From what I've read, treating the dog badly, and leaving it behind will be an option. Your treatment of the dog is supposed to influence the way other people deal with you (I would imagine, if I were programming it, that I would have some people react differently to how you treat your dog, i.e., some people that warm up to you because you beat your dog, and others that shy away from you or shun you for it. If I were feeling really kinky, I'd even mix it up so that some positively aligned characters reacted positively to a beaten dog, and vice versa. Just because you're a bad guy, doesn't mean you didn't love a puppy as a child. And just because you're a good guy, doesn't mean a dog didn't bite your thumb off when you were child.) The dog will never give up on you though, and will always go wherever you are. As far as being all-knowing, my understanding is that one of the dog's purposes is to eliminate the mini-map, by pointing the way to objectives, etc.TheNecroswanson said:
FABLE 2
- Thread starter MGG=REVIEWS
- Start date
Recommended Videos
If they would just shut Molineux up, this game might just be not a great disappointment. The man loves to make wild promises he just can't live up to, which is a shame.
Also, what's up with the dog? How about all the cat-loving people? If the game gives me a dog, I'll sell it to some NPC who actually cares about dogs.
And I'm curious how the leaving the dog behind will work. Imagine NPC's telling each other "Oh look, a stranger about whom we don't know anything entered our town, and he has no dog at all! The cruel bastard must have left it behind somewhere!"
Since the dog is also radar and combat aide, leaving him behind would be handicapping yourself. Just like playing evil screwed you over twice when playing Black & White.
Also, what's up with the dog? How about all the cat-loving people? If the game gives me a dog, I'll sell it to some NPC who actually cares about dogs.
And I'm curious how the leaving the dog behind will work. Imagine NPC's telling each other "Oh look, a stranger about whom we don't know anything entered our town, and he has no dog at all! The cruel bastard must have left it behind somewhere!"
Since the dog is also radar and combat aide, leaving him behind would be handicapping yourself. Just like playing evil screwed you over twice when playing Black & White.
Cats aren't well known for their loyalty, and unless you have a trained, large, feral cat, they're not all that great in a fight. And no, I don't believe selling it will be an option, unless somehow after you sell it, the dog runs back to you, and the person you sold it to thinks you ripped them off (which would actually be kind of fun, one-time thing to do to anyone you particularly don't like).Quistnix said:
As per leaving the dog behind, (again, just my understanding), when the dog is hurt, it moves slowly. You can outpace it. But it will always follow you, and eventually catch up.
As far as handicapping yourself, since the dog sticks to you, no matter how badly you treat it, if you get lost and need the radar, he'll eventually show up. I think in the end though, as long as it's done properly, no one will want to leave their dog behind. If you're evil, the dog turns out to be a vicious creature, and if you're good, it's a nice, faithful, dog that also happens to be vicious in combat.
The underlying assumption in your statement is that the world has gotten very far with hypocritical politics at the helm, which is an assumption I don't share. If anything, hypocritical politicians are a testament to just how unproductive hypocrisy can be.soladrin said:
I'd even be willing to settle for just one extra head. That would be awesome.TheNecroswanson said:It'd be pretty cool if by the time you've leveled high enough and are evil the dog sprouted two more heads.Geoffrey42 said:
there is actually meant to be ar umor (only a rumor) that you can train your kid to fight for you, ONLY A RUMOR but hopefully a true rumor.Quistnix said:
Most intelligent post in this thread, from what I've seen. Thank you. Fable wasn't that bad of a game, in fact I was having fun the entire time I played it. Was it what was promised? No. But so what? It was fun.SonofSeth said:
And I really don't think Yahtzee's reviews are to be taken seriously. They're fun to watch and absolutely hilarious.. but for an actual review to be taken seriously there would need to be a whole lot less bias. Again, hilarious to read.. and from an entertainment standpoint they're great. But if I seriously want to know if a game is good or not without playing it.. I wouldn't go to his reviews.
The only thing I don't really like about the dog system is that I wish I could just give it to someone else to take care of. I don't really want a dog in the game, because I often like playing solo - particularly when it makes the game harder (like in Baldur's Gate games). I mean, I would want my character in the game to be kind to animals, but that doesn't mean he wants one himself. There should be a "leave it with a friend" (or a "leave it with a lonely orphan") option, so you can pawn it off without being cruel.
What is he biased against (or for)?runtheplacered said:
I'll admit not the most careful watcher, but from what I've seen he seems to have fairly solid reasons behind the cracking jokes and making us (or me at least) laugh. I haven't really discerned any bias.
I have to say I thought the same thing first, but after thinking about I think it is certainly an interesting idea. And as far as I know, you still do play solo effectivelyPyrrian said:
OT: I'll have to admit I was a bit disappointed about Fable. But that was because of what was promised (yes, I've fallen for it everytime, even, I'm sure with Fable 2 *again*). Other then that it was a very good game. I thought the gameplay was good, the world and NPCs charming and funny, and the story interesting - if one didn't think about it too much, then it became a bit by-the-numbers and flimsy. The main thing going for it though is that it was fun!
All in all though its one of the better games I've played.
That is hardly a bias.TheNecroswanson said:
And it is a completely justifiable and commonly used technique when reviewing anything, regardless of the medium. Largely because nothing exists in a vacuum. And if video games ever want to be elevated about the station of trivial diversions this is something that has to be kept in mind.
I'm not sure if the difference in opinion between us is because I'm old enough and ugly enough to have played SS2 (and Deus Ex, another game who's cover is featured in the review IIRC), or not.
But I do largely agree with him. Especially about the difficulty. Even on "hard." It is very challenging at the beginning but then the game seems to conspire to make itself ridiculously easy. Certain tonics effectively make the wrench terribly over powered, research helps with this too, and makes enemies easy, far too easy.
Also the game effectively trivialises itself by making it impossible to fail. Die and you are reincarnated (the vita chambers also annoyed me), even the escort mission was impossible to mess up. Probably for the best.
To get back on topic. The game was fine, but when one takes the long view it definately does slip, and a lot of the praise does seem a bit hollow.
Possibly I'm just one of those "games-are-art fags" that he talks about
Though you also raise an interesting point about how games (or films, books, opera et al) should be rated.