As a Belgian, I am quite interested to know the fate of my country and the rest of Europe duing the events of Fallout...

Has it been mentioned?

I'm talkign about how it looks like.. Is it a wasteland? Are there ghouls? Mutans? Raiders?

We. Don't. Know.


I think that the search button should do you good for this.

you find more about that topic in the Fallout Series forum.

but to give you an answer at least: I guess Belgium wouldn't look any better than today and it was reigned by mutaded potatoes that spit frying oil and shot french fries of there sort-of-noses :rofl:

sorry.. couldn't resist :hehe:

It'd be probably reduced to cinders, like the rest of the world.

The Netherlands (represent!) however would be reduced to cinders AND flooded.

Myeah, we've always been different

Fallout intro:



Fallout 2 intro:



Jesse Heinig, one of the FO1 designers:



The very first Fallout 1 timeline by Scott Campbell and Brian Freyermuth (from which all other Fallout timelines in existence are derived):



Emil Pagliarulo, FO3 lead designer:



Tim Cain, one of the main creators of Fallout:

The amount of 'what happened to *insert country here* topics is getting ridiculous. Nobody knows what happenedt t them, because guess what? We haven't seen them. Shock horror! Nobody knows, we're not going to know until they're featured in a game. Stop making these threads.

Lol, Ausir. Are you just replying to every one of these threads with that?

Don't know how it got in the wrong forums... Sorry about that :s

Anyway

I was bored and I made a little picture through the window out of my garage and played around a little with the Fallout engine

http://i640.photobucket.com/albums/uu123/Asator0101/fallouttest.jpg


I'm not that skillfull as you can see.. But too bad belgium is looking like that!

Yes. Just like I have a standard reply to all the "why does it look like 1950s if it's the future?" threads.

I don't believe the part of that Europe would be down the 'boiling' oceans, that is not even possible with just nukes. No i'd really like to see Europe in one of the next parts of Fallout. I think it will look not very different from the US, but it could deliver a whole new story with different factions and groups that take order like the Enclave and BoS in the US.

I would like to see northern Europe (Netherlands, Germany, Scandinavian countries or the mountain region of Austria and Italy). Also what i'd like to see is some underwater entrance to a vault (I bet interplay never thought of that). I mean what better place for a hideout then beneath the depts of the sea? They wouldn't bother coming out anyway (tunnel ladder to the surface just in case?).
Just my two cents.

Edit: And it would be a bit more immersion for the non-US players also. I mean I don't bother with the ideas of the Enclave because I don't feel anything I have in common with the US because I don't live there. So take Nathan with his patriotism, I think he's just a whiner, but I can understand that real-life Americans feel a strong compelling towards the patriotism-path.

pretty good...and yeah, shame about belgium but what the hell happened to Britain

wow just imagine what the houses of parliment looks like.

I think we need a stickied thread "The state of the world when the bombs dropped" that we can just refer to.

Good idea.

Are you a mind reader or something. I';ve been working on a fanfic (wich I'll post once completed) that follows along those lines.
You just screwed the plot of the first chapters....

prob looks alot like the US, nuked and with small settlements or city-states.

i have a hard time believing that every millimeter of Europe (and the World) was nuked during the war, smaller towns away from the major cities (nuke targets) could have survived.

and theres no Super Mutant threat in Europe, just the wild-life, so those settlements will have it alot "easier" to survive.

Although the lack of Supermutants in Europe, I doubt they have it easier to survive. The population density in Europe is pretty big, and outstretched farmland and "wilderness" is not known in the extent as it is in the US.

Besides that, we have no clue whatsoever how the wildlife has mutated. Also, don't forget the destruction that was there since the Resource Wars and the aftermath of that. Perhaps they weren't as badly nuked as the US, but Europe was probably already in a very bad shape when the Great War happened.

just my 2c

Hey, Bethedsa, any chance of us getting a Fallout: England game? Or at least put in London or Manchester as an expansion. Please.

Well, now that the Fallout franchise was brought back to life by a sudden electric shock called F3 and is much more than just a bit succesful...

I bet people at Bethesda already did a lot of brainstorming on what they want to do with Fallout in the future.

They registered the trademarks for Fallout 4 and 5 for a reason.

And with a bit imagination and logic assumptions you can easily find out what ideas they surely already put on the table.


One thing is clear to everyone who ever had to manage a franchise : You need to bring changes, new ideas , things that havent been there before or your franchise will die a slow death.


