Review Vince D. Weller Does Fallout: New Vegas

[Lumpy]

Exactly - they are not at all like the other factions, they are a caricature of a faction. Legion was (at least for me) the single most out-of-place thing in NV. I mean, just LOOK at them.

Niggers are the single most vile thing in the world. I mean, just LOOK at them.

 

[Havoc]

Exactly - they are not at all like the other factions, they are a caricature of a faction. Legion was (at least for me) the single most out-of-place thing in NV. I mean, just LOOK at them.

Niggers are the single most vile thing in the world. I mean, just LOOK at them.

And christian clergy is wearing some robes from the dark ages. They're just a bunch of childrapers. I mean, just LOOK at them.

 

[Lumpy]

If I remember correctly, the people in Nipton were said to be prostitutes, gamblers, etc... so? That's a reason to kill them? I'd say gambling is a bit better than enforcing slavery.

Not necessarily. If you define virtue the contribution towards the reconstruction of humanity, as opposed to corruption and greed as sin, then slavery is indeed virtuous whereas gambling is bad.

About slavery - let's not forget that most of the early societies were built upon it. So it's imaginable that slavery might be necessary for a few decades, until things settle down and society is rebuilt. It's not unambiguously evil.

 

[UserNamer]

I want to stress that the legion uses gun, and their elite soldiers have pretty damn good weapons too. Maybe you didn't play the same new vegas I did, but the legionaries in my game had weapons like 12.7 mm and anti-material rifles.

I imagine them sending droves of slaves and recruit legionaries acting as meat shield while the anti-material equipped centurions would snipe the ncr soldiers.

The legion also relies on effective stealth tactics and psychological intimidations. They have spies, they can sabotage equipment, assassinate people, and so on. The way they are presented in the game, they sound like a genuine menace to the ncr. The only stupid thing is that most legionaries you meet in the game are useless cannon fodder, too easy to kill.

And considering the superhuman attributes the main character can achieve, I have no problem imaging the elite (lvl 30) praetorians as roman super soldiers with super powers.

Maybe you people see fallout as more realistic as it ever was. I always figured the main character could achieve de facto super powers, and that while most of the humanoid you encounter are human, maybe some can achieve the same level of super humanity.

 

[flushfire]

How's that? You know more objective criteria for determining the relative strength of the equipment?

You never use in-game stats to make sense of lore/story because it is a RPG, not a simulation. Otherwise you are looking for too much realism in a fictional setting, which is just stupid. Let's follow how you do it. Throwing Spears (which most recruits use AFAIK) do 35 damage. Service Rifles (which most NCR grunts use) do 20. Assault Carbines 12, Cowboy Repeater 32, Marksman Carbine 24. Legion Recruits are suddenly better armed and have a better chance of penetrating armor than most NCR soldiers. Where's the sense in that?

So, we'll ignore Deathclaw's natural attack/dt which rivals humanity's elite forces and considerably higher HP? Or speedy Cazadores which tend to attack in swarms and deal damage comparable to ballistic fist coupled with poison? That's not exactly the same as an unarmed/naked human.

No, they are just examples why in-game stats shouldn't be used to make sense of game lore. A mother deathclaw has 30 DT. Are you telling me that its skin is more difficult to penetrate than even Enclave Power Armor? How the fuck does it move then? A cazador does 70 damage, it's stinger can penetrate armor better than a Sniper Rifle?

Not the whole unit.

That whole ELITE unit that can't walk a few steps out of camp and go against what, 4, 5 junkies wearing raider armor (DT 4), equipped with golf clubs? And you're saying the Legion's choice in armor is stupid.

 

[sheek]

Thanks Vince, looks like I'll be getting this.

 

[Ausir]

That whole ELITE unit that can't walk a few steps out of camp and go against what, 4, 5 junkies wearing raider armor (DT 4), equipped with golf clubs?

The Fiends are actually pretty well armed. Not all of them, but still.

 

[Awor Szurkrarz]

Otherwise you are looking for too much realism in a fictional setting, which is just stupid.

