#fallout prime critical

[technoturian]

Okay, I have to rant about the one thing about the Fallout show I just hated.

The Ghoul.

I'm sorry, I think he is the weakest character in this whole series. Believe me, it pains me to say it. When I saw in the trailer I was like, "Oh yes, a clever and charismatic, morally ambiguous rascal". I was expecting Boyd Crowder. I got a busted up Punisher/Deadpool mashup who stands out in the open, runs his mouth, then survives every scene only because every other character is made an idiot who can't shoot straight and is forced by the narrative to stand there dumbly, a captive audience to his monologues. His plot armor is ridiculous. He's just terribly written in my opinion.

Were it not for his screentime, his top billing and his flashbacks, he would just be a cartoonish secondary antagonist.

The thing about a good anti-hero/villain/whathaveyou is not knowing what they're going to do in any situation. I knew exactly what he was going to do every single time. Run his mouth, murder everyone in the scene, smirk, repeat. He's not morally gray. He's not complicated. He's not interesting.

And, I'll say something even more controversial, I don't even think he's that well written in his past life. Although I *did* enjoy the flashbacks leagues more than I did his post-apocalyptic self, he was kind of a plot device to get to their VaultTec conspiracy story more than he was a compelling character.

Also, his one funny line was the one in the trailer. I said it.

[a-really-bad-decision]

The fallout show isn’t NOT anticapitalist, but it’s anticapitalist in that way that a lot of recent media goes for, where it makes vague gestures towards ideas like ‘There Is Wealth Inequality, Perhaps’, or ‘maybe a few dozen people having more money than god Isn’t A Good Thing, Actually’. But ultimately it kinda just tiptoes around commenting on anything systemic by offloading the blame onto its shadowy cabal of the ultra-rich, and turning the wastelander underclass into a constant running joke that the audience is expected to laugh along at. Which like. Fine. That’s honestly more than I was expecting I guess. But bad-appling fallout feels like missing the point extra hard, given how much it absolves the US of its role in everything, up to and including literal nuclear armageddon

[deacons-wig]

I'd prefer if we never got to see the origin of Vault Boy and Vault Tec's branding in the same way I'd rather not get a canon answer of who started the War or how. That's the point of War Never Changes.

Vault Boy is a sinister figure in his cheerful embrace of Armageddon. Giving the Vault Tec brand a face and a name and a backstory feels so unimportant to what is actually interesting about Fallout. What's important to me is the big picture pre war, and the details of what comes after.

What is interesting to me is exploring how propaganda is designed to convince people how close they are to annihilation--or homelessness, unemployment, obscurity, or being The Other and therefore destined to suffer--in hell, in oppressions, being ostracized. Honestly insert any sort of marginalization or suffering here. Crony capitalism uses propaganda to market products designed to manipulate people into buying distance between themselves and that annihilation. Putting themselves "behind the thumb" of Vault Boy, so to speak. Buying a lifestyle. Vault Boy does it with a wink and a smile, inviting those who can afford it to buy their way to safety while using capital and fear to perpetuate the cycle. I don't need the specifics to understand this.

Some ghoulnaysis below the cut:

I'll admit, my initial reaction to pre-war Ghoulgins being the inspiration for Vault Boy was funny! Mr. Cooper Howard, washed up actor experiencing an existential crisis being shoehorned into corporate propaganda that then haunts him for the next 200+ years? Selling manifest destiny, racism, the Rugged Individual, the revisionist history that cowboys were a) white and b) more than a brief footnote in the history of the colonization of North America's west. The commodification of entertainers/creatives/public figures. Selling identities to be packaged into a product that will outlive them? Only to have that person live alongside that role they regret (?) playing... kinda tasty, if we have to give Vault Boy a backstory, though I didn't get a clear sense of his actual feelings about being used as a propaganda guy which I think is a failure of the show to commit to the narrative they set up, which happens with a lot of the show's (lack of) engagement with Fallout's larger themes anyway.

