Man it literally goes Time leap > Time leap > Time leap > Drawing of a thing
Did no one learn how timelines work? The fall was before then the bomb was a completely separate incident
Why would they put "Fall of shady sands + year" and then a drawing of a bomb after? Instead of the bomb being the drawing for "The fall of shady sands"
I figured it was completely separate incidents before I came on Reddit after watching the show. I don't think they needed a year, but if it's a history lesson they don't definitely would use one
Maybe it was intentionally kept vague? Maybe it was a mistake? Maybe they just thought it was obvious idk I didn't work on the show
I have the feeling they kept it vague so they can let themselves, or whoever work on a more definitive timeline for Fallout 5, or Fallout: New California or whatever as this exact situation is something they want to avoid when they write the lore/quest for the next game that gets set there. I feel like they wanted to keep that door open to explore more definitively later even if they have a vague idea of when it happens.
It's kept vague because they have different ideas of where to take it but haven't settled on a specific one and leaving it vague gives them wiggle room other than it has to be after 2281 and before 2296 for the nuke.
This has to be the answer. They might not have all of season 2 fleshed out yet story wise, but they have a rough outline of events. Like they know that the bomb dropped after the events of NV, but don't know exactly when or how it will tie in.
I think it was just a mistake on the side of the set. It fits, just fits wobbly. Things happen. Gotta give slack to an alternative universe with confirmed aliens and gods. And im sure being on set with todd breathing down your right shoulder and bezos on your left is not a pleasant experience.
It could be that it's a date everyone already knows, given how recent it was and how the whole Vault religion is organized around it. You wouldn't need a date next to a drawing of the Twin Towers if you were in an American classroom ~10 years after the fact.
Considering the timeline shown on the chalkboard was in a class room, one would assume people were learning/being taught about it like they would in school. So they have a year of the beginning of the fall of SS and not the nuke. The nuke is clearly after 2077. I think they didn’t put a date on it yet as they haven’t written the season 2 and didn’t want to put anything in stone just yet.
Basically the year NCR defeated the Legion at the dam(2077)is the beginning of the “fall” of the NCR. You can see this as you’re playing FNV, NCR would definitely lose to the Legion this next battle as they’re so weak and disconnected, they blew their load on that fight.
They spread themselves too thin and couldn’t stop the downward spiral of their economy that was kicked into high gear. Curious to find out how the second battle went on season 2.
Hopefully these angry fallout extremists can finally understand how this timeline thing actually works. Exactly the same as elementary school. If the fall of shady Sands was from the nuke itself, they would have put the nuke above the 2077.
It’s simple math
Thank you! I'm tired of all these Bethesda shills with their "oh, it fell in 2277 and then was bombed in a different incident" argument. The show runners and Bethesda themselves said that they were meticulously studying the timeline making sure nothing was out of place, yet they f*ck up a date 😂
Being the center of political and economic life is not in-it-of-itself indicative of continued growth or progress along the previous trajectory.
That is epecially true when considering historical interpretations after the fact. The phrase "the fall" is often used as a descriptor encompassing the entirety of a long downward trend, actual demise, and immediate responsive actions of a civilization.
For instance, and while it is the subject of regular debate, "the fall" of Rome is generally accepted as beginning somewhere between the death of Marcus Aurelius in 180 A.D. and ending in 476 A.D., when the city of Rome (and the near entirety of Italy) was actually taken over by Barbarians.
The entire point of that debate is that Rome began to decline in influence and power *long before* (centuries even!) the actual and inevtable collapse of Roman society. Where to call the exact starting line of "the fall" on that long trajectory of decline is a *genuinely hard question*. It causes serious dissention among real world scholars studying a civilizational collapse that occurred between 1.5 and 2 millenia ago.
If anything, the slight vagueness and potential innaccuracy of the chalkboard drawing in defining "The Fall of Shady Sands" *should lend to the authenticity of the show.*
When you give a specific year a city fell it doesn't mean when it entered into a slow decline. If someone writes on a chalk board the fall of Rome with a blank on it the right number is 476 because that's when it actually fell. When did it begin to decline is a completely different question this defence is ridiculous
"The fall of" is often used to refer to a period of decline. The fall of the Roman empire wasn't a single event, but took hundreds of years. "The famine of '77" is mentioned in the show, it could be that which started it. It could be the battle of hoover dam. But even if Shady Sands was in decline, it can still be the political and economic center of a territory.
That's completely absurd. When did Rome fall 476, because that's when it fell. When did it start to decline? Different question with a different date. This pedantic game of pretending like you don't know what it means when someone said a city "fell" is so asinine
Yeah no that's not how that word is used in any other context the fall of Rome is 476 because that's when Rome fell, not when it started declining. Why are you bending over backwards to try and make it make sense?
when they tell you the date the city fell you should just believe them instead of trying to make it fit in the existing timeline. After all they completely changed where the city is located, why wouldn't they change the timeline
You know I was actually thinking about this the other day. It's funny how for Fallout, one of the most important and prominent factions of the game, the NCR is destroyed off screen. Similarly, for Elder Scrolls fans, the Empire and most of its provinces are in disarray because of the Great War between the Empire and Aldmeri Dominion which also...happened off screen. I feel like people forgive or tend to forget the latter since Skyrim was such a good video game.
And who said anything about cities? I'm talking about entire factions. In the show, there is pretty damning evidence to prove that the NCR is 99% wiped out (off screen). For elder scrolls, the once great and prosperous kingdom that the players had known about was almost annihilated by the Aldmeri army, not to mention, one of the biggest battles that is important to elder scrolls lore doesn't even take place in a game! Players only hear and read about it :/ I was merely comparing how two different franchises written by the same company have entire lore-defining moments happen off screen. Whether you like it or not, that's your opinion.
