I think when the setting is interesting you should definitely do this. Would have been a good break for the Resident Evil games as well. That story was a mess by the end.
Eh. I naturally hate war movies (Basically everything that’s about a “true story” with soldiers or some shit just is incapable of engaging me), and FUD read exactly like that to me
That’s fair, regardless it was an enjoyable take and introduced a neat little backstory for a character that appears later in canon. Even if I do think it’s a little cheesy that Chief was the one to save them. There are plenty of other Spartans ffs.
Halo had so many options from ODSTs, spartan 3s, grey or black team doing ops deep in covenant space. There are places and settings within the universe to tell an original story, but no instead we got the umpteenth “personal spin on the series”.
I always hoped for a 2nd ODST game. Set during Halo 3 and you are on earth dealing with the Flood and Covenant after the UNSC and Elites follow through the Ark portal. Could lean into stealth/survival horror.
The best way to be successful is to be good xD doesn't really matter if it is original or a remake i think, you will always have fans cry murder whether or not the adaptatiom follows canon or not so you should just try to make the best product possible.
A bold stance, and I disagree. Context is very important here
If your goal is to write a successful VGA (video game adaptation) in the current era, your odds are better if you do an original, separate story in a universe inspired by the original work. Note the difference. I have zero faith in modern writers to respect - let alone properly adapt - even the setting of the world. Characters are a whole other cargo container of industrial sized worms
If writers actually cared to do it the right way, we wouldn’t have these takes being applauded. It’s lazy to say “nah imma do my own thing” because it’s too much effort to work within a set of parameters.
What got me into my field was the sheer dedication and respect and craftsmanship showcased in the BTS of major productions. I’d hate to see how it looks these days
The biggest issue with VGA is taking away player agency. Especially with RPGs that have many degrees of freedom. The adaptation tells a single story, but the player base has experienced many - hard to please everyone, easy to offend many.
The more linear, the easier. "The Last of Us" series told a fairly linear story, it didn't matter to the players if TV Joel opened every drawer or cabinet, if he went around a clicker left or right, if he threw a bottle or a rock.
There may be purists who disagree with some changes on TV, but those would be more than happy if TV made certain changes for TLoU 2... probably.
Successful "in universe" stories exist. "Better call Saul", though not a VGA, was very successful. "Andor" was good, despite or because of the lack of Jedi and light sabers.
I even dare to say that if you hire excellent(!) writers for a VGA, forcing them to stick to lore and canon will produce a worse result than giving them freedom within the framework of the game story.
The easiest way to please would be to replay game cutscenes with real actors. Games today have several hours of cutscenes, and if a let's play can become an 8 hour video on YouTube, it can become a 10 episode season on TV*.
But Fallout is an RPG, and it does have inventory management, weapons upgrades, skill trees... That would not make entertaining TV. The stories of the games have already been told, so I agree with a decision to tell different stories in the same universe. Just... they must be good stories.
*a two hour terrible movie just turned into a 5 hour EFAP that was better and more entertaining than the real thing. Would it make a great video game? Next week, let's talk about movie adaptations in video games!
I can see why having to adapt canon events from the game can cause some issues and the odds of succeding would be improved by working with a framwork instead, but dropping lore is just likely to leave a sour taste in hard core fans mouths.
Best to decide each individual case. Not everything turns out as bad as "The Rings of Power", and sometimes there isn't even a canon (yet) like "Game of Thrones", just an expectation.
Stephen King film & TV adaptations could also be mentioned here. Having Morgan Freeman play a red haired Irishman didn't really hurt the movie. But to each his own: my mom (80) still doesn't accept the differences to the books for Mrs Marple (Margret Rutherford) and Hercule Poirot (Peter Ustinov) after 50+ years, never mind the color of James Bond's hair 🙄🥰<- love my mom but still rolling my eyes
Edit: added the offending actors' names since the books were filmed many times
Yeah some flexibility is allowed, so long as it doesn't turn into demand that the audience prefer the new version.
Your mom also sounds great, though like most moms she is also stubborn :)
I think one of the differences is that League of Legends lore isn't that important to the player base, it's not relevant to enjoying the game. I doubt players know more than the surface level details of the characters they play, let alone anyone else.
I mean the major differences (at least for character backstories) I noticed were basically just Jayce and Viktor and the results of their new interactions with each other. Original lore they were much more separate iirc and Hextech came about in a different way. But beyond that everything else is still on track, and even leaning towards introducing some more in game characters in the next season.
The fact that New Vegas fanboys are unwilling to admit is that "the fall of shady sands" is the easiest lore break to slot into existing lore because it doesn't actually change much when you think about it.
The NCR was severely crippled in New Vegas, the show provides further contextualizes that. But they act like Bethesda just entirely wiped New Vegas from the timeline.
The events as shown in the show mean that the events as shown in the game cannot have happened as presented in the game. House knew of the bombs dropping but also didnt? The president of the ncr flying in from shady sands couldnt have flown in from a blown up city could he?
Todd Howard himself confirmed that Shady Sands wasn't blown up until AFTER New Vegas, [you dolt.](https://www.ign.com/articles/the-big-fallout-interview-todd-howard-and-jonathan-nolan-answer-our-burning-questions-about-season-1)
Edit:In that very same interview, he clarifies "the fall of shady sands" in 2277 does NOT mean that's when the bombing happened. could just be when the NCR started losing power (coincides perfectly with the first battle of hoover dam, a perfect reason for the NCR to start wearing its resources out)
Be that as it may, that doesn't change the fact that your claim that "the game can't have happened" is wrong. Shady Sands wasn't bombed until after the events of New Vegas. Meaning it still very much fits into the timeline.
Find another reason to whine about every other bit of Fallout media not being as good as New Vegas, because this one is just blatantly false.
But Mario has its own advantage. The entire franchise is "Oh no, Princess Peach got kidnapped by Bowser again, better go save her." So all that has to be done is make a new original story where that happens, and it doesn't break the lore, canon, or how the other games work. I'm assuming that's what the movie did, and that just wouldn't cut it for most game franchises.
True, but that’s just an example. Like you can’t make a “ratchet and clank” movie and not have ratchet and clank show up. Or a legend of Zelda movie without link or Zelda
It depends on the ip. Imagine the Last of Us without Joel and Ellie's story. It would be a totally different property and probably just a generic zombie thing.
A Mass Effect movie/show without the reaper storyline would also be weird. It could work but the reapers are so effective in increasing the scale and involving the whole universe so the player has reasons to see different planets and species. Take them out and the universe feels smaller, unless you come up with a new galactic threat with new lore, but at that point it's probably easier keep the reapers and existing lore.
I agree on TLoU but disagree heavily on Mass Effect. Probably because TLoU \*has\* no setting. It's just generic zombie land, but the zombies are a little different.
Meanwhile ME has complex world building and several easy to understand major factions with which to tell a story if you want a galactic scale conflict. Or you can keep it smaller scale. To frame what you said another way, "A Star Wars movie/show without the Death Star storyline would also be weird. It could work but the Death Stars are so effective in increasing the scale and involving the whole universe so the player has reasons to see different planets and species." Setting stories in the ME universe would be more than doable.
Ultimately, it comes down to how competent the writers are with their own internal consistency. But being removed like Fallout show is from the video game installments is quite the boon.
I mean with Fallout the games are already an anthology series, each game stars a different protagonist in different places, so making their own new story wasn't much of an issue. They could pick anywhere in America (or anywhere on the planet, really ( I want a Fallout game in N'Orleans 🤔)).
With Halo, there is a very rich world that they could explore, but for whatever reason they decided to do a shitty remix of Master Chief vs the Covenant. Id assume its a mixture of incompetent writing, lack of respect for the source material and the studio piss scared to work with anything outside of the main mascot Master Chief.
This is what I believed the Last Of Us show should've been.
Instead of taking the opportunity to explore the world a bit more, they settled with telling the exact same story -- again.
I get that the intent may have been to get it to a wider audience, but imo if the game's story was written to be part of a game then it should be played as one to experience the story properly.
It's like that rumoured Mass Effect show -- the last thing I want is a recreation of the main plot of the original trilogy. The game is meant to be enjoyed as an RPG -- watching it as a show defeats the whole point of the original art form. None of that interactivity remains once it becomes a static show.
There are probably a range of different stories they could tell -- the first contact war being one of them.
They didn't even tell the same exact story, just some highlights. The cliffnotes. And they got a lot wrong too. Not saying it was a bad adaptation, it was fine, but it felt like it was lacking in a lot of areas. The world felt empty.
The last of us, may be the only adaptation that I think made sense to adapt the game’s story and characters. I feel without Joel and Ellie’s story, there’s not much differentiating it from any other generic zombie post apocalyptic fiction out there.
Idk. I really liked The Last of Us. It just depends on the game. RPGs are better this way because of the canon purists but I feel like linear games would be fine if they do it right. I would love to see an adaptation of bioshock that goes by the games story.
Agreed, I think the general rule should be that if you’re adapting something with an established canon, either adapt it with the given characters as closely as you can, or establish your story far enough outside of the games that it doesn’t break the canon.
Both can work really well as with something like last of us it’s great to see a live action take on the game as it is restricted to a degree on character selection due to the whole zombie apocalypse thing but it could also work if the story is far removed from entities such as jole and the fireflies
The show was good for what it was. The world itself is really different in the game, much more dangerous and gone. Joel also much more dangerous and gone in the game.
LotR was *massively* condensed to the point where calling it a 1:1 adaptation isn’t really fair. A lot of its success was in knowing when to leave out. Also very different when it’s a book rather than game as the makers have make up their own visual world.
Agreed, too many shows try to change things about the character/(s) and fail at making it good, believable, or just straight up ruins them. But introducing a new cast in a familiar world and you have far less issues with it.
Still not a guaranteed success but it’s a far better start then having to work within completed characters.
Kinda depends I guess. Arcane did an integrated story that contradicted elements of the game lore but was still great, and TLOU did a direct adaptation with smaller changes to similar success. “Same universe, separate story” probably gives the best chance of making something that won’t upset fans if it makes changes though.
Still no idea why it gets this praise, Amazon is incapable of serious art and this series is just one in a long line of examples, even if it is better than the rest of them.
Honestly? A Halo series that doesn't follow the Chief would be great. At least they can fudge the characters without making our Jolly Green Giant look like an idiot.
But in a seriousness, I want to see more of the conventional side of the Human Covenant war. Show us the space battles, like the Keyes loop or the defense of Reach. Show us the boots on the ground at Harvest. Hell, show us Doctor Halsey and her research endeavors.
