Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Television Games

Amazon's Live-Action Fallout Series Will Start Streaming In 2024 (theverge.com) 102

Posted by BeauHD from the mark-your-calendar dept.
Amazon has revealed that Fallout -- a live-action adaptation of Bethesda's popular RPG video game franchise -- will premiere on April 12th, 2024, exclusively via Prime Video. The Verge reports: The announcement was made on October 23rd, otherwise known to Fallout fans as "Fallout Day" -- the in-game date that marks the beginning of the Great War that turns the world into an irradiated nuclear wasteland. Bethesda's executive producer and game director Todd Howard is an executive producer on the series, which stars Ella Purnell (Yellowjackets), Walton Goggins (The Hateful Eight), Aaron Moten (Emancipation), Moises Arias (The King of Staten Island), Kyle MacLachlan (Twin Peaks), and Sarita Choudhury (Homeland).

Alongside the premiere announcement itself (which was amusingly presented as an interactive Pip-Boy interface graphic), Amazon said in a press release that the show will be an original story set in a future, post-apocalyptic version of Los Angeles and will be considered a canonical addition to the existing game franchise. We do not currently know how many episodes will be in the series or what the release schedule will look like following the premiere.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Amazon's Live-Action Fallout Series Will Start Streaming In 2024 More

Amazon's Live-Action Fallout Series Will Start Streaming In 2024

Comments Filter:

  • After the "original story" of Rings of Fire based on the "canonical" works of its creator...

    This time they (1) have included the original game director, Todd Howard, as executive producer and (2) they have stated that the TV series is going to be "canonical" and have "an original story"... ...what could go wrong with this adaptation?

    • Re:They don't want to fail again. (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Zumbs ( 1241138 ) on Tuesday October 24, 2023 @05:48AM (#63948467) Homepage
      Todd Howard weren't involved in the original Fallout games. He didn't come along until Fallout 3. It would have been nice if they had involved some of the people from the original dev teams as they had some pretty good writers.
      • This is "Bethesda's Fallout," says so in the summary. I would rant here about all the things that I didn't like about Bethesda's interpretation of the franchise, but I don't think anyone cares.

        Instead, why don't I link to this [youtube.com] fan-made short? It's probably at least as good as what Amazon is doing, and you don't have to sign up for Amazon Prime.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by Zumbs ( 1241138 )
          If they hired those guys, it would probably be a series worth watching. I backed at least one of their kickstarters back in the day.

      • It would have been nice if they had involved some of the people from the original dev teams as they had some pretty good writers.

        Unlike Bethesda. If the series will have the same quality writing as Bethesda's Fallouts, I'm not optimistic. At least it can't be worse than Rings of Power.

        • It would have been nice if they had involved some of the people from the original dev teams as they had some pretty good writers.

          Unlike Bethesda. If the series will have the same quality writing as Bethesda's Fallouts, I'm not optimistic. At least it can't be worse than Rings of Power.

          Careful, man. Amazon's series seem to have the uncanny ability to out-fail their previous attempts. Wheel of Time is only marginally bad compared to Rings of Power. I don't expect Fallout to be better than either.

          • I think the Fallout show has at least some potential to be better than Rings of Power since Jonathan Nolan and Lisa Joy are involved and in theory they are capable of something decent. Westworld season 1 was very good and they've worked big budget productions before.

            I had concerns with Rings of Power from the start because they seem to be foisting this very established and lofty series on creators and showrunners who didn't seem to have the experience for it, especially for the money being spent. That lea

            • With some more established names behind it maybe they can be given the freedom to put something together that feels more like a coherent vision.

              You have more faith than me. From what I've seen with modern production, if the executives in charge want to meddle? It doesn't matter who the creative team is. They'll meddle regardless of the creative team. And Amazon seems stuck DEEP in committee creativity, where everything has to match some level of topic-du-jour, regardless of source material.

              • Sadly you are probably correct, I have to wonder if Nolan/Joy got some contract rules to prevent that from happening based on the strength of their credits, the only way that seems to work is if you have a big enough name to make that demand in the first place (I believe Seth Rogen was able to do this in regards to The Boys)

                It's also very, stupid? Ironic? Something on the fact that the decades long shining example of prestige TV, HBO, had it's success from that very concept; find creatives with a vision and

                • I think it's a slowly creeping up idolization of executives. They have more clout, therefore, they're way smarter than creatives. This isn't exclusive to the streaming services. I'll use the one example I'm super familiar with: Paramount / Hasbro with the Transformers movies. They wanted someone extremely different from Bay. Someone with great character development and great story telling ability. Enter Travis Knight. If you've seen Kubo and the Two Strings you know what he's capable of when not on a leash.

