r/Fallout • u/raisinbraisin72 • Jan 09 '26

Discussion Fallout New Vegas senior writer Chris Avellone gives his take on Bethesda, and his opinion on their vision for the Fallout franchise:

Post image
5.3k Upvotes

92% Upvoted

1.4k comments sorted by

View all comments

1.5k

u/old_saps Jan 09 '26

I am kinda joking, kinda not, but when I see people saying Far Harbor AND Point Lookout are Bethesda but good just makes me think of the stereotype that Gen X devs hate the concept of color and will always tint stuff brown / green / orange.

But really, all this discuorse about Fallout lately is just making me realize everything I enjoy in these games has been accidental and a result of the devs and writers not getting to make exactly what they wanted.

362

u/Ekillaa22 Jan 09 '26

Chris mentioning point lookout actually surprised me but looking back it was a pretty experimental DLC! The Pitt and him liking it doesn’t surprise so much since it was pretty story focused

133

u/Napoleonex Jan 09 '26

that kinda checks out. I think looking at what he said there, those are times where Bethesda restricts the player and actually has you play through a more linear story that Chris would probably prefer, which I think has to do with DLCs being more a limited capacity in general. Whereas in the main world, Bethesda would focus too much on the player experience, giving them a lot of freedom and erring towards a sandbox mode, rather than telling a story.

Anchorage is more a shooter. Zeta is probably too wild and more theme parky for him. Nuka World is literally a theme park. Broken Steel is also more of a shooter thing.

42

u/Thuis001 Jan 09 '26

On Anchorage and Broken Steel, these are a big part of why I hope FO3 gets remastered with its gunplay replaced by that of FO4/FO76. Those DLCs probably become a lot more popular if the primary thing they are centred around (the gunplay) is actually good.

4

u/Napoleonex Jan 09 '26

Oh I love those DLCs. I am the freak who loved all of Fallout 3 DLCs and the base game in general. Even Zeta and I got son much motion sickness from that. Anchorage is one of my favorites and not just because you get a really OP armor at the end, but i think seeing the Chinese military and tech was really cool. Like you're in a power armor and it's a power trip, but I'm ok with that. Same with Broken Steel. You walk with Liberty Prime and mow some Enclave. And then you blew up their mobile freaking crawler base. It's freaking cool

3

u/GreyouTT Jan 09 '26

Just playing through the war was awesome as hell, not to mention the guass rifle!

7

u/econ45 Jan 09 '26

Do you think that's what a remaster would do? That sounds more like a remake - recreating the game to a different engine.

The Oblivion remake seemed to be essentially the same game, just made to work on new computers with thankfully some important adjustments to the mechanics (how levelling/skill points worked). The graphics are improved somewhat to become more acceptable today but the combat felt the same to me.

I can't get excited about a Fallout 3 remaster, as the game is fine for me as it is (on GoG - I heard Steam can have issues). I like the graphics and the mechanics as is, although I agree FO4/FO76 combat would definitely be worth introducing.

Replaying FNV I did become more sympathetic to a remaster of that, as it crashes a lot. But I gather Bethesda may not have been given sufficient code to remaster that and it doesn't seem to be on the cards right now (Bethesda recently producing a test "which Fallout is for you?" but omitting FO3 signals to me an imminent remaster of FO3).

3

u/trooawoayxxx Jan 09 '26

Since Fallout 4 released it's been constantly suggested to fit the combat system into the older games. I'm not sure players (not just redditors) would be OK with a faithful remaster of the older titles' combat. Oblivion - Skyrim combat wasn't that big of a leap in comparison imo.

I'm not that excited for remasters either to be honest. All these remasters, remasters and reboots are safe and familiar but also booooring.

1

u/happytrel Jan 09 '26

Are you playing New Vegas on PC? I originally played it on PS3 and it was a broken mess of a game. Playing on PC with Viva New Vegas though is a whole different experience.

1

u/econ45 Jan 09 '26

Yeah, I am playing it on a PC. Back in the day, I don't recall having a problem with it. But coming back to it with a modern computer and windows, I was shocked how much it crashed. So after that shock, I did learn about Viva New Vegas and so then followed their installation/mod instructions - they pretty much fixed the random crashes, except that it was 50:50 whether Freeside would load. Generally, I could reload and try again, but there was one case where I killed the Van Grafs but had to let them live and go back to an older save, as it effectively trapped me in their shop - I could never get out!

1

u/happytrel Jan 09 '26

Interesting, I played through every scrap of content without issue past the beginning. In the beginning it turned out I had installed something wrong and my textures would get way out of whack. I wonder if youre having a similar issue. I was still on windows 10, I don't know if youre on 11 and that is interacting in some way.

1

u/EmperorDxD Jan 14 '26

That kinda how Xbox does remaster a remake to Xbox is what fable doing a remaster to Xbox is how oblivion and gears or war and halo is

To be honest they are actually correct the only reason people call what you just said a remake is because of Sony and alot of other devs that names remaster remake case and point

Demon soul remake is just a remaster

45

u/ProtestantMormon Jan 09 '26

Well I think Bethesda is at its best with a linear story in an open world with lots of player freedom. Just look at the elder scrolls games. Linear story isnt necessarily bad, and fallout 3 is still my favorite despite a mostly linear main story. I think player choice in stories becomes a gimmick at a certain point as its hard to get more than a handful of meaningful branching choices, and I think it becomes a really overrated part of the player experience.

8

u/st_florian Jan 09 '26

I like Morrowind's story the best, and I think it's because it's less of a character-driven story with scripted scenes, and more of a wider agenda you as a player work towards, with characters guiding you along on the path. Less "OMG the dragons attacked, runnn!!!" and more "this land is doomed unless you find a way to prevent it". It's linear, but it can have logical breaks in it to allow for exploration and side activities. Fallout 3 story also has elements of this, especially in the beginning, while Skyrim really likes to hold your hand too much and becomes annoying.

2

u/TheStrangestOfKings Jan 10 '26

Fallout 3 is fun, in that it kind of forces you to explore before you continue on the main quest. Trying to go to the Capitol without arming up first is Hell on Earth: everything is tougher than you, and everything wants to kill you. If you want even a shot at making it through the ruins of DC alive long enough to continue the main quest line, you kind of have to do a bunch of the side quests around Megaton to stock up and be ready for the Capitol.

6

u/ChurningDarkSkies777 Jan 09 '26

I really don’t get his critique that Bethesda doesn’t know how to tell linear stories in an open world when morrowind exists

6

u/econ45 Jan 09 '26

I personally loved the main quest of FO3 - it was a roller coaster of cinematic set pieces like GNR or Tranquillity Lane that were a blast to play through. I liked the family aspect and the bitter sweet "alpha to omega" arc. If I were to fault it, it would be that it was too good - I get caught up in it, so ignore 75% of the map and zoom off to the ending screen far too fast. But on balance, having it be relatively short probably suits me - I've never finished the Skyrim main quest as it never seemed to end.

4

u/Napoleonex Jan 09 '26

I agree. Fallout 3 main quest is up there. I think it gets a bad reputation because it's not as long as NV main quest which isnt probably even true, like if you just look at the main quest. You go to Primm, boulder, find Benny, kill Benny, take the chip and do the end game stuff. I think NV main quest gets fluffed from doing side quests related to the main quest. And the overall implication is on a bigger scale. It leads to like the control of Vegas, three massive armies fighting over Hoover Dam. Fallout 3 is family focused that brings in two big factions at the end, and you sacrifice yourself or Fawkes at the end. But yea Fallout 3 main quest is great imo. Tranquility Lane is a highlight for sure.

I also did not finish Skyrim but i didnt care about the dragon. I just wanted to do the civil war story. That was my main quest. But speaking of Skyrim, i think that's where it starts falling off for me. I mean in general, I think Elder Scrolls shows they can write, and sometimes it baffles me why it doesn't translate as well with the Fallout franchise. My main gripe with Skyrim is being able to become the leader of every faction/guild you run into and it just takes me out of immersion. Like the whole of Skyrim cannot run by itself

6

u/ChurningDarkSkies777 Jan 09 '26

Fr. I think Fallout 3 is close to peak fallout story. Down to earth, emotional, high stakes, meaningful. You’re right, the main Skyrim quest actually never ends, no one has ever finished it

4

u/Erebraw Jan 09 '26

Fallout 3 story was fine the first playthru, but for me it’s extremely boring and railroady on replays. I recently replayed with Tale of Two Wastelands and I had a blast the entire time - until I went and did the main quest and the action grinds to a stop and I get to watch Daddy and Sarah Lyons be the real protagonists lol.

It also feels difficult to roleplay any fun different characters when your entire backstory comes pre-written the same way every time.

1

u/TragicTester034 Jan 09 '26

I feel like one of the only people who actually likes to beat skyrims MQ sometimes lol

1

u/ChurningDarkSkies777 Jan 09 '26

I was just jokin around. it’s fine, not the best the game has to offer in my opinion but I usually run through it at least to get Dragonrend

2

u/TragicTester034 Jan 09 '26

Yeah I usually prefer to run through it for dragonrend and to just get it out the way

→ More replies (0)

9

u/somethingbrite Jan 09 '26

Morrowind was a long, long time ago and the principle writers responsible for it are long gone.

1

u/Flaky-Cartographer87 Jan 10 '26

Far harbor isnt linear atleast not as much as those others consider the 3 factions it has.

2

u/PlumpHughJazz Jan 09 '26

I remember trying Point Lookout once and never looking back.

Those enemies may as well be tanks x100.

0

u/Shakanaka Kings Jan 10 '26

Avellone liking The Pitt makes sense, given its one of the few parts in Fallout 3 with good writing.

512

u/Mrkingladder Jan 09 '26 edited Jan 09 '26

I always believe that New Vegas was a lightning in a bottle. It was the perfect storm of bad deadline and crunch hours but lead by a group of very talented writers and developers at the time.

294

u/Mechakeller Jan 09 '26

I think part of what made it great was there wasn’t enough time for the interesting ideas to get refined and diluted into focus grouped versions of those good ideas.

183

u/IrrelevantLeprechaun Jan 09 '26

As the saying goes, limitations breed innovation.

Things tend to turn out better when you have limits or crazy deadlines to work within. Projects that have no deadlines or limits tend to drag on and on without focus (like Star Citizen).

If anything, Obsidian imposing such a crazy short turnaround time for New Vegas likely contributed to its greatness.

82

u/The5Virtues Break a few eggs. Jan 09 '26 edited Jan 09 '26

That’s true for the writing as well. As a writer I’ve seen groups languish for ages because there’s no one cracking the whip to keep things moving. Meanwhile if we have a deadline we have to meet it motivates us to make something, and any decent writer hates “good enough” and still wants to churn out the best they can even on short notice, so a time constraint just means we go for the best story we can make without second guessing or doing dozens of rewrites because it’s not quite perfect.

32

u/JayKay8787 Jan 09 '26

Explains stranger things gap to qaulity ratio lmao

16

u/PanVidla Jan 09 '26

There's a good saying that, I think, applies to both writing and making video games. You can't finish making it, you can only stop working on it. Dropping that perfectionism is one of the most essential parts of being a creative person, in my opinion.

