I'm not even a fan of the Independent ending, but let's be fair: The devs might have created the rest of the characters, but I was the one who created the Courier. So I will be the one to decide what he'll do with an army of robots. If I created a character who's all about meddling in other people's business, would it really make sense for him to ride off into the sunset and leave everyone alone?

Go independent.

Im not saying its canon im saying thats how i think it is when i finish the game after taking control of a huge army of robots and a bunch of wasteland tribes and groups to back me up. I dont see the problem.

1.) The only officially canon post ending stuff is the ending slides, which, as I've said before, are vague and open to interpretation. I think it's pretty obvious that I'm not declaring anything as canon. All I'm saying is that it makes more sense for the Courier to take control. If the devs did not intend for that to be the case, then their writing betrayed their intentions.

2.) If you're going to spew off petty insults in an attempt to ram your opinion down people's throats, then at least have the common courtesy to actually respond to their arguments.http://www.gamesas.com/topic/1366972-what-each-faction-means-for-vegas-and-who-you-support/page__view__findpost__p__20677336

It is perfectly logical to assume that the Courier could take control of the Mojave. There is nothing stopping the Courier from doing this. The whole game (Indie path) involves the Courier risking his/her life and going to great lengths in order to push the other three factions out of the Mojave and to build up his/her relationship with the different tribes of the region. So that makes it somewhat likely that the Courier would want to continue what he/she started, and shape the Mojave as he/she sees fit. That could be letting it become an Anarchy, or anything else.

So is it possible for yes man to go skynet and kill every living thing in the mojave, since the end slides don't rule it out?

Well he does say he's going to be 'more assertive' after his program upgrade, which could be taken to mean he won't be a 'yes man' anymore. In which case, it's entirely possible he might decide to take over. He doesn't, however, explicitly say that said upgrade will mean he no longer takes instructions, so it's a fairly unlikely scenario.

But for people to treat it like canon is ridiculous!
The devs making a correction post-game should be treated the same as stuff in game.

Why? Because they both come from the devs.


The devs have said that it is completely impossible for him to ever turn on the Courier.

He just doesn't take orders from anybody who walks up to him anymore.

I agree with you, of course, but I was just pointing out that (imo) my version of the Independent ending is more logical based on in-game evidence. That's why I said that their writing seems to have betrayed their intentions. If it seemed like I was trying to pass off my version as canon, then I'm sorry for mis-presenting what I was trying to say. I was saying that, from a logical interpretation/role-play standpoint, my version is fine and makes sense, and that I will continue to interpret it in that why while I play the game no matter what the devs say (unless they provide reasonable explanations for why the Courier couldn't build his/her own nation).

Also, keep in mind that I was unaware of any developer "corrections" to the Indie ending until you pointed it out yesterday, so my earlier posts might have been more on the "I think my interpretation is canon" side because of that ignorance to the interview that you mentioned.

Oh, and do you happen to have a link to that interview or blog post or whatever it was? I can't seem to find it. I'm not saying you're lying; I believe you, but I'm interested to read it and see if MCA goes into any detail as to why the Courier shouldn't take power.

@Martyr - Sorry if I sounded like a [censored] earlier. I do that sometimes...



That's completely different. Why? Because it's illogical and doesn't fit with Yes Man's character at all imo. Nothing at all in the game suggests anything like this except for the thing in the ending slide, which only says that it is an 'assertiveness upgrade.' What in Yes Man's programming would make him suddenly turn from "do everything this human says" to "exterminate humanity." It also makes no sense when you look at all of the different endings for New Vegas:

The NCR ending shows an imperialist democratic state annexing the region.
The Legion ending shows an imperialist totalitarian state enslaving the region.
The House ending shows a laissez-faire despot taking control over the region.

Those are all examples of different states and their respective political/governmental systems taking power over the region. Now does "robotz exterminating humanity" really fit in with the other endings or make any sense at all? No. Does "Courier takes power and establishes a(n) [insert form of government and economic system here]" fit in with the other endings. Yes. And again, I'm not saying that this is canon, just that it makes sense and (imo) more sense than the Courier riding off into the sunset and letting the Mojave slip into barbarism. (I believe that any large scale anarchist society will eventually, if not rapidly, degenerate into barbarism or if you're lucky, despotism.)

Also, here's Josh Sawyer's explanation:

Formspring

This makes sense. Saying that the Courier will just ride off into the sunset after Hoover Dam II and never have any intention of using his/her control over the only standing military force in the region to take authority over the region doesn't make much sense to me.

I'm not arguing that if the indie ending was canon then yes man would just kill everyone, I'm just saying that it's a possibility, given you saying that the only confirmed post ending stuff is in the ending slides.

As for yes man's character, it's going to change, the problem is knowing to what extent this change will be, given that this code was created by House it's probably going to contain at least a little of House's personality (at least if the purpose of the code was to allow House to guide Vegas after death, which seems the most logical reason for House making it) and how happy is this personality fragment going to be that the Courier killed House

Sorry the second argument is pretty weak but it's half 2 in the morning so I'll explain it more tomorrow

I said that as a point that the Indie ending is left open to interpretation compared to the other endings, e.g., read all of the Indie slides and then all of the Legion slides. There is a pretty clear difference in terms of vagueness. I really should have clarified that earlier though, sorry for the confusion.


Well, I don't know about that. Yes Man says that you copy his neurocomputational matrix onto House's mainframe, so I assume that means that House's personality is all but gone. But then again, I have no idea what a neurocomputational matrix is or how it relates to House's mainframe.

Actually, House's personality isn't on the mainframe, The real House is the one you see on the screen. The moment you kill and or unplug House from the mainframe, he's gone. With Jane, or Yes-Man, they are entirely different. Especially Yes-Man, who is the equivalent of a Malware or a Virus. But he and Jane's neurocomputational matrix is an AI that chooses to behave exactly how their personality would. Take Jane for example, she is a replica in all but body of the real Jane, she behaves as the real Jane would. Likely a bit ditzy, loyal and loving to House, yet sweet and kind.

In short it's more or less an AI system that's replicating a programmed personality.