I'm tired man.

The favorite one I've seen recently is "Well they changed the location of Shady Sands in Fallout 2" - Apparently referencing the fact that there's less distance between NCR and Vaults 13/15, it's on slightly different terrain, and if you try to overlay the maps of the two games the locations aren't aligned. As if that's at all comparable to moving it right next to LA, something which would change the entire plot of Fallout 1 and 2 retroactively.

Bethesda Fans always had a habit of reading things in a deliberately obtuse way, blatantly misreading because they were under the impression that if they all believed hard enough it would be true - But the show has meant they have had to go into overdrive.
this is whataboutism counter-accusation to make the central issue look normal because this previous media also did it but the fact is:
it doesn't make what they defend look any better by trying to make fallout 2 look worse
I mean we literally had to hear these people argue repeatedly that fall doesn't mean fall to try to cope about Shady Sands being destroyed before New Vegas takes place.
and they use the fall of rome as an example
this is the first time i heard fall of rome was a period and not an event in 476
i guess beth fans are historians now
 
Last edited:
Fallout 2 has always been the go to game Bethesda fans use to justify a lot of the crap in the Bethesda games. Oh, you don't like a village of literal children, people playing pretend democracy, or people cosplaying as super heroes or vampires? Well, Fallout 2 had a scorpion playing chess. Forgetting that most of the out there things in Fallout 2 were out of the way, meaning the player had to kind of search hard to run into these things, which is the opposite of Fallout 3 where you had to go through the village of literal children to progress the main story.

Also and i have said this many times, Fallout 2 was made in nine months. Most of the goofy content people criticize Fallout 2 for was made under development crunch, the devs being told to add as much as possible to compete with the RPGs at the time like Baldur's Gate. Meanwhile Fallout 3 had years of development, all the silly, nonsensical content was added willingly because Todd and Emil think Fallout is just jokes.
 
Fallout 2 has always been the go to game Bethesda fans use to justify a lot of the crap in the Bethesda games. Oh, you don't like a village of literal children, people playing pretend democracy, or people cosplaying as super heroes or vampires? Well, Fallout 2 had a scorpion playing chess. Forgetting that most of the out there things in Fallout 2 were out of the way, meaning the player had to kind of search hard to run into these things, which is the opposite of Fallout 3 where you had to go through the village of literal children to progress the main story.
I disagree that it's "Out of the way" - Like the Chess Playing Scorpion, you just wander into a building and talk to a guy. Seymour the talking spore plant is also right out in the field, openly saying "Pssst over here,I got something to say to you" on a loop until you talk to him.

But yeah, I feel like the silly elements in Fallout 2 are often overblown in discussion. Like yeah, you have stuff like the talking sporeplant or the scorpion playing chess, and the occasional fourth wall break, but like, the majority of towns will have a lot of drama and intrigue that's meant to be taken seriously, and then a bit of goofy side quests.

Like Broken Hills, the town with the scorpion in is kinda the area where this contrast is best felt: You have:
-Stuff that's meant to genuinely be impactful, like Marcus and the whole history with Paladin Jacob, the missing people, the caravan master whose stealing uranium to sell elsewhere, etc.
-Comedic moments that don't feel too jarring: Hitting a Ghoul with your car, the treasure hunt
-Stuff like the Sporeplant and the Scorpion which are honestly the most egregious examples of this in the game.

And that's true all over, you go into a town and it's clear what you're meant to take seriously and what you're meant to take as a joke. Like Modoc, likely the first NPC you see is one of the caravaneers in town who will point blank tell you "This town is dying", you go to Trader Jo, and he'll tell you that the town will die in a drought if you don't help them, if you let Jo take over Ghost Farm, he'll sob saying that he accidentally shot some of the children there, and will never forgive himself.
But then Modoc also has the Shotgun Wedding, or blowing up the toilet and covering the town in shit to retrieve the gold watch on top of all that.

Whereas Fallout 3 is the other way round, most towns have the ridiculousness first, and any actual meaningful content second. Little Lamplight the town of children is first, any problem they have with slavers is second. Places like Canterbury Commons or the Republic of Dave straight up exist solely for the bit, and given how the worldbuilding in the game is so weak that it's not even clear what people are eating, that really says something.
 
I disagree that it's "Out of the way" - Like the Chess Playing Scorpion, you just wander into a building and talk to a guy. Seymour the talking spore plant is also right out in the field, openly saying "Pssst over here,I got something to say to you" on a loop until you talk to him.
I did say most things are kind out of the way, not that all of them. You can still run into a few of them, but the thing is that the game doesn't make a big deal out of them and they aren't required for basic main quest progression as far as i can remember.
 
título2.jpg
 
All I could think of from the first post was "welcome to every fandom ever these days".

