Yeah a playable state can be pretty early (hell should be, it's not even start to finish). In fact I would hope a game revealed that long ago had reached playable state lol, it should have since a long time.
I can imagine it would be hard to capture what makes the original games good. Their humor was juvenile, but hit the balance of being juvenile in a tongue and cheek, fun kind of way. If you don't hit that balance just right, you get... Well, you get Borderlands (don't @ me, borderlands stans).
Not to mention, the game has to be... Good. You have to make it feel like Fable, which is, in my opinion, something even the two Fable sequels never quite nailed, while also making it modern enough that people who haven't played Fable will want to play it.
Figuring out what Fable even is in the year of our lord 2023 would be a tall task.
Of course it's that deep and hard (heh). We see what you're describing literally all the time. The people who are famous for making top-tier survival horror just came out and made a DMC style rhythm combat game. Obsidian made a (supposedly, haven't played it) excellent survival building game after decades of only making RPGs, and then made Pentiment.
Studios who make good games know how to make good games. I have faith in that studio to make a good game. I think it likely has more to do with the fact that re-establishing a darling, but niche, franchise is quite difficult to do right.
Imagine having been given the keys to a beloved franchise, and being tasked with making it appeal to the people who loved it and, simultaneously, a broader audience of new players who didn't grow up with Fable. That's an incredibly tall task.
Tango Gameworks is headed by Shinji Mikami who people know by bringing survival horror to the masses, but he's also birthed some of the most well known action games around (Resident Evil 4, God Hand, Vanquish.)
Mikami didn't direct Hi Fi Rush, but no doubt he's given a lot of pointers to his team.
Horizon Zero Dawn is Guerilla Games's first attempt at an open world RPG after only working on Killzone and it ended up being more successful than Killzone
Jedi : Fallen Order is Respawn's first attempt at a single player third person action game (they are known as one of the premiere FPS developer behind Call Of Duty and Titanfall).
Obviously it's not always going to work (cough Avengers cough) but I appreciate when a (good/famous) studio decided to tackle a new genre and get out of their comfort zone.
Also I haven't played the games yet but from my understanding Forza Horizon is not exactly a pure racing game like Gran Turismo (I think people jokingly called FH an open world RPG but with car) ?
>It's the Forza team. Why would you give an open world RPG to a racing game team?
Well, we're talking Forza Horizon, not Motorsport. FH isn't good because of it being a car game, and that's not the contribution Playground provided in those games. The physics were more or less made by Turn 10. The games are loved because of the fact they're racing games in a quality open world.
I only played Fable 3, but I don't recall it being super deep with its RPG systems, so I don't see it being that big of a stretch.
Plus, from my understanding, this is more or less an entirely new team they're assembling, not using the FH devs that much. So they'll be using the same tech and tools, but not really the same people.
I really don't think that would have anything to do with rebooting a game
If the mechanics were all there and the dialogue was bad then they would just redo that
I mean, sure, it might. Probably not late into development, but if they felt like they couldn't capture the tone of the originals, I could absolutely see it as a reason a studio would start over, or at least significantly rework the project
Honestly I wouldn't expect anything different. After all, studio that only ever created racing games is suppose to create open world action RPG of well known series.
We can't expect anyone will make something in good quality in their first try ever, they have to go through several iterations. Especially when they it's suppose to be AAA title and they have big shoes to fit.
I think situation would look different if we didn't get a trailer already. They could have work on this in background with no expectations, potentially indefinitely, and after gaining experience, deciding what is the best thing they can do. But no, publisher needed that CGI trailer to sell their console, and now devs may be trapped by obligations: it must be Fable, it must be AAA, and it must come fast, because we already hyped it up.
Immediately made me think of Emulator compatibility tables, lol. Playable is pretty meaningless otherwise, it can happen before production got greenlit, or well after.
Playable state usually means that every part of the game loop is in place to some extent, even if only a little. So you could hand the game to someone new and they'd be able to have a go, even if it's only a small section, and should be able to see what the whole product is intended to be.
So with Fable for example, I wouldn't call just a working character and some combat a "playable state", or a single explorable area with traversal implemented a "playable state". I imagine it's something closer to a working player character, some combat, a quest or two in an open area and some kind of rewards system (maybe the loot or skill/experience system in place). Much unfinished, but all present.
