Fallout Fatherhood. . um Choose sex -1 IOU FEEL INSIDE. H? CHILD. THEN IT SHALL BE. NOW Enter character name, BEAUTIFUL % UH. JAMES? MAYBE roll 'Aal! j? icij! Y comic Dorkly funny Guns games Money Cars Crash father Hood Pokemon meme doge black k lol dunno tags
Click to expand

Fallout Fatherhood

um Choose sex -1
Enter character name,
UH. JAMES? MAYBE roll 'Aal! j? icij!
  • Recommend tagsx
Views: 57895
Favorited: 76
Submitted: 01/22/2014
Share On Facebook
Add to favorites Subscribe to dragx submit to reddit


What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
User avatar #104 to #2 - gardenjustice (01/23/2014) [-]
Just happened to be playing in background, couldn't stop watching.

User avatar #127 to #2 - incoming (01/23/2014) [-]
I'm to scared to look, it sounds like some ****** up porn.
User avatar #130 to #127 - spaceturtlecadet (01/23/2014) [-]
It's not.
#3 to #2 - threetimesavirgin (01/22/2014) [-]
Of all the things I was expecting, that was not it.
User avatar #55 to #2 - tenfatcats (01/23/2014) [-]
i have this set as my ringtone.
#8 to #2 - John Cena (01/23/2014) [-]
#1 - truffle (01/22/2014) [-]
This is why he ran away.
#85 to #1 - clythoris (01/23/2014) [-]
If I remember correctly, his father just left the vault, which in this case would be fortunate for the child because they wouldn't be abused by their parent anymore. Also, they left the vault to be with/find their father. So, if what you are saying is right, then why would they break every single law of their government (Vault) and confront the dangers of the outside world just to reunite with their abusive parent instead of enjoying their newfound freedom and hooking up with the cute girl/tunnel snakes and/or Andy?
Unless, of course you were talking about the father and how he ran away from their weird and embarassing child, which would not make much sense since the father in the comic seems pretty supportive and proud of their child.
Unleeeeess, the tunnel snake is right and he really hated his child and always made fun of them in a sarcastic way, but then why would he stay eighteen years with them before abandoning them?
#114 - ZTerminator (01/23/2014) [-]
First lesson of Fallout
#122 to #115 - John Cena (01/23/2014) [-]
7/10 would thumb up
then I saw 'fixed'
2/10 would not thumb up
#149 to #122 - mytwocents (01/23/2014) [-]
srsly, fixed.
User avatar #116 to #115 - jackmanagan (01/23/2014) [-]
no, no it isnt.
go be an asshat elsewhere
User avatar #9 - I Am Monkey (01/23/2014) [-]
In this feminism course I had to take, one of the students raised her hand and said she was pissed off because she's trying to let her kid pick her own gender and the other kids in her kindergarten are ruining it by having genders and influencing her.
User avatar #110 to #9 - badsamaritan (01/23/2014) [-]
I feel like most of the comments you make are life stories. Not that its bad but I'm being observant
User avatar #17 to #9 - timmywankenobi (01/23/2014) [-]
According to statistics from the last 6 years in Scandinavian countries where they have made great efforts to be gender neutral, gender typical behaviors and job choices have greatly increased. Meaning that society has little to no effect on gender traits and behaviors. Of course all the tumblr feminist called me a raving misogynist pig raping woman hater with a small dick when I gave them the links and stats Proving their hypothesis that gender was a societal construct and not human nature/evolution was bunk.
User avatar #107 to #9 - kanadetenshi ONLINE (01/23/2014) [-]
Those damn kids and their genders.
User avatar #16 to #9 - commontroll (01/23/2014) [-]
I honestly don't see why people hate "gender roles" so much. I don't mean girls being into things that aren't typically girly, or vice versa. In fact when people act like that's a gender role, it angers me, because you can be a straight man and like feminine things, and visa verse for a woman. That doesn't change your gender.

But gender roles in the sense of who does the hunting and gathering, who does the heavy lifting, who does the crafting and child raising, our bodies are biologically made for these roles. Men are made to be the hunters and gatherers, the builders. We're given aggressive personalities so we achieve what we want and work hard for it. We had to develop these traits because women were developing traits to raise children.

We men are expendable once we spread our seed. That means we have to be as strong and fast as possible so we can continue to be useful for our family. If we die, the family goes through a harder time, but gets by. If the mother dies, the offspring will often die, especially if the child is a newborn.

Granted, this was in the wilderness and untamed world. But my point still stands. We have adapted psychologically, physically, and emotionally to handle these roles. However, those who promote female supremacy (as opposed to equalists who instead use the name feminists, but want equality) instead hate their feminine traits and wish to take the traits of the males. This leads to millions of men feeling useless and powerless, and feeling that they are not needed, which leads to higher suicide rates and escaping to power fantasies like video games.

Don't take that last one too hard by the way, I play video games like crazy, but I recognize where that desire comes from.

Quite honestly, this is something that I feel is horribly ignored by the majority of people, and needs to be stopped. I'm not at all a "men's rights activist," but I recognize that both sexes have good things to offer, and we shouldn't steal those from each other.
User avatar #61 to #16 - Shiny ONLINE (01/23/2014) [-]
Society does not still operate on our basest instincts; we operate on mental routines that our ancestors couldn't possibly imagine experiencing. We are not cavemen. The farther we drift from our genetic predispositions, the more sexually agnostic things become, and our genetic differences become little more than trivial fun facts.

"In fact when people act like that's a gender role, it angers me, because you can be a straight man and like feminine things, and visa verse for a woman. That doesn't change your gender."

Then your definition of gender role is different from the general consensus, since this is what it means. The entire reason these things are flexible is because they're so menial.
User avatar #63 to #61 - commontroll (01/23/2014) [-]
Gender is if you identify as a man or a woman. Being into masculine things does not make a female a man, nor does liking feminine things make a male a woman. In fact, I personally think that most emphasis on the most transgendered people are simply coping with childhood traumas usually based from feeling their sex is inferior.

As for the cavemen thing, we have only recently come into modern society. Our bodies and minds still think we're in the stone age. This means mental illness (especially depression) will be on the rise as we try to fight our own human nature.

Society is great and all, but we're hating what our bodies are telling us we should do, and in my opinion nature should take place before society. Now that doesn't mean the men are the important ones and blah blah blah. Nor does it mean **** rules and such. It's in our nature to have order and rules because they help our species flourish. We should also accept that men and women will never be the same, because we are different mentally and physically. And that's okay. Both are needed and important, and both are equal yet diverse.

I personally think "feminists" should stop attacking feminine roles being filled by females, and stop attacking masculine roles being filled by males. That doesn't mean don't let women work, but it does mean as a society, valuing them choosing to be mothers that are actually raising their children, and raising them well. As opposed to having their children raised by nannies while both parents go work.

