Should Fallout 3 be considered canon?

[CT Phipps]

Listen Phipps, I like you. We may not see eye to eye on everything, but I won't judge you for liking FO3/4, because it's just an opinion.

But the fact that you are fine with paying money to fix something like this... it's just not right. Bethesda should never have charged for the playing after the ending. The Broken Steel missions are fine- whatever- but you were forced to buy a piece of DLC to fix a fundamental flaw with the game, whereas some developers would opt to release an 'extended cut' for free.

I'd like to clarify I don't like being gouged for money. This is where our opinions on the subject probably are closer than divergent actually. In fact, being gouged for money and the fact microtransactions are a major reason why I disliked Deus Ex: Mankind Divided because I felt like I couldn't play my playstyle in the early game because it required extra Praxis kits.

If they were just going to fix the ending in Broken Steel as the primary appeal, I'd feel cheated just like people are feeling cheated by Dead Rising 4 where it turns out that Frank West DIES unless you have the DLC where he lives.

I shit you not.

However, I don't mind paying for Broken Steel because it provided a post-game world and questline that was worth the money. It wasn't just fixing a shitty ending.

 

[SarcasticGoodGuy]

However, I don't mind paying for Broken Steel because it provided a post-game world and questline that was worth the money. It wasn't just fixing a shitty ending.

See Bethesda have included it in a package though. It's like Cable TV charging you hundreds of dollars for 1200 channels, 400 of which are in Portuguese, all so you can get that one channel you actually want. I can make analogies lmao

They should've let you play after the ending for free and not have people judge you for not dying.

 

[Risewild]

I'm mostly flexible about these sort of things as I mention above. For me, Fallout 3 is canon because I love the game and I think people should have the option of disregarding it if it doesn't fit their view of Fallout because

If a company acquires an existing IP and changes the canon so much that the angers 99% of the existing fans of that IP, creates something so far from the originals that each subsequent product is worst in relation to world consistency and lore (and once again angers most of the existing fans of the "classic" IP and manages to anger many fans of the "new" IP) then why using that IP in the first place?
What's the point of buying something and using it's name and some references and then change the rest so drastically that almost nothing makes sense in the IP universe when compared to the previous works of that IP?

You say that you like IPs to do something different from what they always did, that consistency is not necessary if it results in a good story, but then what's the point in using an already existing IP? What is stopping the creators of this new version of the IP from writing the same thing but making their own IP. The product would still have the great story and it would be consistent with their new canon and lore.
For example, what if Obsidian had made Pillars of Eternity in the Faerûn universe (one of the Dungeons and Dragons campaign settings), but kept the same story, magic worked the same way and the locations were the same as in the game we have now. It would have actually been worst because Faerûn is a well established "universe" with it's well established canon and lore and rules and places. People would call it bullshit and the game and story would have suffered because it was shoehorned into an existing IP that was different from what the PoE creators wanted to do.

Breaking consistency is worst for the story and canon than making a new IP. There is nothing stopping creators from making a new one instead of making something stupid and then stick it in an existing IP, it makes the product suffer and the story suffer and would be much better for the author too (unless the author is lazy or sucks so much and can't come up with his own IP and has to "borrow" ideas from existing ones).

 

[lolpop109]

I'd like to clarify I don't like being gouged for money. This is where our opinions on the subject probably are closer than divergent actually. In fact, being gouged for money and the fact microtransactions are a major reason why I disliked Deus Ex: Mankind Divided because I felt like I couldn't play my playstyle in the early game because it required extra Praxis kits.

If they were just going to fix the ending in Broken Steel as the primary appeal, I'd feel cheated just like people are feeling cheated by Dead Rising 4 where it turns out that Frank West DIES unless you have the DLC where he lives.

I shit you not.

However, I don't mind paying for Broken Steel because it provided a post-game world and questline that was worth the money. It wasn't just fixing a shitty ending.

Thanks for the DR4 spoiler

 

[CT Phipps]

Thanks for the DR4 spoiler

Sorry, it's just awkward because the paid for DLC reveals he doesn't die and changes the ending.

