Goddammit, I hate being wrong - showrunners fucked New Vegas

[Norzan]

Essentially, it's the death of intellectual discourse. There's nothing more irritating and pointless than guys who go, "Everything about [insert X] sucks. Everything." If you can't say anything positive about Fallout 3 or Fallout 4 (or Fallout 2) or whatnot then you basically show you don't have two brain cells to rub together. You can't actually converse as an adult because there's nothing valuable in your critique. It's just mindless white noise.

This is some massive levels of butthurt.

 

[ironmask]

they sure do.

Star Field has really shown just how much Bethesda relies on the lore and iconography of past games. They just can't write anything original.

 

[CT Phipps]

I mean, I can fucking HATE something but discussing something requires you to be able to actually TALK about it.

 

[Hexagon]

Now I'm not a fallout scholar but I think the setting of fallout is about civilization being rebuilt AFTER destruction. All those factions in the game have different ideas about what this revived world will look like but it's still the whole point isn't it? Did I not get the message right?
Also:
"It seems inevitably the message of the Fallout games is that we will veer towards destruction of some kind, and our best efforts to restart civilization may be doomed,"
1- This person isn't even sure what the message is if they have to use "seems"
2- Just because our best efforts may be doomed logically doesn't mean you can just change the world to your liking to fit that logic.
They took a ready made world and effectively made an AU to fit their own logic and called it canon.

I'd really appreciate Hollywood staying away from games I like.
I'm not mad about this I'm just so disappointed.

 

[Bradylama]

Now I'm not a fallout scholar but I think the setting of fallout is about civilization being rebuilt AFTER destruction. All those factions in the game have different ideas about what this revived world will look like but it's still the whole point isn't it? Did I not get the message right?
Also:
"It seems inevitably the message of the Fallout games is that we will veer towards destruction of some kind, and our best efforts to restart civilization may be doomed,"
1- This person isn't even sure what the message is if they have to use "seems"
2- Just because our best efforts may be doomed logically doesn't mean you can just change the world to your liking to fit that logic.
They took a ready made world and effectively made an AU to fit their own logic and called it canon.

I'd really appreciate Hollywood staying away from games I like.
I'm not mad about this I'm just so disappointed.

The essential conflict at the heart of Fallout is the contradiction between the human drive towards community and interconnectedness and the opposite drive towards alienation and self-superiority. Civilization reasserts itself because human beings are social animals with social values, who care about the world beyond their immediate families. They have desires informed by material needs, which is why "war never changes" in the first place. People desire to have what is beyond their means through fair exchange, and those desires lead to conflict. There is no "war" in the traditional sense featured in the first two Fallout games, because the actual conflict is an unseen war being waged on humanity by "alien" powers who want to reshape the world according to their own personal ideals. They are not threats which are OF the world as it is, reconstructed by those who live in it. They're threats from the old world, echoes of the instruments and ideologies which caused the Great War.

In every Fallout game, even the Bethsofts, the old world is defeated so that the new world can live. In Fallout TV the old world resets everything back to Square 1 because it turns out they had an "I Win" button all along, and no player characters were born between the events of New Vegas and Fallout 4 so anything can happen.

 

[CT Phipps]

The essential conflict at the heart of Fallout is the contradiction between the human drive towards community and interconnectedness and the opposite drive towards alienation and self-superiority. Civilization reasserts itself because human beings are social animals with social values, who care about the world beyond their immediate families. They have desires informed by material needs, which is why "war never changes" in the first place. People desire to have what is beyond their means through fair exchange, and those desires lead to conflict. There is no "war" in the traditional sense featured in the first two Fallout games, because the actual conflict is an unseen war being waged on humanity by "alien" powers who want to reshape the world according to their own personal ideals. They are not threats which are OF the world as it is, reconstructed by those who live in it. They're threats from the old world, echoes of the instruments and ideologies which caused the Great War.

In every Fallout game, even the Bethsofts, the old world is defeated so that the new world can live. In Fallout TV the old world resets everything back to Square 1 because it turns out they had an "I Win" button all along, and no player characters were born between the events of New Vegas and Fallout 4 so anything can happen.

I mean its greatly exaggerating because NCR isn't gone, it's just severely hurt and frankly, fuck NCR, New Vegas depicted it as a reviving of an evil ghost of the past.

What you're describing is a major theme of Lonesome Road.

That those who repeat the mistakes of the past will always be destroyed like the Divide was.

Basically I don't see NCR going down as a bad thing.

 

[Traeger91]

I mean its grossly exaggerating because NCR isn't gone, it's just severely hurt and frankly, fuck NCR, New Vegas depicted it as a reviving of an evil ghost of the past.

What you're describing is a major theme of Lonesome Road.

That those who repeat the mistakes of the past will always be destroyed like the Divide was.

