greenghost5:

If you get into a fight with someone and they kick your a$$, do you get this big game over screen? No, you don't. You just get a blodied nose and a black eye or something like that. I personally like this system, because to me there is so much more at stake, than just a screen that says game over!!

That's not really what we're upset about in regards to the no-death...I said months back, instead of just outright scarring by a no-name bandit, the Hero should be bruised and get black eyes...Dragged to town and humiliated in front of villagers...Or items/gold stolen from you, but also left with bruises...

Bruises can do just as much as scars when you return to town, but the problem I have is, a boss battle can scar you just as badly as a normal bandit, WITH THE SAME RESULT...

Another problem alot of us have with the system is, it's not varied...It's simple, you either randomly pay in gold/exp/renown or get a scar...I mean, every scenario is quite simply put, EXACTLY THE SAME!!  There's no loss involved if you have the funds or exp to simply get back up and fight some more...

The main problem I have with the death mechanic is, they said they wanted it to be like a movie...When in fact, it does no such thing...In movies, the Hero is usually beaten up badly, but has to limp home, regain his strength, then swear revenge on the people who did him wrong...

Now, in movies, the Hero, only gets back up and fights to a win, IN THE LAST BATTLE...It does not occur during the movie, the last battle is always the most epic battle...

So again, how does this constitute a movie-esque feeling?? Especially when Bobby the Bandit can inflict the exact same long-term effect on you that Twinblades would have...

That's the problem I have with the system...It's too mechanical, it's either or, when in fact, losing should result in alot more present-day consequences, rather than humungous long-term effects...

It's the reason why I want, everyday baddies to only bruise you, or leave you bloodied, but boss battles, are the only time you can be scarred...It's like I've always said, if you can't remember who gave you the scar, then it's not worth the long-term lasting effect it has on your Hero...

You sure whine a lot about a game you haven't even played.

I think the scarring thing will work out, unless you are the one working on it then how do you know? Just an FYI, you posted that whole thing about scarring on the thead about bows.

On the thread about the orbs so many people wanted the game to change and get rid of the orbs, but now here everybody wants the game to stay the same, I'm not going to argue, the if bows are out then I hope there can at least be little one-handed crossbows, those are cool.

---

The Chains of Destiny have broken, the gears are in motion. I am coming. I am Lord of The Shadows, all shall bow before me.
www.gameaces.com

Buddy, the day I complain about a feature and do not give reasoning why I feel the feature sucks, you let me know...I don't post here complaining about others complaining...If I don't like a feature and have no alternative means of by-passing it, I speak out...

In regards to the Bows debate, I said this before...I hated the gun idea, but I never said anything because my weapon of choice, BOWS, were in...So no need to speak about how I hate the gun implementation, when it doesn't even affect me...Now it does and now I speak out...

As for the death system, you think the scarring works for what reason?? Because Lionhead said it??  Yeah, great rebuttal kiddo...Way to prove points...

I played Fable, and those ideas sounded great on paper, but you know what the difference is, THESE DON'T!!

Everyone was blown away back then, by the ambitious ideas Lionhead shared with the world...But these ideas, they don't cut it in my eyes...And I'm going to continue to state reasonings why I dislike an idea or dislike a feature they cut...

So again, when I complain about a feature without putting up any reasonings/examples of why I think it sucks, be sure to let me know...Until then, start contributing to threads instead of upping your post count...

Thanks for playing...

The bows were my favorite weapon too, but I would rather they take something out than change it completely, I would love for the bows to be put in completely unchanged but if they are out then they are out and there is nothing anybody can do about it.

I'm sure that there is much more to the scarring system than what we have been told, from what I've seen LH is just giving us the big picture and leaving the little details for us to find out for themselves.

Also I wasn't around when Fable was coming out, back then I was still playing kotor, so I have no reason not to beleive LH.

