So what lore has Bethesda done gone fucked up?

eissa said:
Is Raul Tejada still consistent with the overall lore? I mean he is a damn fast pistoleros and also a ghoul.
Click to expand...
Clint Eastwood was an awesome gunman in Unforgiven and he was a grey haired old man, I'm sure there are some real world counterparts to him that prove regardless of age (and, by extension, disabilities which ghouls would experience) you can be good at shooting.
 
Izak said:
Clint Eastwood was an awesome gunman in Unforgiven and he was a grey haired old man, I'm sure there are some real world counterparts to him that prove regardless of age (and, by extension, disabilities which ghouls would experience) you can be good at shooting.
Click to expand...

so someone posted on reddit https://www.reddit.com/r/falloutlore/comments/4h3ivg/why_fo4_fucked_fallouts_lore/

at point 17;


17 : Ghouls can run/charge. Contradiction with : Fallout 1 and 2. In Fallout's lore, there are three « races » of Ghouls : Crazies, Scavengers and Mindless Ones. The only ones who went feral were the Mindless Ones or "Zombies" and they were frail, they were few, slow, they were weak and the only place I remember ever seeing them was around Necropolis. I don't even remember seeing any in Fallout 2. Why's that? Cause they've long since died off. Why? Darwinism, that's why. Survival of the fittest. And they disappeared while being protected by the crazies and scavengers, because they knew they needed protection and couldn't survive on their own longer than a single generation.

A single charge, and they'd break their legs. For how long would they be crippled ? All their life. So, logically, they don't run. It's actually a pretty important plot element in Fallout 2, as demonstrated by Lenny.

He, a medic ghoul (not a redneck zombie but an educated doctor) clearly states that Ghouls can't run. This is actually why he feels so sorry for himself and joins Fallout 2's hero, as an atonement act : he couldn't run after the hero's ancestor and help him with his quest. FO1 and 2 made a big deal of showing that Ghouls are easily scared by danger and stay away from trouble because of their fragility... they have advanced atrophy and a skeletal structure that is quite bad at even holding things in place - as we learn from the dialogue in FO2 talking with Harold, and in Fallout Tactics dialogs with the Ghouls who seek the protection of the Midwest Brotherhood of Steel. The bravest Ghouls actually enlist in the brotherhood ranks, but their agility is limited to six points and they can't run. They can only do an awkward, twisted trot.
Click to expand...

either raul is half ghoul, through his inner organ not completely rotten or he expo...
no no stracth that, the origin of ghoul itself is confusing even looking gamepedia wont help
 
Damn near all of it. The only thing off the top of my head that they haven't ruined is wanamingos. But they almost did! Thank balls they were cut from fo3
 
I kinda wish that there were Wanamingos in Fallout 3, I liked their design, shame they died out as quick as they came into existence.
 
Izak said:
shame they died out as quick as they came into existence.
Click to expand...

It's odd that's the case considering they were supposedly superior to even deathclaws. I'm sure they're not all dead... has it been confirmed by recent entries?
I wouldn't have had a problem with an appearance by them in nv.

Also when it comes to cancerous lore I feel like ghouls and super mutants get the worst of it.
 
R.Graves said:
It's odd that's the case considering they were supposedly superior to even deathclaws. I'm sure they're not all dead... has it been confirmed by recent entries?

Also when it comes to cancerous lore I feel like ghouls and super mutants get the worst of it.
Click to expand...

It was confirmed by the Fallout Bible that they were all dead. Essentially, they were very rare to begin with by the time Fallout 2 started. Yes, they can breed like deathclaws but I'm pretty sure they took a lot longer to get pregnant and such, like elves in most mythologies. So the ones you see in FO2 are pretty much the only ones, especially if you destroyed their nest, leaving them unable to recover.

I'm honestly sitting here rapping my desk with my knuckles trying to figure out if there's something they haven't screwed up. I'll get back to you on that.
 
That haven't fucked new Vegas too much. It's too recent of an entry so give them some time. I'm sure cabot house was only the beginning. Also it's been said by Chris himself that the bible ain't cannon no more. But I like to pick and choose my own cannon from it. In my fanon they aren't extinct.
 
eissa said:
so someone posted on reddit https://www.reddit.com/r/falloutlore/comments/4h3ivg/why_fo4_fucked_fallouts_lore/

at point 17;




either raul is half ghoul, through his inner organ not completely rotten or he expo...
no no stracth that, the origin of ghoul itself is confusing even looking gamepedia wont help
Click to expand...
Hi, I'm the one who wrote the text. Was on Steam though, someone pasted on Reddit.
Well, Ghouls "can" trot, as seen in Tactics, they simply decide not to because it's extremely dangerous for them. If they get crippled -which WILL happen inevitably if they decide to run, their limbs being weak and fragile-, they will stay crippled forever. For decades, maybe even centuries. A ghoul who wishes to live won't run, because of its survival instincts.
But Raul is an exception, and I think it's actually explained. If I remember correctly, he considers himself as old and useless. So, maybe he doesn't care anymore if his limbs break and stays crippled for the generations to come. In his mind, he'll die soon anyway. From hunger with his limbs broken in the middle of a desert, or from a stray bullet... He doesn't care enough to protect himself anymore. I think that Obsidian couldn't take the time to animate a walking ghoul (plus, it wouldn't make a very good companion in a first person, open world game), so they gave him a bit of backstory/personality that somehow justifies why he can run.
That's how I see it, though. Not claiming this as a fact, that's a supposition.
 
Wew, not only Bethesda fucked up the lore, but people over in FalloutLore are actively making their own headcanon to explain Bethesda's bullshit. It's literally against the definition of lore. I never, ever, needed to create my own headcanon to explain FO1 or FNV's events, since everything seemed to fit fairly well together.

EDIT:

People, there's a difference between retcon and oversight. A lot of things in Bethesda's Fallout games are straight up oversights. How do you know you are dealing with one? Because generally it's sloppy as hell and no explanation is given. Ghoul kid? Oversight from here to China. G.E.C.K. functions? Retcon to serve the plot. Running ghouls? I'm betting on oversight. Having ghouls run at you probably seemed far more interesting to Bethesda, but I wouldn't call it a "retcon".

Plus every NPC in New Vegas and Fallout 3 can run, so to call Raul "special" is far too much of a stretch. Boxcars can even get up if provoked in New Vegas, so much for the smashed legs.

Strict lore would only be possible in a game where every NPC is crafted so masterfully that they reflect precise the conditions they are in. That is: no walking Boxcars, no "can run at the same speed as the player" Easy Pete and so on.

Else we could realistically say "Easy Pete can run at the same speed as the player because of his excellent athletic condition", and that is BS to the highest level.

EDIT 2: Oh, and my favorite: fat people are not canon. There are no fat people in FO3 or New Vegas. In the near future Gizmo will be retconned to total fitness. You skinny bastard.
 
Last edited:
Get. Back. To. The. Thread. And. Keep. Criticizing. My. Favorite. Game. And. Game. Company. And get back to the original question.
 
No. I just like good controversial debates. I am not a troll. I also like starting debates. Debates are so fun.
 
Slayerite said:
Get. Back. To. The. Thread. And. Keep. Criticizing. My. Favorite. Game. And. Game. Company. And get back to the original question.
Click to expand...
A new Dragonborn has arisen. THIS WAS FORETOLD!
Slayerite said:
No. I just like good controversial debates. I am not a troll. I also like starting debates. Debates are so fun.
Click to expand...
Lol there's nothing controversial about Fallout 4 being a lazy cash grab for ultra casuals that is the lowest rated Fallout game ever made AND the lowest rated Bethesda game.
 
Anything that hasn't been firmly established is free up in the air. So Bethesda has every right to make any new lore as they see fit, and at the same time trying to keep their lore consistent with the originals. F:NV is an indirect sequel, and since F4 takes place 6 years after F:NV, it has pretty much established F:NV into its own side canon, they are still separate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top