Fable IIII when?

Fable IIII when?
Oh god, what if they call it F4ble?

Other urls found in this thread:

straightdope.com/columns/read/438/why-do-clocks-with-roman-numerals-use-iiii-instead-of-iv
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_numerals#Alternative_forms
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

>IIII

Lionhead is ded, m8. Let it go. Maybe we'll get a port of II to pc one day.

>IIII

Oh for fuck sake, America.

what the fuck do you want? dont make fun of me just because you cant count. you probably would of made it IIIII

>IIII

It's a real way of writing it. Blame the Romans

>would of
It's getting too obvious, pal

>IIIII
I know this is bait, but it's V you fucking retard.

>wanting anything else Fable after Fable 3 or that fucking Kinect game
Least they got shutdown before they could release their next shitty project.

No, idiot.

I
II
III
IV
V
VI

etc etc

Jesus Christ, you ACTUALLY can't count

IIII is used on clocks for aesthetical purposes, to counter VIII

>IIII

Molyneux at least talked about wanting to do Fable 4 with the original team, but I'm not getting my hopes up ever.

Yes, IIII is an accepted way of writing "four". IV is also an accepted way of writing "four"
you thinking you need to explain this to me means you're retarded

I only want it if Peter gets fired

>You explaining something I already know means you're retarded

no u

no it's not. only on clocks, that is the only scenario in which it was and currently is correctly used

straightdope.com/columns/read/438/why-do-clocks-with-roman-numerals-use-iiii-instead-of-iv

Well, M$ did tell the team to scrap the entirety of that new Fable game (Legends, was it?) and maintained that they still have an interest in the IP. Hopefully they just went back to the drawing board and we can get a proper Fable sequel instead of another spin off piece of shit that's a waste of everyone's time and money.

Fable has never been good. I'd erase the entire series if I could.

>M$ did tell the team to scrap the entirety of that new Fable game
Microsoft scrapped the whole team. Lionhead Studios officially closed down earlier this year. I think Microsoft still owns the IP so I guess they could hire another developer to do it, but I doubt we'll see anything about it anytime in the near future.

Well... Peter could always start a Kickstarter...
...

.


no

>IIII

I said something. You told me I was wrong, but I wasn't. You're retarded

> en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_numerals#Alternative_forms

>The "standard" forms described above reflect typical modern usage rather than a universally accepted convention. Usage in ancient Rome varied greatly and remained inconsistent in medieval and modern times.

>Roman inscriptions, especially in official contexts, seem to show a preference for additive forms such as IIII and VIIII instead of (or even as well as) subtractive forms such as IV and IX. Both methods appear in documents from the Roman era, even within the same document. "Double subtractives" also occur, such as XIIX or even IIXX instead of XVIII. Sometimes V and L are not used, with instances such as IIIIII and XXXXXX rather than VI or LX.

>Such variation and inconsistency continued through the medieval period and into modern times, even becoming conventional. Clock faces that use Roman numerals normally show IIII for four o’clock but IX for nine o’clock, a practice that goes back to very early clocks such as the Wells Cathedral clock. However, this is far from universal: for example, the clock on the Palace of Westminster in London (aka "Big Ben") uses IV. Similarly, at the beginning of the 20th century, different representations of 900 (commonly CM) appeared in several inscribed dates. For instance, 1910 is shown on Admiralty Arch, London, as MDCCCCX rather than MCMX, while on the north entrance to the Saint Louis Art Museum, 1903 is inscribed as MDCDIII rather than MCMIII.

Just because your 3rd grade teacher taught you IV doesn't mean that's the only valid form my dudes