» Sun Dec 06, 2015 2:21 am *This post might contain potential spoilers as far as a deep theoretical debate goes.*
This is not a hate mail, so I ask you, please don't judge the book by the cover.
Dear Todd,
I wish to inform you that I have figured it all out.
I know what Fallout 4 is.
I know why it is like that.
I felt it too, gone through the process and in the end I felt it was satisfying.
And I deeply regret that you have decided to let this happen ignoring the fact that it could of been fixed by writing a few more lines of script, voiceovers and such. But no, you took the easy way out.
It is palpable that Fallout 4 became a social experiment hidden in the disguise of a modern literary experiment that touches the player so effectively that everything else gets pushed behind the red curtain.
Do you want me to list you the evidence? Here we go:
1. The opening live action trailer, my my, family values!
2. Such a Father/Mother, what can go wrong?
3. Abduction
4. Killing of partner
5. "Boom shoot the robot in the face!" (Oh I got you here Todd, you said (almost this) by your self!)
6. Oh really, that many synth when you shoot Father? (I will come back to this.)
7. Whoops, Li not talks to you after all that!
8. Oh my let's blow up the Institute, why on Earth we would need that thing?!
9. Metonymies, hah, take that Nuclear Option. Aaand let's not talk about that massive hole there after it. (quoting: "the most extreme option of all")
10. Do you really want to leave him there? How can you do this? (Some really did leave it there! Such heart less bastards.)
11. Really, three same endings and only that one is the only different? Death, destruction?
(I might have missed out a couple, but this was enough to form a solid fact regarding the game.)
Dear Todd,
You lied, to all of us.
You created such a work that I had to decypher its inner literary hermeneutics to figure out the hard facts what you and countless others thought would be a good idea to do to people, just to create the perfect experiment in order to achieve something sinister (maybe money related, conclusion so far) that is way beyond my logical thinking. You went as far as hiding this all in the disguise of 'freedom of choice' when there was absolutely non. As a developer, author, game designer, core designer my self I feel deep regret over it and in some weird way feel violate by the fact that this game was all just a form of stupid experiment to see how much you can toy around with human emotions. And for those who didn't get your message all you did is bombard them with hidden meanings, words, metaphors and metonymies, rubbing it all in their face without them even noticing it.
This psychological drama is a brand new take on the genre, I understand we all do experiments but I think you might have crossed a few lines, even though I must acknowledge your originality and skill of achieving such a success with this kind of experiment, it's one of a kind and outstanding work that raises some ethical questions towards who ever thought it would be a good idea. Don't get me wrong, I love the game but I really dislike what you really did in the background as concerning the game's actual literature that you built it upon. Oh, thank mars we got literary theory.
After examining the facts and evidence that was presented in the form of complex hidden meanings, I arrived to the conclusion that all along, you manipulated the player just to let them know that you have already decided what will be or should be the ending of the game. You decided it already by your self and took that option away from the player. No, don't come here with the argument that you got multiple endings, this form of genre you experimented with doesn't work that way.
Such clever way of stimuli that will bring out the best from those players whom are not affected by bias and can think clearly relating back to their own positive moralistic views. I can imagine that this effect will work the most on those whom have a functioning family or at least in some sort, have a positive attitude towards life, have a child in real life or lost one of his parent. Well yeah, these are the criteria that has to be met, else those that will inhibit the effect are, either they intentionally want to be evil, have a dysfunctional family in real life, never played previous titles before, played previous Interplay created Fallout titles, have clear lean towards propaganda and gossiping of negative communication, biased towards The Brotherhood of Steel, or has a massive post-humanistic view on humanity or just simply hates slavery. (In most cases, about 80% these will clearly apply.)
Those whom can not abandon their loved ones due to moral reasons, is possibly the best lab rat for you guys.
The game from the start steers the player onto the good path, it is obvious why you removed the Karma system, it was pointless by this very fact.
You (at least tried to) played onto human emotions just to influence the player's decision making ability and influence his moral choice by the plot twist in the Institute.
You raised the moral question a father or mother might as in real life if it would ever come to a such situation in real life.
You immediately provoked a emotional response by killing the partner and abducting the child, such cold blooded.
You lied about freely being able to kill NPCs, prime example is when you shoot Father (before he can disable the replica Shaun), you wanted to punish the player so much you outright refused to develop a pathway for this type of ending. And the fact that you play the omniscient narrator and kill the player by that point? I saw videos, only the best of the best can survive, and what they are left off with? Disappointment made by your decisions. (Which is of course a shame, because you could of again rub it into the player's face the fact that he killed the actual child and he is left now with a synth replica, I would of called that a nice twist!)
Dr. Li will refuse to talk to you after you destroy the Institution, she was never a bad person, obviously a metaphoric reference to bad choice.
Absolutely zero possibility or even a hint to capturing the Institute, it boggles my mind why, there is absolutely no reason why not to capture it, you obviously did this for a reason.
You even punish the player for choosing these paths, I saw the endings, all three are the same, except one, the Institute, the manner, the referencing, this massive meaning behind it make the facts even more obvious. Emotions are very easily created by this strong stimuli of loss, while the other endings reference death, destruction and regret. You just can't stop rubbing it into the player's face what they have done.
The Nuclear Option, really? You just couldn't find a better play of words and meanings, you could of out right call it "THE WRONG CHOICE" or let me put it more understandable, "THIS AIN'T THAT ENDING YOU WERE SUPPOSED TO GO FOR".
And what not, hell. Let's give the player the ULTIMATE MORAL CHOICE OF THE YEAR that will officially seal the player's moral attitude towards the game, let him decide over whether or not he will at least let something that was 'once' 'loved' by him, go with him or die. Really, who would do that to his own son? (even if it is not real in theory..............right?)
You made the Institute the intended canon ending, I have anolyzed it, deciphered the meanings and cracked that 'The Da Vinci Code' of yours.
Well, this was one hell of a fun way to put hermeneutics to a good use, I enjoyed anolyzing it even though I wasn't satisfied with the conclusion and the hidden motives of the creator, but don't worry I will still love you guys for being über cool guys who make really fun games! I could keep going on and create a cool Thesis about why you did what you did, but yeah maybe at some point later on I will actually, but that's it.
If I have to look at the game from the perspective of a good player, I am very satisfied with the game.
If I have to look at it and make a judgement as a university student who going at literature and connection of it to computer games, then yeah the hermeneutical reasoning was a amazing part that I still uphold in my text.
My inner sociologist loves it.
But, if I have to go look at the game from a developer stand point, I am deeply disappointed.
Fallout 4 in these terms is just a lie, that is truly meant as a simple, linear open world game, where you are given the illusion that you actually control the environment while you all tried to influence the player and see how many will get to that ending you really meant for the game.
You wasted a massive potential, at multiple counts and you are guilty of that, not just you, but all of you whom worked on this great but confused piece of art.
Yours sincerely,
Soret
P.S.:
If I ever decide to go for a Thesis that is related to Cognitive Linguistics, I will include Fallout 4 into it.
