Michi's Control: Fable

Lizmichi

Detective Prince
Jul 2, 2009
4,809
0
0
[HEADING=1]Fable: A Story Told in too Few Words.[/HEADING]​
Further proof that Peter Molyneux can sell a crap and say its brown gold.

Fable, an fantasy RPG by Lionhead Studios, isn't what I'd call one of the best games I've ever played; in fact I'd say it's as far from that as humanly possible, and then some. While it had some potential, it still fell horribly short on standard RPG elements that have been mastered by both elder and newer games. Many of the best games I ever played are RPGS. What can I say? I love them so. [footnote]*Hug copy of Ocarina of Time*[/footnote]

Fable starts out with a terrible cliche. A boy is living a happy life when suddenly his village and family are killed by bandits. So the boy goes off to an elite guild of warriors and vows for revenge. I can name a hand full of games that have used this idea both before and after this game. Maybe not the exact theme but something similar version of it.


It seems like the Games Industry prides it's self on using old ideas over and over again until the sewage passed as "originality" eventually overruns our consoles and PCs. It's lamentable how much we gamers let The Industry get away with this blasphemy. Someone bring the rope and I'll make the gallows, time for some much needed cleansing.

Soon enough, the player discovers that he was not the only one that survived the attack. Big surprise, huh? Anyway, there is some originality in the game I feel should be pointed out. Never before have I known farting was an effective way of flirting, or that completing a trivial missions only to come back to a village where everyone suddenly loves you.


Which compels me to point out, what self respecting person, seeing as you can marry guys and girls, would fall for someone for farting at them? Another laughably effective way of finding love, and sex, is to be extremely perverted. Depending on which moral side the player picks, he can hip trusts at someone to impresses them. There's also no clear cut way of impressing an NPC; something that just worked a second ago could make you lose all of the affection they had for you the next. If something impresses an NPC then it should logically always do so, just like with any normal person.

The term Play Boy fits well with the game because you can get married, have sex a few times with them, ignore or beat them till they leave you only to get married again within an hour. Rinse lather and repeat till you're bored to death. You can have a spouse in each town as long as you have a house and a ring to give them. However, in some cases if they don't live in an area that has houses for sale then you can be engaged to them but you can't marry them because apparently moving seems like a foreign idea at that time in history. Apparently Peter Molyneux has never moved from his mom's basement if that wasn't seen as an issue.


Fable has what is called a moral choice system (MCS). For those out there who don't know what it is, in most cases this usually means you're given two ways to play out a situation that, in some way, effects how the entire game plays out; usually an option is given that is either good or evil . The effect can be mild or severe depending. MCSs look good on paper but, much like communism, don't work out so well in practice. There have been some games that have made it work well like Dragon Age and Mass Effect, but like most are very limited with there really only being two choices such as kill the villagers and help the bandits (evil) or save the villagers and kill the bandits (good). Sadly, Fable falls into the latter style
Life is not like that in anyway, people aren't either Jack the Ripper or Jesus. Why not have someone that doesn't leave a tip that also takes home lost kittens, or reversely someone that bites the heads off of the kittens and give the tip to Make-A-Wish. Even a priest can have a dark side.


The vast combat system, which incidentally will inevitably not matter, is really just a hack and slash. Peter Molyneux made a point to state that Fable will have many spells and attacks at the disposal of the player but most hostile NPCs are melee oriented and will hack into your health bar like Lizzie Borden and her father's skull. That's fine, I like a good hack and slash, however I did say good.

Fable is basically boiled down to mash the attack buttons till everything is dead and maybe even drink a health pot somewhere along the lines. To me a good hack and slash has combos of more then just the basic attack over and over again. If you're going to give experience for spells, then make them as useful as melee and keep the cast times low. Yes there are a ton of attacks, but why bother if all you need is what you have from the beginning?

Combat can make or break a game, and with Fable it's broken beyond help. Lion Head needs to know this saying, "Less is more." Maybe Fable 4 will be better if they follow that saying and keep the amount of available attacks low and useful. Though I'm honestly hoping Fable 3 will kill this franchise for good and great games won't be in the shadow of this... I'm not sure if I can think of a word strong enough to describe how bad this game is. I'll just make up one, this fugnutcrapa. [footnote] Definition, To be of such poor quality as to force one to create new jargon. [/footnote]

I have a really hard time seeing how this game has done so well and how it has made so much money. I like to think that behind every bad game there is a crack team of marketing agents that shine it up and make it look pretty. Quite a catch 22 seeing as if they spend spent less money on marketing then they would have more for good game designers and won't need the marketing team to make it look better than it really is.

Fable was a good idea but good ideas can go bad once someone messes with it. There is one name that comes to mind and it is obviously Peter Molyneux. Lion Head, next game you make, for the love of god, lock him up in a damn padded room like the Man in the Iron Mask. Maybe then his massive corruption will end and his empty promises will be gone as well. Fable is a prime example of good intentions gone extremely bad with the plague known as hype. [footnote]Ruing lives since 1982. That's right Howard Scott Warshaw I'm talking about you.[/footnote]

Many thanks to [user]Pimppetter2[/user] for his advise and editing.​

Also, thanks to you for reading! Please Comment!
 

Rakun Man

New member
Oct 18, 2009
289
0
0
I see your points, however, I did enjoy Fable: The Lost Chapters for xbox.
Then again, I got it for ten dollars, and did not hear a speck of hype.
Hype ruined Fable 2 for me, the ending killed it, and the fact the I found the first Fable to be better in almost every way cut it into little tiny pieces.
That being said, I can rant and rant about Fable, but overall, I enjoyed them, and am looking foward to Fable 3.
 

Lizmichi

Detective Prince
Jul 2, 2009
4,809
0
0
Rakun Man said:
I see your points, however, I did enjoy Fable: The Lost Chapters for xbox.
Then again, I got it for ten dollars, and did not hear a speck of hype.
Hype ruined Fable 2 for me, the ending killed it, and the fact the I found the first Fable to be better in almost every way cut it into little tiny pieces.
That being said, I can rant and rant about Fable, but overall, I enjoyed them, and am looking foward to Fable 3.
Everyone has different likes and dislikes. If you enjoy it then enjoy it by all means. I hate games allot of people like and so on.
 

CloudKiller

Rather Irritated Mage
Jun 30, 2008
390
0
0
Just like supporting the English football team, I get all wrapped up in the hype, but then comes the realisation that the quality just isn't good enough when compared to its rivals. But will I ever stop supporting them? No. Will I ever stop hoping that this time it'll all work out? No.

I just can't help being a slave to Molyneaux's hype machine. Fable 3 better be freaking awesome or I'll have to ***** and moan about it before eventually buying Fable 4.
 

Lizmichi

Detective Prince
Jul 2, 2009
4,809
0
0
CloudKiller said:
Just like supporting the English football team, I get all wrapped up in the hype, but then comes the realisation that the quality just isn't good enough when compared to its rivals. But will I ever stop supporting them? No. Will I ever stop hoping that this time it'll all work out? No.

I just can't help being a slave to Molyneaux's hype machine. Fable 3 better be freaking awesome or I'll have to ***** and moan about it before eventually buying Fable 4.
haha yea the man could sell you your soul.
 

Lizmichi

Detective Prince
Jul 2, 2009
4,809
0
0
joethekoeller said:
Just for the record, Pimppeter2 asked me to give you a little advice and feedback, so any murder threats should be aimed at him. Jest aside, while I may sound a little negative at times, be so kind and take it with good grace. Remember that criticism is ultimately a powerful source for good, not evil. And that I don't pour so much effort into criticism when I don't see genuine potential. And to never put metal in microwaves.

Lizmichi said:
[HEADING=1]Fable: A Story Told in too Few Words.[/HEADING]​
Further proof that Peter Molyneux can sell a crap and say its brown gold.

