Fable II Post-Mortem

By Christian Donlan Published 10 December, 2008

EG chats to Peter Molyneux.

You may think you know everything about Peter Molyneux by now, but did you know he once chatted up a ghost's girlfriend and then killed her in front of him? You may think you've heard everything about Fable II, but do you really know why it only has one save slot? Or which two simple things could have improved the co-op?

With a first round of DLC on the way, we sat down with the Lionhead boss to see how he feels about the company's latest game. SPOILER ALERT: if you haven't finished Fable 2 yet and don't like spoilers, you might want to give this one a miss - at least for now.

Eurogamer: You've said that, most of all, you wanted Fable II to make people happy. Have you succeeded?

Peter Molyneux: If you open the community boards, you can see there are a lot of people who are fractious about things. But a lot of people have come up to me and said what a fantastic experience they've had.

Some of those are gamers and a lot of them are not. I'm very proud of how inviting the Fable world was and how much real freedom it gave you. So, although I'm sure there's room for a lot more improvement, I think on balance, my original statement is at least partially true.

Eurogamer: Has the game found the unusually broad audience you were after?

Peter Molyneux: Yes. Three years ago we were writing the big things on a board, and one of those was: the experience should be for more than just us gamer lot, and why not make it so that it's accessible for everyone? A lot of people who have played it have said, "My girlfriend or my partner saw me play it and they've taken over and continued playing it."

'Fable II Post-Mortem' Screenshot 1

The only criticism that I've got, and I'm not going to fully point the finger at us, is that I think that controller is such a barrier to the casual market. It's so intimidating even before we pick it up. It's not an issue of making the controller pink or blue or something like that: it's far more inherently difficult for people who don't play many computer games.

My wife, for example - one day I'm going to do a game that she actually enjoys - she holds the thumbstick like a little gear lever, and you're looking at her and going, "Put your thumb down there!" and she refuses to do it. She's always going to be challenged by that.

Eurogamer: Do you feel you served the casual audience more successfully than your core audience?

Peter Molyneux: I don't think we gave the core audience enough rewards. Combat in Fable, and I'd argue in RPGs, shouldn't be tedious. It should be part of the relaxation of playing. We achieved that, but we didn't make you feel cooler and cooler.

We had the currency to do that. We had these mechanics called crescendos which were supposed to build up so that it was only later in the game that you realised, "Wow, I'm really cool," but we didn't exploit them well enough. They should have been even more dramatic and widespread.

'Fable II Post-Mortem' Screenshot 2

Eurogamer: Is it hard to sell to the audience the difference between something that's accessible, and something that's just too easy?

Peter Molyneux: It's not the particular challenge that's easy or hard, it's the overall experience: how you feel about each of those combat moments. Personally, if you're defining easy as, "Well, I should have died five times here and had to repeat the same combat over," I think that's just tedious.

It's not about easy and hard, it's about entertainment and tedium. Each moment in Fable is an experience. Sometimes it's an experience about feeling like you're about to fail and just succeeding. That's the ultimate that we want, rather than the experience of going in, failing, and finally succeeding. I wouldn't mind that once or twice but not over and over.

Eurogamer: Is it scary to throw out seasoned mechanics like dying, restarting, grinding, and getting lost?

Peter Molyneux: It was deeply scary to have the breadcrumb trail. It took an awful lot of persuasion. I think everybody predicted, "You'll follow this thing and get bored, and the sense of exploration will be gone." Sometimes, when you're a designer, you have to push against all resistance, and you have to believe it's going to work.

The experience of being lost is not what you want. The experience of exploring is what you want. The argument I use is: if you go orienteering, you take a map. Humans like to know where they're going. The people who really like to explore are the uber-uber-good people who are very good at working out where they are in a 2- and 3-D world. We stuck with the breadcrumb trail, and I'm really happy with the results.

Thinking about the future, I think there's an enormous amount of gameplay in that breadcrumb trail: there's a lot we can do with that which we never had time to explore.

Eurogamer: How do you play Fable II?

Peter Molyneux: Remember, I've only recently played Fable II for the first time, because although I've played through it thousands of times, when you're playing through it and writing down the things that are wrong, you're not really playing it.

After a while, I forgot completely about the good and evil side, and got wrapped up in what was going on in the moment. I found myself taking quite unnecessary revenge on things that I felt had done me wrong, and at other times I'd go along with things.

For example, the ghost that asked me to marry the bride: I was the epitome of cruelty to that bloke because I thought he had done something wrong. I married the girl, took her back, and then I killed her in front of him, and took great glee in that.

Eurogamer: Why the single save slot?

Peter Molyneux: Should I be honest? I think I should. The one save slot is purely a restriction imposed on us because of running out of time. It was nothing to do with the save mechanics, it was purely down to the GUI.

'Fable II Post-Mortem' Screenshot 3

The pause screen having a scrolling list of games was weeded out in the last weeks. Before that I had put in the question: if we give people these save slots, for a lot of people it will ruin the experience, because the feeling you can just go backwards and forwards is rather like rewinding in a film when you're halfway. That's how I justified it to myself, but that was another raging debate. I'm not sure it's a system we'll emulate again, to be honest.

Eurogamer: Which choices in the games have turned out to be the most memorable?

Peter Molyneux: I think the Shadow Court stands out, the idea of being scarred, that stands out a lot, and the end of the game. A lot of people have said, "Where was the big battle?" I stand by it: the Lucien character was not a character to fight. He had an army so it would have been invalid. So those three choices at the end, albeit simple, were very engaging.

Eurogamer: Are you collecting stats on the way people are playing? Do you know what choice people are making at the end?

Peter Molyneux: There is this tool we could have integrated, which would have collected thousands of stats on everybody. But it also generated thousands of bugs, and we had to drop it. What a great shame.

There's been a surprising number of reactions to the choices, from someone sending me a personal email saying that I deserved to die, and that he would never buy another game ever again unless I release a patch to resurrect his dog, to people saying, "I didn't think I had it in me to sacrifice so much, but I feel so good about it."

Eurogamer: The final choice has very clear consequences, but a lot of the other choices are unclear. You often seem to go for a surprise...

'Fable II Post-Mortem' Screenshot 4

Peter Molyneux: You've got to have a blend. We had this technology to change the world radically all the way through the game. We realised that if you kept doing this, unless you say, "Choice A means thousands will live and choice B means thousands will die," it spoils that. I love mixing things up.

Eurogamer: There are moments in the game where you really change the pace: the Spire, where you're a slave, for example. Was that a risk, given the audience you wanted?

Peter Molyneux: It was definitely part of the pacing. A lot of games and films have this arc which is always the same: the baddies get tougher, the weapons get bigger, you're building yourself up for a really big fight and then everyone dies, and that's it. We wanted to mix it up and make it more unexpected.

Eurogamer: DLC: We're getting Knothole Island on December 22nd. I'm guessing that's a version of Knothole Glade in Fable I?

Peter Molyneux: It's an island off the coast. It's far bigger than you would expect. It's something you can go to at any point: there's new simulation stuff, new creatures, a completely new dynamic environment in there which we never had time to exploit in Fable I.

You can expect new weapons, new gameplay, quite a few dungeons with a little bit more puzzly elements, because we didn't do that a lot in Fable I, and it fits into the story and to the world perfectly.

What people haven't realised yet is this thing about Theresa: who is she? That line at the end: "Leave the Spire now, it's mine." What's she going to do with that? And how come she ended up with what she wanted, it seems, more than what you wanted?

Eurogamer: Is this a story to be explored in DLC, or something for Fable III?

Peter Molyneux: If you leave it too long then people will forget. You can sustain a mystery for a certain amount of time, and I think people will talk more about the mystery after DLC1, whether we fully explain it or not - but we can't wait for another Fable to explain it.

Eurogamer: You wanted this to be a game where people not only judged the game, but judged Lionhead, and its ability to deliver. How do you feel you did?

Peter Molyneux: There was a lot of very brave things in Fable II. I rate it pretty high, and in the end, there were areas that needed polishing, but I'm immensely, incredibly proud of the team.

For a team like that, working with an idiot like me is tough. They just want me to design a game that's going to be a great experience, and here I am, adding these things that have never been done before, and that makes their life pretty tough, and I think they've done a stellar job.

'Fable II Post-Mortem' Screenshot 5

Eurogamer: Can I tempt you into being old-school Peter Molyneux and telling me something about what's coming next?

Peter Molyneux: I've already got in trouble for this. But there is a sense of excitement around something we've been experimenting with for an awful long time. If we pull this off - and that's a big if, and please don't think this is hype, it's just a designer talking about his job - if we get even close, I think it's going to produce something you have never seen before: concept, play-style, genre, everything.

This is the reason Microsoft wanted us to be first-party, to give us the ability to make a big step. This industry needs big steps. You can feel it in the air right now: there's an uncertainty about these massive blockbuster formulaic games that we continue to make. I partially accuse myself of doing that.

On the other side there's this real disparity between the machines that we've got at the moment; we've got gamers' boxes and casual boxes. There needs to be this revolution.

Eurogamer: It seems you're saying there are a lot of design problems people have now solved. Can you give us a hint about some of the problems to be solved next?

Peter Molyneux: The big problem is the sense of wonder that you and I had when we first played computer games. I can remember that sense of wonder. I can remember going into the arcades and playing Missile Command and Defender, and my heart was full.

'Fable II Post-Mortem' Screenshot 6

That sense of wonder, to a certain extent, has evaporated from the world. We need to convince people that a form of entertainment so magical it takes people's breath away is still there.

You may think this is all arty-farty rubbish. Let's talk about cinema. Until the golden few years when you had Star Wars, and the cinema turned from being a slightly two-dimensional thing to this huge, epic, queues everywhere [business]. Everyone was talking about it. When was the last time we heard about that in the world of cinema?

For years and years, the same television programs came on. Then out of the blue you had Lost and Dexter, and TV was where it was at. That's what computer games need. They need that redefining moment of the experience itself, and I think we are about to do it. I'm not saying "we" as Lionhead, I'm saying us as an industry.

We have to take the big heavy rulebook we've been writing in blood over the last 20 years, and put it into a mincer. Then say, what if we were starting from scratch? What if we were inventing this now, with all the tools we've got, Live, Controllers, the fact that screens are really big now? What if we were going to do that again and what would we end up with? That's what we're trying to do here.

Peter Molyneux is creative director of Lionhead Studios. Fable 2 is out now exclusively for Xbox 360.

Picture of Christian.

About Christian Donlan

Chris Donlan writes about games for Eurogamer and some magazines. His heroes include Eugene Jarvis, Errol Morris, and Linus Van Pelt.

Read more articles from Christian by visiting the Christian Donlan archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (170) Latest comment 2 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • brappbrap #1 3 years ago

    Generic comment asking for the rest of the game now please

    *yawn*

  • PlugMonkey #2 3 years ago

    So those three choices at the end, albeit simple, were very engaging.

    Not for me it wasn't. It was a massive let down.

    And seriously, can I have my dog back now? I was planning on finishing stuff like the archeologist quest, but now I can't because the choice I made at the end of the story has broken my game.

  • Amajiro #3 3 years ago

    Great interview, helped mostly by the fact that PM gives great copy. More power to him, I say. Fable 2 was great.

  • Dizzy #4 3 years ago

    Good interview. Nice job EG.

    >but now I can't because the choice I made at the end of the story has broken my game.

    Should have made another choice then. You are responsible for your actions.
    Edited by 1 at 10/12/08 @ 14:24

  • Vanmunt #5 3 years ago

    Peter Molyneux: It was definitely part of the pacing. A lot of games and films have this arc which is always the same: the baddies get tougher, the weapons get bigger, you're building yourself up for a really big fight and then everyone dies, and that's it. We wanted to mix it up and make it more unexpected.

    Umm, thats called a RPG you tosspot.. this is one gamer who will never play a Peter Bolloxyneux game ever again.

  • TheNinkyNonk #6 3 years ago

    More big words from the man who makes so-so games

    Actions speak louder, no?

  • ronuds #7 3 years ago

    Ugh...any comments section talking about PM or Fable immediately turn to shite. Probably by a bunch of people who've never even played Fable, either.

    Being a 360 owner, I for one am happy to have PM on my side!

  • beholdthelantern #8 3 years ago

    Loved the game! Looking forward to going through it again - only this time I'm bringing my dog back! I'm guessing the dog will be useful in the upcoming DLC. Also, I can't get the completionist achieve, so I need the lil' moggy to give him the expression item from pub games. Next time, all the suckers who got roped in to building the spire are not coming back!

    So you can't die. But, at the same time I really didn't want scars!!! ha ha. I think getting knocked out in Fab2 is worse than getting killed and not having any real consequence other than replaying the last save point. My face was a mess by the end.

