-
If you are reporting a bug, please head over to our Technical Support section for Bannerlord.
Ehh refunded it.
- Thread starter Jhaerik
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
- Status
There are plenty of full-price, fully released titles which also have gamebreaking issues that make it impossible for some people to play it. That is not the same thing as it being unplayable. You are simply wrong, quit whining lmao
Mawotb
Recruit
so people who cant play even a full released game are invalid? great attitude to bring to a forum for posting about issues and problems. instead getting EA screechers and now elitists saying that an unplayable game for some is still playable because some / more / most people can play it. you lack the depth of awareness to see the variation in performance is more than just playable / unplayable. over 90% of the current patches are bugs ive never seen or encountered myself. so they are all invalid as well right? because seeing 'crash' in most dot points means a game is abolsutely and undeniably 'playable'.... right......
I can't deal with directional block neither, so I bought a shield......Problem fixed. Still on Warband; directional block needed hours of training. Nothing new about that.
You serious man?
I play on a old i7+ gtx 1070 the game is smooth at 700 units displayed.
+it's already 4th patch in 4 days of release, proving the devs are serious with their EA.
Patience doesn't look to be your thing.
Refunding such a game for such reasons isn't the best idea you had, when it will provid hundred hours of gameplay and replayability.
(making a thread about it is completely useless BTW)
it's an EA, asking for an option to switch to auto block would have been a better deal, that's the goal of an early access.
You serious man?
I play on a old i7+ gtx 1070 the game is smooth at 700 units displayed.
+it's already 4th patch in 4 days of release, proving the devs are serious with their EA.
Patience doesn't look to be your thing.
Refunding such a game for such reasons isn't the best idea you had, when it will provid hundred hours of gameplay and replayability.
(making a thread about it is completely useless BTW)
it's an EA, asking for an option to switch to auto block would have been a better deal, that's the goal of an early access.
Last edited:
Look few posts above:
Just because it works for you it doesn't mean it's playable for everyone else.
Oh wait...
You are just a moron.
You're not very good at basic logic, are you? Let me break it down for you.
To say a game is "unplayable" is to say it cannot be played. That there is something fundamentally wrong with the game which makes it impossible (for anyone) to play it. If your particular hardware, or software, or whatever is incompatible with it the game is not unplayable, you simply cannot play it. That's the difference.
For the 10th time. We cannot play the game. It doesn't work due to some coding mistakes. It crashes when you start it.
I'm familiar with EA definition and bought other EA games before. I never had such issues in the past. Titles like Rust, Dayz, KSP, Factorio and many others had their bugs and issues but basically worked.
Selling a completely broken product to customers is not ok, no matter what your fanboy brain thinks.
Ya'll getting trolled so hard by this obvious **** post 
Whatever issues you're having do not make the game unplayable for the majority of the people who can actually play it, what do you not get? If 200k people are IN-GAME and playing the game right now, in it's EA state, then how does that not qualify as EA? I'm a little perplexed by your reasoning here. I understand you're upset that you cannot play the Early Access title you paid for but that's what comes with the territory when you fund a game that's still in-dev.
Settle down with all the name-calling and insults as well, your issue will get resolved and you'll get to play the game too.
Revverie
What all you have to say has to do with what I've said now? All I've said is that he is a twat for buying an early access and expecting a full fleshed game, I havent said anything about perfomance lmao. Please stop making useless texts of walls to argue in your own mind
Most of those games are independent and they cost less than Bannerlord. And also less complicated than Bannerlord.
Mawotb
Recruit
ive seen three patterns so far, people screeching EA incessantly, people whinging about how some margin of people can play and some margin cant and say the game is 'playable' and others invalidating threads on clear valid reasons of things not working, not existing, or being incomplete, a fourth if I just throw in people being asshats for the sake of its namesake just to throw shade on someone expressing discontent, which is their entire right as a paying investor on the damn EA forums. Having a clear lack of sympathy / empathy / understanding or mere common sense that some people had high hopes and had them dashed in a spectacular fashion. I myself was wise enough to give up on all my expectations the moment I heard that the first release period was revoked. Some titles have been crippled due to a single bug and being labelled 'unplayable'. This word has many applications, for example the depth of play in businesses is far inferior to warband, the campaign getting cut very short by the current unreliable faction AI performance overall and its logic, combat is far skewed from that of warband (to be expected), archery is far weaker, the AI doesnt fire at an appreciable range for archers, the damage attenuation is huge, horseback one handed involved having to salute the ground every time you want to dome some poor sop. You may not call this 'unplayable' in the most literal sense but to many others its game breaking and terminal to immersion, play experience or any plethora of other excuses, heck this isn't even touching on the swift talks of people completely incapable of loading into the game. Yes its EA, but yes its also very hit and miss. I have played tons of EA on release day that are far more fleshed out or atleast fluent. I myself have plenty of load time screens with unexplained screens like the combat screen popping up sometimes when i travel between city and roam. calling a game playable because SOME people can run it is absurd. You are just lucky you didnt hit the save scum corruption issue or you would no doubt be singing a very different tune to i can run it it must be 'playable'. Id he said exactly that expecting a fully released game you should have quoted it but you didn't so you are assuming meaning when its not there. everyone has ranges of feeling with a lot being disappointing on how far behind the game is to where many people want it to be to play their way, because they can and they should. stop being assholes lacking basic human sensitivity that wanting a game like bannerlord as warband has become quite dated and the missing components in that ever more clear, just makes the absence of each individuals preference all the more prominent. Good for you, that you don't care enough to understand basic criticism, stay the f away from people who are voicing valid concerns for a game that has spotty content at the best of times with no explanation than right here on the forums.