Fable (I can't honestly call it legitimate criticism, but I personally have always been a fan of italicizing game titles. Shows you take effort in formating and can help the reader easily spot references and tell them apart from when your just using the word that happens to be the games title (like portal and Portal), an fantasy RPG by Lionhead Studios, isn't what I'd call one of the best games I've ever played; in fact I'd say it's as far away from that as humanly possible, and then some a little further away still. While it had some potential, it still fell horribly short on standard RPG elements that have been mastered by both elder and newer games. Many of the best games I ever played are RPGS. What can I say? I love them so. *Hug copy of Ocarina of Time*

As someone who's gotten well deserved lip for it, let me advise you to best drop the use of footnotes, right now. I know how they could be potentially used: To add little jokes and references that nobody will be any worse off for missing. But the truth is that the reader can simply not know if he can safely ignore a footnote when it comes up, and as such nobody treats them as optional as they should be. It simply breaks pace to stop dead, scroll to the bottom of the screen, read the useless tidbit, scroll up again and look for the place you stopped. And this only gets worse with increased length of post, which is why reviews or any piece of similar length should have as few of them as possible. Usually zero, unless you really, really think it's necessary.

Apart from that, as far as possible introductions go, the "This is a review" paragraph belongs to the less engaging and appealing of all possible options. One thing you should definetely avoid is featuring the games title smack in the first sentence. As with all forms of writing, reviews need a modicum of tension to grab and hold the readers attention. The word Fable might be enough to draw in anybody who's looking for a review of the game Fable, but if you want your piece to be generally appealing, you've got to think of something else. Anything really, there's tons of different possibilities when it comes to introductions, whether it's general gaming talk [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/326.175200-Niche-Appeal-Total-Overdose], concerning [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/326.189490-Niche-Appeal-Stronghold] the setting [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/326.178001-Niche-Appeal-Gothic-II] or even philosophy [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/326.193885-The-Firemen-A-Low-Scoring-Review-in-Dire-Need-of-Criticism#6160917].


Fable starts out with a terrible cliche. A boy is living a happy life when suddenly his village and family are killed by bandits (The way this is phrased suggests that both his family and the village were killed, while villages quite notably can't so much be killed as pillaged or burned). So the boy goes off to an elite guild of warriors and vows for revenge. I can name a hand full of games that have used this idea both before and after this game. Maybe not the exact theme but something similar version of it.

image snip

It seems like the Games Industry prides it's self itself on using old ideas over and over again until the sewage passed as "originality" eventually overruns our consoles and PCs. It's lamentable how much we gamers let The Industry get away with this blasphemy. Someone bring the rope and I'll make the gallows, time for some much needed cleansing.

Soon enough, the player discovers that he was not the only one that survived the attack. Big surprise, huh? Anyway, there is some originality in the game I feel should be pointed out. Never before have I known farting was an effective way of flirting, or that completing a trivial missions only to come back to a village where everyone suddenly loves you is enough to make entire villages fall in love with you.

Two paragraphs and about three post-it notes worth of text and we've already stopped talking about the game in general and moved on to specific nitpicking. One of the many, many commandments you'll need to memorise for reviewing is: You should never assume. This one has an abundance of applications, like how you shouldn't put words into the readers mouth ("I know what you're going to say:"). One of them is "You should never assume that your audience knows what you're talking about, no matter how obvious it seems". I know what Fable is and I'm sure most other gamers do as well (though I, and probably many others have yet to play an installment). But just because you probably won't get a comment reading "What is this Fable you speak of?", doesn't mean you can omit the general information. A few words on the game itself, gameplay, story, graphics and the like. Such are the meat and bones of a review, and such is why you can't call it one without those paragraphs. Obviously the amount of detail you pour into them is entirely up to you, but at the very least you need to give us some information on the subject matter.

A review should generally cover the entire game. It's okay to leave out certain parts if you believe they aren't integral to the judging process. But here it's more like you're leaving out everything, then picking a few selected points (again without giving a lot of information about them) and nitpicking them. Depth is your friend. Now that I've removed the images, would you say the review is long or short?


image snip 2

Which compels me to point out, what self respecting person, seeing as how you can marry guys and girls, would fall for someone for farting at them? Another laughably effective way of finding love, and sex, is to be extremely perverted. Depending on which moral side the player picks, he can hip thrusts at someone to impresses them. There's also no clear cut way of impressing an NPC; something that just worked a second ago could make you lose all of the affection they had for you the next. If something impresses an NPC then it should logically always do so, just like with any normal person.

The term Play Boy fits well with the game because you can get married, have sex a few times with them (With who? There's nothing in this phrase for "them" to refer to), ignore or beat them till they leave you only to get married again within an hour. Rinse lather and repeat till you're bored to death. You can have a spouse in each town as long as you have a house and a ring to give them. However, in some cases if they don't live in an area that has houses for sale then you can be engaged to them but you can't marry them because apparently moving seems like a foreign idea at that time in history. Apparently Peter Molyneux has never moved from his mom's basement if that wasn't seen as an issue.

Let me have a few words on flow. The subject is a little iffy to criticize, because there's no real wrongs and no real wrights. It's subjective as hell and a cause of much worry to any writer. I sure know it is for me, and I also know that some of the best reviewers on the site still occasionally struggle with it. That being said, your flow needs a lot of improvement. Ideally each individual paragraph and sentence should flow seamlessly into each other, always connected by a common idea. With you, well, they don't. There's little to no connection between individual paragraphs, and even in them the individual sentences transgress pretty haphazardly. They all have this addendum feel to it. In a conversation they would probably all begin with "And another thing:". All in all it leaves the impression of someone who's quite knowledgeable about the game, but has no scheme or plan behind what he (or she) is saying. As if you asked one of your friends to review the game, on the spot.

How to improve this? Hard to say really, seeing how you mostly have to develop flow on your own, or you'll always end up mimicking something and it'll come about as natural to you as trying to live underwater. I've got a hint though: Conjunctions. Sounds like a no-brainer really. Firstly, find and use as many besides "and" as you can. Variety is the key. Secondly, slowly start using things that really aren't conjunctions, for conjuctory purposes. Let's say you talked about gameplay in one paragraph, and concluded that it sucked. Before you end it, you mention that you like the game anyway, because it shines in other areas. You bring on these areas in a new paragraph. Example:

blablablabla is terrible, and overall the gameplay isn't exactly a shining example of the genre. But I don't hold it against the game, because it more than makes up for these shortcomings in other areas.

[game name here]'s story is one of the best I've ever experienced. Every single line of dialogue spot-on, well written troughout and blablablabla.

image snip 3

Fable has what is called a moral choice system (MCS). For those out there who don't know what it is, in most cases this usually means you're given two ways to play out a situation that, in some way, effects how the entire game plays out; usually an option is given that is either good or evil . The effect can be mild or severe depending. MCSs look good on paper but, much like communism, don't work out so well in practice. There have been some games that have made it work well like Dragon Age and Mass Effect, but like most are very limited with there really only being two choices such as kill the villagers and help the bandits (evil) or save the villagers and kill the bandits (good). Sadly, Fable falls into the latter style
Life is not like that in anyway, people aren't either Jack the Ripper or Jesus. Why not have someone that doesn't leave a tip that also takes home lost kittens, or reversely someone that bites the heads off of the kittens and give the tip to Make-A-Wish? Even a priest can have a dark side.

image snip 4

The vast combat system, which incidentally will inevitably not matter, is really just a hack and slash. Peter Molyneux made a point to state that Fable will have many spells and attacks at the disposal of the player but most hostile NPCs are melee oriented and will hack into your health bar like Lizzie Borden and her father's skull. That's fine, I like a good hack and slash, however I did say good.

Fable is basically boiled down to mash the attack buttons till everything is dead and maybe even drink a health potion somewhere along the lines. To me a good hack and slash has combos of more then just the basic attack over and over again. If you're going to give experience for spells, then make them as useful as melee and keep the cast times low. Yes there are a ton of attacks, but why bother if all you need is what you have from the beginning?

Combat can make or break a game, and with Fable it's broken beyond help. Lion Head needs to know come to terms with this the saying, "Less is more." Maybe Fable 4 will be better if they follow that saying and keep the amount of available attacks low and useful. Though I'm honestly hoping Fable 3 will kill this franchise for good and great games won't be in the shadow of this... I'm not sure if I can think of a word strong enough to describe how bad this game is. I'll just make up one, this fugnutcrapa. Definition, To be of such poor quality as to force one to create new jargon.
image snip 5

I have a really hard time seeing how this game has done so well and how it has made so much money. I like to think that behind every bad game there is a crack team of marketing agents that shine it up and make it look pretty. Quite a catch 22 seeing as if they spend spent less money on marketing then they would have more for good game designers and won't need the marketing team to make it look better than it really is.

Fable was a good idea but good ideas can go bad once someone messes with it them. There is one name that comes to mind and it is obviously Peter Molyneux. Lion Head, next game you make, for the love of god, lock him up in a damn padded room like the Man in the Iron Mask. Maybe then his massive corruption will end and his empty promises will be gone as well. Fable is a prime example of good intentions gone extremely bad with the plague known as hype. Ruing lives since 1982. That's right Howard Scott Warshaw I'm talking about you.

Shame on [user]Pimppeter2[/user] for his imperfect editing.​

Also, thanks to you for reading! Please Comment!
As inconsistent as this will sound, pretty good for your first try. I know I've started worse. There's obviously room for improvement, but it isn't broken past fixation. The important thing is that you don't let the seemingly improbable amount of improving you have to do paralyze you. One thing after another, one small improvement after another is still better than none at all. For next time (and there'd better be a next time), proofread a little more (optionally, get your editor to proofread a bit more. Or a better editor), fix the few grammatical hiccups (mainly about making sure object and verb match) and add a little more depth. Even if it sounds redundant, talk a little bit about the game in general. What gameplay is like, what the story is about, what the game does well and what it doesn't do well (if it doesn't do anything well, at least mention what it's famous for. I'm giving to understand you wrote an entire review about Fable not once mentioning how your actions influence the appearance of your character).
yes you are right. ... damn I did forget about how your actions effect the look of the player. Yes I will wright more reviews. I just might be reviewing some old stuff for a bit because I'm broke and can't feed the gaming monster.
 

veloper

New member
Jan 20, 2009
4,597
0
0
Lizmichi said:
Fable is basically boiled down to mash the attack buttons till everything is dead and maybe even drink a health pot somewhere along the lines. To me a good hack and slash has combos of more then just the basic attack over and over again. If you're going to give experience for spells, then make them as useful as melee and keep the cast times low. Yes there are a ton of attacks, but why bother if all you need is what you have from the beginning?

Combat can make or break a game, and with Fable it's broken beyond help.
Did you play the same Fable as me? In my experience fable combat played more like a popamole, where you need to do block or roll when baddies make their move.

Just spamming attack should force you through your heal pots in no time.
 

Lizmichi

Detective Prince
Jul 2, 2009
4,809
0
0
veloper said:
Lizmichi said:
Fable is basically boiled down to mash the attack buttons till everything is dead and maybe even drink a health pot somewhere along the lines. To me a good hack and slash has combos of more then just the basic attack over and over again. If you're going to give experience for spells, then make them as useful as melee and keep the cast times low. Yes there are a ton of attacks, but why bother if all you need is what you have from the beginning?

Combat can make or break a game, and with Fable it's broken beyond help.
Did you play the same Fable as me? In my experience fable combat played more like a popamole, where you need to do block or roll when baddies make their move.

Just spamming attack should force you through your heal pots in no time.
Yea I'm sure I did. I hardly used my health pots and all I did was spam attack. I got bored fast.
 

veloper

New member
Jan 20, 2009
4,597
0
0
Lizmichi said:
veloper said:
Lizmichi said:
Fable is basically boiled down to mash the attack buttons till everything is dead and maybe even drink a health pot somewhere along the lines. To me a good hack and slash has combos of more then just the basic attack over and over again. If you're going to give experience for spells, then make them as useful as melee and keep the cast times low. Yes there are a ton of attacks, but why bother if all you need is what you have from the beginning?

Combat can make or break a game, and with Fable it's broken beyond help.
Did you play the same Fable as me? In my experience fable combat played more like a popamole, where you need to do block or roll when baddies make their move.

Just spamming attack should force you through your heal pots in no time.
Yea I'm sure I did. I hardly used my health pots and all I did was spam attack. I got bored fast.
Then either Lionhead did something to the TLC version of Fable or I'm not spamming attack right, because it doesn't work. Crowds tear the pc apart and big baddies simply block basic attacks.
 

Lizmichi

Detective Prince
Jul 2, 2009
4,809
0
0
veloper said:
Lizmichi said:
veloper said:
Lizmichi said:
Fable is basically boiled down to mash the attack buttons till everything is dead and maybe even drink a health pot somewhere along the lines. To me a good hack and slash has combos of more then just the basic attack over and over again. If you're going to give experience for spells, then make them as useful as melee and keep the cast times low. Yes there are a ton of attacks, but why bother if all you need is what you have from the beginning?

Combat can make or break a game, and with Fable it's broken beyond help.
Did you play the same Fable as me? In my experience fable combat played more like a popamole, where you need to do block or roll when baddies make their move.

Just spamming attack should force you through your heal pots in no time.
Yea I'm sure I did. I hardly used my health pots and all I did was spam attack. I got bored fast.
Then either Lionhead did something to the TLC version of Fable or I'm not spamming attack right, because it doesn't work. Crowds tear the pc apart and big baddies simply block basic attacks.
Wish I knew what to tell you. Guess I just got lucky.
 

Pimppeter2

New member
Dec 31, 2008
16,479
0
0
I've told you all I could say criticism wise, so i;ll just say that it was a good review and I hope we all see more from you.
 

dbmountain

New member
Feb 24, 2010
344
0
0
it's hard to tell if the OP is a credible authority on RPGs. especially after reading that she considers OoT an RPG
 

Pimppeter2

New member
Dec 31, 2008
16,479
0
0
dbmountain said:
it's hard to tell if the OP is a credible authority on RPGs. especially after reading that she considers OoT an RPG
OoT is widely regarded as an Action Adventure RPG in most gaming crowds, though it really is up to personal preference. Sorry Champ.
 

2012 Wont Happen

New member
Aug 12, 2009
4,286
0
0
I quite like Fable. Fable 2 was sub-par, but I liked the original. Fable 3 looks pretty good.

Pimppeter2 said:
dbmountain said:
it's hard to tell if the OP is a credible authority on RPGs. especially after reading that she considers OoT an RPG
OoT is widely regarded as an Action Adventure RPG in most gaming crowds, though it really is up to personal preference. Sorry Champ.
It does not have a leveling system, and there is only one roll with an extremely linear progression for that roll. Maybe some people consider it an RPG, but there is not really anything to base this consideration on.
 

Lizmichi

Detective Prince
Jul 2, 2009
4,809
0
0
It was a pretty average/good game in earlyish/middle 2004. A lot of the features it had have grown though.
 

Pimppeter2

New member
Dec 31, 2008
16,479
0
0
2012 Wont Happen said:
I quite like Fable. Fable 2 was sub-par, but I liked the original. Fable 3 looks pretty good.

Pimppeter2 said:
dbmountain said:
it's hard to tell if the OP is a credible authority on RPGs. especially after reading that she considers OoT an RPG
OoT is widely regarded as an Action Adventure RPG in most gaming crowds, though it really is up to personal preference. Sorry Champ.
It does not have a leveling system, and there is only one roll with an extremely linear progression for that roll. Maybe some people consider it an RPG, but there is not really anything to base this consideration on.
However, there were multiple optional side quests to perform, and it did have many of the same features boasted in todays western RPGs. It featured an open world, a lot of gameplay hours. Zelda allows you to go around the world and never get stronger. It would be impossible to play all those other mentioned games without leveling up your character at least a little bit, or finding optional equipment upgrades. In Zelda, any upgrade you possibly can get can never be unequipped, with the exception of the tunics, which are just another way to access otherwise inaccessible areas. Anything you do in Zelda is done with the pure intention to progress to the next area of the game. You can not do a low-level challenge run on Zelda, because you can't beat the game without picking up every item the game throws at you


RPG is a pretty broad definition for a game. That's why we have more specific terms for it. You don't have to call it an RPG yourself, but like the guy I quoted it doesn't ruin someones credibility when they do. Zelda just doesn't really fit in any other category than ARPG.


For every rule, there is an exception. We were all taught that back in our elementary school English classes, were we not?

Unless you want to peruse this No True Scotsman [http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/NoTrueScotsman][footnote]Apology for the Trope link[/footnote] argument, I think we can agree that the person I quoted should not say that the Reviewer has no credibility based on this.
 

Scobie

Good Leader. Best Friend.
Mar 16, 2009
1,918
0
0
There is an alternate universe where Peter Molyneux was pushed off a bridge by an enraged gamer three days after the release of Black and White. I wish I lived there.
 

