Making a Better Fable III for PC

Lionhead on Xbox 360 version criticism.

Fable II scored 10/10 on Eurogamer and Fable III scored 8/10. But wasn't the third a better game? Wasn't co-op was better, combat deeper and the map more intuitive? Why didn't Fable IIII receive the plaudits of Fable II?

In this interview, Fable III lead combat designer Mike West sits down with Eurogamer to offer his post-mortem of the Xbox 360 game. He goes on to detail this Friday's PC release, and why the significant alterations he and his team have made ensure this will be "a much better version" of Fable III.

Eurogamer: Now the dust has settled on Fable III, what do you think about the reception it got?

Mike West: We added a reasonable amount of depth to the combat with the new spells, the spell-weaving, the weapon upgrading and the new abilities. The only problem we had from the combat point of view was the difficulty, which is what we've changed in the PC version.

Really we had some of the best quests on Fable III. The Game quest was fantastic - that made me laugh a lot. Comedy like that, and with the gnomes with Mark Heap - he's one of my favourite comedians. Our vocal cast was amazing. I'm slightly disappointed we haven't won any audio awards to be honest, because our music's great, our vocal talent's great - and then you'll see a standard shooter get an audio award. I just think that's because they're more popular than us.

1

Fable III will go head-to-head on PC with The Witcher 2 this week.

Generally what happens when there's any information about Fable or about Peter Molyneux, you get a complete black and white - pardon the pun - split of forum replies. Half of the people, whatever it's about - if Peter has made the most sensible comment about games development ever - just spout obscenities and terrible, ridiculous things. Whether you like him or you don't like him, he's made Populous, Dungeon Keeper - he's done amazing games in the past.

Then you'll get the other half of people saying, "Fable was actually pretty good, I really enjoyed it." It's a frustrating situation to be in because we make good games, but people expect something that no one else is doing. We're making a co-operative role-playing game - there aren't any co-operative role-playing games out there, we're the only one.

Most role-playing games I play, you go into a town and there's someone standing there, and then you walk up and you press a button and he says the same line over and over again, he doesn't move and it comes up in text. In ours, everything is vocalised, everyone has a personality, you can marry people, you can buy every building in the game - we can do this huge width of things in Fable. Many of the games we're compared against have 60 hours of killing the same creatures over and over again. I love Fallout and I love Oblivion, but when it comes down to it, you do the same things quite a lot. If you want a 60-hour game then play one of those.

"A lot of people that play [Fable III] think it's a Lord of the Rings - and it isn't."

But if you want a fun, wide game... And that's the thing, if you play [Fable III] to finish it as soon as possible, Fable won't give you as good a game as Oblivion. But if you play the game to enjoy the world, try everything and play all the little bits and bobs hidden around the game, you'll have a much more fun experience.

Every time you finish playing Fable you'll have a smile on your face. Every time you play Oblivion you'll say "I enjoyed my time there but now I want to go play something fun". [Fable III is] a different type of game: it's more of a fun, comedic TV show than a serious Lord of the Rings film. I think a lot of people that play it think it's a Lord of the Rings - and it isn't.

Eurogamer: Did Fable III live up to your expectations that you had at the beginning of the project? Did you have enough time?

Mike West: It was a two-year project, so it's the shortest project Lionhead has ever done. I probably shouldn't say this, but we have released some buggy games in the past and they have been fixed. Fable II was buggier; Fable III wasn't very buggy - it was pretty polished. It all fitted together very well and as a product it was very good. People expected more. That was the only thing we were guilty of, that people expected it to be this next step. That's a problem we've created for ourselves being Lionhead. Because it was a two-year game, it wasn't going to be a big enough step.

[Fable III] is a better game than Fable II. We did really well for the time we did to release the game with all the elements working together. The consumer doesn't care how long it takes us: they know that it costs this much and that it's in a box.

Eurogamer: Was there any particular criticism you felt was unfair?

Mike West: People saying the story wasn't very good was unfair. It's an interesting situation of you gather people together and then defeating the main bad guy. It's a pretty good story and it's pretty fun.

I talk to people down pub and I bump into people in their early 20s and I mention what I do and they say, "Wow, I love Fable III, I love Fable II." Most of them are too young to play Fable 1, worryingly, but they love these games and I haven't had that before until about the last three or four years.

2

Fable III was Lionhead's shortest project, taking only two years to complete.

Eurogamer: So what's new for Fable III on PC?

Mike West: We didn't want to make it feel like a port. The main thing was to completely redo the control system. It's a modal system now where you switch between modes and the mouse buttons do different things. You feel like you're in melee mode, you feel like you're in ranged mode, you feel like you've gone into magic mode. It's actually got more depth on PC because of the mouse.

When you use the mouse with the guns you can strafe while looking in first-person mode. If you're doing a PC game where you can go first-person, you've got to be able to move.

