Chris Avellone examines the Fallout TV Series

PlanHex

PlanHex

Legislative Senator oTO
Admin
Board Cop oTO
Orderite
Edit: now also has a part 2 about lore: https://chrisavellone.medium.com/fallout-apocrypha-tv-series-review-part-2-1744b68fe4f2

Chris Avellone has posted on his medium for the first time in ages, with what will be the first of (at least) two posts covering Fallout the TV Series.
This first post serves as a more general introduction and quick review, while covering the characters and their arcs in depth, while the next post will focus more on lore. He even promises to give a score at the end, what a cad.

https://chrisavellone.medium.com/fallout-apocrypha-tv-series-review-part-1-c4714083a637

https://chrisavellone.medium.com/fallout-apocrypha-tv-series-review-part-2-1744b68fe4f2

Snippet:
Was Fallout entertaining?

Yes.

The Fallout series is an entertaining spectacle that works well as a trailer for the current state of the Fallout franchise.

This is important because there’s nothing angrier than a player with a false expectation, and as such, the Fallout TV series is an appropriate on-ramp to the current state of Fallout with little to disappoint those who have only the show as a tutorial.

This means if you watch the series and play Fallout 4 or 76, chances are, you’ll feel right at home.

I’d argue if the series felt like a more serious Fallout 1 story, then you tried to play Fallout 4, you wouldn’t be very happy and would be like, “what the hell is this?” (This is one of the reasons why I don’t play F4 or 76.)
Click to expand...

Thanks, @Nodder!
 
Last edited:
I’d very much argue in defense of Fallout 4 being more serious than the show, that’s how bad it was.
 
Nicely diplomatic way of saying 'It's a lot like the new games, which are also bad.'

"Does the series embody the core narratives of later Fallouts (3, 4)?
Yep, as soon as Lucy says, “I need to find my Dad.” Which has been the plot of most of the Bethesda Fallouts, so… yeah."

haha
 
Last edited:
PaxVenire said:
I’d very much argue in defense of Fallout 4 being more serious than the show, that’s how bad it was.
Click to expand...

And you'd be wrong because Fallout 4's story is crap while this is at least fun.

Avellone is aping a lot of complaints (non-disguised Vault entrances) but I do disagree with him about one thing - Fallout 1 and 2 aren't gone. You can buy them on steam now.
 
Last edited:
CT Phipps said:
Avellone is aping a lot of complaints (non-disguised Vault entrances) but I do disagree with him about one thing - Fallout 1 and 2 aren't gone. You can buy them on steam now.
Click to expand...

He means in terms of the Fallout canon, I guess. In that sense, it's true, but it's also a demonstration of why the whole notion of franchise canon is stupid. As you said, the originals still exist and are still the same, they haven't been overwritten by these unrelated products. Honestly, it was only recently that I was able to go back to the originals and realize they are still the same. The work isn't altered by years of corporate IP deals unless you let it be in your own head, which is the only place a coherent canon really exists. We don't even need to proclaim the 'death of the author' in the video game industry, because the authors are already treated as disposable.
 
CT Phipps said:
And you'd be wrong because Fallout 4's story is crap while this is at least fun.
Click to expand...

I would not be wrong, Fallout 4 objectively takes its world more serious than the show does and that says a lot.

I’m not talking in terms of writing quality, I’m talking tone overall.
 
For those of you who swear by the older Fallouts, I did want to address some potential horse blinder aspects of “oh wow, the older Fallouts were so much better.”

I mean Fallout 1 was. It was pretty damn good. And that voice cast! Dammmmn.

However, Fallout 2 and what followed — the console game Brotherhood of Steel — weren’t as good. I’d argue they hurt the franchise more than people “blame” Fallout 3, 4, and 76 for doing.

This is important to point out because I think there’s some kind of illusion out there that Fallout at Interplay was going amazingly well and keeping the franchise “on track”.
Click to expand...

i disagree with this for one simple reason. the older games have genuinely no influence on the series as it is now. fallout bos is barely even considered a part of the series anymore and fallout 2 for as retarded as it could be at times had a solid story with good worldbuilding in it. it could've been course corrected from fairly easily. hell new vegas proves that they could, and arguably did, course correct even from fallout 3. but that wouldnt last because bethesda is deliberately making games that are disinterested in the setting and storytelling. fallout 3 and 4 arent hated because theyre bad. theyre hated because they're the standard that bethesda has set and CONTINUES to adhere to. i dont think fallout 3 and 4 would be nearly as maligned if they were just a few bad games in a series that managed to recover. but they refuse to let it recover and the show is part of that.
 