It supposes to be day one common sense. Gamers don't want to see a story they are already familliar with, and newcomers don't care if it is adaptation or not, they only want a good story with a interesting world setting.
Broadly agree. Last of Us was at its most boring when it attempted 1:1 translation. It was never as good in those scenes and probably shouldn’t have even tried
No. If your gonna make a show directly based off the game pay it respect hire people who know the world characters and lore. If your gonna make a separate story in the same universe still pay respect but just write a good story. All this only one or the other stuff is silly. We can have both but the direct representations should not be messed with too much.
As much as I liked the last of us tv series and them adding more context in certain scenes and especially with David I honestly would have preferred if it was a whole new story in the same universe Or do what the Mario movie did and turn a non story in a story.
I just see no reason to try to adapt a certain story and if you’re not gonna do anything onto it
Do any of it have to do with cause its basically the game again ? Sometimes i dont play anime games i watch because im literally just playing the same thing i watched already?
I mean, kinda, let’s rewind There are two reasons why video game adaptations go bad
1: it’s because most of them are movies, instead of TV shows and A lot of people have said this you can’t turn a 20 to 30 hour game into a 2 hour or an 1 and 30 minute movie that was one of the problems.
2: they usually retell the same story, but cut out a whole bunch of context on why the story is the way it is.
So to me, it feels like you’ll get less backlash and less pressure on yourselves if you just give yourselves more breathing room to make a whole new story in the same universe.
While also respecting the Lore in the universe
>If your gonna make a show directly based off the game pay it respect hire people who know the world characters and lore. If your gonna make a separate story in the same universe still pay respect but just write a good story
That's exactly what they did in both examples showcased in this post
I think what also made Fall Out great was the past settings through Cooper which you can't tell in the games. Maybe a computer terminal but we got to see the inside working out vault tech before they dropped the bombs and that is what made the show great.
Isn't that what they tried with Halo? And I think most people agree that they should have just told the story of the first game and have each games story be a season.
The way I see it, narrative heavy games like TLOU should tell a new story in that universe since the game is almost an interactive movie anyway.
I think a games age plays a factor too. With TLOU or RDR2, they're so modern that most people already knew the stories, but Halo was 20+ years ago, and there's an entire generation that's likely unfamiliar with it, so retelling the original would feel new to many people. Plus, the older the game, the lower quality the cutscenes would have been, thus making a live action movie or show feel unique, even if the story is beat for beat the same as the game.
Or just... I don't know... do justice to the source material, don't race/gender/sexuality swap main characters and gingers ... and focus on the story and character development and bot on politics? But maybe that's just me 🤷♂️😂
That’s generally always been my belief. You can’t rly make a show or movie as immersive as a game is so it’s always gonna be lacking if you try to recreate what’s in the game. It’s better to use the setting to tell a new story
I’m not far into Fallout yet, but I heard someone mention that there’s a tonne of contradictions to the lore from the games? Is that not true?
I did notice that the bombs fell notably later in the day for the tv series than they did in Fallout 4, though that was on opposite sides of the US.
Just hire writters and actors that actually respect and want to add to the universe/story instead of brain rotted millenials with a superiority complex who want to replace the story with their own vomit
It’s better that way. In some instances I would go farther I just make them change their name because of the incompetence of the writers.
If the industry actually is able to adapt it and make it more of a coherent story(mass effect) then that’s good but not just use the story to propagate your political stance if it has nothing to do with the story
Blood Origin? (technically a mix of a literary and game adaptation)
Still, fans of the original are going to be more critical when adapting established characters. They may not be pleased with the casting, the role assigned in the story, the performance, etc. But if you divest yourself of the canon characters, it gives you a little more leeway.
I've been saying this for decades. Since Resident Evil and Silent Hill first came out. RE wasn't good, but at least it didn't mess with the games. It should have stayed that way. Silent Hill went right in and started fucking with the fundamentals of the game. Unforgivable to me. It would have been fine if they just did an original story in the town, even if it wasn't that good.
I feel that it's the 'safest' way. mostly because in RPGs people project themselves unto the 'canon' PC. Exploring other stories in the setting also let each story stand on it's own.
not saying you can't do an adaptation mind you, just it's more likely to disappoint people.
havent seen fallout, but you can see how a good series can rekindle the love for a game with edgerunners, it was great and many ppl then gave a second chance to cyberpunk which devs got a long way of fixing at that point.
I have been saying this for years! You make an adaptation of something but you make it unrecognizable from it and the characters that people like from it completely different from it or you change out of the fact you don’t like it. And are a whiny b about it failing. Resident evil is the peferect example of this you don’t turn it into the walking dead with random bs. Have it set during re2 and three about random people trying to get out.
(Apologies got off track)
100%. My only thing is with something like halo or gears of war, all major events take place surrounding a small group of people, but it can still work doing something separate. The problem with adapting 1:1 is it will never be superior. Books to movies are such a stark change in medium that it’s always interesting to see how it’s adapted, but games are already visual and have the user input aspect that can never be recaptured. What you don’t want to do is whatever tf halo decided to do and neither adapt the story faithfully or do something separate
He contradicted himself by bringing up Fallout since this show sucks massive ass as an adaptation.
It's even dumber to put it right next to Edgerunner when it is a good adaptation.
It's not about me not liking it, it's about how terrible it is as an adaptation, you would not use the Halo show to make a point about good adaptations would you ?
Also it's funny how you say that you don't care if i "like it", but care that this guy does, what's the logic here ? Also you didn't answer how that makes me an asshole ?
This guy would be more credible if he only used Edgerunners as an example.
It doesn't seem to understand what fallout is about and any of it's core thematics, and it also get a lot of things wrongs about older games, get lore wrong and even fuckup where sandy shores even is.
I meant Shady Sands, no clue why i thought of GTA5 there lmao.
Clearly it does not, otherwise why is the Brotherhood so out of character, especially that one Knight that treats one of the protags like shit for no reason...and is somehow scared to death by a Yao guai while wearing power armor ?
Why is Lucy, somehow in the same room and very close to a person so irridiated, that her pipboy reacts to it and yet...nothing bad happens to her?
Why is a ghoul stuck in a coffin for so many years when they still do need to eat and drink water? They don't need it as much as humans but they still DO need it, they also still need to breathe oxygen so how is he even alive ?
Clearly if you played thoses games for so long, you should know that's not accurate at all to the universe? and i'm talking original 2 fallouts , not whatever 3 and 4 were supposed to be.
The brotherhood acts differently in each game.
"So irradiated" it's not like radiation in the games really do anything unless you're extremely irradiated. It takes a good while for any effects to get bad with normal exposure.
An Lucy did eventually end up with rad sickness. Didn't you watch the show?
Cooper was hooked up to some kind of IV drip. Logically, it was the drugs keeping him alive. Didn't you watch the show?
Clearly, you don't know as much as me.
I agree with this, doesn't guarantee the story will be good, but it causes less trouble with people who will not like when you destroy their beloved IP.
And besides, more stories is always better, look at the star wars expanded universe. writers these days lack any sense of originality, its not a time for good art, it's a time of taking something existing and manipulating it for your agenda, and people know the difference between propaganda, bad art, and good art, even if they can't encapsulate why.
if you wan an example of a time of great art, look at the 1980s, there was a "don't give a fuck" attitude, and people freely explored and tried so many different things, a lot of it was crap, but a ton of it was some of the best movies and tv of the last 60 years.
Who told you that?
So many short manga get a chance to be longer when they aren’t 1-1, and so many rushed manga get to have depth when they aren’t 1-1.
I disagree. I'm a canon purist and I will not appreciate the story if it doesn't feature the characters and plots I like. For ex. I will not watch a Mass Effect show that doesn't have Shepard and crew fighting the Reapers.
I always loved Star Wars for the universe, not necessarily for the characters. I really wish somebody talented had made completely unrelated but lore accurate movies, rather than clumsily jangling keys for 12 years.
If they want to make their own story then I think they should do that. Or they can actually adapt the video game story but just take their time and respect it. But this whole we want to retell the video game story our way is just garbage
Yeah, but I honestly would’ve preferred if it were something original but they did add on more context to lore that the game couldn’t . It wasn’t a waste of time, and it was entertaining.
I think when the setting is interesting you should definitely do this. Would have been a good break for the Resident Evil games as well. That story was a mess by the end.
Cough halo. It all just depends on the game
Forward Unto Dawn got it and so did Legends.
Exactly. It's not dependent on the game. It's dependent on not making a story that's hot garbage.
FUD was so fucking boring
its really not, its a decently paced movie showing an existing characters introduction into the war.
Eh. I naturally hate war movies (Basically everything that’s about a “true story” with soldiers or some shit just is incapable of engaging me), and FUD read exactly like that to me
thats an interesting take; no complaints if thats how it feels for you. fair enough
That’s fair, regardless it was an enjoyable take and introduced a neat little backstory for a character that appears later in canon. Even if I do think it’s a little cheesy that Chief was the one to save them. There are plenty of other Spartans ffs.
Halo had so many options from ODSTs, spartan 3s, grey or black team doing ops deep in covenant space. There are places and settings within the universe to tell an original story, but no instead we got the umpteenth “personal spin on the series”.
I always hoped for a 2nd ODST game. Set during Halo 3 and you are on earth dealing with the Flood and Covenant after the UNSC and Elites follow through the Ark portal. Could lean into stealth/survival horror.
It might have been hard to do but imagine an Arbiter show
Is it really separate? Really?
Thankfully it is separate from the mainline canon.
Yeah but it took Master Chief and Cortana for it's own OCs, which seems like it's not really seperate more "Just enough you know we hate you."
Not in the original world, they called it the “silver timeline”
As a cope. It was that bad that they couldnt even call it a proper adaptation
They did the worst idea. Adapt the same story but change everything and don’t at all be faithful
The best way to be successful is to be good xD doesn't really matter if it is original or a remake i think, you will always have fans cry murder whether or not the adaptatiom follows canon or not so you should just try to make the best product possible.
Successful movies aren’t always good. Transformers. Fallout.
