I really didn't want to be this disappointed

[Lord of Shadows]

Complaining is good. If enough people complain the devs will eventually catch wind of something missing that people really want and add it.

That's not how it works. Sure, maybe for some small insignificant feature. But we're talking about much bigger features here. Kingdom management, weapon crafting, diplomacy, death/aging. I'm sure they know we want it. Us complaining won't make them work faster.

 

[Moheemo]

My intention is not to complain and I apologize if it comes across that way. As fans we are passionate about our interests and this game has been on my radar for years. My hope is that TaleWorlds will hear our concerns and see our disappointment and do everything within their power to give us something closer to what we hoped it would be...but I can't be faulted if I doubt they will fulfill that vision so late in the game.

They literally gave you the earliest possible version with the commitment to improve over the next year and then some. Saying that if you wanted the end game to wait...your problem is the instant gratification which, to say the least, speaks for itself

 

[enridem]

Everything works better than in Warband? Did you even play that game?
You know what I did in PoP? I told my cavalry to dismount, move behind their parked horses and then I killed elite enemy stacks from behind without losing a single hitpoint, because they would get stuck in the dismounted horses unable to move away.

Compared to a game like that this plays completely different, I have already had more impressive battles than would ever be possible in Warband.

Yes, I played Warband. I did not ask how this game was polished and how many bugs were fixed. I asked how this game is SIGNIFICANTLY better than Warband. Bug fixes and polishing is probably not what people would chat about at the watercooler when they are excited for a sequel.

 

[Moheemo]

The reason why **** games have been coming out in the past decade is because of the fan boys and white knights. Oh, it's fine. It'll be ironed out. It's beta, blah blah blah. OMG. Can't even launch the game.

Youre tossing Bannerlord in with every other dev team and everything other title. This is the entitlement speaking. MB has always been a passion project and has always been a small independent team. Assuming they will be the same as everything else is disrespectful and entitled. Even if I'm wrong at least I'm not the one making assumptions out of anger

 

[Lord of Shadows]

The reason why **** games have been coming out in the past decade is because of the fan boys and white knights. Oh, it's fine. It'll be ironed out. It's beta, blah blah blah. OMG. Can't even launch the game.

There's probably 200k+ people playing each on a slightly different PC. You can't possibly account for every single configuration to work perfectly 100% of the time. Stuff like that happens. And they'll fix it ASAP.

 

[Noviix]

You are judging your purchase off your immediate value from an EA title.This is everything wrong with what you and people similar are saying and proves just how entitled you all are. You paid $50-40 for an EA title that comes with free 24/7 development for the next two years AT LEAST. If you can't get this through your thick skull refund and get lost

Meanwhile I paid $15 for CSGO, the full game, which is now the pinnacle of competitive FPS and has been for years even succeeding to keep high player counts despite Overwatch's release. They then made the game free and continue to add content, update the game, and there's even rumor of updating the engine entirely.

I paid $12 for ARK in EA, albeit on sale but I'm pretty sure it was no more than $30, and had way more content, and "free 24/7 development for the next two years". It's also still being updated.

I paid $20 for Rust in EA. it also had two+ years of constant improvement and development. Though it was significantly different when I bought it from where it is now, it was constantly improved upon, but never asked for more. It's also still being updated.

Rimworld is/was $20 and that was EA, also saw more features at launch and at a far reduced price point. It's also still being updated.

My thick skull is pretty understanding of value unfortunately, and I did not pay for $50-$40 worth of content. At the moment I would have been happier to acquire any combination of two games I listed above, or hell even three of them for the price of Bannerlord instead.

And news flash genius, ALMOST EVERY GAME GETS FREE 24/7 DEVELOPMENT FOR THE NEXT TWO YEARS OR THE GAME DIES.

 

[Noviix]

You can expect whatever you like is your opinion of course, I just don't share it when people just mention the bad things and completly forgets/ignores the good ones. After all this is a game, like in movies people have their opinions but I don't like it when they just completly ignore facts.

So people should just praise the good things never the bad?

It's the same way people like me don't like when games get undying praise.

 

[enridem]

Why can no one answer this simple question?
Again, how is Bannerlord a SIGNIFICANT improvement over Warband?

I'm not talking about graphic improvements or general polish. Those are expected at a very basic level.
What are the features that we simply have to be excited about?

 

[Moheemo]

Meanwhile I paid $15 for CSGO, the full game, which is now the pinnacle of competitive FPS and has been for years even succeeding to keep high player counts despite Overwatch's release. They then made the game free and continue to add content, update the game, and there's even rumor of updating the engine entirely.

I paid $12 for ARK in EA, albeit on sale but I'm pretty sure it was no more than $30, and had way more content, and "free 24/7 development for the next two years". It's also still being updated.

I paid $20 for Rust in EA. it also had two+ years of constant improvement and development. Though it was significantly different when I bought it from where it is now, it was constantly improved upon, but never asked for more. It's also still being updated.

Rimworld is/was $20 and that was EA, also saw more features at launch and at a far reduced price point. It's also still being updated.

My thick skull is pretty understanding of value unfortunately, and I did not pay for $50-$40 worth of content. At the moment I would have been happier to acquire any combination of two games I listed above, or hell even three of them for the price of Bannerlord instead.

And news flash genius, ALMOST EVERY GAME GETS FREE 24/7 DEVELOPMENT FOR THE NEXT TWO YEARS OR THE GAME DIES.