---

The Chains of Destiny have broken, the gears are in motion. I am coming. I am Lord of The Shadows, all shall bow before me.
www.gameaces.com

fablier:

I don't think that really addresses the point of Portarock's post.  The traditional game over screen might be the least compelling game over ever but at least it is a game over, as far as we know Fable 2 doesn't have one.  Now thats all well and but it hasn't been replaced with anything, there is no way to lose to an enemy.  So as far as we know Portarock's statement, We have no game over screens at the cost of not been able to lose, is completely accurate.

One button combat could very likely take control away from the player.  If attacks happen based on the hero's location, without any activation by the player, then the player has lost control of combat.  It might look cool, but you could end up just pushing X to see a combat move that you have no control over.  It is possible that you would have to do things to make these actions happen but so far it sounds like it will just be pushing the X button.  If it is just push X and some random action happens then this statement is true, we get one button combat at the cost of control.

With the dog we lost the mini-map, which isn't that big of a deal except some people don't want to play with the dog.  The people who want to play without it will be at a disadvantage, they might miss content and key areas in the game but that is their choice.  The dog also could take combat out of the players hands if it isn't done right, if the dog is too involved in combat it will force players to play a certain way.

Now bows, I still don't see why they have to be changed dramatically.  Crossbows might be quiet but they are still mechanical versions of bows, which would make them louder than bows.  So if crossbows are adjusted so they alert enemies when fired, just like guns, then bows would become useful for stealth.  If they won't be included because they can't look cooler that probably isn't a big deal, bows look cool enough already.  But if you won't reconsider then there isn't much more to debate, but then this statement is true, and now we get guns at the (cost of) bows.

I asked most of these questions in the episode 4 blog but they probably won't get answered because they aren't world related.  Hopefully you guys have looked at some of these and have solutions to them, the new features are great but they always seem to have a price attached to them.  Maybe in time we will find out that features have been added or expanded upon and that assumption is incorrect, but as far as we know it is true now.

Couldn't have put it better myself, you even corrected my typo

greenghost5:

I would like to say, that though we may not be able to lose in the traditional sense of gaming, we still can lose plenty, and yes we can lose to an enemy just because there is no game over screen doesn't mean you didn't lose. If you get into a fight with someone and they kick your a$$, do you get this big game over screen? No, you don't. You just get a blodied nose and a black eye or something like that. I personally like this system, because to me there is so much more at stake, than just a screen that says game over!!

But with the current system getting you ass kick doesn't mean you will have a bloodied nose. You can be stabbed and shot repeatedly and not have a scratch. Also as another member said ( fablier I think) if you are in a fight and you kill your opponent you win, which will always be the end result of this system.

greenghost5:

One button combat, could in fact, take control away from the player, but that's the risks you take when you are innovating. The player has to press the button before he does anything. Let me ask you this, how much control did you have over combat in Fable, or even oblivion? You had a limited amount of control with those games (I'm only speaking of melee combat) Fable 2 control, if you ask me will be about the same really, only there will be more options, if you will, of going about it.

In Fable if you had a sword and pressed X to swing it that is exactly what you did. In this system if you want to swing and just happen to be by a bottle, a wall, fence a chandelier, mug, or any number of other things that might not happen.

greenghost5:

I don't think the dog will become too involved in combat, to the point of where you have to sit it out, or you have to try to race him there so you can kill something. And can't you get around just fine without the dog? I mean can't you find your way through all of Albion, without the dog?

 I'm not saying it you can't just that it is at the cost of something the other might not want to give up like maybe cat lovers The dog replaces the mini map so no dog means no feedback. You wont be able to find items the dog would have, you won't be able to tell where enemies are as easily, and the dynamics of combat will also be changed as the dog helps to balance battles against ranged and melee enemies at the same time.

greenghost5:

I don't see why bows would have to be changed dramatically either.

If we are going to have repeating crossbows, hopefully some of you real big bow fans will like them alot.

I doubt cross bow will satisfy the bow fans it just a personal preference thing.
greenghost though we seem to disagree alot you are becoming one the members whose post I truly enjoy to read

I would just like to point out that I am not against all these things I have mentioned I am merely pointing out that as Fablier said "the new features are great but they always seem to have a price attached to them."

@ butlerm Hopefully that is in. Stealth was surely lacking in the first Fable I am hoping it is handled much batter this time.

---

Thank you Ralph H. Baer

sCM redruM:

greenghost5:

If you get into a fight with someone and they kick your a$$, do you get this big game over screen? No, you don't. You just get a blodied nose and a black eye or something like that. I personally like this system, because to me there is so much more at stake, than just a screen that says game over!!

That's not really what we're upset about in regards to the no-death...I said months back, instead of just outright scarring by a no-name bandit, the Hero should be bruised and get black eyes...Dragged to town and humiliated in front of villagers...Or items/gold stolen from you, but also left with bruises...

Bruises can do just as much as scars when you return to town, but the problem I have is, a boss battle can scar you just as badly as a normal bandit, WITH THE SAME RESULT...

Another problem alot of us have with the system is, it's not varied...It's simple, you either randomly pay in gold/exp/renown or get a scar...I mean, every scenario is quite simply put, EXACTLY THE SAME!!  There's no loss involved if you have the funds or exp to simply get back up and fight some more...

The main problem I have with the death mechanic is, they said they wanted it to be like a movie...When in fact, it does no such thing...In movies, the Hero is usually beaten up badly, but has to limp home, regain his strength, then swear revenge on the people who did him wrong...

Now, in movies, the Hero, only gets back up and fights to a win, IN THE LAST BATTLE...It does not occur during the movie, the last battle is always the most epic battle...

So again, how does this constitute a movie-esque feeling?? Especially when Bobby the Bandit can inflict the exact same long-term effect on you that Twinblades would have...

That's the problem I have with the system...It's too mechanical, it's either or, when in fact, losing should result in alot more present-day consequences, rather than humungous long-term effects...

It's the reason why I want, everyday baddies to only bruise you, or leave you bloodied, but boss battles, are the only time you can be scarred...It's like I've always said, if you can't remember who gave you the scar, then it's not worth the long-term lasting effect it has on your Hero...

I'm half and half on this, while I see your point, I would have to say as an example here, If you were cut acroos the face by some stupid little drug pusher, you would still scar right? Now if you were cut in the same place by Bruce Lee, would that scar be any different, really, would it be bigger or more noticable? One man can scar just as easily as another one can. As for the death system being like a moive, I don't see how that part will work out, so I'll agree with you there, but I will say this none of us has played it yet, and for all we know this could be really neat. Sometimes things don't sound so on paper, but work in practice.


@ Portarock

I didn't mean you would get a bloodied nose in the game, I was just using that as an example, Though this arument has two very sides. I still think it will work out fine, I mean we have only glimpsed the system, right? So by the time we see it again it could be much better.

As to combat, I see what your concern is, again though I think it won't be like that, LH is running a risk of Fable 2, kind of bombing doing that, but I think that if we want to swing, we'll be able to, but, we don't know all the details of this combat system yet, or how it's coming along, so who knows really.

I do have a lot of faith for these systems, because it is something new and refreshing.

Thank you, Portarock, I also enjoy reading yours as well. It's always fun to have someone to have a argument with.

---

"Arms discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property...Horrid mischief would ensue were the law-abiding deprived of the use of them." (Thomas Paine, Thoughts On Defensive War, 1775)

greenghost5:

I would like to say, that though we may not be able to lose in the traditional sense of gaming, we still can lose plenty, and yes we can lose to an enemy just because there is no game over screen doesn't mean you didn't lose. If you get into a fight with someone and they kick your a$$, do you get this big game over screen? No, you don't. You just get a blodied nose and a black eye or something like that. I personally like this system, because to me there is so much more at stake, than just a screen that says game over!!

I don't want a game over screen either, but what was announced at E3 (and discussed in the following interviews) doesn't seem to be a complete death system.  So what happens after they kick your a$$?  According to the interviews you watch your hero get beaten then rise up, paying the penalty or taking a scar, and continue the fight.  Why?  That enemy just defeated you, why is he going to stand there and let you keep getting up over and over until you kill him?  Does he have a death wish or is he just amazingly stupid?  If you were fighing someone who was one of the best warriors in all of Albion and you managed to beat that person in a fight would you just stand there and let him get up again, would you take that risk for absolutely no reason?  No, you would make sure he was no longer a threat or you would run away while you had the chance. 

You always win, no amount of scars and lost gold/xp/renown can change that, you go into every fight knowing that you will definately walk out a winner.  If there was a possiblity that the enemy could win, without killling you, battles would be much more interesting. 

greenghost5:

One button combat, could in fact, take control away from the player, but that's the risks you take when you are innovating. The player has to press the button before he does anything. Let me ask you this, how much control did you have over combat in Fable, or even oblivion? You had a limited amount of control with those games (I'm only speaking of melee combat) Fable 2 control, if you ask me will be about the same really, only there will be more options, if you will, of going about it.

Well Fable had great combat controls, when you pulled that thumbstick back and attacked you always swung in that direction.  With Fable the hero always did the attack you told him to do, if you wanted to attack a guy behind you it was simple and worked well.  Oblivion melee was a joke, one of the many reasons I hated that game, it was annoying and had little control.

As for Fable 2 melee, I think the dueling looks great and I can't wait to try that.  The only thing that could possibly take control out of your hands in the use of the environment during combat.  In diary number 2 at 0:58 you see the hero spear an enemy against the wall with his sword, now how did that happen?  Does your enemy have to be off guard, the hero facing a wall and you hold down x for a second?  Or is it just another simple tap of the x button?  If it is the latter and it can happen without any conscious command it could be aggravating because the hero might be doing that move when you really want him to swing his sword.  The one button combat would be great if it allows the player to stay in control and fight using the moves they want to use, if the game selects the action for you then you have lost control of combat.  Hopefully this isn't the case.

greenghost5:

I don't think the dog will become too involved in combat, to the point of where you have to sit it out, or you have to try to race him there so you can kill something. And can't you get around just fine without the dog? I mean can't you find your way through all of Albion, without the dog?

I still wonder if the dog will eliminate the biggest threat (as was said at GDC) or neutralize the biggest threat.  So rather than the dog killing the ranged hobbe he might just run up and take the hobbes gun away, that hobbe could then pull out a sword and attack you.  That way the dog has been helpful but hasn't taken removed the threat of the enemy.  Also, what happens to the dog in a 1 vs.1 duel?  Hopefully he will sit there and watch, allowing the player to do what he does best without any interference.  Again, its not that the dog can't work well its just that we haven't seen it yet, so assumptions have been made in place of fact.  I think about other games that had fighing sidekicks (Dom in Gears of War, Arbiter in Halo 3, etc.) and they didn't remove anything from combat, but these games didn't have things like duels and most of the fights were against large groups so you didn't really notice your companions fighting.  Time will tell I guess.

greenghost5:

I don't see why bows would have to be changed dramatically either.

If we are going to have repeating crossbows, hopefully some of you real big bow fans will like them alot.

Agreed

Sam:

Right, I'll make a video diary about death and how all that works, as part of a future diary. " src="/emoticons/emotion-5.gif">

*not sure if that was serious, the smiley always gets me*  But if it is, that would be great, hopefully it would clear up any confusion on the subject.

---

Are you an ODST (fanboy)?

I'm pretty sure that we all have believe Lionhead will make the right decisions in the end otherwise we would just stop posting. I just feel that if we don't voice our concerns now then we can't expect then to address them. Feedback is why these forums are here and feedback is what Lionhead wants and needs. After all how can they make the game we want if we don't tell them what we want.

Again it seems that our feedback has resulted in something for the community as Sam has stated the he will address Death in a future dairy. I and I am sure many others will really be looking forward to that dairy. Thanks Sam Hopefully we wont have to wait to long for it

---

Thank you Ralph H. Baer

Hopefully they will clear up a lot of things for everyone about the death system, and pherhaps some more on the combat too. Either time will truly tell.

I see your point, as well, though I am too tired to give a proper rebuttle, for now.

---

"Arms discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property...Horrid mischief would ensue were the law-abiding deprived of the use of them." (Thomas Paine, Thoughts On Defensive War, 1775)

First of all, regarding the main topic this forum was founded upon:

When I saw the teaser, I got kinda stoked at the fact that the setting was 500 years later, and set in what we would consider to be our colonial era, with the inclusion of muskets, hand cannons, and tri-pointed hats.  That's the setting that they must build upon.  First, let me ask anyone on this whole forum, who thinks "bows" when they think "colonial?"  And don't be all "lolthe nativeAmericans used'em!"  While this point has merit and we can see how powerful the bow truly was (what with the 120 lbs remark), I will bring up a few thoughts I have on all this.

1.) Albion has no Native Americans.  In fact, much of the population is white, clearly symbolizing English subjects (no brainer food for thought).  If you WANT to think historically and bring Native Americans into this, the Europeans and settlers didn't use bows because bows are primitive.  The Native Americans were primitive.  Fable 2 is all about the evolution of Albion over time, and its all about upgrading.  Honestly, has anyone here seen the Three Musketeers?  The Man in the Iron Mask?  Pirates of the Carribean?  Is anyone carrying a bow throughout the movie?  The time period basically transitions from bows to rifles/crossbows.  They do not co-exist.  Sorry folks, this isn't World of Warcraft. 

2.) Fable's damage system was never based on the realistic weight of the impact of one's arm stretching back to pull the string of a bow (i.e., the 120 lbs).  In fact, most games don't consider that much realism.  It was just a matter of what the number rating said under the weapon description, for instance the Bow of Skorm's damage rating, vs. an ebony longbow's damage rating.  Clearly the BoS is what the player is going to go with.  Not because the player knows about the physical material the bow is built of, but because that's what the damage rating says. This isn't a point of dispute, just stating my thoughts on "well this is realistic because it does more damage."  It does as much damage as the game says it does.

That being said, going back to point #1.  Take a bow that does 100 damage and a musket that does 100 damage.  Let's just hypothetically say that they have the same firing rate, accuracy, etc.  Same weapon in essence, just one's a rifle and one's a bow.  Which is upgraded, less primitive, and appropriate with what Fable 2 is about?  Clearly, the rifle.  I say this because the people of Albion at one point used bows (Fable 1) then 500 years later, the same people historically invent rifles.  Why?  Because the people of Albion deem it more modern and more upgraded.

3.) Now then, stealth. I love playing the rogue, it's my favorite role.  While longbows are quiet, so are crossbows.  At least - crossbows are significantly quieter than rifles.  I personally think an assassin concealing a badass light crossbow is a lot more stealthy (and role-appropriate given the time period) than some shady figure carrying a goofy, big ass bow twice his size.

When you get right down to it, the one indisputible aspect to a longbow that can't really be paralleled with a musket is its range.  That's one thing I will admit the longbow has going for it, and don't know how they would compensate for it in Fable 2.  Maybe just altogether make the rifles useful for far-ranged attacks.  Who knows?  The people of Albion might have developed rifles better than we have historically.  It's a fantasy game.  Frankly, including bows in every fantasy game is way too cliche for me.  That's just my opinion.

Now, onto the death system that people recently brought up.  I do understand peoples' points when they bring up statements such as "the player will ALWAYS win, undeniably," due to the fact that the player cannot die per se.  Someone brought up "you go into a fight, and even if you lose you'll still get back up and fight and keep fighting until you win."  That is no different from saving just before a fight, dying, then re-loading to just before you fought them, then repeat the process until you win.  The player will still undeniably win.  Basically, the DEV's took that "save, re-load" cheap theory knowing that in order to beat a game the player simply cannot die otherwise he's just going to load back to before the fight and do it again until he wins, and they put physical tangible consequences to the loss of the battle.

Don't get me wrong, I don't hate the bow at all.  I'd love to see them SOMEHOW implement it and still accurately make it appropriate, but I just don't see it happening for this one.  I've always had a hard time picturing a guy in this particular age carrying a longbow.  Anyways, sorry for the long post.

fablier:

In diary number 2 at 0:58 you see the hero spear an enemy against the wall with his sword, now how did that happen?

It takes positioning, timing and practice/skill, to spear someone against the wall like that is the end result of a couple of moves.  Just button mashing X won't get you this result.

The Bag:

fablier:

In diary number 2 at 0:58 you see the hero spear an enemy against the wall with his sword, now how did that happen?

It takes positioning, timing and practice/skill, to spear someone against the wall like that is the end result of a couple of moves.  Just button mashing X won't get you this result.

If it takes practice and skill how were all those journalist able to do it with in seconds of picking up the controller?

In one of the other videos a journalist is in controlling the hero who is in an alley. He has a bandit in the stun animation and when he goes to try to kill the bandit he can't. Every time he went to kill the bandit he would just keep slamming him against the wall. This lead me to believe that the enemies probably have to be below a certain HP threshold in order to perform context sensitive killing blows. It was probably one of the wost showings because it makes it seem as if the player could not get the hero to do what he wanted (kill the bandit with a final slash) because context sensitive actions (smashing the opponent against the wall) were taking over.

---

Thank you Ralph H. Baer

The Bag:

It takes positioning, timing and practice/skill, to spear someone against the wall like that is the end result of a couple of moves.  Just button mashing X won't get you this result.

I see, there is more to it than just pushing x.  Thanks for clearing that up.

---

Are you an ODST (fanboy)?

Portarock:

The Bag:

fablier:

In diary number 2 at 0:58 you see the hero spear an enemy against the wall with his sword, now how did that happen?

It takes positioning, timing and practice/skill, to spear someone against the wall like that is the end result of a couple of moves.  Just button mashing X won't get you this result.

If it takes practice and skill how were all those journalist able to do it with in seconds of picking up the controller?

In one of the other videos a journalist is in controlling the hero who is in an alley. He has a bandit in the stun animation and when he goes to try to kill the bandit he can't. Every time he went to kill the bandit he would just keep slamming him against the wall. This lead me to believe that the enemies probably have to be below a certain HP threshold in order to perform context sensitive killing blows. It was probably one of the wost showings because it makes it seem as if the player could not get the hero to do what he wanted (kill the bandit with a final slash) because context sensitive actions (smashing the opponent against the wall) were taking over.

You have to realise, though is that the video was shown through a test engine, so.......It could have come along way since then. PM had said they would take a year to polish all of the features, well this problem has probably been addressed since then. I'm sure LH noticed this,  just as much as any one else, if not more.

In the final build it may take practice and skill, remember this was a test engine, they made it this way to demonstrate how combat would work. Not necessarily, to demonstrate the skill or timing it would take to perform these moves.

---

"Arms discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property...Horrid mischief would ensue were the law-abiding deprived of the use of them." (Thomas Paine, Thoughts On Defensive War, 1775)

Portarock the game isn't finished yet, and the purpose was the demonstrate it a couple of minutes some of the things that are possible.

That was the whole purpose of the question lol I know the game isn't done yet and that the demo was meant to show people what was possible in just a few minutes. I was just trying to get a comment saying if it was so easy because the demo was tweaked to be that way or if that is the easy they are going for in the final game. I also wanted to know if I was right in my HP threshold assumption.

I don't really see how doing these combos can be difficult at all though since it is just one button. The only ways I see to make it hard to perform are by using the RTS in conjunction and timing which still doesn't sound very challenging. IMO it actually sounds as if it could be detrimental because instead of the player be immersed in the fight the will be thinking of it as a mini game.