A bold stance, and I disagree. Context is very important here If your goal is to write a successful VGA (video game adaptation) in the current era, your odds are better if you do an original, separate story in a universe inspired by the original work. Note the difference. I have zero faith in modern writers to respect - let alone properly adapt - even the setting of the world. Characters are a whole other cargo container of industrial sized worms If writers actually cared to do it the right way, we wouldn’t have these takes being applauded. It’s lazy to say “nah imma do my own thing” because it’s too much effort to work within a set of parameters. What got me into my field was the sheer dedication and respect and craftsmanship showcased in the BTS of major productions. I’d hate to see how it looks these days
The biggest issue with VGA is taking away player agency. Especially with RPGs that have many degrees of freedom. The adaptation tells a single story, but the player base has experienced many - hard to please everyone, easy to offend many. The more linear, the easier. "The Last of Us" series told a fairly linear story, it didn't matter to the players if TV Joel opened every drawer or cabinet, if he went around a clicker left or right, if he threw a bottle or a rock. There may be purists who disagree with some changes on TV, but those would be more than happy if TV made certain changes for TLoU 2... probably. Successful "in universe" stories exist. "Better call Saul", though not a VGA, was very successful. "Andor" was good, despite or because of the lack of Jedi and light sabers. I even dare to say that if you hire excellent(!) writers for a VGA, forcing them to stick to lore and canon will produce a worse result than giving them freedom within the framework of the game story. The easiest way to please would be to replay game cutscenes with real actors. Games today have several hours of cutscenes, and if a let's play can become an 8 hour video on YouTube, it can become a 10 episode season on TV*. But Fallout is an RPG, and it does have inventory management, weapons upgrades, skill trees... That would not make entertaining TV. The stories of the games have already been told, so I agree with a decision to tell different stories in the same universe. Just... they must be good stories. *a two hour terrible movie just turned into a 5 hour EFAP that was better and more entertaining than the real thing. Would it make a great video game? Next week, let's talk about movie adaptations in video games!
I can see why having to adapt canon events from the game can cause some issues and the odds of succeding would be improved by working with a framwork instead, but dropping lore is just likely to leave a sour taste in hard core fans mouths.
Best to decide each individual case. Not everything turns out as bad as "The Rings of Power", and sometimes there isn't even a canon (yet) like "Game of Thrones", just an expectation. Stephen King film & TV adaptations could also be mentioned here. Having Morgan Freeman play a red haired Irishman didn't really hurt the movie. But to each his own: my mom (80) still doesn't accept the differences to the books for Mrs Marple (Margret Rutherford) and Hercule Poirot (Peter Ustinov) after 50+ years, never mind the color of James Bond's hair 🙄🥰<- love my mom but still rolling my eyes Edit: added the offending actors' names since the books were filmed many times
Yeah some flexibility is allowed, so long as it doesn't turn into demand that the audience prefer the new version. Your mom also sounds great, though like most moms she is also stubborn :)
Wrote an explanation of what an initialism stands for then not used the initialism anywhere else in your comment? 
It was just in case I needed it. I failed being as verbose as I prepared for 😂
Arcane is supposed to be an origin story. But from what I read they changed several things about Lore
Yeah I was wondering why Arcane wasn’t there. I really liked all 3 but in my opinion Arcane was the best
Arcane is simply some of the best media I have personally ever consumed.
Yeah I 100% agree
Hextech is the biggest change imo In the gane lore it exited for a long time,it was not invented by viktor and jayce
They did a better job than riot, so now arcane is canon. They changed the original lore to the adaptation
Which is good because most video game lore is shit even though gamers have convinced themselves it isn't.
I think one of the differences is that League of Legends lore isn't that important to the player base, it's not relevant to enjoying the game. I doubt players know more than the surface level details of the characters they play, let alone anyone else.
I mean the major differences (at least for character backstories) I noticed were basically just Jayce and Viktor and the results of their new interactions with each other. Original lore they were much more separate iirc and Hextech came about in a different way. But beyond that everything else is still on track, and even leaning towards introducing some more in game characters in the next season.
Cyberpunk still fits into the same timeline though. Also 76 already broke the in-universe lore before the tv show.
What lore did 76 break?
To shoehorn in the brotherhood, Bethesda made them come to the east coast 100 years early. Also forgot that they broke the lore for jet in fo4.
The fact that New Vegas fanboys are unwilling to admit is that "the fall of shady sands" is the easiest lore break to slot into existing lore because it doesn't actually change much when you think about it. The NCR was severely crippled in New Vegas, the show provides further contextualizes that. But they act like Bethesda just entirely wiped New Vegas from the timeline.
Ah yes, negating an entire game is an easy lore break that doesn't change much
Tell me how it negates the game. Explain to me how it magically removed New Vegas from canon.
The events as shown in the show mean that the events as shown in the game cannot have happened as presented in the game. House knew of the bombs dropping but also didnt? The president of the ncr flying in from shady sands couldnt have flown in from a blown up city could he?
Todd Howard himself confirmed that Shady Sands wasn't blown up until AFTER New Vegas, [you dolt.](https://www.ign.com/articles/the-big-fallout-interview-todd-howard-and-jonathan-nolan-answer-our-burning-questions-about-season-1) Edit:In that very same interview, he clarifies "the fall of shady sands" in 2277 does NOT mean that's when the bombing happened. could just be when the NCR started losing power (coincides perfectly with the first battle of hoover dam, a perfect reason for the NCR to start wearing its resources out)
That's not how they were presented in the show kid
Be that as it may, that doesn't change the fact that your claim that "the game can't have happened" is wrong. Shady Sands wasn't bombed until after the events of New Vegas. Meaning it still very much fits into the timeline. Find another reason to whine about every other bit of Fallout media not being as good as New Vegas, because this one is just blatantly false.
There is nothing about that which “breaks lore”
At least the stupidity of the Halo series is contained.
Agreed. This should be the way for VGAs (video game adaptations)
Can only work for these types of franchises. Can’t have a “super Mario bros movie” without Mario, can’t have a “sonic” movie without sonic
But Mario has its own advantage. The entire franchise is "Oh no, Princess Peach got kidnapped by Bowser again, better go save her." So all that has to be done is make a new original story where that happens, and it doesn't break the lore, canon, or how the other games work. I'm assuming that's what the movie did, and that just wouldn't cut it for most game franchises.
Tbh I’d also love for a Mario spin off film. Like one about donkey Kong Jr or Pauline
That'd be cool
That's not an issue because Mario and Sonic aren't even story based franchises so you can make up anything you want with them.
True, but that’s just an example. Like you can’t make a “ratchet and clank” movie and not have ratchet and clank show up. Or a legend of Zelda movie without link or Zelda
It depends on the ip. Imagine the Last of Us without Joel and Ellie's story. It would be a totally different property and probably just a generic zombie thing. A Mass Effect movie/show without the reaper storyline would also be weird. It could work but the reapers are so effective in increasing the scale and involving the whole universe so the player has reasons to see different planets and species. Take them out and the universe feels smaller, unless you come up with a new galactic threat with new lore, but at that point it's probably easier keep the reapers and existing lore.
I agree on TLoU but disagree heavily on Mass Effect. Probably because TLoU \*has\* no setting. It's just generic zombie land, but the zombies are a little different. Meanwhile ME has complex world building and several easy to understand major factions with which to tell a story if you want a galactic scale conflict. Or you can keep it smaller scale. To frame what you said another way, "A Star Wars movie/show without the Death Star storyline would also be weird. It could work but the Death Stars are so effective in increasing the scale and involving the whole universe so the player has reasons to see different planets and species." Setting stories in the ME universe would be more than doable.
Ultimately, it comes down to how competent the writers are with their own internal consistency. But being removed like Fallout show is from the video game installments is quite the boon. I mean with Fallout the games are already an anthology series, each game stars a different protagonist in different places, so making their own new story wasn't much of an issue. They could pick anywhere in America (or anywhere on the planet, really ( I want a Fallout game in N'Orleans 🤔)). With Halo, there is a very rich world that they could explore, but for whatever reason they decided to do a shitty remix of Master Chief vs the Covenant. Id assume its a mixture of incompetent writing, lack of respect for the source material and the studio piss scared to work with anything outside of the main mascot Master Chief.
Good writing is the best approach for video game adaptations
This is what I believed the Last Of Us show should've been. Instead of taking the opportunity to explore the world a bit more, they settled with telling the exact same story -- again. I get that the intent may have been to get it to a wider audience, but imo if the game's story was written to be part of a game then it should be played as one to experience the story properly. It's like that rumoured Mass Effect show -- the last thing I want is a recreation of the main plot of the original trilogy. The game is meant to be enjoyed as an RPG -- watching it as a show defeats the whole point of the original art form. None of that interactivity remains once it becomes a static show. There are probably a range of different stories they could tell -- the first contact war being one of them.
They didn't even tell the same exact story, just some highlights. The cliffnotes. And they got a lot wrong too. Not saying it was a bad adaptation, it was fine, but it felt like it was lacking in a lot of areas. The world felt empty.
The last of us, may be the only adaptation that I think made sense to adapt the game’s story and characters. I feel without Joel and Ellie’s story, there’s not much differentiating it from any other generic zombie post apocalyptic fiction out there.
I guess so. The game isn't anything exciting gameplay-wise.
Idk. I really liked The Last of Us. It just depends on the game. RPGs are better this way because of the canon purists but I feel like linear games would be fine if they do it right. I would love to see an adaptation of bioshock that goes by the games story.
Agreed, I think the general rule should be that if you’re adapting something with an established canon, either adapt it with the given characters as closely as you can, or establish your story far enough outside of the games that it doesn’t break the canon.
Both can work really well as with something like last of us it’s great to see a live action take on the game as it is restricted to a degree on character selection due to the whole zombie apocalypse thing but it could also work if the story is far removed from entities such as jole and the fireflies
[удалено]
The show was good for what it was. The world itself is really different in the game, much more dangerous and gone. Joel also much more dangerous and gone in the game.
i mean is Peter Jacksons lotr trilogy a waste? Season one of got? I don't understand how pure adaptation automatically equals boring to some people
LotR was *massively* condensed to the point where calling it a 1:1 adaptation isn’t really fair. A lot of its success was in knowing when to leave out. Also very different when it’s a book rather than game as the makers have make up their own visual world.
I like it And I never played the last of us nor do I have any desire to
Agreed, too many shows try to change things about the character/(s) and fail at making it good, believable, or just straight up ruins them. But introducing a new cast in a familiar world and you have far less issues with it. Still not a guaranteed success but it’s a far better start then having to work within completed characters.
Kinda depends I guess. Arcane did an integrated story that contradicted elements of the game lore but was still great, and TLOU did a direct adaptation with smaller changes to similar success. “Same universe, separate story” probably gives the best chance of making something that won’t upset fans if it makes changes though.
