As was Mexico if I'm not mistaken

As a separate game yes, as a DLC no.

No. The whole Fallout mythos is tied to the idea of Americana gone horribly wrong. Going to another country hold no interest to me.

Umm, sorry if I'm being dumb but... Why does the fact that other nations didn't have fusion power and MIGHT (it's not written in stone there was no other kinds of vaults constructed around the world but lets presume there wasn't) not have had any vaults, stop the idea of a dlc outside of the us? I mean everyone in the wasteland aren't descendants from vault dwellers, so why wouldn't people in other countries have survived (or been ghoulified)? Even if noone had survived, even though I think it's unlikely, a dlc without towns and friendly npcs can be done in a sort of "expidition" dlc.

I was just meaning a game around it would be IMO kinda boring. No power armor, no laser rifles, it would basically be Metro 2034 by Bethesda.

Ah, I see your point. But it still doesn't make much sense for a DLC. The commonwealth still have those things for you when you come back, so I honestly wouldn't mind a DLC that introduced other "items" that isn't a result of US technology in the fallout universe. We got plenty of power armours, laser rifles and other advanced technology in the base game and I'm sure other DLC's will introduce even more of it. So it would certainly be nice with one DLC that gives us something else and something different. It still wouldn't change the fallout lore nor the technology and items we know of, simply add a few more. I think it would be fun, and basically wouldn't change anything of the fallout we already know (only those couple of hours of additional content would be different) and yet I'm sure there's way to spin the story and enviroment so we recognize the fallout style in it as well. I feel a bit repetitive, sorry about that

Personally though, I'm mostly interesting in getting some more knowledge about the rest of the world. It think it actually would make the Fallout lore in the US more immersive and interesting for me by knowing more of this alternate universe history as a whole. But perhaps that's just me.

Heh, that's certainly outside the borders

Personally I don't have much interest in that though.

Just giving this a slight bump to see if it can get 2 more votes and reach 100 votes and I'll be satisfied.

Overall I'm a bit suprised is was this even, was expecting alot more on the no side. Nice to know I'm not the only one who thinks this would be interesting

To be fair, the American continent was the United States by the time the bombs fell. The reason I'd like to clarify is because Mexico (invaded at least) and Canada were annexed by the United States. The Fallout IP setting is in post-apocalyptic America. Otherwise I would have voted no myself. It seems like a couple others throughout the thread felt the same way (not speaking for anyone but myself though of course).

https://youtu.be/OZxGATrB5jw?t=3m21s the Fallout 1 intro was similar.

Besides most of the stuff in Fallout was exclusive to America. They'd have to exclude basically everything from every previous Fallout like landscape and designs, mutated animals, super mutants, all factions, weapons, armor, clothing, etc.

Not certain how to get there? Aren't there vertidbirds and the like? Doesn't seem impossible to have them take us somewhere.

We've got Russian, Irish and possibly English immigrants in FO4. They must have come to Boston somehow.

Does it state anywhere in the lore that every single living thing was exterminated? (Honest question, not trying to be a troll) I ask because it doesn't seem out of the realm of possibility to start an expedition to escape the commonwealth and most of the current factions certainly have motivations to do so. At that point it could be simply explore, settle, expand, and survive. I mean if there are survivors elsewhere it's very possible that they would all be ghouls and mutants and other various deadly creatures. You recruit your team, go to wherever and have to pick and establish a settlement with nothing. That itself could be interesting. Add in the possibility of expanding on the lore in ways that we haven't seen yet and it seems like a great idea to me. Just my two cents though.

The Fallout 1 and Fallout 2 intros both explain that most of the world was reduced to cinders, going so far as to say "The earth was almost wiped clean of life; a great cleansing; an atomic spark by human hands quickly raged out of control. Spears of nuclear fire rained from the skies. Entire continents were swallowed in flames and fell beneath the boiling oceans. Humanity was almost extinguished..."

Vaults housed a thousand people and as far as I know were exclusive to America (I think Canada too, but not sure). People survived outside of vaults, but I think it's safe to assume the majority of the world didn't make it.

I think the immigrants after the war like Moriarty and Tennpenny were plot holes since their countries (country?) would most likely have been in the category of falling beneath boiling oceans.

Seriously someone explain this to me: Scotland, Ireland and England are all a part of the United Kingdom, right? So the United Kingdom is a singular country and not a kingdom of several countries? One thing I wasn't taught in history or high school.

Cuba!!!!!!!!

