Fable 3 is another game I completed a few weeks back, and I’ve finally gotten around to reviewing it for today. As the Xbox 360 library continues to dwindle in exclusive franchises, the Fable series is one of Microsoft’s remaining franchises to assist Halo and Gears of War against the sheer number of Sony-exclusive franchises. My first experience with the Fable franchise is with Fable 2, and I found that game to be quite charming and enjoyable. Hit the jump to see if the third game in the series continues the trend.

The Highs
One of the first things you will notice about Fable 3 if you played its predecessor is that Fable 3 has now been streamlined a lot to become more user friendly. From interacting with villagers to managing your gear, abilities, and equipment – many aspects of the game are easier to comprehend. In Fable 2, buttons were mapped to various expressions you could perform when socializing with villagers, yet who knows what those expressions accomplished. Fable 3 now simplifies everything: you have one button to perform a positive action with the villager, and one button to perform a negative action. The action itself is random, but I think it works because it’s now intuitive enough to understand that you are either going to make the villager either feel loved or bullied through one button or another.

Another major aspect of the streamlining of the game is the entire menu system. Fable 2′s menu system was convoluted and cumbersome since you had to navigate menus within menus to change equipment and the like. Fable 3 implements a new interface where if you “pause” the menu, you character warps to the Sanctuary where your butler resides. Within the Sanctuary, your character is free to run around to different rooms to change your outfits, equip weapons, view medals and trophies, level up, fast travel across the world, etc. Having to run around on foot to a room to change your equipment does indeed take more time than navigating a menu to do so, but after using it so much, I think that the Fable 3 Sanctuary interface is better overall than the complicated menus of its predecessor because while it takes a little longer, it is easier to navigate. The butler commenting on your equipment and clothing choices is also a nice touch.

My favorite aspect of Fable 3 is the ability to become the ruler of Albion. The game’s first half opens with your brother as the King, but from what you can see, he treats the citizens poorly and seems to make terrible decisions. The first half of the game is all about your character coming of age and gathering supporters to help overthrow your brother. While this may sound like a pretty typical storyline, the game changes once you overthrow the King because you get to now sit on the throne and the game continues from there. As ruler, you have quests and decisions that you have to make on each of the selected ten or so days in the game when you are King/Queen. These decisions you make affect the outcome of Albion, and in a way, it demonstrates why your brother seemed so sinister. Gamers that first played Fable 3 when it launched were understandably upset when they found themselves without enough money to cover the cost of making the “good” decisions as ruler. Therefore, if you want to be a good ruler, it’s important to save up as money as you can early on in the game. With this knowledge gathered ahead of time, I was able to make enough to provide a harmonious rule.

Like its predecessor, Fable 3 allows you to plays as a female or a male character.

The Lows
Fable 3′s definitely suffers from technical issues. The game engine does not handle a lot of things on-screen at once very well at all, resulting in some super slowdown (we’re talking single digit framerates here). This is especially annoying when you play Guitar Hero-like mini-games where the slowdown simply throws off the rhythm completely. Very few other things in the game are as frustrating as missing out on these Guitar Hero mini-games because the game just gets too slow and cannot handle what is going on in the screen. Fable 2′s breadcrumb trail feature also returns here, providing you with direction should you need it to get to your next quest. The problem though, is maybe a third of the time, it doesn’t show up when you try to use it. The game has been patched since release, so bugs are not as crazy, but I still found some strange and annoying bugs where quests would not activate, things weren’t present where they were supposed to be, etc.

True game content is also lacking. The just aren’t enough interesting things to do like in Fable 2. A majority of the quests in Fable 3 tend to be fetch quests and the storyline progression seems to generally revolve around running through linear corridors of all types (desert, forest, cave, etc.) and fighting from one point to another. The way the game feels presented it just didn’t feel as epic as I would have liked it to be. There are far too many collectathons as well.

Performing evil tasks will gradually result in your character exuding an evil air.

Final Thoughts
Fable 3 goes in a very interesting direction; tackling the aspect of being a ruler has not been implemented in games much  these days. The highlight of the game is being a ruler and having to make choices – having that amount of power is a gameplay element that I found fresh and exciting. Outside of the new ruling aspect of the game, Fable 3 tends to be worse off than its predecessor in two major aspects: lacking in content and less technologically sound.

Fans of earlier Fable games will still find enough to enjoy here and it’s still worth a playthrough for those that enjoy the Fable franchise. It has just enough to make it worth a look if you’re curious, but for others that never got into the series to begin with, Fable 3 is not necessarily the best one to jump into either. Lionhead Studios needs to change things up if they decide to make Fable 4.

Final Grade: B

Welcome to Leveling Down’s 3rd Annual Gaming Awards/Holiday Shopping Guide! For those of you that are first time readers of our awards/holiday shopping guide, cmfl3x and I have basically compiled a list of various games released this year into different categories. We choose a “winner” of each category, but at the same time, all games mentioned as nominees in each category are worth considering – hence, the shopping guide aspect of it. If you can only pick one game from the category, go with the winner. If you enjoy that category a lot, consider checking out all of the nominees on that list!

As cmfl3x and I discussed the various categories and selected winners for each one, some categories we did not always agree on the same winner. This year, instead of forcing one another to see agree on the same game, we have instead allowed for ties – so there is a potential of two winners for each category. Our gaming tastes are not exactly the same and I didn’t think any of you would gain much from us forcing only one winner.

Our 2010 Gaming/Awards/Holiday Shopping Guide will span across all gaming platforms, and will run over the next two weeks on our normal Monday, Wednesday, and Friday posting schedule. Next Friday’s entry will conclude this year’s feature with our 2010 Game of the Year.

Without further ado, hit the jump for today’s categories: Best Action/Adventure Game and Best Role Playing Game.

Best Action/Adventure Game of 2010

Bayonetta [winner - tie]
Darksiders
God of War III
Alan Wake
Castlevania: Lords of Shadow
Enslaved: Odyssey to the West
Assassin’s Creed: Brotherhood [winner - tie]

For those that don’t know much about Bayonetta, it’s basically like Devil May Cry, but on crack and stars a female protagonist covered in her own hair. Everything is over the top: guns strapped to boots, combos that end with her hair forming huge fists to crush opponents – the list goes on. The crazy part about it all is that everything about it works. While the storyline is lacking in Bayonetta, it’s a game that is an exhilarating rush from start to finish and the most enjoyable action/adventure game I’ve played this console generation. Of course, Bayonetta is a little more heavy on the action than the adventure part of the category, but for those not bothered by the lack of a strong storyline will be in for a treat with this game. It’s my pick for  2010 Best Action/Adventure game of the year.

2010 kicked off the year with a great start with same day release of both Bayonetta and Darksiders. For those of you that recall, I was dismayed how when I went to pick up Bayonetta on launch day at my local Gamestop, I was surprised that there was a lot more hype for another game called Darksiders – a game I had never heard of until the day I picked up Bayonetta. I’m actually about to start playing Darksiders (finally) for the first time now, and from what I hear, it’s gotten good reviews as it seems to combine the adventure elements of Legend of Zelda with the darker themes of God of War. In short – if you ever wanted to play a darker Zelda-like game in HD, Darksiders is the way to go. The sequel has already been announced, so get a move on!

God of War III is the final God of War game in the epic trilogy that began on the PS2. For fans of the first two games, God of War III is a spectacular and epic conclusion to the tale in glorious HD. One of the major strengths of the God of War games is its epic storyline revolving around the God-killer, Kratos. God of War III is no exception, but if you have not played the first two, I highly recommend picking up the God of War: Collection as they have been redone for the PS3. Don’t start the God of War series with God of War III – end with it!

I just completed Alan Wake this past weekend, and while my conclusion about the game wasn’t exemplary, I realize that it’s mainly because it doesn’t pander well to a hardcore gamer like myself. But for those that sit in-between the hardcore “Bayonetta action gamer” and the “Wii Sports only” casual gamer, Alan Wake is great. It presents an interesting tale with enough hand-holding that it makes for a great action/adventure game to share with those that are looking for a game with a more spooky theme and yet aren’t too quick with the controller.

Surprisingly, I have not picked up Castlevania: Lords of Shadow yet. It’s a reboot to the series developed by a small Spanish studio with Hideo Kojima, the guy behind Metal Gear Solid, overlooking part of its development. I got a chance to check out the demo, and it seems to play similar to the God of War games, but with a more European look and feel. God of War fans will most likely enjoy this game, as it felt very similar to me but I’m sure it has Castlevania touches.

Enslaved: Odyssey to the West is developer Ninja Theory’s first multi-platform title after their 2007 PS3 exclusive, Heavenly Sword. In Enslaved: Odyssey to the West, players control a man named Monkey, who travels with Trip, a woman who has pretty much enslaved him and “forces him” to help her in her quest. The action/adventure aspect of the game revolves around Monkey’s vast combat abilities as they encounter all manners of mech-like enemies on their travels. cmfl3x got a chance to play through this one and had a lot of positive things to say about it.

The final major action/adventure title released this year was Assassin’s Creed: Brotherhood. cmfl3x felt that this was his winner for Action/Adventure game of the year, and here’s what he had to say about it:
While Bayonetta is a worthy winner in this category, that game is a bit too crazy for my tastes. I personally prefer the simple running and jumping in the Assassin’s Creed series, and the ability to be stealthy and sneaky. Assassin’s Creed: Brotherhood, adds another fun gameplay element to the mix – now you can use your guild to assassinate people. This involves assassin’s dropping in from the sky, appearing from the shadows, and other awesome methods of murder. Assassin’s Creed: Brotherhood, has also simplified the fighting, adding an Arkham Asylum-esque button press/timing system. Sure, the game is pretty similar to Assassin’s Creed 2, just with a few new bells and whistles, but I asked myself, “Is that such a bad thing?” Probably not.