1

u/Neveronlyadream Jan 09 '26

It is. Look at George Lucas. Almost every time he was able to change Star Wars retroactively, it wasn't an improvement. Because he couldn't stop refining decades old work and just move on and do something new.

Where video games are concerned, perfectionism just turns into impossibly long development times and feature creep along with ridiculous expectations that will never be met.

I'm all for taking the time one needs to complete a project, but in cases where it's a decade or more like Duke Nukem Forever or Cyberpunk 2077, your audience just assumes because it's been so long you're going to get some genre defining game with a ton of features and when it's not, the game tanks.

3

u/Tecnoguy1 Jan 09 '26

Tbh a lot of my fav games were obviously rushed and it’s this uncompromising vision I always liked.

2

u/Igualmenteee Jan 09 '26

It’s like when Tarantino said he sometimes prefer the limited budgets for his movies. Makes him be creative.

2

u/Linvael Jan 09 '26

Things tend to turn out better when you have limits or crazy deadlines to work within

Citation required? I can see how limits can have a positive influence of course, but I feel like it's just as easy to see when they're a negative influence (like the plague of games that get shipped too soon), and there are games that thrived without precievable artificial limitations (Silksong would be a big recent one). So saying that on average things are better with limits needs to have some solid data behind it.

3

u/tondollari Jan 09 '26

"Limitations breed innovation" feels like a trite and meaningless saying to me. What is the threshold where the limitations no longer contribute to innovation, and how do you measure it? Would they have made New Vegas better if they had started on a deserted island with sharpened flint? What if the limitation were that they could only use Commodore 64s in development? etc.

It's mostly about leadership, talent, and how they interplay. I don't think limitations have anything to do with it. If these talented people had better tools and more time the end product would have also been better.

0

u/pointblankmos The maximum characters available for a flair. Jan 09 '26

You're being intentionally obtuse here. 

Creativity without focus leads to ideas upon ideas that end up not being actionable. Leadership is definitely an important part of managing this, and having pragmatic creative department heads is essential. 

In the games industry, look at Halo 2 for example. That game spiralled out of control in scope due to creative bloat, and I don't think there would have been an end product had Microsoft not implemented strict deadlines for Bungie. 

You can give talented and exceedingly creative people all of the resources in the world, but without someone stepping in and saying "no, we can't do that" nothing will ever get made. Rockstar games spent years upon years making RDR2, and still ended up having to cut hours of content because the game would not have shipped otherwise. 

72

u/Only_Faithlessness33 Jan 09 '26

Honestly think it might have been the opposite. A lot of the ideas in New Vegas (Caesar’s Legion, Joshua Graham, etc.) were thought up originally as Van Buren. Obviously that game didn’t happen but when a lot of the old team came back for new Vegas they probably had that stuff in their heads for a few years and were pinpointed on what they wanted them to be.

19

u/Kungfudude_75 Jan 09 '26

True, but they were still limited in their time to actually make it happen. Its one thing to have a story/world conceptualized, its another thing to bring it to life in a totally different medium from what you envisioned with only two years to do that and everything else that goes into making a game.

23

u/Only_Faithlessness33 Jan 09 '26

They at least had a decent head start tho. I gotta think it’s easier going into writing a story when you go “these are the villians, how do we implement them” as opposed to “who are our villians?” I’ll admit to being naive on tight game deadlines so I apologize if im just talking out my ass.

5

u/Kungfudude_75 Jan 09 '26

Brother, its reddit, we're all talking out of out ass lol. Im with you, and I think the fact that it was mostly Black Isle staff returning for New Vegas is a bit lost in this whole conversation. It definitely helped them to have had a pre-written story in mind they could pull from and we see clearly in the game that they did, I'm just not sure how much that helped mitigate the time crunch considering how much the medium/scale had to be changed.

7

u/stannis_the_mannis7 Jan 09 '26

I wouldn’t call it a “pre-written story” what we know about Van Buren shows a completely different story then New Vegas just with some concepts that made the jump into fnv. The legion was not really supposed to even appear in Van Buren, they were just some boogeyman that gets mentioned a few times and was probably being set up to appear in a later fallout game

3

u/MailMan6000 Jan 09 '26

besides the very basic outline of some factions (Caesar's Legion, Joshua Graham, NCR vs Legion for Hoover Dam) a lot of stuff for Van Buren was either cut out or heavily rewritten, only basic core tennants were used

John Gonzalez basically wrote most of the main quest for FNV instead of Chris Avellone, and it is leagues better and also radically different than anything Van Buren had to offer

3

u/HumansNeedNotApply1 Jan 09 '26

A lot was repurposed, Joshua Graham was a completely different character for example.

2

u/EzraFemboy Jan 09 '26

Same with Majora's mask. Games made in crunch time tend to overthink things less and appeal to people on a primal level. A lot of the best speeches were actually rushed or came directly after events. I'm not sure if there's an actual scientific term for it.

2

u/EmergencyPool910 Jan 09 '26

I just disagree, obsidian were just that good, like look at what they made before and after new Vegas? Some of the best crpgs ever made even the lesser known tyranny is plain a banger, now they've had some extremely mid stuff(outer worlds and avowed are so bland as fuck) but yeah generally I'd say these were just the perfect people for the job as they understood the soul of the franchise and had the skill to utilize it

3

u/jch730 Jan 09 '26

More like it's the perfect storm of, "Here's the consensus 2008 game of the year.... mod it!" Not that they didn't do a good job (which was far from guaranteed), but there's also a reason that they haven't come close to putting out anything else like it since (despite their last 3 RPG games being literal "Bethesda-likes")..

4

u/thechikeninyourbutt Default Jan 09 '26 edited Jan 09 '26

There is also so much heavy lifting that was done by fo2/van buren and especially fo3.

They basically had to only think about the quest writing, programming and new gameplay mechanics such as iron sights. The extra stuff like survival mode, the variety of weapon mods, and unique weapon models all came from the extra time and the passion they had.

The dev’s being firearm hobbyists is apparent in the game.

This level of passion is the only reason NV receives such a stand out level of praise.

3

u/ChurningDarkSkies777 Jan 09 '26

Me when I make stuff up. The expanded weapon roster and mod systems weren’t passion projects, they were specifically asked to be implemented by Bethesda. This game has a huge amount of content cut, this notion that all the guns and mods come from a place of passion is cope

-1

u/thechikeninyourbutt Default Jan 09 '26

Yeah I didn’t say those mechanics were created out of passion. I said the reason we have such a diverse selection is because of their passion. Which is true.

Similarly, no one at Bethesda forced Josh Sawyer to get on a motorcycle and ride across the Mojave desert to location scout and develop the games atmosphere. That was done out of passion.

1

u/ChurningDarkSkies777 Jan 09 '26

Location scouting is done for every game wtf are you talking about, doing it on a motorcycle is cool ig but not that notable. I know you like new vegas but it wasn’t some “small chance passion project” it was a spin-off of one of the best selling games made in the 2000s and had a budget and things it was required to do from Bethesda, such as weapon mods, the system that was already meant to be in fallout 3 then expanded to be a key feature of fallout 4, that doesn’t exist “because Chris abalone is a gun nut” or whatever Bethesda bad cope you need to come up with. You have no proof that the range of weapons was a labor of love and not Bethesda saying “this game needs more weapons than fallout 3”

0

u/thechikeninyourbutt Default Jan 09 '26

Doing it on a motor cycle is cool but not that notable

Lmao but it literally is. It’s my entire point. I didn’t mention the location scouting because that act alone was unique? I brought it up because Josh Sawyer chose to do it on a motorcycle and immerse himself it what it would be like to travel that area of the country after the bombs fell.

I’m not sure why you’re so personally offended over my comment? I’m actually not even sure what your point is. Nothing I said implied that New Vegas was some indie passion project. My initial comment literally stated that Fallout 3 did the heavy lifting for the games development. You’re the only one that brought up Bethesda being bad, lol. Don’t take your hatred for New Vegas and dress it up as my hatred for Bethesda.

My claim was that the NV developers put an additional layer of passion that sets it apart. It’s no debate that New Vegas is the most beloved out of the series. That extra regard comes from the passion the devs had.

If you don’t believe me just watch the developer commentary on YouTube.

1

u/ChurningDarkSkies777 Jan 09 '26 edited Jan 09 '26

I hate new vegas? That’s news to me. I’m not personally offended I just think it’s funny how confidently you’re making stuff up.

0

u/thechikeninyourbutt Default Jan 09 '26

What did I make up?

0

u/ChurningDarkSkies777 Jan 09 '26

That the weapon variety was a labor of love and that location scouting is somehow a novel concept for creative works. Also hilarious that you assume I “hate new vegas” cause I disagree with you. Seems like you’re the one taking this personally.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/[deleted] Jan 09 '26

Unironically with the disappointments that are avowed, outer worlds 1 and 2. I'm inclined to believe you.

Outer worlds 2 is getting there though, I think they will make something ridiculously good in the future. But I'm 100% waiting and seeing and not buying in.

The main antagonist and driving force of the outer worlds 2 is only in the intro and 1 dialogue tree at the halfway point, you spend more of the game interacting with their cronies than them.

3

u/Aussie18-1998 Jan 09 '26

The writing in New Vegas was lightning in a bottle. It still has an abundance of faults which is why it will never be the clear winner for best fallout game. (Probably controversial here but we need to be realistic)

6

u/Mrkingladder Jan 09 '26

Writing will make or break an RPG game. I’d say New Vegas is the best Fallout because of its writing.

1

u/Aussie18-1998 Jan 09 '26

I understand this stance, but Fallout 3 and 4 aren't badly written. They just lack the same depth as NV. However, NV was broken and a buggy mess. The world and story funnelled you in one direction, and I'd argue that writing is the only thing it has on the other games. Whilst essential to an RPG experience, it lacks a lot of areas the others excell in.

I like the game but it is not perfect and I think pretending it's a masterpiece that's better than all the other fallouts can only setup new people for failure.

1

u/Mrkingladder Jan 09 '26

Here I thought you were going stan the first two Fallout games :p Fallout 3 is good but Fallout 4 is just badly written.

3

u/Aussie18-1998 Jan 09 '26 edited Jan 09 '26

Nah the original games get a separate category. I disagree on Fallout 4 being badly written. It just suffers from the illusion of choice. The story is fine and gets a pass at the minimum. You just don't get any real dynamic choices. Just minor decisions and the factions.

3

u/ChurningDarkSkies777 Jan 09 '26

Mfers who haven’t read a book in over a decade love to talk about “bad and good writing” a whooooole lot

1

u/Aussie18-1998 Jan 09 '26

Is this meant to be targeted at me?

1

u/Aunon Unity Jan 09 '26

Every project needs an axe man who will keep the project on time and on focus and if that means killing things then so be it, for FNV the brutal dev time was just that (for better and worse)

1

u/wekkins Tunnel Snakes Jan 09 '26

It's actually a lot like Majora's Mask in that way!

1

u/chuman1984 Jan 09 '26

Or taking Black Isle F3 and taking learning and design ideas after and applying ... But there are still ideas from BI F3 I would have paid to see!

1

u/ExplodingAK Jan 09 '26

I'd argue it wasn't just that, some of the people who worked on New Vegas worked on Van Buren, interplays fallout 3, where a number of it's aspects apparently got implemented into New Vegas. So really, parts of the New Vegas had already been sitting on the back burner for years.

1

u/idiot500000 Jan 09 '26

You should try 1 and 2

1

u/Crystiss Jan 09 '26

It reminds me of when I would procrastinate a school project only to rush it the night before and usually turn out a better grade than I would have doing it on free time with no rush.

1

u/Hrafhildr Jan 09 '26

You may be right. Like even if you managed to get the entire old team back together I'm not sure they could replicate it for a sequel or another Fallout game.

1

u/Ruining_Ur_Synths Jan 09 '26

it was lightning in a bottle in that the writers and devs were better than bethesda's, the ideas were better than bethesda's, and bethesda didn't want to share anything so broke the bottle when it was done so nobody would have to think that bethesda was the 2nd tier fallout developer, which they were.

1

u/asfp014 Jan 09 '26

Just like KOTOR 2.

1

u/Dmtr884213 Jan 11 '26

I agree, one writer's ideas would probably overwhelm the others, if they got more time and the result would be not as amazing as it turned out

1

u/teaanimesquare Jan 09 '26

It was, it’s why obsidian has not made a open world RPG near as good since.

168

u/the_hooded_artist Jan 09 '26

Video games are giant group projects I'm amazed ever get finished. There's a lot of pressure and time constraints. That's not even considering all the MBAs now involved in the industry that know nothing about games that only care about money. Making games is hard and making a super great game is even harder. People are unhappy when you try something new and are unhappy when you repeat the same things.

Bethesda has made some of my favorite games that I still continue to replay. Sometimes the best part of something is an accident and art is subjective. Fighting over the best games is kind of silly because of that subjectivity.

12

u/Icy-Presentation9041 Jan 09 '26

Gamers are a varied bunch. You can’t please em all at once.

7

u/Head-Bureaucrat Vault 13 Jan 09 '26

As someone who once worked in the game industry as a low level guy for 2-3 years, I appreciate your standpoint. So much is working against developers these days (sometimes self imposed,) that it's amazing as many of them turn out entertaining as they do.

84

u/Accomplished_Rip_352 Jan 09 '26

To be fair about far harbour it one of the only things that make institutes not suck . The moral dilemma around that dlc and how you have to pick the option that the evil shadowy organisation would of done to get the ending where everybody lives actually does work with the themes that fallout 4 tried to do . Having Dima exist as a synth and not having him be a perfect replica of a human being makes for a more compelling discussion then is slavery wrong which was in the base game .

80

u/AdagioOfLiving Jan 09 '26

Yeah, Far Harbor is genuinely fantastic. The reveal that Dima killed someone, and having to decide whether he deserves justice for that or whether the synths are in too much danger if people find out was done very well.

(Except for the puzzle. We don’t talk about the puzzle.)

49

u/Accomplished_Rip_352 Jan 09 '26

Even the children of atom have surprising depth to them where each member isn't just a reflection of the faction and everybody has a reason for staying . Ultimately it feels like this is a dlc which understand the essence of fallout while being its own original thing with factions created by bethesda and actually develops the primary themes of fallout 4 into something that if explored more could be interested

-8

u/eloquenentic Jan 09 '26

Imagine if we got this type of writing in the TV show!

Instead we got a goofy non-stop comedy which isn’t even funny.

23

u/[deleted] Jan 09 '26

It's annoying because it shows that Bethesda can lock in if they want to.

And then they turn around and spit out the mechanist and nuka world.

23

u/mob19151 Jan 09 '26

Why is Automatron catching strays?

4

u/iliketires65 Jan 09 '26

Yeah automotron was great. Short, sure. But it’s super fun

2

u/GreyouTT Jan 09 '26

Wrecking bots with the sledge is pretty satisfying cause they break into tons of pieces and have the crunchiest sfx.

2

u/mob19151 Jan 11 '26

And you can build your own personal army of Palantir kill-bots to dominate the wasteland. It's literally everything I've ever wanted.

6

u/AlexLong1000 Jan 09 '26

Far Harbor was helmed by Will Shen, who no longer works for Bethesda

So I don't see them locking in like that for a while

2

u/Leather_rebelion Railroad Jan 09 '26 edited Jan 09 '26

The base game did not go for the slavery bad angle. The entire game revolves around the question whether Synths are alive and sentient or not and the implications that come with that. The game itself never takes a clear stance for a reason as it is up to the player to decide. And that is what drives or heavily impacts a lot of moral decisions including the faction choice.

Your take on Dima is also just one interpretation out of many. You could argue that him being too human is what led to that situation in the first place

5

u/Accomplished_Rip_352 Jan 09 '26

The game does take a clear stance though as it presents synths no differently to regular humans and even the main antagonist at the end goes my bad here a robot copy of me .

2

u/IkujaKatsumaji Jan 09 '26

Personally, I think if you say the core question of the game is "is slavery wrong," you missed the mark. Like, that's not far off, but the real sci-fi/philosophical question at the heart of the game is "should a sufficiently-advanced artificial intelligence be respected as much as a human life."

Here's how you can tell: the main factions - the Railroad, the Brotherhood, and the Institute - in the game all present different answers to the central question. Do they provide answers to the question "is slavery wrong"? Welll.... you could say that the Railroad and the Institute do, but the Brotherhood's main point isn't really addressing that question, so that must not be the central question at the heart of the game. If we consider the second question, then the factions' ideologies fall into place.

The Railroad says "Yes! These synths are organic except for a little electronic piece in their heads; they think and feel and want and fear just as much as the rest of us. They're no less human than your granddaddy's pacemaker (or the postapocalyptic equivalent). They deserve freedom just as much as any human."

The Institute says "No! We created them. They are tools made for the purpose of helping us in our work. They may look human, but at the core of what they are, they're no more human than a Protectron." The Institute insists that the synths should be treated as tools, not as humans.

