My review of Fallout: the Series Season One 9/10

[Risewild]

* The games about the massive Resource Wars that involved destroying Canada?

The games are not about the resource wars... The resource wars are just a small background detail to explain why the world was at war 4 generations before the first game happened.

Also, Canada wasn't destroyed in the classic game's backstory until the bombs fell and supposedly destroyed the entire world (never confirmed in the classic games). The US annexed Canada, but it was never said, mentioned or implied that it was destroyed before the apocalypse.

Here we see it again, people who think Fallout was about the bombs, the apocalypse and what happened before that, instead Fallout was about what happened almost one century after the bombs fell (and more than 1 century by Fallout 2).
I think this is because Bethesda focuses so much on the pre-war world in their games, which is fine for those games and Bethesda's vision for the franchise, but it deviates from what classic Fallout focus was on. The problem I have with this is when people who didn't play the classic games or (didn't understand them because they didn't think about it) say that the classics were about the past, the war and bombs just like Bethesda's Fallout.

* The games that have the Far Right government based on an OIL rig? (symbolism much?)

It's not the games, it's the game. Enclave only exists in Fallout 2, not in the first game. Also, I'm pretty sure that the oil rig base was for (at least) three reason:
The first reason is that it's an isolated place in the ocean that would not be targeted by nukes.
The second reason is because it's easy to explain how they get food and water, the ocean can provide a lot of food and as long as they have desalination machines, they have virtually infinite drinkable/usable water.
The third and most important one is to explain how the Enclave still had enough fuel to fly and make refuelling stations on the mainland for their Vertibirds. This way they wouldn't have to come up with an explanation for why the Vertibirds could fly around all over the West Coast without any other fuel source.

* The games that repeatedly drill home the destructive nature of consumer focused 1950s America?

Repeatedly? I kindly ask you to give me five or more explicit examples (not vague and open to interpretation) of that in the classical games. I would love to see just five times where the classic Fallout games explicitly told us about the destructive nature of consumer-focused 1950s America. The 1950s aren't even mentioned in the entire games and neither are the games happening in the 1950s.
The only thing mentioned was that the world had run out of most resources, and that led to wars in the (mostly forgotten) past. That information is (once again) just a tiny background element that is said once or maybe twice in the games and that's it (because, once again, classic Fallout games weren't about the past, they were about the present and future of that post-apocalyptic area). It's not important or relevant for the characters or factions in those games, it's not repeatedly mentioned or talked about, it's not repeatedly shown either. It's just a little footnote in the backstory of that world.

 

[PaxVenire]

I told this to Yossarian, but the pre-war Fallout universe shown to us via the originals only gave us the 1950s aesthetics through advertisements for products such as the TV commercials in FO1's intro, the Blades posters in Adytum, and the Vault-Tec projection in the FO2 opening. Aside from that, the actual world you explore seemed to be more complicated than that. And of course the corporate advertisements are gonna have that perfect clean and proper aesthetic to it, they want to sell you something, not show you the horrors of reality. The same way Advil commercials will show you a happy family in a perfect neighborhood playing with puppies while telling you the violent possible side effects to the product. The actual Fallout universe seemed more like the grungy 1990s with 1940s architecture and 1950s products with 1980s technology. It was such a beautiful and unique blend of style that hasn't since been replicated and I don't think ever will. The style of the originals is like a lost signature.

 

[CT Phipps]

I mean Brian Fargo talks extensively about how Fallout was 1950s themed, the original, thanks to Leonard Boyarsky.

 

[Hardboiled Android]

Well being as the commonwealth is two entirely different settings depending on whether you're playing fallout 3 or 4, not great.

How do you mean?

Is there a ratio of more males than females in this BoS place? My wife thought if it was overwhelmingly male, you might have situational gay activity as in other real world overwhelmingly male scenarios (prison, or old sailing ships). The idea that he can't possibly know about sex seems bizarre to me. If there's women as well in the place, wouldn't people be figuring out sex like all humans growing up in all places?

Genuinely, from the way he sounded kind of scared and confused about the idea of sex, I immediately read an implication that he was sodomozied/molested in the Brotherhood. Which I actually liked conceptually, because in the Brotherhood as depicted in the show (with basically zero women, which is retarded in itself and completely at odds with earlier depictions), that probably would be happening constantly. And it was also funny.

