-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
"Fable 2 First Details for Xbox 360"
- Thread starter Wunderchu
- Start date
In before blind Prine.
And they better:
- dump the shitty tiny-ass maps or should I call'em - corridors.
- make Fable 2 longer than 10 hours.
- make everyone age not only your main char.
- dump the "main hub where you pick quests" idea.
- give players some real choices. Old 2D Fallout 1 & 2 did, Fable failed so hard it ain't even funny.
- put back all those features cut from Fable during the development time (I can't name them cause I didn't follow Fable's dev.)
So here's a question, Xbox GAFers:
what was missing from Fable - I heard only about growing trees, anything else?
And they better:
- dump the shitty tiny-ass maps or should I call'em - corridors.
- make Fable 2 longer than 10 hours.
- make everyone age not only your main char.
- dump the "main hub where you pick quests" idea.
- give players some real choices. Old 2D Fallout 1 & 2 did, Fable failed so hard it ain't even funny.
- put back all those features cut from Fable during the development time (I can't name them cause I didn't follow Fable's dev.)
So here's a question, Xbox GAFers:
what was missing from Fable - I heard only about growing trees, anything else?
Beer Monkey
Member
Hack/Nethack, bizzotch.
Sathsquatch
Member
QFT. I also hope that they don't make the game so easy or at least include difficulty settings.Borys said:
Nah he's mistaken, other characters age as well but not the way you do. None of the normal NPCs age, mainly since they aren't important the the story.DarienA said:
There are characters that you meet as a child that you see again later on in the game who "grow" to adulthood but you don't see the process and they don't get any older after that point. Much the way that your character doesn't age gradually in the game either.* You're 6 or 7 here and then you advance the story which is told through a cutscene.. then all of a sudden you're in your mid teens. And it advances again from then to adulthood etc.
Then of course there's the fact that your body ages rapidly with magic use, so when you're all white haired etc those people will still look like they're just entering adulthood.
* Other than magic use.
DarienA said:
Yes. It's bizarre and fucked up, really. At age 18 you enter a school and there are lil' kids and their teacher in his 40s. Later when you are 60 he is still in his 40s and same kids are running around him.
Same goes to pretty much every person in the game be it shopkeeper, innkeeper or NPCs.
Guildmaster doesn't age, Thunder doesn't age, the only one who ages is Whisper and it happens in a *gasp* cutscene!
Sorry raYne but you are bullshitting.
In Fable only your main character goes from a healthy 18-yr old to a cranky old grandpa (with white beard and all) while everyone around you stays EXACTLY THE SAME. Talk about an artificial experience :/
Many, many things changed over the course of development -- from the entire opening plotline, to the bulk of the engine -- so it's kind of hard to nail down "what was missing" when there were so many different builds of the game over the years. Plus, many of the features that people consider "missing" are actually present, just in a much more limited fashion.Borys said:
That said, I may as well run down the ones I remember:
Real-Time Aging
-- Originally, the entire game world was meant to be effected by time, with you and NPCs, towns, etc showing age as the years go on.
-- Also worth noting that the aging model changed multiple times over the course of development, and was at one point, supposed to "compess" time (for lack of a better term) to a sort of chapter set-up, so everything in the game world would advance at set intervals.
-- Also tied into this is the real-time foliage system. It was meant to work much like it does in Oblivion, though it was also meant to offer player interaction, allowing you to do things like step on an acorn, and return to that location years later to find a tree there.
-- You originally started the game at Age 15, and ended at Age 44 (Molyneux's age at the time).
-- In the final game, as everybody that has played the game knows, only your character and a few select NPCs age as the game goes on. Your hero ages at set intervals in your childhood, and in real-time from 18-65 (accelerated through the use of magic); the NPCs, on the other hand, simply age at a single set interval for each one. The world itself, on the other hand, doesn't change one bit.
Real-Time Character Development
-- Many elements were originally intended here: running around a lot would cause your leg muscles to strengthen, swinging a heavy sword would cause the muscle in that one arm to strengthen and grow larger, sitting in the sunlight for long periods would cause you to develop a tan, you'd develop scars from getting injured, your hair would grow over time, etc.
-- At certain stages in development, Molynuex and Carter constantly kicked around the idea of character deterioration. Basically, if you failed to utilize certain muscles, skills, etc over long periods of times, they'd essentially "level down." Those large arm muscles you gained from swinging that sword around would return to the original near-tooth-pick state, if say, you spent a few hours doing nothing but slinging spells or pelting things with arrows. Another element that tied into this was the ability to spend time in jail, ala Morrowind, which would accelerate the game world a set interval of time, and deteriorate your body accordingly.
