Export thread

My thought: Thank goodness it's a 360 game and not for the Wii... seems like it'd be a sure fire way to ruin a perfectly good wiimote.

Does it at least buy you dinner first?

Wait... what? You can have sex with other players? lol

Man, I can't wait to rent Fable 3.

So... did you?

"What do you say?"

Gusto said:

"What do you say?"

Click to expand...

No Glove No Love?

Gusto said:

"What do you say?"

Click to expand...

"Help?"

Jay said:

Wait... what? You can have sex with other players? lol

Man, I can't wait to rent Fable 3.

Click to expand...

Not only can you have sex, you can have children and form "business partnerships" that allow you to share gold.

Wha... why does it specify unprotected sex? I find this whole thing... disturbing.

Espy said:

Wha... why does it specify unprotected sex? I find this whole thing... disturbing.

Click to expand...

Because in Fable you can:

1.) Have children
2.) Wear protection to prevent having children
3.) Get STDs (though they don't have any bearing on the game, really)

...oh.

Didn't know that was out already. I wish I hadn't lost my website, because I had a good writeup on my thoughts about fable 2. I'm guessing this falls into the same category. There's something really strange about the fable franchise. You can do all of these really strange things, but the depth to all of them is minimal at best. I think the name I used for it was "Lord of the Rings Barby Dress Up Party." I'm guessing that still applies.

Necronic said:

There's something really strange about the fable franchise. You can do all of these really strange things, but the depth to all of them is minimal at best.

Click to expand...

That seems to be the case for a lot of Peter Molyneaux's post-bullfrog games... like Black & White, The Movies, and... well, that's pretty much all of them after Dungeon Keeper, isn't it?

I really liked Black &White (and a lot of the Bullfrog games before it), but I was never able to get into Fable.

I actually used to be addicted to At The Movies, no idea why, but making my own film studio and forcing my writers to churn out works, plus the ability to make custom little movies, really appealed to me. It was a lot of fun.

The only thing I hate was how cast people aged. I kept having to recycle actors because my main stars would grow old and retire after like 4 movies.

ScytheRexx said:

I actually used to be addicted to At The Movies, no idea why, but making my own film studio and forcing my writers to churn out works, plus the ability to make custom little movies, really appealed to me. It was a lot of fun.

The only thing I hate was how cast people aged. I kept having to recycle actors because my main stars would grow old and retire after like 4 movies.

Click to expand...

Agreed. Another huge problem was the slow rate at which writers got good, and then just as they start to churn out decent scripts, they retire. You'll get 30 mediocre/terrible scripts grinding your way up to a decent/good one, and then the guy who wrote it will retire.

I think the problem is that the game makes the actual shooting of the movies take too long. A script being written over a couple months I could believe, but taking 2 years to get shooting done? While not unheard of, I suppose, it's highly unusual. But it would happen ALL the TIME in "The Movies."

---------- Post added at 11:50 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:48 AM ----------

SpecialKO said:

I really liked Black &White (and a lot of the Bullfrog games before it), but I was never able to get into Fable.

Click to expand...

I liked Black and White, too, but even I could see the shallow nature of the wide variety. Creature behavior. Creature archetypes. The reward/punish system and the glitches therein. The micromanagement of the scaffolds. The constant screaming for "We need XXXX!" (and if they don't need food, or wood or anything else, they scream "WE NEED OFFSPRING!"). There was so much to do of such a varied nature in B&W that it was impressive... but under the hood it didn't go very deep.

Remember "stalk the Guru?" I hated that shit.

---------- Post added at 11:52 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:50 AM ----------

But yeah, if Peter Molyneaux decides to remake Dungeon Keeper (or make DK3), I'll probably end up buying it without even.. uh... "testing" it first.

I dunno. Based on the crap games he has put out since then I am willing to bet that a DK3 would be horrible.

Edit: Let me clarify. Every game he has put out is conceptually brilliant. They consistently challenge the standard game design paradigm (I feel like a douche for saying that.) The problem is that the execution is generally so severely flawed that as soon as the novelty of the system wears off it becomes painfully clear how bad of a game it is.

People seem to give it a pass for the groundbreaking novelty, but for the most part that's all his games become to me. Novelties.

Fable 2 is one of the best examples. It really pushed the boundaries on certain aspects of an interactive sandbox. The world could change based on the actions of the player. But, and this is a big but, it was in and of itself a very bad sandbox game. There were huge balance issues with the combat system, the leveling system was uninspired at best, the economy was severely broken, the itemization was boring, and the world map and design were poorly executed.

To make a comparison, think of the movie Tank Girl. That's what Fable 2 was to me.

GasBandit said:

The constant screaming for "We need XXXX!" (and if they don't need food, or wood or anything else, they scream "WE NEED OFFSPRING!").

Click to expand...

I'm almost certain this was an intentional design choice and was supposed to be some kind of commentary on what faith has become to many people, and that it would be MUCH worse if people know that it gave tangible results.

AshburnerX;447923][QUOTE=GasBandit said:

The constant screaming for "We need XXXX!" (and if they don't need food, or wood or anything else, they scream "WE NEED OFFSPRING!").

Click to expand...

I'm almost certain this was an intentional design choice and was supposed to be some kind of commentary on what faith has become to many people, and that it would be MUCH worse if people know that it gave tangible results.[/QUOTE]

Hm. Maybe. I did notice that if I didn't DIRECTLY give them what they needed, but rather indirectly enabled them to get it for themselves (IE, watered their crops instead of miraculously creating food) they got the hint and got more self-sufficient.

I just broke the behavorial AI to the point where I had trained my monster to eat ONLY rocks, NEVER poop, and kick every monster battle off with a fireball.

hah, I trained mine to lightningbolt.

GasBandit said:

Agreed. Another huge problem was the slow rate at which writers got good, and then just as they start to churn out decent scripts, they retire. You'll get 30 mediocre/terrible scripts grinding your way up to a decent/good one, and then the guy who wrote it will retire.

Click to expand...

You just described the Hollywood process right there.

I like the Fable games. Sure they're never all that deep but they are genuinely funny, always building upon what the games before them did right and always deliver the fun without any bullshit.

Sure Molyneaux is a twit who always seems to not get it but the Fable games never fail to be fun.