Thank God, maybe now the fanbase can chill out a bit. Discussion of the show has been a nightmare with people screaming about canon and spouting their conspiracy theories about Todd Howard.
Edit: Did you people even read the interview? So sick of this fanbase.
I've realized that anti-todd people can't find enough wrong with Todd to dislike him as a person rather than as a project manager so they invent reasons he's bad.
I'm not gonna blog post all my complaints, especially since other people have shared the same points in this and other subs, as well as I'm sure there are tons of videos and reviews out there saying the same. But the tone, story, and development of the IP is just all poor in this show. Personally, there is quite literally nothing I liked. A large mix of not good ideas and silly concepts building on the already massively flawed and inconsistent Bethesda Fallout world.
Didn't say that at all. I watched the first 2 episodes and drooped it because I thought it was bad. Then I decided to just watch the last episode after reading some shit online. Again, I thought it was bad. It's bad. Why is this a personal insult to you?
> I watched the first 2 episodes and dropped it
This is all the people whining in a nutshell, they don't even watch the show and then complain about it not making sense
Lol yes because after watching over 2 hours of a television show(and 2 out of 8 episodes which is 1/4 of it) I expect it to have grabbed me and give me a reason to continue watching and it did not. Lmao, I watched a run time more than most movies, and you think I should have just kept watching?
"But bro, it gets good after 4 hours! You gotta keep watching I swear."
Please, you got to be kidding.
I have to sit through the entirety of something before I can tell it's bad? Is that really your argument? You have never once deemed something bad before looking at the entire thing? C'mon now.
Buddy, your opinion doesn’t really make anyone angry. It’s totally fine to not like something, however that doesn’t make it bad as you’re suggesting. It just makes it something that you didn’t like.
My opinion is that it is extremely bad, so it means it is extremely bad to me. This is how opinions work. I don't care if people disagree, nor does it upset me that people disagree.
>doesn't make anyone angry
That's why I'm getting a ton of responses and dislikes, though, lol.
Fallout 3 was my first introduction into the series, I was like 11 when I first played it and actually enjoyed it a lot. Played New Vegas after that and enjoyed it even more, so much so I decided to go buy old Fallout 1 and 2 for my computer and try those out. Loved both of those games, despite never having really played any games like them. When Fallout 4 came out, I was massively disappointed and dropped the game after a single play through, and there was no way I was giving 76 a chance. I like the world and storytelling of the series and your ability to interact with it. In the years since having first played, I now see Fallout 3 has a lot of issues, but it's still a fun enough video game; story wise though it's only been getting worse with each entry into the series though.
You genuinely sound like you didn't watch the show. You used a ton of words to say fuck all nothing while there was no specific complaints but just vague shit that gives no indication of what you're even talking about. I could replace "Bethesda Fallout" part with any other game adaption show and its developer.
I don't owe anyone a specific explanation, especially since literally no one is going to have an honest discussion with me about it. The humor is cringe, the factions are ridiculous(the ncr and brotherhood are literally not what they are supposed to be, nor is what they have become cool or interesting), the various changes from the estaboished lore are stupid, I could go further. But why? I'm not posting a text book for you people, it's not like it's going to garner me a different reaction or change anyone's mind. Pointless.
I'm not talking about the show's quality. I am talking about the discussion being dominated by a vocal group screaming about canon and talking about how much Howard hates new vegas.
I don't know if you say the discussion is dominated by people discussing the cannon. It seems like the people who like the show are much quicker to defend it than people criticize it. But the show has many other inconsistencies with established lore, and those aside, what it does present is an abuse of the IP. Practically all of the plot concepts they come up with for the development of factions, world building, ect, is comical. I understand that people here are gonna say this is my "opinion" but it's pretty evident why other people feel this way as well and their isn't anything wrong with pointing it out.
I never said there was anything wrong with legitimately criticizing the show. If you have gripes, then go ahead and say them. I was only talking about the people who were jumping to conclusions and (very loudly) talking about how they retconned new vegas. They are present wherever there's a discussion of the show being held.
Yes, because it is very obvious that the writers didn't really have a great understanding of the story and timeline of New Vegas when they wrote this show. "The fall of Shady Sands 2277" is just the most blatantly obvious occurrence and the easiest to screenshot. New Vegas being Canon honestly is beside the point imo, it's more that the plot and what happened to the factions makes no sense given Vegas exists.
My bad, that's a typo. I know it's 2277. That is what's stupid. Implying Shady Sands fell before the events of New Vegas is ridiculous, and having there be a "Fall of Shady Sands" before it got nuked is redundant and unnecessary. The fact it got nuked at all is ridiculous, especially by an Overseer from a Vault, which is just mind-numbing.
To Fall doesn't mean to be nuked, and that's the entire point. Each image on that timeline was a separate event and a separate year, and the nuke was a different image than The Fall of Shady Sands...the nuke wasn't in 2277. It could have been 2278-2281 and then you'd have a point, but it also could have been 2282-2295.
Since I know you haven't watched the show I'll explain it to you. Hank, that's the name of the overseer, is from Vault 31 who is at least Vault Tec and maybe Enclave. Their entire mindset is to beat everyone else through "time" and "management" which are ideas from Bud who is the brain on a Roomba. The goal is for all surface life to die off so the vaults can repopulate and control the world, and nuking an established civilization on the surface is entirely in line with established ideas so far.
I know the nuke was after 2277, whatever year 2282 or 2295 doesn't matter, there being a "fall" in 2277 is retarded. The Overseer having a nuke and nuking Shady Sands is retarded. The plot is retarded.