 

[lolpop109]

Sorry, it's just awkward because the paid for DLC reveals he doesn't die and changes the ending.

I know its unlikely I'll ever play the game because of I heard of the sham ending didn't realise it was like that though

If you where going to play that game I fell you play it at Christmas, I feel you can't play games like that now its not Christmas

 

[CT Phipps]

See Bethesda have included it in a package though. It's like Cable TV charging you hundreds of dollars for 1200 channels, 400 of which are in Portuguese, all so you can get that one channel you actually want. I can make analogies lmao

They should've let you play after the ending for free and not have people judge you for not dying.

There's definitely a lot of coulda, shoulda, woulda.

For example, Deus Ex: Human Revolution: The Director's Cut should be the one they sell with all the changes to the boss fights and The Missing Link installed. Mankind Divided also has the DLC which is inside it having been CUT as the original game was supposed to have it.

Which is why it feels half-finished.

If a company acquires an existing IP and changes the canon so much that the angers 99% of the existing fans of that IP, creates something so far from the originals that each subsequent product is worst in relation to world consistency and lore (and once again angers most of the existing fans of the "classic" IP and manages to anger many fans of the "new" IP) then why using that IP in the first place?
What's the point of buying something and using it's name and some references and then change the rest so drastically that almost nothing makes sense in the IP universe when compared to the previous works of that IP?

This is notably why I believe the Enclave and BOS being on the East Coast was a good idea. If they weren't going to use the characters and factions from Fallout 1 and 2, there's no reason to buy the Fallout IP. They could have just called it "Post-War" or "Radioactive" and it would have been different. I'm GLAD they chose to use both the Enclave (who I love) and the BOS in a new and innovative way.

You say that you like IPs to do something different from what they always did, that consistency is not necessary if it results in a good story, but then what's the point in using an already existing IP? What is stopping the creators of this new version of the IP from writing the same thing but making their own IP. The product would still have the great story and it would be consistent with their new canon and lore.

See above.

Breaking consistency is worst for the story and canon than making a new IP. There is nothing stopping creators from making a new one instead of making something stupid and then stick it in an existing IP, it makes the product suffer and the story suffer and would be much better for the author too (unless the author is lazy or sucks so much and can't come up with his own IP and has to "borrow" ideas from existing ones).

The thing is the question of what breaks consistency and lore varies greatly from the person to person. Fallout 3 was a game which sold 5 million units of which the majority of people loved. I played Fallout 1 and 2 before but it was Fallout 3 which convinced me of the series true artistic potential as well as convinced me to become the die-hard lore fan I am.

Then again, the majority of complaints about Fallout 3's lore to me have always been less about breaking canon than just not liking what they've done with it.

 

[MojaveMoproblems]

* What happened to the Nevada Rangers who seem nonexistent in Nevada?

Combined with NCR forces, ya know the big statue at Mojave Outpost? Talk to NPC's some time mate, they're the cool ones with the cool armor and helmets woah

* Why is New Reno not mentioned in New Vegas?

oh but it is boy, example time

Bruce originally hails from New Reno - but after stealing some caps from Mr. Bishop's casino, he had to hide out in Novac until the heat died down a bit. It's possible the "Mr. Bishop" he's on the run from is the son of the main character from Fallout 2, since you can sleep with the elder Mr. Bishop's wife (or daughter) and impregnate them with a child, who ultimately inherits the Bishop empire.

How is Caesar's Legion able to fight NCR when they don't use most modern weapons?

boy they use thermic lances, pretty advanced. Also, they use modern technology they just prefer to stay with the old weapons because they are reliable and make for better soldiers. Weapons they use include the anti-material rifle for christs sake.

Why has Shady Sands abandoned its spiritual beliefs to become a secular expansionist nation?

ncr took that shit over mate

Why did they change the Vaults by making them social experiments?
Why would the Vaults make social experiments AFTER a nuclear war?

