Bethesda's Fallout 4: Continuity Breaker

[fred2]

The thing is though, retcons happen all the time, and not just to Fallout. It's the one problem with fictional universes in general; their histories are always subject to minor (or major) changes depending on the stories that the writers want to tell. To have a fictional universe free of retcons, you'll need to either stifle any sort of creativity going forward, avoid doing sequels, plan out every last minute detail of backstory yourself (thereby effecting option one) -- which could quite possibly take many, many years -- or any combination of the above. Either way, retcons keep the series going and evolving from a story standpoint.

Indeed. This was most notable with Beth reboot that for obvious reasons was separated from the originals.

 

[The_Time_Master]

They already retconned it by having Vertibirds bring in troops with power armor in the VR sim in Operation Anchorage which was written before the Great War.

That entire simulation is suspect as its explained that General Chase was nuts and kept changing things. So we don't know what was real and what was fake.

Fair enough, but the sim was still written BEFORE the war... my only point was Bethesda already reconned them in back in Fallout 3.

It's been a long time since I played Fallout 1 and 2, but I seem to recall that the Enclave was good at expanding existing technology but were unable to come up with new ideas of their own, hence my surprise that vertibirds were actually designed by the Enclave and not just enhanced models of pre-war tech.

 

[SMBComix]

No, you don't need to stiffle creativity to avoid retcons, you just need to enforce thoughtfull additions. I mean it's one thing for the original creator to retcon a couple of thing that is already kind of bad, another thing is to have some other person retcon the shit out of the original author's work just to add in "cool" stuff to the story.

What you suggested is basically stifling creativity. You just can't see it because you're a hipster.

Look, don't get me wrong -- I *love* the original series. It's excellently-made and holds up rather well all these years later. That being said, they have NOT made me feel like I was actually exploring or immersed in the world they were portraying, whereas Bethesda's succeeded in doing that with their Elder Scrolls style gameplay formula. The new games could definitely be better -- Fallout 4 looks to be a massive improvement over 3 and New Vegas combined, so much so that I can't even play 3 and New Vegas anymore after seeing the trailer -- but I enjoy them immensely.

On the subject of lore though, Blizzard Entertainment once did a massive retcon with a Warcraft race known as the draenei, all because the lead writer forgot the lore he'd already made up for them... supposedly. In the end though, they came out with a more compelling story than the story they had before, even though the story was pretty good already.

I honestly haven't found the huge retcons in Bethesda's Fallout that everyone seems to be spouting about -- the retcons presented as examples seem a lot like minor backstory changes to me. I've personally had no problems reconciling them with the already-established lore from the classic series.

Plus, again, retcons happen in EVERY fictional universe. There's no avoiding it without stifling creativity.

 

[Walpknut]

You are saying that only hipsters have standards for good fiction? What does that even have to do with anything? Hear, you want dumbstories that just keep retconing themselves for "cool stuff" goread superhero comics, see how welll that has worked quality wise for them. A consistent vision and quality storytelling that respects it's own rules will always be better specially because you can EXPAND on things, not just retcon them because you can't be assed to even put any effort on consistency.

 

[agiel7]

As far as the LAV clashing with the '50s feel, might be worth remembering New Vegas had fairly modern AR-15 style rifles in the form of the Model 733 as the Assault Carbine and the Model 933 with very late 20th/early 21st century mod rails in the form of the Marksman Carbine in contrast with the 50s/60s H&K G3s and M-16A1s.

 

[TorontoReign]

The Service rifle is a combination of the AR-15 and a AR-10 which doesn't necessarily break the retro theme.

 

[Walpknut]

The Fallout world didn't have just retro guns, they were in 2077 when the bombs fell, them having guns from the 50's wpould be pretty stupid. I mean they were already building Lasers gatling guns and Plasma Casters....

