A smidge of hope in the Wasteland

 

It hasn't exactly been a fun couple of days to engage with the Xbox ecosystem, and by extension engaging with Bethesda has felt a little awkward. Theirs was the home to the award winning studio that Xbox callously murdered for no discernible reason before immediately coming and declaring they needed more studios just like the one they destroyed a few days earlier. Incredible. And within that debris questions have been asked about who would be next, what other legends would find themselves jobless for the foolhardy whim of having worked with Microsoft? How much more grandly could Xbox damn themselves before a seemingly inevitable exit from the console market that seems all but confirmed at this pace- regardless of whatever, increasingly futile, lip service the team constantly feeds our way. But through it all, I hear that Fallout seems to be doing okay.

I mean it should be, right? Fallout is the face of video games breaking into the mainsteam right now and the surging player count's for the entire franchise are a startling example of that. Fallout 4 is getting updates again, that break all current mods but it's the thought that counts, people's twentieth New Vegas playthroughs are kicking off with gusto. Fallout 76 is actually seeing a rise in players that are somewhat galling about all the hate the game received back in the way, blissfully unaware of all the actual pain they missed getting involved so many years down the line. They don't even have to experience the dead Wasteland before the 'return to Appalachia' update. Truly they are the winners of the Fallout fanbase. But all of that only really goes so far, now doesn't it?

When The Last of Us dropped it's series the creator's were ready with a rushed and messy port of the iconic game finally coming to PC after all these years that people absolutely wharfed up with abandon- rocketing the game up the charts despite it's shoddy QA work. That is a tangible boost in profits that can be traced directly back to the show. And Fallout? Well, I'm sure they've made a pretty penny from people catching up with the games- but there isn't anything new in the Fallout world, is there? You can't really get away selling even Fallout 4 for full retail after all this time, so people are picking up inexpensive collections for a fraction of 60$ and filling themselves up on all the Fallout hype. I would call it an unexploited marketing opportunity.

What Bethesda really needs is a fresh product they can sell the heck out of. A remaster would be nice, but what they need is a fresh new game that soars in the spotlight- a great game that is rocketed into superstar status by merit of association. What they need is Fallout 5.  Which is ironically the only thing that they can't have. Fallout 5 isn't on the docket until after The Elder Scrolls 6, as probably Todd Howard's last game before retirement. Which means we won't be seeing the Wasteland again until at least the 2030's. What we need is something in the interim to keep people busy. An in-between game. A 'Fallout 4.5' so to speak. And whole could possibly be employed to create a little something like that? Oh yes, the rumours have started once more.

Obsidian have been sitting patiently on the sidelines for what feels like half their lifetime. Gone are the days when they were pushing the boundaries of the Classic RPG genre, reviving it with a gusto- now are the days when it feels like they're pushing what's possible from a AA perspective- proud work, to be sure, but not enough to get their name in lights for the new generation. And dammit, they deserve to be! Obsidian have yet to put out a bad game, even if I think The Outer Worlds wasn't really what I wanted, it's still a cracker of a title! Whatsmore, they've always demonstrated a deeper understanding on what makes Fallout special than Bethesda ever has- we need them back around again!

Fallout New Vegas was their last go around, given the tools that made Fallout 3 and given a little over a year to smash together those elements into something new, Obsidian put out the single best game the franchise had ever had, and still has ever produced. The created an RPG of choice and consequence, a world of purpose and weight and value and the tools to destroy it all as much as you wanted. New Vegas put Bethesda to such shame that they attempted to ape it's systems with Fallout 4, to honestly somewhat amateurish (in comparison) results. Give them the Fallout 4 engine and who knows? Obsidian might even be able to make a real RPG out of it! And what a way to send up the Fallout franchise, than giving it back to the people who made it to begin with!

Of course there's nothing real in the works yet. Xbox have declared that they're aware of the feelings about Fallout, particularly given the popularity of the TV show, but playing it coy is the name of the game so that no hopes are drawn up. However, I would say that recent happenings may end up expediting the process a bit. Xbox is desperate, looking for a way to justify itself underneath a parent who is placing ever more attention on their goings ons. In fact, following the surprise layoffs of Bethesda award winners, one might say that the next few projects might end up being influential in deciding whether or not Xbox even makes it to the next console generation or not. It's times like these, you need to start cashing in the chips at your disposal.