-- In the final game, absolutely none of the growth elements are in real-time, and the deterioration isn't present at all (and definitely not missed). Instead, scars are only gained through losing set intervals of health, the size of your body/muscles only changes via leveling up certain attributes, your hair style/length only changes via haircuts, etc. Tanning, the leg muscles bit, etc simply didn't make it in at all.
Competing Heroes
-- Pretty much the most commonly groaned about "missing feature," the game was originally supposed to offer something akin to Skies of Arcadia's "Discoveries" system, only on steroids. The world was meant to be full of rival heroes that would compete with you during quests, take more boasts than you to show you up and earn more recognition, or even finish quests before you got off your lazy ass to get around to 'em.
-- In the final game, however, you're pretty much alone in the hero thing. Only competing hero in the game is 'Whisper,' and even then, she only pops up at set story points, and is easily bested.
Multiplayer
-- Big Blue Box added this in the form of an "import" option via a Memory Unit. Basically you'd take your character over a friend's house, import your hero, and quest together in 2-player co-op. Twist being that one of you was the hero, and one was the sidekick, and only the former earned experience points -- you could switch roles at any time with a single button press, so you'd have to balance out who would receive the spoils (bad design, if you ask me). After you're finished playing, you could simply import your hero back to the Memory Unit with all of the loot, experience, etc you gained.
-- Soon after, they expanded it to 4-player co-op, only to cancel multiplayer altogether the following year (in March 2004, IIRC) due to time constraints.
Outside of that, and the non-linear design originally promised, most of the other missing/changed elements are relatively minor in comparison: no killing kids, no ripping out people's hearts as an evil character, no permanent deaths for NPCs, NPC's impressions of you affecting your alignment, no learning expressions from NPCs (ie: a character in a bar burps, and you could rapidly press a button to learn the "Burp" expression from him), no learning abilities from opponents in the same fashion, fist fighting not effecting your alignment, no having children, etc.
Also, considering the news about Fable II featuring a pet, it's worth noting that the starting storyline in the original game (the cause for you joining the guild) changed a few times over the years. Originally it was meant that your family (father and mother) would get kidnapped, and your dog would get slaughtered and nailed to your front door (seriously); later on it changed to both (the bulk of) your family and pooch being slaughtered; and then finally it changed to how it is now, with no dog in sight.
...Which makes me wonder, will the dog make the cut this time?
I'm bs'ing? I already agreed with you that the npcs don't age. :lolBorys said:
I simply said that there were a few characters (involved in the storyline) that you meet as a child who are then children as well... then later on you meet them as an "adult" and they've also grown into adulthood.
The first one that comes to mind is the teddy bear girl you meet in Oakvale, then later you return as an adult and she has grown up. If I could remember more I'd list them as well but it has been a long-ass time since I've played it.
Did you even read what I wrote or did you just stop at the part where I said "Nah, he's mistaken"? :lol
Ghost said:
Duh, I never had any to begin with.
I was just messing with ideas and really curious about the whole HYPE --> LETDOWN thing (thanks Scott! seems not a big deal after all besides the Falloutish quests of course).
I'm sure F2 won't hit the PC for a long time so again I won't follow its development.
I don't have much faith in this at all. It seemed like a lot of the design choices in the first game were deliberately done to make the game more accessible (i.e. noob-friendly), and formula obviously worked (as far as selling a lot of copies) so there's no reason they should change it.
I'd bet that again they'll stick with a smallish world of paths because they're afraid people will get lost, make it easy and short so even "non-gamers" can finish it, etc...
As much as I'd like it to be a tighter, more whimsical Elder Scrolls game the chances of that are probably pretty slim.
I'd bet that again they'll stick with a smallish world of paths because they're afraid people will get lost, make it easy and short so even "non-gamers" can finish it, etc...
As much as I'd like it to be a tighter, more whimsical Elder Scrolls game the chances of that are probably pretty slim.
Teknopathetic
Member
How about they make it fun this time?
Ive got faith in it for exactly the same reason, they've focused the ideas down into something thats actually a fun game rather than just an awesome list of features for fanboys to salivate over.
Hopefully now they can develop a sequel without forming another set of bloated ideas that arent all going to work.
