Doesn't really say anything, Vault-Tec was contracted by the US Government to initiate Project Safehouse, West Tek was a military contractor dedicated to a completely different cause, NO ONE from Vault-Tec would have known of FEV, absolutely no one beyond those that worked on the PVP which would evolve into FEV research and those that oversaw its progress knew of the project.
It isn't an "explanation", it's simply retconning, looking back at the old games and defying their canon in order to make some abstract plot element make sense, it doesn't work, especially not in the case of Fallout 3, an explanation would have been an exact reason as to how this individual got his hands on the FEV and how exactly the Government managed to get the EEP started in the Vault before FEV ever existed.
Look at it like this, the PVP was initiated in 2073 by West Tek as a countermeasure against possible biological attacks by the Chinese, nearly all of the Vaults were completed by 2063, Vault 13 was the last Vault to be completed, on the date of 2069. Before that, there was only testing on a virus to kill the New Plague that had been present in the US, which did not provide the same effects as the final form of FEV did.
Now, considering the inane Social Experiment plotline that Fallout 2 introduced, this would mean that Vault 87 would have had to been completely outfitted with FEV containment facilities, been given the time to modify the virus, after receiving it from whatever stupid source managed to remove entire vats of FEV from the containment facility at Mariposa, a highly armed secret military base, so that they would have enough FEV to supply two hundred years worth of Supermutants, without complications before the date of 2077 but after the date of 2075, it takes years to construct Vaults.
The Great War occured on 2077, four years after the project was initiated. When did the PVP's subject known as the pan-immunity virion finally form into the FEV agent which would factor so importantly into the Fallout canon? In 2075, and at this point they were still working on test animals. The project was moved to the Mariposa Military Base in 2076, a single year before the Great War.
Even if Bethesda acknowledges this somehow (which they obviously don't at any point in Fallout 3), it makes no sense whatsoever. It would take ages to move a bio-hazardous material sensitive to the exposure of the outside air and still in experimental form, all the way to the east coast of the US, somehow transfer all these materials into a controlled Vault constructed many years before, modify the Vault enough (a Vault that took years to complete) to accommodate the FEV virus, have enough scientists work on it in the period of two years (various logs in Vault 87 acknowledge it as FEV, which means it had to be in the year 2075 when the project was actually named as such) in order to modify it for the EEP project (considering the fact that it took many years to develop FEV, this is highly improbable) and at the same time this has to be done in secret without the general populace noticing.
Because that is stupid and absolutely no sensible person would consider it to be a fitting addition to the series lore, the only explanation is that the Vault was constructed for this purpose before the FEV project existed.
If anyone would care to know, there's a lot more I could point out that doesn't make any sense in Fallout 3, the plot is not only broken, but it is filled with so many holes that I caught one at nearly ever major point in the main quest.

I think that's why Bethesda said it is completely separate from Fallout 1 and 2.. not to rush to Fallout 3's defense or anything.. but if you take the game as non-canon it's just as fine as Fallout Tactics which.. was a load as well.
Anyway, I would like to hear more about how Fallout 3 doesn't match up. :)

I'm by no means I Fallout timeline expert. I know most the important items and facts but the dates you've described do conflict with Fallout 3's setting. I wasn't trying to imply that Vault Tec or West Tek were working directly together (joint operation might have been bad wording) but rather that the government wanted a sample moved to Vault 87's whereabouts, but seeing how there was a possible 1 to 2 year timespan to not only move the large amounts of FEV but also modify a Vault it does seem very sloppy. I mentioned before that everything Beth did to bring over the factions was very contrived and this definately seems even more so after reading your post. Very interesting read.

One of the more obvious ones is Jet, which was being exclusively manufactured by the Mordinos at the Stables in Fallout 2. Myron, being the genius he was, would be the only person that knew its exact processes, effects, and the science behind it.
It's highly unlikely that the vats which were required to cultivate the drug, the personnel needed to maintain its growth, and Myron himself (who according to canon was stabbed to death in the Den by a Jet addict) would somehow survive, especially since powerful cities such as Vault City and the NCR both rejected the drug and outlawed it in the city limits. The Mordinos tried to spread the drug in Redding in order to addict the miners and cause dependency on the drug to corner the gold mining operation there.
That's pretty much the gist of the drug's influence, it couldn't really spread because drug control was heavily and strictly enforced in the major hubs of civilization in the wastes, the Mordinos wanted the process all to themselves to utilize it as a major "political" tool and as such kept Myron locked up at the Stables, not only that, but distribution was extremely limited as a result since there was only one single production center on the West coast, ever. Jet, being the incredibly complex drug that it is, would be highly difficult to reverse engineer and all those "Jet labs" you see spread around in Fallout 3 really don't make any sense, Jet is cultivated on Brahmin dung (hence, the Stables) and requires a long period of time to reach potency, then it needs to be condensed to a distributable format that also acts as a dispenser.
So in Fallout 3, one would see a few Ghouls in the metro working on "Ultra Jet' (which is really not explained at all, which is frankly horrendous, especially considering Myron's amazing dialog in Fallout 2) with a few chemistry utilities lying around, which looks more like a meth lab than anything else.
Not to mention the fact that you can find Jet in prewar facilities as well, Vaults, forts, and so on.
@Crowservo - I understand, but there's very limited room for Bethesda to provide exposition regarding this experimental "FEV" without tripping over their facts, they set themselves up something bad. I'd just like to see how they explain it, if at all, especially since there was little to no background information on the EEP, only what it was.

I thought the ghouls were working on a different drug.. it's the one you needed the sugar bombs for though, right?

They were working on "Ultra Jet", modified Jet made to be more potent so that Ghouls would experience a larger effect since their senses have been dulled from the deterioration of their bodies.

One of the things I noticed was the Jet too. I remember the ending of Fallout 2 where Myron died. Not only does that pretty much put a nail in the coffin of Jet too, but it moving ALL the way to D.C. is just beyond improbable. The more and more I play Fallout 1, 2 and 3 the more I see how Bethesda tried to use every bit of 1 and 2 while trying to make it's own story. They knew that Vault Tec and West Tek were two different people but they wanted Super Mutants in D.C. They had to have known Myron was dead, but they wanted an item from 2. They knew the Brotherhood's ways and general demeanor, but they needed a good guy and split them up into the BOS and Outcasts. I really think Beth would have done a better job if they had had the courage to either go their own way with new enemies and factions or stayed in the West and used the characters where they belonged. I have a feeling they felt Fallout 1 & 2's setting were sacred but at the same time a Fallout without Super Mutants and BOS isn't Fallout.
All in all Fallout 3's inconsistencies doesn't annoy me any more than Fallout 2's random story. The pop culture references were cute at first, but talking Deathclaws (and the Enclave made them out of lizards? What the hell?), Vault experiments, New Reno, Super Mutant Cyborg Frank Horrigan and so on all irked me. But so far Fallout 3 has hit enough of my 'fun' buttons for me to like it along the same terms as Tactics, which I enjoyed as well. But Fallout 1 still holds the 'best RPG' angle for me and probably always will. Fallout 2 gets major props in the game design department for improving almost every aspect of Fallout 1's gameplay though.

I find all of the hate on Fallout 3 and Bethesda to be really quite silly. Sure there are going to be a few plot "holes" here and there and some general inconsistencies but talking to and reading a bunch of developer interviews this falls under "game logic". Essentially you have to cut corners for the purpose of the gameplay. Sure, Bethesda could go out and recreate a completely new world with new monsters, new viruses (or none), new drugs, etc. but then they'd get the same complaints that they're getting now: it's not Fallout. The fact is the original developers moved on and Interplay certainly wasn't going to do anything. So who better to continue the series than Bethesda, creators of the highly successful Elder Scrolls series? What, you want to see Fallout just die out, to never come back again for the sake of canon purity?
There were obviously going to be differences mainly because the game is played in first or third person instead of an isometric perspective, as well as the fact that it is not Black Isle Studios making it. But for what Bethesda has accomplished, all of these minor complaints like Jet proliferation, FEV research, Super Mutants, etc. on the East Coast and Brotherhood of Steel Outcasts are SILLY! Use some imagination to explain why everything is the way it is. If I recall correctly, Fallout 3 is set 36 years after Fallout 2 (which is set 80 years after Fallout 1). During those 36 years, the Brotherhood of Steel sent out an expedition to the East Coast to find more tech (completely plausible) and along the way perhaps they brought Jet (who's to say there aren't any BoS junkies?) or a bunch of wastelanders decided to follow their expedition? Suffice to say, 36 years is a long time and a lot could have happened then. Personally, I do see Jet a bit out of place but nothing that a little bit of fill-in-the-blanks can't help.
