Fable

[Apocalypse]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

But have they really shown that yet?

Yes, they've shown it to me by the video Busta refered to.

Is there anything that isn't a video? All I have to go on is what you guys say since I have a slow connection.

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

I really don't see how that does it.

Because you get extra gold from fulfilling your exact boast. And that's the thing, you have to pick what you are going to try to do to get the extra gold. If you accomplish something else which you hadn't boasted, then you get jack for it, unlike other RPGs which may give you more experience and gold for doing something which wasn't even your plan. The boast makes you actively seek a goal for reward and not just get it because you do your quest well.

Meh. Those goals aren't even that big. Ooooo do something without getting hit. Again, they better have it so there is a chance of it not working since it's incredibly easy to never get hit in Morrowind, or even games like Jagged Alliance if you are good enough.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Is there anything that isn't a video?

Um... it's a freaking video game for God's sake. You can't judge one without a video or it running on the screen right in front of you. Screenshots don't do any game justice.

Meh. Those goals aren't even that big. Ooooo do something without getting hit. Again, they better have it so there is a chance of it not working since it's incredibly easy to never get hit in Morrowind, or even games like Jagged Alliance if you are good enough.

You are such a hater because this is an X-Box RPG. If it was Fallout 3 which boasted this, you'd be jumping up and down and declaring it to be the be all and end all. Admit it.

And I'd think doing a quest without getting a hit, doing a quest with no weapons, doing a quest with no armor are pretty big goals.

[Apocalypse]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

Is there anything that isn't a video?

Um... it's a freaking video game for God's sake. You can't judge one without a video or it running on the screen right in front of you. Screenshots don't do any game justice.

Well then I'll only be able to go on what you say. At least until August 25th when I'm back at my normal college.

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

Meh. Those goals aren't even that big. Ooooo do something without getting hit. Again, they better have it so there is a chance of it not working since it's incredibly easy to never get hit in Morrowind, or even games like Jagged Alliance if you are good enough.

You are such a hater because this is an X-Box RPG. If it was Fallout 3 which boasted this, you'd be jumping up and down and declaring it to be the be all and end all. Admit it.

And I'd think doing a quest without getting a hit, doing a quest with no weapons, doing a quest with no armor are pretty big goals.

I am not a hater. If this was Fallout 3 I'd be wondering why they were adding in this stuff and would be worrying Bethesda was going to **** it up. Just like I eventually was going with some of Fallout: Tactics gimmicks.

Without getting hit?
Again: Morrowind, JA

Without weapons?
Well, spells are pretty powerful

Armor?
Monks never use armor. And ranged attacks can make it quite easy. Heck, in BG1 you could kill Ankhegs at level one if you had an archer and just kept running away.

[Imran Siddiqui]

If this was Fallout 3 I'd be wondering why they were adding in this stuff and would be worrying Bethesda was going to **** it up.

Uh huh... and if it is was Troika, you'd be sucking their ****, like you have been doing (even though Arcanum wasn't that great of a game and you treat it like it was God's gift).

Without getting hit?
Again: Morrowind, JA

Without weapons?
Well, spells are pretty powerful

Armor?
Monks never use armor. And ranged attacks can make it quite easy. Heck, in BG1 you could kill Ankhegs at level one if you had an archer and just kept running away.

You are really something. So because in some games you could do some quests without getting hit, or without weapons, or without armor, that means it should be easy to win boasts in Fable too?

Of course all those games had the threat of losing gold for not finishing the boast either? Oh, but you'll find something utterly unrelated to attempt to lie your way into saying they did.

[Apocalypse]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

If this was Fallout 3 I'd be wondering why they were adding in this stuff and would be worrying Bethesda was going to **** it up.

Uh huh... and if it is was Troika, you'd be sucking their ****, like you have been doing (even though Arcanum wasn't that great of a game and you treat it like it was God's gift).

I don't really see Troika doing this. And lets take another PC game. I was really interesting in Republic for a while until I decided a lot of it's **** was gimmicky and wouldn't be implimented well.

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

Without getting hit?
Again: Morrowind, JA

Without weapons?
Well, spells are pretty powerful

Armor?
Monks never use armor. And ranged attacks can make it quite easy. Heck, in BG1 you could kill Ankhegs at level one if you had an archer and just kept running away.

You are really something. So because in some games you could do some quests without getting hit, or without weapons, or without armor, that means it should be easy to win boasts in Fable too?

Of course all those games had the threat of losing gold for not finishing the boast either? Oh, but you'll find something utterly unrelated to attempt to lie your way into saying they did.

I didn't say this was definitely going to happen with Fable, just that they better make it not a sure thing. And who really cares about losing gold? In what game was gold a serious problem and you didn't end up having more than you knew what to do with at the end of the game?

[Asher]

Originally posted by Dissident
It might be a good game, then it might not.

