My Fall Out, With Fallout.

This is a confession that has been a long gestating burden on my conscience for a while now, but I feel empowered enough to finally admit that I don’t really like Fallout. Now when I say Fallout, I’m referring to Fallout 3, 4 and New Vegas. Controversial, I’m sure. It’s worth noting however that this is not an opinion intended to be sensationalised or contrarian, but a simple surmise gathered through active participation with the post apocalyptic triplicate. I have dedicated significant time to each of these iterations, permitting the games a latitude to express their own individuality. Yet despite repeated attempts, this series always fails to intrigue. There are things I admire, concepts that entice. The retro 1950’s inspired aesthetic is neat. V.A.T.S is a visually gratuitous way of dispatching enemies, which I always appreciate. But it really isn’t enough.

Some of this enmity can often be attributed to inflated expectations, or being in the wrong frame of mind when playing them. Sometimes its completely irrational. And oftentimes a perspective is rational and totally justified. Like hating broccoli or James Corden. But where I could compose a 10,000 word dissertation endorsing the eradication of mushrooms. An endeavour that I believe would have been a far more legitimate vindication for the invasion and subsequent occupation of Iraq that a search for fictitious weapons of mass distraction. But when it comes to Fallout, my antipathy is much simpler and succinct, in that it’s just very boring.

Being set in a post apocalyptic wasteland, bereft of sustainable living conditions, for human and or verdant growth. Ravaged by centuries of polluted air and irradiated water, you’re not expecting any of these games to emphasis vibrant, joyous aesthetics. Other than gathering resources and fulfilling the trivial errands submitted by the desperate natives that litter the detritus of this world, there’s little reason to negotiate such a dull and barren environment. Ultimately the story is the only incentive, artificially designed to encourage exploration. With the congruent theme across all 3 games involving the search for some absent individual. Searching for an assassin. Your father. Your son. You then resolve these “unique” narrative arcs, with a series of asinine contrivances that somehow leads to the individuals. And all while you’re forced into combat situations with some of the most perfunctory shooting.

The real issue here is me really. It’s just a series that simply doesn’t exhilarate me as anything other than a passing curiosity. Something I’d see in a sale and think “maybe I’ll like it this time”. There’s a lore built into its foundation that is more fascinating than the games themselves. Like the ostensibly constructed vaults, designed to shelter thousands of potential families against an impending nuclear holocaust, that were actually testing facilities. With the unfortunate denizens subjected to bizarre social experiments, where environmental conditions and other clandestine parameters were altered for the purpose of studying human behaviour. Now that’s something I’d like to “read” more about.

Though having broached this subject with a colleague of mine – someone that possess a “Rain Man” knowledge of the series – I was surprised to find that he, at least partially, agrees with this sentiment, lamenting the day’s before Bethesda acquired the rights to the series. So perhaps my prejudicial aversion to Bethesda’s lauded editions isn’t as controversial as I thought.

---

Are you a fan of Fallout? Let me know in the comments below. Cheers.

The Fallout From Bethesda Being Sold.

I’ve often opined about the stubborn, often prejudicial bias of fanboys. A conceited bracket in the gaming firmament, committed to deliberate ignorance, so entrenched in their own fanatical agenda that it prevents them from acknowledging the promising features of the other. Actively engaging in disinformation in an attempt to deflect criticism away from their own consoles failings, rooted in the arcane perception that you must be stringently aligned with one, and vehemently opposed to the other. As if gaming was some kind of political affiliation. Certainly neither Sony nor Microsoft have ever tried to moderate this social discourse, but rather passively nurtured the burgeoning rivalry. Often the snide, factually questionable conversations that derive from such singularly modest opinions, boils over into spiteful shit slinging. It’s a sad, very vocal minority that spoils such a joyous activity. Being the consummate sitter of fences that I am, it is especially difficult to engage in these kinds of indignant discussions without feeling rather grubby. Though I’m not at all opposed to criticising something I deem immoral.

Take for instance Sony’s decision to remaster the 2 year old Spiderman game. Though an exceptional game, it has no business being remastered in such an untimely fashion. There’s nothing particularly unethical about remastering a celebrated title, with Demons Souls being an acceptable example. But to drastically alter one that’s barely out of nappies yet is not only ludicrous, but ostensibly greedy. Employing such rapacious business strategies only further incites the mobs that remain dedicated to the verbal vilification of their adopted rivals. In much the same way that Microsoft’s sudden acquisition of Bethesda has incited the considerable resentment of its peers.

Microsoft’s $7.5 billion acquisition of Bethesda is huge, generating significant enthusiasm around a console that was beginning to be undermined by the PS5. This was a bold statement of intent, deliberately orchestrated to cause maximum humiliation to a company that was buoyant by its own proliferating arrogance. A declaration that has significant repercussions for the industry as a whole, and not necessarily for the best. Let’s not pretend that this is Microsoft hurling a stone from its sling, directly between the eyes of Goliath. With an annual net income of over $40 billion and valued in excess of $1 trillion, realistically Microsoft IS the Goliath in this analogy! And on the surface purchasing such an illustrious software developer like Bethesda makes perfect sense considering the advantage of exclusivity over popular IP’s curated by them, but there is a few notable caveats.

