View attachment 8362590Thats... actually an interesting idea?
But it implies that Courier and Boone didnt actually massacre the Fort because someone would actually go there and search the corpse, so this shit fuckin sucks dewd.
Also why is Ceasar's corpse in some ditch instead of his bed? Isn't he comatose by the time 2nd battle of Hoover dam takes place? Or at least is
days from being.
It
can be an interesting idea, the main problem is entirely within the writer's court though. Like,
any idea is capable of being good depending on the execution, regardless of how awful it might seem on the surface. The Legion themselves can just as easily be turned into a parody from the premise of "Post-apocalypse Rome-Larpers motivated by Hegelian dialectics", but the execution was good enough that as a faction they're contentious at worst. The writers not being able to do that idea justice is entirely because of them.
Obligatory episode 1 script extract:
I can see Caesar doing
something like that (ambiguous successor) if he wanted to keep his Legion in conflict to prevent complacency/weakness (he shuns medicine and makes firearms meritocratic on the same premise) but you'd need to be competent to do it in such a way that it doesn't undermine his own objective whilst also not immediately seeing the Legion be destroyed as an idea. Basically, he'd need some way of manufacturing something similar to the Roman civil wars without it resulting in something that sees successor states/ruination of the empire itself.
As I was typing the above I was going to try and make it work (Write on behalf of the writers essentially) but I've changed my mind. It's giving respect to an idea spawned from people who had no respect for the source material in the first place and I doubt they put much more thought into it other than, "Isn't this all stupid? haha".
@Serbian Peacekeepers
I see the rangers in episode 3 as basically the same as those Japanese holdouts post WW2, they know in their hearts the war is over, but the refuse to accept it so they keep fighting. Todd says in a interview a week after season 1 released (
IGN article) that the "bombs" fall just after the events of New Vegas. Now of course, season 2 showed there was only 1 bomb, so I can assume plans did change between season 1 and season 2 in regards to what happened, but the official timeline squeezes New Vegas in just before the nuking of Shady Sands. This does make the date of 2277 confusing, and has lead me to believe for a while now that the showrunners meant the date of 2277, but then someone in Bethesda realized the timeline fuckery and had to somehow retcon it after the show released.
I think trying to change the timeline to not make New Vegas non-canon was legitimate interjection on Bethesda's part rather than an attempt to make New Vegas non-canon and get away with it.
What I think happened is the actual interaction between the writers of the show and Bethesda has been overstated/exaggerated by Bethesda themselves to give the impression of the show being faithful to the IP, when in actuality the showrunners probably have a cheatsheet of lore details on various factions* and Bethesda thereafter are otherwise not involved in the process much at all. They might sign off on scripts but I doubt they've given more than a cursory read because they don't want to jeopardise possible future projects by appearing too nitpicky over things. Personally the project would've died during the Vault scene if I had a say because I wouldn't have signed off on anything too comedically stupid, but that's just me.
The haphazard handling of Fallout would give the impression of Bethesda chasing a bag over legitimate care for the franchise as a whole, which'd piss off the game audience moreso than the show's audience, which would impact them financially moreso than Amazon. So Todd trying to change "2277: fall of Shady Sands" from the show into "2277: decline of Shady Sands" (as dumb as that is), shows they were at least trying to
pretend they give a fuck. (
I'd argue Fallout 76 is so beyond the pale in terms of them giving no fucks whatsoever about Fallout that you don't need the show to act as evidence of this but I digress) At the same time it's also the bare minimum in terms of intervention, and discrepancies are still turning up now with season 2 so I'm taking that as they're no longer giving a shit about maintaining the illusion.
If they were more anal about the show needing to pay more attention and reverence to the material, then it might ruin future prospects for them to squeeze even more value from the IP - think how LOTR hasn't been milked as much as you would expect (until recently) because of how strict the Tolkien estate was with the IP - if people/studios are faced with a ton of restrictions and IP-holder meddling, then they won't even want to attempt creating something.
I'm interested to see how the faggots on reddit react to the Fallout-themed reality gameshow that's supposedly in production.
From what I can tell people can only cope about the show and shit turning more people onto the games, which I honestly don't see happening given the show's depiction of the material. The two types of people watching this show are people who've already played the games and those who probably won't play games at all, and I doubt one shitty show that portrays the material as immaturely as non-gamers already expect games to be like will jump in based on that. Even when the Marvel movies were raking in billions of dollars it's not like it then lead to an upswing in comic book sales - people rarely transfer from one medium to another unless they actually care for the material.
Given Fallout wasn't Bethesda's own original IP I think it's something of a red-headed stepchild for Bethesda. It's why it plays second fiddle to an IP they actually care more about, like Elder Scrolls, which is their actual flesh and blood. That's not to say Elder Scrolls hasn't been the victim of Bethesda's shit parenting, but the lows of Elder Scrolls still haven't reached reached the lows of Fallout.
Horse Armour at least came with new voice acting.
*
If you look at the show like the writers are working off of a bunch of conjecture instead of actual detailed lore, then the decisions make sense. For instance: "Brotherhood of Steel don't like ghouls" doesn't demarcate feral from non-feral, so to the writers this'd be portrayed as a blanket hatred of all ghouls regardless of sapience despite Fallout 3 and 4's Brotherhood doing nothing against the smart ones by and large. Fallout 3's "potshot" comment can just as easily be construed as Brotherhood not being able to tell the difference from afar between ferals and non-ferals, and the Brotherhood in 4 don't shoot Hancock on site nor do they send you on missions against non-ferals, and Danse still treats the kid ghoul in a fridge (fuck you Emil) like an actual child. The Indian Brotherhood dude might've got his head smashed in because his character was acting in accordance with half-assed lore notes.