The second big change is the engine, with the high resolution and the 3D as well. Fable and Albion have never looked better for anyone on any machine. The Xbox guys got it first, but the PC guys are going to have a much better version.

This is definitely the best Fable PC - it's much better than Fable 1.

"The Xbox guys got it first, but the PC guys are going to have a much better version."

Eurogamer: Why is Fable III more difficult on PC?

Mike West: Partly in response to some of the fans and partly because we've always thought PC gamers are slightly more hardcore. You've got core gamers on Xbox, but you very rarely get casual PC gamers with a 3D card. If you've gone out and bought a 3D card you're usually a core gamer, just because of the cost - a good 3D card these days costs the same as an Xbox.

In future games we're going to have difficulty levels for everyone on every machine, but this time we wanted to give PC gamers something more challenging. We've upped the difficulty level; we've stopped the player's health regenerating all the time - the player has less basic health, the AI attacks more often. It's tweaks. A couple of designers had time to go in and really ramp it up and make it feel a lot more hardcore.

Eurogamer: How much bug fixing and engine improvement has been done on Fable III?

Mike West: All the time has been spent on the engine and doing bug fixing for multiple formats of graphics cards and PC set-ups - all those elements you don't get on Xbox.

If you mean bugs that were on the Xbox build: I don't think we had a huge number, to be honest. We've done some title updates and they've covered most of the ones we're aware of, but Fable III hasn't been too bad, especially compared to some of the games that are coming out at the moment - they're pretty terrible and I don't think we're really in that class.

Eurogamer: Could the PC additions be patched onto Xbox 360?

Mike West: That's up to the studio as a whole - what the studio is working on and whether it fits.

We generally look at what games we are working on next, how much time we have and which people are working on those things - [patching these additions is] quite code-heavy, and those guys are probably going to start working on something quite important now!

As far as porting things back to [Fable III on Xbox 360]: it's probably unlikely. We're going to be working on new stuff now so the next game comes out sooner rather than later.

Eurogamer: Fable III will be the first Microsoft game to be released on Steam (it also uses GfW - Live). That's a big deal. Whose idea was that?

Mike West: Steam is a very powerful and globally used system. If you're doing a game on PC at the moment - that doesn't mean things won't change in the future - then Steam is the platform of choice. We've all been pushing for it from day one on PC. We don't know if we need Steam in the future, but at the moment it's definitely a platform we need to use.

It's been really good that Microsoft has gone with us on this.

More on Fable III

Eurogamer: The Witcher 2 arrives on the same day as Fable III. Isn't that a game for PC gamers?

Mike West: I don't see the same people who play The Witcher as playing Fable, and the other way around. The Witcher 1 was quite a dark game with a lot of blood and bits flying about, whereas Fable is very friendly and happy and funny - it's a fun, relaxing time. I loved Fallout 3 on the Xbox, but I couldn't play it for more than a few hours because everything was brown and grey and rusty and there was a nuclear war. It was a great game, but every now and then you just got depressed.

Eurogamer: Will the next pillar Fable instalment be an Xbox 360 game?

Mike West: That's definitely one I'm not allowed to talk about ha ha ha.

Eurogamer: Are you making a Fable game for Kinect?

PR: A very nice try, Rob, but the answer is we don't comment on rumour and speculation, sorry.

Eurogamer: When is it time to start working on a next generation engine?

Mike West: As soon as I know it [a next generation machine exists], it's a good time to start working on it. As soon as someone from Microsoft walks into the room and says, "This is what we're doing, this is the date it comes out, this is what we want for it." That's the day we're going to start working on it. As soon as we're given the go ahead then we're straight on it. But we're not looking particularly at the next console.

Mike West was lead combat designer on Fable III, lead scripter on Fable II and senior scripter on Fable. He's worked at Lionhead for seven years.

Comments (74) Latest comment 1 year ago

Comments for this article are now closed, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • Katana-Bob #1 1 year ago

    I think Angry Joe made it abundantly clear what they needed to fix:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oSaw85bliyQ
  • itsfuzzy #2 1 year ago

    "A lot of people that play [Fable III] think it's a Lord of the Rings - and it isn't."

    Eh no we didnt, we just believed the hype machine again and when we played it knew we were conned for a 3rd time

    The Eurogamer comments threads are just unreal, you cannot criticise a reviewer, game, developer, studio or console in the said article or you get negged to death. Only cheerleaders for the article are allowed to comment.
    Edited by itsfuzzy at 17/05/11 @ 13:24
  • AcidSnake #3 1 year ago

    Only just started playing this so I'll avoid this for fear of spoilers, but did read the first bit and I almost wanted to cry...

