Lionhead announced today that the Fable 2 online co-op patch is locked and loaded on its end for day one of release -- now the developer just needs to get through Microsoft certification. This means when gamers try to enter Albion for the first time in their respective regions (beginning with North America October 21st), there should be a patch happily waiting to be downloaded.
At least reviewers will now be able to test out the online co-op feature and give an informed opinion soon after. We'll raise a virtual pint down at the Cow and Corset with a friend when Fable 2 releases for Lionhead's hard work on resolving this issue.
[Via X3F]
Reader Comments (39)
Posted: Oct 9th 2008 4:46PM Boffo the Sock said
Negative. He's wearing the Frilly Armor of Gender Confusion.
Reply
Posted: Oct 9th 2008 1:42PM (Unverified) said
So where are all those arcade models going to store this patch at? Seriously has to be the dumbest thing ever to patch a game that is not out yet a screw people over who you sell too.
Reply
Posted: Oct 9th 2008 1:47PM PedoJokerBear said
buying an xbox arcade (with no HDD) is probably the second dumbest thing to do huh?
Reply
Posted: Oct 9th 2008 2:00PM (Unverified) said
You could win one - http://www.xonegallery.com/pixelsandpages - and then buy a hard drive.
Reply
Posted: Oct 9th 2008 2:00PM WackyCoffee said
Probably on the 256MB memory card that comes with each Arcade package.
Reply
Posted: Oct 9th 2008 2:15PM (Unverified) said
If people play online AT ALL, they almost need the HD. How else do you get map packs, or ANY DLC. If on line co op mattered to the person, they wouldn't buy an Arcade or Core system. End of story.
Reply
Posted: Oct 9th 2008 3:44PM Snowblind said
It was either release the content as a patch, or delay the game and force it to go through the testing process all over again, which would have meant we wouldn't see the game for another few months.
Patching it in was by far the best move, even if we did have to wait a week. But since we don't, there's no way you can spin this to try and make it sound negative.
Reply
Patching it in was by far the best move, even if we did have to wait a week. But since we don't, there's no way you can spin this to try and make it sound negative.
Posted: Oct 9th 2008 1:43PM FredFredrickson said
Very good news - I was afraid that if it were left out for reviews, the game wouldn't come off as great.
Reply
Posted: Oct 9th 2008 3:05PM FredFredrickson said
Obviously - but with the patch finished, at the very least they won't be saying the co-op will be coming sometime in the future... and at the very most, they may get to try it out somehow.
Reply
Posted: Oct 9th 2008 6:46PM (Unverified) said
Agree with Marty. The day that the patch is available, all the reviews are going to be revised. At least any good reviewer will have updated their article.
It'll help anyone who is still on the fence with fable 2, because those people usually decide 2-6 days from release to read comments and more reviews.
Reply
It'll help anyone who is still on the fence with fable 2, because those people usually decide 2-6 days from release to read comments and more reviews.
Posted: Oct 9th 2008 7:40PM cc123 said
So reviews should be revised when a developer adds content that isn't on the disc?
I can understand if the reviews have notes added to them regarding the patch once it's been released but if the original score/review is changed for a patch they will be setting a horrible precedent.
Reply
I can understand if the reviews have notes added to them regarding the patch once it's been released but if the original score/review is changed for a patch they will be setting a horrible precedent.
Posted: Oct 9th 2008 1:45PM (Unverified) said
Good. "We're going to patch it" and when they "hope" to have the patch out was worthless, especially from them. Calling it done, on the other hand, is black and white.
Nice work on earning back some of that credibility. Now that one of its major selling-points is back in, I may end up with a copy of this game after all.
Reply
Nice work on earning back some of that credibility. Now that one of its major selling-points is back in, I may end up with a copy of this game after all.
Posted: Oct 9th 2008 2:14PM D3m0sthenes said
This is great It'll be out on launch day.
Not defending the decision or anything... but you have to be online to use this feature anyway, and if it's free, I don't really see much of a problem.
Can't wait to play it!
Reply
Not defending the decision or anything... but you have to be online to use this feature anyway, and if it's free, I don't really see much of a problem.
Can't wait to play it!
Posted: Oct 9th 2008 2:38PM (Unverified) said
Oh yes, this is because of all the people bitching and moaning. It couldn't possibly be that the developers are actually passionate about their games and want to provide the best experience possible is it? It isn't that it's something they were already working on fixing well before they even announced the need for a patch, considering it went Gold before they made that public?
Nope, you certainly accomplished something. I know in every respectable game studio the developers don't give a shit about what they do unless people start raising a stink in an internet forum. Then it becomes *serious*.
Reply
Nope, you certainly accomplished something. I know in every respectable game studio the developers don't give a shit about what they do unless people start raising a stink in an internet forum. Then it becomes *serious*.
Posted: Oct 9th 2008 2:55PM Anticrawl said
Do you not think Blogs and Gaming News sites control the industries image? Developers have gone on record stating they have to watch what they say because of how the press is set up today. Public outrage on where the industry is headed where they sell the game before it is finished and just "fix it later" is neccessry. If you'd rather sit quietly and let things keep going as they are by all means do so, but don't try to drag the rest of us down with you. If consumers never objected to anything we would have no quality assurance, return policies, etc. You are an idiot.
Reply
Posted: Oct 9th 2008 3:28PM (Unverified) said
I am sure they were more motivated by dollars. It stands to reason that this game will open with bigger sales and better legs through the holiday season. I actually think they could give a shit less what you or anyone else says on a blog or site. Hell, I only responded to you because I am bored at work.
Reply
Posted: Oct 9th 2008 5:05PM Anticrawl said
Exactly, they are motivated by sales and money. They want as much as they can get. This was made a big deal by the major gaming web sites, they saw that and were worried about losing a few extra bucks. Thus they made sure to publicly announce there would be co-op at launch. Otherwise if they didn't care they would have said nothing.
Reply
Posted: Oct 9th 2008 2:35PM Professor Lario said
I hope the reviewers have access to the co-op patch so that they can evaluate.
Reply
Posted: Oct 9th 2008 4:10PM IannCannon said
Umm, how about both? Although it's gonna be hard deciding which to play first.
Reply
Sorry, you must be logged in to leave a comment.
Featured Stories
The most popular posts
in the last 7 days
- Vita 'UMD Passport' won't be offered in US 221 comments
- Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning review: A tempting fate 161 comments
- Blizzard taking Valve to court over 'DOTA' trademark 116 comments
- David Jaffe leaves Eat Sleep Play, layoffs hit developer [Update] 107 comments
- Don't call it a remake: Final Fantasy X is a 'remaster,' to be clear 95 comments










