Review Vince D. Weller Does Fallout: New Vegas

[TalesfromtheCrypt]

So VD, does the implementation of factions in FNV and your discussion with BN affect at all your philosophy with AoD?

In what ways?

BN and I are disagree because we look at the setting differently. As he said:

"Makes you biased on this. Your view that Fallout's setting should have developed into feudalism is valid, but the fact is that it didn't. I "get the feeling" (but correct me if I'm way off the mark) you're predisposed to like the Legion because they're closer to your vision of what should've happened between Fallout 1 and Fallout 2."

That's exactly the issue. What's missing, imo, is a violent struggle for domination. The Master wanted to unite people and create a better man. The Enclave wanted to gas everyone. What the fuck did the rest want? Where are the other "players"?

Fallout seriously lacked something that would justify the Master. There should be some kind of a war - not between neutral and evil but between neutral and neutral. Then his idea of Unity could look at least a bit non-batshitinsaneevil.

Why? The Master in Fallout 1 was just plain evil, a deranged madman. There was no moral gray zone, no justification for his plans except in his own twisted mind. Joining him was more of a gimmick option and actually equaled getting a game over screen. The Master was the evil guy, and the Vault Dweller fought him. There was no moral ambigiousity. And guess what, it worked fine that way. I don't think the Fallout Devs wanted the Master to be something else than just an interesting, but ultimatly evil supervillain.

Only later people like VD and some loonies over at NMA with their completly absurd, pseudo-philosophical interpretations of the words right, wrong and morality interpreted some kind of moral gray areas into the whole thing, claiming that somehow the Master was not evil and that his comicly evil plans are a valid option for the wasteland.

 

[Kz3r0]

ITT we discover that people played Fallout because of its intriguing faction politics and philosophical dilemmas.


Fuck that shit gimme a Martian faction Killraven style.

 

[Davaris]

Why? The Master in Fallout 1 was just plain evil, a deranged madman. There was no moral gray zone, no justification for his plans except in his own twisted mind. Joining him was more of a gimmick option and actually equaled getting a game over screen. The Master was the evil guy, and the Vault Dweller fought him. There was no moral ambigiousity. And guess what, it worked fine that way. I don't think the Fallout Devs wanted the Master to be something else than just an interesting, but ultimatly evil supervillain.

Only later people like VD and some loonies over at NMA with their completly absurd, pseudo-philosophical interpretations of the words right, wrong and morality interpreted some kind of moral gray areas into the whole thing, claiming that somehow the Master was not evil and that his comicly evil plans are a valid option for the wasteland.

The victors of WW2 can "justify" dropping atomic bombs on civilians in Japan. So that was not an evil act?

All you have to do is define evil. Everyone on planet Earth, has their own opinion of what it is and of course, double standards apply.

 

[Awor Szurkrarz]

So VD, does the implementation of factions in FNV and your discussion with BN affect at all your philosophy with AoD?

In what ways?

BN and I are disagree because we look at the setting differently. As he said:

"Makes you biased on this. Your view that Fallout's setting should have developed into feudalism is valid, but the fact is that it didn't. I "get the feeling" (but correct me if I'm way off the mark) you're predisposed to like the Legion because they're closer to your vision of what should've happened between Fallout 1 and Fallout 2."

That's exactly the issue. What's missing, imo, is a violent struggle for domination. The Master wanted to unite people and create a better man. The Enclave wanted to gas everyone. What the fuck did the rest want? Where are the other "players"?

Fallout seriously lacked something that would justify the Master. There should be some kind of a war - not between neutral and evil but between neutral and neutral. Then his idea of Unity could look at least a bit non-batshitinsaneevil.

Why? The Master in Fallout 1 was just plain evil, a deranged madman. There was no moral gray zone, no justification for his plans except in his own twisted mind. Joining him was more of a gimmick option and actually equaled getting a game over screen. The Master was the evil guy, and the Vault Dweller fought him. There was no moral ambigiousity. And guess what, it worked fine that way. I don't think the Fallout Devs wanted the Master to be something else than just an interesting, but ultimatly evil supervillain.

