Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I write for a German Videogame Website and decided to cover Fable III. So, to prepare myself, I finally took up the second game. It has a rating of 86 on Metacritic and so far I've only heard good things about it.
But damn, this game was bad.

The story is boring and your character basically is nothing more than a glorified delivery boy. It moves you through the world on rails and does not let you decide anything.

The whole marriage and love system is completly pointless because I simply do not care about any of the NPCs. Hammer was the only interesting female character in the entire game. Everbody else is just a cardboard cut-out.

I spend 10 years in that fething tower and when I come back my Dog hasn't changed one bit and nobody even considered paying rent for the 5 buildings I owned at this point.

And don't get me started on the ending.


There are a lot of things I really hated about this game and I'm currently working on a pretty long review, but I wanted a few more opinions. Did I somehow fail at enjoying a great game? Or is this supposed to be an elaborate hoax my Lionhead? Why does everbody love this game?

I agree with you, this game is an overrated pile of crap.

Also if you are covering Fable III, let me know if it's any good as I'm a bit reluctant to go out and waste money on it after this one

Fable I was alright, but this one just felt like a step forward in graphics for three steps backwards in gameplay and fun.

well i have to say the game was ruined on many aspects. Overall it was far too simplified. You can spend an hour bartending, after that, buy a whole town and then no more money troubles ever. The best thing about this game was it s simplicity, as my wife loves this game to death because of the one button approach to combat. She gets to dress up her character in random odd outfits change the hair styles and makeup and swing a 'uge clubba to kill stuff. It s pretty much a cross between playing dolls and orks. The story line was very short, but add in all the extra side quests and the two expansions I got my wife for christmas, and it is at least entertaining to go back to everynow and then. My worst complaint about the game was the glitchyness. overall it really wasnt horrible, but my first time through the game I got to the part where you fight the huge shard and the game decided that it was never going to open so i sat there for an hour trying to figure out what the crap I was doing wrong. I had to go online to figure out it was just a stupid glitch and reload my game after wasting an hour of my life. Glitches were very common on my game, could be I have a generation 1 xbox as well, but after talking to a few people they were having similiar issues albeit not as often. The graphics were decent, audio I never found more annoying than most other games of it's type. But the simplicity of combat makes it a game anyone can pick up and play, and for me to be able to do something video gamey with my wife, that alone gives it a thumbs up.

The combat was the best part of the game imo. I wanted to play a gunslinger with quick sword moves but it looked pretty stupid in the end because I was like 2 meters tall and quite burly.

I found it fun

It had its limitations, but it was charming, simple, had appealing graphics, fantastic sound/music, and oldey-worldey feeling. The British voice-overs also were brilliant. The combat and mixing of gunplay, swordplay, and magic was perfectly tuned, I found. Story wasn't bad either, the ending seems to be a .. point that Molyneux was trying to over-prove. Basically the villain gets so high on his power that he forgets that he is only a feeble man, and so one bullet killing him is symbolic yadda-yadda. Good idea, poor execution.

The limitations, however, were pretty huge. I found it obtuse how your character ALWAYS turned out looking exactly the same, his body went through about 4 sudden evolutions after major story moments and it seemed ridiculous that you couldn't customise his face, physique (to a great extent) and posture. The morality system was also crud. Basically 'Horns - Boring - Angel' and seemed pretty useless.

Fable III seems to be interesting. I'd like to imagine it takes some of the things that II started further (jobs, the Dog, Families etc. etc.) but keeps in the same vein the combat and feel of the game.

sA

I played it once at my friends house, and decided then and there that it was crap.
There was nothing fun about it. The game froze constantly, it was chappy when it didn't freeze.

I quit playing after the first level.

From what i've seen and heard of the third one, I hope it'll be better.

Golden Eyed Scout wrote:I played it once at my friends house, and decided then and there that it was crap.
There was nothing fun about it. The game froze constantly, it was chappy when it didn't freeze.

I quit playing after the first level.

From what i've seen and heard of the third one, I hope it'll be better.

Froze once ever for me. And that wasn't even when I had my 360 on for 18 hours straight running Fable II. (Don't ask)

Can you judge a game properly when experiences are so inconsistent?

I guess, on the other hand, that inconsistent experiences are in themselves a reason to judge.

sA

Pros:
British humor that stayed out of the way unless you looked for it.
There is a fair amount to do off the beaten path.
Expressions.

Cons:
Combat took a step back. You were basically pigeon holed into being an all three attribute character, unlike the first one.
Customization took both steps forward and back. More cloths options, less armor.
How money was handled.


Overall I rather enjoyed it. My character, of whom had a revolver pistol, Katana, and Time Control, kicked alot of butt, but the only way I could keep him as not being an overly muscular dude was keep his abilities low.......

That's the problem with the leveling up. It's a very interesting, nay, a very good idea, that your characteres appearance changes if you upgrade his physical abilities but in the later part of the game most enemies can cause a lot of damage and you really need to upgrade your health to get through some parts without dying.

My game never froze, but it stuttered a lot.

The game had some good ideas that I thought were executed in boring to annoying ways. The worst part of the game, unfortunately, was the most important part for a RPG: the story was almost incredibly lame and felt completely disconnected from character development--which Bioware has taught us is unacceptable!

The west (i.e., not the railroading Japanese but rather us sandboxers) needs to produce a RPG with the novelty of LionHead (without its stupidity), the interactivity of Bioware (without the rapacious corporate greed), and the immersiveness of Bethesda (without the half-decade or more development times).

After the hype, over-hype, delays, more hype and then immense let down that the original Fable was, totally failing to live up to the claims, I pretty much swore off the franchise. So far that seems to have been a wise choice

Its sad they choose to stick to the linear designs instead of the more appealing open formats.

I hate Peter and his half-promises.

The only thing that stands out more than anything for me was the complete lack of fishing in the second game. Why was that? When I used to play WoW and I fished, I thought "Why the hell can't they make this more fun, like Fable?"

Crap game, just like Fable 1, and I'm not giving 3 a chance anymore. Not gonna let peter molyneux piss all over my wallet again.

I only played the first game for 2 hours or so. For a game with such high ambitions the whole structure was a bit bland.

"Hero, there is a new quest for you at the guild." Seriously? That's your angle. There is a new quest I can go and take. Wasn't this game about an emmersive world or something like that?

Anung Un Rama wrote:I only played the first game for 2 hours or so. For a game with such high ambitions the whole structure was a bit bland.

"Hero, there is a new quest for you at the guild." Seriously? That's your angle. There is a new quest I can go and take. Wasn't this game about an emmersive world or something like that?

My biggest problem was that it's piss easy, same counts for 2, these games have no challenge at all.

I breezed through fable 1 in less then 5 hours.

Fable 2, i took some more time on, but there was not a single part where i actually had to try my best. And the ending still pisses me off. worst, boss, ever.

There was a boss? There was some sort of villian, but he was shot by a NPC, so I'm not sure.

Anung Un Rama wrote:There was a boss? There was some sort of villian, but he was shot by a NPC, so I'm not sure.

No, you shoot him with a quick time event, like... press x to win the game.

Soladrin wrote:

Anung Un Rama wrote:There was a boss? There was some sort of villian, but he was shot by a NPC, so I'm not sure.

No, you shoot him with a quick time event, like... press x to win the game.

There's an explanation for that. I put it above.

I guess the boss-fight is meant to be the million minions you slaughter on the top of the rock just beforehand.

sA

smiling Assassin wrote:

Soladrin wrote:

Anung Un Rama wrote:There was a boss? There was some sort of villian, but he was shot by a NPC, so I'm not sure.

No, you shoot him with a quick time event, like... press x to win the game.

There's an explanation for that. I put it above.

