@Fallout Lorecast Maybe it feels humerus and silly because it’s an Easter egg nerd reference for nerds and that they weren’t supposed to be in a Fallout game?
@Fallout Lorecast What kind of argument are you making. Yeah, there was Easter eggs in Fallout and they’re a little silly however, the games still took themselves seriously when they needed to. Fallout 4 cranks it up to where you don’t care about the world because the game is so silly its treats its world and characters like jokes or a Hannah Barbara skit. There’s no meaning in anything you do, not that you’ll care.
@@KingofFreaks "Not that you'll care." Since you've already decided exactly what I think, I guess there's no need to explain my perspective. Have fun continuing to yell into the void and thanks for commenting on the video.
@Fallout Lorecast Well do you? Fallout 4’s world far from perfect. It’s the reason Bethesda’s in the state they’re in. Do you even care that Bethesda gets lazier with stuff. To the point you cranking up silliness to everything’s a big joke? I don’t think you do.
One of my favorite random encounter in fallout 2 is when you find the portal that takes you to vault 13 before the events of fallout 1 and you cause the water chip to break, before coming back to the “present” time.
I saved my game on that encounter, you can find a unique weapon called "Solar Scorcher" it reloads during daytime and keeps firing until you either run out of AP or ammo from its capacity
@@kokojack No shit, Sherlock. But the 60s japanese movie called Gojira doesn't have a giant, three-toed footprint in it in which the main character stands.
Some people dont understand the humor of FO1 and FO2. Old games were not super serious. Bethesda humor is more in your face and its usually not required to know the reference , while the old games were either wacky or if you didnt know the reference you wouldn’t understand that it was a joke. I like most fallout games but prefer the wacky, also subtle jokes/reference/easter eggs from FO1, FO2 and FNV.
I think that for better or worse, fo1 &2 style depth and humor wouldn't work today. People expect every single conversation to lead to something, and every single encounter to have a reason and resolution. If there's a joke, there has to be a punch line, rimshot and wink for people to think it was any good. Oh and a possible romantic dialogue response if you specced into charisma....
@@JK.Fraser agree, very true. More ”hand holding” now. There were some jokes or wacky things in the old game that I didnt get at first. But when I did I absolutely loved it. Love most fallout games but there are something about wacky and funny jokes that are smart and/or ”hidden in plain sight”.
But Bethesda's references are also quite subtle sometimes and require knowledge of various topics, which includes not only pop culture, but also american history, cultural heritage and classic literature. I've learned a decent amount of interesting stuff about American culture thanks to Bethesda's fallout games.
@@Pluto_Holidays Im not sure if we are speaking about the same thing. I'm talking about the humor and writing of it in the FO games, not that the games present facts and references on different things or not. All of the games does it, but its about what type of jokes and how they are delivered.
Real bummer you didn’t mention what you find if you loot the bodies of the aliens besides the alien blaster: a framed painting of the King of Rock n Roll, Elvis Presley 😂
The Troika guys left very early on. They did have some effect on the final game and it wasn't insignificant. However I wouldn't consider them amongst the people who made Fallout 2.
@@themightypen1530 meanwhile if you kill deputy Kenny the info panel reads "you killed Kenny, you bastard!" Or you can find the doctors tardis in fallout 1 Brahmins will say "moo I say, moo" They reference 9 inch nails, and tool posters appear in game Or Lucy in the chapel says "there's no place like home, there's no place like home" 22 major gags/references in the entire first game 120+ in the second game 10 in tactics 60 in fallout 3 51 in fallout NV 81 in fallout 4 66 in fallout 76 I just beat fallout 1 last year, it had some funny moments, I feel like 3, NV, and 76 really grasp classic fallout feel. 4 is the odd one out imo but still a good game.
13:25 if i remember correctly, tim cain himself did not like the idea of humanizing deathclaws, he wanted them to be the scariest thing youll ever witness so to say. These decisions were made by people who havent worked on fo before. Which is sad, because tims grip on the games slipped entirely throughout fo2s developement, until he left completely.
@@3456haloYou were actually supposed to be able to avoid Frank killing the deathclaws if you finished the game's ending without returning to Vault 13 2 weeks after obtaining their G.E.C.K. but it was bugged making them die no matter what.
Yeup, you got everything wrong in the first minute. All Fallouts, including Bethesda's had this balancing act; they could be silly, and they could be serious. But to say both are identical in this regard is a big stretch; would you say the Simpsons and Family Guy are identical? What because they are both sitcoms about dysfunctional American families? So any joke Family Guy makes wouldn't be out of place if it was on the Simpsons? Old Fallouts, and New Vegas to a degree always kept the silly aspect separate from the serious aspects which were mostly preserved within the 'main story'. The silly stuff was more of a 'side' thing. In Bethesda Fallouts, the silly aspect are given more front stage treatment, and the serious aspects are... In the simplest way I can say it; written poorly; in ways that was done better in HUNDREDS of other stories.
Yeah, imo the writing is usually worse than 1. A good portion is probably worse than New Vegas's writing honestly. Fallout 1 played it mostly straight due to Cain's involvement though. The weird stuff is all limited to, essentially, wild wasteland random encounters. Just like New Vegas. (Though New Vegas could have been more wacky in a few places)
@@earhearthush-up5549 cause most of the times it's the elitist new vegas fans who take everything seriously lol some of them act like it's only game they played before
Fallout 1 had some easter-eggs, but not really whacky things in the main game content. Overall it had a pretty serious tone. The games afterwards (including Fallout 2) added more and more whacky, pop culture elements.
Fallout 1 and 2 absolutely had wild things in them. But for me, it’s not that modern fallout is too wacky. It’s how modern fallout handles the darker, more serious moments and themes that fallout 1 and 2 handled perfectly. The older games weren’t more or less silly. They were simply better balanced and knew when to take themselves seriously, and when to joke.
The serious moments in old school fallout are also, for me at least, much more impactful. Like the scene at the end of fallout 1 when you (SPOILER ALERT) Speak to the master.
@@artyom-ovsepyan for sure. But I’d still rather be safe than sorry. I do still want new younger people to play the old fallout games because they absolutely deserve the attention and so I don’t want to spoil it for those potential new players.
I don't think that Bethesda has made the games any less serious, but I do think they've made them less dark. I think there was some darkness and grit present in the original two games that Bethesda kind of eased up on in Fallout 3 and even more so in Fallout 4. I think New Vegas tried to inject some more of that back into the game, but not at the same level as the original two.
I feel like this is the best assessment. Just look at what its like when you get a game over. But its kinda inevitable with the different pacing between formats, so I ain't too mad.
@@caseycox1002the Enclave are cartoonier than ever. The Super Mutants are reduced from organized, hulking soldiers to... cannibal orcs, for some reason. Very few people in game actually act like real people, which I feel is the major thing.
This happens with all long running franchises. Like how the GTA community says the PS2 trilogy had realistic art design even though they clearly have cartoonish comic book designs.
While I agree with some of the points made, some of them just seem disingenuous. Fallout 1 and 2 having a rare alien random encounter easter egg that the majority of players won't see is one thing, but Bethesda making an ENTIRE DLC involving the Aliens is completely different. Also just because Fallout 2 did it doesnt automatically make it good, while I would say Fallout 2 is the best in the series, its biggest flaw is it being too weird at times and having an inconsistent tone because of it.
See that’s the thing I always call back to It was an EASTER EGG in the original series, but Bethesda took that as being like “Oh shit we can’t come up with anything original uuuuuuhhhhh aliens” Fallout 2 had its humorous moments but the thing is that they were actually *funny* Bethesda thinks that if you show the whole wasteland being silly and there’s barely any serious elements in the game that you’ll laugh more, but that’s just not true at all They really did turn Fallout into a joke, they turned a frightening bleak world into borderlands with a 50s aesthetic.
@@Gooeygiuseppe "Well, FO1 and FO2 had aliens, therefore we can make an entire DLC about how aliens are watching the planet and then infer in another game that the aliens were behind the Great War and also we've been using their tech to make the Robobrains." But really, that's just how Bethesda works with Fallout. They can't come up with anything actually good, so they scrape whatever they can from old Fallout and then make it a thousand times worse. This is why the Enclave and Brotherhood will be in every game. This is why there will always be ghouls and super mutants. Dogmeat will always be there in some capacity. Bethesda is creatively bankrupt.
This video needed to be made. Classic Fallout & NV fans ragging on Bethesda Fallouts for their wackiness conveniently forget these things and also probably worship the fever dream that is Old World Blues
I mean, I like the Bethesda games except 76 however I wish the art style did change from 3/NV to 4/76. Something about the new color pallet makes the jokes hit worse than in the old color pallet. The more gritty colors made the jokes work better in contrast.
FO1 and FO2 were more serious. The fact that there were easter eggs and random events that were humorous doesn't change that. Stop trying to defend Bethesda and Amazon slop.
It was serious when it needed to. However you were less restricted in them, you can literally slay anyone and anything or even whore yourself in New Reno. Even got sexual perks for sexual acts, like gigolo and sexpert. One issue what i missed in the newer games was mended in Fallout 4, namely the npc's reaction to power armor. In Reno there were some hilarious comments when you walk in a power armor.
I think it's a bit disengenuous to take the criticism of the Bethesda games and their lack of seriousness and compare them to easter eggs. Sure, Fallout 1 had aliens, but that was an Easter egg. You yourself said that not everyone will see it. Bethesda, however, then takes said Easter egg, makes an entire DLC about it, and then alludes to the possibility that said aliens may have instigated the Great War. People don't criticize Bethesda for having humor in their game. They criticise them for going beyond the pale with said humor. As for Fallout 2, it was a very common complaint even at the time of its release that it went too far with its humor.
The humor was to keep things interesting and to bring a little joy to the bleak world. Just look at the old radiation mechanics that shit was horrifying and relatively realistic. Then you have the dark shit like rape slavery child killing etc… the old games where more serious then the modern versions not because of humor but because of story and mechanics.
Imo the early games where computer-nerd comic-book-geek silly, and the newer ones are pop culture marvel fan silly. Different vibe I guess? Enjoyed all the games!! Good video, you covered a lot :)
@@StroggKingu First, it's a good theory to look into, but I won't be convinced if it's accurate or not until I do. Second, if it is real, it might just not matter that much to me. Maybe I just find the funny parts funny, and didn't think twice about them.
@@StroggKingu Because it's less about the delivery of said humor and more about how the humor affects the narrative as a whole. People get too caught up in how the humor affects the lore based on ideas about the lore that never really existed in the first place. Like if Bethesda implemented those same jokes as the original, people would be having a nuclear meltdown about how they ruined the lore.
Ironically the types of references in the original games fit that description a lot more considering all the corny fourth-wall breaks and references to blockbuster movies. Whereas Bethesda actually has some good examples of more geeky-nerd stuff such as all the pulp novel references in Fallout 4 like the Silver Shroud and the magazines
I always thought Bethesda’s fallout was more serious than the originals. I think the Wild Wasteland trait is supposed to be a callback to that era of classic Fallout. In my personal opinion, Fallout 4 has got to be the most serious of the fallouts due to its story and their companions backstories like Nick, Preston, Deacon, Cait, Maccready, etc. I say all that even though my absolute favorite is New Vegas and Fallout 3. I think New Vegas turned me into an armchair philosopher lol
@@Tortillasoup-se7sh I wanted to include NV because even though they had original developers involved, it still felt serious to me- from the DLCs story to the NCR politics and whatnot. If I want an original fallout experience I’ll choose the wild wasteland trait along with the Yes Man ending 😂
Fallout 1 was more serious overall, most of the jokes are hidden behind random encounters and optional. Even one of the developers said he didn’t like Fallout 2’s humor, because it was way more in your face with it. New Vegas’ wild wasteland perk was completely optional as well
Man, I hate that we still have to deal with the fallout "purists". Nobody but the most acoustic people on the planet give this much of a shit about all these damn nitpicks and discrepancies when lore drift occurs. It's all so tiresome.
In F1 and F2 you can hold down left control and click credits on the main menu. It'll show a ton of inside jokes from the dev team i remember being hilarious.
14:35 Wrong, the plants name is Audrey-II. Seymour is Rick Moranis' charactor. Who was neither insane, nor a professor... He just found Audrey-II in a chinese flower store during an unprecidented total eclypse of the sun.
You definitely make some good points - - I think oftentimes we hear things repeated on the internet and forums particularly and certain things become common belief, although they may be a bit more of a stretch than some people realize. Well done - subbed.
fo1 and 2 are filled with so much wacky stuff that, when asked on what is canon, the writers for it outright said "we added so much stuff we kinda went overboard, we genuinely don't remember what is and isn't canon anymore". Objectively. the only REAL way to play fonv like an authentic fallout title, would be with wacky wasteland, because if someone actually picked fo1 and 2 up today and played them, there is absolutely no way to deny that they're filled with weird, silly nonsense. Mony python references all over the place. a red shirt next to a crashed alien ship. a dead whale in the middle of a desert with hints of 'something large', dinosaur footprints out of nowhere. harold and bob are expressly comedic. You have an arm wrestling match with a supermutant to decide if you're going to get fucked or fuck him, and depending how good you do, a sex doll gets named after you(which is not at all treated as non-canon, as it happens in a main hub, and also breaks pre-established lore that says supermutants both male and female lose all genitalia, which is fundamentally one of the ways in fo1 you can convince the master to stop his plans). If you take this series seriously, you're just going to come away wondering what fucked up kinks the devs must have been into with just how many 'horny' moments are in the first two games. Honestly. i first hated fo4, because i played fo3 and nv first, but then went to try fo1 and 2 to see if the fo3 hatemob was justified, and all i gained was an appreciation for 4. Canonicity was broken WELL before bethesda got their hands on the series to such an extent that at this point each game should be considered it's own game, separate from what came before, even if it references events from previous iterations. Edit: if i were to compare fallout, i'd have to compare it to Yakuza in this regard. Yet for some reason while the silliness contrasting the seriousness has become the selling point of yakuza, with fallout, people get a hate boner every time they see something that isn't 40k grimdark happening in fallout.
One thing, F1 never said the super mutants don't have genitals, only that they're infertile. In simpler term, they always could do the deed, but could never make a baby.
You mean Fallout 2 had too much wacky stuff. Fallout 1 is perfectly balanced and the wacky stuff is limited to what would be Wild Wasteland encounters in the New Games. Tim Cain and Chris Avellone admit that Fallout 2 was way too silly.
@@absolutezerochill2700 never ceases to be expected that the same crowd claiming every game (except vegas) to ruin fallout, will always point to fo1 and 2, but whenever someone jumps to point out 'flaws' to those, the first thing you people do is abandom fo2 and pretend like fo1 was any different. Just as fickle as the writers of the franchise.
@@antirevomag834 fo1 literally is different though. If anything it's weird how so many people treat 1 and 2 like essentially one game, always bringing them up in exactly the same breath, when I'm willing to wager they haven't played both games. And certainly not finished them. The truth is that the writing in Fo2 takes a completely different direction than in Fo1. It's like bringing up Fo4 and Fo3 in the same breath which, no, I do not do. In fact I really like 4.
@@absolutezerochill2700 Huh. I admit i was defaulting into a certain mindset on you since like you said, many people do that. I will defend that fo1 is a significantly wacky game on it's own, regardless of how people want to view it as less-so than latter titles. The concept itself is somewhat wacky, and even the themes are wacky solely in how overly-dark they tried to treat them. I mean. A good example of that is you can "join" a bandit group by being told to shoot one of their people, and by doing so, you get respect with them. You don't get to do odd jobs for them or anything, you just get to shoot one of their guys, they say you're alright, and let you go on your merry way. Not to mention you can just randomly run into a guy who's running a gas station that has no gas (even though gas isn't even supposed to be a fuel type by that point in the lore), just as a couple interactions.
The thing isn't that the original Fallout did not have anything silly in it, it is more about the fact that the silliness has taken over at the expense of the horror elements
A couple of things: 1. Anybody who says fallout one and two were entirely serious has never played fallout one and two or at least never paid attention to them. 2. The killer plant in little shop of horrors was actually called Audrey II by Seymour, because he named it after the woman that he loved. 3. I think the mole rats were also a reference to the Rat King, Shredder, and Krang from Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles 4. I always thought that the aliens had escaped from area 51, went to Vegas, got hammered and crashed their UFO again. They have a photo of Elvis with them, which suggests that maybe they had seen a Vegas show with an Elvis impersonator at some point.
The cyclops thing in the show actually fit very well. It didn't hurt that the character was also Chris Parnell playing a bumbling villian, he's good at that.
I think a different indicator that there's multiple alien species in Fallout is also that the alien blaster is noticably different in material & stats between Fallout 1 and say Fallout 4.
the older fallout games are like the guy that knows life sucks and the best way to deal with it is to engage in comic relief the newer fallout games are the guy that has lost all hope and turns life into a comedy
Newer fallout games are just reddit tier jokes (manchild soy shit) used to prop up dogshit writing, no one on this planet is going to defend Fallout 3s ending.
All games have their own moments of humor, references, dark humor. But the original games through their difficultly felt scarier and through its characters and set piece feels not at all comedic
The fact that there are people out there who don't realise Fallout is part comedy, and satire is scary. Fallout 1 had literally the TARDIS from Doctor Who in it and it actually travels through time to escape when you get too close
Nah. Sorry but there’s no comparing a few quick easter eggs with say, a goofy faction that cosplays like they’re in the 1776 colonial militia and is also central to the main story. Apples and oranges.