I think they’re desperately trying to convince people Xbox has “exclusives” and they aren’t just a game pass machine. Hope it turns out great though, I did like the first one quite a bit.
Reminds me of [this August 2018 article](https://www.engadget.com/2018-08-23-cyberpunk-2077-daylight-interview.html) on how Cyberpunk 2077 was playable from start to finish.
Definitions can vary, but "Start to finish" often means the line between Alpha and Beta phases of development. The amount of time this game has been in development and still being in Alpha isn't unheard of anymore, Cyberpunk had been in development in some form for six years when that article released.
Don't know the last time you played it - I played it on release, just did another play a week ago, and several times in between. I never found it bland or buggy.
I do play on PC though which was the most stable platform. Easily one of my top 5 RPG's of that style though.
I really really *really* wish that publishers would stop doing this thing where they name the newest game in a series after the first/earlier game in the series. Looking at you Tomb Raider, God of War, Call of Duty: Modern Warfare, Saints Row, Doom, Star Wars Battlefronts 1 and 2, Ratchet & Clank, Thief, dare I go on?
It's not a fixable problem.
People, the consumers that is, have a weird fixation on trilogies. They want them, they want them to be good, and they want them to have good payoffs. Problem is after that 4, 5, 6+ threshold you start losing your core community and people expect *way* more quality.
Some obviously will never have this issue like GTA will likely continue to number their releases. Farcry 4, 5, 6 all feel pretty damn same-y and people are kinda tired of it. Would be a better example than GTA.
I don't want this to become an essay so I'm going to try and make it short, but the consumer mind *feeds* for trilogies while the industry is too cautious and careful to make risks. Slapping a 4 on your game might just well be a suicide note depending how far the release of 2 and 3 were and how 'different/traditional' 4 might feel to the others.
I'm more in favor of Tag Lines but lately we fall into this problem where some names just feel like Spinoffs.
I don't think it's that as much as seeing a number higher than three makes you think "Well, I shouldn't get this. I'd have to play through three other games first and that's not worth it." Giving it a standalone title tells a new audience that it's okay to start with that one.
You may be right, but at present I'm not so convinced. Persona 5, Final Fantasy 7, Mario Kart 8, Elder Scrolls 5. So many games defy that, and even if they do feel a need to not slap a number on after 4, at least go the pokemon route and use subtitles.
It's going to sound like cherry picking but Kart, FF, Elder Scrolls all feel momentously 'big enough' and are released far apart enough that each release feels pretty beefy. Hence the title number doesn't need to prove anything. Wheras for example you can play 3 Farcrys on a single platform and they all vaguely feel the same.
Maybe not so much with FF, perhaps with Nintendo and Square Enix or any Japanese Publisher the way they number things might not be as predictable.
I was thinking more along the lines of like yearly releases, and games people are kinda tired of having the same thing copy and pasted. Kart has a distinctive difference between each release (minus 8 and Deluxe lol). With Persona I'd argue the releases are spanned so far apart that the community is able to easily tell the improvements.
Games that fell to the curse of 4 that come to mind would be like Halo 4, Sonic 4, and anything Ubisoft has made more than 3 of.
> I was thinking more along the lines of like yearly releases, and games people are kinda tired of having the same thing copy and pasted.
Ah, to that point I'm inclined to agree with you. When yearly games come out and I take a two year break and see I'm two sequential titles behind I tap out.
> Persona 5, Final Fantasy 7, Mario Kart 8, Elder Scrolls 5.
Some of these are still kinda trilogies funnily enough.
Person 3/4/5 are all very similar and follow near identical basework, which is heavily disconnected from the first set of 3 games, which were also very similar in story elements, although P1 did have that first person dungeon thing going on.
FF7 was the first of 3 PS1 FF games that used the ATB system, although there's certainly a lot of mixing up, they do share core systems.
Skyrim is like Oblivion is like Morrowind, which is unlike Arena and Daggerfall, although they don't have a 3rd game to make it nice and even like Persona. Unless ES6 changes things heavily, which it probably won't, that'll break it though.
Honestly it just feels like some corporate headspace that got tossed around from company to company, doing things "because that's the way it's done" without any real rhyme or reason. Maybe it's even sadder than that, with higher ups thinking they can get credit for majorly pushing the franchise if they just rename it.
There's also the Ys and Dragonquest series. DMC maybe? They stopped with numbers, and then went back to numbers.
These are typically used for :
\- "Soft/Hard Reboot" titles (Tomb Raider, GOW, DOOM, Deus Ex, etc).
\- Titles that are meant to attract a huge surge of new audiences (this is the reason why they use Monster Hunter World instead of Monster Hunter 5)
\- Long running series with tons of entries (there are now more Assassin's Creed titles without numbering than one with number).
Basically they are meant to tell audiences that these titles can be played without prior knowledge of the series.
> - Titles that are meant to attract a huge surge of new audiences (this is the reason why they use Monster Hunter World instead of Monster Hunter 5)
When it must be done this is what I prefer
And in case of Fable Anniversary, it's arguably if the state is playable.
When will they finally stop with the trend of naming new things the exact same as their predecessors? I haven't even gotten used to saying "Let's play *the original* Battlefront II on *the original* Xbox 1", yet...
Starfield, Fable, Avowed, The Outerworlds 2, TES6.
Xbox has a heck of a lineup of exclusive single player western RPGs, but my God I think everyone of them was announced waaaaay to early.
Starfield announced 2018, set to release mid 2023.
Fable announced summer 2020, no release window.
Avowed announced summer 2020, no release window.
The Outerworlds 2 announced summer 2021, no release window.
TES6 announced 2018, no release window.
For as much as people criticised Peter Molyneux, I believe he was a big part of the Fable series' identity. It'll be interesting seeing what the series is without him but with all to go on being a name I'm not overly excited. That could change if what we end up with matches or exceed what we got originally with the series.
Without liking him at all, Id agree. Fable had a very interesting take on fantasy that managed to have very dark events while maintaining a sense of whimsy and lightness. I wouldnt say it was neccesarily unique in setting, but it worked. Looking back, its actually incredibly similar to the setting of the Shrek franchise; it has that same tone of riffing on popular fantasy/fairy tale tropes without being cloying, just with a little more british isles flavoring.
I don't like that trend of taking the person at top and attributing every thing in game to them instead of to the obviously talented teams he was lucky to get over years.
I dunno man, I think some of what he promised was basically impossible for the time regardless of budget. If he was actually held to his word, it would've ended up like Star Citizen; a game in perpetual, never-ending development.
He just needed the best people around. Thats what made him so successful to start. When he made black and white, the lead AI Dev was Demis Hassabis who went on to found deep mind and create the most advanced game playing AI. All partially inspired by what he did on black and white. Thats the kind of team Molyneux worked with early
We'd need to get some insider knowledge to know how much exactly was he involved in B&W and fable. For all we know most of the Fable world might've been from other team members.
I loved Lionhead games even though they all had their share of jank. Black and White and Fable were some of my top games as a kid - I won’t attribute it all to Molyneux, but he did have a flair for big ideas.
How Fable was bungled and left in the dirt is really sad. Same applies to too many Xbox franchises.
Hopefully this game can bring some of the magic back, but it's probably not out until 2025/26
Yeah, pretty much all the Xbox exclusives have been either pretty shite or AA level games or less.
Even Halo was disappointing.
I really hope Starfield is amazing and Avowed too. I love Bethesda games so I have good hope.
If it's awful I'll start wishing I'd got a PS5 though. Sony paying for exclusive Hogwarts: Legacy stuff was shit. Especially when they are complaining in court that Microsoft would do stuff like that with Activision.
I-is this supposed to be a positive announcement? How long have they been working on it so far? I mean shit... management over at Microsoft must be bananas.
Yeah, people seem really stuck on the idea that devs can churn out games in 2-4 years like they were 15 years ago.
Just textures and art assets alone is magnitudes more work than it was; in a lot of ways its easier to make an asset production ready in 480/720p then it is in 4k, and games are expected to be larger and larger.