Best Role Playing Game of 2010

Mass Effect 2 [winner]
Final Fantasy XIII
Resonance of Fate
Nier
Fallout: New Vegas
Fable III

Among the role playing games of 2010, it was an easy choice for both cmfl3x and me to select Mass Effect 2 as the Role Playing Game of the Year. While the game lacks the hardcore stats and gear collecting of more traditional role playing games, Mass Effect 2 manages to do something that I didn’t think was possible: present a stream-lined role playing game that is highly enjoyable for gamers of all types. The developers seem to have made nearly all the right choices and focusing the game on what’s fun. The amount of speech and speech choices that Mass Effect 2 provides is staggering, and go a long way in providing a unique role playing game experience. It is the quintessential game that anyone can play – even non-RPG fans. The quality of the game is top notch, and for those that have yet to play the game on the PC or Xbox 360, it’s probably worth checking out the first game just to appreciate its storyline better – even though it is rougher around the edges. For Playstation 3 owners, don’t fret: Mass Effect 2 will be released on the Playstation 3 early next year, with a summary of Mass Effect 1 included.

I was not a big fan of Final Fantasy XIII, but I think it’s such a major RPG title that it is one worth considering. The game is a very linear RPG throughout its 50 hour course. I did enjoy the combat mechanism of having to switch character classes on the fly during combat, but when that’s the only thing the game has going for it for 50 hours, it got old fast for me. Ironically, once you beat the game, the entire world and sidequests open up, and that’s where you are then able to do the hardcore Japanese RPG farming for resources to construct elite gear. Will people last that long? It’s really up to you – I can imagine some not even lasting past the first 20 hours since all of that is basically the tutorial, but for those that have a special fondness for Final Fantasy, maybe this game will still be up your ally.

Interestingly enough, while Final Fantasy XIII made some departures that left the more traditionalist Japanese RPG fans out in the cold, another Japanese RPG, Resonance of Fate, was released one week later. While Final Fantasy XIII made gameplay changes that seemed to really polarize opinions of gamers, Resonance of Fate is probably the best Japanese RPG game for fans of more classic Japanese RPG games as this game comes from tri-Ace, the Japanese studio that brought us Infinite Undiscovery, Star Ocean, and Valkyrie Profile. In Resonance of Fate, the game takes place in the future, with combat revolving more on action and gunplay. While the storyline is typical Japanese RPG fare, the one thing that Resonance of Fate does that Final Fantasy XIII could not was keep the traditional Japanese RPG gameplay elements that fans of the genre have come to grow and love.

Another highly underrated Japanese RPG that was released this year is Square-Enix’s Nier. Final Fantasy XIII, Resonance of Fate, and Nier were the three primary RPGs that came out of Japan this year, and while they all tried to innovate in various ways, only Resonance of Fate and Nier kept traditional gameplay elements alongside their new features. Nier is a bit more of an action-RPG game, as players take control of the sword-wielding Nier, who looks for a cure for his daughter. While critics seemed to have panned Nier (as a Japanese RPG fan, I don’t really trust Western critics on their JRPG reviews), it tends to get a lot better reviews from actual Japanese RPG fans.

Fallout: New Vegas is the next major Fallout title after 2008′s Fallout 3. New Vegas uses the same engine as Fallout 3, but takes place in New Vegas and is developed by a different studio comprised of several people that worked on the original Fallout 1 and 2 games. While the game is not quite innovative and at times feels like more of an expansion to Fallout 3 than its own standalone game, fans of Fallout 3 will no doubt enjoy this game.

Fable III rounds out the RPG category for this year, and like Fallout: New Vegas, is the next game in the series after the last one in 2008. While it is a decent game in and of itself (and probably a pretty good game to get into for those that have never played the series before), Fable III makes some drastic changes from the previous title that do not seem to sit well with long-time fans of the series. With the amount of features simplified/streamlined, some even call the game Fable 1.9 – as in a game that feels more like a predecessor of Fable 2 than its sequel. But, like Final Fantasy XIII, there are people that enjoy the game, so consider checking out the various reviews to see if it’s the right RPG for you.

Stay tuned for Wednesday when cmfl3x presents the next categories: Best Live Arcade/PSN Game, Best Music Game, and Best Multiplayer Game!

Going into this year’s holiday gaming season, I am lacking enthusiasm. I don’t know if it’s because I’m busier now or if the current games this holiday season are just not as exciting as in the last couple of years. To be honest, most of the games I am about to call out I haven’t played yet, but based on buzz I am reading and demos I’ve played today’s entry will sort of be my knee-jerk reaction as to why I am not excited about what’s in store for the 2010 holiday season.

The problem is, we have so many sequels that are worse than their predecessors or sequels that don’t exactly blow their predecessors out of the water. This leads me to find practically all of them lacking in the excitement category that I have had in past holiday seasons. How many sequels are being released this holiday season? Let’s see!

The Force Unleashed 2
It seems like a lot of people were fans of the first Force Unleashed game, commenting about how cool the storyline was and all that. Unfortunately, I thought the gameplay was lackluster at best, as can be read in my review. If a game has a decent story but lacks gameplay – it might as well be a film or a TV show since it has no business being a game. With this second one, even critics are trashing The Force Unleashed II and calling it a simple cash grab so I’ll definitely be steering clear.

Medal of Honor
This big reboot to the franchise had the potential to be good, but instead fell on its face. I hear that the 6-hour campaign isn’t so bad, but people usually buy FPS games to play multiplayer. Sadly, that is where Medal of Honor doesn’t quite hold up so well. DICE, the developers behind Battlefield and Battlefield: Bad Company, were not the ones that developed the single player for Medal of Honor. But they were responsible for Medal of Honor’s multiplayer and so they implemented Call of Duty style gameplay in combination with Bad Company style gameplay. Medal of Honor multiplayer thus sits in this weird limbo between both major franchises, alienatinating fans of the two games it’s trying to merge. (I guess this game is maybe better than Medal of Honor’s true predecessor: Medal of Honor: Airborne, but I still consider it more of a sequel for Battlefield since the multiplayer was created by DICE.)

Fable III
Apparently, Fable III is a simpler version of Fable II, disappointing fans of the second one. On top of that [MINOR SPOILER AHEAD], the game has angered many players who have made it to the end because it screws them over without even giving them a chance to see it coming. Am I really excited to play this? I was, but maybe I should just go back and replay Fable II instead?

Fallout: New Vegas
Yeah, I’m putting New Vegas on the list of “lackluster” sequels even though I bought it, haven’t even played it yet, and of course I’ll probably end up enjoying it. I loved Fallout 3, yet I was never really too interested in picking up Fallout: New Vegas since there was barely any buzz about it. Is it really all that different from Fallout 3? It’s still marred by all sorts of technical issues that Fallout 3 contained (such as freezing, memory leaks, etc.), but this time around, it doesn’t have the gigantic leap from Fallout 2 to Fallout 3 to counterbalance it. I guess I won’t know until I give New Vegas a spin, but even now, it doesn’t really feel like a fresh sequel, since it’s more of the same. In this case for me, more of the same is good since I loved Fallout 3, but in terms of excitement? Not too much.

DJ Hero 2
cmfl3x picked this one up and seems to be really enjoying it, but from my point of view, I am not excited with it. Unlike the other sequels already mentioned on this list, DJ Hero 2 has been getting reviews that seem to indicate that it is a slightly better game than its predecessor. But does it really feel like a fresh sequel? A couple of new, yet non-revolutionary features and a new soundtrack are enough to call the game a sequel? Did the gameplay really change that much between the first and the second one such that a sequel needed to have been released just one year after the first? And what’s with the lack of compatibility between the soundtracks of the first and second game? I guess Activision wants to quickly make as much as it can off of DJ Hero before DJ’ing also goes the way of Guitar Hero.

Rock Band 3
Rock Band 3 is a game that got so many great reviews that I considered buying it. Unlike DJ Hero 2, Rock Band 3 really brings all sorts of new and innovative features over Rock Band 2. Rock Band 3 still has major problems going against it though, even if it’s nearly a flawless game. The first is that I still can’t help but feel tired about the entire music game genre. If I don’t feel like partaking in Rock Band 3′s major new features such as picking up the key-tar or learning to play with real musical instruments, is Rock Band 3 really that different from the second one? Some even complain that something like 20% of the songs on the Rock Band 3 soundtrack are already present in other music games too. I gave the demo a try this past weekend, and it honestly didn’t feel any different than its predecessors. I think the feature about Rock Band that I enjoy the most – being able to play drums on my favorite songs, doesn’t exactly require me to pick up Rock Band 3 to do so. Maybe that explains my lack of excitement for Rock Band 3.

Call of Duty: Black Ops
The verdict is still out on this one, as there is a lot of potential for good and bad. Good: currency system so players have their own choice as to what they want to unlock. Bad: Treyarch is the developer – enough said. Good: Zombie mode returns. Bad: Setting is not present day, so we may end up with antiquated or goofy stuff (i.e. ray gun). At the end of the day, Black Ops is another Call of Duty game in an “off year” since it’s not made by Infinity Ward. It should be a decent title, but I don’t think Modern Warfare 2 is even old yet by this point. Can both games co-exist?

Holiday 2010 vs Holiday 2009 & Holiday 2008
So what do we have in terms of new IPs to enjoy this holiday season?The 4-6 hour single player game Vanquish? Enslaved: Oddyssey to the West – a game with a fine storyline, but bland gameplay mechanics? Castlevania: Lords of Shadow – a Japanese franchise given the God of War gameplay makeover (not a compliment in my book) from a Western studio? Or how about Majin & the Forsaken Kingdom – a Japanese developed title that probably won’t even make a dent in the Western market due to its simplistic execution? I’ve played demos to nearly all of these titles, and none of them had my blood pumping.

