Syraxis Posted October 22, 2009 Posted October 22, 2009 Lionhead boss Peter Molyneux isn't just pushing the curve on Xbox 360 with now-confirmed Project Natal support in Fable 3; during his speech at the annual BAFTA gathering, the legendary designer revealed his intent to integrate an "in-game shop" within the game world, enabling players to purchase DLC without disrupting the game experience (i.e. exiting to the Xbox Live Marketplace). In a report on the presentation, That VideoGame Blog noted that Molyneux had suggested special weapons, for example, could be sold for about
Morgoth Posted October 22, 2009 Posted October 22, 2009 So, once I paid for the game, it forces me to pay more just to get through? How Microsoft-ish. Rain makes everything better.
Slowtrain Posted October 22, 2009 Posted October 22, 2009 So, once I paid for the game, it forces me to pay more just to get through? How Microsoft-ish. Well the idea would appear to be that you are paying for additional content from within the game vs some other way. The additional content would have to be paid for either way, whether in game or out. Notice how I can belittle your beliefs without calling you names. It's a useful skill to have particularly where you aren't allowed to call people names. It's a mistake to get too drawn in/worked up. I mean it's not life or death, it's just two guys posting their thoughts on a message board. If it were personal or face to face all the usual restraints would be in place, and we would never have reached this place in the first place. Try to remember that.
Monte Carlo Posted October 22, 2009 Posted October 22, 2009 It's the future, introducing MMO-style payment models into single-player games.
Cl_Flushentityhero Posted October 22, 2009 Posted October 22, 2009 I don't see how this is fundamentally different from other DLC.
Monte Carlo Posted October 22, 2009 Posted October 22, 2009 ^ In-game DLC, signposting optional stuff that looks heavily like progressing in the game is pretty rare. Although obvious once you think about it. In future games publishers will own your game - you'll have to buy it online, register it online, be online to play it and buy stuff online from within the game. In effect, you'll only rent this virutal product. I'm going back to hex-based wargames on a board with little minis.
Purkake Posted October 22, 2009 Posted October 22, 2009 (edited) But will it use Natal? That's the real question. @Monte Carlo: Welcome to today, you haven't owned your games for a while now, not on the PC, at least. Businesses will do what they can to make money, if people are willing to buy it, what's the problem? Edited October 22, 2009 by Purkake
Monte Carlo Posted October 22, 2009 Posted October 22, 2009 ^ Just failed my Geek Lore check, what's Natal, apart from a S. African province?
Morgoth Posted October 22, 2009 Posted October 22, 2009 They'll probably design the game that way that you're forced to buy some ingame items. Otherwise you'll have a very very hard time. It wouldn't surprise at all. Rain makes everything better.
Monte Carlo Posted October 22, 2009 Posted October 22, 2009 I don't mind as long as the game is good and they're upfront about what you're getting for your money.
Purkake Posted October 22, 2009 Posted October 22, 2009 ^ Just failed my Geek Lore check, what's Natal, apart from a S. African province? Microsoft's new controllerless input system.
Amentep Posted October 22, 2009 Posted October 22, 2009 (edited) But will it use Natal? That's the real question. "Lionhead boss Peter Molyneux isn't just pushing the curve on Xbox 360 with now-confirmed Project Natal support in Fable 3..." ^ Just failed my Geek Lore check, what's Natal, apart from a S. African province? Its the Xbox 260 "Controler Free Gaming" periphrial. Edited October 22, 2009 by Amentep I cannot - yet I must. How do you calculate that? At what point on the graph do "must" and "cannot" meet? Yet I must - but I cannot! ~ Ro-Man
Deadly_Nightshade Posted October 22, 2009 Posted October 22, 2009 ...you haven't owned your games for a while now, not on the PC, at least. That's not clear as your view is, I'm guessing, based on the EULA - something that is legally gray. "Geez. It's like we lost some sort of bet and ended up saddled with a bunch of terrible new posters on this forum." -Hurlshot
Purkake Posted October 22, 2009 Posted October 22, 2009 No, based on the fact that you have to activate it online or be connected to play, they can turn the servers off and you'd have a fun little frisbee.
Pop Posted October 22, 2009 Posted October 22, 2009 It sounds to me like they're charging to go to places you otherwise would have to work through in the game. Like if Bioware offered to bring your character to the Underdark in BG2 for a few bucks. You'd get there even if you didn't pay but it eliminates the hassle of, you know, playing the game. That is assuming that the areas in question aren't DLC. It's not entirely clear from the quote. If they aren't, that tells us 3 things about Molyneux and Fable 3, things that we should already know, really. 1. The narrative is an optional framing device for the game experience. Fable 3 is either sandbox or episodic in its setup. 2. The game design abhors difficulty in all its forms (duh) 3. Giving players instant gratification is important. I'd wager that these are the reasons why Fable is the most popular RPG franchise ever created (I think?) but then, I'm also pretty sure the National Enquirer gets better circulation than the Economist. Join me, and we shall make Production Beards a reality!
Cl_Flushentityhero Posted October 22, 2009 Posted October 22, 2009 They'll probably design the game that way that you're forced to buy some ingame items. Otherwise you'll have a very very hard time. It wouldn't surprise at all. Fable 2 wasn't exactly the most challenging game in the world.
Monte Carlo Posted October 22, 2009 Posted October 22, 2009 Thinking about it, it could be a pretty cool way of playing a game and it really lends itself to RPGs. Think of it as the core game being the rulebooks of a RPG and all the DLC as modules / splatbooks. If a game was awesome enough, and the developers committed to it long-term, then it might be groovy.
Morgoth Posted October 22, 2009 Posted October 22, 2009 There's nothing cool and groovy about having that bull**** enforced on a singleplayer game. Rain makes everything better.
Mamoulian War Posted October 22, 2009 Posted October 22, 2009 There's nothing cool and groovy about having that bull**** enforced on a singleplayer game. QFT Sent from my Stone Tablet, using Chisel-a-Talk 2000BC. My youtube channel: MamoulianFH Latest Let's Play Tales of Arise (completed) Latest Bossfight Compilation Dark Souls Remastered - New Game (completed) Let's Play/AAR Europa Universalis 1: Austria Grand Campaign (completed) Let's Play/AAR Europa Universalis 2: Xhosa Grand Campaign (completed) My PS Platinums and 100% - 29 games so far (my PSN profile) 1) God of War III - PS3 - 24+ hours 2) Final Fantasy XIII - PS3 - 130+ hours 3) White Knight Chronicles International Edition - PS3 - 525+ hours 4) Hyperdimension Neptunia - PS3 - 80+ hours 5) Final Fantasy XIII-2 - PS3 - 200+ hours 6) Tales of Xillia - PS3 - 135+ hours 7) Hyperdimension Neptunia mk2 - PS3 - 152+ hours 8.) Grand Turismo 6 - PS3 - 81+ hours (including Senna Master DLC) 9) Demon's Souls - PS3 - 197+ hours 10) Tales of Graces f - PS3 - 337+ hours 11) Star Ocean: The Last Hope International - PS3 - 750+ hours 12) Lightning Returns: Final Fantasy XIII - PS3 - 127+ hours 13) Soulcalibur V - PS3 - 73+ hours 14) Gran Turismo 5 - PS3 - 600+ hours 15) Tales of Xillia 2 - PS3 - 302+ hours 16) Mortal Kombat XL - PS4 - 95+ hours 17) Project CARS Game of the Year Edition - PS4 - 120+ hours 18) Dark Souls - PS3 - 197+ hours 19) Hyperdimension Neptunia Victory - PS3 - 238+ hours 20) Final Fantasy Type-0 - PS4 - 58+ hours 21) Journey - PS4 - 9+ hours 22) Dark Souls II - PS3 - 210+ hours 23) Fairy Fencer F - PS3 - 215+ hours 24) Megadimension Neptunia VII - PS4 - 160 hours 25) Super Neptunia RPG - PS4 - 44+ hours 26) Journey - PS3 - 22+ hours 27) Final Fantasy XV - PS4 - 263+ hours (including all DLCs) 28) Tales of Arise - PS4 - 111+ hours 29) Dark Souls: Remastered - PS4 - 121+ hours
Purkake Posted October 22, 2009 Posted October 22, 2009 You can show both Microsoft and Lionhead your extreme dislike by not buying the game. Cool, huh?
Morgoth Posted October 22, 2009 Posted October 22, 2009 You can show both Microsoft and Lionhead your extreme dislike by not buying the game. Cool, huh? That's what I did in the past. And that's what I'll do in the future as well - not buying any Lionhead crap. Rain makes everything better.
Purkake Posted October 22, 2009 Posted October 22, 2009 Not only does it save money, it's also somewhat more effective than complaining about it on the internet.
Maria Caliban Posted October 22, 2009 Posted October 22, 2009 So, once I paid for the game, it forces me to pay more just to get through? How Microsoft-ish. It's an expansion. You pay for it in game, and now have a new area with a new quest. Like Tales of the Sword Coast, only you'd pay for it and d/l it while in the game. "When is this out. I can't wait to play it so I can talk at length about how bad it is." - Gorgon.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now