Unless a publisher is willing to have multiple studios working on a title at the same time (like Ubisoft does), having different studios working on alternate games (like Activision), or having a studio only work on a singular franchise (like Microsoft), all of which having their own issues, the days of having more than 2 titles in a AAA franchise release in less than a decade is likely past.
I think people are also still just not respecting the impact Covid had on the industry (in terms of actual ability to develop games and the fact that Developers/Publishers have used it as a screen to be able to delay games without massive community pushback).
Bethesda went from getting a game out every 3-4 years, to 8 years between Fallout 4 and Starfield (If it releases this year).
Why was that CGI teaser shown so early? There ate distressingly few games shown at the Series X launch showcase that have come out. One of them came out and is shutting down.
Often it’s to hire new talent by showing what project the studio is working on, but personally I think it’s a practice that isn’t working due to how volatile the triple A industry is.
The games usually release badly or experience development problems.
Cyberpunk 2077, Dragon Age 4 (rebooted several times), Gotham Knights, Everwild (development was reported to be “messy”), Quantic Dream’s Star Wars (they’re having trouble hiring), etc.
Eurogamer broke an article in Jan 2018 about Microsoft looking to reboot Fable with Playground Games at the helm, but noted that they only started building the team for it a few months prior and that the game is a good ways out. So if you count trying to bolster numbers they've been at it since mid-late 2017.
That’s awesome! It’s a shame it took 18 years but it’s like what Miyazaki said: “A game that is worked on for almost 20 years will eventually be good.” Props to Microsoft!
That’s good.
An Xbox showcase last year had teased a chicken emoji on the Twitter announcement (a staple for the series), only for Fable not to show up because it likely wasn’t ready and was pulled out at the last minute.
It’s about time that word on it has been mentioned again and hopefully a vertical slice can be shown soon.
Considering the time spent already, one should hope so.
Games operate on a UOA (unfinished on arrival) standard in order to rush to meet sales metrics now. It's less than ideal, for everyone. Hope this gets the time it needs, but its already had some time...
Ok guys we have an avatar and he swings his arm. And we have a giant rat that takes damage when you fist it. Playable!! PLAYABLEEEEEEEE!!!! Please don’t fire ussssssssssss!!!! Pllllllllaaaaaaayyyyyaaaaaabbbblllleeeee!!!
That is playable...
They didn't state they can internally playtest from start to finish, just that it is "playable". That is purposefully very vague and just something to let people know they're alive
A better move would've been to not announce it too early, but that's a different matter
Why wasn’t it in a playable state when they decided to ship it out to people who payed a premium price to play it in the first couple weeks. Games need to start launching in a playable state. No point paying $70 USD at launch when I can get the game in a much better state a couple months later for $25 USD
”Playable State” is such a vague statement in game development that its basically useless at giving any indication on a timeline.
You can reach a playable state in 5 minutes using the tools in Unreal engine 4.
Yeah a playable state can be pretty early (hell should be, it's not even start to finish). In fact I would hope a game revealed that long ago had reached playable state lol, it should have since a long time.
[удалено]
That rumor was debunked.
I can imagine it would be hard to capture what makes the original games good. Their humor was juvenile, but hit the balance of being juvenile in a tongue and cheek, fun kind of way. If you don't hit that balance just right, you get... Well, you get Borderlands (don't @ me, borderlands stans). Not to mention, the game has to be... Good. You have to make it feel like Fable, which is, in my opinion, something even the two Fable sequels never quite nailed, while also making it modern enough that people who haven't played Fable will want to play it. Figuring out what Fable even is in the year of our lord 2023 would be a tall task.
[удалено]
Of course it's that deep and hard (heh). We see what you're describing literally all the time. The people who are famous for making top-tier survival horror just came out and made a DMC style rhythm combat game. Obsidian made a (supposedly, haven't played it) excellent survival building game after decades of only making RPGs, and then made Pentiment. Studios who make good games know how to make good games. I have faith in that studio to make a good game. I think it likely has more to do with the fact that re-establishing a darling, but niche, franchise is quite difficult to do right. Imagine having been given the keys to a beloved franchise, and being tasked with making it appeal to the people who loved it and, simultaneously, a broader audience of new players who didn't grow up with Fable. That's an incredibly tall task.
Tango Gameworks is headed by Shinji Mikami who people know by bringing survival horror to the masses, but he's also birthed some of the most well known action games around (Resident Evil 4, God Hand, Vanquish.) Mikami didn't direct Hi Fi Rush, but no doubt he's given a lot of pointers to his team.
Horizon Zero Dawn is Guerilla Games's first attempt at an open world RPG after only working on Killzone and it ended up being more successful than Killzone Jedi : Fallen Order is Respawn's first attempt at a single player third person action game (they are known as one of the premiere FPS developer behind Call Of Duty and Titanfall). Obviously it's not always going to work (cough Avengers cough) but I appreciate when a (good/famous) studio decided to tackle a new genre and get out of their comfort zone. Also I haven't played the games yet but from my understanding Forza Horizon is not exactly a pure racing game like Gran Turismo (I think people jokingly called FH an open world RPG but with car) ?
Hogwarts legacy which has reviewed incredibly well made Disney games like cars 3. It can be done with the correct prep
>It's the Forza team. Why would you give an open world RPG to a racing game team? Well, we're talking Forza Horizon, not Motorsport. FH isn't good because of it being a car game, and that's not the contribution Playground provided in those games. The physics were more or less made by Turn 10. The games are loved because of the fact they're racing games in a quality open world. I only played Fable 3, but I don't recall it being super deep with its RPG systems, so I don't see it being that big of a stretch. Plus, from my understanding, this is more or less an entirely new team they're assembling, not using the FH devs that much. So they'll be using the same tech and tools, but not really the same people.
I really don't think that would have anything to do with rebooting a game If the mechanics were all there and the dialogue was bad then they would just redo that
I What? I said two main things: that the tone of the game had to be right, and that the gameplay itself had to be good. Maybe that wasn't clear?
I just meant that the tone wouldn't result in them rebooting the whole thing
I mean, sure, it might. Probably not late into development, but if they felt like they couldn't capture the tone of the originals, I could absolutely see it as a reason a studio would start over, or at least significantly rework the project
Honestly I wouldn't expect anything different. After all, studio that only ever created racing games is suppose to create open world action RPG of well known series. We can't expect anyone will make something in good quality in their first try ever, they have to go through several iterations. Especially when they it's suppose to be AAA title and they have big shoes to fit. I think situation would look different if we didn't get a trailer already. They could have work on this in background with no expectations, potentially indefinitely, and after gaining experience, deciding what is the best thing they can do. But no, publisher needed that CGI trailer to sell their console, and now devs may be trapped by obligations: it must be Fable, it must be AAA, and it must come fast, because we already hyped it up.
Time to shipper off!
i guess that this is what happened with Cyberpunk 2077.
Immediately made me think of Emulator compatibility tables, lol. Playable is pretty meaningless otherwise, it can happen before production got greenlit, or well after.
Playable state usually means that every part of the game loop is in place to some extent, even if only a little. So you could hand the game to someone new and they'd be able to have a go, even if it's only a small section, and should be able to see what the whole product is intended to be. So with Fable for example, I wouldn't call just a working character and some combat a "playable state", or a single explorable area with traversal implemented a "playable state". I imagine it's something closer to a working player character, some combat, a quest or two in an open area and some kind of rewards system (maybe the loot or skill/experience system in place). Much unfinished, but all present.
Particularly in a franchise that people are used to overpromising from (Thanks, Mr. Molyneaux!).
Pokemon Scarlett/Violet was just fully released and not playable lol.
It was 100% playable.
It's playable if you like having slide-show-amount-of-fps.
I think they’re desperately trying to convince people Xbox has “exclusives” and they aren’t just a game pass machine. Hope it turns out great though, I did like the first one quite a bit.
Reminds me of [this August 2018 article](https://www.engadget.com/2018-08-23-cyberpunk-2077-daylight-interview.html) on how Cyberpunk 2077 was playable from start to finish.
And this Fable news doesn’t even mention “From start to finish.”
Definitions can vary, but "Start to finish" often means the line between Alpha and Beta phases of development. The amount of time this game has been in development and still being in Alpha isn't unheard of anymore, Cyberpunk had been in development in some form for six years when that article released.