    If you're so concerned with the voice talent, how about you stop letting other countries dub your game?!
    Subtitles will do just fine...
    And in the options screen don't offer up languages as an option if you can't change it!...There...Rant over...
  • TheNinkyNonk #4 1 year ago

    I don't know what it is with Lionhead. Form before function, style over substance, hyperbole over reality, concept over mechanics, call it what you will. Don't get me wrong, the industry needs big dreamers and those willing to push their envelope but at the end of the day if you haven't mastered the basic ingredients of your medium, of what makes a great game 'tick', the end product is like a big ivory tower built on sand: looks nice from a distance but you wouldn’t want to move in.

    Edit: I'm assuming I'm being negged by Fable 3 enthusiasts? You do know that you bought a game that charges you extra for the use of black to colour your clothes? Ivory Tower. Sand.
    Edited by TheNinkyNonk at 17/05/11 @ 11:58
  • J0rdan_KZ #5 1 year ago

    Fable III was the most disappointing game in years. Rushed story, bland characters, fairly boring missions, the feeling of been here done that.. Oh and being King/Queen for about 20 minutes and having to make the choices you simply didn't want to but felt forced into.
  • RodHull #6 1 year ago

    I thought Fable 3 was a fun, well scripted and engaging romp. It wasn't Mass Effect 2 or Oblivion and it want trying to be. Without a doubt one of my gaming highlight of last year and I certainly cannot wait until I can wander through Albion which has to be the best setting of any game I've played. In fact the locations in the Fable universe are probably the games greatest asset. Why it gets so much bile directed towards it baffles me.
  • Kazama74 #7 1 year ago

    Wow, promises of better/more features on a Fable game. Thats a first. I can't see any way for this to go wrong. (..searches for the sarcasm emoticon)
  • MiY4MOTO #8 1 year ago

    I adored Fable 1 and 2 but I gave up on Fable 3 after a couple of hours and I couldn't truly say why. It was missing something and I couldn't put my finger on what.

    It was my biggest disappointment of 2010, the sequel I was looking forward to the most. Maybe I just expected too much of it.
  • technicianTed #9 1 year ago

    I have to admit i preferred fable 2 over fable 3.

    The game engine seemed to struggle even more than fable 2 despite not looking any better graphically.
    The excellent music was recycled from fable 2 with only a few new tunes added(from what i remember).

    It just felt like fable 2 lite to me, or more like a very long dlc addon.

    I still enjoyed it though and would certainly get fable 4 if it ever arrives.
    I'll be interested to see how fable 3 turns out on pc as well(i might have another go on a system that can do it justice).
  • roquey Verified Lead Quality Assurance Tester and Compliance Specialist, Universally Speaking #10 1 year ago

    "Eh no we didnt, we just believed the hype machine again and when we played it knew we were conned for a 3rd time "

    Fable I wasnt a con, it was a great game and didnt particularly need sequels to take away the glory it had. Fable 2 wasnt just 'buggy' it was fucking terrible a game where you rely on quests making you restart the whole game because the quest was fucked really made me hate it, yet i still completed it. Now Fable 3 is the only one i havnt bothered to finish. im not even the king and just felt it got a bit too boring. But then i do play a fair few games and never complete them.
  • Darren #11 1 year ago

    I can't see Fable III selling very well on the PC, not when it has been released the same week as the eagerly awaited and likely vastly superior The Witcher 2. This game really should have been released months ago when people would have been more interested in it following the release of the 360 build. Most PC owners will just utter a polite meh I'd imagine and carry on playing The Witcher 2. Stupid, stupid Microsoft.
  • Tyrhinis #12 1 year ago

    "and with the gnomes with Mark Heath - he's one of my favourite comedians"

    Do you possibly mean Mark Heap?
  • CaptainQuint #13 1 year ago

    So, how do Lionhead plan on compensating those who laid down 40 quid a pop for their poorly finished product?
  • telboy007 #14 1 year ago

    "Wasn't co-op was better"

    Sorry?
  • rudedudejude #15 1 year ago

    OK, Late to the party.

    I have Fable 2 & 3 sitting here and have never played any Fable game before.

    It sounds from this I should play 3 & then 2, as 2 is much better and if I play 3 afterwards I'll think it's shit. Whaddya reckon?
  • kinky_mong #16 1 year ago

    Lionhead should team up with Splash Damage to make a super game that promises to be the most ground-breaking experience ever, then take 3 years to deliver a product so broken and buggy it actually destroys the console it was played on, and retro-actively breaks any other consoles the player has ever owned.

    Eurogamer will give it 11/10 after month's of banner ads promoting it.
  • dingo75 #17 1 year ago

    Whether you like him or you don't like him, he's made Populous, Dungeon Keeper - he's done amazing games in the past.