Bethesda's attention to detail and perfect recreation of Fallout's atmosphere (not necessarily plot) is something that I doubt most other developer studios could do nowadays. The background stories fit perfectly in the Fallout universe and actually help explain some things that were murky in the original Fallouts and present more exciting questions to dwell and expand on. The game world is humongous and populated by everything you would expect from a post-apocalyptic DC. The wasteland is something that you could feel apart of (stealing from m.r._lewis here) instead of the detachment you got from Fallout 1 and 2. Essentially, Fallout 3 is way more immersible and believable in terms of the world than Fallout 1 and 2 ever were. That alone should annul any complaints about minor inconsistencies with Fallout 1 and 2 (and those weren't perfect games by any measure).
Though everyone's tastes and opinions may differ, I personally think a lot of the hate and complaints against Fallout 3 to be unfounded and incoherent, with respect to everyone who voiced their opinion. Just what I believe. I personally think Fallout 3 is an excellent game (and a work of art) and deserves every amount of praise it can get.

They had to cut corners with the plot for gameplay's sake? That is untrue, in fact, it's so heinously incorrect I find it baffling that you could even believe that. There is still dialog in the game, there are still holotapes, notes and physical indicators. What reason, if any (that makes sense) could there be for them to diminish the quality and consistency of the plot? Too many words that take up time for shooting things? The absence of FEV creates a wormhole that disrupts the fabric of space and time? Jet has to exist because replacing it with something else causes a major system error that reformats your hard drive?
There is no such thing as cutting corners on the plot for the sake of gameplay in an RPG, the only time that would ever be the case is if the developers believed there was not enough time for one or the other, I make this argument with Planescape: Torment as well, they sure spent a lot of time on the writing and story, but what happened to the gameplay, similarly, Fallout 3's gameplay (which I actually did not even enjoy) seems to have taken precedence over the story, while they're two separate entities.
In RPGs it's not story OR gameplay, it's gameplay AND story, because of the nature of the genre, they can be made completely separate, the mechanics of the game will give way to the story when appropriate, and the plot will draw back in instances where the player is to be engaged with combat or exploration.
This differs from shooters where typically there is a cinematic element thrown into the mix, things happen to the player as he progresses linearly (and at times non-linearly, depending on the game), but the plot is always part of the gameplay, it coexists and drives the pace of the game.
This does not apply with RPGs, and when it is attempted it entirely disrupts any sensible elements the game may have. For example, why is your father completely invincible while trekking across the wastes, running into Giant Radscorpions, Supermutant Masters, and even in one ridiculous instance in one of my playthroughs, a Behemoth (which, for a greater effect of hilarity, he attempted to beat to death with a board with a nail in it) yet the instant the Enclave occupies the Water Purifier he dies from some radiation that at the end of the game I can even survive in for an extended amount of time?
It might work in a shooter, but not with RPGs, if anything, Bethesda did not cut enough corners, they did not realize that RPGs just don't work this way, RPGs are meant to separate the story and gameplay into two cohesive elements that intertwine without overlapping. The Master in Fallout 1 merely exists at a certain point, his reaction and his eventual demise all rely on your personal exploration, not some scripted event that you triggered earlier, similarly, the Ghouls in Necropolis die if you perform specific acts, yet there is no grand gesture of theatricality, no sequence where all the Ghouls are annihilated in a storm of gunfire, you simply happen upon their deceased corpses upon your return to the city.
So why couldn't Bethesda have realized that? Rather, they attempted to maintain the cinematic route so common in shooters and other genres that attempt to emulate film. No matter your opinion of the game otherwise, this is something garishly wrong with the execution of Fallout 3.
And as such, I must address the issue of canon, you could have learned all I detailed in my posts in this thread by playing both games at least twice, you could have visited the Fallout Wiki which is so chock full of in-depth information and facts quoted and sourced directly from the games themselves. What could Bethesda have done? Why, they could've dropped in some decent dialog, checked their facts, replaced the Supermutants with something sensible (why not change EEP into something entirely different, a parallel military super soldier project that produced something altogether different than big yellow hulking brutes), replaced Jet with another drug, and no one would have complained. Naturally, there would have been comments regarding the poor dialog that the game does contain, but there would be little complaints about the proper addressing of canon. The few that would complain about the absence of Supermutants or Jet would be the nonsensical fans who did not understand the lore of the originals.
Please do not serenade me with the woeful and irresponsible rebuttal of it's "game logic!" This cockamamie response to the limitations of implementing comprehensible plots or mechanics into games has been around since the dawn of the hobby and not at one point has it been a valid excuse. If Fallout 1 or 2 had the ability to provide the exhaustive exposition and fleshed out attention to detail that they did, why not Fallout 3? Or perhaps this extensive literary muscle flexed in the original titles were just a product of "technological restraints" which Fallout 3 so wonderfully managed to avoid with its vague and ambiguous detailing of major plot points, obviously a product of the fantastic technology now at the hands of the top game developers.
Industry buzz words, don't use them, never, none of them make sense, especially the dreaded "immersion".
Also, become aware of your hypocrisy whence waxing over the supposed accuracy of atmosphere and world structure and then mentioning counterpoints such as the "activity" of the wastes on the East Coast, or the sense of "detachment". Excuse me, I maintain composure, if Fallout 1 and 2 were "detached" and this was to be considered part of their atmosphere, then Fallout 3 directly fails by its inability to maintain that feeling. This is also where you insist on the usage of blabbering buzz words that sprouted from the stupidity of journalists in the early 3D era who believed that the advance in graphical technology would somehow produce realistic game worlds. “Immersion” is such a vague and subjective quality that its broad application amongst the groveling nancies of so-called “gaming journalists” has become a perpetual and saddening joke for the gamers who have had the luck to participate in this hobby since its earliest years.
Immersion, as it would find itself in film and literature, is a quality formed by the human element of personal preference. Some would find the tactic of third person narration far more immersive than the limitations of first person, their arguments would maintain that a third person narrative would provide far more detail on the world and characters in general, yet the individual who prefers the nuances of a first person narrative would argue that the musings of a single man and his perspective are far more insightful than the “detached” nature of a third person narrative, to directly apply your wording here.
Who is right in this situation? Naturally, neither of them are, opinion is opinion, and the fact that their opinion brushes so generally over a subject as yours would (first person is better because you’re there apparently, if I read you correctly) provides that neither of them can substantiate their preference, rather they have been limited to preference by the stoic and stubborn nature of supposed superiority. They do not believe that one or the other can carry precedence in certain context, if, for example, Ulysses was to be third person omniscient rather than a stream of consciousness narrative, would the effect of the work not falter? If the Iliad was written in the limited first person perspective of one of the soldiers before Troy, would the representation of an epic and immense conflict not lose its power, and rather wander upon the musings of a single individual?
From this observation one could state that immersion is an incredibly broad term that loses meaning as its application is so diverse and varied in its proposed definition when applied to a product such as a video game. Fallout, as its original incarnations would prove, produces its own contextual case of “immersion”, something that could not be replicated in any other perspective, Fallout 1 and 2 are more immersive Fallout games because their worlds are represented in a stylized manner unique to themselves. Fallout 3 is not an immersive Fallout game because it loses the effect that the previous titles had. As such, there is only one argument that could be applied, which one is more immersive? And that, is up to opinion.
In Fallout, would the desolate, broken, destroyed and almost deserted, irradiated lands of the waste not lose their sense of hopelessness, gargantuan size and imposing mystery with the departure from a distant third person perspective to that of a close first person perspective in a chaotic and overpopulated world? Would not the illusion of travel across a ghost land of death be broken, as there is no longer the silent ominous observation of a small blip moving across a map taking days to arrive at its destination with little to nothing in its path, yet now instantaneous travel from one point to the other in a matter of a few hours? Indeed, opinion cannot be wrong, but it can be counterproductive to the effect of deriving a true analysis of what makes a gaming series and its lore cohesive and unique, and from what you say, the fact that Fallout 3’s world is full of activity and “populated by everything you would expect” should actually countermand the belief that it is actually accurate to the atmosphere of the original Fallouts.
Fallout 1 and 2 were desolate, the player felt alone and detached from society, so why is Fallout 3’s direct defiance of that somehow more accurate to the general feel of the originals? Rationality is often a virtue that requires intense deliberation beyond mere acts of “defense”, in regards to your opinion of Fallout 3, so I can only say, that I have always found Ultima VII and Fallout 1 far more immersive than many first person RPGs to have been released, and this sentiment applies to genre classics such as Daggerfall and Ultima Underworld as well.
I honestly would have preferred for the series to "die out", set in quotations considering the fact that the series hardly died at all, much like its spiritual predecessor Wasteland is still played and remembered to this day, despite its incredible age. Even if it didn't, there are many other prospective developers that could have worked on the title, especially Stardock, whose chief developers have shown extreme competence in their views regarding sequels and the gradual "evolution" of a series, rather than the abrupt and equally clunky incarnation of "change" that was born from Fallout's move to a 3D world.
Also, I seriously hope you were kidding telling me to ignore Fallout 3’s inconsistencies simply because it has an “immersive” world or whatever else industry term you might throw at me, I do not ignore faults in a game simply because it does everything well.
In fact, I did not ignore the faults in Fallout 1 and 2 and they annoy me to this day as well. I have struck my keyboard in anger at Vic becoming apathetic in Fallout 2 and had sworn that Fallout 2 has some of the worst bugs I’d ever encountered in my experience gaming. These bugs and problems hound me to this day, and as such, I never give Fallout 1 or 2 scores of nine or above when I have reviewed them, they are flawed, and there are some annoying flaws in there.
However, these flaws are not detrimental to the experience as a whole, they do not destroy important game mechanics, and fortunately they do not degrade the general quality of the game to an extreme extent. Fallout 3 however, insists on presenting childish, infantile dialog, flat cardboard voice acting, nerfed SPECIAL that hardly means anything anymore, a ridiculous level cap that cuts off too soon as experience is far too plenty, an experience absolutely devoid of challenge (so easy in fact, that I managed to beat the game on Very Hard having used only thirty stimpaks the whole game, and my Medicine skill was around ten), and to top it off, filled with canonical errors and general stupidity.
Oh, how I could relate its bugs, how I could relate its nonsensical quest structure and ridiculously broken karma system with much ado. But I won’t, because it would consume far more space than this already massive post contains.
I do not ignore flaws in games, and in conclusion, I sincerely hope you do not either, the complacency of the consumer in this industry has lead to its steady decline of creativity and quality.

Let me make a few things straight here:
Everything you stated is nothing but an opinion. Your elitist attitude does not make your points anymore legitimate, correct or superior to anyone else. What I'm trying to make a point of is that a lot of the criticism Fallout 3 received from Fallout purists is silly. While Fallout 3 is by no means a perfect game, any criticisms for being "untrue" to the first two Fallouts is bluntly stupid and most arguments against the game based on technical faults can be witnessed with the first two Fallouts.
Fallout 3 is NOT meant to be a direct sequel to Fallout 1 or 2. It is a spin-off, regardless of the number next to the title. Bethesda did the right choice in not intruding on Black Isle Studio's domain (the West Coast) and decided to import the game world of the West Coast to the East Coast where Bethesda can take what BIS did without risk of dishonoring the previous iterations. They took things like Jet, the Brotherhood of Steel, Super Mutants, FEV, the Enclave, etc. and decided to create a new world that still has some form of familiarity to the rest of the franchise. I always thought of it as more of a "modern remake" of the first two Fallouts combined in a new location. I don't think it was Bethesda's intention to mess with the first two Fallouts nor was it to create a completely separate game but rather tie both together with familiar motifs. I by no means work for Bethesda and I cannot honestly state with certainty what their intentions with Fallout 3 were but I do believe that it was more of bringing Fallout to the masses than continuing the series in the vision and direction that purists and the original developers had in mind. This is what I mean by "game logic". I think it was intentional to simply input everything from the West Coast, separate that part of the series and start anew using everything BIS created. I don't think this presents any canon inconsistencies or irregularities as you can simply explain everything with a little bit of logic (I'll show you in a bit). In fact, there are inconsistencies and errors within Fallout 1 and 2. If you read the Fallout Bible you can see a bunch.
