Horses svck in skyrim, but they're totally necessary in a medieval fantasy game, I'm happy with them not being in fallout, it's feasible that they could have been wiped out, and I don't think having them would add anything to gameplay. Possibly even take away from it, "wandering the wastes" is kind of the whole point, and going into buildings and subway systems etc.

I'd sooner pack mules or donkeys be introduced for carrying large numbers of items.

It's actually about 3 square miles 20% percent smaller and gta 3 is tiny in contrast.

Do they make sense? in terms of lore probably, as for game world/mechanics it can obviously be done as there is horses in TES games.

My main qualm is do they really fit in with fallout?

That is being able to drive about running over people and what not?

For me they don't as someone said they should be left for borderlands and rage to do.

They are actually pretty fragile because they are a prey species, so they are very sensitive, and are hypersensitive to diseases and such.

They're also really big, would make a good food source to people who are trying to not starve. And even in our universe wild horse are dying off due to human thingys. I imagine that that the fallout universe would be similar or worse up by 2077. And domestic horse aren't going to just go out and be wild grazers.

Then how did they survive thousands of years and managed to evolve successfully? Horses are a successful evolutionary design, which means they have the capacity to adapt and survive.


Why not? Domestication isn't total conditioning. A hungry, scared non-human animal is capable of great feats. You're basically reducing horses to total morons who go "gee, humans don't give food, let's die lulz."

Still look at how much of the map is occupied by the city and how much by the countryside (wasteland).


I wouldn't put too much weight on horses in TES. Vehicles are faster, bigger, and more problematic to implement than a horse.


They fit in as background elements (eg. NCR is using military trucks). But as a player vehicle? The only successful implementations are in games with world map travel.

They survived because they are fragile and sensitive. Animals don't have to be tough beasts to survive. They grouped into giant herds and can run faster than most things.

A horse, by itself would just be a target. A whole bunch of different species of horses aren't going to travel miles looking for other horses to gang up with and roam the wastes. They're going to wander around looking for food, then get killed by something whether it is mutated animal number 14, disease, or a human.

Out of curiosity, how much do you know about horses? I'm researching the subject now and everything I read is at odds with what you claim.

Um... do you have any idea how many feral (aka wild grazing) domestic horses there are in the world?

They're perfectly adept wild survivalists IRL, but I'm fine with them being extinct in the fallout universe, seems most things are except for .... ugh, molerats and giant geckos... seriously the illogical wildlife in fallout is possibly it's biggest flaw.

Yes, because every fictional universe bar Fallout explains in full complex detail how the ecology works.

They don't have to explain anything, it just would have been nice if someone on the dev team knew a tiny bit about wildlife before making the game and making extremely ignorant illogical decisions regarding which animals should have survived and had descendants/mutants.

We're looking at a world with SCIENCE!, not science. If mole rats survived and horses didn't, that's the way it is.

If a middle ground for transportation is added into FO4 the speed at witch the transportation moves vs the size of the

external map would be taken into consideration.

vehicles and or animals wouldn't move super fast I wouldn't think also it's unlikely thay would be abundant odds are

any added form of transportation would be made to make sense and would fit within the structure of the game world.

IMO.

Horses didn't have to survive the great war in order to exist in the FO world thay can be added in at any given time

same goes for any other animals pre existing the great war.

Its called DNA and cloning is consistent within the FO lore just ask Gary or Gary or Gary or Gary or Gary also we don't

yet know the contents of all the vaults therefore it's possible animals exist within one or more vaults in fact it would

make perfect sense to preserve animals and there DNA as animals play a huge part in human survival.

1) show me the source

:

2) If it doesn't make logical sense then it is not valid (My theory is that they just were too lazy to implement them). No need to follow what he says if there really isn't any solid ground to what he says

:

3) Why would horses and mules disappear?

Vaults were created as social experiments, an ark of animals don't really fit in, and cloning? It was done in one vault, which has deteriorated and barely usable. Vaults should not be used as an excuse to shoehorn in anything, nor should cloning. I remember someone saying that someone should create wannamingo's again and when questioned why all he could respond with was basically "just because". No one in the right mindset would re-create wannamingo's if they knew what they were capable of and how unstable they are and for all we know no one will ever be able to either as the research data might be destroyed or the ingredients (FEV being one of them IIRC) going the way of the cats. Yet he insisted that they should be brought back through any means necessary.

The point is, just cause X could be used to bring in Y does not mean that it makes sense for X to be used in that way, nor that Y is necessary to be in the franchise/future games in the first place. And if X is to be abused just so that Y can be forced into Z then it's poor writing at best.

Cloning does not exist everywhere, for all we know it only exists in one single facility and that facility is literally dying.

And even if it does exist at more places where it is more functional why would someone decide to breed enough horses and waste a crapload of genetic material just to un-extinct horses?

And even if someone decided that for some reason horses had to be brought back how would he convince the rest of the research team to supply him with the materials needed and help him with the instruments to perfect the cloning process?

And why would a vault program that is designed to either be a control vault or a social experimentation vault house several hundred horses?

You can't use vaults as an excuse to just shove whatever you want to see in a Fallout game into one, they have to make sense. And cloning? FEV experimentation? Zombie plants? We've had enough ridiculous crap as it is with vaults, they're meant to be social experiments, not military facilities for biological/biochemical testing and experimentation or "horror dungeons". Vaults are already being toyed with too much, abusing them to bring back an animal that seems to be extinct would push it too far and we'd officially go from a few mishaps with the lore to clown-town bananza.

Your talking to general about horses.. I am sure there are variations within horse breeds making some more prone to being a wimp and others may be less fragile. Natural Selection would deal with the weaker breeds leaving perhaps stronger and more resistant horses in the game. But that is not including the effects of radiation. Radiation may effect the offspring like it has done with Brahmin for example. Perhaps the new age horse is basically resistant to radiation and if it needs to vomit it can secrete the waste via another way (would be interesting). Also, I am sure it isn't far fetched (atleast in the fallout universe) to have some doctor who has horse DNA to simply try to reinvent horses for the modern world. Could be a doctor who is hooked to a machine with some past of horses (whole past built around ranch life maybe?) and he wants to resurrect the species (if they are actually dead, which I don't think they are). Also, Earth consists of giant landmasses that are basically all connected (or places with horses connected to basically everywhere). Meaning if not every spec of the world looks like D.C., then horses could still be alive. Just so you know, the minor backstory I just gave is probably more than any bethesda character so perhaps bethesda isn't the best to explain there sudden re-arrival in Post-Apocalyptic North America.

1. http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Fallout_Bible_8

2. All true, and now that i think of it, I'm not even sure if Fallout Bible is considered canon.

3. Thing is, without hay or grass they don't have anything to eat, both of which would be near to impossible to get after the bombs dropped.

I'd like to see NPCs riding around in rat rods and rat bikes. I'd like to see some crazy looking Rat Fink like stuff. Like a model-t with monster tires and rocket engine. maybe even some Army trucks, jeeps and tanks too. I just don't want to see any cars that look like they were made after 1965 (unless there some super advanced BOS or Enclave Sci-Fi looking vehicles). I also don't want to see GTA Fallout if you know what I mean. You should only be able to get into a vehicle if it doesn't already have a driver.

Your argument is self based because of this your ignoring facts.

Fact cloning exists not only in the FO world but the real world as well.

Fact cloning compared to other forms of existing technology in the FO world such as cyborgs, synthetic androids, brain transplants,ect..is on the lower end of the difficulty spectrum obviously as in the real world the others don't yet exist.

Just because you don't like the idea of cloning it shouldn't exist?

Just because you don't like the idea that a vault could be experimenting on animals this shouldn't exist?

Im sorry but FO is a science fiction game with super mutants,synthetic android,plasma rifles,UFOs,cyborgs,monster ants,

laser pistols,ect..ect..ect..

But to clone a horse thats just crazy because all the above is so much more realistic.

So because Fallout has SCIENCE! it means that logic and consistency should be thrown out the window?

The clones in the vault shows that it was a failure, and that it was continued in a Vault of all places (just like FEV was) it means that it must have been something they had yet to perfect, this means that the technology to successful cloning has to be limited if not not exclusionary to that vault. It's about context, vaults are primarily social experiments and control vaults so for one to be remade into a biological experimentation vault means that whatever is studied down there is not perfected and it's so important that they'd contract Vault Tec to change their design plans for a vault solely for that experiment. Comparing it to the FEV experimentation in V87, with the only other locations being Mariposa and West-Tek, it means that cloning technology is limited to be put into such high priority. But even 'then' it was a failure as it shows with how bat[censored] crazy the Gary clones turned out to be. Hell the vault deteriorated and is rusting apart, any tech that could have been useful is badly damaged and whatever research data was left has withered away with the years.

I don't mind cloning, I don't. But what I do mind is when something is just thrown in there for the hell of it. And what I do mind is when lore is [censored] over just so we can have "cool things". Vaults are 'not' biological/biochemical experimentation vaults, that we even had 2 is pushing the limit, and that Obsidian thought it'd be a good idea to have plant zombies in another is closing the breaking point.

