FABLE 2

[Geoffrey42]

Also, what's up with the dog? How about all the cat-loving people? If the game gives me a dog, I'll sell it to some NPC who actually cares about dogs.

And I'm curious how the leaving the dog behind will work. Imagine NPC's telling each other "Oh look, a stranger about whom we don't know anything entered our town, and he has no dog at all! The cruel bastard must have left it behind somewhere!"

Since the dog is also radar and combat aide, leaving him behind would be handicapping yourself. Just like playing evil screwed you over twice when playing Black & White.

Cats aren't well known for their loyalty, and unless you have a trained, large, feral cat, they're not all that great in a fight. And no, I don't believe selling it will be an option, unless somehow after you sell it, the dog runs back to you, and the person you sold it to thinks you ripped them off (which would actually be kind of fun, one-time thing to do to anyone you particularly don't like).

As per leaving the dog behind, (again, just my understanding), when the dog is hurt, it moves slowly. You can outpace it. But it will always follow you, and eventually catch up.

As far as handicapping yourself, since the dog sticks to you, no matter how badly you treat it, if you get lost and need the radar, he'll eventually show up. I think in the end though, as long as it's done properly, no one will want to leave their dog behind. If you're evil, the dog turns out to be a vicious creature, and if you're good, it's a nice, faithful, dog that also happens to be vicious in combat.

 

[soladrin]

but I'm just trying to point out that hypocrisy won't get anyone very far.

then why do politics rule the world...?

 

[Geoffrey42]

but I'm just trying to point out that hypocrisy won't get anyone very far.

then why do politics rule the world...?

The underlying assumption in your statement is that the world has gotten very far with hypocritical politics at the helm, which is an assumption I don't share. If anything, hypocritical politicians are a testament to just how unproductive hypocrisy can be.

 

[Geoffrey42]

If you're evil, the dog turns out to be a vicious creature, and if you're good, it's a nice, faithful, dog that also happens to be vicious in combat.

It'd be pretty cool if by the time you've leveled high enough and are evil the dog sprouted two more heads.

I'd even be willing to settle for just one extra head. That would be awesome.

 

[HuCast]

I believe the whole "dog replaces the map" rubbish is just a clever paraphrase/transcription for a very linear way of gameplay? Once a dog leads you from Quest to Quest theres not much space for free roaming and sidequests

 

[MGG=REVIEWS]

If they would just shut Molineux up, this game might just be not a great disappointment. The man loves to make wild promises he just can't live up to, which is a shame.

Also, what's up with the dog? How about all the cat-loving people? If the game gives me a dog, I'll sell it to some NPC who actually cares about dogs.

And I'm curious how the leaving the dog behind will work. Imagine NPC's telling each other "Oh look, a stranger about whom we don't know anything entered our town, and he has no dog at all! The cruel bastard must have left it behind somewhere!"

Since the dog is also radar and combat aide, leaving him behind would be handicapping yourself. Just like playing evil screwed you over twice when playing Black & White.

there is actually meant to be ar umor (only a rumor) that you can train your kid to fight for you, ONLY A RUMOR but hopefully a true rumor.

 

[runtheplacered]

Then theres the fact that your reviewing things that cant be reviewed in the first place. How do you review a 5 minute trailer? copy paste what they say?

exactly, dont trust in trailers and somes reviews, if you want make a review you have to play the game, at least you did that with WoW, besides, after of the crazy promises that yahtzee told in his review of the first one, i dont think this could make a diference

Hhahaha, yeah, because Yahtzee's word is gospel. Go join a cult or something if you if you want to follow so badly.

I don't get the negativity for Fable, it didn't have all the stuff it was promised but it was kinda fun and very "sweet", as much as a game about killing, death and magic can be.

Judging a game creator by his last games is not realy that much better than judging it by trailers....

Most intelligent post in this thread, from what I've seen. Thank you. Fable wasn't that bad of a game, in fact I was having fun the entire time I played it. Was it what was promised? No. But so what? It was fun.

And I really don't think Yahtzee's reviews are to be taken seriously. They're fun to watch and absolutely hilarious.. but for an actual review to be taken seriously there would need to be a whole lot less bias. Again, hilarious to read.. and from an entertainment standpoint they're great. But if I seriously want to know if a game is good or not without playing it.. I wouldn't go to his reviews.

 

[Pyrrian]

The only thing I don't really like about the dog system is that I wish I could just give it to someone else to take care of. I don't really want a dog in the game, because I often like playing solo - particularly when it makes the game harder (like in Baldur's Gate games). I mean, I would want my character in the game to be kind to animals, but that doesn't mean he wants one himself. There should be a "leave it with a friend" (or a "leave it with a lonely orphan") option, so you can pawn it off without being cruel.

 

[Xen Monkey]

but for an actual review to be taken seriously there would need to be a whole lot less bias.

What is he biased against (or for)?

I'll admit not the most careful watcher, but from what I've seen he seems to have fairly solid reasons behind the cracking jokes and making us (or me at least) laugh. I haven't really discerned any bias.

The only thing I don't really like about the dog system is that I wish I could just give it to someone else to take care of. I don't really want a dog in the game, because I often like playing solo - particularly when it makes the game harder (like in Baldur's Gate games). I mean, I would want my character in the game to be kind to animals, but that doesn't mean he wants one himself. There should be a "leave it with a friend" (or a "leave it with a lonely orphan") option, so you can pawn it off without being cruel.

I have to say I thought the same thing first, but after thinking about I think it is certainly an interesting idea. And as far as I know, you still do play solo effectively


OT: I'll have to admit I was a bit disappointed about Fable. But that was because of what was promised (yes, I've fallen for it everytime, even, I'm sure with Fable 2 *again*). Other then that it was a very good game. I thought the gameplay was good, the world and NPCs charming and funny, and the story interesting - if one didn't think about it too much, then it became a bit by-the-numbers and flimsy. The main thing going for it though is that it was fun!

All in all though its one of the better games I've played.

 

[phooks]

Don't worry about them MGG, it's the thought that counts.

Personally I rank fable in the top 10 games i've ever played. That shit was awesome. Can't wait for #2.

 

[Xen Monkey]

[
What is he biased against (or for)?

If you pay close enough attention Yahtzee has a tendency to review games and rate them on a curve.
The curve being that isntead of looking at the games by themselves, he reviews them in comparrison to games he likes more.

Such as the Bioshock review, he takes too much time calling it Systemshock, rather than separating it from that series and reviewng it as a game on it's own. Hell, when I was 16 I tracked down a copy of Atari's E.T. just to see what the hell everyone was talking about.
I vomitted shortly afterwards. <----- Complete dramatization.
But more to the point, I tracked down a video game tragedy, but when I played Bioshock I had no clue that Systemshock even exhisted! (Bioshock was awesome however and on Normal it was insanely hard, I have no clue was Yahtzee was talkign about.)
Yahtzee tends to review games base don their predeccesors, a fathers sin passed onto the son, if you will.
It's not a great way of reviewing a game, but it's a great way apparently to make a short little cartoon bitching about it.

That is hardly a bias.

And it is a completely justifiable and commonly used technique when reviewing anything, regardless of the medium. Largely because nothing exists in a vacuum. And if video games ever want to be elevated about the station of trivial diversions this is something that has to be kept in mind.

I'm not sure if the difference in opinion between us is because I'm old enough and ugly enough to have played SS2 (and Deus Ex, another game who's cover is featured in the review IIRC), or not.

But I do largely agree with him. Especially about the difficulty. Even on "hard." It is very challenging at the beginning but then the game seems to conspire to make itself ridiculously easy. Certain tonics effectively make the wrench terribly over powered, research helps with this too, and makes enemies easy, far too easy.

Also the game effectively trivialises itself by making it impossible to fail. Die and you are reincarnated (the vita chambers also annoyed me), even the escort mission was impossible to mess up. Probably for the best.

To get back on topic. The game was fine, but when one takes the long view it definately does slip, and a lot of the praise does seem a bit hollow.

Possibly I'm just one of those "games-are-art fags" that he talks about


Though you also raise an interesting point about how games (or films, books, opera et al) should be rated.

 

[Swenglish]

Crap. Now we have to listen to Mr. Hype himself, Peter Molexnyxixax, again.

 

[Xen Monkey]

Crap. Now we have to listen to Mr. Hype himself, Peter Molexnyxixax, again.

You love it really

(Well I do, It is quite nice to see genuine enthusiasm imo)

 

[runtheplacered]

but for an actual review to be taken seriously there would need to be a whole lot less bias.

What is he biased against (or for)?

I'll admit not the most careful watcher, but from what I've seen he seems to have fairly solid reasons behind the cracking jokes and making us (or me at least) laugh. I haven't really discerned any bias.

The only thing I don't really like about the dog system is that I wish I could just give it to someone else to take care of. I don't really want a dog in the game, because I often like playing solo - particularly when it makes the game harder (like in Baldur's Gate games). I mean, I would want my character in the game to be kind to animals, but that doesn't mean he wants one himself. There should be a "leave it with a friend" (or a "leave it with a lonely orphan") option, so you can pawn it off without being cruel.

I have to say I thought the same thing first, but after thinking about I think it is certainly an interesting idea. And as far as I know, you still do play solo effectively


OT: I'll have to admit I was a bit disappointed about Fable. But that was because of what was promised (yes, I've fallen for it everytime, even, I'm sure with Fable 2 *again*). Other then that it was a very good game. I thought the gameplay was good, the world and NPCs charming and funny, and the story interesting - if one didn't think about it too much, then it became a bit by-the-numbers and flimsy. The main thing going for it though is that it was fun!

All in all though its one of the better games I've played.

right, because there's no bias in the words "console tards", is there? I dislike consoles as much as he does, but come on.. at least I can admit I'm biased.

 

[Xen Monkey]

right, because there's no bias in the words "console tards", is there? I dislike consoles as much as he does, but come on.. at least I can admit I'm biased.

As I stated fairly openly, I'm not claiming encyclopaedic knowledge of ZP. Just saying I hadn't seen any of this percieved heavy bias.

What I have managed to glean however is that he has owned various consoles. Which makes the "console tard" seem more a comedic thing than a phrase betraying systemic bias.

Not that he has ever denied being biased to my knowledge. I'm just disputing the claim he is too biased to have his reviewer credentials taken seriously.

(Though come to think of it, IIRC he has said that PC owners are used to a better quality of game... though as a PC owner I am tempted this is an objective observation rather than bias ;-) )

 

[Xen Monkey]

I'm also not sure why bias, if it can be comined with decent reasoning and logic, is necessarily a demerit when reviewing anything.

To use an example from film. Kim Newman* is still a capable and intelligent reviewer who is worth listening to (/reading), despite an obvious and open bias towards horror and science fiction.

Yes, if you think it is a slow work day you would be right


*First to spring to mind, even though I realise he isn't world famous.

 

[X nosgoth X]

I didn't click your links to the YouTube videos, but anyone who saw the videos on XBL Marketplace has to agree that Peter Molynolynoly shows his true hippie side once again. Talking about love with a dreamy face and giving compliments to his staff.

Perhaps Fable 2 will be a good game, maybe it won't. I'm not buying it when it comes out, though. He fooled me once, he fooled many people twice (with Fable: LC) and whatever he throws at me with his Developer's Diaries, he should put a demo out before the game is finally released.

 

[REDPill357]

As enjoyed by Peter Molineux. :V

 

[PettingZOOPONY]

The first Fable was great and but dissapointing at the same time, hopefully the second one can make up the shortcomings of the first.