The Ending of Fable 3 Sucks

[IMesh]

-Spoilers Possible Below-
I can't say that the ending to III was terrible, I mean atleast there was actually a battle, that being compared to a one-shot kill in II. Though, I suppose the ending did lack in the moral industry, seeing as no matter what you did there was always a downside. Walter Dies, Swift Dies, Randomly Generated Npcs Die.
Atleast your dog dosen't DIE =)

 

[DarkONI]

I liked the ending. Actually, the story was the best thing in-game.
They should move over CGI movies industry and forget about video games
if you ask me.

 

[Arseface]

I liked the ending. Actually, the story was the best thing of the game. They should move over CGI
movies industry and forget about video games if you ask me.

Yeah, apart from all the glaring plotholes and the sheer number of things that don't make sense at all, yeah it's got a good story.

 

[DarkONI]

Yeah, apart from all the glaring plotholes and the sheer number of things that don't make sense at all, yeah it's got a good story.

Yeah, it is in many ways when you take the game only by doing the main
quests. That's just my opinion.

 

[Arseface]

Yeah, it is in many ways when you take the game only by doing the main
quests. That's just my opinion.

I think the main quest is the part that has all the plotholes and things that don't make sense.

 

[DarkONI]

I think the main quest is the part that has all the plotholes and things that don't make sense.

Fine. Post all the plot-holes you know and I will clear them up for
you. If I can't clear them up then you are right.

 

[Quistrix]

Fine. Post all the plot-holes you know and I will clear them up for
you. If I can't clear them up then you are right.

 

[Arseface]

Fine. Post all the plot-holes you know and I will clear them up for
you. If I can't clear them up then you are right.

Challenge accepted!

All the decisions you make as king are pointless and don't make any sense. Why can't I take austerity measures for a year and then be a good ruler after that? Nope, gotta have those pointless "consequence" things, otherwise it's not Fable. But the funny thing is that I can just busk and make all the money required anyway, without making any of the bad decisions.

The fact that Logan is painted as a cruel tyrant, but then halfway through the story it flips to him just trying to save up for the Crawler. Then why, at the start, does he force you to choose between killing your girlfriend or a bunch of strangers? That is a defining moment of the development of the story, but it doesn't make any sense at all.

They're the biggest two. I'll post more if I think about it.

 

[DarkONI]

Challenge accepted!

All the decisions you make as king are pointless and don't make any sense. Why can't I take austerity measures for a year and then be a good ruler after that? Nope, gotta have those pointless "consequence" things, otherwise it's not Fable. But the funny thing is that I can just busk and make all the money required anyway, without making any of the bad decisions.

The fact that Logan is painted as a cruel tyrant, but then halfway through the story it flips to him just trying to save up for the Crawler. Then why, at the start, does he force you to choose between killing your girlfriend or a bunch of strangers? That is a defining moment of the development of the story, but it doesn't make any sense at all.

They're the biggest two. I'll post more if I think about it.

Simple, it's called Molyneux'd. The plot makes sense if you forget
that it has been Molyneux'd. It works like "owned" but it's far worse.

 

[IMesh]

Challenge accepted!

All the decisions you make as king are pointless and don't make any sense. Why can't I take austerity measures for a year and then be a good ruler after that? Nope, gotta have those pointless "consequence" things, otherwise it's not Fable. But the funny thing is that I can just busk and make all the money required anyway, without making any of the bad decisions.

The fact that Logan is painted as a cruel tyrant, but then halfway through the story it flips to him just trying to save up for the Crawler. Then why, at the start, does he force you to choose between killing your girlfriend or a bunch of strangers? That is a defining moment of the development of the story, but it doesn't make any sense at all.

They're the biggest two. I'll post more if I think about it.

1. I see what you're getting at, but frankly, I don't think that a one-to-two year rushed game would have the option make a decision whenever you saw fit.
2. They were probally writing the storyline as they developed it, decided to go with "ooh, I know, the hero's brother was actually a good guy, but we can kill him anyway!"

 

[DarkONI]

1. I see what you're getting at, but frankly, I don't think that a one-to-two year rushed game would have the option make a decision whenever you saw fit.
2. They were probally writing the storyline as they developed it, decided to go with "ooh, I know, the hero's brother was actually a good guy, but we can kill him anyway!"

I think you're wrong. I believe they reached a point where Design and
actual development were involved in a crash and they started removing
things from the game for the sake for it to reach Gold in the
scheduled time for release as asked by Microsoft.

Therefore they started removing things from the game at the time and
they had to *fix* them with some kind of cheap brown glue.

 

[Zjuggernaut]

Or because LionHead haven't produced a half decent game since Fable 2 and Microsoft are greedy money grabbers?

 

[DarkONI]

Or because LionHead haven't produced a half decent game since Fable 2 and Microsoft are greedy money grabbers?

Fable 2 was half good. You can see the other half of Fable 2 in Fable 3,
therefore it's a complete game.

 

[Zjuggernaut]

Fable 2 was half good. You can see the other half of Fable 2 in Fable 3,
therefore it's a complete game.

What, the bad half? I agree with that.

 

[IMesh]

they had to *fix* them with some kind of cheap brown glue.

That is the first time I've seen someone else use that metaphor.

 

[DarkONI]

That is the first time I've seen someone else use that metaphor.

We came to that deduction ages ago.

 

[El Mosqueton]

I think you're wrong. I believe they reached a point where Design and
actual development were involved in a crash and they started removing
things from the game for the sake for it to reach Gold in the
scheduled time for release as asked by Microsoft.

Therefore they started removing things from the game at the time and
they had to *fix* them with some kind of cheap brown glue.

Correct, the whole king portion of the game, as well as the actual revolution were changed 6 months before release.

Simple, it's called Molyneux'd. The plot makes sense if you forget
that it has been Molyneux'd. It works like "owned" but it's far worse.

This is a terrible answer, as you did not answer anything.