By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Microsoft - Official Fable III Review Thread

M.U.G.E.N on 26 October 2010

1up

http://www.1up.com/do/reviewPage?cId=3182073

83/100 on meta :S not sure how that conversion happen from B plus to 83

level7.nu

70/100



In-Kat-We-Trust Brigade!

"This world is Merciless, and it's also very beautiful"

For All News/Info related to the PlayStation Vita, Come and join us in the Official PSV Thread!

Around the Network
themanwithnoname on 26 October 2010
Doobie_wop said:
themanwithnoname said:
Doobie_wop said:

I knew this would happen, instead of working on all the positives that Fable 2 had and then improving on them, they introduced a whole bunch of new systems that are inferior without fixing the flaws of the old game. The people that are dismissing the Destructoid review should probably read it before getting defensive, Jim makes plenty of good points and he actually identifies the problems the game has. Trusting sites like IGN and Gamespot would be silly, especially when their sites are plastered with Fable ads. 

The guys from Giant Bomb are the most trust worthy reviewers on the Internet, they have no corporate backing and they are some of the best in their field. They gave the game a 3 out of 5. I'm disappointed in Lionhead, they had something special, but Peter's bighead got in the way. I won't judge it any further until I can get a chance to rent the game, but the things I was worried about after reading and watching all those previews seem to be real.

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.

You aren't making any sense.

A) How is the scale of the game smaller when there's a whole new continent to explore? -_-

B) That's just your opinion of what an RPG should be, and the game's creator has said that this isn't an RPG anyway.

C) Just about all of these games have technical problems. That's not an excuse, but still, I can't remember the last one of these games that didn't have technical problems.

D) What's so bad about combat?

E) Did you really expect them to do change the emotion system when it's been the same in both of the previous games?

F) You'd need to be more specific.

But I'm really most interested in your defense of your first point. Every video/interview/review I've seen of the game has not only denied that, but said the exact opposite. I can go get quotes if you want me to.

EDIT: And meh at better alternatives. I like Bethesda and BioWare, but they are not an alternative to Fable, nor is Fable an alternative to what they do. People buy multiple games from similar genres, y'know.



themanwithnoname's law: As an America's sales or NPD thread grows longer, the probabilty of the comment "America = World" [sarcasticly] being made approaches 1.

Doobie_wop on 26 October 2010
themanwithnoname said:

"The rest of the game is just Fable II, but far less epic in scale. Fable II felt like a real adventure across all of Albion, while Fable III feels incredibly limited. You visit only a few places, and fight only a fraction of the types of enemies that Fable is known for." Destructoid

"Unfortunately, the quests that form the bulk of the experience lack the originality of those in Fable II. A sizeable portion of the game simply involves dragging an NPC from one environment to another. While this might demonstrate the game's new 'touch' mechanics nicely, it isn't actually all that entertaining. It's the age old escort mission in disguise, and plays out a little too often for my liking. It's the very same mechanic used to take girlfriends on dates, too, and quickly becomes laborious. This and 'clear the area of enemies' quests are the bread and butter of Fable III; don't expect anything as memorable as the Spire this time around. Perhaps Fable II set the standards too high, but the lack of diversity in III is mildly disappointing." Video Gamer.com

It's a small thing, but I expected the game to get rid of it's linear pathways and make the world more open. Peter hinted at that in a few interviews and I guess it's my fault to fall for it.

To the other points:

The HUB is a stupid idea because according to most of the reviews, it's clumsy and takes far to long to do the smallest of tasks. Peter can say what he wants, but the game relies on upgrading, customizing and adjusting your character and their inventory.

Fable 3 is a bigger game (budget and development) than a lot of RPG's, Fable 2 didn't suffer that much and I was expecting a similar experience to be in Fable 3, but somehow they made a few mistakes and left some annoying technical issues into the game.

Fable 3 should have broken out of that simplistic two button combat mechanic, the game is already being put down as being far to easy. Had they had a more in depth combat mechanic with smarter AI, it might have given the game the challenge it needs.

They should have broken out of the whole farting and foot stomping mechanic they've got themselves into, Peter endorses the emotion system and in every game it becomes more annoying, if he at least tweaked it to make it more engaging, then it wouldn't be a problem.

A few of the reviews have listed some problems that I had with the last game, which is that your dog gets janky sometimes, your enemies aren't that smart and in general the NPCs are stupid.

I don't hate the game, I haven't even played it yet, but I do get disappointed when a good game could have been an excellent game, but instead it suffers from several dumb flaws. I felt the same about Lair, Alan Wake, Medal of Honour and No More Heroes.




Bet with Conegamer and AussieGecko that the PS3 will have more exclusives in 2011 than the Wii or 360... or something.

