Fallout- in the right hands?

 

We've spoken before about the state of the Fallout franchise, the rival of Fallout's popularity following the series and all that has come of it- but now I want to talk directly about Fallout in a microcosm. Is the franchise in the right hands? Fallout began life as a spiritual successor to the Wasteland series under Black Isle Studios, wherein it developed a retro-futuristic 50's style unlike it's predecessor and would grow into the studio's flagship franchise. To scrub away the work that Fallout 3 did in popularising the franchise once Bethesda got hold of it, however, it to dig one's head in the sand like an ostrich. No matter what it is you think of the games that they made, the way they told their stories or the reigns they hold on the franchise- Fallout 3 totally redefined the franchise and turned it into the megahit it ended up becoming. Fallout would not be anywhere near as big as it is today had it remained an isometric RPG like the original.

But the question of whether or not Fallout belongs in the hands of the Bethesda does, in fact, start with Fallout 3 and their particular approach to handling the main narrative of that game. Rather bizarrely, Bethesda never seem to write their games in a manner inherit to most RPG game developers- who typically try to champion player choice in scenario development. Bethesda create strangely linear and boxy narratives in which they sometimes try to retroactively insert branching narrative consequence to small effect. I would go so far as to call that the biggest hurdle between their talent and the style of games they want to play- as starting out living the curated early years of Liam Neeson's child is a lot more limiting than waking up with a bullet in your head and a trail of revenge to track. And within that might be the biggest problem with Bethesda's Fallouts.

For a post-apocalyptic Role Playing franchise, Bethesda's Fallout games are increasingly difficult to actually role play within. At any given moment you'll have a surprisingly pressing core narrative which the game struggles to send you down which means any deviation off the beaten path comes at contradiction of your character's forcibly imposed core motivations. Enjoying the Capital Wasteland? Well, what about your dad, you lazy ass? Track him down! Enjoying Boston? Well, your son isn't going to track himself down, is he? It's a limiting framing device for an RPG that doesn't challenge Bethesda to create these more wide open narratives like the ones' featured in Fallout 1, 2 and New Vegas which feel like they touch on more of a cohesive breathing world- as that is what is needed in order to sell personal investment and drive to the story.

New Vegas merely affixes you with a destination and allows the player to find their way there, ostensibly to get revenge on the man who shot you in the head but no real drives are inserted into your head- you can work at your own pace. Fallout 1 tells you to find a water chip, but apart from that you are free to do whatever. Fallout 2 is even looser- just figure out how to keep the tribe alive at some point while your having fun out there. Actually, even the one game not actually upkept by Bethesda proper has a more RPG traditional setting- Fallout 76. You are a Vault Dweller pushed out to restart society. You are given the breadcrumbs of tracking down what happened to your Overseer and that's it, when stakes do start to dawn on you- they're the classic 'everyone is in danger to an unreasonable threat including you, better deal with that' style affair which DnD groups have be relying on since time immemorial. 

But if there is one thing which best encapsulates modern Bethesda and the way they handle their products, I think it has to be Fallout 4's next gen update. That's right, we're moving out the nitty-gritty of the game itself and jumping into the wider mechanical function of the company itself. Why? Because Bethesda are responsible for the dropping of what might go down as the most head scratch-worthy game breaking update of all time. Yes, the game managed to update itself in order to work better on consoles- which is always good. But these games are PC games first, and breaking PC gaming across the board during the celebration period for the Fallout franchise is peak Bethesda in a way little else can properly quantify. All to add some bug fixes and... that's it. PC Fallout get's nothing worth writing home about. Aside from, maybe, the HD pack which breaks textures on 9/10 mods. Great. 

Todd Howard wants to put himself up for at least on more Fallout under his directorship, and that desire to be the one in charge seems to have been one of the key factors stifling the potential this franchise has had to grow. Obsidian have pitched several spin-offs to Bethesda over the years, in Elder Scrolls and Fallout, and all have been rejected. Superior RPG developers want to make the company money, for nothing more than a licensing fee, and Bethesda are keeping a lid on the franchise for no discernible  reason! New Vegas is crowned as the series' best for a genuine reason, keeping Obsidian out of the loop is only asinine!

And then there's the more insular complaints- that Bethesda seem to have some deep vendetta against basic narrative consistency. The Brotherhood of Steel are increasingly expanded in series-wide protagonists despite being a West Coast cult of weirdoes in the beginning- before 76 teleported them into the mid-east as well. Ghouls seem to be ever changing in whether they need food to survive or not. Jet has been shot back into being a pre-war drug despite being developed in Fallout 2. T-60 power armour seems to pop up all over the Wastes despite the fact they were never deployed until Fallout 4 literally invented them on the spot. And 76 creates brand new builds of power armour every other week. It's a mess.

Bethesda have the money and scope to keep Fallout going for the next thirty years at least. But do they have the skill and discerning eye to keep it improving and relevant throughout that period? Time and time again fans have remarked how the best of this franchise has been achieved outside of Bethesda's walls, and yet the very spine of the series is held up by Bethesda alone. So what is the way we reconcile these two divides? Licencing! Bethesda don't have the special sauce to make this work, that's fine because someone out there does. But that doesn't mean I think Bethesda should let the series go. Maybe they do best as holders of the IP- be the Disney of the gaming world for a little, see how it works out for them.