But The Ghoul (stupid name!!! weird and boring choice!!!) is just such an uncompelling and repellent character to me. I love a good bad guy or even anti-hero, but honestly he lacks any interiority. He's an evil karma character (eats people, waterboards and mutilates people, sells people to organ harvesters...like? that literally makes you evil in the games...) but the narrative pushes him as an antihero or someone with gray morality because he what..."likes" dogs? And isn't as decayed or unsettling looking as other ghouls (implying handsome=good or interesting). People aren't afraid of him because he is a ghoul, they're afraid of him because he's evil and will hurt them! Sometimes for no reason! I see the callback to the director telling him to shoot his co-star and Cooper saying he's "the good guy," but is that why he becomes so fucking evil post war? Really?

I don't know why he does what he does other than...the world sucked before and sucks now so he might as well represent the basest of human behavior? That seems to be the thesis of the show--unless kindness and community is engendered (by the vaults, by Management, by a civic government, by corporations) people will descend into chaos.

So why have this poorly executed anti-hero be the origin of Vault Boy? What are the narrative choices being made here? Is it just Rule of Cool?

Personally I would like a pathetic, rotting wet cat of a ghoul, some sort of carved out husk of a washed up movie star either trying to relive his glory days, or avoid them--having given up hope of finding his family after 200 years--being dragged into Lucy's orbit and being constantly reminded of his Vault Boy fame, that she is a walking Vault Girl with her Okey Dokey's and Golden Rule. He'd be a joke, a footnote of the old world. He'd be mean and snarky, even unpredictable and uncooperative--have a public persona of friendly curiosity and a private, cynical one.

Pathetic Ghoulgins would remind audiences of the cost of capitalism and imperialism without resorting to the thesis that war never changes means that people are inherently cruel and will resort to violence, rather than existent corporate and political power structures intentionally create the conditions in which people accept perpetual cycles of exploitation and harm for the sake of their own safety and comfort, despite knowing the cost of maintaining the status quo, and not seeing or believing that distance between the status quo and total annihilation is measured by the smiling thumbs up of a cartoon mascot.

I'm sure there are other ways The Ghoul could have been a successful character as well but.... That's satire. That's interesting. That's Fallout.

[artemis-pendragon]

I remember hoping the Fallout show wouldn't reveal who dropped the first bomb because that's not the point. Instead they made it a handful of corporate elites (masterminded by a Black woman, which is fucked up for reasons other people have articulated better than I can as a white girl) whose goal was nuclear armageddon.

For me, Fallout's message was always that there are no winners in war, and that long after the governments who dropped the bombs fell to their own warmongering hubris, 200 years of future generations are still paying for their crimes. But in the show, there are winners. The corporations get exactly what they want. It's not the tragic consequence of failing political systems reliant on militarism, it's an intentional move by an elite cabal who planned it all along.

Having the people who ruined the world still alive in the future takes away the idea that there was no justice after the bombs fell. The specter of nuclear war brought on by military posturing and arms racing gone too far is a much more sinister and devastating antagonist to me than Some Guys who wanted to make money and take over the world. You can punish Some Guy, but you can't punish long-dead governments who destroyed their own people for nothing. To me, who started the war and why was never the point. It was ambiguous because war never changes; this war was just like any other but with more permanent consequences.

I know everyone has their own opinions and interpretations, and that not everyone sees this the way I do, but to me shifting the blame for the apocalypse onto an elite secret organization of corporate heads looking to create a "new world order" sounds like something my drunk alt-right great uncle would say at Thanksgiving to divert the conversation away from the deeper systemic issues plaguing the world's nuclear superpowers.

Anyway, feel free to ignore me but I just had to write this out so people can see where I'm coming from. Much love to all my Fallout homies! ❤️

[copdog1234]

I think some Fandoms kinda have a bias against black and brown characters unfortunately, it’s disappointing. There always seems to be less attention paid to the black and brown characters

Yeah... I know that's exactly the reason why, even if some are unaware of it themselves. I mean, I've seen how people in the bg3 fandom treat Wyll. But both him and my boy Maximus deserve all the love, damn it!

[the-celluloid-correspondent]

Fallout Season One: Starts Off With an Explosive Bang.

In a future, post-apocalyptic Los Angeles brought about by nuclear decimation, citizens must live in underground bunkers to protect themselves from radiation, mutants, and bandits.

“Flash, bam, alakazam. Out of an orange colored sky” are the opening words to Nat King Cole's song “Orange Colored Sky”, which describes his feeling of falling in love. But Prime Video’s adaptation of the beloved game franchise, Fallout, it takes a much more sinister and literal meaning as that Orange Colored Sky marks the beginning of the thermonuclear apocalypse and the ends of the world.

I have not played the Fallout games, but I am familiar with the franchise as I have watched some gameplay and lore videos regarding Fallout. The games don’t really have a story structure as they are an open-world RPG, where the player can do whatever they want in a nuclear wasteland. It is filled with unique worldbuilding as the aesthetics are a mix of what the 1950s thought the future would be and a thermonuclear apocalypse. Furthermore, the series' iconic dark humor and brutal violence add to the fun nature of the games. So adapting this franchise into a television series was going to be very interesting as Amazon’s history with adaptations have either been massive hits like The Boys and Invincible, or massive clusterfucks like The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power and The Wheel of Time. Thankfully, Fallout is a masterful adaptation of the video game franchise that sticks true to the games while also being accessible and fun to those unfamiliar with the franchise. 

Fallout flawlessly captures the essence and look of the franchise right down to the last bottlecap. The costume and production design swiftly transports viewers into a world of stark contrasts. From the pristine, utopian 1950s aesthetics of the vaults to the radioactive Wild West of the surface is meticulously rendered. Furthermore, it nails the game's twisted and dark humor as well as the horrors of thermonuclear warfare. Now some lore changes will make some purists unhappy, but Fallout is a faithful adaptation of the game. 

The series' narrative simplicity proves to be both its strength and its weakness. Centered around three characters vying for a MacGuffin, with two intertwining subplots—one set in the vaults and the other as a prelude to the nuclear devastation—the storyline is straightforward yet interconnected. Each subplot offers vital insights into the others, weaving a compelling narrative without resorting to misleading twists. However, despite its apparent simplicity, the storyline occasionally feels contrived and lacks consistent internal logic. It's unexpected for such a straightforward plot to stumble over basic storytelling elements. However, this flaw can be readily forgiven given the impeccably crafted characters. 

Our trio of main characters is exquisitely portrayed, with performances worthy of acclaim, possibly even Emmy-worthy. Ella Purnell's portrayal of Lucy is particularly remarkable; she brings depth to a character archetype that might have easily fallen flat in less capable hands. As the moral compass of the show, Lucy is portrayed with a blend of bubbly naivety and genuine kindness that never veers into caricature thanks to Purnell's natural charisma. Witnessing her gradual transformation into a hardened survivor as he learns from her mistakes and takes advice from others without compromising her core values is both riveting and emotionally resonant.

Aaron Clifton Moten, a veteran of the industry for nearly two decades, delivers a breakthrough performance in Fallout as he embodies every gamer's fantasy by donning the Armor of The Brotherhood of Steel. His portrayal of a sheltered man-child who is trying to do the right thing when he realizes the religious military cult he grew up in views him as expendable. To see him try to break away from the cult while also battling his inner designer for power is a fascinating character development. As he navigates his character's journey alongside Lucy, offering guidance on the harsh realities of the wasteland, Moten's performance is both poignant and subtly humorous, showcasing his impeccable comedic timing.

However, the biggest standout performance of the series is Walton Goggins as Copper Howard and The Ghoul. These two characters are on opposite sides of the moral spectrum. When he is Cooper in the past, he is a morally righteous character who slowly realizes that he might have sold his soul to the devil by promoting Vault-tec. To watch his slow realization of the evils of not only the company he has associated with, but the woman he has married is a powerful moral reckoning. Then his transformation into the hardened, badass, Ghoul with no moral code has a tragic undertone. To see a man become the very thing he hates is tragic. Yet watching him slowly regain his moral code while interacting with Lucy is powerful. This is a layered performance from Goggins that is centered entirely on moral conflict. If he does not receive an Emmy, I am going to riot. 

To watch these three characters learn and grow from one another is a testament to the power of writing excellent characters with fully realized arcs. I can’t wait to see where these characters go into their future seasons. Will they keep to their ways or will they realize they have a common enemy? 

In conclusion, Fallout emerges as a compelling adaptation of the successful game franchise. It understands and respects not only the source material but also the fanbase as the series is clearly made for them. I can’t wait to see what lies in the next season, but I know that I am excited to see New Vegas. 

My Rating: B+

[garaviel]

I KNOW i will be critical of the fallout show but i also am really in a fallout mood and really want to watch it i just KNOW i will like maybe 3 things and perhaps a few characters and the potential violence but then i will pick apart the copy/paste characters and storylines and insult the subpar/nonexistant practical effects and i dont want to watch something from a franchise i technically like just be a hater again 😭😭😭

On the other hand i could just boot up my ancient 360 and replay 3 and nv and see if that scratches the itch bc 4 sure doesnt rn (no shade its just not quite There on everything)

[hussyknee]

(alt included in all images)

Another thread by Senator Ben Ray Luján here.

A book on the subject (haven't read it myself):

One of the sources in another one of Alisa's furiously impassioned twitter threads have been debunked, so I didn't include that. But she claims that her own family was caught in the fallout zone when her mother was a baby, which eventually led to her and large numbers of her community developing cancer. It's human for that kind of grief to be caught up in inaccuracies. People are already being ghastly and racist to Hispanos and Indigenous people criticizing the hype for the movie. They're not attacking Oppenheimer for being Jewish, they're criticising the erasure of the human cost of these bombs and the continued valorisation of the U.S military's actions in World War II as some kind of moral saviourism.

While Oppenheimer himself believed that the nuclear bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were morally justified (they had planned to drop them on Germany except they surrendered before they could), he also felt had blood on his hands and regretted his role as the "Father of the Atomic Bomb". He spent the rest of his career vehemently opposing further development of thermonuclear weapons and the hydrogen bomb accurately predicting the concept of mutually assured destruction. This eventually made him a victim of Senator McCarthy's Red Scare and his clearance was revoked. I haven't seen the movie (Christopher Nolan is the kind of casual white racist I avoid on principle) but people who have seen it say that it doesn't glorify nuclear weapons and depicts the man himself with the complex moral nuance that seems to be accurately reflective of his real life.

The backlash to Indigenous and Hispanos people's criticisms and to people pointing out that Hiroshima and Nagasaki were genocides is also frustrating because...both world wars were a clash of genocidal empires. The reason they were world wars is because the countries colonized by Japan, China, the European powers and the US were all dragged into it, whether they wanted to or not. Jews were one of the many colonized peoples that suffered in that time, who were left to die by everyone until they could be used to frame the Allied powers as moral saviours, establishing a revisionist nostalgia for heroism that powers the US military industrial complex to this day.

As early as May 1942, and again in June, the BBC reported the mass murder of Polish Jews by the Nazis. Although both US President, Franklin Roosevelt, and British Prime Minister, Winston Churchill, warned the Germans that they would be held to account after the war, privately they agreed to prioritise and to turn their attention and efforts to winning the war. Therefore, all pleas to the Allies to destroy the death camp at Auschwitz-Birkenau were ignored. The Allies argued that not only would such an operation shift the focus away from winning the war, but it could provoke even worse treatment of the Jews. In June 1944 the Americans had aerial photographs of the Auschwitz complex. The Allies bombed a nearby factory in August, but the gas chambers, crematoria and train tracks used to transport Jewish civilians to their deaths were not targeted.

(Source)

Uncritical consumption of World War II media is the reinforcement of imperialist propaganda, more so when one group of colonized people is used to silence other colonized peoples. Pitting white Jewry against BIPOC is to do the work of white supremacy for imperialist colonizers, and victimizes Jews of colour twice over.

Edit: friends, there's been some doubt cast on the veracity of Alisa's claims. The human cost to the Hispanos population caught downwind of the nuclear tests is very real, as was land seizure without adequate compensation. However, there's no record I can yet find about Los Alamos killing livestock and Hispanos being forced to work for Los Alamos without PPE. There is a separate issue about human testing in the development of said PPE that's not covered here. I'm turning off reblogs until I can find out more. Meanwhile, here's another more legitimate article you can boost instead:

[beantothenighe]

Can I say for as much as I love Fallout Prime, I have one small criticism. One that a lot of shows do regarding sibling relationships. Speaking as someone with 8 little sisters and 1 littlest brother.

Lucy doesn't mention Norm once when talking about the Vault. It's always her dad, or her mom, never her brother. Which I find unrealistic. I never shut up about my siblings. I think about them all the time.

The amount of dumbshit siblings can get up to when unsupervised. Holy shit. Especially when one is reckless and brave (Lucy) and the other too smart for their own good(Norm). You're telling me Lucy doesn't tell Maximus one damn thing about something stupid they've done growing up? Hiding spots, passing veggies on one another's plate, teasing about crushes. Nothing?

(Could she have done so off camera. Sure, but unless I see it, it didn't happen.)

And it can't be because they aren't close. Watch episode 1 again, Lucy and Norm are best friends, and you can't convince me otherwise. But like all shows, as soon as the siblings are out of sight, they're out of mind.

Lucy didn't ask herself 'what would Norm do' for a complicated problem? Norm doesn't sike himself up to be as brave as Lucy when things got scary? Unrealistic.

The second Lucy found out what was really going on in the Vaults she should have hightailed it back to 33 to pick up her little brother cause no fu@king way I'd let my sibling stay in there by themselves. Nope. Couldn't be me.

Plus sibling solidarity. Norm deserves one good punch to Hank's nose. That was his mom too.

[artbyblastweave]

Brotherhood of Steel

Oh, wow, this one's been languishing for like six months, sorry about that. Anyway the show is inspiring me to revisit this question- Anyway, one thing about the Brotherhood of steel- I think that to an extent, the Brotherhood in general suffers from the same kind of problem as Iron Man, where their out-of-universe popularity, star power, and resultant shoehorning into installments where they absolutely don't belong, all serve to elide that the actual text of even the Bethesda-produced Fallouts aren't particularly gung-ho about the Brotherhood as an organization.

I think the buzz around them, the misaimed-fandom they accrue and the resultant back-and-forth in all the discursive spaces, sort of primes you to expect a humanity-fuck-yeah sort of attitude in the source text. But in the games themselves, it's really only that Fallout 3 that positions the Brotherhood as straightforward quote-unquote "good guys," and paying even a little attention to the subtext demonstrates that that's an extremely tenuous and conditional status. Half of their guys started their own Brotherhood with blackjack and hookers because Lyons was too nice! Lyons got sent east in the first place because he was too nice! The guy they left behind in Pittsburg rebuilt the entire local economy as a slave society! Many of Lyons nominal "supporters" are at least quietly grumbling about his priorities when you talk to them, they're clearly itching to collapse back into a comfortable authoritarianism- which, of course, they do, come Fallout 4. Their turn in that direction was completely telegraphed by 3. And 4, which admittedly had a lot of mixed-messaging on this point, telegraphed.... whatever the fuck they've become in the TV show. Which is interesting, right, because if you're even remotely media-literate, it's impossible to view the TV version of the Brotherhood as anything remotely good. We're introduced with a hazing ritual, a panning shot of child-soldiers sharing a cigarette, meatheads playing a game of brickball, an Elder who screams "cult leader," a brotherhood knight who's framed as this monstrous, inhuman presence during Maximus's interrogation. The branding scene, the abuse of squires. And then they go from oppressive to pathetic- Titus dying like a chump, Thaddeus being the world's chew toy, a half-dozen Brotherhood knights existing as suitably impressive target practice for the Ghoul in a big showdown.

By volume, this is going to be most people's first introduction to the Brotherhood as an organization. This is what the Brotherhood is now, for all intents and purposes. I think they've basically poisoned the well on using the Brotherhood as a straightforwardly heroic faction ever again, and moreover it's adjusted my perception of whether even Bethesda ever understood them as such in the first place. It's still a complete worldbuilding kludge that they're on the East Coast at all, but I find myself wondering if hammering the Brotherhood into a suitably powerful antagonistic faction wasn't the long-term project here the whole time; if so, the obvious criticism from there is that the Brotherhood was a still a weird pick to evolve into that role, given their initial status in the first two games as a handful of overinflated bunker-dwelling pricks kept in a position of comparative superiority only by the failure of everyone else to play catch-up. Whatever, it can be made to work.

[2xplusungood]

People should really take "Let people enjoy things" to heart and no I dont mean in the sense that media a lot of people like is above criticism but realizing that there must be something that draws people to it.

Like for example, as a Fallout New Vegas fan its my GOD GIVEN DUTY to hate Fallout 3 and 4, but its also healthy to understand that, while 3 and 4 fails at what makes me like FNV, people still enjoy them for other reasons. Ive heard people say "oh fallout 3 is less like a living, breathing world and more like a theme park ride" like okay? Are themepark rides suddenly not fun? Is it really that wrong for people to be okay with a silly cookie cutter story when one of the big main draws of the series is being able to spend hours playing without engaging with the main story at all? And dont act like the story wasnt at the very least memorable when people STILL quote liberty prime to this day.

I may have been turned off by Fallout 4 within the first couple of minutes the first time but I accept the fact that it exists and a lot of people enjoy it so maybe one day Ill give it another chance going in with a differant mindset

[a-really-bad-decision]

This is mostly a joke, but like. C’mon Todd. Why bother setting the show on the west coast if all you were gonna do was turn it into a carbon copy of the east coast wastelands? I just want to talk Todd. Put down the phone and open the door. I know you can hear me Todd just unlock the

[deacons-wig]

Todd Howard, possessed by the spirit of Vault Boy: You know boys, I think what would really make this story pop is giving the cartoon mascot of disaster capitalism a backstory

[adizzyninja]

I think the larger point being overlooked in all the Fallout Prime VS New Vegas Canon controversy is less who's in charge of canon and the future of the franchise and more just the general potential for stories being kinda squandered with some of these decisions.

(As a disclaimer I really liked the Fallout show!! Really solid mysteries and reveals and just overall presentation. Just criticizing a bit how it handled the wider lore)

So like, Bethesda's lore is completely separate from the 1,2 and NV stories, in my head. They can reference the past stuff as much as they want but it doesn't change the fact that the writing teams are comprised of different people working from fundamentally different mindsets. That's totally cool! They can create their own spin on the canon and go whatever direction they want with it. The Interplay/ Obsidian stories will always be there and there's nothing that can change that.

All that being said though, I feel like there's another perspective to look at some of the wider lore choices the show makes through: wasteful. The show writers had an incredible springboard of interacting factions and pre-established lore to work with. And it seems like all they really did with it is blow it up. Maybe season 2 will turn things around and it turns out New Vegas is actually fine, but it doesn't change the fact the NCR has been effectively wiped out.

