Fallout 4- doesn't have to be incremental, chronologically

Discussion in 'Future Fallout Game Discussion' started by Yazman, Dec 15, 2008.

  1. Commiered

    Commiered It Wandered In From the Wastes

    Nov 17, 2008
    Well I think that would be a good idea. Maybe not while the war is starting though as I prefer to have the 'War' as a kind of mystical cataclysm that no-one really knows how it came about or what happened and they create their myths from this.

    Fallout was 80 odd years after the war, FO2 160 years. By the time of Fallout 2 civilization had really started to take hold again, and so it was more of an aftermath of the aftermath. With Fallout 3 being set 200 years after the war and seemingly even more primitive than Fallout 2 it became ridiculous.

    Look at how the world has progressed in 200 years. How the US grew. Now even after a nuclear war if there were survivors and a lot of technology survived as well, well it wouldn't be that long to rebuild society back to 'normal'.

    What really may have changed is the relations between people, different ideologies and ways of operating for the various city states that would show up. This is interesting as a game concept, like in Fallout 2, but whereas in Fallout 2 the world was still at the tail end of the apocalypse, another Fallout set even after 3 wouldn't really be Fallout anymore.

    The early years would be the most interesting in terms of conveying a true wasteland, the later years better for simulating emerging power structures.
  2. Yazman

    Yazman It Wandered In From the Wastes

    Dec 23, 2004
    I don't think Fallout 3 was more primitive than Fallout 2 at all.. I think that it really varied depending on the community. The larger communities with scientists etc seemed to be thriving, developing state-like structures as well akin to the NCR (Commonwealth and its androids etc. for example).

    Rivet City epitomises this, with their city being supported logistically by hydroponic farms and water purification combined with an extensive trade network.

    I think there's a lot of communities with potential to "step up" so to speak but are either too small or lacking the expertise to do so, particularly in the face of the supermutants and the enclave. The advanced ones seem to be in the well defended strongholds that are developing quite well, again Rivet City is the prime example.

    I think you're right in saying it would be different set even after Fallout 3, although nobody is able to accurately talk about realism especially in such a broad and blanket sense as we tend to do here when it comes to the world after a nuclear apocalypse... I imagine in such a fragmented and torn region as the continental US it is too much to simply say "everybody would be like ______ in ______ level of development" as the regions vary far too much to really do so accurately.

    We can't even predict modern levels of development over the centuries accurately let alone in the event of nuclear apocalypse... I mean looking at Africa in the past 200 years there hasn't been substantial development in a blanket sense.. its been restricted regionally depending on stability, expertise, and access to resources. I think it would be pretty much the same in the Fallout setting, or any post-nuclear apocalypse setting.
  3. Commiered

    Commiered It Wandered In From the Wastes

    Nov 17, 2008
    I think what I meant by more primitive was in how by Fallout 2, towns were beginning to look like towns. Buildings rebuilt etc. while we have Megaton looking like a shanty town from scrap, and Rivet City a hollowed out tanker. Why not rebuild the skyscrapers and malls? They are just there a few metres away! I understand the idea that Rivet City is protected with it's bridge, but why do people live in tin sheds in Megaton when there are mostly intact structures close by?

    You make a good point with the Africa comparison as probably 200 years ago it was mostly like most of the US would have been after the bomb in development terms, and it shows that different distribution of technology has allowed some areas to develop to first world standards while others remain in mud huts even after 200 years.

    It depends I guess on where a future Fallout is situated to an extent. If in DC or other locations of prewar high tech then I would expect these areas to show a lot of development. Other areas that were agricultural or mining areas would probably have more Tribal areas.

    I actually miss Tribals. I think that in a world that would be so depopulated there would be groups that try to start over from scratch somewhere, isolated from others. Just like in Africa today even.
  4. Herr Mike

    Herr Mike Look, Ma! Two Heads!

    Jul 28, 2008
    Logically I think by the time of Fallout 3 there would be more infrastructure. But, it's easy to rationalize why there isn't.

