Lionhead showing Fable III next month

By Robert Purchese Published 11 January, 2010

Two new videos will be released.

Lionhead community manager Steve Van Tilburgh has promised the world its first Fable III sighting next month.

The company is making two new videos that will be released alongside an unspecified event for the game in San Francisco in February.

"I'm writing storyboard summaries for two new Fable 3 videos," Tweeted Tilburgh (picked up by VG247). "Videos are to come out when we show Fable 3 for the 1st time at an event next month in SF."

Both Gamefest and the D.I.C.E. Summit take place in San Francisco next month, although neither has been singled out yet.

Fable III, announced at gamesom 2009, will be released this autumn. The 'big idea' is putting players on the throne of Albion and allowing them to shape a nation to fit their morals and beliefs.

Both Natal and micro-transactions will be supported, although in what form is both unknown and subject to change so far away from release.

Eurogamer's Fable III preview has more information.

Picture of Robert.

About Robert Purchese

Bertie is Eurogamer's Senior Staff Writer. When he's not hunting down news stories he's often found playing with his kids or gabbling about fantasy games and strange online worlds.

Read more articles from Robert by visiting the Robert Purchese archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (49) Latest comment 2 years ago

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

  • crazyhorse174 #1 2 years ago

    Honestly, if news that there would be another Fable sequel had been released a couple of years back, I'd be having palpations just now over the thought of going back to Albion.

    Unfortunately, these days the only response I can muster is 'meh'.

    And thats not meant as a dig at Molyneux - I'm sure there'll be plenty of those below - I just couldnt enjoy Fable 2 in the same way that I did the first one. There was something very empty about the world the second time around.

  • RustyBullet #2 2 years ago

    I was one of the ones that loved Fable II. I just hope Fable III is not a rush job and has some of what Fable II (although loved) was missing. Dont screw it up adding Natal support either.

  • cianchristopher #3 2 years ago

    Well, I'd be shocked if Fable II didn't have Natal support, tbh!

    Molyneaux will see to it that it's the most casual, user-friendly RPG yet made...

  • Britesparc Verified Creative, ITV #4 2 years ago

    @ cianchristopher
    Is that a bad thing? Fable II is one of the most popular games I know amongst "casuals". Guess that's why there's so much hardcore hate for it!

    Personally, I loved Fable I and II but agree there's room for improvement. Hopefully FIII will be more of the same, but with niggles ironed out.

  • sneetch #5 2 years ago

    Looking forward to this too. I absolutely loved Fable II and I'm hoping they add more in the way of side quests.

    As a king/queen this time around your decisions should have much more of a lasting or sweeping effect, as in you should hopefully be able to make your land prosperous and then tax the crap out of it driving everyone into poverty then bring them back again.

  • zisssou #6 2 years ago

    Here comes Peter with his hyping.

  • creepylizard #7 2 years ago

    I honestly thought that the first Fable was a far better game in that it was actually an adventure as opposed to some sort of sim that the second one seemed to be. I dread to think of what new features will be added to the 3rd that will further distance it from what I thought the whole concept originally was. An RPG.

  • lordofthedunce #8 2 years ago

    Enjoyed Fable II to begin with but other than the main story it just felt shallow and pointless. I can't say I've been arsed to pick it up again since finishing it. The decision to allow you to earn money while not playing was daft, it ruined the game for me.

  • Yossarian #9 2 years ago

    Pretty sure it's "Sam", not Steve. The twitter link says Sam too.

  • AHiFi #10 2 years ago

    Yup, was just about to say that. =S

  • BillyBrush #11 2 years ago

    with about 20 'property ladder' type shows on TV, i think most people would have loved being an albion property tycoon, i know i did

    it did get silly with the money, but that was a good feature (there was something to do with the money for a good while which was nice, unlike assasins creed 2 where you have buckets of cash and very little to spend it on.)

    needs a few tweaks though...i guess this time with you as a king it's more about setting taxes and the like...and who doesn't want to be Gordon Brow...

    ...ruh roh...problem on the horizon

  • Rubarack #12 2 years ago

    All the Fable backlash was a bit of a pity, for all PMs mad ranting about features he couldn't really implement damaged the game in a lot of peoples eyes it was a damn site more entertaining than "There'll be a video next month"

  • Lukree #13 2 years ago

    Played the first one and wasn't quite pleased with it. Played the second one with high hopes that it would be better and it still left me somehow empty. I didn't care for the people or story enough I guess.

    Most likely will skip the third installment.

  • muscleblade #14 2 years ago

    I thouth Fable 2 was overrated expecially on Eurogamer. The combat was incredibly lackluster and i found the game kind of boring the whole way through. It was a cosy and relaxing game so it wasnt all bad. 7/10 imo.

  • metalmike25 #15 2 years ago

    I couldn't really get into Fable 2. It was very linear for the type of game it was supposed to be. Also it was as if they hadn't fully finished some of the elements of the game like the whole marrying and having babies part. Maybe i was expecting too much after it got 10 on this website but i think they should spend some time fixing the features from Fable 2 instaed of adding a whole load of new ones

  • Shinetop #16 2 years ago

    I'm interested to see what they can do with the whole reign as a king type gameplay. Could be an interesting twist to the standard "You're a nobody who can rise to greatness!" RPG approach. Let's see what happens if you take a top-down approach and are already at the top.

    I still need to get into Fable 2. I thought the land was interesting, but I never got around to delving deeply into the game. Also, am I the only one who kept feeling sorry for the dog when ignoring it everytime he found treasure?

  • cianchristopher #17 2 years ago

    @Britesparc

    No, not a bad thing at all. I was just responding to the statement on Natal.

    I'm all for casual games, probably the most fun I've had this generation (mostly Rock Band & Peggle)

  • butler` #18 2 years ago

    The combat was incredibly lackluster

    why?

  • kangarootoo #19 2 years ago

    I enjoyed Fable 2 quite a bit. I don't really care whether it is mainstream or hardcore or any of that kind of nonsense. I know it was fun for me, I don't really care what else anyone chooses to call it.

    So this vid will be a concept demo reel, which seems fair. We get to find out what time period it has and maybe some art style tit bits. Seems fair.

    My suggestion is that nobody expects too much of the inevitable PM hype and just views the game for that it is when it arrives. If you expect the moon on a stick (even if that is what we are tradiitionally promised by PM) you will be disappointed. I you expect a fun game, you might just get it.

  • DugBriderider #20 2 years ago

    Fable II had a lot of charm in it's art style, voice casting and stories. It was the first game in a long time that felt like British Fantasy, as apposed to American or Japanese. I will always keep an eye on the franchise.

    But the overall adventure was not tightly scripted enough and a lot of the combat, inventory and upgrading needs a new look at. It's like being given an E-type jag but with a tractor engine and your only allowed to drive on a single beautiful but short road.

    Lets hope they fix all FII's problems before adding a whole load of new features, hopefully Molyneux's new role will mean he has less time to meddle.

  • oktava #21 2 years ago

    I could only play through F2 at the third attempt due to gamebreaking bugs. Will only buy number 3 when its in the bargain bin and patched up properly.

  • glaeken #22 2 years ago

    I liked Fable 2 but I was pretty disappointed that it did not have as fully open game world along the lines of Oblivion. I honestly thought that would have been a central aspect of the design of the game but instead we get linked levels with loading in between them which ends up giving me no idea where everything is in relation to each other. Unfortunately I really don't think they are going to have moved on the game in this regard at all given how little time they have had to come up with the next game.

    There were also quite a few things that I actually preferred about Fable 1 to Fable 2. In Fable 1 I loved the visible combat multiplier and I think the controls system between melee and magic selection worked far better.

    I would no doubt buy another Fable game but its probably one I would pick up when cheap rather than a day one purchase that Fable 2 was.

  • towser #23 2 years ago

    Surely you mean "Fable III, announced by Jonathan Ross, will be released this autumn." :-)

  • makeamazing #24 2 years ago

    I am still hopefull of playing Fable 2 on Pc, but its not looking likely :(

  • darleysam #25 2 years ago

    RARRRGH I CAN'T SPELL PETER MOLYNEUX'S NAME RIGHT BUT I'M GOING TO BE ANGRY ABOUT HIM MAKING GAMES ALL THE SAME!

  • Phishfood #26 2 years ago

    I very much doubt I will getting Fable 3 if it was anything like 2. It felt so generic and clunky.

  • patchbox360 #27 2 years ago

    Eurogamer - Fable II - 10/10

  • Murton #28 2 years ago

    Played the first Fable on PC, was kinda hoping that Fable 2 would come to the PC until the day I actually saw it. Both games suffered greatly from Molyneux's spiel-machine. There are few greater examples of a game coming nowhere near what a producer say it will be than Fable, Molyneux claimed in the first Fable that the player character's hair will grow and that all actions performed would leave a lasting mark in the world. As we learned by playing the game, this was utter balls. Fable 2 was pretty much the same, you can marry people, you can have sex, you can gay, you can buy every building in the world, you can be king, but none of these actually impacted the story at all. They were just things you could do if you wanted to, but without a reason or reward for doing these things Molyneux's question of "what do you want to do?" was replaced by the game's own question of "why do you want to do that?"


    I can't help but get the feeling that Fable 3 will be a continuation on this theme of massive hype and expectation building that is not even partly delivered upon. I'd say that Molyneux might have learned by now but considering that he's been over-hyping like this since Black and White I just don't think it's likely myself.

  • kangarootoo #29 2 years ago

    "It felt so generic and clunky"

    Much like that sentence, ironically enough.

  • darleysam #30 2 years ago

    There was actually very little Molyneux-driven hype for Fable II. He talked about stuff that would be in the game, and it was there. He made constant references to and apologies for his enthusiasm. The high review scores and strong sales that it got weren't from deluded fans and backhanders, but because it was actually a good game that deserved the acclaim and sales that it found.

  • miiiguel #31 2 years ago

    Combat was indeed the worst aspect of Fable 2, it was close to inexistent. I mean, I do understand the urge to make things easy, but that was plain dumb. Not even the most casual of the casuals needs that simple a combat. Please mr. PM spice it up.

    The world is lovely though, the voice acting is very good and the story is solid. DLCs were not bad also.
    Edited by 1 at 11/01/10 @ 15:48

  • coomber #32 2 years ago

    I'm hoping it is not anywhere near as childish.

    And that you can die, rather than having combat a pointless game mechanic.

  • menage #33 2 years ago

    I loved F2, so bring it on.

  • kangarootoo #34 2 years ago

    "And that you can die, rather than having combat a pointless game mechanic"

    I didn't feel combat was pointless just because you didn't reload a checkpoint. People say there is no penalty for dying, but reloading a checkpoint is hardly a penalty (except that you have to repeat a section, and where is the fun in that).

    I don't doubt it is subjective, and your preference is as valid as mine or anyone elses. I just think it is a bit strong to declare the combar pointless, when many found it to not be that.

  • darleysam #35 2 years ago

    You don't die though, you never die. You just reload from your save point. So people asking to 'die' rather than get up from being beaten to the ground, really aren't thinking this through.

    You can, however, placate yourself by writing "GAME OVER, PRESS ANY BUTTON TO RELOAD" on a piece of card and holding it up in front of the screen when you get knocked out.

  • JamieR #36 2 years ago

    The controls in for the magic worked much better on the first game the second game i never used magic unless i needed to because the controls are shit for it. I hope they fix this for the 3rd game.

  • darleysam #37 2 years ago

    How were they bad? It made a hell of a lot more sense than having you neck 'mana potions' whenever you wanted to use magic. That just made me (and many other people) never want to use magic spells because they then become a consumable resource. Making it a time-based system instead is a vast improvement. You need to buy yourself a few seconds in combat to cast a spell, rather than a few potions.

    Ho-ho, wordplay! More Magic-ade, Gandalf?

  • zisssou #38 2 years ago

    @ kangarootoo

    "Much like that sentence, ironically enough. "

    Aren't people allowed to have opinions?
    Edited by 1 at 11/01/10 @ 18:31

  • miiiguel #39 2 years ago

    My problem with the combat was not the fact of dieing or not, problem is, it is shallow. Then again, I did play the game, and I completed it, along with all the DLC's. Yes, in my case I'm entitled to an opinion, though I know ppl who are opinating about this game and didn't even play it.