I've been a Fallout fan since the first game in the 90's, and have lurked around NMA for decades even if not always active here; it felt like "my people"; even as I enjoyed the Bethesda games well enough, the original F1 and F2 are just amazing, superior (IMO) and deserve all the respect they get here.

But while Fallout does have a specific history with "toxic fandoms", retcons and in-fighting, what the OP describes has sadly become the norm for almost ALL fandoms these days.

Take your pick: from the massive fandoms of Star Wars ("nobody hates x like x fans" actually comes from Star Wars fandom, I believe) and Star Trek to niche game or film fandoms like The Last of Us or Aliens.

These days, there are apparently only two types of fan: "toxic" and "problematic" ones, the "haters" who are always negative, and "shills" who worship anything that comes out without any regard to quality.

One can't be a "normal" fan anymore, where you like some stuff but dislike other parts. No, now criticism is derided as "toxic" and those people should just shut up and be grateful their corporate overlords give them ANY content. Saying "actually, I quite liked..." makes you a sellout shill who grovels for scraps.

And of course, criticism of any kind is often reinterpreted as "you don't like it because you're racist/sexist/phobic/a terrible person".

Like I suspect many folks here, I'm an old bastard so I've seen a lot of people being assholes to each other, but I still find this to be a fairly recent turn of events. I remember the whole "criticism must be silenced" thing seemed to start with the Ghostbusters reboot (which was partly why IMDb's forums got shut down), but really took off with the (IMO, awful) Disney Star Wars sequels.
 
Take your pick: from the massive fandoms of Star Wars ("nobody hates x like x fans" actually comes from Star Wars fandom, I believe) and Star Trek to niche game or film fandoms like The Last of Us or Aliens.

These days, there are apparently only two types of fan: "toxic" and "problematic" ones, the "haters" who are always negative, and "shills" who worship anything that comes out without any regard to quality.

One can't be a "normal" fan anymore, where you like some stuff but dislike other parts. No, now criticism is derided as "toxic" and those people should just shut up and be grateful their corporate overlords give them ANY content. Saying "actually, I quite liked..." makes you a sellout shill who grovels for scraps.
imagine having an opinion
 
imagine having an opinion
What gets me is the whole "if you criticize something, you are obviously not a fan".

I would assume many of us criticize *because* we are fans and care! Being told "just move on if you don't like it" seems insulting to me.

For example, I never gave a crap about The Matrix franchise, so when a bad Matrix film comes out, I don't care and wouldn't bother criticizing it. On the other hand, I grew up with Star Wars so when I dislike something Disney does with that, I am much more likely to complain. Same with Fallout versus, I don't know, Castlevania? One I adore and want to see treated well so I can continue to enjoy it, the other I don't care about past having a bit of fun with.
 
All I could think of from the first post was "welcome to every fandom ever these days".
I think it's kinda inevitable. Media isn't made to be complete works anymore, it's made for continuity, but the thing is, the more things go on for, the longer they will start to resemble something completely different.

Bethesda made massive changes to the world, engine straight off the bat so the changes were felt more easily, and so got more of a reaction, but it happens to all franchises, even well recieved ones.

Like, look at the Simpsons. We can talk about how it took a nosedive around the 2010s all we want, but even in the "Golden Age" of the Simpsons, it was still a vastly different show to what it was in Seasons 1 and 2 - Homer went from being an idiotic but still human dad to just a terrible person with no redeeming qualities, Lisa went from being the smart and conscientous kid to being adult levels of educated, bart went from the POV character struggling with childhood to a mini-Homer.
 
Too much time is spent on giving Bethesda both attention and dollars and not enough on playing and creating new games. Even conversations like this don’t really bear any fruit; most people here dislike the degradation of Fallout since the acquisition; what’s new?

We’re now seeing a new generation of fans who were raised on New Vegas and disappointed with Fallout 4 basically get forced into the same kind of traumatic event that happened to the first generation of BIS fans when the acquisition happened, with most of what they liked or loved about New Vegas and its world totally trashed by the TV show. And yet we continue to see the same people create and upgrade New Vegas-related content. Go to ModDB and you can see some pretty major and innovative mods still being worked on. I think that’s pretty commendable, all things considered.

People shouldn’t feel like Bethesda’s weird blunders is all there is to Fallout.
 
Too much time is spent on giving Bethesda both attention and dollars and not enough on playing and creating new games. Even conversations like this don’t really bear any fruit; most people here dislike the degradation of Fallout since the acquisition; what’s new?
I'm currently replaying Fallout 2, but once I'm done, I'm going to go look at the mods, to see where I can get that classic Fallout experience.

I already played Fallout 1.5 Ressurection ages ago, I think back in 2016 even, so maybe I'll replay that, but I'm going to look at Sonora or Nevada first.
 
Back
Top