    Yup IN THE PAST!
  • MrWonderstuff #18 1 year ago

    Finished this last night. Was fun and the charm wormed its way back into my affections as I played on. However, the locations still felt disjointed (Lionhead invest in some streaming tech please - Oblivion was doing it years ago). The graphics were very painterly in many areas which suited the game (some lovely locations). Music, well it was a rehash of old tunes and some new ones. I felt the combat was too easy as I cannot recall a moment when I was knocked out. I go with EGs 8/10.
  • TheDudesRug #19 1 year ago

    I really enjoyed Fable II and bought Fable III on the strength of that. I was hugely dissapointed with both the technical issues as well as it feeling like exactly the same game. I thought the audio and art was fantastic, but, playability wise, it was ultimately a very dissapointing experience.
  • geeza2020 #20 1 year ago

    How's about just making a better Fable 3 whatever platform its on? Fable 3 was ok, not the worst game I've ever played, but certainly one of the most disappointing.

    All that hype, for a game that didnt even manage to make me care one iota about any of the characters in it, the plot, the locations and graphics all seemed fairly average, and when I eventually completed it the only sense of achievement i felt was in knowing that I would never play a Fable game again, which is a shame as I have fond memories of the original. Streamlining and giving the game mainstream appeal has just turned it into a shiny novelty rather than an actually memorable story (Fable). *sigh* But I guess thats where the money is these days, the bloody casuals.
  • raloB #21 1 year ago

    Cross-platform play, is it in or out?
  • coolbritannia #22 1 year ago

    "Fable III was the most disappointing game in years. Rushed story, bland characters, fairly boring missions, the feeling of been here done that..!"

    Sounds a lot like Fable 2. Cheers Lionhead, I won't even pick this up 3rd hand then. Shite games.
  • Shinetop #23 1 year ago

    And that's the thing, if you play [Fable III] to finish it as soon as possible, Fable won't give you as good a game as Oblivion. But if you play the game to enjoy the world, try everything and play all the little bits and bobs hidden around the game, you'll have a much more fun experience.

    That's.. how I played (and loved) Oblivion.
  • Stranded87 #24 1 year ago

    Reading the start of the interview i'm not really sure this guy has much experience with RPG's or even really has more than a cursory knowledge of what his competitors are doing or how the genre's developed over the years.

    No one else making co-op RPG's? I'm sorry, what?
    Most RPG's not being fully voiced? (or even if he's just saying that a text box comes up as well as the dialogue that doesn't apply to all games, and if his proposed alternative is some freaky sims mashup then im all for on screen text.)
    60 hours of killing the same creatures over and over again?

    All so very wrong.
  • telboy007 #25 1 year ago

    Fable II scored 10/10 on Eurogamer and Fable III scored 8/10. But wasn't the third a better game? Wasn't co-op was better, combat deeper and the map more intuitive? Why didn't Fable IIII receive the plaudits of Fable II?

    Come on, it's still there!
  • ZaammK #26 1 year ago

    I love how he repeatedly bashes Bethesda games, a company renowned for basically making the best RPGs out there along with Bioware. Perhaps because they don't constantly over promise and under deliver? And I like how he very matter-of-factly states you can come back to Fable again and again, but you can't with Oblivion and Fallout. That's simply not true.
  • fragglerocks #27 1 year ago

    Yes Fable 3 had it's problems but I still really enjoyed playing it!
  • Seoh #28 1 year ago

    I'm just curious why bother, are there that many people who wanted to play fable 3 but couldn't because they didn't have an Xbox but do have a good spec PC.

    No arguing that Fable 1 on the PC was the better version and no doubt Fable 3 PC is the better version but if you can't do a unified release in this day and age then there is little point. in my opinion.

    With regards to the Witcher 2 question, i played both fable 2 and the Witcher 1 i also played fable 3 on 360 and plan on playing the witcher 2 very soon. I don't think many people will not play the witcher cos its serious or not play fable cos its funny, most people enjoy both drama and comedy and will chose the game based on their mood.
    Edited by Seoh at 17/05/11 @ 12:57
  • Monkey_Puncher #29 1 year ago

    I very much enjoyed myself in Fable 3, but it certainly had it's problems. The end of the game when you become King was a missed opportunity and was clearly missing content to get it out on time. I love the world of Albion though and have great hopes for the next game in the series whenever that comes out. I just hope they take a bit more time with the next one!
  • Ptarmigandalf #30 1 year ago

    Hm... when I finish Oblivion, I mostly feel like playing Oblivion again, I sure as hell don't feel like playing Fable. It would be like having filet mignon and following it with a fresh, creamy turd for dessert.
  • UncleLou #31 1 year ago

    Too little, too late, and too close to The Witcher 2 and L.A. Noire. One for a Steam sale.
  • SpaceMidget75 Verified Senior Software Developer, Minerva Computer Services #32 1 year ago

    Well I enjoy myself in the world of Albion.

    And I appreciated the candid, non political set of answers from him.
  • edhe #33 1 year ago

    IMO:
    Renew the game engine so that it's performant, preferably 60 fps for combat.
    When i quick travel to somewhere on the map make it actually take me *there*.
    Bring back the crowd expressions and remove the 1:1 BOREFEST that occurred in 3
    Separate the liking with respecting. Use the trophies from 1 again but without mandatory levelling so you have to chase people down in all the villages.
    Bring back the magic - moving into the industrial age really put a dampener on the feel of fable.
    Bring back the extreme evolution of the character - it was *fun* to become a horned menace to the society.
    Bring back the different magic - was quite disappointed with the fable 3 spellcasting.
    Also didn't previous fables have weapon mods?
    And the digging. Seriously? my dog distracts me when i'm 20 hours into the game to dig up a fucking RUBY? I own *every* house in albion and that happens?
    More unique stuff. I seem to remember chests being a delight in the first couple of games where in 3 it was either XP or some other piece of money.

    Meh.
    I had some fun with 3 but 2 is still the best imo. I Loved 2, it was more of an RPG. Even if it did have it's faults.

    Also if you want to use John Cleese in a game for the love of god make sure he says more than "Buy DLC! Buy DLC! Buy DLC!"

    I think MS have a lot to prove when it comes to the next iteration of their games.
    Fable needs a massive kick up the jacksie, as does crackdown. Forza needs to have a large edge over gt5 and Halo won't be Bungie...
  • dangermouse76 #34 1 year ago

    "Conned by the hype machine" comments smack a little of over invested teenagers. And if you still feel conned after 3 games you really need to look at your expectations of hype again.
  • DNM #35 1 year ago

    Fable III had numerous problems and game design decisions that question the play testing capabilities of all involved, but I still found myself expending many hours playing the thing! The wife enjoyed it too which is always a bonus, gets me valuable Xbox play-time tokens! ;)
  • nakedlunch #36 1 year ago

    I've played all three and would agree that the third is probably the weakest. It had some excellent, inventive missions but these would be followed by a generic fetch quest. The decision making as king was weaker than I had hoped, mainly because money felt so easy to come by. Fable 3 is still far more interesting and entertaining than the majority of xbox titles but suffers when compared to it's predecessors.
  • AdamAsunder #37 1 year ago

    Mike West: We added a reasonable amount of depth to the combat

    Stopped reading right there and then.

  • deadstoned #38 1 year ago

    Game should carry a warning sticker on it.

    WARNING this game use Games for Windows Live

    Avoiding the plague, not to mention I hear its a bad game.
  • lavalant #39 1 year ago

    Why would you remind people that you gave Fable 2 a 10/10?
  • Killerbee #40 1 year ago

    Hmmm...

    I think the biggest problem Fable III is going to have selling itself to the PC crowd (i.e. someone like me) is that Xbox 360 gamers don't seem to be unanimous in praising it.

    Given that it was held up as one of the big first party platform exclusives of its year, that's pretty damning... Positive word of mouth counts for an awful lot, especially if you're releasing what is going to be perceived as an "old" game on a different platform. I just don't think Fable III has quite got what it takes.

    So come on Microsoft, how about chucking Halo 3 / Wars / ODST / Reach in our direction instead?

    Or better yet, let Epic release Gears 2 and 3 on PC.
  • ronuds #41 1 year ago

    Love all the Fables and it's the only game I've ever bought the LE for, but I felt III was the worst as well.

    Why remove the expression wheel? We wanted a deeper experience and their response was to make it more shallow, but add quests to some of the NPCs. Money was still meaningless. Their answer to our complaints about it from II was to give you a bunch of arbitrary "decisions" near the end that cost a lot. The experience system was worthless. They talk about "moulding your hero," but did anyone have a hero that by the end of the game didn't have all of the upgrades? And what happened to the hero's appearance changing based on how you played the game? It seemed to be completely missing! My guy looked exactly the same from the beginning to the end of the game. And don't EVEN get me started on their food and potion changes. Not sure what they were thinking with that. I can go on and on!

    Some of my favourite things from the original Fable were all of the little secrets (fight club, sword in the stone, etc.) and they got rid of 'almost' all of that for II and ALL of it for III. Why? It made the world more of a place you wanted to keep exploring endlessly, just to see if you missed out on something.

