Fable 3: A Critique

My mind was blown by Fable 1 & 2. Not because it was something different to the games I'd been playing (namely Conker: Live and Reloaded, and Mad Dash Racing), but because it was so well done. The graphics weren't Fable's strong suit in the first game, but recieved a major overhaul in the second. The storyline went from a minor rescue and vengeance seeking, to a much thicker plot with many twists. The amounts of content were plentiful, as you could repeat quests and help out nearly every named NPC in the towns.

Sadly, Fable 3 is not all it was hyped up to be. As most games go, the first one is seen as an introduction - things could be improved, completely removed and some new features could be added. In the second game, you work on feedback and give it a new plot. That, dear reader, was what Lionhead did. Yet the developers wanted to add way too many things - they kept promising features like children companions, pets besides dogs to fight alongside us, having warrior husbands and wives, etc. But alas, this could not be added. When developers make promises for three games running and still can't keep them, the community loses trust in them. And I'm writing this critique to tell you how NOT to lose £60 unlike me.

The games link together very well, often with characters who reached the top and becoming the king/queen. In the next game, you'd play as the son or daughter, or a relative (perhaps long lost in Fable 2's case?). In this, you play as your character from the second game's children, growing up to become the next ruler. But your brother has taken over and is very evil! Someone has to stop him.... someone has to lead a revolution.

Revolution in video games is never how it's made out to be. In Red Faction, it's true that you're doing major things but they feel rather unrealistic. In Half Life, you're just making your way around and killing the Combine. In Fable 3 you're:

• NOT assassinating the king's generals and high ranking officials
• NOT assassinating the king's friends to lower morale
• NOT gaining the influence of others through rallies, daring deeds
• NOT growing long hair, wearing a kilt, getting your wife's throat slit at the stake, shouting "THEY CAN TAKE OUR LIVES, BUT THEY'LL NEVER TAKE OUR FREEDOM!" and being beheaded for all of Scotland to see.

No. None of that happens. I'll try giving you a scenario:

Imagine your least favorite demon door quest (probably an "eat some much of [x], and then do a [y] emoticon" one, for example), but doing it over and over again.

Because that is exactly what this game feels like. If I wanted to grind my way to Endgame through quests which use the same template each time I'd just play World of Warcraft.

Little has changed from Fable 2's idea of combat, which I admire. My main problem is that, if you've played the ancestor to death, you're gonna find this a bore. Weapons have changed a bit in this however, as instead of getting new weapons to compare DPS and stats to, your weapons now level up as you do. Need I say World of Warcraft: Heirloom System? Magic hasn't changed much either, which is a shame because new and fun ideas could've been added. And yes, this isn't like Skyrim where you can mix and match your talents - you'll only use one or the other anyway, despite having the choice? Why? Because pewpew is not as fun as skullshattering, and vice versa.

I won't say that combat is broken, but rather repetitive due to the lack of combos needed, lack of parry, lack of mobility, etc. There's barely any involvement between you and your character, due to the same ol', same ol' system.

Whenever my friends and I talk about RPGs, one of the few topics I bring up is questing. This is crucial to the traditional (difference between tradition and copying) Fantasy game, where players need to help the poor and needy, and serve royalty, etc. In a lot of F2P or Paid MMORPGs the questing system is repetitive and unoriginal. We'll always say that it copies off WoW, and WoW copied off Everquest, and Everquest copied off something in the 60's, etc. It's not that the quests in this game are like any other, on the contrary. It's that they're too much like Fable 1 & 2! Literally, there's always the:

• Kill the wasps/beetles/rats that are bothering us
• Slay the bandits/raiders/royal guard that kill our traders
• Defeat the werewolves of the forest
• Destroy the threat that looms ahead that we've never bothered to tell you about despite being the main storyline.
• Win in some arenas

I'm OK with these for two games, but it's just taking the biscuit in this one. If you removed questgivers from this game, the plot points would not be like a zigzag (as that's what it feels like), and we'd be a smooth running locomotive. The worst thing about Fable 3 is its lack of content, or content you won't experience. The only time you'll do sidequests (or bother to) is when you're gaining favor before seeing whoever runs the town (mayor, rebel leader, etc) and making promises (like Peter Molyneux, you'll be breaking a lot of them).

What, we're there already? Yes, I had only two headings to comment on because that's all there is in this game. At endgame in Fable 1 and 2, players could repeat quests, explore areas and raise a family. In this, the choice no longer exists. We hope you've amassed a few million gold while you were out there because the plot finally arrives! Apparently the apocalypse is coming and Logan became corrupt because he was doing what was best for his country. All the promises you made, are going to have to be broken so you can save the world. But if you keep them, the world will be nice and pretty before it's blown to smithereens days later. It's like in the Dragon Age expansion where you had to make choices now you're the Mayor of the new town. Only with this, the whole world can be wiped out - therefore, no more endgame content for you. Bye-bye, next game please.

No seriously, that's what happens. I'm not making this up! I sound discouraging because I don't want you to waste around 3 days of gameplay, only to come to the worst climax of a game ever - a black screen, then a picture of some ruins, with a huge text box telling you the following:

"Wow, you're a real bad king/queen aren't you? Promised all those people lovely things then BAM! You shatter their dreams! Tut tut tut.... oh well, at least you made the world look nice before it was completely obliterated! Well gotta run, seeya!

Oh, and you suck!"

Actually, that's what the game practically tells you throughout the entire course of it.

I'll admit that I half-assed this critique mainly because there's too little to talk about, but it's important that players know when they're going to be cheated because the developer of two hit games and E3 lied to them.

The game has nothing to offer other than an empty wallet and a broken heart, and on the way there it's like walking bare-foot through faeces and broken glass. No, it's not enjoyable and never will be. If there's a sequel to this game then.... why not actually keep the promises? The pets, talent trees, better homes, new ways of telling someone you like them instead of farting and playing a lute. That's all for now, feel free to add anything else in the comments or give me a constructive argument. I thank you for the time you spent reading this.