What I meant by mystery was that this vault dweller/player walks outside for the first time, not really knowing what’s out there with a great sense of unknown, traveling around the wasteland. This feeling gets compounded once you figure out that your seemingly simple task of finding a water chip isn’t quite so simple. Run into secret military installations, twists in the plot, etc. I wasn’t talking strictly plot, as far a s mystery goes, but the general feeling I got when I played Fallout for the first time.



It wouldn’t bother me if we never saw those factions again. However, I would love to see a future game where we see the pre war/war mentality origins of clinging to technology, that 50’s cold war paranoia, the need to be overtly controlling, surviving in chaos, and relate it back somehow to previously used factions such as the BoS and the Enclave, as a nice tie in with the series.

As you mentioned, Commonwealth could be interesting, as would a completely new faction. I think it would go a long way to have new factions reflect the mind set we saw with the BoS/Enclave, maintaining a common root mentality between them, but with different outcomes due to different circumstances.

This.

I forsee the NCR falling, causing the same sort of ripple effects, the fall of Rome caused. That is to say, a dark age.

Shady Sands days are numbered.

But yeah, I agree. I think the biggest indication of this, are the settlements. I mean, other than New vegas itself, all of the settlements have no fortification. Its like they aren't even worried, about what could happen.

Edit: and another thing, WTH happened to the rest of the world? I agree exploring the common wealth is a good idea, I wanted to hear more from that, as soon as I heard about it in Fallout 3. But I think encountering factions from other parts of the world, thats sort of an envitability. I mean, you can add new factions, new history, to the world by making these large leaps of time between the games. Where Fallout 2, takes place 50 years after Fallout 1. 36 years between Fallout 2, and 3. But if you do that, for too long, the setting isn't post apocalyptic any more. Or you can expose the rest of the world. And all of a sudden you have 200 years of existing fallout lore, in which these factions existed. And you can draw from that. So you can introduce these new factions, with their own history, their own ideologies, without making these large leaps in the time line.

Im sure im not the first one to connect the dots. The Enclave are the remnants of the american goverment. The Brotherhood grew out of the survivors of a U.S military base. They both have their origins in the american goverment. So it would kind of be this sort of crazy turn of events, a cosmic irony, if a new faction from Russia, or china, arrived in post apocalyptic america, forcing the two enemies into an uneasy alliance. That would give, " War, war never changes", a whole new meaning.

I think you might be missing those bits of foreshadowing about NCR. It may not be as much of a radioactive wasteland, but it's a fair assumption that civilization in the form of current factions won't be around by the time of the next game.

Wtf are you guys talking about trash? Empty syringes? Are you kidding me?

One of the things that bothered me in Fallout 3, was the food. There was food freakin everywhere. And Im not talking new food, im talking 200 year old snack cakes. But there was little to no agriculture, hunting or fishing going on to any scale. There should have been major food shortages. I like how in new vegas, you can be in hardcoe mode and have food matter a little bit. What might be interesting, is a game set a few years after the war, with communities fighting each other for the dwindling supplies of food and water. And I dont mean psycho drug abusing raiders. I mean each group of people would be in and of itself a decent to live in group, but perfectly willing to go and kill every last person of another community to get to their food. I liekd how in New Vegas, the Khans werent just a generic raider group. They were bad, but not generically bad. They made some sense as a society. Maybe on top of this, have surviving bands of chinese soldiers fighting the remanents of the Army.

If you want a doom and gloom fallout, thats fine. But you cant have it 200+ years after the war. Simply because the pre-war resources wouldnt last that long.

Well I think it's great to see the west coast finally rebuilt after FO2, and I think this game is to wrap-up that area for the fallout series so now we can move on. until the NCR ends up conquering its way to the east.