I'm not cynical like some people appear to be. I have learned to use the wait and see tactic. I'm tired of buying bad games.

My main problem with this game is it's on the X-box. Therefore no demo. I won't consider buyuing this game until I can play it first.

There are lots of Xbox demos.

[duke o' york]

The change of skin colour is interesting, I'll give them that, but hopefully the gimmick won't get in the way of letting me play a black (or whatever colour) character. All the screenshots I've seen posted here are of white people.
And in that shot where one cuts the other's head off - how was that possible, given where the defender's sword is?
Not something to be too bothered about though.

[Space05us]

Again, what ideas in the game are really that new? I'll admit some of them might be the next step in some areas if they are implimented well, but what is truly new?

you're just stonewalling, you're plugging your eyes and saying "****, ****, ****, its just ****, ****, ****".

Every game is just a new spin off of an old idea. The thing that really makes me excited about Fable is that if everything is how they say it is it will begin a whole new era for RPG's. The player will really start to be the avatar and not just the person controlling a cartoon character, it will be like a second life. It will be one step closer to the holo-decks on Star Trek. Thats every gamers wet dream is to have a holo-deck to play games in, is it not?

And in that shot where one cuts the other's head off - how was that possible, given where the defender's sword is?

you're missing the point. he cut the dudes head off.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Indeed Space. Fable, if they can pull it all off, seems to be the Half-Life of RPGs in terms of redefining the genre in terms of immersiveness. Half-Life did it with FPS by including a story which was more than 'kill more stuff'. Fable seems like they are including a more realistic experience to RPGs, where you aren't just your class or your species (ie, you define your character in terms of being a monk or a dwarf), but you actually are the avatar.

[Apocalypse]

Originally posted by Space05us

Again, what ideas in the game are really that new? I'll admit some of them might be the next step in some areas if they are implimented well, but what is truly new?

you're just stonewalling, you're plugging your eyes and saying "****, ****, ****, its just ****, ****, ****".

Every game is just a new spin off of an old idea. The thing that really makes me excited about Fable is that if everything is how they say it is it will begin a whole new era for RPG's. The player will really start to be the avatar and not just the person controlling a cartoon character, it will be like a second life. It will be one step closer to the holo-decks on Star Trek. Thats every gamers wet dream is to have a holo-deck to play games in, is it not?

Well, some things are really innovative. Like some of the stuff in RoN. And the thing is, this game is running on "new" ideas that aren't new. Fallout and Arcanum ran on story and atmosphere. Dungeon Siege ran on combat. Diablo ran on a dress-up game. You know? They were good on what they advertised. If there was more to it than them saying they have new **** that isn't that new, then maybe it'd come off better. I'm not saying the avatar won't be fun, and I might buy this game, but I don't see why everyone is spluging everywhere.

[Apocalypse]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Indeed Space. Fable, if they can pull it all off, seems to be the Half-Life of RPGs in terms of redefining the genre in terms of immersiveness. Half-Life did it with FPS by including a story which was more than 'kill more stuff'. Fable seems like they are including a more realistic experience to RPGs, where you aren't just your class or your species (ie, you define your character in terms of being a monk or a dwarf), but you actually are the avatar.

Yeah, it kinda cool but who cares if you can have an avatar if there isn't a word to back up it. Customizability of character isn't what's going to create atmosphere for a game. You need story to back it up. And the cartoonish graphics aren't really helping. I don't care for detailed graphics, they just have to be decent.

[Imran Siddiqui]

So cartoonish graphics (a critique I don't understand at all) mean the story is going to suck? Call the makers of Zelda and let them know!!

Get off it, Apoc, we all see through you and your anti-console bias. You got no basis in anything for your assertions of a 'bad' story at all. You just want to shoot arrows because it would hurt you badly if a console RPG was declared 'best'. You did the same thing with KOTOR.

[Apocalypse]

Damn, Imran I never said cartoon graphics = bad story. Just that they mean a bad atmosphere. I mentioned FFVII having a good story and it had cartoonish graphics.

I'm not worried about it being the best. Maybe if they talked more about how good the story was I'd be disappointed because I don't have my own Xbox and would have to use my office's one to play it. You're just remembering my bias from three years ago and putting it on me again. I've changed a lot in three years just like I did in the three years before.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Just that they mean a bad atmosphere.

Why?

[Dis]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
So cartoonish graphics (a critique I don't understand at all) mean the story is going to suck? Call the makers of Zelda and let them know!!

Get off it, Apoc, we all see through you and your anti-console bias. You got no basis in anything for your assertions of a 'bad' story at all. You just want to shoot arrows because it would hurt you badly if a console RPG was declared 'best'. You did the same thing with KOTOR.

I'm not sure I like cartoonish graphics. This is why I'm worried about World of Warcraft. I'm not sure I like the graphics.