• 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

Fable 4?

Status
Not open for further replies.
callycap3

callycap3

The Iron Marquis
Feb 1, 2009
75
11
55
36
manchester, england
I know Peter Molyneux has confirmed that he has ideas/storylines for at least 2 more Fable games.
I just want to hear opinions of other Fable fans of what kind of thing would happen, as I can't see them going further into the future (a fairytale RPG set after industrial revolution would be boring IMO).

Personally I'd like to see them exploring the huge gap between 1 and 2, possibly the peasant uprising against the guild, or go even further back....
Old Kingdom, you rise up and become the first Archon, build the spire and then make the choice that will inevitably lead to the destruction of the Old Kingdom.

Any thoughts?
 
  • Like
Reactions: ajmanno
Return of Queen of Blades(hell, she is way more powerful than that other person).

Theresa either helps or betrays you.

But they will go for a modern then future setting.
 
If these games carry on I will most likely loose interest it will end up like final fantasy with 13 and counting...
 
ForcedDj said:
Return of Queen of Blades(hell, she is way more powerful than that other person).

Theresa either helps or betrays you.

But they will go for a modern then future setting.
Click to expand...

Firstly, who is Queen of Blades?? I've played the first 2 Fables dozens of times and completed Fable 3, never heard of her.
Secondly modern and future would suck. Imagine an RPG based in your neighbourhood. Fable is about the snowy little villages and the lush forests.
 
With the responses Fable 3 has been getting, I'd be surprised if Fable 4 didn't return to its roots, if it even comes out at all.
 
callycap3 said:
Firstly, who is Queen of Blades?? I've played the first 2 Fables dozens of times and completed Fable 3, never heard of her.
Click to expand...
Was in the void with Jack of Blades and Knight of Blades. William Black fought her. How could you not know this? I thought it was common knowledge...
 
None of the beings of the Void are coming back for future Fable games, especially not Jack! They won't be set in the Old Kingdom or the fall of the Guild either. We already know what happens in those time periods. Fable is about making your own choices. If we played as William Black and defeated the Court, we wouldn't get to make our own choices. We would just play through the choices that William Black made.

Fable will also never be set in a modern or futuristic time period. If the next two games were set close enough in time to Fable 3 and to each other, they could probably squeeze out a little more time on the timeline before ranged weaponry made melee weaponry obsolete (which would effectively ruin Fable). However, there is one thing they could do. It's a little radical, but I would enjoy it. Theresa might be looking at the world and decide that it is too industrialized and too corrupt, and she might decide to use the Spire to end that society much like the first Archon did in hopes of a purer one taking its place. Then, Fable 4 and 5 can still be set in the future, but we can be put back into a TLC-like setting a while after Albion is being recreated. I can sort of see Lionhead doing this, but it is more unlikely than it is likely.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pikpik and ajmanno
I think Lionhead already said we're not going back, but they could change their mind. I don't see why so many people want to play as the first Archon, how would we get female characters into this? And like Necromancer11 said, it's about our choices. I can imagine Fable IV being in the "Steampunk" time setting, but I don't know what Lionhead would do with the fifth.
 
People need to remember that Fable III is steampunk era: The industrial revolution.
If they made a steampunk sequel, then it COULD be with the F3 hero's child, but 50 years after our industrial revolution was the build up to WW1 when swords were becoming obsolete. I think Lionhead made a huge mistake putting 500 years between 1 and 2.
 
Necromancer11 said:
That's what I've always thought. Making the gap smaller by just a few hundred years wouldn't change the story at all
Click to expand...
Yes it would, because stories and traditions generally don't die out in just 200 years, and part of the story of fable 2 was that the hero was one of the last and the world had moved on. They could probably have done it after 200 years but we wouldn't get the same feeling that everything has gone
Necromancer11 said:
but I think when they did that, they weren't thinking long term.
Click to expand...
or they were and they needed industrial age tech
 
I would like to see Fable 4 go back to its roots. Maybe even before the first game even started. The whole outlook the game has become is not the same as what it was originally.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ajmanno
callycap3 said:
Firstly, who is Queen of Blades?? I've played the first 2 Fables dozens of times and completed Fable 3, never heard of her.
Secondly modern and future would suck. Imagine an RPG based in your neighbourhood. Fable is about the snowy little villages and the lush forests.
Click to expand...

thats true i want the fable where you exlpore big forest and woods with bandits and monsters. another future fable would be horrible
 
atlantiantokra said:
Yes it would, because stories and traditions generally don't die out in just 200 years, and part of the story of fable 2 was that the hero was one of the last and the world had moved on. They could probably have done it after 200 years but we wouldn't get the same feeling that everything has gone
or they were and they needed industrial age tech
Click to expand...

I kind of see where you're going about the 200 years thing, although assuming that Fable 2 is set around the 1800's, Fable 1 was probably in the 1300's when recording of historical fact was not accurate (they even make jokes about that in the sequels, and Lionhead got away with completely changing the map of Albion and explaining this by saying map-making techniques have improved).

The point is, Fable 2 could have been only 200 years after Fable 1 if the guild was destroyed just after the time of the Hero of Oakvale because 200 years is long enough for the children and grandchildren of the last heroes to die out. Also that would mean you would become king in Fable 3 around the mid 1500's, in the time of the Tudor period which would have been fudging awesome (Henry VIII was a Tudor king).

That would mean that Fables 4 and 5 could be when 2 and 3 are. I just think they left out a good chunk of history.
 
callycap3 said:
The point is, Fable 2 could have been only 200 years after Fable 1 if the guild was destroyed just after the time of the Hero of Oakvale because 200 years is long enough for the children and grandchildren of the last heroes to die out.
Click to expand...
the people mabye, but the stories, rumours and legends, probably not. Also if they did it in the tudor period ranged weapons would suffer, because they had guns, using bows and arrows against guns doesn't really make sense even for a hero and you couldn't use the guns yourself because they'd take longer to reload than crossbows
 
I would like for them to go to the past...not really being the archon or anything, but just being one of his many children, or being one of the heroes that were buried at the heroes guild (like the dragon rider)
 
With the travelling to the desert in Fable 3, I'm thinking they might go further that way with Fable 4. Albion is just one country, they could easily go to the other side of the world and have a new game with a whole different culture. It would be very Lionhead to be playing that and hearing news from Albion of something you did in Fable 3.
 
I think it'd be interesting to go to a "World War" setting, now of course it would implement the fable virtues and (hopefully) wouldn't include machine guns and tanks.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom