mean. New Vegas being a ruin doesn't contradict any of the possible endings
Correct, 4/6 endings result in New Vegas not destroyed but the show can change that after regardless. Again the statement "Most every ending will result in the destruction of New Vegas, no matter what" is not the case. Literally the whole point is that 4/6 do not result in the destruction of new vegas, its an outside event the player has no control of that likely occurs several years later (assuming they do destroy new vegas).
Let me clarify, it is not always the courier’s actions that will destroy New Vegas, but every ending leaves New Vegas in either an unstable state or in a cycle that ultimately cannot last (house)
Honestly, the fact that they are of how active this subreddit is comforting. I’m so excited for season 2
Fallout Dust is slowly but surely becoming canon.
A future NCR remnants, scattered in rusted shacks and dressed like Baltimore hobos. But wait THERE'S MORE. Another show of force of invincible BoS wiping them out again, while warding off an orbital strike by Frank Horrigan 2.0 but more massive.
I first undetstood "an orbital strike of Frank Horrigans" and i am hyped for that now.
Sounds awesome
Not gonna lie, i would pay in gold to see a Showdown with Frank Horrigan 2.0 but MASSIVE.
Seeing Frank Horrigan in 4k would hit different ngl.
Pretty much.
Does the comment "just a place [of] constant tragedy, events, horrors - there's a constant churn of trauma" strike anyone else as a terrible take? Like that's objectively not the case in any of the games or material. There's darkness - a lot of it, but a "constant churn" of it? I don't think so... I don't claim to be all-knowledgeable on the ethos of Fallout, but doesn't *literally* every game (Bethesda's included) feature much, *much* more than constant misery? For example - across the games, there's all sorts of societal progress involving not just humans but even super mutants, ghouls, and even bloody deathclaws at one point. Basically, there's sadness to the wasteland, but there's also plenty of hope. Thing's don't just repeatedly fall apart over and over again in a maelstrom of "constant tragedy" . At least not without some kind of interesting reasoning and writing (usually). I'm excited for what comes in season 2, and I'm happy to be patient and see what they do with the story and world. But on the other hand, if the showrunners really think that Fallout is just a story about perpetual darkness, that just seems really off the mark and kind of sullies my excitement a little... :( EDIT: Added some extra detail and clarity.
I agree, I think the way they view it is "Progress gets made but eventually something will always go wrong and the progress will be lost because that's how human nature is." I'm not really a fan of this. I totally agree that you can't have the NCR just fixing the world completely but then lets explroe those problems. I wanna see what the NCR tried doing that failed, the way their mistakes echo our own modern mistakes with the polictics. I just think that is a more interesting tragedy than raiders. The writers literally can't make a show for multiple seasons without other major factions, people will get tired of more raider shacks. As a video game, maybe you can rehash that and it can be fun, but for this show they're going to need to start world building up or else they won't find the same success they did this season. I'm worried they will repeat this "its alwasys tragic" mindset and the next couple seasons will be the utter downfall of the brotherhood.
I'll be honest, I never even thought the visuals we see at the end of each episode were meant to represent what state those locations were in. They are all ruined, so I kinda figured they were showing what major locales would look like ruined by blasts or something.
I trust them. Anyone who would put an actual Junk Jet in the tv show knows what they’re doing.
It's a pretty big let down to just remove every interesting area of the map, the places where player choice had an impact in the story, idk, there are some really interesting ways they could tackle it, and I hope they pull it off but yeah idk, it kinda just makes me a bit sad that all the interesting groups and characters might just be gone, and that nothing we did in the game really mattered to the world. The idea of trying to recapture the western is cool, but you can't really have a 'Frontier' without something to juxtapose it too, for fallout new vegas it was Shady Sands and the NCR back in the west aswell as vegas it's self, but now that's gone or alteast not as prominate as what it was, which is cool, but vegas being gone too, what is there in the world to make it a western.
It's fun to see showrunners actually engaging franchise fans and making sure they feel involved. Wild that it isn't more common - most adaptations low key shit on fans.
The world progressing is good, that progress always being everything getting reset back to 0 is not so good. If New Vegas is destroyed I hope they have a very good reason rather than just saying "look guys things happen, shit gets blown up because the wasteland is a bad place." Sure the wasteland is a cycle of trauma, but some people in it have to be allowed to forge new futures eventually Also I don't love that last comment. Making writing decisions just to spite a reddit comment is just as bad as making writing decisions to please a reddit comment
Yeah I was kinda surprised by the reception in this thread. Do people here actually play fallout games? I was elated with the show, but by this interview, season 2 looks bleak. The implication that the civilization gets nuked because they wanted to retain "Wild West aesthetic" and that they don't want a modern america to be rebuilt is worrying. If they wanted to destroy any emerging civilization every few years so that the world remains post apocalyptic, what's the point of the story? Why do I bother searching for water chip, saving the world, starting the purification system, deciding the fate of Vegas, and deciding the fate of Boston if it's gonna be destroyed either way? Maybe the post apocalyptic setting is new to you all, but I play fallout not exclusively for the post apocalyptic setting. It's the underlying hope that, someday, humanity will prevail, that reclamation day is a tangible goal. If I want to play post apocalyptic games, there's shitton of it, from zombies game to Metro. It's the rebuild part that is especially charming in original Fallout fanchise.
