was it really that hard for lionhead to make a traditional sequel that didnt try to shoehorn in stupid gimmicks, like trying to be completely menuless
[QUOTE=bloboo;50086385]does this mean Peter Molyneux would get to make a low budget disappointment instead of a high budget disappointment or what[/QUOTE]Molyneux left Lionhead in 2012.
Just let it die, it would probably have been crap anyways.
It had hardly anything to do with previous Fable games except the name.
Can't see why MS wouldn't just let them continue it with a different title, but then why would they bother when the idea was never appetizing to begin with.
In Molynuese, that means "TIME TO GO FOR KICKSTARTER BOYS!".
[QUOTE=Nautsabes;50086443]was it really that hard for lionhead to make a traditional sequel that didnt try to shoehorn in stupid gimmicks, like trying to be completely menuless[/QUOTE]
I'm currently replaying Fable 3 after not playing it since launch and I totally forgot about most of the features. It did do a lot of things right, the atmosphere and charme is still there and it could have lived up to the success of Fable 1 (never played 2) but they really wasted that opportunity with the inventory room, the map that makes no freaking sense and the laughable difficulty.
I don't understand how some developers/publishers manage to make these horrible decisions. It takes a lot of intelligence, creativity and other values to create a game. They already fucked up so much in the past and now they do this?
[QUOTE=bloboo;50086385]does this mean Peter Molyneux would get to make a low budget disappointment instead of a high budget disappointment or what[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Pvt. Martin;50088193]In Molynuese, that means "TIME TO GO FOR KICKSTARTER BOYS!".[/QUOTE]
Molyneux had nothing to do with this game...
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.