The stars seem to be aligning. Xbox is too desperate to say no, Bethesda are too busy to multidevelop, Obsidian are reaching the end of work on their current RPG and Chris Avellone has been cleared of all those misconduct allegations he had thrown his way. This is the time to bring the band back together for one last go around, smash out a Fallout game like the world has never seen before and give this franchise the absolute rocket high it deserves! And if ever it was going to happen, it's going to be now! I usually don't fan the flames of speculation, I'm usually the first to douse cold truth over it all- but today of all days I'm daring to dream. Bring us back to Fallout, Obsidian- I know you have it in you!

Mediums and consumers

 

With the success of Fallout signalling another vector through which the mediums of gaming and television have harmoniously conjoined, of course this has become an inexplicable weapon wielded to denigrate the integrity of video games as a medium because the more walls we put up between people the better, I guess. I am referring in part to a particularly frustrating Metro Contributor who recent opined on how Fallout as a TV show is the way that the story should have always been told, and actually the world of Fallout has been underserved being a purely video game franchise all these years. Why? Because video games are inherently poor mediums through which to tell stories thanks to their defining traits of size and length and game-ability. Another clouded perspective born from the 'I have trouble understanding/interacting with this thing therefore this thing is bad' prep school for the deterioration of modern essaying. 

It is annoying that these are still the ideas that float around from those so staunchly married to traditional media that any slightly different method for storytelling, whether it be another culture's take on storytelling, or through another medium altogether, is immediately rejected as a threat. Video games that embrace open worlds effectively, such as Bethesda in their Fallout games, use that size to foster something that traditional TV struggles to- a rich and complete world to interact with. That is Bethesda's key defining trait which they bring to all their franchises- breathing worlds propped up with cultures and factions and vastly distinct ideologies conflicting across a grand tapestry through which the main story is presented. Fallout has become so very iconic because of Bethesda's hand in realising this world so utterly and fully- in a way that didn't quite exist as starkly until Fallout 3's big open Wasteland. A show can only ever present one curated journey, relying on allusions which depend entirely on the skills of the writers to be coherent. It's what makes a world like Fallout's seem vast, whilst a similar post-apocalypse like 'Into the Badlands' rang increasingly hollow as the show went on.

As for length- it's often brought up how the lengths of stories can influence their impact and potency, which meandering narratives sometimes drag out. It's almost a cliché of a modern entertainment critique to lackadaisically throw out a 'this could have been cut down' during a review, which I personally think has contributed to a culture of ever-rushing modern media that never permits it's stories and characters a chance to breath. But that's neither here nor there, video games are long by their design and as demonstrated by The Last of Us, you don't always need all that time in order to tell a story like this. So does that mean every video game hopelessly stretched out basic narratives in a manner that makes them worse? Of course not, novels exist- dum dum! This is a fallacy of ignorance defying the fact that the nature of the medium fundamentally changes the stories that are being told as well as the way that we tell them.

To keep this on Fallout, the story of these games are the stories of their respective regions and how they came to ruin. The main character's journey is more of an incidental familiar hook in there, what makes Fallout is the environmental landscape upon which the story of a society rising from the ashes is written. The lights of New Vegas glittering beyond the scrap wall perimeter surrounded by disparate crime ridden slums- a richly painted steel-trap lure around which the very themes of every story New Vegas portrays is personified. Esoteric storytelling makes up the bulk of open world video games, and even the more linear narrative based stories know how to take advantage of their time to open up the scope of their stories to present side narratives and conflicting story threads. Bad and prolonged video game stories stick out like a sore thumb- and they are exemplified by Ubisoft! (I should start charging a cameo fee for those guys for how often they guest star in these blogs!)

A big point of contention is on the fact that games cannot focus on telling their stories when they're busy trying to be games. Which is a bit of a closed door way of looking at literally any medium in the world. That's like someone saying that a movie cannot possibly focus on telling stories because they're always so focused with shooting pretty videos. No- obviously that isn't the case. Those shots are, ideally, designed to aid the story telling method- that's kind of why we refer to these vectors as 'mediums'. They are tools through which a story is shown- if you are so adverse to none traditional storytelling then you'll probably be forced to stick with campfire tales, because that is as pure as it gets with storytelling! But if we're going to really look at the storytelling of video games with a thoughtful eye, then you need to acknowledge the bare basics of what interactive audience participations achieves. 