In the meantime, men have to work even harder to feel useful. If a woman is making the same amount of money as her husband, he's viewed as a deadbeat and a failure, thus he's pressured to lay aside spending time with his family and working even harder and making more so he can prove his worth. It's in us to prove our worth as men. When that's gone, our self-value is gone, and with that we try to prove it in other ways.

All in all, society is crap now.
User avatar #67 to #63 - Shiny ONLINE (01/23/2014) [-]
"As for the cavemen thing, we have only recently come into modern society. Our bodies and minds still think we're in the stone age."

I disagree greatly with this. We have our primal instincts simply because they are a part of our genetic heritage; it is what binds us all beyond our decisions as individuals. One can clearly see how we have distanced ourselves from such savagery even in recent centuries, how we've kept the necessary evils of our biological states in check: by modern IQ standards, our great grandparents would be considered moderately mentally retarded.

If you are not in mortal danger or being forced through measurable mental trauma to survive, you are not being told by your genes what to do. Humans possess the incredible ability of sapience. We can pick and choose to an alarming degree how we fire our neurons, and if we didn't, we couldn't logically hold people responsible for any of their actions. Do you want to live in a world like that?

Honestly, you're tired of something that doesn't actually happen because it's easy to sit in front of a computer monitor and whine that everything sucks.
User avatar #77 to #67 - commontroll (01/23/2014) [-]
I've decided that I can't take you fully seriously, as you genuinely believe that the average person now is more clever than the average person a few centuries back. There has always been brilliant minds, dating back millennia that even now we don't know how they did things. For example, creating an alloy that binds chlorine and iron together that was thousands of years old. We've never figured that one out, or being able to recreate the Great Pyramids on a small scale. The creation of aquaducts, or the dome and arch.

You insult humanity as a whole when you imply our ancestors were morons. If anything the average person back in the day was better at problem solving than we are now, because they didn't have computers to do all the solving for them.

Oh, and that's the thing about IQ, it's about problem solving, not knowledge. So while we'll be able to do more things today thanks to our technology, our IQ is essentially the same as always.

Now, we should hold ourselves to more than our instincts, I agree. However, we should not go so far from them that we become mentally ill, which is happening. You can disagree with that as much as you like, and think that we shouldn't try to stick with the roles our instincts tell us to go for, but it doesn't make you any more right.

All mammals share a similar trait: the males have to prove themselves worthy of having offspring. We have that, though we don't necessarily want to keep others from having offspring, but we do want to have the best offspring we can. That means having them well fed, well raised, and knowing they're safe. Thus we go and get jobs, we work hard, we fight for promotions and we go and achieve things to prove we are worthy of having a genetic legacy.

But society is changing, and within all of us is a war between our instincts, and society. Some battles society needs to win, others, our instincts. I'll let you figure out which one I think should win this.
User avatar #83 to #77 - Shiny ONLINE (01/23/2014) [-]
You are clearly taking everything I am saying out of context, and frankly, you believe things that you adamantly contend to be self-evident, but refuse to acknowledge as a stance in and of themselves, but falsely push them as **** we need to accept because baww, life is bad. This is where the Crusades, the white man's burden, the Inquisition came from.

Your IQ comment solidifies this for me, because you also apparently think you can bend universally accepted concepts as they suit an argument. We've had a very solid idea of what consitutes human intelligence for a long time, and the fact that the Flynn effect exist proves that you are talking out of your ass. There is also the repeated use of the naturalistic fallacy that makes the repeated assumption that people are incapable of making their own decision and feeling their own preferences.
#132 to #77 - John Cena (01/23/2014) [-]
It's a fact the Average IQ of people has been steadily increasing over the last 100 years, however IQ is greatly influenced by education. There is a theory that RT (true intelligence) the brain's natural ability to solve problems and mental agility, has been decreasing over the last 100 years. There's also a theory that 20 000 years ago humans were at the most intelligent, because their brain size in relation to the size of their body was at its biggest, however the human brain is the least understood thing in all of science so it's easy to doubt our ancestors were smarter or dumber than us. But every generation throughout history has thought itself smarter than the last, and then repeated the mistakes of their parents.
User avatar #79 to #67 - commontroll (01/23/2014) [-]
And I believe I am doing something to help change things. One, I'm helping figure out my own views on the matter and solidify them. Secondly, I'm giving others food for thought on this subject, as it's one nobody ever talks about. Everybody knows that men are becoming more and more depressed with every generation, and more and more detached to their families and those around them. Less ambitious.

At least, they are in Western societies. In China, if a man wants any hope of having a wife, he has to be the damn best around thanks to the strict one child laws. Now China is overwhelmingly male in the under 30 demographic. Granted, they also feel no hope because of this and are even more prone to escape. Look at Japan, and they have become so afraid of rejection and failure, many young men do not try. Period. Ever.

In the Middle East, where men are viewed as the head of the families, the sole providers, etc. they have a hell of a lot less problems like men not feeling man enough or having to prove themselves. Except the ones who can't grow mustaches, they get transplants because it makes them so insecure.

So while men in every culture have something that makes them feel unlike men, our culture does so by robbing us of our inherited duties. I'm not saying we should be like patriarchal societies (and actual ones at that) and all women should stay in the house. I'm just saying that maybe, just maybe, we should be more accepting of men trying to fulfill their genetic roles, and women trying to fulfill theirs. If somebody doesn't want to, great, they really shouldn't have kids in my opinion. And they usually don't, so that's good.
User avatar #84 to #79 - Shiny ONLINE (01/23/2014) [-]
"Everybody knows that men are becoming more and more depressed with every generation, and more and more detached to their families and those around them. Less ambitious."

"Everybody knows" is a euphemism for "my feelings say so". If anything, you sound like you're going through some kind of early adult phase of disillusionment, not forming a stance on philosophy. Your view of human existence is sickeningly simplistic and makes sweeping, short-sentence assumptions about entire ******* nations full of people with different lives, experiences, cultures, beliefs, movements, economic influences... I also sense a bit of a persecution complex, because you automatically reduce any non-paleoconservative gender beliefs to absurdity.
User avatar #142 to #84 - commontroll (01/23/2014) [-]
My "short sweeping sentences" are called summaries. I am summing up the data that I have gained through research. That whole failure thing in Japan? It really is happening, most of this next generation won't marry because of fear of failure and a cultural obsession with work work work.

These summaries are from what I've gathered over months, and cutting it down to a few sentences so it fits in the 2000 character limit. Look at the rate of depression in America's young men and tell me I'm wrong. This is affecting an entire generation, and it is and important issue that is never discussed.

Like I said, you can think you're right on this matter as much as you want, but it doesn't make you right. There's some cases where we need to cut back the fight against our human nature, and gender roles is one of them. And that would mean everybody being extremely useful for their family and their community, and they all work hard, but they work hard on the things they're good at.

Though I do need to correct myself. Women are more likely to be depressed than men, but what I was confusing myself with was that men commit suicide more than women. So I was wrong on that matter, however, I take that as even more evidence that women psychologically have a much more difficult time than men with the stress of being the provider. Both are affected by women consistently taking the duties of men. Men become lethargic, and lazy and we become content with women doing more. Try and argue against that trend, it's absolutely everywhere in real life and media. Not all men, but a massive amount. Meanwhile women are bringing stress on themselves that their bodies are only used to during childbirth and rare attacks.

And before you say so what, stress is your body having a fight or flight reaction. You get frazzled and restless because your body thinks you're fighting a lion. Only your body thinks it's doing it for hours and days.

I hope you see the problem in that.
User avatar #147 to #142 - Shiny ONLINE (01/23/2014) [-]
Seriously? You think being depressed is some kind of epidemic? More people are being diagnosed with depression, and many other mental disorders, because more people are willing to be diagnosed. Mental illness is one of the most stigmatized personal issues.

Frankly, traditional gender roles have been as strong as ever. You have absolutely no evidence that gender politics are somehow the reason everyone is depressed.

If you want actual issues to right, our political climate and economic turbulence might actually help. Not your crank whining.
#139 to #67 - chudy (01/23/2014) [-]
The real question is how accurate were IQ tests in the past when they first came into being and can we really judge how intelligent people were way back if we do not possess any means to measure them in person. While widespread education has caused society to rise its overall IQ level (especially in more developed countries) I do not believe that on a biological level our intelligence is far superior than that of a caveman. Take Africa for example filled mostly with piss poor countries lacking good schooling - average IQ score for a sub-saharan is around 70 while an average afro-american scores at around 85, sure there is also a question of crosbreeding but proper learning certainly throws something into the mixture.
The contrast is quite big and after only few centuries, too little time for such change on an evolutionary scale. Cro magnon possessed bigger cranial capacity than modern man but also a heavier build so our brain to body mass ratio are comparable. If you were to raise a cave child from day one other than having a bulkier body it wouldn't stand out too far provided with the same standard of living we have.
User avatar #144 to #139 - Shiny ONLINE (01/23/2014) [-]
That is my point, though. The average IQ of an African hasn't been 75 in most nations for years--after major conflicts like the Rwandan genocide helped bring Africa into the global community, the continent's average intelligence rating has skyrocketed.

Probability dictates that because there is some genetic aspect to intellectual capability, some people will technically be more capable than others, but as research has gone up, so has the predicted environmental influence. It only goes to show how being smart isn't something you're born with.
User avatar #143 to #139 - commontroll (01/23/2014) [-]
Don't forget that even with no education, and African teenager made a wind turbine to generate electricity for his village using scrap metals.
#152 to #143 - chudy (01/23/2014) [-]
I don't deny that and I'm not claiming anyone's superiority. People are born with certain capabilities and education helps them harness their brainpower. Tribal societies mostly don't care about IQ standards or college degree - their thinking is limited to just getting by.
User avatar #153 to #152 - commontroll (01/23/2014) [-]
Yeah, I'm just saying how even with poor education and little to no resources, people are able to figure out how to make things that even we can't make with our education. Maybe we could, but we won't because that's not a problem we need to solve.
#156 to #153 - chudy (01/23/2014) [-]
Problem solving is the very definition of intelligence but not necessarily in the academic sense. IQ tests are meant to be pretty much universal but they are tailored by educated people for educated people - common knowledge is a broad concept, one that cannot be applied with 100% certainty to all of humanity. Logical reasoning may be very well different behind a desk and out in the open, some things do not apply there and vice versa. Our brains are still shrouded in mystery, IQ score is just an estimate it doesn't describe your mental ability "spot on".
User avatar #13 to #9 - hudis (01/23/2014) [-]
She has a point, in a way. There are multiple private kindergartens in Scandinavia that have attempted to eradicate all signs of gender roles and norms and stereotypes from influencing the children, and the only reason it doesn't work is because they see all those things anyway. They know that most truck drivers are men, they know that most nurses are women, they know how men and women typically dress, act, how loud they are, what they talk about, who is typically dominant in relationships, etc.

Now, I don't support such kindergartens (or such methods at all for that matter), but I do find them interesting nonetheless and consider it something worth thinking about (for the simple reason that I consider all things we don't understand worth a lot of thought). However, it's worth noting that without all these influences, we simply have no idea how a boy or a girl would grow up to be, completely unaffected by society's traditional roles for the genders. Most of who we are is made through social means, after all, rather than biological.
User avatar #19 to #13 - timmywankenobi (01/23/2014) [-]

most of what we areas far as gender traits/behaviors is biology brain chemistry ect. There have been studies of babies as young as 4 months old that already exhibited gender topical behaviorism's. since 4 months is too young for society to have had any real impact the choices can be almost exclusively be attributed to the human brains growth and the chemicals and neurological pathway's laid out by evolution. Despite all evidence being against it feminist still claim that gender behavior is greatly if not solely created by society. I suggest you do some research on the topic before you talk about it again lest you look ignorant of science. Well.. Have a good night.
User avatar #25 to #19 - hudis (01/23/2014) [-]
Obviously there are small differences in the brains of infant boys and girls. I mean, they are different sexes. However, the theories and research kind of cancel each other out on this subject. There are many studies that support the view you are advocating, but there are also many that contradict it.

In other words, it's not as simple as 'true or false' - people have been trying to figure this out for decades and there are numerous theories as to exactly how it works, but as you must be aware, it's very hard to measure with any accuracy and the area within which these studies can be replicated on young children and infants is limited.

And please, if you are going to engage in a discussion on science, don't start by generalising all those opposing your view as 'feminist' - a term which I've learned is basically equivalent to "retarded man-hating bitch" on funnyjunk.
User avatar #30 to #25 - timmywankenobi (01/23/2014) [-]
the studies against the view I have taken are non-scientific and are based on the "researchers feelings" and preconceived notions which is typical of many feminist funded studies. I believe in hard science not emotion and preconceived biases that completely taint the work ,if you set out with a result you want to see you will make that result occur through your own bias making your work worthless.
User avatar #34 to #30 - hudis (01/23/2014) [-]
I agree with you, I'm just saying I don't think the studies we have available on this are substantial or replicable enough to be referred to strictly as facts. I do believe that more extensive and replicable studies would indeed show that there are differences very early on that play a role in gender development and motivation if not in gender behaviour itself, however I'm also prepared to be open-minded to the idea that a person growing up without being influenced by society would be quite different from what we perceive as traditional gender roles.

That is not something we can freely experiment with, however, as it would be ethically wrong.
User avatar #36 to #34 - timmywankenobi (01/23/2014) [-]
Hmm Agreed the current data is inconclusive in that respect but it does suggest that they would most likely follow typical expected gender behaviors aside from homosexuals/transexuals who exhibit noticeably different behaviors from 8 months on.
User avatar #70 to #36 - Shiny ONLINE (01/23/2014) [-]
You sound like a tremendous hypocrite, hand-waving any contrary opinions as "feelings" while considering your own confirmation bias correct assumption.
User avatar #125 to #70 - timmywankenobi (01/23/2014) [-]
Not at all I am simply stating the data is not 100% conclusive in all respects more study is needed.
User avatar #145 to #125 - Shiny ONLINE (01/23/2014) [-]
I doubt more studies will really solve anything. Social influence is much more pervasive than just personal choice, and can be very hard to predict, especially across cultural boundaries. That people have sex-specific wires hooked up is in no way surprising, it will be extremely difficult to prove that these biological predispositions actually do make people predisposed toward manmade constructs.
User avatar #188 to #145 - timmywankenobi (01/24/2014) [-]
Ohhh Is that what you were saying ok I think I get you point I was talking about lower brain functions and basic functions in general ,higher brain functions and reasoning from person to person are unpredictable yes but the basic choices people make are easy to study but we are far from being sure exactly why the choices are made. ie we know from studies 96% of male toddlers like toy trucks but not dolls but we don't really conclusively know why they like the toy trucks they just do, but what we can say it is only nominally societal since they are only two years old. There are many other similar examples in the studies.
User avatar #189 to #188 - Shiny ONLINE (01/24/2014) [-]
But kids are very socially malleable. They are not capable of consciously choosing to follow mob rule, but do tend to do what other kids do, that is a common way for them to learn and try to get to know their world. The toy truck thing is strange, because automobiles are a very recent invention, not something written in our blood. So there is no way for them to know whether they are "boy" or "girl" toys. One could argue, for instance, that cars are girl things, since females would be more likely to need machines to perform physical labor.

Remember that I am not denying that there is a difference between men and women--that is idiotic. In fact, I despise some feminist branches because they are strongly against transgendered people, which reinforce the idea of different genders, which is in turn turn anathema to extreme pro-equality thought.
User avatar #190 to #189 - timmywankenobi (01/24/2014) [-]
hmm I suppose you can't really control for toddlers interacting with each other outside of testing. Yes several branches of feminism are staunchly against the existence of transgendered people and thus any need to consider their rights etc, which is quite silly in my opinion. Also of the 4% that did not choose the truck 3% later were found to be something other then heterosexual leaving only 1% of heterosexual boys that didn't play with the truck. while not really scientific it gives the impression that brain wiring,growth and hormones play a more important role in how we make choices then most people would admit.
User avatar #191 to #190 - Shiny ONLINE (01/24/2014) [-]
Or, or, kids like playing with toys.
User avatar #192 to #191 - timmywankenobi (01/24/2014) [-]
oddly specific toys.
User avatar #193 to #192 - Shiny ONLINE (01/24/2014) [-]
So? That says nothing about their genes, your conclusions are nonsense.
User avatar #194 to #193 - timmywankenobi (01/24/2014) [-]
not non sense simply inconclusive but they do lean in a certain direction that is we are strongly predisposed to make certain choices and act certain ways based on brain development in the womb.
User avatar #195 to #194 - Shiny ONLINE (01/24/2014) [-]
There is zero evidence of this. Genetic explanations for behavior are a last choice, and there are countless possible explanations.
User avatar #196 to #195 - timmywankenobi (01/24/2014) [-]
I was leaning more towards growth of certain areas of the brain and exposure to different hormones and chemicals which are unique from gender to gender .

PS.You should see the study that show that homosexual and trans sexual brains grow differently and release different chemicals in different amounts then heterosexual ones and are usually more congruent with the opposite genders brain activity.
User avatar #203 to #196 - Shiny ONLINE (01/24/2014) [-]
Well, correlation is not causation and all that. There's certainly an explanation, but it's probably related to the specific situation.
User avatar #204 to #203 - timmywankenobi (01/24/2014) [-]
User avatar #197 to #196 - Shiny ONLINE (01/24/2014) [-]
I can imagine so, but gender and sexuality are not the same thing. Gender, unlike sex, has a lot to do with conscious thought as well, and that has a lot of direct effect on subconscious thinking.
User avatar #198 to #197 - timmywankenobi (01/24/2014) [-]
true enough, but it is a interesting congruence.
User avatar #154 to #145 - timmywankenobi (01/23/2014) [-]
hmm you raise a good point however I would remind you that over the last 15,000 years we have seen many different cultures with different customs keep the same basic relationships and behaviors between men and women except the rare exception to the rule.
User avatar #159 to #154 - Shiny ONLINE (01/23/2014) [-]
You'd be surprised, some cultures have seen greatly different social norms than ours. Most similar cultures also tend to borrow from each other and have common roots.

Mind you that I'm not necessarily saying these behaviors are bad. I just have a lot of qualms with the concept of genetically influenced higher thinking; it all has the same root in just world logic.
User avatar #160 to #159 - timmywankenobi (01/23/2014) [-]
very few though they are more exceptions to the rule, and no society discovered so far as really left the norm to any real degree, Ie. men protect,hunt,build,invent,explore and fight wars. Women take care of things at home and in the neighborhood/clan etc.
User avatar #162 to #160 - Shiny ONLINE (01/23/2014) [-]
There are plenty of exceptions to this rule. You are making huge assumptions.
User avatar #163 to #162 - timmywankenobi (01/24/2014) [-]
I have only seen a few cases and all of them except one failed horribly.
User avatar #164 to #163 - Shiny ONLINE (01/24/2014) [-]
WIth all due respect, I fail to see why I should care about your anecdotes.
User avatar #165 to #164 - timmywankenobi (01/24/2014) [-]
Hey now you are the one claiming that there have been many successful abnormal societies in which the dynamic between men and women was different. I'm saying you are mistaken not only were their not many but of those few almost all of them we're failures.
User avatar #185 to #165 - Shiny ONLINE (01/24/2014) [-]
"Everyone on my side is right and everyone on your side is wrong"

I'd figured I'd give you a chance to better explain your position. It seems this was wasted time, because you have repeatedly made claims that we both know you will never substantiate and are obviously biased. Every reputable source will say it's a debate, and that the most likely event is a compromise between genes and society. You have also repeatedly dismissed all logic with No true Scotsmans, when the very existence of exceptions proves the rule.
User avatar #186 to #185 - timmywankenobi (01/24/2014) [-]
The "Debate" is between Scientists and Political ideologues with a predominately Marxist agenda(which hinges on genders behaving the same when the "patriarchy" is removed) who would profess the world was flat if it fit their desires or furthered their agenda. See they make more money and gain more power if the scientist's are wrong so they make the issue controversial so the fact they are wrong no longer matters cause now they have a whole conflict going.
User avatar #187 to #186 - Shiny ONLINE (01/24/2014) [-]
Everything in your post is a blatant lie. Evidence by scientific experts that opposes your worldview exists, and is perfectly valid reasoning. You are spreading FUD with a ******** strawman. It won't take me more than ten seconds to find a study by a well reasoned, well educated scientific professional that takes an environmental stance. Political arguments are also distinct and have several sides; should I start assuming you're a racial supremasict because you are hereditarian?

Scientists do not care about politics, and they think it is inconclusive and on a spectrum of influence. This is a fact. Nothing you can say will negate this.
User avatar #166 to #165 - Shiny ONLINE (01/24/2014) [-]
I never said that, you're putting words in my mouth. Whether a society is a "success" or "failure" is highly arbitrary, and the fact that most of the societies we know of well were inherently prosperous and had enough longevity to put their genes in our current pool means they can't possibly be evolutionary failures.
You have also done nothing to prove that any of their cultural norms were genetic, too. See: memes (the actual Dawkins definition).
User avatar #167 to #166 - timmywankenobi (01/24/2014) [-]
well almost all of our genes are from societies that had a typical patriarchal style construct , unless you are part Iroquoian Indian. So clearly we have a genetic disposition to follow a pattern that works.
User avatar #183 to #167 - Shiny ONLINE (01/24/2014) [-]
Claiming that there are studies is no different from saying "some argue" to make a statement NPOV. I can easily find several essays, dissertations and citations claiming the opposite of what you are saying. And no, they are not feminists.
User avatar #184 to #183 - timmywankenobi (01/24/2014) [-]
well since all the top neurologist's (you know the people who study the ******* brain) are on my side with no agenda but furthering understanding of the human race and the universe and on your side of the debate you have a few sociologists on yours who you claim are not backed by ideologues with an agenda. I'm more inclined to believe the brain doctors.
User avatar #180 to #167 - Shiny ONLINE (01/24/2014) [-]
After a quick Google search, I have yet to find any definitive summaries. It is an ongoing debate, not truth one of us refuses to acknowledge.
User avatar #179 to #167 - Shiny ONLINE (01/24/2014) [-]
I very strongly doubt that is true, that it is universal, or that there are no contradicting findings. Feminist theory has nothing to do with biology, it's about ethics, and contends that even if genetic influences do exist, social ones override them. I do not care about these, because they give people an excuse to discredit any and all environmentalist theory as political bunk.

I could not possibly care about what a few studies say, because cherry picking is pointless. Someone always has a contradictory finding, conclusion or theory, and few debates are as crystal clear as, say, whether vaccines cause autism (hint: there are "studies" that claim they do). Arguing on reasoning is what matters.
User avatar #181 to #179 - timmywankenobi (01/24/2014) [-]
As I said there are exceptions to every rule but they are just that rare exceptions. There is no evidence at all to suggest that society has anymore then a small influential effect on most people's every day life and behaviors. Except in obvious cases of peer pressure or extortion. Yes there was a study that was doctored decades ago to make look like mercury in the vaccines was causing autism. later studies found the link to insubstantial. I am referring to over 100 studies at and by universities by scientists over the last 20 years that all show very similar results there for the margin for error is small.
User avatar #177 to #167 - Shiny ONLINE (01/24/2014) [-]
Nothing I've said has anything to do with feminism, it's just an environmental view on human behavior. Documentaries are also extremely boring and full of cherry picked, poorly explained data.
User avatar #178 to #177 - timmywankenobi (01/24/2014) [-]
well the result of a bunch of the studies and research are readily available as well as. I found the studies on child neurological development quite interesting. Gender feminists claim that all gender traits are social constructs forced on people who would act completely different if there were no social gender constraints. All of the scientific studies show that even when you take away as many social expectations as possible the difference in choices men and women make become even more pronounced and normative instead of less as Feminist expected thus completely disproving that theory completely.
User avatar #170 to #167 - Shiny ONLINE (01/24/2014) [-]
I disagree with you therefore I am a feminist? **** off. It's also hilarious that you think YouTube has ever been a reliable source for anything; ever read a medical journal in your life?
User avatar #176 to #170 - timmywankenobi (01/24/2014) [-]
I never said you were a feminist at all, you implied my views were wrong because I disagree with feminist theories . Professional Documentaries can be quite insightful but there is a lot of nonsense on you-tube but you could torrent some of the documentaries from elsewhere or watch them on a different site or even rent or buy them from a video retailer. Yes I have read a medical journal several in fact you should read up on child development and the display of gender normative traits during infancy. The internet is full of interesting things.
User avatar #168 to #167 - Shiny ONLINE (01/24/2014) [-]
You clearly have no idea what you are talking about and likely have a personal agenda in the matter, though I already knew this from your "wah wah feminazis" post yesterday. At least pretend to provide evidence beyind "correlation = causation" next time.

I've had this conversation a million times and know where it will go. I'm done. Have a nice one.
User avatar #169 to #168 - timmywankenobi (01/24/2014) [-]
I have no agenda at all and if you want information on this issue there are some good documentaries on you tube etc. Clearly no matter what I say you will obstinately ignore it so this conversation will get nowhere as you argument as degraded in "you don't like feminist patriarchy theory so you are wrong."
#69 to #36 - Shiny has deleted their comment [-]
#102 to #34 - firesky (01/23/2014) [-]
If you are interested in the subject I recommend you this:
#68 to #19 - John Cena (01/23/2014) [-]
He is citing the well known effects of a nationwide political policy, and you are citing unverified and poorly peer reviewed study #813718.

You are also a ******* retard if you think gays are half-woman or something.
User avatar #123 to #68 - timmywankenobi (01/23/2014) [-]
I only glanced over the studies about homosexuality but my understanding is several parts of homosexual brains are developed like a female brain not a male brain. I am talking about 4 separate studies done in china,Sweden,Canada and the US and they have been thoroughly peer reviewed the gender feminist rejected the findings on ideological grounds not scientific ones.
#45 to #19 - John Cena (01/23/2014) [-]
Hence why it's possible for people who display one gender to be mentally aligned with the opposite gender. Though I'm sure some people choose a gender other than what they're born, there are many who have no choice but to have the mind of one gender and the body of the other. Not sure about how the US feels about that medically, but I know in at least some European countries these people can get sex changes covered under health care because if it's causing them enough stress, it's considered to be a medical necessity.
User avatar #47 to #45 - timmywankenobi (01/23/2014) [-]
Correct you can be born with your brain "set up" as it were for the opposite gender or for gay people half way between both or a 60/40 split.
#136 to #13 - John Cena (01/23/2014) [-]
I've seen this ******** in my country. It makes me angry to see retarded people trying to make your gender optional.
User avatar #137 to #136 - hudis (01/23/2014) [-]
I don't think it ought to make you angry, to be honest. These kindergartens don't force it on anyone; they are privately owned and privately funded, and it's completely up to the parents whether they want their children in such an environment or not. The methods have not shown to have any directly negative effect on the children either, and while the methods succeed with some, it is my understanding that most retain their gender roles anyway due to being influenced outside of kindergarten and home. Even those with whom it succeeds have not been shown to suffer as a direct consequence of this schooling later in life.

