So... I beat the game twice in four days with two characters. I was wondering to anyone who bought the game, what do you think about the game? Should there be an expansion?
haha, though you know whats sad?
Most of the 360's nowadays give you the "E-74" red light, or so called, "The Red ring of death" where your xbox 360 power button lights up with 3 red lines blinking, as the xbox idles doing nothing.
Damn PS3's are better in performance i shall say. Some 360's have cooling problems. Stoopid Microsoft.
My take on Fable II (Never played the first) is that is claims to be a lot more open ended than it really is and ends up falling on its face. I've only played it a little bit myself, but have spent many hours watching two guys play both the "good path" and the "bad path."
For the purposes of this illustration I'm going to be comparing it to Oblivion, which has set the current standard for how an open ended game should look. I realize they're completely different games and that some people don't like Oblivion, but hear me out.
Fable II makes the claim that every one of your actions (Good or bad) determines your path in the game, how you look, how things are played, etc. The thing about this, that I don't see, is that the story is played exactly the same whether you're good or bad. I mean, sure, you'll eventually get a halo or horns and your skin tone might change color, but you're still playing through the exact same story. You're still teaming up with the same people to accomplish the same thing whether you're the most vile and evil thing or the most heroic and pure character. The only difference I can really see is how people react to you, which is a very small part of the game. And even then, the main NPCs on the main quest treat you exactly the same whether you've chosen good or evil. Oblivion is pretty much the same way, but it never claimed to be anything but.
Another thing is the perceived "options" of doing side-quests, in fact, most "side quests" are just required for the main quest. Take the very first level when you're a little kid for example. You have all these little side quests in order to get gold pieces, but if they're actually required to make it past that part, are they really side-quests? I would venture no. Let's look at open endedness in Oblivion, though. You can play this game for hours upon hours and never even touch the main quest. You can roam around the world with any option available to you whether you're on the main quest or not, at any point in the game. With Fable, we see places that are blocked off to go to unless you do a certain thing, kill a certain NPC, or complete a certain quest - again, just the main quest disguised in "side quests."
The biggest and most apparent flaw in concern to Fable's open endedness is the blatant path of sparks to lead you in the right direction. Seriously, how can they even claim this game has "multiple paths to choose from" when there's clearly one path you have to take in order to advance any further in the game. They're telling you themselves that this game is linear through its gameplay. In Oblivion, again, there's not even anything suggesting you to do a certain thing.
Overall, I don't think Fable is that bad of a game if it just didn't try to be more than it is. It's just so pretentious and gives you such a false sense of open endedness and depth, when it's just as linear as any other action/rpg. However, I think it could have been a lot better if it actually did what it claimed (which would take a lot more time in development) or AT LEAST have a separate campaign for good and evil characters.
Comments
I've heard of it. What's it like?
And no the new xbox wont be the 720, its the Xbox 360 Linillium
Oh dear. Another Microsoft failure is at hand...
~Syn~
Maybe they'll go eco-friendly. They'll give us a biodegradable paper-weight.
Most of the 360's nowadays give you the "E-74" red light, or so called, "The Red ring of death" where your xbox 360 power button lights up with 3 red lines blinking, as the xbox idles doing nothing.
Damn PS3's are better in performance i shall say. Some 360's have cooling problems. Stoopid Microsoft.
For the purposes of this illustration I'm going to be comparing it to Oblivion, which has set the current standard for how an open ended game should look. I realize they're completely different games and that some people don't like Oblivion, but hear me out.
Fable II makes the claim that every one of your actions (Good or bad) determines your path in the game, how you look, how things are played, etc. The thing about this, that I don't see, is that the story is played exactly the same whether you're good or bad. I mean, sure, you'll eventually get a halo or horns and your skin tone might change color, but you're still playing through the exact same story. You're still teaming up with the same people to accomplish the same thing whether you're the most vile and evil thing or the most heroic and pure character. The only difference I can really see is how people react to you, which is a very small part of the game. And even then, the main NPCs on the main quest treat you exactly the same whether you've chosen good or evil. Oblivion is pretty much the same way, but it never claimed to be anything but.
Another thing is the perceived "options" of doing side-quests, in fact, most "side quests" are just required for the main quest. Take the very first level when you're a little kid for example. You have all these little side quests in order to get gold pieces, but if they're actually required to make it past that part, are they really side-quests? I would venture no. Let's look at open endedness in Oblivion, though. You can play this game for hours upon hours and never even touch the main quest. You can roam around the world with any option available to you whether you're on the main quest or not, at any point in the game. With Fable, we see places that are blocked off to go to unless you do a certain thing, kill a certain NPC, or complete a certain quest - again, just the main quest disguised in "side quests."
The biggest and most apparent flaw in concern to Fable's open endedness is the blatant path of sparks to lead you in the right direction. Seriously, how can they even claim this game has "multiple paths to choose from" when there's clearly one path you have to take in order to advance any further in the game. They're telling you themselves that this game is linear through its gameplay. In Oblivion, again, there's not even anything suggesting you to do a certain thing.
Overall, I don't think Fable is that bad of a game if it just didn't try to be more than it is. It's just so pretentious and gives you such a false sense of open endedness and depth, when it's just as linear as any other action/rpg. However, I think it could have been a lot better if it actually did what it claimed (which would take a lot more time in development) or AT LEAST have a separate campaign for good and evil characters.