Since the game released it passed 5 months but...

Users who are viewing this thread

I still see the same repetitive town,castle scenes in different locations. They promised to make each town,castle will be unique but nothing added since the release so far..
 
i mean from the beginning of the early access.

Devs have been concentrating on stability of the game and optimization so far rather then on adding context. Which make sense. Adding new stuff would make optimization later just that much more difficult. It's sensible to make sure that what is already in the game runs smoothly before adding more stuff.
 
Devs have been concentrating on stability of the game and optimization so far rather then on adding context. Which make sense. Adding new stuff would make optimization later just that much more difficult. It's sensible to make sure that what is already in the game runs smoothly before adding more stuff.
Making scenes is different work. I am scener too and I know there are people works in taleworlds as a scener. I am wondering what they have done so far?
 
With 1.4.3 there have been added a lot of new battle scenes, as far as I can tell. I am not sure about the sieges, though, as my current 1.4.3 playthrough is halting because of the lack of new content.
You may want to play the Beta branch.
 
If I were running the office, I'd tell my programmers that what you're asking for is better saved for late development. Five months in beta isnt a long time at all - my game now only stutters occasionally on siege maps, never on the Strategic map, pathing has improved, new equipment has been introduced, perks have been slowly trickled in.

But there's still major pathing issues, especially on sieges - one desert city it looks like there used to be a door in one of the towers, but isnt anymore - the AI acts like there should be a door. Economy, dear lord, still needs so much damned balance work - I mean, economics on release was borked, but its swung to the other extreme. 75 quality troops, no holdings, I'm loosing 500 gold a day, and I'm still not nasty enough to fight even the smallest of lords (save me from the ubermercs that field like 100 cav that magically regenerate even if you manage to defeat them). The only way economy could be worse for the player is if the devs added a student loan mechanism.

You want a new experience? I want a game that's playable first.
 
Devs have been concentrating on stability of the game and optimization so far rather then on adding context. Which make sense. Adding new stuff would make optimization later just that much more difficult. It's sensible to make sure that what is already in the game runs smoothly before adding more stuff.

This is not the way most projects are structured. Developers will usually map out and implement all the game mechanics first and then do all the balancing and finer bugfixing etc later. Adding and polishing game mechanics one by one is typically how you end up with spaghetti code which you spend 80% of your time trying to make usable

In the 2000s there were a few smaller developers run by (more or less) amateurs who used to do this, i.e. making the game playable first and then adding new mechanics if they felt like the game would be better with them, but this is extremely risky to do and I don't see how a large company like taleworlds could pull it off.
 
This is not the way most projects are structured. Developers will usually map out and implement all the game mechanics first and then do all the balancing and finer bugfixing etc later. Adding and polishing game mechanics one by one is typically how you end up with spaghetti code which you spend 80% of your time trying to make usable

In the 2000s there were a few smaller developers run by (more or less) amateurs who used to do this, i.e. making the game playable first and then adding new mechanics if they felt like the game would be better with them, but this is extremely risky to do and I don't see how a large company like taleworlds could pull it off.

Yeah, not being involved in development myself I have no idea. But having been in quite a few closed alpha, pre-alpha, early access, and beta tests it was ALWAYS additions before fixing as anything you fix will just get broke when some new big system is implemented. This is literally the only game in development where I have seen the opposite argued and I was beginning to think I had been lied to in every single test I'd been in...
 
I am going to make a guess by saying that I believe the 'Code Refactoring' came as a necessity that was not planned. Perhaps as the project went on there was a realization that things were not going to be able to move forward if the code was not 'coherent'.
Or perhaps there is simply a different project philosophy at TW.
In any case, as a retired IT Project Manager I was not asked to participate ( they probably did not know I was available) and I am also guessing neither were you. So we just fasten our seat belts and go along for the ride.
 
This is not the way most projects are structured. Developers will usually map out and implement all the game mechanics first and then do all the balancing and finer bugfixing etc later. Adding and polishing game mechanics one by one is typically how you end up with spaghetti code which you spend 80% of your time trying to make usable

All or at last most game mechanics are already in the game. Question was about new content, more exactly about new settlement scenes. That's not mechanics.
 
This is not the way most projects are structured. Developers will usually map out and implement all the game mechanics first and then do all the balancing and finer bugfixing etc later. Adding and polishing game mechanics one by one is typically how you end up with spaghetti code which you spend 80% of your time trying to make usable

In the 2000s there were a few smaller developers run by (more or less) amateurs who used to do this, i.e. making the game playable first and then adding new mechanics if they felt like the game would be better with them, but this is extremely risky to do and I don't see how a large company like taleworlds could pull it off.
It's quite funny because that's exactly what Hoppo did with Risk of rain 2. It has a full realse tomorrow and it's been one of the best early access titles since it's realse.Hoppo isn't a big team either, but I guess the scope of the game is much larger in bannerlord.
 
If adding new settlement scenes causes bugs or makes optimisation harder then the game is utterly doomed
Lol have you been playing? Most of the performance issues have come from retreat pathing being bugged on maps, its been one of their biggest issues. They no doubt are now testing maps to ensure they dont introduce massive performance issues and we have no idea how they plan to implement the new maps.... one by one or in a batch.
 
Lol have you been playing? Most of the performance issues have come from retreat pathing being bugged on maps, its been one of their biggest issues. They no doubt are now testing maps to ensure they dont introduce massive performance issues and we have no idea how they plan to implement the new maps.... one by one or in a batch.

If the retreat pathing is bugged then adding new maps now wont introduce more bugs or make it harder to fix later. The game deals with most assets like maps and models agnostically, so a bug in one of them is going to be a (potential) bug in all of them.
 
Back
Top Bottom