Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by Tim S, 8 Aug 2007.
(though my previous comment was better)
You do realise he admitted fable was crap and it could have been so much better.
Rubbish, good, good, good, rubbish, don't know, great
Funny that the newest game out of that lot is B&W2 and that was pants compared to B&W1 - a real step backwards
I found Fable: The lost Chapters to be quite enjoyable. Way too easy though as I plowed through it in about 6 hours. However, stating that Oblivion, one of my definite all-time favorite, is rubbish I think is something of an atrocious exaggeration. Of course everyone is entitled to their own opinion, and as such I can't help but think the one-button system described for Fable 2 sounds appalling and I can't quite see how this system will cater to both beginners and hardcore gamers. Maybe it's me though.
So he wants to make the sequel 'better' by dumbing it down even more?
He may be making the combat not to everyones liking but it is going to be as good as the first one if not better, the game on a hole though is going to be far superior as you can interact more, more to do, you cana ctually properly have kids and look after them or not, and do many other things the combat system however might not be a great improvement I just think in my opinion. Which everyone is intitled to that it will be better.
Yeah? You've had hands-on time with the game then?
It's hardly dumbing it down is it, Fable essentially had a one button combat button. Same with Oblivion really, yes you have block too but the majority of the time I just dodged my opponents unless I wanted to have a fight that looked cool. Morrowind and Oblivion's combat basically entailed running up to someone, and furiously clicking the LMB until one of you died, if you made yourself an overpowered enchanted item then all it required was a single click on the majority of enemies. Yes, the option to do more than that was there, but it was hardly ever used. I think Molly (his name is far too complicated for my tiny brain to spell) saw that this kind of thing was happening, and probably thought, what's the point in adding in a complicated combat system if all everyone is going to do eventually is resort to using the basic attack over and over because it's easier? I'm going to make a combat system where the basic attack is the only one available, but the basic attack would be situational, making the battles a lot more interesting.
Theme Park is rubbish?
I never enjoyed it, maybe i was crap at it, maybe i didn't understand it
Either way, i didn't like the game, and even when i tried theme park world a few years later, i still hated it
I tried rollercoaster tycoon as well, but didn't like that either - so i don't think i like the whole theme park genre
I've been playing a little MMORPG called Guild Wars (RPG since I only play PvE not PvP) and I can't imagine it as one button. The 8 skills at a time thing feels like a real limitation at first but half of the game is selecting those 8 skills and changing them as the quest requires. There is no reasonable way to simplify that to one button. What if I want an alternate attack or a heal or a res or a shout or ...? G.W. has a fairly rich and intricate combat system that makes the game what it is. I'm sure it's not the only game that aims at including that.
Separate names with a comma.