Incidentally, this was also the turning point where Maximus became the only character in the show I liked, realizing the extent of his idiocy.

The first reason is that it's an isolated place in the ocean that would not be targeted by nukes.

Well this makes sense on its face, though is contradicted by lore laid down in Fallout 2, namely the GNN transcript which establishes this particular oil rig as THE oil drilling platform which ignited tensions between the US and China and ultimately led to War... well if this were literally such a hot-button oil rig, and indeed an important strategic asset, I doubt it would pass under the notice of China's military planners...

Of course I'm happy to discard the GNN transccript as non-canon.

Nevertheless, this reason (and the other two), while perfectly reasonable in-universe explanations for why the government would establish its national redoubt there, is very clearly not the reason why it was written that why. By the magic of writing, virtually any location could be made to make sense. But the real reason an Oil Rig was chose is very obviously, as @CT Phipps contends, thematic. I think you're being a little obtuse if you can't see that. Fallout 1 and 2's intros both explicitly call out the struggle for resources, Fallout 1 citing oil explicitly.

We also have to keep in mind the context in which these games were written. It was the 1990s, the End of History. The epoch of ad-busters, Gen X nihilism turned into a hack ideology. Anxiety about the idea of peak oil was near its height. The slogan "No Blood for Oil" was not coined in the context of the Second Gulf War, but the First. The First Gulf War which brought us truly apocalyptic imagery of oil wells burning, black rain falling from the sky, M16-toting US soldiers in gas masks.

Soldiers in gas masks. A new wave of paranoia about the government. George H.W. Bush, "New World Order". Government murder at Ruby Ridge, fiery massacre at Waco. Tales of black helicopters criss-crossing the countryside, mutilating cattle and hapless passer-bys. Secret airstrips deep in the Arkansas woods running midnight flights to South America, murdering boys who happened across them. The concept of the Shadow Government reached prominent in this decade. The X-Files is released. Behold, a Pale Horse.

And finally, it feels like people are all too willing to forget: These games were created by a bunch of left-coasters. Including a since-avowed homosexual.

Death of the author is a thing of course, but you have to delude yourself a little to pretend this cultural miasma didn't play into the way the Enclave was conceived and depicted in Fallout 2, and indeed that these sorts of concepts and this zeitgeist didn't play at all into the conception of Fallout 1.

 

[CT Phipps]

@Hardboiled Android certainly says what I think.

But let's not also forget where a lot of Fallout inspiration came from too.

 

[Hassknecht]

How do you mean?


Genuinely, from the way he sounded kind of scared and confused about the idea of sex, I immediately read an implication that he was sodomozied/molested in the Brotherhood. Which I actually liked conceptually, because in the Brotherhood as depicted in the show (with basically zero women, which is retarded in itself and completely at odds with earlier depictions), that probably would be happening constantly. And it was also funny.

Incidentally, this was also the turning point where Maximus became the only character in the show I liked, realizing the extent of his idiocy.


Well this makes sense on its face, though is contradicted by lore laid down in Fallout 2, namely the GNN transcript which establishes this particular oil rig as THE oil drilling platform which ignited tensions between the US and China and ultimately led to War... well if this were literally such a hot-button oil rig, and indeed an important strategic asset, I doubt it would pass under the notice of China's military planners...

Of course I'm happy to discard the GNN transccript as non-canon.

Nevertheless, this reason (and the other two), while perfectly reasonable in-universe explanations for why the government would establish its national redoubt there, is very clearly not the reason why it was written that why. By the magic of writing, virtually any location could be made to make sense. But the real reason an Oil Rig was chose is very obviously, as @CT Phipps contends, thematic. I think you're being a little obtuse if you can't see that. Fallout 1 and 2's intros both explicitly call out the struggle for resources, Fallout 1 citing oil explicitly.

We also have to keep in mind the context in which these games were written. It was the 1990s, the End of History. The epoch of ad-busters, Gen X nihilism turned into a hack ideology. Anxiety about the idea of peak oil was near its height. The slogan "No Blood for Oil" was not coined in the context of the Second Gulf War, but the First. The First Gulf War which brought us truly apocalyptic imagery of oil wells burning, black rain falling from the sky, M16-toting US soldiers in gas masks.

Soldiers in gas masks. A new wave of paranoia about the government. George H.W. Bush, "New World Order". Government murder at Ruby Ridge, fiery massacre at Waco. Tales of black helicopters criss-crossing the countryside, mutilating cattle and hapless passer-bys. Secret airstrips deep in the Arkansas woods running midnight flights to South America, murdering boys who happened across them. The concept of the Shadow Government reached prominent in this decade. The X-Files is released. Behold, a Pale Horse.

And finally, it feels like people are all too willing to forget: These games were created by a bunch of left-coasters. Including a since-avowed homosexual.

Death of the author is a thing of course, but you have to delude yourself a little to pretend this cultural miasma didn't play into the way the Enclave was conceived and depicted in Fallout 2, and indeed that these sorts of concepts and this zeitgeist didn't play at all into the conception of Fallout 1.

I agree with this (apart from liking Maximus. I did not like the character, and while maybe the actor can do better, he did a terrible job for most of his screen time. If you only have your face to act for several episodes, don't look like you have facial paralysis for most of it); the oil rig, besides practical reasons, was also symbolic, the last remnants of the old world sitting on the last bits of oil for which the world burned. It was good stuff.
But Fallout 1 barely mentioned much of the old world, very few locations were directly named after pre war locations and nothing was recognisable. With Fallout 2 they brought back the old world a bit, and with the end of the Enclave, that should have been it.
The problem with the later titles, especially by Bethesda, is that they focus way too much on pre War organisations and ideologies and happenings. And with the show in particular, the old 90s paranoia about the government was further reduced, as everything is Enclave, and Enclave is powerful corporations who don't do things for power or political or ideological reasons, but just for money. They just want to win capitalism, and they're fine with burning down the world to do it. Frankly, I think it's kinda lame. I preferred the style of the classic games when it came to everything government related. There was always a sense of danger and fear attached to old world locations and uncovering all the shit that the government and military did. Now its just Vault-Tec this, Vault-Tec that, and worse, Vault-Tec is basically still around.
And yeah, sure, Fallout was 1950s inspired, but it isn't 1950s. It's the future as they imagined it to be in the 1950s with the social decay of Mad Max happening in it.
In the show, the pre-war scenes just look straight 1950s. No enormous art deco statues, bulky skyscrapers, scifi buildings, not even the cars looked futuristic at all. It was straight 50s with pipboys, which is just shoddy design. In the classic games you don't see much pre-war architecture left, but what you can glimpse is not 1950s, its a different world for sure. Fallout 3 actually kinda nailed that aspect of the architecture, Fallout 4 a bit less. The show, not really. Or it was just drowned out under the plain 50s look and I forgot, which is not a good thing.

 

[Hardboiled Android]

But Fallout 1 barely mentioned much of the old world, very few locations were directly named after pre war locations and nothing was recognisable. With Fallout 2 they brought back the old world a bit, and with the end of the Enclave, that should have been it.
The problem with the later titles, especially by Bethesda, is that they focus way too much on pre War organisations and ideologies and happenings. And with the show in particular, the old 90s paranoia about the government was further reduced, as everything is Enclave, and Enclave is powerful corporations who don't do things for power or political or ideological reasons, but just for money. They just want to win capitalism, and they're fine with burning down the world to do it. Frankly, I think it's kinda lame. I preferred the style of the classic games when it came to everything government related. There was always a sense of danger and fear attached to old world locations and uncovering all the shit that the government and military did. Now its just Vault-Tec this, Vault-Tec that, and worse, Vault-Tec is basically still around.
And yeah, sure, Fallout was 1950s inspired, but it isn't 1950s. It's the future as they imagined it to be in the 1950s with the social decay of Mad Max happening in it.
In the show, the pre-war scenes just look straight 1950s. No enormous art deco statues, bulky skyscrapers, scifi buildings, not even the cars looked futuristic at all. It was straight 50s with pipboys, which is just shoddy design. In the classic games you don't see much pre-war architecture left, but what you can glimpse is not 1950s, its a different world for sure. Fallout 3 actually kinda nailed that aspect of the architecture, Fallout 4 a bit less. The show, not really. Or it was just drowned out under the plain 50s look and I forgot, which is not a good thing.