Regarding the giant footprint and the possible connection to Bambi meets Godzilla; I first saw that short in 1995 when Doctor Demento was touring wirh Weird Al and showed funny shorts as part of the pre-show, so it's definitely plausible timeline-wise (Fallout came out in 1997)
I mean I heard the whackiness of NV was Obsidian (a studio with Black Isle alums) was silly because it was a throwback to the humor of 1-2. I haven't completed those yet but it tracks
“The classic games were all realism!” Brotherhood of Steel in their power armor powered by fusion reactors that will outlive them, super hydraulics, and protected by tank thick composite alloy plates:
@ there are fusion paks created by Texas tech. They are about the size of a car battery but spread out to be thin and cover a large surface area. Outputs 60K watts.
while i still think the game has an overall more foreboding and ominous tone, there is definitely humor to be found. one of the weirdest random encounters i've had so far while playing Fallout 1 is a group of wild Brahmin that kept saying "Moo I say" over and over. the combat log said something along the lines "you feel as though something is wrong here and want to leave immediately." off-putting but also hilarious
As a fan who like New Vegas the most, I love the wackiness! Maybe it’s because I started playing New Vegas and FO3 for the first time ever at the same time basically back in 2011. And I took wild wasteland in NV and in FO3 I made sure to do all the weird things. So since my first experiences with it Fallout has always been wacky and had funny odd moments. It’s definitely a serious series with a commentary on real life and politics but it also has many things to not be taken seriously! The balance between the serious and weird is what makes it work to me
The plant in little shop was audrey 2 not Seymour, and it was an alien that beamed to earth during a total eclipse. Seymour was a shop sweep in a flower store who found it
IMO: The problem isn't that fallout 4/76 are filled with jokes. The problem is that when Bethesda tries to take itself and the setting seriously, they do a terrible job. It comes across as funny, to me, when I say "no" four times in a row and still get a quest marker. When those games try to nudge and wink at me, I'm offended--like, "you aren't on my level", "you haven't earned this"--and they just shatter what little investment remains
I actually don't know how a cyclops in the fallout world is weird at all. There's super mutants, zombies, kaijus, and advanced killer robots. But a guy with one eye is where dome folks draw the Line? Huh
2:15 - At this moment I just wanna pay for all that straw flying around since that would be enough to feed a whole country's livestock for a winter season. Last time I've been checking on fallout fans they had issues not with Bethesda making fallout weird but with quality of writing, blunt game design and a total loss of fallout's identity. "A post-nuclear RPG". Not "skyrim with guns".
The actual critique of Bethesda Fallouts is not that it doesn’t take the world of Fallout seriously enough, but that the storytelling sucks and lore is a mess.
It's not about the jokes, it's about the world and how lacking in immersion it is. Fallout 3 did okay, I really did enjoy a lot of it and it has such great moments, with some decent writing. But to say the new games aren't silly, is stupid. They are, they make little sense and they're just goofying up the lore to fit their new writers terrible ideas. Like synths, absolutely awful idea, makes 0-0.00000001% sense. I'm high balling the logic percentage on that one. Most advanced societies with more resources, no radiation and more scientists could barely make power armour and stealth suits, yet these goombas made high advanced synthetic humanoids that can fool humans who autopsy them? Fuck off.
Fallout 1 and 2 had elements of actual dread and horror. I had moments playing these games as a teenager, feeling actually anxious about existing in this universe. There is no tension in modern Fallout games. They definitely have their place, don't get me wrong. But there wasn't a moment in Fallout 3 or 4 where I actually felt worried about walking around and travelling. Existing and surving in a post apocalypse, should feel overwhelmingly terrifying and weird. 1 and 2 had passion man. The facial animations, voice acting, death scenes were made with actual passion. Modern Fallout is a sellout. The show is a joke, the lore and story make no sense and the characters are awful. You can't even debate me on this, I dare you to try. Bethesda is the perfect example of a company just holding onto an IP they have no idea what to do with, just because its popular
That’s what I’m saying And an even bigger problem I have is that in Bethesdas fallout society is just too lazy/inept to start and progress The whole story of Fallout 3 was to find your dad and make water pure enough to drink 200 years AFTER the bombs dropped, Fallout 1 had villages and towns that survived off of water chips and water purification plants 80 or so years after the world ended. Fallout 4 went even further, 210 years after the bombs dropped, and you have to find your son this time(really clever Emil.) and also it’s not really an objective but you’re all but demanded to rebuild civilization itself by yourself, but in fallout 2 civilization already started to develop and a new country was already formed out of California, 164 years after the bombs dropped. Interplay/Black Isle was interested in a world that emerged from the ashes of nuclear hellfire, but Bethesda thinks that Fallout is just about the ashes.
I’m playing fallout 1 right now to see what all the hype about it is. People say that the culture of the classics is different and all this and that about how Bethesda’s fallout isn’t real fallout but honestly bro they all feel like fallout. It all feels like one world and the only thing that change is the mechanics and choices but the tone doesn’t seem to be that different. Other people will disagree, which is fine. But at the end of the day I feel like people just want to rage bait and or have something to complain about. I think that Bethesda and Classic fallout needs that respeck on their name💯
This is such a terrible argument. "uhh actually fallout 1&2 have humor too." What a reach it is to compare the special events (aka Easter eggs to anyone with half a brain) to the Gary vault or the entirety of diamond city. How disingenuous can you be?
I don't know. In classic games it didn't stand out and break the immersion THAT much, but in Bethesda's games I just hate it.For me their gamesare trash in general - especially those that parasite on old franchises, like Fallout and Doom, turning them into something completely different from what I know and love for several decades.
I always laugh when people try to say that wild wasteland is silly compared to the earlier games/ isn't the cannon way to play...yet its MOSTLY references TO those earlier games
I feel like this misses the point. Bethesda turned fallout into a joke not because of the goofy writing, but the awful execution of it. I have no problem with throwaway jokes and references, though Fallout 2 went overboard in my mind (and the devs have gone on record saying that) but the writing was still good. Emil is just a bad writer so it comes off as cringe.
And that's not to mention my distaste for Bethesda dumbing down their games more and more with every release. Fallout 4 is hardly an rpg, and the dialog system is abysmal
I would wager that people that say that Fallout 1 and 2 were ultra serious are people that never played through them. As somebody that played both of those games when they came out back in the 90s, I was amazed at how well the Fallout 3 and New Vegas captured the spirit of the originals. Fallout 4 not so much, but it didn't have anything to do with the humor. I can't speak on Fallout 76 as I never played it.
Let's say there's a spectrum, on one end, silly games, on the other end serious games. If you ask me, Fallout's in between early Doom games and Postal 2. Pretty silly.
Fallout 1 humor is mostly hidden or easter eggs, not very in your face. Fallout 2, on the other hand... But the issue with modern Fallout is that the overall tone is less dark than classic Fallout, so the goofy elements feel more present.
Bethesda made fallout 4 and that's pretty good! The guns could use some work but that's about it. It's got pretty much the same level of seriousness in a wacky world, but is that worth to hate on it like "fallout 4 sucks! The old games were better" yes, the old games were made by different dev teams! Ofc it'll feel different, that's like asking Dice to make a cod game! They are different. Fallout 76 SUCKS!
@Nameless50000 Its different and the main problem with it is the game literally hold your hand the entire time. Too many encounters with people, no struggle, even your power armor was hand out to you. Not to mention what they did with it. It was suppose to be the pinnacle of defense, in Fallout 4 even a raider can whack your armor with a wooden stick. The music doesnt reflect your situation and the radio was the biggest mistake Bethesda ever did, it is an immersion breaker. Fallout 3 was the closest to the original atmosphere with the music and still quite far from it. I dont mention NV because they are literally stole many soundtrack from the original game(my favorites from old Fallouts were the city of the dead, the desert wind which gave you the immersion of the empty and bleak wasteland, city of lost angels and the underground troubles).
@Zappina I actually agree with everything you said but it's still fun af. Say what you will but Bethesda knows how to make entertainment. I'm not a fan anymore since they made a f'n live service game. That sh°t is unacceptable to me, but fallout 4 was really fun. Typically if I hate a games story I hate the game but fallout 4 is an exception . It's not a masterpiece or anything probably a 6/10 but still seems overly hated. I get why people are hard on it tho, they want Bethesda to do better. That said I will never buy 76 or Stanfield. And if they make fallout 5 a live service Bethesda is going to lose me forever
My problem with Bethesda is they change the enviroment of the game...the Fallout 1 and 2 look more like Mad Max, with a lot of destruction and a feeling of empty, the soundtrack was awesome, with few peoples around. Fallout 3 and 4 change it all...i dont like the way they go with the story too. They make the visuals more bright and with more cities. Classic Fallout have a lot of weird things and dark humor, and thats great, they did it better than Bethesda.
