Consider: Post Release.

[Apocal]

You said Armagan didn't say what he definitely did say (more than once). You called those changes big (big/drastic/meaningful are all similar in this regard, in this particular context). You said the game is not complete yet you don't expect "drastic" changes or for them to even fix what's not working properly....

That's easy: I knew he didn't say the game was "complete." Playable is subjective but complete is a lot less so. As for the other? You literally had to cut out the sentence half of my sentence to reach this conclusion:

Like, four by my count (kingdom management, storyline, perks-ish and rebellions) for the first and no big changes to the core loop of fight->upgrade->exploit that every M&B title relies on.

Four new features, zero big/drastic changes.

I usually take that as a sign of someone not being entirely honest.

And you cutting out half my sentence was honest?

 

[JustinTime49]

@Apocal, I think there is a definite misunderstanding.

You also cannot cut half your post to prove your point. It reads:

How many new features did they add? How many big changes have their been?

Like, four by my count (kingdom management, storyline, perks-ish and rebellions) for the first and no big changes to the core loop of fight->upgrade->exploit that every M&B title relies on.

which HEAVILY implies that you believe that drastic changes occurred considering you responded to this:

These statements also suggest (rather strongly) that large, drastic changes are not likely.

Context is key. It is completely fair for Ben to conclude this since you quoted ^, implying that you disagreed with the statement and believe drastic changes indeed occurred.

Furthermore:

I didn't say they were drastic changes? It's been really clear they weren't going to drastically change anything for awhile now, even before release. They are added features, though.

This is a contradiction to your previous belief of this:

He definitely didn't say that prior to EA release:

Why Mount & Blade II: Bannerlord is choosing early access after eight years of development

TaleWorlds' CEO says it's about testing systems.

www.pcgamer.com

He was careful to emphasize that the early access version of the game, and the build players are seeing on the floor at Gamescom, are a long way off from a finished build.

"This is not going to be the kind of game where early access is…" Yavuz said, trailing off and reconsidering his words. "It's at a very rudimentary stage."

That was my impression going into EA, that it was going to be really rough and feature incomplete.

 

[Apocal]

@Apocal, I think there is a definite misunderstanding.

You also cannot cut half your post to prove your point. It reads:

which HEAVILY implies that you believe that drastic changes occurred considering you responded to this:

Context is key. It is completely fair for Ben to conclude this since you quoted ^, implying that you disagreed with the statement and believe drastic changes indeed occurred.

 

[Niroc]

Wow this turned into quite the discussion quickly. But if you guys wouldn't mind a lot of threads have already covered if they have or have not **already** added major changes to the game. The discussion I personally would like to hold is if they plan on making these sorts of changes at somepoint after version 1.0 is released and the game is out of EA.

So to start back on topic again. Do you guys think that they will add any post release content? Be it free updates or DLC?

 

[WhyAmIHere]

Wow this turned into quite the discussion quickly. But if you guys wouldn't mind a lot of threads have already covered if they have or have not **already** added major changes to the game. The discussion I personally would like to hold is if they plan on making these sorts of changes at somepoint after version 1.0 is released and the game is out of EA.

So to start back on topic again. Do you guys think that they will add any post release content? Be it free updates or DLC?

Probably some of each but I don't expect them to be substantial.

 

[JustinTime49]

You cannot make that interpretation...

no big changes TO the core loop of fight->upgrade->exploit that every M&B title relies on.

"no big changes" is tied to "the core loop of fight->upgrade->exploit that every M&B title relies on" not "How many big changes have their been". Otherwise, your sentence makes no sense. Unless, that is to say, you believe that the only big change capable in M&B as a series is the mechanic fight>upgrade>exploit, and anything NOT a change in that mechanic is trivial.

Sorry, I know I wasn't part of the initial conversation, but I am really confused as to what you are trying to convey.

 

[SOku]

About half a decade later we see comments from devs and community managers responding to overwhelmingly popular player suggestions with: "too complicated" and the appearance of a radial command wheel that would work perfectly on PS and XBox but is cumbersome on PC...

Is that your piece of evidence ? A freaking UI change ?

 

[stevehoos]

Is that your piece of evidence ? A freaking UI change ?

The game looks specifically made with console in mind. Look at how shallow and streamlined the features are.

 

[SOku]

The game looks specifically made with console in mind. Look at how shallow and streamlined the features are.

Yes I hear you, and this is a fallacy. Correlation =/= causation.
Are we going to redo the debate we had a week or so earlier ?

 

[Apocal]

Unless, that is to say, you believe that the only big change capable in M&B as a series is the mechanic fight>upgrade>exploit, and anything NOT a change in that mechanic is trivial.

Not trivial, but not a big change in the core experience either.

Something like an actual criminal gameplay loop, distinct from raiding and the gang quests, where you jockey with gang leader and bandit notables to increase your power. Or a merchant route, where it isn't fire-and-forget passive income but tied into its own mechanics.

Sorry, I know I wasn't part of the initial conversation, but I am really confused as to what you are trying to convey

Again: They've added (by my count, YMMV) four major features and zero big changes since release, and I don't think big changes are in the cards. Duh even said that they already had the criminal gameplay element implemented, which implies it was only ever meant to be quests, the rating system and maybe owning alleys.

Do you guys think that they will add any post release content? Be it free updates or DLC?

DLC, yeah. Probably naval and/or something with goofball stuff that doesn't fit the period, like pirates.

 

[JustinTime49]

Again: They've added (by my count, YMMV) four major features and zero big changes since release, and I don't think big changes are in the cards. Duh even said that they already had the criminal gameplay element implemented, which implies it was only ever meant to be quests, the rating system and maybe owning alleys.

Ah, I understand now. So I assume this mindset is carried out throughout the game, such as clan members being devoid of any life other than serving the clan leader?

Not trivial, but not a big change in the core experience either.

Something like an actual criminal gameplay loop, distinct from raiding and the gang quests, where you jockey with gang leader and bandit notables to increase your power. Or a merchant route, where it isn't fire-and-forget passive income but tied into its own mechanics.

Just a quick question, does the criminal system work even remotely close to the explanation back in this 2016 vid?

Spoiler

13:00

 

[stevehoos]

Yes I hear you, and this is a fallacy. Correlation =/= causation.
Are we going to redo the debate we had a week or so earlier ?

The radial UI and other "Not too complex" elements are made for console. There's no debate here. =/=

 

[SOku]

The radial UI and other "Not too complex" elements are made for console. There's no debate here. =/=

Yes you're confirming my point earlier, a freaking UI change as a piece of evidence, really ? Are you joking or something ?
With that in mind, could you elaborate your thoughts further ? This is the exact same debate that happened in another thread, for some reasons past the UI rant nobody could explain me why they logically think the shalowness of that game was magically because of a console port.
And you were on that thread.

I agree the debate isn't starting very well for you if you think you made good logical points above.

 

[Arcaian]

Yes you're confirming my point earlier, a freaking UI change as a piece of evidence, really ? Are you joking or something ?
With that in mind, could you elaborate your thoughts further ? This is the exact same debate that happened in another thread, for some reasons past the UI rant nobody could explain me why they logically think the shalowness of that game was magically because of a console port.
And you were on that thread.

I agree the debate isn't starting very well for you if you think you made good logical points above.

I have to agree with you here - there's a large chunk of this forum's population that seems to go to "simplified for console ports" as their go-to reason for everything with seemingly no justification, and I don't think there's almost any backing to this assumption.

 

[stevehoos]

Yes you're confirming my point earlier, a freaking UI change as a piece of evidence, really ? Are you joking or something ?
With that in mind, could you elaborate your thoughts further ? This is the exact same debate that happened in another thread, for some reasons past the UI rant nobody could explain me why they logically think the shalowness of that game was magically because of a console port.
And you were on that thread.

I agree the debate isn't starting very well for you if you think you made good logical points above.

The game is super simplified because it is going to be put on consoles. They are pushing this game to a broader market that does not like complex features. It's as clear as the noon day sun; Did VC does this in their DLC expansion? A radial UI is not a PC feature, it has nothing to do with PC. A radial UI is a strong supporting argument for a console market, you do not have such on your end. But keep it up Genius, you lost the argument in other thread as well.

 

[Lord Grindelvald]

Yes you're confirming my point earlier, a freaking UI change as a piece of evidence, really ? Are you joking or something ?
With that in mind, could you elaborate your thoughts further ? This is the exact same debate that happened in another thread, for some reasons past the UI rant nobody could explain me why they logically think the shalowness of that game was magically because of a console port.
And you were on that thread.

I agree the debate isn't starting very well for you if you think you made good logical points above.

Instead of laughing away valid arguments and asking for more, provide some counterarguments. Put on your big-boy pants and “debate”. Convince us of the opposite, instead of saying: u dumb, try harder, hehe.

 

[ShakenSpeare]

I have to agree with you here - there's a large chunk of this forum's population that seems to go to "simplified for console ports" as their go-to reason for everything with seemingly no justification, and I don't think there's almost any backing to this assumption.

It's pretty obvious to anyone who's been paying attention. Several dev statements ranging from "it's just an action game" to "a slider is too complex, it must be a drop-down menu" to Warband having been put to consoles and the likelihood of the same thing happening to Bannerlord, to the dev philosophies over and over, stated to be surrounding "player accessibility" that nobody asked for. Not to mention the "Bannerlord is being made precisely for consoles" quote as well. Game has been dumbed down and simplified on all kinds of angles for seemingly no reason, other than trying to appeal to the widest possible audience, especially when we remove player choice in the options menu because apparently, some people are too stupid to understand that big number means big CPU needed, to summarize a developers statement on why this was apparently necessary.

 

[Apocal]

Bannerlord's living world sim (econ, quest generation, production, AI parties' priority, recruiting) is a lot more complex than Warband's. I don't know where people get the idea it is simplified or whatever.

If they really cared that much about a console release, they could have (should have) stripped all of it out, since players won't notice unless they pay attention -- and judging by the fact that people still haven't noticed the kill bandits quests pops in response to bandits being nearby or the gang leader quest for weapons happens right before one of them tries to take a corner from another, I'd say most players don't.

 

[AJAJP_Juan]

especially when we remove player choice in the options menu because apparently, some people are too stupid to understand that big number means big CPU needed, to summarize a developers statement on why this was apparently necessary.

I dont really want to get into this, but you know that console gamee have no options menu (at least for any graphical or performance elements, with exception of maybe motion blur) because they all have the same specs so there is no need to change them by the user to fit their needs, right?

 

[SOku]

Instead of laughing away valid arguments and asking for more, provide some counterarguments. Put on your big-boy pants and “debate”. Convince us of the opposite, instead of saying: u dumb, try harder, hehe.

I already did that my friend, yet you are here wasting your time on messaging me while I was specifically talking to @stevehoos.
If you had remotely a glimpse of good intention, you could easily get my last messages or/and search by yourself using your browser since the thread was, as I said a week or so ago.
No you didn't, because somehow you all of a sudden missed that part to write your rant.

The game is super simplified because it is going to be put on consoles.

I think we all got it that you think the game is "super simplified because of consoles". Now I did gently ask you to elaborate your thoughts.
Something that you failed, color me surprised.
It's super obvious as.. for some reasons you can't even build a single solid argument past the UI change.


Now I'm happy to see that some players aren't jumping straight away on your narrative, as if you wanted to stay wet on your confirmation bias and copy paste this type of : " Consoles bad, so this game bad " thingy.
That's still an enlightement to me to be honest.

If they really cared that much about a console release, they could have (should have) stripped all of it out, since players won't notice unless they pay attention -- and judging by the fact that people still haven't noticed the kill bandits quests pops in response to bandits being nearby or the gang leader quest for weapons happens right before one of them tries to take a corner from another, I'd say most players don't.

Not mentioning that, as I said on the other thread, the Interface on that game is far from being UX friendly. The Encyclopedia is rough for any newcomer on the series, some mecanics are barebones if not correctly documented inside the game itself, there is no such thing of a main quest yet, and the list goes on and on and on ...
I don't think that Radial UI change could play a big role here, it's at best a black sheep for their arguments, mentioning all of that is litterally slicing their narrative so they'd better not to.


I don't like the act to quote myself but this part is still revelant as of today :

I got the impression that somehow, you guys tend to point a general public ennemy as to why Bannerlord seems shallow, omitting countless of variables some we can't know we as a community, since we are on the realm of Soon™ .

Agreed on your points especially the last one, but to me you're fooling yourself if you think that somehow the state of the game on it's current build has to be because of an allegedly console port.
[...]
This isn't an explanation, this is an assumption based on 2-3 things, mainly the UI change and that's it.
It's nowhere near reasonable to say that, of course your point of view matters as much as mine.
I'm pointing how shallow are these arguments with the actual material we can get from : modders, outsiders developers, TW's developers, and as you said and as I agree, the current status of that game.

This " explanation" is flawed, and I'm legit asking why a lot of you guys fall for it.
Humans by their nature tend to fall into oversimplyfing things to ease out their mind when they aren't able to understand or to get some pieces of hard evidence or/and facts on a subject, I'm legit wondering if we don't have a perfect example here.

The thread :

https://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php?threads/freelancer-should-be-implemented-into-vanilla-bannerlord.443041/page-2#post-9695037

( so the genius above can have some read, since as he probably still thinks right now I didn't explain my thoughts earlier ... )