Yeah - seems like they're trying to add a very light sprinkle of a strategy game building it now after the fact rather than at the base of development. That generally doesnt bode well from own experience but i hope im dead wrong
You have made many good criticisms in this thread froggyluv but this one is what I believe best outlines the truth.
Bannerlord and all games in the Mount and Blade series are the fusion of two seperate games:
- The battle simmulations in which we hack and slash our enemies.
- The campaign map on which we strategise
The character development system touches both halves of the game as you try to make a character more affective in both aspects.
Its clear that the battle simulations are a difficult technical feat of AI calculations and units rendered.
Even the continuous non turn based nature of the campaign map makes it a greater technical challenge than other games.
However with these consideration for the economy of developers time.
The campaign side of the game it seems has never had a singular vision of design, it is several good ideas roughly welded together with no vision for the overall whole. Which can work its just harder. (Even games with overal visions make changes and adjust for new ideas, but they know where they intend to finish)
My example for this is the dynasty system, this is the most ambitious departure from the previous Mount and Blade titles in terms of the campaign. expanding your character story to be intergenerational, lengthening your Journey!
But what has been added to make your story more interesting so that you would want to enjoy it longer? A snowballing solution beyond the numbers tweaking would surely be an essential feature, infact maybe multiple. How else would players interest be maintained through multiple generations if the gameplay loop shows no variety or change in diffuclty over time.
The last thing is while I know many features have a decent amount of depth to them with many ways a player can affect an outcome, all of that depth is hidden from the player. Never properly explained in a tooltip at the place of relevance.
If for example an AI makes a binary choice with 8 or so variables effecting the final descision but the player has no idea that it is within their agency to affect those 8 or so variables and hence the end choice. Then that end choice appears irrational random or somewhat outside player control.
Setting aside the technical difficulties of a new engine as a player after 10 years in development I simply expect a better game, even if thats irrational given realties its how I feel.
If im honest and I compare Bannerlord to Warband, this patch 1.5.6 which added rebellions and clan marriages, is the day one patch of early access the first content of the sequel game.
This post may seem very negative and I suppose its the result of pent up frustration as I have watched the development of the game but I actually have a lot of patience for the game and think it can be saved. If they better work as a team on the campaign side of the game. I think mexxico's effort to involve the community in development has also been hugely admirable and important. The campaign side of the game needs the resources given to it in development to consolidate and flesh out its features.