I've always felt that getting too liberal with death and destruction in a story is a good way to quickly make a world feel a lot smaller. It can be done well, and to its credit the show does seem to have made the nuking of Shady Sands a fairly integral part of its plot/ themes. But I don't feel like the narrative mileage they'll get out of that could compare to just... having a massive faction like the NCR present! Not to mention how much fun could be had with a functioning New Vegas, or an even vaguely acknowledged Legion for that matter!

Idk, riding NV's coattails too hard would easily come off as cheap, but at the same time I can't help but wonder why they even bothered setting it in California if they were just going to wipe away pretty much all the established stuff that made it interesting! There's a *massive* middle chunk of America that's untouched in the lore! I just don't really see the point of basically arguing with what exists instead of just focusing on whats missing and making something new with it.

[copdog1234]

You know when the director said before the release of the show: "You will never make the fans happy, so I'm not trying to do that." (Or something along those lines in an interview) I was skeptical. It felt disrespectful.

And the show ended up great.

Yet, certain loud reactions don't recognize it.

I now see what he means explicitly. Good on this show for sticking to a vision and executing it in honestly the best fashion they could've. Let the "fans" complain about nonexistent problems. This was a faithful adaptation.

[earthstellar]

Caminus is a disabled Titan and I love him

His physical body has been completely separated into parts and fully utilised to the maximum possible degree for the sake of his Citizens

He was never going to be able to be fully repaired in the first place, and instead of even trying, he decided to put all of his remaining energy and resources into entering a permanent physical dormancy so his people would have somewhere to live and thrive

The effort it takes him to keep himself operational enough to provide the basics for his Citizens means that the strain severely impacts his remaining cognitive capacity and communicative ability

The Camiens realise the extent of Caminus' love for them, the extent of his devotion to his people being so great that he has given them every physical and mental part of himself to build upon and thrive

Even if those parts were already damaged upon arrival, it doesn't matter-- Caminus fulfils his duty into perpetuity

The most important thing the Camiens derive from Caminus himself is not fuel or power or infrastructure, but his eternal love

He has imbued his people with his creativity, curiosity, a more spiritual approach to philosophy, a cultural emphasis on friendship and mutual aid borne out of a need for resource conservation-- Thus providing environmental and resource awareness via his very state of being

We don't know much about Caminus as a person, aside from his heartbreak at the betrayal of Life Maximo and how the fallout from that was enough to send him away from Cybertron and leave Metroplex behind

But I think we can take some reasonable guesses from what we know of him through the optics of his Citizens and from what we know of his actions in general, and say that Caminus is--at his very core--devoted, loving, creative, sensitive, strong

And he is very much a disabled character. The fact that he is physically and mentally disabled is a critical part of why the Camien culture is the way it is, informed how this society developed, and even lent quite a bit to the creation/revival of Cityspeaking as an art form, which allowed him by proxy to help Metroplex from afar even while largely dormant himself

I don't see Caminus himself discussed very often, but he is absolutely one of my favourite characters

A Titan who brought an entire people and civilisation into existence, while also being physically and cognitively disabled.

He is never repaired. He cannot be repaired.

And that is fine; His love for his people is undying. His spark continues to spin, hidden far below the surface, for as long as love itself can live-- Far beyond any physical or metal tolerances, Caminus loves his people.

Forever.

And even without repairs, that is enough for the spark of a Titan.

(This isn't to romanticise the state of his health and his difficulties, but rather, is to highlight that his personal motivation is primarily his love for his people.)

Being disabled does not stop anyone from loving.

And we actually get to see that with Caminus!

In a lot of media, disabled characters are often highlighted for what they don't have, rather than what they do have and who they actually are as people.

The way Caminus is portrayed, his disabilities are critical to not just his own story but to the stories of all Camien people in one way or another. His influence and the impact of his state of health is massive.

But we also get to know who Caminus is, as a person. He values connections with others, he is loyal, creative, caring, and so on. He has significant compassion and dedication towards smaller beings, and values life. He had close relationships with his respective Prime and his "brother" (Metroplex).

I just really like Caminus a lot, idk I'm at work so this is probably not as coherent as I'd like lmao