I've been thinking, based on the existance of Oasis, do you think it's possible for the Wasteland to become green again?

I doubt it, the only reason that it bloomed was because of Harold, so unless there are other FEV dipped treeheads like him, probably not.

Only the DC wasteland is brown and dead. Pointlook out is very green and FO1, FO2 and New Vegas show farms and living trees and plants.

But yea the whole thing with Harold and Oasis was Bethesda's way of saying "this is how the wasteland will become alive again!"

Poor Harold :sadvaultboy:

I know Harold is the only reason it's alive, but I think that maybe if you put the ointment on his heart that accelerates his growth, and combined with the effects of project purity, the wasteland might make a comeback

Pripyat (where Chernobyl happened) is plenty green. So is Hiroshima. So if we're talking 200 years after bombs drop in the Fallout-verse, then some recovery should be happening.

Thats what Beth was going for :thumbsup:

Why it was not green or did not have plants outside of Oasis I don't know why but it should have been.

I feel like Oasis is a bit of a "miracles happen" idea. There are fresh flowers growing in some parts of the Wasteland as well but they are few and far between.

I also feel like it makes sense that the DC Wasteland is still a dusty, dead place, even 200 years after the bombs fell. It is the capital of America and I'm pretty sure that it wasn't just China that aimed some nuclear warheads at it, just as I'd expect Ottawa would have the crap bombed out of it because it's the capital of Canada, annexed to be the US. It likely took the biggest hit, population wise, of the number of people who were wiped out directly by the bombs and the rest...well, I guess there were some survivors initially, but who knows how many didn't end up ghoulified or whatever.

I don't think Oasis can make the whole Wasteland green, though. I mean, it did a bit, but there's to much working against it I think.

My Oasis theory is that Harold was never there... Bob had seeds and some were brought all the way to DC (and places in between). These seeds when planted, grew into the kind of tree you saw in the Oasis; each with a genetic (incomplete) imprint of Harold's memory up to the point which they fell to the ground. They all think they are Harold.

Hmmm... might make an interesting fan fiction prologue to a mod.

As to why it was there... What if it were the sight of a battle (80 or 120 years back), and mutant fertilizer from the remains altered the ground in that area.

Fallout 2 mentions that certain plants just don't grow in the soil anymore, but maybe that's not true of all places, or that some places were affected in some way that made them fertile.
(What would happen if a GECK were used or accidentally wasted at the sight of the future Oasis?)

If DC was hit worse then any other place in America just because its the capital, then why are there still buildings? Every location in the West was nuked to cinders and yet there is still farms and trees. FO3 just had the wrong setting "war was yesterday" look.

To me, it seems that most of the destruction was caused more by the shockeaves of the bombs than the actual bombs themselves, also, it seems like for whatever reason, the capital wasteland was just in chaos for a lot longer, preventing resettlement. Also, something to keep in mind is that the vaults In dc were for the most part never meant to open like some vaults out west were also preventing resettlement

Who can say? How heavily built up is the actual area? I've never been and certainly don't know. Why wouldn't there still be some buildings?

I mean, you're probably right, there likely wouldn't have been a thing left. But...it's just a video game. It needs some kind of setting. 100% open desert makes for very little to do, 100% re-settled sort of takes away the spooky wasteland factor...

You strike me as the type that will just refuse to be satisfied with anything, haha.

The Setting of FO1 and FO2 had rebuilt settlements as well as areas that are just burned out ruins. New Vegas has alot of buildings like FO3 but at least there is a reason given as to why, which I am satisfied with. LA is nothing but burned out ruins and its population would have been alot bigger then DC's and it was the Capital.

I would be satisfied if people just stop saying "DC was hit worse" because thats not the case. People don't want to do that because they would have to admit that that "atmosphere" was not right in FO3.

I suppose so. I haven't played any of the other FO games myself. I think that as developers they must have had a hard time figuring out how to pull it off. Either DC basically doesn't exist and is some crusty crater all together, or there are remnants of some of its famous architecture to make it one really spooky, if difficult to explain, setting.

I am sure they had a hard time like you said. The problem I have is not really that there are still alot of buildings. Its that there is zero sign that in over 200 years since the Great War; no trees or other plants have started to grow anywhere but Oasis. No one has figured out how to farm, plants or animals. No one is building anything that's not made out of scrap wood and metal. Radiation has not gone away. Yet with everyone sitting around doing nothing for 200 years some people have figured out how to become "Doctors and Surgeons." Not one person figured out how to grow crops, not a one.

Edit: Most of the borded out houses should have just been burned out ruins (would have been a nice touch.)

I can definitely see your point, especially because everything you have mentioned are the exact same problems my husband has with the game. He insists that after 200 years there would have to be some kind of society, and yet there still appears to be no people and no re-establishment of some kind of culture. He hates that the Super Mutants just wander around aimlessly killing people and things. For me, I'm a Final Fantasy fan, so I'm kind of used to not expecting too much from my entertainment