Vault Tec wanted to test the results while they themselves were in a vault my dude, they were just interested in learning more about how hewmans work. At least I think, I'm not 100 percent certain about this part so if I'm wrong please correct me. Also, their only chance where they wouldn't get shunned for performing their experiments is if the entire civilization as we know it got bloown the fuck up.


my boi phipps, you cause a lot of stir here on NMA, that's pretty cool mate

 

[a721402]

There's definitely a lot of coulda, shoulda, woulda.

For example, Deus Ex: Human Revolution: The Director's Cut should be the one they sell with all the changes to the boss fights and The Missing Link installed. Mankind Divided also has the DLC which is inside it having been CUT as the original game was supposed to have it.

Which is why it feels half-finished.



This is notably why I believe the Enclave and BOS being on the East Coast was a good idea. If they weren't going to use the characters and factions from Fallout 1 and 2, there's no reason to buy the Fallout IP. They could have just called it "Post-War" or "Radioactive" and it would have been different. I'm GLAD they chose to use both the Enclave (who I love) and the BOS in a new and innovative way.



See above.



The thing is the question of what breaks consistency and lore varies greatly from the person to person. Fallout 3 was a game which sold 5 million units of which the majority of people loved. I played Fallout 1 and 2 before but it was Fallout 3 which convinced me of the series true artistic potential as well as convinced me to become the die-hard lore fan I am.

Then again, the majority of complaints about Fallout 3's lore to me have always been less about breaking canon than just not liking what they've done with it.

Except you are not a die hard fan, you just a tourist of this series, as you only consider this series is about power fantasy and violence, claim to respect the classic one yet show otherwise by saying something like lore consistency is not important, if you ever really die hard fan of something, you are a die hard fan of late bethesda game, which we already know are all about power fantasy, and Fallout as a series is not just about power fantasy.

 

[CT Phipps]

Except you are not a die hard fan, you just a tourist of this series, as you only consider this series is about power fantasy and violence, claim to respect the classic one yet show otherwise by saying something like lore consistency is not important, if you ever really die hard fan of something, you are a die hard fan of late bethesda game, which we already know are all about power fantasy, and Fallout as a series is not just about power fantasy.

Ah yes, I'm sorry, I didn't realize you were the gatekeeper to determine who is a real fan or not.

Also, as much as I love Fallout 3, 1 and 2 are still on my top ten favorite games ever list.

I even freely admit Fallout 3 has got shit on New Reno.

 

[Risewild]

This is notably why I believe the Enclave and BOS being on the East Coast was a good idea. If they weren't going to use the characters and factions from Fallout 1 and 2, there's no reason to buy the Fallout IP. They could have just called it "Post-War" or "Radioactive" and it would have been different. I'm GLAD they chose to use both the Enclave (who I love) and the BOS in a new and innovative way.

And that would be what they should have done. A new IP with new name for the Enclave and for the Brotherhood of Steel. They gained nothing besides not have to work as much creatively to make a background for why their IP is a wasteland and come up with names for things.

Fallout 3 sold 5 million copies but the majority did not "love" the game, the majority liked the game. There is a difference.

For example Fallout New Vegas on Steam always had more people playing it than Fallout 3. Just this month there has been 5,066 players for FNV and only 820 for Fallout 3 and during the existence of both games Fallout New Vegas has always maintained a much higher number of players that still play the game compared to Fallout 3.

Comparison Graph:
http://steamcharts.com/cmp/22370,22380#All
Now if canon and lore doesn't matter and Fallout 3 is so loved, how come it has always been beaten by an incomplete game, using the same engine, made in just 18 months (Fallout 3 took 48 months to make) and had a more "boring" setting (a desert will never be as interesting to explore than a ruined capital of the US of A) but that follows canon better?

There are also 476 pages of mods available for Fallout 3 on the Nexus network and there are 585 pages of mods for Fallout New Vegas (each page contains 30 mods, 30x109=3,270), so there are 3,270 more mods for Fallout New Vegas than Fallout 3. Fallout 3 only got 19 new mods made this year/month vs 66 new mods made this year/month for Fallout New Vegas (which helps showing which game people still love to make mods for).