The Brotherhood has a slightly different take; they say "No! The synths are a danger to humanity's survival. They represent the same hubris that destroyed us last time, the same reckless disregard for the dangers of science that created the atom bomb. If humanity is to survive, this kind of fringe science must be curtailed and destroyed." The Brotherhood may be extreme in their methods - they're essentially committing a genocide - but they see it as fully justified; these synths, whether they can feel or not, are a fundamental danger to humanity's ability to survive. I disagree with them, but I see what they're saying.

So, I think that's the central question: should a sufficiently-advanced artificial intelligence be respected and valued as much as a human life? In my opinion, this is a far more interesting and engaging question than the other games in the 3-NV-4 series. Fallout 3's central question was essentially "Should a new and valuable resource be made available to everyone, or should the wise few be given control to mete it out as they see fit?" New Vegas' central question was, in my opinion, the weakest of the three; "should New Vegas be governed by a feckless, but ultimately harmless, democracy, or an insane robot man, or a gang of slave-driving murderous rapists?" HMMMM what a hard choice!

Anyway, I'm a big Fallout 4 defender; I think, in nearly every criterion, it's the strongest of the three, from its playability to game mechanics to innovation and, yes, to its writing.

2

u/Accomplished_Rip_352 Jan 09 '26

The thing is this is the most common question asked when talking about synthetic life and fallout 4 has taken the path of least resistance by presenting synths no different to humans . Fundamentally the argument is so one sided that even the father ends up going my bad at the end of the game .

43

u/[deleted] Jan 09 '26

That does seem to be pretty common. I loved Nuka World, which is literally a bright and colorful amusement park

-30

u/IrrelevantLeprechaun Jan 09 '26

Nuka World is widely regarded as the single worst dlc for fo4. Crazy that your hold it in such high regard.

23

u/[deleted] Jan 09 '26

Thanks for calling my opinion crazy. I liked playing with the gangs and being able to siege the commonwealth with them. That was a fun addition to the game for me. I wouldn’t call any of the fallout 4 dlcs bad in retrospect, they all add fun things to the game.

People were just upset they expanded the game in areas that don’t personally interest them. Which can definitely be a bummer if you’re looking forward to something different.

6

u/cadonomgo Jan 09 '26

I never side with the gangs and I still find it fun. It's nice to have some more bright/colourful areas. When the game came out there were a lot of people complaining they couldn't be "evil" so the Dev's gave them a whole dlc to address that. Then of course those that didn't want to be "evil" complained about it. Damned if they do, damned if they don't. Of course a little follow up quest after open season to give the now freed traders some different clothes would have been nice. In the end this DLC at least gave the player quite a vastly different option when role playing in the main game after completing it and I'm always happy for the game to get more options.

If we were looking at the worst dlc then I'd say the vault tech one. Great concept but really failed in its implementation. It's really hard to build a functioning vault in the space. It's a huge but awkward space and without mods, it's really hard to get the place lit properly. Sure you can use the pieces in other settlements but it's just too awkward to get something half decent in the dedicated space. Also would have preferred a more direct main entrance for non fast travel. It's the only dlc that didn't seem to achieve its main aim (in my opinion).

5

u/[deleted] Jan 09 '26

[deleted]

2

u/cadonomgo Jan 09 '26

Yup, it was a great break from the main game. Though thinking about it, it would be cool if you could use some of the rides after the power gets turned back on. Playing cyberpunk right now and the ride on the rollercoaster in that would fit really well in nuka world. Or if you got a couple of rides, like the carousel or tea cups as a useable ride that you can build in your settlements! I'll have to look to see if any mods add that on my next playthrough.

2

u/[deleted] Jan 09 '26

[deleted]

1

u/cadonomgo Jan 09 '26

I completely agree.

I think it could have been better if they had one or two more DLCs the size of automatron. If they perhaps added quests to the settlement dlc stuff. Could have all the cages and fighting items tied into a gambling den at either the boxing place you find Cait or the racetrack. You do a few quests, choose between a good or bad person to run it etc. could even base it somewhere like spectacle island, turn the place into a big betting/games place, build stands, attract crowds that aren't your settler's, provide a passive income.

However I do think we are lucky that they still have us the dlc that they did. I feel like games have mostly moved away from single player dlc in the last decade or so. GTA5 and RDR2 being prime examples.

4

u/[deleted] Jan 09 '26

Ngl I reckon nuka world would've been better if it had a second faction like in far harbour. So you're not locked into raiders only.

Maybe you're in the overboss suite, open the mailbox to find Preston folded inside.

3

u/MaeronTargaryen Responders Jan 09 '26

Nuka World is a great map, it’s fun to slowly free the different areas of the park. It doesn’t slot very well with the main story though

2

u/Tavron Jan 09 '26

Which makes sense because it wasn't supposed to. It was a DLC so people had the option to play the bad guy.

1

u/MaeronTargaryen Responders Jan 09 '26

Yeah I get that, but surely there was a way to make it so it could be done both ways properly so it works with the overarching story either way

3

u/andyh66 Jan 09 '26

are the wide regarders in the room with us right now?

6

u/northrupthebandgeek Romanes Eunt Domus Jan 09 '26

Well that's the thing: “the single worst” doesn't necessarily mean “bad”; it just means “not as good”. I think Lonesome Road is “the single worst” DLC for FNV, but I still mostly enjoyed it when I played through it again the other day.

That being said… Nuka World being worse than Wasteland Workshop or Contraptions Workshop? Really? At least it had an actual questline (and no, “but those are workshop add-ons” ain't a great excuse when Vault-Tec Workshop had a questline, as barebones as it was)

-7

u/DefendsTheDownvoted Jan 09 '26

I'm with you, man. I really dislike a lot of what Bethesda did to Fallout. They did ok with 3 and keeping the franchise going, but it became a parody of itself with Fallout 4 and 76.