 

[ChildServices]

If they were trying to just give us the 1950s there's no way they'd have overlooked the FN FAL. But they weren't aiming for that at all, at least that's not the impression that I got, since most of the guns gave me more of an 80s vibe than anything else. Especially my favourite weapon, the .223 pistol, which is based off of that gun from Blade Runner.

I really don't see why we'd have just skipped past the modern tacticool guns entirely, though.

 

[TorontoReign]

The Fallout world didn't have just retro guns, they were in 2077 when the bombs fell, them having guns from the 50's would be pretty stupid. I mean they were already building Lasers gatling guns and Plasma Casters....

A 1950's retro look at the future. The laser guns are clearly inspired from 1950's sci fi. Yes, they don't just have retro guns, but most of them are clearly inspired by older model weapons, usually hybrids of several different guns in one. That is why Fallout Tactics pissed many people off. They threw in a bunch of real world weapons.

 

[Walpknut]

Yeah, Inspired is the key word here, they shouldn't have modern guns in there but they shouldn't just have outdated ones either. More like an hybrid of both?

I mean for me is kind of harder to tell with most weapons unles they are obviously modern because I am not really that knowledgeable about them. What does exactly make the service rifle different? I am genuinely curious.

 

[TorontoReign]

Yeah, Inspired is the key word here, they shouldn't have modern guns in there but they shouldn't just have outdated ones either. More like an hybrid of both?

I mean for me is kind of harder to tell with most weapons unless they are obviously modern because I am not really that knowledgeable about them. What does exactly make the service rifle different? I am genuinely curious.

Exactly. If they are going to do a modern style gun it should be a hybrid. Something that fits that retro aesthetic without being shackled by that very theme. Like with this one.

There is very little difference really, but enough to be it's own rifle. The Service Rifle appears to be made of wood in parts. You can clearly see the differences though.

http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Service_rifle?file=ServiceRifle.png

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AR-15#/media/File:Stag2wi_.jpg

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:AR-10_in_the_National_Firearms_Museum.jpg

 

[Courier]

Meh none of this really seems like a big deal to me. As long as they don't do any more stupid major retcons like they did in Fallout 3 (turning super mutants into stupid orcs, etc.)

Blurring some obscure sections of the timeline feels like a non-issue to me though.

 

[SMBComix]

You are saying that only hipsters have standards for good fiction? What does that even have to do with anything? Hear, you want dumbstories that just keep retconing themselves for "cool stuff" goread superhero comics, see how welll that has worked quality wise for them. A consistent vision and quality storytelling that respects it's own rules will always be better specially because you can EXPAND on things, not just retcon them because you can't be assed to even put any effort on consistency.

No, you CANNOT expand on something with strict, unchanging rules. Believe me, I know -- I'm a writer myself! I have to constantly change my own rules just to be able to get anything done.

 

[Walpknut]

Of course you can, if you can't do that then you are a mediocre writer.

"I am a writter" is like the most vacuous assertion anyone can make, specially to give gravity to their arguments, anyone can be a writter, not everyone can be a good one.

 

[Yamu]

I'd graciously ask that comments like "hipster" and "mediocre writer" be left out of this. If you two want to debate on that level, you're better served with AOL Instant Messenger or /v/.

I agree with you in that you need to leave yourself a measure of flexibility in an ongoing saga, SMBC, but once something significant is down in the world, especially if it's a shared world that you profess to love and respect, suddenly and repeatedly altering the tone, changing established particulars, shifting core pillars, and "revealing" things that, while not retcons (per se) pointlessly clash with or fly in the face of what was previously established-- that's not exercising creative freedom in action, that's slipshod writing

 

[Walpknut]

Just look at DC/Marvel mainstream comicbook lines, they are so filled with retcons and bullshit that they are almost impenetrable for new readers and most people still reading them just get frustrated at the constant change, when a story starts just retconing things and the writter keeps pulling stuff out of their rear that cklashes with the rest any sense of tension, payoff and discovery is completely scrubbed off the game. Nothign really matters because it will get changed by some other dude next semester. Was the backstory rich? Well it won't be for long because we'll just reveal that half of it was a simulation or fake memories implanted by an alien, etc. DC has the sense to reboot it after it gets to a certain level of convolutedness but they still excercise so little quality assurance on tone and rules that it just invariably ends up becoming a mess again.