R.Graves said:
the older games have genuinely no influence on the series as it is now.
Click to expand...

The big Fallout TV show which is probably the most widely consumed piece of Fallout media takes almost everything from Fallout 1. Todd Howard is a modern Ed Gein with a Morrowind suit and a Fallout 1 suit.
 
I have seen the narrative that "Fallout wasn't in a good shape already before Bethessda acquired", but the Bethesda Fallouts did far more damage to the franchise in the short and long run than whatever Interplay did. Whatever Interplay did with the franchise is small potatoes compared to what Bethesda ended up doing with it.

Brotherhood of Steel is a footnote in the franchise, it was destined to be that on release and with time, and that game was advertised as a spinoff, they didn't plastered a 3 on it and called it a sequel. Basically it wasn't a big title, it was just something done to make some quick money. Getting pissed at this game and saying it killed the franchise is like getting pissed at those crappy Final Fantasy spinoffs, hardly anyone expected anything good from those anyway. Meanwhile Fallout 3 presented itself as a sequel, as the next big title, and that game is a colossal disaster that has no respect for the license.
 
He shits on it more than one would think, given how he and everyone else has been diplomatic in the past, maybe it was good for him that all bridges got burnt.

This was kinda depressing though:
On Craftsmanship — is Fallout a good, thoughtful, well-paced series whose plot respects its own internal lore, its own dramatic payoffs, and uses foreshadowing effectively cinematically and narratively?

Nope.

I’ll address some of the biggest examples later. I didn’t even bother with most F1 and F2 contrasts because that was too easy (we already know there’s leagues of difference there just from the proximity of the new vaults’ placement to the original vaults, origin of ghouls, etc.) and unfortunately, those contrasts are not important. I know that me saying that will likely anger those who love the originals, but it’s true — those Fallouts are gone.

Instead, I believe it’s a more valid comparison to drill down on how the show tried to craft its own internal lore, and see how their attempts succeeded and failed.
Click to expand...

He's probably right that we'll never again see anything that regards the first or the first two games above anything else, like New Vegas did.
If anything takes place on the West Coast ever again, it will probably only look at what happened after the TV Series.


Edit: so yeah, in that sense I agree with the above post as it would be a lot less depressing if I didn't have to see these big billboards while I'm going to do the grocery shopping or taking the baby for a stroll. Big billboards that say "hey, remember that we changed your favorite game series into a bunch of games and a tv show that shits on your favourite parts?" Yeah, thanks Amazon, I remember Bethesda did that, leave me alone now thanks. "Haha nope sorry, we're also plastering it on the YouTube commercial before the video you watch while the baby sleeps!" OK great thanks amazon
 
Last edited:
Norzan said:
I have seen the narrative that "Fallout wasn't in a good shape already before Bethessda acquired", but the Bethesda Fallouts did far more damage to the franchise in the short and long run than whatever Interplay did. Whatever Interplay did with the franchise is small potatoes compared to what Bethesda ended up doing with it.

Brotherhood of Steel is a footnote in the franchise, it was destined to be that on release and with time, and that game was advertised as a spinoff, they didn't plastered a 3 on it and called it a sequel. Basically it wasn't a big title, it was just something done to make some quick money. Getting pissed at this game and saying it killed the franchise is like getting pissed at those crappy Final Fantasy spinoffs, hardly anyone expected anything good from those anyway. Meanwhile Fallout 3 presented itself as a sequel, as the next big title, and that game is a colossal disaster that has no respect for the license.
Click to expand...
So what you're saying, is essentially Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel > 3, 4, & 76? ;) :rofl:


In all seriousness, would you guys say that MCA is ballsy for publicly giving his own REAL opinion/full in depth review of the Fallout TV Show? Because nobody else who's an OG Fallout Developer, has at all! Ah yes, the wonders of being a freelancer. :nod: :-D

NOTE: Tim Cain doesn't count! The guy isn't going to share his REAL thoughts on it, and if he did, there's no telling what kind of controversy & conflict with Bethesda would come from it. In which he definitely doesn't want that!
 
