To practice my writing, I decided to do a brief scene with two original characters I created. And now, ironically enough, I’ve found myself invested in where this storyline is headed. So, I’ve decided to do a quick poll to see if anyone would actually want to read my writing eventually. The goal is to have a feeling of “H.P. Lovecraft meets Fallout 4”
Another loose thesis about Fallout’s overall implementation of the retrofuturistic aesthetic-
From an environmental design perspective 4 and 76 knock the 50s retrofuturism out of the park. As a MA resident, Fallout 4′s version of Boston is extremely immediately recognizable as a retrofuturistic version of the real city, which also happens to have unrelatedly undergone an apocalypse; both components are visible and prominent, and in that order. In Fallout 3, by contrast, the salient aesthetic element is “rubble” and this much more immediate sense of oppressive environmental devastation, rather than the sense you’re specifically in a 1950s version of D.C. The fifties stuff, the art deco stuff is still there, certainly omnipresent when you remember to start actively looking for it, but in my experience it was an element concealed an inch below the grit.
(New Vegas has the same thing going on to a lesser degree- the 50s elements are definitely present, but in a way that comes part-and-parcel with setting something in Vegas. A lot of the rest is rubble, and the western elements are mixed in as a confounding thing. Harder to describe what’s going on with New Vegas aesthetically, particularly when you throw in asset reuse due to the short turnaround time.)
But. One area where I think Fallout 3 and New Vegas actually surpass fallout 4 and 76, one area where I think the newer games back-tracked a bit in terms of 50sishness, is the mutant design. FO3/NV Mirelurks are a big example of this. The regular ones went from bipedal near-humanoid crab people of the sort you’d see in a b-movie from the fifties, to.... semi-plausible Big Crabs. The super mutants went from kinda looking like guys in yellow rubber costumes to lovingly-detailed-and-animated abhuman colossi. Ditto for the feral ghouls, who went from looking almost sculpted (and textured with pictures of raw meat!) to the twitching, crawling, lurching serkis-folk of Fallout 4. The 3/New Vegas deathclaw feels to me a bit like a Ray Harryhausen sculpted clay thing, while the Fallout 4 deathclaw is, well, the Fallout 4 deathclaw.
And fundamentally both games and films were subject to the same process here- better fidelity became possible. The monster designs of Fallout 3 and Fallout New Vegas were informed by the limits of what was technically possible within the engine of the time, and did a great job within those limitations, just as the cheesy rubber-suit b-movie beasts were informed by the limitations of their effects budget, and often did a great job within those limitations. The budget improves, the tech improves.... insert Brian Eno’s quote about medium emulation, you know? Fallout 4, Fallout 76, those are monsters you fight in a green-screen environment. Fallout 3, those are monsters meant to be fought in a rented quarry that’s doubling for a new planet every single week.
Another reason why I think Hancock would have a crush on the Sole Survivor besides the obvious fact that you're out here helping the people of the Commonwealth, or how he thought you were an innocent vault dweller who needed protecting, is the fact that he's finally got someone he can be emotionally vulnerable with. Being the mayor of such a dangerous place like Goodneighbor means he needs to keep up a reputation to match it. There's no room for him to be soft or emotional in a place like this.
He's happy when strangers know who he is for having reputation that precedes him for being deadly because it eliminates any chances of someone out there possibly getting the idea that he might actually have a sweeter, more caring side. That's one of the main reasons why he even killed Finn in the first place. But he WANTS to be able to express softness. The problem is just that Goodneighbor isn't the place to do it, and a lot of the kinds of people you find in the Commonwealth in general aren't really the greatest types to be emotionally open towards anyways. In a world like this, it's something that could very easily be held against him.
He tells you that it's lonely being mayor and that he's running out on the good things and people he's got. He tells you that he's always been the one telling others to keep the emotion out of relationships in the past, but here he is being open and emotional with you. He says that everyone is entitled to some softness, himself included… but after he opens up to you about running out on the good things in his life, he asks you not to tell anyone else. Not necessarily because of the fact that it's personal, but because of the fact that he's afraid of word spreading around about this more emotionally vulnerable side of him and that people will think he's crazy for it (and as a side note, let's be honest, we've all seen how society on a larger scale views emotionally vulnerable men as weak).
A lot (not all) of his contradicting ideals when you first meet him make so much more sense when you look at him through the lens of a man desperately trying to conceal and repress the more sensitive side to him. The way he just lets you get away with so much during The Big Dig questline, even if you take your time to do every little thing against him. It's obvious that he doesn't really care all too much about punishing you - he just likes knowing he still has the power to make people frantically scramble to please him, because it helps uphold his reputation.
If there's one thing Hancock hates being more than anything, it's being powerless and weak. His biggest traumas come from how he was unable to protect the ghouls in Diamond City from being exiled or protect the drifters in Goodneighbor from being abused by Vic. If people in the Commonwealth knew there was a softer side to him, a large majority of the more dangerous organizations, especially the ones operating in his town, would consider him weak. If Hancock was considered a weak leader, then he wouldn't be considered fit to protect the innocent people that he so sworn to protect.
It's always baffled everyone how Hancock doesn't show any sadness when it comes to the death of Fahrenheit or finding out his brother was replaced by a synth and killed years prior, but I'm starting to wonder if we've been looking at it the wrong way this entire time. Maybe Hancock's lack of being visibly upset over them had nothing to do with Bethesda making poor writing decisions (they kind of do tbh), but had everything to do with him repressing his emotions.
So when he gets to travel with YOU the player, who has no prior knowledge of him, his reputation or past (and you aren't just another citizen he has to put on a show for) he feels like he can let his walls down around you. He's allowed to be emotionally vulnerable because he doesn't have to pretend to BE someone for you, and in turn, he feels like he doesn't have to run anymore.
(That was a lot sorry but I tend to get my thoughts out better in the form of long ramblings. Honestly there's so many ways he can be interpreted though, but I guess this is just somewhat of an analysis/me theorizing a little)
favorite fallout faction is the children of atom no contest
like idk. they just have vibes that go undefeated. fallout 4 really killed it with all the cool make up and the far harbor dlc (which i really need to replay btw)
they're not right in the head they're just a little bit strange they place their faith in the very thing that destroyed the world good for them 👍
Its wild to me that the polarization of the fallout show seems to match the polarization of the game fandom along two very distinct groups (purley just from looking at my dash). I haven't watched it yet and I'm so conflicted!
Fallout NV is probably my favorite game but I also love Fallout 4 (specifically for the reasons a lot of people hate it)
Looking at the trailer and from the people who've watched it: it sounds like what I was hoping or, not too serious, kind of silly has the vibes of the games. On the other hand. People are saying they retconned F:NV (from what I can tell because of a background image?) which I also hate! I hate the idea of "oh no we have to clear out the new societies so we can maintain a post apocalyptic status quo cause that's the franchises bread and butter" what I've always loved about Fallout is its post-post-apocalyptic vibes. (I mean F:NV is only post apocalyptic in passing)
Ironically my issue with the post-apoc genre is its always backwards looking. Its the re-building part thats the interesting part and that was what F:NV was all about
But also....I dunno man...I wasn't even going to bother but like...Look at her! she says "Okie Dokie" I love that shit. (don't come in here and tell me its lame I don't care)
Someone on the page for Old World Oddities requested I make a skirt version of the Greaser and Letterman jacket, so I did using parts from other vanilla outfits. I also kept the jacketless version because I like it
I’ve been playing some Fallout again and wanted to actually draw my protagonists. Here’s my Sole Survivor, Natasha! Out of all the protags, she’s the most (successfully) diplomatic. She takes her role as General of the Minutemen quite seriously, especially in the late game. Her main focus after the main events of the game would be to build up settlements and secure safe routes throughout the Commonwealth again. (I don’t normally like base building games but something about building up settlements in Fallout 4 is satisfying.)
Replaying Far Harbor cus DIMA…… I MISSED MY LIL WAR CRIMINAL DIMA…. So here’s some old doodles from July 2021! Wanna draw them againnn but also drawing DiMA means committing to. Drawing DiMA, unfortunately.