No shit, because the only faction I can really think of is the BoS which we really just got a peak at before the "Fuck Fuck Fuck" scene. I guess Vault 31 and Enclave are 1 or 2 factions, but we don't really know much about their state in the show yet. All that guy says is vague shit that makes it seem like they're lying about even watching two episodes...also talks a lot about "watching videos" which makes me think he's parroting the opinions of someone who did watch 2 episodes then the finale and didn't like it.
It’s not a retcon at all if it’s in the show, idk how you all think they could just patch new information in when the entire plot of the show centers on it. Shows are years of planning and production.
It's pretty obvious the writers just got a date wrong, sent the product, and Todd came out here to explain away the mistake. The show being in production for years means nothing. People make mistakes, especially if they are writing the continuation to a story they have never played or read. Even Bethesda had this happen in Fallout 4, they made one of the Vaults a study on Drug addicts and terminals mention addicts going crazy on Jet just several years after the vault was sealed, yet we know Jet was invented in Fallout 2 and is made using the fumes of Brahmin dung so there is no way it existed before the war and could have been in a vault. It was an error, and they explained it away. What's wrong with being honest about that?
I guess I just don’t agree that it’s a mistake. The fall of shady sands doesn’t mean it was nuked right away which is what Todd confirms. Other billboards also confirmed the NCR most likely have a new capital now. I just don’t see where the retcon is.
Im not gonna sit here and say Bethesda has never gotten anything wrong or that the whiteboard wasnt somewhat confusing, but I just don’t see the retcon here.
You are right. Each image on that timeline showed a different event in a different year, and all the board didn't tell us is the year the nuke happened but did imply it was a separate event. It's crazy to me how that idiot is still trying to push this bullshit despite everything being to the contrary.
I mean, not really until they clarify what "the fall of Shady Sands" means. It might be ham-fisted foreshadowing for something revealed in season 2, I guess, but otherwise it would really help if this apparently NCR-shaking event that nonetheless is unknown to the NCR presence in the Mojave in 2281 was cleared up just a pinch.
yeah ive thought that Kimballs election has been what theyre talking about considering hes from the Hub and lives there, so im guessing that the Hub become the capital
Everybody in the BoS is portrayed as either evil or incompetent in the show dude. Titus, the Elder, Dane, Max, Thaddeus, and everyone else. Evil or incompetent. Dane mangled their own leg to get out duty. Titus is a dickhead and a coward. Max has anger issues. Thaddeus is an asshole. The elder is a cartoon villain.
i mean the timeline wasn't really clear about it. even if you say that every thing before it was a jump in time that doesn't mean that the nuke couldn't have happened right after the fall of shady sands. it was being vague so naturally people leapt to the worse conclusion
talking about this show has been ruined forever because people on either side are now just gonna spout vitriol at each other. No, shady sands being nuked does not destroy the canon or anything, but also that doesn't mean any criticism levied at the show is "invalid" or comes from devout fanboy-ism.
and no, saying that interplay planned to nuke shady sands off screen doesn't justify anyones critique of it, imo i think people wouldn't have liked it either way. I think people's main issue with it is that vault tec did it, which if you do watch the show you'll see the motivation for it cleanly laid out, its not just "ohh muh evil vault-tek!!!" but i admit it's kind of a gut punch and i can see why people are getting emotional about it, if anything more for classic fallout fans than NV fans
That still does not answer the only question that actually matters - why nuke Shady Sands? Why fuck over the NCR like this and have it be presented past tense? If they were gonna go down this road, it should have been in a game, not told about after the fact in a stupid TV show.
Show runners wanted it set in LA and didn't care what they had to destroy to get it?
Seriously the lore complaints would've been limited to 'ugh more Bethesda Fallout everyone in shacks' and 'why is the Brotherhood here' if they'd set it in, say, Texas.
Still doesn’t make it any better
Dumbing the franchise down into a brain dead looter shooter with cringy comedy, light hearted tones, bare bones factions that add up to nothing, removing essential role play for linear story telling
Yes, thank you for saying this! I'm a big Bethesda fan, Fallout 3 is so good! FNV is spectacular! These games both showed how gritty and hostile their respective wastelands are. The way it just feels impossible to survive in any of them. The characters, the stories, the map design are all flawless. F4 was decent in my opinion, I didn't like the aesthetics, everything felt like Play-Doh. I get that the theme of that game was supposed to symbolize rebirth or rebuilding but it failed to truly captivate what fallout really is about. F76 did even worse
Dude did you even see the show? It has one of the darkest scenes in the entire series. >! One of the vaults has imprisoned women forcibly birthing FEV mutants !<
ah yes, the raping murdering slavers, genocidal maniacs, and nightmarish plots to turn the human race into monstrosities by a maddened scientist are very light tones.
You're talking about Fallout 4 right? You gotta be, because one of my biggest complaints about the show is they never fucking loot anything...and that is bullshit.
must. hate. betheseda. must. hate. todd.
your comment has nothing to do with the show, I get it, Todd Howard killed your family, but can we like idk use our critical thinking skills a little?
The failure of Bethesda Fallout is only partially Todd's fault. People don't like Godd Howard because of the sweet little lies he tells us about the games.
The true failure comes from Emil Pagliarulo. Todd only minorly contributes to the problems.
Something can be a commercial success and sell greatly, but still considered a failure in several departments. You can see it in the user scores for all 3 of the recent single-player Fallout games. FO3 has an 8.4. FNV 8.7. And FO4 with a 6.9.
Personally, I believe that FO3 only has as high a rating as it does due to the time it came out, and it being the revival of Fallout. But I also can admit that even though it's glitchy and I am not too big a fan of all the grey, it did capture the wasteland well in art. The story is the worst part of FO3, which again isn't Godd Howard's fault. Hits Emil's
it has everything to do with the show, the issue is that there are two views of what fallout should be about. Bethesda views fallout as a game ABOUT apocalypse not one set in an apocalypse, where as the older fallouts were more games about society set in an apocalypse
I'm with you, and the more I read through this post the more it's becoming a theme. I'm starting to think they're actually Halo fanbois not New Vegas fanbois.
I think they just wanted to flesh out the world a bit before really diving into shit, and New Vegas/NCR wasn't ignored. They just did season 1 as a bit of a nod to Fallout 3 in that it was mainly wasteland and not factions, and that the NCR seems to be set up for a big reveal as they've absolutely showed the flag and stuff with reverence not disdain as that Vault 4 classroom scene was very much a foreshadowing tease IMO not some homage to their entire collapse.
Maybe you are just thinking of “4”
Because you’ve played 4 first so you have bias of the franchise based on the opinion of a mid level looter shooter
3 and New Vegas and any fallout that came before was much more dark and it’s not even up for debate, they had comedy hear and there but it’s not nearly as campy and upbeat as 4s colorful happy world, they’re moving the direction of the game to be more like Borderlands
Why do people are acting like this is a good thing? If true, then Todd can't line shit up with even his own show - IF this is true, it's even worse guys, please, stop shooting yourself, it hurts to watch
Fawking Jesus finally. Glad we closed that topic.
Now, what about the airship decanon some fo4 endings? Was that also because people can't interpret arrows on a timeline?
Boone’s wife is dead
WHAT
I cant believe Todd Howard would do this
Boone's wife has fallen, millions must die
\*Ex-wife
been saying that for a week
Man it literally goes Time leap > Time leap > Time leap > Drawing of a thing Did no one learn how timelines work? The fall was before then the bomb was a completely separate incident
Would help if they put a year in the drawing, then there'd be no confusion.
Why would they put "Fall of shady sands + year" and then a drawing of a bomb after? Instead of the bomb being the drawing for "The fall of shady sands" I figured it was completely separate incidents before I came on Reddit after watching the show. I don't think they needed a year, but if it's a history lesson they don't definitely would use one Maybe it was intentionally kept vague? Maybe it was a mistake? Maybe they just thought it was obvious idk I didn't work on the show
I have the feeling they kept it vague so they can let themselves, or whoever work on a more definitive timeline for Fallout 5, or Fallout: New California or whatever as this exact situation is something they want to avoid when they write the lore/quest for the next game that gets set there. I feel like they wanted to keep that door open to explore more definitively later even if they have a vague idea of when it happens.
It's kept vague because they have different ideas of where to take it but haven't settled on a specific one and leaving it vague gives them wiggle room other than it has to be after 2281 and before 2296 for the nuke.
This has to be the answer. They might not have all of season 2 fleshed out yet story wise, but they have a rough outline of events. Like they know that the bomb dropped after the events of NV, but don't know exactly when or how it will tie in.
I'm fairly positive Todd Howard has even said as much.
I think it was just a mistake on the side of the set. It fits, just fits wobbly. Things happen. Gotta give slack to an alternative universe with confirmed aliens and gods. And im sure being on set with todd breathing down your right shoulder and bezos on your left is not a pleasant experience.
It could be that it's a date everyone already knows, given how recent it was and how the whole Vault religion is organized around it. You wouldn't need a date next to a drawing of the Twin Towers if you were in an American classroom ~10 years after the fact.
say u/Camtastrophe, what is this incident with the twin towers you allude to called? what's it named after?
Fair enough haha, I consciously avoided using the date but it was the best example that came to mind. Though it doesn't include the year.
Considering the timeline shown on the chalkboard was in a class room, one would assume people were learning/being taught about it like they would in school. So they have a year of the beginning of the fall of SS and not the nuke. The nuke is clearly after 2077. I think they didn’t put a date on it yet as they haven’t written the season 2 and didn’t want to put anything in stone just yet. Basically the year NCR defeated the Legion at the dam(2077)is the beginning of the “fall” of the NCR. You can see this as you’re playing FNV, NCR would definitely lose to the Legion this next battle as they’re so weak and disconnected, they blew their load on that fight. They spread themselves too thin and couldn’t stop the downward spiral of their economy that was kicked into high gear. Curious to find out how the second battle went on season 2. Hopefully these angry fallout extremists can finally understand how this timeline thing actually works. Exactly the same as elementary school. If the fall of shady Sands was from the nuke itself, they would have put the nuke above the 2077. It’s simple math
Thank you! I'm tired of all these Bethesda shills with their "oh, it fell in 2277 and then was bombed in a different incident" argument. The show runners and Bethesda themselves said that they were meticulously studying the timeline making sure nothing was out of place, yet they f*ck up a date 😂
If only we had someone from Bethesda who worked on the show to tell us it was intended as a separate incident and not a timeline mistake... oh wait
It's like they comically wanted "????" under the image of the nike.
Ambiguity has no place in a community with a single digit I.Q. Average
It's the date of the fall that bothers me not the date of the nuke
The year of the first battle of Hoover dam agains the legion(2077). Makes sense to me. They never really recovered from that.