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=3879752

themanwithnoname on 26 October 2010
Doobie_wop said:
themanwithnoname said:

"The rest of the game is just Fable II, but far less epic in scale. Fable II felt like a real adventure across all of Albion, while Fable III feels incredibly limited. You visit only a few places, and fight only a fraction of the types of enemies that Fable is known for." Destructoid

"Unfortunately, the quests that form the bulk of the experience lack the originality of those in Fable II. A sizeable portion of the game simply involves dragging an NPC from one environment to another. While this might demonstrate the game's new 'touch' mechanics nicely, it isn't actually all that entertaining. It's the age old escort mission in disguise, and plays out a little too often for my liking. It's the very same mechanic used to take girlfriends on dates, too, and quickly becomes laborious. This and 'clear the area of enemies' quests are the bread and butter of Fable III; don't expect anything as memorable as the Spire this time around. Perhaps Fable II set the standards too high, but the lack of diversity in III is mildly disappointing." Video Gamer.com

It's a small thing, but I expected the game to get rid of it's linear pathways and make the world more open. Peter hinted at that in a few interviews and I guess it's my fault to fall for it.

To the other points:

The HUB is a stupid idea because according to most of the reviews, it's clumsy and takes far to long to do the smallest of tasks. Peter can say what he wants, but the game relies on upgrading, customizing and adjusting your character and their inventory.

Fable 3 is a bigger game (budget and development) than a lot of RPG's, Fable 2 didn't suffer that much and I was expecting a similar experience to be in Fable 3, but somehow they made a few mistakes and left some annoying technical issues into the game.

Fable 3 should have broken out of that simplistic two button combat mechanic, the game is already being put down as being far to easy. Had they had a more in depth combat mechanic with smarter AI, it might have given the game the challenge it needs.

They should have broken out of the whole farting and foot stomping mechanic they've got themselves into, Peter endorses the emotion system and in every game it becomes more annoying, if he at least tweaked it to make it more engaging, then it wouldn't be a problem.

A few of the reviews have listed some problems that I had with the last game, which is that your dog gets janky sometimes, your enemies aren't that smart and in general the NPCs are stupid.

I don't hate the game, I haven't even played it yet, but I do get disappointed when a good game could have been an excellent game, but instead it suffers from several dumb flaws. I felt the same about Lair, Alan Wake, Medal of Honour and No More Heroes.

Albion has never been bigger, and the addition of the large desert zone of Aurora features plenty of space for ambitious explorers. -VGChartz

Fable III does seem much larger in terms of scale than Fable II and for the most part, it seems like “more, more, more” is the mantra. -Xbox360achievements.org

I'd trust just about any reviewer over Jim Sterling any day of the week.

Since when has the hub idea been about speed? The entire reason it exists is for more people to use it, not to make it faster. If I'm developing a game, I'm going with the option more people are likely to use, not the one that's slightly faster.



themanwithnoname's law: As an America's sales or NPD thread grows longer, the probabilty of the comment "America = World" [sarcasticly] being made approaches 1.

Doobie_wop on 26 October 2010
themanwithnoname said:
Doobie_wop said:
themanwithnoname said:

"The rest of the game is just Fable II, but far less epic in scale. Fable II felt like a real adventure across all of Albion, while Fable III feels incredibly limited. You visit only a few places, and fight only a fraction of the types of enemies that Fable is known for." Destructoid

"Unfortunately, the quests that form the bulk of the experience lack the originality of those in Fable II. A sizeable portion of the game simply involves dragging an NPC from one environment to another. While this might demonstrate the game's new 'touch' mechanics nicely, it isn't actually all that entertaining. It's the age old escort mission in disguise, and plays out a little too often for my liking. It's the very same mechanic used to take girlfriends on dates, too, and quickly becomes laborious. This and 'clear the area of enemies' quests are the bread and butter of Fable III; don't expect anything as memorable as the Spire this time around. Perhaps Fable II set the standards too high, but the lack of diversity in III is mildly disappointing." Video Gamer.com

It's a small thing, but I expected the game to get rid of it's linear pathways and make the world more open. Peter hinted at that in a few interviews and I guess it's my fault to fall for it.

To the other points:

The HUB is a stupid idea because according to most of the reviews, it's clumsy and takes far to long to do the smallest of tasks. Peter can say what he wants, but the game relies on upgrading, customizing and adjusting your character and their inventory.

Fable 3 is a bigger game (budget and development) than a lot of RPG's, Fable 2 didn't suffer that much and I was expecting a similar experience to be in Fable 3, but somehow they made a few mistakes and left some annoying technical issues into the game.

Fable 3 should have broken out of that simplistic two button combat mechanic, the game is already being put down as being far to easy. Had they had a more in depth combat mechanic with smarter AI, it might have given the game the challenge it needs.

They should have broken out of the whole farting and foot stomping mechanic they've got themselves into, Peter endorses the emotion system and in every game it becomes more annoying, if he at least tweaked it to make it more engaging, then it wouldn't be a problem.

