Fallout: New Vegas Analysis : House Ending

In Fallout: New Vegas, the player can choose to ally himself from among three different factions: New California Republic, Caesar's Legion or House. Allying with different factions will lead to different endings.

A lot of people end up choosing to side with House. It's a reasonable choice. House was the man who saved Las Vegas. He's intelligent and charismatic. He seems to have things figured out, which is more than you can say for the corrupt and incompetent bureaucrats of the NCR. House is strict but he's not outright cruel like the Legion. He has a plan to restore New Vegas and maybe even colonize space. What a visionary! He may be a ruthless and unfeeling dictator but hey, nobody is perfect.

The Question

Humanity rising from the ashes of the old world to create new societies is a constant storytelling element of Fallout. These new societies run the gamut from backwards, spear-throwing tribes to Mad Max style raiders with spikes and leather to cultures revolving around some misunderstood relic of the past. It's all good fun.

However, there is a underlying thread running through these new societies, a dreaded question haunts each and every one of them: Will they repeat the same mistakes? War never changes, after all.

That the NCR and the Legion represent certain bad things from the past is obvious but they deserve their own separate posts. With House, it's not immediately clear what he represents. He is not manifest destiny America like the NCR nor is he an old school conquering civilization like the Legion. To best understand House, one must stop trying to tie him to a historical analog and simply look at the way he operates, the way he treats those around him and the way he deals with those who stand in his way.

Don't Mess With the House

House serves no god and answers to no man. He rules New Vegas alone and rules as he sees fit. He is a force unto himself. He operates through cold logic, always calculating the odds. He's ruthless when dealing with obstacles and threats.

The Brotherhood of Steel, for example, is a serious threat to House. The BoS is dangerous to him for a couple of reasons: they have the knowledge to figure technology out quickly, they have impressive weapons technology of their own, and their philosophy is to keep dangerous technology out of people's hands. Since House's regime practically runs on robots, he'd want them nipped in the bud before they become a complication. To remove the BoS, the player must find the BoS bunker and either turn the bunker into a slaughterhouse by gunning down every last one of them or turn the bunker into a tomb by initiating the self-destruct sequence. Either way, a lot of people are going to die but at least with the second option, you can't hear the screaming.

This is the part when some players break with House. This is curious since the player has probably been doing some killing up to this point. But bandits and raiders are a different story, eh? If killing the BoS isn't genocide, it sure does seem close to it.

I mention this particular episode since we're trying to figure out House. If it isn't immediately obvious to the player now, House doesn't really much care for people.

More Machine than Man

The common argument to justify siding with House is that he's the best hope for humanity. However, House doesn't care about humanity at all but only cares about New Vegas. Consider this: sweeping aside the romantic image of Las Vegas, how does it operate?

Historically, Las Vegas is widely known for one thing. Its image isn't exactly squeaky clean and it's called "sin city" for a reason. Las Vegas is a gambler's mecca - it runs on vice. There's something both wonderful and terrible about Las Vegas. I've been to Las Vegas and I was amazed at how in the middle of this harsh and barren desert, a great gleaming city stood defiant.

New Vegas, as it is portrayed in-game, is a place where people go to get money sucked from their wallets. New Vegas has no industry to speak of and exists by profiting off of people's vices. While the Strip is a dazzling place full of entertainment and luxury the likes of which are unheard off in the wasteland, it is surrounded on all sides by slums. The dregs of humanity are kept at bay by a wall patrolled by securitrons armed with machine guns. Only those with enough caps are allowed in. New Vegas is kept in order by police bots while anarchy reigns just outside its gates.

House's lack of humanity is also well portrayed in-game through your dealings with him. He's just a face on a screen. He interacts with the outside world rarely and only through robot agents. His own casino, the Lucky 38, is empty and accepts no guests. Even before the war he was an eccentric genius who was a recluse. Hell, his girlfriend is just an A.I. personality hooked to a securitron. His dealings with the courier is purely on a professional level.

But so what? What does all of this mean? Well, it loops back to the question. Is House repeating the same mistakes of the past? One of the main themes of FONV is the problem of technology in the wrong hands. Its retro-futuristic designs are more than just aesthetics. The atom was supposed to usher in a new age of progress but only brought death and destruction instead. Science without morals was extensively covered in the DLC Old World Blues. We see humanity grow in leaps and bounds in terms of scientific discovery but fail because human morality and ethics couldn't catch up.

With house we have the promise of order and progress but lack the increase in human welfare that ought to go with it. Order and progress come only on House's terms and his terms are only for the good of New Vegas. It is tragic that New Vegas is a supposed to be this center of prosperity while just outside people live absolute squalor. If you don't have the caps, House doesn't care. If you're no use to House, he doesn't care. If you get in his way, well too bad.

Greed is Good?

I've read that House is supposed to be a critique of anarcho-capitalism or capitalism in general. While I don't wholly agree, I believe there is some merit to this. When House brought the tribes of Vegas to heel, he turned them to his "employees" to operate his casinos. House is basically a promoter of a one-of-a-kind experience. He offers services in exchange for your cold hard caps. No money? Then get your poor ass out the door.

How one views this operation is the crucial point separating players who support house and players who don't.

Supporters of House will point out that when House isn't applying violence, as he sometimes does, his interactions with the tourists of New Vegas is entirely consensual. House isn't putting a gun to people's heads and ordering them to gamble their money away. It's all "legal" in a sense. However, what is legal is not necessarily moral and it's not good to confuse the two. If a man wants to buy heroine to get high or kill himself, is it moral to sell it to him?

Look, whether or not people were going to prosper with nuclear power isn't an issue in the Fallout series. The promise was there. The issue is whether or not people could deal with the enormous responsibility. I believe House failed and that his vision is flawed in a sense that it will not bring humanity to an enlightened and prosperous age. House's modus operandi is exploitative in nature and any "prosperity" he brings about will only go to the rich few who can afford the high price tag. It's sad that House boasts that he could eventually colonize space (not for free, of course) while so many people are still suffering right outside his lawn right now. Hubris, much? The only time House cares about the slums is if it causes too much trouble for the tourists, in which case, he won't hesitate to bust some heads

So the past repeats itself in a way. Humans exploiting other humans, people eating each other. Wealth is everything and greed is good. It's a world without compassion ruled with an absolute dictator's iron fist. This time it's all coated in a veneer of  being civilized, consenting adults in a free market. FONV wouldn't be considered deep if it didn't challenge our beliefs. A lot of people support a free market economy but what if raising the standards of living was no longer the goal of the free market? What if it became soulless and oppressive? What if charity was no longer a consideration?

House could easily help mankind with the tools at his disposal but altruism isn't in his blood. Altruism has it's own problems and isn't exempt from criticism in the game. It isn't profitable, for starters - just look at the Followers. Charity is often abused and at worst, only enables bad behavior.  House, however, takes the opposite to the very extreme. 

In Conclusion

There's perfectly good reasons to support House, he's not all bad. House will bring progress if it would mean him profiting from it. His regime is peaceful and stable at least. House will ensure humanity will survive enough to be useful, like cattle.

It's really up to the player. In terms of mankind's continuation, House is a good bet. In terms of mankind living in a golden age, it's unclear. At least the wealthiest will. Nothing is free when it comes to House.

Humanity will benefit if only incidentally. It's only rational, at least, that's how House would see it.