All of the games you just quoted are solely multiplayer. Of course they die without development. We're talking about a single player game here, genius. Left hand needs to talk to the right hand on this one g. All of which also include paid DLC and micro-transactions which there are NONE of in this game. So yes the price is HEAVILY justified. Y'all just don't get it. Entitlement from years of gaming and circlejerking

 

[Kipsta]

Yes, I played Warband. I did not ask how this game was polished and how many bugs were fixed. I asked how this game is SIGNIFICANTLY better than Warband. Bug fixes and polishing is probably not what people would chat about at the watercooler when they are excited for a sequel.

hurr durr i no ask why better than warband i ask why much better than warband
? Oh the humanity

 

[Noviix]

All of the games you just quoted are solely multiplayer. Of course they die without development. We're talking about a single player game here, genius. Left hand needs to talk to the right hand on this one g. All of which also include paid DLC and micro-transactions which there are NONE of in this game. So yes the price is HEAVILY justified. Y'all just don't get it. Entitlement from years of gaming and circlejerking

I haven't bought any ARK DLC, I haven't bought any Rust DLC, Rimworld is a single player only game, you're just completely wrong. It's not entitlement, I'm just right.

CSGO has no DLC.

ARK has no necessary DLC.

Rust has no necessary DLC.

Rimworld has no necessary DLC.

What part don't you get? GENIUS

 

[No idea]

So far I have played for 75 minutes and I liked it. Yes, it is Warband, but it is Warband on steroids, which is what I was hoping. Yes, there are lots of things to improve, balance and expand, but this is early access. The only thing I think they should have reworked from scratch but they didnt was the clunky way to command troops. Something like the total war games system (where you simply click, drag and drop units around) is way better, and they had the money and the time to do it.

 

[Lord of Shadows]

What are the features that we simply have to be excited about?

Are you not excited about the crafting system? Or having children and successors? Or any of the new features really? Just because you're not excited about something doesn't make it irrelevant.

 

[enridem]

hurr durr i no ask why better than warband i ask why much better than warband
? Oh the humanity

Mature

 

[Lord of Shadows]

Meanwhile I paid $15 for CSGO, the full game, which is now the pinnacle of competitive FPS and has been for years even succeeding to keep high player counts despite Overwatch's release. They then made the game free and continue to add content, update the game, and there's even rumor of updating the engine entirely.

I paid $12 for ARK in EA, albeit on sale but I'm pretty sure it was no more than $30, and had way more content, and "free 24/7 development for the next two years". It's also still being updated.

I paid $20 for Rust in EA. it also had two+ years of constant improvement and development. Though it was significantly different when I bought it from where it is now, it was constantly improved upon, but never asked for more. It's also still being updated.

Rimworld is/was $20 and that was EA, also saw more features at launch and at a far reduced price point. It's also still being updated.

I bought Rocket League 2 years ago and I now have 1000+ hours on it. Does that make Bannerlord a bad purchase?

 

[ricewind]

Why can no one answer this simple question?
Again, how is Bannerlord a SIGNIFICANT improvement over Warband?

I'm not talking about graphic improvements or general polish. Those are expected at a very basic level.
What are the features that we simply have to be excited about?

You can read my post a few pages behind I think you could filter your answers within them (sorry for the long bibles people)

 

[Malorn]

I haven't bought any ARK DLC, I haven't bought any Rust DLC, Rimworld is a single player only game, you're just completely wrong. It's not entitlement, I'm just right.

...you should look at the ark community sometime, if you want to see an example of people who may not agree with your views...

Why can no one answer this simple question?
Again, how is Bannerlord a SIGNIFICANT improvement over Warband?

I'm not talking about graphic improvements or general polish. Those are expected at a very basic level.
What are the features that we simply have to be excited about?

1. Kingdom voting and management, incredibly better, much more flexible.
2. Dynasty systems to have children and have a much larger 'clan' system which you can command, not just yourself. Including other parties, caravans, etc.
3. Map design is not just prettier, it's better. Choke points, terrain, a huge number of things create a much better map. Smarter party AI also means a better map experience by far.
4. The combat AI, oh my LORD the combat AI. Push F6 sometime and watch your army actually do intelligent things, rather then blindly charge, stand still, or get bogged down. Cavalry actually charges and retreats to charge again.
5. Fighting AI is also quite a bit better in terms of reflexes, but also in terms of positioning.
6. Seige AI... repositions archers, moves to attack multiple angles. It's night and day from warband. And the pre-battle siege is also interesting.
7. Castle and Town management is much better now, the militia system is great.

That's just the things I managed in five minutes. The real key point, is that you need to compare bannerlord to warband, not to warband with mods. That's the key gap most people seem to be having. Bannerlord will have mods, they will be even better. this is the bones, not the muscles.

 

[부부를 넘어서 가자]

Why can no one answer this simple question?
Again, how is Bannerlord a SIGNIFICANT improvement over Warband?

I'm not talking about graphic improvements or general polish. Those are expected at a very basic level.
What are the features that we simply have to be excited about?

Noone can answer that because it isn't. There're some cool new features (and some more not added yet) but nothing extraordinary so far.

 

[enridem]

Are you not excited about the crafting system? Or having children and successors? Or any of the new features really? Just because you're not excited about something doesn't make it irrelevant.

Sure. Those are all great and I never once said they are irrelevant. They are just not particularly noteworthy for something so long in development (in my opinion).
I would ask that if you make an argument, please use factual information so as to not intentionally distort your opponent's intent.

 

[Lord of Shadows]

Sure. Those are all great and I never once said they are irrelevant. They are just not particularly noteworthy for something so long in development (in my opinion).
I would ask that if you make an argument, please use factual information so as to not intentionally distort your opponent's intent.

No offence, it's just that in my eyes you're making it sound like having no super cool features makes it a bad game. I guess we just have different expectations for the game.