I really do believe that Tim Cain is being completely honest in his takes, there's no indication that he isn't. Same with Chris here, and Josh elsewhere.
It just seems like cope that your opinion is valid if and only if Tim or other developers agrees, but that's not the case.
 
PlanHex said:
I really do believe that Tim Cain is being completely honest in his takes, there's no indication that he isn't. Same with Chris here, and Josh elsewhere.
It just seems like cope that your opinion is valid if and only if Tim or other developers agrees, but that's not the case.
Click to expand...
Yeah if he didn't like the show he probably wouldn't comment on it at all. This would be like people coping saying George Lucas doesn't really like the prequels. Like nah somethimes creators are wrong or don't really understand the appeal of what they made. And I know some people are gonna be like "how you gonna be so arrogant as to claim you know better than the creator(s)" and all I can say is like cmon man. Play literally any fallout game other than 4 or 76 and tell me the show accurately portrayed the settings themes, lore, or tone. Hell I would argue it's tone is even more unserious than even fallout 4 was
 
Some fans have the view Fallout was always this incredibly serious and grim story like the post-apocalypse Lord of the Rings.

Others have the view it was always a silly fun theme park of post-apocalypse and sci-fi concepts.

The latter is what Bethesda believes and thus continually everyone on Team A thinks the franchise was ruined.
 
CT Phipps said:
Some fans have the view Fallout was always this incredibly serious and grim story like the post-apocalypse Lord of the Rings.

Others have the view it was always a silly fun theme park of post-apocalypse and sci-fi concepts.

The latter is what Bethesda believes and thus continually everyone on Team A thinks the franchise was ruined.
Click to expand...
I mean, that's certainly one of the axes where they skewed the wrong way for me personally, but the franchise wasn't ruined by that alone. There's also
  • Top down turn based vs FPS hybrid
  • Branching paths vs exploration focus
  • Probably more stuff unrelated to the writing and story that I can't think of right now
 
CT Phipps said:
Others have the view it was always a silly fun theme park of post-apocalypse and sci-fi concepts.
Click to expand...
its not even JUST a tone problem. fallout 2 is a tonal nightmare but is still a worthwhile entry because of how much it added to the setting. it did a lot of exploration of post nuclear society and fit in pretty well worldbuilding wise. the modern games are coldly disinterested in the setting. they add almost nothing beyond recycled iconography and what they do add is so underwritten as to not even really be additions to the setting outside of a few footnotes on a wiki. ie. "in the capital wasteland there is a group called the regulators." "in the the commonweallth there are scientists with a mysterious motivation to make robot people" any questions you can think of for anything they do add are not answered by the game because its either a badly written addition, underwritten addition, or both.
 
R.Graves said:
its not even JUST a tone problem. fallout 2 is a tonal nightmare but is still a worthwhile entry because of how much it added to the setting. it did a lot of exploration of post nuclear society and fit in pretty well worldbuilding wise. the modern games are coldly disinterested in the setting. they add almost nothing beyond recycled iconography and what they do add is so underwritten as to not even really be additions to the setting outside of a few footnotes on a wiki. ie. "in the capital wasteland there is a group called the regulators." "in the the commonweallth there are scientists with a mysterious motivation to make robot people" any questions you can think of for anything they do add are not answered by the game because its either a badly written addition, underwritten addition, or both.
Click to expand...

I'd argue that it did massive contributions to the Pre-War era.
 
CT Phipps said:
I'd argue that it did massive contributions to the Pre-War era.
Click to expand...

I really dislike how they presented the pre-war era, and also the fact that they represented it at all. To me, Fallout was at its best when it kept its distance from the details on that time, and contented itself with saying that some idiots fought some other idiots and everyone killed each other, and now none of them matter anymore. All that's left is some grandiose architecture, and some cheesy propaganda. Then the new games are full of nostalgia to the point where they made the cheesy propaganda real.

It's like the original message was: "50s America is dead and has been for a long time, and those who tried to hold onto it ended up destroying the world."
Then the new message turned into: "Golly, remember 50s America? Wasn't it great? Let's all sing their songs and wear their clothes forever, 200 years later."
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top