The problem isn't necessarily that the NCR got nuked, it's that Bethesda are the ones that did it. See ever since Fallout 3, Bethesda has shown that in the past 200+ years their east coast has been incapable of establishing long lasting realistic settlements. Now is that for a good storyline reason? No, it's because they want the world in a perpetual state of the apocalypse, so they can keep pumping out more games, shows, movies etc. So what's the first thing they do the moment they're handed a preestablished civilization? Why destroy it of course! It's self parody at this point.

 

[CT Phipps]

The problem isn't necessarily that the NCR got nuked, it's that Bethesda are the ones that did it. See ever since Fallout 3, Bethesda has shown that in the past 200+ years their east coast has been incapable of establishing long lasting realistic settlements. Now is that for a good storyline reason? No, it's because they want the world in a perpetual state of the apocalypse, so they can keep pumping out more games, shows, movies etc. So what's the first thing they do the moment they're handed a preestablished civilization? Why destroy it of course! It's self parody at this point.

https://www.ign.com/articles/the-bi...n-answer-our-burning-questions-about-season-1

It's not even Bethesda who did it, though. Graham Wagner (show runner) and Geneva Roberston Dworet was the one who wanted to do it and Bethesda just gave permission.

Was there any pushback on making a show that was extremely loyal to the lore in art design of the games?

Howard: I mean, there were lots of conversations. Things come up. Look, every time we do a game, we want to push the story forward as well. We're looking at things and how do we add? And so the show does that as well, as they had story elements that they wanted to do. It's like, oh, that's really interesting. Let's find a way to make that work...

So Graham and Geneva wanted to blow up Shady Sands. The first time they bring that up, you're like, "what do you want to do?" I had actually an emotional reaction to it given the history of that location in the franchise from Fallout 1. And we talked through it, and it was, "this will be a pretty impactful story moment that a lot of things anchor on." And just so people hear it, we're careful about the timeline. There might be a little bit of confusion at some places, but everything that happened in the previous games, including New Vegas, happened. We're very careful about that.

And so when they brought that up, threading that needle to make sure that that was a moment that landed in the show, that also moved things forward in terms of what's going to be happening in the world of Fallout. That was a big one that we talked about.

So it's not Bethesda who wanted to destroy NCR but Jonathan Nolan's writers and production company.

 

[Traeger91]

https://www.ign.com/articles/the-bi...n-answer-our-burning-questions-about-season-1

It's not even Bethesda who did it, though. Graham Wagner (show runner) and Geneva Roberston Dworet was the one who wanted to do it and Bethesda just gave permission.

Was there any pushback on making a show that was extremely loyal to the lore in art design of the games?

Howard: I mean, there were lots of conversations. Things come up. Look, every time we do a game, we want to push the story forward as well. We're looking at things and how do we add? And so the show does that as well, as they had story elements that they wanted to do. It's like, oh, that's really interesting. Let's find a way to make that work...

So Graham and Geneva wanted to blow up Shady Sands. The first time they bring that up, you're like, "what do you want to do?" I had actually an emotional reaction to it given the history of that location in the franchise from Fallout 1. And we talked through it, and it was, "this will be a pretty impactful story moment that a lot of things anchor on." And just so people hear it, we're careful about the timeline. There might be a little bit of confusion at some places, but everything that happened in the previous games, including New Vegas, happened. We're very careful about that.

And so when they brought that up, threading that needle to make sure that that was a moment that landed in the show, that also moved things forward in terms of what's going to be happening in the world of Fallout. That was a big one that we talked about.

So it's not Bethesda who wanted to destroy NCR but Jonathan Nolan's writers and production company.

Regardless, no matter how they want to word it, it wasn't handled properly; Bethesda okayed it, so it's still on them.

 

[CT Phipps]

Regardless, no matter how they want to word it, it wasn't handled properly; Bethesda okayed it, so it's still on them.

Ehhhh, is it?

Because this pretty much confirms Bethesda doesn't have a secret agenda to keep the Wasteland hellish.

It's just the showrunners thought it would make a good story to destroy NCR.

 

[Traeger91]

Ehhhh, is it?

Because this pretty much confirms Bethesda doesn't have a secret agenda to keep the Wasteland hellish.

It's just the showrunners thought it would make a good story to destroy NCR.

Let me ask you this, which games in the series do the show runners know the most about? And by extension the "World Building" within?

 

[CT Phipps]

Let me ask you this, which games in the series do the show runners know the most about? And by extension the "World Building" within?

I'm guessing F3 and NV.

Hence why there's constant NV references.

They destroyed NCR because they thought it would be a big sexy hook.

 

[naossano]

So they want to keep things moving and change the status quo, but at the same time, reset those changes so thing could stay the same. All of this within the span of the same interview... I guess someone is having a mentat downtime...