Now imagine if Bethesda had followed the canon, Fallout 3 would probably be even or maybe higher in numbers of players and modders than Fallout New Vegas still now.

 

[a721402]

Ah yes, I'm sorry, I didn't realize you were the gatekeeper to determine who is a real fan or not.

Also, as much as I love Fallout 3, 1 and 2 are still on my top ten favorite games ever list.

I even freely admit Fallout 3 has got shit on New Reno.

Excpet I am not one and it's not only judge by my preference, the common recognition about a die hard fan is a person not just love a series very much, but also have read/played the original and have actual respect to it, and will never say something like lore consistency is not important than story.
To a die hard fan, lore is backbone of the series he love, and you clearly are not this kind of "fan".
And by the way, claims like "the classic still on my top ten list" won't support you in this argument about if you ever really a fan of this series.
Since we already know you will never play the classic if not because we bring up it in many arguments, and how you react to it already tell us what you love is never Fallout as a whole.

 

[naossano]

About IP ownership. Videogames being made by several people won't necessary mean that all of them are the author. You can sum it up to the designers and writters, which are a fraction of the whole team. And have a legal basis on what those people would agree to on the broad sense, on what could be done with the IP or not and how they would share the benefits, so it wouldn't be necessary to reach all of them all the time. But the author rights are also poorly handled in other mediums on the USA and some other countries, like movies.

The IP being owned by a company means that you got an idea, wrote a story, but are forbidden to write the sequel or have any involvement on the sequel, no matter how those new ideas could enhance your saga while being faithfull to its core vision, while at the same time, a company made of people who do not share your vision would end up making a sequel or several sequels that could severely contradict your vision, and you couldn't say anything about it. Not dwelling into who made it legally possible, but it doesn't make it right in any case.

About the canon thing. The question of the thread is not if Fallout 3 IS canon or not, with is mostly the concern of Bethesda lawyers, but if it SHOULD be canon, which means that everyone opinion on the matter could potentially be relevant.

 

[CT Phipps]

I should probably state there's a difference in my mind between the benefit of retcons and a loose adaptation of continuity versus direct errors.

Fallout 3 made an excellent use of explanations in the game for those willing to look for them as to how events had come there. They explained why the Enclave was on the East Coast, why the Brotherhood was acting the way it was, and also provided an explanation for why there were Super Mutants. The explanations may not have worked but they were there.

There's mistakes in Fallout: New Vegas for long time fans too. Like the fact the Nevada Rangers are not in Nevada but California despite a statue of them. Like the fact Reno is Nevada but no one mentions this either or its relationship to Vegas, just an Easter Egg about the Bishop family (and a welcome one). However, they're relatively minor ones and allow the story to flow. The Rangers being gone is handwaved but it doesn't matter because the world is otherwise consistent.

Fallout 4, by contrast, irritates me not because it violates "canon" but because it has BAD STORYTELLING which I draw a difference between. What's wrong with T-60 power armor and X-01 Power armor in the game isn't the fact it's a violation of canon. I don't care about that. It's the fact there's no in-story reason for it. It exists SOLELY for the purposes of facillitating game mechanics and draws you from the game. It's a bit like "Another settlement needs your help." It takes you out of the game because it's purely there to facilitate game mechanics versus being actual story content.

The difference between the two, to me, is the fact The Vaults being social experiments changes canon but it's there to tell a more interesting story.

Excpet I am not one and it's not only judge by my preference, the common recognition about a die hard fan is a person not just love a series very much, but also have read/played the original and have actual respect to it, and will never say something like lore consistency is not important than story.
To a die hard fan, lore is backbone of the series he love, and you clearly are not this kind of "fan".

Yeah, I deal a lot with people on the Star Wars Literature forums on Theforce.net who hate anything by Disney because it isn't close enough to the books. These people are hated by the people who only liked the original movies and didn't consider the EU canon. For me, I'd rather NOT be that kind of fan. I prefer to be a fan who actually likes Fallout's releases.

And by the way, claims like "the classic still on my top ten list" won't support you in this argument about if you ever really a fan of this series.
Since we already know you will never play the classic if not because we bring up it in many arguments, and how you react to it already tell us what you love is never Fallout as a whole.

I just replayed it a month ago. :rolls eyes:

http://www.nma-fallout.com/threads/well-im-replaying-fallout-1-now-thanks-to-you.207296/

BTW, Fallout 1 is inferior to Fallout 2. I love Fallout 1 but Fallout 2 is still just so much MORE in terms of what you can do and experience.

Plus the Enclave is awesome.

 

[a721402]

Yeah, I deal a lot with people on the Star Wars Literature forums on Theforce.net who hate anything by Disney because it isn't close enough to the books. These people are hated by the people who only liked the original movies and didn't consider the EU canon. For me, I'd rather NOT be that kind of fan. I prefer to be a fan who actually likes Fallout's releases.



I just replayed it a month ago. :rolls eyes:

http://www.nma-fallout.com/threads/well-im-replaying-fallout-1-now-thanks-to-you.207296/

BTW, Fallout 1 is inferior to Fallout 2. I love Fallout 1 but Fallout 2 is still just so much MORE in terms of what you can do and experience.

Plus the Enclave is awesome.

Then perhaps you shouldn't make such bold claim, saying you are in the same caliber of long time fans while you are not can be quite insulting to some people.

And there is nothing wrong to prefer one over another, but claim one is inferior to another? We already beating the dead horse too much.

 

[CT Phipps]

Then perhaps you shouldn't make such bold claim, saying you are in the same caliber of long time fans while you are not can be quite insulting to some people.

Yes, I'm not a long time fan despite decades of love of the franchise including playing Fallout 2 when it first came out because I like Fallout 3 more. I'm sorry, I find that very offensive. It's also a ridiculous opinion.

And there is nothing wrong to prefer one over another, but claim one is inferior to another? We already beating the dead horse too much.

People say Fallout 3 is inferior all the time here. What's the difference? Oh yes, you agree with that opinion. I'm okay with people saying I'm wrong. It's after all, only a game.

 

[Prone Squanderer]

I should probably state there's a difference in my mind between the benefit of retcons and a loose adaptation of continuity versus direct errors.

Fallout 3 made an excellent use of explanations in the game for those willing to look for them as to how events had come there. They explained why the Enclave was on the East Coast, why the Brotherhood was acting the way it was, and also provided an explanation for why there were Super Mutants. The explanations may not have worked but they were there.

The game made an excellent use of explanations but they might not have worked, but because the explanations are there it's all ok?

There's mistakes in Fallout: New Vegas for long time fans too. Like the fact the Nevada Rangers are not in Nevada but California despite a statue of them.

Those Rangers were merged with the NCR, as pointed out before.

www.fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Ranger_Unification_Treaty

the fact Reno is Nevada but no one mentions this either or its relationship to Vegas, just an Easter Egg about the Bishop family (and a welcome one).

How is lightly referencing Reno a mistake? Besides various characters reference it. Maybe not the similarities to Vegas but that's hardly a mistake.

However, they're relatively minor ones and allow the story to flow. The Rangers being gone is handwaved but it doesn't matter because the world is otherwise consistent..

It doesn't matter because the world is consistent, yet canon isn't important.

 

[CT Phipps]

The game made an excellent use of explanations but they might not have worked, but because the explanations are there it's all ok?

I think they worked in Fallout 3. Other people disagree...and they are wrong.

Those Rangers were merged with the NCR, as pointed out before.

www.fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Ranger_Unification_Treaty

Yeah, it's an awful explanation that doesn't in any way make sense. WHERE ARE THEY? They all move to California? Where are the places they were, the people they knew, their former bases, and so on. Their absence save as NCR mooks is notable.

But it's okay because we don't care about the Rangers since the rest of the story is so good.

