Fable III Preview

By Oli Welsh Published 12 February, 2010

You rule.

"Our job at Lionhead is to surprise and shock you," says Peter Molyneux, kicking off his presentation of Fable III at Microsoft's X10 event in San Francisco. Does he shock us? Not quite. Does he surprise us? Absolutely.

We're surprised by some of the details: unique, morphing weapons that can be traded online, customisable magic based entirely on equipment, the removal of RPG staples like experience and a health bar, and the subtle reach of the Touch system, the emotional heart of the game. More than that, we're surprised at the extent - almost exponential - to which Lionhead is increasing Fable's scale and ambition while relentlessly pursuing an agenda of extreme simplicity and accessibility. Surprised, and very excited.

"More than half the people that played Fable II understood and used less than half the features in the game," Molyneux says, recalling an eye-opening piece of research that changed his whole approach to the sequel. "As soon as you see that you think, 'Oh my God, what a talentless bastard I really am'."

So the HUD fades away, the combat is ruthlessly simplified, and in a stunning move against the prevailing winds that have blown XP from RPGs into virtually every other genre in recent years, the whole concept of gaining experience which is spent on new abilities has been scrapped.

Instead, your hero's growth, your increasing power in the fantasy land of Albion, will be mainly represented by the number of followers he or she has. This (as well as being an amusing echo of Twitter mania) ties in with Fable III's theme and its narrative arc: the road to power, and what you do with it when you get it.

'Fable III' Screenshot 1

Peter Molyneux, yesterday. Literally.

"I want you as a player to feel powerful, I want to give you the ability right all the wrongs in the world," Molyneux says. "I could just give you the normal story, the Hero's Journey. That's pretty much what every film, book and certainly game does - why is it always like that? If it's all about power, the problem is the end of [that story]. I want to feel like the bloke who defeated the bad guy."

The is a bad guy to defeat, naturally: Logan, a king whose tyrannical rule has turned Albion, the bucolic fantasy England of the first two Fable games, from a medieval idyll into an industrial nightmare.

Molyneux's colleague fires up the game and shows us scenes more reminiscent of Dickens and Lowry than Tolkien. We're in a city choked with grime and beggars, dominated by dark red-brick factories and workhouses with tall smoke-stacks. Our hero has a Napoleonic, piratical flavour, with a one-armed frock-coat, a tricorn hat and a cutlass on his back. It's 50 years after Fable II, and the industrial revolution has just arrived.

You will defeat Logan about halfway through the game - and for Molyneux, what happens next is what's most interesting. You'll defeat him by persuading the people of Albion to follow you and believe in you, which will give you the power to overthrow him - but to persuade them, you're going to have to promise "whatever it takes," he says.

'Fable III' Screenshot 2

Matchstalk men and matchstalk cats and dogs not pictured.

"You're going to promise to turn all the factories into schools - then when you're on the throne you're going to have to deliver those promises. Will you become worse than [Logan] or better than him?"

Molyneux doesn't elaborate on how ruling will work, whisking us on to the topic of Touch. Touch arose out of his dissatisfaction with Fable II's gimmicky expressions which, he felt, were ultimately only good for fart jokes. Touch is "your emotional connection with everything in the world". It might involve hitting someone or hugging them - but, in what Molyneux freely admits is a nod to ICO, its main expression is through holding hands.

His colleague demonstrates. The hero's wife asks him to find their lost daughter. He uses his dog companion to do this through a new system Molyneux actually calls "context-sensitive scenting", allowing the hound to track down people and things within the world. (A couple of other things have changed about the dog, apparently, but Molyneux won't say what.)

Child found, our hero scolds and then hugs her with Touch, before taking her hand and leading her back through the streets. She's still an independent AI character throughout this time, chatting away, commenting on and responding to the environment.

A darker example occurs when he leads a beggar who's defaulted on a debt to a factory to sell him, effectively, into slavery. Initially he confidently takes the player's hand, but as soon as they're through the factory gates he needs to be dragged kicking and screaming, saying that if he's left here he'll be dead in two weeks.

You can use Touch in any situation, in combat, when you're king - dragging characters to dungeons or the gallows. Molyneux hopes Touch will drive home the emotional weight of such decisions, and says it's absolutely central to Fable III. "Touch is the first thing taught in the game," he says. "You can apply that trigger anywhere, at any time."

He's evasive on how it will be controlled, however. There will be visual cues not in the current build of the game, such as glows around people you can touch, and "we've replaced functionality of the A button to an extent", but it's not clear how you'll be able to change the tone of your physical interactions. This is one area of the game where the promised support of Natal, Microsoft's new motion-sensing device, might come into play.

Combat is "a lot simpler and more accessible," says Molyneux, with a one-button system that unleashes light attacks with fast taps and heavier ones you build up by holding the button down. This isn't capped at all, so you could hold down the button for hours to deliver a "thermonuclear explosion" if you wanted, and the same system works across melee weapons, guns and magic.

In the demo, a half-naked hero with a giant axe who's clearly taken the evil path butchers opponents with heavy, slow-motion finishing blows. We're in a dungeon, a huge, high, open and atmospheric cave that will be fully navigable. There's a surprising amount of blood spattering about; the gore level adjusts to your moral alignment since, quite simply, evil players of the previous games wanted to see more blood, and good players wanted to see less. Phantom wings flash behind the hero as he strikes, the size and colour of which will show your power level and alignment.

'Fable III' Screenshot 3

Touch screen.

But that's just the least of the visual representations of your achievements and choices in Fable III. As in its predecessors, your character will morph, but instead of physical attributes being dictated by stats (a particular problem with female avatars who tended to end up looking like "shot-putters", Molyneux says) they will be influenced by weapon choice.

"If you want to be big and strong use a big weapon. If you want to be lithe and slender and graceful, use pistols and swords. If you want to be magical and mysterious, use magical objects like rings."

In the game's most visually striking change, those weapons (including magical objects) will now morph with you. They'll be unique, bearing your gamertag and changing according to how they've been used, and how much.

They'll have their own alignment, dripping with blood or glowing with a holy aura depending on how many innocents they've killed. Very aligned weapons will start singing of things that have happened to them when you take them out, a reference to Michael Moorcock.

Weapons' size is dictated by the number of kills and appearance by what enemies they've slaughtered - an axe that has killed a lot of Hobs will look like it's made out of Hob parts. They'll even have detailing drawn from your gamerscore.

'Fable III' Screenshot 4

Cave story.

"We're just bored of making more weapons for you," Molyneux says. He recalls how dispirited the team at Lionhead got when considering the 200 weapons they were going to have to design to beat Fable II's tally of 150. "People are going to be bored," he remembers thinking. "Why don't we get you, the gamer, to craft the weapons? You craft them by using them. Any weapon will reflect the way you use it and what you've done with it."

You can even trade a weapon online, selling to other players in whose hands it will continue to grow and change, although it will always bear your name. We ask if this means there'll be some sort of auction house, an economy tying Fable III's players together, but Molyneux, with a visible effort, dodges the question. "Something like that," he says, explaining that he can't go any further without digging into the online side of Fable III for which Lionhead appears to have very big plans that it's not ready to talk about.

He does mention that online co-op is a "really big feature"; that Touch can be used with other players invited into your world, and that you can even marry them; that they'll bring their own morphed weapons and dog with them into your world; and that players will no longer be tied to a single camera or area, but will be able to split up and do entirely separate things within the same game world.

If Lionhead can make this most individual and personalised of RPGs a truly social, connected game - something it never quite managed to do with Fable II - it will be a great achievement. We're anxious to know more, but in truth, our heads are already spinning.

It was a typically Molyneux presentation, stronger in suggestion and rhetoric than hard detail. But Fable III's ideas are bold and clear, and the game on the screen was solid and handsome and bursting with character. The king might just have found his crown.

Fable III is due out exclusively for Xbox 360 this "holiday season".

Picture of Oli.

About Oli Welsh

Oli is Eurogamer's acting deputy editor and reviews editor and likes to take things one word at a time. He is among the best dressed people in South London.

Read more articles from Oli by visiting the Oli Welsh archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (108) Latest comment 2 years ago

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

  • MaFlippinHeadHurts #1 2 years ago

    Really looking forward to this

  • JunglistVIP #2 2 years ago

    That photo makes him look like the yellow guy from Sin City

  • Armoured_Gideon #3 2 years ago

    The fact that it will have true co-op is enough to make it tempting for me. The 'invisible rope' version in Fable 2 was a bit of a letdown in an otherwise terrific game for me.

  • mkreku #4 2 years ago

    Oh no. It sounds fantastic, as usual.. and then you remember it's Molyneux. Help help I must keep my hype level low!

  • Batfink #5 2 years ago

    Sounds exciting, but then so did Fable 2 and I got bored of that about 1/2 way through

  • mingster #6 2 years ago

    Meh.. Just do an updated Dungeon Keeper and you will have my money.

  • Svalbaard #7 2 years ago

    This should be interesting. Love his games or hate his games, Pete and his team have always stayed on the cutting edge of games design and it sounds like there are some refreshing new design features to make this stand out from the crowd.

    Of course, if you can't embrace new ideas, or if they scare you, then you can always go back to wanking yourself off over Elder Scrolls or WOW.

    Hope this is a hit.

  • Shinetop #8 2 years ago

    I can't wait for the Slave Trader achievement. That dragging a beggar into a factory bit sounds hilarious.

  • hiddenranbir #9 2 years ago

    I liked Fable 2 and understood what Peter was attempting. Sure he doesn't manage to pull of everything he tries but the fact he tries to push envelopes in an industry that is very happy to recycle 'safe' games with few attempts to test your tastes is a good thing in my book.

    svalbaard said it too!

    Also loving the world of Albion moving, again, in time to a more steampunky age that 2 gave a tasting of. Love the steamin' punk.

  • Dizzy #10 2 years ago

    Good to see more procedural stuff sneaking in. Sounds all really cool... I love the direction Lionhead is taking.

    My pet project ;)

  • thisisatempaccount #11 2 years ago

    Ye Gods, is the word 'follow' in all of its forms now the exclusive domain of Twitter? Having followers has been big since Jesus, and come to think of it, he seemed to get a whole lot more done with twelve than Steven Fry or Perez Hilton ever will with their thousands..

  • FladgeMangle #12 2 years ago

    I just hope for the sake of all the Molly fans that it actually works. Genuinely I do.

    However, he does have a history of promising the world and then delivering a big bag of broken mechanics and disappointment.

    @Anthony_Daniels - You trolling is utterly pointless. 4/10 for a 360 exclusive Lionhead game on this site?.

  • OnlyMe #13 2 years ago

    I think this sounds good, although I'm not so sure I want to see less blood just because I'm playing a good guy (which I usually do). Heck, if someone was to rape my daughter and kill my wife, I would certainly want to go all Kratos on that someone, and I'd want to see him suffer.

  • StanleyPointLarge #14 2 years ago

    "Meh.. Just do an updated Dungeon Keeper and you will have my money. "

    yeah, that would be great. I still liked fable II tho, although it wasn't without problems. I can't help thinking making the combat 'easier' is a good thing, how easy does it need to be?!?!

    And some decent drop in drop out co-op like ResEvil5 would be great. The implementation in Fable II was rubbish.

    Unless it's a complete turkey, i'll still end up getting this just for the atmosphere. Walking round the towns of Fable II was always fun for me, plus the english speaking actors really helped with this. :D

  • TeaFiend #15 2 years ago

    I can marry other players? If that is like my past Fable experience I will then proceed to kill them in some dramatic way, upset the town, slaughter the town, eat some celery and leave.

  • hiddenranbir #16 2 years ago

    Yes, the voicing agency they used was top notch. Likes of Julia Sawalha, Stephen Fry, Corden, Stephen freakin' Greif! Probably more I've not figured out yet too.

  • Jeepers #17 2 years ago

    Fable and Fable 2 both had their charms, but both suffered - imo - from some pretty extraordinarily bad design decisions. Having your stash of gold grow even when the game wasn't loaded soon meant that money had no value; customising the character based on the foods you ate brought us back to San Andreas levels of grind-to-customise chores.

    He's a great industry figure, but I wish that he'd spend as much time getting the details right as he did imagning the big, high-concept ideas.

    I'll still buy it, I'm sure ;)

  • actionfitz #18 2 years ago

    ""As soon as you see that you think, 'Oh my God, what a talentless bastard I really am'."

    uh oh. Must not comment... too ... easy...
    ah!

    nah to be fair i've always loved the look and feel of the fable games, shame though that they last about 4 hours each unless you delight in buying houses and kicking chickens.

  • Bertie Verified Senior Staff Writer, Eurogamer.net #19 2 years ago

    Sounds brilliant. Fable II was great.

  • Segnit #20 2 years ago

    Leading Albion and the whole political aspect to it sounds very appealing to me. But the game sounds too ambitious to have been pulled off right in just 2 years of dev time. What's the catch Peter?

  • des #21 2 years ago

    You can marry other players...hmm

  • Shinetop #22 2 years ago

    But the game sounds too ambitious to have been pulled off right in just 2 years of dev time. What's the catch Peter?

    Not having to develop a new graphics engine from scratch ought to have helped.

  • Dizzy #23 2 years ago

    >Not having to develop a new graphics engine from scratch ought to have helped.

    Indeed... focus has obviously been on features. Looking at the screens the engine is tweaked but probably just a team of a few experts has been busy with that while the rest of the gang could go wild with content.

  • lavalant #24 2 years ago

    Look and feel of Fable is awesome, it's the other things that are crap, you know like the game design, isn't that PM's department??

  • crazyhorse174 #25 2 years ago

    Without trying to sound like a prick, and not getting on at Molyneux - but how much of what he says do you actually expect to end up in the game?

  • Lee_Morris #26 2 years ago

    Must resist buying a 360.

  • CaptainScarlet #27 2 years ago

    lol at Peter!

    So rather than make 150 weapons which the team didn't enjoy they will now have to make 150 weapons and umpteen different iterations of the weapon to accommodate the growing and morphing! Typical bloody designer. No real concept of the consequences of his ideas. Where does this he think that the morph states will come from? The player? His own arse?

    jeez!

  • hiddenranbir #28 2 years ago

    Actually they won't have to design that many combinations. It allows simple rules to limit the variations.

  • SUNDANSS #29 2 years ago

    Molyneux bugs me with his bullshit marketing speak, it's always the emperors clothes with his games. Oh look, a wall I want to jump over to take a short cut. Nope, can't do that so have to find a gate. Oh look, a villager who looks exactly the same as 10 others in the last village and talks with a terrible olde English accent. Oh look, a bad guy on the road. I will shoot him with my bow while he stands there and waits to die.
    Sorry for the rant, but he really bugs me!!

  • miiiguel #30 2 years ago

    Sorry to crash the bashing party, but for me it sounds pretty exciting.
    Then again, it is Friday, things do look better, generaly.

  • Eraysor #31 2 years ago

    Sounds very impressive. This is why western RPGs are so much better than Japanese ones nowadays - they actually bother to push the boundaries forward rather than sitting in the ancient Final Fantasy groove.

  • Quint2020 #32 2 years ago

    A lot of the new stuff like the touch system and the weapons that customise themselves to you all sound really cool but the combat system sounds dull and even mashier than the one in Fable II and I'm still not convinced on the levelling system....

  • InternetRed #33 2 years ago

    Instead of this whole exp/follower system, what if he made a system where the user did not gain exp or have skills, but relied entirely on the weapons, and the ability to learn? Say the second analogue stick controls sword movement. You know how to slash and hack as the game explains that to you, but then you wonder "if I twist the sword when I parry, can I disarm?" Bingo. Trainers in the game teach you real-time, how to do skills, but, you can sit and practice until you make combos which allow you to maybe parry and thrust past defences, or make them react, while you hack at their ankles, so on and so forth. People in game can show other people in game, people can post on forums about the latest ability they have 'made', and so on. Sword fighting and such will get a bit stale as there's only so much you can do with the analogue stick (and maybe a button or two), but then magic rears it's head. Imagine when you cast a spell, you "pause" the game, (or slow it down), and then draw a rune sequence using the analogue stick. You know, X is Fire, and T is throw, so you can do TX to throw flames. However as you go along, books and trainers (or sitting messing with it) will teach you how to string together more runes, allowing you to do many more things. Maybe you throw an illusion that the people are on fire, and when they run around, you telekensis their weapons from the ground. Maybe you combo a slip ability with a nature restraint, causing the target to fall over and vines reach up and grab the person, before then finishing them off with a shot to the head.

    I dunno.

  • Dizzy #34 2 years ago

    "So rather than make 150 weapons which the team didn't enjoy they will now have to make 150 weapons and umpteen different iterations of the weapon to accommodate the growing and morphing"

    Err... please refrain from talking about technical things. You have no clue.

    It is much easier to write code that will do the morphing for you based on a number of parameters then to create weapons by hand. The procedural weapons will ofc all fall withing certain parameters and have the same wide selection of handmade weapon looks (well depending on how expansive the procedural code is).

  • andywilkie35 #35 2 years ago

    Eggsellent, can't wait

  • Alterego-X #36 2 years ago

    So, what about Natal? He said it would be used, but even if it is, based on this review it is just a gimmicky side feature, not a core part of the combat, this is still a controller-based game.

  • darm #37 2 years ago

    wtf, even more simplified combat? is there really a way to make it more primitive?

    Apart from that, a very exciting preview, granted I loved Fable 2(although it looked like an insult to western RPGs at first glance). Have to keep hopes low, though: PM has been known to be over-promising and exagerating.

  • DrR0b3rts #38 2 years ago

    I loved the way Fable II integrated other player's icons zipping round the world, that's as close to an MMO as I'd want to get. Looking forward to this.

  • Byzanite #39 2 years ago

    "You're going to promise to turn all the factories into schools"

    .. so the children can have no jobs to go to? Sounds like some Utopian nightmare lol

  • kestral #40 2 years ago

    get the clue, it's no longer about the combat, it's just a vehicle for progression.

  • Eraser #41 2 years ago

    Touch, Morphing weapons, dogs, interaction with NPCs... that's cute and all, but will the game itself be any fun to play? I didn't think Fable 2 was a particularly good game. Yes, you could do a lot in there, in that world, but ultimately, the core gameplay was pretty weak IMO.

  • Load_2.0 #42 2 years ago

    Make combat simpler?

    Holy kerap, how simple can it get? The worst part of fable 2 was the fact it was just button mashing simplicity.

    How about introducing some tactics? You could pretty much wade in and batter every combatant after shooting up a few levels and it made combat dull in both of the previous incarnations.

  • Hypercube #43 2 years ago

    I enjoyed Fable II, and completed it, but lost interest after that even though there are apparently more missions/quests left.

    I liked my dog though.

  • kangarootoo #44 2 years ago

    Some genuinely interesting ideas. I don't buy into the hype, but neither will I dismiss this because of it. I'll wait for a review, then maybe a demo, then maybe my own playthrough before forming a concrete opinion.

  • hiddenranbir #45 2 years ago

    Why should Fable have rts level tactics for combat?

    I personally think Diablo should be more interesting than just mashing LMB to attack the enemy while my hands hover the hotkeys of mana and health potions. But of course, that would be heresy to ask Diablo to be more complex than it is. :p

  • jimboton #46 2 years ago

    Whenever P M speaks about the latest interactions, behaviours and possibilities to be featured in the latest Fable game I can't help but think what tremendous fun must it be to come up with and do all this stuff. I mean designing a Fable game has to be about 10-20 times more fun than the methodical task involved in crafting your regular Zelda game with all its carefully scripted pacing, tightly balanced gameplay, complex puzzley dungeons and that huge overworld full of secrets.. with Fable you unleash your innovative procedural code and advanced A.I. routines and hope for the player to have tremendous fun exploring the intrincacies of the system you've created... unfortunately we all know by now what all of this translates to in the gaming end (fart jokes mostly as Pete himself puts it). Fable games are so clever in concept yet so dumb in actual play..

    So my opinion is: Peter Molyneux is a talented bastard. It's quite obvious that he is talented and he is a bastard because he keeps the best of the Fable experience (the making of it) for himself and his Lionhead chums, but expects us to enjoy (and pay for) a simplistic toy which doesn't really work as a game in any way (much less the role playing one) no matter how open minded you are about it.

    How about you make games again for the other 'half of the players' Pete? You know, the half that can put the effort needed to understand and enjoy a truly interesting (complex) game such as this?

  • makeamazing #47 2 years ago

    I always like games that push the "Things that you do will have an effect on the world"... this is what I personally want more of in games. I want it visually and gameplay wise, so even if PM doesnt live upto some expectations, I am glad he is moving forward in this area of gaming.

  • Nightbite #48 2 years ago

    I think Lionhead would do a lot better having someone other than Emporer's Tailor Molyneux talking about the games - he always massively over-hypes them, probably makes half of this stuff up mid-interview, annoys the hell out the actual grafters on his development team that have to make the impossible happen, and ultimately disappoint. I wouldve enjoyed ALL of Lionhead's creations significantly more if he hadn't sold me the moon on a stick in the first place. This game will be good - their skill is undeniable, but it wont be a scratch on his promised "vision". Also, I hate the way he's always to quick to criticise his former work - "only good for fart jokes" - a ten year old would have had the foresight to predict that, yet he didnt manage it?

  • Rubarack #49 2 years ago

    I don't get why half of the players only using half the features is a problem, I'd rather play a game with hidden depths that I don't explore than Snakes and Ladders because the designer is worried not everyone will understand getting hit by a sword is bad.

  • Petulant_Radish #50 2 years ago

    I’ve never understood why people who post of a gaming forum can have such unabashed vitriol for a man who clearly loves games and is passionate about trying new ideas and attempting to push the boundaries of how you interact with them.

    Sure he might fail on delivering what he’s aspired to, but that doesn’t mean he should be vilified for it, he loves talking about them because he gets excited, that should be applauded. With failure comes learning, with learning comes improvement.

    Anyway, before I develop a man crush for him I’ll just say I’ll be looking forward to this, I loved Fable II, for all its faults and quirks it was a wonderful charming game.

  • Bremenacht #51 2 years ago

    I agree. Much better to hear him, than a play-safe suit who avoids saying anything that might turn out wrong, or a weasel who only ever implies things.

  • captainrentboy #52 2 years ago

    ''That photo makes him look like the yellow guy from Sin City '' Haha, I was about to post the exact same thing but thought I'd read the comments first to see if anyone else picked up on it, waddya know? The second bloody post. :)
    I hope the online co-op isn't as shitty as the second one's, what's the point if they can only move about 10 metres away from you? That was really dissapointing.
    And I think Molyneux could, already, be exagerating some of the things you can do in this new one. Nuclear explosion filled Axe swings!!??? Really??? :)
    Still, the touch thing sounds pretty cool and is surely the gameplay mechanic that will make use of Natal.
    Edited by 1 at 12/02/10 @ 13:38

  • kangarootoo #53 2 years ago

    @Rubarack

    I agree. RPG games of all the genres are surely ripe for players not using anywhere close to all of the mechanics. The whole point is that you craft your own experience, so you would surely expected the experience of each player to differ from that of the next, which in turn suggests each player will NOT experience aspects of the game that the next player does experience.

    Cutting content based on the number of players that get to see it is the sort of thing bad publishers say (I once had a publisher telling me we shouldn't allow to skip cutscenes, purely because they had cost money to make and so in his mind every player should be forced to experience them - the glaring fact of the gamer having already spent money buying the game, which would not get refunded just 'cos he skipped a cutscene, fully escaped the hard minded fool).

    The ONLY thing that matters is the end experience of the player, and if multiple options (not all of which get experienced by any given player) increase the quality of that experience, then you have a strong reason to include them.

    HOWEVER, if PM is saying that cutting the number of mechanics allows each of the remaining ones to be better, that is a decent reason to consider it. That might in fact be what happened, but it ended up getting draped in misleading "50% of players..." statistics.

  • bdgr #54 2 years ago

    But nothing will beat the 'Congratulations, you are now famous enough to use the 'kiss my arse' expression'

    :)

  • jimboton #55 2 years ago

    I think Peter Molyneux goes about making games the way most of us played Theme Park: "what can I invent now to attract more of these mindless halfwits to my place?"

    He's as play-safe and calculating as Bobby kotick, and it may well be that he respects the player even less. The one (huge) difference is: he actually enjoys making games (which probably makes him a much happier man than Kotick).

  • Tonka #56 2 years ago

    The hero's wife asks him to find their lost daughter. He uses his dog companion to do this through a new system Molyneux actually calls "context-sensitive scenting",


    You couldn't make that up. It reads like a Molinjö parody ffs

  • Dizzy #57 2 years ago

    "How about you make games again for the other 'half of the players' Pete? You know, the half that can put the effort needed to understand and enjoy a truly interesting (complex) game such as this? "

    How many times to people have to says this. Dungeon Keeper is OWNED by EA. Lionhead/MS can do nothing.

  • jimboton #58 2 years ago

    @ Dizzy

    How many times to people have to says this. Dungeon Keeper is OWNED by EA. Lionhead/MS can do nothing.

    .. so? has anybody asked for Dungeon Keeper 3 in this thread or something?

  • geeza2020 #59 2 years ago

    I was sceptical about this, but Pete's done it again, and got me all excited!

    If the multiplayer is as good as it sounds in the end product, it'll be worth the purchase. I don't think there has really been a good multiplayer rpg/adventure game on this gen of consoles yet. Feel free to correct me though :)

  • TeaFiend #60 2 years ago

    @Jimboton:
    See post 7.

  • darleysam #61 2 years ago

    Anyone who hates Molyneux and the things he says in interviews, needs to go read Eurogamer's live interview with Ray 'Bioware' Muzyka. That was a textbook case of play-it-safe rhetoric from a guy absolutely bound by the restrictions of PR-speak.

  • Zidargh #62 2 years ago

    I get the impression then that good or bad alignment, your character's going to come across as a molester or rapist being that you can 'touch' everyone.

  • oktava #63 2 years ago

    Yes please dumb it down even more. I want my handicapped monkey to understand 100% of the mechanics.

  • darleysam #64 2 years ago

    It amuses me that it's always the immature morons complaining that there's not enough sex in their Mass Effects, or that Fable has been dumbed down too much.

  • Segnit #65 2 years ago

    Time will tell if 2 years of pure content creation by a large team is enough time for a quality open ended product to emerge. However experience tells me that it's just not enough to enter gaming's hall of fame.

    After typing a long essay post here ... i deleted it because it all comes down to the following: Is there any chance the game will turn out equal to or better than what Peter Molyneux is describing?

    Personally, I don't think so. And the reason why I feel that way is because when Peter speaks, he's just too passionate about his project(s). Like a kid, he describes the absolute best case scenario and makes it seem like what he's working on is the holy grail of organic game design.

    Pre-release themes he touches on are usually relationships and emotions while he almost always avoids talking about any of the technical and arbitrary processes running in the background.

    I honestly believe that Peter is a visionary man but after two decades of playing games; logic and reason tell me that for him to realise the dreams he's been talking about, it takes more then just passion to make it work. It takes many years of planning, many years of developing, many countless set-backs, many release date-slips and blood, sweat and tears to boot.

    The actual problem is that simplistic combat aside, Peter is describing a game that's too good, meanwhile his track record along with reality tells us that his games are just good games with missed opportunities.

    Basically it's a missmatch between what he's saying and what he's delivering. I'd love to see what Peter could achieve with a huge budget and a lack of any publisher influence on his work.

    Edit: Why would you look at that, I deleted one essay post and ended up with another :p
    Edited by 1 at 12/02/10 @ 14:46

  • Vyggo #66 2 years ago

    Hmmm, this time it actually sounds like he has a good focus on what he wants to achieve. The things he is talking about don't sound unimplementable or overambitious. Starting to get interested in this game.
    Edited by 1 at 12/02/10 @ 14:46

  • Segnit #67 2 years ago

    I'll keep my fingers crossed but for the moment at least, I am un-enthused. Naturally I'd love to be proven wrong by the end product.

  • TitusCrow #68 2 years ago

    Now in fable 3 if you marry someone and they displease you you can give them a taste o the back of your hand! :) STELLLLAAAAA!!!!

  • Scimarad #69 2 years ago

    "...Fable II's gimmicky expressions which, he felt, were ultimately only good for fart jokes. "

    At bloody last! I always quite liked the expressions systems as an extra but it sucked as the main method of communicating with the world. I'm not sure this touch system is going to be much better, mind you.

    Aside from that I think this sounds rather promising.

  • Zidargh #70 2 years ago

    @farticus: Well said. I think that speaks more than just for gaming.
    Edited by 1 at 12/02/10 @ 15:35

  • jimboton #71 2 years ago

    It amuses me that it's always the immature morons complaining that there's not enough sex in their Mass Effects, or that Fable has been dumbed down too much.

    oh i very much doubt those are the same morons ;)

  • metalangel #72 2 years ago

    Not good. The combat has been made even more simple (if Fable 2 is anything to go on, you won't get to use those charge up attacks much as foes will run up to you and chop you before you charge much beyond a standard attack), the dog is back (PLEASE let it be optional. The dog in Dragon Age is a million times better in every respect but I don't always want to as a companion) and very little seems to have changed. So same crappy, laggy menu, worthless map, shoddy character customization, stupid "gesture" system...

  • hiddenranbir #73 2 years ago

    The dog in DA is terrible. He doesn't behave naturally to his environment because he is designed as a robot. Only becoming active if you trigger his behaviour by interacting with him. You're essentially having to press a button to turn him off and on. That goes for the same with every npc in DA too. They're inactive furniture until you activate them. DA has a good story and nice rts-lite tactics but the world you inhabit is static.

    The dog in Fable behaves as dog, whether you press the talk button with it or not. I'm not saying it is the best dog in the world but in terms of behaviour its a much better dog than the mabar war hound of fereldan.


    I plussed that farticus person.

  • SheffieldSteel #74 2 years ago

    A black sword was at his side, murmuring in its scabbard cold
    Waiting for the moment to arrive, to drink the very essence of soul
    He did not know that the sword he'd hold would turn his priceless empire into fool's gold
    The truth, the shadow of the sword will hide - til it's too late, a traitor at his side...

    See, now I'm all looking forward to it again. Personalised weapons sound great.
    I'm just wondering why Eurogamer should be so surprised that Molyneux is promising the moon onna stick. This always happens. The game is going to be a beautiful ambitious glorious mess. I will hate it, but not before I've loved it. 'S all good.

    Although.... if online co-op is the norm, will I still be able to play with a friend at home? The shared-screen co-op was a bit weak but it's better than nothing.
    Edited by 2 at 12/02/10 @ 15:56

  • Korpers #75 2 years ago

    Yay for Peter!

  • Raiten #76 2 years ago

    I'm getting slightly confused as to where this series is headed, it's quite aparant that Fable III won't be a rpg, but an action adventure game in like with darksiders etc. leveling weapons? check, charachter getting more powerfull by collecting followers, in action adventure form this'd be mostly collecting items to enhance your health / armor, so.. check. Basicly it is an action game now, not an rpg anymore.

  • geeza2020 #77 2 years ago

    hmm, why did i get negs for my comment? fuck you, you lot of cunts.

  • Shikasama #78 2 years ago

    Petulant_radish

    Yeah that is all very true and elegant. The problem is his failure and learning costs me 40 quid a pop.

  • SheffieldSteel #79 2 years ago

    @geeza - some people just like to crap on everything. Don't worry about it.

    The game industry needs more developers like Lionhead and more designers like Molyneux.

  • hiddenranbir #80 2 years ago

    I'm getting slightly confused as to where this series is headed, it's quite aparant that Fable III won't be a rpg, but an action adventure

    If anything I see PM trying to break games out of these restrictive compartments called genres.

  • Raiten #81 2 years ago

    @Hiddenranbir, that's good and all.. but i don't see fable3 attempting to even do so, recharging healthbar? it's something that should be left out of games like these to begin with, what's left with so far from everything PM said is just action adventure game with a few twists. There's either way very few games that manage to integrate/merge features from multiple genres making a compleatly new experience, or games that have no preset genre to begin with, but those are rare in betwean and more often they fail at what they're trying to do.

    Besides having genres isn't anything bad, and besides if by any chance PM would manage to invent something compleatly new it'd be given a genre sooner or later fitting the game.

  • hiddenranbir #82 2 years ago

    But a recharging health bar is a minute detail in comparison to his overall objective. It seems improper to criticise Fable3 for it.

    For what I see and what I'd focus on is a game world with procedural and emergent behaviour. Let's see how far PM manages to take that and how much further it can/should go.
    Edited by 1 at 12/02/10 @ 17:47

  • ronuds #83 2 years ago

    I'm angry at someone for having passion about their work.

    Damn them and the resulting awesome games they give me!

  • smelly #84 2 years ago

    Why does this article make it sound like molyneux single handedly made the game?

    Must be great to work for him and have him take all the credit for your work!

  • Mudo #85 2 years ago

    Sounds really good.

    But I'm not sure I approve of gore being toned down with less/no blood for 'morally good' players. If you want it so 'good' players don't have to see blood, give them an alternative to brutally murdering other characters.
    Edited by 1 at 12/02/10 @ 18:21

  • zisssou #86 2 years ago

    You just know Peter wants to add a pied piper quest, the dirty bugger.

  • Mr.DNA #87 2 years ago

    I have major problems with the Fable series. I was extremely disappointed with the original game, after the hype machine had built it up (in no small part thanks to Molyneux himself), and Fable II was utter shit as well, even in view of the inexplicable and wholly undeserved 10/10 that Eurogamer afforded it (what the fuck, Eurogamer... what the fuck). And so forgive me if I view this third game with suspicion.
    Edited by 1 at 12/02/10 @ 18:57

  • Lukey__b #88 2 years ago

    "...They'll bring their own morphed weapons and dog..."

    We get cars as well!?

    @Zisssou

    He's already done the pied piper quest in Black and White.

  • metalangel #89 2 years ago

    @hiddenranbir: the dog in DAO is highly intelligent and well trained, and knows to keep out of the way :) He is useful in a fight too, unlike the Fable dog who only seems to attack floored foes, charges in, does no damage, and gets wounded in every fight. I ended up using this to my advantage: by not healing him when he was wounded and limping, I'd outpace him easily and so be spared him barking obnoxiously every 3 seconds as I went through a new area because he smelled yet another worthless buried treasure.

  • ronuds #90 2 years ago

    @ Mr DNA

    Why don't you do us all a favor then and not buy the 3rd one or visit the comments sections. :p

    I mean, if you don't like something and have no desire TO like it then why are you following it at all?
    Edited by 1 at 12/02/10 @ 20:02

  • Dizzy #91 2 years ago

    >However experience tells me that it's just not enough to enter gaming's hall of fame.

    Some of the best games ever have been made in a few months by a small team and some of the worst games ever have been made on 5 year cycles with big teams.

  • coomber #92 2 years ago

    For fuck's sake, can anyone working for this site write a preview to a game without filling it with one spoiler after the next? Every single review/preview seems to be made up "then this happens, then this happens, then this happens".

  • RazorObsession #93 2 years ago

    So from a daily mail perspective, you can touch kids?

    After what Fox news did with Mass Effect, it will be interesting to see the interpretation this gets!

  • Revfosco #94 2 years ago

    Peter Molyneux on Fable 2: “There has to be one big, big thing about Fable 2 that is going to shock and surprise people and that's what we've got”; “it's uniqueness, it's originality and it's taking something and doing something with it that no-one's done before”

    Sounds the same as what he’s saying about Fable 3.

    My bet as a world renowned psychic – he’ll be rehashing the same kind of tosh when Fable IV squirts out his ass.

    Overrated glossgame from a Microsoft-lackey bullshit- Meister.

  • hiddenranbir #95 2 years ago

    @metal

    Oh he did well in combat, that's the only part of npc behaviour that exists in DA. But in an overall picture...it was lost on me.

    I've been spoilt by the non-static game environment of Spaaaaaaaace Rangers 2. It is far more difficult to keep that suspense of disbelief. Fable manages to provide a non-static world, albeit to a lesser extent, in terms of stuff, than SR2 but for me, it's doing the right thing in how the base of a game world that you're put in should be. A living vibrant world that will wage war and have people die whether you take part in it or not. Where the Dominators will conquer star systems one by one while you faff about on a sidequest...bah, i've gone on another SR2 monologue.
    Edited by 1 at 13/02/10 @ 01:08

  • Grayvern #96 2 years ago

    l'm looking forward to it but at the same time he just doesn't get that people didn't use half the mechanics in fable 2 because they just weren't that fun.

    And while while acessability
    is okay at some point you have to realise that videagames just like films and books should be allowed to ask something of their audience.

  • Grayvern #97 2 years ago

    Also by insulting experience he basically insults all pen and paper role playing games. And no videogame will be able to match pen and paper freedom until computers can acurately simulate the human brain.

  • Raiten #98 2 years ago

    @hiddenranbir, you must be joking? recharging health a minor detail? it's something that can make or break game, it can destroy any form of immersion the game would offer, along with challenge etc. it certainly is a major part of any game and it shouldn't be slapped here and there without a second thought especialy when it comes to rpg's and action adventure games.

    Best uses of recharing health so far have been in Halo 1 and Resistance 1, only two games.. tho halo 1 only used recharging shield which was entirely plausible since you're wearing futuristic armor anyways, but having to deal with health packs gave a nice addition to it and thus good amount of challenge. I didn't like halo 2-3 nearly as much since the fully regenerative health sucked any immersion out of the experience not to mention made the sequals considerably easier.

    Resistance 1 on the other hand gave you recharging healthbar all tho not one that compleatly recharged, and it was also backed up with a reason why your charachter had such an ability, it was a nice addition and quite refresing. It provided the game with enough challenge without breaking immersion, unfortunatly rest of the game didn't keep up that well.

  • Highspeed123 #99 2 years ago

    People should not expect so much and then you will avoid dissapointment. To be fair the Fable games were 2 of the best RPG's for both the xbox and the xbox 360. With Final Fantasy looking to be a major letdown this is still going to be one of the best next gen RPG's available. Take the game for what it is...not what it isn't.

  • Slipstream #100 2 years ago

    Forget talk of timeline, this game does not take place in any reality I know, so I ask.
    What are the chances of some actual metallic armour making a return? Of course it could be optional depending on the path you decide in which to take your character on, but I really missed the noble or intimidating atmosphere the shining armour could do for the game.

    As a Hero you felt safe, strong majestic and truly looked the part in the first Fable, same with the villian, dark, dented armour with an ominous red aura could instill a genuine source of fear.

    Of course Fable II removed this and you ended up as some guy in an overcoat with red eyes, evil, but not very intimidating, more peadophilic if anything.

    They might huff about having to put various armour sets in this one as they did with the weapons, but to be fair the first game didn't have that many armour sets, and who says the armour doesn't have to shift as your weapon does...although I don't like the idea of ugly hob parts pertruding from my weapon, especially if it was never my intention to slay as many of them and it was something I was forced to do enroute to an objective.

    As usual Peter is rife with ideas, absolutley nothing wrong with that. So far I have enjoyed all of his games and played through them all extensivley, yet people are quick to shoot him down, if you haven't learned to take his interviews with a pinch of salt by now, you never will.

  • kaya08 #101 2 years ago

    I think the fart jokes were the only part of Fable 2 i liked
    Edited by 1 at 13/02/10 @ 23:50

  • jachap #102 2 years ago

    I love the fact in this year's Molyneux Hyperbolic Preview (in which he apologises for the previous game and discusses a few features out of context) he's selling the game on the idea that, as King, you will be able to personally drag people by hand to the dungeons. As you do so, I imagine your hordes of followers will stand around clapping and whistling like a special bus day trip.

    Expressions are rubbish but the "Clap him in irons" expression" would actually be preferable to this new, stupid "Pull people about" idea. How does combat work if I'm leading someone by the hand? If they disconnect, surely that old stalwart "Follow" expression would, again, be preferable.

    I'm not asking for an in-depth depiction of being a monarch circa-1820... but I genuinely think being able to get your soldiers to do stuff for you, "Seize him!" "Off with his head!" "To arms, men!" "Once more unto the breach, my friends" would be more fun than, uh, the incredible ability to hold hands with certain NPCs.

    "[Players] used less than half the features in the game."

    Why doesn't the article quantify that, for God's sake? If you count the minigames as one feature and buying property as another... what else was there that wasn't utterly essential in the completion of the game? Did the average player get into their first combat scenario and just throw the controller away and start weeping inconsolably?

    "Combat is "a lot simpler and more accessible," says Molyneux, with a one-button system that unleashes light attacks with fast taps and heavier ones you build up by holding the button down."

    I'm sorry, its been a while, but I'm pretty sure they did this last time around. You can't re-sell me the "One button for combat" feature. How exactly can they make it simpler? I suppose, with the use of the technology Lionhead is developing for Natal, all you have to do now is frown at the screen to progress.

    I'm also pretty sure tricorn hats and pistols were in Fable 2. Unless this one has machine guns, ring bayonets, snap-top revolvers and a healthy sense of sea-bearing imperial colonialism it won't really have updated at all.
    Edited by 1 at 14/02/10 @ 14:07

  • mizcicz #103 2 years ago

    don´t think that he always promises and fails to deliver. fable 2 was an awesome games. as promised. he´s a very talented storyteller AND salesman. his presentations are more like a stroytelling, he tries to create and share a vision. i like that style. promises are made by every developer. most of the time it´s more about graphics, technical improvements etc. molyneux got a different, more emotional style to deal with selling/ promoting his games and thats a good thing.

  • kongzi #104 2 years ago

    I have nothing but respect for Molyneux and Lionhead but I think there's something wrong here. If the game is supposed to be about mature choices and challenges, why does it have to be easy and accesible like a kids game? It's too complex and violent for little kids but it's too childish and easy for mature gamers. Also, there's a difference between making things accesible and bringing everything down to 'press x to..'. He's talking about a sense of connection, emotional response... I never felt that in Fable 1 or 2, it was too much about just trying out the features and moving on to the next. You never were never actually challenged to do something with them.

  • tossum #105 2 years ago

    Do you reckon theres some poor bugger at Lionhead that comes up with all these new ideas, like the dog, morphing weapons, touch etc, then has to just sit there and watch while Pete gets interviewed and goes on like he dreams all this stuff up himself?

  • bonker #106 2 years ago

    Wish this guy would smoke less shit and actually, y'know, put out a good game ...

  • gameofilo #107 2 years ago

    hope this could be a good game, with or without farts they haved a lot of new ieas in the second chapter

  • ChadSexington #108 2 years ago

    Fable - shit. Fable II - shit. Fable III - I wonder?