Potential multiplayer skins leak

Users who are viewing this thread

I disagree. It keeps people engaged and makes them want to spend money, thus allowing the company to have more assets and thus be able to make a better game. As long as they don't have any effect on gameplay, I see no reason to not have microtransactions.
 
[SOTR] Roy said:
I disagree. It keeps people engaged and makes them want to spend money, thus allowing the company to have more assets and thus be able to make a better game. As long as they don't have any effect on gameplay, I see no reason to not have microtransactions.

Give me an example.
 
Aldemar said:
[SOTR] Roy said:
I disagree. It keeps people engaged and makes them want to spend money, thus allowing the company to have more assets and thus be able to make a better game. As long as they don't have any effect on gameplay, I see no reason to not have microtransactions.

Give me an example.
CS:GO.
 
[SOTR] Roy said:
Aldemar said:
[SOTR] Roy said:
I disagree. It keeps people engaged and makes them want to spend money, thus allowing the company to have more assets and thus be able to make a better game. As long as they don't have any effect on gameplay, I see no reason to not have microtransactions.

Give me an example.
CS:GO.

Compared what they earned over years to that what they delivered. Its a joke. Dont forget the big problems CS:GO had with skin markets. They would make more then enough with the game itself. ESL Events e.t.c


Its like to buy another Bus ticket after you already payed for one, but the Bus company said "its for maintaining the Bus-Line". So you only can sit on the hard wooden seat.
 
Had they allowed players to sell skins for real money, then the markets wouldn't have been an issue, and while they would not make too much money since players won't be forced to spend that money in their store, they would still be making more money overall.
 
Skins will take a serious toll on TW's reputation and I hope you will heavily reconsider skins. There's no denying the fact that the whole concept feels completely alien in view of how TW is perceived by its supporters.
 
DtheHun said:
You don't need to do this for singleplayer since you can play without internet if you wanted.

I'm not a big gamer, but the last one I bought on DVD!! (Mad Max) do not starts without Steam online, so I'm not convinced, as I don't know what will be the trend at the time of BL's final relese.

But singleplayer skins are absurd. I don't know why you would even think taleworlds would even CONSIDER doing it since singleplayer native would be able to be modified at will.

No One said that those paid skins will be stored in the same format as SP models. I anticipate serious resrictions in that field.
Unless they are going to be more restrictive on multiplayer mods wouldn't the same hold true who would consider buying a mp skin over playing a mp mod that will be less restrictive than the current gear/class system thats in the game?
 
To add to the suspicion:

1:50 to 2:00

TLDR:
Question:
"So will that also mean that you won't cut any of the already existing content and sell that as a DLC"
Answer:
"Things that we are working on at the moment are not going to be offered as DLCs,
they are just going to be inside the game"
 
They're pretty much making the multiplayer of this game to become like all the other games we hate. Games where your character will look like a peasant compared to the people who spend hundreds of euros on cosmetics. Alone by the thought of purchasable cosmetics, I'm wondering if the game will be worth the money. The only factor that is making me think twice is the singleplayer aspect where I can FREELY make my character bear whatever arms or armor I want it to wear. Warband was a good game, but I'm afraid that this game will only survive by its singleplayer.
 
marko-mus said:
They're pretty much making the multiplayer of this game to become like all the other games we hate. Games where your character will look like a peasant compared to the people who spend hundreds of euros on cosmetics. Alone by the thought of purchasable cosmetics, I'm wondering if the game will be worth the money. The only factor that is making me think twice is the singleplayer aspect where I can FREELY make my character bear whatever arms or armor I want it to wear. Warband was a good game, but I'm afraid that this game will only survive by its singleplayer.

Fun fact: 85% of warband players are SP. Probably explains the huge push for MP.
 