(BTW I think X number of miles of explorable landscape is one of the 'bloat' ideas)
Hopefully now they can develop a sequel without forming another set of bloated ideas that arent all going to work.
(BTW I think X number of miles of explorable landscape is one of the 'bloat' ideas)
Id like them to implement a Zelda type jump/climb button. I want to climb tree's and scale building if im uber stealthy, hack off limbs with a great physic system backing the game. I want to roam open fields and hills, venture up mountains, explore old myths and follow legends, compete with heros, i want them to expand the property management they introduced with Fable, be able to alot more things with my wife, allow for deeper interactivity with NPCs. be able to fix my house as a mini game, errect staues of myself, inspire followers to protect me, ride horses and dragons, be able to take over towns and villages making my own rules with they all have to obey, be able to wage war against other communities to become ruler of ALbion.
Theres just so much potential with this franchise, I like the idea of a dog follower
TekunoRobby
Tag of Excellence
A lot of people already echoed what I wanted to initially say. What I envision is for them to work on the game that they originally promised to the industry. They have the experience and they have the concept art, they simply need to expand the concept now. I hope Big Blue Box Studios drop everything of irrelevance if it hampers too much of their original vision. They already have a fantastic stepping stone to work from and with the X360 they have a lot less technical limitations to hamper progress.
Hopefully that's what they're doing and this idea of having a dog companion won't take away from the meat of the development.
Hopefully that's what they're doing and this idea of having a dog companion won't take away from the meat of the development.
Before they fix the awful narrative, or implement all the cut features, or even expand the game world beyond a bunch of scripted 'accelerated age moments', boring corridor forests and pointless moral 'choices', I'd really like to see BBB fix the absolutely atrocious, repetitive and uninspired battle system, which I always found to be the game's most glaring flaw, and one I'm surprised more people didn't complain about.
Oh, and it would be nice if we got the game before 2009 too.
Oh, and it would be nice if we got the game before 2009 too.
Sathsquatch
Member
I agree. The thing I hated most about Fable was the combat system. I guess Heian-kyo is right that it is both repetitive and uninspired, but I would like to add that it wasn't much of a "system" at all. There was no intelligent way to fight in Fable at all except for to use the most powerful spells availible.Heian-kyo said:
The melee combat was particularly unintelligible. You couldn't do anything to break an enemy's guard except use time freeze to get behind them or use flourish, which wasn't always availible. The enemies never telegraphed their attacks and attacked so quickly that you could not react to their attacks. You couldn't tell if they were about to attack because they never charged in or anything. They would just suddenly be passive then unleashing a lightning fast combo. You couldn't even punish them after blocking their combos because they recovered from their failed attacks to quickly and could even block in the middle of a freaking attack . Basically, melee combat was just flailing on the button without knowing when or why to attack. The game covers up how bad its combat system is by making the game super easy and giving the player a ridiculous amount of health potions.
The entire point of Fable was to make the player feel like a hero, but the game failed to do that. I never felt heroic when I never had to fight the least bit skillfully or even had the potential to fight skillfully. It's hard to feel heroic when you are just slashing wildly at pathetically weak enemies.
VictimOfGrief
Banned
To counter-punch the Fable haters DoA styel...... The game was good.... IF you didn't take into account what was promised to be put in... Fable was an enjoyable and unique experience. What I expect from Fable 2 is a more immersive storyline, more choice, more fighting, less loading and just a more rounded experience.
So I say.... bring it on....
So I say.... bring it on....
Die Squirrel Die
Member
Heian-kyo said:
I complained at the time. It did just feel so woolly and imprecise, and it just lacked a satisfyingly solid feeling when your hits connected. Button mash to boringness.
They had the right idea with the combat, i like the fact experience was allocated depending on how you approached a particular situation. If i use my arrow then yellow orbs would drop from downed enemies, red for using melee and blue for magic. You could use the orbs as currency to spend on special attributes. Id rather control my growth then the computer randomly calculate what it percieves to think what skills im elegible for.
But yeah, they need to sort out the kentic movement and hit detection of swinging weapons. After watching House of Flying Daggers i was filled with ideas for what the next Fable can achieve. Jumping from tree to tree in the woods, stalking enemies would be so much fun
But yeah, they need to sort out the kentic movement and hit detection of swinging weapons. After watching House of Flying Daggers i was filled with ideas for what the next Fable can achieve. Jumping from tree to tree in the woods, stalking enemies would be so much fun