Listen, we have the games, but that's about it as of now.
So what about starting up the Fallout Bible again?
You could expand on lore that can't really be explained/has not been explained in the games.
You can also correct contradictions in lore and explain what was the canon choice of certain things.
Like for example, Harold, since he's been rooted to the ground it'll be hard to know what happened to him.
With the Bible you could decide that he was burned/killed/sped up in production/slowed down in production.
It could be a way to flesh out factions, people, events, items, organizations that you otherwise cannot do.
It would help in setting ground lore for the Fallout universe so that we don't run around with a bunch of "what if's".
Like Junktown, what happened there exactly?
Does it still exist?
Did it get overrun?
Did Gizmo or Killian take over the town?
How did they rule the town?
How is it like now (2277/2281) ?

I think that it should be started again so that you as developers can set official lore for the Fallout world and for us as fans to have lore carved in stone to discuss. (It's hard to discuss things if we don't know what "actually" happened and if what we discuss aren't fleshed out enough.)

In general Bethesda tries to avoid choosing an official path for their games, even going so far as to use metaphysical twisting to allow all of the possible endings of Daggerfall to occur. If they don't need to force one path to be canonical they'll leave it ambiguous and while this may leave a lot of 'what if' topics those are still things that can be discussed.

I think they are especially unlikely to make decisions like this for past Fallout games since they weren't involved with them.

Maybe if we pester Chris Avellone enough he might start it up again.

Killian took over Junktown just so you know.

I think several NPC's in FO2 said that.

EDIT: Everyone grab a stick and hit Chris Avellone til' he starts it up again.

A Fallout Bible for New Vegas would be great but in the end it would be up to Beth would it not?

Would Bethesda let Chris Avellone work on it?

If so I think it'd be great. In particular I'd like to know what exactly is happening out in California between the BOS and the NCR. Causes of the war and all that and if it's even still happening by the time of New Vegas (and if not what happened to the remnants of the BOS outside the Mojave?). What info we got about in New Vegas was pretty vague.

Well then they need to get it into their [censored] heads that this isn't Elder Scrolls and that they have to give it official lore. (Not angry at you, angry at Bethesda if they do this crap... (Yes I do realize it's a bit premature.))
Kick them out and hire me, I'll officialize the lore damn good. :shifty:

:foodndrink:

They should, at least, seeing that Chris have that kind of history with the Fallout Universe, though he might be busy with other project.

Similar state in the Elder Scroll, Bethesda have a fellow member that goes by MK (Michael Kirkbride) filling in the "holes" with the lore and storyline, since his background is base on the fact that he contribute a handful of lore the Elder Scroll have to offer in the past.

I think that a joint effort by both Obsidian and Bethesda on a new Fallout Bible would be wonderful. They don't even need to answer questions they purposely didn't give an answer to in the game for role playing reasons. For example, I once asked Gstaff a long while ago if he could ask the guys at Bethesda to confirm exactly where a handful of locations they introduced in lore really are. They couldn't give me an answer, so I don't know if they just don't know, or they don't want to reveal the answers, but if the former is a case, working on a new Fallout Bible would be a good motivation to decide on concrete locations.

The fact that the exact locations of Ronto and Great Lanta are uncertain keeps me up at night. :brokencomputer:

(Well not really but I'd still enjoy knowing where they actually are)

Just like how aliens were never actually canon until Bethesda made them so? I'd love to see the return of the Fallout Bible.




Seriously, keep Bethesda the hell away from the lore.

I agree, a Fallout Bible would be a great idea, but not in the hands of Beth. It needs people capable of deciding what is canon and what isn't, what fits into lore and what doesn't. In short, the people in charge of Fallout Lore should be

The Fallout Inquisition
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbcyiFt5VEs

Plus, that which never happened and as such we don't mention can be written out of history

I like the Idea. Where would this "Bible" be maintained?

The problem is, once its written down it becomes "locked" so if a later game would work better with something that hasn't been throught up yet we face "fan Wars" over the "true canon".

