No Need to Be Hasty: Fable II (Full Review)

I will, perhaps, in the future be revising my conceit of posting "first impressions" of video games. In the case of Fable II, what started out as an occasionally distasteful but largely entertaining experience (see related post below) turned out to just be, well, distasteful. So distasteful that I have no desire for a second play.

The discovery of how brainlessly cynical the completed main quest is did me in. It's obvious from the beginning of the "The Hero of Strength" quest that Theresa has transformed over the centuries into someone corrupt and more than a little unhinged - her anger at the discovery that the Hero of Strength is a monk (and therefore cannot possibly be motivated to do what Heroes need to do?), and determination to corrupt Hammer into a creature of violence and vengeance in order to get the job done, is pretty disturbing and scary. Who wants to guess that Theresa's the one who orchestrated the sudden murder of Hammer's dad? Either way, Theresa is in full Kreia-from-Knights of the Old Republic II mode here; that is to say, perverted evil hag mode. The key difference, however, in KotoR II, is that you are not ultimately beholden to Kreia's will for things if you don't choose to be. Fable II talks a lot about choices, but when it comes down to the ones that really matter, you are for the most part denied the power to choose.

And then there's the cynicism taken to an extend that's just plain stupid. The game talks about how the original Hero's Guild was destroyed because of self-absorbed, corrupt Heroes who took no action and were subesquently lynched by the people. The final Hero you must recover before endgame is Reaver, a pirate king legendary for his near-supernatural pistol skills. Lionhead Studios at least gets points here for pirates not being cool: Reaver is a thoroughly corrupt, perverse, narcissistic, childish, evil individual. Amongst other things, if you wait around during his dialogue you will see him murder three innocents for the most petty reasons imaginable. He rules the port town of Bloodstone, where Oakvale used to be, on a foundation of despotism and terror. And you must take him with you to defeat the Main Evil, and after that's done you cannot even challenge him to a duel - in other words, you can't actually pursue evil with the intent of eliminating it, only the evil the game insists is untenable (the main villain, Lucien). With Reaver, the game developers are running with a cynicism that defies all logic: the idea that a "hero" who's evil but talented is better than no "hero" at all. They're also badly misusing the Neiztchean concept of the rules not applying to the special people. Has no one at Lionhead ever seen Rope? To muddle the waters further, the end of the game sees the Heros saying, "well, glad I don't have to help people any more, time to piss off!" as Theresa happily disbands them instead of rebuilding the guild...so that she can take over Lucien's old residence in the Tattered Spire. Well, now we know what Fable III will be about!

And Fable II's version of you not having a boss fight? A nonsensical, boring, failed shadow of Oblivion's, and a very poor and lazy argument for why the world needs someone like Reaver.

There's no replay value here; the game offers me nothing to work towards as a goal (or enjoy working towards), and I can't stomach it anyway. I'm sorry I gave it an initial thumbs-up, and may very well delete that post soon.