    Things to consider:

    The more advanced you are, the harder you fall. Yes, tech can and would be salvaged. But to implement it back into society on a massive scale would take many, many years. And squabbling over it could delay it indefinitely.

    A good parallel is the collapse of the Roman Empire. It took a 1000 years to get back to that level of civilization. The technology the Romans had didn't go away, it just didn't get implemented on a large scale. Someone still knew how to build an Aqueduct, but not one did.

    Think of that, and then consider the relative low state of technology that existed at the time of the collapse. Most people went from being poor farmers to being poor farmers. In 2070 or whatever the shock of societal collapse would be a very harsh one indeed.

    Consider the domino effect. The collapse of agriculture. The collapse of communication. The collapse of transportation, medicine, entertainment, all that. Famine, massive depopulation.

    Point being, it's not as simple as finding tractor blueprints and then building a bunch to farm with.

    Would there be more significant political entities? Hard to say. In Fallout 2 you had NCR trying to exert control, in Fallout Tactics you had the BOS. Both of which make sense. But, but doesn't mean there would be similar entities in the east.
  5. Fade

    Fade It Wandered In From the Wastes

    Aug 27, 2007
    Power vacuum and resources. If there are enough people and resources for a town then someone will build it unless someone else stops them. The big question is how advanced any of the towns will be. Which in places like the mid-west with farming communities before the war... you aren't going to have a city of skyscapers and police armed with lasers.

    The big question is how much the places NCR have spread into the little towns & farming communities. Which we can each come up our own different answer to and argue endless about.

    Question: How many of you have a working knowledge of Television instead of being able to build a TV?
  6. big brother

    big brother First time out of the vault

    Oct 31, 2008
    Yep. Jesus did it with Peter amd John but the prototype failed thanks to Judas...

    And stop thinking about 200 years after the war and how the word should have been. Fallout 2 was programmed to finish in 2254 and the "kid from vault 101" was born a mere 4 years after. How could the world be much more evolved? And as for agriculture, California has a climate way more lenient to agriculture and it still wasn't the lush gardens 150 years after the war...
  7. Fade

    Fade It Wandered In From the Wastes

    Aug 27, 2007
    Fallout Bible:

    How much has the world changed since you were born? How much since your parents were born?

    The reason 200 years since the war is tossed around so much is:
    1) Things decay alot after that much time.
    2) Resources are used.

    What resources does DC have that wouldn't decay & cann't be scavenged in 200 years? Not much. The buildings would slowly fall to rubble.... the people would use the rubble to piece together houses. The canned food, guns, ammo & other items lying around in the game would have been used years ago by Megaton, BoS or any of the 'towns'.

    Lush gardens.... did anyone mention lush gardens? Nope, we talked about farms which you would need after all the canned stuff is gone. The type of farms is probably close to what is in parts of Africa nowdays... given the world that was shown in Fallout.
  8. Herr Mike

    Herr Mike Look, Ma! Two Heads!

    Jul 28, 2008
    Have you played Fallout 3?

    The buildings ARE rubble. Settlements are pieced together from scraps. There isn't canned food and guns "laying around". The food you find has been scavenged from somewhere.

    As for farms, it would make no sense to have a farm so near DC, which is a hive of raiders and mutants. Anyone who wished to farm would move as far away as possible. Settlements like Megaton trade for food, which we should assume comes from outside of the map.
  9. Keegah

    Keegah First time out of the vault

    Dec 21, 2008
    So all these buildings have been untouched for the last hundred years? Your character is the only person who ever thought to scavenge the ruins for food, ammo, money?
  10. Slaughter Manslaught

    Slaughter Manslaught Vault Senior Citizen

    Dec 11, 2006
    Can someone explain to me why the RobCo factory on the way to Tenpenny Tower was not scavenged? A bunch of Protectons ins't going to stop a group of well-armed scavengers from raiding that place. Protectons can't even take some rifle bullets without going down, hard. If they were, say, Robobrains or those yellow sentry bots from Fallout 2, it would make more sense. Specially the yellow robots. Only God knows how those juggernaults resist .233 rounds like they were made out of plastic.

    I always knew that Power Armor was a blessing from god...
  11. Herr Mike

    Herr Mike Look, Ma! Two Heads!

    Jul 28, 2008
    No, you are scavenging what has already been scavenged, is what I said. The stuff in the school, for example, was stuff hoarded by the raiders living there.
  12. Fade

    Fade It Wandered In From the Wastes

    Aug 27, 2007
    My point was that the items would have been used up. Wood buildings still standing 200 years after the city has been nuked... yeah right. The buildings as they are would not be good shelter so tear them down to make something new. It happenned after the fall of Rome why wouldn't it happen in Fallout 3?

    Ammo: How fast do you burn throu it? Do you think raiders/Enclave/BoS would still after 200 years of use?

    Food: People can go 1 month without food, but after that amount of time they are weak as hell. So let's see 1 meal a day for 1 person for 200 years is 73000. 73 thousand cans of food for 1 person is probably about what an average supermarket holds, so you're looking at 1 supermarket per person in the game. Realism where did you go?

    Guns: Guns don't decay like Fallout 3, but forgetting that the amount of guns needed to keep up with the decay.... well see Food just not quite as bad.

    The sad thing is that all of this could have been avoided by better writing. Say talking about farms that one town traded with outside of the DC area & that traded the food with the other towns in the game. Or was raid so often for the food it had.

    Or you could fix it by setting the game in the years right after the bomb and just renamed BoS, Enclave & the other factions. Hundreds of possible solutions and alot of them were written on forums. Sad day when the fans are better at fixing things than the creators who were paid to do so.
  13. TorontoReign

    TorontoReign Guest

    ^^^ Well I always chalked the standing buildings up to SCIENCE!.

    Since Fallout diverged from our current timeline and went into the realm of Robby the Robot and Gigantic Insects, it makes sense that a new kind of composite wood made of more durable stuff might exist. Besides....the buildings make the Wasteland look better.
  14. Fade

    Fade It Wandered In From the Wastes

    Aug 27, 2007
    SCIENCE! has rules. They aren't the same as the ones reality has, but the rules exist all the same. Retro 50s SCIENCE! doesn't use composite wood & instead goes for shiny metal surfaces & some plastics.

    Looks better? To you and alot of other fans sure. Not to everyone otherwise we wouldn't be having this discussion.

    :cry: The number of things we're having to explain away for Bethsoft is extremely worrying in the face of everyone saying Fallout 3 is a great game & game of the year. Why are fans having to fix/improve so much of the game if it's so great?
  15. Herr Mike

    Herr Mike Look, Ma! Two Heads!

    Jul 28, 2008
    Fans are modding out wooden buildings?
  16. Rev. Layle

    Rev. Layle A Smooth-Skin

    Jul 26, 2005
    Personally I think wooden buildings are just a rather "who the fuck cares" type of thing. Let them stay - I never cared either way in ANY of the games.
  17. Chancellor Kremlin

    Chancellor Kremlin Mildly Dipped

    Nov 17, 2008
    Did it ever occur that people just chopped down trees and made wood... you know, the good, old fashioned, all american way?

    Im sure wood will still be a basic, and relatively commom commodity after a nuclear holocaust. Except if there is a nuclear winter, but FO shows no sign of that having happened.
  18. Ausir

    Ausir Venerable Relic of the Wastes

    Apr 20, 2003
    They're pretty clearly pre-War buildings, still standing after 200 years. And yes, wood would be a basic commodity, which is why e.g. the pre-war Springvale wooden buildings should have long been disassembled and used by the people of Megaton.
  19. Herr Mike

    Herr Mike Look, Ma! Two Heads!

    Jul 28, 2008
    Yeah, 200 years doesn't fit the landscape, I don't think. In reality the Fallout 3 world is probably accurate for 20-30 years after the war. 50 maybe.

    Did they ever address a period of nuclear winter? I don't recall any. That could go a little ways to explaining things.
  20. Ausir

    Ausir Venerable Relic of the Wastes

    Apr 20, 2003
    There was no nuclear winter in the Fallout universe.