What could've replaced intelligent deathclaws

Ugly Kid said:
I'm bringing this back because I changed my mind about talking deathclaws, and I'd also like to start the conversation again.

I'm thinking about this right now mostly because of Avellone's Fallout Apocrypha. He gave his reasoning for why he disliked them and I really disagreed with his points. He said that he hates regretting killing a creature if it can be "saved". I've never thought that I could save all the primal deathclaws I encountered because of the intelligent ones. I see the two as completely separate breeds, even if they can inter-breed.

He also said he doesn't think talking animals fit in Fallout. And while I disliked the psyker Molerats from Fallout 2, I generally think that talking animals can be done just fine in Fallout. Maybe make the deathclaws' voices really deep and gravelly, and give them the speech pattern of apes from the new planet of the apes films.

And it's not like I want them to be as numerous as other intelligent species in Fallout, just keeping them here and there is nice. They appear in Fallout 2, Nuka-Break, and Fallout Empire, and while not exactly how I would've done it the last example I still think that having sparse appearances like this are good.
Click to expand...
I hate how everyone makes Avellone out to be the end all be all of Fallout lore.
 
TorontoReign said:
I hate how everyone makes Avellone out to be the end all be all of Fallout lore.
Click to expand...
To clarify I am a big fan of his work but...

Like yeah, he wrote majority of Fallout 2, Van Buren, New Vegas DLCs, and a large portion of the main game... but he himself said Tim Cain is the god of Fallout. And besides there were so many other writers for the classics and New Vegas. He didn't even work on the first game. So while I respect his opinions I don't see everything in the Fallout Bible as canon.
 
I feel the same. Hairy Deathclaws get way too much shit too considering how dumb a lot of easter eggs are in Fallout to begin with. I want hairy deathclaws in a Bethesda game then I will buy it.
 
Ugly Kid said:
I don't see everything in the Fallout Bible as canon.
Click to expand...

I don't. Sometimes the answers seem to be made up on the fly. I saw Centaurs were just brushed over in the latest ' Bible ' part 2. No mention of floaters, so I guess they developed from those floaty turds some people do. The Centaurs in FO3 were a joke, just lobbed in for the sake of it. If you don't want to waste ammo just get off.

I got told he was very generous that Chris Have a loan guy.
 
MCA probably had one of his con whores write all the lore while he was painting their toes.
 
The Fallout Bible is useful for insight into what the developers were thinking while developing the first two games, but not so much as a literal Bible of Fallout lore.
 
TorontoReign said:
MCA probably had one of his con whores write all the lore while he was painting their toes.
Click to expand...

You are so irreverent, toe painting and hairy deathclaws lol.

Iprovidelittlepianos said:
The Fallout Bible is useful for insight into what the developers were thinking while developing the first two games,
Click to expand...

Well yeah. I don't take it all too seriously, after all, It's only a game.
 
That word describes me well I guess. Drop by Redacted if you are bored we are planning a stakeout.
 
I think I'm in a middle-ground camp compared ot a lot of people when it come to talking deathclaws. I really liked them in Fallout 2 (and for that matter I liked the talking molerats, though wish a bit mroe had been done with them). They're weird but not too weird, they feel logical to me, they have interesting characters. It's certainly not a concept that would be out of place in a 50s B-movie. I think it's a cool idea.

But what I do not like is the idea of them expanding into the wider world. This would just feel a faint bit ridiculous to me, to have these talking chameleons integrated into polite society, and would just make everything they touch feel unserious. And if they continue, it starts to verge into furry territory.

I also really like the idea of one offs in the Fallout world - it's such an expansive world where so much insane shit has happened pre and post War that there are a lot of things localized to only one region or location, that end up being dead ends, shadows and legends that exist for only a moment before passing into folklore. I think that's really neat. Plus it adds an additional twinge of tragedy to them.

But take what I say with a grain of salt, because I also like the talking molerats in Klamath and Gecko. My main problem with them is that they didn't do enough with them.
 
69752-1598227678-2077452773.jpeg
 
Hardboiled Android said:
I think I'm in a middle-ground camp compared ot a lot of people when it come to talking deathclaws. I really liked them in Fallout 2 (and for that matter I liked the talking molerats, though wish a bit mroe had been done with them). They're weird but not too weird, they feel logical to me, they have interesting characters. It's certainly not a concept that would be out of place in a 50s B-movie. I think it's a cool idea.

But what I do not like is the idea of them expanding into the wider world. This would just feel a faint bit ridiculous to me, to have these talking chameleons integrated into polite society, and would just make everything they touch feel unserious. And if they continue, it starts to verge into furry territory.

I also really like the idea of one offs in the Fallout world - it's such an expansive world where so much insane shit has happened pre and post War that there are a lot of things localized to only one region or location, that end up being dead ends, shadows and legends that exist for only a moment before passing into folklore. I think that's really neat. Plus it adds an additional twinge of tragedy to them.

But take what I say with a grain of salt, because I also like the talking molerats in Klamath and Gecko. My main problem with them is that they didn't do enough with them.
Click to expand...
I do like the idea of zaney things flashing for a moment then becoming folklore but I don't see why we can't have that and still have talking deathclaws here and there. I also don't want them to be integrated fully into society though. I'd just want around a dozen colonies within or around the Core Region, I'd say that's fair.
 
Ugly Kid said:
I do like the idea of zaney things flashing for a moment then becoming folklore but I don't see why we can't have that and still have talking deathclaws here and there. I also don't want them to be integrated fully into society though. I'd just want around a dozen colonies within or around the Core Region, I'd say that's fair.
Click to expand...
Well if they are a real, true people - one with a real history that is able to socially reproduce their way of life - then in some measure they must cease to be this oddball flash in the pan, they become a people, they become a part of history.

Moreover, if they become a permanent fixture, the "Wow" factor sort of wears off, with just leaves us with the silliness. And I don't think they would really add much to the setting, other than "Remember talking deathclaws??"

Finally, from a lore perspective, Talking Deathclaws were explicitly created with FEV, and things created with FEV really should be sterile.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top