Bethesda's Settings; Which Had More Potential?

[Brandy Beavers]

Well, key location is probably the wrong terminology to use. But didn't you wonder how other areas were like when playing Fallout 1 and 2? Or even New Vegas if you played that one first? Like "Wonder what's going on in NYC. Or D.C." The answer from the old canon that D.C. was just destroyed (But not like the rest of the world. It was SUPER DESTROYED!) was always something I found unsatisfying.

 

[CT Phipps]

It is a retcon. In the originals the Gecks weren't even terraformers, but agricultural/scientific/etc manuals, seeds and so on.

Except with a quantum mechanics weird thing which made a bunch of desolate land clean.

 

[Prone Squanderer]

Really I was always kind of displeased with the whole idea from Avellone that D.C. was totally flattened. It felt like cutting down a key location before anyone got the chance to explore that. So while Fallout 3 is bad the prospect of just not using the Fallout Bible as gospel and doing D.C. anyway is an idea I would be behind.

A lot of wasted potential in Fallout 3... A lot A LOT of wasted potential in Fallout 3... Which I would argue makes it worse than 4.

But surely as it's the capital of America the Chinese would target it more over any other location? You could still have D.C but most of the population and society lives in the metro tunnels.

saying that makes me want to play Metro Last Light

 

[CT Phipps]

They all dead. D-E-A-D. Life is dead. Vaults are dead because they are wacky experiments by design. Vault 101 won't live long enough because it's not designed to last that long since radroaches are their big problem. (A RADROACHES!) The craters and ruins are everywhere because bombing was more intense than west coast. (writers these days...) When the setting is dead inside, it's boring and doesn't deserve any potential exploring. You lost.
Radioactive desert and ruins of poisoned goods no longer serving any purpose. It's not like Zone from STALKER, because no one will ever want to cross the land, cross the midwest BOS to enter some radioactive desert to unlock some dark pre-war secrets meanin jack shit in the new world.

No it's not. It won't work in capital wasteland. Only west since it's soil not damaged too much.

Uh, Fallout is a game about new societies forming in the aftermath of a Nuclear War. It's 200 years later. OF COURSE Washington D.C. is going to be populated.

 

[Dr Fallout]

Except with a quantum mechanics weird thing which made a bunch of desolate land clean.

But it was already clean. Radiation doesn't magically cling to land for centuries.

 

[CT Phipps]

But it was already clean. Radiation doesn't magically cling to land for centuries.

The Vaults were designed to be exited after the war and relatively recently, which is kind of a thing everyone has ignored.

Vault 13 was weird for not exiting.

Let alone 81 and 101.

 

[Dr Fallout]

The Vaults were designed to be exited after the war and relatively recently, which is kind of a thing everyone has ignored.

Vault 13 was weird for not exiting.

Let alone 81 and 101.

Actually only several faults were. Vault 13 was supposed to be cast aside after 200 years.

 

[0wing]

Well, key location is probably the wrong terminology to use. But didn't you wonder how other areas were like when playing Fallout 1 and 2? Or even New Vegas if you played that one first? Like "Wonder what's going on in NYC. Or D.C." The answer from the old canon that D.C. was just destroyed (But not like the rest of the world. It was SUPER DESTROYED!) was always something I found unsatisfying.

Honestly? Whatever and good riddance, Fallout of all things is post-apoc western and in definition not bethesda's patriotic masturbation.

Except with a quantum mechanics weird thing which made a bunch of desolate land clean.

A Ken Levine level of stupidity, that's for sure.

Uh, Fallout is a game about new societies forming in the aftermath of a Nuclear War. It's 200 years later. OF COURSE Washington D.C. is going to be populated.

There should be soil good enough for society to grow up, which capital wasteland doesn't have. Chinese worked good on that one.

 

[Prone Squanderer]

The Vaults were designed to be exited after the war and relatively recently, which is kind of a thing everyone has ignored.

Vault 13 was weird for not exiting.

Let alone 81 and 101.

None of the D.C. Vaults opened, except for Vault 76 which was the only control Vault in D.C.

 

[0wing]

None of the D.C. Vaults opened, except for Vault 76? (it's seventy-something) which was the only control Vault in D.C.

If even all Vaults in D.C. were control, then what do their population will find? A big depressing nothing bashing their heads with cold reality. They'd extinct under one generation and by the time Fallout 3 takes place, 2277, there should be no humans, they are dead or took risk and gone to other states not as damaged as capital wasteland. NYC is unfortunately all dead.

 

[Brandy Beavers]

Honestly? Whatever and good riddance, Fallout of all things is post-apoc western and in definition not bethesda's patriotic masturbation.

A Ken Levine level of stupidity, that's for sure.

There should be soil good enough for society to grow up, which capital wasteland doesn't have. Chinese worked good on that one.

