Microsofts too lazy to make new IP so they’re trying to reboot any game that wasn’t a complete flop.
Comment on Fable delayed to 2026
p03locke@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 week ago
Fable already came out, and it was a pretty mid game. Why are we doing this again?
Not_mikey@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 week ago
scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech 1 week ago
Miceosoft!? Create original IP? Agreed they’ll keep regurgitating their IP no matter how many lame halos it makes.
Hell not even dos was theirs.
oxideseven@lemmy.ca 1 week ago
This is the 4th game… Not the OG.
mic_check_one_two@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 week ago
The first game was cool. Vastly over-promised, but still cool. Fable 2 was mid, at best. Then Fable 3 was just pure dogwater.
I don’t have high hopes for a reboot. If it’s actually done properly, it’ll be a nice surprise. But I refuse to get my hopes up.
PieMePlenty@lemmy.world 1 week ago
I preferred fable 2 over 1 because it had guns.
Psythik@lemm.ee 1 week ago
Fable 2 has guns? Damn I need to play this series. I thought it was just some fantasy wizard bullshit. (LotR is the only fantasy wizard bullshit that I enjoy, everything else can die in a fire.)
monotremata@lemmy.ca 1 week ago
I never actually played Fable 2 (it never came to PC) but 1 was decent for its time, and yeah, 3 kind of fell apart. (You get to what seems like the halfway point, then the rest of the game plays out in a few minutes, entirely through menus, and is super boring.)
But mostly I’m finding it hard to imagine how a new take on this would stand out in today’s market. It’s, let’s see, a third-person action game with RPG elements tacked on. The setting is…generic western fairytale fantasy. I’m not saying the game couldn’t be good, but what would be distinctive about it? Having people call you “chicken chaser”? What is the contribution of the “Fable” pedigree here, apart from Molyneux baggage?