Many things considered silly in Fallout 1/2 were not available to a player with low luck, so most of the extra silliness was optional and as luck did not play a major role on the gameplay, people tended to skip above-average luck a lot. Talking animals, especially under scientific oversight aren't that special even in the real world, parrots can repeat human language while chimps and even better gorillas can learn hand language as used by deaf people and actually use it in a sensible manner, though their vocabulary is limited to a few years old children thus is hardly inconceivable that much larger animals with large brains would not be able to do the same. What is on the other hand questionable is why would such large animals even develop in a world with very limited resources even for much more resourceful humans, note that food and oxygen supplies were on entirely different levels in the Jurassic era where large animals and insects existed in reality that was hardly possible in post-nuclear exchange world... Bethesda Fallout silliness is on an entirely different level because in their games breaking of reality is done on so many levels for the sake of coolness, like giving you power armor at the beginning but at the same time making fusion cores last less than gasoline-powered lawnmower to balance it out, not to mention or addition of laser rifle with a hand-cranked dynamo power source as if you ever could power megawatt class energy weapon with hand cranking. Thus the main issue with Bethesda games is why and how often immersion of a believable world is broken for the developer's convenience sake that sways away from how game mechanics and tech worked in the first two Fallout games without improving the game very much, not like giving you power armor later but make its power source last longer than first iPhone in battery stress test app would make the game worse but it was done entirely for the sake of grabbing gamers attention into the game early on and any kind of realistic feel was thrown away just to achieve that goal. Because Bethesda sold a lot more copies than the first two Fallouts under Black Isle ever could hope in the 90ties, Bethesda has very little motivation to change their approach to Fallout tech&gameplay design despite it breaking immersion to the point of making Oblivion looking more realistic than new Fallouts with Mr. Handies butler robots levitating with fire blasting jet engine indoors...
I dont remember any criticism of the new games about them being too whacky. the gripe people have of the new games are simply about the writting system "KISS" keep it simple stupid.
Fallout 3 and onwards were definetly inspired by the humor present in fallout 1 and 2, i mean sometimes it would miss the mark but the effort is still there none the less. I mean.. yeah We all love serious story telling but sometimes its nice to break the flow with some off color humor just so it actually does feel more grounded.. i mean when you think about it the world is a crazy and chaotic place and you have a crazy and chaotic setting like a post apocalyptic wasteland and dudes in power armor.. i'd absolutely say there is a huge amount of space for abstract comedy to emerge and not break you out of the immersion. Crazy chaos in all forms whether it be serious or not seems like its fitting for any wasteland. Also I hate when games take themselves too seriously...
Full disclosure: I'm relatively new to Fallout, having only started playing the series for myself around late last year. I've seen playthroughs of FO3 and NV, but it was a while ago. So I'm speaking with limited knowledge. In my playthrough of FO1, maybe my RNG was bad, but out of the multiple hours of travelling map square-by-square that I put in, I personally came across only *one* 'wacky' incident, of a cow saying something like "moo, moo, I say". The rest of the game was tense, atmospheric and grim; a world wherein I felt like any speech-check failure or backchat could result in an instant shootout. To put it as clearly as I can, mostly all of the 'wacky' humour in FO1 feels like intentionally 4th-wall breaking humour that the player knows couldn't possibly exist in-world; the kind explainable by dehydration, starvation, radiation poisoning or heatstroke causing hallucinations or mirages. It's random and scarce, and the only 'canonical' humour is in the dark humour provided in the commentary of the inhabitants. It was the type of 'survivalist' or 'make-do' humour, typically found in world war diaries. If I were to sum up what Fallout was, I'd say that it's a post-nuclear world, whereby only a couple of generations ago, the whole of civilisation as we know it was completely turned to ash. Whereby you as the vault dweller have to make sense out of being thrown, blindly, into a degenerated and fragmented society. Trialling through a wasteland that has been reduced to a survivalist, tribalist and paranoid mindset, amidst a desperate struggle between emerging and ever-conflicting philosophies. All of it being set in a war-torn, baron, desolate and resourceless world of mutation and radiation, riddled with moral ambiguity, death & disease. Between the growing 1950s aesthetic (FO1 felt only inspired by, not closely reflective of the 1950s aesthetic), saturated colours, and more frequent and zany in-world humour that tries to make the audience outright laugh, I just haven't felt the prior paragraph being upheld so well in post-NV Fallouts. And this feels especially apparent in the Amazon series. Again, I'm only a noob to the series really, but this is the impression I get when contrasting the original game to the Fallout of which we have today.
Get almost 300 more audio episodes of the Fallout Lorecast: open.spotify.com/show/0e30iIgSffe6xJhFKe35Db
wow, bethesda apologist alert
@Fallout Lorecast Maybe it feels humerus and silly because it’s an Easter egg nerd reference for nerds and that they weren’t supposed to be in a Fallout game?
@Fallout Lorecast What kind of argument are you making. Yeah, there was Easter eggs in Fallout and they’re a little silly however, the games still took themselves seriously when they needed to. Fallout 4 cranks it up to where you don’t care about the world because the game is so silly its treats its world and characters like jokes or a Hannah Barbara skit. There’s no meaning in anything you do, not that you’ll care.
@@KingofFreaks "Not that you'll care." Since you've already decided exactly what I think, I guess there's no need to explain my perspective. Have fun continuing to yell into the void and thanks for commenting on the video.
@Fallout Lorecast Well do you? Fallout 4’s world far from perfect. It’s the reason Bethesda’s in the state they’re in. Do you even care that Bethesda gets lazier with stuff. To the point you cranking up silliness to everything’s a big joke? I don’t think you do.
One of my favorite random encounter in fallout 2 is when you find the portal that takes you to vault 13 before the events of fallout 1 and you cause the water chip to break, before coming back to the “present” time.
Happened to a buddy of mine not what you said but something completely different
@@christophermartinez4149yeah me too
@christophermartinez4149 lol what 😂
I saved my game on that encounter, you can find a unique weapon called "Solar Scorcher" it reloads during daytime and keeps firing until you either run out of AP or ammo from its capacity
@@_Circus_Clapped_ yup and it only takes 2 AP which is great :D
I assumed the giant dino footprint was just a reference to Godzilla 1998, when the main character stands inside a giant, three-toed footprint.
According to Tim Cain your assumption is correct
I wonder how a game released in 1997 referenced a movie that was released in 1998.
@@okreylos Godzilla is the American version of a 60s japanese movie called Gojira
@@kokojack No shit, Sherlock. But the 60s japanese movie called Gojira doesn't have a giant, three-toed footprint in it in which the main character stands.
Same shot was in Lost World in 97
Not mentioning that the aliens in Fallout 1 have a photo of Elvis with them is criminal
Zetans bop to Elvis confirmed.
they are part of the kings :0
That's an easter egg. Fallout 1 was a serious game.
@@shihonage cope
@@funki4896 just facts, kiddo
Seymour was Rick Moranis's character. The plant was Audrey 2
Glad I started with a ctrl-f for Audrey
And Seymour was *not* an insane professor lmao
Some people dont understand the humor of FO1 and FO2. Old games were not super serious.
Bethesda humor is more in your face and its usually not required to know the reference , while the old games were either wacky or if you didnt know the reference you wouldn’t understand that it was a joke.
I like most fallout games but prefer the wacky, also subtle jokes/reference/easter eggs from FO1, FO2 and FNV.
Spot on
I think that for better or worse, fo1 &2 style depth and humor wouldn't work today. People expect every single conversation to lead to something, and every single encounter to have a reason and resolution. If there's a joke, there has to be a punch line, rimshot and wink for people to think it was any good. Oh and a possible romantic dialogue response if you specced into charisma....
@@JK.Fraser agree, very true. More ”hand holding” now. There were some jokes or wacky things in the old game that I didnt get at first. But when I did I absolutely loved it. Love most fallout games but there are something about wacky and funny jokes that are smart and/or ”hidden in plain sight”.
But Bethesda's references are also quite subtle sometimes and require knowledge of various topics, which includes not only pop culture, but also american history, cultural heritage and classic literature.
I've learned a decent amount of interesting stuff about American culture thanks to Bethesda's fallout games.
@@Pluto_Holidays Im not sure if we are speaking about the same thing. I'm talking about the humor and writing of it in the FO games, not that the games present facts and references on different things or not. All of the games does it, but its about what type of jokes and how they are delivered.
Real bummer you didn’t mention what you find if you loot the bodies of the aliens besides the alien blaster: a framed painting of the King of Rock n Roll, Elvis Presley 😂
The velvet Elvis.
13:17 Black Isle made Fallout 2, not Troika. I don't think Troika was even around yet in 97.
Yup, and that's coming from a lore channel.
The Troika guys left very early on. They did have some effect on the final game and it wasn't insignificant. However I wouldn't consider them amongst the people who made Fallout 2.
@@dropzone662 ow wow i didnt expect to see you here. I love the DC 1hr track
Haha. Fallout 1&2 were not serious at all. They had all sorts of humor.
