themanwithnoname said:
The Giant Bomb review was weak and didn't even mention co-op. I wonder if it was done by the guy who gave Halo: Reach a 4 who played the campaign on heroic and got frustrated because he kept dying. It never ceases to amaze me though how much stock people put into reviewers without getting their hands on the game. How would you know new systems are inferior without playing the game? And when has Jim Sterling ever made good points? |
No, the Halo: Reach review was written by Jeff Gerstman. I played Halo: Reach and I would have given it the same score and very similar criticisms. If Jim Sterling gave Fable 3 a 9 out of 10, no one would have blinked an eye or they would have taken it as positive because of how harsh his reviews can be. People can't pick and choose between reviews, they have to take all the points they make and come to final conclusion.
After reading a bunch of reviews, these are things that I'm already troubled by:
- The scale of the game is smaller, less places to explore and less things to do.
- The menu system turns into hub point instead of an inventory system, which is bad for an RPG and doesn't allow for quick and easy access.
- Technical problems.
- The combat has not improved.
- The emotion system is still flawed.
- The AI, especially companion AI, is still stupid.
That's some problems shared by four different reviewers, I doubt they all rang each other up while writing their reviews and exchanged stories. It's just disappointing to see a game with so much potential, release with so many stupid problems that could have easily been fixed. Fable 3 could have been the best RPG of this generation, but instead it's going to fall by the way side while other devs provide better alternatives.
Bet with Conegamer and AussieGecko that the PS3 will have more exclusives in 2011 than the Wii or 360... or something.







