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

Forums - Microsoft - Fable 2 Missing Online Co-Op At Launch

TRios_Zen on 24 October 2008
vlad321 said:
TRios_Zen said:
vlad321 said:
JaggedSac said:
The online co-op is lacking. But the amazing single player experience more than makes up for it.

 

Agreed, but then what about other games which had excellent single-player but bad multiplayer? For instance, Metroid Prime 2 got slammed by everyone for its multiplayer. They weren't even promising anything great in terms of multiplayer either, meanwhile the co-op was one of the centerpieces during E3. In any case, another developer fucking up by not delaying a game when it's obvious they should have and I'm getting tired of developers pulling shit like that.

What date did the patch have to be released by?  I agree that multiplayer could have been better, but I'm not sure I understand why exactly you are saying this was rushed.

 

 

It went gold before all the features they intended the game to have was actually coded. Then they patched it, sure it wass a day 1 patch but obviously it has bugs in it currently. There shouldn't have been an online co-op patch at all, good developers just push back release dates rather than releasing unfinished products, Molyneux isn't one of them.

Molyneux isnt a good developer, because of this?  HAHA, okay, whatever dude. 

I'd guess you aren't really interested in the quality of this game because you are interested in playing it, but rather more interested in trying to marginalize it's quality and therefore the 360.  Clearly the 90% review average it's getting is in spite of Molyneux's/Lionhead's ability.

 



Around the Network
Spankey on 24 October 2008
TRios_Zen said:
Spankey said:
TRios_Zen said:
vlad321 said:
JaggedSac said:
The online co-op is lacking. But the amazing single player experience more than makes up for it.

Agreed, but then what about other games which had excellent single-player but bad multiplayer? For instance, Metroid Prime 2 got slammed by everyone for its multiplayer. They weren't even promising anything great in terms of multiplayer either, meanwhile the co-op was one of the centerpieces during E3. In any case, another developer fucking up by not delaying a game when it's obvious they should have and I'm getting tired of developers pulling shit like that.

What date did the patch have to be released by?  I agree that multiplayer could have been better, but I'm not sure I understand why exactly you are saying this was rushed.

 

 

The way i understand it is that by the time the game had to go to print they didn't have the online enabled proberly yet, so they wanted to get the patch out on release day or as close to that as possible so as not to annoy too many people.

Having played a short stint in multiplayer mode, I agree with Mielke's comments from the 1up review; basically it's cool that you can earn gold and experince while playing with a buddy, but sucks that you can't go across as your own character. 

I don't know that they are ever going to be able to allow you to come across as your own character though, so I'm not sure that this is a) a good reason to say the patch (or game) was rushed or b) really impacts the quality of a game that has, for all other aspects, been rated as exemplary.

 

 

Please don't get me wrong - I'm not saing Fable 2 is bad in any way, i just said there and above why i think they had to patch the game in the way they did, and that i think it's unfortunate that the patch doesn't seem to have been fully tested before it was released (similarly, I didn't like the PS3's 2.40-2.41 debacle)



Proud Sony Rear Admiral

TRios_Zen on 24 October 2008
vlad321 said:
TRios_Zen said:
Spankey said:
TRios_Zen said:
vlad321 said:
JaggedSac said:
The online co-op is lacking. But the amazing single player experience more than makes up for it.

Agreed, but then what about other games which had excellent single-player but bad multiplayer? For instance, Metroid Prime 2 got slammed by everyone for its multiplayer. They weren't even promising anything great in terms of multiplayer either, meanwhile the co-op was one of the centerpieces during E3. In any case, another developer fucking up by not delaying a game when it's obvious they should have and I'm getting tired of developers pulling shit like that.

What date did the patch have to be released by?  I agree that multiplayer could have been better, but I'm not sure I understand why exactly you are saying this was rushed.

 

 

The way i understand it is that by the time the game had to go to print they didn't have the online enabled proberly yet, so they wanted to get the patch out on release day or as close to that as possible so as not to annoy too many people.

Having played a short stint in multiplayer mode, I agree with Mielke's comments from the 1up review; basically it's cool that you can earn gold and experince while playing with a buddy, but sucks that you can't go across as your own character. 

I don't know that they are ever going to be able to allow you to come across as your own character though, so I'm not sure that this is a) a good reason to say the patch (or game) was rushed or b) really impacts the quality of a game that has, for all other aspects, been rated as exemplary.

