NO Trees

W

Wyco

It Wandered In From the Wastes
well. this is a post-NUCLEAR game ,isnt it?
then i dont want to see more trees than i saw in fo1.that is optimal. (fo2 was had too much trees)

and if fo3 will be played after fo2 (in time) then some new kind of "trees" should be invented
 
Vegetation in Fallout!

I think vegetation was pretty overdone in Fallout 3, if you consider the immense strain that was put on the landscape by the HUGE NUCLEAR BOMBS! But to be honest, I think it adds quite a bit of interest in the landscape! :) I personally would hate to just be walking around a plain area when travelling! The Oasis in F3 was a good idea though! Although I haven't done much exploring into its lore or history (E.g. how they got the trees to grow in the environment).

Tree's shouldn't be overdone in the games, however as time goes on with the series I expect to see more and more, especially with conservation efforts which would have taken place in many areas. :shock: But I suppose its all relevant to the location, which is why I understood 'New Vegas' having more vegetation than the capital!
(P.s. I know this topic is old, It just interested moi!) :D
 
The Oasis in F3 was a good idea though!
Click to expand...

mqdefault.jpg
 
Languorous_Maiar said:
The Oasis in F3 was a good idea though!
Click to expand...

mqdefault.jpg
Click to expand...

Harold! :D Sure the Oasis had its problems, but where else would Harold survive? I remember seeing clips of him in the earlier games.
Although how he ended up there is a different story, one in which I am not sure of :D

R.I.P Harold
 
If they keep setting the timeline 200+ years after the war, the lack of vegetation (trees included) would be just stupid.
 
I liked Oasis. Might have been overdone, though. And it kinda bothers that he's so far from the core region, but I didn't think about that the first time (I've almost zero knowledge about USA geography).
 
When it comes to vegetation, Fallout is more or less a "correct" game.
Initial burn would cause immense damage to plants (forest fires as a result etc.) radiation too, resulting in extinction of many plants, but many more resilient species would survive (I'm totally excluding GECK).

Grass and such have a relatively short life span and reproduce rather quickly, and would easily survive.
Many tree forms, too. It would take time, but green life would recover.

Only real, actual damage that could be cataclysmic for plants is if the war resulted in massive amounts of dust, ash etc. to come into the atmosphere, which would basically block out sun's light and that would result in the total abortion of photosynthesis which would result in...yeah.


In general, plants are more resilient than animals (humans included), and will survive. It would take them some time, but they would grow, and Fallout portrays this pretty well (it's still largely dependant on climate - i.e. deserts aren't lush, but there are lush places - Zion for example). Falllout/2/NV are set in and around places which aren't really Norwegian woods in present day, so I don't see what's the problem here.

War would have consequences on climate change, I guess, but still not enough to kill trees.







If the series continues in the given chronological order, I don't think it would be surprising to see big forests, green fields and similar. After all, this series isn't post-apocalyptic anymore...




EDIT: Only now do I see what a gravedig this is...howly shit.
 
When it comes to vegetation, Fallout is more or less a "correct" game.
Click to expand...
I disagree.

In Fallout Universum vegetation didn't re-grow by itself.
Just look at all those deserts!

(it's still largely dependant on climate - i.e. deserts aren't lush, but there are lush places - Zion for example
Click to expand...
Zion have vegetation because of 1 easy fact, it wasn't hit by nukes, and it's protected by mountains.
 
Languorous_Maiar said:
In Fallout Universum vegetation didn't re-grow by itself.
Just look at all those deserts!
Click to expand...


As I've said, those deserts you're mentioning are deserts even in present day - Southern California, Mojave whatever...
If it's a desert in a pre-War period, why would there be too much vegetation in the post-War period?

Most of the vegetation has re-grown, finding its own habitat, as before.


Languorous_Maiar said:
Zion have vegetation because of 1 easy fact, it wans't hit by nuked, and it's protected by mountains.
Click to expand...


Although there wasn't a direct hit, Zion was basically surrounded by falling bombs and clouds of radiation that spread across the whole continent. It being protected by mountains does not protect it from the very fallout, the black rain that would poor from above. And that is highly radioactive.


It's basically an in-game proof that radiation itself isn't enough to kill plants.
 
Although there wasn't a direct hit, Zion was basically surrounded by falling bombs and clouds of radiation that spread across the whole continent. It being protected by mountains does not protect it from the very fallout, the black rain that would poor from above. And that is highly radioactive.
Click to expand...
Nope, read survivalist diares.
Zion never lost it vegetation, that's way for example some Mexicans wanted to live there, not in other place... why not in other? Because everything other was desert because of nukes.

As I've said, those deserts you're mentioning are deserts even in present day - Southern California, Mojave whatever...
Click to expand...
Lets look...

231231231231.jpg


A LOT of green, not only deserts.

After war.

FO2_WorldMap.jpg

FO1_WorldMap.jpg


Ehe!
 
Having lived in California, I can tell you that most of that green there is metro in southern and farmland in central.

And yes this is quite a gravedig. You must have been really bored to even stumble across this.
 
July 2000? Holy shit, is this sub thread so inactive you can stumble across a 13 old topic by chance?
 
Walpknut said:
July 2000? Holy shit, is this sub thread so inactive you can stumble across a 13 old topic by chance?
Click to expand...

There must be something wrong, look at the OP. It says he/she joined in 2003, while the post seems to be from 2000.
 
Languorous_Maiar said:
Nope, read survivalist diares.
Zion never lost it vegetation, that's way for example some Mexicans wanted to live there, not in other place... why not in other? Because everything other was desert because of nukes.
Click to expand...


You're basically confirming what I'm saying, and that is that plants can survive harsh radioactive conditions, adapt and repopulate.

They were somewhat "assisted" by all those folks from Vault 22, but the nature itself still played the main role.

Zion did suffer radiation contamination. Read the survivalist diary.





And I'm not sure what you're trying to get at with this pictures.

There is green in California? Sure.
And a lot of that would regrow over time? Yes, not all of it, since plenty of the aforementioned "green" is there thanks to man's influence, but there's a difference between 80 years after nuclear war and 200 years after nuclear war, and whatever's in between.
I'm not saying that Fallout world is absolutely lush with green, especially in the period of the first game, but overtime, as negative effects of a century old conflict start to diminish, already adapted plants ( as well as animals, humans etc. - and they do adapt - it's a scientific fact) will re-grow and repopulate the wasteland based on the climate and geographic patterns of the post-War world.
 
At FO1, Shadysand grows cabbages.
And Background of FO1,2,NV is desert so even without nuclear war, trees are not that common but for civilized area since people need plants, they grow it and it isn't that weird.
Most weird thing is fo3. how they survive without agriculture?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top