| Counti said: Thats interesting (IGN scores from fable 1 & 2): Fable 1 10 Presentation A true storybook game, the fresco-painting cut-scenes are a perfect idea and the controls are very intuitive. Albion is a very dense world that has a rich history. 9.0 Graphics Beautiful environments and great details on your character. The bloom lighting is a nice touch of the fantastic and the magic looks great. Occasional framerate drops and repetitive NPC skins hurt. 9.0 Sound Beautiful opening score from Danny Elfman and plenty of great voice dialogue. Some of the sounds get repetitive and I wish a few of the creatures sounded a bit more varied. 9.0 Gameplay It's lost a lot of what would have made it revolutionary, but the combat is good and the game is still a lot of fun. Some of those NPC reactions are priceless. Great humor. 10 Lasting Appeal Sure, the main adventure is short for an RPG, but there's reason enough to play again. Plus, the world is dense with secrets and fun stuff. It's great to just fool around for a while. Fable 2 8.0 Presentation The story is nothing special, but Albion is a believable world full of interesting people. 8.0 Graphics The environments are impressive, and there’s a wide variety of looks for your character. The spells are visually potent. 8.5 Sound Solid voice acting and a script packed with humor. The music takes some unexpected, but welcome, turns. 8.5 Gameplay The combat system is a success and for the most part, the economic and morality systems work well, and the dog is a great addition. The co-op, though, is not up to par. 8.5 Lasting Appeal The main quest is short, but there are numerous other distractions. If you invest yourself in Fable II, you can spend easily spend 30 hours in Albion. If not, you can truck through in under 10 hours.
So, overall, Fable 2 makes everything better then Fable 1, but gets a lower Score? Strange... |
To be honest though expectations rise over time and some circumstances can cause games scores to be inflated from what they normally are or should be. Even though to some Fable 1 disappointed it generally brought some fresh ideas to the genre so I can see why it received very good reviews from some places and because of hype levels poor ones from others.
This isn't the case for Fable but another example would be launch titles and how they tend to get scored slightly higher than they should be. PDZ got an 8.4 from IGN. Games like Brothers in Arms got scores much lower. Is PDZ a better game? Other sequels to games got scores lower than their predecessor even though improvements were made (although some smaller than others). Ghost Recon 2 and Rainbow Six Vegas 2 are two examples of that. I think the logic that "X game received 1 score so an improved sequel should receive higher" is flawed. The same way people compare scores for two totally different genres of games is also flawed.
I hate even bringing an exclusive for another system into the arguement because it's bound to start flaming from ignorant fanboys but what would happen if Resistance 2 or Gears 2 got a score from IGN that was the same or lower than the first? Does that mean the first game is better or just as good as the sequel? To any logical person the answer would be of course not. Clear improvements and additions have been made but taking a number at face value is a pretty narrow way to look at things.
 |
 |
Completed X360:  |
|
| High Def Movie Collection |
Currently Online 