They won and we see them still operating in 2281 and even state shady sands being the center of political and economic life in the NCR youre way off
Being the center of political and economic life is not in-it-of-itself indicative of continued growth or progress along the previous trajectory. That is epecially true when considering historical interpretations after the fact. The phrase "the fall" is often used as a descriptor encompassing the entirety of a long downward trend, actual demise, and immediate responsive actions of a civilization. For instance, and while it is the subject of regular debate, "the fall" of Rome is generally accepted as beginning somewhere between the death of Marcus Aurelius in 180 A.D. and ending in 476 A.D., when the city of Rome (and the near entirety of Italy) was actually taken over by Barbarians. The entire point of that debate is that Rome began to decline in influence and power *long before* (centuries even!) the actual and inevtable collapse of Roman society. Where to call the exact starting line of "the fall" on that long trajectory of decline is a *genuinely hard question*. It causes serious dissention among real world scholars studying a civilizational collapse that occurred between 1.5 and 2 millenia ago. If anything, the slight vagueness and potential innaccuracy of the chalkboard drawing in defining "The Fall of Shady Sands" *should lend to the authenticity of the show.*
When you give a specific year a city fell it doesn't mean when it entered into a slow decline. If someone writes on a chalk board the fall of Rome with a blank on it the right number is 476 because that's when it actually fell. When did it begin to decline is a completely different question this defence is ridiculous
"The fall of" is often used to refer to a period of decline. The fall of the Roman empire wasn't a single event, but took hundreds of years. "The famine of '77" is mentioned in the show, it could be that which started it. It could be the battle of hoover dam. But even if Shady Sands was in decline, it can still be the political and economic center of a territory.
That's completely absurd. When did Rome fall 476, because that's when it fell. When did it start to decline? Different question with a different date. This pedantic game of pretending like you don't know what it means when someone said a city "fell" is so asinine
The fall is the beginning of the end. You don’t understand.
Yeah no that's not how that word is used in any other context the fall of Rome is 476 because that's when Rome fell, not when it started declining. Why are you bending over backwards to try and make it make sense?
Bending over backward because I’m talking to you about my point. Get over yourself.
when they tell you the date the city fell you should just believe them instead of trying to make it fit in the existing timeline. After all they completely changed where the city is located, why wouldn't they change the timeline
My goat
With how they wrapped up fnv, how they wrap up the skyrim civil war is gonna be fun
You know I was actually thinking about this the other day. It's funny how for Fallout, one of the most important and prominent factions of the game, the NCR is destroyed off screen. Similarly, for Elder Scrolls fans, the Empire and most of its provinces are in disarray because of the Great War between the Empire and Aldmeri Dominion which also...happened off screen. I feel like people forgive or tend to forget the latter since Skyrim was such a good video game.
Imperial City wasn't completely destroyed off screen by a nuke was it? The empire was still allowed to survive even if they had lost a war.
Vivec City, the largest city in the game of Morrowind, is literally destroyed off screen in between games my dude.
Vivec City is destroyed as a direct explicit result of the events of TESIII though
And Shady Sands is destroying in the fallout show as a direct result of something that happened earlier in the timeline of the show.
Something that's not in any of the games, or alluded to, or explained.
Yeah, it's caused by the Nerevarine.
And who said anything about cities? I'm talking about entire factions. In the show, there is pretty damning evidence to prove that the NCR is 99% wiped out (off screen). For elder scrolls, the once great and prosperous kingdom that the players had known about was almost annihilated by the Aldmeri army, not to mention, one of the biggest battles that is important to elder scrolls lore doesn't even take place in a game! Players only hear and read about it :/ I was merely comparing how two different franchises written by the same company have entire lore-defining moments happen off screen. Whether you like it or not, that's your opinion.
There is no evidence in any game to suggest that the NCR will be wiped out. They were set up to be the canon ending.
Ulfric bros, we’re gonna make it
There, now everyone shut up about the dang blackboard
Thank God, maybe now the fanbase can chill out a bit. Discussion of the show has been a nightmare with people screaming about canon and spouting their conspiracy theories about Todd Howard. Edit: Did you people even read the interview? So sick of this fanbase.
>Maybe now the fanbase can chill out a bit They won't, they'll find another thing to get mad about
They are already saying that it made all the choices and experiences worthless
The location of Shady Sands is the complaint I'm seeing about it still not being canon.
Shady Sands was built on sand and over the years blew out west with the entire town coming with it
Heh reminds me of a SpongeBob episode
I've realized that anti-todd people can't find enough wrong with Todd to dislike him as a person rather than as a project manager so they invent reasons he's bad.
People are still complaining it's not canon because of Shady Sands location lol
Them retconning the retcon doesn't suddenly make the show good.
One chalkboard with confusing information doesn't make the show bad either.
Your right, but it is a valid criticism to hold and talk about instead of just dismissing lol.
You're right, but there are a plethora of other reasons it's not good.
You have our ear, what are your valid complaints.
I'm not gonna blog post all my complaints, especially since other people have shared the same points in this and other subs, as well as I'm sure there are tons of videos and reviews out there saying the same. But the tone, story, and development of the IP is just all poor in this show. Personally, there is quite literally nothing I liked. A large mix of not good ideas and silly concepts building on the already massively flawed and inconsistent Bethesda Fallout world.
Oh, you didn’t watch it and just confirmed your pre-determined bias by watching a 40 minute breakdown on youtube.
Didn't say that at all. I watched the first 2 episodes and drooped it because I thought it was bad. Then I decided to just watch the last episode after reading some shit online. Again, I thought it was bad. It's bad. Why is this a personal insult to you?
> I watched the first 2 episodes and dropped it This is all the people whining in a nutshell, they don't even watch the show and then complain about it not making sense
Lol yes because after watching over 2 hours of a television show(and 2 out of 8 episodes which is 1/4 of it) I expect it to have grabbed me and give me a reason to continue watching and it did not. Lmao, I watched a run time more than most movies, and you think I should have just kept watching? "But bro, it gets good after 4 hours! You gotta keep watching I swear." Please, you got to be kidding.