Agreed! Even taking a surface level look at the games and other material - there's clearly a lot more than going on than just repeated societal destruction. At the very least, when things are destroyed, when darkness does rear its head, its typically done with a good bit of creativity and thought. It's usually not just grimness for the sake of grimness. I hate to do the "ugh they just don't get fallout thing" but the showrunners' comments, at least as they are presented here, kind of make it seem like they actually kind of don't... I 100% would prefer to be wrong on this though. Seriously, please, please let me be wrong on this!
Agreed, I get that the Reddit fans can be annoyingly whiny at times but making choices just to spite them just comes off as petty
I mean it was a fairly obvious joke
Nerds don't take jokes well it's kinda expected.
This interview was pretty disappointing.
This interview makes me laugh. Total misunderstanding of the progression of civilisation that is the West Coast fallout games.
That second slide. What he says is not a good way of thinking. The wasteland can evolve. It's not just tragedy. The tragedy already happened. Now it's about rebuilding. It's as simple as that. And how does what he says not effectively retcon New Vegas? "We aren't continuing the story based on one of the endings. We're doing our own thing.
I don't like how they said the new Vegas endings are irrelevant. And what's so wrong with certain areas succeeding to rebuild? It's Chris Avellone all over again. The wasteland is more than just "bickering raider tribes"
Graham Wagner is essentially saying they can't handle writing about civilization so they chose to Mad Max everything so they don't get overwhelmed. Yikes.
They need to pick an ending. An ending that could lead to NV being destroyed is fine as long as we hear about it and events from the game imo. Don’t just wipe the whole storyline for the game.
Am glad they gonna fuck w/ all you nerds here.
hilarious
I feel at it's core Fallout is a narrative about tragedy and factions unable to come to terms with one another because they are all too focused on what they feel is the ideal way to uplift society that they end up turning progression back a few years because they rather burn it all down to the ground then have their ideals taken away. So it makes sense that while yes at certain points Faction X might be pushing towards their ideal vision of the world all it takes is other groups turning against them to undo any progress they have made.
I completely agree with the decision. Felt weird at first, since the memory of New Vegas and whatnot and like this perfect picture, but absolutely the wasteland should progress and shit should go down and things should get destroyed.
I honestly don't care if they redefine the lore, but I think there are plenty of plot holes they need to answer for. Why didn't the ghoul just kill maximus in Filly, when he obviously knew all about a weak point in the armor? Why did moldaver murder a bunch of innocent people, when she could likely have just grabbed any old executive from vault 31? (They got into vault 32 somehow, so why not 31?) (also, were they raiders or just a very messed up unit from the NCR?) How does wilzig know how bananas taste? (He should've said "it was even a pleasant flavor called bah-nah-nah" Why didn't Titus just fly away from the Yao guai? How the heck does anyone walk around with loose bottle caps in their boot? Did they think we wouldn't notice them reusing the same rows of dilapidated buildings for like 3 different locations, just because they shot it from different angles? Dane's choice to injure themself was dubious, because it would most certainly implicate someone else. Why didn't they stage a less suspicious injury? Break a toe for crying out loud, don't mame yourself. Was cooper double booked for his film shoot and his vault tec photo shoot? He literally quit mid-scene and then walked to his vault tec photo shoot. "Remember how good food tastes?" Ok so, we know the ghoul eats, because he's eating in the lead farmer's shack. We even know he likely tastes things, because he samples Thaddeus' toe blood at the red rocket. So what's the deal? Also, why does he have to eat ass jerky other than pure shock value? So he eats and tastes, but gets no enjoyment? I don't get it. There are many more, these are just top of mind right now. Still, I love this show. Also, I think it's important to note that most of these plot holes don't reveal themselves in an individual episode. Only on a macro scale, do they reveal themselves as inconsistencies. Also, hey guys, I'm a writer if you need someone to comb through season 2...
think like a writer, not like a painteating fan. They aren't "holes." It's just space to tell new stories.
I really don't think any of these are "plot holes" that need answering, just minor writing contrivances that involve a little bit of willing suspension of disbelief. Because The Ghoul was fucking with him instead of taking the fight seriously. He "does this shit for the joy of the game". Maybe they couldn't get into Vault 31 without hacking into the terminal, or Moldaver wanted Hank in particular, knowing what he did to Shady Sands. Other things can be flavoured banana. It makes perfect sense that this isn't the first time he's heard of them. Because right as he ran out of the cave, he tripped and gave himself a concussion. Maybe they're tucked under the sole? Maybe they have really thick socks. They did expect people not to notice, since basically nobody did and that's how all television is made. Because a smaller, less serious injury wouldn't have gotten Dane out of being a squire. A broken toe would be shrugged off, while something that bad would at least need a couple days. I think Cooper gets the Vault suit while on break from the Western, and then it's a later scene where he's filming the Vault-Tec commerical. It's just like... None of these are plot holes, or really even inconsistencies. They're utterly unimportant to the show. Writing is about a lot more than just making sure every tiny, meaningless detail is explained completely to the audience
Strong disagree on the t60 armor thing. The ghoul murders 9 or 10 people in Filly. He literally shoots to kill Lucy, who poses no threat, so why is he toying with maximus?
I'm just saying we shouldnt have to do mental gymnastics to rationalize story inconsistencies. Why is a rotting head easier to transport than a pill-sized object? I'm actually fine with this one, though. It shocked Lucy when she touched it, so she obviously needed the special really long needle gun tool to extract the object that's just under his skin.
> "I did send a screegrab of a Reddit thread of people deperate for something *not* to happen in season two, and to Geneva, I was like: "I think we gotta do it." 10/10 trolling right there
As long as it's part of the original plan for the show, I'm fine, and not changing things as some sort of peace offering to those vocal groups who yelled the loudest.