Fable III - PC Video Review
Populous and Fable designer Peter Molyneux speaks about the very idea of his work being exhibited in a museum space for ACMI's Game Masters exhibition in Melbourne, Australia.Posted Jun 27, 2012 | 1:47 | 4,712 Views
Today, we take a look at who will be replacing luminary game designer Peter Molyneux at Microsoft Game Studios and how 1988 game Wasteland may get a sequel through Kickstarter.Posted Mar 14, 2012 | 4:52 | 7,155 Views
Johnny brings you news of a mysterious ticker on Lionhead's website, and a Crytek developer possibly confirming the name of the next Xbox.Posted Feb 29, 2012 | 3:02 | 10,805 Views
Nokia's made the switch to Windows Phone with the Lumia 800. But are the games better than Snake? We rounded up five of the best Windows Phone mobile games to find out.Posted Nov 6, 2011 | 6:34 | 6,998 Views
As Peter Molyneux admits he's ashamed of himself and the Supreme Court declares itself in favour of violent games, Johnny offers you a job and a free game. Sort of.Posted Jun 28, 2011 | 5:34 | 9,550 Views
- May 20, 2011
Fable III gets another day in the sun with Tom Mc Shea in this video review.
i think we are have a lot of expectation from this title.one of the bad thing happen and all of us expect better than that, is BAD ENDING GAME.i think Fable 3 can better story line than this.anyway afte 36H played i think 7/10 best number they can grab.
This game is like The Sims with RPG elements. gameplay is not as good as Fable1, but its still a very enjoyable game. Im so glad they brought it to the PC
Steam has an offer at 66% of as of 8th Oct - 11th Oct. Thank goodness I watched the review... not really worth it :(
In the end, it's still a broken game. The combat can get really annoying sometimes. It may seem you can choose how you fight, between melee, firearms and magic, but the truth is that at some point in the game you begin to encounter enemies that strike A LOT and charge, which makes it impossible for you to charge a spell without dying, or forces you to dodge endlessly between two shots (I'm speaking challenging mode of course). So for this specific foes, you play melee, coming back to blocking (which blocks in every direction) as soon as you land a hit. And even if you suck at fighting, the game is still very easy for one reason : you can just buy hundreds of healing potions (like the review says, money is worthless in this game). Granted, you'll have to constantly go back to potion vendors, since they all have a limited stock of 5 or 10 potions, but the fact is, the game will be a cakewalk. With broken combat, economy and moral systems, the game could be not worth playing. Yet, it has an undeniable charm. Some environments are really cool looking, and it really has funny moments. It's just sad the studio missed an opportunity to make a great game. And the PC version fares better than the X360 one.
Fatal-Chaos said : "Why did PC get 7.0 and console 7.5? What difference was there between the two?" The weirdest thing is that the PC version got a lower score than the console version. Maybe PC gamers have higher standards than console gamers, but still, they fixed a few elements between the two releases. For example : in the console version, to repair the houses you bought to rent and make money, you had to repair them individually. In the PC version, there's a "repair all" button on the map that saves you 10 minutes of laborious clicking (there're a lot of houses to buy ...). Also, the "challenging mode" makes the game worth playing. Don't get me wrong : it's still a very easy game, but at least it corresponds to modern difficulty standards (let's just say it's "Assassin's Creed-like easy"), and 12 years old kids can beat the game on normal difficulty, which makes it a good family game (prostitutes apart). The challenging mode also brings some punishment for death : you lose your experience (aka guild seals) which can significantly slow your progress. The most annoying thing about the port is that it's clearly a port : you have to old buttons for different actions, and the interactive menu makes little sense when you have a mouse to click (although it was already a somewhat retarded idea on console). Fully aware of this, Lionhead put in hotkeys to accelerate the navigation in the menu, which raises the question : why not just do a more regular menu ?
shipping this game at the same date with witcher 2 was a big mistake.. fable 3 has sold only 50.000 units on PC.
I can't type message in forums, it says this bullcr*p message: "Errors: Messages cannot be blank. Ensure your post contains non-whitespace characters and does not consist solely of formatted or quoted text." Help please.
Why wasn't the crappy inventory system mentioned in this review? This review is generous.....way too generous if you catch my meaning......
you say that the player's investment in the world makes the problems become lessened, but one of the problems you cite is that it's difficult to become invested in the world.
Is an excellent game, too bad this classification, deserved at least 8.5 in my opinion. is a pity not to have played Fable 2, because everyone is saying it is a great game.
They should've srsly include traitor's keep and understone DLC's. I mean look at all the other games that have the 'console released first than PC later' thing. e.g Assassin's Creed1, 2 and brotherhood. PC version got all DLC's and bonus content for free. I've played and 'finished' the game, and I can say the 'bonus' items r srsly lacking. Its not a bad game, its basically a bad console port with the graphics engine revamped, combat difficulty balanced and throws in like a bonus clothing or two. Had they ported it well (i.e. better mapped keys, NO bloody mouse lag when turning + stupid 'press&hold&release' crap) and throw in all the DLC's and packs for free just for us PC gamers since we've been waiting 6months in addition to what they have already tweaked, it would've been a way better game.
it just surprised me that they dared to bring out fable 3 the same date as the witcher 2 lol?? smart choice
I said this would happen on the Lionhead site. The devs took our reports of bugs in the console version and fixed them for the PC version, thus leaving console gamers stuck in Reavers Manor or at the Shooting Range (yes, the DLC packs broke the game) Still, this is a good game and worth 5 points more, around an 8.0 score.
Peter, Peter, Peter. Can we please lay this tired console port series to rest and fire up some of that gray matter for some more Bullfrog-esque titles? This is cute and all, but I'm craving that sheer genius of yesteryear and I'm just not seeing it anymore.
Fable 3 is better than a 7 or 7.5, it's not as good as 2 but it's still a fun game that doesn't take itself to serious
from the written review "If you had the option to just "repair all," it would have made things less tedious" dear gamespot, you can repair all, on the map put your mouse over the ground and press "5"
@Payne121 Normally I would agree with you, in fact, I kind of do to an extent, but there were really only three types of games that consoles ever had a hope of matching PCs with, that's racing games, sports games, and third person action/survival/adventure games. Yes the game sucked before, but that still doesn't explain why the inferior version got the higher score.
Yeah and teh wticher 2 looks like its more awesomer than this failquest too, fable should be called overhype
@eagles_band CD Projekt embarrseses Bioware even more. Showing how you still make a great and deep RPG with realtime combat without sacrificing everything that makes a RPG.
Fable 3 was god-awful, it was actually okay and had a few interesting innovations up to the "road to rule" then it plummeted to rock-bottom nothingness. It lacked sooooo much on its promises that i have given up on fable 3 completely. Man, they screwed up.