Immersion is merely the end goal, the glittering emerald at the end of the special stage, the transformative aspect of interaction is participation. I'll never forget the famous 'Brothers: A Tale of Two Sons' (spoilers for that game incoming) wherein you control two brothers puzzle solving across a dangerous and fantastical world. One analog stick controls the younger brother, one controls the older. Most puzzles involve cleverly positioning both brothers to push heavy objects or balance appropriate weights- we're talking those kinds of puzzles.  In the late stages of the game the brothers find themselves in a spot of bother with a deceptive spider girl and, long story short, the older brother dies. The younger still has to make his way back home, but he's not strong enough to push his way through the challenges that remain. Until, with enough force, the player makes the choice to use both sticks to push for him. Symbolising the young boy summoning the strengths his older brother left him with to push past his own shortcomings and represent how some part of the boy lives on now, even if just a shadow of his will distilled into strength. Tell me that ain't storytelling.

Now I will admit, there is a tendency for many video games to default to the same realms of storytelling. The vast majority of video games are inherently violent, and whilst I hold no personal moral qualms regarding that, that does limit the range of stories that can be told through the gaming medium. The indie space typically permits more experimental games where you can get other experiences, Stardew Valley is one of my favourites that revolves around the rigors of quiet village living and farm management- but then is that really all that different from the movie industry? Certainly, action is more prevalent in the higher tiers of gaming than in movie making, but does that really make it less valid of an artform?

It seems that no matter how mainstream video games become, how recognised their potential for storytelling is, still we have to fight for validation at that most basic of levels- against the brick wall of tradition behind which the world cowers. Always we'll be seen with a different lens compared to the rest of the world thanks to a gulch of comprehension that absolutely no one is willing to try and cross because the status quo is comfortable. I hate the inherently laziness of the average consumer, but I would hate it a lot less if they didn't use their ignorance as a soapbox atop which to espouse their superior tastes and discerning eye. Makes it real difficult to just sit back and enjoy things like this, doesn't it?

The Fallout show is kinda good, actually.

 

With the coming of a series based on Fallout, I'll admit to being somewhat sceptical. Okay, I was a straight up hater- but can you really blame me? The custodians of the franchise have exhibited all the tale-tail signs of dementia, steadily regressing in their craft from a masterpiece factory to a bit of a limp joke, the show runner was going to be the same guy who launched the intriguing Westworld, that was then dragged into the ground with an stretched-out plot that dragged on for years- there wasn't actually a lot of good reasons to be an optimist. Not to mention the source material of Fallout can be extremely hit or miss on a narrative front. Sure, sometimes you get Fallout New Vegas blowing you away with its layers of converging convictions clashing in seismic political tension, but then you also get the Institute from Fallout 4 with their, lets be frank, largely limp wider plans for the world. This was no 'The Last of Us'. 

But now that the series is out it won't be any great surprise to hear me say that I was wrong, the show is actually pretty good and the Avatar effect was largely avoided. Which in hindsight is starting to make me believe that the Avatar franchise is just legitimately haunted- no one can seem to get a good adaptation or addendum to that original series for the life of them. (I really hope this new movie is going to be good but... well... with their policy about voice actors sharing the fictional nationalities of their characters- there's a good chance they recast Azula which is... frankly unacceptable.) Where was I? Oh yeah! So Fallout could very well have fallen into the same traps of it's fellows if it followed those footsteps, but instead the series did the one thing it could have done without ruining the past- it went forward.

Using the established world of Fallout as a spine from which to grow a new narrative is of course the optimal way to handle a video game adaptation, relieving you from the ridiculous responsibility of carrying the entire hundreds of hours of game on your back trying to squeeze that into a coherent show. And though there are very clear parallels to Fallout game narratives tucked not so neatly into this show, not least of all the lamentable revival of Bethesda's most annoying Fallout story trope- the missing family member- there's scatterings of new story too which has proven... intriguing thus far. And that is perhaps the strongest praise I can leverage upon the show at this point. (I'm watching it slowly, I'll admit. I don't want to rush through the thing.)

Needless to belabour, the visuals of the show are obviously incredible. The team looked towards the sensible redesigns of Fallout 4 and copied that style perfectly in their live action recreation of the game assets- bringing the game to startling life. It's quite insane to see assets replicated to such popping perfection, and I'm certain there were onset prop craftsmen scratching their heads at some of the weirder design choices, but whether it was Nolan's exacting eye, or Bethesda's insistence- no expense was seemingly spared. Hell, they even brought the Fallout 4 version of Power Armour to life with insane precision! And executed Stimpacks flawlessly! With the exact same sound byte from the games! Love letter indeed!

However, this isn't to say that I think the show is a 'masterpiece' by any stretch of the imagination. In actuality, looking past the copious heapings of fan service- I have found the early season to be a little bit messy. The second episode in particular seemed to take some interesting directions with it's action choreography that felt a little... cheap, shall we say? Watching someone get punched by a man in power armour, and then seeing them pulled weightlessly by obvious wires, is kind of CW level stunt work. Of course, those cheaper shortcomings are supposed to be drowned underneath the violence which is effective and fittingly gory- and yet... both action scenes I've seen so far seem to linger on for a couple of minutes past their prime effectiveness. The first episode wanted to play around with Lucy's perspective of sudden violence in a place that has always represented safety, so I understand the directing choice even if I don't agree with it. The standoff in the second episode, however? The longer it went on the cheaper everything looked, there really needed to be someone on set yelling 'cut' more. Seriously.

Another aspect of the show I absolutely did not expect to be critiquing was the tone but- yeah, we're there. It's not egregiously off, I must insist- but there are times when the black humour slips into farcical in a way that undermines the weight of the scene. I get that the sudden suicide in Episode 2 isn't supposed to be some emotional send-off to someone we just met- but Fallout doesn't usually make light of the finality of a death, unless we're talking about an exceptionally hilarious or ironic end. Death is supposed to gnaw at it's emptiness, hence why it lingers on the corpses of the world you travel and the locations you visit. It's a spectre hanging over anyone who wanders the wasteland, that is rarely shrugged off. But again, I'm still on the first half of the season- maybe I'm just over analysing the blinking hours of the show. Even as I wonder if this tone doesn't perhaps better fit a Borderlands adaptation over a Fallout one. (Maybe that's going a little far on my part.)

As for pacing- it varies. I would not call this show impeccably paced, but I wouldn't call it a rush job either. Time actually is a commodity spent and it's often spent well- effectively, even. Letting us settle into these worlds they've built is exactly what you want out of a TV show all about this iconic world, and I really hope we keep up this sort of environmental focus as Lucy delves into the urban destruction of the Wasteland. My problem is fleeting. Literally. The odd scene flies by a little too quickly. A man and his dog slip out from a shooting turret in the blink of an eye, before any tension or threat can be built. Is that more of a tone issue? I'd conflate the two. There's intention behind these decisions, I just don't know if I agree with these intentions a lot of the time.

And for the good? I think the cast is solid. Great actors given fine material. Nothing too complicated I've noticed, which I know this showrunner doesn't shy away from, and so I suspect was another intentional choice in order not to distract from the copious amounts of subtle world building this first season needs to establish. I like all three leads and want to know about all their individual stories, and I like the fact this show seems to remember that Fallout isn't a world of heroes and villians, just the jaded and the naïve. Even among our leads there's apparent flaws and humanity with them all, which makes me sadly reflect on the absolute lack of that in the Avatar show. (God, Netflix really screwed that show up. It makes me so sad!)

Now already the show has been deemed enough of a hit for a Season 2 to be announced, which does actually get me excited for whatever is planned next. Not knowing where this season ends I could not possibly speculate, but I'm going to go out on a limb and assume our three leads end up on something of the same team- given how chummy they look on the poster. What I would personally hope for would be a smattering of anthology stories told from season to season- with new casts crossing over with previous season casts as the grand story of the true main character of this show, The Wasteland, is unravelled. But something tells me that is a fat chance in hell because shows like this need marketable faces. At least I hope the fight scenes get better funding now that this show is considered profitable!

The Best of Fallout

 

As surreal as it is to say out loud- by the time this blog comes out the Amazon Fallout series would have debuted and we'll know well and truly whether or not Johnathon Nolan has pulled of what, frankly, sounds impossible. (Making a good Fallout TV series that both respects the source material and introduces a wider audience.) I've been impressively sceptical throughout all the marketing stages, but that was because I already knew I was going to be watching the show- so the chief point of the marketing, to draw my watch, was irrelevant. All that was left was the hunt for any indication that this show had been mistreated or placed in unfit hands and so far... I'm not sure. But I don't want to air such feelings, I want to talk about the best of what Fallout was so we can celebrate more coming to our post-apocalyptic wasteland after all this time waiting!