Compare this year’s holiday season crop with the past couple holiday years. Last season we got to play some really strong sequels: Modern Warfare 2, Assassin’s Creed II, and Left 4 Dead 2. There were also several new IPs that delivered: Brutal Legend, Borderlands, DJ Hero, and Dragon Age: Origins.

Back in 2008, we had some big sequels as well: Fable II, Far Cry 2, Saints Row 2, Fallout 3, Gears of War 2, and arguably, Call of Duty: World at War. And again, the original IPs then were strong too, thanks to titles like Dead Space, Mirror’s Edge, and Left 4 Dead.

It’s sad that this holiday season, I feel like I’ll just be playing the games to go through the motions, and won’t have the kind of excitement I used to have these last couple of years. Having said all this, I’ll probably end up getting all of this holiday season’s releases anyway – especially if Amazon and other retailers go with some crazy sales around Black Friday. Fable III may be worse than its predecessor, but if I can get it for $20, I guess that’s all right.

One of my friends asked me last night if I was going to trade in Halo 3: ODST now that I had the 1000 in it. He was saying it gets something like $35, which is pretty good considering we ended up getting it for around that (or even less) when it first came out. In the past, I used to trade in practically any game I got all the Achievements I wanted in and moved onto the next game in my queue.

Over just this past year alone, I’ve started winding down on my gaming tendencies (yes, it’s hard to believe but I’m less hardcore today than I was years ago), and actually started missing games I had gotten rid of. So I started rebuying games that I knew I would want to replay again at some point, just for fun. Looking at my 360 collection today, I’ve realized that more than half of the games I currently own I’ve sold and reacquired.

Nowadays, I’ve decided that no matter how good of a deal it is to trade in/sell a game that I enjoyed, I won’t get rid of it since the amount of work it takes to reaquire the game just doesn’t make up for the nice little “deal” I got when I sold it. What majorly sucks is that several of the games I end up wanting to reacquire turn into Platinum Hits titles, and I hate that design. Therefore, I’m forced to scour used game bins or find people online to buy from that can get me non-platinum hits versions that are not all scratched like crazy. I feel like I’m in some sort of game rebuying netherworld where I’m paying for my mistakes. I owned these games in mint condition and now I’m spending time trying to track these same games down that will no way be in as good condition as when I owned them. Why couldn’t I just have been happy with my original copies and not sell them in the first place?

Currently, I’ve been spending the last few weeks trying to rebuy the following games:

Mass Effect – I actually want to replay through this before playing the sequel coming out early next year, but the tough part is of course finding a non-platinum hits version in great condition.

Assassin’s Creed – Like Mass Effect, I do want to play this game again before the sequel releases next month but have to find a non-platinum hits version in great condition.

Fable 2 – Platinum hits was announced to be released in January, so I still have time to reacquire this game and I know I will want to play through it again before Fable 3 releases.

The Orange Box – I actually have cravings from time to time to play Team Fortress 2, and while I own it on the PC, people on the PC are too hardcore (clans and whatnot) so I just want to play it casually with my 360 controller. Plus, I figure I will want to play Portal again from time to time.

Once I successfully repick up these titles, I’ll only have a few left to go. Good thing I didn’t sell Halo Wars since I do have cravings to play that game too. In any case, that’s my simple warning to you – if you feel like at some point you may want to replay a game (just because it was amazing, you’ll miss it, or a future sequel gets you to want to replay its predecessor, etc.), consider holding onto it. I want to spare you this ordeal that I’m going through today…

I had to laugh at espion4ge’s post last week detailing Halo 3: ODST’s kung-fu grip on his friends list. Last week’s release, combined with the out of this world reviews for the upcoming Uncharted 2 on PS3 got me thinking about what games are system sellers on the big gaming systems (especially because I’ve felt tempted to buy a PS3 lately, though I have resisted that urge for fear of death). Some of these games justify the very purchase of the system itself, which are “must have” games for their respective systems. Anyway, I only own a 360, Wii, and DS, but I did my best to compile these system sellers anyway.

Xbox 360

System Seller: Halo Series
Halo is basically the reason why Microsoft is still in the games’ market today. Halo and Halo 2 singlehandedly saved the original Xbox from turning into the next Jaguar or 3DO, and ODST just showed once again that Halo is as popular as ever. Love it or hate it, Halo sells boxes.

Must Have Exclusives: Gears of War Series, Fable Series
A lot of people who don’t like Halo love Gears of War, the original cover based 3rd person shooter. It’s bloody and full of machismo which makes it pretty popular. Fable 2 (and the recently announced Fable 3) are also incredibly popular for the wide range of choices they give the player: the quintessential western RPG.

Upcoming: Mass Effect 2, Halo: Reach, Fable 3

Playstation 3

System Seller: God of War III
People probably will disagree, and it’s bit a ridiculous since this game isn’t even OUT yet, but I think God of War III is PS3′s system seller. None of PS3′s exclusives can really compete with Halo’s grip on the gaming community, but God of War comes close. I know people who bought a PS3 just in anticipation of this game, and they’ve been waiting ever since. The time is near…

Must Haves: Uncharted Series, Little Big Planet, Metal Gear Solid 4, Killzone Series
PS3 makes up for its lack of a killer app with a bevy of very strong exclusives. Resistance, MLB: The Show, and Gran Turismo could all be added to this list. The Uncharted series is incredibly well reviewed and hailed as the next Tomb Raider, but for some reason, it doesn’t seem as popular (to me at least) as it deserves. And I still don’t get why Little Big Planet didn’t hit it big, but Sony’s trying to remedy that with the sequel.

Upcoming: Heavy Rain, Little Big Planet 2, God of War III, Final Fantasy Versus XIII
Note: I am more interested in Heavy Rain than any other game on the horizon, including Modern Warfare 2. Hopefully that game turns out better than the last game I was intrigued by did. I’m looking at you, Scribblenauts.

Anyway, it’s weird to start with 2nd and 3rd place, but 360 and PS3 are the “hardcore” systems. I’m sure I may have missed some exclusives. If I’m being honest, I actually think PS3 has more to offer in terms of exclusives. But Halo still trumps them all for me, plus I find Xbox Live so superior that I have no problem paying for it. I’m always checking out what my friends are playing, and it does a great job of building more of a gaming “community.” But to each his own…

Next week: Wii, DS, and PSP. Until then, what’d I miss? And please, if you own a PS3…tell me what’s awesome. I’ve only played MGS4.

cmfl3x asked me a little while back if I was looking forward to the Fallout 3 downloadable content. He seemed pretty excited about it and I felt bad telling him but no, I didn’t share in his excitement. In fact, while there are games I may fully enjoy, like Ninja Gaiden II or Fallout 3, I’ll never buy their DLC. To this day, I have not paid for downloadable content for any traditional game, and I don’t plan on ever doing so. Why? Because I don’t believe in what it stands for. Obviously if downloadable content is free, such as Burnout Paradise’s motorcycles and whatnot, or BioShock’s extra plasmids, then sure – it is always welcome. It’s when it starts getting charged for that it gets on my nerves.

I actually wrote up an entire article just knocking on it, but then felt it may come off as too much of a rant so I held off. I figure that if I could turn it into a discussion topic with cmfl3x, it’d be a little more civil.

Let’s look at what type of monster paid downloadable content has become and why I choose to avoid it.

The biggest argument for publishers/developers to charge us for downloadable content is that we get more content for our favorite games. We can explore new things and play the games even longer. Woohoo! But honestly, do I want to pay for a couple more multiplayer levels in a game and maybe a new small planet or island I can explore instead of putting all of that money towards a new game with a more complete experience? And with game publishers and developers fully embracing downloadable content, it looks like more bad than good has come out of it for us consumers. Here’s why I think so.

1. Paid DLC is rarely even a part of the main game
Games like Oblivion, Fallout 3, and Fable II are heavy single player games that have all gotten or are getting paid DLC that allows you to travel to a small island somewhere to explore a new area. That’s all great but compared to how huge the in-game worlds of these games already are to begin with, these little diversions for $10 comes up a little short compared to what we’re already used to. In Fallout 3′s $60 retail package I can explore over a hundred unique areas and now I’m being charged another $10 to explore just a single new one? And now that we’ve maxed out our characters in games like Fallout 3 and Fable II, what’s the point of even playing these new diversions? Did people really think the Mass Effect DLC was worth its price? It’s like you buy a $10 movie ticket, and then buy another $2 ticket to go watch 10 minutes of footage of the characters in the movie you like doing something completely separate from the movie where it’s not part of the plot, has no relevance, nor does it contribute anything to the movie itself.

2. Paid DLC segments the userbase for online games
Games like Halo 3, Gears of War, and Call of Duty 4 have had map packs released that cost about $10 or so for a few new maps. But did we really sit down to think how this works out? When everyone buys a game, everyone has that map. But then when DLC comes out and only a fraction of the people buy the map, those are the only people you will end up playing with if you bought the map packs. Now you have a segment of the online audience playing the core maps, and another segment playing the core maps and the DLC maps. That’s all great but it screws over friends who can/want to buy the new maps versus the ones that don’t. Everyone has to pay or no one does in order for everyone to play together. Why not just make it all free like it is on the PC?

3. Paid DLC is just a fix for developers not finishing their game
Paid DLC is an easy way out for developer strapped on time as a consequence of poor management of the project. With the advent of title updates, we already have to deal with developers skipping thorough testing because they know they can always patch our games later down the road. But now with paid DLC, they even just cut out entire levels in their games if they’re running short on time. After all, that not only gives them a nice extension on their poorly organized release, but also gives them some extra money while they’re at it. (See Tomb Raider: Underworld.)

