this guy needs to look at his own website see the tons of people saying how bad fable 3 is mainly because they changed it from the series..
Fable 1 = RPG/Good
Fable 2 = RPG/Better Than 1
Fable 3 = Action Game/WTF is this even fable ?
read your forums dude... read your negative feedback.. u guys need to make a real sequel to Fable 2... stop screwing with a winning formula..
I'd love to see them deliver the type of experience I believe they're truly capable of. Anything less is not only a disservice to their fans, but a disservice to themselves.
However, I've never played any of the Fable games. They just don't look that great to me. Can anyone convince me to give them a try?
A gripping story would be nice but largely optional.
Placing the game on rails and putting the emphasis on magic-based combat isn't a way to address all of Fable 3's short comings.
Microsoft: Don't worry, you're going on a journey of your own.
Molyneux? Yeah? Whose coming with me ?
Psych ward officer : Faeries, elves, demons... that sort of thing.
Molyneux: Sir, did you play Fable 2? I thought it was my best game ever, but then again it wasn't quite as good as Fable 3. Actually, Fable 3 was terrible know that I think about it.
Microsoft: Please take good care of him.
Well...Fable II is an actual game. Not some interactive movie and a level editor.
/done trolling.
Fable 1 suffered from a lot of championed features just not being there; none of your choices had conciquence, killing Twin Blade ment his remnants send assassins after out of vengeful remorse, sparing Twin Blade ment he sent assassins after you out of shame. Killing Whisper ment Thunder wanted to kill you out of vengeful hate, sparing Whisper ment Thunder wanted to kill you out of shame...and you could only see Whicper again in The Lost Chapters made the game a bit better.
Fable 2 solve that problem by having the world change with such choices during the decade long gap plot decive and made things feel more open and explorable, but I kind'a felt like I was playing with an action figure, a lot of immersion was gone from the first game. I wanted big hammers that I had to drag behind me out of sheer weight until I upped my strength, but oh well.
Both also suffered from an annoying moment where you become ayor of Bowerstome and King.Queen of Albion in the first and second games respectively, but you didn't get any added features, you couldn't change the law so you could get away with evil shit like a moral god mode reward for getting to this point.
So Fable 3 comes along and you get to finally make shit happen as king or queen...only for it to be the last five minutes of the game and shorter than it claims to be.
The series had soooo much potential, and as an Xbox exclusive it should be so much more...a rival to Zelda maybe, but it'll never happen.
Still, we have Skyrim, Dark Souls, Dragon's Dogma, and more on the way to give our RPG/Adventure thirsts a quench on 360.
I wouldn't argue the Fable series is crap, or doesn't have some worthwhile elements. However, I really don't get how this series is considered 'AAA' quality with the *exact same drawbacks* in each title.
Really disappointing, because it sounds like if they had another year, or a much better process, Fable III could have been pretty grand.
I really hope Molyneux and team get to make the grand game they're trying everytime to make.
I personally think of the Fable games were great, and well worth my time.
I think this was a better quote from the interview, but whatever.
Fable > fable2 > fable3. Lionhead! look at the past and learn from it for once! Stop bashing all the potential this series had into the ground!

surf dtoid with 

Rising (10+)
People you follow


























follow



