I got to thinking about this today, the period in which the Fallout Universe was 'locked' in the retro futuristic cultural motif was (presumably) somewhere between 1940's-1950's and October 23, 2077. That's over 120 years that cultural expansion, modification and experimentation where stifled to the point of having little to no impact on the world as it is seen in the Fallout series. That's a long time. I got to thinking about historical precedence and if there was ever a time when artistic creativity, design evolution and day to day technology took a back seat to the business of war, for over 100 years. Each time, I keep coming up with the Medieval period. This could of course, be my flawed perception and (admittedly) weak understanding of the intricacies of the period. However it's my understanding that very little changed during those 100 years in human history as far as a cultural mindset, be it clothing that was worn, speech, or the activities of general day, to day living.

If a society is subjected to the cultural stagnation found in a period of war that has been drawn out for such a long period of time, is a Renaissance a naturally occurring societal reaction as is seen in the historical transition from Medieval to Renaissance. More to the point...

Would the Fallout Universe eventually move on to a grand Renaissance type of period on it's own, had the bombs never fell?

Was Nuclear Armageddon in it's own way, a type of Renaissance?

Is this why the Fallout genre is so well liked by so many fans? It plays on the same principle we see in common fantasy RPGs. A mosty familiar historic setting that has been altered in some way (i.e. magic in many Fantasy campaign worlds, nuclear war in Fallout) so as to be both familiar and alien to the player? The setting is a long standing one, where centuries have marched on to the tune of inhibited scientific and cultural progress. Hobbits still live in their homes beneath the ground, the King still lives in his Castle, and Raiders can always be found in that abandoned junkyard over there.

Do RPGs, no matter what the setting, ever actually change?

What a cool question, and totally unsuited for a gaming board..

I've seen this argued both ways in the academic world. RPG's are generally single player, so the mechanism of the game is actually peddling a specific way of looking at history (a really interesting topic, btw). Some people argue that gaming itself is generally conservative in the sense that it reaffirms that people are generally bad and when they're not, it's because a strong father hand comes to guide them. Others say the opposite, where they say that the player enters a world of darkness and (if playing presumably "good") attempts to bring an age of light (Enlightenment) or enable that age to flourish, making it somewhat progressive.

The alteration of history I don't think is the important point. The alteration--which itself is arguable since despots did rule in medieval societies and nuclear war was and is still very possible in the modern age--simply gives an excuse to provide a single player with an oppportunity to become a "historical" Great Man. It's the Great Man progression which is central to RPGs much more so then the cultural background IMO, although you could jsut as easily say that the RPG genre appeals to people who see their times ass one of rot in which only they can emerge and "save" their world. An overt appeal to the superego.


I don't know how you make a dramatic RPG, though, without that element. Otherwise, you'd have the Sims, where ordinary people do ordinary things. You wouldn't have levels, because in real life, people sadly don't generally get past level 3 in a complete lifetime.

So in short, I'd answer, "no"...

Only one problem in your anology that I can see. The Middle Ages cultural stagnation was directly linked to its technological stagnation (I would say even caused by it), this does not seem to hold true to pre-war Fallout Universe where technology was continuosly moving forward, whereas it just seemed to be preference of the society that kept cultural and artistic norms more or less the same. Even more shocking is the general lack of societal and technological change in the post war Fallout universe... you are in year 2281 in this game and serious attempts at governance are only now emerging. This is in a universe where apparently all pre-war set ups for safety went as amazingly as possible and people and significant tech survived the bombs. Thats what I find most confusing. I mean people aren't moving old vehicles out of the streets, they have reactivated robots but not vehicles... industry only seems to just be making a comeback.

I think you are over thinking the world/story and game. You are reading WAY too deep into this world.

Just play and have fun.

I don't mean to rain on your parade here but you realise that you've put a lot more thought into this than the people who created the world in the first place don't you? I don't mean to do the writers down but I've seen first hand the development process for video games. I'm pretty sure the initial design meeting went something along these lines.

"Hey what kind of game should we make?"
"An RPG"
"Yeah, but there are loads of those, we need to stand out"
"Make it a sci-fi RPG set in the future with lazors and s****?"
"Nice...but we need to think outside the box...shift those paradigms"
"Make it like the future? But it's like still the 50s and stuff? But with robots? And Zombies?"
"AWESOME!!! Find me some writers to jam a plot in there and we've got ourselves a hit"

The reason there was no cultural advancement in 100 years is nothing more complex than that is what they wanted the game to look like. You can't transpose historical anolysis onto a fictional world and then extrapolate meaningful results, you're one step away from those kids you knew at school who would argue endlessly about who'd win in a fight, Optimus Prime or Lion-O.