                  • To be fair in your example though if you are a newish director and you are coming onto Transformers, a franchise that's already made at that point like $4B from a director not exactly known for characters and plot ("Those aren't ideas, those are special effects!", "I don't understand the difference") [youtube.com], from a franchise most known for dumb action and one that explicitly markets for broad international appeal (the Chinese love some Transformers) .

                    Pretty much like how the Marvel and DC franchises have chewed th

                    • My biggest thing with the Transformers movies was the publicly stated goal of bringing in a "different type of director with a broader view of character and plot" and then doing everything they could to gut-punch him during the process. That's gotta sting. Especially for a guy that was super pumped to be able to work on a property he'd loved since he was a kid. Unlike Bay, who literally spent years saying publicly that Transformers was utter shit and he would never approach it, though in retrospect, that wa

                    • Yeah I feel like that type of talk always gets bandied about when you have the 4th or 5th part of a franchise. If they were serious about it they would let the guy do a reboot (or soft sequel reboot, otherwise known as a seaboot) instead of an in-universe spinoff. Hope the guy got paid though and can move to better things, Kubo was very good.

                      I know they've had other missteps and good things since then but man, those last 2 seasons of GoT really showed them asleep at the wheel, like, did they watch those l

                    • Yeah I feel like that type of talk always gets bandied about when you have the 4th or 5th part of a franchise. If they were serious about it they would let the guy do a reboot (or soft sequel reboot, otherwise known as a seaboot) instead of an in-universe spinoff. Hope the guy got paid though and can move to better things, Kubo was very good.

                      I know they've had other missteps and good things since then but man, those last 2 seasons of GoT really showed them asleep at the wheel, like, did they watch those last 6 episodes before they aired them?

                      It's a lot to read, but the backstory is available on the Westeros fan site [westeros.org]. Basically, the Ds wanted to film the red wedding. After that happened, they literally made public statements that it was now a race to the end. Originally set to do ten seasons of thirteen episodes, they kept cutting back and still felt like they were trapped. And they were big headed enough to make lots of public statements about how they went to school for this and so were better equipped to handle the story of Westeros than Geor

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by BigFire ( 13822 )

          One of monkey paw's finger curled...

      • I'm iffy on this. While technically true, it was an evolving franchise. There's stuff accepted 100% as canon that I kind of disagree with because it was only in the "Fallout Bible" and not in any prior game. Such as all vaults being experiments, that was an add-on by the original developers *after* fallout 2.

        Also, because Bethesda Game Studios purchased the intellectual property, it was not contested, not a hostile takeover, it means BSG gets to say what is canon or not. They do seem to have more consis

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by Zumbs ( 1241138 )
          The originals certainly weren't perfect. The vault experiments sounded like a fun idea, but taken to its logical conclusion gets really weird, as we saw in the sequels. As it happens, I also enjoyed Fallout 3 and 4, and it is certainly true that the writers of those games are quite creative and Bethesda is generally good at visual story telling.

    • Honestly, it's hard to predict with Amazon.

      On one hand you have Rings of Power and Foundation, but on the other hand, you also have Reacher, The Boys, and The Terminal List.

      I am going to be cautiously optimistic.

      • Don't forget Carnival Row, which was a VERY refreshing experience.

      • Foundation is Apple, Amazon did take over The Expanse and did a good job with it.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by cob666 ( 656740 )

        Honestly, it's hard to predict with Amazon.

        On one hand you have Rings of Power and Foundation, but on the other hand, you also have Reacher, The Boys, and The Terminal List.

        I am going to be cautiously optimistic.

        Rings of Power: Let's make a show about a time period in a beloved franchise but we have rights to maybe 1% of the source material, what could go wrong?
        Foundation: Let's make a show about a much beloved franchise and use only about 1% of the source material, what could go wrong?

        While I hope I'm wrong, I'm not going to go into this with very high expectations...

  • Yet another "$streaming_service exclusive" (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Opportunist ( 166417 ) on Tuesday October 24, 2023 @05:38AM (#63948447)

    And yet again, nobody gives half a fuck.

    Let's be honest here, these things won't drag anyone to your streaming service. The reason why things like this worked on cable was that people already paid for the cable networks anyway and whether they switched to $three_letter_station_A or $three_letter_station_B didn't matter to them. Nobody would have signed up for yet another cable TV subscription just to see some new series that they don't even know whether it would be any good.

    But that's what you expect people to do here.

    So you go out and buy some name people recognize, hoping that name recognition alone will convince people to sign up for your service. You buy names like Lord of the Rings or, now, Fallout. And you think that's enough for people to drop money to switch to your streaming service and hope that what you do there is any good.

    Sorry, but people don't do that.

    And of course, your expected effect, i.e. a sudden spike in sign ups, doesn't happen. So what do you do? You drop the series after a season. Which kills any chance that this would EVER cause anyone to sign up for your service due to word of mouth finally getting around. So even if your show was any good, you killed it before it takes off.

    Say, one question: What idiot is responsible for planning this? I mean, that's something I figured out now, here, while I was writing this. Someone there gets PAID to NOT figure this out, for money.

    • But what if it DOES work? Am like you on this and, if anything, these exclusives simply encourage me to sail the seven sees and find whatever show I want to watch without paying a dime.
      But... If they keep doing this... Maybe it DOES work? We don't have access to the numbers, but maybe whenever they release a new show with a big name, they get a sudden spike of new paying accounts?
      Am honestly trying to make sense of this because, unless it's actually working, they are legit burning through money for nothing.

      • I think it was Einstein who said that insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.

        So they're not stupid.

        Just insane.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by gweihir ( 88907 )

          Makes sense to me. Of course that assumes they can see they are trying to do the same thing again. If they cannot see that (a real possibility) then "stupid" becomes a factor again. You can only be insane enough to ignore things if you see the things.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by gweihir ( 88907 )

        They wouldn't be THAT stupid, would they?

        Never underestimate the stupidity of large, complex organizations. Never underestimate the stupidity and disconnect of people in "leadership" roles. Never underestimate the number of people in such organizations that _know_ things are going badly but cannot do anything about it.

        By now I have come to the conclusion this is the central reason why capitalism does not work: Without strong incentives otherwise, there is always a tendency to larger and larger corporations and these universally go to dysfunctional

    • And yet again, nobody gives half a fuck.

      I'm in a Fallout group and they're pretty excited. Even if it sucks it'll create some new imagery to make memes with, and make it more likely that Fallout 5 comes sooner rather than later.

      • Excited, sure. Excited enough to sign up for Amazon Prime just for this one show? And I don't mean "watch whether the reviews are good and then decide" but I mean sign up right then and there when it lands.

        • Excited, sure. Excited enough to sign up for Amazon Prime just for this one show?

          What percentage of them do you think don't have Prime already?

          And I don't mean "watch whether the reviews are good and then decide" but I mean sign up right then and there when it lands.

          Probably most of them. It's not like it's expensive to sign up for Prime for a month.

        • Comment removed based on user account deletion

          • Yes, a better question would be will it do what Amazon wants it to do and get people to sign up long term. And obviously the answer is no. Netflix USED to have that back when they were the only game in town. Users don't want to have to subscribe to a whole bunch of different services to see everything. What they want is to subscribe to one service that has whatever technology and agreements in place are necessary for them to just watch whatever they want, and they can't have that.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Zarhan ( 415465 )

      But that's what you expect people to do here.

      Actually...we are doing just that.

      However, for the rest, the new series are *exactly* what draws us to those. Right now we are looking at Netflix since they got Young Sheldon and Star Trek Enterprise and we had missed those. Next one up is Disney+. Holidays are coming, lots of kids coming to visit, and we also want to see the new Marvel and Star Wars stuff (Loki Season 2, Ahsoka).

      Plan is to switch over to Amazon Prime at some point after holidays for Wheel of Tim

    • Or maybe by producing new content they differentiate themselves from other services so people stay.

      My friend's Hulu account glitched so I had to re-login with qr-code etc. I didn't bother for a week and haven't actually watched anything since. 2 weeks downtime. Didn't notice or care for so long because nothing original on there I care about when I already have 3 other services showing 99% of the same stuff.

      If it was my account I would've canceled.

      When Apple raised their rate, it was incentive to stop aut

    • Re:Yet another "$streaming_service exclusive" (Score:5, Informative)

      by Zumbs ( 1241138 ) on Tuesday October 24, 2023 @07:53AM (#63948683) Homepage
      I signed up to HBO because they had GoT (and a few other interesting things). When it ended, I cancelled by subscription. I signed up to Amazon Prime (in Germany) because it had the Orville and cancelled my subscription when I had watched it. When watching a lot of TV in a shortish amount of time strikes my fancy, I'll probably sign up to each of the streaming services in some order and watch any interesting shows on them before moving on.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by gweihir ( 88907 )

      And yet again, nobody gives half a fuck.