I guess the boss-fight is meant to be the million minions you slaughter on the top of the rock just beforehand.

sA

I call BS, the only point he made is that he shouldn't be making these games IMO. I'd rather have an exciting boss fight without any point making. Using the same minions you'v been killing for say... 50% of the game as a boss because theres more of them is also nonsense.

That brings me to another point, there was so little difference between the enemies, and not a single original looking/acting monster/beasty/enemy in the game.

Jobs were also a hassle, who the hell want's to play the same quick time event times a million? No thanks I'll just go play a game that doesn't make me work.

The extremely over used cliché of losing all your stuff was off course also used. Something I hate with a passion. The story was so bland that I can't even remember how it went.

But after all, my biggest gripe will always be, it's to bloody easy.

Popular press, independent press, and many many happy consumers disagree with you

You never lost all of your stuff. Jobs were optional, and really quite rewarding if carried on.

Name me some original enemies, too, that have come out of the fantasy genre recently?

I guess the game gave back what you put in, nad if you chose to skip the cutscenes, not embrace the lore, it's your fault.

sA

smiling Assassin wrote:Popular press, independent press, and many many happy consumers disagree with you

You never lost all of your stuff. Jobs were optional, and really quite rewarding if carried on.

Name me some original enemies, too, that have come out of the fantasy genre recently?

I guess the game gave back what you put in, nad if you chose to skip the cutscenes, not embrace the lore, it's your fault.

sA

I didn't skip anything, and it didn't embrace me, it left me feeling kind of... dissapointed.

And I can't name you a single one, which is the whole reason I've become somewhat fed up with fantasy as a genre. The last good fantasy game I played was Sacrifice, boy was that a gem.

I didn't even think about the lack of originality in the enemies. But now that you mentioned it, there wasn't that much to do.

Another thing which bugged me: at some point my character was covered in blue scars which I think was because I used a lot of magic. But I only used because, well, it was the most effective way of dispatching a group of enemies. But I only leveled up two spells.

Also: what causes a character to get red eyes? Because at one point I had those and little blue things flying around me.

Don't take the game too seriously, as Lionhead decided to take a nap while making this game (didn't even try to make a PC port for it).

The first Fable, even after we all were disappointed in how little they promised came to fruition, actually had some lively characters and interactions between NPCS.

Fable 2 was basically the same as 1, and ergo, nothing new or interesting.

Just consider F2 it the bridging gap between F1 and F3. All F2 was was a Sims expansion- extra content but nothing new in terms of gameplay.

And Fable 3 will be more of the same. Peter has a reputation for promising the world and instead giving you a flower pot that he pissed into. Besides, he's too busy with Milo and being the new projects manager of all 360 games.

BrookM wrote: Besides, he's too busy with Milo...

We know why he's busy with Milo, the dirty old man.

sA

I have to say I really enjoyed it on the 360 and thought it was a fun game to play. Only annoying bit was the compulsive tutorial first level that you can't skip even when you've completed it and want to start over.
The add ons packs weren't up to that much but it did have a few more gimmicks to bring to the game.

Not one for the hardcore gamer by a long shot but I enjoyed it enough to get the download packs for it and still play it from time to time.

Soladrin wrote:

Anung Un Rama wrote:There was a boss? There was some sort of villian, but he was shot by a NPC, so I'm not sure.

No, you shoot him with a quick time event, like... press x to win the game.

Nope, it does the "cutscene" then there's a brief moment where you can hit him once and kill him. If you take too long the NPC does it for you. But it might as well have been a cutscene that went "Press any button to win if you want..... No can't be bothered? Well you win anyway" then right after he dies it goes
"YOU'RE AWESOME!!!"
And theres a few rainbows and crap because you're special and need to be constantly reminded of that fact. Or at least that's what the game looked like it was trying to do

You arn't the only one. While it had it's qualities, it was a pretty crappy game and certianly nothing compared to the first Fable.

I dislike it also