Maybe the beauty of art lies in the infinite variety of unexpected interpretations…
Or, in his own words
“I don’t think I have any themes that run in common in all my games (maybe mistrust of power),” said Cain, but “people will interpret my games in all kinds of ways. And that’s ok. Everyone brings their own perspective, and a story can mean different things to different people.”
Fallout is about me, my dog, and my walking tank armor. Who cares about capitalism when i have ghouls and super mutants to hunt?
Tim Cain worked on the original fallouts, fallout 1 and 2. He has not been credited in the series since. The fallout series has passed through the hands of many others, who may have included a critique of capitalism as a theme.
If you’re interested in Tim Cain’s ideas on capitalism, he was the director of the outer worlds, which is far more focused on capitalism much more directly than fallout ever was.
I can see where the critique and capitalism is coming from but that side of the games doesn’t really start until Fallout 3, post-Tim Cain
I thought that it was about how industrial food always ends up making you sick.
I think it’s only really the show that highlighted how fucked capitalism is, which is ironic given who made it and who now owns the games.
Ironic, or, ahem, fucked?
not the point of the game ≠ isn’t there in the game
FWIW, Ray Bradbury used to argue that Fahrenheit 451 wasn’t about censorship at all, but the dumbing down of society.
Once work leaves the hands of an author, the author no longer controls the narrative, or how the narrative is interpreted.
Kinda curious where this energy is when an incel calls a video game woke propaganda for having a female main protagonist.
Propaganda implies intent
Ok, then replace propaganda with a different word. My point still stands.
Still no, because woke is something specific to the ideal of making people aware of real injustices.
Your original statement equates to “this is a deliberate attempt to push an agenda”
Even with replacing propaganda you still end up with “this promotes making people aware of real issues”. Which implies 1 - an acknowledgement of the fact that they’re real issues depicted (which such people usually contest) and 2 - that the author was aware of such issues in their effort to depict these things realistically.
In the end we all know that what they’re saying is “this shows me something that I don’t like because it doesn’t fit with my vision of the world”
People can be wrong about intent and about content, but people can’t be wrong about how it affects them and what messages they receive.
You can also replace woke with another word and it is indeed true that this hypothetical game has a message of female empowerment by having a strong female lead yes. Fallout can have an anti-capitalist message whether you’re pro or anti capitalist yourself and use your own word of choice to denigrate or praise the message. The word you chose says more about you than the message.
What was your point already?
Once work leaves the hands of an author, the author no longer controls the narrative, or how the narrative is interpreted.
This sentence being upvoted on Lemmy of all places is hypocritical. I don’t fully disagree with it, but people’s interpretation of art can definitely be wrong. People interpreting fallout as anti capitalist could be wrong if the author says so. This is just being upvoted because it suits Lemmy’s political views in general.
If someone interprets the Mona Lisa as an alien; that’s wrong. Or is it?
Bit more realistic; why did nobody say “the interpretation isn’t up to the author” when Trump decided to use Rage Against the Machine at his rally? Was that also not wrong because a large group of people interpreted the narrative differently than the author? Ofcourse they were wrong.
There’s giving a different importance to something that is, in fact, present in the art piece because it touches you more importantly than it did the author, and then there’s making shit up whole cloth. But like I said, the words you chose, and also the things you chose to defend, say more about you than the art
…and what is that exactly? I’m just disagreeing with the quote in my last post. What are you on about?
VaultTec being evil wasn’t really part of the first game, but the evil megacorp exploiting (and encouraging) disaster to put profits over human lives, that’s an obvious critique of capitalism. Maybe he didn’t set out to make it a critique of capitalism, but that became part of the foundation in later games.
Eh, does Vault-Tec care about profits or science? Almost everyone died, and the ones that didn’t aren’t paying anymore.
There are certainly some critiques of capitalism - the vaults being paid at all - but I think you’re overselling it
It needed the profits for even more radical science!
Of course it cared about profits. Profits right then. That’s one of the key components of capitalism. The complete and utter lack of an ability to put long-term profit ahead of short-term profit. I can think of nothing more quintessentially capitalist then destroying the world in an effort to make a lot of money today.
That’s not capitalism though it’s corporatism.
“Corporatism vs Capitalism” was invented by capitalists to create a strawman that they can blame instead of blaming capitalism for everything wrong with captitalism.
The rest of the world uses Corporatism for something else entirely, what you might mean is corpocracy or corporate capitalism, which are just manifestations of capitalism.
Except for they don’t care about profits at all.
The entire stick with the enclave/ valtek is they want to rebuild society from the ground up in an image that they deem to be correct and perfect. And the capitalism was just an end to a means
That would only be further reinforced by the slides from the X8 research facility in Old world blues if you complete all tasks.
Yeah basically, but… Capitalism kinda is human nature, so he isn’t wrong, greed was always a thing and will always be.
But Vault Tech was more the like the science people wanting test subjects and reshaping humanity. Vault Tech could have been run by Joseph Mengele or a similar person who disregarded all ethics for hardcore “science”
Capitalism has only existed for a couple centuries. Something that new can’t be human nature!
Yeah shure lol, the people in stone age didn’t trade stuff in exchange for shells (their “currency”)
Capitalism ≠ commerce. Trade exists under nearly all economic systems.
And so did and does greed, wich is what capitalism is
https://archive.org/details/inquiryintonatur00smit_3
Please read that, and help your understanding of what Capitalism is, and is not. It’s rather short, only takes a few hours to read, but comprehension may take some time pondering.
That’s not capitalism. It’s so strange you parrot status quo propaganda like “capitalism is human nature,” and don’t stop and reflect why. Do you genuinely think capitalism is a synonym for economy? Lol
I think what a lot of people missed from the original video is that while it wasn’t the point, the first games did critique capitalism even if that wasn’t the main point. Would highly recommend people check out Tim’s videos directly - each one is usually about only 15 minutes long, but taken together is a masterclass on game dev and story telling.
deleted by creator
Did you start with Fallout 1 or 3?
He made another game which is a direct criticism of capitalism. The dude is talking about the first few Fallout games, he hasn’t worked on Fallout since Bethesda bought the IP.
deleted by creator
Well I tell you what, we can circle back to your argument the very moment war stops being a inevitable part of human nature.
It kind of is. When people come into conflict, there’s 3 main outcomes: one side wins, both sides agree to disagree, or both sides disagree to disagree. The disagree to disagree option is what war is. Given enough people interacting with each other, war is an inevitable outcome of human nature.
I mean, sure, it might be a dumb argument to make, but it doesn’t mean that wasn’t what he intended it to be about. The author is free to have an intention and interpretation of the work that is radically different from the audience’s perception. It happens with all art forms.
No u