    Thank you Peter and everyone else involved - fantastic game! Oh, and cheers for dishing out Pub Games codes on Lionheads blog.

  • PlugMonkey #9 3 years ago

    Good interview. Nice job EG.

    >but now I can't because the choice I made at the end of the story has broken my game.

    Should have made another choice then. You are responsible for your actions.

    Hmm. Breaking the game was not highlighted as one of the consequences of my actions, and it wasn't as a consequence of my actions anyway, it was as a consequence of an arbitrary and highly contrived decision I was forced to make, none of options of which made any real sense. Had it been as a result of my actions, something might have come of me repeatedly shooting that Stephen Fry voiced **** in the back of the head through the whole final section of the game. But no. That wasn't allowed.

    Also, I sacrificed THAT dog. There must be another one somewhere in this blighted kingdom. A semi-tame balverine would do.

    The upshot is that I would right now still be playing the game if I could, as it is I'm not because it's broken. If that's the effect Molyneux was going for then good for him. It worked.

  • Beek4257 #10 3 years ago

    That last bit about the sense of wonder is spot on; here's hoping.

  • McBradders #11 3 years ago

    The game was fantastic, and I absoloutely loathed the first one.

    Good work, Pete. Now... can I have my dog back? PLEASE?!

  • L_Ron_Cupboard #12 3 years ago

    well i liked it anyway

  • menage #13 3 years ago

    I loved F2, it's a bit short but one of te highlights this year.

    I think you can still finish the Arch quests without the dog. just follow the line I heard, it will tell you when you need to dig.

    The shadowcourt girl was actually pretty cool, who cares if you knew her or not, she's still fucked, or you are. It actually felt more engaging because I didn't know her, saves me some crying cutscene. It wouldn't make any sense if you knew her in the story as well, it's a big world, would be a huge coincedence if you did. Thta would be bad storywriting right there. Not everything has to tie together in a story.

  • Mudo #14 3 years ago

    Loved Fable 2.

    Felt I needed to comment to balance out the bullshit from just about everyone else so far.

  • shotgun44 #15 3 years ago

    I think he gave some honest answers which is refreshing for once. I'm holding out on buying ths because my brothers version broke. I've not read up on the problem but it's quite widespread, right? Seems a shame because I think it looks stunning!

  • ronuds #16 3 years ago

    @ Plugmonkey

    The game isn't broken because you can't complete a quest. That is one of the consequences of the choices you made. It wouldn't really mean much if you can make any choices you wanted to and not have to face any consequences for those actions. I'm sure if that were the case, you'd complain about that too.

    Play the game again and choose something else. It's not that difficult and you've probably bitched and moaned about it so much to this point that you could've easily just done it over again and saved yourself some time - and us some grief.
    Edited by 1 at 10/12/08 @ 14:44

  • kangarootoo #17 3 years ago

    "We had these mechanics called crescendos which were supposed to build up so that it was only later in the game that you realised, "Wow, I'm really cool,""

    What are these crescendos? I don't think I encountered them. I'm not even being sarcastic or mean about it, I just don't know what he means.


    @PlugMonkey

    There is no WAY you can blame the devs for you choosing not to revive your dog. Your dog is clearly and consistently the ONLY way you can find and dig up random treasure, and at no point did the game EVER suggest there was another dog in the kingdom (one of the loading screen messages even jokes about there being no other dogs), and you CHOSE to not revive your dog, and the game told it would remain dead if you chose that option..... and yet you complain now that you have no dog. YOU CHOSE TO HAVE NO DOG.

    Seriously dude, take some responsibility. Do you complain in cinemas when you run out of popcorn because you ate it all?

    I've seen quite a few people raise this same "complaint" and actually I think it demonstrates the effectiveness of what PM and co achieved with that decision. Some gamers (people) are too used to getting everything, and when presented with a proper decision that forces them to leave something significant behind, they make the choice but whine about it afterwards. And even try and blame someone else because they aren't happy with their OWN choice.

    Bizarre.

    P.s. you can still complete the archaeologist quest. I gave up my dog well before I even began that mission, and I found it made no difference at all. When you get to the right area for each artifact, just read the archeologist's note again.
    Edited by 2 at 10/12/08 @ 14:54

  • penhalion #18 3 years ago

    @ronuds

    Do you work for lionhead or something? You seem a little too eager to shoot down the opinions others have of this game. The reality is that the game wasn't liked by many because it was once again nothing like described by PM.

  • agparrot #19 3 years ago

    I thought it was a great interview and article, and it brings me a day closer to getting hold of Fable II.

    It was just released too near to the gush of games that I'm still playing.

  • Beano #20 3 years ago

    EG forgot to ask if we will be able to resurrect the dog ...

  • hiddenranbir #21 3 years ago

    Awesome game.

  • Daymare #22 3 years ago

    "Then out of the blue you had Lost and Dexter, and TV was where it was at."

    He was clearly a very busy man in the last decade (or two). :)

  • kangarootoo #23 3 years ago

    "Personally, if you're defining easy as, "Well, I should have died five times here and had to repeat the same combat over," I think that's just tedious.
    It's not about easy and hard, it's about entertainment and tedium."

    and also...

    "The experience of being lost is not what you want. The experience of exploring is what you want."

    I will quite often berate PM for talking a lot and not doing much, but Fable 2 changed my attitude a fair amount (I realise that a lot of the key ideas may not of actually been his own). Both the comments above show that he (somebody) still GETS it. Its about fun, and sometimes games make players do things that just aren't fun with NO real justification.

    Fable 2 didn't really do that. It never said "but you HAVE to just try not to kill that innocent person by accident" or "you HAVE to just find your way through this maze, even though it is boring".


    And I'm sure I read in a feature about the upcoming DLC that it will include something that lets you ressurect the dog (that you chose to leave dead).

  • InsoFox #24 3 years ago

    For years people have complained about choices in games not having real consequences. Now here people are complaining that Fable II -does- have some choices with real consequences. The thing about consequences is that once you get them, you have to -deal- with them. I knew I'd lose the dog, and I knew that'd make me less likely to want to continue the game. But I still made that choice because it felt right, and I'm pleased I did.

    There are other things I dislike about fable 2, but actually giving you meaningful decisions was one thing I think it did pretty well.

  • doragor #25 3 years ago

    Yes! I loved Fable 2 and I'll definitely be getting the DLC. Great game. This and Fallout 3 were my favourite games of the year. And to echo what others have said here, losing your dog is a result of you deciding to do so.

  • andywilkie35 #26 3 years ago

    I thought Fable II was brilliant, altho the NXE update lost my save (so obviously I'm not annoyed at PM or Lionhead or anything, not their fault!) so when I was 5 silver keys and 5 gargoyles away from the end I lost them!

    He said something about "the story can't wait for another Fable" so I'm going to interpret that as "there will be another Fable in the future", wahey!

    is this DLC free or we gotta pay?

  • PlugMonkey #27 3 years ago

    ronuds - Well, look at you mr conclusion jumpy man. You've managed to pinpoint my entire personality from two forum posts. Apparently.

    This big final decision is supposed to be the final moral choice in a game about morality. If I have to cynically reason:

    Well, option (a) is choosing to stop playing the game, (b) is choosing to carry on playing the game and (c) is already pointless because I have an extra million gold pieces every time I boot the console anyway. So I guess I'll choose (b).

    then I'm not really making a moral choice any more, am I?

    I chose to sacrifice my dog. That's a shame. I liked him. He was cute. And we'd had lots of adventures together.

    But now I've gone through denial, anger and into acceptance I wan't to keep playing a game I was really, really enjoying; but I can't because the only remotely interesting remaining questline is fucked. That's a bit annoying, isn't it? Or is even the tiniest criticism too much for you? The game was great, but the last decision was contrived and forced me to stop playing.

    menage - I'll give that a go, although I'm mostly holding out to see if the DLC resurrection temple rumours are true.
    Edited by 1 at 10/12/08 @ 15:06

  • berelain #28 3 years ago

    Christ, the way some of you guys talk you'd think Peter Molyneaux had personally come round to your houses and raped your wallpaper or something.

    I thoroughly enjoyed Fable and Fable 2, warts and all, and I personally found the lack of lengthy final boss battle hugely welcome and refreshing. It made the game about your character and your choices, and not about how good you personally were at pressing buttons. A lot of Fable 2 critics just don't seem to get that. You have to look at the game a certain way. If you don't, it becomes rather flat. But if you actually take some ownership for your character and your actions, it becomes so much more, and all those that don't are really missing out on a pretty unique experience. It certainly has its faults, of course.

    Anyway, good interview EG. Molyneaux always seems very humble about his involvement and what his team have done; and good on him. And I think he's right about the revolution of gaming that needs to happen soon. Games have become very nearly mainstream now- and with just the right push they really could be the massive entertainment and storytelling medium that they have the potential to be.

  • matrim83 #29 3 years ago

    Good interview. I actually picked my dog to be ressurected.

    Can I have some monies??

  • Pirotic #30 3 years ago

    My game of the year, and the first game my wife has ever completed.

  • Monkey_Puncher #31 3 years ago

    You can you get your dog back in the new content, there's a place called the temple of ressurection....

  • PlugMonkey #32 3 years ago

    matrim83: I'll see what I can do for you. I own just about everything and I haven't turned it on for a week so I should be minted. ;)

    I couldn't get a lend of your mutt, could I?

    A dog, a dog. My kingdom for a dog!

  • Tenaflyviper #33 3 years ago

    I think it's the first game where you can actually shit yourself, so, kudos to them.

    I didn't like people coming into my house all the frikkin time when I wanted some action with my wife though.

  • Dizzy #34 3 years ago

    "The reality is that the game is liked by many"

    Fixed that for you.

    Emo whiners barely like anything. I wonder why some of you still game. And ooooohhh.. Peter promised something and it didn't turn out as I expected. Go cry with your mommy FFS. It is only a game. Get angry about global warming/taxes/the government/Bush or something else that affects your lives.

    >A dog, a dog. My kingdom for a dog!

    So missing the little bugger are you? :) Why did you NOT have him resurrected then?
    Edited by 1 at 10/12/08 @ 15:24

  • glaeken #35 3 years ago

    The Molyneaux haters are a great example of why you should never pander to hard core gamers when designing a game. You are dammed if you do and dammed if you don't with these people.

  • DanForinton #36 3 years ago

    @penhalion

    "the reality is that the game wasn't liked by many because it was once again nothing like described by PM."

    Maybe that's why I'm enjoying Fable2 so much that I've dropped Fallout 3 (having hit lvl20) - as, in my opinion, PM is a tosser, I've ignored anything he's said about the game prior to his release and only paid attention to word of mouth and a few reviews. I've found that going in without any expectations of what's supposed to be in there has meant that I'm not disappointed or annoyed by any missing features that had been promised, just happy with what is in there. If that makes any sense...

    I started ignoring PM shortly after Dungeon Keeper, when it was obvious that the finished product bore no reality to PM's hype (or the original design documentation). And when Evil Genius turned up and demonstrated how Dungeon Keeper should have worked...

  • PlugMonkey #37 3 years ago

    kangarootoo - But playing it as I was, as a game where I was portraying a character, a character who wasn't the sort of chap to sacrifice thousands of people for his pet, how am I supposed to approach this big final moral decision?

    If I choose option 2 purely and cynically so I can keep playing the game, then the final morality choice has failed because my response is nothing to do with my character or the other characters or the context of the story. That's bad.

    If the result of this choice is that I now find the rest of the game unplayable and so stop playing, that's also bad. Isn't it? I'm not sure why this statement is causing quite as many tantrums as it is. I'm frankly amazed that anyone didn't find that final choice to be rather contrived.

    Re: The archeologist - I went to the next clue location, nothing happened to indicate it was or wasn't the right location because my dog was dead, so I stopped playing. Edit: Well, I stopped doing that quest, and then I ran out of other quests and stopped playing.

    It's not like I'm threatening Molyneaux with violent death or anything. I just thought the ending of his otherwise great game was a bit bobbins and didn't really work.
    Edited by 1 at 10/12/08 @ 15:32

  • morriss #38 3 years ago

    Top man.

  • kangarootoo #39 3 years ago

    @PlugMonkey

    Ok, re the quest that apparently isn't working (as it was confusing me for a bit too). If you are in the right location, simply hit down on the D-pad to read the note again (maybe flip it for info, this might not be neccesary) and then hit A to put it away. A big sparkly breadcrumb trail (unless you turned it off in the options menu.....) should appear guiding you, sans dog, to the spot where you can get busy with your spade in the time honoured tradition.

    I agree that the design around this is not that clear, but its not broken, and it should not be used as a stick to beat the choice you were previously given regarding your hound.