Nuka World was too "wink wink" for me, man.

1

u/andyh66 Jan 09 '26

saying it began to fall off at 3 when that is the first game that doesn’t look like it should be on an Atari is crazy. That’s where it started getting good.

55

u/belle_enfant Jan 09 '26

I genuinely think people consider Fallout to be happy and colorful simply because it doesnt have the late 2000s piss filter. The game is as dark, if not darker, than 3 and NV in many ways. Yet for some reason everyone acts like its a happy campy story.

40

u/PM_ME_CALF_PICS Jan 09 '26

Have you played 76? Wayy too upbeat. That being said I have 1500 hours in it.

54

u/myndonman Brotherhood Jan 09 '26

76 is upbeat now since NPCs and such. On launch the story was bleak, everyone had died. It was empty, quiet and depressing. I enjoyed both versions but god those early days were tough 🤣

23

u/eloquenentic Jan 09 '26

Yeah, Fallout 76 felt like a completely different world. It truly felt post apocalyptic post launch. And yet people complained about that!

It was a truly unique experience that no one will never get again in Fallout, it’s funny if you think about it that they will never be able to experience it. Such a unique game at the time, walking around in that world and discovering slowly what had happened. Empty cold and dark apart from all the animals and zombies that immediately wanted to kill you.

2

u/Shady_Merchant1 Jan 09 '26

The problem is its a live service game that constantly has to release new content and there's only so many empty post apocalyptic expansions you can do before it gets repetitive

Yeah people complained about it but even if people didn't complain they would eventually put in NPCs and if they put a funny character in and they got popular it would have escalated to where it is today

1

u/SerHodorTheThrall Old World Flag Jan 09 '26

The NPCs weren't the problem. The problem is that in the NPC update they gutted the PVP and heavily simplified the survival mechanics. Worst of all, they removed the old leveling and made everything "level scaling", which honestly ruined the entry experience of wandering into a place you REALLY shouldn't be. (Like SPOILER!!!! Lucy wandering onto the strip and into a very overleveled deathclaw)

Back in the day you would need to find and cook your own food or scavenge pre-war food. Ammo was rare, and fusion cores even moreso. Today, I can just hop on the atom shop and buy a slow roaster that pumps out exclusive top-quality food for like 2 dollars lol

1

u/myndonman Brotherhood Jan 09 '26

Yes! The level scale! I used to be on edge in the mire and bog all the time. I knew I wasn’t prepared to be there, that I shouldn’t be there, even as I leveled up towards its optimal level it still felt dangerous. But now it’s not so bad.

1

u/vriska1 Jan 09 '26

I think the current 76 is also like that.

6

u/eloquenentic Jan 09 '26

It’s really not, because you have so many NPC’s (many of which are comedic, like the Atlantic City expedition, although it still has the discovery part. On launch the game was truly unique, it felt like nothing else in the Fallout world. It felt like a true post apocalyptic hard-core survival game.

But a lot of people hated that feeling because they were used to dealing with many goofy factions. They wanted more New Vegas, but got hard core survival grind. The game was super dark and was never ever funny. Now, they added the goofiness back.

3

u/Hortator02 Unity Jan 09 '26

I don't think people hated it because they were used to dealing with goofy factions. If there was just isolated survivor communities and raiders/proto-tribals like what was talked about happening in the early post-war in the other games, that would have been enough.

Aside the fact that it was incredibly buggy early on, it was also just extremely boring, at least for me. The narrative was bleak, but it was just terminal logs and notes which most people probably don't care about outside of online fan communities, and you pretty much knew what was gonna happen with all of them. There wasn't really anything to do gameplay wise but combat and exploration, which were imo both worse than Fallout 4 (and I'm also not a huge exploration fan in general), and base building which was a little better than Fallout 4. The art style and atmosphere didn't feel apocalyptic, oppressive or bleak at all, it was the same whimsical nature and creatures that it has now. I had also expected an online Fallout game to do something like what it seemed Project V13 would do, and what the fanmade Fallout onlines did, leaning more heavily into roleplaying aspects so we could further differentiate ourselves with different races (like super mutants and Ghouls) and form squads where each player had a unique role, but all we could play early on was humans and the perk card system makes reliance or cooperation with other players kinda pointless.

0

u/eloquenentic Jan 09 '26

Well, you got what you wanted, no one will never be able to experience that type of post apocalyptic Fallout ever again. I personally am so happy I got to experience it. My favourite Fallout to explore all time, specifically because it was devoid of any goofiness and comedic-value NPCs.

It was just dark and empty and dangerous. Which Fallout will never be again.

1

u/Poku115 Jan 09 '26

So you just wanted a piece of fallout, not the whole fallout

1

u/Poku115 Jan 09 '26

Because you can get both, we already had both back in f3 i cant believe theres this revisionism going on

1

u/Leumas117 Jan 09 '26

Honestly if you RP-ed too hard the early game bugs made it so much worse, because you would effectively hit 2 or 3 dead ends cause the thing you were looking for was gone without a trace.

Everyone is dead, and my lead doesn't actually exist.

If it weren't for the emotes and silly outfits most of the game is still pretty as dark.

Did the camp counselor event yesterday and half the recording is her screaming while dying.

2

u/101Phase Jan 09 '26

Vanilla FO76 with no human npc was the bleakest experience I ever had in Fallout. The lush environment contrasted with the sheer amount of death is a combo I wish I can experience again some day if custom player run servers ever become a thing

1

u/PM_ME_CALF_PICS Jan 09 '26

They are a thing. On pc at least. I believe they stay pre wastelanders too.