I don't really see how "I think D.C. had potential." equates to the idea that it'd be the same Michael Bay video game story that Bethesda keeps making. Chaining Fallout to the Western United States seems foolish to me. Especially when the original intent of Black Isle's Fallout 3 was to start heading Eastward.

 

[Prone Squanderer]

I don't really see how "I think D.C. had potential." equates to the idea that it'd be the same Michael Bay video game story that Bethesda keeps making. Chaining Fallout to the Western United States seems foolish to me. Especially when the original intent of Black Isle's Fallout 3 was to start heading Eastward.

I don't think anyone's saying Fallout should stick to the West Coast. Seeing how the rest of the U.S turned out would be great. What I'm saying is that realistically China would have wiped D.C. off the map.

 

[0wing]

I don't really see how "I think D.C. had potential." equates to the idea that it'd be the same Michael Bay video game story that Bethesda keeps making. Chaining Fallout to the Western United States seems foolish to me. Especially when the original intent of Black Isle's Fallout 3 was to start heading Eastward.

Keeping the capital and concentration of all dare I say 'evil' and pretty much chinese's target of interest seems more foolish to me. The landscape of the east doesn't look like a good setup for a good Fallout either.
BIS' Fallout 3 wasn't heading right into NYC and Washington, don't shitpost with this one. In a best case scenario it's just a worse STALKER than Fallout in the east coast.

 

[Brandy Beavers]

I don't think you're really getting what I'm saying. I know where Black Isle's Fallout 3 was going to be. Everyone does. But the idea of everyone working on Fallout was to pretty much head East. Except Tim Cain who wanted to take Fallout into space if he got control of it again, according to Avellone.

I even made sure to say that Fallout 3 was bad in my first post in this thread just so people wouldn't be like "YEAH BUT BETHESDA!" but alas...

 

[0wing]

I don't think you're really getting what I'm saying. I know where Black Isle's Fallout 3 was going to be. Everyone does. But the idea of everyone working on Fallout was to pretty much head East. Except Tim Cain who wanted to take Fallout into space if he got control of it again, according to Avellone.

And I think, thread's derailing into shitposting. Heading east doesn't make it automatically go into New York's crater and building a setting with a shantytowns around nukes, there's so much good and better settings to play, like mid-west, colorado, you know the map. After Fallout 3, BIS could also go south, so what? (instead of them, fans did in 1.5 Resurrection, so that, actually)

 

[CT Phipps]

I don't think anyone's saying Fallout should stick to the West Coast. Seeing how the rest of the U.S turned out would be great. What I'm saying is that realistically China would have wiped D.C. off the map.

It didn't?

Compared to every other setting, it's a barren radioactive hellhole. It's like an entire setting which resembles the Glow.

 

[Brandy Beavers]

I don't think anyone's saying Fallout should stick to the West Coast. Seeing how the rest of the U.S turned out would be great. What I'm saying is that realistically China would have wiped D.C. off the map.

Not really. There's not really much point in sending that many nukes, even if you're expecting many of them to be shot down.

And I think, thread's derailing into shitposting. Heading east doesn't make it automatically go into New York's crater and building a setting with a shantytowns around nukes, there's so much good and better settings to play, like mid-west, colorado, you know the map. After Fallout 3, BIS could also go south, so what? (instead of them, fans did in 1.5 Resurrection, so that, actually)

... Again, you seem to be confusing my disappointment in the original fate of D.C. as if it were an endorsement of Fallout 3, which it certainly isn't.

 

[0wing]

... Again, you seem to be confusing my disappointment in the original fate of D.C.

I don't. I just think that your disappointment is not into a Fallout cash. Devs didn't even bore in mind D.C. and wiped it off in advance to cut off adoring fans.

with endorsement of Fallout 3, which it certainly isn't.

This is the words you brought into debate with a somewhat 'Fallout 3' """""""""""""fan""""""""""""", unwise move, very unwise.

 

[Brandy Beavers]

I brought Fallout 3 up by saying that it was bad, though. So using examples from it against me is confusing.

And I'm not really saying that eventually the original games would or even should go to D.C. But cutting that question off with "Nothing's there." is... a bit cheap. At the very least, it could have been left to the imagination. All I'm really saying is that the answer was unsatisfying to me because I think the capital of the nation in which Fallout is set has potential. Nothing more or less.

 

[0wing]

And I'm not really saying that eventually the original games would or even should go to D.C. But cutting that question off with "Nothing's there." is... a bit cheap. At the very least, it could have been left to the imagination.

It's most realistic scenario in Fallout, cheap or not. D.C. and NYC already a time bomb with such dense infrastructure empowered by extensively developed nuclear technology that only small prod is enough to left "nothing's there". Cheap or not, Chris played this card in advance, small child escapists could go full STALKER for erotic fantasies about abandoned dense infrastructure and see how well it lays in Fallout. (not good)

I brought Fallout 3 up by saying that it was bad, though. So using examples from it against me is confusing.

Unwise move, the world of Fallout 3 exactly shows and explains what's wrong with such setting in great detail.