>:I

Overthinking the world this immersive game takes place is PART of the fun, genius.

This thread gave me a good read, sadly, with my 5 intelligence, I really have nothing new to imput. You gave me something to think about though! I kind of feel that thisworld seems more like only 50 years after a great war, judging by the state of social and political strife. Maybe I overeestimate human connection and will for human progress and evolution. We DO have a very self destructive streak as well, and perhaps if things DID go anarchy style people would be quick to embrace it and keep it simple and anti-progress.

Awesome topic... probably more appropriate for a history lecture or thesis in college, but still damn good none the less. As far as the cultural stagnation of Fallout, it's not too unrealistic. Just look at many native tribes around the world... almost all of them remained largely unchanged for generations at a time, only changing with the seasons, until acted upon by an outside force beyond their control caused them to adapt or be wiped out. So really when you look at it, if the Korean and Vietnam wars had not occurred, one could easily imagine that style of the 1940's and 1950's could have potentially lasted for several more decades.

I just think you are looking too deep. You do make very good points though.

I'm quite pleased with many of the responses given thus far and would like to thank you for the time and effort you put into crafting them.

To tcp, you make a very strong point in that it seems that the RPG 'grand unification theory' isn't so much as in the setting as it is in that the player is tasked some great, herculean thing to which they are permitted to pick the path they choose to succeed. I still wonder if a successful setting for an RPG is determined by getting just the right mix of familiar and alien. If finding this right ratio would be the key to making and marketing a campaign setting, assuming success is measured in dollars. There will always be genres that are near and dear to our hearts, but not necessarily for the rest of us. Some people LOVE Spelljammer. I don't get it. I'm a big fan of the cyberpunk/dystopian future genre, not everyone else is. But I think the common denominator amongst every fan of every genre can be linked back to some Tolkien/Gygax world which we all started in. The Fantasy genre is HUGE. Is it this way because on some level, we can all connect and relate (familiarity) with this world of epic hero/kings and powerful magic (alien)? Did these guys get that mix 'just right'? If we could apply their formula for success to another, existing genre that is not seeing much in the way of a fanbase, would we see an improvement. (Shadowrun, for the cyberpunk example).

to smerdykov, This is one factor that annoyed me greatly. The infrastructure has, more or less survived. Just how long would it take for humanity to rebuild? It's surprising that it's taken the Fallout Universe this long to proceed as far as it has. People were ready for the bombs, they prepared to a great extent. Rebuilding was even an addressed concern with the existence of the G.E.C.K, so why has it taken this long? Apathy, bad luck? Does it really take hundreds of years to rebuild civilization to the shadow it once was, despite the benefit of reverse engineering and a near limitless supply of salvageable pre-war tech, or would it be something more akin to what we see in say, the Postman. Apocalypse to Civilization in 1-2 generations? I know that personally, if I found myself in that type of a situation, my first instinct would be to survive and my second would be to rebuild.

to Ringosis, To the scenario you have outlined, I do not doubt. Fallout's original intention was to display the game engine and it's capabilities. The original intent with the engine was to make a GURPS style RPG creator, and Fallout was intended to be a simple tech demo. Much like Portal however, it has grown far beyond it's humble origin. It's fair to say that too much thought has, and is being put into this, and if we never get an answer, I don't think anyone will be up sleepless nights over it. However, it's still a fun exercise and it wouldn't hurt us to consider some of these questions, seeing as how we're in the third installment of the series, not including the multiple spin-offs and fan based projects this game has sprouted. It's evolved beyond it's intent, and now it's up to us to try and fit the pieces together into a cohesive, sensible history. *EDIT* Can the sword of Omens cut through whatever kind of steel Optimus Prime is made out of? Answer that and I think you have the answer to your question.

to Locusta, No need to diminish anyone's intelligence here, especially your own, this is all for the sake of fun. The idea that, once descended into anarchy, humans as a collective would tend to adhere and embrace an anarchy would make a great deal of sense given the savagery we are capable of. But, and this ties in with Joeyheadwound's post, at some point, some external point would push us for change, for whatever reason. If society is counter to the human condition, how did society come about in the first place?

to Joeyheadwounds, An excellent example cited in the native tribes that still live unchanged after untold generations of existence. It really does point to the idea that cultural change is only enacted by an outside force, and rarely internally.

There are RPGers like me who do not care about changing the world. Our favorite ways to pass the time are kicking ass and chewing bubble-gum.....and unfortunately we ran out of gum. I played WoW for a long time because I liked being just another peon in the Horde getting my stab on. I would be happy to play an RPG where the main protagonist is just sorting out some personal [censored] and has to keep a low profile or suffer interference from the world's power players. The only important feature of any game is a well developed story....no game is fun without that.

Just give me a gun and a target (that is put into an appropriate context of good, bad, or ugly) and its all good.

You forget that the Enclave, Brotherhood of Steel, Raiders, and who knows what else are all trying their damndest to keep everyone else barefoot and ignorant. The only sources of power in this chaos are knowledge and threat of force....

P.S> don't forget that all of the "vaults" used to preserve society were actually psychological experiments gone horribly awry.

I more or less have to agree with this.


Though I also have to ask the question of whether or not culture advances in the linear sense implied in the original post or whether culture advances in a state of constant flux simply from circumstance? For that matter, does technology advance along a linear path? At least with my understanding of history, development seems to be more responsive to immediate needs as adverse to being a proactive act of progression or regression.

Considering the original Fallout is a 2D sprite based affair with turn based animation I seriously doubt this is the case. Technical showcase games like Metro 2033 or Cryostasis did not exist in the 90s. That does not change the fact that your anolysis is trying to manufacture depth where none exists. Like trying to swim in a puddle, it makes you look foolish



Yeah see that is where I disagree. If the canon of the story is not cohesive and logical then that's the end of it, move on, it's not your job to fix the authors mistakes. Going too deep into fictional worlds is not healthy...you'll be live role playing next, then there's nothing for it but the flamethrower.



If you are a fan of everyman stories where the protagonist doesn't change the world but just lives their life (and has lots of western movie references?) I can't recommend Red Dead Redemption more strongly. You wouldn't think herding cattle, roping horses, driving off coyotes and delivering grain could make for interesting plot devices but the way it weaves the players everyday life into an over arching storyline as well as tying the whole thing into the political upheaval of the old west at the turn of the century is exquisite.

The last few missions leading up to the end is some of the most engaging story telling I've experienced in a game.

I'll ignore the just-a-gamers for now. Seriously, have you guys ever read anything the people at BI and Obsidian put out? ^_^


I agree that the period from the 50s to the 2070s was kind of a dark age in the Fallout world. But where the Middle Ages were one of technological decay for various reasons, this is one of cultural stagnancy caused by the state.
I would say that the period of the arising NCR could count as a kind of local renaissance in California, though. The good ideas and values of the pre-war time adapted and taken up by people after it kind of mimic the adoption of Ancient thought, art and philosophy during the Renaissance. And like in our world's past, different factions take up different ways of thinking. That's where the conflict in FNV comes from - try talking to Caesar once you're all rosy with the Legion, he can go on for hours about this.

This is off topic, somewhat but...

The deeper into a fictional story you get, any fictional story, the more perspective and enlightenment you get in your "real" life... So I disagree. Sure you may become a social recluse as a result, but that's a whole different story about a personal issue that is different with each individiual, but for the most part, fictional stories are what keep the human race human and suffice to the worldly problems one has to go through. We'd be dead without them, the world would take itself too seriously for you to enjoy anything else but survival of the fittest.

You have to indulge in every chance to understand life, and fiction, in any medium. is actually a good medicine that helps cure curiousity and objectivity of eachs own thoughts, issues, and contradictions.

Fallout universe is probably some kind of the collective memory of human kind from ancient times. I wasn't surprised at all when I first played it, I was simply startled.

Don't forget that up until the current generation the people were advancing in FO 1-2 despite being savaged by mutants, wildlife, savages, radiation........ I believe the life expectancy of folks is not 80 years like in their olden days (unless zombified). The evolution of modern medicine paved the way for rapid technological advance.... but what happens when all of the biological variables are thrown out the window and you have to work with a new puzzle. The Enclave even said that "wastelanders" were mutated enough to be a separate species, and that means unable to procreate with "normal" people. Did everyone mutate the same or at least similar enough to ensure a reasonable success rate for live, healthy births? I am shocked that there has not been a viral epidemic yet. There are NO immunization vaccines being manufactured....... You would have to expect growth and recovery to degenerate to pre-industrial age rates until what we consider to be basic health standards are being met. They may have mentioned the lore for such topics in stories and what-not outside the game, but I do not bother to search for them.

I guess I should search this out.... but maybe yall can enlighten me.

Edit: I forgot.... if you get a boo-boo or the sniffles you just slap a stimpack on it!

There is a difference getting as much as you can out of a story and becoming so obsessed with a story that you have to invent new parts of it to satisfy yourself. You might argue that this is some how expressive or enriching, but have you ever read any fan fiction? It does not make the world a better place. Hurling all the fan fiction writers into the sun might though.

See Webb this is exactly the kind of guy I'm talking about. IT'S FICTION YOU NUTBAR. There hasn't been a viral epidemic because the guy who wrote it didn't write that, therefore it didn't happen....none of it happened, get a grip.

lol! This is so true.

Well ignoring that this is fiction. To be specific, it's a dystopian post-apocalyptic setting with dark absurdest humor that pokes fun at 50's American culture and the post war speculative predictions/fiction of the 'nuclear age' and the cold war in general.

One reason you may not have huge epidemics could be in part due to the lack of civilization, or maybe more appropriately stated as the sheer isolation of communities from outside contact for most of the time prior to the games. Though all things considered, it doesn't matter.

The dark ages.

Those games did not exist, but others did. Wing Commander (1 and 2), the latter of which introduced speech with an add-on pack? (Yes, there was a time when all games were "silent movies.") Wolfenstein 3D and its successor, Doom, which created an entire genre? Mechwarrior? Tomb Raider? Descent and its spinoff, Freespace?
The state of the art wasn't what it is now, and the technology displayed probably isn't anything you would consider impressive, but when an average desktop machine is a 486 or a "Pentium" (586), with a clock speed of 100 MHz or less and a massive 8 megabytes of RAM, and CD-ROMs and 3D graphics cards are brand new tech...


Games don't arise out of a cultural vacuum, purely as technical constructs. They are immersed in a context of thousands of years of culture and storytelling conventions. Kill the bad guys, save the town/kingdom/world, get the girl/boy. It may be trite, but it's still a story.
The developers choose what kind of story they want to tell, to accompany their "lights a-flashin', [their] buzzers and bells." Examining those choices - of characters, themes, etc - is valid, even if the answer turns out to simply be (e.g.) "because hot chicks sell."


It surprises me that you'd criticize story in one game and then turn around and praise it in another. It sounds like the Rockstar developers did a fine job getting you to care about your character, to invest yourself in their fortunes. Because if we don't care what happens, if we don't believe and aren't invested, why not treat the whole thing as a mindless shooting gallery?

If I wanted, I could dismiss the game you like as "Grand Theft Stagecoach, a cheap moneygrab by a studio with no new ideas." I imagine that you would disagree, saying that it's much more than that.

The Fallout universe doesn't really stand up to any kind of serious scientific scrutiny, that's correct. There's no excuse for why some things are as they are other than "for the sake of the story." That does not mean that the story, the narrative of the setting, is unworthy of anolysis on those terms.

The biggest reason for Cultural Stagnation in the Fallout Universe is population. There really weren't all that many survivors after the Bombs fell, and of those that did survive, the vast majority either succumbed to Radiation Sickness or were Ghoulified (Which meant they were also sterilized and could not add back into the population). Those that survived that were of too few number to do much of anything beyond maintain the population for a good long while.

Despite Fallout 3 officially taking place 200 years after the bombs fell, it really is a case study of a generation after the Bombs in terms of settlements and general population levels. There are no towns in the Capital Wasteland, merely small places of refuge amid a broken, dead landscape. There isn't enough population in the whole Capital Wasteland to do much more then maintain their population levels. Hell, in the case of Andale, you've got a "community" that's inbreeding heavily just to maintain itself.


As for Viral Epidemics, keep in mind most of the population of the Wasteland has been born into a environment of background radiation and trace, airborne amounts of the Forced Evolutionary Virus. The FEV inoculates the denizens of the Wastes against most, if not all Pre-War Diseases. Only residents of Vaults remain unaffected and thereby, susceptible diseases in environments the Wastelanders take for granted.