Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

This LP is rigged from the start...Hey, we made it to Vegas!

Whose side is the Courier on?

  • Independent New Vegas - Yes Man backing

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • NCR

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Mr. House's New Vegas

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0
  • Poll closed .

Vibalist

Arcane
Joined
Jul 21, 2008
Messages
3,585
Location
Denmark
Vaarna_Aarne said:
Vibalist said:
stupid elements ... Caesar
:x

Read the previous page bro.

Sorry bro. I guess alcohol and browsing the Codex doesn't go well together, as I actually just skipped most of the last page in my eagerness to post my own response. :oops:

Will get to it at some point. Hopefully.
 

Wyrmlord

Arcane
Joined
Feb 3, 2008
Messages
28,886
Drakron said:
we should not have Ghouls either because "their story is over"?
Yes, why not?

Ghouls were a phenomenon unique to the Bakersfield Vault.
 

Vaarna_Aarne

Notorious Internet Vandal
Joined
Jun 1, 2008
Messages
34,585
Location
Cell S-004
MCA Project: Eternity Torment: Tides of Numenera Wasteland 2
Theoretically the conditions could have happened elsewhere, and not even with a stretch.

And even then, Ghouls are functionally immortal, so like Super Mutants they're not just going to go away. In fact it's a shame New Vegas didn't have anything on the "Born Ghouls" Van Buren had as a plot point.
 

Wyrmlord

Arcane
Joined
Feb 3, 2008
Messages
28,886
You know how KotOR and Star Wars prequels included certain races, themes, or characters simply because they were there in prior instalments and there was need of an excuse to throw them in again?

It's the same thing. Ghouls in Fallout sequels are like Master Vandar and Ebon Hawk in KotOR.

Couldn't the Fallout series have done something new that was still in the spirit of the first game? Something like an abandoned underground military base being a virtual coffin for a nuclear-powered superhuman creature (a purplish glow in humanoid form) who is released by a group of raiders scavenging it for supplies? And then the nuclear man blows out of the place and goes all Supergod on the wasteland.
 

Brother None

inXile Entertainment
Developer
Joined
Jul 11, 2004
Messages
5,673
New indeed, Wyrmlord. Bethesda got it all topsy-turvy. They failed to appease fans in gameplay and then they added insult to injury by trying way too hard on the setting. Apparently their thinking was "if we throw in all elements from older Fallouts, no one can deny it is a Fallout!"

At least they skipped making F:BoS canon.

Wyrmlord said:
Drakron said:
we should not have Ghouls either because "their story is over"?
Yes, why not?

Ghouls were a phenomenon unique to the Bakersfield Vault.

Sort of? I mean Bakersfield mostly produced a TON of them in one go and that's what made it unique, but it's not like the ghoulification process can't be reproduced by coincidence independently. It doesn't require anything special unless you believe the FEV-in-the-air explanation (I don't).

So you can have ghouls. They shouldn't be necessary, and they definitely shouldn't be swarming the wasteland like they are in modern-day Fallouts.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom