Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Fallout pretty much died after Fallout 2. The new franchise has very little to do with the original game(s).

It's important to understand what Fallout went through before Bethesda even got their hands on it:

By the time there were plans for a Fallout 3, Western CRPGs had become a niche as the "RPG" label had become widely associated with "Action RPGs" like Diablo and RPG mechanics (skill progression systems really) had started popping up in many genres.

So rather than funding another RPG, Interplay decided to test the waters in a more promising genre: tactical action games. Because they lacked any experience with the genre, they outsourced the production of Fallout Tactics to a company unfamiliar with the franchise with very little input. The game was aesthetically and thematically very alien to the established canon. Some fans encouraged others to buy the game to demonstrate an interest in the franchise while others saw it as evidence that the series was dead. In the end it was a mixed bag but had very little to do with Fallout other than some flavor text.

With FoT not being nearly as successful as they must have hoped, Interplay made another last ditch attempt: Fallout Brotherhood of Steel, an action adventure based on the engine of an AD&D game that only had a moderate level of success. Instead of sticking with any of the core themes, the game heavily relied on language and dialogs written in a desperate attempt to appeal to teenage boys with an over-reliance on sexual themes. The press kits included glow-in-the-dark condoms. The game bombed, as expected.

Eventually Interplay did leak information about an in-progress sequel developed in-house with the code name "Van Buren" but Interplay had long been struggling financially and the game was eventually scrapped, though many elements would later re-appear in New Vegas (developed not by Bethesda but a company employing several people who worked on this and earlier Fallout games).

Interplay initially sold the licenses for Fallout 3, 4 and 5 to Bethesda. Still trying to produce their own take on the franchise they now spent their last resources on a Fallout MMORPG, temporarily titled "Fallout Online". "Fallout Online" (or "FOOL" as it had been titled by the community) had been an idea in the fan community for a long time but always been dismissed because the idea of an MMO game ran counter to the thematic constant of Fallout 1 and 2: the lone wanderer in a hostile wasteland.

If I recall correctly, part of the deal with Bethesda was that they would get the full rights to the franchise if Interplay did not produce another Fallout game within a given timeframe. The failure of Fallout Online sealed that deal. Ironically Bethesda's latest Fallout game is basically Fallout Online but based on their renewed franchise rather than the originals, but still an utter failure though for slightly different reasons.

Fallout's fan community, small but strangely persistent, at the time had been adequately described by game journalists as "glittering gems of hatred". I think that is justified to some extent: many of us would have rather seen the franchise die after Fallout 2 than move on and change. Some even argued that Fallout 2 was already overloaded with pop culture references (which to some degree had already been part of Fallout 1's DNA) and strayed from Fallout 1's leitmotif. But with the release of Fallout 3 it had become quite clear that this leitmotif had been completely abandoned.

For those unaware: While Fallout had always juxtaposed the optimistic 1950s Americana aesthetic and futurist outlook of technology and the "Atom Age" with the post-nuclear hellscape, the message was clearly a cynical dismissal of that optimism: nuclear power hadn't created a utopia, it created hell on Earth; instead of picket fences you had dirt farmers and scrap merchants trying to survive in an irradiated desert. Fallout 2 further emphasised this bleak outlook by showing that even the vaults that were supposed to protect American citizens from the aftermath of WW3 were actually cynical experiments, each being flawed in their own cruel ways, while the government elites get to live in safety (intentionally taking a page or two from Doctor Strangelove).

Fallout 3 eliminated any of the remaining bleakness and subtlety and replaced it with mini-nuke launchers and more Americana. Where Fallout 1 and 2 were satire, Fallout 3 had already lost the intent of that satire and just ended up playing it straight. But these themes were already mostly absent in Fallout Tactics and completely abandoned in Fallout Brotherhood of Steel: Fallout already died before Bethesda added to the franchise.



The subquests in Fallout 3 are pretty good at being Fallout, none of them have solutions that are wholly positive. For example, there’s no way to solve the Tenpenny Towers quest with a satisfying solution for both the humans and ghouls.

As a design goal and due to the better graphics, the environment design also does a better job at conveying stories. You’ll enter a storm drain and find a skeleton with bullets and a radio or whatever. There’s almost nothing that seems out of place or bland.

For some reason the main quest doesn’t follow the same philosophy and is too linear. But I always find it strange how Fallout 3 critics focus on the main quest when it comprises maybe 10% of the total playtime altogether. The main quest set pieces are all incredibly brief.


Exactly. I love FO3's side quests, and that was my first contact with Fallout series, and I'm far from being the exception on this.

Republic of Dave, finding Quantum Colas, Tenpenny tower, the humor on texts, all those Vaults with mysteries... it's amazing. I totally bought the dark Americana design. It's one of my favorite games of all time.


If you're living in Tenpenny tower you've also more than likely nuked Megaton as well, which is pretty damn ridiculous considering saving Megaton gets you a house. I'd say save Megaton, and let the ghouls kill everyone in Tenpenny if possible, that'd be sweet justice. Sadly I havent let the ghouls in yet.


Don't know if it's reassuring or not, but for someone who has only played Fallout 4, I took it as bleak satire. From your description 1 & 2 sounds even better, but there is plenty to go around even in (maybe a bit bland, I now realize) Fallout 4.


> Fallout 3 eliminated any of the remaining bleakness and subtlety and replaced it with mini-nuke launchers and more Americana.

Huh? I thought it was almost unremittingly bleak, albeit leavened by moments of dark humour. Using a sniper rifle with VATS and the Bloody Mess perk to splatter ghouls into their composing body parts in super slo-mo isn't bleak?


Gore isn't bleak. A pop up of a chuckling Vault Boy notifying you of a critical hit isn't really "dark humor". Fallout 3 is very on the nose compared to Fallout 1.

I'm not faulting anyone for enjoying any of the newer games (or even Fallout Brotherhood of Steel) but the tone is extremely different. You can call Fallout 3 bleak, but it's not bleak in the same way as Fallout 1 was.

<SPOILER> The entire story arc of Fallout 1 is that you are cast out into the lethal wasteland to save your vault (one of the first things you find is the corpse of some other unlucky guy from your vault), struggle against all odds, bring down an army of super soldier mutants and a fanatic cult that wants to turn all humans into mutants while what's left of the US military sits in its own little bunker full of high tech equipment but refusing to help you, then once you make it back to your vault your Overseer refuses you entry because you would no longer fit in with the community. The entire journey is basically the premise of Rambo First Blood. </SPOILER>

That's a lot bleaker than the gory ultraviolence in Fallout 3. BTW, Fallout 1 and 2 already had the Bloody Mess perk and ultraviolent death animations, it just wasn't slo-mo and first person. Those weren't what made the game bleak, though. If anything, that was intended as dark humor (cf. splatter "horror" movies like Braindead, ultraviolent "splatstick" comedies) and a nod to pulp fiction (cheap novels, not the movie of the same name).


Yes. The semi-sad partial victory of the large quest arcs was what I loved about F1,2. There's definitely less in 3+, (wont rehash exceptions elsewhere in comments).




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: