@Innovator said:

I think you should watch more episodes, this show is hardly kiddy. It's got sex, nudity, extreme violence. Yes, it's goofy, but the Fallout games are goofy, and this show is very accurate to the games in look, style, satirical humor, and lore (+sex and nudity mods). Many reviewers consider this show one the best if not the best live action video game adaptation so far.

Totally agreed. This is the same team as Westworld which i loved (S1 and S2) and that shows had me hooked instantly. This was good but also a tad slow. I would say most of Ep 1 is prologue. But by episode 4 I am all in on this show. I honestly did not expect the story in the vault to happen since we were already following 3 main characters.

The acting is great in this. the protagonists brother was introduced in ep 1 as an immature kid and by episode 5 we want more of him and his storyline. The main Character of Lucy is great. She plays it so perfectly and I want to see more of her innocence in a place that has none left.

@wonder2wonder said:

@Markoff said:

I recently tried watching Brothers Sun and it was racist crap full of dumb stereotypes by someone without clue about China, 3 Body problem was nice surprise quite decent show, The regime was complete trash (and I come from post commie country, so I should be able to appreciate it, but it was trying too much into extremes), Fallout slightly better but still too childish with no depth and yesterday I finished Ripley which I enjoyed a lot despite knowing the story and one woke actor who almost ruined the show, it has great main character acting, amazing camera, great production. So out of 5 shows I gave up on 3 and enjoyed only 2, Fallout is overrated by game fans and kids, you can see it if you look how they voted, most of the votes are 10/10 as if this was done next Breaking Bad or other cult classics, while it will be forgotten in few months.

In the past two days TMDb has gone from 85% to 86% with 33 more users giving it a 10/10. On Rotten Tomatoes the critics rating went from 93% to 94%. On Metacritic the user score is up from 6.9 to 7.0.

The - often negative - YouTube critics with their hundreds of thousand - millions subscribers have given it a thumbs up, so all their followers will be giving it high ratings. This must be an exception, because it is expected that they will hate watch "Velma" and "Rings of Power".

Yeah, I saw critical drinker gave it flowery review. This makes me wonder if he is sold out now.

All these people like something I don't like, it must be a conspiracy.

It's a long running video game series with a lot of fans and it respects that lore and (more importantly) the same themes, it's a well made production with creators who have made some great sci-fi in the past (Interstellar, Person of Interest), with some great performances from some great actors (particularly Walton Goggins).

It's fine to not like it, but it's not hard to see why so many people do.

Finally got around to seeing this and I have to disagree. Was fully expecting to not like it especially given the Westworld people were doing it (that show got incredibly stupid and I never finished it), but I was pleasantly surprised at how fun, gory, and creative this show was. Never played the games so this was all new to me.

It's not a perfect show by any means but I would absolutely watch another season as long as it doesn't get stupid like Westworld did. Walton Goggins as the Ghoul is the clear standout, they could kill off everyone else and keep him around and I'd still watch.

All these videogames are completely missing me, but I have to admit Last of us was way way better TV shows than this, it felt much more adult. Btw. I'm just watching Mars (2016), which had trashing reviews and find it surprisingly good/interesting, can't say same about Snowpiercer.

@Markoff said:

Are all TMDb users kids playing video games? I tried to watch this, but gave up after two episodes, it feels like some Disney channel TV show for teenagers, extremely dumb black and white flat characters, nothing really happening here and only thing that stands out is the name, if this was not supported by Fallout branding it would tank in ratings. I mean nothing wrong about video games, after all people playing Fallout back in the days are now already way beyond their childhood, so why not make adult TV show instead of this kiddie nonsense.

Users nowadays are really like kids rating with 10 their favorite game instead of rating actual TV show, this has even higher rating than pretty decent Silo on similar topic. I wouldn't say Silo is some amazing TV show, but certainly more adult and way better than this kiddie show, it blows my mind these two shows have comparable ratings.

What I'm thinking is that very few people actually score the shows from a professional perspective. Most people just give ratings based on their feelings.

As you said, it's possible they came for the name, didn't actually watch it, and just gave it a rating before leaving. For example, serial experiments lain and Samurai Champloo, these two anime, maybe a lot of people recommend them, but personally, I can only appreciate the music derived from them, I can't watch the anime itself.

For example, Demon Slayer and Sex Education, the first two seasons of the shows were very appealing to me, while the remaining two seasons were the parts I disliked

Even so, I still rate Demon Slayer and Sex Education 7 to 8 out of 10

This is the rating for his first two seasons; as for the latter two seasons, I will just consider them as if they were never produced.

This is the rating from ordinary people. Giving a high score to a show may be due to a few aspects being exceptionally well done, which evoke emotional responses, or it could be that both strengths and weaknesses are very prominent. Overall, the flaws do not overshadow the merits, so a high score is reluctantly awarded.

Rotten Tomatoes, the rating site, has long since deviated from its original intent at the time of its creation

Rotten Tomatoes simply provides a binary judgment based on the platform's interpretation of a review, categorizing it as either positive or negative. If a review is ambiguous in tone and expression, will the website rate it as good or bad?

What I want to say is this: whether it's the score you want to give yourself or the artificial score formed by popular acclaim, it's all very subjective. Just because a lot of people think something, it doesn't mean their evaluation is correct

@谭哞哞 said:

@Markoff said:

Are all TMDb users kids playing video games? I tried to watch this, but gave up after two episodes, it feels like some Disney channel TV show for teenagers, extremely dumb black and white flat characters, nothing really happening here and only thing that stands out is the name, if this was not supported by Fallout branding it would tank in ratings. I mean nothing wrong about video games, after all people playing Fallout back in the days are now already way beyond their childhood, so why not make adult TV show instead of this kiddie nonsense.

Users nowadays are really like kids rating with 10 their favorite game instead of rating actual TV show, this has even higher rating than pretty decent Silo on similar topic. I wouldn't say Silo is some amazing TV show, but certainly more adult and way better than this kiddie show, it blows my mind these two shows have comparable ratings.

What I'm thinking is that very few people actually score the shows from a professional perspective. Most people just give ratings based on their feelings.

As you said, it's possible they came for the name, didn't actually watch it, and just gave it a rating before leaving. For example, serial experiments lain and Samurai Champloo, these two anime, maybe a lot of people recommend them, but personally, I can only appreciate the music derived from them, I can't watch the anime itself.

For example, Demon Slayer and Sex Education, the first two seasons of the shows were very appealing to me, while the remaining two seasons were the parts I disliked

Even so, I still rate Demon Slayer and Sex Education 7 to 8 out of 10

This is the rating for his first two seasons; as for the latter two seasons, I will just consider them as if they were never produced.

This is the rating from ordinary people. Giving a high score to a show may be due to a few aspects being exceptionally well done, which evoke emotional responses, or it could be that both strengths and weaknesses are very prominent. Overall, the flaws do not overshadow the merits, so a high score is reluctantly awarded.

Rotten Tomatoes, the rating site, has long since deviated from its original intent at the time of its creation

Rotten Tomatoes assigns its own subjective score to a review and then aggregates it into an overall score. If a review doesn't say good things about the film, nor bad things about the film, will Rotten Tomatoes necessarily give it a score of 5 out of 10?

What I want to say is this: whether it's the score you want to give yourself or the artificial score formed by popular acclaim, it's all very subjective. Just because a lot of people think something, it doesn't mean their evaluation is correct

Also, I recall a film that received a very low audience score on Rotten Tomatoes, prompting the platform to adjust the weight of audience reviews and artificially inflate its rating. However, I can't remember what film it was.

@Markoff said:

All these videogames are completely missing me, but I have to admit Last of us was way way better TV shows than this, it felt much more adult. Btw. I'm just watching Mars (2016), which had trashing reviews and find it surprisingly good/interesting, can't say same about Snowpiercer.

If it took itself more seriously, it wouldn't be Fallout. Ain't that the point of an adaptation? Or in this case (as it's supposed to be cannon), a continuation of the series. it's like asking for a serious hard sci-fi adaptation of Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, absolutely no one who has read the book wants that.

@谭哞哞 said:

Also, I recall a film that received a very low audience score on Rotten Tomatoes, prompting the platform to adjust the weight of audience reviews and artificially inflate its rating. However, I can't remember what film it was.

Captain Marvel most likely. At least it began with Captain Marvel. The people that run RT are connected to Disney and so protect bad Disney productions from bad ratings.

Personally I consider Fallout show to be some twisted take on The Wizard of Oz, though I am not sure if it also appears in the games as I didn't play them. But I was impressed from the first episode and thoroughly enjoyed the show, which is evolving through the episodes and adds more and more layers to the story and to the characters. It is a good show, some people don't have enough patience to appreciate it.

@Innovator said:

@Markoff said:

All these videogames are completely missing me, but I have to admit Last of us was way way better TV shows than this, it felt much more adult. Btw. I'm just watching Mars (2016), which had trashing reviews and find it surprisingly good/interesting, can't say same about Snowpiercer.

If it took itself more seriously, it wouldn't be Fallout. Ain't that the point of an adaptation? Or in this case (as it's supposed to be cannon), a continuation of the series. it's like asking for a serious hard sci-fi adaptation of Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, absolutely no one who has read the book wants that.

Adaptations also heavily depend on the technical aspects; for example, the program "Under the Dome" is completely sci-fi trash, but the actor, who plays Hank, the drug enforcement officer from "Breaking Bad," has no issues with his acting—it's the script that's extremely poor.

The Expanse, a science fiction series about space colonization based on a novel, was produced by another studio in its first few seasons, before being taken over by Amazon in later seasons. While we should thank Amazon for giving the story an ending, Amazon's work is actually a bit of a let-down, not as good as the original production team

@cswood said:

@谭哞哞 said:

Also, I recall a film that received a very low audience score on Rotten Tomatoes, prompting the platform to adjust the weight of audience reviews and artificially inflate its rating. However, I can't remember what film it was.

Captain Marvel most likely. At least it began with Captain Marvel. The people that run RT are connected to Disney and so protect bad Disney productions from bad ratings.

LOL, I thought it was the Disney live-action version of Mulan. Btw, The Little Mermaid is also a terrible movie, and they wasted a lot of money advertising it everywhere.

@谭哞哞 said:

The Expanse, a science fiction series about space colonization based on a novel, was produced by another studio in its first few seasons, before being taken over by Amazon in later seasons. While we should thank Amazon for giving the story an ending, Amazon's work is actually a bit of a let-down, not as good as the original production team

The production team didn't change, just the network.

The Rotten Tomatoes changes prevented manipulation by people who hadn't seen the movies (you had to verify you had a ticket) and previously you could leave a review before a movie was even released. There was manipulation in both directions, but the brigading of the incels against Captain Marvel was the primary reason. (It didn't hurt the movie, it still made far more than Guardians 3, Dr Strange and Thor released after it.)

@谭哞哞 said:

@Innovator said:

@Markoff said:

All these videogames are completely missing me, but I have to admit Last of us was way way better TV shows than this, it felt much more adult. Btw. I'm just watching Mars (2016), which had trashing reviews and find it surprisingly good/interesting, can't say same about Snowpiercer.

If it took itself more seriously, it wouldn't be Fallout. Ain't that the point of an adaptation? Or in this case (as it's supposed to be cannon), a continuation of the series. it's like asking for a serious hard sci-fi adaptation of Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, absolutely no one who has read the book wants that.

Adaptations also heavily depend on the technical aspects; for example, the program "Under the Dome" is completely sci-fi trash, but the actor, who plays Hank, the drug enforcement officer from "Breaking Bad," has no issues with his acting—it's the script that's extremely poor.

The Expanse, a science fiction series about space colonization based on a novel, was produced by another studio in its first few seasons, before being taken over by Amazon in later seasons. While we should thank Amazon for giving the story an ending, Amazon's work is actually a bit of a let-down, not as good as the original production team

In the technical sense, the studio that made the Fallout games, Bethesda, had a lot of oversite into the production, as well as provided the production with the actual 3D models from the games. Even all the music and sound fx from the games were used in the series. Hence why it looked, sounded, and felt like the games. As for its writing, Jonathan Nolan himself stated what attracted him to the project (other than he was a fan of the games) was its satirical dark humor. Even the most prestigious gaming magazine, IGN, gave the series a 9 out of 10, saying "stands up there with The Last of Us among the best game adaptations ever made."

@Markoff said:

Are all TMDb users kids playing video games? I tried to watch this, but gave up after two episodes, it feels like some Disney channel TV show for teenagers, extremely dumb black and white flat characters, nothing really happening here and only thing that stands out is the name, if this was not supported by Fallout branding it would tank in ratings. I mean nothing wrong about video games, after all people playing Fallout back in the days are now already way beyond their childhood, so why not make adult TV show instead of this kiddie nonsense.

Users nowadays are really like kids rating with 10 their favorite game instead of rating actual TV show, this has even higher rating than pretty decent Silo on similar topic. I wouldn't say Silo is some amazing TV show, but certainly more adult and way better than this kiddie show, it blows my mind these two shows have comparable ratings.

Tried watching it—may have lasted three episodes—gave up. But MAYBE only for now!

Swear it’s like everyone associated with this series is laughing at us just for watching. Almost, expected one of the characters to wink at the camera.

Yet, it’s one of my favorite genres, AND I’m a big fan of some of the cast.

I can’t give my word that I won’t give it another look-see.