Berzerker Jay
Why do people who obviously do not enjoy the experience of playing early-access games buy games while they're still in early-access?
-
If you are reporting a bug, please head over to our Technical Support section for Bannerlord.
Mods may worth the wait but...
- Thread starter Dulannjah
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
What is the point of having an opinion if we have to go only one way ? same energy
and in truth it is you who limit the development of the game, you agree with everything that Taleworlds does and all we have had is hotfix overall, taleworlds has so far shown no motivation to improve the game in depth and the fears of a desire for casualization are felt and in any case it is good for a game like Mount and Blade
Taleworlds vision of the game? I'm sure the developers had a vision for many things, that just got declined and declined again.
Because it feels like the managements vision of the game is to finish the last few quests and things like Prison break, add the last few perks and get this game ready for console release without anymore substantial content added.
Because it feels like the managements vision of the game is to finish the last few quests and things like Prison break, add the last few perks and get this game ready for console release without anymore substantial content added.
Berzerker Jay
First, nowhere have I said I agree with everything Taleworlds does, nor will you find evidence of that in my posts. That's ridiculous.
Beyond that you have a subjective opinion that has no facts to debate over. That's fine that you think it's all hotfixes overall (even though it's not, and I'm not interested in debating the subjective terms involved, especially considering the argument that's supporting) and it's fine that you think the devs show no motivation...even though we can see they're motivated just by their engagement in the forums, and updates come on a regular basis.
I'm not saying anything about your right to hold or post your personal opinion -- that's exactly what we're all here for, isn't it? -- but I am pointing to the validity of some claims. Have your opinion, but what's wrong with me having mine and expressing it just the same?
No. Not the same energy at all.
I never said you didn't have the right to express yourself but we can talk about your first message
It's pathetic. What are you aiming for? Chip away at the morale of the dev team with stupid comments, so that maybe, just maybe, you can have the chance to interfere and become right?
Berzerker Jay
You've been talking about that message...at long length....
Yes, it is my opinion that it is whiny. It's nonsense as far as having a game developed. You have a developer actively trying to engage a community, and then if the toxic elements dominate it all you have no point to it. I've already mentioned this is part of why I respect this developer.
Guess we can drop it now? You have your opinion and I have mine, and we don't like each others' opinions -- cool? You seem to want more than that, but I absolutely stand by my opinion about unreasonable criticism of early-access development, and you haven't said a single thing to convince me otherwise. Ironically it feels like whining.
Yes, it is my opinion that it is whiny. It's nonsense as far as having a game developed. You have a developer actively trying to engage a community, and then if the toxic elements dominate it all you have no point to it. I've already mentioned this is part of why I respect this developer.
Guess we can drop it now? You have your opinion and I have mine, and we don't like each others' opinions -- cool? You seem to want more than that, but I absolutely stand by my opinion about unreasonable criticism of early-access development, and you haven't said a single thing to convince me otherwise. Ironically it feels like whining.
You obviously missed the word "clear" in vision part. Everyone can have a vision about everything but if it is not clear the process to reach that vision will be messy. That is what we experience now. If you don't believe it go and see the code.
You also obviously missed the main point of that discussion. The post to which we responded was blaming some group of players to have bad influence on the game development decisions. The objective of the discussion was not the quality of the game that was only side topic. After this, your response turned this to discussion about the quality of the game. I am not going there because...
... this section of your response disqualifies you from any further civilized on topic discussion. As a matter of fact I think it violates the forum rules. If you did not get it why - well, you essentially insulted other members of the forum by calling their comments stupid, i.e. you called them stupid. All the other participants were civilized enough to not make direct isults on other community members. They can disagree in their views but calling someone stupid just because they have different opinion is out of limits.It's pathetic. What are you aiming for? Chip away at the morale of the dev team with stupid comments, so that maybe, just maybe, you can have the chance to interfere and become right?
It's not your role to command people here about what they should do and whether they should post here or not. As a matter of fact I myself have already stopped to play. I still think I will get back to Bannerlord after some time (maybe a year or two, if mods fix the game) but you did not get the point again. People post criticism to inform other visitors of the forum about their opinion of the game. You may not like it but we have the right to express our opinion.
Berzerker Jay
Note that you have to change my wording and meaning entirely in order to claim I'm violating the forum rules and participating so poorly.
I said it's pathetic to slam Taleworlds like this, and whatever you want to say, I was responding to people slamming Taleworlds. You got some spin, that's for sure. You read this as me calling some unnamed person's comments stupid.
I never commanded anyone, but ironically you seem to feel it is your role to command me, and with some of the most manipulative rhetoric I've read in a bit.
If you don't like my opinion, I don't like yours, so let's call it even. I really don't like your attitude.
Berzerker Jay
And as if I have been off topic. My first responses were clearly to the point of the topic, and from there I have been responding to people whining about someone disagreeing with them.
Honestly, is this forum so toxic no one can voice an opinion against these few members who won't say anything to the points, but just fallaciously and even dishonestly try to invalidate and dismiss?
If I've made a mistake it's in engaging certain individuals at all, individuals who obviously are not here to contribute.
Honestly, is this forum so toxic no one can voice an opinion against these few members who won't say anything to the points, but just fallaciously and even dishonestly try to invalidate and dismiss?
If I've made a mistake it's in engaging certain individuals at all, individuals who obviously are not here to contribute.
Thank you!
This isnt 2015, when people did not know what the term "early access" meant because it was being confused with and had similarities to closed beta tests...
If anyone does not know what early access means now, its from their newness to PC gaming...and that is their fault for not understanding, not the companies or the players that understand it. We do not have to entertain them in any way other than giving them a quick reply with a brief explanation. Anything beyond that is them clinging to ignorance...then there is also the pandemic factor that caused many to have to quarantine and do what work they could do at home that has to be taken into account in the delays.
What was to be about a year long early access has more than likely now been turned into a 1 1/2-2 year project...and normally, there is a BETA before final release. I would be SHOCKED if this game is completed by the end of 2021.
I enjoy a lot of early access games, those real small indie games which still deliver stuff and have some quality behind it like:
- Workers and Ressources - Soviet Republic
- Cryofall
- Ostriv
- SimCasino
and many more which already had left the EA status.
One of the best EA games ever are games like Rimworld, Kenshi or Factorio, guess what, all were below 20€ and had very good devs.....but TW is going for the EA Games route....but at least EA Games won´t sell you early access games for full price....
You know what is the difference between them and TW? They listen to their communitiy, they cost between 9,99 - 19,99€ and they don´t introduce new/old bugs with each release....also they never claimed to be done within around 1 year and deliver a mess like TW did.
So EA can be a great concept, TW uses it for free test users for a full price and give a damn about the people who bought the game.
Last edited:
Berzerker Jay
I mean, okay, I have played some of those early-access games, as well, including Kenshi. Kenshi mostly did it right, but do you remember the game when it was selling cheap? I love the game and mean no sleight against it, but the game was incredibly and boringly bare-bones back then -- I played more then probably for the imagination of the game that would come of what I was seeing. The game, however, was empty. It also basically started that way, and guided by a single self-employee.
In this case you had an entire team working on the game for years before its release, its concept even years before that. The game that was put out in early-access wasn't complete, but it was a fairly well developed game by then that really was just at the point where it needed players to populate its code and show what was working and what was not. I can definitely acknowledge the differences in value, and honestly I don't feel I overpaid for that value, either -- and that's coming from someone who is hard on devs for putting out early-access titles at what should be full-price. That is actually what kept me from participating more heavily in this development at first -- I've actually got a fair amount of experience at this, going all the way back to SneezyMUD in the 90's, and probably up to Kenshi, actually. I'm pretty happy to contribute here even if I did pay about five times for this game as I did for Kenshi.
What kind of wicked travesty is this?! i have 412 (just counted) carefully patched and merged together mods in my Skyrim folder and they won't leave while i draw breath
I think this has a pretty easy answer. So they can offer their opinions, complain about things they don't like and trying to get things the do like added to the game. Early access means the game is not done which means people believe they can influence the direction of the game.
To give an example of what I mean, If I come on the site and complain that I am miserable about the constant unending wars (which I am by the way), my hope is that Taleworlds will read my post and listen to what I have to say and it will influence their decision to change how wars work. I may also have issues with the lack of progress (which I do) and complain that Taleworlds should change their priorities to work on the things I feel are broken. Then I may feel like EA is taking to long (which I do) and it harming the game long term due to driving off modders (which I also feel) and that they should think about wrapping it up soon.
Obviously there are quite a few things I am not enjoying but I hope by not enjoying them and making it clear that I am not enjoying them, Taleworlds will eventually make changes and release Bannerlord in a state I absolutely enjoy.
There you go. Simple answer with an example.
Berzerker Jay
I'm talking about the people who are here for no constructive reason, who just complain basically that the early-access game they bought is early-access.
I think your input is well considered and constructive.
Obvious, but well put.
The fairly negative player feedback is an Early Access version of the potentially positive player feedback to the released game. How the turntables...
As for me, I'm so ahead of the curve, I haven't even bought or played the game and yet I complain about it with a view of potentially buying and playing it if it turns out to be good. A truly revolutionary concept that could tilt the power balance back to the players and stop this fraud called EA.
Berzerker Jay
I don't think negative feedback is invalid, not by any means, but especially negative feedback should be framed in constructive ways or else what are you accomplishing? Consider that the devs need to make something of that feedback in order for it to affect the game development at all.
Also, early-access isn't a fraud. It doesn't sell itself as anything other than being early access to a game that isn't yet finished, and being provided with exactly what you are promised is not fraud. Fraud may be more providing feedback based on experiences of playing the game you have not actually had.
Also, early-access isn't a fraud. It doesn't sell itself as anything other than being early access to a game that isn't yet finished, and being provided with exactly what you are promised is not fraud. Fraud may be more providing feedback based on experiences of playing the game you have not actually had.
Nobody "understands" what early access is because every company implements it differently and has different results. There are no standards and no clear guidelines (maybe on steam but nobody really follows them).
For bigger companies like Taleworlds, Early Access is nothing but a marketing term that mainly serves to deflect criticism on a game they think will be poorly received otherwise. The reasoning is to ease buyers into the modern reality that there is no "final" game most of the time, and that there will always be massive gamechanging patches after the release hype has already died down. The point of saying it's in Early Access (for a large company) is to maintain at least some of the hype until the game is presentable, while also selling it at full price.
It also has to do with reviews. Nobody can predict the future, so even if a reviewer knows that a game won't change much, they have to include "this is not the final release" or some other platitude, and often save any real criticism of the game.
Frankly I think it's PR genius. Taleworlds sold millions and millions of copies, but avoided any immediate backlash whatsoever by just saying "it's early access". The playerbase may have evaporated but who cares, they have their money now, and the majority of redditors who haven't played since June still think Taleworlds is a cute happy cottage company.
Taleworlds has released Two (2) games; Mount and Blade (which they released twice under two slightly different names) and Bannerlord. The first was a mess that took years of community input to be half decent, the latter is a mess that is ignoring community input entirely. Their development philosophy is a shambles, one look at the code or employee reviews from either game will tell you all you need to know. There is also some shadier stuff I can't go into. They have a very poor track record which is only getting worse.
Similar threads