Npc ahh comment
@@yesyes-cu9nk why yes, your comment is.
Fallout 1 didn't have whacky humor in it. That came in with Fallout 2.
@@themightypen1530 I found it funny, personally.
@@themightypen1530 meanwhile if you kill deputy Kenny the info panel reads "you killed Kenny, you bastard!"
Or you can find the doctors tardis in fallout 1
Brahmins will say "moo I say, moo"
They reference 9 inch nails, and tool posters appear in game
Or Lucy in the chapel says "there's no place like home, there's no place like home"
22 major gags/references in the entire first game
120+ in the second game
10 in tactics
60 in fallout 3
51 in fallout NV
81 in fallout 4
66 in fallout 76
I just beat fallout 1 last year, it had some funny moments, I feel like 3, NV, and 76 really grasp classic fallout feel. 4 is the odd one out imo but still a good game.
The plant in Little Shop is named Audrey 2. Seymour was Rick Morranis's character.
In Fallout 2 there's a goddamn ghost.
Hell yeah there is
13:25 if i remember correctly, tim cain himself did not like the idea of humanizing deathclaws, he wanted them to be the scariest thing youll ever witness so to say. These decisions were made by people who havent worked on fo before. Which is sad, because tims grip on the games slipped entirely throughout fo2s developement, until he left completely.
Avellone also said he regretted making the intelligent deathclaws
Tbh I think talking deathclaws rule. An intelligent monster is way scarier than just an aggressive killing machine to me.
Fallout 1 made Death claws sound like literal demons. I was terrified to accidentally stumble across one by the way the NOC's described them
I mean they did reverse it by having Frank Horrigan murder all of the Intelligent Deathclaws, but Goris was left with an unconfirmed fate..
@@3456haloYou were actually supposed to be able to avoid Frank killing the deathclaws if you finished the game's ending without returning to Vault 13 2 weeks after obtaining their G.E.C.K. but it was bugged making them die no matter what.
Seymour is the protagonist of Little Shop. The plant is Audrey.
Well, Audrey II. Specifically. Or just a Mean Green Mother from Outer Space.
I think the contrast of the dark and ridiculous is what makes fallout so great
Yeup, you got everything wrong in the first minute.
All Fallouts, including Bethesda's had this balancing act; they could be silly, and they could be serious. But to say both are identical in this regard is a big stretch; would you say the Simpsons and Family Guy are identical? What because they are both sitcoms about dysfunctional American families? So any joke Family Guy makes wouldn't be out of place if it was on the Simpsons?
Old Fallouts, and New Vegas to a degree always kept the silly aspect separate from the serious aspects which were mostly preserved within the 'main story'. The silly stuff was more of a 'side' thing. In Bethesda Fallouts, the silly aspect are given more front stage treatment, and the serious aspects are... In the simplest way I can say it; written poorly; in ways that was done better in HUNDREDS of other stories.
I just feel like we'll never see anything as creepy as The Master in the TV Show for example.
Only if Cronenberg did the show.
Love the video, just a quick note that in Little shop of horrors, Seymour was the human, Audrey II was the plant. Other than that, great!
Playing through 2 right now. If this came out today, people would say "wow was this dialogue written by vivzypop?"
Yeah, imo the writing is usually worse than 1. A good portion is probably worse than New Vegas's writing honestly.
Fallout 1 played it mostly straight due to Cain's involvement though. The weird stuff is all limited to, essentially, wild wasteland random encounters. Just like New Vegas.
(Though New Vegas could have been more wacky in a few places)
Didn't people complain that 2 was too silly at the time?
You think New Vegas fans actually played/know anything about the first 2 Fallouts? They're like proto-Persona 5 fans
@@meetomeeto8271
Lolwhat
This person’s comment mentioned nothing about NV
Homie over here’s got CDS - Courier Derangement Syndrome
@@meetomeeto8271 I played new vegas it was my favorite fallout game. then i tried 1 and 2. i liked 2 better bc there wasn't any time limit
@@earhearthush-up5549 cause most of the times it's the elitist new vegas fans who take everything seriously lol some of them act like it's only game they played before
I still stand by it. Fallout 2 is too silly. Even Avellone and Tim Cain said it.
Fallout 1 had some easter-eggs, but not really whacky things in the main game content. Overall it had a pretty serious tone. The games afterwards (including Fallout 2) added more and more whacky, pop culture elements.
Fallout 1 and 2 absolutely had wild things in them. But for me, it’s not that modern fallout is too wacky. It’s how modern fallout handles the darker, more serious moments and themes that fallout 1 and 2 handled perfectly. The older games weren’t more or less silly. They were simply better balanced and knew when to take themselves seriously, and when to joke.
The serious moments in old school fallout are also, for me at least, much more impactful. Like the scene at the end of fallout 1 when you (SPOILER ALERT)
Speak to the master.
@@Danger11007 The game is 27 years old, I think you can't really spoil it anymore.
@@artyom-ovsepyan for sure. But I’d still rather be safe than sorry. I do still want new younger people to play the old fallout games because they absolutely deserve the attention and so I don’t want to spoil it for those potential new players.
You young people don't know how serious it was for us oldschool Fallout players to boot up Fallout 3 and play some DLC
Also serious stuff in modern Fallout tends to be badly written, like "get turbocancer saving the purifier because it's your destiny or something"
Fallout 1 and 2 were my first PC games and i still love them to this day. Always thought the footprint was a godzilla reference
It’s also said that it’s a reference to the fact fallout was going to be a time traveling game with dinosaurs
I don't think that Bethesda has made the games any less serious, but I do think they've made them less dark. I think there was some darkness and grit present in the original two games that Bethesda kind of eased up on in Fallout 3 and even more so in Fallout 4. I think New Vegas tried to inject some more of that back into the game, but not at the same level as the original two.
I feel like this is the best assessment.
Just look at what its like when you get a game over.
But its kinda inevitable with the different pacing between formats, so I ain't too mad.
Fallout 3? Being less serious? Did we encounter the same game?
Finally. Another person who understands Fallout.
@@caseycox1002
Yeah if anything my critique would be that Fallout 3 was trying TOO hard to be dark and gritty, like it’s 13 year old edge lord stuff
@@caseycox1002the Enclave are cartoonier than ever. The Super Mutants are reduced from organized, hulking soldiers to... cannibal orcs, for some reason. Very few people in game actually act like real people, which I feel is the major thing.
This happens with all long running franchises. Like how the GTA community says the PS2 trilogy had realistic art design even though they clearly have cartoonish comic book designs.
There’s a lot of funny humors in the original too. Like for example there’s this guy who randomly backflips and he says “I hope nobody sees that”
While I agree with some of the points made, some of them just seem disingenuous. Fallout 1 and 2 having a rare alien random encounter easter egg that the majority of players won't see is one thing, but Bethesda making an ENTIRE DLC involving the Aliens is completely different. Also just because Fallout 2 did it doesnt automatically make it good, while I would say Fallout 2 is the best in the series, its biggest flaw is it being too weird at times and having an inconsistent tone because of it.
See that’s the thing I always call back to
It was an EASTER EGG in the original series, but Bethesda took that as being like “Oh shit we can’t come up with anything original uuuuuuhhhhh aliens”
Fallout 2 had its humorous moments but the thing is that they were actually *funny*
Bethesda thinks that if you show the whole wasteland being silly and there’s barely any serious elements in the game that you’ll laugh more, but that’s just not true at all
They really did turn Fallout into a joke, they turned a frightening bleak world into borderlands with a 50s aesthetic.
@@Gooeygiuseppe "Well, FO1 and FO2 had aliens, therefore we can make an entire DLC about how aliens are watching the planet and then infer in another game that the aliens were behind the Great War and also we've been using their tech to make the Robobrains."
But really, that's just how Bethesda works with Fallout. They can't come up with anything actually good, so they scrape whatever they can from old Fallout and then make it a thousand times worse. This is why the Enclave and Brotherhood will be in every game. This is why there will always be ghouls and super mutants. Dogmeat will always be there in some capacity.
Bethesda is creatively bankrupt.
Yeah back in the day easter eggs were more of a thing. Bethesda Fallout is whacky in the wrong places.
This video needed to be made. Classic Fallout & NV fans ragging on Bethesda Fallouts for their wackiness conveniently forget these things and also probably worship the fever dream that is Old World Blues
True plus the Gary vault was the funniest thing in all the games. Haha Garryyyyy!
Or how they forget that the Kings exist
New Vegas is my favorite but the wackiness is one of my favorite things about fallout
They also rag on Bethesda for Fallout 76’s launch (which, yes, is justified) but don’t really do the same for Interplay releasing Fallout: BOS..
I mean, I like the Bethesda games except 76 however I wish the art style did change from 3/NV to 4/76. Something about the new color pallet makes the jokes hit worse than in the old color pallet. The more gritty colors made the jokes work better in contrast.
