The uproar over lore inconsistencies in Prime’s Fallout Show may worry some diehard fans, but it’s important to remember that adaptations like this are separate entities from the original franchise. Details like a whiteboard date causing a commotion over the canon status of Fallout: New Vegas highlight how seriously fans take the lore. The show’s creators should be allowed creative liberty. I recently finished watching Amazon Prime’s Fallout show, although I admit that I didn’t give it my full attention.
Despite not being a big fan of Fallout 4, I enjoyed the show. However, I’ve been following the discourse around the lore with some confusion, as I don’t know as much about the franchise as the passionate fans debating its lore. The show’s big reveal at the end of the first season reframes our understanding of events in the Fallout world, which may not perfectly align with the established lore. While I understand the desire for continuity within a franchise, it’s essential to remember that these events are fictional.
It’s impressive that the showrunners managed to create a compelling narrative within the constraints of an established IP. The decision to move the apocalypse to the UK piqued my interest as an American viewer. The show is a part of a long legacy but should also be allowed to tell its unique story as an adaptation. Franchises are standalone works with creative value and should not be limited by strict adherence to established lore.
Adaptations like this should be given the freedom to adapt and create their own space. Sticking too closely to the source material can limit the creative potential of an adaptation. Fallout is a diverse franchise, including games, spin-offs, and now a TV series from Amazon Studios.
