• Welcome to the Fable Community Forum!

    We're a group of fans who are passionate about the Fable series and video gaming.

    Register Log in

How I feel about Fable III.

Status
Not open for further replies.

MaleficRaven

New Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2010
Messages
553
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Fable III was an abomination. The storyline was lacking, the combat was lacking and the characters were lacking. It was shorter than both the original and second Fable game and the fact that they cut out content just so they could force us to purchase it later down the road as DLC should be enough to cause concern/disappointment/hatred for even the most rabid/blind fans. The final boss was twice as disappointing as Lucien and was an obvious cop out so they wouldn't have to come up with something unique and original. Most of the humor in this is absolutely childish and unfunny (e.g. Mourningwood). The touch feature consists primarily of holding everyone's hands as well as expressions that are not only incredibly time-consuming but are essentially just ripped from the previous games. There is absolute zero variety in terms of weaponry as there are only two models (or weapon types) for melee and ranged weapons which consist of a sword & a hammer and a pistol & a rifle.


There's no freedom in aiming when using ranged weapons and in fact, all you have to do is tap the left thumbstick once and you're automatically locked on to an enemy. There is an unnecessary amount of combat cutscenes which makes everything take longer and after seeing it a few hundred dozen times becomes very irritating. There is little variety in clothing and even less variety in dyes seeing as how most of them look terrible and hardly change anything and when they do it's to a very dull color of whatever you chose. The spells are limited and they all do the same thing with slightly varied animations which makes them boring to use after a while.


Numerous NPCs and not enough screen times makes a terrible story with shallow characters. There is no emotional attachment between you and any of the characters and most of them don't get more than a line or two here and there. Some are even killed off before they have a time to shine (i.e. Major Swift, Jammy, etc.). Again, there is little variety in enemies as most of them are taken from the previous games with the exception of the Sand Furies and shadow monsters. Because of the predictability of the enemies the only possible way for anyone to even be touched is to throw as many of them at us as possible which makes the gameplay severely lacking in all departments. Most of the game consists of open, empty areas with "pretty graphics" which does absolutely nothing to add to the game itself except for a partial distraction.


The king/queen aspect of the game is disappointing and linear which consists entirely of activities only pertaining to the preparation of the final boss and a few promises you said you would keep. There is no middle ground between any of the decisions and either choice is extreme which leaves much to be desired for those who aren't evil bastards or light-loving, goody two shoes. The final battle itself consists of being thrown into a "war" near its end while fighting off a few enemies you've seen before while fighting a possessed character with the same move set as the shadow statues. Very original. I could keep going but then I'd end up repeating myself. I think you all get the idea by now anyways.

If this seems a little weird or off, that's because I was originally writing it as a response to someone in another thread but I figured it was more deserving of it's own than falling into obscurity elsewhere.
 

handsdown65

A Smart Fella
Joined
Aug 25, 2009
Messages
296
Reaction score
27
Points
70
Age
27
I think if I hadn't read every bit of information I could find on the game pre-release I'd have enjoyed it a whole lot more. I knew what to expect and it fell short of what I expected.. If I'd brought it not knowing anything about it, I'd love it. It's still a great game imo, however short and buggy
 

Kahindes

Active Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2010
Messages
53
Reaction score
5
Points
25
I think if I hadn't read every bit of information I could find on the game pre-release I'd have enjoyed it a whole lot more. I knew what to expect and it fell short of what I expected.. If I'd brought it not knowing anything about it, I'd love it. It's still a great game imo, however short and buggy

Agreed. I looked up everything that I could and, in my naivety, believed that everything said to be featured would be featured. Silly me. I think that someone new to the series, or perhaps someone that bought the game out of curiosity, would have found it rather impressive. Don't get me wrong though, there were many things that could have been improved. Some good pieces of gameplay and functions were removed from Fable 3, were as in Fable 2 these implements were already perfect for the series. A lot of little things that didn't need improving in the first place seemed to be have been altered to their idea of "improved". Overall I like the game, I just wish that it had a little more thought put into it.
 

DiamondFlair

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2010
Messages
137
Reaction score
27
Points
55
Sorry, but you look on the original Fable with misty eyes. I clocked the original Fable in, 10 hours and even when they released TLC, which in case you forget, wasnt a few quid as DLC but the entire game again, complete with full price tag, it was still only about 15 hours.

Its touch and go with Fable 2, but its not much shorter if it is at all.

I kinda agree with all the rest of the stuff, but I still love the game despite it. There are alot of brilliant moments too, and some great additions. It a shame it had to come with the bad, but I still find it a great game to play. Its like a bad action film, they can be pretty bad but still fun to watch.
 

Shadowfiend

Of eternal agony, etc.
Joined
Oct 30, 2008
Messages
289
Reaction score
66
Points
90
Age
36
Fable III was an abomination. The storyline was lacking, the combat was lacking and the characters were lacking. It was shorter than both the original and second Fable game and the fact that they cut out content just so they could force us to purchase it later down the road as DLC should be enough to cause concern/disappointment/hatred for even the most rabid/blind fans
An abomination? Really? If this game is an abomination, I would dearly like to play the glorious golden examples of gaming perfection you've set as your standard. Assuming you aren't just being melodramatic. I'm not out to defend Fable against its detractors. What purpose would that serve? No, I've just got an opinion on it. Everyone on this forum does or they wouldn't be here. I'm a hardcore Fable fan, I've played the first two games more times than I can remember and I'm currently working on my fourth playthrough of Fable III. I know these games as well as anybody, and probably more than most. Does the series have problems? Undoubtedly, and they are numerous. Is Fable III a bad game? Not in my opinion. Fable III is generically quirky at worst and an enjoyable action RPG co-op game at best. It's definitely shorter than the first installment, but it's roughly the same length as II if you combine all the quests and story missions onto a list.

The final boss was twice as disappointing as Lucien and was an obvious cop out so they wouldn't have to come up with something unique and original. Most of the humor in this is absolutely childish and unfunny (e.g. Mourningwood). The touch feature consists primarily of holding everyone's hands as well as expressions that are not only incredibly time-consuming but are essentially just ripped from the previous games. There is absolute zero variety in terms of weaponry as there are only two models (or weapon types) for melee and ranged weapons which consist of a sword & a hammer and a pistol & a rifle.
I don't know if anything could possibly be as disappointing as Lucien, but you're right about the final boss being a joke. It was a re-skinned Dark Sentinel made to look like Walter. There weren't even any Shadows or Minions to back the Crawler up. This is undeniably lazy work, but worse than that... they handed victory to us on a silver plate with a complimentary chocolate mint.
Be that as it may, the combat system in Fable III is far more intuitive now than it's ever been before. Well, no, I take that back. Only the melee combat system is more intuitive. It isn't just the showy new Finisher moves which reflect this (or even the now removed Chain Attacking and Reversals), the environments respond to melee combat in Fable III. The player can boot enemies off ledges and shoulder check them into walls, (stunning them into a "knock down" state) and actually using the nearby terrain to their advantage. When I fight enemies I actually feel like the world around me is interactive and useful.
Unfortunately, magic (Will) and guns (Skill) are often fun to use, but they've been simplified to the point where they feel overpowered, stale, and repetitive. There's only one kind of spell: Offensive. There's only one thing you can do with a gun: Shoot it. Some variety would have been nice. Weird how they obviously spent more time refining the melee combat and yet it's the least effective of the three combat styles.

I don't think you have much of an argument when it comes to the variety of weapons. I mean, did you ever bother using an axe in the first Fable? What about a cleaver? Let's face it, anyone who even took the time to look at stats and gauged the performance of weapons was using katanas and great swords. Preferably the legendary versions of them. Why did we use them? Because they did the most damage in the shortest amount of time. The other weapon types were simply inferior, so they were very rarely used. In Fable II, this same trend continued. The game contained a large number of weapons that, frankly, no one used unless they didn't have enough gold to buy anything else. It seems like a natural and understandable progression that weapons would be simplified into two types: Fast and slow. Were there ever really any other kinds of weapons? No, there weren't. The differences were purely statistical and cosmetic.
The biggest problem with the weapon selection in Fable III isn't a lack of variety in functionality, it's that all the legendary weapons draw from the same cosmetic stock as the Hero Weapon evolutions. None of the legendary weapons feel especially unique, which is what we've come to expect from them. That's all it really boils down to: We wanted our weapons to look cooler. Does that break a game? Hmm... no, but it would have helped out quite a bit.

There's no freedom in aiming when using ranged weapons and in fact, all you have to do is tap the left thumbstick once and you're automatically locked on to an enemy. There is an unnecessary amount of combat cutscenes which makes everything take longer and after seeing it a few hundred dozen times becomes very irritating. There is little variety in clothing and even less variety in dyes seeing as how most of them look terrible and hardly change anything and when they do it's to a very dull color of whatever you chose. The spells are limited and they all do the same thing with slightly varied animations which makes them boring to use after a while.
They took out the fine aiming system from Fable II. Did it really do anything all that useful aside from providing the player an opportunity to perform head shots? Shooting weapons out of enemies hands was kind of cool, even if it was pointless. I can see why they got rid of it. It would have been a lot of extra work and hardly made any practical difference in combat, but I must admit that I miss having the option. It made gunplay feel less stiff and provided some amusement.
You know, sometimes the slow-down cutscenes don't happen. I have no idea why. Occasionally, the Finisher will simply be executed at normal speed and be over quickly. I would have preferred this to be the case every time, or at least have been given the option to turn off the slow-down effect.
I don't think there's really any less clothes in Fable III than there were in the past games. Fable II had a ton of clothes, but the majority of them were so retarded that no one would ever wear them. The first Fable actually *did* had fewer clothes than Fable II or III, but this is counterbalanced by the fact that virtually all the outfits in the first Fable look awesome. If we want to get technical, the first Fable probably had the most 'wearable' clothes. Even so, you're wrong about this. Fable III has plenty of clothes. There's just not that many that are worth wearing, much like in Fable II (Did anyone not wear the Highwayman's Coat? Anyone? I sincerely doubt it.)

Numerous NPCs and not enough screen times makes a terrible story with shallow characters. There is no emotional attachment between you and any of the characters and most of them don't get more than a line or two here and there. Some are even killed off before they have a time to shine (i.e. Major Swift, Jammy, etc.). Again, there is little variety in enemies as most of them are taken from the previous games with the exception of the Sand Furies and shadow monsters. Because of the predictability of the enemies the only possible way for anyone to even be touched is to throw as many of them at us as possible which makes the gameplay severely lacking in all departments. Most of the game consists of open, empty areas with "pretty graphics" which does absolutely nothing to add to the game itself except for a partial distraction.
Oh I don't know about all that. The voice acting in this game was superb. They had a lot of big names in there, as it happens. Maybe you're just desensitized, or maybe you've become accustomed to a higher standard of character development. Where you might have gotten that from I have no idea. It's not like any of the games which have come out in the past couple of years have had very impressive stories.While it's true that the characters have a minimal amount of interaction with the player, their interactions with each other are spot on. These were professional actors, after all, not a bunch of flash movie rejects. There was a lot of talent here, but I agree that Lionhead didn't make full use of them.

You're pedantry is slipping, old bean. Didn't you notice that the Sand Furies were just re-skinned Highwaymen? Their AI behave exactly the same way right down to the little sword twirling move they do before they perform a lunge. The shadow monsters are re-skinned too. In fact, the only original monsters with original move sets in the entire game are the Dark Minions and Dark Sentinels.

Fable III's world is actually noticeably larger than II's, and has quite a few more areas to explore. Not that they actually did all that much with the extra space. Just as you've said, there's generally nothing to be found except the occasional dig spot and pretty scenery. Still, it makes a nice change of pace from the completely linear paths that have dominated the past two Fable games. The first Fable often felt like a series of narrow corridors flanked by impassable scenery, and Fable II's starting area was the only place where the player could really wander around without feeling boxed in. I'd say the environments (at least) have been improved, although certainly not perfected.

The king/queen aspect of the game is disappointing and linear which consists entirely of activities only pertaining to the preparation of the final boss and a few promises you said you would keep. There is no middle ground between any of the decisions and either choice is extreme which leaves much to be desired for those who aren't evil bastards or light-loving, goody two shoes. The final battle itself consists of being thrown into a "war" near its end while fighting off a few enemies you've seen before while fighting a possessed character with the same move set as the shadow statues. Very original. I could keep going but then I'd end up repeating myself. I think you all get the idea by now anyways.
I never read anything about what the King/Queen aspect was supposedly meant to be like, so perhaps I was spared a great deal of disappointment. I wasn't overly wowed by the cutscenes and predictable quests involved with Kingship, and I can think of about a hundred ways the experience could have been improved, but hey-- I wasn't disappointed.
 
Joined
Jul 1, 2010
Messages
1,537
Reaction score
274
Points
215
If You enjoyed it, then good for You. Personally, I didn't, I thought it was a load of old bollocks. However, everyone has their own opinion. I expected more from this game, lets just leave it at that.
 
Joined
Sep 6, 2010
Messages
130
Reaction score
2
Points
25
Ok im sorry but you just took this to a whole new level, Fable 3 is a great game, if not as good as 1 and maybe 2, im not a 'blind' fan i can see the flaws and i can also look past them, i found the game the funniest of the 3, and the combat? The best of them all i would say, it does fall very short of expectations BUT this does not mean its a bad game. Sorry man i just dont agree......
 

Pink

Member
Joined
Oct 29, 2010
Messages
86
Reaction score
3
Points
15
Age
33
I kinda agree with you on the King/Queen parts, that was really slacking, they could have turned that and made it brilliant.
 

Mastperf

Active Member
Joined
Sep 11, 2010
Messages
77
Reaction score
16
Points
35
Age
42
I agree completely. Take out Bowerstone and Theresa and you have nothing more than a poor Fable wannabe. I couldn't care less for any area or character in the whole game. It took more effort for Lionhead to screw it up this bad than it did to actually do it right.
After reading some of the ideas people have for Fable 4 on the official Lionhead forums I can see why it turned out so bad. Some of them think Fable in space is actually a good idea.:'(
Considering how many are actually pleased with this game I can safely say the franchise is on its last leg.
 

Silent420

Proud Progressive
Premium
Joined
Oct 1, 2007
Messages
620
Reaction score
0
Points
58
Age
121
Though this game was lacking in many areas I still enjoyed it more than Fable 2. The main reason for this is the atmosphere of the game. It felt alot like the first Fable. It had alot of music back from Fable, and the scenery/enviorments felt alot like the first one. Take Silverpine for example, it felt like a flashback to Darkwood, I really liked the enviorments in this game.

That being said, overall it still felt lacking.
 

MaleficRaven

New Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2010
Messages
553
Reaction score
0
Points
0
So you'll be selling the game then, yes?

If I could get back the full $80? Definitely. Unfortunately, GameStop doesn't work that way so I'm basically stuck with eighty dollars worth of disappointment and failure.

I think if I hadn't read every bit of information I could find on the game pre-release I'd have enjoyed it a whole lot more. I knew what to expect and it fell short of what I expected.. If I'd brought it not knowing anything about it, I'd love it. It's still a great game imo, however short and buggy

I agree with you slightly but the fact of the matter is, if you've played Fable or Fable II and compared them to Fable III, it's still a very disappointing game. It lacks all the elements that made the first two great while providing very little of its own. In fact, the only redeeming qualities to this game are the "Spellweave" function, the ability to pull off bad-ass finishing moves and... well, I guess that's it, really.

Sorry, but you look on the original Fable with misty eyes. I clocked the original Fable in, 10 hours and even when they released TLC, which in case you forget, wasnt a few quid as DLC but the entire game again, complete with full price tag, it was still only about 15 hours.

Its touch and go with Fable 2, but its not much shorter if it is at all.

I kinda agree with all the rest of the stuff, but I still love the game despite it. There are alot of brilliant moments too, and some great additions. It a shame it had to come with the bad, but I still find it a great game to play. Its like a bad action film, they can be pretty bad but still fun to watch.

I don't believe I mentioned time being an issue. It is, however, a very short game. The original Fable had mostly small areas which wasn't exactly bad because it cut back on traveling time. Fable II was a lot bigger so you wasted a good chunk of your time just walking around but there was plenty to do in both those games. Fable III has large, open areas filled with absolutely nothing. The only reason this game takes so long is (aside from the slow-mo deaths) is that you have to walk miles and miles and on top of that, you can't skip everything scene where people are talking.

If You enjoyed it, then good for You. Personally, I didn't, I thought it was a load of old bollocks. However, everyone has their own opinion. I expected more from this game, lets just leave it at that.

Why do you capitalize certain words like "You" when it's not at the beginning of a sentence? I've noticed that quirk of yours for a while now and I still can't quite grasp why you do it. Oh well. (Not trying to attack you or anything.)

I agree though, this game leaves so much to be desired.

I kinda agree with you on the King/Queen parts, that was really slacking, they could have turned that and made it brilliant.

That part I had the highest hopes for. I expected to really be a king and not just follow some agenda which really only deals with events that lead up to the final battle.

I agree completely. Take out Bowerstone and Theresa and you have nothing more than a poor Fable wannabe. I couldn't care less for any area or character in the whole game. It took more effort for Lionhead to screw it up this bad than it did to actually do it right.
After reading some of the ideas people have for Fable 4 on the official Lionhead forums I can see why it turned out so bad. Some of them think Fable in space is actually a good idea.:'(
Considering how many are actually pleased with this game I can safely say the franchise is on its last leg.

I made a joke on the GameFAQs boards about one of the next games being in space... I'm actually a little saddened to think that I may have predicted the future. To be honest, I did like Sabine but that's just because he's a crazy old man who enjoys blowing things up. I did like the Hunter's Lodge area but that only comes with the Limited Edition so it's not exactly something everyone gets to experience.

It does seem that way, doesn't it? I'm amazed that Lionhead, the same people who made the Black & White series as well as the game that started this mess (Fable) could be capable of something so... lame.

Though this game was lacking in many areas I still enjoyed it more than Fable 2. The main reason for this is the atmosphere of the game. It felt alot like the first Fable. It had alot of music back from Fable, and the scenery/enviorments felt alot like the first one. Take Silverpine for example, it felt like a flashback to Darkwood, I really liked the enviorments in this game.

That being said, overall it still felt lacking.

Are you kidding me? This felt nothing like the original Fable nor did Fable II but at least Fable II had variety and a relatively decent storyline to it. The gameplay wasn't half bad either. Fable III on the other hand is just... ugh.

Ok im sorry but you just took this to a whole new level, Fable 3 is a great game, if not as good as 1 and maybe 2, im not a 'blind' fan i can see the flaws and i can also look past them, i found the game the funniest of the 3, and the combat? The best of them all i would say, it does fall very short of expectations BUT this does not mean its a bad game. Sorry man i just dont agree......

Actually, I wasn't calling anyone in particular a "rabid/blind fan" but the fact that you got defensive over that remark sure seems suspicious. Fable III is nowhere near the original and even the second one is ten times the game this one is. Looking past the flaws is one thing but completely ignoring them is something else. You can't expect anything to improve if you ignore or "look past" what's wrong with it and it's not going to get much better when people share that same logic.

That's fine if you don't agree but I disagree with your disagreement.
 

Silent420

Proud Progressive
Premium
Joined
Oct 1, 2007
Messages
620
Reaction score
0
Points
58
Age
121
Are you kidding me? This felt nothing like the original Fable nor did Fable II but at least Fable II had variety and a relatively decent storyline to it. The gameplay wasn't half bad either. Fable III on the other hand is just... ugh..

It didn't LOOK like the original Fable, but alot of the enviorments felt enjoyable alot like the first one and unlike Fable 2.
 

MaleficRaven

New Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2010
Messages
553
Reaction score
0
Points
0
It didn't LOOK like the original Fable, but alot of the enviorments felt enjoyable alot like the first one and unlike Fable 2.

