Talk:Fable II Pub Games

Name

Officially named "Fable II Pub Games" in the press release, and all three games are included as one download. JAF1970 (talk) 00:24, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism

Protection request made. JAF1970 (talk) 15:47, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Removal

In reference to this edit summary, I am explaining my removals. First, the "third save" in Fortune's Tower: Wikipedia is not a game guide. Moreover, the game doesn't even label it as a Misfortune-saver. That it's true doesn't mean it needs to be mentioned. Second, Exploits: all games have some sort of exploit. Unless this one is patched or it has an impact on Fable II, there's little reason to mention it. Even if it were to be included the reference does not reflect that there is any "controversy" concerning it. Finally, Cultural references: it's WP:OR. That some forum-goers have drawn parallels between it and Lord of the Rings means nothing. Even if these removals were wrongly done, it's called adding them back, not reverting them and any overlapping rewrites. ~SnapperTo 03:38, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

It is a misfortune saver, however. And it's no more a "game guide" than the rest of the article describing the gameplay.

Stop using "game guide" as a catch-all to remove content. "Game guide" only refers to strategizing, not description (ie. what = acceptable. how to = unacceptable.) If the article were to include how to win at a game, that would be against policy. JAF1970 (talk) 17:45, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

What about the code that shows how to clear the Xbox 360's memory cache so you can un-patch the game and use the gold exploit again? Is that not a game guide based on your definition? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.240.241.2 (talk) 03:52, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

That sentence explaining about the memory cache is clearly in violation of the "NOTGUIDE" poilcy. Not to mention that documention methods of exploiting and/or removing intended patches by a game's developer is not Wikipedia's purpose, and that such questionably ethical information could make Wikipedia legally vulnerable. (I'm not suggesting anyone would bother to sue over something that trivial ever, i'm just making a point). 124.149.121.68 (talk) 15:33, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Confusion over codes

Hi i was just wondering if we should do a small section on some of the confusion that has been generated by preordering Fable 2 collectors edition and getting the pub games free for example game arnt giving out the codes until purchase of the game which kinda nigates the point of releasing them early as they are incorporated into the game disc. also there was a lot of confusion among some retailers also. anyway let me know what you think. 78.144.80.49 (talk) 17:29, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

It's not a major issue, and it was resolved on Day 1. JAF1970 (talk) 17:43, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

i Dissagree if u check the loinhead forum there are a few people who are upset about his and also there as an actual difference in what was promised by microsoft if Fable 2 was pre ordered and what some retailers are offering which i feel may merit so dicussion and as for it having been cleared up it took over a week for any of the staff at my local game and gamestation stores to have any information about the free pub games so it wanst cleared up on day 1. Kobol (talk) 18:44, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

There is a post telling you how to "get round" the patch... i tried this and it didn't work. As this seems to be incorrect and there are no sources given for it, I suggest that this should be removed.

Sir jcd (talk) 19:55, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Why was my contribution deleted?

I contributed, telling of how the exploit had been planned by lionhead and about the "surprise" for cheaters and i cited it. Why the hell was it removed?

Sir jcd (talk) 17:01, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

What was the link? Just out of personal interest, I do not know why it was removed. Thanks Prof Tubs —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.207.160.254 (talk) 15:28, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Free?

The article says the pub games "will be included for free in both editions of Fable II". Is that true? Where does it say so? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.131.124.215 (talk) 16:43, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Fable II Pub Games. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080813113533/http://gamerscoreblog.com:80/team/archive/2008/08/07/560488.aspx to http://gamerscoreblog.com/team/archive/2008/08/07/560488.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:37, 29 December 2016 (UTC)