The funniest thing here is that Bethesda in fact made the Capital Wasteland into a dead, boring, endless desert. It's just brown, dry and sterile. New Vegas' Mojave desert actually has more vegetation than what you find in Fallout 3! In reality, D.C. has like 120 rainy days annually, on average, and abandoned to nature the area would very soon turn lush, green and overgrown. Regardless of radiation effects, if people can live unprotected in the locality, so could plants. To me, this is a perfect example of why Bethesda shouldn't be allowed to make games they don't understand. Instead of actually giving the issue of D:C.'s climate and vegetation three seconds of thought, they just copied other post-apo (or is it post-post-apo? Now I'm confused...) settings like Fallout and Mad Max straight up and made D.C. all deserty, never realizing that those settings are arid because they actually take place in arid locations. Unlike D.C. Here Bethesda had a perfect opportunity to actually do something more original and interesting with the Capital Wasteland and really play around with the vegetation. Just look at the cool, overgrown areas you have in games like Wasteland 2 (both the Agri Center and LA) or Stalker (even if this takes place much closer in time to the apocalyptic event). Moreover, it seems Bethesda is doing the same thing again with Fallout 4. In the trailer, I see nothing but dead trees (like 200 year old dead tree trunks would still be standing!) and dead grass. It's just boring. Why not milk the fall in Fallout to the max and set the game in a beautiful autumnal New England, where the majesty of nature is juxtaposed against the ugliness of man (or something trite like that, which even the average Beth fanboy could appreciate). But no, that would have been asking too much; post apocalyptia equals sterile desert. Period. In fact, I'm starting to suspect that Toddy is severely pollen allergic and just hates vegetation in general.