245 réponses à ce sujet

[saMoorai]

Johnnie Walker wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...

Jack of Blades >>>>>>>> Lucian >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Crawler.

That is all.

This.

^

[Bekkael]

LPPrince wrote...

Yeah, they're not. If playing as a lady is a deal breaker for you, you'll be skipping the remake. They aren't really changing the game like that.

I see. Yep, it's a deal breaker. After spending time in the Promised Land of Bethesda and BioWare games, I'm just not ready to settle for anything less.

[LPPrince]

Bekkael wrote...

LPPrince wrote...

Yeah, they're not. If playing as a lady is a deal breaker for you, you'll be skipping the remake. They aren't really changing the game like that.

I see. Yep, it's a deal breaker. After spending time in the Promised Land of Bethesda and BioWare games, I'm just not ready to settle for anything less.

I think back then they realized, "Hey, this whole character evolution thing we have going on is pretty cool, maybe we can expand it so the player can play a lady next time around?"

Hence Fable 2 and onwards. But the classic was a little behind that, I guess. I'm glad they aren't revamping the original too much, hopefully that means more focus was put into Fable IV.

And of course, in Fable IV we can be sure that choice of male or female PC will be available.

[Bekkael]

LPPrince wrote...

I think back then they realized, "Hey, this whole character evolution thing we have going on is pretty cool, maybe we can expand it so the player can play a lady next time around?"

Hence Fable 2 and onwards. But the classic was a little behind that, I guess. I'm glad they aren't revamping the original too much, hopefully that means more focus was put into Fable IV.

And of course, in Fable IV we can be sure that choice of male or female PC will be available.

I.....just realized that I will likely miss out on the next Fable if the X1 is as evil as I think it is.

[LPPrince]

It isn't.

[LPPrince]

Jayne126 wrote...

You'll end up looking like an old hag anyway, so it might been for the better.

I wonder if they do something about the ageing stuff.

Yeah, in Fable you age too quickly. They corrected that in Fable 2 and 3 for sure.

[Ravensword]

Will they be making a remake of Fable 3  ?

Modifié par Ravensword, 05 juin 2013 - 02:44 .

[LPPrince]

Ravensword wrote...

Will they be making a remake of Fable 3?

I hope they never touch that game again. No, they aren't currently. Hopefully they never do.

[saMoorai]

LPPrince wrote...

Ravensword wrote...

Will they be making a remake of Fable 3?

I hope they never touch that game again. No, they aren't currently. Hopefully they never do.

What if they remade it to be actually decent?

[Ravensword]

I don't understand all the hate for that game. Could someone enlighten a non-Fabler as to the issues w/ that game, please?

[LPPrince]

saMOOrai182 wrote...

LPPrince wrote...

Ravensword wrote...

Will they be making a remake of Fable 3?

I hope they never touch that game again. No, they aren't currently. Hopefully they never do.

What if they remade it to be actually decent?

That would take A LOT. A FRIGGEN LOT.

But if it looked promising, I'd pick it up and give it another go.

[LPPrince]

Ravensword wrote...

I don't understand all the hate for that game. Could someone enlighten a non-Fabler as to the issues w/ that game, please?

They moved from the fantastical sort of thing they had going on in 1 and 2 to more of a steampunk era thing. Brought more guns into play.

Weapons were advertised as all being "legendary" with their own histories, yet were made up of the same parts. I swear to God you had two legendary weapons with different backgrounds and they looked exactly the same.

Interacting with villagers became a hassle while in Fable 2 it was simple and fun.

The Dog in Fable 2? Useful and you cared for it. The dog in Fable 3? A hassle that didn't help whatsoever.

Etc etc etc would you like me to keep going or can we stop here?

[LPPrince]

Jayne126 wrote...

saMOOrai182 wrote...

Then they might as well make 4.

AYE.

[Ravensword]

LPPrince wrote...

Ravensword wrote...

I don't understand all the hate for that game. Could someone enlighten a non-Fabler as to the issues w/ that game, please?

They moved from the fantastical sort of thing they had going on in 1 and 2 to more of a steampunk era thing. Brought more guns into play.

Weapons were advertised as all being "legendary" with their own histories, yet were made up of the same parts. I swear to God you had two legendary weapons with different backgrounds and they looked exactly the same.

Interacting with villagers became a hassle while in Fable 2 it was simple and fun.

The Dog in Fable 2? Useful and you cared for it. The dog in Fable 3? A hassle that didn't help whatsoever.

Etc etc etc would you like me to keep going or can we stop here?

Well, that sounds pretty crappy, although I do like the sound of a steampunk setting.

[Dave of Canada]

Ravensword wrote...

I don't understand all the hate for that game. Could someone enlighten a non-Fabler as to the issues w/ that game, please?