I never said they did. I said this game felt nothing like the previous too.
 

DiamondFlair

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2010
Messages
137
Reaction score
27
Points
55
I dunno. Fable 1 you went through multiple small areas, Fable three you go through one large one. Mob frequency is about the same. They might respawn slower now though. I assumed when you said "It was shorter than both the original and second Fable game" that was what you meant :p. Its definatiatly intentionally shorter then it could be for the sake of DLC.
 

MaleficRaven

New Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2010
Messages
553
Reaction score
0
Points
0
I dunno. Fable 1 you went through multiple small areas, Fable three you go through one large one. Mob frequency is about the same. They might respawn slower now though. I assumed when you said "It was shorter than both the original and second Fable game" that was what you meant :p. Its definatiatly intentionally shorter then it could be for the sake of DLC.

Oh, derp. I guess I did say it was short. My bad. There's no doubt that there are more enemies in Fable III than the original but having to fight the same mobs again and again doesn't exactly make it a great game.
 

TheDarkCynder

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 24, 2010
Messages
103
Reaction score
8
Points
55
The thing that most dissapointed me was the "variety" of things Lionhead promsed.
There's barely any clothes, in Fable II I had trouble choosing. Now, I have trouble finding something I DO want. I don't find myself using the dyes very much in this game, when in Fable II I was obsessed with them.
Also, being Queen was a bit more dull than I had been promised.

Being an avid, emotional RPG player, I did enjoy the game more than most. I continue to play it happily, and I would not return it, even if I could get full price.
If they fix the game with DLCs, i'm completely fine with that. I have enough money to waste between my Xbox and iPod touch. (Not sarcastically.)
 

DiamondFlair

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2010
Messages
137
Reaction score
27
Points
55
Oh, derp. I guess I did say it was short. My bad. There's no doubt that there are more enemies in Fable III than the original but having to fight the same mobs again and again doesn't exactly make it a great game.

Indeed, the variety of enemies is pretty poor. Although my latests game as actually glitched so that I have max strength stature and will, from the start of the game. Which means I spawning advanced enemies but not dealing much damage due to low skill values :D So its actually slightly challanging!

I dont understand why there is so many enemies cut from the game. Humans in different costumes are still just human, and they all fight the same. It is one of those games I want to hate, but for some reason just cant :D
 

MaleficRaven

New Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2010
Messages
553
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Indeed, the variety of enemies is pretty poor. Although my latests game as actually glitched so that I have max strength stature and will, from the start of the game. Which means I spawning advanced enemies but not dealing much damage due to low skill values :D So its actually slightly challanging!

I dont understand why there is so many enemies cut from the game. Humans in different costumes are still just human, and they all fight the same. It is one of those games I want to hate, but for some reason just cant :D

Lucky you.

The thing that most dissapointed me was the "variety" of things Lionhead promsed.
There's barely any clothes, in Fable II I had trouble choosing. Now, I have trouble finding something I DO want. I don't find myself using the dyes very much in this game, when in Fable II I was obsessed with them.
Also, being Queen was a bit more dull than I had been promised.

Being an avid, emotional RPG player, I did enjoy the game more than most. I continue to play it happily, and I would not return it, even if I could get full price.
If they fix the game with DLCs, i'm completely fine with that. I have enough money to waste between my Xbox and iPod touch. (Not sarcastically.)

I hate people who think "Well, as long as they bring me DLC, everything will be fine!". How is spending more money to get content that should already be in the game a good thing? You know, I had hoped the economy tanking would have made gamers a little more conscious about how much money they're spending but I was wrong. Oh well. I hope they drain you all dry of every dime you have and that the future titles suck even more than this one.

Call me a vindictive asshole if you want but that's just how I feel. However, considering the path they're currently on, I wouldn't be surprised if that ends up happening.
 

Angel

Down with this sort of thing
Guildmaster
Town Guard
Joined
Aug 13, 2006
Messages
8,388
Reaction score
1,466
Points
365
If you really hate this game so very much, why keep going on about it? If you hate, stick it back in the box and stop talking about it. If it truly offends you that much surely you would rather not have to speak of it anymore at all?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top