We’ve had a pretty good hit rate with video game adaptations lately. Fallout and Arcane are both among my favorite TV shows. I think we finally got far enough along that show runners are gamers themselves and aware of what makes these things good and what needs to change to be a good show.
To each their own, but I thought they completely nailed the tone, respectfully incorporated the established fiction, and even wrote some great new characters.
What made new Vegas interesting was that it’s not just another kitschy wasteland romp. It’s post-post-apocalypse, and it asks who rebuilds after.
My limited understanding is the TV show nuked the NCR so they could do more wasteland theme park, and not continue that train of thought. But also didn’t just set it somewhere else.
But admittedly I haven’t actually watched it.
But also, again, trying to make a TV show intersect with a video game with multiple endings is a foolish idea. You won’t make everyone happy, and it’s an entirely avoidable problem. They could’ve just set the show in a different part of the world that hasn’t had a game.
Video games sequeling other choice-based video games run into the same issue, and you quickly forget once you’re in it that maybe you treated Shady Sands differently than the canonized decision about it. As it takes place further in the future than any of the games, it acknowledges what happened in their past, creates new events that happened since we last saw them, and also steers them in new directions, because people change, and the old leaders would have long since been replaced by new ones. That’s all just part of continuing a story. The only way to avoid having to pick a canon is to never continue it ever, but I’m happy we got this show at all.
Bg1 and 2, Dragon age, and mass effect famously had save imports, so “the only way” doesn’t check out.
The dark souls games are so far removed in time that the previous game is legend, so that’s an option.
For the tv show they also could have, as I said, just set it somewhere and somewhen else. They can have rumors about what’s happening in Vegas, but it’s 20 years ago and you’re in Chicago, so who knows what’s true.
So, yeah, they could’ve done something else and still made a TV show.
BG2 only takes a few things from the previous game and throws out the rest. I haven’t played Dragon Age, but Mass Effect and Telltale infamously had “the choice diamond” where they respect your choices up until it has to eventually lead somewhere, so they all end up funneling back into only a few options. These are just different ways to dress up the same problem. Fallout the TV show does exactly the same thing as Fallout 2 did to Fallout 1, which is the same as your Dark Souls example: it’s set far enough in the future that you’re unlikely to run into anything contradictory.
We’ve had a pretty good hit rate with video game adaptations lately. Fallout and Arcane are both among my favorite TV shows. I think we finally got far enough along that show runners are gamers themselves and aware of what makes these things good and what needs to change to be a good show.
I kind of refuse to watch Fallout. Partly because I read they fucked up the NCR. But also Amazon sucks , and Bethesda is kind of creatively bankrupt.
To each their own, but I thought they completely nailed the tone, respectfully incorporated the established fiction, and even wrote some great new characters.
What made new Vegas interesting was that it’s not just another kitschy wasteland romp. It’s post-post-apocalypse, and it asks who rebuilds after.
My limited understanding is the TV show nuked the NCR so they could do more wasteland theme park, and not continue that train of thought. But also didn’t just set it somewhere else.
But admittedly I haven’t actually watched it.
But also, again, trying to make a TV show intersect with a video game with multiple endings is a foolish idea. You won’t make everyone happy, and it’s an entirely avoidable problem. They could’ve just set the show in a different part of the world that hasn’t had a game.
Video games sequeling other choice-based video games run into the same issue, and you quickly forget once you’re in it that maybe you treated Shady Sands differently than the canonized decision about it. As it takes place further in the future than any of the games, it acknowledges what happened in their past, creates new events that happened since we last saw them, and also steers them in new directions, because people change, and the old leaders would have long since been replaced by new ones. That’s all just part of continuing a story. The only way to avoid having to pick a canon is to never continue it ever, but I’m happy we got this show at all.
Bg1 and 2, Dragon age, and mass effect famously had save imports, so “the only way” doesn’t check out.
The dark souls games are so far removed in time that the previous game is legend, so that’s an option.
For the tv show they also could have, as I said, just set it somewhere and somewhen else. They can have rumors about what’s happening in Vegas, but it’s 20 years ago and you’re in Chicago, so who knows what’s true.
So, yeah, they could’ve done something else and still made a TV show.
BG2 only takes a few things from the previous game and throws out the rest. I haven’t played Dragon Age, but Mass Effect and Telltale infamously had “the choice diamond” where they respect your choices up until it has to eventually lead somewhere, so they all end up funneling back into only a few options. These are just different ways to dress up the same problem. Fallout the TV show does exactly the same thing as Fallout 2 did to Fallout 1, which is the same as your Dark Souls example: it’s set far enough in the future that you’re unlikely to run into anything contradictory.