      Indeed. That was my first, second and last though: Do I care? No.

      I would very much like to have another _good_ fallout game, but that does not seem likely for the foreseeable future. Some life-action TV-level stuff that gets most of the lore wrong? Why on earth would I have any interest in that?

      • The series is being done by/with the same people responsible for the games now, so it will get the lore no more wrong than another game.

        Development of the next Fallout title has already been announced, but they're doing another elder scrolls game first, so it's likely to not happen until 2030 by some estimates. That's presumably why they're doing a refresh of FO4, which I for one do not want. My potato barely runs FO4 at 1080p gracefully. I don't need another high res reskin project, as I don't have budget

        • I think they have plans to produce remastered versions of Oblivion and FO3 too. I'm not sure if they're too cowardly to include Morrowind or if they think it's already perfect.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by Zumbs ( 1241138 )
          Given that they have only just released Starfield, I would guess a release of the next Elder Scrolls game would be at least 5 years in the future and the next Fallout title 5 years after that. At best. Unless they have actually managed to split their teams, so they can work on multiple titles in parallel. But rumors have been flying around about that for 15 years, and they still take a long time between their major RPG titles.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by gweihir ( 88907 )

            If they do not want to lose the Starfield universe, they have to put a ton of work into that. It is just too generic at this time. That pretty much precludes another large effort.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by gweihir ( 88907 )

          Sure. FO4 was already pretty bad, unfortunately. So even having the current people in there does not make for good prospects. And it is a freaking TV show (or equivalent). The reason I liked Fallout was that I could play it as a game.

          • FO4 is a very different game from 3 or NV, but now that it's grown up a bit and there's a lot of good community fixes for its major failures it's become a pretty good game. There are story mods that fix the really dumb decisions you were forced into for no good reason for example, and mods which reduce the overhead of the downtown Boston area that frequently craters people's systems.

            Hopefully they've learned something from the best of what the community has done with their baby.

    • Re:Yet another "$streaming_service exclusive" (Score:5, Insightful)

      by thegarbz ( 1787294 ) on Tuesday October 24, 2023 @09:40AM (#63948979)

      And yet again, nobody gives half a fuck.

      What do you mean again? By all accounts these streaming service exclusives are wildly popular, popular to the point that streaming services invest hundreds of millions of dollars to produce more.

      Why is it every time you talk about Netflix your posts are completely devoid of reality? Actually what even is Netflix? I seem to recall you saying everyone cancelled their account because everyone was using a shared one. That is of course the second major bankruptcy you predicted after their price rise, or maybe the third after their ads supported service.

      Why should anyone take your comments on streaming seriously when your predictions are time and time again not remotely reflecting reality?

  • Get your predictions in folks. Mine:

    The odds they'll retcon "this is canon" are so high if this tarnishes the brand (by becoming a laughing stock and burning a money mountain) it's not even worth further discussion of canonicity, but because that irrelevancy will drive arguments in comment sections influencers will keep bringing it up.

    Dogmeat in the first half of the season, if not the first episode, if not the first 5 minutes of the first episode, if not the first damn trailer they show. Early "Look, a dog

    • Predicting "same process as usual" is a pretty cheap shot.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by a5y ( 938871 )

        As cheap as no predictions at all?

        • I know, I know, predicting anything else would probably be like saying that after an election it won't be the same shit as before...

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by a5y ( 938871 )

            That's fair. I was going to go with some more specifics ("if it goes down badly they'll end with a We-FONV-TV-now cliffhanger."), but after 76 I really don't think I've the pulse of what Fallout as a thing someone will throw money at means anymore.

            I'd have thought 76 would have been the final nail of the coffin of whether people care about Fallout anymore but I guess not.

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by gweihir ( 88907 )

              I'd have thought 76 would have been the final nail of the coffin of whether people care about Fallout anymore but I guess not.

              For me it was. Well, at least about any _new_ fallout stuff. My guess is we may get lucky in 10 years or later again, but not before that and only if some people take a real risk. At the moment the franchise is completely screwed.

            • I'd have thought 76 would have been the final nail of the coffin of whether people care about Fallout anymore but I guess not.