Bethesda decided to go a different route from what BIS did with Fallout 1 and 2. Not only to denote that Fallout 3 is a different game and separate but also to appeal to the majority of today's gamers and simply from a development point of view. Instead of presenting a third-person omniscient point of view they decided to put the character smack-dab in the game world and make him believe he was living in it. This is what I mean by the term "immersion". It is not some mindless industry buzz word, it is a legitimate word used to explain the mechanics and properties of a game's execution. There are indeed many ways of being immersed into a game but I think anyone with an ounce of logic can tell you that in a first-person perspective it's making you believe you are in the game and not outside of it. I believe Fallout 3 did and went for this (presenting heavy theatrics instead of Fallout 1 and 2's method of presenting a story) for a variety of reasons. Chief of these reasons is simply appealing to the market of today. Today's gamers are a lazy bunch. They want their games to feed and chew their cake for them and be as simple and easy as possible. For financial and game reasons Bethesda wanted to appeal to the majority and they succeeded. Fallout 3 is a stellar success both with critics and sales and is not representative of most of your criticisms. Today's gamers have a different gaming mentality than those of us of from the "good ol' days". Personally, I believe both mentalities (story, plot and innovation first (FO1/2) and theatricality and first-person action (FO3)) are fine. As a gamer, I try my best to enjoy everything. I never dwell on the past and wish for a continuation of the status-quo but rather enjoy everything for its own merits and never try to compare different games or one genre to another. I simply sit back and have fun.
But I am not stating that I am a mindless consumer who will play and love everything. I have very, very high standards and I personally believe Fallout 3 met them. This is all a matter of opinion and of course we will never agree but I believe Bethesda spent an incredible amount of effort in getting Fallout 3 to be as close to the originals as possible. They aren't perfect and I certainly wasn't expecting the second coming of Christ like you are but I appreciate Bethesda's other achievements with Fallout 3. They managed to create a stellar game world, be it true to the first two Fallouts or not, and something that you can lose yourself in for hours of blissful enjoyment. I don't try to compare Fallout 3 to Fallout 1 and 2 because I see they are two different games. Canon wise I believe Bethesda did everything right and I hope to see them continue with DLC and expansions and maybe actually create something new with a Fallout 4 in the future.
Fallout 1 and 2 have already been made. It's time to move on or leave it at that. You can ask for a remake from BIS themselves (if they were still around) but I can probably guarantee that years of nostalgic build-up has jaded your opinion of anything further to come, regardless of what it is.
I do know people that simply don't like the gameplay of games like Fallout 3 and Oblivion and that is a legitimate reason to not like the game. But to simply cry out that Fallout 3 is a piece of crap just because it fails to live up to the legacy of Fallout 1 and 2 is silly. I obviously see that you are not part of this latter group but I know people who are and it irks me when people do not realize that this is a different game set in a different time in a different place. There are going to be heavy differences between Fallout 1/2 and 3. Bethesda thought it could address that by bringing anything from 1 and 2 to 3 and I think they did just fine. I could go on and on and rebut your opinions but I think we have made our points clear.
Please forgive my English. I'm trying really hard to learn it and hope you understood what I was trying to convey. I realize a lot of my rant was constant droning as I hope that each time I repeat the same argument it becomes a bit more clear. ^^

In any case, here's my silly little explanation to your very first arguments on canon inconsistencies:
Jet - Though this drug is hard to make I would think that in 36 years time there would be competitors with their own Jet stocks and improved methods of creating it to meet an increasing demand (due to strict laws in the region and its rarity). When the Brotherhood of Steel traveled east I wouldn't doubt that a bunch of Wastelanders might have followed all the way to DC and introduced Jet and methods of producing it in various communities. Whilst I do find Jet in the East Coast being a bit far-fetched it is still plausible. Who's to say that the East is devoid of something the West has in order to produce a drug? They both have Brahmin so it should be only a matter of gathering up junk to use to make Jet. The reason why you see Jet everywhere in FO3 is because of the game's engine which randomizes loot whenever you open containers. So because you see Jet inside a Vault doesn't mean the developers purposefully put it there but rather because the program randomized everything. A slight technical oversight and not a serious inconsistency worthy of getting angry about.
FEV - Though Vaults take years to make it isn't exactly decades. It's about the right amount of time it takes to build any large structure. I think Vault-Tec had in mind a vault dedicated to experimentation with drugs and biological substances before PVP or FEV was ever thought of. When the government took control of the FEV project from West-Tek and put it in a military base a year before the bombs dropped they distributed other batches to other facilities around the country to maximize research. As I recall the batch in Mariposa was different from the one used in West-Tek. The batch used in Vault 87 was also different from the one used at either West-Tek or Mariposa. I don't think distributing such a substance throughout the USA would be too much trouble in a full year's time. Mariposa was already up and running and prepared to take vast amounts of FEV in a relatively short amount of time, I would think that a Vault with biological weaponry or drugs in mind is capable, too. I wouldn't think that a completely new set of proprietary equipment is needed to handle FEV and transporting things before the War doesn't involve long caravan voyages using beasts of burden. Just fly it over. I would think that there was plenty of FEV to go around, especially considering that in official canon the West Tek facility was nuked, causing the vats to crack and spill a ton of FEV into the atmosphere (enough to affect a serious portion of the world or the world altogether).
