So why did Chris want the wasteland nuked in lonesome road at the end of it?

TheHouseAlwaysWins

TheHouseAlwaysWins

Look, Ma! Two Heads!
I heard the original ending had you nuke both the legion and the NCR and there was no way out of it. So can anybody tell me the purpose of this ending actually? Is it a meta way of obsidian saying theyre done with the IP?
 
If I remember correctly, it's that Chris believed civilization had gone too far in Wastes, turning Fallout from a post-apocalyptic series to a post-postapocalyptic one. Same reason he created the tunnelers, basically
 
"lol the tunnelers will destroy the Mojave"
"Lol big mountain is releasing abominations into the mojave"
"Lol the cloud will one day swallow the Mojave"

All of the dlc apart from honest hearts were really trying to re-apocalpyse-ing the wasteland.
 
Van Buren/FONV woulda shoulda been the natural culmination (and imo final conclusion) of a Fallout series
1. Pure post apo, but with signs of civilizations regrouping: Major city-states take shape, and begin trading with minor independent villages
2. City states form networks, large territories are organized, defended, patrolled. You see administrative centres and their satellites, you see organized military forces. You see serious rivalries between powers.
3. Fully fledged countries, complete with social tiers, fully rehabilitated urban centres (in particular in for example NCR heartland, not shown, but alluded to), standing armies, political systems in competition - humanity repaired for good and for bad.

The only way to continue the franchise from here would be to nuke everything again, which... would be a bit... forced? But I can def see that mindset, the want to nuke it all again, for that exact reason, if not only to make a statement.
 
zegh8578 said:
Van Buren/FONV woulda shoulda been the natural culmination (and imo final conclusion) of a Fallout series
1. Pure post apo, but with signs of civilizations regrouping: Major city-states take shape, and begin trading with minor independent villages
2. City states form networks, large territories are organized, defended, patrolled. You see administrative centres and their satellites, you see organized military forces. You see serious rivalries between powers.
3. Fully fledged countries, complete with social tiers, fully rehabilitated urban centres (in particular in for example NCR heartland, not shown, but alluded to), standing armies, political systems in competition - humanity repaired for good and for bad.

The only way to continue the franchise from here would be to nuke everything again, which... would be a bit... forced? But I can def see that mindset, the want to nuke it all again, for that exact reason, if not only to make a statement.
Click to expand...


NV was the original Fallout 4 in the timeline. The legion would only be foreshadowed in Van Buren.

I had an idea for a Fallout 5 where the Legion would collapse into multiple kingdoms and the NCR would become butthurt over the events of New Vegas, becoming largely fascist/reactionary and unable to let go. There would also be other new nations and city states and you got a situation for a huge multi sided conflict.
 
R.Graves said:
"lol the tunnelers will destroy the Mojave"
"Lol big mountain is releasing abominations into the mojave"
"Lol the cloud will one day swallow the Mojave"

All of the dlc apart from honest hearts were really trying to re-apocalpyse-ing the wasteland.
Click to expand...
There's a mod that basically does all of those things called Dust. CA must be proud.


zegh8578 said:
Van Buren/FONV woulda shoulda been the natural culmination (and imo final conclusion) of a Fallout series
1. Pure post apo, but with signs of civilizations regrouping: Major city-states take shape, and begin trading with minor independent villages
2. City states form networks, large territories are organized, defended, patrolled. You see administrative centres and their satellites, you see organized military forces. You see serious rivalries between powers.
3. Fully fledged countries, complete with social tiers, fully rehabilitated urban centres (in particular in for example NCR heartland, not shown, but alluded to), standing armies, political systems in competition - humanity repaired for good and for bad.

The only way to continue the franchise from here would be to nuke everything again, which... would be a bit... forced? But I can def see that mindset, the want to nuke it all again, for that exact reason, if not only to make a statement.
Click to expand...
I can see where that view comes from, but personally I enjoy seeing how the world has recovered. I want to see the new cultures, the new social structures, etc. I suppose it may not be very close to the original intentions for fallout, though.

Either way, another disaster is still a better solution than "oh look it's been 200 years and no one has rebuilt a single thing" like another company we know has been doing...
 
TheHouseAlwaysWins said:
NV was the original Fallout 4 in the timeline. The legion would only be foreshadowed in Van Buren.

I had an idea for a Fallout 5 where the Legion would collapse into multiple kingdoms and the NCR would become butthurt over the events of New Vegas, becoming largely fascist/reactionary and unable to let go. There would also be other new nations and city states and you got a situation for a huge multi sided conflict.
Click to expand...
That would actually be really interesting. Its just too bad that the company and creative team that has the Fallout license will never put the thought, creativity or effort that you would put into a Fallout 5 and instead will probably do something like NCR vs Brotherhood of Steel for the dumb pop-a-mole crowd and it will be just as well written and memorable as the Civil War quest line in Skyrim. :V
EHnuzyzWoAAy-LM.png
 
Last edited:
zegh8578 said:
Van Buren/FONV woulda shoulda been the natural culmination (and imo final conclusion) of a Fallout series
1. Pure post apo, but with signs of civilizations regrouping: Major city-states take shape, and begin trading with minor independent villages
2. City states form networks, large territories are organized, defended, patrolled. You see administrative centres and their satellites, you see organized military forces. You see serious rivalries between powers.
3. Fully fledged countries, complete with social tiers, fully rehabilitated urban centres (in particular in for example NCR heartland, not shown, but alluded to), standing armies, political systems in competition - humanity repaired for good and for bad.