You cant just pick a new Vault and a new place in the USA, grab into the Enclave, Supermutants, FEV drawer for every new Fallout game. Van Buren was to be a first step into that direction but Fallout 3 couldn't do that as it had to please old fans and gain new ones at the same time with a franchise that was effectively dead for 10 years.

For that it was vital to create a clear connection to past games. Thats why there is the Enclave and the Supermutants in Fallout 3 in sharp contrast to the plans for Van Buren which was supposed not to involve any of these factions but to focus on totally new things.

The connection is now created and franchise reborn so its as good as certain that Fallout 4 will not feature the Enclave , nor Supermutant, nor the FEV or the Brotherhood. Its time for new ideas, new factions, new enemies yes a beginning of a whole new story arc. Black Isles sketches for a Fallout 4 after their Van Buren project already outlined the introduction of new powerful faction : Ceasar's Legion. Ceasar's legion was to have a first short appearace in Van Buren to prepare people to what would come later on.

Bethesda must now come up with something similar.

One logical options is : A prequel. Prequels are the order of the day. In games as in movies. Meaning that it would be a good idea to put a future Fallout game somewhere in the 80 years timespan between the great war and the beginning of Fallout 1.

Another option is : A radical change of location. Meaning not the USA anymore, not Vault-tec or the Bos or Enclave anymore.... but somewhere else on the planet with a character that has no connections to the already known factions.

A third option is : Still in the USA, but the character is not from a Vault (like in Fallout 2) and will not encounter the Bos and definitely not that Enclave anymore (Beating the Enclave in two games was enough dont you think ?) but having to fight a different yet unknown enemy that threatens the future of all mankind.

In reply to the original post, although no piece of canon (that I know of) concretely describes the fate of Europe after the Great War in 2077, I can imagine that Belgium would not have done so well. The headquarters of both NATO and the EU* are located in Belgium's capital, Brussels. Assuming that the Fallout universe has anything like NATO, then you can bet that Brussels was a central target for China'a nukes.

* In the Fallout universe, the EU was consolidated into a single super-state called the "European Commonwealth". However, the Commonwealth was disbanded in 2060 due to the economic collapse caused by the drying up of the oil fields of the Middle East. By the time of the Great War in 2077, Europe was presumably once again divided into numerous small states. http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/European_Commonwealth

They did introduce the Institute.

Right. Forgot about that.

So the Institute is propably the MIT (the famous Massachussetts Institute of Technology) and Fallout 4 may take us even further north.

Cambridge and maybe Boston too.


As for Europe. Somehow i doubt that NATO existed in the Fallout Universe. At least not anymore in 2063.

As NATO is a defence alliance assuring mutual defence in case of a war declaration against any member nation , the Chinese invasion of Alaska would had triggered a war declaration by all NATO members against China. We would have heard of european soldiers fighting in Alaska or opening a second front by attacking China on the Eurasian continent and in the Pacific.

There is no reference to that in any Fallout game or the Fallout Bible. And given that the UN was disbanded and the USA was not ready to export any of its oil it was in no interest for the equally oil thirsty European Commonwealth (or any of its member states) to help the USA. They propably prefered to stay neutral and out of the trouble, hoping to make a deal with whoever would win.

And they propably had enough problems on their own or some of them were already fighting against each other at that time.


There is a hint in the Fallout Bible that the european countries "sent their nukes on the way" once they recognized that the USA and China had pushed all buttons. Thats the only logical thing to do in that scenario.

It is not said who they fired at but its pretty certain that the Middle East and China were the main targets and they fired back in return.

Europe looks like the USA and China so much is clear, otherwise they would had showed up in the USA at some point during the last 200 years to get whatever is left of the oil and to the rule the world as the undisputed king of the hill.

Hmmm I think its a big stretch of the facts to presume that NATO didn't exist, for as far as I know Russia is/was still around. Who knows, in the Fallout3 time-line the Soviet system may never have collapsed, the cold war could have still happened and NATO may very well have existed in much the same form as it does today. As you say there are no references to it Just as there are no references to Europe in general.

Also a BIG assumption, I would say a false one, to assume that NATO would all band-together to fight China. If that logic were true, World War III would have started when Russia invaded Georgia - and it did not. Why? Because there was no power capable of stopping Russia with a country on its boarders.

Now take that to China, also with few/any land boarders with Europe, which is growing and growing and by all recollection by 2066 would become as much a dominant world power as they are right now. If things continue as they are and China continues to grow in power, then by 2066 it is Very probable that their military will be comparable to that of the United States. And also equally probably is that Europe will continue to be a 2nd or 3rd-rate military power when compared to countries like the US, Russia and the emerging China. By 2066, the 3 big dogs on the block may have been the only ones capable of mounting any kind of war strategy.

