not really. We have a lot of poor, uneducated people and a few rich people that are corrupt. I wouldn't say we are the most successful nation, the richest maybe but that in itself does not equal success.

Lets look at the standard of living of the bottom 50%. USA still places in the top 10%. I didn't say "THE BEST" just one of the most successful.

Eden talked a good game, but it was all vague, feel-good generalities and platitudes. Nothing about actually restoring democracy to America. The closest he got was a pledge to hold an election when "his term was up", not that he ever elaborated when that was.

Human rights means nothing in the world of fallout, especially when society has collapsed the your prerogative should be restoring your industrial capacity, your agriculture, and your ability to mobilize your population.

I guess my point is that unless we can prove that his motivations are completely self-serving at the expense of others we can't definitively label him as "evil" even if we do choose to accept the contemporary Western definition of the term as truth. Heck, even if we can prove it it's impossible to say it's truly evil over being simply misguided. Besides, we're already equating democracy with "good" without a logical justification. We've been programmed pretty well, methinks.


I'm under the impression that, as far as we know, the NCR is in fact the most capable centralized power in the country. Like I said, "as far as we know."

Given the situation, I can see why the Constitution and the other important documents are being ignored. President Eden seemed as though he wanted to restore pre-war American society and government. If you listen to the Enclave Radio in Fallout 3, he talks about the "Capital Congressman" baseball team, and how great it would be if those kinds of teams could exist again.

In my opinion, I would rather have a strong dictatorship that benefits the people rather than a weak Democracy that fails to help its people.

To your first point: No, the real Roman Empire was not evil. They were brutal compared to our standards today, but by ancient standards they were as civilized as any society really could be, with a standard of living second to none for the era. Ironically, Caesar's Legion is more similar to the horde of Genghis Khan than Rome under Julius Caesar. Like Genghis Khan, Caesar is intent on sacking and brutalizing those with more advanced culture and technology and planting a flag in the ruins.

I don't think that Caesar has an endgame in mind. He thinks he does, but in practice he's a dying old man with a psychotic right hand who will succeed him when he inevitably dies... how exactly did a seemingly intelligent leader make such an obvious mistake as that? He's either short sighted, or that tumor started to do his thinking for him. What are Caesar's motivations? He's a power hungry dictator, that's all that needs to be said. Do you think it's something deeper than that?

To your second point, I contend that the Enclave in Fallout 3 did not have that goal, that was only Eden's ambition. If any lower level Enclave agreed, he could have gave them the FEV, but they obvious followed Autumn's vision of the Enclave as a ruling body, not a group bent on genocide. Eden is as 'evil' as a computer can be said to be, but I don't see the human body of the Enclave that way.

Can you actually give me an example of a "strong dictatorship" that actually benefited people? Not "benefiting people" in an abstract way but actually improving life for ordinary citizens? One could say that Stalin's industrialization programs brought benefits to Russia, but thousands of people suffered because of it.

The Enclave wanted to wipe out everyone who was exposed to radiation and the FEV and restore human purity. I really doubt that Autumn's vision is really that different. At best, he'll treat people in the wasteland like second class citizens and give preferential treatment to "pure" humans. Best case scenario for the Enclave would be something like the Brotherhood in Tactics.

Ok, so "evil" is a threshold attained by exceeding a certain standard set by comparison with surrounding entities, then? Slavery is only evil unless it's accepted by others? For the sake of argument I'm looking for a yard stick here.


He obviously holds himself up to some moral standard that places him above the NCR, for example, as he and his higher-ups imply on several occasions that they see them as immoral. So you think he's delusional, then? Does that make him evil?


He's evil because he's genocidal? Is his intent malicious or does he believe himself to be acting for the greater good?

Still wouldn't call it successful. Better yes, successful no.

Julius Caesar, Augustus Caesar, Napoleon Bonaparte, etc. These were good dictators that benefited the country they ruled and their people. Why? Because they reformed tax systems, road systems, improved standards of living, etc.

I know! Isn't it awesome?

[quote name='Momaw' date='11 November 2010 - 12:36 PM' timestamp='1289496989' post='16665976']
All of the factions are basically "trying to make the world a better place" they just have different ideas of how that should happen. The Enclave in Fallout 3, I thought, was very nicely done in that they *weren't* just omnicidial maniacs. They had a plan. Their poison wasn't engineered to kill *everybody*, only those who had been genetically compromised. You could argue that it was in fact a repentant goal since they were the ones that caused the problem in the first place with the FEV. It was a plan with different priorities than most people would consider proper given that we know ghouls and mutants are intelligent reasoning beings, but consider this: the Enclave has air transport, satellite communications, high tech armor and weapons, clean water, and tons of other things. Their methods in achieving this strategy are questionable for people not officially part of the Enclave due to their reckless disregard for personal rights and property (and downright unsurvivable for mutants and ghouls), but the fact is that they have more functional technology and a higher standard of living than anybody else, and their plan is probably the most direct route to getting humanity on a road to what it once was. It's also worth pointing out that while the Enclave did build many of the vaults with radical scientific experiments running in the background, they did build many vaults that did exactly what it said on the box: protect the inhabitants through the war and beyond until the outside world was capable of sustaining them.


The Eastern chapters have the ability to recruit and be a force with that Giant robot(I forget the name lol.) The Western wise up if you choose to make a positive decision with the NCR (dont want to spoil it.)

Also i disagree, the NCR,Followers, and BOS are the most sensible choices.

1. NCR may be selfish but its for the greater good and them being in charge they wont just murder people. They try to help they are just focused on the war effort because they are trying to build a nation, against crazy Caesars legion who believes in slavery and torturing people. Everyone knows slavery leads to revolts/War. This type of nation would fail it would never work efficient. I see the NCR, fighting against drug users,murders. I see them providing water,electricity and you can debate that, but it's true if they did not take over helios one, the brotherhood might have it still with the weapon along with it.


2. The Followers would actually be the best choice, if you want to get down to taking care of problems and the wasteland/people.
The followers just lack the firepower,numbers, and i could easily see factions like the great khans,Vipers,legion and fiends walking all over them (lol).

3. Next i would choose the BOS, they may have narrow point of views and lets face it be straight [censored] bags sometimes, but they are a way more sensible choice. It only makes sense that once they control the wasteland they plan to build some kind of nation, One BOS nation built from prior U.S Army cannot be that bad.

4. The Eastern BOS whole different story they want to help the wasteland and keep tech out of peoples hands that wish to use it for the wrong reasons against humanity, They are a really good sensible choice too and they have firepower. Plus you cannot say these guys are selfish.

5. The Enclave would be good if they wised up and was not as selfish, to the point to where they murder people and let a A.I who wants to murder people rule. Who knows what the crazy things the enclave would do if they ruled the wasteland, even if it is for the greater good they are doing it in some of the most inhumane ways. Maybe if they had better leaders they would be a good candidate.

Just saying this makes the most sense to me.

That's not what I meant. I'm not talking about roads or aqueducts or unified weights and measures. I'm talking about a "good dictator" that didn't view it's citizens as a renewable resource. There were plenty of despots that lead their respective nations to greatness. They just left a trail of human wreckage in their wake.

And you don't have to be a dictator to reform taxes or build roads.

You lose the internet.
But on a more serious (?) note, the term "evil" is completely subjective, which makes games like these so cool - in a wasteland where everything is up for the taking, who wins? And on what terms?
Tbh, me and my SO just had a mini argument about something similar - he thinks you can build a utopian society where wealth is distributed evenly, technological advances are made, education is at it's highest and nobody feels displaced by the transition. I personally think of myself as a realist lol - someone, somewhere, will be pissed.
And I should add I agree with The Revenginator wholeheartedly.

I agree.

In a bureaucratic country like America, yes. Human stupidity seems to be common place for career politicians. Military experience should be a requirement for any government position. Most often people without it are reckless and careless with wars and foreign relations, most who serve in the military get to see the lovely atrocities of war, and usually wish to avoid war and unnecessary conflict.

That aside logistics is a big part of military and the knowledge of it is very important for running a country.

Eh, The Enclave may have been wrong in their ways, But the idea was to help rebuild society. (Sorry if i just diverged from the conversation/discussion you are having right now.)

How many times have you read the novel "Starship Troopers"?

There have been plenty of moronic and self-destructive dictators that have lead their respective nations into chaos and ruin. Giving one person unlimited authority, even if he was in the military, doesn't guarantee your country greatness. Do I really need to start a list of the various autocrats and despots, going back to Caligula, who abused the absolute authority invested in them by their respective nations?

Only Eden wanted to poison everyone, he went behind Autumn's back when he asked the Lone Wanderer to take to FEV. Autumn wanted only the Enclave to be in control over everyone, which IMO would have been for the best. I know the Enclave and Autumn aren't saints but all they wanted was order, Autumn would use the pure water as a way to get the wastelanders to support and flock to the Enclave and what would have emerged from a Enclave-Wastelander union? Probably something similar to Vault City, the Enclave are still bigoted and a two-class system would probably be created with the educated Enclave citizens doing administration and planning, keeping tech working etc. the Enclave troopers would keep order (and as you said with an orbital platform, vertibirds who would or could dare oppose them?) and keep things safe whilst the wastelanders would probably trade their old lives for new ones, they trade labour for clean water, a decent meal, safety and a routine.

But of course the Enclave are teh bad guys so the heroic BoS stallions come in to save the day and under-manned, incompetant water caravans are the result, being picked off at the whims of raiders; those that make it to there destinations are just given' over to whoever asks like the crazy cultists outside Megaton, because the BoS care you understand. As far as I'm concerned the BoS ruined whatever hope the CW had for becoming more ordered and secure.

I think that we need to shift into reverse and get to the issue at the heart of your questions, and that is you asking me to demonstrate objective morality. Your questions were all predicated upon the notion that morals are relative to the intent of the individual performing an act, I don't see this as the case.

-- I actually typed out half of an argument for objective morality, but realized that would derail this thread entirely. I don't feel like getting a temporary ban. If you want to have a discussion on objective and subjective morality, might be better to start a fresh thread for that.

Back on topic: Caesar's Legion isn't cuddly, they're a bunch of slavers who aren't more than bullies pretending they're the ones who are working to better humanities' future. They aren't.

Caesar's Legion is a disease, and the only prescription is more cowb- er.. an incinerator and lots of flamer fuel.

He also talks about growing up in Kentucky with a pet dog. He lies to get public support. He doesn't care about baseball.

The Enclave doesn't want to benefit the people, they want to benefit the Enclave. This is evident in the fact that all of their plans involve either experimenting on "the people" or outright genocide of "the people."

Your sorta wrong on that point. The Enclave never to my knowledge experimented or murdered "it's people". They only killed mutants aka the greatest enemy of it's people and it's goal to restoring pre-war way of life to "it's people."

The entire Vault program was the Enclave experimenting on the people of the United States. The first thing you see in Fallout 2, the cinematic your avatar is from, is them killing vault dwellers.

The only way your statement makes remote sense is if you're defining "it's people" as "the Enclave." Which is exactly what I said. They only care about the Enclave.