    No, I don't kiss and tell.

  • Shinetop #40 2 years ago

    DarleySam speaks wisely. It's the fact that "Game over -> press button to continue where you left off" messages are so institutionalised that we consider it "better" than Fable 2's system, when they're really exactly the same.

  • smelly #41 2 years ago

    Considering the 2nd one had the near EXACT same story as the first one (including the going to jail bit).. i dunno if im even slightly arsed.

  • smelly #42 2 years ago

    Prediction: Natal support will be taking the gesture system from the previous game (laughter/dance/fart/etc) and replacing it with stuff like "handshake", "hug", etc... Then take those gestures and have you wave your arms about to try to get it to recognise those movements.. and that'll be it.

  • metalangel #43 2 years ago

    The combat was appalling. Especially with guns - oh, you've simplified it for IDIOTS with only one button press? Those same idiots won't remember the bizarre combinations of taps, holds and releases needed to be effective in combat, not to mention the finger-twisting (and *shock* multiple buttons) needed to perform headshots.

    How about an option, at least, to use normal controls if we're not some drooling imbecile who's just graduated from Motion Controller Puppy Groomer on the Wii?

    Hell, how about a better fucking camera? You know, so we actually feel like we're in the world as opposed to flying along 30 feet behind some twat who sometimes does what we want him to in a fight.

  • curtlikesmeat #44 2 years ago

    Gimmicky gesture system similar to what happened to the last Zelda game on the Wii : DO NOT WANT.

    (or at the very least make it optional, I'm not in the slightest bit interested in waving my controller about in the air like a twat..... well, not intentionally anyway).

  • SheffieldSteel #45 2 years ago

    Fable II was utterly charming... at first. Then it took me away to a nasty island where I had to do nasty things and I came away from that a sad, changed man. My farting and dancing never seemed to have the same lustre to them, and the end of the main game was rather an anticlimax: Okay, you have won now, please choose chocolate or strawberry for your reward, okay run along and fart and dance some more.
    I guess my only question about Fable II is: How is Natal going to improve on that? Are you going to be doing those dances for real? When you try to extend the fart expression and fail, will you have to follow through?

  • man.the.king #46 2 years ago

    @muscleblade

    "I thouth Fable 2 was overrated expecially on Eurogamer. The combat was incredibly lackluster and i found the game kind of boring the whole way through. It was a cosy and relaxing game so it wasnt all bad. 7/10 imo. "

    I didn't think too much of Fable II myself, but my personal rating would be somewhere around 8/10. Cozy and relaxing describes it to a "T' though :)

  • kangarootoo #47 2 years ago

    @zisssou

    It just didn't seem very imaginative or constructive a critisism. WHY was the combat generic and clunky? What do those words even mean in this context?

    The word generic means "of the genre", so the combat in Street Fighter is generic, as is the combat in Halo. It is not inherrently a bad thing to be generic.

    And as for clunky?.. Was there control lag? Do you have to wait for animations to complete before the character would respond to player input? I don't recall either of those things being the case. I am keen to know what the problem is that the original poster experienced. "Generic" and "clunky" tell me nothing.

    I just like to this that if people feel the need to say they don't like something, they can add to the discussion by saying why. Of course everyone is entitled to an opinion, but if the opinion is voiced in a way that adds nothing to a discussion, why voice it at all? Its no different to writing "meh". Would you have objected if I had critisised someone writing "meh"?

  • kangarootoo #48 2 years ago

    @metalangel

    "The combat was appalling. Especially with guns - oh, you've simplified it for IDIOTS with only one button press?"

    How many button presses do you think should it take to fire a gun exactly?


    This whole issue seems to be one of principle for many, as if a game is not good unless it makes you work hard. I suspect however all of this is just bluster from people who simply didn't enjoy the game first, and went looking for a list of reasons second. Its fine that some people didn't like the game, but lets not act like it all breaks down so simply as "4 button presses > 1 button press".

  • ronuds #49 2 years ago

    Newsflash for those who somehow didn't know: Fable II wasn't made for the hard core RPG audience. I know...pick your jaw up off the floor from this shocking news.

    Saying that, I would like at least a difficulty slider for the third. I can't wait!!!!