4. Paid DLC is an easy way for developers to make an extra buck
Horse armor anyone? If you remember Oblivion’s first DLC, there was an uproar over Bethesda Softworks trying to charge a couple dollars to simply put an armor texture on your horse. That was it. While the industry has since learned from that fiasco, that hasn’t stopped their decision to release new character costumes that you can buy for a couple dollars (see Ninja Gaiden II, Dead Space). This is honestly no different than the horse armor but I guess because it is the character you are controlling, players are less prone to complain. I still think it’s a rip-off all around since it really takes an insignificant amount of time to simply add a new art texture into the game.

5. Paid DLC is an easy way for developers to hold features ransom
The best example of this is Soul Calibur IV. This game came out with Yoda exclusive to the Xbox 360 version and Darth Vader exclusive to the PS3 version. Fans were asking if there was any way to unlock the other character on their system and Namco continued to deny it. Well, just when the game dropped from popularity, Namco released a $5 DLC to allow you to unlock the other Star Wars character on your console. Great. This character could have already been included, but was intentionally withheld simply to force users to buy it later. And what about times when you see paid DLC that’s the size of less than a meg? It means the content was sitting right there on your disc already but the developers decided to lock it so you’d have to pay for it. Games like the Dance Dance Revolution Universe series and Virtua Fighter 5 are guilty of this. If that’s not the biggest slap in the face, I don’t know what is.

In summary, for the most part I think paid DLC is a terrible “evolution” in gaming. It’s a monetizing of gaming not unlike the airline industry where we now have to pay for food, pillows, blankets, check our bags, or to even pick our own seats. The problem though, is that we’ve grown to accept it. When companies that are used to giving free content to their userbase on the PC (like Epic and Valve) want to do it on the 360, Microsoft will rarely let them. It now becomes Microsoft’s decision to price stuff accordingly because if they let companies that want to give out maps for free but other companies are charging, it makes everything seem out of wack. But unlike the airline industry where we have to fly, we don’t have to buy DLC. So I will continue my lone crusade and boycott buying any and all DLC content.

Correct me if I’m wrong, cmfl3x!

Well, espion4ge, unfortunately I can’t disagree with you completely, but I do think DLC does have its strong points. I probably will get Operation: Anchorage, eventually, but I’m trying to decide whether to wait for Broken Steel, the third DLC for Fallout 3 coming in March, first. Broken Steel will raise the level cap so I can at least get experience from Operation: Anchorage.

Honestly, your reasons for hating DLC are pretty valid, so I’m not going to try to refute them here. In fact, it really annoys me too when companies use DLC to make up for not finishing development on time. I pass on those kinds of DLC. Also, the nickel and dime DLC, like the new character in Castle Crashers, or new outfits for my avatar are the kinds of things I stay away from. I’d probably say, though, that monetized DLC is here to stay (which you know), and in some ways, it’s a necessary evil.

The fact of the matter is, we live in terrible economic times, which everyone knows. Developers and publishers are losing money just like everyone else, and they need ways to sustain themselves cheaply, and DLC is an answer to that. Gaming companies have been laying people off in droves. Without extra income from DLC, who knows whether some of these developers will even still be around in a year or so? That might sound over dramatic, but I don’t think it’s that far away from reality.

Meanwhile, I think there are some legitimate ways that companies can pull off DLC and not rip off consumers. I think a good example is GTAIV’s upcoming The Lost and the Damned. Liberty City is an amazingly well put together location, and the idea of basically creating another “game” to be played in it makes sense to me. Liberty City is a game world that deserves to have another story told in it. Sure, it’s not part of the main story, but it’s basically like buying an Arcade game that takes advantage of a pre-rendered game world.

Another factor at play is, consumers want more from their games and want to go deeper into the experience. The main game in Fallout 3 dropped hints about another city called The Pitt that was overrun by ghouls. As I was playing the game, I found myself interested in seeing how the nuclear war had affected some other cities. Well, then two months later Bethesda announces that the 2nd DLC for Fallout 3 will be The Pitt! Clever in-game marketing? Obviously. But the fact is, it’s the developer’s job to make me want to buy the DLC. In this case, I think they’ve done a good job.

Ultimately, I think it’s important to realize that video games are a business. Very few companies think like Valve, who is incredible about putting out new, free content for their users. And like you said, Microsoft forces Valve to charge for content that Valve releases on the PC for free. But you could argue that even Valve has been charging for DLC with Episodes 1 and 2 of Half Life 2 (although the Orange Box made up for all of that).

I respect your decision not to buy DLC, because when it comes down to it, companies will only put out DLC if people will buy it. Unfortunately, just like things like Wii Play, people buy DLC for all sorts of reasons that aren’t really in hardcore gamers’ control. I’m sure there are people who love buying new outfits for their characters or their horses. Which means that like it or not, DLC is here to stay. As for me, I’ll let the developers convince me that their DLC is worth it, and if I think it is, then I’ll probably buy it.

A question for you, do you buy DLC for Rock Band?

Rock Band is a different case, and while I mentioned that I did have some Rock Band DLC in my original writeup, I decided to remove it when sharing my thoughts with you because I figured you would bring that point forward as at least one legitimate defense for paid DLC.

I have bought several Rock Band DLC tracks – probably about 15 or so songs. They are actually the only DLC I’ve ever bought for the 360, and I think that for the most part paid DLC in Rock Band is fine. This is because Rock Band is more about the music than the actual game. People want to sing and play instruments to songs they like, and with such a varied taste in music from one consumer to another, this is really the only possible solution.

For me, I tend to like pop rock bands from the 90s and up, so stuff like Weezer, Green Day (where is Green Day content anyway?!), Fallout Boy, All-American Rejects, etc. are my bread and butter for music games.

It would certainly be nice if all of the Rock Band DLC was free, but I understand that there’s a cost to licensing the use of the song, work needs to be done in making it playable by 4 people, etc. It’s not the same as an additional minor diversion to the main game. it’s very much a part of the main game since some people may just play the same 10 songs they bought for the life of their Rock Band game and that’s all they wanted to do. I tend to skip all the heavy metal songs in Rock Band so paid DLC is my only real option to enjoy the game how I best want to.

But what concerns me about Rock Band (and Guitar Hero) is that with how much money they’re making in DLC, the developers would intentionally withhold highly requested songs from sequels simply so they could charge for them separately later. Take for example, the 20 promised free DLC tracks with Rock Band 2 purchase. People were all excited about the songs and then we find out that no one has even heard of these songs or even the groups themselves. There could have been more well-known bands on that list of 20 songs, but they were probably held back to be charged for later. I’m just concerned that Rock Band 3, for example, may not have as good of a playlist as it should simply because the developers are intentionally withholding songs to sell later. It’s a minor issue though, since I probably get more out of a $2 song in Rock Band than a $10 island in Fable II.

Seriously, where IS Green Day!?

2 dollars for 4 instruments worth of gameplay really is a pretty good deal. What would be the absolute worst, I think, is if not only they hold back the good songs, but they start charging a premium for them. Say 3 dollars instead of 2. Especially with the way things have been going on iTunes lately, that could be a possibility, and wouldn’t be a good one.

I think ultimately you are probably right that DLC is another example of companies trying to rip us off. I wish I could have the same moral standards as you, but when it comes to being a consumer I am mostly a sucker: If they hype it and it sounds good I’ll probably buy it. I try to exact my revenge by buying games on sale. Small consolation, I know.

Since money is tighter these days, I will pick and choose what I purchase, especially for download, carefully. I’ve decided definitively to hold off on Operation: Anchorage right now. Though I would love to bust some communist heads, that level cap is a real bummer. I’m also more interested in what The Pitt and Broken Steel have to offer anyway, especially since Broken Steel supposedly extends the storyline a bit (plus fighting alongside the Brotherhood is cool).

Until then, I probably won’t even consider buying any DLC. Unless Valve comes out with some new maps for Left 4 Dead. Man, wouldn’t new maps for Left 4 Dead at least TEMPT you? What if they were like, 5 bucks? Just kidding…you should stick to your morals…maybe. [Editor's note: This discussion of Left 4 Dead DLC was before Wednesday's news that it would be free on the PC and 360.]

Left 4 Dead is a tough choice – especially if I see that PC gamers get all the stuff for free and we have to pay $10. I’ll probably pass, as once again, my morals are telling me that if I submit and pay the $10, it puts me down a slippery slope for buying DLC. Maybe I’ll just save that $10 and put it towards the PC version of the game.

I do want to go back to one point you mentioned earlier though, and that is how the current economic climate is bad so companies need to release paid DLC to help make some money to stay afloat. But if you think about it, the income from the paid DLC is only a tiny fraction of retail sales. Is it really worth it to charge for this stuff considering the good will and fanbase the companies could garner by just making the DLC free? I’m fiercely loyal to Blizzard, and am now starting to be pretty loyal to Valve too. These are companies that certainly don’t release paid DLC and thrive in today’s economy. Anything they release, I’ll buy. Don’t other companies want that level of appeal? Having such a strong fanbase that you can actually hold conventions with $100 tickets and still sell out?

In a way, this current economic climate may benefit us hardcore gamers. Being hardcore generally means we are well-versed in gaming and are serious about it. Isn’t it better if game companies die off as a result of releasing mundane games in a struggling economy since we won’t buy them? It’s during this time that the companies would have to “bring it” and release games that aren’t shovelware. If the game is good, it should sell itself right?

I remember how BioShock was almost canceled because no publisher was willing to pick up the game. They all thought it would not sell but it instead went on to become game of the year last year and sold millions. I guess this discussion is almost moving towards a discussion on whether DLC should even be charged for. And I honestly don’t think it should be. Maybe it seems harsh, but I want companies that release bad games to fail – not to extend their life by nickle and diming us. In a way, it has similarities to the banks these days asking for a bailout of taxpayers’ money for mistakes they made. It just so happens that our bailout for mediocre games these days is paid DLC. I’m not bailing out anyone!!

Yeah, I guess it all comes down to the different philosophies of different companies. Blizzard and Valve have both proven they can make boatloads of money by putting the consumer first. EA has proven it can make boatloads of money by continuously putting out sequels to mediocre games. And as you pointed out in your Mirror’s Edge review, when they tried something different they got burned financially. That’s why these companies like bailouts. Brilliant analogy, btw.

But maybe you’re right, the lower tier companies trying to nickel and dime us with DLC and cheap sequels might end up losing out and shutting down. Like, who is seriously going to buy the Prince of Persia DLC? (Actually, I don’t want to know the answer. Plus Ubisoft isn’t small, although no one is safe). As for me, I won’t mind buying DLC if it’s for a game I really love. But the funny thing about this little debate is I can’t think of a single piece of DLC that I have bought outside of Rock Band! I got all the Halo maps for free thru various machinations I think.

But yea, I can still fight for DLC at some level in principle because I will eventually purchase something for Fallout 3 and Left 4 Dead and not lose too much sleep over it.

Yeah – looks like we all just have to coexist in a happy medium of some companies not charging while others do. I think that my thoughts on the matter are obviously more skewed towards being a hardcore gamer, and remember how things were “back in the day”. Maybe this generation is a bit different now, especially with the amount of casual gamers playing these days. For all we know, it could be the casual gamers that are buying most of this paid DLC. I remember how appalled I was a while back that EA was selling DLC that would just unlock features of a game in case you found it too hard. What the heck? But they are still doing it even today, with Skate 2′s paid DLC. So apparently people buy it! Maybe not you and me, but I guess it’s the same idea as people in MMORPG’s paying real money for in-game gold. The hardcore gamer would never stoop to such levels, but maybe the casual gamers are what are lining the pockets of these mediocre game developers on the 360…

I’ve created a new section for Leveling Down called Discussion. In this section we will be posting gaming related discussion that either cmfl3x or I may have from time to time with members of the gaming community or even just between ourselves. In some ways, this isn’t really different from one of us posting an article and the other one commenting on it but we’ve structured it in such a way that we expect the other to sort of reply – at least to have somewhat of a conversation. These posts may be nothing more than idle chit-chat, but I guess this is what aging hardcore gamers chit-chat about. Feel free to jump into the discussion with your comments as well.

This first discussion topic was suggested to me by cmfl3x, as he asked me how I felt about how morality was currently handled in video games.

cmfl3x: One thing I’ve been thinking about is how different games handle “morality” issues – the strengths and weaknesses, where we hope games can go, etc. Like, what differentiates the morality choices in different games like Fable, Fallout, Mass Effect, or even Bioshock? How does the way the game handle choice enhance the experience or cheapen it? I dunno, something like that. Haha, do you have any idea what I am saying?

espion4ge: It’s funny to think about games with morality, because for me, it’s a no-brainer to always go the good route. I think that’s inherently my nature since maybe I read too many comic books as a kid and believe in good always prevailing, justice, and all that. I actually have trouble playing games like GTA just because I don’t really get much enjoyment running over pedestrians and such.

But when it comes to the games you mentioned, I feel that they are really at in their infancy or aren’t handled completely well yet. What I don’t like is how in games like BioShock and Fable 2, you pretty much are more rewarded if you go the “good path”. it’s almost like there’s no reason to go the bad path and the game conditions you so with all of the positive feedback you get back. Why kill a Little Sister when you can save her and get basically the same reward? It would have made more sense if you decided to save the Little Sister and not gotten anything out of it – then it really comes down to you deciding morally that you want to do it purely out of conscience than because the reward is greater. Fable 2 is practically the same way – if you do bad things people will react differently towards you, you’ll grow horns, have flies flying around you, etc. I’m sure there is a certain type of gamer that likes that, but why do you have to be ugly and generally disliked just because you’re playing an evil path? You can still be cool.

Mass Effect and Fallout 3 do a little bit more of a decent job on handling morality, in that the games have a more neutral stance on the matter instead of “wanting you” to play good. But honestly, perhaps Mass Effect was too symmetrical because you were often given the option to either threaten or persuade someone, and they basically led to the same result. The Karma system wasn’t too bad in Fallout 3 – I liked that you could pick up followers depending on what type of moral standing you had but it was all still just number crunching anyway if you wanted to change morality. Want to be good when you’ve been bad the whole game? Just give bottled water to the beggar until you’re good. Want to be bad when you’ve been good the whole game? Just kill citizens over and over.

I don’t think we’re quite there yet in terms of gaming, but hopefully gameplay elements become more interesting because of it. The problem is, it’s difficult to set it up well in a game. I don’t like how some games have achievements for playing the game good and then evil, only to discover that they’re practically the same.

cmfl3x: In a gameplay sense, I agree that it’s annoying that you are rewarded for being good, because in that kind of system all choices are not created equal. At the same time, I don’t think I particularly want to see games rewarding people too much for being bad. Maybe I’m old fashioned but I don’t think that’s a message we should be imparting on our youth, especially in a more realistic setting. That’s probably why games like Fable make you fat and ugly when you’re bad, to turn you off from that. What you propose though, getting no reward for being good, could work.

Fallout 3 is definitely one of my favorite moral choice type games, even though like you said you can “change your karma” more or less whenever you want. What Fallout 3 does is it puts you in a world full of characters who already are morally predisposed one way or another and allows you to choose the role you play in that world, as you alluded to in your review.

The Capitol Wasteland is a messed up place, and its residents are all over the place morally. Some are trying to rebuild a functioning society, others are just trying to get everything they can for themselves. Your choices in each quest affects the communities that have been formed, for good or for ill or sometimes both. You have a real sense that your actions matter, even if its only on a small scale. A few times I found myself just staring at my screen trying to decide what to do, because like reality, sometimes it is not clear what is “right” or “wrong” in Fallout. Sure you can reload a save, but that takes away from some of the immersion factor.

I would love to see a game that builds on these types of choices by not only affecting NPCs but the game world itself. Imagine a city as well developed as Liberty City where you aren’t constrained to playing as a gangster. GTAIV’s moral choices boiled down to shoot or don’t shoot someone or choose who out of two people you want to shoot. The choices are okay in and of themselves, but imagine if the world changed depending on your choices. In Fable, your look changes depending on your choices. How cool would it be if the game world looks, sounds, and feels different depending on your choices?

Obviously, it’d be tough to pull a game like this off, especially if some of the changes to the game world are more unexpected (e.g., kill a gangster, but instead of the city getting better, another gangster who is much worse takes their place). But I think it would give a real feeling of importance to the gamer about their choices.

It would have been cool if Bioshock 2, a prequel, was designed like that. Rapture is going to a dark place as we all know, but as a character in Rapture, am I going to work to slow down the process or speed it up? I’d buy a game like that in a heartbeat.

espion4ge: Actually you are right about Fallout 3 – maybe it’s the best game out now that explores moral choice. When I think back to it, while I do think the Karma system was a little silly, even if you were to strip that moral indicator completely out of the game you could have still played it as a very evil character since there were plenty of things you could do. And in a certain context of the game, Fallout 3′s setting really allows you to do that since sometimes you have to do what is considered “evil” simply to just survive.

Thinking back – yeah Fallout 3 had a lot of things you could do if you so inclined – killing anyone you wanted, stealing practically anything, enslaving people, lying to them, etc. I guess since I rarely went down the evil path, I never really saw the other side of that game nor was I curious to try it out. And if you were to really think about it, what gives you the right in the game to even take another man’s life? Just because he enslaves other humans, is that really your call?

I do agree with you though that maybe games do have sort of a moral responsibility to teach kids to be good. While you and me are adults already and can play Grand Theft Auto games without influencing our real lives, kids may not know better. In fact, with each of us probably having our own kids eventually in the future, I would probably prefer that they got any sort of conditioning from media outlets to be a good person. Seeing how big the game industry has me thinking that there should be some responsibility to bringing up kids to be good people too, if possible. It worked with comics didn’t it? Kids like Spider-Man, Batman, Superman, etc. and thus are more excited to do the right thing.

Perhaps exploring the concept of moral choice in video games might not be a good idea if children of the future may become influenced in a bad way. Or maybe they could learn from seeing the consequences of their actions in videogames? Ugh – analyzing the role of morality in videogames is tougher than I thought. You could probably write a college research paper on this subject and it still probably wouldn’t be completely unrefutable.

I never ended up playing the first Fable, but having now completed Fable II, I have to say that the series does deserve its fan following. Fable II is an adventure-RPG game that plays like an offline World of Warcraft style game while also including Sims-like character statistics and management. The game is quite enjoyable for the most part, with its main problem being that it suffers from not being able to deliver on some gameplay aspects it flirted with.

Good
- The dog companion is quite innovative and enjoyable
- Charming presentation
- Intuitive and engaging combat system

Bad
- Limitations on many of the grander aspects of the game
- Poor co-op
- Several bugs combined with no save slot management system

Intro
Fable II comes from Lionhead Studios, a UK based company most famous for the first Fable game on the Xbox and Black & White on the PC. Peter Molyneux, the lead designer at Lionhead Studios, got his start over at Bullfrog Productions as a programmer and designer for games such as Populous, Theme Park, and Dungeon Keeper. He has generally been a pretty outspoken invidual in the gaming industry and it has cost him a little. Nowhere has this been more evident than with Fable 1, a game that went on to pretty good reviews but disappointed several people due to the over-promises that Molyneux made.

It’s not surprising when features are cut due to time constraints for a game, but it’s even worse when the public is told about such a feature and then it’s cut. One such case was the ability to have children in Fable 1, something that Molyneux had talked about but ultimately never delivered. He also went so far as to hype the game up before it released, saying “It’s gonna be the best game ever.” It wasn’t and obviously the game took some flak for that but it was still quite successful, selling almost 2 million copies in the United States alone.