Mutant Parots!

Mutant Crocodiles!

Mutant Sharks!

Mutant Tarantula!

Deluded Communist Ghoul towns who think they can still win the war!

Amazing Drinks!

Completly different architecture and plantlife!

yes, in south america, a radiactive mutant forest or swamp, wouldn't that be awesome!?

JUST SAY NO TO MORE TROPICAL GAMES!

Need to stick with the theme guys.

Fallout is a game with an "alternate reality". Those saying they want China, um.. no. They're the "red menace". You want to play as the communist survivors? I think not. I'm also pretty sure the USA got bombed less than them. The US East coast got hit the hardest. That said, I'd rather see China than "exotic" locations.

For those wanting "exotic" locations... really? Like what? Tropics? As if we don't already have enough tropical locations. Jungle? Plenty of those games, almost every single military game has tropical jungle and/or desert landscapes. Want them, go play those games. There are a plethora to choose from.

And, speaking of desserts, NO! You want a Fallout game in the desert, go play New Vegas, it's been done.


#1 reason most people want a setting outside the USA is because they're xenophobic against them. It has nothing to do with them being tired of Fallout having been set in the USA, it has to do with them jumping on the Anti-American bandwagon. It gets old. Fallout is set in the USA... DEAL WITH IT!


Now on to ACCEPTABLE locations:

Canada: Yes
UK: Yes
France, Germany, or other parts of Europe: Yes
Russia: Sure!

All these locations fit the theme of the game. I am almost pissed off that people are saying "I want a change in scenery"... GO PLAY ANOTHER GAME!

Note, however, that this would be an entire game: Fallout 5. A DLC in a new location is probably not going to happen.

I'd be ok with it being in Canada or UK, anything but a Dead Island or a Dying Light type setting.

Tbh I much prefer it to remain in USA, so I vote no. Besides, Fallout 4 just came out... Why discuss the next title when you could be wandering in the beautiful game that is Fallout 4?

Your #1 reason up there, I would rephrase or delete. It is really not a cool thing, nor has it any merit.

This. I'd be down to visit Ronto in annexed Canada but that's about as far as I care to go. Postwar USA is the Fallout setting, and even if there wasn't an abundance of places still worth visiting in the states, I'd sooner revisit areas we've seen before like California and the Belt than leave the country.

Firepower is definitely not Canada's forte, so I'm not sure I'd want to see a DLC set in my country. I'd love to see a Fallout set in Asia. Perhaps Japan or China. The architecture, the history, the people, the culture, all of it would juxtapose so well with Boston.

I'd take that as just being poetic way of saying "nuclear explosions and radiation* happened, more than 90% humanity died."

*Radiation burns --> burning waves --> boiling oceans.

Cuba, huh. Definitely works with the 50s theme. Their revolution happened in the late 50s too so you could have ghoulified Batista and Castro -stand-ins and their factions fighting each other. Cuba would also fit FO4's colorful style.

You could also make the place relatively unscathed, because if they had significant Capitalist and Communist factions, both US and China might have had second thoughts about nuking them. EDIT: I mean, sure, some nukes, but, you know, not too excessively.

Ronto is reputed to be a significant military power. And remember that around the time of the time-line divergence Canada was a significant military power with the 5th largest navy in the world.

Key phrase in my #1 reason is "Alternate Reality" Ergo: Fiction

If you don't think it's a "cool thing" then you don't think the Fallout story is a "cool thing". What, is the Danish translation censored that much? It completely has merit in the story. Why don't you play some Fallout and find out what I'm saying is absolutly true. Maybe just 10 min or so until you talk to Codsworth for the first time. "They're probably hiding from the RED MENACE".... Heck, watch the opening video for Christ's sake. I'm obviously not talking about REAL WORLD China which has it's own political problems like everyone else and happens to have a wonderful historical culture with many wonderful humans living there. I love Chinese culture.

I'm talking about Fallout's China. The fictional 1950s era China the game's canon is based on. The one where China bombed us! You know, the story of the game we're playing?

The fact that you are so blatantly easy to offend offends me!

As long as it's well made and I have fun, I don't care where it's at.

I'll buy that, if provided with a statistical significant survey to back up the assertion, that people want a setting outside the USA, because they're xenophobic and not eg. that other people wan't either something different or something closer to home, but what do I know. I don't have a statistical significant survey to back up any claims purported to be "the truth".

Til then, I'll assume you're wrong about that and most everything else.