The only way to continue the franchise from here would be to nuke everything again, which... would be a bit... forced? But I can def see that mindset, the want to nuke it all again, for that exact reason, if not only to make a statement.
Click to expand...

At the end of the game you'd also have to bomb at least one location, because of the B.O.M.B. satellite auto-targeting system on the New Plague infected areas. Personally I thought it was a pretty good idea.
Lonesome Road pretty much picked up that idea and did something very similar with it.
 
Because despite his writing talent he's a short-sighted dolt like most people who just wants Mad-Max shootem-ups in the game. The whole point of Fallout is Society emerging and growing from the war, not nukes and monsters and raiders and little podunk settlements.
 
@Eshanas I understand that Lonesome Road was arguably the most divisive DLC next to OWB, but isn’t that... really, really, REALLY dumbing down the messages of Lonesome Road?

You know, the idea that one person can start a movement that becomes a community, that can then be swept away by cruel fate? The idea of inevitability/history repeating that the tunnelers and the nukes represent? All that shit?

What you said is literally just taking everything at face value. Hell, not even, considering that what all of these things represent is all but laid out by Ulysses (especially the first one).
 
I think some people on this forum act disingenuous, or perhaps hyperbolic, at times with their views or statements on what Fallout "should" or is aiming to be. Fallout was not meant to be dieselpunk Red Dead Redemption or about exploring totally recovered and functional civilizations. Obviously Bethesda and the popular mainstream's conceptions of it in the opposite direction aren't exactly on the money either, but there is a balance between "A-Bomb Drop wacky fun time survivors" and "NCR tariff and banking scandal simulator 2023, ensuring the railway transportation of lead reaches its destination without logistical delay GOTY edition"

I think New Vegas's setting is fantastic and I would have liked to have seen more of the stuff from Van Buren such as the functional railways that displayed a frontier society on the cusp of new civilization, but I think that is where the line should be drawn. Fallout always wore its pulp post-nuclear influences on its sleeve, and Fallout 1/2 hit a perfect balance beyond the well-trodden "survivor" scenario of everyone clinging onto ruins in an apocalypse, and instead provided new cultures and societies surrounded by a savage, unrelenting and wild world full of dangerous and strange atomic horrors. If you get rid of the latter, the former isn't as interesting to me. Vegas hit the perfect balance of having these societies reach interesting developmental points, whilst still at the stage where this weird nuclear wasteland could cut their throat and send them tumbling.

I disagree with Chris though in that making that civilization get destroyed to reset the clock is massively fucking stupid. The simple answer I think is that Vegas's level of civilization should be the landmark stopping point for the future. Just set games elsewhere and earlier in the timeline to preserve this. We've seen the West Coast develop, and Vegas saw us set the course for the future of it's civilzation. Now I want to see what new societies developed in the strange Wastes of Texas or Louisiana.
 
The wild west aspect of fallout was always the coolest bit and only became more prominent as the series went on (apart from Bethesda games where its almost entirely absent for some reason). Honestly keeping it wild west shouldn't be too difficult.
 
R.Graves said:
Yeah and Django unchained isn't a western cause it takes place in the south lmao. No you can have a western wherever you want. All a western is is a collection motifs and tropes.
Click to expand...

Sure, but how many cowboys do you have in Maryland friend?
 
AlphaPromethean said:
The simple answer I think is that Vegas's level of civilization should be the landmark stopping point for the future. Just set games elsewhere and earlier in the timeline to preserve this. We've seen the West Coast develop, and Vegas saw us set the course for the future of it's civilzation. Now I want to see what new societies developed in the strange Wastes of Texas or Louisiana.
Click to expand...
This.

I'd love to see how the future world of Fallout develop, though. Yeah, it's not Fallout anymore, hence just make a new IP/series with the setting of Fallout but set much further in the future, how fully recovered civilization behaves some 300-500 years after the Great War. Heck, exploring the theme of, "War, war never changes. But men do, through the roads they walk." might actually feel refreshing if done properly.
 
I remember posting in a somewhat similar thread a while back.
While I can understand where MCA is coming from with his thoughts that the Fallout universe was becoming to civilized I think nuking it all was also going a bit too far.
Especially because Fallout does not need to remain on the West Cost/South West or each new entry needs to be a chronological follow up to the previous games.

Now that we know how the South-West developed follow up Fallout games could have done something in the Mid West around the same time period of the previous games, or of course the East Coast before Bethesda did that but basically transplanted a lot from the West Coast to it.

Edit or perhaps show what places like Arizona and New Mexico were like before the Legion arose. I think Resurrection had some real cool new factions and places.

I definitely have proposed this before but I think the decision should have made on how long the world remains in the post apocalyptic to post-post apocalyptic state until the world has become to civilized again and campaigns like in Fallout 1, 2 and New Vegas can no longer be done any more.
Say three hundred to perhaps five or six hundred years after the War.
And some places of course would never be reclaimed by humanity or become civilized again.

I don't think that would be constricting to good writers and game designers. They would simply know there are limits and work with those.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top