«

[El Quia]

I am not sure if you should be bothered with fable... at least from my point of view. I just plainly hated it

But, your mileage may vary

[Maxor127]

I liked Fable. Especially the PC Lost Chapters version. There are some things that could've been better, but there's a lot to like.

[El Quia]

Originally Posted by Maxor127

I liked Fable. Especially the PC Lost Chapters version. There are some things that could've been better, but there's a lot to like.

I played the same version, and found the game seriously lacking... but I guess we like different things, then

[Tomekk]

Fable was more like an action game with added RPG stuff just for the hell of it. Not that good.

[rabadi]

I already started playing Gothic (simultaneously with Vampire: The Masquerade - Bloodlines), so I probably will not be able to play other games at least for the next several weeks (As I said the progress is slow, due to many things to do, real life or otherwise). I guess in the meantime I will do more review reading on Fable, and see whether I still want to pick it up or not in the future

[Maxor127]

Fable is like a Zelda style RPG. I don't see anything about it that would make it a bad game. Like El Quia said, it just boils down to taste. I like any game as long as it's well-made. It got mostly positive reviews, and most negative reviews were based on high expectations. Peter Molyneux is notorious for promising lots of features and boosting expectations and ultimately failing to meet them.

If you're expecting something deep, like a Bioware game, then you'll be disappointed. But if you want a fun, light-RPG, then Fable is a good choice. I liked its storybook quality, and thought the graphics and music were excellent.

[_r.u.s.s.]

maybe it's just that fable really sucks. it's a general knowledge

[rabadi]

Oh I have no problem with light RPG. Heck, I am even willing to call Diablo, Dungeon Siege and other clones as light RPGs When I come home from work, I am usually already tired and my brain needs rest. So, in order to relax I play videogames (in addition to having some time with my family, of course).

When I am having rough weeks, I do not want to play games that require me to think much. Hence, light RPGs and/or other casual games are much welcomed in that situation. Even then I usually also consult walkthroughs 'cause I really do not want to think much while playing. During those weeks I want to be relaxed, not challenged. During those weeks, even games with too easy gameplay are welcomed. Let me give you an example: Harbinger. This Diablo-clone-in-space gets bad reviews everywhere. The gameplay is way too easy, consisting only of hits and runs. RPG stats there are way too simple. Not much story either. But in the end I found myself enjoying the game. Why? Because I played it during rough weeks, and in fact that too simple gameplay helped me relax.

On the other hand, when I am having easy weeks, challenges are fine (Although I also draw a line between challenge and frustrating gameplay). During these weeks, more in-depth RPGs are welcomed. If you use Bioware games as standard for in-depths RPGs, then I cite KotOR 1 as a Bioware game that I have played.

That being said, no matter what week it is, no matter how rough or easy a particular week is, I do not enjoy RPGs that are way too complicated (for my taste). Take for example: Icewind Dale II. The D&D Third Edition ruleset implemented there is superb, but is also too much for me. I remember spending almost an hour and a half just for the party creation. So as much as I want to play that game in the end I never really got to play it. Maybe it is just me but I prefer videogames that are not too complex to play. Maybe that is why I also do not play strategy games either.

[El Quia]

Originally Posted by rabadi

The D&D Third Edition ruleset implemented there is superb

[rabadi]

Originally Posted by El Quia

Okay, I know next to nothing about D&D Third Edition ruleset. So maybe "superb" is not the right term. I meant to say "complex" :laugh: