Necro, because we have the first trailer.

It looks... meh. Not much there go on, really. To me it looks too clean, rather bland. Fallout should feel... I don't know, grimy? The world should look more "used". This looks kind of... sterile. I can't help but expect it to be a very shallow, surface level adaptation of Fallout. Though, from what I heard of Fallout 4, that would actually make it a very faithful adaptation of Fallout as it is now, so I don't really know what to think :D

Female main character = woke shit. Will wait for the Critical Drinker review.

Has there literally ever been a Fallout game without gender choice?

Dude, you can play as a woman since the first Fallout and Fallout 2 was one of the first videogames to have an option for same-sex marriage

But that's beyond the point, just because some garbage shows and movies have a female lead that doesn't mean it's the deciding factor or even a worrying sign

I'd like this to be good, but I'm too much of a pessimist about video-game-to-film/show adaptations... At least it should be enjoyable to see Walt Goggins do his thing.
Calling it too clean seems like a weird thing to say about Bethesda's Fallouts as they're usually the exact opposite. Hell, people can't even be bothered to properly clear their living spaces of detritus. "Yeah, keeping these old skeletons, random assortment of trash, and destroyed furniture in this ramshackle house of mine is a-okay by me!" *thumbs up* I always found that odd about those games rather than people trying to properly rebuild and clean up as seen in the original games. It's only been a century or two. That's the one criticism of Beth's games I view as quite valid. It's like their denizens don't know what a broom is.

I meant about Fallout 4 being (supposedly) shallow a game that only replicates the surface level iconic elements of Fallout. You know, "power armors are cool and we don't really care what Brotherhood of Steel is about" kind of thing. The "cleanliness" was a separate concern I did not mean to relate to F4. I guess I could have structured the post better to make that clear.

It's a valid criticism for sure, and yet at the same time I wouldn't wish it away, at least from Fallout 3. Even if it doesn't make too much sense, it is part of the great experience of exploring the wasteland that we can see the desolation, see these moments the bombs hit frozen in time in a way. I guess that's why I'm always a bit puzzled about the games moving always and so fast further and further away from the war. A proper modern Fallout game (not a 76-like online abomination) set in a very early timeframe would be most fun for me. That's why I'm disappointed about this show starting out over 200 years after the war. It's an insane decision to me. I'd understand getting there by season 3 or 4 after a few time skips between seasons. But starting out that far ahead? Absurd. I'd start season one 50 years after the war at most.

Yer da sells Avon.

Gettaefugg!

Go pound sand into rubies with that misogynistic crap.

As to the matter of the show? I imagine it'll be about as good as the baffling Halo live action television series, irrespective of who happens to be in the leading role.

20 years ago I'd have been excited. Not any more. Especially after seeing that trailer. Give me more Expanse, instead, please. They respected radiation and The Bomb far more than Todd Howard's Fallout.

How on earth do you go from female lead to "woke shit" without even knowing what happens?

Perhaps it was the Rings of Power "experience" they've read so many memes about.

"I'll wait for someone else to tell me what to think" is exactly what's gotten you to this point right now.

And we're getting more of that too. It just so happens that the first trailer for season 2 dropped just after Fallout.

Honestly, I stopped watching that after the very first episode, I was just so bored. I don't know much about the Halo universe/plot, I only played the first game long ago, so I would have been indifferent to most major changes, but it was just so bland and dull...

Critical Drinker is not always in line with my opinions, but what he does get correct, is the gender role changes. As in, when male characters are swapped, with no change to the logic to being female. Which is not just unrealistic, it is rediculous and insulting to the audience.

Before anyone rants at me, just think about how insulted you would be if a male took any female role and how rediculous that would be with no course correction to the logic of it.

I think if a female were to be the lead in a Fallout show, it would be best to serve up a 80s style MacGyver role. As physical strength would be less believe able. Hell, a Mad Max 3 Tina Turner, would be plausible....oh stop cringing! It is Fallout afterall lol

Right. And do you think we could maybe save that for when it has something to do with the topic, and drop it for now? Because there is no gender swapping going on here, it's just a female character. A new character. In a new story.