FO1 and FO2 were more serious. The fact that there were easter eggs and random events that were humorous doesn't change that.
Stop trying to defend Bethesda and Amazon slop.
Anyone who says fallout 2 is a serious game either didn't play it or didn't get past the tutorial
It was serious when it needed to. However you were less restricted in them, you can literally slay anyone and anything or even whore yourself in New Reno. Even got sexual perks for sexual acts, like gigolo and sexpert. One issue what i missed in the newer games was mended in Fallout 4, namely the npc's reaction to power armor. In Reno there were some hilarious comments when you walk in a power armor.
@@Zappina FO2 is where Bethesda got all their "Fallout is just whacky" nonsense ideas, because yeah, it had a lot more humor in it.
I think it's a bit disengenuous to take the criticism of the Bethesda games and their lack of seriousness and compare them to easter eggs.
Sure, Fallout 1 had aliens, but that was an Easter egg. You yourself said that not everyone will see it. Bethesda, however, then takes said Easter egg, makes an entire DLC about it, and then alludes to the possibility that said aliens may have instigated the Great War.
People don't criticize Bethesda for having humor in their game. They criticise them for going beyond the pale with said humor.
As for Fallout 2, it was a very common complaint even at the time of its release that it went too far with its humor.
The silly weird things are what make it more fun. Picture being in a post apocalyptic he'll full of people that lost their minds.
The humor was to keep things interesting and to bring a little joy to the bleak world. Just look at the old radiation mechanics that shit was horrifying and relatively realistic. Then you have the dark shit like rape slavery child killing etc… the old games where more serious then the modern versions not because of humor but because of story and mechanics.
Fallout 3, nv and 4 were just as dark.
@@MegaDman163 and 4 aren't dark, they're stupid and contrived.
@@mediokay
3 is VERY dark, it’s just not as well done
I’d say if anything the issue is it’s trying too hard to be edgy grimdark
The plant in little shop of horrors wasn't called Seymour it was called Audrey 2.
Seymour is the protagonist
Honestly Bethesda toned down the silliness of Fallout in a lot of ways. They also pushed it into areas where it doesn't belong.
dont forget the toll keeper for a rope bridge that gives out riddles which is a reference to Monty python and the holy grail
Imo the early games where computer-nerd comic-book-geek silly, and the newer ones are pop culture marvel fan silly. Different vibe I guess? Enjoyed all the games!!
Good video, you covered a lot :)
Thanks! Yeah, there may be a tone shift in the kind of silly. I hadn't considered that. Fun thoughts.
@@FalloutLorecast I'm wondering then, how or why, you focused on humor as is and have not catched that tone shift?
@@StroggKingu First, it's a good theory to look into, but I won't be convinced if it's accurate or not until I do. Second, if it is real, it might just not matter that much to me. Maybe I just find the funny parts funny, and didn't think twice about them.
@@StroggKingu Because it's less about the delivery of said humor and more about how the humor affects the narrative as a whole. People get too caught up in how the humor affects the lore based on ideas about the lore that never really existed in the first place. Like if Bethesda implemented those same jokes as the original, people would be having a nuclear meltdown about how they ruined the lore.
Ironically the types of references in the original games fit that description a lot more considering all the corny fourth-wall breaks and references to blockbuster movies. Whereas Bethesda actually has some good examples of more geeky-nerd stuff such as all the pulp novel references in Fallout 4 like the Silver Shroud and the magazines
I always thought Bethesda’s fallout was more serious than the originals. I think the Wild Wasteland trait is supposed to be a callback to that era of classic Fallout.
In my personal opinion, Fallout 4 has got to be the most serious of the fallouts due to its story and their companions backstories like Nick, Preston, Deacon, Cait, Maccready, etc.
I say all that even though my absolute favorite is New Vegas and Fallout 3. I think New Vegas turned me into an armchair philosopher lol
fallout nv was not made by Bethesda
@@Tortillasoup-se7sh I wanted to include NV because even though they had original developers involved, it still felt serious to me- from the DLCs story to the NCR politics and whatnot. If I want an original fallout experience I’ll choose the wild wasteland trait along with the Yes Man ending 😂
Fallout 1 was more serious overall, most of the jokes are hidden behind random encounters and optional. Even one of the developers said he didn’t like Fallout 2’s humor, because it was way more in your face with it. New Vegas’ wild wasteland perk was completely optional as well
Keeng Ra'at: "What are we doing tonight?" Brain: "Same thing we do every night Ra'at!"
Man, I hate that we still have to deal with the fallout "purists". Nobody but the most acoustic people on the planet give this much of a shit about all these damn nitpicks and discrepancies when lore drift occurs. It's all so tiresome.
That style of alien design is generally called "Roswell aliens", for namesake town and incident.
In Fallout 2 there is mission that allows you to plant explosives below an outhouse; the resulting explosion cover the entire village in dookie.
In F1 and F2 you can hold down left control and click credits on the main menu. It'll show a ton of inside jokes from the dev team i remember being hilarious.
couldn't you go back in time in the second to break the water chip from the first?
There was indeed a time portal. A stone arch. Not sure, but I think you could find a solar powered laser pistol while there.
@@WilliamScavengerFish Pretty sure that the solar pistol was cut content from the EPA.
It was also a star trek reference for the Guardian of Forever! @@WilliamScavengerFish
The picture shown in the intro is fucking awesome. You just love to see stuff like that.
I thought the humor in Fallout 2 was because of time constraints.
14:35 Wrong, the plants name is Audrey-II. Seymour is Rick Moranis' charactor. Who was neither insane, nor a professor... He just found Audrey-II in a chinese flower store during an unprecidented total eclypse of the sun.
You definitely make some good points - - I think oftentimes we hear things repeated on the internet and forums particularly and certain things become common belief, although they may be a bit more of a stretch than some people realize. Well done - subbed.
fo1 and 2 are filled with so much wacky stuff that, when asked on what is canon, the writers for it outright said "we added so much stuff we kinda went overboard, we genuinely don't remember what is and isn't canon anymore".
Objectively. the only REAL way to play fonv like an authentic fallout title, would be with wacky wasteland, because if someone actually picked fo1 and 2 up today and played them, there is absolutely no way to deny that they're filled with weird, silly nonsense.
Mony python references all over the place. a red shirt next to a crashed alien ship. a dead whale in the middle of a desert with hints of 'something large', dinosaur footprints out of nowhere. harold and bob are expressly comedic. You have an arm wrestling match with a supermutant to decide if you're going to get fucked or fuck him, and depending how good you do, a sex doll gets named after you(which is not at all treated as non-canon, as it happens in a main hub, and also breaks pre-established lore that says supermutants both male and female lose all genitalia, which is fundamentally one of the ways in fo1 you can convince the master to stop his plans). If you take this series seriously, you're just going to come away wondering what fucked up kinks the devs must have been into with just how many 'horny' moments are in the first two games.
Honestly. i first hated fo4, because i played fo3 and nv first, but then went to try fo1 and 2 to see if the fo3 hatemob was justified, and all i gained was an appreciation for 4. Canonicity was broken WELL before bethesda got their hands on the series to such an extent that at this point each game should be considered it's own game, separate from what came before, even if it references events from previous iterations.
Edit: if i were to compare fallout, i'd have to compare it to Yakuza in this regard. Yet for some reason while the silliness contrasting the seriousness has become the selling point of yakuza, with fallout, people get a hate boner every time they see something that isn't 40k grimdark happening in fallout.
One thing, F1 never said the super mutants don't have genitals, only that they're infertile. In simpler term, they always could do the deed, but could never make a baby.
You mean Fallout 2 had too much wacky stuff. Fallout 1 is perfectly balanced and the wacky stuff is limited to what would be Wild Wasteland encounters in the New Games.
Tim Cain and Chris Avellone admit that Fallout 2 was way too silly.
@@absolutezerochill2700 never ceases to be expected that the same crowd claiming every game (except vegas) to ruin fallout, will always point to fo1 and 2, but whenever someone jumps to point out 'flaws' to those, the first thing you people do is abandom fo2 and pretend like fo1 was any different.
Just as fickle as the writers of the franchise.
@@antirevomag834 fo1 literally is different though.
If anything it's weird how so many people treat 1 and 2 like essentially one game, always bringing them up in exactly the same breath, when I'm willing to wager they haven't played both games. And certainly not finished them. The truth is that the writing in Fo2 takes a completely different direction than in Fo1.
It's like bringing up Fo4 and Fo3 in the same breath which, no, I do not do. In fact I really like 4.
@@absolutezerochill2700 Huh. I admit i was defaulting into a certain mindset on you since like you said, many people do that.
I will defend that fo1 is a significantly wacky game on it's own, regardless of how people want to view it as less-so than latter titles.
The concept itself is somewhat wacky, and even the themes are wacky solely in how overly-dark they tried to treat them. I mean. A good example of that is you can "join" a bandit group by being told to shoot one of their people, and by doing so, you get respect with them. You don't get to do odd jobs for them or anything, you just get to shoot one of their guys, they say you're alright, and let you go on your merry way.
Not to mention you can just randomly run into a guy who's running a gas station that has no gas (even though gas isn't even supposed to be a fuel type by that point in the lore), just as a couple interactions.
The thing isn't that the original Fallout did not have anything silly in it, it is more about the fact that the silliness has taken over at the expense of the horror elements
A couple of things:
1. Anybody who says fallout one and two were entirely serious has never played fallout one and two or at least never paid attention to them.
2. The killer plant in little shop of horrors was actually called Audrey II by Seymour, because he named it after the woman that he loved.
3. I think the mole rats were also a reference to the Rat King, Shredder, and Krang from Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles
4. I always thought that the aliens had escaped from area 51, went to Vegas, got hammered and crashed their UFO again. They have a photo of Elvis with them, which suggests that maybe they had seen a Vegas show with an Elvis impersonator at some point.
The cyclops thing in the show actually fit very well. It didn't hurt that the character was also Chris Parnell playing a bumbling villian, he's good at that.
The bridge keeper. The Holy Hand gernade. The vorpol rat instead of the killer rabbit. Knight of the round table going clippity clop (coconuts).
I think a different indicator that there's multiple alien species in Fallout is also that the alien blaster is noticably different in material & stats between Fallout 1 and say Fallout 4.
the older fallout games are like the guy that knows life sucks and the best way to deal with it is to engage in comic relief
the newer fallout games are the guy that has lost all hope and turns life into a comedy
Nah, newer fallout games are like kid who trying to impersonate that old guy.
Newer fallout games are just reddit tier jokes (manchild soy shit) used to prop up dogshit writing, no one on this planet is going to defend Fallout 3s ending.
The alien skulls are made large to emphasize that they're not human skeletons, otherwise it may not be so pronounced in low resolution pixel art.
All games have their own moments of humor, references, dark humor. But the original games through their difficultly felt scarier and through its characters and set piece feels not at all comedic
The fact that there are people out there who don't realise Fallout is part comedy, and satire is scary.
Fallout 1 had literally the TARDIS from Doctor Who in it and it actually travels through time to escape when you get too close
I think that not taking itself entirely seriously at times is part of the charm that got it popular
At one point fallout 1 was going to have a clan of talking raccoons
Nah. Sorry but there’s no comparing a few quick easter eggs with say, a goofy faction that cosplays like they’re in the 1776 colonial militia and is also central to the main story. Apples and oranges.
Yeah someone told Bethesda that Fallout was full of jokes and they were basically like 'so you want us to make a goofy game with lame jokes?'
Regarding the giant footprint and the possible connection to Bambi meets Godzilla; I first saw that short in 1995 when Doctor Demento was touring wirh Weird Al and showed funny shorts as part of the pre-show, so it's definitely plausible timeline-wise (Fallout came out in 1997)
The Bridge Keeper encounter was the best silly encounter.
You really can't go wrong with Monty Python
I mean I heard the whackiness of NV was Obsidian (a studio with Black Isle alums) was silly because it was a throwback to the humor of 1-2. I haven't completed those yet but it tracks
“The classic games were all realism!”
Brotherhood of Steel in their power armor powered by fusion reactors that will outlive them, super hydraulics, and protected by tank thick composite alloy plates:
There are no fusion cores in the classics, also not in fo3 or fnv, but yes, there's some fantasy in it
@ there are fusion paks created by Texas tech. They are about the size of a car battery but spread out to be thin and cover a large surface area. Outputs 60K watts.
Try hards :"fallout is serious, theres no place for humor"
Fallout 3 :"gaaaaaary?"
while i still think the game has an overall more foreboding and ominous tone, there is definitely humor to be found. one of the weirdest random encounters i've had so far while playing Fallout 1 is a group of wild Brahmin that kept saying "Moo I say" over and over. the combat log said something along the lines "you feel as though something is wrong here and want to leave immediately." off-putting but also hilarious
I think using non-canon Easter eggs to try and justify Bethesda’s bad writing is one of the most embarrassing copes I’ve ever seen. Holy shit.
As a fan who like New Vegas the most, I love the wackiness! Maybe it’s because I started playing New Vegas and FO3 for the first time ever at the same time basically back in 2011. And I took wild wasteland in NV and in FO3 I made sure to do all the weird things. So since my first experiences with it Fallout has always been wacky and had funny odd moments. It’s definitely a serious series with a commentary on real life and politics but it also has many things to not be taken seriously! The balance between the serious and weird is what makes it work to me
Tragedy and comedy. They go so well together, that the masks used to represent them became the symbol for theater.
The plant in little shop was audrey 2 not Seymour, and it was an alien that beamed to earth during a total eclipse. Seymour was a shop sweep in a flower store who found it
IMO: The problem isn't that fallout 4/76 are filled with jokes. The problem is that when Bethesda tries to take itself and the setting seriously, they do a terrible job. It comes across as funny, to me, when I say "no" four times in a row and still get a quest marker.
When those games try to nudge and wink at me, I'm offended--like, "you aren't on my level", "you haven't earned this"--and they just shatter what little investment remains
I actually don't know how a cyclops in the fallout world is weird at all. There's super mutants, zombies, kaijus, and advanced killer robots. But a guy with one eye is where dome folks draw the Line? Huh
2:15 - At this moment I just wanna pay for all that straw flying around since that would be enough to feed a whole country's livestock for a winter season. Last time I've been checking on fallout fans they had issues not with Bethesda making fallout weird but with quality of writing, blunt game design and a total loss of fallout's identity. "A post-nuclear RPG". Not "skyrim with guns".
The actual critique of Bethesda Fallouts is not that it doesn’t take the world of Fallout seriously enough, but that the storytelling sucks and lore is a mess.
It's not about the jokes, it's about the world and how lacking in immersion it is. Fallout 3 did okay, I really did enjoy a lot of it and it has such great moments, with some decent writing. But to say the new games aren't silly, is stupid. They are, they make little sense and they're just goofying up the lore to fit their new writers terrible ideas. Like synths, absolutely awful idea, makes 0-0.00000001% sense. I'm high balling the logic percentage on that one.
Most advanced societies with more resources, no radiation and more scientists could barely make power armour and stealth suits, yet these goombas made high advanced synthetic humanoids that can fool humans who autopsy them? Fuck off.
The plants name is Audrey. The Shop owner is Seymour. Hence "FEED ME, SEYMOUR!!!"
With the show being set back out in California, I'm really hoping Lucy runs into some talking Deathclaws. I want an update on my buddy Goris
Fallout 1 and 2 had elements of actual dread and horror. I had moments playing these games as a teenager, feeling actually anxious about existing in this universe.
There is no tension in modern Fallout games. They definitely have their place, don't get me wrong. But there wasn't a moment in Fallout 3 or 4 where I actually felt worried about walking around and travelling. Existing and surving in a post apocalypse, should feel overwhelmingly terrifying and weird. 1 and 2 had passion man. The facial animations, voice acting, death scenes were made with actual passion. Modern Fallout is a sellout. The show is a joke, the lore and story make no sense and the characters are awful. You can't even debate me on this, I dare you to try.
Bethesda is the perfect example of a company just holding onto an IP they have no idea what to do with, just because its popular
That’s what I’m saying
And an even bigger problem I have is that in Bethesdas fallout society is just too lazy/inept to start and progress
The whole story of Fallout 3 was to find your dad and make water pure enough to drink 200 years AFTER the bombs dropped, Fallout 1 had villages and towns that survived off of water chips and water purification plants 80 or so years after the world ended.
Fallout 4 went even further, 210 years after the bombs dropped, and you have to find your son this time(really clever Emil.) and also it’s not really an objective but you’re all but demanded to rebuild civilization itself by yourself, but in fallout 2 civilization already started to develop and a new country was already formed out of California, 164 years after the bombs dropped.
Interplay/Black Isle was interested in a world that emerged from the ashes of nuclear hellfire, but Bethesda thinks that Fallout is just about the ashes.
I’m playing fallout 1 right now to see what all the hype about it is. People say that the culture of the classics is different and all this and that about how Bethesda’s fallout isn’t real fallout but honestly bro they all feel like fallout. It all feels like one world and the only thing that change is the mechanics and choices but the tone doesn’t seem to be that different. Other people will disagree, which is fine. But at the end of the day I feel like people just want to rage bait and or have something to complain about. I think that Bethesda and Classic fallout needs that respeck on their name💯
This is such a terrible argument. "uhh actually fallout 1&2 have humor too." What a reach it is to compare the special events (aka Easter eggs to anyone with half a brain) to the Gary vault or the entirety of diamond city. How disingenuous can you be?
If you want a bleak post-apocalyptic game to take seriously then I would point you in the direction of the Metro franchise.
@@seendon5394OG fallout is as bleak as metro.
I don't know. In classic games it didn't stand out and break the immersion THAT much, but in Bethesda's games I just hate it.For me their gamesare trash in general - especially those that parasite on old franchises, like Fallout and Doom, turning them into something completely different from what I know and love for several decades.
I learned the terms "gimp" and "fluffer" from playing Fallout 2, so i guess you know how my playthrough went
The plant from Little Shop of Horrors is named Audrey 2, Seymour was the Rick Moranis' character....
You see Fallout is not serious! It's really goofy because in 1977 a stormtrooper bumped his head!
I always laugh when people try to say that wild wasteland is silly compared to the earlier games/ isn't the cannon way to play...yet its MOSTLY references TO those earlier games
I feel like this misses the point. Bethesda turned fallout into a joke not because of the goofy writing, but the awful execution of it. I have no problem with throwaway jokes and references, though Fallout 2 went overboard in my mind (and the devs have gone on record saying that) but the writing was still good.
Emil is just a bad writer so it comes off as cringe.
And that's not to mention my distaste for Bethesda dumbing down their games more and more with every release. Fallout 4 is hardly an rpg, and the dialog system is abysmal
I would wager that people that say that Fallout 1 and 2 were ultra serious are people that never played through them. As somebody that played both of those games when they came out back in the 90s, I was amazed at how well the Fallout 3 and New Vegas captured the spirit of the originals. Fallout 4 not so much, but it didn't have anything to do with the humor. I can't speak on Fallout 76 as I never played it.
If you guys steal from whiskey Bob there’s a chance he’ll say “I’ll beat you like a red headed stepchild”
Let's say there's a spectrum, on one end, silly games, on the other end serious games. If you ask me, Fallout's in between early Doom games and Postal 2. Pretty silly.
Fallout 1 humor is mostly hidden or easter eggs, not very in your face. Fallout 2, on the other hand...
But the issue with modern Fallout is that the overall tone is less dark than classic Fallout, so the goofy elements feel more present.
Lmao Fallout 1&2 is serious. This just means they haven't actually played those games
just because 1 and 2 have some wacky jokes in them doesn’t mean their overall tone is the same as the bethesda games…
Bethesda made fallout 4 and that's pretty good! The guns could use some work but that's about it. It's got pretty much the same level of seriousness in a wacky world, but is that worth to hate on it like "fallout 4 sucks! The old games were better" yes, the old games were made by different dev teams! Ofc it'll feel different, that's like asking Dice to make a cod game! They are different. Fallout 76 SUCKS!
@Nameless50000 Its different and the main problem with it is the game literally hold your hand the entire time. Too many encounters with people, no struggle, even your power armor was hand out to you. Not to mention what they did with it. It was suppose to be the pinnacle of defense, in Fallout 4 even a raider can whack your armor with a wooden stick. The music doesnt reflect your situation and the radio was the biggest mistake Bethesda ever did, it is an immersion breaker. Fallout 3 was the closest to the original atmosphere with the music and still quite far from it. I dont mention NV because they are literally stole many soundtrack from the original game(my favorites from old Fallouts were the city of the dead, the desert wind which gave you the immersion of the empty and bleak wasteland, city of lost angels and the underground troubles).
@Zappina
I actually agree with everything you said but it's still fun af. Say what you will but Bethesda knows how to make entertainment. I'm not a fan anymore since they made a f'n live service game. That sh°t is unacceptable to me, but fallout 4 was really fun. Typically if I hate a games story I hate the game but fallout 4 is an exception . It's not a masterpiece or anything probably a 6/10 but still seems overly hated. I get why people are hard on it tho, they want Bethesda to do better. That said I will never buy 76 or Stanfield. And if they make fallout 5 a live service Bethesda is going to lose me forever
My problem with Bethesda is they change the enviroment of the game...the Fallout 1 and 2 look more like Mad Max, with a lot of destruction and a feeling of empty, the soundtrack was awesome, with few peoples around. Fallout 3 and 4 change it all...i dont like the way they go with the story too. They make the visuals more bright and with more cities.
Classic Fallout have a lot of weird things and dark humor, and thats great, they did it better than Bethesda.
Many things considered silly in Fallout 1/2 were not available to a player with low luck, so most of the extra silliness was optional and as luck did not play a major role on the gameplay, people tended to skip above-average luck a lot. Talking animals, especially under scientific oversight aren't that special even in the real world, parrots can repeat human language while chimps and even better gorillas can learn hand language as used by deaf people and actually use it in a sensible manner, though their vocabulary is limited to a few years old children thus is hardly inconceivable that much larger animals with large brains would not be able to do the same. What is on the other hand questionable is why would such large animals even develop in a world with very limited resources even for much more resourceful humans, note that food and oxygen supplies were on entirely different levels in the Jurassic era where large animals and insects existed in reality that was hardly possible in post-nuclear exchange world...
Bethesda Fallout silliness is on an entirely different level because in their games breaking of reality is done on so many levels for the sake of coolness, like giving you power armor at the beginning but at the same time making fusion cores last less than gasoline-powered lawnmower to balance it out, not to mention or addition of laser rifle with a hand-cranked dynamo power source as if you ever could power megawatt class energy weapon with hand cranking.
Thus the main issue with Bethesda games is why and how often immersion of a believable world is broken for the developer's convenience sake that sways away from how game mechanics and tech worked in the first two Fallout games without improving the game very much, not like giving you power armor later but make its power source last longer than first iPhone in battery stress test app would make the game worse but it was done entirely for the sake of grabbing gamers attention into the game early on and any kind of realistic feel was thrown away just to achieve that goal.
Because Bethesda sold a lot more copies than the first two Fallouts under Black Isle ever could hope in the 90ties, Bethesda has very little motivation to change their approach to Fallout tech&gameplay design despite it breaking immersion to the point of making Oblivion looking more realistic than new Fallouts with Mr. Handies butler robots levitating with fire blasting jet engine indoors...
God you're lame as fuck lmao.
I dont remember any criticism of the new games about them being too whacky. the gripe people have of the new games are simply about the writting system "KISS" keep it simple stupid.
It’s funny that the super mutant in the title is the general from fallout 1
Fallout 3 and onwards were definetly inspired by the humor present in fallout 1 and 2, i mean sometimes it would miss the mark but the effort is still there none the less. I mean.. yeah We all love serious story telling but sometimes its nice to break the flow with some off color humor just so it actually does feel more grounded.. i mean when you think about it the world is a crazy and chaotic place and you have a crazy and chaotic setting like a post apocalyptic wasteland and dudes in power armor.. i'd absolutely say there is a huge amount of space for abstract comedy to emerge and not break you out of the immersion. Crazy chaos in all forms whether it be serious or not seems like its fitting for any wasteland. Also I hate when games take themselves too seriously...
i'm always thought the footprint is a reference to the tarrasque from DnD, as they used the imagery for the deathclaw...
Full disclosure: I'm relatively new to Fallout, having only started playing the series for myself around late last year. I've seen playthroughs of FO3 and NV, but it was a while ago. So I'm speaking with limited knowledge.
In my playthrough of FO1, maybe my RNG was bad, but out of the multiple hours of travelling map square-by-square that I put in, I personally came across only *one* 'wacky' incident, of a cow saying something like "moo, moo, I say". The rest of the game was tense, atmospheric and grim; a world wherein I felt like any speech-check failure or backchat could result in an instant shootout.
To put it as clearly as I can, mostly all of the 'wacky' humour in FO1 feels like intentionally 4th-wall breaking humour that the player knows couldn't possibly exist in-world; the kind explainable by dehydration, starvation, radiation poisoning or heatstroke causing hallucinations or mirages. It's random and scarce, and the only 'canonical' humour is in the dark humour provided in the commentary of the inhabitants. It was the type of 'survivalist' or 'make-do' humour, typically found in world war diaries.
If I were to sum up what Fallout was, I'd say that it's a post-nuclear world, whereby only a couple of generations ago, the whole of civilisation as we know it was completely turned to ash. Whereby you as the vault dweller have to make sense out of being thrown, blindly, into a degenerated and fragmented society. Trialling through a wasteland that has been reduced to a survivalist, tribalist and paranoid mindset, amidst a desperate struggle between emerging and ever-conflicting philosophies. All of it being set in a war-torn, baron, desolate and resourceless world of mutation and radiation, riddled with moral ambiguity, death & disease.
Between the growing 1950s aesthetic (FO1 felt only inspired by, not closely reflective of the 1950s aesthetic), saturated colours, and more frequent and zany in-world humour that tries to make the audience outright laugh, I just haven't felt the prior paragraph being upheld so well in post-NV Fallouts. And this feels especially apparent in the Amazon series. Again, I'm only a noob to the series really, but this is the impression I get when contrasting the original game to the Fallout of which we have today.