Firstly, $7.5 billion is a somewhat inflated estimate for a company notorious for releasing unfinished content. No doubt the merger will provide a mutual benefit for both parties long term, but there is still a risk in acquiring a company as recognised for the fallout of its games as well the Fallout games. But also, considering the rather expansive nature of Bethesda games, to retain total exclusivity over previously cross platform games like the Elder Scrolls series really isn’t viable. It’s like making the ultimate “Big Dick” move, but not purchasing enough viagra to maintain the erection! I’m not naive enough to consider this to be a consumer friendly gesture, but more an attempt to monopolise the industry and ultimately consolidate power. Ultimately this decision is more about propegating game pass than anything else, which I expect it will succeed in. But this kind of corporate hubris is concerning.

If you eradicate your competition, strip the carcass of its tender flesh, assimilate those profitable assets for your own benefits, then how is anyone expected to stand a chance.

What do you guys think about the way these next gen consoles are shaping up? Let me know in the comments below. Cheers.

Everyone Disliked That Bethesda!

The world has witnessed and endured some truly mind boggling shit in it’s long and illustrious existence: Dozens of extinction events. Global, environmental degradation. Agricultural plights. Famines. Pestilence. War. Coldplay. Michael Bay movies. A Donald Trump presidency. Liquorice. Automated soap dispensers. Country and/or Western and a Lance Armstrong autobiography that attributes his success to “hard work”. Yet, through sheer perseverance to be publicly revered as the world’s most incompetent game developer, Bethesda, despite a myriad of equally inept competitors, have out done them all. Surmounting the most staggering ascent to the peak of mount “Everyone Disliked That”. Out of all of the confounding decisions made by Bethesda over the years, the decision to implement private servers, as well as other exclusive incentives in a game that by its very nature propegates a social, interactive experience, is probably the most baffling. And quite possibly the most brazen act of sabotage ever committed by a video game developer.

“Fallout 1st” is a premium subscription service that uniquely affords Fallout 76 users access to private servers, as well as other exclusive content for a modest £12 monthly excess. That’s an annual £144 surplus for an open world game, requiring permanent online connection to play, but now with the added support of being a traditional single player Fallout game. You know, the ones that didn’t need to be constantly anchored to a WiFi router! This contradictory philosophy would be alarmingly neglectful if it wasn’t so hopelessly redundant. Seriously, this might be the most absurd, insulting and egregious waste of everybody’s time. You’d think that the extensive issues Fallout 76 has suffered since launch would have prompted some contrition from Bethesda, perhaps even a little humility. The shoddily assembled Nuka Rum bottles. The systemic exploitation of the Atomic store. The pre-order gift canvas bags constructed from cheap nylon, as well as their patented brand of interminable glitches were already inexcusable. Yet the “Fallout” from 76 has become just another symptom of a greater malignancy: greed.

The pervasive consistency of Bethesda’s “ignorance” to glitches and aggressive monetization is far too coordinated to be an oversight. These kind of decisions would be reviewed extensively, with the expressed intention of achieving maximum benefit from nominal effort. Any persistent or lingering issues can be rectified in post when you’ve already recouped the revenue necessary to compensate for it. Which is a cunning expedient in the short term, but an artifice that becomes substantial more volitile once the loyalty of your consumers has been severely compromised. And perhaps the goodwill generated by Bethesda’s earlier successes has inevitably been eroded by the perfunctory efforts of a developer that has taken its fans for granted for far too long. Perhaps we simply underestimated their greed, or merely overestimated our own integrity in ignoring the problems. But if one disgruntled fan’s acquisition of the “Fallout first” domain name, for the purpose of humiliating Bethesda’s interminable idiocy is any indication, then perhaps Bethesda have finally gone too far.

The deceitful parlance and flagrant disregard for fan recognition has been sabotaged beyond refute. At this point their actions are irredeemable. They have routinely proven that they simply can not be trusted. And with the Elder Scrolls 6 in development, you have to wonder if this is their last chance to save themselves!

No One Can Mess Up Quite Like Bethesda.

Oh Bethesda, you ignorant fools. The perennial punchline of the gaming community. The drunken uncle at a family wedding trying to impersonate his wife by making misogynistic comments in a shrill, high-pitched voice that doesn’t reflect his spouses cadence. “Knock, knock. Who’s there? Bethesda”. Bethesda’s historic negligence has become mythologized. Ridiculed and dismissed, mocked for their flagrant disregard for conscientious quality control and spurious statements concerning their shoddy often misleading work. Bethesda have steadily become the industries most notorious charlatans, with Fallout 76 only solidifying their adverse notoriety.