With such a large fanbase already, Fable II would inevitably sell well if it improved on its predecessor and Molyneux let the game do the talking instead of him. While Molyneux learned his lesson and kept his promises to a minimum, Fable II’s release was still not without problems.

Two months before Fable II’s October release, the team put out an Xbox Live Arcade title called “Fable II Pub Games” for 800 Microsoft Points or free with a Fable II pre-order. Some players found out ways to cheat the game and make tons of money. Molyneux responded and said that the glitch the players found was intentionally left in the game by the developers so as to affect the players in the Fable II game based on how much cheating they did. This was obviously a lie, as the developers had no idea that the glitch was in the game and could simply release a patch for the retail game to not allow such a vast amount of money to be transferred into the game (which is basically what they did).

Fable II also released with a Limited Collector’s Edition. Fable II was the first game I have seen released where the Limited Collector’s Edition was downgraded after what was originally promised. The Limited Edition was announced at $79.99 and was to include the following:

- a bonus DVD containing the “Making of Fable 2″
- in-game extras (The Hall of the Dead Dungeon, “The Wreckager” Legendary Cutlass Weapon, and an ingame Halo outfit)
- five printed Fate cards
- a Hobbe figure

Shortly before the release of the game, the limited edition was downgraded so it no longer included the premium box, the five printed Fate cards, and the Hobbe figure. The price of the Limited Edition was also reduced from $79.99 to $69.99. This left the Limited Edition with just the bonus DVD and in-game extras. But to make matters worse, several people who bought the Limited Edition did not get the code in their retail copy for the in-game extras.

Microsoft went ahead and announced that they would email the code to anyone who purchased a copy of the Limited Edition. Of course, Microsoft had no way of knowing if a player bought one version or the other, so anyone with the regular edition was able to acquire the code for the limited edition in-game content. The Limited Edition buyers were thus burned twice – first because several extras were removed, and secondly, because the bonus in-game content they paid for was handed out to everyone else. So in reality, they paid $10 for the “Making of Fable 2″ bonus DVD, something that most people didn’t even really care about.

It was also discovered that online co-op, an advertised feature, would not be in the shipped version. Molyneux informed the gaming public that there would be a Day 1 patch that would enable this functionality, and pleaded with reviewers to hold off on reviewing the game until they got the patch. True to his word, the online co-op patch was indeed added in a release day patch.

During Sparrow’s childhood, a crowd gathers around a vendor selling “magical” wares.

Storyline and Premise
Fable II takes place 500 years after Fable I, in the same world of Albion. While it is the same world, storylines are not connected between the first and second game so players do not have to experience the first game to play the second. Albion is a fantasy world, with swords and sorcery, but the biggest change in the 500 years is that the present world of Fable II is more of a colonial one. Unlike in Fable I where projectile based weapons were limited to crossbows and bows, somewhere in those 500 years gunpowder was discovered so Fable II introduces muskets and such to complement arrow-based projectile weapons.

Also new to the sequel is the ability to play as either a male or a female character. The player does not have an actual name in Fable II, but rather, is given titles. He/she begins the game as a child with the nickname Sparrow (the player’s title can change throughout the game based on feats accomplished) and is accompanied by an older sister named Rose. The two are poor orphans that dream of living in Castle Fairfax one day. The young Sparrow accompanies Rose to look for ways to make money, and rescue a dog during the brief gameplay that takes place during their childhood.

One night, Rose and Sparrow are summoned to Castle Fairfax by Lord Lucien, who ends up submitting them to some of his magical analysis. Upon discovering his findings, he shoots both Rose and Sparrow, killing Rose, while knocking Sparrow out the window of the castle’s tower. Sparrow survives, and awakens 10 years later. Joined by the dog rescued as a child, Sparrow sets off to find Lucien to stop his evil plans and seek justice for his sister.

Fable II’s main quest line can be completed in about ten hours, and this was no different from the first game. And just like the first game, there are many sidequests and jobs that the player can pursue, which add more depth and longevity to the game. Many of these sidequests have interesting and amusing storylines themselves and some can only be undertaken after the main storyline is finished. The unique aspect to the Fable games is that there is a certain level of consequence to the player’s actions in the world. The player is often presented with several choices throughout the game in various quests whether he/she wants to go down the good or evil path. These choices not only affect how the player is perceived by citizens of Albion, but also the character’s appearance. Going down the good path will keep the player’s complexion clear, a halo will form over his head, etc. while the evil path leads to horns and flies.

While melee combat can be pretty fun, the sheer number of enemies thrown at you make it quite difficult to rely solely on it.

Gameplay Mechanics
Combat System and Leveling
The combat system simplifies the leveling up process and does not force the player into being a particular build. There are three fighting styles: melee, ranged, or magic. The player is free to use any of those fighting styles when encountering enemies, and experience orbs will drop during combat. There are four experience orb types, pertaining to each of the three fighting styles and a fourth general one. While each hit on an enemy will drop certain experience orbs based on the fighting style used to attack the enemy, killing the enemy rewards the player with the fourth general experience type, which is spendable on any of the three fighting styles. Thus it is possible to play through the game using only magic to fight foes, leveling the magic abilities with the magic experience orbs they drop, but using the general experience orbs to unlock the melee and ranged abilities.

The player is able to use the experience orbs to unlock three different abilities under each of the melee and ranged skill trees. Only orbs earned from that fighting style and the general orbs can be used to unlock skills in a particular tree and when a skill is unlocked, the next tier for that skill can be unlocked next, but usually with an exponentially higher orb cost. Most skills max out at tier 4 or 5.

Increasing melee damage, melee-related skills (like defending and countering), and your maximum lifebar tend to come from the strength-based melee tree, while faster attack speed, dodging, and targeted attacks (like headshots or groinshots) come from the dexterity-based ranged tree. The magic tree is a little different, as there are six or seven different magic spells that can all be leveled out to tier 5 and the skills are all magic-based, rather than some of the more general benefits gained from the other two trees.

I originally decided that I would play through the game as a ranged specialist due to the fun of shooting people with localized damage, but after some time I realized that I would need to rely on some magic in order to be able to use ranged weapons without enemies closing in too fast. Two of the magic spells I used were ones that summoned “undead minions” to tank for me and a time spell to slow down enemies. While the combat system is pretty fun in terms of an action/adventure sort of way, I came to discover that magic is far more powerful than melee and ranged. About halfway through my game, I switched over to magic soley due to not only its damage output, but because it had area of effect attacks that were quite useful against larger packs of enemies.

I personally felt that magic was too imbalanced because it made getting through enemies and bosses with ease. The main drawback to magic is that when you want to cast a tier 5 spell, you have to charge it all the way until it hits the tier 5 meter. This leaves you open to attacks for several seconds, but with the minions spell to tank for you, enemies go after them allowing you to freely charge. Then you just unleash your tier 5 area of attack-styled spell, such as lightning, and it kills everyone in the entire room. Once I went down that path, it was too difficult to go back to “swashbuckling” with 6-7 enemies at a time since I could just clear the room and go along my way.

Your Dog Companion
While it may seem silly, your dog is one of the major highlights of the game. Not only does it accompany you everywhere, it can learn tricks, attack enemies when they’re down, and even play fetch. But the most welcome aspect of his addition is that he starts barking whenever he is aware of treasure or an enemy in the area, often leading you to the location in question. There is also various random treasure buried, and your dog also barks and starts digging in an area where he knows something is buried. Often times I don’t try to check every single nook and cranny as I’m traveling, so it’s quite useful when I’m walking past an area and the dog barks to inform me that there’s actually a treasure chest in there so I won’t miss it. In short, your dog is an instrumental part to finding many of the secret treasures in Albion.

“The Sims” part of the game
Fable II is one of the only RPG games that I have seen where the people in cities and towns actually react to you. In most RPGs, you may see citizens wandering around town, but they always have the same sentence when you talk to them and are basically a talking cardboard cutout. In Fable II, each citizen has particular likes and dislikes, particular locations they enjoy, and even sexual orientation. Each citizen’s impression of you is impacted through three different meters: Hate/Love, Ugly/Attractive, and Fat/Thin. These meters general represent a scale that will determine when a citizen will want to either give you a gift or marry you. While most citizens will want to give you gifts if they love you enough or find you attractive enough, if you go to the slums sometimes the opposite will be true. Being a jerk may get you rewards with certain types of people.

You are also able to get married and have a kid. In fact, you are able to get married as many times as you want, and have several wives all over the world. You’re able to take several people to bed at once, get STDs, etc. While all of this sounds pretty amusing and interesting to play, it’s actually pretty rudimentary and doesn’t have much depth at all.

The concept behind the particular likes and dislikes of each citizen are supposed to help you in terms of being able to win their adoration and love. But with the simplicity of the attribute design, I don’t have to even do any of that stuff. I can just dance like a fool in the middle of the town square for a few minutes and then every woman will want to marry me. That just doesn’t seem right.

I was also disappointed in the family aspect of the game. Basically, by marrying someone you just need to set an allowance aside for them every day to keep them happy. If they are happy, they won’t leave you. You can also have protected or unprotected sex with people, and by having unprotected sex when you’re not married you have a higher risk of catching an STD. Having unprotected sex with your wife will net you a child.

The wife and child don’t really ever do anything – they’re just citizens in the town you found them in. If you married a poor woman who wore poor clothes, even if you moved to a mansion and bought rich clothes for her, she can’t change into them or become any different than you first met her. Being married serves no general purpose but maybe some rudimentary amusement but it’s annoying that every time you see your kid she wants a present. The kid doesn’t ever seem to grow up past childhood, but since you don’t particularly age yourself, it’s a wash. The game has a clock so there’s night and day, but there’s no actual calendar or aging.

