Citing that the old commercial for Fallout 4 is “morally reprehensible,” Dion DiMucci is now suing the game developer Bethesda for using his song.
Upon its debut, Fallout 4 became a massive hit across all platforms. It happens to be one of the best open-world games you can buy and incredibly (almost obnoxiously) detailed to the point where you can literally spend more than a day in the wasteland of Boston without making any progress in the semi-linear storyline.
This November marks two years since the game’s release and some people (some people being me) still haven’t completed the game. Really, there is no “completion,” considering a player can level up to infinity and there’s always something new to find.
But since the game’s been out for a while already, it seems kind of strange that only now Bethesda’s apparently being sued for an old commercial. In the 30 second TV spot, we hear Dion DiMucci’s 1987 song, “The Wanderer.” It’s a really appropriate song for the game, especially since Fallout 4 focuses on the playable character known as the Sole Survivor that literally wanders around the Commonwealth looking for his son. It’s almost as if DiMucci wrote the song for Fallout 4.
However, according to DiMucci’s lawsuit:
"Defendant’s Commercials were objectionable because they featured repeated homicides in a dark, dystopian landscape, where violence is glorified as sport. The killings and physical violence were not to protect innocent life, but instead were repugnant and morally indefensible images designed to appeal to young consumers."
According to reports, anyone who wants to use the song has to contact DiMucci separately from Universal for negotiations. Of course, that’s all well and good, except that if we go off this one spot in question, I could very much argue against these “repugnant and morally indefensible images.”
Here’s the spot:
First and foremost, nuclear apocalypse? In this day and age, it’s more likely than you’d think. Then, we have a dude and his dog wandering around Boston essentially minding his own business. He passes a protectron and chooses not to shoot it, because there’s no need. He does, however, shoot the supermutant standing on the pile of garbage. Anyone who plays the game knows that supermutants are always hostile. We call that self-defense, not glorifying violence. With the exception of Strong, if you get close enough to a supermutant camp, they will attack the player and his harmless dog.
Here’s more from DiMucci’s claim:
"Without Plaintiff’s consent, Defendants dubbed The Wanderer into commercials in which the protagonist, a wanderer, roams from one location to the next, armed and hunting for victims to slaughter. Defendant’s Commercials have no redeeming value, they simply entice young people to buy a videogame by glorifying homicide, making the infliction of harm appear appealing, if not also satisfying."
Nope. Wrong.
Like, I can understand if DiMucci wants to protect his content. But I object to the idea that Fallout 4 follows the exact same no-rules premise as Grand Theft Auto. They, without a doubt, have a lot in common in terms of game mechanics. But the Sole Survivor’s one true goal is to find his son. What he does on his journey to complete that mission is left to the player. “Freedom of choice” is not something Bethesda can control or an idea they created. Moreover, the game studio doesn’t look like it’s trying to encourage it, least of all not in this commercial. I mean, you can’t shoot or steal on a whim without consequences in the game.
Even if you watch this longer one with more footage, the clips show him shooting monsters. Or radroaches. Or raiders, who are very bad, amoral, non-playable characters. Basically, he shoots a whole bunch of stuff that would otherwise kill him if given the chance. Thus, the game is Rated M.
Related Story: The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild’s second DLC
To sue Bethesda or Zenimax for “irreparable” damage caused by lingering YouTube videos shows a tangible misunderstanding of the game material and I hope the matter is resolved quickly.