http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4882330.stm

Boooo. I might have to buy a next gen console.

Microsoft is evil.

Seems I've been saying this a whole lot these days, but :

I think I just puked a little in my mouth.

Everyons says that too much. I dont get it / its not funny

It just means its a disgusting thought.

I used to think Molyneux was all that, because of how much I adored Black and White.

And then Black and White 2 sucked, and made me feel like an idiot for wasting my money on it.

Maybe Fable is good, though. I really haven't played it.

He then added, "Because we like to crush those sorts of things."

Fable was good for what it was, but it was far from what it had been advertised to be, not to mention that it had a 5 hour long quest for a game that was 3 years in development (if not more).

It was the standard hack-and-slash rpg with flashy graphics and an awesome character creation system. Thats it.

10 hours long, and The Lost Chapters was even longer. It was awesome, but not what it had been promised to be.

Well it never took me 10 hours to beat that game. It was amazing fun for what it was, definatly. And Lost Chapters was a funky addition, but it was nothing revolutionary like it was supposed to be. :p

Jack of Blades was cool. And his new voice in Lost Chapters was awesome.

Boooooooo.

Now, personally I didn't think that B&W2 was that, but it's my kind of god sim.
The Movies however was good in short burst, but got crappy quickly.

[QUOTE=Dj Yoshi]10 hours long[/QUOTE]by '10' you mean '4', right?

Fable took a long time to develop because they planned all sorts of dumb misfeatures. Like trees slowly growing over time.

Unless you have suddenly come up with some reading disorder, I believe you read right. 10 is the average gameplay length with all the side missions. Of course, that's not long at all for any kind of RPG, but still, not as short as some people claim. I spent 3 hours in that game just going around and exploring.

i spent ages trying to max out my skills

[QUOTE=Dj Yoshi]Unless you have suddenly come up with some reading disorder, I believe you read right. 10 is the average gameplay length with all the side missions. Of course, that's not long at all for any kind of RPG, but still, not as short as some people claim. I spent 3 hours in that game just going around and exploring.[/QUOTE]Okay, by that logic FFX is 80 hours long.

I was talking about the main quest. All of the time when people talk about game length they talk about the main quest except for you apparently. 4 hours. Maybe 5, unless you really suck at Fable in which case it might have taken you 7 or 8. Fable was ridiculously short and easy, not only by RPG standards but by the standards usually applied to Olson Twin GBA games. God.

Not really. If you're just pumping into the main quest, yeah, I'm sure you could only get 4 or 5 hours of gameplay out of it...I was talking complete length. RPGs usually aren't measured just by the main quest, unless they're ridiculously long, because then you can't quantify them in their entirety. Oblivion is said to be some 300 hours long with all the side quests, and I'm sure there's a lot more to that.

Just because it's short for you because you don't care about any aspect of the RPG except the main quest, doesn't mean nobody else took their time and had fun. 20-25 hours could easily be milked out of it if you just go around exploring, interacting, having fun.

[QUOTE=Dj Yoshi]RPGs usually aren't measured just by the main quest, unless they're ridiculously long, because then you can't quantify them in their entirety. Oblivion is said to be some 300 hours long with all the side quests, and I'm sure there's a lot more to that.[/QUOTE]There is.... with a 15-20 hour long main quest. 15-20 hours for the main quest is perfectly reasonable. 4 hours is not.

Like I said: FFX has a 40 hour long main quest with an extra 40 hours of side-quests and minigames. 20-25 hours of total content in Fable versus 80 hours from FFX. This should not be a difficult concept for your to grasp.

Yeah, you can "milk" any game that has respawning enemies for fun.
Fable had like 6 optional quests and one 4-hour long main quest. Short of slaughtering everybody and buying every building (which I did) there wasn't a whole hell of a lot to do. I don't know why you're arguing this: Fable, even with all of its side content, is significantly shorter than any other major retail game in recent history.

Can we stop argueing over a 4-5 hour difference now?

HAHA, in the time we spent arguing about the length of Fable we could have played through it twice.

No it's not. Black is much, much shorter, technically. Fable's not the longest game, but it's not as short as everyone says it is. Seriously, especially in TLC, you're looking at 30-40 hours of content. And you twisted my "milked" bit--I meant you can easily get 20-25 hours of gameplay out of it.

And it's not a "hard concept for me to grasp" that Fable is significantly shorter than most RPGs. In fact, I said it myself. But thanks for trying to make yourself seem superior by looking down on me.

You act as if I've never played the game.

I must have accidentally skipped that part, as I was stuck playing as the same shmuck as everyone else...

My flatmate completed both Fable and TLC in a single normal waking day. It really is a very short game.

If you want it to be. But then again, you can beat Super Mario 3 in the span of 11 minutes.

It's all about how you take time and enjoy the game.

Fable got hype out the a** and then it came out and it was 'meh'. Games that are good shouldn't hype like they are amazing. That's what happened with Fable. It was a good game with way to much hype. I remember when everyone was saying the combat was going to be revolutionary, and then it was just average. The missions were very linear at some points and the story was a bit cliche, but the game as a whole was still good. I don't think the length of a game should be what judges if it's worth the price tag, it should be based on the experience. In Fables case, it was worth the price tag just for the detailed worlds and experience alone.

[QUOTE=Victor Van Dort]Fable got hype out the a** and then it came out and it was 'meh'. Games that are good shouldn't hype like they are amazing. That's what happened with Fable. It was a good game with way to much hype. I remember when everyone was saying the combat was going to be revolutionary, and then it was just average. The missions were very linear at some points and the story was a bit cliche, but the game as a whole was still good. I don't think the length of a game should be what judges if it's worth the price tag, it should be based on the experience. In Fables case, it was worth the price tag just for the detailed worlds and experience alone.[/QUOTE]
It did get WAY overhyped. It was nowhere near what it was supposed to be. But, with TLC, it was definitely a very solid game. Very fun, fairly short, but what was there was done very well.

And the combat reminded me a lot of KH, so not revolutionary but definitely awesome and very fun.

KH?

i liked fable combat, i want this KH game.

[QUOTE=Mr. Stafford]KH?

i liked fable combat, i want this KH game.[/QUOTE]
Kingdom Hearts.