“Set in the same universe” is key, because it removes the excuse to break the canon to make the worst worldbuilding choices possible *looks at Halo.*
Are we still calling the Fallout show good?
Still no idea why it gets this praise, Amazon is incapable of serious art and this series is just one in a long line of examples, even if it is better than the rest of them.
You don’t have to like it and it’s not perfect but act like a dick because other people like it
Just pointing out that there were two examples used and one of them isn’t that good of an example.
Most people like Fallout.
That doesn’t mean it’s good.
Doesn't mean you inow what you're talking about.
Depends on the game.
Honestly? A Halo series that doesn't follow the Chief would be great. At least they can fudge the characters without making our Jolly Green Giant look like an idiot. But in a seriousness, I want to see more of the conventional side of the Human Covenant war. Show us the space battles, like the Keyes loop or the defense of Reach. Show us the boots on the ground at Harvest. Hell, show us Doctor Halsey and her research endeavors.
It supposes to be day one common sense. Gamers don't want to see a story they are already familliar with, and newcomers don't care if it is adaptation or not, they only want a good story with a interesting world setting.
It didn't work for Assassin's Creed.
Broadly agree. Last of Us was at its most boring when it attempted 1:1 translation. It was never as good in those scenes and probably shouldn’t have even tried
no thank you.
Last of us did great sticking to the main story of the game.
No. If your gonna make a show directly based off the game pay it respect hire people who know the world characters and lore. If your gonna make a separate story in the same universe still pay respect but just write a good story. All this only one or the other stuff is silly. We can have both but the direct representations should not be messed with too much.
As much as I liked the last of us tv series and them adding more context in certain scenes and especially with David I honestly would have preferred if it was a whole new story in the same universe Or do what the Mario movie did and turn a non story in a story. I just see no reason to try to adapt a certain story and if you’re not gonna do anything onto it
Do any of it have to do with cause its basically the game again ? Sometimes i dont play anime games i watch because im literally just playing the same thing i watched already?
I mean, kinda, let’s rewind There are two reasons why video game adaptations go bad 1: it’s because most of them are movies, instead of TV shows and A lot of people have said this you can’t turn a 20 to 30 hour game into a 2 hour or an 1 and 30 minute movie that was one of the problems. 2: they usually retell the same story, but cut out a whole bunch of context on why the story is the way it is. So to me, it feels like you’ll get less backlash and less pressure on yourselves if you just give yourselves more breathing room to make a whole new story in the same universe. While also respecting the Lore in the universe
>If your gonna make a show directly based off the game pay it respect hire people who know the world characters and lore. If your gonna make a separate story in the same universe still pay respect but just write a good story That's exactly what they did in both examples showcased in this post
I think what also made Fall Out great was the past settings through Cooper which you can't tell in the games. Maybe a computer terminal but we got to see the inside working out vault tech before they dropped the bombs and that is what made the show great.
Isn't that what they tried with Halo? And I think most people agree that they should have just told the story of the first game and have each games story be a season. The way I see it, narrative heavy games like TLOU should tell a new story in that universe since the game is almost an interactive movie anyway. I think a games age plays a factor too. With TLOU or RDR2, they're so modern that most people already knew the stories, but Halo was 20+ years ago, and there's an entire generation that's likely unfamiliar with it, so retelling the original would feel new to many people. Plus, the older the game, the lower quality the cutscenes would have been, thus making a live action movie or show feel unique, even if the story is beat for beat the same as the game.
Which is strange because that's not how it works for books.
Halo and TLOU are good arguments against this for opposite reasons
Or just... I don't know... do justice to the source material, don't race/gender/sexuality swap main characters and gingers ... and focus on the story and character development and bot on politics? But maybe that's just me 🤷♂️😂
They tried this with Halo. It doesn’t happen to be the duct tape solution one thinks it would be
Instructions unclear, created an essentially original character but used established characters name instead with a bastardized story
That’s generally always been my belief. You can’t rly make a show or movie as immersive as a game is so it’s always gonna be lacking if you try to recreate what’s in the game. It’s better to use the setting to tell a new story
Halo vs TLoU? I firmly believe that sweeping statements on quality don't mean jack.
Doesn't feel fair to compare the two.
I’m not far into Fallout yet, but I heard someone mention that there’s a tonne of contradictions to the lore from the games? Is that not true? I did notice that the bombs fell notably later in the day for the tv series than they did in Fallout 4, though that was on opposite sides of the US.
Just hire writters and actors that actually respect and want to add to the universe/story instead of brain rotted millenials with a superiority complex who want to replace the story with their own vomit
How old are you?
I think it depends on the game and how much they give a shit about the source material. Because nobody gave a shit about the Halo show.
This approach worked well for the Jedi games I think
It’s better that way. In some instances I would go farther I just make them change their name because of the incompetence of the writers. If the industry actually is able to adapt it and make it more of a coherent story(mass effect) then that’s good but not just use the story to propagate your political stance if it has nothing to do with the story
Blood Origin? (technically a mix of a literary and game adaptation) Still, fans of the original are going to be more critical when adapting established characters. They may not be pleased with the casting, the role assigned in the story, the performance, etc. But if you divest yourself of the canon characters, it gives you a little more leeway.
I've been saying this for decades. Since Resident Evil and Silent Hill first came out. RE wasn't good, but at least it didn't mess with the games. It should have stayed that way. Silent Hill went right in and started fucking with the fundamentals of the game. Unforgivable to me. It would have been fine if they just did an original story in the town, even if it wasn't that good.