I don't disagree with your general point about the Bethesda titles over-focusing on the pre-War world, and this show especially focusing too much on the pre-War, and in doing so completely cheapening it. I agree that having a scene with a smoky backroom where a bunch of businessmen decie to blow up the world for... profit? Even though the entire economy and their lifestyles (if not their lies with it)? is completely and totally retarded. It's a childish view of how these things happen. Perhaps this is a point where @CT Phipps and I would differ, since he does seem to be more bullish on the show than I am.

But I think there is a way to play with that basic idea and make it fit perfectly fine. Indeed, initially in that stupid boardroom meeting, they talk about it initially in the correct way albeit with retard dialogue: Rather than Vault-Tec directly raising the idea of nuking the world, an organization like it would benefit from sabotaging any move towards peace. Even if Vault-Tec doesn't want the War to happen, it benefits from continued tensions and paranoia about the end of the world. This would push it to tend to encourage policy makers away from reconciliation or peace, and towards keeping up the tempo of war. Thus, unintentionally in the pursuit of its own self-interest, Vault-Tec ends up bringing about the end of the world. The Ghoul having this realization or making this discovery should have been sufficient for him to reach a breaking point in his relation with his wife.

Even then, that's at a lower level. At the higher echelons, I think it's feasible to write something where the elite power-brokers in government and business are resigned to a nuclear war as an inevitability, and indeed from their death-driven point of view even see it as a good thing. But to do that idea justice would require a higher caliber of writing than "Everyone decides to destroy the world for the opportunity to do funny Vault experiments."

(apart from liking Maximus. I did not like the character, and while maybe the actor can do better, he did a terrible job for most of his screen time. If you only have your face to act for several episodes, don't look like you have facial paralysis for most of it)

I'm sort of coping in this regard. Initially for the first half of the show, I was flabbergasted by what a bad actor Maximus was, and how poorly written he seemed to be. It was kind of unbelievable.

Than, when he said that thing, I immediately burst out laughing. Then I consciously re-contextualized everything we had seen up to this point. Maximus became, in my mind, a man with the mind of a child recruited by a fanatical militant organization who was constantly being raped by his brothers-in-arms. He acted so strangely because he was a socially maladjusted freak, the equivalent of those Albanian orphans that the prior regime attempted to raise up into a generation of supermen by cutting them off from human contact (who just ended up being violent and retarded). And he kept making extremely stupid decisions in the worst way possible because he was legitimately stupid and mentally undeveloped. This way of viewing his actions and behavior transformed him from a bad nothing into a something. It actually made him an interesting character, as opposed to The Ghoul and Lucy (both very by-the-numbers and tropey characters).

Now - does this way of looking at him actually justify the actor's performance? Probably not at all, I think he really is just a bad actor. The writing, that actually is a little more justifiable in light of this viewing - minus the rape, it seems like this really is how the writers intended to depict the character. The problem is just that they did it in a quite cartoonish way like they did everything else.

 

[Hassknecht]

I don't disagree with your general point about the Bethesda titles over-focusing on the pre-War world, and this show especially focusing too much on the pre-War, and in doing so completely cheapening it. I agree that having a scene with a smoky backroom where a bunch of businessmen decie to blow up the world for... profit? Even though the entire economy and their lifestyles (if not their lies with it)? is completely and totally retarded. It's a childish view of how these things happen. Perhaps this is a point where @CT Phipps and I would differ, since he does seem to be more bullish on the show than I am.

But I think there is a way to play with that basic idea and make it fit perfectly fine. Indeed, initially in that stupid boardroom meeting, they talk about it initially in the correct way albeit with retard dialogue: Rather than Vault-Tec directly raising the idea of nuking the world, an organization like it would benefit from sabotaging any move towards peace. Even if Vault-Tec doesn't want the War to happen, it benefits from continued tensions and paranoia about the end of the world. This would push it to tend to encourage policy makers away from reconciliation or peace, and towards keeping up the tempo of war. Thus, unintentionally in the pursuit of its own self-interest, Vault-Tec ends up bringing about the end of the world. The Ghoul having this realization or making this discovery should have been sufficient for him to reach a breaking point in his relation with his wife.

