Dear Internet,
There,
I am done with it. I pulled an extra
hour again to be rid of this game. I was
able to amass a fortune of over 6.5 million to go towards saving the ungrateful
NPCs. I got fluffy white angel
wings. The Darkness came and went. Even now the credits are rolling as I type
this up. No wait, I can skip them. I am not sitting through about twenty minutes
of slow moving text that does not even try to be entertaining. Considering that the controller turns off
after 15 minutes, you would think someone might realize that any movie in a
game that lasts longer than that might be a problem, but I digress. If by now you still do not understand what I think
of "Fable III," go back and read the last four entries. Today, absolutely nothing that occurred changed
my opinion of this game. The few to
little quests that the game throws at the player come the endgame make waiting
for the rent payments unbearable. There
are only about three of them that can be done and they are very short. The ending of the game tries to be bitter
sweet with one important character dying amongst the number of unnamed soldiers
and civilians that lie dead upon the street, but the game never really got me
to care much about the few characters that it pushed forward. So, let me just cover a few bits here and
there that I have not covered before.
Reaver
is a good-for-nothing, public murdering, self glorifying, take-all-the-credit cretin
that the game utilizes as the only bad individual once the protagonist has
become king. HIs mere presence in the
game in the second half of the game creates a giant plot hole. Why is he still alive? Or should I say, why is he not in jail? The man shoot a worker in broad daylight in
from of a group of people, and then threatened to do the same to others. Later on, he trapped the protagonist and Page
in a death match against a variety of otherworldly creatures. Who knows what else he has done? The former king had to undergo a trial of
some sort. Why did Reaver not have to? Could the developers not think of any other
way to portray the binary decisions that the player had to make than to have Reaver
advocate all but one or two "evil" choices? They could have had many smaller villain characters
throughout the story reappear instead of having just one guy act as the only
bad guy in the game. I say "only
bad guy" because the game already tried to say the old king had good
reason for being a tyrant. Reaver's
homicidal tendencies are completely glossed over come the second half of the
game by making more of a token character driven by money. On top of that, he narrates every decision
that the king makes saying it was his company doing all the work. How is there only one company in this game? Apparently, Reaver has a monopoly on every
industry possible, well, except land.
The king now owns all the land.
 |
| Subtle, right? |
The
constant use of gamertag is a giant immersion breaker that readily makes itself
unwelcome at every chance it can get. A
gamertag, or online handle, is something that should stay as far away from
single player experiences as possible. I
can understand using it for online connections so that people can identify who
is who especially for co-op mode, but why is it there when I am playing
alone? They even bring forth the Xbox
Avatar for when you sign the promises.
Am I supposed to be playing as a cookie cut protagonist where my only
choice in their appearance was which gender they were, or am I supposed to be
playing as myself? The game allows you
to customize your character to a degree, and by degree I mean about 10 degrees
on a circle. There are more ways to
color your hair than types of faces. It
is no Bethesda face builder.
 |
| "I, King xXxHaXoR1337xXx, so declare..." |
The
game allows you to get married and have kids or adopt. This is not new to the series. What does seem to be new, from what I recall
so I might be wrong, is that your spouse can cheat on you. Now the game never comes out and states
this. It probably is another instance
where the developers were lazy. My second
child was very dark skinned. Now this is
not a problem unless you realize that my character and wife are both Caucasian. Also after having off-screen whoopee , I
seemed to contract an STD. I did not
even know about this until one of the loading screens informed me hours later. The only person that my character was with
was the wife. While I was out trying to
save the land from "the Darkness" my wife was sneaking around behind
my back it seems. I blame the
programmers.
 |
| The programmers were trying to say my money was overflowing. It was overflowing through the walls. |
"Fable
III" is a bad game. What kept it
from being horrible? Not much, really. It is playable, but so is Kick the Can. The soundtrack works, but you will be muting it
while you make enough pies to feed a nation. The premise had something go for it, but it
fell through in the second half. It would
be hard for me to say that it did not make me care, since I spent nearly a week
on it. But most of that week was money
management just so that I would never have to pick up the game again. An evil run through would take less than a
third to go through because you would not be trying to save anyone or even take
responsibility. It is the good run that
takes time and effort. There are a few
cheap laughs here and there. The satire
is spot on and would be quite a deal more funny if it was not inadvertently
making fun of itself in the process. It
is like a really foolish girl who makes dumb blonde jokes but does not realize
she is blonde, too. What you can take away from this game is that being good if hard while being evil is easy. In "Fable III,"
the point of being good is supposed to be some rewarding feeling you get for
saving everyone. The point of being evil
is the rewarding feeling that you get because you no longer have to play "Fable III."
 |
| Do I at least get a huge gun? |
Yours in digital,
BeepBoop
P.S. Tomorrow is "Godzilla vs The Sea Monster" (1966).
P.S. Tomorrow is "Godzilla vs The Sea Monster" (1966).
No comments:
Post a Comment