Should Fallout 3 be considered canon?

Since BethSoft has confirmed its canon, it is technically canon.

I consider Fallout 1, 2, Tactics, 3(not much. Only the whole main quest) and New Vegas as canon. Fallout 4 is entirely not canon in my head canon.
 
I consider FO3 as much of a canon Fallout game as I consider FO Tactics to be canon. Some of it is canon to me, some of it isn't. I consider the core story of FO3 and most of it's side quests to be canon but some of the really stupid things are not, like Little Lamplight or what they did with the GECK to name the most extreme examples.
 
I don't see the point of having Fallout 3 canon, it adds very little to the lore and fucks up a lot of the preexisting story.
Is it really important to your headcanon that the BoS made it to Washington, where they'll effectively have no affect on the actual story which takes place on the West? Is it really important that there exists a small republic lead by a man named Dave, even though he'll affect nothing important whatsoever? What's the point of Fallout 3?
 
I pretend fallout 3 is set in a different universe than 1 2 nv and 4 and 4 is set in a different universe than 3. So you've got three alternative cannons to choose from but with an obvious choice...
 
I never see how Fallout 3 could have added much to the canon at all. The distance from the main plot and the lack of a solid connection to any of the previous games just looks to me like a "adds nothing, takes away nothing" situation. Could be better, could be worse, if you get my meaning. The game doesn't ruin lore but it doesn't add any either.

But what do I know about lore? Trying to understand the complexity behind written worlds in RPGs have rarely managed to do anything beyond bore or confuse me, and Fallout 3 was the first Fallout game I played. From my eyes, it's a neat little game with average writing and solid gameplay. Trying to look from the shoes of a core fan, it's insubstantial and irrelevant.

Unlike Fallout 4, it never seems to takes any direct potshots at pre-existing background, so it can be canon or non-canon for all I care.
 
I'm going with FO3 and Fo4 being movies that the people in the NCR see in theaters. They have familiar factions, lots of action, fucking aliens, well worth the 3 cap admission.
 
Doomsdayprepper69 said:
Yes in my opinion because the story and setting was brilliant
Click to expand...
Fallout 3?

image.gif











Wait you're serious?
 
Well, of course. It is canon and will never not be since as much as we'd like to be, NMA is not in charge of what is or what is not canon within the Fallout universe. Bethesda is.

Whether it should however is up to debate. Personally, I have to give props to Bethesda for keeping their hands off of the Core Region/West Coast and making their own distinctive Fallout setting on the East Coast. In that regard, it makes a nice and easy continuity split. To me, Fallout 3 and 4 are in their own little continuity on the East Coast. They have their own tone, style lore and that's their thing. They do how they do. Similarly, Fallout 1,2 and New Vegas are in the other contiunity with their own tone and style. Tactics is the semi-canon border zone that both sides pick from.

Unfortunately, aspects of Fallout 3 HAVE to be canonized as they are directly referenced in New Vegas. i.e Adams Air-Force Base, General Autumn, the Hellfire Armor. There's also reference to a splinter group of the Brotherhood out East but that's vague enough that you can come to your own conclusions.
 
My 2 cents is this, FO3 is Canon, burn it with fire, and leave the ashes to the wind. That is all.
 
After replaying it for like the 7th time, I can safely say, it may be canon, but it's still one of the laziest written games I've ever played.
The main quest pits you in about 7 locations, there's about three missions that actually matter.
I didn't even do anything in the ending.

It's a very poor Fallout Game.
 
I'd say that the water purifier storyline is canon, along with the brotherhood and enclave implication.
The rest is fanfiction. But I found a way to bear these elements : the events you see are, in fact, a campfire story told by the old you, and you exaggerate or invent things to spice the story. Super mutants were in the area for two centuries, there was Jet like here and now and you convinced the enclave president to kill himself... These are things you add to your story to sound badass, but they never happened.

Like the 300 movie. Narrated by a guy who exagerates everything, which justifies the presence of monsters on the battlefield.
 
Just because you hate the canon doesn't change it. Personally I typically go for the darker endings but I don't pretend that the ghost people descended on Vegas, that both the Legion and the NCR got nuked and that the Lone Wanderer put the modified FEV into the water purifier. But here's the things, canon can change, just like it changed from f2 to f3.
 
I don't consider much from fallout 3 canon. Here's a short list of what I do consider canon:

  • Mirelurks cuz I like em
  • The Pitt
  • The brotherhood and their civil war
That'd be about it.
 
I consider Fallout 3 to be a remake of Fallout 1 and Fallout 2 so it's not really "canon" in my view. It's the start of a new universe.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top