| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Joystiq, and more

Reader Comments (10)

Posted: Oct 29th 2008 8:19AM Rollins said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I played Fable 2 pretty much constantly from the day it came out until yesterday. Unfortunately, I'm mostly out of things to do.

This is why I play MMOs!

Posted: Oct 29th 2008 10:05AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Considering I only play PC games, this is an easy choice.

Fallout 3 has been great so far, and can easily run it with all graphics turned up full and runs very smooth. Graphically looks great, nice upgrade over Oblivion.

Loving it, most likely game of the year.

Posted: Oct 29th 2008 10:51AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Fallout 3

dictated mostly by the fact that i have a PS3 and not an Xbox. Fallout is great so far, been a while since i played an RPG where your choices have so much consequence

Posted: Oct 29th 2008 10:42AM Zandareth said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Fallout 3


That game looks amazing.

Posted: Oct 29th 2008 10:49AM arnavdesai said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I am sorry, but I strongly disagree with the author that Fable II is 'almost a MMO' at heart. I think this runs in contrary to what Peter M. has envisioned for this simply brilliant game. He wants it to be a living world where your actions determine the future of the world & simply put I am sorry to say MMO's fail to do that.
It's a brilliant game as it is and even the thought of it being a MMO makes me cringe.
As for Fallout 3 I am yet to try it and just might order it for my PC which I made for AoC.

Posted: Oct 29th 2008 11:16AM xepherys said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Actually, the writer said it was like an MMO *WITH* heart, not at heart. In which case you've just argued parallel to the author.
Reply

Posted: Oct 29th 2008 11:29AM arnavdesai said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
You are right in saying that, but I still cannot wrap my head around using Fable II and MMO in the same sentence:). I would not like to see this turn into a MMO especially since the whole premise of the game is 'your choice as a hero have big consequences'
Reply

Posted: Oct 29th 2008 11:09AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I agree with the essence of Arnie’s statement. The MMORPG and the single player RPG are two different animals. The lack of other living players in a SUVW is a significant difference that should not be passed off as a “feature” of a single player environment. Admittedly, many MMORPGs out there are based on single player architecture, some more than others. It is only natural in the evolutionary process coded entertainment of this type is going through.

This inverted conceptualization basically states that a SUVW is a MMORPG that enforces solo play, which is as absurd of an idea as an MMORPG that enforces grouping. The MMORPG should offer a user the opportunity, nay, the ability (which is, in my opinion tantamount to a right) to choose to play solo or in groups. That difference is semioticly very stark.

As far as choices go: red rover red rover let post apocalyptic awesomeness come over!

Posted: Oct 29th 2008 11:43AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Are you joking? Are you seriously comparing Fallout 3 to fable? Fable is a joke of a game compared to most PC rpgs, and isn't even in the same frikin' league as such a game as fallout 3. >_>

Posted: Oct 29th 2008 7:16PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Fallout 3. Without a doubt.

Featured Stories

Engadget

Engadget

Joystiq

Joystiq

WoW Insider

WoW

TUAW

TUAW