Fable: A Masterpiece?

[Sephiroxas]

Re: Fable: A Masterpiece?

Thats the way YOU rate games, not the way everyone does

I guess...I just see it like...saying. I'M better than THIS person because I have neat boots.

 

[afs]

calm down

Wow.This boomed faster than I thought it would. I guess I'll start at the beginning.

Fable is a game that has a huge emphasis on Good/Evil. I compared that to another (Game of the Year winning) game that had an emphasis on the same thing, Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic.

All I said was KotOR did what people said Fable was going to do, and did it better at that. I never said this makes KotOR better. I think it is better, but I never said that. And I can't begin to tell you how ridicules it sounds to not rate games in any way. There are some games that are just better than others. It's all opinion of course, but still... Halo would kick the crap out of GoldenEye: Rouge Agent any day of the week. But there are novelty games that take a special interest (think Shenmue) that can't fairly be rate by those who have a hate or love for them. This is what I thought of this site calling Fable a masterpiece. I thought they were being biased. Although, Fable is really commercial, so maybe not.

It's great to know that people on the internet, a place for free exchange of ideas, pornography and plagiarism, still don't want others to voice their opinions. But that is neither here nor there.

If you want me to compare Fable to another game, I'll be more than happy too. But when you're asking if Splinter Cell is a great game, you compare it to Metal Gear Solid. There's a lot more similarities between Fable and KotOR than, say, Fable and Max Payne.

But, not trying to argue. You could blame Fable's "downfalls" on the fact that it was rushed, a fact that made KotOR2 much less than it could have been. Maybe Fable is working the same mistakes backwards... we'll have to wait and see.

And, to those of you who have yet to play Knights of the Old Republic: There's no excuse for that. It's on PC and XBox, get your ass out there and get it. Come on. Game of the Year.

And let's try to keep this civil.

 

[Sephiroxas]

Re: Fable: A Masterpiece?

If wanted to rate a game..I'd rate it..by itself. Not against other games. that's just how I work.

 

[Master]

Re: Fable: A Masterpiece?

i agree seph, but back to the point would we consider fable a masterpiece don't get me wrong its the best game ive ever played, BUT i belive they couldve made it just a little longer and a little more challanging.

 

[Angel]

Re: Fable: A Masterpiece?

But surely the people who make games are limited by time and money?

 

[Sephiroxas]

Re: Fable: A Masterpiece?

But surely the people who make games are limited by time and money?

yes..yes they were.
which is why I think it's a masterpeice, because they ran out of time and money..maybe not money..Iunno...

 

[Dark Drakan]

Re: Fable: A Masterpiece?

But surely the people who make games are limited by time and money?

Yeah it had been hit with alot of delays and the publishers were getting impatient and made them remove some content etc to get it released in time.

 

[Master]

Re: Fable: A Masterpiece?

yeah your right now that you mention it time is a very vital part in game developement guess i wasnt thinking outside the box the big blue box coorpiration that is.

 

[afs]

Re: Fable: A Masterpiece?

Well, Seph, now your going against your previous logic. Earlier you said that you rate games by themselves, without outside sources, such as other games. Now your saying the game should be judged based on the amount of time in which it was made.

If there was a painter, and he was giving you two paintings, one that he painted in a week nd one that he painted in 2 years, and the two-year-painting was just slightly better than the other, would that make the other a better painting in general, because it was done in a shorter amount of time? (I know that's a strange analogy)

The time shouldn't matter, it should be the finished product that is judged. Sure, a shorter time could make the overall experience more impressive, but it doesn't make it any better.

 

[Sephiroxas]

Re: Fable: A Masterpiece?

Well, Seph, now your going against your previous logic. Earlier you said that you rate games by themselves, without outside sources, such as other games. Now your saying the game should be judged based on the amount of time in which it was made.

If there was a painter, and he was giving you two paintings, one that he painted in a week nd one that he painted in 2 years, and the two-year-painting was just slightly better than the other, would that make the other a better painting in general, because it was done in a shorter amount of time? (I know that's a strange analogy)

The time shouldn't matter, it should be the finished product that is judged. Sure, a shorter time could make the overall experience more impressive, but it doesn't make it any better.

You're twisting my words around. That's not what I said. what are you ranting about? The fact that they ran out of time doesn't make it better.
I was Answering Angels question it has nothing to do with rating the game. I think they did a good job with the time they had. That doesn't mean it's better than another game. (IE the two year painting is NOT better then the ONE WEEK painting. but the ONE WEEK painting gets more respect because of the short ammount of time it was painted in.)

 

[Master]

Re: Fable: A Masterpiece?

Paintings................what?........... .............