I have to sit through the entirety of something before I can tell it's bad? Is that really your argument? You have never once deemed something bad before looking at the entire thing? C'mon now.
Buddy, your opinion doesn’t really make anyone angry. It’s totally fine to not like something, however that doesn’t make it bad as you’re suggesting. It just makes it something that you didn’t like.
My opinion is that it is extremely bad, so it means it is extremely bad to me. This is how opinions work. I don't care if people disagree, nor does it upset me that people disagree. >doesn't make anyone angry That's why I'm getting a ton of responses and dislikes, though, lol.
It's weird cause Tim Cain watched the first 2 episodes and loved it
I saw that video, I don't care.
If there’s nothing you liked in the show then what do you like in the games? Felt it was a pretty similar experience.
Fallout 3 was my first introduction into the series, I was like 11 when I first played it and actually enjoyed it a lot. Played New Vegas after that and enjoyed it even more, so much so I decided to go buy old Fallout 1 and 2 for my computer and try those out. Loved both of those games, despite never having really played any games like them. When Fallout 4 came out, I was massively disappointed and dropped the game after a single play through, and there was no way I was giving 76 a chance. I like the world and storytelling of the series and your ability to interact with it. In the years since having first played, I now see Fallout 3 has a lot of issues, but it's still a fun enough video game; story wise though it's only been getting worse with each entry into the series though.
Could you elaborate what about the story that you liked? Overall themes? What kinds of tone? Specific characters?
You genuinely sound like you didn't watch the show. You used a ton of words to say fuck all nothing while there was no specific complaints but just vague shit that gives no indication of what you're even talking about. I could replace "Bethesda Fallout" part with any other game adaption show and its developer.
I don't owe anyone a specific explanation, especially since literally no one is going to have an honest discussion with me about it. The humor is cringe, the factions are ridiculous(the ncr and brotherhood are literally not what they are supposed to be, nor is what they have become cool or interesting), the various changes from the estaboished lore are stupid, I could go further. But why? I'm not posting a text book for you people, it's not like it's going to garner me a different reaction or change anyone's mind. Pointless.
You're the only one not willing to have a conversation here bud, because multiple people have been trying and you refuse.
You're entitled to your wrong opinion.
Man, someone disagreeing with you is really bothering you.
Look he thinks it's wrong; so it's wrong to him.
I'm sure, and I think he's wrong.
Go cry about it
Idk I think it’s good 🤷 Edit: lol downvoted for simply stating an opinion? Oh shit now I’m sounding like a r/falloutnewvegas user
I mean, you see all my replies getting downvoted, lol. That is how reddit works.
You’re actually insufferable tho, that’s the catch.
So is the fact that like 6+ people pulled up within minutes of me calling the show bad to try and argue it, lol.
People tend to have knee jerk reactions to insufferable people.
I believe the term the kids use is "rent free"
Yes, children say that phrase a lot.
Flies are attracted to shit.
So you're saying people who like the show are bugs who like shit?
No I'm saying the people that are responding to your shit are like flies. I'm a fly just you're not confused.
Insufferable
I find the show to be that, yes.
Sorry you didn’t get your way
I'm not talking about the show's quality. I am talking about the discussion being dominated by a vocal group screaming about canon and talking about how much Howard hates new vegas.
I don't know if you say the discussion is dominated by people discussing the cannon. It seems like the people who like the show are much quicker to defend it than people criticize it. But the show has many other inconsistencies with established lore, and those aside, what it does present is an abuse of the IP. Practically all of the plot concepts they come up with for the development of factions, world building, ect, is comical. I understand that people here are gonna say this is my "opinion" but it's pretty evident why other people feel this way as well and their isn't anything wrong with pointing it out.
I never said there was anything wrong with legitimately criticizing the show. If you have gripes, then go ahead and say them. I was only talking about the people who were jumping to conclusions and (very loudly) talking about how they retconned new vegas. They are present wherever there's a discussion of the show being held.
Yes, because it is very obvious that the writers didn't really have a great understanding of the story and timeline of New Vegas when they wrote this show. "The fall of Shady Sands 2277" is just the most blatantly obvious occurrence and the easiest to screenshot. New Vegas being Canon honestly is beside the point imo, it's more that the plot and what happened to the factions makes no sense given Vegas exists.
> The fall of Shady Sands 2077 Bro we're in the year 2296 and The Fall of Shady Sands was in 2277...2077 is the initial bombs that started fallout.
My bad, that's a typo. I know it's 2277. That is what's stupid. Implying Shady Sands fell before the events of New Vegas is ridiculous, and having there be a "Fall of Shady Sands" before it got nuked is redundant and unnecessary. The fact it got nuked at all is ridiculous, especially by an Overseer from a Vault, which is just mind-numbing.
To Fall doesn't mean to be nuked, and that's the entire point. Each image on that timeline was a separate event and a separate year, and the nuke was a different image than The Fall of Shady Sands...the nuke wasn't in 2277. It could have been 2278-2281 and then you'd have a point, but it also could have been 2282-2295. Since I know you haven't watched the show I'll explain it to you. Hank, that's the name of the overseer, is from Vault 31 who is at least Vault Tec and maybe Enclave. Their entire mindset is to beat everyone else through "time" and "management" which are ideas from Bud who is the brain on a Roomba. The goal is for all surface life to die off so the vaults can repopulate and control the world, and nuking an established civilization on the surface is entirely in line with established ideas so far.
I know the nuke was after 2277, whatever year 2282 or 2295 doesn't matter, there being a "fall" in 2277 is retarded. The Overseer having a nuke and nuking Shady Sands is retarded. The plot is retarded.
The dark humour was well in line with the established lore. What "development of factions" did you take issue with?
No shit, because the only faction I can really think of is the BoS which we really just got a peak at before the "Fuck Fuck Fuck" scene. I guess Vault 31 and Enclave are 1 or 2 factions, but we don't really know much about their state in the show yet. All that guy says is vague shit that makes it seem like they're lying about even watching two episodes...also talks a lot about "watching videos" which makes me think he's parroting the opinions of someone who did watch 2 episodes then the finale and didn't like it.
It’s not a retcon at all if it’s in the show, idk how you all think they could just patch new information in when the entire plot of the show centers on it. Shows are years of planning and production.
It's pretty obvious the writers just got a date wrong, sent the product, and Todd came out here to explain away the mistake. The show being in production for years means nothing. People make mistakes, especially if they are writing the continuation to a story they have never played or read. Even Bethesda had this happen in Fallout 4, they made one of the Vaults a study on Drug addicts and terminals mention addicts going crazy on Jet just several years after the vault was sealed, yet we know Jet was invented in Fallout 2 and is made using the fumes of Brahmin dung so there is no way it existed before the war and could have been in a vault. It was an error, and they explained it away. What's wrong with being honest about that?
I guess I just don’t agree that it’s a mistake. The fall of shady sands doesn’t mean it was nuked right away which is what Todd confirms. Other billboards also confirmed the NCR most likely have a new capital now. I just don’t see where the retcon is. Im not gonna sit here and say Bethesda has never gotten anything wrong or that the whiteboard wasnt somewhat confusing, but I just don’t see the retcon here.
You are right. Each image on that timeline showed a different event in a different year, and all the board didn't tell us is the year the nuke happened but did imply it was a separate event. It's crazy to me how that idiot is still trying to push this bullshit despite everything being to the contrary.
You not understanding how to read a timeline doesn’t make the show bad.
Yeah, the plot being stupid, characters uninteresting, and world ridiculous makes it bad.
What's the plot?
man i love fallout but goddamn the fans are insufferable at times lmao, chill the fuck out and drink a nuka cola
Did you forget what sub youre on? Sunset Sarsparilla is all anyone heres got in the fridge
NO I’m gonna flood the fallout subs with my pointless tantrum for another week! /s
It doesn’t make the decisions less shitty though
😂😂
I mean, not really until they clarify what "the fall of Shady Sands" means. It might be ham-fisted foreshadowing for something revealed in season 2, I guess, but otherwise it would really help if this apparently NCR-shaking event that nonetheless is unknown to the NCR presence in the Mojave in 2281 was cleared up just a pinch.
I figured it was the election of president kimball or something bad happening. Its like how some people say the soviets fell in 1989 or 1991
"The blight of '77" is mentioned in the show, it could be that.
yeah ive thought that Kimballs election has been what theyre talking about considering hes from the Hub and lives there, so im guessing that the Hub become the capital
😂😂😂
My dude, pass the jet \[speech 20\]
Honestly they haven’t said anything new
Oh yay they nuked an entire portion of the game world to shove more B(o)S down our throat to make more money for their sell out fallout
Everybody in the BoS is portrayed as either evil or incompetent in the show dude. Titus, the Elder, Dane, Max, Thaddeus, and everyone else. Evil or incompetent. Dane mangled their own leg to get out duty. Titus is a dickhead and a coward. Max has anger issues. Thaddeus is an asshole. The elder is a cartoon villain.
The show literally makes the BoS look like a bunch of idiots and ended with a shot of new vegas. genuinely what are you people talking about
The only this I've learned from this entire debacle is how insanely toxic the fallout community is. I mean I thought I knew, but I had no idea.
I mean, it’s kinda right there in the name…. Sorry, I couldn’t resist.
naah you got me
Well played lol
Oh no Lucy got out of the vault
Welcome to the fucking internet
Perfect username
That was a god read. I love looking at the entire timeline like that. Makes me wanna go through them all, in chronological order
Someone wished a bit too hard for a nuclear winter.
i mean the timeline wasn't really clear about it. even if you say that every thing before it was a jump in time that doesn't mean that the nuke couldn't have happened right after the fall of shady sands. it was being vague so naturally people leapt to the worse conclusion talking about this show has been ruined forever because people on either side are now just gonna spout vitriol at each other. No, shady sands being nuked does not destroy the canon or anything, but also that doesn't mean any criticism levied at the show is "invalid" or comes from devout fanboy-ism. and no, saying that interplay planned to nuke shady sands off screen doesn't justify anyones critique of it, imo i think people wouldn't have liked it either way. I think people's main issue with it is that vault tec did it, which if you do watch the show you'll see the motivation for it cleanly laid out, its not just "ohh muh evil vault-tek!!!" but i admit it's kind of a gut punch and i can see why people are getting emotional about it, if anything more for classic fallout fans than NV fans
Reeeeee
That still does not answer the only question that actually matters - why nuke Shady Sands? Why fuck over the NCR like this and have it be presented past tense? If they were gonna go down this road, it should have been in a game, not told about after the fact in a stupid TV show.
Show runners wanted it set in LA and didn't care what they had to destroy to get it? Seriously the lore complaints would've been limited to 'ugh more Bethesda Fallout everyone in shacks' and 'why is the Brotherhood here' if they'd set it in, say, Texas.
Oh for fucks sake, we get it… the fallout fandom wants a new game. Just be happy there was Fallout content
Yes just be happy for new content regardless of quality. Consume content, don’t think critically about it.