Why? Unless we're talking about magic and Science! there's no reason for lack of realistic physics and stuff. Unless we're talking about typical action movie conventions which have nothing to do with whenever the setting is fictional or not.

 

[Silellak]

That's correct. However, in the game you don't see all that many legion members, while NCR troopers are almost at every step. It's a major breakup between the narrative and the gameplay. Even during "epic" final battle, when you expect to be swarmed by the Legion, you'll be disappointed.

As it should be - after all, throughout most of the game, you are in NCR territory. The only Legion you do encounter throughout most of the game are small groups of scouts or raiding parties, and it's pretty telling that even those small groups are enough to give the NCR a headache (the burning of Nipton, the destruction of Camp Searchlight and the capture of Nelson). I wish we could've had a chance to see some truly-Legion-held territory in the game, because I think it would've fleshed out the faction and been an interesting juxtaposition to the NCR-centric areas. It'd make for some solid DLC, I think, but instead we get some stupid "Treasure of the Sierra Madre" bullshit I couldn't honestly care less about.

It's funny, that so many people accuse the Legion of "larping", when I actually got the sense that it was the NCR members who are "playing soldier". The Legion are organized, disciplined, loyal, and determined - all the things the NCR aren't.

I do agree, though, that the final battle was depressingly lackluster. I wish more had been done to emphasize the true strength of the Legion.

 

[Ausir]

By the way, partly for the purposes of this discussion, I have updated the following articles with more background information taken from the collector's edition of the official FNV guide (which includes excerpts from the design documents):

http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Caesar
http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Caesar's_Legion
http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/History_o ... 9;s_Legion

 

[Crooked Bee]

Thanks Ausir!

 

[Awor Szurkrarz]

At least, there's an actual discussion about factions and controversy, not everyone just getting shocked with stupidity of everything like in FINO3.

 

[Ausir]

Well, Autumn's Enclave (excluding Eden) in FO3 was actually more of a grey faction than Caesar's Legion in FNV. Only the game didn't actually give you the option to support Autumn - you could either support the goody-two-shoes BoS or the absurdly evil Eden.

As for his army being more barbaric than Roman, it's actually what Caesar himself secretly feels. From the official guide:

Many years have passed, and by post-apocalyptic standards, Caesar's accomplishments have been prodigious. But the man's hunger for greatness has never been sated. Having assembled a loose nation of slavers and slaves, having won countless "wars" against inferior peoples, secretly he still feels like an upstart, an amateur - a barbaric king of the Gauls, instead of a lofty emperor of Rome. To advance, he needs two things - a Carthage and a Rome.

 

[Kz3r0]

At least, there's an actual discussion about factions and controversy, not everyone just getting shocked with stupidity of everything like in FINO3.

Typical fans' discussion, this means that NV gained the Codex' seal of approval.

 

[Darth Roxor]

The point is that a loosely organized group of soldiers and workers has managed to seize power in a huge country and defeat several armies, including the White army and the Polish army.

Uhm, you might want to check your history again

 

[Ausir]

Anyway, while I don't mind the "larping" aspect as much as Brother None does, I still think that they are portrayed as too evil in the game, and the game is too skewed towards NCR in terms of number of available quests, companions, etc. None of your companions will have issues with you supoorting the NCR as long as you don't blow up the BoS bunker, while there are no Legion-aligned companions. And just compare the number of available quests for each faction:

http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Fallout:_New_Vegas_quests

 

[Pegultagol]

Perhaps Legion would be fleshed out more in planned DLCs. And it seemed to me a bulk of their quests were direct opposite of the NCR ones, using the same objectives but just the other way around.

 

[Jasede]

Great game, better than Fallout 2. Great quest design.
Great review; bit short though, by VD-standards.

Also, the Legion could have used some more fleshing-out. Not a fan.
That's all.

 

[Lgrayman]

If I remember correctly, the people in Nipton were said to be prostitutes, gamblers, etc... so? That's a reason to kill them? I'd say gambling is a bit better than enforcing slavery.