2012 Wont Happen

New member
Aug 12, 2009
4,286
0
0
Pimppeter2 said:
2012 Wont Happen said:
I quite like Fable. Fable 2 was sub-par, but I liked the original. Fable 3 looks pretty good.

Pimppeter2 said:
dbmountain said:
it's hard to tell if the OP is a credible authority on RPGs. especially after reading that she considers OoT an RPG
OoT is widely regarded as an Action Adventure RPG in most gaming crowds, though it really is up to personal preference. Sorry Champ.
It does not have a leveling system, and there is only one roll with an extremely linear progression for that roll. Maybe some people consider it an RPG, but there is not really anything to base this consideration on.
However, there were multiple optional side quests to perform, and it did have many of the same features boasted in todays western RPGs. It featured an open world, a lot of gameplay hours. Zelda allows you to go around the world and never get stronger. It would be impossible to play all those other mentioned games without leveling up your character at least a little bit, or finding optional equipment upgrades. In Zelda, any upgrade you possibly can get can never be unequipped, with the exception of the tunics, which are just another way to access otherwise inaccessible areas. Anything you do in Zelda is done with the pure intention to progress to the next area of the game. You can not do a low-level challenge run on Zelda, because you can't beat the game without picking up every item the game throws at you


RPG is a pretty broad definition for a game. That's why we have more specific terms for it. You don't have to call it an RPG yourself, but like the guy I quoted it doesn't ruin someones credibility when they do. Zelda just doesn't really fit in any other category than ARPG.


For every rule, there is an exception. We were all taught that back in our elementary school English classes, were we not?

Unless you want to peruse this No True Scotsman [http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/NoTrueScotsman][footnote]Apology for the Trope link[/footnote] argument, I think we can agree that the person I quoted should not say that the Reviewer has no credibility based on this.
Yeah, it definitely doesn't hurt the reviewers credibility to say that it is an RPG, I've just never really considered it as such. I guess what you listed are common RPG elements though, so it makes more sense now.
 

Lizmichi

Detective Prince
Jul 2, 2009
4,809
0
0
Scobie said:
There is an alternate universe where Peter Molyneux was pushed off a bridge by an enraged gamer three days after the release of Black and White. I wish I lived there.
I'd like to live in that world too.
Pimppeter2 said:
2012 Wont Happen said:
I quite like Fable. Fable 2 was sub-par, but I liked the original. Fable 3 looks pretty good.

Pimppeter2 said:
dbmountain said:
it's hard to tell if the OP is a credible authority on RPGs. especially after reading that she considers OoT an RPG
OoT is widely regarded as an Action Adventure RPG in most gaming crowds, though it really is up to personal preference. Sorry Champ.
It does not have a leveling system, and there is only one roll with an extremely linear progression for that roll. Maybe some people consider it an RPG, but there is not really anything to base this consideration on.
However, there were multiple optional side quests to perform, and it did have many of the same features boasted in todays western RPGs. It featured an open world, a lot of gameplay hours. Zelda allows you to go around the world and never get stronger. It would be impossible to play all those other mentioned games without leveling up your character at least a little bit, or finding optional equipment upgrades. In Zelda, any upgrade you possibly can get can never be unequipped, with the exception of the tunics, which are just another way to access otherwise inaccessible areas. Anything you do in Zelda is done with the pure intention to progress to the next area of the game. You can not do a low-level challenge run on Zelda, because you can't beat the game without picking up every item the game throws at you


RPG is a pretty broad definition for a game. That's why we have more specific terms for it. You don't have to call it an RPG yourself, but like the guy I quoted it doesn't ruin someones credibility when they do. Zelda just doesn't really fit in any other category than ARPG.


For every rule, there is an exception. We were all taught that back in our elementary school English classes, were we not?

Unless you want to peruse this No True Scotsman [http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/NoTrueScotsman][footnote]Apology for the Trope link[/footnote] argument, I think we can agree that the person I quoted should not say that the Reviewer has no credibility based on this.
And thank you Pimppeter. I've always seen OoT as an RPG. Could I have narrowed it down more? Yes I could have but this wasn't a review on RPG's or OoT; this was a Fable review. As for my next review well I just need time to write it.