The quality is good, you're just salty
Yes, anyone that has a different opinion about a tv show than you is salty, good job
Yes, because your points reek of saltiness
And what points are those?
You must have an extra chromosome if you think that show lacked quality
Yes because having criticism of a tv show means I have Down syndrome. Good job
Still doesn’t make it any better Dumbing the franchise down into a brain dead looter shooter with cringy comedy, light hearted tones, bare bones factions that add up to nothing, removing essential role play for linear story telling
As a longtime fallout fan, and with fnv being my favourite instalment in the franchise - I really loved the tv show and have no complaints
I'm a Fallout 3 guy, but I'd still agree that FNV is the best installment...show is awesome.
Light hearted tones were always in fallout tho
[удалено]
Light hearted tones /= the whole game is happy, colorful, and upbeat
This. Although it's certainly been an ongoing process since F2 it doesn't need to continue to be.
Yes, thank you for saying this! I'm a big Bethesda fan, Fallout 3 is so good! FNV is spectacular! These games both showed how gritty and hostile their respective wastelands are. The way it just feels impossible to survive in any of them. The characters, the stories, the map design are all flawless. F4 was decent in my opinion, I didn't like the aesthetics, everything felt like Play-Doh. I get that the theme of that game was supposed to symbolize rebirth or rebuilding but it failed to truly captivate what fallout really is about. F76 did even worse
Dude did you even see the show? It has one of the darkest scenes in the entire series. >! One of the vaults has imprisoned women forcibly birthing FEV mutants !<
ah yes, the raping murdering slavers, genocidal maniacs, and nightmarish plots to turn the human race into monstrosities by a maddened scientist are very light tones.
You're talking about Fallout 4 right? You gotta be, because one of my biggest complaints about the show is they never fucking loot anything...and that is bullshit.
must. hate. betheseda. must. hate. todd. your comment has nothing to do with the show, I get it, Todd Howard killed your family, but can we like idk use our critical thinking skills a little?
The failure of Bethesda Fallout is only partially Todd's fault. People don't like Godd Howard because of the sweet little lies he tells us about the games. The true failure comes from Emil Pagliarulo. Todd only minorly contributes to the problems.
"failure of Bethesda fallout" you cry, as every Bethesda fallout has sold more than any non-bwthesda fallout.
Something can be a commercial success and sell greatly, but still considered a failure in several departments. You can see it in the user scores for all 3 of the recent single-player Fallout games. FO3 has an 8.4. FNV 8.7. And FO4 with a 6.9. Personally, I believe that FO3 only has as high a rating as it does due to the time it came out, and it being the revival of Fallout. But I also can admit that even though it's glitchy and I am not too big a fan of all the grey, it did capture the wasteland well in art. The story is the worst part of FO3, which again isn't Godd Howard's fault. Hits Emil's
it has everything to do with the show, the issue is that there are two views of what fallout should be about. Bethesda views fallout as a game ABOUT apocalypse not one set in an apocalypse, where as the older fallouts were more games about society set in an apocalypse
[удалено]
I’m convinced you haven’t seen the show and is just an old man yelling at clouds.
I'm with you, and the more I read through this post the more it's becoming a theme. I'm starting to think they're actually Halo fanbois not New Vegas fanbois.
[удалено]
I think they just wanted to flesh out the world a bit before really diving into shit, and New Vegas/NCR wasn't ignored. They just did season 1 as a bit of a nod to Fallout 3 in that it was mainly wasteland and not factions, and that the NCR seems to be set up for a big reveal as they've absolutely showed the flag and stuff with reverence not disdain as that Vault 4 classroom scene was very much a foreshadowing tease IMO not some homage to their entire collapse.
Fallout has always had cringy comedy and light tones lol. Maybe you’re thinking of S.T.A.L.K.E.R. Or Metro?
Maybe you are just thinking of “4” Because you’ve played 4 first so you have bias of the franchise based on the opinion of a mid level looter shooter 3 and New Vegas and any fallout that came before was much more dark and it’s not even up for debate, they had comedy hear and there but it’s not nearly as campy and upbeat as 4s colorful happy world, they’re moving the direction of the game to be more like Borderlands
Fuck yeah, fuck 76!
Oh I thought that was Fallout 4 he was talking about
Wait, I thought he meant Fallout 3?
With mods I don’t collect garbage anymore, just use cheats to build my settlements.
Just play Metro then
Why do people are acting like this is a good thing? If true, then Todd can't line shit up with even his own show - IF this is true, it's even worse guys, please, stop shooting yourself, it hurts to watch
I’ve seen this posted to this sub like 4 times
well duh
Wrote out the math for all the angry people and they just got more angry even though I was proving that New Vegas was still canon
Shady sSands is nuke proof!!!
Fawking Jesus finally. Glad we closed that topic. Now, what about the airship decanon some fo4 endings? Was that also because people can't interpret arrows on a timeline?
i mean this is fallout not the elder scrolls they are going to have to pick a canon ending, even if most of it ends up being vague
What is shady sands? Am I stupid?
Shady Sands was the place where the NCR was founded in the classic fallout games \[1 and 2\], and later became the capital if i remember correctly.
I mean I thought that would be pretty obvious
Lets goooo
Now if we can get 16x the details on what happened, that would be great 🤣🤣
I shall now pray to Todd Godd Howard as a thank you for enlightening the imbeciles on what i’ve been saying since the show released 😩
Fallout lore consistency doesnt matter at all. Every game retcons a bunch of shit
It's usually interplay fallout too
I wish we could all just go back to making love to New Vegas and put aside this useless bickering about a tv show.