Fable 3 Opinions
Fable 3 Opinions
So now that Fable 3 is out and has been out for a short while now i am wondering what people think about it. I personally thought it was a good game, loved and hated the choices you had to face throughout the story as they had very far reaching consequences. While there were several annoying glitches and pathfinding issues for NPCs and stuff the game was all around very good and despite its incredibly easy difficulty(i didnt die once lol) it delivered a very in depth gameplay element that is worth your while even after beating the short storyline. The desert is very interesting, eerie and terrifying, somewhat of a diablo 2 feel if anyone got that, anyway i thought it was worth while and hoped others did too id like to hear your comments.
Lionhead has taken the series' simplicity to a new level with Fable III. Combat is hilariously easy (I've just stood in the middle of a group of bandits and let them fire their rifles at me - they'll miss 95% of the time, if not more), NPC interactions are dumbed down even further, the one-button expression system is annoying to a fault, and there's far less freedom in this installment than the others.
The expression wheel in Fable II worked just fine, but now Lionhead has made it so that you just press A to do a randomly chosen expression when you begin interacting with an NPC. What this means is that if you want to hug someone, you're probably going to have to dance with them or play pat-a-cake before "Hug" just randomly appears as a choice. One demon door in particular requires you to perform the hug, tickle, and kiss expressions, but you'll end up doing a dozen of them before you randomly get those three as choices. Why this was considered a good idea is beyond me.
As for the lack of freedom, in the other Fables you could eat some pies, drink some wine, or quaff a potion or two whenever you wanted. In Fable III, the only time you have the choice to eat food (of which you can only carry one type now) is when you've been injured in battle. So, again, to appease a demon door that wants you to be overweight, you have to buy several food items and then let monsters wail on your character so that you have the choice to eat them. Since you can only carry one food item at a time, you have to fast travel to a merchant to pick up some pies (or whatever), fast travel to a location with hostile creatures, let them beat on your for a good minute or two to have a chance to consume the food, then rinse and repeat. I've done this several times already and I'm nowhere near appeasing the demon door's request. It's beyond irritating that I can't just buy food and eat it at my leisure in town.
The Sanctuary system is a good idea on paper, but it has some serious design flaws in-game. For one, the only items you can view there are weapons, magic gauntlets, vanity items, and trophies. There's no way to know how many bottles of wine you're carrying unless you visit a pawn broker or let yourself get hurt to the point that you have the option to consume one. Want to know what pieces of furniture you've purchased? Sorry, there's no way to do that in Sanctuary (you'll have to redecorate a home to see a list). There's also the annoyance of having your butler mention that there's new DLC to download every time you zone into Sanctuary, even if you don't want to buy the dog costume that's there (the only PDLC currently available). And, overall, equipping your character with a new weapon and putting on a new outfit is a lengthier process than doing it from a traditional menu. I'm not sure why they've always claimed it's quicker.
The best part about the game is the "darkness" you deal with in Aurora. It's almost as if someone completely separate from the development team wrote that part of the game. Whoever it was, they should be promoted, despite the area's linearity.
The expression wheel in Fable II worked just fine, but now Lionhead has made it so that you just press A to do a randomly chosen expression when you begin interacting with an NPC. What this means is that if you want to hug someone, you're probably going to have to dance with them or play pat-a-cake before "Hug" just randomly appears as a choice. One demon door in particular requires you to perform the hug, tickle, and kiss expressions, but you'll end up doing a dozen of them before you randomly get those three as choices. Why this was considered a good idea is beyond me.
As for the lack of freedom, in the other Fables you could eat some pies, drink some wine, or quaff a potion or two whenever you wanted. In Fable III, the only time you have the choice to eat food (of which you can only carry one type now) is when you've been injured in battle. So, again, to appease a demon door that wants you to be overweight, you have to buy several food items and then let monsters wail on your character so that you have the choice to eat them. Since you can only carry one food item at a time, you have to fast travel to a merchant to pick up some pies (or whatever), fast travel to a location with hostile creatures, let them beat on your for a good minute or two to have a chance to consume the food, then rinse and repeat. I've done this several times already and I'm nowhere near appeasing the demon door's request. It's beyond irritating that I can't just buy food and eat it at my leisure in town.
The Sanctuary system is a good idea on paper, but it has some serious design flaws in-game. For one, the only items you can view there are weapons, magic gauntlets, vanity items, and trophies. There's no way to know how many bottles of wine you're carrying unless you visit a pawn broker or let yourself get hurt to the point that you have the option to consume one. Want to know what pieces of furniture you've purchased? Sorry, there's no way to do that in Sanctuary (you'll have to redecorate a home to see a list). There's also the annoyance of having your butler mention that there's new DLC to download every time you zone into Sanctuary, even if you don't want to buy the dog costume that's there (the only PDLC currently available). And, overall, equipping your character with a new weapon and putting on a new outfit is a lengthier process than doing it from a traditional menu. I'm not sure why they've always claimed it's quicker.
The best part about the game is the "darkness" you deal with in Aurora. It's almost as if someone completely separate from the development team wrote that part of the game. Whoever it was, they should be promoted, despite the area's linearity.
-
Anarchy Nooblet
- Posts: 162
- Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2006 11:08 pm
- Location: West Athens
- Contact:
Basically, that.
It's not a bad game but the amount of freedom that Lionhead has taken away from us is just horrible. They focused so much on how you changed the world they forgot that what made Fable 1 so good was it focused on how the world changed you and how you dealt with it. [Spoilers for Fable 1-3]
For instance, Jack took your family away from you and when you finally beat him you got to make a some heavy choice that effected no one else but yourself. If i killed my sister here and now for the ultimate power, no one but myself was going to pay for that price. If I wanted to kill the Guildmaster instead of Nostro, I could and the Guild would be running like normal and even then I would STILL have his annoying voice in my head (Should of made him black and had Morgan Freeman play the voice actor to have the opposite effect.) Twinblade's Dead? Well his camp is still up and running. And if you did become the mayor of Bowerstone, not one thing changed and that's because the game was focused around you and we loved it. We loved taking our orphan child and raising him to react to certain situations differently and watching those actions reflect on himself as opposed to the world. Even Fable 2 had some of that element especially with the Corrupt/Purity system (Personally,I liked it.) And once again you were an orphan child who experienced a great trauma but we didn't really have time to focus on how the world effects our characters since we were all so busy trying to figure out how we effect the world and in Fable 3 you start out as what? A prince? What was our great travesty that is fueling us to go forward and over throw our tyrant brother? It was nothing compared to Fable 2s and nonexistent to Fable 1s. By Lionhead making you start off as a prince they kind of cut out a HUGE detail about being a hero and that is renown. Half of Albion knows who we are by the time we start the game. You didn't take an unknown traumatized child and raise him yourself to become a famous hero that has the power to seize the world. Instead you took a spoiled prince/princess gave them the power of a hero and were told you can do whatever you want but it effects the world more so than you.
Personally, I would of preferred to see a story line where you as a poor and illegitimate child of the former and King, rightful heir to the throne and Logan finds diary entries in the castle that proves it, he sends his armies to attack your village, you escape by boat just in time to see the pillars of smoke begin to rise and get blown to bits by their navy. Theresa finds you washed up on shore and you see where it leads to. The whole point is that you should start from scratch, work your way up, gain peoples trust or fear and then from the shadows use your new-founded army to fight off Logan, who'd also be a hero, become king and afterwords could have read a tome or something that opened the void releasing the Creeper, or even better the Knight, Queen(Or both) of Blades and there's the second half of your story. I just think it would of been nice to bring back members of the court into this to try and get the same feeling from fable 1. But that's just my opinion. Others might love what Lionhead did with Fable 3.
It's not a bad game but the amount of freedom that Lionhead has taken away from us is just horrible. They focused so much on how you changed the world they forgot that what made Fable 1 so good was it focused on how the world changed you and how you dealt with it. [Spoilers for Fable 1-3]
For instance, Jack took your family away from you and when you finally beat him you got to make a some heavy choice that effected no one else but yourself. If i killed my sister here and now for the ultimate power, no one but myself was going to pay for that price. If I wanted to kill the Guildmaster instead of Nostro, I could and the Guild would be running like normal and even then I would STILL have his annoying voice in my head (Should of made him black and had Morgan Freeman play the voice actor to have the opposite effect.) Twinblade's Dead? Well his camp is still up and running. And if you did become the mayor of Bowerstone, not one thing changed and that's because the game was focused around you and we loved it. We loved taking our orphan child and raising him to react to certain situations differently and watching those actions reflect on himself as opposed to the world. Even Fable 2 had some of that element especially with the Corrupt/Purity system (Personally,I liked it.) And once again you were an orphan child who experienced a great trauma but we didn't really have time to focus on how the world effects our characters since we were all so busy trying to figure out how we effect the world and in Fable 3 you start out as what? A prince? What was our great travesty that is fueling us to go forward and over throw our tyrant brother? It was nothing compared to Fable 2s and nonexistent to Fable 1s. By Lionhead making you start off as a prince they kind of cut out a HUGE detail about being a hero and that is renown. Half of Albion knows who we are by the time we start the game. You didn't take an unknown traumatized child and raise him yourself to become a famous hero that has the power to seize the world. Instead you took a spoiled prince/princess gave them the power of a hero and were told you can do whatever you want but it effects the world more so than you.
Personally, I would of preferred to see a story line where you as a poor and illegitimate child of the former and King, rightful heir to the throne and Logan finds diary entries in the castle that proves it, he sends his armies to attack your village, you escape by boat just in time to see the pillars of smoke begin to rise and get blown to bits by their navy. Theresa finds you washed up on shore and you see where it leads to. The whole point is that you should start from scratch, work your way up, gain peoples trust or fear and then from the shadows use your new-founded army to fight off Logan, who'd also be a hero, become king and afterwords could have read a tome or something that opened the void releasing the Creeper, or even better the Knight, Queen(Or both) of Blades and there's the second half of your story. I just think it would of been nice to bring back members of the court into this to try and get the same feeling from fable 1. But that's just my opinion. Others might love what Lionhead did with Fable 3.
We're all going to die some day, I intend to deserve it.
The “choices” in Fable 3 are by far, the worst I have ever seen in any RPG game that provides this dynamic methodology of story-telling.
Perhaps it’s lazy writing or a sign that the British education system is failing in the political science department, because the options I get look more like an episode out of Pokemon than anything meaningful or connective on an emotional level.
For comparison, look at Mass Effect. The choices you make have stark differences, yet no matter what you choose, you are still the good guy. This is a realistic approach to comprehending and analyzing historical characters (why Chin the Emperor of China, did what he did, and so on) as well as providing players a greater emotional connection to the character they are playing. Some of these choices are difficult for me to pick, and sometimes there are so many choices available, I have to save the game and reload it multiple times to see my different outcomes, or to even play the game multiple times over to fully experience it.
Fable 3 provides none of that depth. Can you imagine if Lionhead Studios made Mass Effect?
“Shepard, you can either starve off half of humanity and sell the rest as slaves to alien civilizations; or you can transform Earth into a vegan nudist paradise and spread the message of peace and love across the galaxy!”
How about ‘none of the above’? Neither of these choices makes sense to any degree of human understanding, and I think the only realistic option would be to gauge my eyes out rather than excruciate myself further to another minute of simplistic dribble.
These are the types of choices you are constantly exposed to in Fable 3. Are you a savage barbarian meat-eater or a loving, kind, vegetarian? Are you seriously providing me with this choice? Can I not be good and a meat eater simultaneously? Is it not possible to be evil and a vegetarian at the same time? Clearly the staff of Lionhead Studios couldn’t even fathom the possibility that the man responsible for the Holocaust was perhaps one of the most renowned and principled vegan’s this world has ever known.
I was annoyed and dismayed that Reaver was the archetype of the “evil conservative right-winger” who wishes to do no good, simply for the sake of doing it. Now I understand the Fable series retains a sense of humour, and perhaps it’s sometimes better to force people to choose sides rather than allow them to sit on the fence. But what happens when both sides are full of ****? Then you’re really screwed.
And what makes the hippies automatically good? If I had even thought about listening to their nonsense, the whole kingdom would have been millions in debt, and the darkness would have killed them all. I can only be thankful that my real estate empire (ie. The very capitalism your rebels are fighting against) saved me from racking up Obama-sized deficits.
Despite the fact my real estate empire is the saviour of the kingdom; all you ever hear is your people bitch and complain. “Why do you have to own my house! I want to own my own house!” even after I gave everyone the lowest rent rate possible. Since when did industrial-era caricatures even give a **** about owning their land? If you want to have your child benefits and not have your house swallowed by shadow, then I need some form of cash to make that happen.
So why were these people complaining about their home ownership? Why is Reaver the bad guy? Why are hippies and vegans the good guys? It’s the bias. The liberal-Labourite bias that Fox News is always ranting about has manifested itself in a British video game that targets Echo boomer males, of all places. Politics has little place in the video game world, and as a political science major, I can sniff out this rubbish one pixel away. I’m a moderate, but I’ll quote Matt Stone on this: I hate conservatives, but I really ****ing hate liberals. The self-righteous, arrogant, latte-sipping social justice crusaders are by far the most annoying segment of society. So why on earth are they bringing their indecipherable megalomaniac stupidity to my TV screen? I don’t want it. And if you’re going to force it upon me, then at least provide an opt-out.
But there was no way out of this. You can either be a good person, and start preserving the environment, giving rights to animals, and redecorating your castle to suit post-modern avant-garde tastes, or you can be the right-wing nut job who will reap destruction upon his own people for his own personal gain. This was by far the most annoying aspect of the game. I was willing to ignore the glitches, the plot holes, and put the missing functions aside, so long as I could get something out of this experience. I did not gain anything, but I did accumulate a sort of spite for the folks at Lionhead Studios for thinking they could pass horse **** for Haute cuisine.
It was like trying to convert Karl Marx’s Das Kapital into a colouring book. How on earth can you **** up industrial-era politics that much? I don’t even think the writers of Lionhead Studios have an understanding of Marxism, rebellion, republicanism, and all the “history” this game tries to base itself on. My elementary classes on social studies had more depth than their interpretation of the materialist conception of history.
In conclusion, the choices this game provides are liberal biased, incoherent, lack sophistication, and reflect a lack of understanding on Lionhead Studios staff part. The people that play Fable 3 are not the same demographic of Pyjama Sam’s adventures, and everything Fable 3 provides only insults the intelligence of those of us who belong to the “Mature” rating this game sells itself on.
If Lionhead ever wants to regain the loyalty of once-fans like me, then they need to both acknowledge their sheer stupidity, and go on a massive hiring spree; because their current weakness was not in programming, but in story telling.
Perhaps it’s lazy writing or a sign that the British education system is failing in the political science department, because the options I get look more like an episode out of Pokemon than anything meaningful or connective on an emotional level.
For comparison, look at Mass Effect. The choices you make have stark differences, yet no matter what you choose, you are still the good guy. This is a realistic approach to comprehending and analyzing historical characters (why Chin the Emperor of China, did what he did, and so on) as well as providing players a greater emotional connection to the character they are playing. Some of these choices are difficult for me to pick, and sometimes there are so many choices available, I have to save the game and reload it multiple times to see my different outcomes, or to even play the game multiple times over to fully experience it.
Fable 3 provides none of that depth. Can you imagine if Lionhead Studios made Mass Effect?
“Shepard, you can either starve off half of humanity and sell the rest as slaves to alien civilizations; or you can transform Earth into a vegan nudist paradise and spread the message of peace and love across the galaxy!”
How about ‘none of the above’? Neither of these choices makes sense to any degree of human understanding, and I think the only realistic option would be to gauge my eyes out rather than excruciate myself further to another minute of simplistic dribble.
These are the types of choices you are constantly exposed to in Fable 3. Are you a savage barbarian meat-eater or a loving, kind, vegetarian? Are you seriously providing me with this choice? Can I not be good and a meat eater simultaneously? Is it not possible to be evil and a vegetarian at the same time? Clearly the staff of Lionhead Studios couldn’t even fathom the possibility that the man responsible for the Holocaust was perhaps one of the most renowned and principled vegan’s this world has ever known.
I was annoyed and dismayed that Reaver was the archetype of the “evil conservative right-winger” who wishes to do no good, simply for the sake of doing it. Now I understand the Fable series retains a sense of humour, and perhaps it’s sometimes better to force people to choose sides rather than allow them to sit on the fence. But what happens when both sides are full of ****? Then you’re really screwed.
And what makes the hippies automatically good? If I had even thought about listening to their nonsense, the whole kingdom would have been millions in debt, and the darkness would have killed them all. I can only be thankful that my real estate empire (ie. The very capitalism your rebels are fighting against) saved me from racking up Obama-sized deficits.
Despite the fact my real estate empire is the saviour of the kingdom; all you ever hear is your people bitch and complain. “Why do you have to own my house! I want to own my own house!” even after I gave everyone the lowest rent rate possible. Since when did industrial-era caricatures even give a **** about owning their land? If you want to have your child benefits and not have your house swallowed by shadow, then I need some form of cash to make that happen.
So why were these people complaining about their home ownership? Why is Reaver the bad guy? Why are hippies and vegans the good guys? It’s the bias. The liberal-Labourite bias that Fox News is always ranting about has manifested itself in a British video game that targets Echo boomer males, of all places. Politics has little place in the video game world, and as a political science major, I can sniff out this rubbish one pixel away. I’m a moderate, but I’ll quote Matt Stone on this: I hate conservatives, but I really ****ing hate liberals. The self-righteous, arrogant, latte-sipping social justice crusaders are by far the most annoying segment of society. So why on earth are they bringing their indecipherable megalomaniac stupidity to my TV screen? I don’t want it. And if you’re going to force it upon me, then at least provide an opt-out.
But there was no way out of this. You can either be a good person, and start preserving the environment, giving rights to animals, and redecorating your castle to suit post-modern avant-garde tastes, or you can be the right-wing nut job who will reap destruction upon his own people for his own personal gain. This was by far the most annoying aspect of the game. I was willing to ignore the glitches, the plot holes, and put the missing functions aside, so long as I could get something out of this experience. I did not gain anything, but I did accumulate a sort of spite for the folks at Lionhead Studios for thinking they could pass horse **** for Haute cuisine.
It was like trying to convert Karl Marx’s Das Kapital into a colouring book. How on earth can you **** up industrial-era politics that much? I don’t even think the writers of Lionhead Studios have an understanding of Marxism, rebellion, republicanism, and all the “history” this game tries to base itself on. My elementary classes on social studies had more depth than their interpretation of the materialist conception of history.
In conclusion, the choices this game provides are liberal biased, incoherent, lack sophistication, and reflect a lack of understanding on Lionhead Studios staff part. The people that play Fable 3 are not the same demographic of Pyjama Sam’s adventures, and everything Fable 3 provides only insults the intelligence of those of us who belong to the “Mature” rating this game sells itself on.
If Lionhead ever wants to regain the loyalty of once-fans like me, then they need to both acknowledge their sheer stupidity, and go on a massive hiring spree; because their current weakness was not in programming, but in story telling.
-
endboss
- Posts: 310
- Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 4:32 pm
- Location: Right after that really long cutscene
- Contact:
That's disappointing. I played Fable 1 and thought it was pretty good, but really needed to be more open ended and not have such a stupid plot with idiotic "choices". I heard about Fable 2 and thought it sounded good, like they were really fixing their mistakes. Then sometime after it was released I read Shamus Young's write-up on it and though, "Well, maybe they'll get it right with the next game." I also don't have an Xbox. Now, Fable 3 looked really cool. There is even going to be a PC release! I thought they were fixing up what was wrong with the previous game. Now, I've read about it and I'm thinking, "That's disappointing. Well, maybe Fable 4 might work out." It's a funny cycle.
Do they make you go through those stupid torture scenes this time too? I always found it hilarious that something so psychologically traumatizing was shrugged off so easily. It was also hilarious how the game basically said, "Okay, you're character is going to stop playing so smart, and he's going to get captured, and also you can't fight back, and nah nah boo boo." It reminded me of when they forced you into jail in Chrono Trigger and Final Fantasy VII. Yes, I can summon ****ing dragons and shoot fire from my fingertips, but okay these generic guards which I've destroyed a hundred of easily, yea I'm going to let them just drag me off. I'm also not going to use my magic to break these little bars. Fable's was hell though, and from what I read Fable 2's was even worse than that. I swear, Molyneux freaking hates the people who play his game. That was just sadism, pure and simple.
Do they make you go through those stupid torture scenes this time too? I always found it hilarious that something so psychologically traumatizing was shrugged off so easily. It was also hilarious how the game basically said, "Okay, you're character is going to stop playing so smart, and he's going to get captured, and also you can't fight back, and nah nah boo boo." It reminded me of when they forced you into jail in Chrono Trigger and Final Fantasy VII. Yes, I can summon ****ing dragons and shoot fire from my fingertips, but okay these generic guards which I've destroyed a hundred of easily, yea I'm going to let them just drag me off. I'm also not going to use my magic to break these little bars. Fable's was hell though, and from what I read Fable 2's was even worse than that. I swear, Molyneux freaking hates the people who play his game. That was just sadism, pure and simple.
"No I did not perform an orgy, and yes I need tips on how to do this." - MaxfireXSA
More like he's determined to get as many people as possible to play the game, even up till the point of simplifying them to beyond easy.endboss wrote:I swear, Molyneux freaking hates the people who play his game. That was just sadism, pure and simple.
''They say truth is the first casualty of war. But who defines what's true? Truth is just a matter of perspective. The duty of every soldier is to protect the innocent, and sometimes that means preserving the lie of good and evil, that war isn't just natural selection played out on a grand scale. The only truth I found is that the world we live in is a giant tinderbox. All it takes...is someone to light the match" - Captain Price
-
Anarchy Nooblet
- Posts: 162
- Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2006 11:08 pm
- Location: West Athens
- Contact:
-
Loki[D.d.G]
- Posts: 2515
- Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2007 8:50 pm
- Location: The initial frontier
- Contact:
In the first place, the Fable series was never meant to be deep or compelling. It offered a quick, sometimes senseless, sometimes fun fix. Approached from a simplistic angle with low enough expectations an it'll be sure to impress
Love is just a chemical. We give it meaning by choice ~ Eleanor Lamb, Bioshock 2: Sea of Dreams
-
SDxBrandimus
- Posts: 3
- Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 2:46 pm
- Location: Maine
- Contact:
-
FABLEandGEARZ
- Posts: 2
- Joined: Sun Jan 09, 2011 5:52 pm
- Location: United States
- Contact:
...
i'd honestly give it an 8.5 out of 10 stars. It was pretty good, but my least favorite out of the 3 fables. Fable 2 was the best becuz of the sacrificing with the "Wheel of Misfortune". In the third one they misued it completely (they made it for reaver to use as like an arena for you to fight in...). The sanctum is ok.....i guess. They should've brought back the expression wheel. The way they did the expression's in fable 3 was really gay . The game was overall easy. It is really easy to make cash (i have 30m+ now just by walking around doin stuff). So that is my idea of the game.
i'd honestly give it an 8.5 out of 10 stars. It was pretty good, but my least favorite out of the 3 fables. Fable 2 was the best becuz of the sacrificing with the "Wheel of Misfortune". In the third one they misued it completely (they made it for reaver to use as like an arena for you to fight in...). The sanctum is ok.....i guess. They should've brought back the expression wheel. The way they did the expression's in fable 3 was really gay
. The game was overall easy. It is really easy to make cash (i have 30m+ now just by walking around doin stuff). So that is my idea of the game.