Okay, the first Fable came out roughly 5 years ago, Fable 2 less than 2 years ago, and they're planning for a Fable 3 already? I haven't heard anything about this other than seeing it on Amazon, but I'm already skeptical on what this game is going to offer that's going to differentiate from the other 2.
First off, the variety of weapons and the combat system in 2 made it unique and fun, and all of the vulgar quirks within the game kept me laughing until the end. I am hoping for more improvements this time around, including:
-A better economic system where it isn't a joke to buy out an entire town -More exciting less tedious and repetitive job works -More compelling side quests
And above all:
LONGER GAME PLAY
That has been my biggest problem with the Fables. I finished them in what seemed like no time and was constantly wanting more. The additions to Fable 2 were weak in my opinion and didn't keep me engaged very long.
I'll have to start checking on trailers and possible diaries to download on this game since I love the series, but I really hope these improvements come along. The open ended environment of these games is what I love about RPGs more than anything (and linearity is currently the only problem I have with FFXIII at this point in time, one of the best RPGs I have played in a long time) and if they really utilize this aspect, Fable 3 can trump the other Fables by a landslide and become a next-gen milestone. I hope they do things right.
Absolutely Reed, longer game play. The second fable had FOUR quests. THAT'S IT! Took me a few hours to beat, and the extras were not interesting at all. Really, pushing a button at a certain time to hammer something over and over? Definitely not worth buying. It must have been really easy to make such a short game that they are already putting this one out. Fable has the capability of being absolutely great if they would just put more time into it and make it longer. Oh well, people will buy it no matter what.
They'll have no problem putting out Fable III so soon after Fable II, because they don't care if the game's actually finished and properly tested before they release it. Fable II and the first add-on, with their host of game-breaking bugs, convinced me of that. I gave 'em more chances than they deserved; I won't be buying Fable III. Probably won't buy another Lionhead game, in fact.
No, the reason "Fable III" is coming out so soon after the second game is because (like "Fallout: New Vegas") it uses the exact same gameplay engine as "Fable II," which means a far quicker turnaround time from the last installment.
And I don't know what was wrong with your console, Wordhurler, but neither myself nor anyone who owned the second game experienced any "game-breaking bugs" while playing it; I don't know where you're coming up with this stuff. As a matter of fact, "Fable II" was widely hailed as one of the more stable games out there for this generation.
Every single game has their share of launch-bugs, not just Lionhead titles, but that's what patches are for.
@Bandsaw: "Neither myself nor anyone who owned the second game experienced any 'game-beaking bugs' while playing it"?
Really? You know everyone who owned the second game? Wow. That's amazing. You're one connected guy.
I own the second game, and I'm telling you I ran into game-breaking bugs. Bugs that made it impossible to proceed further without starting the game over from the beginning. So that's one person you know who did.
Now go to Lionhead's own forums and look at the posts from when Fable II was a current game, and from when the first add-on came out. One bug in particular that a lot of people ran into -- myself included -- is one that makes your dog disappear. You need the dog pretty early in the add-on to help you find a buried artifact. If you can't dig up that artifact, you can't proceed any further. If your dog has disappeared...you can't dig up that artifact. The game is broken.
I'm glad you had a good experience with the game. But the fact that you didn't run into any problems doesn't mean no one else in the world ran into any problems. I have a Toyota that has never accelerated out of control, but that doesn't lead me to assume all those news stories are made up.
And "that's what patches are for"? I can't believe how some people have come to simply accept that a product they spend $60 for is going to be broken or incomplete when they get it home. If you bought a cheeseburger at McDonald's and found it was raw, and the clerk said "Oh, that happens all the time. We'll cook it for you tomorrow," you'd never go to that dump again. Why do you accept the same basic situation in something you spent 20 times as much money on?
It's not necessarily that that the patch-situation applies to every single new game that hits the store shelves. There are those each year that do, and these do seem to be growing in number each year, in either event.
That said, what I was referring to there were minor gameplay or programming issues, for which most developers "tweak" immediately after release for most new titles; these are actually pretty commonplace, on PC as well as on consoles. This seems to occur slightly more frequently on PCs, where developing for that platform also involves a lot of extra resources for support and testing, considering the vast amount of configurations that one has to take into account.
Games for the PC are often shipped "broken," and have to be patched later. Not necessarily because the developers were lazy, but because that exact configuration was not considered during testing. It's simply far easier to produce a game within the framework of the existing consoles, than to do so with PCs, what with all the hardware and software configuration hurdles the devs have to plow through, let alone all the rampant piracy going on.
As for whatever issues you ran into with your copy, I definitely sympathize; it seems that both my acquaintances and myself all got lucky with our copies, or else just in how we played it...though there was an article up this past year on either IGN or GameSpy where "Fable II" was singled out as being one of the better-engineered games in the past few years right out of the box, in an age when most "AAA" titles tend receive at least some nominal-to-significant patching/upgrades.
I don't doubt that IGN or GameSpy or Whoever said Fable II was well engineered out of the box (although one site, the name of which you're not sure of, hardly qualifies as "widely hailed," does it?). Game review sites are occasionally wrong. In this case, whoever said it was definitely wrong.
It would be a mistake to assume that, because Fable II didn't receive significant patches, it didn't have significant problems. It simply had problems Lionhead declined to fix. And if they fixed some of them with the first add-on -- in which case they charged us money to fix the game we'd already bought -- the first add-on introduced bugs of its own. I don't know if those problems were ever fixed; having been bitten twice, damned if I was interested in buying the second add-on to see if it improved matters.
I can't personally say that I encountered many (or any, really) significant bugs even after the first expansion was released, but if you yourself did, it's unfortunate, and I get what you're saying -- my acquaintances and I lucked out, evidently. Also, that IGN article wasn't the only one that lauded "Fable II"'s stability (on major post-release issues, compared to other big games from that year), but it was the one that sprang immediately to mind when I wrote that earlier post, there.
I suppose it's more of a "your-mileage-may-vary" type of thing, depending on the personal experience in question.
William, I'm sorry to see you deleted your post. I didn't see anything wrong with it!
Glad to see someone agree that there were a whole buncha bugs in Fable II. I agree with the gripe you posted after your spoiler warning, too -- that bothered me.
I think you're right when you say the first Fable was very stable (no rhyme intended). I don't recall having any trouble with it. I've got much fonder memories of Fable than of Fable II, even though Fable II had some really cool stuff in it.
I think that, as videogame consoles with hard drives and broadband Internet connections became more and more common, some videogame developers embraced the model that has made PC gaming so frustrating: that "We can always patch it later" attitude. Before consoles had hard drives and broadband, videogame companies knew that whatever hit the shelves on release day was their one shot -- they weren't going to be able to fix any problems with the game without sending a new disc to every customer. They might fix small bugs in a reissue, like a Greatest Hits edition, but if there were any big bugs in that initial release, the damage was done...so I think they tested their games much more carefully in those days. I do think it's great that consoles have big, roomy hard drives today, and I enjoy the benefits of Xbox Live -- but this "ship it now, fix it later" syndrome is a really annoying by-product of those advances.
IMO~ Fable 1 was a load of fun, very stable, and kept me playing more. However, the guild master was getting on my nerves with his constant, "Your health is low, do you have any potions or food?" or talking about quest cards, hardly any side missions that the reward was really worth anything, and once the game ended, it was over. No added missions after you kill the Jack of Blades. All the boss fights were a joke as well. Slow time, berserk, then hack and slash before they knew what happened. Fable 2~ Once again fun, stable, and kept me playing for hours and hours. I had absolutely no problems with bugs and played for 4+ hours a sitting. Beautiful graphics (besides the problem with your weapons and other articles of clothing going through your clothes not staying on top of them, big pet-peave), the interactions with the townsfolk was both fun and entertaining and lets face it, blowing a guys head off with your rifle was way too much fun. But this one lacked the same thing the first one did. Good boss fights. I was not challenged AT ALL throughout the entire game. Once I was done, and saw how depressing the final "boss fight" was, made me put down the controller and not touch it again for a while. Also, I was not a fan of the combat system. The single button mashing maybe fun for Dante's Inferno, and God of War, but with a game like this, it should be a little more complex. I believe they should stear more twords how Prince of Persia: Warrior Within was. If I were to buy Fable 3, which I probably will, there needs to be boss fights that I can't figure out and HAVE to go online to look for different stratigies. Don't make them impossible, but them change periodicly. Maybe adapt to your gameplay, ie. if your a hack-and-slash kind of guy (or girl) make the boss use more of their ranged techiques to make the player learn more of the total gameplay instead of just making the boss fight work for them. Also, I would ask for bad guys that can interupt magic. Being able to summon a ring of fire and knock everyone around you back at a click of a button makes me feel like a god in a sea of mortals. Once again no challenge. Fable has the potental to be the greatest RPG for this platform, they just need to work out little things.
I ran into some pretty annoying persistant bugs in the game--a character who can't sleep ("You can't sleep now" message every time he selects a bed...) and a character with a phantom wife (tried to move a character's wife from one house to another, and the game duplicated her. The original wife divorced him after he was blackmailed for "polygamy," the second one just wouldn't go away. :-S ) but nothing game-stopping. Still, I suppose that's a consequence of having a game with so many interactions, you simply can't test them all.
I don't mind the combat system--it was a bit too easy, but I didn't get the game for combat, that's what Devil May Cry is for. As for the game being a bit short, I suppose it is if you just hurry along to perform the main quests. I like to take the time and do all the side quests and explore the environments and so forth. I think that's what the developers had in mind. The "Love Hurts" quest is alot of fun. And I liked the dog. Animals are always a nice addition to games--I'd wished Fable 2 had had a horse, too, sometimes--sprinting about the countryside gets old, but I could have Wanda ride Agro all over the Shadow of the Colossus environment for hours at a time. A seamless world would have been great, too, in Fable 2. The constant load screens are a bit wearing. But, my biggest gripe with Fable 2 was the autosave feature--that's what caused the persistant wife clone. Bought the house and the game married him over again and autosaved after the marriage! lol If the power flickers and I lose progress, then its my fault. The game glitches and saves the glitch, then I'm not a happy camper.
In short, Fable 2 isn't perfect, but I haven't played a game yet that is. I'll invest in Fable 3 when it becomes available, but I'll be looking for a discount--probably wind up getting it six months or so after release and pick up a used copy from a less easily-satisfied gamer.
I never had any problems with "bugs " in Fable 2 . I also had never even heard of that until now . I did have that problem in GTA IV and it pissed me off so bad I sold it . My character would get stuck in walls or endlessly fall of a building but never land , then a blank grey screen . I believe it is totally possible . I would never , ever eat a cheeseburger from McDonalds though .
I don't believe that problems that crop up on current console or pc games are a result of the "we'll patch it later" mentality. I believe the problems occur because programming games today is WAAAY harder than making Super Mario Brothers or Castlevania (both of which had errors as well)! If people only realized how much more lines of code and WORK went into making these games than in previous generations, I think they'd have a lot more respect for the developers.
Personally, I have a lot of admiration and respect for Molyneux's vision, even if he hasn't fully realized it. I do believe that he's getting closer, and I look forward to Fable 3 with the anticipation of seeing what he's bringing to the table next!
Movies are way more complicated today than The Great Train Robbery was in 1903...but filmmakers still manage to hit their release dates, and movies don't have big chunks missing that the filmmakers plan to fill in later.
The "games are harder to make today" argument doesn't wash. As a consumer, I don't care how hard the product is to make. If you're going to charge me sixty bucks for it, then make sure it's finished and sufficiently tested. Games like Fable II don't ship broken because they're complicated; they ship broken because gamers have shown that they're willing to buy broken products and accept them as the status quo. If you want to make sure Fable IV is as close to perfect as possible when it ships, don't buy Fable III -- or at least don't buy it on release day. Wait until they fix the bugs...or until it's been out a while and appears relatively bug-free. Let Lionhead and Microsoft know there's no profit in releasing a game until it's truly finished and properly tested.
Or, you know...continue leaping on games the day they hit the shelves, and show their publishers you like being unpaid beta testers.