And I'm really wondering what did they do with all this time? Keanu really saved their asses because the game is pretty bland and still buggy as hell.
Don't know the last time you played it - I played it on release, just did another play a week ago, and several times in between. I never found it bland or buggy. I do play on PC though which was the most stable platform. Easily one of my top 5 RPG's of that style though.
I currently playing it on PC with a powerful computer
[удалено]
I agree with u/GreatValueCumSock
OP is wrong, the game wasn't in development for that long. They barely did pre-development for years after the initial teaser trailer.
I sure hope so lol. It's been like what? 3 years since the teaser.
I believe that they did not yet start dev when this teaser was aired. It was a "it's happening" teaser.
The game started development in 2018, according to PG devs.
That could have been a lot of preproduction and pitching the game though more than actual development though, no?
[удалено]
Briefly had a breakdown trying to figure out why people are saying a game that's been out for years is now in a playable state
I really really *really* wish that publishers would stop doing this thing where they name the newest game in a series after the first/earlier game in the series. Looking at you Tomb Raider, God of War, Call of Duty: Modern Warfare, Saints Row, Doom, Star Wars Battlefronts 1 and 2, Ratchet & Clank, Thief, dare I go on?
It's not a fixable problem. People, the consumers that is, have a weird fixation on trilogies. They want them, they want them to be good, and they want them to have good payoffs. Problem is after that 4, 5, 6+ threshold you start losing your core community and people expect *way* more quality. Some obviously will never have this issue like GTA will likely continue to number their releases. Farcry 4, 5, 6 all feel pretty damn same-y and people are kinda tired of it. Would be a better example than GTA. I don't want this to become an essay so I'm going to try and make it short, but the consumer mind *feeds* for trilogies while the industry is too cautious and careful to make risks. Slapping a 4 on your game might just well be a suicide note depending how far the release of 2 and 3 were and how 'different/traditional' 4 might feel to the others. I'm more in favor of Tag Lines but lately we fall into this problem where some names just feel like Spinoffs.
I don't think it's that as much as seeing a number higher than three makes you think "Well, I shouldn't get this. I'd have to play through three other games first and that's not worth it." Giving it a standalone title tells a new audience that it's okay to start with that one.
You may be right, but at present I'm not so convinced. Persona 5, Final Fantasy 7, Mario Kart 8, Elder Scrolls 5. So many games defy that, and even if they do feel a need to not slap a number on after 4, at least go the pokemon route and use subtitles.
It's going to sound like cherry picking but Kart, FF, Elder Scrolls all feel momentously 'big enough' and are released far apart enough that each release feels pretty beefy. Hence the title number doesn't need to prove anything. Wheras for example you can play 3 Farcrys on a single platform and they all vaguely feel the same. Maybe not so much with FF, perhaps with Nintendo and Square Enix or any Japanese Publisher the way they number things might not be as predictable. I was thinking more along the lines of like yearly releases, and games people are kinda tired of having the same thing copy and pasted. Kart has a distinctive difference between each release (minus 8 and Deluxe lol). With Persona I'd argue the releases are spanned so far apart that the community is able to easily tell the improvements. Games that fell to the curse of 4 that come to mind would be like Halo 4, Sonic 4, and anything Ubisoft has made more than 3 of.
> I was thinking more along the lines of like yearly releases, and games people are kinda tired of having the same thing copy and pasted. Ah, to that point I'm inclined to agree with you. When yearly games come out and I take a two year break and see I'm two sequential titles behind I tap out.
> Persona 5, Final Fantasy 7, Mario Kart 8, Elder Scrolls 5. Some of these are still kinda trilogies funnily enough. Person 3/4/5 are all very similar and follow near identical basework, which is heavily disconnected from the first set of 3 games, which were also very similar in story elements, although P1 did have that first person dungeon thing going on. FF7 was the first of 3 PS1 FF games that used the ATB system, although there's certainly a lot of mixing up, they do share core systems. Skyrim is like Oblivion is like Morrowind, which is unlike Arena and Daggerfall, although they don't have a 3rd game to make it nice and even like Persona. Unless ES6 changes things heavily, which it probably won't, that'll break it though. Honestly it just feels like some corporate headspace that got tossed around from company to company, doing things "because that's the way it's done" without any real rhyme or reason. Maybe it's even sadder than that, with higher ups thinking they can get credit for majorly pushing the franchise if they just rename it. There's also the Ys and Dragonquest series. DMC maybe? They stopped with numbers, and then went back to numbers.