Truth be told, I'm ready to leave the Fallout plot. The point where I'm really "into" what happens with NCR,BoS,whatever has now passed with finishing FNV. What hasn't passed, something I'd buy in a nanosecond and keep up with, is simply an apocalyptic game. The disaster would most likely have to again be nuclear war, a traiditional (non-zombie things) plague, or a combination. Whatever the cause, this new game would be unburdened by all the aging plot, and focus on true apocalyptic survival. Possibilities of using cannibalism and doing anything you literally wanted to would be in this new game. Needless to say, the game would be incredibly dark, sort of a super-MA audience. Maybe a game like this was already out there and I missed it. The main problem would be that it would be so drowned out of zombie-apocalypse games.


I loved the FO series, but at this point I'm not seeing any real avenue for plot to do anything but build "up" in terms of civilization, while at the same time, never being resolved. The ideas for a setting in Minneapolis, Atlanta, or similar cities are good, yet they are very unlikely to be made due to too small numbers of people familiar enough with those to recognize where you're supposed to be. I want to live in a horrific world, just w/o zombies.

Strangest thing... I went into this one building that was occupied by a fiend couple (one girl one guy). The girl had a flamer and the guy had a plasma rifle. When i went into their house, despite the gaping hole in the side it was actually very clean. The room looked orderly, the toilet was intact, the bed didn't have body parts/blood all over it. Was really really strange

Yeah, that's a bit strange.
But the world [censored] on itself in 2077.
In the real world, we're suffering from overpopulation in 2010.
Must've been way worse 67 years in the future.

Could be that the world's companies had to produce their food products to ungodly excess to meet the demands of the population.

And after a massive nuclear war, the population was reduced to a fraction of what it once was... and that might be why there's still pre-war foods laying around?

It's going out on a bit of a limb, but it kinda makes sense.
But meh, like others have said. It's a video game. Doesn't have to be perfectly logical.

Wow theres been a lot of posts since i last checked and i want to adress as many of them as i can...

I agree that the timeline should stop advancing and explore other places or even go back a bit in the fallout timeline. some places that need to be explored are the northeast, midwest, southwest, basically anywhere in the US that hasnt been explored. i also think that Fallout should go outside the US especially CANADA, its close enough to the US to not have to add a whole new timeline/story/canon but its still a whole new location and region.

I also agree that Fallout is starting to feel post-post-apocalyptic, everone and everything is starting to rebuild and stable societies now exist, people are no longer having to fight for survival and have actual pre-war/non-fallout jobs such as mailmen/couriers, strippers/prosttutes, i can't think of anymore but i think you get the idea. There are also actual businesses and not just traveling merchants/caravans that make deliveries and do business across entire states basically. Things are definitely returning to pre-war "normal" which i kind of like but i also like the whole recent-apocalypse-post-apocalyptic feel. I don't want a Fallout game where there is absolute chaos shortly after a world-wide nuclear war (this seems like a good idea for a more action-oriented game like a shooter not a story-reliant RPG). I don't want it to be too much about complete societies and their problems or individuals and their day-to-day struggle for survival but a good mix of both.

About some people saying they(NCR or other factions) could have some sort of war that sets everyting back a bit, like one of the possible endings to New Vegas, or whoever said they could just destroy everything again and start over (even though it was a joke) i honestly think this is a likely end to the entire Fallout saga. With the whole "War, war never changes" slogan (sorry, i don't know what this would be called exactly) i think they may have actually been setting up for a second apocalypse/great war for the ending to the Fallout series. It would totally make sense and be a great ending, in my opinion.

To wrap things up i think future Fallout games should stop moving forward in the timeline and explore new locations and ideas...so, yeah...thats all i have to say about that...

EDIT: sorry my speeling andgrammer svck

I disagree, I like the feel of a world rebuilding and starting from the beginning socially. It makes for interesting storylines.

But why not both? There is a whole world to develop for this game. There is an entire USA to explore (and maybe other places too?) and years and years of time. More fallout!

Honestly... After loving FO1, really liking FO2, really liking the [TB side of] combat in FO:Tactics; really ~REALLY liking the art and landscape in FO3, and Liking FO:NV for all it's improvements over FO3............
I am of the honest opinion that (Barring a Cain/Boyarsky/Taylor reunion...), I would love for there to not ever be a Fallout 4 or beyond, at this point ~and here is why...