There is also the element of fame. Completing enough quests increases your fame meter. High fame causes other citizens to follow you whenever they see you, kids will ask you for your autograph, etc. While it’s pretty cool at first, it gets a bit annoying when the citizens follow you into your own house and block the door so you can’t even leave.

I do appreciate that the stats and attributes of the citizens increases the depth of how the world of Fable II reacts to you, but I feel that it didn’t quite live up to what I expected. It’s definitely an increase over Fable I, and fans of the first game will probably love how much more depth the sequel has in terms of socialization with the citizens, but for a game that talks about change and consequences of your actions, being able to dance or whistle away to get the world to love me after doing a bad deed seems a bit silly.

You can buy practically every habitable place, including this guy’s wagon.

Earning money
In Fable II, enemies don’t really drop money when they die. Money is found either in treasure chests, or through jobs and real estate. There are several jobs offered throughout the game such as blacksmithing, lumberjacking, etc. Most of these jobs rely simply on timed button presses that provide multipliers on income the longer the streak goes.

The best way to earn money though is through real estate. Practically every store and residential area can be bought, and by owning it the player is able to adjust the rent or pricing of the goods through a simple meter. Setting it to double the prices on everything will double the income, but get the citizens of that town to hate you while setting it towards nothing will get them to love you. By owning any property, you will get a certain amount of money every few minutes in the game, and even when you’re not playing. If you log off for the night and play the next morning, when you log in you will accrue a nice chunk of change from the time you weren’t playing.

In a sense, after buying real estate and making more money, it’s wisest to buy even more real estate with it. Eventually you will own so much real estate that the money earn from them makes money trivial. While not completely realistic, I found that the handling of real estate and earning money was simplified enough to be enjoyable without overly frustrating.

Co-op & Online
Fable II supports offline co-op and online co-op (after a free patch). Both are quite disappointing. In the previews, Molyneux described how you’d be able to enter another player’s game, earn money and experience in that player’s world, and take it back to your own game. What he did not specify was that when you entered that player’s world, you would just be a generic henchman to the player, and not your own character. Joining in a co-op game online or offline forces you to pick one of the generic henchman templates, and the host decides how much percentage of the money and experience he earns will be given to you during the playtime. It works exactly like Molyneux stated – that you do take the money and experience back to your game (if the host gives you some), but many were disappointed that not only did you not see your character, but you also had only the abilities of the host and not your own character’s.

With the co-op being pretty silly and stupid, the Player Orbs is perhaps one of the coolest aspects of the game. It really does make the game feel like an MMORPG. The initial setting for Player Orbs is “Friends Only”, and what that means is that if you are playing Fable II and are on any stage or town in your game and one of the guys on your friends list is also in the same area, you will see them in your game. They will be a spherical orb with their Gamerpic, and if they run down the street in their game, they will run down on your screen too. You can go up to them and trade with them or inspect their stats, etc. It’s pretty neat. What’s even cooler is that you can set the Player Orbs to “All players” instead of just friends, and then anyone on Xbox Live that is playing Fable II and running around the town will show up in your game. Very neat and innovative.

The undead are a major enemy type in Fable II.

Achievement System
The Achievements in this game were generally pretty well designed. There are Achievements for beating the main game, getting the various endings, accomplishing certain tasks, and even ones that require some pretty good skill. There was a majorly annoying one though which revolves around collecting six different dolls. These dolls can only be won by scoring high (a feat in and of itself) on a shooting range, but the worst part is that each player can only earn a particular doll. That means, in order to get all six, he would need to win the shooting range six times to get six of the same dolltype he already has, and then trade the other five to other players that have the other ones. How is this fun?

Another issue I have is an Achievement called “The Completionist”, which requires you to find basically everything. The only problem with that Achievement is that two of the items on that list are only awarded to you if you beat the Fable II Public Games, which was free as a pre-order or 800 points to buy now. Forcing the player to have to play a game on Live to get an Achievement in a retail game is just ridiculous.

Fortunately, Lionhead Studios made a controversial decision with many of the Achievements, including the two that I found very annoying. While their decision was ultimately to my benefit in the end, I would argue that both the earlier two Achievements and this decision were both stupid and canceled each other out. The controversial decision was for many of the Achievements, including the most difficult ones (the dolls and the Completionist) to be received by a player in co-op that simply sees another player acquire it. We’re not talking the only time the Achievement unlocks for the player, but any time the criteria is fulfilled.

In order to get those last two Achievements I didn’t want to jump through hoops to get, I found generous players who were willing to share the Achievement with me. I joined their games, and all they did was sell an item that was needed for the Achievement, and then buy it back from the store. Then the Achievement unlocked for me. This trivializes more of the difficult Achievements, even the unfairly difficult ones. If it were up to me, I would have removed the dollcatcher Achievement, made the Completionist Achievement not rely on spending another 800 Microsoft Points on, and not allowed any of the Achievements to be shareable. There’s no feeling to accomplishment if anyone can get them.

Magic ends up being the most powerful fighting style.

Final Thoughts
Fable II was quite ambitious in scope and nearly succeeded in delivering what it went for. While it didn’t quite hit the mark, it’s still quite an enjoyable game when analyzed from a pure gameplay standpoint rather than measuring it against what it was planning to achieve. Unfortunately, the game is also saddled with bugs that are still being worked out to this day. Some bugs I encoutered were minor, such as not being able to untarget citizens until I restarted the game (happened a lot but a recent patch seems to have fixed it for the most part), main quest events not triggering (I would sit there wondering why nothing would happen until I restarted the game and on the next iteration it would magically work), to even being able to doing a unique subquest more than once (got two Diamond of Sorrows because Chesty’s Quest was offered again). On top of that, you can’t have multiple saves – only one that gets overriden with autosaving from time to time. This makes things worse because some people have encountered game-ending bugs that they could not skip because they had no other save to revert back to.

I give the game a B+. Bugs aside, the game was still quite enjoyable. I have to admit though, that my overall impressions with the game started out enthusiastically high, but as the game went on it started to decrease as I began to realize certain aspects that I felt were grand ended up too simple and limited. The storyline is still quite charming and it’s worth checking out if you are enjoy adventure-RPGs of any sort. Most of the bugs are being fixed or have been fixed already, and while co-op is forgettable, the social aspect of being able to see every Xbox Live player playing Fable II and running around is something that has to be seen to be believed. Fable II delivers an entertaining single player experience while being slightly marred by developer decisions. But in the end, it’s still quite fun and that’s most important.

I don’t know whether to try to finish up Fable II next or jump right into Call of Duty: World at War. Part of me wants to complete Fable II just so I can be done with it (and also get a review out), but I got turned off of it. Besides the simple storyline, I think I’m just annoyed with all the little nuances that come with some of the Achievements for that game – especially one that requires me having to trade dolls with other players and another with me having to play the public games that I don’t even have. People got the public games free if they pre-ordered Fable II, but since I didn’t, I have to pay $10 to play them so I can get the corresponding Achievement? Pretty annoying. Maybe I’ll just beat the game and skip out on the dolls and public game oriented Achievement. I’m guessing it’s the OCD part of me that likes seeing the 1000/1000, but there’s only so many hoops even I’m willing to jump through to get there.

Finally, with Black Friday rolling around the corner, I’m sure there will be plenty of gaming deals to be had. I’m actually on the lookout now for Gears of War 2, Fallout 3, Left 4 Dead, and even Brothers in Arms: Hell’s Highway. Then my game queue will be even longer, but I’m thinking after these holidays, I’ll have some time to push through many of these games. Yes…that’s what I’ll tell myself…

In Fable II, if you’re well-known you’ll attract a crowd of followers whenever you enter a town.

I never got in on the Fable game for the original Xbox, as I was too busy playing World of Warcraft or something during that time period. I ended up picking up the original game several months back for a few bucks since I figured I wanted to try it before the sequel came out. I played it for about two hours total, broken up over several various days. I had a negative initial impression on it at first, but as I played it a bit further it got a little better. The thing I disliked most about it was the game was running in basically low resolution on a 4×3 box on my LCD. It looked dated and the dialogue/humor/etc. was definitely not American. I sort of struggled to understand the nested action/expression system in the game, and it was not very intuitive.

You can laugh, flex, etc. and people you do it to give you a reaction, but the confusing thing is that when you hit the D-pad direction (left, up, or right for a different expression theme), it performs the expression but then switches to the next expression in that group. So say I want to perform a playful expression like dancing. I hit the D-Pad right and when it’s over, intuitively I would imagine that if I hit the d-pad right again, I could dance again. But no, the d-pad right action is now whistling – a different expression but one that still falls under the social category. I had a hard time grasping that for a while and didn’t like how the specific expression assigned to a button would change automatically after I used it. Regardless, I pushed on for a bit and found the combat enjoyable enough to get further into the game. But then it seemed to suddenly branch out too much and I didn’t quite care what to do next so I just stopped playing.

For this holiday season, I expected to be spending dozens of hours in one game only: Fallout 3. Fable 2 was more of an afterthought for me – after not really “getting into” the first one. But when I saw it for cheap I decided to pick it up. And I’ve discovered it’s actually pretty good.

Does Fable 2 Fix the Issues I had with Fable 1?
Fable 2 seems to address many of the issues I had with the first game. The graphics were certainly cleaned up and now optimized to run in HD, and there’s a lot more handholding. I didn’t know about the expressions changing automatically in Fable 1 until I was taught about it in Fable 2. It was only after Fable 2 that I realized why I was so confused in Fable 1 why I couldn’t continue to perform the same expressions. What’s also quite useful is the inclusion of a breadcrumb trail in the game. Any quest, whether it’s the main or a sidequest allows you to set a gold pellet trail (like Pac Man) to the quest location. This is like in the Grand Theft Auto games where you want to set a waypoint to an area of the city and the map automatically draws the lines for you for the optimal path. Very useful. All in all, yes – all of the issues that prevented me from getting further in Fable 1 have been fixed with its sequel, and I’m actually probably going to go back to play the first one now that I understand the mechanics of the series better.