              People who have played it have pretty mixed responses. I haven't played it and won't because I don't mess with online-only games without run-your-own dedicated servers, I'm not making a time and money investment in it just to have it rugpulled. But it's not about the game's merit or lack thereof as a game, it's about the whole idea's lack of merit as an investment. I have a backup of my FO4 install, I can play that without anyone's blessing any time.

              • Re: (Score:1)

                by wfj2fd ( 4643467 )
                It's worth looking at FO76 as different type of thing from a normal Fallout game. Think of it like an immersive themepark in the Fallout universe. It's not really story driven, it's event/quest driven if that makes any sense. The themepark view explains things like the repeating events, daily quests, etc.

            • Except fallout 1 through 4 were great. I know people have predicted the end and that Bethesda was goign to fail any hour now, but Bethesda did a good job taking over the franchise. Obsidian did goo also. To label one as the utlimate evil game maker and the other as the supreme goodness is the typical style, but it's nonsense. Obsidian has many flaws of its own, really only had a very tiny number of original devs (and not Tim Cain, the Fallout originator, who was only at Obsidian briefly _after_ New Vega

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by gweihir ( 88907 )

        Well, it is a pretty obvious good guess here as well. So cheap it may be, but if it does the trick it deserves respect nonetheless.

        One thing I have learned about the human race by now is "yes, they are really _that_ stupid" and "in groups, it gets even worse".

        • The intelligence of a group can be determined by taking the IQ of the dumbest person in the group and dividing that by the number of feet.

  • I like Twisted Metal, it's been more fun than I thought it would be, and they managed to get some drama in there too to keep me interested between the funny bits.

    With Fallout, I would have preferred they adapted the New Vegas game before moving on to new material. The overall story is solid enough to carry a show, and it is conveniently divided into different areas each with their own little problems and stories that could be episodes if compressed a bit, or seasons if stretched a bit. Why start over and

    • Why start over and take a big gamble when there's already something that works and would be a much smaller roll of the dice?

      The advantage to starting over in a new setting every time is that you can always just chuck one in the bin and say it was never canon without having to worry about the effects on any other part.

    • I'm gonna second Twisted Metal, was actually a lot of fun and I think a key part of that is that the makers of the show knew the premise is ridiculous and defies most logic so just have fun and go over the top. Also Marvel should let Anthony Mackie actually be funny, they really underutilize him.

      I can see a show wanting to carve it's own path, the fans of New Vegas are gonna excoriate anything so why take the chance, Fallout by it's premise is kinda just designed to take place in different settings.

      I am ju

    • Personally, I like FO3 more then FO:NV. New Vegas has some serious flaws, and I think a lot of the "Bethesda Bad, Obsidian Good!" cultists overlook them. Like New Vegas is mostly on the rails for the first half the game - if you try to explore in any direction you will be punted very quickly. Also the stupid trolley problem keeps popping up - why can't I fix the reactor AND rescue the vault dwellers, why is there no good ending to the game and ALL endings are bad endings. New Vegas insists that I canno

      • I didn't even know the devs had changed, NV was just my first Fallout experience and the rails were pretty well disguised - well enough for a first full playthrough anyway. It impressed. Now I know it well enough that the rails chafe a bit, but I can run the map in any direction just by being cautious.

        What did not impress were the bugs. I loaded a lot of mods to fix things, and also to do things like make the Strip one contiguous zone, add companions, and a bit more content in the wastes.

        I tried the DLCs

        • The difference is that FO:NV is trying to tell a story in an open world environment. But FO3 is an open world environment that has some stories. That leads to a different feeling. And the smaller stores in FO3 realy pisses some people off, especially those that bee-line through the main story and then say "that's all there was??"

          That's probably biggest flaw in my view of the Fallout 4 storyline. It gives the main quest a sense of urgency, but almost everyone quickly diverts from that. You can see onlin

  • Wasteland vs fallout (Score:3)

    by iAmWaySmarterThanYou ( 10095012 ) on Tuesday October 24, 2023 @07:54AM (#63948689)

    Earlier Fallout games had a great sense of humor which was tossed out later, unfortunately. F4 was pretty serious right from the start once you leave your house. The no-humor version is pure post-nuclear world. Nothing special about the world that hasn't been seen before.

    Wasteland is an older game with an inferior UI but I like the grittier ugly world and the plot and characters are more interesting and desperate. F4 is more like the world in the recovering stage while Wasteland humanity's survival is still in doubt.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by gweihir ( 88907 )

      Yep. FO4 still had it in pockets, but not as overall tone. And that was basically the end of the series.

