@Bryan Danielson
Fable 1
was promised to be this huge open world game where all of your decisions would come back to haunt you and you really had a say in even the smallest persons life. he even infamously said it was gonna be, "The best RPG ever".
It was kind of them things.
Open world? it was closer to Final Fantasy X instead of Morrowind. Sure you could fast travel to spots but looking back it wasnt even the biggest RPG world compared to games that came before it.
Your "choices" were some cliche cut n dry good or bad. Sure you could kill that trader and a few guards, and the game operated on a morality system of good and bad like KOTOR. So it was medieval Star Wars RPG without as much weapon customization.
Length of the game was short. even as a kid by the time i beat Jack of Blades i thought damn i thought itd be longer. Even doing the sidequests and Lost Chapters Expansion aint gonna add a whole lot of extra game.
Combat was your typical hack n slash, if you wanna do better do a headshot with an arrow. overall average character progression system.
Okay, you can get married, have kids, age, cop a crib. Thats its attempt at being a custom character RPG. Witcher 3 is the story of Geralt(and Ciri), not you.
I guess you could do custom greetings like laugh or Cheer. Like Animal Crossing New Horizons
Witcher 3
So right of the bat its a true open world, i mean true in the sense of games like Skyrim. You aint stuck to following a path in a forest. climb that mountain or sail around it? your choice.
quests. this the biggest difference. Sure Geralt cant grow horns from his head from killin a civilian, but thats because the choices in this game are a little more nuanced. Theres no good and bad, theres "i hope i did the right thing and nobody got fukked over". and this dont apply to the main story, which already has way more branching choices than Fable, but even insignificant sidequests. Them soldiers harrassing dude? lemme kill him. aww shyt that prisoner was a scumbag and that soldier had writings to his wife and kids, whoops. Do i take these notes from Kiera or send her to the king or kill her? She might not survive eiher choice i make.
Bloody Barron quest got way more detail, writing, branching choices and consequences then all of Fable 1.
Combat? Witcher gets a lot of shyt, but throw that bytch on Death March and see if you aint experimenting with 30 different builds, gathering right oils, specific armors, weapons, etc. havin a crazy time flippin through offensive and defense spells and melee(depending on the enemy). which comes back to fable, run through the game, same enemies, and you aint really got switch shyt up much. and that final fantasy style "oh this enemy is weak to magic instead of physical" dont count.
before I forget, lets talk characters. Fable lackin big time in the ammount of unique people in the game, taking away generic NPC's, theres maybe 20-25 characters doing shyt. Witcher 3 has more unique characters with names starting in "A" than Fable got in its entire roster.
You cant get married in Witcher 3, you right. You left with a few choices of who to end up with but dont remember marriage. Geralt a simp but he still GMB
in Blood and Wine you can get a home and fix it up n shyt
"But pikachu, why you bringin up DLC content
"
glad you asked.
Lets make it a fair fight and only compare one since Fable only had one.
Blood and Wine vs Fable Lost Chapter
One of these is a full game for the price of an add on, while the other adds about 5 hours to the main story.
fukk that, Blood and Wine is longer than Fable and its DLC combined.
Takes all the shyt you liked about Witcher 3, adds more customization, a better story than the base game. Lost Chapters adds a new (non open world despite being promised to be open world) spot and some quests.
So i stand by what I said, Witcher 3 delivered on the promise Peter Molyneux made about the original Fable.