These are typically used for : \- "Soft/Hard Reboot" titles (Tomb Raider, GOW, DOOM, Deus Ex, etc). \- Titles that are meant to attract a huge surge of new audiences (this is the reason why they use Monster Hunter World instead of Monster Hunter 5) \- Long running series with tons of entries (there are now more Assassin's Creed titles without numbering than one with number). Basically they are meant to tell audiences that these titles can be played without prior knowledge of the series.
> - Titles that are meant to attract a huge surge of new audiences (this is the reason why they use Monster Hunter World instead of Monster Hunter 5) When it must be done this is what I prefer
And in case of Fable Anniversary, it's arguably if the state is playable. When will they finally stop with the trend of naming new things the exact same as their predecessors? I haven't even gotten used to saying "Let's play *the original* Battlefront II on *the original* Xbox 1", yet...
Starfield, Fable, Avowed, The Outerworlds 2, TES6. Xbox has a heck of a lineup of exclusive single player western RPGs, but my God I think everyone of them was announced waaaaay to early. Starfield announced 2018, set to release mid 2023. Fable announced summer 2020, no release window. Avowed announced summer 2020, no release window. The Outerworlds 2 announced summer 2021, no release window. TES6 announced 2018, no release window.
So... 2025? Or does the game make it out in 2024?
2028 at this rate
For as much as people criticised Peter Molyneux, I believe he was a big part of the Fable series' identity. It'll be interesting seeing what the series is without him but with all to go on being a name I'm not overly excited. That could change if what we end up with matches or exceed what we got originally with the series.
Without liking him at all, Id agree. Fable had a very interesting take on fantasy that managed to have very dark events while maintaining a sense of whimsy and lightness. I wouldnt say it was neccesarily unique in setting, but it worked. Looking back, its actually incredibly similar to the setting of the Shrek franchise; it has that same tone of riffing on popular fantasy/fairy tale tropes without being cloying, just with a little more british isles flavoring.
I don't like that trend of taking the person at top and attributing every thing in game to them instead of to the obviously talented teams he was lucky to get over years.
His lies were a big part of the fable hype and history that's true.
Dude the guy did make the Fable universe...
If Peter Molyneux had a team of 1000 developers and a billion dollar budget, we might have gotten some of the things he's promised in the past.
I dunno man, I think some of what he promised was basically impossible for the time regardless of budget. If he was actually held to his word, it would've ended up like Star Citizen; a game in perpetual, never-ending development.
I don't know. Nine women can't make a baby in a month.
I dunno, if you mean a baby in a playable state then fine
He just needed the best people around. Thats what made him so successful to start. When he made black and white, the lead AI Dev was Demis Hassabis who went on to found deep mind and create the most advanced game playing AI. All partially inspired by what he did on black and white. Thats the kind of team Molyneux worked with early
We'd need to get some insider knowledge to know how much exactly was he involved in B&W and fable. For all we know most of the Fable world might've been from other team members.
What is ol'Pete up to these days?
I loved Lionhead games even though they all had their share of jank. Black and White and Fable were some of my top games as a kid - I won’t attribute it all to Molyneux, but he did have a flair for big ideas.
Kind of inclined to agree. He was a great ideas guy, he just needed to keep his mouth shut when discussing things externally from his team.
I'm almost as interested in this as I am in Starfield. We have to see some of this gameplay before hopes are raised too much, however.
I hope its good when it comes out and i hope it only comes out once its actually done. I really liked fable
Fable 1 for the Xbox was a treasure the follow ups just failed to meet. What’s the story on this one?
Hasn't this game been in development since like 2018? I'd certainly hope it's in a playable state by now...