Better to leave any Bible to a behind the scenes look.

The Bible is final, any future game's contradiction is corrected in the bible or excluded as non-canon.

Don't we already have that?

I preffer that Bethesda dont touch the Bible

Only Avellone have that privilege

"Where did they touch you!?!"

"D-down in my c-canon.."

"Damn th- It's okay! W-we'll talk about it when y-you feel like it.. it's okay... it's okay..."

I'd like to see more setting back story developed in something resembling the Fallout Bible, but I don't want to see stuff like who gained control of Junktown given a set in stone answer. Fallout is an RPG series with emphasis on player freedom, and as such the writers should avoid giving a definitive resolution to past installment content whenever possible.

I swear to god I did not know! <.<

I agree that if the Fallout Bible were to start again, it probably ought to be done by Chris Avellone or someone from the earlier Fallouts like him. Bethesda isn't horrible with this sort of thing, but they clearly don't understand as much of the older cannon as people like Avellone do, based on some mistakes in their lore of Fallout 3. And plus, I liked reading his Fallout Bible. Not sure if some others could do that.

But Bethesda would, naturally, have to agree with that. And I'm not sure if they would.

The problem with leaving choices open is that we have no idea what is part of the official storyline.
We can only speculate about the choices and what "could" have happened with them.
But speculation =/= canon.

While it's up to player choices I see it like this, that in the game, we can make choices, and while we play we can see a bunch of "what if's" but the official story and canon needs to have something set in stone.
If not then we can only speculate, but speculation is pointless, I could say that there are dragons in Fallout, that is speculation, and there is nothing to prove me wrong.
A bit of an extreme example but it still ties in with choices made in games, if we don't know what happened then we have no structure to go by.
I understand some people feeling like "But... I did B6" when the storyline says that B2 happened.
It would make it seem like they weren't in charge, like what they did didn't matter.
And that's the point of it to me.
Our choices don't matter when it comes to building an official storyline, an official world, a fictional world with canonized lore that cannot be broken.
Without it it limits our arguments when looking up facts for discussions.
Not all quests need to be canonized as "X happened" in the bible.
Like, who took control of Junktown is an important quest, while something like "Did the Courier go gecko hunting with Sunny?" isn't very important and can be skipped.
Major events should be canonized, the others, don't, it's not very necessary for the actual game-world, unless the characters involved in the quest shows up in a sequel.

/opinion.

+1 :fallout:

You're correct that speculation isn't canon, but having one path set in stone doesn't exactly encourage discussion like speculation does because there's nothing to discuss at that point. If what happened in Junktown doesn't really matter in any future game then it's fairly pointless to canonize a certain path.



I understand where you're coming from, but I think that defeats one of the points of the series. As I said player freedom is an important element of Fallout, and I just find it silly to offer those choices in the first place if you're just going to end up canonizing a certain path anyway. I can understand canonizing some stuff like the Vault Dweller saving Shady Sands since Shady Sands becomes the NCR, but canonizing stuff that doesn't really matter in the long run is unnecessary (like who gained control of Junktown ), that's my two cents.

I'd be more interested in a new Fallout Bible that develops locations we've heard about or seen, but doesn't go into specifics about what a certain player character did there if it's been in a previous game (unless it's absolutely necessary), and introduces new locations around post apocalyptic America. More importantly though, I'd like to learn more about the greater world since chances of Fallout leaving the US are slim to none. I think it would be interesting to learn about what's going on over in Europe, Asia and Africa etc while Fallout 1/2/3/NV are taking place, and what's going on in the rest of the world between each installment. For example, I find it cool that while the Lone Wanderer is leaving Vault 101 and venturing across the wastes that the Caesar's Legion is taking Fortification Hill and engaging in the First Battle of Hoover Dam; I'd also be interested in knowing about other major happenings that are going on around the world at the same time, like a tentacle mutant invasion in Japan or something.

Well, opinions opinions.
But yeah even if the bible only focused on fleshing out stuff we've only heard or seen very little about it'd still be great to get it starting again.