So I need help clarifying some lore...

Todd Howard said in an interview that they went through the original source material and the Fallout Bible when they were making Fallout 3. Emil also commented on the Duck and Cover forums that he had read it (more than once) when he was invited to work on Fallout 3.

Fallout 3 and Fallout New Vegas also contain things that were previously only mentioned in the document (and nowhere else). Both Vault 106 and Vault 34 exist in those games and they follow the information from the Fallout Bible

There is no one from Bethesda that ever said that document was or wasn't canon.
Since some things from the Fallout Bible were used in games after Bethesda acquired the IP. I would say it is canon (as long it doesn't contradict anything in the games released after Bethesda got the Fallout IP).

 

I'd like to point out that if you are looking in to Bethesda's canon, note that in various newspaper headings in Fallout 3, they seem to follow Avellone's timeline

 

When it comes to lore and information from outside the main serires(1/2/3/NV/4), I consider everything to be soft-canon, which is to say everything is true until proven otherwise by the current rights holder of the series.

As risewild and jogre have said, Bethesda seems to be following along with what the Fallout Bible has stated, and though I've heard people say it isn't canon, I have yet to see Bethesda say the same.

 

So it's just a rumor that was spread around?

What about them saying only the important events of Tactics being canon, is that also just a rumor or did they actually say that?

 

Emil said something about that to Paweł "Ausir" Dembowski (the founder of The Vault gamepedia *mentioned below*):

 

Could you go into the specific details of the lore bit you mentioned? What's this GNN holodisk and all that?

 

Welcome to Fallout lore where the continuity is skewed, the years are made up (again), and the developers retcon every detail to fit into their poor design choices. One of the few games not made by EA that follows the same design choices of taking an established story and decimating it to maximize profits at the cost of their fan base and market share. (DERP)

I think we are all well past trying to define any reasonable details from the now defunct concept of Fallout. Attempts to connect the original titles with the modern releases will only yield long winded rants, and the odd forum user to spew a bunch of head cannon in an effort to make everything think they are "smart". Much like this:

However to actually give this question a shot:
I always thought that the mystery of the "resource war" as it was more often described as a chaotic event in human history was a better approach rather than flatly outlining what is or was the event. Granted factoids were revealed over time pertaining to the war, however realistically the approach the average survivor of the wasteland considered it just a catalyst to the end of civilization.

In situations likes this I thought it was better to leave the entirety of the war to remain obscured in the past with only rumor and assumptions to identify the history of it. At least then the populations the player encounters would seem more "realistic?" confined within their various situations vs. "I know things yes, I will now provide the requested information because I am programmed to!"

Sometimes the lore can be a detractor to the overall impression the game environment has on a player. While confusing history around a specific subject can be great for discussion; having a developer identify 2 specifically different version of lore or histories can yield deleterious results overall.

 

I like playing history detective though...which is technically what Indiana Jones does...hmmm.

 

The Galaxy News Network transcription disk is a holodisk in Fallout 2. It is found in the Sierra Army's Depot and talks about USA events before the war (like USA getting access to the last remaining oil source and the annexation of Canada for example) and also talks about the declaration of war by China (and the Alaska invasion).

IIRC Chris Avellone said that the information on that disk isn't canon, and the stuff there had been altered by soldiers for whatever reason.

 

That's... kinda dumb. Avellone doesn't typically shoot himself in the foot like that. So you're telling me that historical information inside a game that cannot possibly be propaganda is "untrue?" Because jarheads "modified" it? Why would soldiers do that? Again, shooting himself in the foot.

As far as I'm concerned that holotape is canon. Especially when Fallout 3 CONFIRMS said information as canon. What the hell?


Edit: Also, it's pretty funny you're still using my quote.

 

Acknowledging 3 as canon breaks the continuity beyond repair. It's best to just ignore it.

Also MCA is amazing and all but he really does make some dumb assertions sometimes.

 

He says why, on the Fallout Bible:

 

So basically everything that made Broken Hills fun and great. He didn't mention the airforce pilot that fell asleep for 150+ years in the uranium caves funnily enough.

Must be a Wild Wasteland encounter. *shoot self in foot*

 

I take everything in Fallout 1 as cannon; and everything after it as—unfortunate. A few things and most major locations in Fallout 2 are not too egregious.

I take all of the Special encounters in both games as having been strange events in the wasteland... but with none of them verifiable.

The Bethesda games are like bad fan-fiction to me; as by someone who doesn't understand the setting, and who writes for a different audience. New Vegas... is like extrapolation—on that [bad] fan fiction, by an informed author doing their best to make it blend with the existing content... as if Tolkien's son tried to write new stories that followed the mangled cannon of the Peter Jackson films instead of the books.

 

I don't agree with omitting the old Ghoul's home... I found Typhon to be a very in-keeping, and somewhat credible character, that fit well in the overall setting.

 

Yeah, but I find it strange he skipped over the 150 year old pilot and instead mentioned the... old ghoul's retirement home?

 

I don't really see the need to excise anything from Broken Hills. It's not like those aspects have any bearing on anything. I guess he felt ashamed? I don't really know the development backstory here. It didn't seem egregious when I played it, just out of focus. Maybe it was supposed to be funny? Either way it seems a rather trifling thing considering where the series has since ended up.