The original Fallout was brought into existence as a spiritual successor to the original Wasteland- and in that vein I found their command of portraying the harshness of the Wastes to be Fallout's biggest strength. The tribes, gangs and roving packs of mutants creates this kind of survivalist-western vibe, alongside the overbearing reminder of the scarceness of common essentials. That the entire story is about securing the water for your tribe is a grounding factor cutting through all the silliness and black humour that would come to characterise the Fallout franchise later. I think it's the spirit of this original game that keeps the franchise from devolving into the out-and-out tryhard comedy that Borderlands has become. Not that the original Fallout doesn't have it's share of absurdities, mind you- but it was really Fallout 2 that defined those original twists.

Fallout 3 cannot, in my opinion, be under-represented for the influence it had on action adventure RPGs. Before Fallout the very idea of a RPG, with inventory management and levelling and all that good stuff- was the pure purview of fantasy. People were still stuck in the mires of what Dungeons and Dragons stood for when it was introduced all those decades prior, despite the fact that many more modern set RPGs had been fully realised in the years since. (Cyberpunk, Shadowrun- there were options!) What Fallout 3 did so well was bring those concepts, creating your own character, living a life of consequence and customised outcomes, and brought it to a generalised audience through a widely accessible genre type. For all that I think Fallout 3 did wrong in it's direction- I will never call it over-rated. The game had it's part in play in the journey of the craft.

New Vegas was pretty much the game that defined what every RPG could be for the next ten years. Oodles of potential to be whoever you were amidst a wild and untamed post-war society balanced between various factions of different shades of thug. New Vegas was all about creating a world without ultimate forces and providing tools to the player to veer practically whatever direction they wanted to create the world they wanted to. New Vegas is a bit much when you first play it, but all it takes is a little bit of experimentation to learn the true range of what is possible with a little bit of creative thinking. And that's just narratively. The world is also the franchise's best in terms of individual character writing, ambitious side quest lines that introduce you to unforgettable side characters, brilliant DLC support with the single best written lore story in Fallout history hidden away within and... it's the best Fallout game ever made, nuff said.

Fallout 4 was the game that really nailed a comprehensive look to the Fallout universe. Whereas New Vegas will remain my favourite, and because it was built on the bones of Fallout 3- I consider that look to be what Fallout is when I imagine it- Fallout 4's redesigns hit every single nail directly on the head for creating the most tangible vision of what Fallout could be. I understand fully why this was the world that Johnathon Nolan sought to bring to life when he started on the show. The functionality of the Vaults, the genuine 'mech suit' iteration of power armour, the bestial remodelling of mutated Yao Gui and Deathclaw- that is the Fallout we always saw in our minds eye- and seeing it brought to life is a special kind of brilliant. 

76 was the Fallout game that introduced some of the most contentious parts of the lore that... I suppose broke up the stigma of this franchise being a coherent narrative. I mean there was a time when the Fallout wasteland was this ever-stretching blossoming cornucopia of new stories and ideas that could spring up game after game, but Bethesda have been so enamoured with the Brotherhood of Steel for so very long it's become clear they'll shoehorn those tincans into literally anything that they can. 76 has been the dissolution of the brand, and from that has come a lot of new ideas- which is something worth celebrating I guess. We've got a whole new branch of the Brotherhood that spawned half a continent away from the Maxon branch by way of radio. We have every company and their mother developing their own suits of Power Armour. Note, I didn't say 'sprays for power armour' such as you find in Nuka World- I'm talking brand new fully unique sets of Power Armour. Every private company in Appalachia has one of their own now! And... I guess we just don't have to care anymore.

Along the way I suppose it's worth celebrating some of the other games that have struggled along in relative obscurity lending their little this and that to the franchise as they're fazed out of canonicity. At the very least Fallout Shelter is worth a shout-out for being the most successful Fallout game of all time. Yes, that is the sad truth of the mobile market. The game is sick though, I understand the appeal. Pretty sure they heavily toned down the drop rate of legendary settlers though. Of course, the best of the best Fallout has to offer will always be their mods- for which New Vegas is the reigning king. The Someguy Series of bounty-hunting mods, Tale of Two Wastelands, Enclave Rising, Autumn Leaves, Fallout California... and I suppose Fallout: The Frontier is worth a mention. The community for Fallout is so brilliant and huge they go out of their way to make the Fallout they love! Isn't that great?