Not necessarily. If you define virtue the contribution towards the reconstruction of humanity, as opposed to corruption and greed as sin, then slavery is indeed virtuous whereas gambling is bad.

About slavery - let's not forget that most of the early societies were built upon it. So it's imaginable that slavery might be necessary for a few decades, until things settle down and society is rebuilt. It's not unambiguously evil.

I would define something that causes unnecessary harm or suffering as immoral and not at all virtuous. I don't really think slavery is necessary, and more importantly the Legion don't even attempt to defend it or make a good case for it whilst they criticise the NCR for doing minor things like taking bribes. At the very least, I would've liked some more dialogue justifying their actions.

If I remember correctly, Caesar even says how awful it was that he and his mother were enslaved originally by another tribe, but has no issue doing it to others. It just seems to me that the Legion has been purposefully made to look villainous and not a shade of gray when they go around using slaves and crucifying people just for gambling and whatnot.

Anyway, I agree with Ausir - it annoyed me how all the companions were fairly goody two-shoes; I would've liked a few with some more questionable morals. I got a bad reputation with the NCR earlier than I would've liked by killing someone barely connected to them at all as part of a quest, which gave me significantly more negative reputation than even killing Caesar would make up for. So I wasn't happy with how many quests the NCR gave in comparison to everyone else, and how several companions would abandon me because of it.

 

[Brother None]

Anyway, while I don't mind the "larping" aspect as much as Brother None does, I still think that they are portrayed as too evil in the game, and the game is too skewed towards NCR in terms of number of available quests, companions, etc.

It's separate issues, but they reinforce each other. The Legion is comically evil, and that comical element is reinforced by how badly they fit into the setting.

By the way, partly for the purposes of this discussion, I have updated the following articles with more background information taken from the collector's edition of the official FNV guide (which includes excerpts from the design documents):

Which digs up the problems of using concept art/design docs to determine canon. Doesn't a lot of that contradict what's in the game?

Why reinvent the wheel? What could be simpler than armor made of overlapping stripes of leather and metal?

Man, the overlapping stripes are easy and practical for the desert, though leaving your legs unprotected doesn't seem like a particularly great idea in a desert crawling with beasties that go for the legs. The feathers on the head or wolfpelt on the head are similarly odd. But the basic armor design of overlapping stripes of leather? Can't say I mind.

When you take away the old values and customs, you have to give people something new to replace what you've taken, and it can't be something as primitive as what the Fiends have.

Even accepting that it can't (and I don't immediately see why it's impossible for the Fiends identity to function in this context assuming it's refined), this is still arbitrary. But I think you missed my point, since I did specifically say identities are about internalizing and externalizing. That means certain identities have an advantageseither inherently or because of history that people still remember. People don't remember the Romans.

Most attempts to construct identity throughout history do exactly that by grabbing back to their own history. That's the easiest way of doing it, really, and it's what the NCR is doing. When it comes to choosing an identity, there's a range of options for both internal and external use. The Romans have no advantage in this sense, whatsoever.

The advantage is their system - a proven success formula tested by centuries.

Except that their system and culture aren't really inherently related. And the Legion doesn't actually seem to be adopting many of the facets of the system that made it successful, nor adopting it well to their circumstances, unlike, uh, everyone else throughout history that's been inspired by the Romans.

86 tribes they've conquered and assimilated, according to the wiki.

Once you got the first 12 or whatever the number was, those other tribes are irrelevant. Somehow no one had gained any significant foothold of power in Arizona, so rolling up a bunch of tribals there is really not an accomplishment. Keeping them together is, but the game never really tells us how that's supposed to work.

Because the Roman Empire has lasted for nearly a millennium, during which the Roman Legion, considered by many to be the ultimate military machine of the ancient world, was nearly unstoppable.

You are still answering me in ingame plausibility and not game design. This is a Fallout game. Why is the developer bringing Romans into Fallout? Why is he implementing the idea with such lack of subtlety? I'm not interested in ingame plausibility explanations, I'm interested in why this would be called "good design". I can offer such explanations for the Boomers or Kings. Not so much for the Legion.

