Thoughts on canon endings for Fallout?

[PaxVenire]

What’s the general consensus on canon endings to Fallout?

The classic games certainly have the most player freedom in the series, however each game has an established canon ending.
For New Vegas, the developers to this day don’t have a canonical ending and will most likely keep it that way for good.
So what do you think about canon endings? Good to keep track of history overall in the franchise? Bad for player freedom? Should the games always have a canon ending, should they always be vague as to not compromise playthroughs?

 

[Iprovidelittlepianos]

I think establishing a canon ending is more or less a necessary evil if we want to advance the timeline of the series, especially if the next game takes place in the same location. I don’t really have a huge problem with it myself. I’d prefer it to be kept as vague as possible.

The Elder Scrolls has an interesting way of doing this (and I’m not talking about dragon breaks). From what I’ve heard, every quest line in the game gets completed, but not all of the quests are necessarily completed by the player character. Of course it’s easier for them to get away with this because their games don’t really have much choice involved in the quest outcomes. But I think we can apply this philosophy to Fallout as well.

For example, someone ends up killing the deathclaw in Modoc, but it wasn’t necessarily the Chosen One.

 

[PaxVenire]

I think establishing a canon ending is more or less a necessary evil if we want to advance the timeline of the series, especially if the next game takes place in the same location. I don’t really have a huge problem with it myself. I’d prefer it to be kept as vague as possible.

New Vegas does this fairly well. Marcus says he traveled with a tribal, not necessarily detailing how said tribal was the one to take down the Enclave or if he had a car or was traveling with Goris, etc. Actually, if I remember correctly the NCR in FNV takes credit for the defeat of the Enclave when you talk to someone about it. The events definitely happened but specifics are left out.

The Elder Scrolls has an interesting way of doing this (and I’m not talking about dragon breaks). From what I’ve heard, every quest line in the game gets completed, but not all of the quests are necessarily completed by the player character. Of course it’s easier for them to get away with this because their games don’t really have much choice involved in the quest outcomes. But I think we can apply this philosophy to Fallout as well.

I’m not familiar with Elder Scrolls or what a dragon break is, but what you say sounds like a good workaround for not having to straight up detail what happens in the previous game.

 

[Iprovidelittlepianos]

I’m not familiar with Elder Scrolls or what a dragon break is, but what you say sounds like a good workaround for not having to straight up detail what happens in the previous game.

A dragon break is some kind of crazy time warp that makes it so multiple contradictory events occurred simultaneously. It was first used to explain what happened at the end of Daggerfall, a game that had multiple endings. It was kind of an interesting metaphysical way to explain what happened without explaining what happened, but the phenomenon has since been used to write off any kind of retcon or inconsistency Bethesda makes in subsequent games.

 

[Ugly Kid]

Is part of your question what I think the canon endings should be?

I like to imagine independent is the best ending for FNV. Say what you want about progress but it allows for more creative freedom and honestly more interesting outcomes for future titles.

I have detailed what the state of the world would be if independent ending happens in a note document and if anyone is interested I'll copy paste it here. It takes inspiration from DUST mod and also just how I would run the Mojave as a dictator.

 

[PaxVenire]

Is part of your question what I think the canon endings should be?

I like to imagine independent is the best ending for FNV. Say what you want about progress but it allows for more creative freedom and honestly more interesting outcomes for future titles.

I have detailed what the state of the world would be if independent ending happens in a note document and if anyone is interested I'll copy paste it here. It takes inspiration from DUST mod and also just how I would run the Mojave as a dictator.

The question is moreso how you feel about canonical endings as a whole, whether you like them or prefer vague and unanswered endings like NV

 

[Ugly Kid]

I think there needs to be canon endings for each game, otherwise how would the world progress? If the fallout 1 ending was vague then we'd never even know if the NCR existed.

This doesn't necesarily mean every game needs to use the same cannon though, like Fallout 2 uses one canon and Fallout 1.5 Resuurection uses another.

 

[Feday Of Madness]

Think of it like the walking dead s01 you see the world as any apocslytia should be but you know "cannon" endings are often disappointing as in the country is sent back to the stone ages and starts from there. It shows that there's too much unity for a game that is both bleak and humorous. It should've been darker rather then humanity finally achieving world peace in the span of a century by 2 ppl

I know people suck new Vegas's dick more then marvels garbage movies and both the supposed endings of it is just better imo.

It's more interesting and down to earth.