A few of the reviews have listed some problems that I had with the last game, which is that your dog gets janky sometimes, your enemies aren't that smart and in general the NPCs are stupid.

I don't hate the game, I haven't even played it yet, but I do get disappointed when a good game could have been an excellent game, but instead it suffers from several dumb flaws. I felt the same about Lair, Alan Wake, Medal of Honour and No More Heroes.

Albion has never been bigger, and the addition of the large desert zone of Aurora features plenty of space for ambitious explorers. -VGChartz

Fable III does seem much larger in terms of scale than Fable II and for the most part, it seems like “more, more, more” is the mantra. -Xbox360achievements.org

I'd trust just about any reviewer over Jim Sterling any day of the week.

Since when has the hub idea been about speed? The entire reason it exists is for more people to use it, not to make it faster. If I'm developing a game, I'm going with the option more people are likely to use, not the one that's slightly faster.

That's fine, I just wanted the game to be special and I'm hoping these flaws don't ruin my experience when I finally get to play the game. I don't want to turn this into a four page debate arguing about a game neither of us have played, so hopefully once we both finish we can discuss the game in the official Fable 3 thread. The reviews seem to be saying that the voice work, the story and the overall atmosphere of the game is fantastic, so maybe they'll make up for the problems I've been reading about.



Bet with Conegamer and AussieGecko that the PS3 will have more exclusives in 2011 than the Wii or 360... or something.

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=3879752

Around the Network
Mr Puggsly on 26 October 2010

Fable 2 was over rated in my opinion, so I'm expecting Fable 3 to get a lower score.

I can't even finish some of the side quests in Fable 2 because its bugging out.



Recently Completed: 
River City: Rival Showdown for 3DS (3/5) - River City: Tokyo Rumble for 3DS (4/5) - Zelda: BotW for Wii U (5/5) - Zelda: BotW for Switch (5/5) - Zelda: Link's Awakening for Switch (4/5) - Rage 2 for X1X (4/5) - Rage for 360 (3/5) - Streets of Rage 4 for X1/PC (4/5) - Gears 5 for X1X (5/5) - Mortal Kombat 11 for X1X (5/5) - Doom 64 for N64 (emulator) (3/5) - Crackdown 3 for X1S/X1X (4/5) - Infinity Blade III - for iPad 4 (3/5) - Infinity Blade II - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Infinity Blade - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Wolfenstein: The Old Blood for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Origins for X1 (3/5) - Uncharted: Lost Legacy for PS4 (4/5) - EA UFC 3 for X1 (4/5) - Doom for X1 (4/5) - Titanfall 2 for X1 (4/5) - Super Mario 3D World for Wii U (4/5) - South Park: The Stick of Truth for X1 BC (4/5) - Call of Duty: WWII for X1 (4/5) -Wolfenstein II for X1 - (4/5) - Dead or Alive: Dimensions for 3DS (4/5) - Marvel vs Capcom: Infinite for X1 (3/5) - Halo Wars 2 for X1/PC (4/5) - Halo Wars: DE for X1 (4/5) - Tekken 7 for X1 (4/5) - Injustice 2 for X1 (4/5) - Yakuza 5 for PS3 (3/5) - Battlefield 1 (Campaign) for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Syndicate for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: MW Remastered for X1 (4/5) - Donkey Kong Country Returns for 3DS (4/5) - Forza Horizon 3 for X1 (5/5)

Munkeh111 on 26 October 2010

Despite my mixed feeling towards Fable II, the reviews of this game are looking nice and positive, but I won't be able to play it until December unfortunately...



wholikeswood on 26 October 2010

Didn't expect the Metascore to be so low (81 after 18 reviews now), but those are some really controversial scores from Destructoid and Giant Bomb...



Skeeuk on 26 October 2010

im guessing its getting lower scores because its more of the same with bits cut out from fable 2. fable 3 is looking the better game though i really want to play it. might get hold of fable 2 again to finish it then onto fable 3.

my only reason for trading fable 2 goty was each copy of goty i had it wouldnt load past a certain part, otherwise i would have kept it its a classic. looking on ebay right now for fable 2 standard game



...not much time to post anymore, used to be awesome on here really good fond memories from VGchartz...

PSN: Skeeuk - XBL: SkeeUK - PC: Skeeuk

really miss the VGCHARTZ of 2008 - 2013...

darthdevidem01 on 26 October 2010

Nice reviews, luckily my next door neighbor in my dorm has a 360....and he's gonna get this so I can play it kinda!

The Destructoid Emperor Jim Sterling always does this to get hits, he did it to FF13, Vanquish and now to Fable 3....his scores are always wayyyyy below the others of metacritic and he doesn't even complete games he reviews!

I will never forgive that horrible reviewer, thank you for not linking him in seece!



All hail the KING, Andrespetmonkey