Captain Obvious said:
marko-mus said:
They're pretty much making the multiplayer of this game to become like all the other games we hate. Games where your character will look like a peasant compared to the people who spend hundreds of euros on cosmetics. Alone by the thought of purchasable cosmetics, I'm wondering if the game will be worth the money. The only factor that is making me think twice is the singleplayer aspect where I can FREELY make my character bear whatever arms or armor I want it to wear. Warband was a good game, but I'm afraid that this game will only survive by its singleplayer.

Fun fact: 85% of warband players are SP. Probably explains the huge push for MP.
I do know that a large portion of warband players are singleplayer, but where do u have these percentages from?
 
You can compare the number of active players on Warband on Steam to the number of players on servers.

This very moment that number is:

8 211 in-game

664 on MP servers

Which is 8%.

Naturally, MP depends much more on events and organised matches so the percentage of MP players in prime time(17.00-21.00) GMT+0 would be higher.
 
Captain Obvious said:
To add onto Gabe's point above, here are the numbers I recorded for warband.

- Multiplayer (Not NW) - 778
- Multiplayer NW - 544
- Singleplayer - 8146
- Total Multiplayer - 1332

- NW is approx 40% of all of MP players
- MP is approx 14% of all warband players

Singleplayer has been thinning out for a few years yes, the game is nearly 10 years old so it is no surprise, but to say that singleplayer doesn't keep the game alive, or NW is absurd.

Something I posted a while ago. Bit of an expanded analysis onto Marko's post. This was also when us Nerdy RPers were playing a lot, practically no one doing RP now.
 
I see. But everyone also knows that the multiplayer of Warband is not at its highest. This is probably the lowest of lows in Warband mp history. I remembered a couple of years ago there were multiple 200 man servers that were filled up. I totally agree that the singleplayer keeps the game alive.
 
You can compare the number of active players on Warband on Steam to the number of players on servers.

This very moment that number is:

8 211 in-game

664 on MP servers

Which is 8%.

Naturally, MP depends much more on events and organised matches so the percentage of MP players in prime time(17.00-21.00) GMT+0 would be higher.
The multi-player has lost a lot of it's public player-base compared to the single-player, that's true. The explanations are many, but the main reason might be as simple as most of us aren't teenagers anymore. Many loyal MP-oriented players has grown into adults since the release ten years ago. Now we've got heavy real-life duties such as jobs, families and other hobbies. There are always going to be youth and other newcomers to the series who's loving the SP, but since the MP is lacking in activity they don't bother with it. Meanwhile, I remember having to daily spam-click to join NRP five years ago before I joined the admin team.

There's a common knowledge among server owners that popular servers makes for popular servers. No-one wants to play on an empty server (aside from a few exceptions such as with a couple of friends or competitive duels), thus having a lack in popular servers also makes newcomers overlook the MP-aspect of the game.

It would've been nice if we were able to use the group event calendar on these forums to spread further awareness of open and public events in-game. As it's hard to do so on other public and large social medias related to M&B but apparently has moderators with their own self-interests and no clear or easy guidelines for promotions/lack in communication.
 
Last edited:
Seems like a silly thing to do. they can easily make customizable individual items like any other game.... making for a much deeper level of customization an engagement overall... so, if they really did opt for full body skins, it would force me to conclude they are either lazy or short sighted or not ambitious enough
 
Compared what they earned over years to that what they delivered. Its a joke. Dont forget the big problems CS:GO had with skin markets. They would make more then enough with the game itself. ESL Events e.t.c

First of all, I assume you are referring to CS:GO's problem with gambling. It wasn't a problem really but Valve still decided to shut those down possibly due to ethical and some legal issues. Still the problem wasn't about the skins really. CS:GO and DOTA still have skins, a lot of them and some even going up to thousands of dollars in price. There are people who buys those and even though I never actually cared about them there are people who enjoy them and actually enjoy playing with them as well.