Only later people like VD and some loonies over at NMA with their completly absurd, pseudo-philosophical interpretations of the words right, wrong and morality interpreted some kind of moral gray areas into the whole thing, claiming that somehow the Master was not evil and that his comicly evil plans are a valid option for the wasteland.

I agree about the Master being batshit insane evil. The problem is that Tim Cain claimed that it isn't true. If he didn't intend him to look completely insane, then there should be something going on in game that would make the player stop and think if the Unity wouldn't be better. For example a some big war going on.

 

[TalesfromtheCrypt]

Why? The Master in Fallout 1 was just plain evil, a deranged madman. There was no moral gray zone, no justification for his plans except in his own twisted mind. Joining him was more of a gimmick option and actually equaled getting a game over screen. The Master was the evil guy, and the Vault Dweller fought him. There was no moral ambigiousity. And guess what, it worked fine that way. I don't think the Fallout Devs wanted the Master to be something else than just an interesting, but ultimatly evil supervillain.

Only later people like VD and some loonies over at NMA with their completly absurd, pseudo-philosophical interpretations of the words right, wrong and morality interpreted some kind of moral gray areas into the whole thing, claiming that somehow the Master was not evil and that his comicly evil plans are a valid option for the wasteland.

The victors of WW2 can "justify" dropping atomic bombs on civilians in Japan. So that was not an evil act?

All you have to do is define evil. Everyone on planet Earth, has their own opinion of what it is and of course, double standards apply.

There's usually some kind of basic definition of evil that is shared by a large group or even the majority of people.
Clearly, the absolute majority of the people in Fallout 1 would rather continue to live their miserable lives in that post-apoc world than experience the "blessings" the Master has in store for them. At least the game doesn't do any effort to convince us otherwise.

 

[TalesfromtheCrypt]

I agree about the Master being batshit insane evil. The problem is that Tim Cain claimed that it isn't true. If he didn't intend him to look completely insane, then there should be something going on in game that would make the player stop and think if the Unity wouldn't be better. For example a some big war going on.

I didn't know about that. Well yes, if it really was the Devs goal to make the Master somehow morally ambigious (and not just Tim Cains personal opinion) then they utterly failed. Judging from what the game itself presents us, not considering fallout bibles, dev quotes and other utterly pointless "extended universe" lore that die hard Fallout fans are so anal about.

 

[hiver]

They didnt fail. Hardly anyone who played Fallout came out thinking that Master was a simple evil douche.
And it was explained directly in the game, if nothing else then by talking directly to him.

Ofcourse its possible to see him as ultimately evil, in a sense that he worked against humans, vatted many, killed even more and planned to do the same to the rest. Which you, as a player and a human might object too.

Or atleast the game railroaded you into it because there was no option to go over to the other side.

And he was a bit insane too, juggling on that line between a genious and a lunatic, being made out of several fused people in addition.

But, he had an idea, a goal and a plan and a line of reasoning which can be defended generally.
He saw that ordinary humans were an evolutionary dead end. Ordinary humans that were direct culprits for the apocalypse and global destruction.
So why not try and do something better out of these monsters?

Why would you ever let them rebuild the past society when all they will do is the same thing again?


Thats where the gray area comes from.
In the end, it could be said he failed because he was human and invariably applied human reasoning to the problem. He dealt with it by violence.
Which is ironic and fitting.

Of course the same thing is what happens with the Enclave although they come from a different angle of the past world trying to get a hold of the future all over again. Sure they can be viewed as just a shallow evil by their actions, but theyre not - in their motives.


All this is mostly clear to people who actually are capable of deducting such "nuances" from the game itself. Youre problem is that apparently you cannot, which has nothing to do with the game.

Its really hard to imagine in what way the games could have been more clear about these issues without spelling it in huge green letters all over the screen every five minutes but apparently it would help some cretins.


-edit-
Well ok.
You could say that they could have done more to increase the sense of ambiguity. More does not equal : "they didnt do anything".
Besides, publishers forced them to change even the Junkyard, not allowing that choosing Gizmo ends up as a better option.

The way the game was rushed out, nearly canceled and all the other shit - we can be happy we got it at all.

 

[TalesfromtheCrypt]

But, he had an idea, a goal and a plan and a line of reasoning which can be defended generally.
He saw that ordinary humans were an evolutionary dead end.

Same as Hitler ZING!

Seriously, you go to great lengths to defend the Master's plan, but ultimatly what you write just comes off as a big pile of bullshit.

HEY LOOK GUYS I ARBITRARILY DECIDE TO GENOCIDE OR HORRIBLY MUTATE A BIG PART OF THE POPULATION BECAUSE LOL I HAVE A FEELING ONCE THEY REBUILD THEIR CIVILIZATION THEY MIGHT REPEAT THE NUCLEAR HOLOCAUST LOL SERVES THEM RIGHT

yeah right...

 

[hiver]

No, its nothing like Hitler.
Thats a rather stupid and shallow way of seeing it.

I dont need to defend it you cretin. Thats whats in the game. Humans are monsters who destroyed the world.

 

[TalesfromtheCrypt]

yeah I'm sorry I'm not as insightful as you and fail to see THE OH MY GOD PHILOSOPHICAL DEPTH in a half-serious comic sci-fi setting for a computer game

Honestly though, the setting was fun, original, and even somewhat coherent in its own limits, but Fallout fanatics seriously need to consider getting another hobby...

 

[TalesfromtheCrypt]

Humans are monsters who destroyed the world.

CRAAWWLING IN MY SKIN

 

[Awor Szurkrarz]

Humans are monsters who destroyed the world.

Some humans are. Also, replace humans with Jews and you'll get Hitler .

 

[Kz3r0]

That Mutants would try to replace Humans while incrementing their ranks makes a lot of sense to me.

 

[hiver]

yeah I'm sorry I'm not as insightful as you and fail to see THE OH MY GOD PHILOSOPHICAL DEPTH in a half-serious comic sci-fi setting for a computer game

But thats the point you fail to comprehend. It doesnt have philosophical depth of such caliber. It merely poses a few interesting questions, some irony and a few entertaining juxtapositions.

So, its really not a game for complete retards.

 

[Lumpy]

Of course the Master was comic-book villainy - he was meant to be. But that does not imply he was unambiguously evil - indeed, his plan made a lot of sense if you were a mutant.
Besides, the smart muties you meet don't seem particularily displeased with their condition.

 

[TalesfromtheCrypt]

Of course the Master was comic-book villainy - he was meant to be. But that does not imply he was unambiguously evil - indeed, his plan made a lot of sense if you were a mutant.
Besides, the smart muties you meet don't seem particularily displeased with their condition.

I hate to overuse the Nazi comparisons, but Hitlers plan also made a lot of sense if you were a blond aryan german.

Of course the Masters plan made sense from his perspective and from the perspective of the group of interest he represented, if you want so. Doesn't make him more of a valid option for the majority of wastelanders.

Hey, I admitted the Master is an "interesting" villain, because he has a interesting motivation behind his evil plan. My point is that I don't see how that makes him any less evil or more of a valid option to join for the player character. That's all Im trying to say.

In the end, the Master's plan is completly unessecary. Sure, the wasteland is fucked up, there's drug dealing, prostitiution, slavery, violance etc. But in the end the people of the Fallout world manage to survive and life their lifes somehow. Not to mention fairly prosperous and peaceful societies like Shady Sands. Do they deserve to suffer just because the Master has decided he wants to create a perfect master race?

Someone who is willing to kill innocents for the self-defined "greater good" is pretty much a universaly accepted concept of evil.

Now, like Awor says, if there was some big ass war going on and humans would endlessly kill themselves, then maybe the Masters plan would make more sense.

 

[hiver]

My point is that I don't see how that makes him any less evil or more of a valid option to join for the player character. That's all Im trying to say.

Exactly.

Of course the Master was comic-book villainy - he was meant to be.

No he wasnt.

 

[Melcar]

So the discussion is about Nazis now? Did I miss the trannies bit, or is that still pending?

 

[TalesfromtheCrypt]

We're still waiting for SMA to show up

 

[Sceptic]

The comparison to Hitler would've made sense if the gassed Jews emerged as blond aryans. Otherwise it's completely nonsensical.

 

[janjetina]

So VD, does the implementation of factions in FNV and your discussion with BN affect at all your philosophy with AoD?