On the topic of bows, will there be any killing blow animations for the ranged weapons? Are we still able to decapitate enemies with a well place shot?

---

Thank you Ralph H. Baer

I hope we can still decapitate with a well placed shot. I wonder how exactly the ranged system will work?

---

"Arms discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property...Horrid mischief would ensue were the law-abiding deprived of the use of them." (Thomas Paine, Thoughts On Defensive War, 1775)

I'm guessing that you press RB or LB to pull the weapon out and Y to shoot.

---

The Chains of Destiny have broken, the gears are in motion. I am coming. I am Lord of The Shadows, all shall bow before me.
www.gameaces.com

PM said tapping Y would make you shoot and holding it would make you zoom in.

---

Thank you Ralph H. Baer

Portarock:

PM said tapping Y would make you shoot and holding it would make you zoom in.

Ah.....ok, I see now, thanks.

---

"Arms discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property...Horrid mischief would ensue were the law-abiding deprived of the use of them." (Thomas Paine, Thoughts On Defensive War, 1775)

Is there a powerd up attack like melee but with ranged weapon?

same goes for spells

---

i suppose the powered up type characteristic is the zoom, and spells i would guess would be like fireball in fable 1, charged and ready to blow, meh cant be certain

---

yes im a panda...

Shiningsoul:

Is there a powerd up attack like melee but with ranged weapon?

same goes for spells

That's an amazing question, and do you know why? Because just only today I learnt something new about the combat in Fable 2. It's not just everything said here and in a lot of other posts to describe how the combat works - there is another vital thing to it. One button combat: yes, correct. You only use one button, but apart from the other things mentioned, it is also how you press that button. I heard this today while listening to someone from the team explaining to someone else how the combat works. So you can quickly tap tap tap the X button quickly (for melee) or you can hold and then release it. There's a few more variations to it (four I believe but my memory is failing me now). So flourishes are a matter of holding the X button and releasing it at the right time. This is all for melee combat but more importantly, also for your Will spells and the ranged combat (mainly guns and crosbows).

And just like in the original game you can mix and match as you go along. So you cast slowtime, then pierce the head of a bandit with a bullet, then pull out your sword, slash the other bandit's throat and to finish it off throw a fireball at them. They're dead even before time is running at its normal speed again.

oh ok cool, thanks for clearing that up for us Sam

i do like the idea of having variations of attacks by use of timing and not combos

*down,down-left,left+Y* fireball? 

---

yes im a panda...

Sam:

Shiningsoul:

Is there a powerd up attack like melee but with ranged weapon?

same goes for spells

That's an amazing question, and do you know why? Because just only today I learnt something new about the combat in Fable 2. It's not just everything said here and in a lot of other posts to describe how the combat works - there is another vital thing to it. One button combat: yes, correct. You only use one button, but apart from the other things mentioned, it is also how you press that button. I heard this today while listening to someone from the team explaining to someone else how the combat works. So you can quickly tap tap tap the X button quickly (for melee) or you can hold and then release it. There's a few more variations to it (four I believe but my memory is failing me now). So flourishes are a matter of holding the X button and releasing it at the right time. This is all for melee combat but more importantly, also for your Will spells and the ranged combat (mainly guns and crosbows).

And just like in the original game you can mix and match as you go along. So you cast slowtime, then pierce the head of a bandit with a bullet, then pull out your sword, slash the other bandit's throat and to finish it off throw a fireball at them. They're dead even before time is running at its normal speed again.

That's just awesome!!! I'm so pumped for this game!!

(mainly guns and crossbows) I'm really starting to wonder what other ranged weapons will be added. How do you mean holding the x button down will work for a gun, or a crossbow? I mean you can't charge them for strength, they're both mechanical. 

---

"Arms discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property...Horrid mischief would ensue were the law-abiding deprived of the use of them." (Thomas Paine, Thoughts On Defensive War, 1775)