Fallout worked.
Everything ~IMO EVERYTHING after Fallout suffered the "copy of a copy" effect in a bad way (even when it turned out pretty good).

I am not talking tech, I am talking the setting, the mechanics and the general outlook and behavior of the inhabitants. Its like the world of each follow-up game was sketched over a bad [degraded] copy of the previous one; with details and intents lost in each new iteration (paired with the necessary commercialism [changes] to tempt the market of the time).

IMO this ruined it in a way that could not be realistically fixed as the market changed. (This would be like as if some company had made this wonderful Sassafras Ice cream and in the next decade The global temperature dropped incredibly, and Sassafras had been banned as a food additive. Think about it, The original was celebrated for something that could not later be accurately reproduced and would have a smaller market even if it were, due to its very nature ~in this case being cold and selling it to people that live in the bitter cold.)

FO3 and NV [undeniably] sell well to current consumers... but IMO neither one is a suitable sequel (though NV is about as close as we could hope); Its called Fallout, but its still a new recipe for a different product with the Fallout name ~same as (say...) the way it is with "Coke" and "Coke Classic"; Coke Classic does not taste like (or nearly as good as) Coke did 25 years ago; (this is not nostalgia, they are using a different recipe for the syrup).

My point is that future games will [be compelled to] follow the pattern. Due to lost details, player surveys, and market pressure (and the likes and dislikes of the new talent creating them).

---

Fallout took place 80 years after the great war... IMO anything past that is too far.

Gizmo, I get what you're saying but "ruined" is in the eye of the beholder. That same argument could be applied to any iteration b/c they always run the risk of degrading the original--which of course is subjective too.

To me, the issue is whether the developers bring their creativity and integrity to the project. Sure, there are market forces in play and a changing cast but the final product always speaks for itself.

I think you give too little credit to Fallout fans. This isn't a FPS where the shooting mechanics carry the day. The fan-base may disagree over which Fallout game has the most merit but almost all of them will be able to spot utter crap if it's produced and the sales will reflect that.

This is truth... but the eye is looking for something else, and the new Fallouts have been redesigned to be a closer match... :shrug:

Agreed... I don't dislike either of them, and do like plenty about each... but in a way... isn't this a bit like following Warcraft 2 with WOW instead of Warcraft 3?

Also true, but crap is in the eye of the beholder, no?

Well what option do they have?

NCR decides the only solution is to nuke the Legion? The Legion is like "good idea" and nukes them back? Suddenly the world is devoid of all architecture period and we now have Omega mutants and Ultra Ghouls?? That sounds [censored].

I'd rather see society develop. There's still bombs, there's still annoying ass explosions in every direction, there's still ghouls and there's still Super Mutants, and yet you wanna complain because 2% of the population has running water? I seriously fail to see how that 2% of running water makes this non-post-apocalyptic.

Where do they get the nukes?

Well that's my whole point.
It'd be ridiculous for them to continue forwards and do ANOTHER Great war or something to get back to the post-apocalyptic feel. Either we keep moving forward and advancing or we keep playing the same 200 year time frame. Personally I think the same 200 year time frame would be boring: part of the fun of the series is seeing how things advance with time. And again, personally I don't understand how one city with three casinos that have (limited) electricity takes away from the post-apocalyptic feel of the game.

I'm thinking that even 200 years is a bit much. By now you would think things would be a little bit more re-built than they are. I know it's not the best example but several parts of Europe and much of Japan was destroyed by non-nuclear weapons during WWII. Then of course there are the two nukes. That has all been rebuilt since then, and obviously there was much help from the unaffected surrounding areas. But I would think the US would have some unaffected areas (I'm not entirely versed in the Fallout universe to know) where 200 years would clean up a lot of stuff. I know it is highly irradiated and all, but still. Again I need to read up on canonical fallout history, but I would imagine there are unaffected countries that would take claim or help with the cleanup too.

I'm just nitpicking though. I take it that in FO3 that the DC area was hit pretty hard and most people stayed away from it for a while because of it. But Vegas is pretty clean aside from the random skeleton in hotel rooms