In what ways?

BN and I are disagree because we look at the setting differently. As he said:

"Makes you biased on this. Your view that Fallout's setting should have developed into feudalism is valid, but the fact is that it didn't. I "get the feeling" (but correct me if I'm way off the mark) you're predisposed to like the Legion because they're closer to your vision of what should've happened between Fallout 1 and Fallout 2."

That's exactly the issue. What's missing, imo, is a violent struggle for domination. The Master wanted to unite people and create a better man. The Enclave wanted to gas everyone. What the fuck did the rest want? Where are the other "players"?

Fallout seriously lacked something that would justify the Master. There should be some kind of a war - not between neutral and evil but between neutral and neutral. Then his idea of Unity could look at least a bit non-batshitinsaneevil.

Why? The Master in Fallout 1 was just plain evil, a deranged madman. There was no moral gray zone, no justification for his plans except in his own twisted mind. Joining him was more of a gimmick option and actually equaled getting a game over screen. The Master was the evil guy, and the Vault Dweller fought him. There was no moral ambigiousity. And guess what, it worked fine that way. I don't think the Fallout Devs wanted the Master to be something else than just an interesting, but ultimatly evil supervillain.

Only later people like VD and some loonies over at NMA with their completly absurd, pseudo-philosophical interpretations of the words right, wrong and morality interpreted some kind of moral gray areas into the whole thing, claiming that somehow the Master was not evil and that his comicly evil plans are a valid option for the wasteland.

Oh plkease. The Master wans't some misundersttood hero. he was evil, and eh only cared about hois own power. And,t eh crap that he didn't know about inferitility; but the player finds out so eaisly is just another joke. FO is awesome at role-playing; but its main villain while ok; is so overrated.

The Master didn't care about peace. At all. Ever.

Anyone who thinks otherwise is a moron who while playing the game shut their brain off, and pretended otherwise.

The facts prove that the Master was as evil as they come.


"I WILL SAVE THE WORLD BY DIPPING PEOPLE IN GOO AND TURN THEM INTO RETARDED MUTANTS AND KILL EVERYONE WHO OPPOSES MY DREAMS OF CONQUEST!"

He's a Hitler wannabe.

No.

 

[TalesfromtheCrypt]

@ Sceptic: Except the Master doesn't want to turn all wastelanders into happy supermutants. According to his plan those wastelanders who don't fulfil the requirements (i.e. the majority) will be killed at worst or sterilized and put into reservates/concentration camps at best. Awesome. Did you even play the fucking game?

@juintesomething: I repeat: If if was the devs ambition to make the Master seem like anything else than a deranged madman they failed.

It's quite telling that Volorun is more reasonable than a majority of the codexers.

 

[janjetina]

@ Sceptic: Except the Master doesn't want to turn all wastelanders into happy supermutants. According to his plan those wastelanders who don't fulfil the requirements (i.e. the majority) will be killed at worst or sterilized and put into reservates/concentration camps at best. Awesome. Did you even play the fucking game?

@juintesomething: I repeat: If if was the devs ambition to make the Master seem like anything else than a deranged madman they failed.

It's quite telling that Volorun is more reasonable than a majority of the codexers.

Do you claim that you and Volourn know more about Master's motivation than Tim Cain? His ''no'' invalidated your argument in its entirety.

 

[Vault Dweller]

@juintesomething: I repeat: If if was the devs ambition to make the Master seem like anything else than a deranged madman they failed.

The fact that many people are under the impression that the Master wasn't a deranged madman should tell you that the developers didn't fail. Obviously, some people have different opinions, but that's to be expected. No character, no matter how well developed, would ever be embraced by everyone.

Edit: welcome to Page 12! The discussion is now about the Master: a deranged madman or the real chosen one? You decide!

 

[TalesfromtheCrypt]

@ jujainta: I don't care what Tim Cains "knows" about the masters motivation.

All my arguments are based on what we - as players - are actually shown in the game.

I've already stated that I don't care for Fallout bibles, Fallout wiki entries and the Devs knowledge what goes on in the heads of fictional characters that were created by them.

His "no" didn't invalidate anything. It shows that he wanted to make the Master moraly ambigious - well he failed.