As I said I am not a skin guy but I still don't care too much if they are in the game, as long as they don't affect the gameplay. DOTA or CS:GO model is quite fine. I actually like CS:GO model because skins aren't way over the top and you can always distinguish items, DOTA is getting a bit too much in terms of creative freedom resulting in some skins making some heroes not easily recognizable. So as long as the skins don't affect the gameplay in any way, like powerup/recognizable etc. they are fine to me.

Also ESL is an independent org. they have no relation to the Valve, they neither give or take money to them. Valve is also an extreme case, there is no comparison of Valve to any other game company. Going by the money they are making, on purely economic standards you can justify Valve making all their games for almost free from now on. Not every company has that luxury.
 
The multi-player has lost a lot of it's public player-base compared to the single-player, that's true. The explanations are many, but the main reason might be as simple as most of us aren't teenagers anymore. Many loyal MP-oriented players has grown into adults since the release ten years ago. Now we've got heavy real-life duties such as jobs, families and other hobbies. There are always going to be youth and other newcomers to the series who's loving the SP, but since the MP is lacking in activity they don't bother with it. Meanwhile, I remember having to daily spam-click to join NRP five years ago before I joined the admin team.
Correct, looking at my own group a lot of people just grew out of playing Warband. But something makes me think that back in the day when a lot more people played MP, a lot more people played SP too. We don't have the data so it's pointless to argue but even as someone who played 99% of Multiplayer it's very clear to me Singleplayer always had more concurrent players. The median time spent in-game of SP players is probably orders of magnitude lower than MP ones though.

There's a common knowledge among server owners that popular servers makes for popular servers. No-one wants to play on an empty server (aside from a few exceptions such as with a couple of friends or competitive duels), thus having a lack in popular servers also makes newcomers overlook the MP-aspect of the game.
You are absolutely right, and this is a very important thing that I had to keep in mind while developing MP mods for Warband. People bring people, and good releases and consistent activity is key. It'll be the same on BL's Early Access release. A dead Multiplayer can extremely rarely be revived because of how much critical player mass you need to get it going again.
 
No real surprise here but I think this is a mistake. I'm not trying to blame them for trying to squeeze money out of their product but I just don't think that this is a good way to go about it. Taleworlds seem to think that they can be the next CS:GO or fortnite and the only thing seperating them from their financial success is the absence of virtual hats. What they fail to realize here is that there are only so many people willing to spend money on cosmetics in any game to begin with and those that are probably already spending their money on, well, fortnite and cs:go.
What I'm trying to say here is that frankly the market seems saturated. Afromentioned games and others have created a gold rush mentality but developers fail to realize is that the gold rush is over. I've seen this with other games before where their creators thought themselves huge financial geniuses by trying to sell ultimately useless cosmetics to their established playerbase with underwhelming success and the much more tangible effect being the alienation of their players who felt just plain weirded out.
I'm just having trouble picturing the average M&B player getting as overly excited over virtual hats as I know some TF2 players can.

If I was in any way responsible for this kind of decision it would not be a financial risk I'd be willing to take when I could just keep doing what's worked in the past ie. making a game that people mostly played because of how both accessible and available mods were and thus boosting sales in return by sheer populatiry because let's face it, no one bought bannerlord because he or she thought M&B native was such hot ****.
 
Last edited:
The are going to have to choose between skins and supporting the multiplayer mods. No ones gonna bother buying skins if there's a multiplayer mod with plenty of content with no paywall. I think its pretty telling that they've already made their decision considering how they are handling custom servers which is the backbone of MP mods...

I don't know, perhaps they think by stagnating the multiplayer mod scene for another few years they might squeeze a few extra schmeckles out of us, maybe it they want to test the water with skins first and depending how well that goes they'll decide if want to completely stop mp mods or revert back to selling DLCs.

Things really wouldnt be this sketchy if they just came straight with us about what they want this game to be, the secrecy and lack of communication is by far the most stupid decision they've made and are continuing to make.

Yo callum, convince them to let you make a roadmap we know this is probably getting unbearable
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom