FANDOM


Icon nowrite
This forum page has been archived. Please do not make any further edits unless they are for maintenance purposes.
Forums: Index > Wiki discussion > Arroyo and Klamath's real world locations
 
Gametitle-Wiki
Gametitle-Wiki


The issue of Arroyo and Klamath's real world location has been recently brought up, and I'd like to extend the discussion to the community. Presently, here is what we know concerning Klamath:

  • Fallout 2's game map places Arroyo and Klamath some distance east of Lake Earl, and northwest of Redding. However, the actual Klamath Falls, which we are currently assuming to be the game's Klamath, is located In southern Oregon, a long distance from Lake Earl and northwest of Redding. Assuming Klamath to be Klamath Falls renders the game map completely wrong.
  • There is a small town Klamath in northern California, but it it does not match the game map location either. Also, it is located south of Lake Earl, and is a coastal town (which would place Arroyo on the Pacific Ocean).
  • The only piece of information linking Klamath to Oregon's Klamath Falls is the game's location map screen, which depicts a presumably pre-War map or postcard, with the caption "Klamath Falls".

Given those facts, how should we tackle the issue of Klamath's (and by extension, Arroyo's) geographic position?
Limmiegirl Lildeneb Talk! ♪ 18:34, February 16, 2014 (UTC)

CommentsEdit

From where I can see, there are 3 possible ways to deal with the issue. Namely:

  1. Assume that the game's Klamath indeed refers to Klamath Falls, OR. That would, however, be somewhat speculative and mean completely ignoring the game map.
  2. Assume that the game's Klamath refers to another pre-War city also named Klamath Falls, which only exists in the Fallout timeline and has no actual equivalent. That would still be speculative, but would eliminate the game map discrepancy.
  3. Leave the issue open and not make any factual claims as to Klamath's location.

Personally, I lean towards the 3rd option, as I believe we are in no position to make claims can be reasonably disputed in light of the absence of consistent information from canon sources.
Limmiegirl Lildeneb Talk! ♪ 18:34, February 16, 2014 (UTC)

I'd go with #1 myself. I'm pretty sure it was (or was supposed to be) a continuation of Klamath Falls. Enclavesymbol 18:38, February 16, 2014 (UTC)

I asked Chris Avellone via Twitter ([1][2]) and he said, that he thinks it was intended by the designer, that Klamath and Klamath Falls are the same. But like in FO1 befor they changed and moved locations (Necropolis was supposed to be in Bakersfield but was moved to Barstow). So it's reasonable to think they moved (or altered) what was Klamath Falls further south and made it into Klamath, and all that remaind was the Town Map Picture. --Modgamers (talk) 20:09, February 16, 2014 (UTC)

The Image in the Klamath Falls postcard is clearly Klamtath as rendered in game - looking to the right you can clearly see the square surrounded by Buckner's store, The Duttons' smokehouse, Sally Dutton's Bathouse, the Golden Gecko pub, and other minor buildings. The right hand side is clearly the Klamath Mall map. As such we have to go with what the game identifies it as. Agent c (talk) 20:13, February 16, 2014 (UTC)

You're right that postcard shows the ingame town. But you have to admid, that it's strange, that there is no further reference to Klamath Falls in the game. So know we have to find out if it's a bug ora feature. But even if Klamath and Klamath Falls should be the same, and there actually be placed in Oregon, does not mean that Arroyoy is placed in Oregon (and so Oregon's cannibals are actually Californian cannibals, and so on). --Modgamers (talk) 20:18, February 16, 2014 (UTC)
We cannot do that because that would be speculation. This is all guesswork. If it's what the game says, and even the devs themselves haven't a clue, then we have to go with it. User OfficialLolGuy  OfficialLolGuy  Talk  Blog  20:20, February 16, 2014 (UTC)
No I don't think its strange at all. Its 200 years later. Language and place names change. Perhaps the river dried up so there are no more falls. Perhaps people just got lazy and stopped calling it its full name (heck, do we even know whether people in Klamath Falls today regularly use the full name, or just shorten to Klamath? I regularly hear people call "New Jersey" just "Jersey"). Agent c (talk) 21:14, February 16, 2014 (UTC)

But the Game doen't place Arroyo in Oregon, so why does the article state otherwise? Isn't that also speculation? So you cannot go to Oregon at all in the game, you stay on Californian ground in the North, so why do you call the Oregon's canniblas while you are in California? Isn't that also speculation? --Modgamers (talk) 20:23, February 16, 2014 (UTC)

I agree. That the postcard refers to Klamath, and therefore that the pre-War name of Klamath was Klamath Falls is not on dispute. But assuming that the Klamath Falls the postcard refers to is Klamath Falls, OR, is itself speculation.
Limmiegirl Lildeneb Talk! ♪ 20:28, February 16, 2014 (UTC)
I'm hesitant about using out of game material to decide where something is "placed" except where it is immediately obvious (by place name). The number of disputes over what in game weapons are supposed to be I think gives us ample reason not to do that. We simply have to go with what landmarks we do know for sure. Its is parallel, and not a long walk to Klamath. The only identifiable Klamath Falls is Klamath Falls, OR. Just as I think its fairly safe to say that Redding is Redding, CA, and not some other Redding. Agent c (talk) 21:17, February 16, 2014 (UTC)

In this situation, and others, it's obvious that the in-game world map is inaccurate. The postcard proofs that Klamath was named Klamath Falls, and there is no Klamath Falls in California. If Klamath is Klamath Falls, Oregon, then Arroyo must also be in Oregon because Arroyo's elder confirms they are west of it. Paladin117>>iff bored; 21:25, February 16, 2014 (UTC)

@Agent.c: It's not that you can't identifiy coastlines, as they are still the same, and even correspond with the Map of America made by by J.E. Sawyer, which also shows that the old state borders didn't change also. So why do you acknowledge real world cities, but not real world coast lines? --Modgamers (talk) 21:26, February 16, 2014 (UTC)
@Paladin117: Real World Klamath Falls also lies (north) eastwards of the actual ingame location of Arroyo in northern California.--Modgamers (talk) 21:29, February 16, 2014 (UTC)
Arroyo's elder does not state northeast though. She says east. and the world map's position of Arroyo is exactly southwest of real life's position of Klamath Falls. Why would the Arroyo elder tell the Chosen One to go in a completely different direction? Paladin117>>iff bored; 21:33, February 16, 2014 (UTC)
Aren't there a lot of disproportions? I mean that not all locations are placed *exactly* where they should be. With the card as proof, I think we should let the reference stay as it is. Energy X 21:44, February 16, 2014 (UTC)

The map is actually quite accurate. --Modgamers (talk) 21:45, February 16, 2014 (UTC)

If this graphic is correct, then what's the problem? I don't understand the point of the page's question if so. Is this just because someone thought they caught Avellone in a slip at some point while the map is a perfectly passable approximation of the real location of Klamath Falls? Looking at the locations on Google Maps, there's nothing wrong with the map at all. NokiaTouchscreen (talk) 01:12, February 17, 2014 (UTC)
The Map shows, that the FO2 World Map just shows northern California, while Klamath Falls is located in southern Oregon, which would be much furthern northwest, of it's current location. --Modgamers (talk) 08:41, February 17, 2014 (UTC)
I'm in favor of option three because it is the most neutral and factual thing we can say. This is what I would state in the article if given the task,
When asked if Klamath in Fallout 2 was supposed to be the real world Klamath Falls, Oregon, as was potentially referenced in the in-game postcard of Klamath, Chris Avellone answered, "I wouldn't be surprised, I'm afraid I don't know for sure. :( Fallout lore explaining why it would move would be interesting." [3] When asked if Klamath was the actual town of Yreka, California instead, Chris Avellone responded with "Wish I could say. Based on the Town Map image (it says Klamath Falls), I *think* the designer intended it to be the actual place." [4]. Without anything further or to the contrary, Klamath's canon relationship to the real world is unknown.

The wording is subject to revision due to being impromptu and my fallibility, but I know for certain the last thing we want to do in situations where we don't know the answer to something is pretend we do. State what we do know, state how it's relevant, and then STOP. This is the stance I endorsed in the citation policies I played a part in constructing. --The Ever Ruler (talk) 22:43, February 16, 2014 (UTC)

Ahem... It's very likely it moved further south. There is a Klamath Basin that stretches into northern Cali as well. And the city of Klamath in Cali is westaward, along the coast, sw of where Arroyo is located. I always preferred to think of Klamath in Oregon, mainly because it is my home state... Same with Arroyo. Though I would say that coastlines simply say otherwise. In my mind, it will always be in Oregon. But given the size of the Klamath basin, it's very probable the city just moved south, into another city, and adopted the name. Deadling (talk) 02:00, February 17, 2014 (UTC)

  • I also wanna state that I was confused, and have been sick the past few days. I somehow confused Klamath Falls and Multnomah Falls in N. Oregon. I'm an Oregonian, and am ashamed of my confusion... Deadling (talk) 02:02, February 17, 2014 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.

Fandom may earn an affiliate commission on sales made from links on this page.

Stream the best stories.

Fandom may earn an affiliate commission on sales made from links on this page.

Get Disney+