How is lightly referencing Reno a mistake? Besides various characters reference it. Maybe not the similarities to Vegas but that's hardly a mistake.

Reno as a gigantic city in Nevada should have a huge affect on Vegas and its development.

It doesn't matter because the world is consistent, yet canon isn't important.

Yes, exactly. Canon doesn't matter because you can change it if the story is good enough to paper over it.

 

[TorontoReign]

The complaints leveled against the New Vegas story/lore are garbage. Strictly speaking there is nothing in Fallout 3 (or 4 while we are at it why not) that is beyond saving lore wise, but the current owners - which are the problem - don't give a shit if the canon is fucked up. They would rather pull off some insignificant plot beat that throws away all established lore for a gag that goes nowhere. Or tell the fans to not give a shit what the canon says because it's a silly game with mutants and ghouls. Maybe they would like to hold all copies of their newest release until a day before launch so the reviews can't get out. Or get rid of the last remnants of the original Fallout series - Ron Perlman. Oh he was the fucking news reporter on the tv at the start of F4 that you can hardly hear? Thanks Todd! They can just do what they want as long as it's epic and cool.

The canon is something that nerds like us can argue and complain about on message boards so Bethesda can shat out three sentences referencing minor plot points from other games to tease us along until the next soulless sequel. Look we referenced NCR from the old games! It's like the originals! It's really only there to immerse you in the world lest the paper thin facade crumble under all the bugs and bullshit. I advise any of you that are still bothered by all this to find a new series to emotionally invest in only for it to repeat the same inevitable decline. Marvel in the new age folks. To help with this psychological disturbance I suggest creating your own fanon to masturbate over. This type of canon can allow you to possibly enjoy the NuFallout series while detaching yourself from the harm it does to your psyche due to it's inferior stock. Just take solace in the fact that the gaming community at large finally got what we were saying the whole time about Bethesda.

 

[Deleted member 93956]

If they weren't going to use the characters and factions from Fallout 1 and 2, there's no reason to buy the Fallout IP. They could have just called it "Post-War" or "Radioactive" and it would have been different. I'm GLAD they chose to use both the Enclave (who I love) and the BOS in a new and innovative way

"New and innovative way" yeah, space nazis and white knights in power armor. Some FPS have better factions (Helgast and Gears).
Fallout isn't about the smutsntghoulrobotbosenclaveradiationnukacola that the Bethesda's fallout fans gobble so much. It's about an RPG adventure centered in the GURPS aka SPECIAL, Skills and Perks system. It's a humane story in a different post-apoc world, for one you don't go to scavenge pork n'beans to the ruins of New York and shoot people on the way; humanity has rebuilt and overcome hardship, and yet they are damned to repeat the same mistakes as the people who started the Great War.
In the setting you are, you can make a difference if you want to. War never changes, men do; through the roads they walk.
That's how you get a 20min slideshow at the end.
That's why I don't enjoy Fo4 and pretty cold to Fo3. It's just another generic post-apoc game (the apocalypse "just" happened) with a texture pack of marketable stuff from Fallout.
Now, you can bring back those factions if you do something notable with them that's not "open for your debate". No, the New Cegas Supermutants suffered a great loss when they lost the Master. Some have gone crazy (not cannibalistic) some tried to replace him (Dog/God) some just have different perspectives (Lily, Marcus). Dead Money, dialogue, eyes.
The BOS is the logic conclusion to their ideology, and it's 99% inevitable. "I Can Make You Care", "Eyesight to the blind"
The Enclave is mostly a honorary mention that doesn't get much in the way. It still shows how there were good people there and how they lived until the Chosen 1 screwed them up. "For Lang Auld Syne"
Ghouls aren't old scrotums that become zombies in a blink. Every portrayal of ghouls (Searchlight is to not retcon Bethesda back and is a deal with ferals)
NCR and Legion. Y'know.

Would you enjoy a Korean 1000$ Budget version of Disney Land becouse they nicked all the costumes and scenery?

Everyone enjoys mindless fun as much as you do. Just not in our franchise.