 

[The Doctor]

It's been well established since Bethesda's first go at the Fallout Franchise, that they weren't particularly interested in the Fallout continuity to begin with, however it seems that Bethesda's Fallout 4, has wholly given up on even trying to respect the continuity(some of which they now established).The technical demonstration of the product, which can be seen on Youtube, given by a fellow with frizzy hair and a rather high pitched voice, proceeds to take a hammer to established continuity:

Continuity Errors:
Hovering vertibird just prior to nuclear attack (Established that Vertibirds were not brought into service until after the Great War)
Vault-Tec still vending vaults prior to attack (established that they were already sold out previously)
Warning of nuclear attack (The POTUS in Fallout 2, mentions that the Chinese launched first and there was no warning on the East Coast)
Light Armored Vehicle seen in the neighborhood( Clashes with Bethesda's own established retro-50's stylings)


There were other oddities and errors, but just sticking with those for now, show's how little Bethesda even cares about their own continuity, which gives me a high degree of doubt in the final product!

Can't we consider them Retcons for a better-flowing story?

If we had no warning, then I could definitely see Vault-Tec still sending out people to notify potential Vault Dwellers of their choice as Nukes were flying across the ocean

 

[Yamu]

Yes and no. Some people are still sore over the degree of that that went on even for Fallout 2, but it is sort of an accepted truth that any ongoing franchise will experience growing pains. The commoditization inherent here, though, the increasing prioritization of action and lulz over narrative and consistency when it could and should be *at least* just as natural and compelling to build within a world as it is to REbuild it-- well, if they're going to rebuild the Fallout ethos around the experience they want to deliver instead of building that experience on and within the existing definitions of the ethos, what makes it Fallout at all?

Not saying I don't enjoy the new games, but really, I think that's the core of the issue for a lot of the oldsters. It's troubling to love a thing and learn a thing for fifteen years and then have much of the very substance of it torn down and invalidated. Being constantly assailed with "my country right or wrong" proclamations about how you must hate the thing if you're not on board with the changes doesn't do much to ease the sentiment, either.

 

[The Doctor]

There's people that still tout the Fallout Bible as canon

Ah well, there's plenty of Lore Mods being written that will "Fix" everything wrong with Fallout 4, I'm sure

We're smart like that

 

[fred2]

Yes and no. Some people are still sore over the degree of that that went on even for Fallout 2, but it is sort of an accepted truth that any ongoing franchise will experience growing pains. The commoditization inherent here, though, the increasing prioritization of action and lulz over narrative and consistency when it could and should be *at least* just as natural and compelling to build within a world as it is to REbuild it-- well, if they're going to rebuild the Fallout ethos around the experience they want to deliver instead of building that experience on and within the existing definitions of the ethos, what makes it Fallout at all? [..]

I agree with first part, since gaming became mainstream many IP followed that wider appeal path, however, you didn't make the case for lore consistency. In fact you seem to have moved on to changes beth introduced in general, trying to explain older fans sentiments\bias.

I agree with you in that you need to leave yourself a measure of flexibility in an ongoing saga, SMBC, but once something significant is down in the world, especially if it's a shared world that you profess to love and respect, suddenly and repeatedly altering the tone, changing established particulars, shifting core pillars, and "revealing" things that, while not retcons (per se) pointlessly clash with or fly in the face of what was previously established-- that's not exercising creative freedom in action, that's slipshod writing

A follow to the above comment. Considering that your biggest grippe was the power armor types, it is exactly the minor details that SMBComix eluded to.