Time between FO Games (In Fallout Timeline)

[Eternal]

I was kinda wondering why Interplay and Bethesda decided such LONG times between games in terms of the time line. I mean you'd think that after 200years more cities would have banded together to start forming a centralized government, not only that but you'd also expect some more NEW technology to come about, rather than just re-hashing the old pre-war stuff. Just look how far America has come in the last 200 years (Heck the country only existed for 232 so far!)

Do you think the time between the games is too long? Or do you think they made the right choice?

 

[rcorporon]

I didn't mind FO2 being so far from FO1, as it allowed the designers to evolve the world quite a bit.

As for FO3, even though it's only a few years since FO2, since it's on the East Coast, the time difference doesn't really mean anything. It could have happened at the same time as FO1, and aside from the BoS making even less sense, it would have been the same game, really.

 

[The Dutch Ghost]

Basically the whole world was reset again, with isolated settlements here and there despite that this is suppose to take place two hundred years after Fallout 1 right?

While it would not necessarily mean another government along the lines of the NCR, by the time Fallout 3 would start we should have seen at least something resembling an organization of unified settlements.

As for new technology, I am not sure about that, perhaps local innovations but nothing on the scales as we have had in the last sixty years, that requires larger infrastructures.

 

[Wooz]

To be honest, the game world in F3 looks like the war happened 10 years before the game takes place.

"Republic of Dave" ? "Kingdom of Tom" ? Working tech in every home?

Please.

 

[MrCaleb]

To be honest, the game world in F3 looks like the war happened 10 years before the game takes place.

"Republic of Dave" ? "Kingdom of Tom" ? Working tech in every home?

Please.

Amen