 

 

Did you read the part where the patch causes game freezing? I haven't encountered it but apparently plenty do. Apparently it's caused by the patch.

I have not experienced any freezing or problems and you are completely entitled to your own opinion.  It appears you have an awful lot of dislike for this game, and I'm not sure why.  If I've misunderstood your intentions I apologize.  I have spent about 6 hours with this game (I don't have a lot of free time at home, but have put as much time as I could in Fable 2) and I've really enjoyed it.  I would not consider it rushed, or of poor quality.

If you disagree, that is fair.



goddog on 24 October 2008
vlad321 said:
TRios_Zen said:
Spankey said:
TRios_Zen said:
vlad321 said:
JaggedSac said:
The online co-op is lacking. But the amazing single player experience more than makes up for it.

Agreed, but then what about other games which had excellent single-player but bad multiplayer? For instance, Metroid Prime 2 got slammed by everyone for its multiplayer. They weren't even promising anything great in terms of multiplayer either, meanwhile the co-op was one of the centerpieces during E3. In any case, another developer fucking up by not delaying a game when it's obvious they should have and I'm getting tired of developers pulling shit like that.

What date did the patch have to be released by?  I agree that multiplayer could have been better, but I'm not sure I understand why exactly you are saying this was rushed.

 

 

The way i understand it is that by the time the game had to go to print they didn't have the online enabled proberly yet, so they wanted to get the patch out on release day or as close to that as possible so as not to annoy too many people.

Having played a short stint in multiplayer mode, I agree with Mielke's comments from the 1up review; basically it's cool that you can earn gold and experince while playing with a buddy, but sucks that you can't go across as your own character. 

I don't know that they are ever going to be able to allow you to come across as your own character though, so I'm not sure that this is a) a good reason to say the patch (or game) was rushed or b) really impacts the quality of a game that has, for all other aspects, been rated as exemplary.

 

 

Did you read the part where the patch causes game freezing? I haven't encountered it but apparently plenty do. Apparently it's caused by the patch.

 

I had christ on the cross hovering syndrome after a long time into one of my sessions.... it took a restart to get rid of it.... basicaly all the waling and running animations were replaced by a floating version of my guy in the christ on cross pose, fighting would be normal, but i couldnt tell if my weapon was drawn because of this, and it only happend once, and it was post patch



come play minecraft @  mcg.hansrotech.com

minecraft name: hansrotec

XBL name: Goddog

TRios_Zen on 24 October 2008
Spankey said:
TRios_Zen said:

Having played a short stint in multiplayer mode, I agree with Mielke's comments from the 1up review; basically it's cool that you can earn gold and experince while playing with a buddy, but sucks that you can't go across as your own character. 

I don't know that they are ever going to be able to allow you to come across as your own character though, so I'm not sure that this is a) a good reason to say the patch (or game) was rushed or b) really impacts the quality of a game that has, for all other aspects, been rated as exemplary.

 

 

Please don't get me wrong - I'm not saing Fable 2 is bad in any way, i just said there and above why i think they had to patch the game in the way they did, and that i think it's unfortunate that the patch doesn't seem to have been fully tested before it was released (similarly, I didn't like the PS3's 2.40-2.41 debacle)

Understood, and on the general premise I agree, games should be released only when they are ready (I made this comment about SOCOM: confrontation and it's true for any game, 360, PS3 or Wii).  I'm just not aware of any real problems that the patch has caused, outside of not delivering on the "hoped for" multiplayer experience.  That is the multiplayer patch, IMO, failed in scope, not quality of programming. 

Now Vlad321 mentioned there may be freezing issues caused by the scope and I have not personally experienced that, so can't speak to it.  If that is the case, then I am wrong and owe you both an apology.

 



Around the Network
Spankey on 24 October 2008
TRios_Zen said:
Spankey said:
TRios_Zen said:

Having played a short stint in multiplayer mode, I agree with Mielke's comments from the 1up review; basically it's cool that you can earn gold and experince while playing with a buddy, but sucks that you can't go across as your own character. 

I don't know that they are ever going to be able to allow you to come across as your own character though, so I'm not sure that this is a) a good reason to say the patch (or game) was rushed or b) really impacts the quality of a game that has, for all other aspects, been rated as exemplary.

 

 

Please don't get me wrong - I'm not saing Fable 2 is bad in any way, i just said there and above why i think they had to patch the game in the way they did, and that i think it's unfortunate that the patch doesn't seem to have been fully tested before it was released (similarly, I didn't like the PS3's 2.40-2.41 debacle)

Understood, and on the general premise I agree, games should be released only when they are ready (I made this comment about SOCOM: confrontation and it's true for any game, 360, PS3 or Wii).  I'm just not aware of any real problems that the patch has caused, outside of not delivering on the "hoped for" multiplayer experience.  That is the multiplayer patch, IMO, failed in scope, not quality of programming. 

Now Vlad321 mentioned there may be freezing issues caused by the scope and I have not personally experienced that, so can't speak to it.  If that is the case, then I am wrong and owe you both an apology.

 

 

All I can find on the issue at the moment:

http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3170876

which references this:

http://community.lionhead.com/forums/1/3146731/ShowThread.aspx

another link:

http://xbox360.thegamereviews.com/story-2199-Fable-2-Hit-with-Freezing-Issues.html



Proud Sony Rear Admiral

vlad321 on 24 October 2008
TRios_Zen said:
Spankey said:
TRios_Zen said:

Having played a short stint in multiplayer mode, I agree with Mielke's comments from the 1up review; basically it's cool that you can earn gold and experince while playing with a buddy, but sucks that you can't go across as your own character. 

I don't know that they are ever going to be able to allow you to come across as your own character though, so I'm not sure that this is a) a good reason to say the patch (or game) was rushed or b) really impacts the quality of a game that has, for all other aspects, been rated as exemplary.

 

 

Please don't get me wrong - I'm not saing Fable 2 is bad in any way, i just said there and above why i think they had to patch the game in the way they did, and that i think it's unfortunate that the patch doesn't seem to have been fully tested before it was released (similarly, I didn't like the PS3's 2.40-2.41 debacle)

Understood, and on the general premise I agree, games should be released only when they are ready (I made this comment about SOCOM: confrontation and it's true for any game, 360, PS3 or Wii).  I'm just not aware of any real problems that the patch has caused, outside of not delivering on the "hoped for" multiplayer experience.  That is the multiplayer patch, IMO, failed in scope, not quality of programming. 

Now Vlad321 mentioned there may be freezing issues caused by the scope and I have not personally experienced that, so can't speak to it.  If that is the case, then I am wrong and owe you both an apology.

 

 

Near the top of this is a whole anippet from an article about the game freezing on many people's systems, I even said that it hasn't happened to me yet. You also seem to be misinterpreting exactly what aspects of this game I'm hating, please read more about this before you start labeling me off as one of those people.



Tag(thx fkusumot) - "Yet again I completely fail to see your point..."

HD vs Wii, PC vs HD: http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/thread.php?id=93374

Why Regenerating Health is a crap game mechanic: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=3986420

gamrReview's broken review scores: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=4170835

 

TRios_Zen on 24 October 2008
vlad321 said:

Near the top of this is a whole anippet from an article about the game freezing on many people's systems, I even said that it hasn't happened to me yet. You also seem to be misinterpreting exactly what aspects of this game I'm hating, please read more about this before you start labeling me off as one of those people.

That's fair, my bad, if I over-reacted.

I still disagree with your Molyneux comment though!  :)

 



vlad321 on 24 October 2008

I'd like to take this post space to say that Ensemble would have pushed for pushing the game back instead of releasing early.



Tag(thx fkusumot) - "Yet again I completely fail to see your point..."

HD vs Wii, PC vs HD: http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/thread.php?id=93374

Why Regenerating Health is a crap game mechanic: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=3986420

gamrReview's broken review scores: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=4170835

 

jasonnc80 on 24 October 2008

@vlad

I wasn't so much highlighting the problems people seem to be having with freezing but more of the issue about the actual content available in co-op. What is there is exactly what was shown 8 months ago. The timeframe of the patch may have lead to problems for some but I don't think it has any relevance on how the co-op is implemented. I'm also not saying it couldn't have been done better either, because IMO it could have been.

The only thing I was addressing was your post 2 above mine from 1up complaining about how the co-op was put in the game. You assumed that as proof that the game was rushed when it's false. The issues about the game freezing I wasn't aware of so I wasn't even talking about that. If that is vindication of the rush job then I won't disagree.

I've only put about 8 hours into the game (my 360 died) but haven't had any freezing/glitching myself.



Completed X360:
High Def Movie Collection