Life After People

[FMod]

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_7eWZRHJjXu8/S-mYWCfoSvI/AAAAAAAAEGk/y9CSwl2yQRI/s400/-History_Life_After_People_Ep101_Image_019.jpg

 

 

Tied to the topic of "Nuclear apocalypse in real life", but with a more specific twist.

Have you seen this show? If you are a Fallout aficionado, you should. Some of it is available freely on History Channel website.

 

Like Fallout, it deals with a "what if", specifically what will happen to the world, mostly US, if all people were gone. Not exactly a nuclear war scenario, but very close to it.

 

In a real-life nuclear war, only a modest percent of the populace (Cold War estimates were less than 30% in US and less than 10% in USSR due to its lower urbanization and compulsory civil defense system) would be killed directly by weapons and their effects. Most would die considerably later as a result of social collapse, starvation, ongoing warfare, a lot of other things. Cities wouldn't be leveled, as a general rule, and you don't need to level a city to make it uninhabitable - a modern city without power, water and sewers is a deathtrap. They would have to be abandoned, leading to the show's premise.

 

Now, the show has different views on what happens next than Fallout does. If you have seen it, or once you have seen some of it, what are your opinions? Do you agree with the show, or do you find it to be skewed in its own way? What impact does that have on your perception of the Fallout universe?

 

I personally find the show's focus on environment regeneration a bit too optimistic, and a little too restricted. A lot of places look much more post-apocalyptic after a few decades of abandonment, without much vegetation other than the occasional small tree on a building roof. Perhaps it accounts too much for global warming, when it shouldn't, or maybe it doesn't apply to a nuclear war large enough to cause a nuclear winter - what are your thoughts?

Edited December 17, 2011 by FMod

[darthsloth74]

Yes that was a really interesting show. Not sure if its too optimistic or not really. In regard to the episode focused on Cherynobl which was the first stand alone episode before the series it clearly showed how wildlife and even endangered species had suddenly thrived in recent years in what is regarded as an inhospitable environment for people.

 

I also enjoyed the episode regarding the creeping vine plants that are continually cut down near Atlanta. The idea of a plant that was imported from Japan which then proved incredibly difficult to control was another interesting concept.

 

As you say the show always considered people removed from the equation and although similarities exist between this and a Nuclear outbreak its not really the same. You have to consider that a full scale nuclear exchange is going to cause large scale Nuclear Winter for many years and the potential for anything to survive that, let alone thrive is very remote.

 

I did look at the show and consider all that over the top vegetation would look exceptional in Fallout, the films Logans Run and I am Legend have a similar style to Life Without People.

 

I remember watching a British film called Threads which showed a more likely scenario, survivors dying of radiation poisoning, ash clouds, freezing storms and what was left of a shattered military carrying out a final mission of burning the dead. Grisly stuff.

[FMod]

As you say the show always considered people removed from the equation and although similarities exist between this and a Nuclear outbreak its not really the same. You have to consider that a full scale nuclear exchange is going to cause large scale Nuclear Winter for many years and the potential for anything to survive that, let alone thrive is very remote.

Strictly speaking, the modern consensus on Nuclear Winter theory leans towards considering it exaggerated. We kind of ran a medium-scale test... burning Iraq in 1991 and then again in 2003. That showed cities burning with less smoke and ash falling out quicker than expected. In recent years the views have changed away from outright denial, and it's considered a semi-likely scenario.

Still, a long 30-year Arctic-like winter is not going to happen. It depends heavily on how many bombs are dropped, but, overall, the more likely outcome is a decade of reduced temperatures, but not to the point of overwhelming plant extinction.

 

What would hinder plantlife is radiation. In the most unexpected of outcomes, Chernobyl managed to damage the forests more than it damaged the wildlife; turns out that trees aren't resistant to radiation at all. But radiation decays, and in some time the invasion of plantlife would happen. Would it happen as over-the-top as in the show? I think not. It really bummed me that the show focused too much on tropical and subtropical areas - if these are so repetitive, they could take a look at colder regions, Canada for one.

 

 

I remember watching a British film called Threads which showed a more likely scenario, survivors dying of radiation poisoning, ash clouds, freezing storms and what was left of a shattered military carrying out a final mission of burning the dead. Grisly stuff.

Thanks for the tip - will have to try and find it. Although it's perhaps skewed in its own way.

 

 

 

I actually like the aesthetics of Fallout, it would be too much like "Oblivion with guns" if they went all realistic on it. Mostly it's Fallout 1 and 2 though that got it right. The issue developed when they let too much time pass between War and Fallout, and then between Fallout and Fallout 2. I think something like 2120-2140 would have served Fallout better, and then 2170 for Fallout 2.

And the first real mistake was when in Fallout 3, instead of going back on the timeline, they went forward; too much forward. The world of Fallout 3 is something like 20 years after the War, you can still find edible food and usable supplies around, and it's all old world.

 

In Fallout, you already had new buildings... Shady Sands, for one. In Fallout 2, it's actually harder to find old buildings than new ones: Klamath and Den are the only all-ruin towns still standing. Vault City, NCR and new San Francisco are 100% post-war built, New Reno is a restoration, Modoc, Redding and Broken Hills are mixed. In Fallout 3, you should have quite a lot of new construction, but instead you have just one enormous Junkyard. New Vegas could fix the situation, but, sadly, they largely just reused old meshes. This is the part of new Fallout aesthetics I don't like: they lack the sharp contrast and diversity, characteristic of Fallout 2.

[darthsloth74]

Oh yes Threads is definately skewed. I think it was banned in the UK for a while. I remember seeing it at school our teachers weren't as PC then as they are now. I found it last year in the local library. It was aimed at being informative and cautionary, conflicting aims obviously.

 

However what is interesting is how it deals with social collapse and how even the most prepared governments can become totally powerless in the event of loss of power, inadequate emergency services and bad organisation/leadership. It also touches on how one weak link in the government structure can cause greater disaster.

 

I too always preferred Fallout 2 with its empty wreckage strewn locations. It always had the feel of humanity balancing on the brink of extinction. Throw the fascist Enclave with their survival of the fittest philosophy in there and its atmosphere had a very nightmarish feel. Fallout was more heroic in its feel as is Fallout 3. I always thought the various surviving communities should have a more living amongst the ashes feel with people trying to cling to the memories of the past, restoring buildings in an attempt to preserve their history and humanity. The Book of Eli movie had this feel in the first community we see.

 

Much that I enjoy New Vegas everything feels too well established especially when you introduce post apocalyptic psuedo superpowers like the NCR and Legion. A lot of the feeling of simply trying to survive is gone. Too many people play nice when in reality they'd be doing each other over at every given opportunity. Stalker got the type of atmosphere right for me despite its buggy nature.

[Meroviginian]

I seen that show on the history channel. Most sky scrapers would fall from the lack of maintaince in less than 200 years....and in 10,000 years there wouldn't be a trace of humanity left....just forests and such. Love the history channel