My honest review of the new fallout show.

[SimonJester]

Alright, folks, Simon Jester here, and I’ve got a bone to pick with the new Fallout show. If you’re a long-time fan of the franchise, especially the West Coast games like Fallout and New Vegas, you might want to sit down for this one. Because what the showrunners have done isn’t just a mistake—it’s a full-on assault on everything that made this series great. Let’s dissect the trainwreck piece by piece.


---

The Great War Rewritten

Let’s start with the big one: the Great War. In the games, the war was a tragic, inevitable clash between the United States and China—a geopolitical powder keg of resource wars and brinkmanship. It wasn’t about one singular villain; it was about humanity’s collective failure. The Fallout show, however, decided that nuance is overrated and made Vault-Tec the sole culprit, dropping the first nukes to kick off the apocalypse.

That’s right, Vault-Tec, the cartoonishly evil corporation, apparently orchestrated the end of the world. Forget the complex tensions between superpowers, forget the resource wars—it’s all Vault-Tec’s fault now. It’s lazy, reductive, and it spits on the rich geopolitical backdrop that made the Fallout universe feel real and grounded.


---

Erasing the West Coast Legacy

The NCR? Shady Sands? Gone. Nuked into oblivion by Hank MacLean, some random Vault-Tec executive, because apparently, wiping out one of Fallout’s most important factions was easier than writing a coherent story. The NCR wasn’t just a faction—it was a symbol of humanity’s attempt to rebuild civilization. It represented hope, struggle, and the messy reality of governance in a post-apocalyptic world. And the showrunners decided to nuke it for cheap shock value.

This isn’t just about erasing a faction; it’s about erasing choice. The Fallout games were always about player agency—navigating morally gray decisions in a complex world. By destroying the NCR, the show doesn’t just rewrite history—it flattens it. They’ve turned a rich, multi-layered universe into a one-dimensional wasteland.


---

Anti-Capitalist, Pro-Communist Agenda

Vault-Tec in the show isn’t just evil—it’s cartoonishly capitalist evil. Characters give long-winded speeches about corporate greed and shareholder profits, hammering home a message so heavy-handed it could double as a super sledge. Don’t get me wrong, the Fallout games critiqued greed and corporate exploitation, but they did it with subtlety and nuance.

The show, on the other hand, goes all-in on an anti-capitalist, pro-communist narrative that feels completely out of place. The games weren’t about endorsing ideologies—they were about exploring humanity’s flaws, no matter the system. The Brotherhood of Steel, the NCR, the Enclave—they all had their sins. The show’s one-sided narrative turns that moral complexity into a shallow soapbox.


---

The Chinese? What Chinese?

In the games, China was a critical player in the Great War, locked in a desperate conflict with the U.S. over dwindling resources. The show? Barely mentions them. There’s a vague reference to the Battle of Anchorage, but they don’t even bother to say who the U.S. was fighting. By erasing China’s role, the show guts the very tension that made the Great War feel real.

The games painted a world on the brink, with nations pushed to the edge by scarcity and paranoia. The show simplifies all of that into “Vault-Tec bad, capitalism bad,” completely missing the point of the original story.


---

The Character Assassination of Mr. House and Sinclair

Oh, and then there’s what they did to Mr. House and Sinclair. In New Vegas, Robert House is a visionary tyrant who single-handedly preserved Las Vegas through sheer intellect and iron will. He’s all about independence, control, and humanity’s survival on his terms. The show, however, reduces him to a Vault-Tec lackey. Let me be clear: Mr. House would never play second fiddle to anyone. His entire character is built on his disdain for bureaucracies and corporations he doesn’t control. Tying him to Vault-Tec isn’t just wrong—it’s insulting.

And Sinclair? The genius architect behind the Sierra Madre Casino, whose tragic story of love and obsession made him one of Fallout’s most compelling characters? The show turns him into another Vault-Tec crony, dragging his deeply personal story into a corporate villain plotline that has nothing to do with his original character. Sinclair wasn’t about world-ending schemes—he was about legacy, heartbreak, and the haunting consequences of unchecked ambition. The show’s rewrite flattens him into just another cog in the Vault-Tec machine.


---

Vault-Tec’s Big Meeting: A Character Assassin’s Ball

The show’s depiction of Vault-Tec’s “meeting of the minds” is the worst kind of lazy writing. By shoving characters like Mr. House and Sinclair into the same room, they’ve turned brilliant, independent figures into pawns in Vault-Tec’s convoluted evil plan. The brilliance of Fallout has always been in its individuality: each character, each faction, each storyline stood on its own while adding to the larger world. The show’s attempt to centralize everything into a single narrative strips away what made these characters compelling.


---

Final Thoughts: A Wasteland of Creativity

The Fallout show isn’t just a betrayal of the franchise—it’s an obliteration of everything that made it great. By rewriting the Great War, erasing the West Coast factions, and mangling characters like Mr. House and Sinclair, the showrunners have shown a complete lack of respect for the series’ legacy.

If they wanted to honor the Fallout universe, they could have told a new story in a new region, introducing new factions and ideas while preserving the integrity of the existing lore. Instead, they chose to rewrite history, flatten characters, and push a heavy-handed agenda that misses the point of Fallout entirely.

So, here’s the takeaway: just because you own the rights to a franchise doesn’t mean you understand what makes it great. Simon Jester out. And remember: war… war never changes. But apparently, bad writers think they can.

 

[Cambragol]

Most of these issues fade away if you don't consider anything past Fallout 1 to be Fallout. It was a downhill slide right from Fallout 2 on...

Further, it's just TV. We can't expect a medium like TV, or movies, to really hold any deep content. It's just moving pictures after all. Produced by liberal captured entities. Just lower your expectations. Loooower... keep going.

There. Now it can be enjoyed.

Without the post Fallout (not gonna call it Fallout 1, it is just Fallout) 'canon' the only issue remaining is if the Great War was rewritten. Maybe this stands. However, it seems from the show that the opposing factions had already built up a geopolitical climate of impending nuclear Armageddon. From this it seems more like Vault-Tec merely blew on the fuse that had already been lit. The blame doesn't lie solely with them, but still remains with the tragic, inevitable clash between the United States and China, and all the political and social build up that lead to that clash.

Further, there still remains open some mystery as to how intertwined the 'military industrial complex' is, of which Vault-Tec is part of, which restores blame to the 'blowing on the fuse' back to the original party of the 'United States'.

If one does consider the post Fallout lore to be 'canon', then your other points holdup, the more so the more you care about that lore.

 

[SimonJester]

Most of these issues fade away if you don't consider anything past Fallout 1 to be Fallout. It was a downhill slide right from Fallout 2 on...

Further, it's just TV. We can't expect a medium like TV, or movies, to really hold any deep content. It's just moving pictures after all. Produced by liberal captured entities. Just lower your expectations. Loooower... keep going.

There. Now it can be enjoyed.

Without the post Fallout (not gonna call it Fallout 1, it is just Fallout) 'canon' the only issue remaining is if the Great War was rewritten. Maybe this stands. However, it seems from the show that the opposing factions had already built up a geopolitical climate of impending nuclear Armageddon. From this it seems more like Vault-Tec merely blew on the fuse that had already been lit. The blame doesn't lie solely with them, but still remains with the tragic, inevitable clash between the United States and China, and all the political and social build up that lead to that clash.

Further, there still remains open some mystery as to how intertwined the 'military industrial complex' is, of which Vault-Tec is part of, which restores blame to the 'blowing on the fuse' back to the original party of the 'United States'.

If one does consider the post Fallout lore to be 'canon', then your other points holdup, the more so the more you care about that lore.

Alright, Simon Jester back again to tackle this response head-on. Let’s unpack this point by point because there’s a lot here worth addressing, and not all of it is wrong—but there’s a core disagreement about what Fallout was, is, and should be.


---

"Most of these issues fade away if you don't consider anything past Fallout 1 to be Fallout."

That’s a fair enough position if your love for Fallout begins and ends with the original Interplay game. But the reality is, Fallout became a franchise, and with that comes evolution—good or bad. If we dismiss everything after Fallout, we lose New Vegas, which stands as one of the best narrative RPGs ever made. It took the DNA of the first game—freedom, moral ambiguity, and a reactive world—and expanded it into something truly remarkable.

Yes, Fallout 2 leaned harder into humor and pop culture references, and it divided fans. But to dismiss all post-Fallout canon feels like throwing the baby out with the irradiated bathwater. If the original Fallout is your gold standard, I get it. But the games that came after, particularly New Vegas, added depth and nuance to the lore. The NCR, Mr. House, the Legion—these factions and characters are an essential part of what makes Fallout resonate for so many.


---

"It's just TV. We can't expect a medium like TV or movies to really hold any deep content."

Here’s where we part ways. TV is absolutely capable of depth and nuance—if the creators respect the source material and have a clear vision. Shows like The Expanse, Battlestar Galactica, or even The Last of Us have proven that adaptations can honor their origins while delivering meaningful storytelling.

The issue isn’t the medium; it’s the execution. The Fallout show could have been a thoughtful exploration of the wasteland, a way to introduce the world to newcomers while giving long-time fans something to chew on. Instead, it opts for easy answers, cartoonish villains, and a clear disregard for the lore. That’s not a failure of TV—it’s a failure of the writers.


---

"Vault-Tec merely blew on the fuse that had already been lit."

This is an interesting take, and I see what you’re saying. If Vault-Tec’s actions were framed as opportunistic—taking advantage of an already crumbling geopolitical landscape—that would fit better with Fallout’s established lore. But the show doesn’t frame it that way. It makes Vault-Tec the architects of the apocalypse, removing the shared culpability between nations that the games emphasized.

In the games, the Great War was a tragedy born of human hubris, resource scarcity, and distrust. Vault-Tec’s role was to profit from the fallout (literally), not to kickstart it. By pinning the blame squarely on Vault-Tec, the show simplifies the narrative, stripping away the layers of complexity that made the Fallout universe feel real.


---

"How intertwined is the 'military-industrial complex'?"

This is a good point, and Fallout has always hinted at the blurred lines between corporations like Vault-Tec and the U.S. government. If the show had leaned into this—exploring how corporate greed and government corruption fed into the apocalypse—it could have worked. Instead, the show turns Vault-Tec into the sole villain, letting the U.S. and China off the hook for their roles in the collapse. It misses the nuance entirely.


---

"If one does consider the post-Fallout lore to be 'canon,' then your other points hold up."

Exactly. If you accept Fallout 2, New Vegas, and even parts of Bethesda’s Fallout 3/4 as canon, then the show’s treatment of characters like Mr. House and Sinclair becomes indefensible. These were fully realized figures with complex motivations, and the show reduces them to generic Vault-Tec stooges. That’s not just bad storytelling—it’s disrespectful to the franchise’s history.


---

Final Thoughts

You’re not wrong to suggest lowering expectations for modern media—especially when it comes to adaptations. But here’s the thing: Fallout deserves better. Fans deserve better. It’s not about clinging to a rigid canon; it’s about respecting what made Fallout special in the first place: moral ambiguity, player choice, and a world that felt alive with history.

The Fallout show isn’t just disappointing because it deviates from lore—it’s disappointing because it lacks the depth, nuance, and respect for its source material that defines great storytelling. Lowering expectations doesn’t fix that. It just lets bad writing off the hook.

Simon Jester out. And remember: war… war never changes.
But great storytelling? That’s worth fighting for.