      • Yeah, it's a bummer. I still have my F1 manual, although the media is long gone. I found it while cleaning out the garage and flipped through it. It's a saver; still funny. I have this vague hope they'll go back to that eventually but seems unlikely.

        F4 was more like pure dark humor when they had it, not so much funny dark. And some shit was just very dark... on my first play through I was exploring some random apartment building and found a skeleton in a tub with a radio in it's lap. It struck me as a

    • What? Fallout 4 has plenty of humor all over it. Did you even apply for the job at Cambridge Polymer Labs, or go for a ride on the USS Constitution, or send the Hubologists to the stars?

      • Did you play F1?

        • Yes, and Fallout 2. And Brotherhood of Steel.

          • You didn't find 1&2 way more funny than F4?

            Obviously humor is a personal thing but F1 was funny right from opening the manual. I just didn't find F4 up there on the same humor scale.

            • I thought both were funny. But your original post said "The no-humor version", implying that Fallout 4 lacked all humor, and that was what I was responding to, not trying to say which was funnier.

              • Sure F4 had a few moments but all over all yeah I don't think of it as a humorous game. It's pretty darkly themed.

                SPOILERS FOR ANYINE WHO CARES.

                We start off by nuking the town, seeing our neighbors not allowed into the bunker, waking up part way to see our spouse murdered and child kidnapped. Then the bunker was run by a madman as seen in his computer files. We emerge to find the corpses of the guards and neighbors and then head back home to find the whole place demolished except for a crazed robot butl

  • What they won't do (Score:3)

    by packrat0x ( 798359 ) on Tuesday October 24, 2023 @10:26AM (#63949145)

    1) Fix Fallout 3's Plot.
    Change timeline to be about the same time as Fallout 1.
    Eliminate BoS from East Coast narritaive. Replace with Ghouls in Power Armor,
    who mostly live underground / in metro tunnels.
    Maryland (especially Rivet City) sucks up to the Enclave.
    Virgina (BoS Outcasts reskinned as Virginia Army) engaged in Observe and Report, but
    hate the Enclave. Enclave tries using Project Purity then Super Mutants to destroy Ghouls (war by proxy).
    DC wasteland becomes a narrative of a local anarchy (of wastelanders, slavers, raiders)
    bordered by recovering states. (think Demolition Man: outside the DC wasteland, play by the
    rules; inside the wasteland, try to survive).

    2) Fix Fallout New Vegas' Plot.
    Move time to between Fallout 1 and Fallout 2.
    New Vegas should be in better shape, especially towards the east. (explain as
    old Fallout 1 map only extends to west Los Vegas).
    Shady Sands (NCR Capital) is NW of New Vegas. Most caravan traffic shouldn't be coming
    from the SW (ie from Los Angeles / Boneyard). NCR's plan is to fix the
    railroad to Boneyard and restart the LA water canal--thus expanding the NCR.
    Caesar's plan is to stop them.

  • Canonically Los Angeles is the "Angel's Boneyard" and filled with.... ghouls. Nary a human to be found. It's a dangerous place for your human player character because a lot of ghouls are feral.

    Did fucking nobody at Bethesda play the original Fallout?

    Kind of surprised I'm the only person to mention in this thread that we already have a canonical Los Angeles, and it ain't the kind of place you'd start a Fallout story unless your main character is a Ghoul.

    • Did fucking nobody at Bethesda play the original Fallout?

      They did but seemed to really embrace the most superficial aspects of them. That's why New Vegas is generally considered superior to 3 and 4

      "Brotherhood of Steel is badass bro" only kinda getting to the core that they are a bunch of luddite weirdos who should be stopped
      "The original games had that oldey time song in the beginning, let's make that the entire soundtrack and theme!"
      "The world was nuked in the 1950's and the originals had an undercurrent of atomic age themes. Let's take that and ramp it up 49

  • I'm curious about what product placement they will use.
    Will they change all the items in-game ( Nuka Cola?) to real life versions, or will they begin selling in real life versions of the in-game products?

  • Will it be "One Piece" good or "Last of Us" bad... that's the question.

  • due to cost - otherwise it will be low budget in a derlict industrial estate- . They never do sci-fi anyway , They do character drama in a sci-fi setting.
  • ...to hear about how the end of the world was men, white people, and the police's fault!

  • Hello, siblings from Fallout. We of the Tolkien and/or Asimov tribes welcome you to whichever support groups you might need. Good luck.

Slashdot Top Deals

Reality must take precedence over public relations, for Mother Nature cannot be fooled. -- R.P. Feynman

Close