What if he doesn't have a clue as to what the future holds? How does it make him a bad character?

It doesn't, it makes him even less appealing as an option to follow, as if he's not unappealing enough.

That's not all he says. He says that people are looking for themselves and nobody cares about the greater good (which is why the wasteland is a shithole). He also complains about the "extreme bureaucracy, corruption, and senatorial infighting". Can't say I disagree with him.

You can't? How. The game tells us, but it doesn't show us. Sure, there's a few instances of minor, fairly irrelevant corruption in the game, but this is all frontline, bad morale stuff. We don't really see how the NCR isn't functioning no more than we see how the Legion is, and all we got are a few vague "yeah people only care about themselves" remarks? Sure, he's disgruntled, but if he's so disgruntled, you'd think he'd give some actual solid examples of what he's unhappy about or why it's falling apart. It doesn't. Am I really supposed to be convinced by that? C'mon.

For a ruler who wants to get things done and who doesn't care about the individual, military dictatorship is the best way to impose his will without having to waste time to sell his ideas to other people sharing power (the senate, etc) and to keep people happy.

Yes? I hadn't really been arguing against that, but y'know, cool.

Caesar thinks he got all the answers and he knows what he needs to do. He's definitely a plausible character.

You seem a bit overly focused on plausible. Plausibility and good design are not the same thing.

 

[Kz3r0]

Yeah, Romans wannabees are so unlikely ,,,,,,,
In America.

 

[Ausir]

Which digs up the problems of using concept art/design docs to determine canon. Doesn't a lot of that contradict what's in the game

Mostly a few dates that weren't properly adjusted to the change in timeline (as FNV was originally meant to be set around 2260), and some minor details. As an official publication, I treat the guide as semi-canon in the wiki, just like the Fallout Bible, as long as it doesn't contradict the published game. And all bits taken from the guide should be properly sourced.

 

[Twinkle]

You never use in-game stats to make sense of lore/story because it is a RPG, not a simulation

I don't ask for full simulation but some inter-faction balance that fits the lore is welcome. Like in the first Fallout: BoS knights are few in numbers, but have considerably better equipment than the rest of the wasteland, mutants - too, with rather high natural armor class.

A mother deathclaw has 30 DT. Are you telling me that its skin is more difficult to penetrate than even Enclave Power Armor? How the fuck does it move then?

Well, the Deathclaws were specifically designed as the ultimate melee fighting force, so high dt is not unexpected, else they'd be gunned down before entering melee.

A cazador does 70 damage, it's stinger can penetrate armor better than a Sniper Rifle?

That's a balance hole.

That whole ELITE unit that can't walk a few steps out of camp and go against what, 4, 5 junkies wearing raider armor (DT 4)

Well, they have Boone to compensate. And Fiends, despite the shitty armor, are numerous, respawn really fast and often equipped with pretty powerful energy and heavy weapons. Fiends, to be fair, are more of a threat in the game than almost everything Legion.

I wish we could've had a chance to see some truly-Legion-held territory in the game

That's another problem with the game. There is simply no content balance between major factions. If you choose to support Caesar exclusively you are cutting yourself from a fairly large amount of sidequests given by rangers/officers. The Legion, on the other hand, offers whopping four.

 

[Havoc]

A cazador does 70 damage, it's stinger can penetrate armor better than a Sniper Rifle?

That's a balance hole.

No.

 

[Lumpy]

I would define something that causes unnecessary harm or suffering as immoral and not at all virtuous.

You would. My point obviously wasn't that Ceasar's viewpoint is objectivelly true - but that his morality is not inconsistent.

I don't really think slavery is necessary

You can't argue that it's a lot easier to build a society when you don't have to give a fuck about the well being and happiness of 70% of the people. Have enough free men to keep things running smoothly, rebuild a proper, stable society, and as soon as the power plants are rolling and the wars are over, you can happily discard slavery and condemn it as an atrocity of the past.
Pretty much how we got to where we are today.