Tesla's 'Death Ray'

[Brother None]

And they always tried to explain shit with the current scientific standard.

Uh, no they didn't. Again, Incredible Shrinking Man. Them. No scientific standard whatsoever.

 

[Sander]

Hm, you make a good point, but I'm not convinced. Main reason - Americans clung to their positive outlook even after the nuclear scare was taken to a new level with the Sputnik launch. Their attitude towards the war changed in sense that they became aware of its looming likelihood and acknowledged the fact that they might not win it, or at least that a victory would come at a tremendous cost. Yet even with such grim prospects their optimism didn't falter, as they seemed to believe that with proper preparations, their civilization and way of life could be quickly rebuilt after a nuclear war.

This typically American optimism in regard to a very grim issue is reflected in various fallout shelter ads and handbooks that were omnipresent in 1950s and 1960s. These materials typically show a happy American family enjoying the same comfort in their shelter as they enjoyed in their pre-war home, completely unperturbed with the nuclear carnage that's going on outside. For example, this handbook is from 1962, the year when nuclear scare approached its climax with the Cuban missile crisis, yet it's rife with exactly the same kind of light-heartedness that permeates the Vault-Tec ads in Fallout. It's because of this that I think Fallout is more inspired by late '50s and early '60s than by early-to-mid '50s.

The issues of ill-preparedness is reasonably easy to explain. First off, the reason why so many didn't respond to the sirens and take shelter in the Vault in time is because of the cry wolf effect. This effect inevitably begins to occur even after a few "false alarms". I can personally attest to that, as during the war in Croatia there was a period when air raid sirens sounded on an almost daily basis here in Zagreb. After nothing happened the first few times (or rather, nothing that put my family in immediate jeopardy), we just started to ignore them, even though we were very much aware there was a real war going on out there.

Secondly, Americans (real-life Americans, not Fallout Americans) were never properly prepared for a nuclear war, not even when tensions between USSR and USA were at their worst. Though press was full of ads for fallout shelters and other equipment that supposedly guaranteed survival, I'm pretty certain most Americans would still end up relying on the ol' Duck and Cover method if shit hit the fan. Public shelters, though solid protection against conventional air raids, were hopelessly inadequate against nukes, as they didn't stock nearly enough supplies for the number of people they were expected to house, nor did they even possess adequate air filtering. Obviously, they were never intended to save the population of America, but only to instill them with a false sense of security. The haphazard nature of the Vault project makes sense in light of that... or, if you go by what is revealed about Vaults in Fallout 2, they weren't even shelters to begin with, but a sinister social experiment under the guise of shelters.

Yes, I thought of all that. So, as I said, the only definite answer can come from one of the main devs, really.

Vox: for fuck's sake, man, did you read anything here? Science! is applicable within the established boundaries of canon. Retinal scanners, for instance, don't exactly require vacuum tubing, nor do any of the other examples you mentioned. Just because everything is solved using computers *now* doesn't mean in any way that that's the case in the Fallout universe.

Also, The Incredible Shrinking Man is awesome. They're supposedly making a remake of it.

 

[Vox]

I aggree.
The car add in F1 even proudly announced the lack of computers (or was it electronics at all, can't remember correctly) in the used car.

But I already said some post before that it's pretty much possible to build certain devices with alternative technology, but you said it's bullshit.

But I'm happy to see that you understand what I mean.

 

[Sander]

I aggree.
The car add in F1 even proudly announced the lack of computers (or was it electronics at all, can't remember correctly) in the used car.

But I already said some post before that it's pretty much possible to build certain devices with alternative technology, but you said it's bullshit.

I did what-where now?

 

[Brother None]

Also, The Incredible Shrinking Man is awesome. They're supposedly making a remake of it.

Really? Can't imagine that working.

Remember, the reason a film like the Incredible Shrinking Man worked was because there was no necessary call for suspended disbelief, and you kind of get that spirit from it even now. There's no need to explain anything that's going on, despite the fact that even a basically educated modern-day viewer will soon realise the film is breaking some major laws of physics (and logic).

I don't see the plot working in a modern-day film. Too much postmodern thinking unleashed on it would just make it an overly explained and thus stupid. I hate forced suspended disbelief, hapy-zany suspended disbelief is much better. For an example; the Hulk's backstory in the new Hulk movie really sucked.

 

[Vox]

There are many ways to create certain effects, not just with that what WE call conventional

On page 2 of this thread.

You haven't dismissed the idea instantly in the direct answer but you dismissed it with not paying attention to certain stuff I said.

Same with the missile. I said HYPOTHETICALY and shit like that all the time. You seem to only pick that where you can complain instead of picking stuff an acknowledging it, what would make a discussion much better. Simply ignoring correct things causes chaos and leads into misunderstandings in the further discussion.

 

[Talisien]

Summary of this thread:

Vox: I'm hijacking this thread to say:Big-ass nukes COULD be in FO3, I haven't found a reason they can't.

Sander: There's nothing in FO canon that says they should be there, so they shouldn't.

Vox: Bullshit!

Sander: Bullshit on your Bullshit!!


Vox:
Your point in this thread seems to be that anything that isn't already stated in FO canon and was plausible in the 50's is fair game for FO3. That's fine as far as it goes, but remember that the FO setting is more about the atmosphere than the tech.

Sander:
Your point in this thread seems to be that if something contradicts established canon, it is bad and should be kept as far from FO3 as possible. That's fine, but remember that just because something was not directly stated or obviously implied in an earlier game doesn't mean it CONTRADICT'S canon, it just isn't COVERED by canon.

Vox and Sander both:
You both have good points in your arguments, but you also are both too tied up in them at this point, too emotionally invested. Neither of you will ever get the other to come around to your own point of view. You have been trying for four pages worth, and it hasn't happened yet. If Rosh were handy (BTW: where has he been, anyway? I'm missing his ass chewings, they were a great read...) he'd probably have ranted both of you into submission by now. Either that, or this would be a three-way argument. Whatever.

What I'm trying to say, in my own bumbling and incompetent way, is that you are both getting to the point where your original points are being completely lost. You're getting down to arguing about your argument about your argument about an idea for use of ICBM's in FO3. That's just a bit silly, IMO. Can't we all just go back to the good old days of bitching about Bethesda? Because let's face it: whatever they do will most likely be the thing least palatable to any true FO fan, and that's something truly worth getting mad about, not wether an ICBM could happen in the FO world.

Oh, and about the nuke in the Cathedral: wasn't there something in the Bible about the Master bringing it with him from the military base?

 

[Sander]

On page 2 of this thread.

You haven't dismissed the idea instantly in the direct answer but you dismissed it with not paying attention to certain stuff I said.

Same with the missile. I said HYPOTHETICALY and shit like that all the time. You seem to only pick that where you can complain instead of picking stuff an acknowledging it, what would make a discussion much better. Simply ignoring correct things causes chaos and leads into misunderstandings in the further discussion.

*sigh*
Taking a quote out of context (the context being a discussion relative to Fallout *canon* and *setting*) doesn't work, Vox. The discussion was about whether it would fit in Fallout canon, saying 'hypothetically' about a *fictional* universe is completely useless, as I've also stated before, since Fallout's universe is a fictional universe. Hypothetically speaking I could fit in a giant Chewbacca who eats half the world.

In other words, no, Vox, I didn't dismiss 'alternative technology', I dismissed alternative technology or explanations unfitting for the Fallout universe.

Really? Can't imagine that working.

Remember, the reason a film like the Incredible Shrinking Man worked was because there was no necessary call for suspended disbelief, and you kind of get that spirit from it even now. There's no need to explain anything that's going on, despite the fact that even a basically educated modern-day viewer will soon realise the film is breaking some major laws of physics (and logic).

I don't see the plot working in a modern-day film. Too much postmodern thinking unleashed on it would just make it an overly explained and thus stupid. I hate forced suspended disbelief, hapy-zany suspended disbelief is much better. For an example; the Hulk's backstory in the new Hulk movie really sucked.

Yep, I agree. I really doubt they'll make something decent out of it, rather, I think they'll try to go for comedic effect instead of the somewhat more serious approach of the original one. Supposedly, Eddy Murphy will be the Incredible Shrinking Man now. Psch.

Talisien: Have you been paying attention at all? I've given rather numerous examples of why ICBMs wouldn't *fit* canon, and why I feel they don't carry the right atmosphere. In fact, the discussion didn't ever revolve around whether they were already present or not, since bombers or the like weren't present in Fallout either.
So, no, your attempted summary of this thread doesn't hold any water, and is especially useless since the 'discussion' with Vox pretty much ended two pages ago.