 

[CT Phipps]

So they want to keep things moving and change the status quo, but at the same time, reset those changes so thing could stay the same. All of this within the span of the same interview... I guess someone is having a mentat downtime...

Destroying NCR is fine.

Destroying New Vegas is a crime.

Its also redundant with the tragedy of NCR to draw from.

 

[Traeger91]

Destroying NCR is fine.

Destroying New Vegas is a crime.

Its also redundant with the tragedy of NCR to draw from.

Did you really think they wouldn't touch New Vegas? Really? Also, you sound a bit biased, what if the roles were reversed? Why you'd be bitching and moaning like you claim the rest of us are.

Edit: Also, hello from a fellow Kentuckian

 

[CT Phipps]

Did you really think they wouldn't touch New Vegas? Really? Also, you sound a bit biased, what if the roles were reversed? Why you'd be bitching and moaning like you claim the rest of us are.

Edit: Also, hello from a fellow Kentuckian

Hi!

I mean, Vegas whole thing is that it s a thriving lively tourist place. Shady Sands as a symbol works but isn't the most interesting part of NCR.

 

[Bradylama]

I mean its greatly exaggerating because NCR isn't gone, it's just severely hurt and frankly, fuck NCR, New Vegas depicted it as a reviving of an evil ghost of the past.

What you're describing is a major theme of Lonesome Road.

That those who repeat the mistakes of the past will always be destroyed like the Divide was.

Basically I don't see NCR going down as a bad thing.

Nuking Shady Sands is not "letting go of the past" it's annihilating it. It's an actual genocide carried out off-screen by someone we've never seen before, who turns out to be the secret evil villain of the entire franchise all along. It's so obviously stupid I can't believe you're trying to carry water for it. The NCR didn't fall apart because of its own internal contradictions or an enemy greater than themselves that they couldn't overcome, it's a unilateral mass murder by the world's most divorced dad. It takes a story about conflicts between peoples and how those conflicts repeat across history, and drags it into the trite domestic conflict of the household. Literally everything is interpersonal, from Lucy's dad being Hitler, to the secret bad guys being a corporate conspiracy, which reflects the author's workplace politics. These are labor/management grievances with no understanding of who actually owns capital and what their interests are. This is Fallout imagined by a guy who got a warning for sexual harassment.

 

[CT Phipps]

Nuking Shady Sands is not "letting go of the past" it's annihilating it. It's an actual genocide carried out off-screen by someone we've never seen before, who turns out to be the secret evil villain of the entire franchise all along. It's so obviously stupid I can't believe you're trying to carry water for it. The NCR didn't fall apart because of its own internal contradictions or an enemy greater than themselves that they couldn't overcome, it's a unilateral mass murder by the world's most divorced dad. It takes a story about conflicts between peoples and how those conflicts repeat across history, and drags it into the trite domestic conflict of the household. Literally is everything is interpersonal, from Lucy's dad being Hitler, to the secret bad guys being a corporate conspiracy, which reflects the author's workplace politics. These are labor/management grievances with no understanding of who actually owns capital and what their interests are. This is Fallout imagined by a guy who got a warning for sexual harassment.

In the pre-Bethesda canon, the plan was that NCR gets nuked in Van Buren by a random mad scientist with a space station full of nuclear weapons.

Fallout is full of evil mad scientists who threaten the Wasteland with biological and nuclear WMDs.

Why?

Because it's against arms proliferation and the belief that these individuals are a bunch of awful man children who can destroy who sections of humanity's survivors.

 

[Bradylama]

In the pre-Bethesda canon, the plan was that NCR gets nuked in Van Buren by a random mad scientist with a space station full of nuclear weapons.

Fallout is full of evil mad scientists who threaten the Wasteland with biological and nuclear WMDs.

Why?

Because it's against arms proliferation and the belief that these individuals are a bunch of awful man children who can destroy who sections of humanity's survivors.

That's not "canon." Van Buren never got past the production stages. There's not even a guarantee that idea would have carried through to the final game. You don't know what you're talking about, and you claim to have a degree in literature?

You posted this thread complaining about the showrunners not understanding the setting or New Vegas yet here you are reaching for excuses to explain away the very bad decisions you're complaining about. What is up with you?

 

[CT Phipps]

That's not "canon." Van Buren never got past the production stages. There's not even a guarantee that idea would have carried through to the final game. You don't know what you're talking about, and you claim to have a degree in literature?

You posted this thread complaining about the showrunners not understanding the setting or New Vegas yet here you are reaching for excuses to explain away the very bad decisions you're complaining about. What is up with you?

Everyone is entitled to like or dislike a work based on the merits thereof or how it makes them feel.

I just note that Fallout is a place full of supervillains who destroy cities.