It's not about that "I" don't like it, it's about that the lore says that vaults are X, not Y and what you're suggesting is that we should throw lore out the window cause Y is more fun. I actually want the lore to be enforced and vaults have no business being anything but 'social' experiments. The other experiments? FEV testing? Slicing tech? Holograph soldiers? Insta-refinable resources? Those take place at military facilities such as Mariposa and Big Mountain. Because those are military facilities designed for whatever testing they are meant to perform. Vaults aren't. Unless I'm remembering it completely wrong the 87 Vault had to be refitted when the military contracted it.

Laser weapons, cyber technology and brain transplants are things that were developed and polished 'before' the war. Cloning didn't start it's research until very close to the war, if it didn't they wouldn't have needed to contract Vault Tec for another vault to use, so since this research was relatively new it means that they most probably did not have tons of cloning facilities set up as they hadn't even perfected it yet. It's the same reason for why FEV was only in 3 locations, it's original design took place in West-Tek then when they realized it's potential the military set up a facility specifically designed for FEV research at Mariposa and even then for good measure they wanted to make sure the experimentation continued so they made a deal with Vault Tec to refit a vault for their experimentation needs. Does cloning exist elsewhere? Sure, I think it's feasible that it ought to exist in one or two locations at most bar the vault just like FEV did. But do I think that after 204+ years there are resources left? No. Do I think that the facility is still operational after centuries of neglect? No. Do I think that anyone in the right mindset would waste a crapload of bio resources to un-extinct horses? No. And finally, is it likely that whatever facilities were above ground was hit by a nuke like West-Tek and Big Mountain was? I find it highly probable.

To me, with all these things considered, cloning is very limited, maybe even exclusive to that vault, it does not exist everywhere.

And vaults? They are meant for social experiments, and while having to live with several hundred animals might be considered a social experiment fact is that most vaults fall apart so what would make this one more special than the others, and more importantly; Why is it necessary to have an 'ark' vault anyway if the sole purpose for it is to shoehorn in an animal into the Fallout games? And how long do you think that the animals in this ark vault will survive being closed in for 204+ years? They wouldn't even be able to function outside because they never adapted to the wasteland.

This

Well that is an interesting question and I asked Chris Avellone for his opinion and I have to say I agree with it.

"It’s up to Bethesda, but I’ve always felt that horses distract from the post-apoc feel and make it too Western vs. Mad Max. Brahmin are fine, dogs are fine, but horses never seemed to jive for me because (1) they weren’t in the first game and (2) because the presence of horses changes a LOT of things about culture and civilization in a post-apoc world – they become transportation, food, affect how roads and caravans are set up, etc. Plus, when you have a horse in Fallout, you want to ride it, which from a developer point of view, is also more resource work, but that’s minor.

Just my 2 cents."

That makes sense IMO. If people complained New Vegas was "too western" it surely would have been if horses were added. Horses weren't in the first Fallout which would show the orginal developers didn't want them included and most of all. The impact horses have on cultures. Horses would greatly increase the how fast things will improve and if people want the world to be more destroyed then rebuilt. Horses should be left out. Horses would be the cars of the Fallout Universe. Look at the impact horses had on native americans and the rest of the world.

But as I already said and Chris said, it is up to Bethesda if they want to add them.

Yeah I'd also like to see brahmin pulling car carts as in the former games as well as large caravan groups instead of just 1 or 2 mercs with 2 traders, would make raiding them a lot more fun.

In order to save space I will assume this will continue as following your post witch by the way was impressive well written

and full of great point.

realism and lore are very important aspects in any open world RPG IMO so to half hazardously write anything in to a game

like FO would be a huge mistake and I understand your argument however why the cloning of animals would completely

break lore for you seems odd to me as you admitted it's existence within the FO world.

If your reasoning as to why the cloning of a horse would be unrealistic is because your against the idea of traveling on one I wish you

would just say so as it would save us a lot of time. If on the other hand you truly believe the cloning of a horse world break lore

I strongly disagree.

You can't take fact out of a game like FO sometimes we wish we could like your point about plant zombies witch was a good

one by the way but sill it happened therefore it's lore the same holds true regarding cloning it exists within the FO world

like it or not.

As to how cloning may or may not be used to write animals or people into the FO world we can't really say we can only guess

but as far as it being a none lore braking option it very much is just that you said it yourself scientists started working on

cloning shortly before the war.

Whatever I have read through some sites...
....Like how in the US today there are only 30,000 or so horses roaming the wild and are considered an endangered species. So if the Fallout Universe followed a similar matter to ours, that isn't exactly very good survival odds.

Not too much info on horses after a nuclear apocalypse though.