Or perhaps Vault-Tec did corporate espionage, discovered FEV, smuggled some from West-Tek (or bought it or whatever) and decided to conduct their own experiments? Vault-Tec sounds like a huge, shadowy corporation with an agenda of their own, separate from the US government and full of resources.
I don't think you need too much FEV to supply "200 year's worth of Super Mutants" especially seeing as though Super Mutants are as long lived as any mutated creature. You just need enough pure humans to produce a good population and they'll last for a long time. Seeing as though the experiments were conducted on a population of 1000 PURE human inhabitants they'd be more successful in creating a Super Mutant population than the West Coast. I don't believe Vault 87 was the only facility on the East Coast with FEV, I believe there was another the Super Mutants were using to expand their population (seeing as though the vats in Vault 87 read as "empty" in the terminals and that the Super Mutants were still gathering humans from the wasteland to expand).
You also forget that the Vaults were inhabited right when the bombs were about to fall and that any research conducted on them would have happened after 2077, probably a few years after just to stabilize the population emotionally, physically, medically, etc.
I do believe Bethesda could have better expanded on the plot but it's still very much plausible and acceptable. I don't know... just use some imagination to figure out why things are the way it is. The background is very much open and Chris Avellone (an original Fallout developer) has stated many times his will to leave the background of the Fallout world open to player interpretation.

Oh and I did want to note that Fallout 3 isn't over, dlc and all that

sorry to interfere in your "science speech" (but it's nice to see someone who know so many about old fallout) but one thing is on my mind all the time.
Let me quote Sykop4th
"I do know people that simply don't like the gameplay of games like Fallout 3 and Oblivion and that is a legitimate reason to not like the game. But to simply cry out that Fallout 3 is a piece of crap just because it fails to live up to the legacy of Fallout 1 and 2 is silly. I obviously see that you are not part of this latter group but I know people who are and it irks me when people do not realize that this is a different game set in a different time in a different place. There are going to be heavy differences between Fallout 1/2 and 3. Bethesda thought it could address that by bringing anything from 1 and 2 to 3 and I think they did just fine. I could go on and on and rebut your opinions but I think we have made our points clear."
I have to disagree, at first I preordered CE F3 as fallout fan, then I have played it and understood that fallout is dead, so I tried to play it as completly new game and there are still sooo many flaws on this game.
- it's called RPG, so i suppose some story, some backstory, some roleplaying, I haven't seen anything of this in F3 (the main story cannot be called story at all, oh i forgot that there are few good/evil dialogues)
- lots of hype about using S.P.E.C.I.A.L. system, but have you tried it ? It's just bunch of numbers without any real influence on game (another part of this RPG case), even Diablo which is hack and slash was more dependant on stats
- graphical glitches from oblivion are still there, try to jump or play in 3rd person, I have seen better animation in ten years old games, do not tell me that bethesda is so incompetent
- skills are useless, picklocking is just 4 steps in dificulty nothing less nothing more, same as science, half of the skills are usable once or twice in game
- personal feeling about skills ---- what the F-word ? can anyone tell me why skill influence damage? I had thought that if I shoot someone into head from two meters with shotgun regardless my skill with weapons i will make something really messy, i just press the trigger not disassemble this gun.
- A-bomb in megaton, how can be bomb like this in DC vicinity ? I supposed that they used balistic rockets to nuke each other, looks really stupid
- radioactive water, i don't know if USA have so stupid people (or just bethesda), but there in europe (at least i suppose) every person who have some education knows that water CANNOT be radioactive, only dirt in it, so project purity is hard way to create sandfiltering device
- CQC manuals from china in DC, just another of weird things in this "game"
- gameplay time too short for RPG game, if i stick to main story (and do ALL mainstory quests) it is 8 hours at max.
- what is brotherhood of steel? what is powerarmor? too many things in game which are without answer if you do not know F1 and F2, how then can I play this game without comparing it with old fallouts ?