    However, the best thing about III was the world itself and some of the quests were excellent and very funny. I still love the game, but really want a deeper experience for the next installment (if there is one) and not something that seems to be progressively less so.
  • Xeopuppy #42 1 year ago

    "I don't see the same people who play The Witcher as playing Fable, and the other way around"

    Cobblers, I've played all the Fable Games and The Witcher & I will be playing The Witcher 2 (when I've downloaded it from Steam) and I will be playing Fable III on Friday (I'm Pre-downloading that now on Steam) and I enjoyed them all, yes Fable is funny but the Witcher is Awesome, I love them all and I'm sure others do to...
    Edited by Xeopuppy at 17/05/11 @ 14:14
  • linksdad #43 1 year ago

    Fable 2 beat fable 3 by a country mile. And you nerfed the combat to the point it may as well not have bothered being in the game.

    I almost traded it in out of disgust, not that I got round to it though.
  • VibratingDonkey #44 1 year ago

    The combat was basically about magic area of effect spells. Don't know where this supposed depth was to be found. Perhaps there is potential for it with the combat system, but the situations and enemies you were faced with were generally quickly taken care of with magic. Still, while not ever close to being challenging I think the combat in Fable can be fun. But only in small doses. Eventually in Fable 3 it started feeling like a chore.

    The weapon upgrading could've been interesting, but tying them to these ridiculously tedious challenges was a mistake. And in my experience actively trying to upgrade a weapon was pointless anyway as it'd eventually get outdone by a significantly more powerful weapon anyway.

    The stuff he talks about after this I agree with. It's what makes you tolerate all the misguided design choices and technical jank (less buggy than Fable 2 my ass). The world and character of Fable is very enjoyable.

    Some of the flaws of Fable 3 run too deep to be reasonable to be expect a fix for, but you know, less bugs, unshitty minimap, stuff like that. They're at least beefing up the difficulty, so that's something. And good to know they've discovered difficulty levels for Fable 4.
  • smelly #45 1 year ago

    Oooh.. 3 molyneux (sorry "lionhead";) stories on the front page.. must mean they're about to release another 9/10 game!

    I look forward to daily interviews with molyneux from ths point onwards.
  • smelly #46 1 year ago

    There's an interesting thing which happens with a lionhead games.

    Seems to me - The more interviews/daily updates/etc peter gives to a site, the higher the score for the game will be.

    So if we get daily updates from here on - it'll be 9/10.
    If this is the only update we get... 7/10

  • patrollin #47 1 year ago

    Mike West should not be comparing his product to the likes of oblivion, ME2, and fallout 3. IMO those games blow the fable franchise out of the water in terms of depth and gameplay. I played fable 1 in college and loved it...and yes, fable 2 had a dog and some good humored minigames.... but seriously, the dog was hardly an innovation (navi from ocarina of time, anyone?) and how much fun is hitting the same button again and again to chop wood or pose for a statue? After beating fable 2, to be honest I was fabled out...combat was fun but I felt like I was playing Fable 1, without the cool armor and weapons. Fable 3 didnt interest me at all, especially after I read all the reviews.

    I don't know about everyone else but when I play an RPG im not really looking for a "fun, comedic TV show". I'm looking for a good story, exciting combat, ethical dilemmas, and character customization. Truly great RPGs (read: 10/10 games) will also innovate and redefine something about the genre, something Fable 1 did when it introduced its take on character customization. Fable 2 and 3 were all more of the same though, and each failed to improve on Fable 1's biggest flaw: all of these games are TOO EASY. Who cares about co-op in an RPG like this? You cant limit your "innovation" to shallow aspects of gameplay if you want to compare yourself with oblivion, fallout, or ME. DAO or the Witcher too, for that matter.
  • SvennoJ #48 1 year ago

    @Katana-Bob Thanks for that link, now I won't be tempted by a Steam sale of Fable 3. The sanctuary would drive me crazy as well, I already got annoyed by the animated menu system of Dirt 2.
  • omicron1 #49 1 year ago

    It's six months late, it's overpriced ($10 more than the 360 version on Amazon), it's almost completely free of upgrades/extra content, it has no demo, it comes with GFWL, it comes out the same day as the (vastly superior, according to the early reviews) Witcher 2, and to top it all off it was only a "good" game to start with.
  • Miths #50 1 year ago

    Fable II was one of the last games I played on my 360 before it died a year and a half ago, and I can't really say the ten hours or so I put into it made for a particularly engaging experience.

    On the other hand I'm currently downloading The Witcher 2 and I never really took the first game in that series (restarted it three or four times due to all the praise it was getting, and my interest in what seemed like it ought to be an interesting setting with interesting characters, but boredom kept preventing me from pushing past the ~10 hour mark), so perhaps I ought to give Fable 3 the benefit of the doubt as well.
    Although in that case of course I can obviously just go and read some of the 360 reviews to help fill in the blanks.
  • VoodooGibson #51 1 year ago

    "Wasn't co-op was better, combat deeper and the map more intuitive? Why didn't Fable IIII receive the plaudits of Fable II?