From a psychological standpoint, I find it really interesting. From a social perspective, I don't know how I feel about it, but as long as it isn't implemented in government-owned establishments or institutions I don't see why it should make people angry.
#129 to #13 - John Cena (01/23/2014) [-]
Black men and white men are genetically 99.9% the same. White women and black women are 99.9% the same. A male human and male chimpanzee are 98.5% the same. A man and a woman are 98.5% the same. So in fact men and women are as different from each other as chimpanzees are to humans. Just an interesting thought for you. Also you said "most of who we are" is determined by society, greatly false, very little of our behaviour is because of society, it's mostly instinct, such as compassion, helping strangers, speaking, smiling, even gender roles are instinct, women aren't made to chase an animal for 5 hours and then kill it when it collapses from exhaustion, men are built for that kind of stamina. Women are more instinctively better at socializing. Even music is instinctual. You can identify what about yourself is human and what is learned through society by looking at what exists in only your society and what is universal for all humanity throughout history.
#126 to #13 - John Cena (01/23/2014) [-]
me daddy was a nurse and me mamma was a teacher
brother worked in fashion and me sister was a preacher
But now each and every one of their jobs are the same
Cause they're locked up in me basement and bound with chains
#62 to #53 - urapooper ONLINE (01/23/2014) [-]
jokeexplain I summon you
#75 to #62 - ffinfinity (01/23/2014) [-]
In the movie Book of Eli, it takes place in a post apocalyptic surrounding where the main character turns out to be blind yet is bad ass as hell.
User avatar #199 to #75 - hahahaheidi (01/24/2014) [-]
I've watched that movie a million times and I honestly didn't know he was blind.

I need to rewatch it holy **** .
#201 to #199 - ffinfinity (01/24/2014) [-]
It never seems like it but their are a ton of subtle hints like when he opens the closet in the beginning you think he get scared by the suicided person but it was really the door falling down. Or when he was in the gun fight in town he only shoots when he hears sounds and how he stuck his head out to see if anyone would shoot and he didn't do anything when one guy was aiming at him.
User avatar #202 to #201 - hahahaheidi (01/24/2014) [-]
I have no idea how I missed all this.
It really does make the movie a lot more badass than it already was, and more complex I guess, which is cool.
#78 to #75 - urapooper ONLINE (01/23/2014) [-]
ah ok that makes sense thanks
#80 to #78 - ffinfinity (01/23/2014) [-]
10/10 worth the watch imo
#81 to #80 - urapooper ONLINE (01/23/2014) [-]
I've seen most of it. The joke just didn't hit me
#134 - tombobbusama (01/23/2014) [-]
fukkin changing his daughter's name right after she picked it. What a prick.
#14 - alilmetalkid (01/23/2014) [-]
He keeps saying her name wrong anyway...
User avatar #21 to #14 - nocta (01/23/2014) [-]
User avatar #120 to #113 - psychotichemp (01/23/2014) [-]
Hey you, yes you there. Stop scrolling and click that link ^
#103 - specialone (01/23/2014) [-]
Love me some Fallout Logic. Thread time?
#131 to #103 - hauntzor (01/23/2014) [-]
here's one I made
#119 - nolana (01/23/2014) [-]
Jared Leto was born.
User avatar #133 to #119 - lotengo ONLINE (01/23/2014) [-]
no B!KJHDGI^F4 was born, did u even read the content?
User avatar #108 - kanadetenshi ONLINE (01/23/2014) [-]
Nature v Nurture Pretty interesting video on gender roles.
#140 - kolya (01/23/2014) [-]
laughed so hard....more!!!
User avatar #135 - beezox (01/23/2014) [-]
ITS b!kjhdgi^4F not b!kjhdgi^F4
#15 - teamrocketninja (01/23/2014) [-]
But the Lone Wanderer isnt born in a vault. So there shouldn't be any vault suits or Tunnel Snakes ruling here...
User avatar #22 to #15 - ehzio ONLINE (01/23/2014) [-]
This is Fallout 3 buddy not New Vegas
#26 to #22 - teamrocketninja (01/23/2014) [-]
I just always post Legion pics on Fallout posts, you degenerate.
User avatar #18 to #15 - xshredderx (01/23/2014) [-]
>Fallout 3
>Lone Wanderer
User avatar #31 to #18 - nyangiraffe (01/23/2014) [-]
He is actually 90% right. In Fallout 3 you are called The Lone Wanderer. You are not born in the vault brought brought in later after your mom's death and the failure of Project Purity. So there would not be any vault suits in the first few panels because they were not in the vault. The last panel he is wrong though since that one takes place around the time when the Lone Wanderer had to take the G.O.A.T and was not 18, therefore didn't look like you would when you leave the vault.
User avatar #37 to #31 - xshredderx (01/23/2014) [-]
This is new to my knowledge. Thank you, sir. I accept these red thumbs.
User avatar #66 to #37 - exor (01/23/2014) [-]
People admitting the were wrong? Dear god, what has the internet come to...
User avatar #20 to #18 - taintedangel (01/23/2014) [-]
Except teamrocketninja is right, the Lone Wanderer wasn't born in Vault 101. James and his newborn were allowed into Vault 101 because they needed a doctor.
#28 to #20 - teamrocketninja (01/23/2014) [-]
This ************ here, he knows what's up.
User avatar #29 to #28 - taintedangel (01/23/2014) [-]
My knowledge of Fallout lore is superb.

Ave, true to Caesar!
#32 to #29 - teamrocketninja (01/23/2014) [-]
Same here, amicus. Casual degenerates and not knowing things.
User avatar #33 to #32 - taintedangel (01/23/2014) [-]
Indeed fellow legionnaire. They should all be hung on the cross.
User avatar #35 to #33 - anusholeboner (01/23/2014) [-]
Brotherhood of Steel is best faction
#38 to #35 - taintedangel (01/23/2014) [-]
You mean the self-righteous pricks who steal and horde tech and don't share it with the wastelanders they claim to protect?  Those dicks sound like the best faction /sarcasm
You mean the self-righteous pricks who steal and horde tech and don't share it with the wastelanders they claim to protect? Those dicks sound like the best faction /sarcasm
User avatar #128 to #38 - progenitormimic (01/23/2014) [-]
Player faction is best faction, mate. **** the sexist/murderous/arrogant slavers, **** the corrupt bureaucrats, **** the tin soldiers hidden in their bunkers, and **** Ole Wrinkly most of all. Just kill the House and take New Vegas for yourself. It's the best option.
User avatar #40 to #38 - anusholeboner (01/23/2014) [-]
Are we talking about NV or 3 here?
User avatar #43 to #40 - taintedangel (01/23/2014) [-]
Aaaaaaaaalllll of it.
User avatar #44 to #43 - anusholeboner (01/23/2014) [-]
Well, the Brotherhood in 3 arent the ones I meant. I meant the one in NV, now, I know theyre really selfish and old-fashioned, but can you really blame em for being that salty? They were completely rejected, hunted down and forced into hiding by the NCR.
User avatar #105 to #44 - iamnuff ONLINE (01/23/2014) [-]
well, the FO3 brotherhood are the only decent ones.

all the others horde tech and refuse to help anyone, but the FO3 easten chapter abandoned their mission and decided to sit down and help people, as much as possible.

User avatar #52 to #44 - taintedangel (01/23/2014) [-]
All of the Brotherhood (aside from the East Coast Chapter (FO3)) act like they are the self-righteous protectors of the wasteland while hording all the tech they can find. The Mojave Chapter was a very extreme sect of this attitude to the tech hording.

Their quasi-religious ******** started when Roger Maxson exited the Mariposa Military base after he took control of it because of his opportunistic power grab just days before the bombs fell. And when he left it, he made himself the first High Elder of the Brotherhood and leadership has only left his family twice in the main branch since it's founding.
User avatar #54 to #52 - anusholeboner (01/23/2014) [-]
You are obviously very well-versed in Fallout. I see your point, I shouldnt have taken you on when I myself have a very basic understanding of both of them. I just liked BoS better without knowing all the details, but would you mind telling me why people side with Caesar's legion often? They seem like barbarous, awful people.
#57 to #54 - taintedangel (01/23/2014) [-]
Thank you, and it's kool.     
Caesar's Legion, while slavers, actually keep the roads protected and actually seem to be bringing some sense of civilization to the wasteland, albeit in a messy way.  Caesar had managed to conquer 4 states (hand has stable control over them) before he came to Nevada.   
The NCR, while still trying to bring back Old World Democracy, they also brought back it's corruption, greed and inefficient bureaucracy.  They acclimate and tax every area they can and their reach is widespread, but very thin and unstable.  They mean well, but their instability is their downfall.   
Mr. House is a crazy, Howard Hughes-esque character.  He kept himself in stasis for over 200 years with his delusions of grandeur that he himself will save the world with his army of robots and how he will advance the human race's science and technology under his leadership.   
Followers of the Apocalypse are really just travelling doctors and teachers.  They don't stand out too much.   
Great Khans are a raider tribe.  Thye basically just become cannon fodder at the end of the game.   
Enclave are the remnants of the US government, US elite, and big corporate people and were the sick bastards behind the Vault-Tec social experiments.  They see themselves as the genetically pure human race and anyone who has a slight radiation mutation is to be cleansed from the earth (usually with fire).  They also see themselves as the true America and are trying to rebuild it like it was before the Great War.  They even kept electing presidents even up until 2277.  They were that committed to this effort.  The Enclave were even the ones to develop the FEV virus back at the Mariposa Military base back in 2077 and had it also worked on in Vault 87.   
If you want I could give an explanation about the factions from FO 1 and 2.
Thank you, and it's kool.

Caesar's Legion, while slavers, actually keep the roads protected and actually seem to be bringing some sense of civilization to the wasteland, albeit in a messy way. Caesar had managed to conquer 4 states (hand has stable control over them) before he came to Nevada.

The NCR, while still trying to bring back Old World Democracy, they also brought back it's corruption, greed and inefficient bureaucracy. They acclimate and tax every area they can and their reach is widespread, but very thin and unstable. They mean well, but their instability is their downfall.

Mr. House is a crazy, Howard Hughes-esque character. He kept himself in stasis for over 200 years with his delusions of grandeur that he himself will save the world with his army of robots and how he will advance the human race's science and technology under his leadership.

Followers of the Apocalypse are really just travelling doctors and teachers. They don't stand out too much.

Great Khans are a raider tribe. Thye basically just become cannon fodder at the end of the game.

Enclave are the remnants of the US government, US elite, and big corporate people and were the sick bastards behind the Vault-Tec social experiments. They see themselves as the genetically pure human race and anyone who has a slight radiation mutation is to be cleansed from the earth (usually with fire). They also see themselves as the true America and are trying to rebuild it like it was before the Great War. They even kept electing presidents even up until 2277. They were that committed to this effort. The Enclave were even the ones to develop the FEV virus back at the Mariposa Military base back in 2077 and had it also worked on in Vault 87.

If you want I could give an explanation about the factions from FO 1 and 2.
#73 to #57 - teamrocketninja (01/23/2014) [-]
Wait, Im not the only one who honestly thinks the Legion is the best option for long term peace?
User avatar #82 to #73 - taintedangel (01/23/2014) [-]
Out of the choices given, yeah they seem to be the most grounded choice. And what civilization wasn't started with the need of slavery?
User avatar #121 to #73 - strangemoo (01/23/2014) [-]
I didn't want to join them for peace, I just ******* hated the NCR and loved killing things.
User avatar #155 to #57 - anusholeboner (01/23/2014) [-]
Wow, thanks. If it's not a bother, could you explain them seeing as I know nothing before, close, or right after the Great War?
User avatar #205 to #155 - taintedangel (01/25/2014) [-]
Well for starters the main villainous faction in FO1 was The Master's Army. The Master (aka Richard Meraux, aka Richard Grey) was an undoubtedly insane half man/half computer hybrid. He was kicked out of Vault City and wandered the California wasteland until he came to the Mariposa military base and stumbled upon the FEV Forced Evolution Virus virus and began to experiment with it after he had fallen into a vat of it and was stuck in it for months as it slowly mutated him into an intelligent blob of biomass. The first human tests with the virus created 'flawed beings' which he absorbed into himself instead of letting them live. When he perfected the FEV process, the subjects became what are now known as "Super Mutants". The Master used the FEV process to create an army of these "Super Mutants" in his plan to "Unify" the wasteland under his control until he is killed by the Vault Dweller and his companions.

The Children of the Cathedral is a cult started by the Master to cover his plans. The cultists believe that the nuclear bombs and fire from the Great War were a chance to start everything over again and that the Master was a "Dark God" that would bring about this change. It was also secretly used by the Master to recruit willing people for the FEV process. While most people didn't know of the FEV process done to the cultists (if they were found worthy of it), they would often go out into the wastelands to find people in need and help them by establishing hospitals.
User avatar #206 to #205 - anusholeboner (01/25/2014) [-]
Ok, what is Vault City and how does he know how to work the virus?
User avatar #207 to #206 - taintedangel (01/26/2014) [-]
Vault City is a settlement in Nevada that was made from the survivors of Vault 8. They used their G.E.C.K. Garden of Eden Creation Kit to fix all of the radiation damage to the surrounding area to allow them to prosper as a healthy city.

The Master Knew how to work the virus because when he had fallen into the vat of FEV it also gave him super intelligence, plus he had access to the Mariposa military base's laboratories and research notes, thus he continued the resarch and 'perfected' it.
User avatar #208 to #207 - anusholeboner (01/26/2014) [-]
Aaaaah, thanks man. It should help me understand everything a bit better.
User avatar #209 to #208 - taintedangel (01/26/2014) [-]
No problem, man.
User avatar #59 to #54 - taintedangel (01/23/2014) [-]
Also, the Legion has more memorable sayings that got turned into memes.
User avatar #56 to #54 - traks (01/23/2014) [-]
I like to kill the NPCs, they mean nothing and Ill just fight off any resistance and consequence
I usually go with the Legion because NCR always hates me for killing "Their civilians"
User avatar #39 to #38 - anusholeboner (01/23/2014) [-]
#27 to #18 - teamrocketninja (01/23/2014) [-]
Your point is exactly?The player character of 3 is called the Lone Wanderer.
User avatar #71 to #15 - electrickwalrus ONLINE (01/23/2014) [-]
the lone wanderer was taken to a vault after birth
#72 to #71 - teamrocketninja (01/23/2014) [-]
No really? You dont say.   
But he/she was born in or near Rivet City. James didnt have a vault suit at that time.
No really? You dont say.

But he/she was born in or near Rivet City. James didnt have a vault suit at that time.
User avatar #74 to #72 - electrickwalrus ONLINE (01/23/2014) [-]
hehehe i love having fallout debates with people
User avatar #112 - LegititmateKyle (01/23/2014) [-]
Somebody teach me how to pronounce B!KJHDGI^F4, as a word please not the characters.
User avatar #138 to #112 - moldybreadcrumb (01/23/2014) [-]
Albin; similar to how you pronounce the Swedish name "Brfxxccxxmnpcccclllmmnprxvclmnckssqlbb11116".
#117 to #112 - testaburger has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #157 to #117 - LegititmateKyle (01/23/2014) [-]
>as a word please no the the characters.
#161 to #157 - testaburger has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #171 to #161 - LegititmateKyle (01/24/2014) [-]
Well when you pronounce a word such as what you don't say wahaychaytee. But that's how you made out each of the letters there. Exampe: be, kay, jay. I was asking for an actual pronunciation not to just have letters extended and read back to me. Of course that's a request that cannot be filled so I guess nobody wins.
#172 to #171 - testaburger has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #173 to #172 - LegititmateKyle (01/24/2014) [-]
Thumbs don't make the world go round.
#174 to #173 - testaburger has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #175 to #174 - LegititmateKyle (01/24/2014) [-]
That however, is true.
User avatar #58 - ryapr (01/23/2014) [-]
I Wish I could get Fallout 3 to work on my laptop, damn ****** integrated graphic card
User avatar #86 to #58 - zomaru (01/23/2014) [-]
Are you running windows 8?
User avatar #88 to #86 - ryapr (01/23/2014) [-]
no, it's a windows 7 comp with an intel card in it It runs New Vegas, and skyrim fine
but Fallout 3 just tells me to **** off every time i try to load it
User avatar #89 to #88 - zomaru (01/23/2014) [-]
Are you using Steam?
User avatar #90 to #89 - ryapr (01/23/2014) [-]
yeah. I've also tried the .dll download to try to trick the game into believing tha ti'm not using that **** graphics card
User avatar #91 to #90 - zomaru (01/23/2014) [-]
What does it tell you when you try to start?
User avatar #93 to #91 - ryapr (01/23/2014) [-]
also I have verified the cache at least 12 times
User avatar #92 to #91 - ryapr (01/23/2014) [-]
nothing, the game loads up i hit start new game
screen goes black, game freezes for about 6 seconds
and it closes
User avatar #94 to #92 - zomaru (01/23/2014) [-]
Umm, what laptop are you using? Brand and model.
User avatar #95 to #94 - ryapr (01/23/2014) [-]
asus u56e
User avatar #96 to #95 - zomaru (01/23/2014) [-]
I know plenty about Dell and Toshiba, but never owned an Asus, Shot one once though, Man that laptop exploded into glorious chunks.
But, on to the point, Not much I can do with a laptop, if it were a computer and you couldn't get those other games to work I'd say it's your graphics card. But obviously its integrated into the motherboard so it cant be that...
My professional opinion, Fallout 3 doesn't like you. I mean, that is the only game in existence that has the capacity for emotion. So if it doesn't like you, your ****** .
User avatar #97 to #96 - ryapr (01/23/2014) [-]
Well bethesda doesn't support integrated graphics/ intel to begin with, that it works skyrim/ new vegas is a fluke. there are 3 different "mods" out in about to change the games requirements or fix the opening scene check. but 2 of the 3 don't work for my comp, and the third I can't find a good download lol
User avatar #98 to #97 - zomaru (01/23/2014) [-]
I hate to say it, truly do, but have you considered upgrading to an actual rig?
User avatar #99 to #98 - ryapr (01/23/2014) [-]
Oh, trust me, It's in the works but, atm I'm 20 getting the last bit of money saved up inorder to move out of my parent's house again and so cash is tight as hell atm. My girlfriend and I are in plans on a week vacation to FL in the middle of may so another money sink and then after that is when i'm actually gonna start saving for a proper rig.
User avatar #100 to #99 - zomaru (01/23/2014) [-]
Well, I'm also 20, but I make just enough at my part time job to take classes at the CC and have a little left over. But I skipped last semester on accident so I had plenty of money, So here I am on my baby.
User avatar #101 to #100 - ryapr (01/23/2014) [-]
yeah i'm working my way into a future of Retail atm I'm a "Part-Time worker" who is getting 40 hours a week consistently, just no benefits yet and I just got the first of several scheduled high raises for me and from last years tax returns i'm about to get $832
User avatar #158 to #101 - zomaru (01/23/2014) [-]
When you are ready to get your parts, wait for them to be on sale on Newegg. If you get your parts at the right time, you can save about 200$ on a rig that should cost a grand. That's what I did, Except I forgot about the mail in rebates, and lost out in about 80$.
User avatar #182 to #158 - ryapr (01/24/2014) [-]
Yeah, that's the plan, for everything my extremely techie friends don't have lying around spare, cause a few of them save their old parts when they upgrade 6ish months incase any of us need them
User avatar #87 to #58 - lazydevil (01/23/2014) [-]
my laptop runs it, and skyrim etc. with now problem!
Leave a comment
 Friends (0)