  • PlugMonkey #40 3 years ago

    Hmmm, maybe PlugMonkey has me on ignore.

    No, I'm all ears. :D Give me half a chance.

    So what exactly do I do? All the previous archeologist quests I went to the location, the dog would go "Woof! Woof!" and then run off towards the treasure. Now I go to the location and...nothing happens. Nothing in the game has given me any indication that there is any alternative method, other than the dog that found all the other ones. I couldn't be arsed to bang my head against a wall with it - tis the season to play one of the others on the games mountain, especially when you've technically finished this one - and so I stopped and did something else. Which is not really what you want your customers to do, in my opinion, but what the hell do I know?

    Edit: OK, so it's not 'broken'. Can I get away with 'contrived and subsequently confusing'? ;)
    Edited by 1 at 10/12/08 @ 15:41

  • Grayvern #41 3 years ago

    ON his comments on controllers, it's complete rubbish, some people are always phobic of buttons and always will be theyd be put off by the fact it was a game before the controller.

  • Lutz #42 3 years ago

    Penahlion: I thought it was pretty accurate to what was promised.
    There are some issues yes. The latter half of the game is considerably less well developed than the first.

    Personally I put that down to MS forcing it out of the door before it was finished.

    OTOH: the story definitly needs work.

  • Dizzy #43 3 years ago

    >Oh look what I just did. I just dramatised your journey through Fable 2 with one tiny little tweak.

    A little tweak that will probably take 3 weeks to implement in game code. Writing computer games is sadly not like writing books. Once your game design is up and running you will have to play withing the rules/boundaries. And who knows.. maybe there is a quest in the game where you meet that girl? Fable uses out of order questing... so they are limited in linking them together in sequence but it offers the players a wider choice of paths to take.

  • miiiguel #44 3 years ago

    "OTOH: the story definitly needs work."
    What for? If you do a Copola level plot, like GTA IV, the majority of users don't give a shit... It's useless... :/

  • Xerx3s #45 3 years ago

    "More big words from the man who makes so-so games"

    More words from a petty man that has done nothing note worthy in his life.

    Your actions indeed speak volumes.

  • NorfolkNClue #46 3 years ago

    To be fair, if anyone can pull off the creation of a new genre, it's Peter Molyneux. Here's hoping!

  • pinkpanzer #47 3 years ago

    I totally agree with JStar. And as well as the narrative infelicities, the seriously sub-par Python 'humour', the fact that villagers would schizophrenically switch from acclaiming me as a great hero to berating me as an evil killer in alternate sentences, the glitchy graphics, the fucking game crashed after several hours and, thanks to the single save slot, is now lost forever. But JStar's main point stands - the industry should be doing far better when it comes to creating story and narrative. I've played through an endless chain of fantastic looking worlds - from Oblivion to Resi 4 to Dead Space -and even the best of them are inhabited by characters who seem to be born out of the minds of particularly dull teenage boys.

  • kangarootoo #48 3 years ago

    @PlugMonkey

    "No, I'm all ears. :D Give me half a chance."

    I realised that after and deleted, but TOO SLOW :)

    "OK, so it's not 'broken'. Can I get away with 'contrived and subsequently confusing'? ;)"

    Yes :D

  • kaya08 #49 3 years ago

    Its not really a choice though, you'd have to be crazy not to revive your dog. I'm yet to see a single comment from someone saying they're glad they didn't revive their dog. The vast majority are extremely pissed off that they didn't.

    I enjoyed the game a lot while it lasted, but it took a weekend to do absolutely everything there was to do in the game. It wasn't a full game. And kreya (sorry theresa - anyone else played star wars kotor 2) is quite blatantly the last boss (pretty sure its even the same voice actor for both). C'mon they didn't even bother putting the last damn boss in the game. Then there's all the other heroes saying they'll see you later. How many of these DLC are they going to have and how much are we going to have to pay to finish the game.

  • berelain #50 3 years ago

    Grayvern - no, I think he's right about the controller. Just look at what the Wii has achieved with the wiimote- people play games on the Wii who would never have played a game before, because all they need to do is move their arm and not press a button to do something.

    Kaya08 - Nope, its not the same voice actress- not unless Kreya was voiced by Zoe Wannamaker, anyway, and Im pretty sure she was voiced by Sara Kestelman. IMDB agrees ;)

  • TedMoseby #51 3 years ago

    While I love the dog in Fable 2, one of Mr Molyneux's biggest goals in the game so he says, was to have the player feel loved. Unfortunately, for everything Fable 2 did right, it did one thing incredibly wrong: it made it far too easy for the people of Albion to fall in love with your character - and that cheapened the whole "being loved" experience to the numbing.basic mechanic of using emotes and gestures etc.and made the actual experience of being loved feel worthless.

    It's a shame, because I really wanted to love the game, but it feels like a missed opportunity, and it didn't get a look in once Fallout 3 arrived.

  • kangarootoo #52 3 years ago

    @kaya08

    "Its not really a choice though, you'd have to be crazy not to revive your dog. I'm yet to see a single comment from someone saying they're glad they didn't revive their dog. The vast majority are extremely pissed off that they didn't."

    Hang on a minute. You seem to confusing lack of choice with lack of ability to make a decision.

    If a legion gamers decide not to revive the dog and then later regret it, that doesn't make it any less of a choice. That just means a legion of gamers have problems dealing with the consequences of their actions.

    I really honestly find this quite weird. Its like PM has created a giant social experiment, and the results are disturbing. Mass hysteria is somehow causing people to call foul play of a game that gave them a choice, because they themselves eagerly made the choice but later regretted their decision.

    Are people actually trying to suggest that ANYONE in the entire world holds a greater responsibility for the choice they made than they themselves do?

    I think this says more far more about the vast majority* than it does about Fable 2.



    * of course, its not the "vast majority" as you put it, but the angry vocal minority, as always.

  • RedSparrows #53 3 years ago

    I liked Fable II, I think it did a lot right. Interestingly, it is the one game that has got attention from all my non-gaming housemates. Be it for bigamy or for shitting oneself, it has got a positive reception from people who normally don't care or who irritatingly consider games to be for degenerates.

    What it got wrong, in my view, were the usual foibles of games, as mentioned in part by Pinkpanzer - the disparity of reaction (at TIMES), and JStar's narrative points. I don't think they're game breaking but it'd be even better with some more detail there. The other side of the coin is that I prefer a more open RPG exploration, and Fable II doesn't offer that kind of game for me. It doesn't make it bad, it skews my taste to its aims slightly, and so felt a little dischordant. But still, a cracking and *gorgeously realised* bit of fun.

  • thelatestmodel #54 3 years ago

    Decent game. But one of the biggest disappointments I've ever encountered.

    I was hoping for, even expecting, so much more. I can't even see any evidence of what Peter was trying to achieve - the story is weak, the character interactions are embarrassingly simple and ultimately tiresome and annoying, the combat was mediocre at best, and the whole thing presented no challenge whatsoever. And let's not even get into the multiplayer. I'm sure Peter's still proud of the end product, which is fair enough, but I do think that some of the things he "pushed for" (i.e. the breadcrumb trail) should have been left on the drawing board.

    Yes, it was charming, and I did have fun early on. But I was just amazed at how quickly that fun turned into boredom and frustration. By the end it just felt like a chore, and I went and traded it in after a week. Come on Peter, let's get back to making good games. We still love you for Dungeon Keeper.

  • Petulant_Radish #55 3 years ago

    @ PlugMonkey.

    It’s not broken, on one of my games I sacrificed the mutt, and I have been able to complete the archaeologist quest line. Merely have that as your active quest, read the note, decipher where it is you’re supposed to go, when you arrive in said location a breadcrumb trail appears leading you to a ringed area where you dig. Hey Presto.

    The only thing you’re missing out on with the dog is other buried treasure, like a silver key in my game, but then that’s why they put in 51 in total…

  • kaya08 #56 3 years ago

    Rubbish its not a choice. If I offered you 10p, £10 or £10,000 which would you take? They should just take the dog out of the equation. A Choice between 10,000 morons who offer nothing other than an obstacle to getting from poiint a to b. Your family (wife, children) or a million (incredibly easy to get). That would be a choice.

  • udat #57 3 years ago

    Surely the entire point of that Shadow Court thing was that it was a choice based on your attitude to people and life in general, as best represented by the choice you make regarding a complete stranger.

    I hate how everything has to tie up in most movies/tv shows/books etc. Yes, foreshadowing can benice, and so can a good twist, but having "strangers" exist can also be a good thing.

    Plus the ending was great. The "boss battle" was getting to that point, surely.

    I saved my dog. Fuck everyone else. :)

  • BarrettBonden #58 3 years ago

    For the record Pete, Lost and Dexter didn't "save" television (they are in fact a repackaged continuation of the TV narrative norms that preceded them). If you want to point the finger at what changed peoples' perception of television, look to HBO...

  • Petulant_Radish #59 3 years ago

    Actually Lost was a programmes that allowed the major US networks, and as such the world, to have a series that had an overlying story arc that demanded the viewer watch each episode, rather than serialised episodics. So it did change modern American television, Dexter less so.

  • Petulant_Radish #60 3 years ago

    Oh and Kaya08, where there is anything that gives you anything than more than one option, what you take is a choice.

  • kaya08 #61 3 years ago

    Ok its a choice, just a completely pointless choice with one option that isn't going to ruin your continued enjoyment of the game.

  • kangarootoo #62 3 years ago

    @kaya08

    "Rubbish its not a choice. If I offered you 10p, £10 or £10,000 which would you take?"

    I can't believe I am reading this. Go right now to the nearest well stocked bookshelf, take out a dictionary and look up the word "choice". Do it.

    Failing that, go here...
    [link url=http:// dictionary.reference.com/browse/choice
    ]http://di ctionary.reference.com/browse/c...[/link]

    It is exactly this kind of bonkers mentality that has resulted in however many people saying the game is broken/badly designed/whatever. The profound belief that "a choice I don't like" is the same as "not a choice".

  • Petulant_Radish #63 3 years ago

    It only ruins the game if you actually cared about the dog, the rest of it is immaterial as you don’t actually need him for anything. If people feel like it ruined the game for them then all that means is that Lionhead succeeded in making people really care about the dog, perhaps a bit more than they realised!

  • kangarootoo #64 3 years ago

    @kaya08

    Hehe, you beat me to the punch :)

    Here is a question. I chose to save the many, left my dog RIP, and I am still enjoying the game. How do you explain that?


    Regardless, I am sticking firmly to my guns on this one. If a player is presented with a clear choice, the full implications of which are precisely communicated (i.e. "your dog will stay dead", which was utterly clear to everybody with half a brain), and after making their choice they decide they are unhappy with their own decision, NOBODY is to blame but themselves.

    Seems to me that Fable 2 has simply taught a few gamers an important message about life, a message that perhaps they were not emotionally mature enough to really cope with.

  • kinky_mong #65 3 years ago

    There is this tool we could have integrated, which would have collected thousands of stats on everybody. But it also generated thousands of bugs, and we had to drop it. What a great shame.

    But they didn't remove all the other stuff that caused the game to be very buggy.

    In fairness I think it's good that PM is showing a bit of regret that the game didn't live up to his ridiculous claims for it. However I was very disappointed with the game. I found the social aspects of the game very tedious and not worth the payoff (particularly getting married), the story was far too short and ended poorly with the abrupt choice.

    Personally I couldn't care less about thousands of characters I'd never even met, and the money choice was equally as pointless considering I already made a small fortune on rent every few seconds. Saving the dog was clearly the only choice to make because he was pretty much the only good thing about the game.

  • kaya08 #66 3 years ago

    @ kangarootoo

    Whatever about broken, I don't see how a 'choice' of 3 options 2 of which ruin the game isn't badly designed.

  • kangarootoo #67 3 years ago

    "If people feel like it ruined the game for them then all that means is that Lionhead succeeded in making people really care about the dog, perhaps a bit more than they realised!"

    +1

  • kangarootoo #68 3 years ago

    @kaya08

    I don't consider the loss of the dog as something that ruins the game. If you do, perhaps Petulant_Radish's recent comment holds true.

    And I say again, you knew in advance what losing the dog would mean. EVERYTHING that the dog gave you was quite clear at the point at which you chose to lose it. So HOW can you blame regretting the decision on anyone else?

  • kaya08 #69 3 years ago

    @ kangarootoo
    Yeah sorry slow internet connection. I kept my dog. Its just seems quite obvious that losing the dog ruined many peoples enjoyment of the game.

  • kaya08 #70 3 years ago

    And as for people making the decision to lose the dog. My intital reaction was, 'that must be some mistake they can't seriously take the dog off you, unless you can get another one' - nearly ended up taking the money, my character was evil so that decision would've been more in character. It just seemed like a bizarre option to me

  • kangarootoo #71 3 years ago

    I understand that a lot of people were upset at the eventual result, but I also think people need to see that they can't blame anyone else, and that sometimes you just have to live with the consequences of your actions.

    :)

  • kaya08 #72 3 years ago

    Fair enough but the consequences of their actions are that they stopped playing the game or traded it in. I'd imagine its not exactly the kind of reaction you'd want to inspire.

  • shamblemonkee #73 3 years ago

    I chose the money, i regret it a bit but as kagarootoo has been saying all the options AND their consequences were made extremely clear.

    You may feel like it was a no brainer but i bet many other people like me had nowhere near a million by the end of the game and chose the quick fix over the utility of the dog. The very fact that you're on here arguing it means it was a very big decision to you, so big that you've even stated you couldn't beleive they could be serious about removing it.

  • Daymare #74 3 years ago

    @Petulant_Radish

    "Actually Lost was a programmes that allowed the major US networks, and as such the world, to have a series that had an overlying story arc that demanded the viewer watch each episode, rather than serialised episodics. So it did change modern American television, Dexter less so."

    Let's not forget about Twin Peaks, The Wire, Band of Brothers and 24, among others. There's nothing *really* revolutionary about Lost but it sure is popular.
    Edited by 1 at 10/12/08 @ 16:53

  • kangarootoo #75 3 years ago

    @kaya08

    "Fair enough but the consequences of their actions are that they stopped playing the game or traded it in. I'd imagine its not exactly the kind of reaction you'd want to inspire."

    This is true, so maybe I am torn on the matter. The businessman in me doesn't want my customer to be disappointed in my product in principle, but then the... errr... well, just me... doesn't want to just pander to every mental failing (harsh way to out it, but there you go) of every gamer out there.

    Perhaps Lionhead could have presented it all a little better (massive letters saying "are you sure you won't regret this, in like a week, when you realise can't dig up treasure anymore, even though it was obvious?" perhaps ;) ), but the spirit of what they were doing was great in my opinion. I think the fact that some gamers got so upset about their OWN decision, so upset that they just felt they had to have someone else to blame, makes the game quite unique in its own way.

  • kangarootoo #76 3 years ago

    @shamblemonkee

    Man, was it only 1mil? I thought it would be about 5 times that.

    Here is a cash related trick that might cheer some people up.
    Play the game and buy a decent amount of property, so you have a reasonable income totting up under normal play. Unplug your network cable so your 360 can't sign into Live (this stops it correcting its clock). Then enter system settings and set the date to 2009 leaving the day and month where they are. The fire up the game again and load your save, and wait about 30 seconds. The game thinks you have been away for a year and gives you a big sack of dosh (for me it is usually around 650k). Then plug your network cable back in and sign into Live (this will automatically correct the system clock for you). Then GO SHOPPING! :)

  • kaya08 #77 3 years ago

    My main problem with it was neither of the other options was of comparable value to having a dog. Like if the evil option was to get a godly sword and the good option was to get a healing spell or something, sure that would be a worthwhile option.

  • Petulant_Radish #78 3 years ago

    @Daymare

    Firstly where did I say it revolutionised? I said change, and yes, revolution is change, but change is not revolution. And as I said, modern television, so TV from almost 18 years ago is not what I would consider modern, though Twin Peaks is indeed a good example of a series.

    As for the Wire, critical success, never an actual success, especially over here. It was also on HBO, not a major US network. So the same stands for Band of Brothers.

    As for 24, well now there you’ve got me! But I think what he was attempting to put across was that Lost was one of the main talking points so far this century, much bigger than 24.

  • kangarootoo #79 3 years ago

    @kaya08

    That is a slightly different thing though. In your experience the decision was a clear cut one, which undermined the whole point of having to make a decision. But I let my dog stay dead and didn't really regret it that much (I missed the dog, but not enough to regret saving the people). And other people at the time agreed, and let their dog stay dead, but later regretted it immensely.

    The fact that you, me and everyone else have such different opinions on the value of each choice is SURELY the entire point of it all. The examples you use about having a good sword and so on are fine options to have, but they are quite traditional and quite "gamey" choices. Right from the off PM said he wanted to make things a bit less expected and a bit more emotional, and I think he achieved that in this case.
    Edited by 1 at 10/12/08 @ 17:13

  • morriss #80 3 years ago

    Game of the year, imo. Also, I don't think there's a DLC date yet.

  • kangarootoo #81 3 years ago

    @sigmagoat

    "Screw Molyneux He is an arse."

    You cried when your dog died didn't you ;)

    Much like I cried when I saw your disturbing lack of grammar, punctuation and spelling.




    ......unless this is a cunning "in character" post pretending to be a troll, in which case bravo.

  • Petulant_Radish #82 3 years ago

    @Kangarootoo

    I actually did this by mistake, I always turn my console off at the wall when I am not using it, and normally have the internet up and running when I turn it on. So by this point I owned quite a lot of property, turned on the game without being logged into live so the clock had not updated from the factory default setting (2005), so when I logged into live it gave me about 5 million immediately. I was quite annoyed about that!

  • kangarootoo #83 3 years ago

    @Petulant_Radish

    Is that you I saw selling Fable 2 money on eBay? ;)

  • udat #84 3 years ago

    A killer choice for me would have been if your sister was included in "the many". Not sure what I'd have picked then...







    ... I still think the dog :)

  • Petulant_Radish #85 3 years ago

    People actually do that? Mind you, nothing would surprise me as I’ve seen Halo Level 50 profiles for sale on eBay before, why the hell would you want to buy that?

  • kangarootoo #86 3 years ago

    I'm going to spoiler all of this actually, just in case. It concerns the origins of the Theresa character.


    Was it just me that wondered whether Theresa was the sister character from Fable 1?

    She was blinded at some point right? And had seer type powers? And didn't she at some point wear red and white?

    I realise that she could optionally be killed at the end of Fable 1, but that sort of thing should never stop narrative in game sequels (just ask Deus Ex 2)

  • kangarootoo #87 3 years ago

    @Petulant_Radish

    Yeah, I was looking for Fable 2 itself a few weeks back, and someone was selling 5mil Fable 2 gold, starting bid of 99p. Pity the nutters that buy it says I.

  • udat #88 3 years ago

    I didn't just wonder if that was her, I flat out assumed it from the get-go.

    In fact, wasn't there a bit of "loading" text that basically confirmed it?

  • ronuds #89 3 years ago

    @ penhalion

    I must work for LH because I was defending a game that I believe contracts a lot of unfair criticism? There are a million things to do in the game, yet 99% of the complaints are over one tiny and insignificant thing someone didn't like. It's ridiculous. And how exactly is the game "nothing like" what PM said it would be? A couple features may have been cut, but for the most part I don't think he said much that didn't make it into the game.

    I'd also check your like to dislike ratio again because I think there are a fair amount who thoroughly enjoyed it. I've probably heard more "goty" noise about Fable II than any other game.

    @ PlugMonkey

    Sorry for jumping to conclusions, but your comment sounded a little whiney. The game's good enough to give it another run through, so do that and keep the dog! You won't regret it, I'm sure. :)

  • DugBriderider #90 3 years ago

    But I think what he was attempting to put across was that Lost was one of the main talking points so far this century, much bigger than 24.

    If this is true then god help us all.

  • kaya08 #91 3 years ago

    You have a good point there, not sure i agree with it though.
    The money was worthless to me because the only thing I could get with it was property, and the only point to getting property is to make money, which i could only spend on property.But really I can't imagine anyone needing that much money the best weapons in the game cost 30,000 what would you do with the other 940,000.
    I kind of despise the vast majority of the population of Albion just because of the constant high pitched screaming, or the constant stalking and blocking your way and the general lack of any character so the good option was again pretty unappealing.
    It just didn't feel like the options we're ... equal. But thats just my opinion and i dont really know jack so who care, right =).
    I actually voted for the game as GOTY (not first but it got in the list), so while i have no shortage of complaints about the game I enjoyed it. A lot. I have a bit of a love / hate feeling towards most of PM's games.

  • butler` #92 3 years ago

    NOTHING on its stability, predictably. What a joke.

    I recommended this game to a friend, reguardless of all the crashes, and although he loves it, he's done nothing but moan. He asks, and rightly so, "why did they release this in this state?"

  • kaya08 #93 3 years ago

    It runs a lot smoother if you install it on HD.

  • oktava #94 3 years ago

    1 save slot coupled with aprox. 5-10 gamebreaking bugs = epic failure.

  • Bulbatron #95 3 years ago

    I LOVED Fable II, I thought it was amazing. As for the dog, yes, I chose to put the needs of the many before my own. But now I am really missing him. I wish I could now travel Albion, hunting down all the people who I brought back to live, and then killing them, and once they're all dead again, I can get my doggy back!

    And, touch wood, apart from one freeze, I haven't encountered any bugs whatsoever.

    As for the quest with the ghost and his ex-lover, I did feel that we should have had the option of warning him/her what the ghost had in mind, or being able to persuade the ghost not to go through with his plan in the first place. But on the other hand, I never thought of marrying her and then simply killing her in front of the ghost. Great stuff.

    Can't wait for the downloadable content!

  • Frosty840 #96 3 years ago

    "What people haven't realised yet is this thing about Theresa: who is she?"

    Those of us who played Fable and have not suffered horrific and disabling brain-damage as a result have realised that she's sister of that game's main character.

    Those people who didn't play Fable, on the other hand, know that she's the final boss of a Fable 2 expansion or sequel.

    Once again, a game which will want money from me to see the "real" ending. Worse, a game that will force me to purchase non-rentable, non-resaleable DLC in order to do so, when Fable 2 is quite plainly a rental/budget/second-hand game.
    Balls to that.

  • BarrettBonden #97 3 years ago

    @Petulant Radish

    Peter Molyneux:
    "For years and years, the same television programs came on. Then out of the blue you had Lost and Dexter, and TV was where it was at."

    You may not have said that "Lost" revolutionised TV, but PM certainly implies it with the above statement. He's saying that "Lost" came along and changed things. The fact is that "Lost" did not introduce anything particularly novel to the world of narrative television (its success remains its most enduring achievement). It was NOT the first show to introduce a series-long story arc, as evidenced by shows such as 24, The Wire, Twin Peaks and The Sopranos. It was in fact these very shows (with the exception of the Wire, which was viewed by about 7 people) that changed the face of television and led to a climate where something with the cinematic ambition (and budget) of Lost was considered viable. His comment is a sweeping, ill-informed generality with little basis in broadcast-historical fact. And how "Dexter" ever made it into a comment like that is beyond me.

    Note:
    Ratings-wise Lost hasn't scored much higher than the above shows, averaging approximately 11million viewers in its last season (its career high was 16million for S1). Twin Peaks Season 1 averaged 14million viewers back in 1990. Sopranos scored highs of 13/14million (an extraordinary achievement for a cable show), as did 24.



  • bonker #98 3 years ago

    Well, apologies to the FII fanboys in here but for me FII was one of the most disappointing gaming experiences I've ever had.

    For sure I had *some* fun but I gotta say that the only lasting memories I have of the game are getting very loved-up with my new wifey who very shortly got capped along with my dog due to the 'ending' that I chose.

    F*CKING GUTTED!!!

    At that point I stopped playing the game and I'll never go back to it.

    I'll never buy the DLC.

    I'll never play another PM game.


    I've never been to Lionhead and know nothing about them other than the PM stuff but speaking as a dev myself, they are clearly dominated entirely by PM and I imagine that their team is a mix of very young (40yrs) people. This likely being due to the glass-ceiling that is PM himself. People who aren't up to much (or who are extremely well paid) won't care and will be there forever (>40yrs), people who have something about them will likely feel constrained by PM's dominance and will move on to stretch themselves, hence the 25-40 gap which is when most people do their best work .........

    I could be wrong but I bet I'm not ...

  • ronuds #99 3 years ago

    Fable II was such a failure that xplay from G4 TV named it their game of the year. What does that say for every other game released this year, huh?

    Suck on that, newbs! :p

  • yagisencho #100 3 years ago

    This game turned me into a lesbian polygamist. Ban this sick filth!

    (Well, alright, I turned my *character* into a lesbian polygamist. Ban this sick mind!)

  • Scimarad #101 3 years ago

    "What does that say for every other game released this year, huh? "

    It says that was someone's opinion?

    Personally I really enjoyed most of the side quests and the sodding around but I thought the story itself really wasn't up to much. It's all very well saying the game offers you choices but it often offers you bad black or white choices. What about Alex? Break his/her heart or marry him/her - Er...what about just saying "hey there's this ghost that trying to screw you over. I'm just off to 'exorcise' her..."

    Or the thing with the Shadow guythat a certain character has a deal with? Another crap black or white choice. Or when you get back to town and it's being attacked. I wanted to say 'screw you, you evill bastard' and go and help the townspeople. Would it let me? Er, nope! Maybe it was a lost cause but it should have been my choice if the game was living up to it's ideals.

    And the big choice; Why the hell should I be forced to conform to such a ridiculously specific wish when there a so many ways to get around it. Even if it was just Theresa exerting her power over you, how come you never ever get the chance to question that.

    Fable 2 does a lot of things right but some people seem to consider it heresy to criticize the game at all.
    Edited by 3 at 10/12/08 @ 20:06

  • ronuds #102 3 years ago

    "It says that was someone's opinion?"

    lol, I know...was just messing with people. It's probably more than just one person's opinion at the station, though. I'm sure they had to come to some sort of consensus.

    There are definitely valid complaints against the game, but I don't know if I've ever seen the gaming community get more nitpicky over anything before. "I couldn't do "x" with so and so!" Like, big deal...get over it and enjoy the game for what you CAN do with it, which is plenty. If you give people too many options, suddenly it's not enough - and if you give them none, it's more than plenty.

  • dacicus #103 3 years ago

    Let me see...Since Dungeon Keeper and Populous series, Peter Molyneux motto was: we are promissing much and deliver next to nothing...The Movies ended up asa a crippled game, with the gamer being too damn busy pampering the actors and managing the studio, and not having enough time to do the Movies?! Fable2 felt like a bad JRPG ripoff, but with no appeal whatsoever. Black and White was just Populous in a new form??? So what so great about Peter Molyneux in our days??? I just don't get it.

  • Scimarad #104 3 years ago

    It think the 'problem' is made worse by a certain individual telling us about how we can play the exact game we want to play. It really frustrating in a game that promises freedom to be forced to make an extremely artificial choice between to a couple of equally bad options when there are so many other obvious solutions.

    I think what I'm saying is the game's good points make the bad points worse:)

  • figaro7 #105 3 years ago

    I must be the only one who chose to keep the dog... just seemed like the right thing to do, save people? No thanks, i was never given the impression that i should have. If i didnt take the dog i would have certainly took the money.

  • Khanivor #106 3 years ago

    So lavalant, you completed it twice and yet it has no replay value?

    Um...

  • ronuds #107 3 years ago

    "It think the 'problem' is made worse by a certain individual telling us about how we can play the exact game we want to play."

    I think what happens there is that this "certain someone" says something and people interpret it in a number of different ways, when at its core the comment was completely valid. I've seen a lot of complaints about how much towns change and how much they "believed" PM said they would - and how the two don't match. Well, PM said towns would change based on your actions and they do just that. It's a LOT more superficial than what he led us to believe, but at its core the statement is absolutely true. There's a LOT of that going around with Fable II, but that's probably to be expected when any developer talks as much about a game as PM did with Fable II.

    At its core, you can absolutely play the game exactly how you want to, and certain actions definitely affect the world around you. That doesn't mean every single little thing you do has a direct affect on the world, though - or that you can do absolutely anything you could imagine. I don't think he'd be dumb enough to make a claim like that, especially if he knows the types of things the gaming community would likely do with those options. :p Do yourself a favor and if you decide to run through the game again, forget everything PM said you'd be able to do and just play the game for what it is. I think you'll enjoy it a lot more. Because despite this or that shortcoming based on PM's comments, there's still a very good game there.

  • Picnic #108 3 years ago

    In the UK, where I am, 'Post-Mortem' is generally only used for the meaning of a medical examination of a dead body. As it's not the subtitle of the game, did the game die at retail?

    (You learn something new every day. Another meaning is 'An analysis or review of a finished event' which is similar, in a general way, to the other definition).



  • immateriaux #109 3 years ago

    When are Eurogamer going to stop trying to flog Lionhead's desultory games on here? The level of blatant cock sucking needs to be brought to someone's attention, it's immoral having stuff like this on the net with impressionable folk about.

  • BTBAM #110 3 years ago

    Did I see DLC1 mentioned? Can we assume there will be a DLC2?

  • ardamillo #111 3 years ago

    Wow, having a single save slot completely changed the game for me - and it was just a GUI issue?

    Since I felt miserable after my dog sacrifice I went out on a bender, ate pies until I had a massive gut, got head to toe tats, and finished the rest of the quests with nothing but tasseled pink hotpants and a cleaver. And I was a huge celebrity so I could sleep with anyone, kill anyone, whatever I wanted. And sure enough, after a while I started to feel better!

    If I'd had the option at the time, I would have taken back my sacrifice, but now I'm glad I didn't.

  • Bangaioh #112 3 years ago

    @ jstar "10/10 Eurogamer? Seriously - shame on you. Scores like this only reinforce the view that video games are immature and unsophisticated. They could be so, so much more".

    I totally agree with you, I have enjoyed some moments but 10/10 for Fable2 is simply dishonest to say the least. And as far as Lionhead goes, first and LAST game for me. Peter, why don't you spend less time talking and more in delivering, you git.
    Edited by 1 at 11/12/08 @ 02:12

  • squeakyg #113 3 years ago

    I'm about two thirds through the game, so I skipped the paragraphs with spoilers as soon as they looked spoilery (you could have simply highlighted those paragraphs, the rest is safe.) For the same reason, I must skip most of this comments section.

    I just want to say that what I'd change about Fable 2 aren't the big design decisions, but rather lots and lots of little annoyances with the menus, which don't seem like much, but they all add up to a pretty bad RPG menu. I'll give some examples, which I wish Peter Molyneux could read:

    - When I am browsing for new weapons at a weapons vendor, I'd like to see the stats of my currently-held weapons side-by-side. As it is, I always think, "Gah, I can't remember what my current weapons are like," and I have to back out of the trader screens, go into my menus and look at my weapons, then start trading again.

    - I tend to take experience potions in batches of 4 (because I tend to buy them in batches of 4). But every time I take one potion, it sends me back to the game world, and I have to go all through the menus again for each potion. Annoying! Why can't I do multiple things in the menus, which then queue up and get executed at the same time when I leave the menus?

    - Mapping is very poor. All you get is a minimap in the pause menu, which is too small to show many icons (no houses owned, marital homes, etc). No world map whatsoever besides background art, so you can't get a good sense of where each town is in relation to each other.

    - Here's my solution: the Back button does nothing. Who ever heard of an RPG that doesn't need the Back button for something! So I think the Back button should have called up a full-screen area map, hi-res and large enough to show more icons about your owned businesses and homes. Also, warp selection should have been a visual world map instead of a text list of places.

    - When I buy hairstyles, makeup or tattoos, an abstract card is not enough to show me what it will be like. I want a preview on my character model. Expecially for tattoos -- you've got no idea what they will look like, and they cost about 500 gold to remove.

    - The main thing Fable 2 needed was LESS CRITICAL BUGS. I've never seen such a high profile game released with so many serious bugs. Personally I suffered from a message at the top of the screen telling me about buying furniture from furniture shops, which wouldn't go away for hours. But many other people got their game totally broken. And with only one save slot, that's unforgivable. I'm thinking Fable 2 should have been held back until Q1 2009.

    - One small thing. I had an average fight with some bandits at Bower Lake, not paying much attention to my dog. I assumed he was lagging behind. When I got to Bowerstone, a guard casually said, "Why do you even bother carrying on, now your dog's dead?" And I thought, "WTF, my dog's DEAD?" He apparently died in a very average battle at a very average point in the game, and the game didn't even bother to tell me when it happened! I would have expected a screen to pause things and say, "Your dog has died, press A to continue" or something. But nope, I had to hear it from a frigging Bowerstone guard 10 minutes later. I quit and reloaded, and lost about half an hour of gaming. Chewie still lives! (For now... I know there's a spoiler I couldn't avoid).


    Hope *somebody* read this long post.
    Edited by 1 at 11/12/08 @ 03:00

  • BartonFink #114 3 years ago

    @squeakyg

    How did you manage to completely ignore your dog to the point where it died?

  • Bulbatron #115 3 years ago

    I didn't think it was possible for your dog to die. I loved Fable II though (as I've already said), but I do agree with some of the good ideas that people have had about possible improvements. Using the BACK button to bring up a proper map would be a great idea. I can never get a clear idea of exactly where everything is in relation to other places in Fable II.

  • stodgypudding #116 3 years ago

    I think Fable 2 is great, I'm on my second play though and greatly looking forward to some DLC. Hopefully there's going to be several lots throughout the year.

    Goty for me.

  • grandmaster Verified Director, Digital Foundry #117 3 years ago

    Interesting interview but the lack of follow-up questions is infuriating. Just as an example, Molyneux talks about DLC1 but the interviewer doesn't then ask the obvious question about DLC2 - what is it? when's it coming? The whole thing almost reads like an email interview when the video proves it wasn't!

  • udat #118 3 years ago

    I thought your dog could only be injured, not killed, in general play? He would always catch up eventually, even if he was limping along really slowly.

    I find it really weird that so many people have suffered so much with bugs and stability when I can't remember the game crashing or being otherwise buggy at all. Considering we're all using basically the same hardware to play it, that's just odd.

    I completely agree with squeakyg's comments about the inventory. Drinking multiple potions was a needless chore.

    I also find it fascinating that so many people can wind themselves up to the point where they have so much emotion over the game getting/deserving 10/10.

    Personally I really liked it. After completing it, I might have given it 9. All that means to me is that the reviewer liked it a bit more than me. What's to get upset about?

  • Postumo #119 3 years ago

    The game is great, but the story should have been more "epic". Fable I plot was more intense and with better moments, Fable II's is a bit lacking on that.

  • Postumo #120 3 years ago

    The game is great, but the story should have been more "epic". Fable I plot was more intense and with better moments, Fable II's is a bit lacking on that.

    "The main problem with fable is that the storytelling is absolutely appauling. The story itself is so bog standard and simple it's embarrassing. Peter Molyneux and his team have showed once again their total lack of understanding of narative and the way stories work. They spend millions of pounds and man hours on perfecting moss in stone walls and skip over the thing that could elevate their games righ to the top.

    I was so dissapointed with Fable it is untrue. A wonderfully designed world that was ultimately shallow and entirely unrewarding. I don't know why Lion Head seem to feel that NPC's that you can't interact with in any meaningful way add to the atmosphere in a world and the way quests just appeared in your log was frankly shocking. Everything about it just reminded me that this was a game, at no point did it ever feel like i was in an interesting world I wanted to discover or at the heart of a great story. I knew there WAS nothing to discover. Choices were presented to you ni such abrupt and badly thought out fashion. The shadow court is a case in point. Great idea, introduced terribly with the choice presented to you clumsy and badly thought out. The choice had no meaning. you didn't know the girl, she had never been introduced before. Even the worst novelist can tell you that is just plain bad.

    Until games designers realise that they need to employ the services of serious professional writers who actually know about character development and how to tell even vaguely original stories this is going to happen time and time again."

    I totally agree with this comment.

    Peter is obssessive with the idea of creating a world full of interactions and decisions, but he forgets about the epic and the story. Your decisions in Fable doesn't involve you in any sentimental way. The quests just appear in your log and they have nothing to do with the main quest

    I think your character should talk, the story should be longer and better developed, and the should work on the immersion (the game can't make you care about your companions because you don't interact with them...)

    Great ideas, but no so well developed... PM should try to mix Fable's ideas with Fallout 3 development par example. Fallout 3 has lots of "world changing" decisions and the quests work well and aren't repetitive, the main quest is quite good (not superb, but quite good)..

  • kangarootoo #121 3 years ago

    @Frosty840

    "Once again, a game which will want money from me to see the "real" ending"

    Oh come on, the ending on Fable 2 was perfectly complete. Knowing that something else may follow down the line is irrelevant. I'm pretty sure nobody stormed out of the first Star Wars film complaining that they were going to have to visit the cinema again to see the "real ending".

    If you didn't like Fable 2 then fair enough, but lets not start just inventing problems where they don't exist.

    If they stick a traditional boss battle in the end of the DLC I for one will be gutted. I actually got near to the end of F2 and thought "shite, this feels like I'm getting to the end, there will probably be a shit boss battle now" and I was werll pleased to discover that wasn't the case.


    And for the general record, I had not ONE single crash, freeze or bug of any type. I have the game installed to HDD, which may make a difference. I realise I am just one individual with an anecdotal story to tell, but I don't really buy the majority of people suffering freezes and so on. Yet again I just think it is the vocal minority.



    "- When I am browsing for new weapons at a weapons vendor, I'd like to see the stats of my currently-held weapons side-by-side. As it is, I always think, "Gah, I can't remember what my current weapons are like," and I have to back out of the trader screens, go into my menus and look at my weapons, then start trading again. "

    +1 (and for your potions comment)
    Their menu system could have done with a fair bit of sorting out actually, and didn't PM say it was all a bit last minute?

    BACK should always be map. Its just the way of things in RPG land. Like the sun rising and setting each day. I agree that BACK doing nothing just felt all.... wrong :)

    I didn't know the dog could die during normal play. That seems bizarre. Are you sure the dog was actually gone? Had he fallen off a cliff or something?

  • mingster #122 3 years ago

    As much as i loved all bullfrogs creations...
    Magic Carpet, Populous and Dungeon Keeper where all absolute all time classic amazing games.
    Peter and his new team have been on a downward slope since black & white.
    His hype and disapoint started with B&W and has continued with every game since.

  • busboy33 #123 3 years ago

    @kaya08:
    "My main problem with it was neither of the other options was of comparable value to having a dog. Like if the evil option was to get a godly sword and the good option was to get a healing spell or something, sure that would be a worthwhile option."

    Personally, I agree with you. For me personally, It wasn't too hard a decision -- I had been landlording my kiester off, so the cash held no interest, knocking the call down to the "moral" and the "gratifying". Normally, I'd choose moral, but (a) I liked my doggy (which I wasn't expecting, since in reality I'm a cat person) and wanted my sister back (and if she isn't in some of the DLC I'm gonna BEAT Mr. Moly to death -- I was promised ALL my loved ones would return, and I get a bloody "thxfortheresurectioncusoon" note!?!?); and (b) I was actually hoping for some negative karma at that point, since I'd played the rest of the game so squeaky-clean nice that when I went exploring around Bowerstone throngs would bumrush me to tell me how friggin' awesome I was . . . and in the process pin me in an alleyway or against my living room wall. Almost had to start wacking civies a few times before I realized I could fast-travel out (and to the adoring throngs of Albion . . . I appreciate your admiration, but GET THE FU@K OUT OF MY HOUSE. When I do that the guards call it Trespassing with Intent). I took the scarring for the Shadow Court quest to protect the dumb lady (amazing how she figured out how to run outside AFTER I sacrifice my good looks, but wails about being stuck there until I do), and that was just about all the "taking one for the team" self-sacrifice I was willing to put up with at that point. I think it was a brilliant bit of timing to have to make the "save Poochies" decision so soon after he died . . . if I had gone a few hours without him, I probably wouldn't have cared so much, but I was still ready to move Heaven-and-Hell at that point to get some Poochie Payback, and offering to bring him (and Rose) back was music to my ears.

    Anyways, what I was trying to get at was even though the call was an easy one for me (and apparently for you), judging by the outrage of some other posters it seems pretty clear that there were plenty of people who didn't see it the same way -- alot like the screaming posts from people who . . .

    SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER (I don't know how to do that uber-cool "mouse over to reveal text thing";) SPOILER SPOILER

    . . . Finished the Castle Catacombs quest and are rewarded with the sex-change potion. Even though the game couldn't be clearer that you can either drink it now and PERMANENTLY change gender or decline and NEVER HAVE THE OPTION AGAIN (unless you go into someone else's game), there are threads on other game sites of players furious that they drank the potion, changed gender . . . and now want to change back. "Whaddaya mean I'm stuck as a guy/girl? Well, yeah, you did say it was permanent, . . . but like TOTALLY permanent?" Well, them and the one guy who didn't read too clearly and thought "sex transmogrification" meant he was going to become a transsexual, and now he's pissed because although he got the breasts he wanted he lost his external plumbing so no more sex with the wife.
    ENDSPOILERENDSPOILERENDSPOILERIWISHIKNEWHOWTODOTHEMOUSEOVERS CREENITISSOFREAKIN'COOLENDSPOILER

    It apparently was a decision that is seriously impacting players . . . to the point that some apparently are refusing to play anymore. The more I read Fable2 threads on the Net, the more I'm struck by how sublimely impactful the game is turning out to be. I hated that stupid dog . . . until I realized I was willing to turn my back on thousands of victims just to play fetch with him. I took the scars from the Shadow Court . . . and the more I play, the more I see my pug-ugly visage, the more I wish I had slipped the token to the lady, despite such actions being against every instinct I have. Granted, now I look like someone that moonlights as a Mafia enforcer under the name "Lefty No-Nose" and that's a plus I'm trying to come to grips with . . . but dammit, I'm always the skinny character! I was 9th-plane-of-Hades pissed at having to run around the friggin country trying to find every piece of celery so I could at least not have a pot-belly (you'd think running several hundred miles would burn off some fat, but noooo . . . ). "Stupid design choice" I muttered. "There should be a potion". Then I realized that was exactly the point: Losing a gut is a monumental pain-in-the-ass. If I can just swig a potion or mutter an incantation, then getting fat isn't a consequence -- it's a fashion statement. Now I'm back to no gut, and as a completely unintended consequence of all my running around I'm built like a friggin' brick sh!thouse. Absolutely NOT the character I had intended to select/play, but absolutely the character I created through my actions, intended and unintended.

    I've become struck with how "shallow" we as an audience have become. Where was the climatic rousing final battle, complete with John Williams score and a lazer light show? Why no massive decisions (aside arguably from the final one)? No "Save the Gelflings or or become a tyrant over the globe" decisions -- just "dick around with the dead Emo twit or . . . well, or don't." It seems like there aren't any choices, really, not the way we've become conditioned to expect them. But the more I reflect the more I recognize that there really ARE a sea of consequences to every little choice, just so subtle they pass right under my gaze.

    The people in this thread complaining about the lack of "proper storytelling" . . . respectfully, mabye you're defining a "proper" narrative arc in an entirely inapplicable way. The "main quest" is completely irrevelant to the actual story. Do you rescue slaves or slaughter? Who did you laughingly pick up for a casual matress-dance . . . and now regret (btw . . . DO NOT bang Alex the furniture store lady. Hit that one time, and if she stalks me any more obsessively I'm gonna have to see about a restraining order)? Everybody here commenting about how stupid wife/kids are (I presume because they don't "get" you much in the way of specific Super-Awesome Bonuses), I never married, no kids . . . listening to commenters complain about how much of a drag their families are sounds just like the married co-workers sitting around wishing they were single . . . as the single people wonder about what family life must be like. THATS the story, and given that he created a game that can provide you with a narrative you essentially created yourself, my hat's off to the man. Is it the Greatest Game Evar? It has flaws, sure. But darn if this isn't the first time in I-can't-remember-when an "epic" game built itself on subtlety.

    EDIT
    ** I apologize profusely to EuroGamer and the EG community for this obscenely long post/rant/pathetic attempt to delay going back to work. Didn't mean to go on a rambling half-page musing . . . my head hangs at whiplash-inducing levels of embarassment.
    Edited by 2 at 11/12/08 @ 15:19

  • Notorious_LRO #124 3 years ago

    Loved the game Peter. Having only one save slot made the game much more enjoyable than it would otherwise have been. For me at least. It gave the game a feeling of having a more solid narrative and placed more responsability to me on how I wanted to play the game. The evil/good choices sometimes feel a bit gimmicky, because it really does not have an impact on the main story line, but more serious choices, withouth the ability to save, will make each play through feel more like a unique experience.

    It's also a bit like life, isn't it? Some may not agree, but I find that I have to start over and over on these big adventure games (oblivion/fallout) because I always feel I could have done better, leveled up smarter and all that. By having a game made for one playthorugh, you take away som choices, but the game feels more real and cohesive for me.

    The bread crumbs are also fantastic, and the easy class system is a win. Although when you are master of all magics and weapons in the end, it does not feel like my character is very unique (other than being a really huge woman dressed as male royalty).

    And co-op. Man, that sucked like everyone tells you.

  • monkeywithnoeyes #125 3 years ago

    how could you not ask him about the co-op mess? the choice they made in not allowing players existing characters join games. Or having a restricted "elastic band" camera during co-op. What was supposed to be a strong feature ended up being its weakest and feeling rushed. Why did you bottle out of having him explain that?

  • kangarootoo #126 3 years ago

    @mingster

    Have you played Fable 2?

  • thedaveeyres #127 3 years ago

    Great interview - Lionhead delivered with Fable 2 and Peter deserves a lot of respect for that.

  • kangarootoo #128 3 years ago

    @busboy33

    To spoiler-bind text, see the following;

    [hello] This will be invisible unless you roll over it [/hello]

    Then replace hello with spoiler.

  • PlugMonkey #129 3 years ago

    This is true, so maybe I am torn on the matter. The businessman in me doesn't want my customer to be disappointed in my product in principle, but then the... errr... well, just me... doesn't want to just pander to every mental failing (harsh way to out it, but there you go) of every gamer out there.

    Once again, I don't regret not saving my dog. It was the right thing to do. I'm not experiencing loss and regret, I'm experiencing my game not being any fun to play any more. And I'm not suffering from some sort of mental failing, I was well aware of the potential consequences of sacrificing my dog, but the alternatives suggested are equally unsatisfactory.

    Why didn't I just save the dog? Well, at the end of the game my character is faced with a MORAL choice. If I make that decision based on the fact that one of the options makes the game stop being fun, then I'm not making a moral choice and the decision becomes pointless. If I spend the entire game creating a certain character and then at the last suddenly veer off in a new direction just so I can keep playing, then what's the point in all the previous stuff I did that defined my character? It all comes down to one decision, which has only one viable option.

    Either the endgame is no fun, or the big morality choice utterly fails as I make a decision completely removed from the context of my character, the plot, the world, the game. I stop being the noble, eccentric adventurer I've been for the rest of the game and just become a bloke sitting on the sofa pressing a button to continue.

    Neither of those is good.

  • Bluetooth #130 3 years ago

    For the 10 or so hours that I played Fable 2, I loved it. Certainly one of the best this year, if not this generation. Of course I would've played more, but then I progressed into the Hero of Will mission to rescue Garth and it crashed. Subsequent game loads (seeing as the game so nicely saved right before the crash) mean I am loading a black screen of death, where I can't even quit to the dashboard.

    Seeing as I loved the game so much, I restarted again - without getting married, having babies with multiple wives, and charging 200% rent. I go into Brightwood tower again, poor and single, hoping the lack of extra game save data would get me though. Cutscene ends - deja vu. Another crash, another duff save file.

    F off Lionhead.

  • busboy33 #131 3 years ago

    @kangarootoo:

    Now I am 1337 haxx0rz!!

    Thank you kanga!! The first thing I've learned this week that was actually useful.

  • Scimarad #132 3 years ago

    "Why didn't I just save the dog? Well, at the end of the game my character is faced with a MORAL choice."

    I was definitely roleplaying when playing this game:)

    Pretty much throughout the game I didn't connect with anyone other than my loyal dog though I made an effort to be 'good'. All the stuff in the Spire confused matters and I quite easily got into the habit of obeying because it seemed like the most sensible thing to do - Unfortunately I wasn't allowed take what seemed to be the logical progression from that which was to turn in the mage when he finally escaped. When I did get out of the spire I was left feeling even more confused about what to do but I finally found a place that I did immediately like - that town with all the pirates.

    Basically, the only reason I completed that main story was because there wasn't option to say "Find some other chump, you irritating cow! What, the world will end? So what!". I chose the dog at then end because my character didn't really care about anyone else apart from the people in 'pirate town'.

    What I really wanted was an option to say to that cow "You need me? Right, here's what I want..."
    Edited by 1 at 11/12/08 @ 19:57

  • Bulbatron #133 3 years ago

    PlugMonkey, I completely agree with you about the choice at the end, except that I must admit, I do regret sacrificing him quite bitterly. However, I did what I felt was in keeping with the character I was developing. I had done a few nasty things as a young hero, but had grown into a hero who did anything possible to help other people, so it had to be the sacrifice choice - even though I knew I wouldn't like the outcome. But I made the choice and I'm certainly not blaming Lionhead or anybody else for my hero's loneliness.

    I do very much wish I still had my dog, and I have to admit, I've barely touched that particular hero again since I lost the dog, but I just think that shows how well they did at making the player bond with their hero and their dog. So I am hoping that a way will be found to bring the dog back. If this never happens, I will be pretty disappointed, but this will never change my opinion on how great this game is. I did not drink the potion.

    I did console myself a little bit by creating an evil character and having another playthrough, but this time being free to be a completely selfish and imorral bastard! And I chose Love at the end of that playthrough, since it wasn't my 'proper' character and I didn't care so much about him (now her!).

    Also, about the supposed lack of an end boss fight. Surely the GIGANTIC SPIRE SHARD counts as a pretty big boss fight. It may not have been RIGHT at the end, but it was as near as dammit.

    However, just to prove I'm not just a fawning cocksucker , I will suggest a few areas that I feel could have been improved.

    The BACK button could have been used for some kind of map-screen, since the game doesn't really have any decent pictures of the map. Maybe fast-travel could have been done using the map, rather than just a list. It would help create a better sense of geography for Albion.

    What people have said about drinking potions and eating food is also true in my opinion. It would be good not to have to come out of the menu every time. Also, why can't books and documents be organised better?

    When holding down LB to go into first-person, I'd have liked to have been able to move around, rather than being rooted to the spot. I don't mean actually playing and fighting and all that in first-person, just being able to move around at walking-speed would have been good.

    It would also be good to be able to 'lock' items into your inventory so as not to accidentally sell them.

    A good suggestion I saw in the Lionhead forums (which is an addition rather than a change/fix) was an in-game camera, to take and share pictures of anything in the game, including your own hero.

    So that's it really, I loved the game. I'm unhappy with the outcomes from some of my decisions, but I made them knowing what was going to happen, and the only person at fault for the consequences of my decisions is of course, myself.

    Great stuff Lionhead, roll on the 22nd!

    EDIT: Scimarad, the pirate town is called Bloodstone. That was my favourite town too, it has so much character to it!
    Edited by 2 at 11/12/08 @ 20:34

  • smelly #134 3 years ago

    Lots of people here slagging him off i see..

    .. why dont you all come back when you're running a big major games company?

  • busboy33 #135 3 years ago

    @Plug:

    I get what you're saying, and I'm probably wrong about this, but it seems like you approached the game with a pre-concieved notion about how to "properly" play it, and it didn't fit into Fable 2 correctly.

    The climactic final battle . . . I've played more of the game, completed more of the quests, since me and Lord Lucien had our sit-down than. I've become convinced the "main" quest was only there to provide enough direction so that by the time it ended you were firmly evolving as a character in Albion, and now you're established enough that the game can become more "sandbox" than "epic RPG". If you had no direction from the get-go, it would have been chaos. Now, there's already inertia to the evolution of the character andthe world, so it will naturally tend to progress in a semi-predictable manner.

    "Creating" a character -- as I said before, the game seems like it delibrately tries to foil attempts to approach it in terms of "I'm going play as Lawfull Good this time" by giving situations and choices that "punish" you for not progressing organically. If you refused to even consider the choice of townspeople vs poochie (and I agree from a pure morality position its not even open for discussion), then your game is hampered (no poochie). you said:

    "I'm not experiencing loss and regret, I'm experiencing my game not being any fun to play any more."

    If the only thing that changed the game from "fun" to "not fun" was the absence of Poochie, then respectfully you ARE feeling loss and regret -- to play as a completely sin-free character, you had to give up (experience loss) what apparently was the one thing that made the game "fun" for you (as I can tell, nothing else changed). You might not be bemoaning the decision ("Why oh why didn't I save Poochie?";), but you certainly sound like you are unhappy with the consequence of your decision (no Poochie, ergo no fun) and wish that the results of your actions wer edifferent (moral choice and retain the fun-producing Poochie) -- that might not be the dictionary definition of "regret", but it seems to be pretty darn close.

  • kangarootoo #136 3 years ago

    @smelly

    ".. why dont you all come back when you're running a big major games company?"

    SHHHUUUUTTTTT UUUUPPPPP!!!

    Man, what is WRONG with you? Everytime someone critisises Molyneux, you wheel out the same "you aren't allowed to critisise until you have achieved the same things" rubbish. But its rubbish. It was rubbish last time you said it, it was rubbish at the times before that, it is rubbish now and it shall still be rubbish the next time you inevitably say it.

    How many times must it be explained. You do NOT need to be able to do something yourself in order to critisise it. You just don't.

    How about, just once, you try a constructive response. You know, an opposing opinion based on fact and observation (or even purely subjective feelings, whatever). Trying to just shut down some elses opinion by telling them they aren't qualified to express it just makes it look like you KNOW they are right, but you don't like that they are right.

  • kangarootoo #137 3 years ago

    @busboy33

    +1

  • kangarootoo #138 3 years ago

    I think Bloodstone was probably my favourite spot too :)

  • Scimarad #139 3 years ago

    Bloodstone was great - It was like I had finally come home:)

  • mazzl #140 3 years ago

    i also sacrified the dogg, do regret it, but am playing through the game now as evil in local co-op and am playing it now more as a real hack slash game. loads of fun. do miss the option to set the difficulty up. fights are to easy. local co-op is really nice.
    * the fight's should have combo's
    * don't really like the expression system, it's a bit childish
    * love the bread crums trail
    * why is their money in the game? just to force you into the property management thing?
    * put a property management menu in there....
    * loved the colourfull world, graphics and all that

  • kangarootoo #141 3 years ago

    "* put a property management menu in there.... "

    Too right. I didn't do ANYTHING with furniture, as it was clearly going to be a pain in the arse. And having to trek around looking for stuff I hadn't bought yet in each town (still doing it I suppose) was hardly a flowing experience.

  • squeakyg #142 3 years ago

    Okay, I finished the game last night, so I have some things to say about the "choice".

    SPOILERS, all of it:

    I'm betting there are a lot of people like me who chose "Sacrifice" and wish they didn't. I knew I'd be losing my dog permanently, so I'm not complaining about that. Although actually, I WILL complain: there are now things in the game I can't get because I don't have a dog to dig them. After I got back to Albion I bought Farmer Giles's house and it had a dungeon attached, which was a 15-minute grind with hollow men, and what was at the end of it? An empty room. I was so perplexed that I looked at a guide online, which said your dog is supposed to dig here to find a secret "master" weapon. It doesn't work if you dig on your own. Thanks Mr Molyneux! You couldn't have tweaked it so that buried rewards are above-soil when the player has lost their dog? No?

    The trouble with the choices is that any moral person will think "Sacrifice" is more important. Thousands of people who were worked to death in slavery, or my dog? Hmm, no choice at all. But then you aren't rewarded by seeing the game world change at all. Oh, they erect a statue, but apart from the chunky base, it's still just human-sized like all the others. And it's tucked away in a corner of Bowerstone Old Town. Where is the influx of new Albion citizens? Why doesn't it affect any of the towns at all?

    The "Love" option could have been clearer. When I went to deal with Lucien, I had a lesbian wife (who I had stopped caring about), and a loving husband and children (who I really did care about). Lucien said that he killed my WIFE, and I thought, "Oh that's okay, I never even see her any more. At least you didn't touch my husband and kids." So when I was given the "Love" choice at the end, it didn't seem like I was losing anybody except my dog. But when I got back to Albion, I was dismayed to find all families dead. Mr Molyneux, why didn't you get Lucien to say: "I killed all your husbands and wives and children"? Would have been clearer.

  • kangarootoo #143 3 years ago

    All of those sound like bugs to me. Shit ones, but bugs all the same. The husbands/wives oversight in particular is a bit clumsy.

  • PlugMonkey #144 3 years ago

    "I get what you're saying, and I'm probably wrong about this, but it seems like you approached the game with a pre-concieved notion about how to "properly" play it, and it didn't fit into Fable 2 correctly."

    So, I'm not sure what you're getting at here. I think I was playing the game by letting my character develop completely organically, but then at the end of the game all that ended and was replaced by a jarringly contrived good/bad decision. As I said, to take the 'keep the dog' option would have meant completely abandoning my organic character development and making a completely cynical decision as a 'gamer' rather than a 'character'.

    If I'm feeling any emotional 'loss', I'm again feeling it outside the game, if that makes any sense. I feel more like I did when my Final Fantasy VII save corrupted and I had to start again, as opposed to the emotion I felt when Aeris died. (Do I really need to put that in a 'spoiler'? Better safe than sorry, I suppose. :D)

    I'm not missing the character of my dog, I'm frustrated because I'm not doing this:

    "I've played more of the game, completed more of the quests, since me and Lord Lucien had our sit-down than. I've become convinced the "main" quest was only there to provide enough direction so that by the time it ended you were firmly evolving as a character in Albion, and now you're established enough that the game can become more "sandbox" than "epic RPG"."

    Because I've lost a load of functionality that made the game easy/fun to play, and if I want it back I have to start the game again. By contrast, when Aeris died I wasn't just gutted because I was going to have to train up a new support class character to take into battles, I was gutted because she was one of my favourite characters.

    I just know someone who hasn't been paying attention is now going to say "Why didn't you save the dog then? You made the choice and now you're crying about the consequences."

    If I choose saving the dog just to keep the game being fun, then the game's already clunky morality system chokes its final death rattle. If I lose the dog, I lose the fun sandbox endgame element. Catch 22. PM seems to think this final decision worked and worked well. I found it forced and contrived, and anybody who is properly role-playing as anything other than a selfish cad end up with a game that is massively less fun. I don't really see that as proof that it was a triumph, as a lot of other people seem to.

    Still a great game mind, and I'll be getting the DLC, but if PM thinks everyone really liked the ending (as he said in this interview) then I want to set him straight on a few things. ;)

  • kangarootoo #145 3 years ago

    After all this time, I see your point.

    You lose the dog because that is what your character would do, but instead of the only (potentially) "negative" result being the emotional impact of that choice burning a hole in your heart, an accompanying far more contrived and "gamey" result is that you can no longer find random stuff to dig up or be guided to treasure chests (which in turn makes the game less fun, but for the wrong reason).

    I think earlier talk of the archaeologists quest being broken kind of confused things. Nothing is broken as a result of losing the dog, but the emotional impact of losing man's best friend can't be seperated from the "number crunching" impact of losing a game sub-mechanic. And after reflection I agree that this dilutes and confuses the fundamental choice the player is being asked to make.


    ... after a bit more reflection, this is perhaps still like real life but with a different balance. If exactly the same choice existed in real life, the emotional loss of a dog would still be apparent AND the functional loss of your best sheep herder would also be apparent. But perhaps the emotional loss would count for more than the loss of the sheep herder?

    Is perhaps the very root of all of this that PM chose not to let you get a different dog? I suppose in real life you might go out and find another good treasure hunter dog, which would never really mean as much to you in your heart as your original Dave-the-dog, but would at least still get the job done? Would it have made the choice even more profound, if the only penalty for the player was a purely emotional one?

  • kangarootoo #146 3 years ago

    I've thought about this a bit more, and I've changed my mind almost completely I think.

    It actually feels now as if PM wanted people to sometimes choose the dog over all of the people of Albion, because this would reinforce his idea that players would genuinely fall in lonve with the dog.... BUT its like he secretly didn't believe that would be the case, and so he loaded the dice by making it such that a player who revives the dog also gets back their various treasure hunting mechanics too.

    Its as if he could point at a player reviving the dog and say "Look, the bond between player and dog was so strong the player sacrificed all those people, even though they had been playing a good and pure character up until that time". And then hope the player doesn't pipe up and say "naaah, I just wanted the treasure hunting mechanic back 'cos I haven't got all of the silver keys yet".

    Hmmmm.

  • alexander_light #147 3 years ago

    I got the bit with Theresa - she's obviously going to turn on you. I felt it was a bit cheap though - kind of an anti-climax. Reminded me a bit of Crackdown where you find out you're the vanguard of a police state.

    To make up for it I decided to rampage through the capital killing everyone I could find, including the re-spawning guards. From 100% good to 100% evil in about 15 mins.

  • kangarootoo #148 3 years ago

    Does anyone know an equally quick way to get back to 100% good? I can't open a demon door 'cos I need a particular expression that I won't get unless I am 50% good (I am currently about 95% evil).

    I killed all the temple of light dudes ages ago and I'm not sure what other regular activity I can do that will get me in good order. I'm scoffing tofu as fast as I can, but that shit doesn't exactly grow on trees.
    Edited by 1 at 12/12/08 @ 14:41

  • kaya08 #149 3 years ago

    re. theresa
    she already has turned on you. The reason Lucien tries to kill you in the starting sequence is he was given a prediction that he would be killed by a hero. The reason you want to kill him, is him killing your sister. Just think on top of hero hill towards the end of the game Lucien says something along the lines of "I've always done just what she (Theresa) told me to".
    Then think about Luciens diary (translated by Theresa) Did it not seem like large portions where left out. ie. the reason for him wanting to kill you, why he cared if Garth was one of the three. Lucien was a pawn, played (along with you) by theresa. She played him into building the spire and she played you into getting the spire for her. He was a rubbish end boss. He wasn't rubbish because it wasn't a standard boss fight with me waiting for him to open his mouth or some other rubbish weak point, he was rubbish because he was a nobody.
    Really the end choice was a minor gripe for me. The total and utter lack of any finality in the game annoyed me far more. There's a ridiculous amount of unfinished business in the world. (Knothole Glade, that other town in the original fable with snow around the place, the northern islands with Scythe, restoring Oakvale, meeting up with Garth, Hammer, and Stephen Fry at later points and Rose if you picked the love option or do you get a letter from her regardless of your choice? ).
    Someone used Star Wars as a defence for this episodic content. But the first film tied up all its loose ends, and all the story lines it had begun. It could stand on its own and be a complete story. The second was advertised as a part of trilogy and they never tried to decieve anyone into thinking that it was going to finish off the star wars story.
    Fable 2 did, it was never called Fable 2 - episode 1, which it basically is. It was priced as a full price game, it was always represented as a full game and its not.
    The part of Fable I loved was realising I could crap myself, staying drunk throughout the hobbe cave occasionally stopping to puke on guy who lost kid, stiking fear in my enemies with a dreaded sock puppet show, basically the expressions.Having a gang bang with a half dozen women, collecting STD's and sharing them with wife (she gave me the first one so she deserves it, never marry a prostitute).
    But the main story line was ... who knows i'll judge it when they bother finishing it. The fighting was easy, but quite enjoyable. The people of albion are a disaster, there incredibly annoying, and with the odd exception (bards, lute player in Bower Old Town, Storyteller in Gypsy camp) vacuous. They seem to have a hive mind - If one hates you they all hate you (I'm actually going to attempt to completely and utterly wipe them out today, anyone know if its possible). Breadcrumb trail was fine, you can turn it off if it bothers you and its a nice option. For every part they did well they made a monumental cock up
    end essay ... sorry

  • kaya08 #150 3 years ago

    @ kangarootoo

    Give some money to a beggar, think 1k = 1 good

  • kangarootoo #151 3 years ago

    GET IN! Cheers dude.

    Man, that beggar is going to be frickin' delighted to see me.

  • kaya08 #152 3 years ago

    Mine wasn't gave her 500k and she said thanks gave her another 500k and she said 'meh, you've already given me money' or something to that extent. The dreaded sock puppets of death came out at that point.

  • PlugMonkey #153 3 years ago

    But perhaps the emotional loss would count for more than the loss of the sheep herder?

    Is perhaps the very root of all of this that PM chose not to let you get a different dog?

    That thought occurred to me too. If the dog (or indeed any of the people) had a bit more personality, then I might feel the loss a bit more and they wouldn't have to remove all dog functionality to get the point across. If I'd had to train my dog like a Black and White creature instead of reading a book to him I'd have much more of an investment in him. They could give me a new dog, but I'd have to retrain him and he'd never be quite the same, so I'd feel the loss and it would be set in a far better context. The fact that I'm now the king of Albion and can't find another hound at any price just makes it seem even more forced.

    Re: virtuosity. As well as giving money to beggars, you could also have massive adulterous gang bangs - as long as you wear a rubber. Having a three in a bed romp with a married woman and two prostitutes was apparently so 'virtuous' it caused me to sprout a fucking halo!

  • kangarootoo #154 3 years ago

    @kaya08

    Nuts. Sounds like they may have capped the "good" benefit available so that millionaires can't just buy their way into heaven.

    @PlugMonkey

    "If the dog (or indeed any of the people) had a bit more personality, then I might feel the loss a bit more"

    I found this to be completely the case with my short lived wife. I got married, but found the experience utterly hollow (not sure quite what I was expecting, but there you go) as she was no different to every other person who would declare their undying love for me just because I had let off in my pants and dusted the strongs of a banjo for 5 seconds.

    So I took her on a one way day trip to the Temple of Shadows (ahes, if anyone is interested in the outcome) and consequently the authorities took away my offspring (which actually did make me feel a bit bad, even though I had never seen the wee nipper's face). As soon as I got back into town from my jolly day of coporate murder, I had 3 or 4 villagers all vying to be her replacement because they liked the look of my posh trousers. "Where is the love?" I asked myself.

    Cheers for the gangbang tip as well. I guess so long as one legitimate spouse is present it is considered to be a holy act. Though I might write the Pope and ask if he agrees before I run it by my girlfriend, just for extra leverage.

  • kaya08 #155 3 years ago

    My good character was rewarded for keeping the shadow seal by getting bright red eyes. I've heard of other people having flies flying around their character despite having morality and purity maxed, some of the characteristics seem to be independent of morality / purity sliders.

  • kaya08 #156 3 years ago

    @kangarootoo

    Did it not work, I went from 100% evil to 100% good in two donations. (both 500k)

  • kaya08 #157 3 years ago

    Also with the dog's personality I found the more attention you paid to him, the more personality (and skills) he got.
    Like I spent about an hour one day getting him to piss on town guards. After a while he just started doing it on his own accord. Also if you reward him after finding chests / dig spots / silver keys his 'sensor' range grows bigger and if you reward him at the end of fights when he finishes off a downed enemy he becomes more aggressive.

  • kangarootoo #158 3 years ago

    I've not tried the beggar thing (I'm at work). I was just guessing they might have capped it. I'll give it a shot sometime over the weekend, and I'm sure all will be well.

    Btw, does anyone know where I can buy a strumpet's skirt and a farmer's hat (in the game, obviously)?

  • PlugMonkey #159 3 years ago

    "Cheers for the gangbang tip as well. I guess so long as one legitimate spouse is present it is considered to be a holy act. Though I might write the Pope and ask if he agrees before I run it by my girlfriend, just for extra leverage."

    Oh god, no. She wasn't my wife. She just happened to be in a house I was robbing. And the prostitutes just kept following me round everywhere and refused to leave, so I thought 'what the hell'. Woke up with a halo. Quite a night that must have been.

    I never married, for the same reasons as you state. When almost every woman in the kingdom is throwing themselves at me, and the few that remain can be convinced if I just change my hat, there didn't seem to be any particular reason to pick one in particular. There's just no difference apart from a few different adjectives when you view their details.

    This made the final decision even more skewed I guess, as I didn't have a family. My generally good natured character was basically being asked to damn thousands of people in order to save his dog, who by this stage must have been at least 35 years old. That's 245 in dog years. He deserved to go and live on that nice big farm my parents told me about.

    kaya08 - Thinking about it, if my dog was replaced by a crap dog who refused to fight and spent half the time getting me to dig up bones, I would actually miss my old dog more wile still retaining the basic dog functionality.

  • kangarootoo #160 3 years ago

    "Oh god, no. She wasn't my wife. She just happened to be in a house I was robbing"

    Lol. Hehehe, that tickled me.

  • kaya08 #161 3 years ago

    I spent a ridiculously long time messing around with my dog. I could live without the functionality, the dig spots by and large are pretty worthless, it would be losing one of the very few personalities in the world and basically an extension of my character that I would've missed.

    EDIT: sturmpet skirt (or tart skirt) is in bloodstone clothing shop. Farmer hat (or yokel hat) is in Oakfield clothing shop btw
    Edited by 1 at 12/12/08 @ 16:44

  • kangarootoo #162 3 years ago

    Whoohoo!

    You are a mine of info. With my yokel hussy like clothing and mad crazy charity givin' skilz, I shall be the talk of the town (insert pun about it opening doors here).

  • brappbrap #163 3 years ago

    I called my dog Ross Kemp

  • busboy33 #164 3 years ago

    @ kanga:

    AS far as I know, the quickest way to max good or evil is drop or jack rents/prices as far as possible, assuming you have lots of property. Haven't tried this myself, but I've been told that this will flip the morality scale rapidly, again assuming you've accumulated lots of property.

    edit: . . . although max morality swing in 2 donations to beggars certainly trumps this pain-in-the-ass method for rapidity and simplicity. Okay, 2nd fastest way?
    Edited by 1 at 13/12/08 @ 07:14

  • busboy33 #165 3 years ago

    @ squeaky:

    can't get weapon under farm: that might not be a mising dog thing, but rather a glitch thing. I've still got poochie, cleared every goddamn inch of the dungeon, and no dig prompt. Stepped on all the trigger plates, killed all hollow men . . . nothing.

    Anybody lose Poochie and still get the weapon under the farm?

  • busboy33 #166 3 years ago

    @Plug:

    Hmmmmm . . . . I'm deeply conflicted at this point -- darn you and you cogent, valid argument! This is teh Interwebs, for God's sake!

    My confusion seems to be based on the fact that I agree with what you say, but don't end up at the same feeling, and I'm not clear as to why that is. Everything you point out is a true and real deficiency in the game, no doubt. I guess I just ended up feeling different at the end, which may well be strongly related to Poochie still being around. (I wuvs my Poochie-Woochie! Wes I do! Who's a good Poochie?)

    Maybe if you chose "Sacrifice" a big Poochie statue in the center of Bowerstone to pull the heartstrings every time you stop by? Or paintings on walls in every home, to follow you with painted eyes whenever you go into someone's house? Or mabye occasionally in the woods or a dungeon, you hear a faint barking, or catch a glimpse of Poochie in the distance, but can never catch him? Something to make it more of an emotionally painful consequence as opposed to just "no more digging up crap". And there certainly should be more of a payoff for the decision -- the ressurected townsfolk build you a unique, magical house, eclusive additional quests, etc.

    Loss of functionality without a replacement or comparable addition is a flaw, agreed and no argument. I guess I've decided that 98% of the stuff Poochie finds is useless/worthless/pointless at this stage (another meatpie? Thanks Poochie . . . you're the greatest!), so losing that didn't feel like it would change the game from "fun" to "not fun" to me. I felt like the greatest benefit of Poochie is like Kara said -- he's the only damn character (aside from the Heroes) that has more depth than Paper Mario, and he's the only character I control the evolution of: I ignored him completely for a day or so, then noticed that not only wasn't he alerting to anything, but his tail stayed between his legs, he whinedat me if I stood stil too long, etc. I felt guilty and spent an hour playing fetch and giving treats, and he sprang back to life . . . but became a complete wimp and constantly demanded I play with him. It was a refreshingly wierd dynamic in a game -- here were demonstrable, impactful changes in a game character, than frankly didn't have any effect on the actual gameplay, just changed how I thought about the character. It seemed like a unique aspect to Fable2, that I was spending time on "irrevelant" aspects and received satisfaction from it. Still, you're certainly illustrating a painful and glaring defeciency in the game.

  • busboy33 #167 3 years ago

    @kaya and her spoiler plot explanation:

    Man, I hope you're wrong, although you make a persuasive argument. I hope you're wrong . . .

    . . . not because it's not a good "story" twist but because that just seems like a complete peversion of the Teresa character from the 1st game. Granted, she wasn't too well developed as a character, and what little we did learn certainly didn't make her a saint, but she didn't give any suggestion of "mad despot in training", which seems like what your hypothesis would have required. I liked her being amoral and self-serving in the first . . . I'd have to see a HELL of a substantial explanation to justify her turning into an Evil Ultimate Baddie.

    But yeah, I totally missed the connections you pegged. Good eyes.

  • PlugMonkey #168 3 years ago

    Hmmmmm . . . . I'm deeply conflicted at this point -- darn you and you cogent, valid argument! This is teh Interwebs, for God's sake!

    Heh heh. Sorry. I'm not playing by the rules. ;)

    I reckon if I'd chosen the 'save the dog' ending I probably might feel differently as well. I don't think I made my initial point very well either - which was more about the final choice being rather forced and contrived than the fallout of sacrificing the dog, which really just compounded the issue.

    If I'd lost the dog for a better reason, I wouldn't have minded the consequence as much. If sacrificing the dog was less of a handicap, I wouldn't have minded the decision being so contrived.

  • kangarootoo #169 3 years ago

    Don't know if anyone is still reading this.

    I found that massive beggar donations made me good but not moral. A price drop of most of my Bloodstone properties did the trick though after I came back to the game after a few days away. So my character that used to be super evil and corrupt is now a bastion of saintlyness. And I finally ate enough celery that he isn't all fat anymore too (not suggesting being fat is evil OR corrupt btw).

  • EMarkM #170 3 years ago

    @busboy33

    "can't get weapon under farm: that might not be a mising dog thing, but rather a glitch thing. I've still got poochie, cleared every goddamn inch of the dungeon, and no dig prompt. Stepped on all the trigger plates, killed all hollow men . . . nothing.

    Anybody lose Poochie and still get the weapon under the farm?"

    This one bugged out on me at first too: once I left the dungeon and cam back in, the "dig spot: activated my dog straightaway.

  • haoya #171 2 years ago

    for cocktail dresses, dresses for prom, homecoming dresses, and evening dresses. Cheap prom dresses or couture designer evening gowns for your next formal.
    evening dresses
    Wedding Gowns
    Evening Gowns