    Grammer flail and wats fable 4?
  • Darksjeik #52 1 year ago

    Fable III honestly is among the worst titles I've played this generation. To me it was a sum of pointless excercises waisting your life as a human being.
    Why have random interaction options when 99% of the time, the whistle option is the way to go.
    Why have an option for a quick interaction when holding the same interactionbutton is always the better option
    Why can't I look up or down.
    Why can I beat any number of foes looking away from the screen slamming the facebuttons of my controller with my palm.

    The whole game is just built from pointless useless excercises in repetition. The game honestly felt like it was designed with toddlers or special needs people in mind. I felt cheated having spent EUR. 60,00 on that crap
  • Collymilad #53 1 year ago

    Thanks Lionhead.

    Glad I rented it if you're going to use Xbox 360 owners as Beta testers you fucking twats.
  • fallingbadgers #54 1 year ago

    Well as the Xbox 360 version of Fable III came with game breaking bugs in the DLC I think "I don't think we had a huge number, to be honest" is a tad rich. The Sanctuary was a terrible idea and the constant shilling of DLC every time you walked in was hugely annoying.

    Most annoyingly, the touches of dark wit in Fable 2 were lost and it became all very generic.
  • jthorne19 #55 1 year ago

    This took everything I liked about fable 2 and ruined it. The story pacing and content bored me to death. The menu system actually made it harder to get at what you wanted compared to the conventional pause menu. I didn't feel like I wanted to go around and explore each area because they too, were uninteresting.

    The worst part of all for me was the ' king/queen ruling'. This sucked all the life out of the game. The story didn't make you care about the 'dark evil nessies' that were coming. It felt tacked on. Thus the rulings felt pointless. The whole game just felt like it wasn't quite right.
  • BlinkeredAxis #56 1 year ago

    Loved Fable 2 and 3, but I think F3 struggled a bit by being not different enough from F2. An extra year of development, and a refining of the combat would have helped.(you could just roll around, attack, roll around, if you wanted, and win). also, the enemies needed to be renewed and be more imaginative. 10/10 for F2, 8/10 for F3.

    But yes, both games still have that walk-up-to anything/anyone and have fun thing that nobody else really does. I'd hate to see them take much notice of the forum whiners to be honest, just give themselves the time to push it further.
  • uzivatel #57 1 year ago

    I hate devs saying one platform gets a much better version, definitive version or stuff like that. They are basically telling us the other version is rubbish.
    I recently bought the Fable III CE on Xbox 360, I have been really enjoying it and I dont find the changes in the PC version very interesting. Yet, I feel cheated, because they just told me I bought the "much worse version" of the game...

    On an unrelated note - claiming they fixed Fable II is a blatant lie.
  • Pirotic #58 1 year ago

    Planning to double dip and get the PC version too, love the series. Kind of sad how due to the warm reception they are probably going to radically change the next title, hope it doesn't alienate the fans.
  • Scimarad #59 1 year ago

    I quite enjoyed Fable 3 but I think the biggest problem these games face is that they get hyped beyond belief. It doesn't help that they keep saying that they are going to blow every RPG EVER out of the water when what they are basically delivering is a fairly simple action RPG with a lot of voice talent and some mini-games.
  • smelly #60 1 year ago

    >fairly simple action RPG

    I think the word "rpg" is going a bit too far with regards to fable 3.

    "Fairly simple action game" would suffice.
  • darkmorgado #61 1 year ago

    There is so much bullshit in this interview.

    Since when does a decent graphics card cost as much as a 360? You can spend just £50 quid on a card that will outperform the 360.

    The game was not polished; huge memory leaks, the infamous Jasper bug, a framerate that plunges in small indoor areas but is oddly fine in outdoor areas.

    The story was not good. It was adequate. It was also hugely unoriginal and the conclusion was rushed.

    Oh, and remember where it gave you no warning that you had reached the point of no return? Remember how angry that made you? That was the single most annoying gaming moment of this gen for me.
  • lord_fartsalot #62 1 year ago

    Is this guy implying witcher 2 is brown?

    I can't blame him for trying to promote his own product.
  • bosseye #63 1 year ago

    Fable 1 was bad, Fable 2 was better, Fable 3 was bad.

    The problem with the Fable games is they think they're RPGs and they're really not. They're simple hack and slash games when it comes down to it and theres very little I find that actually engages you with the world. The environments don't feel like real places or even ineresting places half the time, herded along linear paths unable to venture into the surrounding landscape and explore - and even in the places where you can wander off slightly you're still hemmed in and you'll only end up up at some dismal and poor looking cave or something.