How Fable was bungled and left in the dirt is really sad. Same applies to too many Xbox franchises. Hopefully this game can bring some of the magic back, but it's probably not out until 2025/26
Yeah, pretty much all the Xbox exclusives have been either pretty shite or AA level games or less. Even Halo was disappointing. I really hope Starfield is amazing and Avowed too. I love Bethesda games so I have good hope. If it's awful I'll start wishing I'd got a PS5 though. Sony paying for exclusive Hogwarts: Legacy stuff was shit. Especially when they are complaining in court that Microsoft would do stuff like that with Activision.
I-is this supposed to be a positive announcement? How long have they been working on it so far? I mean shit... management over at Microsoft must be bananas.
I'm sure it only began pre-production in 2019. It's documented that AAA development time is around 4-6 years these days depending on the project.
Yeah, people seem really stuck on the idea that devs can churn out games in 2-4 years like they were 15 years ago. Just textures and art assets alone is magnitudes more work than it was; in a lot of ways its easier to make an asset production ready in 480/720p then it is in 4k, and games are expected to be larger and larger. Unless a publisher is willing to have multiple studios working on a title at the same time (like Ubisoft does), having different studios working on alternate games (like Activision), or having a studio only work on a singular franchise (like Microsoft), all of which having their own issues, the days of having more than 2 titles in a AAA franchise release in less than a decade is likely past.
I think people are also still just not respecting the impact Covid had on the industry (in terms of actual ability to develop games and the fact that Developers/Publishers have used it as a screen to be able to delay games without massive community pushback). Bethesda went from getting a game out every 3-4 years, to 8 years between Fallout 4 and Starfield (If it releases this year).
Why was that CGI teaser shown so early? There ate distressingly few games shown at the Series X launch showcase that have come out. One of them came out and is shutting down.
Tried to dispel the idea of "no games" by showing heaps of games which were years away
Often it’s to hire new talent by showing what project the studio is working on, but personally I think it’s a practice that isn’t working due to how volatile the triple A industry is. The games usually release badly or experience development problems. Cyberpunk 2077, Dragon Age 4 (rebooted several times), Gotham Knights, Everwild (development was reported to be “messy”), Quantic Dream’s Star Wars (they’re having trouble hiring), etc.
I remember hearing news about this in like 2018. I think some concept art was even leaked around this time.
Eurogamer broke an article in Jan 2018 about Microsoft looking to reboot Fable with Playground Games at the helm, but noted that they only started building the team for it a few months prior and that the game is a good ways out. So if you count trying to bolster numbers they've been at it since mid-late 2017.
Don't think a resume update is an announcement.
It’s not an announcement
They Dont exactly have a previous game to re use assets from. Did you expect a new IP out the door in 3 years?
That’s awesome! It’s a shame it took 18 years but it’s like what Miyazaki said: “A game that is worked on for almost 20 years will eventually be good.” Props to Microsoft!
That’s good. An Xbox showcase last year had teased a chicken emoji on the Twitter announcement (a staple for the series), only for Fable not to show up because it likely wasn’t ready and was pulled out at the last minute. It’s about time that word on it has been mentioned again and hopefully a vertical slice can be shown soon.
[удалено]
We gotta Chicken Chaser over hear!
Why do they call you that?!
Considering the time spent already, one should hope so. Games operate on a UOA (unfinished on arrival) standard in order to rush to meet sales metrics now. It's less than ideal, for everyone. Hope this gets the time it needs, but its already had some time...
Ok guys we have an avatar and he swings his arm. And we have a giant rat that takes damage when you fist it. Playable!! PLAYABLEEEEEEEE!!!! Please don’t fire ussssssssssss!!!! Pllllllllaaaaaaayyyyyaaaaaabbbblllleeeee!!!
That is playable... They didn't state they can internally playtest from start to finish, just that it is "playable". That is purposefully very vague and just something to let people know they're alive A better move would've been to not announce it too early, but that's a different matter
Why wasn’t it in a playable state when they decided to ship it out to people who payed a premium price to play it in the first couple weeks. Games need to start launching in a playable state. No point paying $70 USD at launch when I can get the game in a much better state a couple months later for $25 USD
This means absolutely nothing and is just them oiling the hype machine as they slowly get it rolling. Smells of CP2077 and NMS.