Now with Fallout being passed into the relative mainstream through Amazon we've lost a bit of that control over the franchise as fans. I wonder what will become of the little gaming franchise that could, of the dozens of self-developed stories and adventures that turned our wasteland heroes into unique little nuggets of legend. Will Amazon now own a portion of this franchise? Will they wrangle the rights to start developing their own Fallout content? Will there be a breakdown of Western Civilisation driven by a collective desire to see Jeff Bezos release the rights to make a Fallout New Vegas 2 to Obsidian- a conflict that rises to such a crazed fever pitch that the powers that be have no recourse but to fire thermo-nuclear missiles upon their own constituents, plunging the world into nuclear fire? Probably not. But you never know.

Last call for the Fallout show

 

Onwards we move to the last TV event of the year that I give half a damn about, The Fallout TV show- and to be utterly and brutally honest with everyone: I'm not feeling overly optimistic about it! And a lot of that scepticism has absolutely nothing to do with the show itself but rather my general impressions on the lot of the media proceeding it. The Last of Us show led all of us 'Adaptation wary' into a false sense of security that we've been knocked out of in the wake of movies like 'Madame Web'. And sure, 'Web' was not a direct adaptation of any work, but they still did a bunch of characters that we know incredibly dirty. And then there is the Avatar Live Action show which so far floundered the crucial beginning chapters, picked up substantially with it's middle chapters- and I haven't finished the first season yet- but I'm not blown away by the quality of it all. Which leads me to some degree of apprehension when thinking we've got our Fallout show headed our way in less than a month.

Now the significance of this Fallout show is not lost on me. With the exception of the Final Fallout game coming up in the 2030's- this is going to be the last Fallout project that the series reviver Todd Howard has a chance to produce, to prove that the direction of the franchise is on the right track for the next generation to take over. You know, provided that there is anyone left in the AAA space to take over executive positions in the next decade when everyone has been fired out of the industry. (It's a bit of a toss-up right now in that regard.) Todd didn't personally make this show of course, but it will be under his producing eye to ensure that Johnathon Nolan doesn't grab this source material and drag it into another vapidly existential diatribe into whatever pseudo-religious fringe-philosophy the mad man is currently studying- I just want this to retain it's original DNA a bit more than West World ever did- pretty please!

Of course, Mister Nolan has his own thoughts about exactly what he wants to achieve with this series and to the ear of the receptive it's actually somewhat positive. In an attempt to offer an olive branch out to us who stand afraid of exactly what the man has planned for our favourite post apocalypse- Nolan declared he wants this show to exist as something of a 'Fallout 5', on an non-interactive medium- which is a much more charitable way of saying he wants this to exist alongside that which has come before, rather than The Last of Us showrunner who callously tossed away games as the inferior artform in the face of his superior TV work. (Gotta love petty artistic squabbles!) But in that promise comes a certain shadow of expectation Nolan wasn't exactly cognizant of accepting.

Because at best I saw this as an oddity- an introduction to the world of Fallout to a non gaming audience without any real expectation behind in terms of intent or narrative purpose. Now I know to expect better. And more. By Nolan's curious interpretation, each Fallout is kind of an island of it's own beholden to it's own world and lore and canon whilst existing within a larger space- (an excuse Bethesda is desperate to adopt for how bad they've been at canon consistency over the years) which places this adaptation someplace similar to the Dark Knight Trilogy, for which he wrote. If we're going to compare this upcoming show to the quality bar of the Dark Knight, then my bar seriously shot up for what I'm asking for out of this show- to an extent I'm not sure the showrunners are ready for!

Fallout stories have purpose, they move a needle, they tell stories about pathos and growth and turmoil and concession- Fallout stories are multifaceted and reverberating and they don't have neat clean endings. Fallout stories contain no heroes or... well, okay they always have pretty clearly defined villains, but the 'heroes' are never squeaky and clean. Fallout contains so much fuel to feed into it's core thesis, that no matter how far the world changes and how much evidence persists to affirm the fallen state of the world and what we can do about it- conflict remains unchanging. War never changes. From conception to death Mankind will strife with itself until there is nothing left and that is a foundational aspect of the human condition.

Now if the Avatar show runners were the guys in charge of this show, I would be deeply worried about their ability to hit these nails into the coffin- but Johnathon Nolan is no stranger to reaching those kinds of beats in the entertainment that he makes. In fact, he often has a tendency to elevate the source materials he works on, pulling out it's best elements and highlighting them to their fullest. Maybe even getting lost in them, as I would argue was the case with Westworld. But by that same merit I'm not going to just lay back and assume that man knows exactly what he's on with a game franchise. I just don't believe the man even knows what the games are or cares enough to study them- one who did would be a little more cautious about copy-pasting the Prydwyn into their show without a single design change. (It was a custom construction for god's sake! There can't be two!)

But if there is one thing I need to highlight before it fries my brain like a shot of FOXDIE- OMG the NCR- what are they doing to my boys? Bethesda have apparently nuked Shady Sands and now the NCR look like scavenger remnants? Is this- this can't be the new face of the NCR, right? Tell me that Bethesda, through Johnathon Nolan, didn't just kill the only barely functioning government in the game about post apocalyptic societies! I mean sure, we know that the NCR are so big that the apparent eradication of their capital is a huge blow, but not a shattering event- but do Bethesda know that? They've always had a hardon for dragging the 'post' out of the apocalypse title and wanting to make their Fallout worlds as desolate as possible! Also- for the love of god don't make the Brotherhood the prevailing Western force as well as the prevailing Eastern force! Can we get a break from the tin can men, please!

Phew- there we go! Got the nerd out there and now I can talk about the show... It looks beautiful. Set design, character makeup, the cast- everything looks entirely on point to the extent that now we just need to hear that the writers have their A-game on- which was where the Avatar show lost it's way, so fingers crossed Fallout has them beat there! I seriously want to see a show like this go the distance, cover grounds familiar and new- bring a new face to the world of Fallout so we can talk about the intricacies of the Post Apocalypse in public without looking like irredeemable social outcasts! Please, Johnathon Nolan- save me from myself and make this show good!

So... does Johanthon Nolan even know what Fallout is?

 

With us moving into the new year and the upcoming Fallout show looming over us like a particularly zealous Brotherhood Paladin leering over our brand new iPhones, I think it fair to analyse exactly what it is that awaits the Fallout fanbase as perhaps their only fresh product for the next half decade. (Given Bethesda's lamentable fear of all things 'spin off'.) Fallout 5 is a far off proposition that not many people have the energy to seriously contemplate, least of all myself who fears to look more than a few weeks into the future with hope- so this TV show of questionable canonicity will have to suffice in the meantime, which means us fans our placing all of our hopes and dreams into the hands of the talented Mr Johnathon Nolan, showrunner of that Westworld show that everyone watched for a bit and then dropped off on. (Turns out I don't care about the plight of androids that look human- now please stop presenting me with that exact same 'moral quandary': every near-future sci-fi show ever made!)

Johnathon Nolan is no fresh spring chicken with no idea what he's doing, the guy seems to have nurtured talent just as his Brother has- but talent does not always translate to every task, especially for the very complicated and multifaceted job of an 'adaptation.' Even Westworld, bearing the name of a classic sci-fi movie, pretty severely veered away from the base concept to such a degree that to compare the two and call them the 'same franchise' feels genuinely laughable. Sure, that original concept absolutely did not have the legs to last as long as the show did, but I would struggle to call where the show went a 'natural evolution'. It feels a bit more like that age-old problem of a show runner who wanted to make a certain kind of show but lacked the funds and backing to mount it and so attached it to a more profitable brand. But even then- Westworld was that more profitable brand? I don't know how I feel about the man as an adapter. His team are not as shameless as the Halo team, at the very least.

Video game Adaptations have always been a minefield of cringe, typically assaulted by creatives who consider themselves intellectually superior to the original material and the fans of that material by merit of being a filmmaker- resulting in total irreverent trash that turns away franchise fans and is too stupid for fresh fans. (Like Halo.) Johnathon Nolan is no fool, he probably knew all of this very well when accepting the job to adapt Fallout and yet took the plunge anyway- why? Because he thought himself capable of handling it. But unfortunately that isn't really up to the Nolan to decide, now is it? No, we are going to break down right now whether or not Nolan knows his stuff. As card-carrying Fallout veterans (Barring a spin-off here or there I need to get around to. And I've only ever played both DLCs for Fallout 4 once. And I just learnt I never 'actually' finished Nuka World- there's a secret ending I never triggered.) And it all starts with that original announcement.

Now I have to admit, seeing Nolan sitting in that desert being handed a fresh glass of Nuka by a screen-accurate T-45 hand: that was pretty cool. And perhaps I blanked out a little on what was actually being said in order to bask in the wonder of the moment. But looking back, at that 'funny' little back and forth where he pretended not to know what the franchise even was whilst sitting on the set, (That's humour for ya!) his feedback was a little odd. "Fallout! Yes. The Post Apocalyptic- humourous, dark, bleak- brilliantly written- annoyingly playable.. video game franchise." That's the first we hear Nolan talk on the franchise and it's full of affectations and pretty surface level observations, if we're being pedantic. (And you know we're all about the pedantises here!) First off 'Post Apocalyptic'- yes, the genre- you can read a summary, good for you. No mention of the unique aspect of that Apocalypse- that it happens in a fifties-tinted retro-future. 'Humorous, dark, bleak'- two of those descriptors are being used as synonymous, but otherwise- sure, to the point. "Brilliantly written"? Seriously? I get we're giving a little bit of 'under the table hand service' to Bethesda here, but 'brilliantly'? That needs a bit of closer inspection.

So I can't think of a game in the Fallout canon, outside of New Vegas (Which was not a Bethesda game) which I would call 'brilliantly written'. Fallout 3 presents a pretty straight forward tail stretched out over a long winding plot that stands on the shoulder's of the quality world building, to be decent. Fallout 4 trips over itself in a flurry of factions that withers and ends up failing to say or go anywhere significant by the end of the game. Side quest lines aren't that much better. DLC is pretty hit or miss. And the less said about 76's main storyline, the better. Bethesda aren't really known for their writing- and in fact the best Fallout story was told in the Honest Hearts DLC for New Vegas, that of Randall Clark- and something tells me Johnathon Nolan isn't familiar enough with this franchise to be thinking about a optional note-quest storyline in the second DLC of a spin-off game. Just doesn't seem his speed.

And besides, if the 'writing' of Fallout is so darn brilliant, why does this show seem so eager on changing it? The Prydwen from Fallout 4 found itself copy and pasted into this new show despite the fact that airship was actually a one-of-a-kind custom build from the remains of the Enclave carrier destroyed at the end of Broken Steel. The Brotherhood themselves are described as post-war military in press snippets- without any mention of their tech zealotry- which is, you know, their defining characteristic! Also, the idea that there's still vaults that haven't been opened this long into the timeline (the show is actually the furthest along we've had so far) is supremely questionable. It's all enough to make a guy wander just what Johnathon Nolan thinks Fallout is anyway.

I would describe the Fallout franchise somewhat similarly to how I would describe Star Wars. Neither are brilliantly formed works of storytelling mastery on the main face, but they triumph in the worlds of recognisable design. The power armour, the monsters, the retro-futurism, the iconography- Fallout is a visual icon and that- at least- Nolan has replicated to considerable success. The show looks like the game should. Arguably a little too much like the game, considering this is supposed to be a totally original story but appears to be borrowing hyper-specific scenes from the games and simply transporting them over to LA where this show is set, such as the scrap-yard city built out of the ruins of a downed airliner, or the aforementioned floating fortress for the Brotherhood of Steel. Of course, looking like the real thing is only part of the struggle, Nolan also has to make sure the show feels like Fallout- and that is going to be the thing to look out for.

There's certainly something here, in this Fallout show. Something that wasn't present for the Resident Evil adaptation, which is good- because we don't want a repeat of that. However, there was a visual parity for the Halo TV show, and we all know how Season 1 of that turned out! (Poorly) I just hope that Nolan knows how to make his show feel independent of the Fallout games that we know whilst still remaining in that universe without spiralling off into existentialism like Westworld did, or collapsing under the weight of it's own lore. (Like Bethesda would have done if they were in charge of making this show) I want something original, and good, and I'm asking for too much, aren't I? If this is a low-key Fallout 3/4 remake, like I'm half-certain it is- then we'll just chalk this up to another chunk of wasted potential, won't we?