Even then, that's at a lower level. At the higher echelons, I think it's feasible to write something where the elite power-brokers in government and business are resigned to a nuclear war as an inevitability, and indeed from their death-driven point of view even see it as a good thing. But to do that idea justice would require a higher caliber of writing than "Everyone decides to destroy the world for the opportunity to do funny Vault experiments."


I'm sort of coping in this regard. Initially for the first half of the show, I was flabbergasted by what a bad actor Maximus was, and how poorly written he seemed to be. It was kind of unbelievable.

Than, when he said that thing, I immediately burst out laughing. Then I consciously re-contextualized everything we had seen up to this point. Maximus became, in my mind, a man with the mind of a child recruited by a fanatical militant organization who was constantly being raped by his brothers-in-arms. He acted so strangely because he was a socially maladjusted freak, the equivalent of those Albanian orphans that the prior regime attempted to raise up into a generation of supermen by cutting them off from human contact (who just ended up being violent and retarded). And he kept making extremely stupid decisions in the worst way possible because he was legitimately stupid and mentally undeveloped. This way of viewing his actions and behavior transformed him from a bad nothing into a something. It actually made him an interesting character, as opposed to The Ghoul and Lucy (both very by-the-numbers and tropey characters).

Now - does this way of looking at him actually justify the actor's performance? Probably not at all, I think he really is just a bad actor. The writing, that actually is a little more justifiable in light of this viewing - minus the rape, it seems like this really is how the writers intended to depict the character. The problem is just that they did it in a quite cartoonish way like they did everything else.

Tbh that's just getting yourself to like something because of stuff you made up in your head. There is nothing to imply that any of this actually part of his character, and it wouldn't explain why any other BOS character hasn't also been raped into mental retardation. I mean, Bo from Superstore is also tarded, but in a different way.
Let's be honest here, that is putting wayyyyy too much thought into it, and the reality is simply that the character was written and acted badly. Everything else is headcanon, and headcanon that gives these writers way too much credit.
Also, yeah, the basic ideas of the backroom meeting could have been made to work, if one wanted. Lots of stuff in Beth-era Fallouts could have been made to work if you had competent writers doing it. But there were no competent writers involved, and basically modding the show in your head into a total conversion doesn't make the show better.
I mean, what kind of take is that? The show isn't terrible because if someone else had written it it could have been good? No. It just wasn't written very well, and yeah, it's totally fine to still like it, but don't pretend it's good or anything.

 

[CT Phipps]

Tbh that's just getting yourself to like something because of stuff you made up in your head. There is nothing to imply that any of this actually part of his character, and it wouldn't explain why any other BOS character hasn't also been raped into mental retardation. I mean, Bo from Superstore is also tarded, but in a different way.
Let's be honest here, that is putting wayyyyy too much thought into it, and the reality is simply that the character was written and acted badly. Everything else is headcanon, and headcanon that gives these writers way too much credit.
Also, yeah, the basic ideas of the backroom meeting could have been made to work, if one wanted. Lots of stuff in Beth-era Fallouts could have been made to work if you had competent writers doing it. But there were no competent writers involved, and basically modding the show in your head into a total conversion doesn't make the show better.
I mean, what kind of take is that? The show isn't terrible because if someone else had written it it could have been good? No. It just wasn't written very well, and yeah, it's totally fine to still like it, but don't pretend it's good or anything.

Reality is unrealistic, @Hassknecht

It is utterly stupid to believe capitalism would benefit from the apocalypse but it is actually something that plenty of people argue in RL with the biggest notation being Ayn Rand's ATLAS SHRUGGED as the belief that only the destruction of modern civilization can properly bring about a truly free market society.

(Seriously, look up the plot of the book)

It continues getting advocated in various forms as well that deregulation is literally so important as disasters are to be welcomed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Reset

The point of the scene is that Vault-Tec and other big businesses believe that they can rebuild the world to their own liking post-apocalypse. It's the same sort of logic that I hear from seemingly rationale people that believe an American Civil War or secessionist would benefit the country to no end. It doesn't fail as a metaphor for either nuclear warfare (because Truman was always saying that the MIC was a massive danger to society) or climate change because the end of the world is something we do have to deal with but people don't stop because they continue to make money off of it believing they won't see any consequences in their lifetime or can ride it out.