ultimately I always come back to the same functional base question, how bad does it have to be for you to atleast shut up or agree. if it works fine for you perfect, stay out of the forums if you want to throw shade at other people that have valid issues.
ultimately I always come back to the same functional base question, how bad does it have to be for you to atleast shut up or agree. if it works fine for you perfect, stay out of the forums if you want to throw shade at other people that have valid issues.
This isn't the proper area to be commenting on issues you're facing, that's for the bug reports and technical support areas of the forums.
Also, like I mentioned previously... if 200k people are ACTIVELY playing the game at this very moment... then the game is in a playable state. Just because you are having issues related to your software/hardware configuration does not mean the game is not playable in general, it's just not accessible to you at this moment because of whatever reason... but again, 200k+ people are not having this issue.
They'll eventually resolve these issues in a prioritized manner, like all other development studios would.
Why did you spend 40 hours if you didn't like it, Also $60 AAA games takes less than 20 hours. So Bannerlord did a good thing
yes I can pretty much enjoy with that over 100 hours, which is awesome for an $40 game. Subjective.
Just because they can't load in doesn't make it unplayable and doesn't make it playable too. It means that the game isn't finished. And yes it isn't finished no one denies that. I feel sorry for those that can't play but I'm pretty sure the devs are going to fix the issues and they fixed some already.
Subjective
Generalization, there are things I agree and there are things I disagree with. For example, I agree with combat is better in Warband(FOR ME! It is a subjective thing, you can't say "is better") but I disagree with archery is far weaker, I think it is superior to Warband's archery. You can't say shut up because I agree with combat is better in Warband(again for me) and also you can't say shut up because I disagree with archery thing. They are subjective. There are also objective things like performance issues, I can't say "there are no performance issues" If I say so, then you can tell me to shut up because you can prove it. Objective things, Subjective things.
I checked your messages and it seems to me that, I tried more for solving peoples(that's completely okay, you don't have to try solving peoples problems) If I say "No X, IMO Bannerlords archery is superior to Warbands" that isn't throwing shade that is expressing ideas. Throwing shade is saying "shut up" to someone who said an objective thing.
I strongly suggest you research "Subjective and Objective" sentences.
Last edited:
It just an excuse devs use to release ****ty games then fall back behind "it's EA" when it sucks.
Then after they get their money they stop working on it and abandon it.
If you can afford that computer you can afford this game for $30. Multiplayer is a huge improvement and a lot of fun. Controls imo are improved. Battles are beautiful and for the most part very smooth.
A better move might have been MP only EA release and then SP early access in 6 months. Media is publicizing this as a release, it isn’t ready. Bannerlord might not going to be ready for 1 or 2 years to be feature complete and expanded into a the product it can be. Much of the game is in an unplayable state, but that doesn’t mean I don’t think I already have money monies worth. What’s there and what works is amazing.
A better move might have been MP only EA release and then SP early access in 6 months. Media is publicizing this as a release, it isn’t ready. Bannerlord might not going to be ready for 1 or 2 years to be feature complete and expanded into a the product it can be. Much of the game is in an unplayable state, but that doesn’t mean I don’t think I already have money monies worth. What’s there and what works is amazing.
Mawotb
Recruit
saying specific functions of a game are a certain way is not generalisations when they specify potentially or easily measured things. You are right about better or worse being purely subjective, because you did not include the potentially objective reasons why. no one has to agree but some of the responses on here border on completely redundant and comments for the sake of comments. I dont see how you can consider it superior, archery includes archers. Archers in warband had ~3x the range of rocklobbing looters, bannerlord has about equal. therefore warband archers =/= bannerlord archers. Also health pools are higher in bannerlord and therefore a lot of things at the moment are watered down in comparison. also i just said it is better, and i said why. ironic. im not going to argue with someone that uses the point i dont understand the difference between subjective and objective when i used a literally measurable difference between the two. which should of been a given. This is all beside the point when you werent directly quoted in the comment. I have made specific replies to specific people saying arbitrary or outright unnecessary dribble stating the obvious, throwing shade meaning offering subjective bias and nothing else on what should be a constructive, critical and report based or similar set of threads discussing things, not unnecessarily arguing moot points. like claiming i cant understand something you couldnt take the time to think about and imagine what obvious reasons would support my statement. instead i had to educate you on what you seem so self serving and elitist about.
Didnt you make a post where you stated that you refunded it?
- Status
Similar threads
