Why didn't peter just recycle everything from fable 2 like weapons, clothing and locations along with enemies then industrialize things like locations and people.
Then add new content like weapons, locations and people so on.. to create a larger fable 3?
It seems like that would of worked out better.
3 was good, though.
don't ever mention this game ever againpls it hurts too much
>>337073017
You're probably one of those ''Mass Effect 3 was good execpt for the ending'' people
>>337073183
Was anyone hoping for any closure on Sparrow's sister who was killed at the beginning
>>337072353
What they need to do is simply take the aspects from all 3 games that people like, and incorporate it in the next. Nothing needs to be new, simply refined. Each game has something unique worth using but both sequels take just as much or more away each time.
Was the main part of being the king in 3 just making those building/policy decisions or was there more I'm forgetting?
Because fable 2 was absolutely fucking garbage any even that bald headed kike had enough sense in his otherwise empty head to realize that.
>industrial age
>gimped difficulty to an already easy game
>can't die
>bland characters
>forgettable locations
>no bows
>painfully unfunny "humor"
>shit on the small lore from the first
>terrible villain
>even worse final boss fight
>one of the worst characters in the game, some limp wristed, gun shooting, English cuck literally takes away the opportunity to kill the main bad guy while said bad guy was in the middle of his speech
>tacked on dog system that was more of a chore than that faggot dinosaur in star fox adventures
>no fucking bows
>shitty unnecessary additions that were meant to only add the imitation of depth like fucking jobs
>armor was less useless than the first
>emotions were less useless than the first
>choices meant less than the first
>it felt less like a world inhabited by heroes than the first when that is what the first had as a main selling point
>that tiny dicked lying Jewish bastard literally removed bows from the game
If you think fable 2 was better than the first, or even just in any way a good game your opinion is less than worthless and you should seriously consider never posting again
>>337073794
>Can't die
That was 3 mate, you can die you just can't get a game over.
>>337073794
>caring about bows or even using them in the first game
>not liking reader
>not finding him shooting Lucia in the middle of his speech funny as fuck
Apart from that I agree
>>337074350
>reaver
>lucian
fucking auto correct
>>337073794
>Bows
There was only one good bow in the entirety of fable 1 and every other was shit, atleast the guns had more variety, the magic also good a nice upgrade.
>>337072353
More like why isn't Fable II on PC yet
>>337074538
Because lionhead doesn't care about the fans and neither does microsoft.
>>337074350
Reaver was a faggot and him shooting that queer wasn't funny, it was annoying as fuck. Also it's not that I used bows, it's that bows are a fundamental weapon type that was cut. They were CUT CONTENT, and that in itself is not good. Couple that with the fact with were still technically used as late as wwii and there is no reason to get rid of them apart from saving a few dollars because molyjew is a greedy, big nosed merchant
>>337073954
You couldn't die in 2, just get knocked out and get some experience knocked out of you which you could recover anyway
>>337074503
It doesn't matter if they were good, see above. Also, even though they magic was given a nice makeover there were only like 6 fucking spells compared to over a dozen or so in the first. The second game sucks fucking balls and so do you if you like it
>>337074883
>Stop liking what i don't like!
Go back to /a/
>>337074883
>complaining about historical accuracy in a game with magic and goblins
>>337072353
Molyneaux is a hack with big dreams. He got lucky and caught lightning in a bottle with the awesome first Fable, and then managed to ape it well enough that 2 was okay as well. At 3 he totally lost the plot. Everything he promised, he did the least he could do to technically fulfill it, if anything. There were some signs of this before, but 3 baffles me at every turn.
>>337075120
>no good retort
Go back to counting your sheckles, Molyneux, you bald headed kike heck
>>337077009
There's no good retort to make, it's your shitty opinion.
The fable sequels are truly fucking mind boggling.
How can a sequel not only have less than a previous installment but it happens twice?
What the fuck was Peter thinking.
>>337073458
You had to earn a huge sum of money to fund the defenses of your kingdom for D-Day.
The policies and treaties were how you gained/lost allies and spent/gained funds toward that end.
>>337072353
Because with Fable II they were already set on streamlining and ruining any merit the first game had, so naturally Fable III continued along that line.
Fable II wasn't completely awful, it had some redeeming qualities, but it will never be on par with Fable I. Fable III was just too far gone.
>>Those clunky interactions in Fable III
Now you couldn't fuck up the emotes on purpose and had to interact with everyone one at a time with that black screen transition EVERYTIME.
Things Fable 3 got right.
• The Co-Op online worked
• Larger areas to roam in
• That large desert area and music.
>>337073183
Not him, but holy fuck kill yourself.