It's satire that requires people to be totally detached from reality but that's something that I have fully the mind that a good chunk of the country in RL are and certainly have seen is something that doesn't benefit fiction to pretend is not realistic. Basically, evil people in reality are, in fact stupid and unrealistically narcissistic about their goals.

As for getting people to like something based on stuff they made up in their head, interpreting works is kind of the point of cinema like the Nolans produce. It was a huge thing in Westworld and Interstellar.

 

[Hassknecht]

Again, the idea itself isn't that much of a problem, it's the notion that it's Vault-Tec behind everything. It's Vault-Tec who have the idea to ignite the war so they can somehow reclaim the wasteland 500 years later, and it's a Vault-Tec exec who nukes a center of civilisation to ensure this.
Again, it's not the idea itself. It's the execution, which is based on "we gotta do something with the big names" instead of coming up with a sensible plot.

/edit: another thing. Suspension of disbelief. Fallout takes place in a different universe. It doesn't need to be realistic. But it needs to adhere to its own internal logic and be realistic within itself and in the context of itself. By constantly shifting the tone and historic events (nobody in the Enclave ever mentioned Vault-Tec, they were always just treated as a contractor, yet now they're basically the main decider of it?) it all becomes moot as there can't be any internal logic.

 

[CT Phipps]

Again, the idea itself isn't that much of a problem, it's the notion that it's Vault-Tec behind everything. It's Vault-Tec who have the idea to ignite the war so they can somehow reclaim the wasteland 500 years later, and it's a Vault-Tec exec who nukes a center of civilisation to ensure this.
Again, it's not the idea itself. It's the execution, which is based on "we gotta do something with the big names" instead of coming up with a sensible plot.

Ehhh, I actually would agree except for the fact it...isn't JUST Vault-Tec.

Sort of like how people complain NCR being destroyed is the worst element of the show when NCR sows up in the grand finale to battle the Brotherhood of Steel.

The meeting isn't Vault-Tec, it's Vault-Tec, RobCo, Repcomm, West-Tek, and Big Mountain.

The weirdest thing is if you just had a US Senator there, it'd be flat out the origin of the Enclave as described by Avellone. Vault-Tec has always been an extension of it.

 

[Hassknecht]

Ehhh, I actually would agree except for the fact it...isn't JUST Vault-Tec.

Sort of like how people complain NCR being destroyed is the worst element of the show when NCR sows up in the grand finale to battle the Brotherhood of Steel.

The meeting isn't Vault-Tec, it's Vault-Tec, RobCo, Repcomm, West-Tek, and Big Mountain.

The weirdest thing is if you just had a US Senator there, it'd be flat out the origin of the Enclave as described by Avellone. Vault-Tec has always been an extension of it.

It's Vault-Tec leading it in the Vault-Tec HQ and Vault-Tec laying out the plan and ideas.
And yes, if there had been a senator or some politics representation there, it would have made a lot more sense.
Still wouldn't have had it made so that they decide to nuke the world to save their bottom lines, but as a principle for forming the Enclave, why not.
But they didn't do that, because why make things make sense when people like you will clap their hands so hard they become bloody stumps anyway? Why put in any more but the least amount of effort when the fans don't care about anything but shiny Fallout brand themes and Dollar Store New Girl being so cute and wholesome?

 

[Hawkwing74]

It is utterly stupid to believe capitalism would benefit from the apocalypse but it is actually something that plenty of people argue in RL with the biggest notation being Ayn Rand's ATLAS SHRUGGED as the belief that only the destruction of modern civilization can properly bring about a truly free market society.

I read that overly verbose book. People shutting down their corporations because they are pissed at the government bureaucrats somehow equals nuking the world in your mind? Wow, just wow.

 

[Hassknecht]

I read that overly verbose book. People shutting down their corporations because they are pissed at the government bureaucrats somehow equals nuking the world in your mind? Wow, just wow.

Should have gone for the Communist Manifesto and Das Kapital, according to which true free and classless society really does only come through revolution and destruction of what was before.
Both are, of course, pretty laughable takes that read way too much into what the Amazon writers actually wrote. Which is just "big corporation evil, also look at how many names we found in the Fallout wiki".

 

[TheGM]

is just "big corporation evil, also look at how many names we found in the Fallout wiki".

it really be like that, don't it.

 

[Hassknecht]

it really be like that, don't it.

Yeah, I mean, if you wanted some clandestine meeting discussing the impending end of the world, why have the relatively limited Repconn on board? Have the meeting with at least one representative from politics, and have at least Poseidon Energy with them. Come on, you want to show the start of the Enclave, but you leave out one of THE most important corporations involved with it? You know, the company build the place the eponymous ENCLAVE was based on?
Come the fuck on, just because the wiki didn't list any CEO by name.

 

[Iprovidelittlepianos]

But I think there is a way to play with that basic idea and make it fit perfectly fine. Indeed, initially in that stupid boardroom meeting, they talk about it initially in the correct way albeit with retard dialogue: Rather than Vault-Tec directly raising the idea of nuking the world, an organization like it would benefit from sabotaging any move towards peace. Even if Vault-Tec doesn't want the War to happen, it benefits from continued tensions and paranoia about the end of the world. This would push it to tend to encourage policy makers away from reconciliation or peace, and towards keeping up the tempo of war. Thus, unintentionally in the pursuit of its own self-interest, Vault-Tec ends up bringing about the end of the world. The Ghoul having this realization or making this discovery should have been sufficient for him to reach a breaking point in his relation with his wife.

Yes, this is how you critique capitalist America in an intelligent way. Corporations profit from the current status quo of the world, which is on the brink of nuclear war. They have a vested interest against any potential for peace. They, along with the government, essentially played with fire for their own personal benefit, unconcerned with the potential consequences of their actions, or at least secure in the knowledge that, if push comes to shove, they’ll be able to ride out a nuclear armageddon. Eventually, push came to shove, and they found that they had greatly overestimated their ability to survive a nuclear conflict (Enclave notwithstanding). The world ends. No more corporations, no more governments, and a lot of dead innocents along the way. This is the only way one should argue that “Vault-Tec started the war.” It shouldn’t be a vast conspiracy to bomb the world and rule over the ruins. It should be the result human nature combined with an unsustainable culture and ideology.

 

[Hassknecht]

Yes, this is how you critique capitalist America in an intelligent way. Corporations profit from the current status quo of the world, which is on the brink of nuclear war. They have a vested interest against any potential for peace. They, along with the government, essentially played with fire for their own personal benefit, unconcerned with the potential consequences of their actions, or at least secure in the knowledge that, if push comes to shove, they’ll be able to ride out a nuclear armageddon. Eventually, push came to shove, and they found that they had greatly underestimated their ability to survive a nuclear conflict (Enclave notwithstanding). The world ends. No more corporations, no more governments, and a lot of dead innocents along the way. This is the only way one should argue that “Vault-Tec started the war.” It shouldn’t be a vast conspiracy to bomb the world and rule over the ruins. It should be the result human nature combined with an unsustainable culture and ideology.

That is exactly how it should have been.

 

[Hawkwing74]

Yes, this is how you critique capitalist America in an intelligent way. Corporations profit from the current status quo of the world, which is on the brink of nuclear war. They have a vested interest against any potential for peace. They, along with the government, essentially played with fire for their own personal benefit, unconcerned with the potential consequences of their actions, or at least secure in the knowledge that, if push comes to shove, they’ll be able to ride out a nuclear armageddon. Eventually, push came to shove, and they found that they had greatly underestimated their ability to survive a nuclear conflict (Enclave notwithstanding). The world ends. No more corporations, no more governments, and a lot of dead innocents along the way. This is the only way one should argue that “Vault-Tec started the war.” It shouldn’t be a vast conspiracy to bomb the world and rule over the ruins. It should be the result human nature combined with an unsustainable culture and ideology.

Yes, that I can buy into. We see in our own day how MIC corps want endless wars for profit. It would be Greek tragedy for their hubris to get away from them in this manner. I can't imagine any billionaire CEO wants a full scale nuclear war unless they're insane.

 

[PaxVenire]

Did the show ever mention China by name? I can’t remember if it ever did. We hear about America’s enemies and communism in a blanket sense, but never the actual country who Americans were at war against lmao. They even talk directly about Anchorage but never the opponents. We even see a CCCP satellite in the show, because the Soviet Union is gone and can’t be offended anymore but Amazon really didn’t wanna lose that Chinese money.