"Movies are way more complicated today than The Great Train Robbery was in 1903...but filmmakers still manage to hit their release dates, and movies don't have big chunks missing that the filmmakers plan to fill in later. "
Firstly, movies contain errors as well. Continuity errors, as well as technical and factual errors abound. Secondly, there are plenty of movies that contain GAPING plot-holes, which are barely, or never explored.
Basically, any media produced by human beings WILL BE FLAWED as humans are not perfect. Perhaps YOU are, to which I would like to invite you to make a video game, so I can consume this perfection in all it's glory! Fact of the matter is video games take dozens of people to make, all working on different aspects of the game. Then you have creative leads who try to tie it all together. It's very complicated, and there will ALWAYS be errors. Always! Show me a game without errors, and I will point you to a forum somewhere where people will say otherwise.
Bottom line is that I feel what you're saying. I really do. I've played games where there was such a mess that I wondered how the game ever made it to market! I don't feel like Fable 2 was one of them, as I never encountered any glitches myself, but every person's experience will be different.
My analogy for older video games wasn't to say that video game makers today should get a pass for sloppy coding. It was merely to point out that games like Super Mario Bros. had glitches too. We didn't start a post on the internet back then, condemning the programmers because we found a way to run right over the top of a level! No. We showed our friends. We laughed about it. We played the level all the way through, AND ran over the top of it more times than we could even count. Basically, we had fun. Gamers today are jaded, and cynical and don't know how to laugh at a glitch, and have fun anymore.
Some people like Peter Molyneux want to improve the video game world. They want to change the way we view games, but when they fall short a little bit they get flamed and derided for trying to bring passion to their art. It's kinda sad, really, but as long as there are games out there that bring you some kind of joy we can all be thankful that we have so many choices.
So your argument is that games are hard to make, so bugs are acceptable...and anyway, bugs are fun! And if a developer tries to push the envelope, it's okay if the game is buggy, because hey -- he's got passion.
Okay. That's an interesting perspective. Can we assume you feel the same way about bugs that make it impossible to finish a game? Those are really big bugs, so they must be really big fun.
No, my argument is that video games (as well as all other media, including movies, tv, books, etc.) are made by human being, and human beings make mistakes, especially the more complex the project. This is a fact of life that must be accepted by someone who consumes media. By all means, if the errors are glaring, or don't allow you to finish the game, or to enjoy said media fully, it should be handled accordingly. By this I mean it should be brought to developers attention so that they may remedy the issue. If it is not, then word WILL spread, and the game WON'T be purchased.
Should the game make it out the door with an error as serious as this? Definitely not, but considering a very small minority ever experienced the problem it is either; a) hard to duplicate, or b) an actual data error on a small number of discs, either caused during manufacturing or user abuse of the disc.
Getting back on point, Fable 2 was critically lauded, and was one of the best selling games of this generation. It's unfortunate that you could not enjoy this wonderful game to the fullest, as I, and millions of others have, but such is life I suppose. I'm sure I will enjoy Fable 3 just the same.
I would like to see real 'parties' in a Fable game, I sometimes get bored with just one character, even with all the customization options, I really prefer the party dynamic found in traditional JRPG's or BioWare RPG's. Maybe Lionhead should try their hand at creating a huge turn based Fable RPG ? I also hope that the standard edition isn't being cut down to provide the CE with 'extras', and that the main game/story is a lot more epic.
I experienced the game breaking bug. Towards the end. (I'll just said it since the game's been out quite a while) SPOILER : Towards the end - when you rescue your daughter. She gets stuck and never comes up the ladder. THATS A HUGE BUG. A Bug that should have been patched but never was. Anyone else experience this? You can't go on in the story after that point. I restarted 2 times afterward. Not a good thing
"Gamers today are jaded, and cynical and don't know how to laugh at a glitch, and have fun anymore."
I do agree with you on this point. The first thing you encounter when you're exploring a glitch is "YOU CHEATER". Now there are some glitches like the World At War glitch where you could hide undergound and shoot people without ever dying - we'll thats beyond a fun glitch. Thats just lame. But things like the "Skywalk" in Team Fortress 2 - now there's a fun glitch (speaking of running across the map in Super Mario)