So Twitter decided it hates me and deleted my New Vegas thread. Upon reposting, it was quickly taken off again. Don’t know if this is a shadowban or just the site going wonky, but I’m not going down without a fight. The thread can now be read here in its entirety.
@extradeadjcb made a very insightful remark on this game that I want to expand upon. The player serves as a surrogate mandate of heaven. The game is not a contest of powers but rather a contest of securing the player's side. Who wins the game is not backed by might or conventional force but by who makes the most persuasive argument. In this lies New Vegas' strength, and I think its weakness.
Let's break down the endings. NCR advocates for a bureaucracy, ordered but stifling. Caesar argues for strength but brutal and violent. House wants a mercantile future that is cold and calculating as him. And the Courier can only secure a territorial power for himself.
This is a game about narratives people tell themselves and others. And the game is unintentionally correct in that narratives secure power. The ability to convince a soldier to pick up arms and fight for you is a powerful one. It is what nations are built on. The game's strength is creating a fantasy where the player is thrust in the direct center of these narratives. And unlike most people, the protagonist is gifted with destiny. The Courier is fated not to die on the battlefield but to lead their side to victory.
However, this is a two sided coin. In positioning the player as the mandate of heaven, the game can play no preferences. You'll notice each faction has enough to make the argument for them, but not enough to win the war. Everyone relies upon you.
This reveals an unmistakable flaw. None of the factions presented are enough to resurrect a lasting society. You can fun debates with them, but they do not command the faith of a people. They had to be limped over the threshold of power.
New Vegas is not about who controls the Mojave. It is about who controls the Mojave for the time being. We are waiting until a power comes that is not dictated by a single person but by a collective faith and strength. It is this force which will conquer Postwar America.
TLDR: It would've been more interesting if New Vegas picked a winning side, and the player had to make a moral choice versus a powerful one. Would you fight alongside Caesar's Legion or the NCR if one was destined to win?
I never played New Vegas or any Fallout games but it seems go be the problem of these kinds of games. You can't have one option to be objectively better because it will undermine "player choice". On the other hand, by not having an objectively better option, it makes the whole thing somewhat pointless. It's a catch-22.
Also applies to RPG romance options to a tee.