Mismatch has published part 2 of his Defining (The) Fallout(s) editorial:<blockquote>The Fallout setting is at first glance rather straightforward, and yet it is much more complex than one would think. One part fifties style retro, one part Max Max fashioned post apocalypse, and one part 50's science fiction.
From this mix, something arises. A world harsh and desolate, an "It's every man for himself" mentality only previously seen in old western flicks, and a boy and his dog. By mixing genres which at first glance may seem to clash, Interplay somehow managed to produce a world filled with uncertainty and fear. Even as you entered a town you were on your toes since some local gunslinger was probable to start a mess.
This insecurity somehow made security feel more secure. Regardless of how you felt about they treat mutants and ghouls at Vault City, I know that you, at some point, glanced at the grass and dreamt of just sitting down. You were more than willing to trade freedom for a sense of security and calm. No matter how short the moment was, I'm rather sure it was there.
(...)
The Fallout's story isn't merely a story of violence in a radiated wasteland. It is a story of belonging, of fear of the unknown and intolerance, of how isolation breeds suspicion and one mans quest to once and for all end these fears, end the suspicion, the hate and the intolerance(FO1) but in the end he manages to increase it and gives birth to an attempt to cleanse the world of anyone who is not genetically a human(FO2).
It is the story of Richard Grey.
And hopefully the developers of future Fallout games have understood this.
It is entirely possible that this is why FO has such a high degree of freedom, because the game is not about the player, so controlling him and pushing him in certain directions is not really needed.</blockquote>Link: Defining (The) Fallout(s): Part 2 on DaC
From this mix, something arises. A world harsh and desolate, an "It's every man for himself" mentality only previously seen in old western flicks, and a boy and his dog. By mixing genres which at first glance may seem to clash, Interplay somehow managed to produce a world filled with uncertainty and fear. Even as you entered a town you were on your toes since some local gunslinger was probable to start a mess.
This insecurity somehow made security feel more secure. Regardless of how you felt about they treat mutants and ghouls at Vault City, I know that you, at some point, glanced at the grass and dreamt of just sitting down. You were more than willing to trade freedom for a sense of security and calm. No matter how short the moment was, I'm rather sure it was there.
(...)
The Fallout's story isn't merely a story of violence in a radiated wasteland. It is a story of belonging, of fear of the unknown and intolerance, of how isolation breeds suspicion and one mans quest to once and for all end these fears, end the suspicion, the hate and the intolerance(FO1) but in the end he manages to increase it and gives birth to an attempt to cleanse the world of anyone who is not genetically a human(FO2).
It is the story of Richard Grey.
And hopefully the developers of future Fallout games have understood this.
It is entirely possible that this is why FO has such a high degree of freedom, because the game is not about the player, so controlling him and pushing him in certain directions is not really needed.</blockquote>Link: Defining (The) Fallout(s): Part 2 on DaC
(I love what Harold says about his tree, or everything about the sergant in Navarro 
