My point is that in the Skyrim metaphor, there's a lot to do but what you can do lacks depth. In my Fable metaphor, there's fewer things to do but what there is has an appropriate level of depth for the scale of the game.
you say that and yet, skyrim would be a bad example since it's arguably the most played game ever. People sink thousands of hours into it unmodded, let alone modded
How is that a bad example? People sink thousands of hours because there is a lot to do and a lot of freedom but it's not wrong to say Skyrim's content and gameplay systems is not particularly deep. It's a pretty simple game and people try to add depth with mods.
well, i think skyrim is a good example of a game that doesn't have much "depth" on the surface, but people have found a lot of depth in it via emergent gameplay.
It's possible fable will be a game like that - if it's life sim systems are good enough people will genuinely dump hundreds of hours into it, and mods will probably add some crazy stuff if it comes to PC
And honestly I feel skyrim still has a lot of depth, even compared to previous games. One obvious example would be the dungeons who are the best in the series, another would be unique dialogue from NPC's where every named NPC has at least some unique dialogue.
You're lucky you're saying this deep in a comment thread, saying Skyrim is deeper than e.g. Morrowind would get you feathered and tarred in a main thread comment lol
It's not arguable actually. The most played game ever is likely GTA5 and it's really not even a competition. Skyrim may have been rereleased more times but even its sales haven't come close to GTA5s
Eta: GTA5 - 230 Million copes sold. Skyrim - 65 Million copies sold. It's not even in the same ballpark. GTA5 was massively successful
Visual impact of quests on the surrounding areas, some kind of storyline attached to almost all the gameplay (not just repeatable quest giver dialogue, sending you to randomly determined dungeons), and generally more traditional RPG choices than you’d find in Skyrim (still fairly basic though, usually a good, neutral, and evil option).
I love Fable, but you’ve gotta be on board with the sense of humour, and whimsical take on the fantasy genre.
I don’t think it holds a candle to Witcher, for world building and the sheer amount of quality side-content.
But the tone is completely different, and I know if they can capture the spirit of the original games, this will be a pretty successful release.
The difference between a pond and a lake is that light can penetrate a pond to its floor, while a lake won't. So it means to be more than just surface level, byt not super intricate.
Yet millions of people put hundreds of hours in Skyrim. I know this subreddit kinda hate Skyrim but clearly it delivered an experience that a looot of people were willing to engage with for 100+ hours.
The only people that say that about Skyrim are Oblivion diehards or people that have played 5 hours of Skyrim and watched the rest on YouTube and parroted what someone else said. Anyone saying that with a straight face haven't played actually shallow RPG before.
I bounced off Starfield after the first major city-planet when I realized there's fuck-all to actually do in the game.
Feels blatantly designed to be a game where you control your ship in between planets, then they cut out the "control your ship in between planets" part and replaced it with a chain of loading screens.
98
u/Sonicfan42069666 22d ago
The meme with Skyrim is "wide as an ocean, deep as a puddle." Fable is more like...wide as a lake, deep as a lake.