Is it just me or did fallout get shallower and shallower, or more dumbed down, in each successive version?
I mean, certainly the technology and gameplay improved in various interesting ways with each release, and I am not knocking any of the games because I greatly enjoy playing all 3.
But just the background story itself, the premise of the game seems to become shallower and shallower.
In Fallout 1, the reasons for the war were things like human greed, limited resources, fighting over the last scraps, giving real historical accounts of famous or infamous leaders.
In Fallout 2, the reasons for the war were again human greed, but nothing much more was said about it.
In Fallout 3, the reasons for the war were terror (?), or something like that. Can't quite remember.
My memory is vague as to the exact words, but I just get the impression each successive game cared less about building atmosphere and involving one in the game on an intellectual as well as visceral level. Does anyone feel this way or is it just me?

Actually, I just watched the Fallout 3 intro on YouTube, and it doesn't mention any reason for the war at all. It just says "The destructive nature of man could sustain itself no longer."

Hell even the intro speech in 3 was shorter than the first 2 FO's....

what console gamer has that kind of attention span, to watch a video for so long?
Answer: Metal Gear Solid 4 players.

Why does it happen? I doubt it's purely to do with console gamers.
What reasons are there to avoid politicizing games? Did the first fallout game in some way imply that our own greed made us comparable to Hitler? Did this impact sales, was it too controversial, does the government pay game studios to dumb games down? Or do game studios simply aim for the lowest common denominator in terms of intelligence?
I don't know... any thoughts?

You just did that to get someone to mention Godwin's Law didn't you? Though honestly if you really think that the Fallout 1intro somehow implied that the US's greed was "comparable to Hitler" which in itself is a confusing statement, I'd like to know why.
There's no doubt that modern game studios aim for the lowest common denominator. The stupid are the majority so there are lots of them and they're stupid so they're easy to con. The point is, games used to be about more than just making as much money as possible with as little effort as possible.
"does the government pay game studios to dumb games down?" Seriously? You're seriously asking a question like that? Well I wouldn't be surprised if some politician somewhere has. I'm sure some of them believe the bullshit they spout with as much fervency as their minions, but really, how could we possibly know one way or the other?

Well hitler was greedy for control which makes him rather similar to EA so you could make a pretty tenuous link there.
The government paying to dumb games down is straying rather obviously into tinfoil fedora territory so I'm guessing it's a joke. That or we've found an opponent for Jack Thompson in "Massive Delusion: The Gameshow"

Speaking of Jack Thompson...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bermuda_Syndrome

Well each successive Fallout is farther and farther away in time from the actual Great War. Therefore, I always assumed that the actual reasons for the war get fuzzier in the minds of the survivors.

But Fallout 3's lore is almost too ridiculous to be canonical, so that about voids whatever tie-in it has to the first 2 games
I still can't get into the game. It's been 3 weeks since I last played it - I stopped playing it for (arguably) better games like Dead Space and Space Rangers 2. I'm sorry I just don't care much for B-grade movie violence type of combat in my RPGs, as the story just can't seem to grip me enough

Antihippie, that's a decent way of looking at it. I can work with that idea, it satisfies my need for a reason but something tells me it's not really the truth.
Shoelip, no, I do not seriously believe these things I asked. But the purpose of the questions was to promote serious discussion. They are rhetorical questions. Their purpose was and still is to stimulate discussion about what _you_ think are the actual reasons behind the obvious watering down of the games, not about how stupid you think I must be to believe something which you incorrectly assume I believe. The original responses to my first post were pretty pathetic to be honest, "It's because console gamers are stupid retards" or whatever you said, and I wanted people to actually take the issue seriously.
Anyway so that aside I have gathered that from the people who care enough to respond, basically it's either a plot device (the reasons behind the war become fuzzier and fuzzier as memories fade) or it's aiming to the lowest common denominator.
If the latter is true, has anyone watched Idiocracy? I think that movie is happening right now. I mean, for starters people who are considered by modern standards to have a firm grasp on the English language no longer understand basic constructs of the language, including but not limited to rhetorical questions. For instance a detective inspector was talking on TV today, and he said "There is many lines of inquiry into this assault, there is several suspects we are hoping to interview". I mean this guy has a job which once required a fairly decent grasp of language and communication skills. These days it seems that intelligence is aberrant and stupid people see other stupid people as intelligent by comparison.
It's making it impossible to communicate. Try and talk like a normal intelligent person and these fucking idiots start saying "why do you talk like a retard... fag... moron... everyone knows retards are fags".
So I assume shoelip that you're constantly removing your foot from your mouth, hence the name? Or do you have another serve for me from your font of eternal wisdom?
Peace.

What?
What!?
Why do they need to provide the same lines of exposition every new game, the reasons for the war remain, they're just assuming you already knew that from the previous games. This thread is pointless.