RPGWatch Forums
Page 1 of 2 1 2

RPGWatch Forums (http://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/index.php)
-   News Comments (http://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=10)
-   -   Fable: Anniversary - Review Roundup (http://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/showthread.php?t=23241)

Myrthos February 3rd, 2014 13:56

Fable: Anniversary - Review Roundup
 
Here are some reviews for Fable: Anniversary that is to be released shortly. The review scores range from 6 to 9.

Metro, 6/10

Quote:

If youíve never played any of the games before though, or perhaps just one and not the others, Fable Trilogy is also released this week and includes Fable Anniversary, Fable II, and Fable III. The latter two arenít altered in any way but on a technical level they donít particularly need it.

What all three could do with though is something to address the intrinsic shallowness of the gameplay. Although playing the first one again itís clear thatís never really been Fableís primary focus. Instead it tries to offer a more human and personal experience for a role-playing game, and in that sense it still has disappointingly few peers.

IGN, 8/10

Quote:

Fable Anniversaryís personality has proved truly ageless, even if some of its mechanics havenít. Inevitably, its doesnít feel as fresh today as they did in 2004, but the strange and beautiful world of Albion, with all its weird idiosyncrasies and wildly varied accents, is as absorbing and lovably, peculiarly British as it ever was.

Life at the Moment, 9/10

Quote:

Fable Anniversary is an outstanding version of the original game. If the new console generation can live up to the ambition and imagination this title showed a decade ago theneverything is going to be alright.

And as it takes too much time to quote them all, here is a summary of some others.

More information.

joxer February 3rd, 2014 13:56

I love Escapist's review and here's a quote from it:
Quote:

With its uncomfortably messy combat, obtuse menu system, and overall awkward controls, Fable Anniversary would have benefited from more than just a visual upgrade. Indeed, the original Fable could have done with a full-on remake that modernized everything, as this is one severely dated action-adventure. Even by the standards of its time, Fable was always a little sloppy, favoring its idealistic ambition of choice and personal narrative over slick, polished gameplay. In today's world, going back to the clumsy original has a tendency to make one cringe.
Honestly I'm unsure why they just couldn't leave it as it was and make a proper sequel instead of the viewing horsebutt.

TheMadGamer February 3rd, 2014 18:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by joxer (Post 1061239252)
Honestly I'm unsure why they just couldn't leave it as it was and make a proper sequel instead of the viewing horsebutt.

Easy money is why.

Dez February 3rd, 2014 19:05

Fable trilogy.. Does it finally mean, we pc users get to play fable 2?

joxer February 3rd, 2014 19:26

No, this whole thing is about consoles only.

TheMadGamer February 3rd, 2014 21:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by joxer (Post 1061239303)
No, this whole thing is about consoles only.

All I meant was that it's easier/faster/less work to re-package old games and sell them versus make a brand new game. Getting new money for old games = easy money.

Couchpotato February 3rd, 2014 22:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dez (Post 1061239300)
Fable trilogy.. Does it finally mean, we pc users get to play fable 2?

I agree it would be nice to play Fable 2 on the PC. :)

Unfortunately I don't see that happening any time soon. As Fable fans asked this question for years, and we never got a serious reply just excuses.

Santos February 3rd, 2014 22:01

This (the original) was the game that not me not to ever trust Peter M. A life lesson I still hold firm on.

DArtagnan February 3rd, 2014 22:13

I liked Fable - though it was way too short. Obviously nothing like Molyneux originally promised - but I didn't trust anything he said even then.

It had a certain innocent charm without being nauseating about it. Well, except for the farting :)

I consider it an endearing fairy tale with great music and an entertaining if simplistic character system. It was flexible and combat looked great and felt good at the time.

But I don't think upgrading the visuals will make me play it again. It needs more content - and it should have been 2-3 times longer than it was.

Considering the scope of the design, it's quite unfortunate that it was so tiny overall.

JuliusMagnus February 4th, 2014 02:32

Whether it's actually worth to play it or not, it just irks me my collection goes from Fable 1 to Fable 3 (skipping over Fable 2).

JDR13 February 4th, 2014 05:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by JuliusMagnus (Post 1061239356)
Whether it's actually worth to play it or not, it just irks me my collection goes from Fable 1 to Fable 3 (skipping over Fable 2).

You should be grateful. It's one less shitty Molyneux game in your collection. :)

zahratustra February 4th, 2014 05:53

Fable 3 was a dog. All I want to do is to forget about it.

Stingray February 4th, 2014 09:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by zahratustra (Post 1061239368)
Fable 3 was a dog. All I want to do is to forget about it.

Yep. Not only was the game atrocious, but the camera/character controls were probably the single worst I'd ever seen for a PC game. Just a godawful game all-around, and not even worthy of being called an RPG.

The original Fable was decent, though. Basically what DArtagnan already said.

Trelow February 4th, 2014 19:50

2 was my favorite. They all could have been so much more than they were, it's a shame.

darklord February 4th, 2014 20:42

Never played any of the Fables, I dunno I'm quite happy playing Wizardry 7 at the moment.

It's a shame they spent so much time improving graphics when they could be improving gameplay.

Daniel.

TheMadGamer February 4th, 2014 23:30

I played a couple of hours of Fable 1 and 2. Never played 3. What was so bad about it compared to the first two games?

JDR13 February 4th, 2014 23:44

I've only messed around with Fable 3 for a few hours, but it didn't seem worse than the original game from what I could see. I actually like the setting a lot more than the generic high-fantasy of Fable 1. Never played Fable 2.

DArtagnan February 4th, 2014 23:52

Fable 3 lasted all of 10 minutes or so with me. It was ultra generic crap without a soul. Clearly a desperate cash-grab that ran and controlled like shit on PC.

Fable > Fable 2 >>> Fable 3.

Dez February 5th, 2014 20:51

I haven't played fable 3 because I'm still waiting fable 2. :)

I liked the orginal fable game though. Nice orginal fairy tale atmosphere combined with light hearted action adventure gameplay. I don't get why people dislike it so much. I never expected it to be a serious rpg though.

Quote:

Originally Posted by joxer (Post 1061239303)
No, this whole thing is about consoles only.

Ah should have guessed… :/

Maylander February 6th, 2014 10:29

Fable 1 and 2 were both decent. Fable 3 was rubbish tho.

Making a new version of the Fable games and then only release them on consoles seems pointless - graphics was never an issue.


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 12:44.
Page 1 of 2 1 2

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright by RPGWatch