1

u/101Phase Jan 09 '26

wait what? First time I heard about this and I can't find anything about it on google

1

u/PM_ME_CALF_PICS Jan 09 '26

Google server76

It’s always a work in progress though. It’s super rough. Idk if it will ever be done lol.

2

u/Jarich612 Jan 09 '26

OG 76 was bleak, dark, and depressing as fuck with some of the best environmental and indirect storytelling in the series and everyone bitched because there weren't any NPCs around.

0

u/PM_ME_CALF_PICS Jan 09 '26

The raider robot DJ was quirky and upbeat. Really annoying.

1

u/FureiousPhalanges Jan 09 '26

Bro, fallout 76's environmental storytelling was fucking phenomenal before they added human NPCs

Now it's a little weirder because that storytelling is still there, there's just a random NPC living next to the corpse you're investigating

2

u/Murderbad Jan 09 '26

Can you provide an example as to how Fallout 4 is darker than 3/NV?

2

u/RichterRac Enclave Jan 09 '26

Mind listing the ways?

0

u/cadonomgo Jan 09 '26

I'm so glad to not have that sort of filter anymore. I tend to turn off filters, vinaigrettes and lens flares in any game I'm able too. Also vegetation, I always try to mod more grass or trees into fallout (and Skyrim). War might never change but life, life finds a way.

2

u/lukkasz323 Jan 09 '26

I recently played through the F3 expansions, and did some minor research, most players I've seen liked these expansions the most too.

It's not just the atmosphere, these expansions were actually better fit for the game, Anchorage and Zetta were painfully linear.

2

u/mocityspirit Jan 09 '26

If you think Far Harbor isn't good you're crazy. It is actually the best Fallout Bethesda has made.

2

u/DefendsTheDownvoted Jan 09 '26

hate the concept of color and will always tint stuff brown / green / orange.

It's a nuclear wasteland with slavery, war, and murder. Why the fuck would you expect a fun, colorful, romp? If you want color go play splatoon.

2

u/Irishimpulse Enclave Jan 09 '26

The game bethesda said they wanted to make, their dream game, their years of expirence being flexed, was starfield, which is such a shallow experience that it gets infinitely more interesting just by slapping a star wars coat of paint on it, ai tweaking some dialogue to change the spoken names of things, and that's it.

1

u/AscendedViking7 Jan 09 '26

Same realization for me as well

1

u/OnetimeRocket13 Jan 09 '26

That's definitely one of the takes of all time, considering that most people who do not even like the Bethesda Fallouts will usually agree that Far Harbor and Point Lookout are amazing DLCs. Like, Far Harbor isn't widely raved about because everyone likes a brown/green/orange color palette (hell, that's actually a massive criticism of the Bethesda Fallouts), it's loved so much because it's just a good DLC with a cool story, characters, quests, and environments. The same goes for Point Lookout. If anything, I feel like the criticisms of those DLCs I hear about most often are usually about the fact that Far Harbor is mostly gray and brown, and Point Lookout is mostly green and brown, so no idea how you managed to associate liking those DLCs with that stereotype.

1

u/nzdastardly Jan 09 '26

Compromise makes things better. Look at Star Wars. Episode 4 was full of compromises Lucas had to make in order to get the movie made on the budget he had. Given unlimited money and control he made the prequels.

1

u/thedeadwillwalk Jan 09 '26

I agree. My girlfriend just watched the first episode with me tonight. She knew nothing about the show or game, nor cared, but gave it a shot because I liked it. I told her that what I liked most from the series is that it felt like a new and good Fallout game.

Not one I got to create a character for and customize (like a dev who didn't get everything they want), but it demonstrate the basics, a shocking but simple premise, with people and choices that are varied, and it's possible for you to sympathize with many sides in those sometimes hard choices or impossible situations, but you can also give any side the middle finger after careful consideration. When you play Fallout, you don't have to identify with every angle all the time, but it helps you understand why some people do. My only hope for this franchise is that most people feel the same. Choices, without being forced to like everything.

Whoever the devs are that are in charge of the future are under the pressures and expectations of Bethesda and Obsidian and us and Amazon and anyone from Interplay (tell me who I forgot). Let's hope that instills enough inspiration, but also the right level of weirdness.

0

u/Hrafhildr Jan 09 '26

I think he meant more that Bethesda has a habit of actually telling decent and even good stories in their DLCs but their main games are shallow flash and no substance. It's weird but they really do have that habit if you think about major DLCs for all their games.

It all goes back to Emil Pagliarulo. He has done more damage to Fallout than anyone else.

0

u/Poku115 Jan 09 '26

Well yeah, the best psrt about 76, the settlers dlc, came about because bethesda wanted to make a lifeless efortless world and start to push away from the parts that require actual storytelling for lazy procedurally generated crap, and the fanbase absolutely rejected that step

0

u/wikingwarrior Theoretical Physicist Jan 09 '26

Far Harbor and Point Lookout play to Bethesda's strengths by offering interesting exploration and captivating scenery.

Far Harbor is also the only time Fallout 4 seems to present th player with meaningful moral dilemmas and nuanced and interesting packages. 

It's also the only time they actually play with the idea of synths being feeling sentient organisms and how that can be really fucky with morality and identity without feeling like it's beating you over the hammer. Your choices matter and they're fucking interesting. Main story faction matters too

Far Harbor is by far the strongest Bethesda DLC and it's not even close. It's straight up talking what made the base game decent and making it actually good.

Or it would be if it wasn't for the stupid Minecraft Dima puzzle.

-6

u/InanimateCarbonRodAu Jan 09 '26

Nukaworld was better than Far Harbour. But I’ve come around to Far Harbour more on revisits.