Now understanding that the Europeans won't like being called a 2nd-rate or 3rd-rate military power, but in terms of what would happen in WWIII, I think only England could make a significant contribution of any factor - especially if it's Russia that attacked Europe. And in all this, I have not seen the fate of Russia mentioned anywhere. We have to assume at least that Russia would not sit-out a huge war like this, and we know that nearly all countries were destroyed - so my question is, which side did Russia fall into? And was it Russia that would have destroyed Europe if a major war between China and the US broke out? (Think about it, the USA could not defend Europe at any level if all-out with China broke out - effectively leaving Europe alone and vulnerabile).

All food for thought and I could be as wrong as anyone, this is all speculation. Perhaps NATO was wiped out early-on by Russia like Japan was by China, and as such played no significant role in the war. No one in the USA would know about it or care really, as all communications between countries would have ended the day of the war and news would not travel quickly (if at all) between continents. The fate of Europe and Russia is delegated to the Unknown in the Fallout3 universe, and I for one would love to see a DLC or two devoted to missions over-seas from the US.

M

In our world every country is a 2nd or 3rd rate military power compared to the united states.

This is because while leveling similar rates of taxation and having similar GDP-per-capitas* the US government spends it's revenue on the military, prisons and corporate 'pork' whereas other developed nations spend it on the general welfare (health etc).


Whether this would be true of the more 'conservative' fallout world is a matter for debate. It could be that Europe is more ideological and militarised as per the american model.

*and yes they are if you compare the real statistics and not purchasing power parity which is metric designed for developing countries. You can't buy more military hardware or drugs/healthcare with ppp... it's a statistic meant to show why the poorest countries in the world aren't as poor as you might think, not flatter the economy of a developed nation like the us.

I wonder how will Bulgaria look like... It's not in a hot spot and after WWII we were friends with Russia so I look forward to see my country in Fallout universe ^_^

You obviously misunderstood what NATO actually is. It is a defence alliance formed in 1949 to deter the expansionist Soviet Union and if the deterence should not had worked, to have posed a big enough military power to effectively fight the Soviet Union's military forces in Europe.

It is a defence alliance. The contracts say that a non accidental military attack or a war declaration on any of the member countries is considered a attack on all member countries. Its as simple as that. Thats the main point of the deterence.

Thats a binding contract. There is no "Oh we changed our mind" option in those contracts otherwise it would be worthless.

Meaning you declare war on for instance Poland , you declare war on 27 other NATO nations at the very same moment and they declare war on you within 24 hours. War between member states is fully out of the question and forbidden. There is even a paragraph in the contracts that clearly says that.

Georgia ? Thats a totally illogical example as Georgia is not a NATO member therefore there was no obligation to come to Georgia's help for anyone.

Its a partner of NATO's Partnership for Peace program which is a sole diplomatic construct for coordinating diplomatic approaches and nothing more beyond that. A thing Georgia ignored when it tried to bring South Ossetia back under its authority by using military force.

In case of war this PFP means absolutely nothing except that diplomats of NATO countries will be involved in negotiations like a cease fire. There is no half-membership or anything like that.

Things would had been different if for instance NATO soldiers would had been killed in russian attacks on Georgian soil.

Of course here things would be difficult as you would need definite proof that this attack was intentional and not a accident. As good as impossible except Russia would say "Yes we knew it were american soldiers and it was our intention to kill them". That would be the point when world war three would start.

So in a Fallout universe with NATO in existence, the invasion of Alaska would had triggered a war declaration of entire NATO on China. This is THE role example of the case of common defence in the NATO contracts. There is no room for flexibility under these clear as can be acircumstances that a member is under attack by another country.

Nonetheless there is not the slightest reference to that this happened nor do we have any hint of european soldiers fighting in Alaska.

For as long as the opposite isnt stated in a Fallout game these are the best indications that NATO did not exist anymore at that time , maybe never existed at all or the USA was not a member anymore


The only other defence alliance of this kind is the WEU "West European Union" which is a seperate non-NATO related common defence contract between the UK, West-Germany ,France ,Italy,Belgium,Luxembourg and the Netherlands signed in 1954. The contract automatically adapted to the reunification of Germany and is still in effect today although its relevance has faded for obvious reasons.

Its pretty much identical to the NATO contracts involving a common defence by explicitely mentioned "all available military means" in case one of the members is being attacked. The background to this contract was also the threat posed by the Soviet Union.

LOL