Avoid plot holes, don't go too far with pseudo-science!

For all Wasteland 2 discussion that does not fit elsewhere, suggestions, feedback, etc. No spoilers allowed.

Moderator: Ranger Team Alpha

Post Reply
User avatar
Quanti
Novice
Posts: 32
Joined: March 12th, 2012, 4:14 pm
Location: South Carolina

Avoid plot holes, don't go too far with pseudo-science!

Post by Quanti » March 15th, 2012, 10:19 am

I really hope this game avoids obvious plot holes. Let me explain:

When using the post apocalyptic setting and following up from the original Wasteland, we're going to have to do some things that are just plain unrealistic or unfeasible. For instance, we don't know for sure, but after a global nuclear catastrophe like the one in the Fallout series, the world would probably be full of greenery and regrowth (judging from the examples of Hiroshima, Nagasaki, and Chernobyl). But we add story elements/devices or just ignore those aspects to keep the desolate setting and mood we want for those games. That, I think, is sort of OK. Fallout 2 could have had much more plant life, and it would still be a great game, maybe even better, since it would line up with what little we know about long term radiation effects in nature.

There is a line that you can cross though, IMO. In Fallout 3, a huge story element revolves around the water purity in DC. In the game, pretty much any water you touch will instantly start to irradiate your character. 200 years after the bombs fell, this would be highly improbable, and it really broke immersion for me when I played that game and found out what the story objectives were. That was just one of the pieces of the Fallout 3 plot that made no sense to me and screwed over my interest in the story line.

So really two points here: avoid plot holes in the narrative, and try not to be too ridiculous with some of the scientific explanation for the setting/story. Keep it at least as "plausible" as the first two Fallout games.

Please, discuss.

EDIT: This may need to be moved, it discusses both things to avoid and things to include, so I just kept it in the Must Include section.
Grampy-bone be doing da killin' right now.

User avatar
Roger Wilco
Scholar
Posts: 231
Joined: March 12th, 2012, 4:04 pm

Re: Avoid plot holes, don't go too far with pseudo-science!

Post by Roger Wilco » March 15th, 2012, 10:26 am

Quanti wrote: For instance, we don't know for sure, but after a global nuclear catastrophe like the one in the Fallout series, the world would probably be full of greenery and regrowth (judging from the examples of Hiroshima, Nagasaki, and Chernobyl). But we add story elements/devices or just ignore those aspects to keep the desolate setting and mood we want for those games. That, I think, is sort of OK. Fallout 2 could have had much more plant life, and it would still be a great game, maybe even better, since it would line up with what little we know about long term radiation effects in nature.
Well, Wasteland took place around Las Vegas, which is a desert today anyway. There isn't much plant life now, let alone after a nuclear apocalypse.

Fallout also took place in a desert region, although Fallout 2 was creeping up to a more temperate climate. Again, the setting of Wasteland /Fallout games taking place in the American West / SouthWest is an import piece to the setting that was noticeably missing in Fallout 3 / Fallout Tactics. It's another reason why New Vegas feels better (to me) than Fallout 3.

The Desert Rangers came out of the Desert and it sounds like Wasteland 2 will continue in that tradition

User avatar
Quanti
Novice
Posts: 32
Joined: March 12th, 2012, 4:14 pm
Location: South Carolina

Re: Avoid plot holes, don't go too far with pseudo-science!

Post by Quanti » March 15th, 2012, 10:45 am

You make a good point about the desert setting for those games.

I will mention one other thing about Fallout 3 that I did not like- the green tinted filter over everything. There was always a dull, hazy feeling outside, even on a clear day. Maybe it added a little atmosphere, but again, after 200 years you would most likely have semi normal weather patterns, including beautiful days and thunderstorms(in areas with regular precipitation).

Maybe in an area like the Glow from Fallout, or somewhere similar you could add in strange radioactive-ish effects, but not universally.
Grampy-bone be doing da killin' right now.

User avatar
fixT
Initiate
Posts: 15
Joined: March 15th, 2012, 10:43 am

Re: Avoid plot holes, don't go too far with pseudo-science!

Post by fixT » March 15th, 2012, 11:06 am

Signed for hard sci-fi as opposed to Fallout3 style silliness.

User avatar
CanadianWolvie
Acolyte
Posts: 61
Joined: March 15th, 2012, 9:30 am

Re: Avoid plot holes, don't go too far with pseudo-science!

Post by CanadianWolvie » March 15th, 2012, 11:43 am

Deserts are surprisingly full of life if you know what to look for. And in the event of Nuclear Winter/Fallout, there is no guarantee the weather patterns will stay the same so it can continue being a desert.

I try not to nit pick the setting too hard with realism, it all falls apart pretty quickly.

Also, doesn't our world surprise you all the time with stuff we thought for the longest time in science fiction was just pseudo science with all the various technical marvels we have these days in full production, prototype R&D stages, and that some university or college student came up with?

You may be surprised how un"far out" many things are - but I do agree with you on one thing, holy crap am I tired of the lack of greenery, plant life, and animal life in post apocalyptic settings. The world existed before us and it will survive us, then recycle us, IMHO. Only cosmic level events like our sun going supernova is going to stop this planet from finding a way to have a bit of life on it still existing in some form or another even if us humans die out due to our inability to adapt.

User avatar
LateWhiteRabbit
Initiate
Posts: 18
Joined: March 15th, 2012, 11:02 am

Re: Avoid plot holes, don't go too far with pseudo-science!

Post by LateWhiteRabbit » March 15th, 2012, 11:53 am

I've got to agree.

If you must have a destroyed and irradiated wasteland, don't set the game 200 years after the nuclear exchange! I know in the original Wasteland the war between the United States and the Soviet Union took place in the middle of the 21st century. (Speaking of which, are we know assuming Wasteland 2 takes place in an alternate reality, :geek: since the Soviet Union collapsed 2 years after the original Wasteland game came out?)

And yeah, I would like it if a lid was kept on excessive SCIENCE! in Wasteland 2. No chess playing scorpions like the Fallout franchise please.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 4 guests