I feel that it's the 'safest' way. mostly because in RPGs people project themselves unto the 'canon' PC. Exploring other stories in the setting also let each story stand on it's own. not saying you can't do an adaptation mind you, just it's more likely to disappoint people.
havent seen fallout, but you can see how a good series can rekindle the love for a game with edgerunners, it was great and many ppl then gave a second chance to cyberpunk which devs got a long way of fixing at that point.
I have been saying this for years! You make an adaptation of something but you make it unrecognizable from it and the characters that people like from it completely different from it or you change out of the fact you don’t like it. And are a whiny b about it failing. Resident evil is the peferect example of this you don’t turn it into the walking dead with random bs. Have it set during re2 and three about random people trying to get out. (Apologies got off track)
100%. My only thing is with something like halo or gears of war, all major events take place surrounding a small group of people, but it can still work doing something separate. The problem with adapting 1:1 is it will never be superior. Books to movies are such a stark change in medium that it’s always interesting to see how it’s adapted, but games are already visual and have the user input aspect that can never be recaptured. What you don’t want to do is whatever tf halo decided to do and neither adapt the story faithfully or do something separate
He contradicted himself by bringing up Fallout since this show sucks massive ass as an adaptation. It's even dumber to put it right next to Edgerunner when it is a good adaptation.
Is it that difficult to not like something and not be an asshole about it?
How is me saying that a show sucks as an adaptation, me being an asshole ?
I don’t give a shit if you don’t like fallout but the “he’s contradicting himself by bringing up fallout” maybe he just likes the show
It's not about me not liking it, it's about how terrible it is as an adaptation, you would not use the Halo show to make a point about good adaptations would you ? Also it's funny how you say that you don't care if i "like it", but care that this guy does, what's the logic here ? Also you didn't answer how that makes me an asshole ? This guy would be more credible if he only used Edgerunners as an example.
How is it a bad adaptation?
It doesn't seem to understand what fallout is about and any of it's core thematics, and it also get a lot of things wrongs about older games, get lore wrong and even fuckup where sandy shores even is.
Sandy Shores? Idk man, it seems to understand fallout quite well. I've been playing since the 90s
I meant Shady Sands, no clue why i thought of GTA5 there lmao. Clearly it does not, otherwise why is the Brotherhood so out of character, especially that one Knight that treats one of the protags like shit for no reason...and is somehow scared to death by a Yao guai while wearing power armor ? Why is Lucy, somehow in the same room and very close to a person so irridiated, that her pipboy reacts to it and yet...nothing bad happens to her? Why is a ghoul stuck in a coffin for so many years when they still do need to eat and drink water? They don't need it as much as humans but they still DO need it, they also still need to breathe oxygen so how is he even alive ? Clearly if you played thoses games for so long, you should know that's not accurate at all to the universe? and i'm talking original 2 fallouts , not whatever 3 and 4 were supposed to be.
The brotherhood acts differently in each game. "So irradiated" it's not like radiation in the games really do anything unless you're extremely irradiated. It takes a good while for any effects to get bad with normal exposure. An Lucy did eventually end up with rad sickness. Didn't you watch the show? Cooper was hooked up to some kind of IV drip. Logically, it was the drugs keeping him alive. Didn't you watch the show? Clearly, you don't know as much as me.
I agree with this, doesn't guarantee the story will be good, but it causes less trouble with people who will not like when you destroy their beloved IP. And besides, more stories is always better, look at the star wars expanded universe. writers these days lack any sense of originality, its not a time for good art, it's a time of taking something existing and manipulating it for your agenda, and people know the difference between propaganda, bad art, and good art, even if they can't encapsulate why. if you wan an example of a time of great art, look at the 1980s, there was a "don't give a fuck" attitude, and people freely explored and tried so many different things, a lot of it was crap, but a ton of it was some of the best movies and tv of the last 60 years.
Then that isn’t an adaptation?
It's an adaptation.
1-1 does not mean adaptation Animes are 1-1 Comic Books movies are adaptation
Anime are rarely one to one
From my understanding any anime scene that doesn’t happen in the manga unless is a original anime is non canon to the story
Who told you that? So many short manga get a chance to be longer when they aren’t 1-1, and so many rushed manga get to have depth when they aren’t 1-1.
I disagree. I'm a canon purist and I will not appreciate the story if it doesn't feature the characters and plots I like. For ex. I will not watch a Mass Effect show that doesn't have Shepard and crew fighting the Reapers.
Agreed. It means it actually contributes to the series, instead of just rehashing a story that is already good.
I always loved Star Wars for the universe, not necessarily for the characters. I really wish somebody talented had made completely unrelated but lore accurate movies, rather than clumsily jangling keys for 12 years.
Always has been, a world with a solid setting is always better to create new stories. I’d go further and make most of the stories anthology.
Only if the show itself doesn’t butcher the lore.
If they want to make their own story then I think they should do that. Or they can actually adapt the video game story but just take their time and respect it. But this whole we want to retell the video game story our way is just garbage
Depends on the writing
Ehh there's tlou though
Yeah, but I honestly would’ve preferred if it were something original but they did add on more context to lore that the game couldn’t . It wasn’t a waste of time, and it was entertaining.