When I ask this question, I mean it in a sense of how nature is progressing in the Fallout universe. I was personally very disappointed by the lack of flora in Fallout 3. Washington D.C is situated on swampland in RL, so why hadn't it returned to a state reflecting that after 200 years? To be honest, Metro Last Light showed what I had believed D.C would look like after all those years.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5mOr8-I2H70
Furthermore, the worlds have been static and do not convey the sense of having a true ecosystem. As shown in the video, Metro pulled it off even without actually being an open world game.
My question is, have the nuclear weapons been destructive to the point of rendering zones unable to grow vegetation of some sort? Fallout NV was also very dry, but as it was in a desert i suspect that was the point . Every Fallout game has seemed dry and lifeless in terms of wildlife and flora. Is it the engine limiting this or does lore explain why things are not returning to a (semi) usual state?
This post is mostly targeted at FO3 and I brought this up due to concern that Bethesda might create a barren, dry husk for world spaces in the future. Is that the future of Fallout or will it diversify?
(Also, i played the original games and i duly note the presence of various plants )