You start the game off, you're given an interesting premise: Your brother is a douchebag king of Albion undergoing Industrial Revolution. He's forcing people to work in factories overtime and he's crushing revolts and peaceful protests. You--being the protagonist--are thrown into a storyline with some decent characters to stop him, your dog is there too but unlike the second game remains completely irrelevant and was thrown in just because.

Fable 2 was lauded as an over-simplified mess compared to the first one, Fable 3 does the same regarding Fable 2. You've got no health bar, relegated to regenerative health instead in a game which is already ******-poor easy with no dying mechanic. In addition, they removed all menus. Every. single. one.

You can't pause the game, it brings you into an alternate dimension where you can access options and such in seperate rooms. There's no more shop menu either, instead adopting a very Harvest Moon-esque system where items are placed on a counter and you grab it to buy it. This was done after people they questioned claimed the second game too "complicated".

You can also grab civilians at any time, drag them around them and they don't give a ****. This mostly comes across as a pointless feature which Molyneux half-baked and praised without doing anything with it, it's often just thrown in for side-quests where you drag people from point A to point B.

As you progress through the game, the plot has it's fun ups and downs until you reach the half-way point and you're introduced to the "true" villain, some shadowy thing which has no motivation aside from killing all life, your brother discovered this and this is why he became a tyrant, he hopes to protect everyone by prepping the people.

Decent "war" scene occurs, you overthrow your brother and you're suddenly thrust into becoming King/Queen with your brother's responsibilities and the promises you made to your fellows coming back to haunt you. Technically.

The game's "good and evil" morality has never been more flawed, you're placed as king and the main story takes a screeching halt in which the player has to do his duties as King/Queen which include on how to deal with the kingdom. Do you remain a tyrant in order to protect the people but earn their disfavor? Do you uphold your promises despite knowing it might doom the people?

An interesting conflict which could've been handled infinitely better, you're sitting on your throne and you hear the claims from both sides and they associate one as "good" and one as "evil", rubbing in the "evil" part to make you especially bad. Do you build a brothel or do you build an orphanage? Do you mine out the other continent or protect it? Etc.

All choices ultimately come down to one thing: Currency. Building an orphanage requires you to invest thousands of gold, building the brothel earns you wealth instead and the wealth ultimately means how "prepared" you are for the final conflict.

This means you can be the paragon of virtue and just halt the main quest to farm gold and have the optimal ending, you can bake pie and somehow amass thousands of gold and save the lives of everyone. This is plain idiotic, the choices go from practicallity and pragmatism to pie baking.

About the "main quest", you're also never told when it'll progress. You're given one year to accumulate the gold required, sometimes events trigger in the main quest which advance the time from a month or two and you're always feeling like you've got time to prepare, you've got pies to bake, etc.

No. The game skips around eight or so months to advance you to the final quest, you're dropped on your ass and told "have fun" as you're presented to a scene which remains completely identical regardless if you amassed the wealth which the game poked you with.

The difference between having collected the gold and not having it means nothing, towns will either be filled with people (if you had the gold) or be empty (if you didn't) but have them eventually respawn back to normal conditions. No-one cares either, side-quests and pedestrians never mention anything and the game goes on as if nothing happened.

In other words, it was total ****.

Modifié par Dave of Canada, 05 juin 2013 - 03:10 .

[LPPrince]

Steampunk has its fans, I don't mind it. The thing is, the general public wanted more of the swords and bows medieval armor kinda thing. The Fable 1 setting. Fable 2 moved it forward a little bit, but not drastically like Fable 3. Which is kinda funny given that there were several hundred years between 1 and 2 but only 50 between 2 and 3.

If Fable 3 is your first Fable, you'd love it more than if you started with Fable from the beginning.

[LPPrince]

To be fair, one of the Fable 3 choices was to let alcohol be drunk freely, to a limited degree, or enact prohibition.

If you let people drink it with free will(the "good choice") people will be barfing all over your world.

Not a joke.

[LPPrince]

Jayne126 wrote...

I actually like the setting, but the gameplay was just fubar.

Aye, the game was beautiful. I like how Fable 3 was way more open-spaced.

Speaking of, much like CDProjekt Red and Bioware said about their respective upcoming games(The Witcher 3:Wild Hunt and Dragon Age 3:Inquisition), Lionhead said they were looking at Bethesda's Skyrim for inspiration as to the size of their game world.

So chances are, Fable IV's gonna be even more open, much bigger, and very beautiful if they keep up their art style.

[Dextro Milk]

I can't wait for this!

*Screams like a little girl*

[LPPrince]

Aye. Gonna be marrying Lady Grey again! Probably. We'll see.

[Sajuro]

What I didn't like about Fable 3 is they got rid of all of that glorious flavor text.
Also the good/evil just beat you over the head.
Fable 2 was the best of all the games...just saying

[Dextro Milk]

LPPrince wrote...

Aye. Gonna be marrying Lady Grey again! Probably. We'll see.

I always pick her. 

That guy can find another girl to bring back to life.