I can continue with more and more weirdness in this game which have nothing to do with fallout universe. Then tell me, how can game like this get 10/10 everywhere? Because it hype, no one dares to say anything against this game, but when I look to fansites of fallout, this game is just another 6/10 shooter game. Maybe if I grow up on consoles and no-brain shooters, then i can call it RPG. I have paid for this game, I want some quality, not stupid shooter.

Get off your high horse, EyeNixon. Your arrogance is convulsing. My, the almighty God of everything that is Fallout speaks and must be correct, just because he thinks that way. Well let me tell you that not everything I said was pure "speculation". It was also derived from facts. You don't need Bethesda to hold your hand and say "Well sweety, this is an FEV chamber. You gas people with our special version of FEV. We got this stuff from California before the atomic war."
You forget that Fallout 1 and 2 are presented in a third-person narrative style where you are more aware of heavy details whilst Fallout 3 is presented in a first-person style where everything you see is just that... what you see. You have to look at things to come up with logical explanations in your head as to why that is the way it is, unlike in Fallout 1 or 2 where details will be constantly given at the push of a button. In Fallout 3 if you come across something bizarre or something out of place you have to figure out why in your head, because you don't have some supercomputer on your PIPBoy telling you that the rocks are "out of place". This is the difference between Fallout 1 + 2 and 3.
You forget that Fallout 3 is set on the other side of the fricken country. You think the people of the Capital Wasteland are talking to the people of the West Coast? That they know every detail as to what happened to the Chosen One, Jet, the Brotherhood of Steel, etc.? No! Fallout 3's world is completely cut off from Fallout 1 and 2 save for the Brotherhood of Steel... which later did become cut off. You're not going to see bizarre explanations for every single tiny detail. It's up to you, the person playing the game (the only conduit of information) to figure out why. Sometimes it is in a holotape and other times it is in a terminal but most of the time you simply have to retcon facts.
I'm sorry that you are pissed that Bethesda didn't hire anybody from the original Fallout series that could better elaborate on the details before, during and after the original Fallouts and I'm sorry that you are pissed that Bethesda couldn't afford Pulitzer-winning authors or an array of Hollywood actors that can voice Fallout 1/2-style complex dialog.
Here are the facts: There is a Vault with FEV on the East Coast. This must mean that the US government transported FEV to a Vault on the East Coast. Simple! You don't need Bethesda to write you a silly exposition as to why. Just look at the darn facts and you'll know why.
Here's another fact: Jet is in the East Coast. This must mean that somebody has been able to reverse-engineer it or improve its development enough to create plenty! If the only person that was able to understand Jet was the Chosen One than there you go! The Chosen One, who was smart enough to understand what the heck Jet was, did something to make Jet easier to create! You simply connect the dots. It is not Bethesda's fault that BIS didn't exactly explain every last detail at the ending of Fallout 2, conversely the status of Jet. Though Myron dies, the game didn't say Jet died with him. You, sir, were speculating.
It was made clear that the FEV batch used in Vault 87 was different from the ones in West-Tek or Mariposa. The original method of introducing FEV into the body was through injections. Grey/Master fell into a vat and discovered that you can also just dip the specimen inside a vat. And because official canon shows that FEV can be made airborne (enough to inoculate most of the population by simply breathing it in a lot) and Fallout 3 shows there are gas chambers then it must obviously mean that this special batch of FEV was turned into a gas to be inoculated into a specimen. Simple! And from this you can derive a bunch of Super Mutant explanations.
You can see that the terminals state that all of the vats are empty, meaning it was used up. Yet throughout the game the Super Mutants are still gathering up slaves to expand. Logically, there must be something else that is creating so many Super Mutants that the mighty BoS can't handle.
I wasn't using Avellone as a source, I was just saying that he (a developer of one of the original Fallouts which includes Fallout 2, you airhead) stated through many other developers and himself that they want to keep some facts a secret to speculate on. That is it. I am not saying Avellone was the first person to ever think up of the Fallout series.
You also forget that Bethesda is not done creating Fallout 3. They still have a lot of time to do a lot of explaining. Think of Fallout 3 as the beginning where you are presented a ton of murky and confusing facts that you can't understand. Then think of the micro-expansions and full retail expansions that will be released in the future that will clarify everything the way an epilogue should.
Please, you are not a Fallout clairvoyant, you are an arrogant piece of work.