    The problems lie in the mechanics, they're far too prescripted - simple stuff like you only find loot in chests, or in water sections you can only dive at bubble points. Essentially, why can't I roam free and explore properly? It engages you with the world far more. Theres never any sense that there might be something of interest over the horizon. Think of how many times you got distracted from the main quest in Fallout 3 or Oblivion, how many rewarding and exciting stories and places you found - theres never any of that in the Fable games and the problem is Lionhead seem to think they're making RPGs that compete with the heavy hitters because you can get married and buy houses or do 'hilariously' long farts to impress villagers. And lets be completely honest, Fable games really aren't that funny - you can fart and dance and wear chicken outfits. Mildly entertaining the first time, but to have to keep dancing and farting and pulling ridiculous poses, it gets old really quickly and detracts from the whole thing I think. I'm not saying it needs to be all dark and serious, but if thats the level of humour you strive for then you're not aiming terribly high.

    And the less said about the mini games the better, they were poor in Fable 2 in Fable 3 they'd really run their course - if one of the only ways to make money early on is to continually play tediously dull button tapping games to make pies or play a lute or chop wood then theres something wrong. Deeply, deeply dull games and you pretty much have to play them initially to make some decent money.

    Fable 3 also threw some bizarre mechanics into the mix - having to buy facial hair and then pause the game and select it from the menu room to wear it? What was wrong with the barbers from Fable 2! At least that was coherent, a quality much of Fable 3 lacked.

    Throw in the framerate issues and some buggy stuff and you're far from a premium RPG experience that Lionhead seem to think they're creating. Which is a shame.

    Edited by bosseye at 18/05/11 @ 07:35
  • Judas_Priest #64 1 year ago

    "... Every time you play Oblivion you'll say "I enjoyed my time there but now I want to go play something fun..."

    I don't think I have once, If ever, thought that about Oblivion. Seriously. I doubt there are many games out currently that are as remotely entertaining or immersive as Oblivion is.
  • thisisatempaccount #65 1 year ago

    Are you reading these comments, Mike West?

    There's a dichotomy, all right. A 'complete black and white - pardon the pun - split' if you must put it that way (people who point out there own puns in company are like people who call attention to the fact that they've farted).

    But it isn't your 'on message', fantasy-land version of 'MOLYNEUX IS A PAEDO' versus 'Oh hey Fable 3 was actually a great game, let me buy you a pint, ooh can we be bezzies?'. Yes, you do have the standard echo-chamber internet bile on the one hand - but the response from the other side is that Fable 3 was not "actually pretty good, I really enjoyed it" but that it was lacklustre; it didn't measure up to the Fable games that came before it, it didn't measure up to the brilliant (but long-gone) titles for which Molyneux is renowned, and it certainly doesn't measure up to its present-day genre peers you spend so much time trying to surreptitiously stick the knife into.

    Take the blinkers off and have another think mate.
    Edited by thisisatempaccount at 18/05/11 @ 09:05
  • bf #66 1 year ago

    Steam and GfWL, well they certainly know how to make an attractive package... I think it will be the budget GOTY 360 release for me, if any.
  • CamberGreber #67 1 year ago

    O SHut UP!

    Fable isnt worth Licking the Boots of OBlivion.
  • _LarZen_ #68 1 year ago

    Comments like "PC gamers are slightly more hardcore" and "I don't see the same people who play The Witcher as playing Fable, and the other way around" makes me just laugh...HARD.

    Like wtf?
  • 5h1nj1 #69 1 year ago

    Ok, so the PC version has Steam AND GFWL together? Really? I don't think I'm gonna touch that then.
  • MaybeLater #70 1 year ago

    What is it with Lionhead? Their Fable IP has all the elements of a potentially legendary Game, yet they never deliver. Worse, rather than accepting their faults they choose to belittle their customers and whinge on about how hard they've worked and how their actually doing everything right, it's just that the customers don't get it. They don't seem to understand or care who their customers are or what they think. It has reached the point where the only constructive criticism anyone can realistically level at them is to take their heads out of their asses and learn some humility.
  • DrMGinius #71 1 year ago

    GET. RID. OF. THE. BLOODY. DOG.
  • BlinkeredAxis #72 1 year ago

    TBH, they don't need to do Fable 4, just invent something new. Maybe a grim, hardcore RPG, but with the attention to detail and personality thet made Fable 2 so great. Learn from someone like Valve, and do new stuff that people can't second guess, but turns out to be brilliant (Portal 1+2, L4D 1&2). If Valve had just done sequels of Half Life 2, we'd have missed out on two of the greatest games this generation.
  • alexander_light #73 1 year ago

    F*CKING SANCTUARY. Seriously, I completed Fable II twice and it was a 7 our of 10 in my mind. Fable III was SO boring I couldn't even get more than about 5 hours in to it. Jesus it's bad. DULL DULL DULL.
    Edited by alexander_light at 18/05/11 @ 19:10
  • Crozie #74 1 year ago

    There is no better demonstration of the Law of Diminishing Returns than the Fable series....

    Fable: The Lost Chapters > Fable 2 > Fable 3