That then, is fucking terrible and certainly would have soured my thoughts a bit toward the game had I got to that point.Furioso said:That's how the game is supposed to function. There is no warning of any kind, and the only way to not lose is to know about the time skip before hand.piinyouri said:Are you just repeating what Yahtzee used in his review or did you have a similar experience?tippy2k2 said:Snip
If it was yours, is that time skip thing a glitch that happens, or the way the game is supposed to function?
BlackJimmy said:I enjoyed Fable 3. It was a decent game. I think that's the problem though. It was merely decent, when it had the potential to be great.
The story and characters are pretty damn awesome though.
I'm personally hoping for a franchise reboot with a more open world and a better effort at feeling an emotional connection. Maybe take out the "Marry the nameless NPCs" to "build relationships, romantic or otherwise with defined Characters such as Whisper, Thunder, Briar Rose, Hammer or Reaver". I like the dog though. That was a good start.
Hell, I wouldn't mind seeing Lionhead partner up with Bioware to make it. That would be perfect.
I dunno. Although Kingdoms of Amalur is by no means perfect, I really have a soft spot for that game. Do the mechanics get repetitive? Yeah, but that happens in every big open world game. I just didn't find anything in Fable 3 particularly entertaining.viranimus said:Not at all. It was far too short even for a fable title and wrongly focused on tedious pie making-esque filler/fluff material with an expectation you will keep playing after you beat it but never really gave you all that much motivation to play it before beating it.
As negative as that sounds, I have been in support of the franchise since the begining. Fable 3 was by no measure bad, but by no measure good and suffered from multiple detractors such as short story and failing to hit the bar set by prior installments. However if you actively look for it, there is a good amount there but its not a 5lb Tbone, its more like an all you can eat salad bar with a wide variety of potential things to entertain yourself with if you are so compelled.
Side Note: It is interesting to note many people dislike fable as a series or its individual installments. Often citing similar things. Usually in the vein of "not enough" because they find one element such as say Combat or Story lacking. Its fair criticism but by that same measure if you want to see what Fable would be like devoid of its trademark ADD approach to content? Play Kingdoms of Amalur. Focused like a laser on RPG toon dev, Combat, Story. The meat most RPG fans look for. THe interesting part is that despite all the benefits from the added focus it does not take long to realize how tedious and repetitive those gameplay mechanics get when they are lacking the "what will entertain me right now" randomness that Fable does in fact provide.
So? Why does a game have to be challenging?alphamalet said:A game that is almost impossible to fail and die? Yeah that's pretty bad. If a game doesn't have a challenge, then what the hell are you doing for most of it? Mindlessly pushing buttons? I remember spamming some AoE magic attack and it working like every time. It's been a while, so my memory might be hazy, but I just never felt challenged.
In what way was combat "shit"? I thought it had extremely solid, fun combat. Better than a lot of other games I've played.ShinyCharizard said:Yes it was. It was a fucking terrible piece of shit that has no redeeming No challenge to it, combat was shit
Please don't speak for everyone. I've already had more actual entertainment in Fable 3 in a few hours than I did with the first one.saintpinhead said:We all agree that Fable 1 is the best in the lineup. What I think they started doing wrong is trying to force things on us that they hope is worth while. Most times I would say at least they are trying something new, although this time I would have to say they should of learned from the mistakes. They promised us that our worlds in Fable 2 would all be different, and that we will see people playing differently. There were many more promises that were thrown out that never lived up to the hype. Then with Fable 3 it seems like they were impressed with what they did in 2 that they would just add on to the old.
Relaxing and having fun. Why does a game need to be challenging?alphamalet said:A game that is almost impossible to fail and die? Yeah that's pretty bad. If a game doesn't have a challenge, then what the hell are you doing for most of it? Mindlessly pushing buttons? I remember spamming some AoE magic attack and it working like every time. It's been a while, so my memory might be hazy, but I just never felt challenged.
Well I don't agree. I don't have an Xbox so never played Fable 2, but Fable:TLC is a boring and annoying game IMO.saintpinhead said:We all agree that Fable 1 is the best in the lineup.
You, my friend, are a genius.Anomynous 167 said:The reason behind why you can't explain yourself to the people is actually quite simple: You are your father's son.
Your heroic bloodline is littered with examples of people lacking in communication skills. Chickenchaser spoke only in single word commands (wait!) and curses (Shit!), Sparrow had an expanded vocabulary which included the clucking taunts of a chicken and the phrase used to inquire a dog as to "who is a good boy?".
The fact that your character can speak in full sentences at all is (like you being forced to wear mittens in order to command the Will) merely due to a weakening of your heroic Bloodline. Remember, your character's poor communication skills are not unique to himself, as even Logan is forced to bear horns while he works for the greater good, and even he suffered a lapse in explaining his motives to his subjects.
I find it incredibly hilarious that you complain the game was too easy, yet you couldn't figure out how to get money. It's entirely possibly to get millions without ever touching the minigames in 3.TheYellowCellPhone said:I liked the combat, it was a mix between action and a slow realistic approach (sort of like Arkham Asylum but less show-offy). But it was, as everyone said, horribly easy.
Minigames and sidequests and NPC interactions were incredibly unnecessary and unfun. You never want to do them, unless you want to progress the game because of the 'you need x amount of points to continue'.
Environments were small and empty, they were jokes in liveliness compared to most other RPGs. NPCs are especially horribly forgettable.
Customization was a joke, because clothing has no purpose besides look -- nothing changes armor rating -- and because clothing and weapons are expensive as balls anyway, you never go use anything but your default "Hero" weapon that levels up with you, and you look the same the entire time. (Want that hat? Costs you 30,000 gold, or roughly 35 minutes of doing a minigame perfectly. No, I'm not joking.)
There's more, but I forgot it. I stopped the game around the time you usurp your brother and learn of the evil force, I stopped entirely.
The worst part is that despite the time-jump the system is still broken and abusable. Rent is payed based on out of game time, rather than how the days at the end proceed, and there is no real downside to just jacking your rent prices all the way up. Within a couple hours of play I essentially owned a city, put my feet up and made money hand over fist to just donate to the cause while still making every disgustingly saccharine moral choice.piinyouri said:That then, is fucking terrible and certainly would have soured my thoughts a bit toward the game had I got to that point.Furioso said:That's how the game is supposed to function. There is no warning of any kind, and the only way to not lose is to know about the time skip before hand.piinyouri said:Are you just repeating what Yahtzee used in his review or did you have a similar experience?tippy2k2 said:Snip
If it was yours, is that time skip thing a glitch that happens, or the way the game is supposed to function?
Only you can answer that, as it's definitely down to personal opinion.Adeptus Aspartem said:I've not played it. Fable 1 was brilliant, Fable 2 was meh... so was #3 worse or better than #2?