I haven’t played the game, so most of my assumptions can be dismissed as purely scrupulous conjecture, but it’s an opinion influenced by the numerable and very vocal majority. And I’m inclined to believe those that have no doubt enjoyed Bethesda previous content as well as endured their less than stellar frame rates, glitches and bugs. With hundreds of think pieces already inspiring some rather creative fury against the much maligned developer, it’s hard to imagine how they could have bungled the development of Fallout 76 any worse than they have, short of physically abusing cancer patients with uranium syringes. You’d think a community so openly aghast by their persistent negligence would have realised that Bethesda really don’t care about the quality of their products.

I had intended to debate the various issues and calamitous procedures adopted by Bethesda. To analyse objectively if their dubious conduct is in any way salvageable or perhaps even something that can be vindicated. But the almost daily revelations associated with Fallout 76, and by association Bethesda are so extensive it may take a literal nuclear winter to properly assess the situation with any redeeming clarity. And frankly who has time to deliberate the intricacies of Bethesda’s duplicity when so many respected and creative exponents have already scrutinised Fallout 76’s inept release. For me the most concerning factor is how Bethesda’s indolent development processes will affect The Elder Scrolls 6.

I can tolerate bugs, mild irritations that have a negligible impact on the players immersion. But to endure potentially a decades worth of waiting for a Skyrim successor that replicates the same insufferable apathy that has ravaged Fallout 76 terrifies me. We can only hope that Fallout 76 can be redeemed and that valuable lessons can be gauged from this experience. So help me Bethesda if you mess that up!

Are Fans Right To Be Anxious About Fallout 76?

People don’t like change. Having something they cherish distorted and altered beyond recognition is such a difficult thing to accept. Your immediate instinct is to rebel against it. To dismiss the alteration as misguided and better to be ignored until the decision can be rectified and subsequently retracted. This seems to be a position currently espoused by some members of the Fallout community in response to “Fallout 76”. Evidently fans are divided about this multiplayer variation of the series traditionally developed as a single player experience, with some almost vitriolic of the accursed integration of other human people inhabiting the same decrepit land as themselves. I find all of this controversy fascinating. I can’t confess to being a devout admirer of the franchise, nor a detractor of it either. My butt cheeks are comfortably, if precariously situated on a rather stable fence of neutrality between this two conflicting paradigms. I believe this impartial position affords me an objective perspective on the entire situation, and why Fallout’s support for expanding player interaction may not be such an unsavoury addition.

I guess the primary catalyst for many fans vehement umbrage is the interaction with real players infiltrating their experience with potentially hostile incentives. Traditional commerce with people and environments were artificial, with many instances scripted to enhance “your” experience. Fallout 76 removes those premeditated stabilisers by introducing a threat you can’t predict: idiots. Dangerous, free thinking idiots with personal agendas. Impediments that won’t hesitate to shoot you on sight simply because they believe that fedora your currently wearing would look so much better on them. Because Fallout imbues the player with purpose, creating a narrative that emphasises your significance in this world. But when there are thousands of players similarly empowered suddenly you aren’t as important. And as such you are more vulnerable, susceptible to the whims of a more organised party that will flaunt their superior ballistics regardless of your passivity. That can be intimidating for people who like to feel important, as they have done in previous entries.

You read phrases from disgruntled detractors like “This isn’t my Fallout”, “who asked for this?!” and other pernicious statements and wonder if fans are just being arbitrarily dismissive of a game they haven’t even played yet? Or perhaps their anxiety concerning the intimate single player game-play could become compromised if Fallout 76 is a success? It’s a legitimate concern. Really there are too many variables to definitively support either theory, but I believe Fallout 76 validates its existence by being an aberration rather than an extension of the franchise, much like the Elder Scrolls Online. Personally when the ESO was announced I was similarly sceptical about the series perusing a more communal area for players to explore, especially when it was announced that players required a mandatory monthly subscription to participate, a service quickly revoked before hitting consoles. Visitation to Tamriel felt less appealing to me if I had to share it with similarly endowed users. But having played it periodically over the years, you begin to realise that the MMO style is not a continuation of the series, and certainly not indicative of the franchise itself.

If Fallout 76 expansion into multiplayer doesn’t appeal to you than by all means don’t play it. There’s certainly nothing wrong with preferential affinity for Fallout’s established single player content. With only cursory research about Fallout 76 and no direct interaction with the game I can’t comfortably assuage your fears that it won’t lead to more preferable sequels that include multiplayer, the kind of sustainable income afforded by micro-transactions is highly lucrative after all. But again using Fallout’s mythological sibling as a barometer, the Elder Scrolls single player experience will continue to thrive along side its MMO partner. Of course be vigilant, but also amiable of a new way to play a revered and respected series. This generation has proved just how relevant single player games are to the community, and its unlikely that Bethesda, a studio that has embraced personable experiences, would have forgotten that.

---

Are you looking forward to Fallout 76? Let me know in the comments below. Cheers.