My wife hates the English accents of the characters in the game though. I’m personally fine with them, but I tend to end up playing online games with UK kids that speak like that so I’m more open to it. Of course, I don’t quite understand what half of those kids are saying, but it’s never that bad in Fable II. Could be a turnoff to some, but it was present in the first game as well.

Similarities to Oblivion
I actually felt like Fable II plays a bit similar to Elder Scrolls: Oblivion, but is simpler and more charming in some aspects. Whereas Oblivion takes itself so seriously the whole game, Fable II has lots of goofy stuff and crude humor that adds to its charm. Various expressions you can do and stuff make the overall feel for the game more for teenagers, but the game has an M rating for obvious reasons: you can seduce women, get married, have children, etc. Seems kind of odd to have such a comical-looking graphics engine to go along with these more mature themes.

I like Fable II’s simple inventory system – you can basically keep everything you pick up without having to worry about some annoying weight limit like in Oblivion. That type of realism just made for annoying gameplay. I can pick up and hold onto anything without worrying about running out of room.

I also like that Fable II has Oblivion’s “jump to” mechanic. Basically any area you’ve already been to you can automatically go to again by loading right to it rather than walking all the way there and spending needless time running back and forth. All that is deducted is a certain amount of hours it takes to get there, just like in Oblivion.

Fable II also has a leveling up system that is a tad bit similar to Oblivion, but nowhere near as crazy. In Oblivion, there was no actual preset leveling up mechanism based on experience points – whatever you did leveled that attribute. If you wanted to get better with a certain weapon type, you had to swing it. If you wanted to jump higher, you had to keep jumping to raise that attribute. While it was an innovative idea to level up the attributes that you used most, people thought it was ridiculous at times. Fable 2 keeps the leveling focused on three fighting aspects: melee, range, and magic. It’s a very simple system (perhaps too simple) where the X button performs your melee attack, the Y button performs your ranged attack, and the B button performs your magic. Attack an enemy with any of these three types and they’ll drop an experience orb color-coordinated with that fighting style. Killing the enemy forces a drop of several green orbs, which are usable for leveling any of the three fighting styles and not limited to the particular fighting style that the enemy drops when taking damage. That’s as far as the leveling extent goes that is similar to Oblivion.

I remember there were hundreds of quests in Oblivion. I would go to a new town and there’d be just too many things to do so I’d skip it all and stick with the main quest. I don’t really see that number of sidequests available in Fable II – perhaps two or three at a time per town. It feels like Fable 2′s content is much less than Oblivion.

Major Gameplay Themes of Fable II
The first major gameplay theme I discovered in Fable II that is not present in any other game is how important your status is. While Oblivion scratched the surface of this idea a little bit with getting people to like you to give you discounts in stores, Fable II goes further. Your character seems to have several major attribute bars, but the ones that matter most to other people are: Hate-Love, Thin-Fat, and Ugly-Attractive.

Based on whatever actions you do, how you eat, or how you dress, every other NPC in the game will react to you. If you dress poorly, people will think you’re unattractive, and if you continue to eat fatty foods, you’ll gain a lot of weight as well. Getting people to hate-love you are pretty easy though. If you continue to socialize and play around with people, it increases how much they like you, and if you continue to do good deeds and stuff that also increases your standing in their eyes.

If the NPC likes you enough, he/she will actually follow you around whenever they see you and even give you gifts. It even gets to the point where if they like you enough you can begin flirting with them, propose, get married, and move into a house. You can seduce practically any woman in the game this way, even ones that are already married. It’s pretty neat when you finish a big quest to help save a town and you go into town and everyone is following you and cheering for you and women are throwing themselves at you. You feel like a superstar!

The next major theme that is in this game is good vs evil. Not in the pure player vs enemy sense, but the path the player can take to go through the game. Any little thing he does can be considered good or evil, and moves the player in that direction on their bar. Doing good deeds raises your reputation in a good way, so people like you more, but doing bad ones causes people to begin fearing you more. I tend to play my games with a playthrough of being good first, and then a second one with being pure evil. My inclination is always to do the right thing. But then in this game, I was fooled in an early sidequest that I’ll let slide but I want to share.

I want to talk about it because I don’t think it’s that much a spoiler since it’s not tied to the main storyline at all but worth sharing. Still, if you don’t want to read about it then skip this next section.

—-MINOR SPOILER (Sidequest)—-
One of my early quests required me to assist a ghost so I could become more famous in the area. I went to visit the ghost and he had a simple request. He asked me to go find a particular woman, make her fall in love with me, and hand her his note. The note was basically the note she had given him, which was a hurtful note that she gave to him after I believe he proposed to her and it said bad things. In the end, it probably caused the guy to commit suicide. I thought, sure I’ll help him out. As a guy I can identify a bit with you buddy – and I will help teach her a lesson for you.

I found the woman in town, started talking to her, flirting with her, etc. until she fell in love with me. Then the screen prompted me with a choice: Hand her the note or marry her? I thought to myself from a pure gameplay standpoint, “Why marry her? There’s plenty of women in the game so I don’t need to jump into this so soon.” I handed her the note. She read it and ran off devastated. Job was done so I returned back to the ghost. When I got to him, I discovered that the woman was also a ghost there talking to him and she discovered that he was behind the whole thing. As a ghost, she just ran off and said she didn’t want to see either of us again. The quest ended and I got 10 Evil points. I was like, “What?! I didn’t know doing this was an evil act!” I guess maybe vengeance and seduction could be bad. But yeah, I learned about it the hard way…
—-END SPOILER—-

The last major gameplay theme I’ve discovered so far is the way the money is used in this game. This is the only game I’m aware of that you can literally buy any store, house, or residential abode you see. Every one of these has a piece of paper out front that you can check for how much it costs to buy. Buying shops allow you to get discounts and set prices – lowering prices increases the citizens’ admiration for you, etc. Buying homes allow you to sleep in the evenings, rent them out for money, or house your wife and children. You can also have multiple wives, so buying houses in different cities is a good idea to keep them separated. But yeah, I like making money and buying shops because then I get income from the shops without doing any work. You can also raise the value of the shops by raising the value of the land its on, making you more money and you can even sell them for a profit. Pretty in-depth use of owning property in this game which is fun.

The Other stuff
In Fable II you also have a dog that travels with you. I thought it was pretty gimmicky when I first heard the news, but he’s actually pretty cool. He’ll follow you and you can pet him, teach him tricks, train him to be better at attacking enemies, etc. But the most useful thing about him is that he alerts you when there’s a treasure chest nearby or there’s a good area to dig. You’ll be running down a path and he’ll start barking and lead you to an area where he starts digging. Just break out the shovel and dig up the treasure. I like that the dog isn’t intrusive enough that you have to watch over it all the time, while it also provides a tangible benefit.

One thing that’s a definite negative on the game is the bugs. People have come across game-ending bugs, and in general I feel that the game is a bit sloppy in terms of its mechanics. I’ve come across a minor bug several times where the targeting system breaks, and I can’t “untarget” an NPC after targeting them. The only thing I can do is quit and reload my game. Thankfully, that’s all I’ve gotten so far but my advice would be to try to play the game the way the developers planned for you to, as testing the game’s limitations may end up killing your game file. There aren’t multiple saves either, so if you encounter a game-breaking glitch, it’s back to square one.

My initial good impressions are wearing off though. It’s weird because I thought the game was fantastic and charming when I first started playing it, but as I continue to play through the game I can’t help but feel that the soul of the game is lacking. Maybe there’s just not enough content. Buying houses, charming people and getting married are all nice little diversions, but they should small distractions in the game. Instead, they’re practically half of the game, sharing the spotlight with the very short main quest. I need to put some more time into it and beat it first, but I will get a review out there eventually. This is honestly one of the first games I’ve played in a while where my interest and enjoyment skyrocketed when I first started it, but then came down pretty hard after a few hours in.

Fable II vs Fallout 3
While I haven’t played Fallout 3, I spent many hours in Oblivion so I have an understanding of what Fallout 3 will be like. If you guys are trying to decide between the “ultimate” engrossing single-player adventure this Fall, it really comes down to taste. Fable II takes place in a fantasy realm where you use swords and magic, run to towns and hang out in taverns, etc. We’ve seen many games with this setting before. Fallout 3 is a bleak post-apocalyptic world where you are just trying to survive and find any remnants of humanity. The setting for Fallout 3 is just not pretty. Running around desolate wastelands certainly aren’t as satisfying as running through gardens with blooming flowers, but that’s really a more aesthetic choice of whether you prefer Fable 2′s tried and true fantasy world or Fallout 3′s bleaker post-apocalyptic world.

In terms of overall gameplay, I believe Fallout 3 will still be more hardcore in terms of RPG stat-driven gameplay. It’ll be harder to play, but for those that are up for the challenge, the gameplay will most likely be deeper and satisfying. Fable 2 is charming in its more simplistic way, and sometimes people prefer that type of game more where you don’t have to think too much when you play. There’s no real cooldown for any attacks – the fighting in Fable 2 feels more like an action game than an RPG. I’d say that Fable II is more an action game with minor RPG elements and major “Sims” like elements where you interact with society. I believe that Fallout 3 is still a hardcore RPG through and through, just inserted into a 3D game engine. I also believe that based on content, Fallout 3 will probably be 50-60 hours worth of gameplay to Fable 2′s 20-30 hours. One can argue though that while Fallout 3′s game length may be a lot longer, it may drag on more and ultimately not feel as satisfying. I can’t judge that yet as I’ve yet to try Fallout 3 myself. But from the reviews, it seems that many consider Fallout 3 to be the superior game of the two.