Why are the steam reviews so good?

Users who are viewing this thread

Where you see "potential" others see "unfulfilled (explicit or implicit) promises and expectations".
According to your outlook, the Taliban have plenty of potential to advance women's rights too and we should appreciate they are not selling women as slaves. Why are people so ungrateful to them? It's only early in their reign and who knows what else they would do for women.

@Phantom425
Oh MadVader, with your witty quips and snide remarks. Are you really comparing TaleWorlds with the Taliban? I guess they both start with T... so for you, that is all the evidence needed. :wink:
Your integrity must have been sold at an auction.

The game is simply good.
 
The game is simply good.
Okay, but it could have been the ultimate game to end all games, trumping all ARPGs and strategy games for the foreseeable future and remaining dominant for the next decade! They just needed to do the things thier core fan expected and the things they showcased in dev blogs!
There's nothing to celebrate about getting another game with LESS player agency then thier game from 10 years ago and no meaningful improvement.
"Oh but you can have babies" and they will be about 8 when I finish the map.
"Oh but armies" marshals were better
"Oh but elections" King's rule was better
"Oh but wifus" warband husbands were 10X better
Only thing Bannerlord has in it's favor is stomping everything with Khan's Guards and executions.
 
Most people probably take for granted that TW will improve the game to a decent state in a timely manner. If reviews were based off people who are closely following game development and active in the community, they would look a lot different. That is not to say the game can be enjoyable in the current state, it just has a lot of more potential that should not go to waste
 
Okay, but it could have been the ultimate game to end all games, trumping all ARPGs and strategy games for the foreseeable future and remaining dominant for the next decade!
No it couldn’t of. It was never going to be that game, even with the stuff in the dev blogs. Of course it could have been better, can’t really deny that, but BL was never going to be the messiah of strategy games.

And the things that are brought up are kinda minor, like Marshals vs. Armies. That isn’t going to make it or break it for a lot of players.
 
No it couldn’t of. It was never going to be that game, even with the stuff in the dev blogs. Of course it could have been better, can’t really deny that, but BL was never going to be the messiah of strategy games.

And the things that are brought up are kinda minor, like Marshals vs. Armies. That isn’t going to make it or break it for a lot of players.
Well by all means let us all sort of enjoy mediocrity then. No point in being ambitious about anything.
 
No it couldn’t of. It was never going to be that game, even with the stuff in the dev blogs. Of course it could have been better, can’t really deny that, but BL was never going to be the messiah of strategy games.

And the things that are brought up are kinda minor, like Marshals vs. Armies. That isn’t going to make it or break it for a lot of players.
last time I checked the game it was virtually unplayable. Attention to the choice of word: Virtually.
The balancing and pace were so off, and late game so broken, that the core experience of Mount&Blade itself was nowhere to be found... Any veteran was left with the feeling they were Travolta's gif meme, searching for what to do only to be met with a almost mandatory feeling to restarting. And so I did, because I used to believe maybe playing and giving good feedback would reflect positively in the future. Thing is, future never came, and the slow updates rarely if ever acknowledge the feedback, resulting in not even closely fixing the most aggravating issues with the core gameplay.

Now it seems to be somewhat frozen in time, the excuse of using the pandemic as a means to explain delays or slow paced development are already dying, and some rumors about them trying to start development of another game makes everything worse, idk if they are actually, but if they are that means they don't give a ratsarse to the community, which's bad for us, for them? Yes it is too, but that doesn't seem to be a concern for TW seeing how they've been handling business since BL's release.

As I've said time and time again: I only come here ever few months, look up the state of the game from other peers to see if it evolved, each and every-time the most alarming issues are continuously ignored, while newly added "features" do not function well enough to justify it. I get angry, rant a bit and disappear again for another 2 to 4 months. Had the game uninstalled for a year, maybe over a year now, and I don't even miss it, it also made me disgruntle Warband too, because I don't feel like playing none. Warband used to be a guilty addiction of mine, now I don't even miss the genre thanks to BL's failure so far. So I remain in wait, yet I have no faith in it what-so-ever, more leaning onto the see to believe, which might as well be the only way to treat games for the past decade or so... I mean, even the most acclaimed triple-A companies are releasing failure after failure, franchises getting dumbed-down to cater for borderline mentally impaired people, endless stream of MTX, all releases NEEDING DAY-1 PATCHES TO EVEN WORK WITHOUT CRASHING.... So yeah.... Do what you will with that information.
 
Well by all means let us all sort of enjoy mediocrity then. No point in being ambitious about anything.
As some egomaniac once said "When you tolerate mediocrity, you get more of it", which is why people like @Phantom420 may sometimes be realistic but have a dubious philosophy in passively accepting that reality.
I won’t just idly accept mediocrity, but I also don’t want to have unrealistic expectations. With those, no matter what happens you will be disappointed. I try to keep my expectations realistic, with that I can’t really be let down all too often. If you’re a pessimist, you’re either right or pleasantly surprised.

You can think amazing things are gonna happen, that doesn’t mean they will and that will negatively edfect your view on the game. Of course, this stance may seem hypocritical with my beliefs on post-launch content, which it very well may be, however given that its happened before I have little reason to doubt it happening again.
 
I won’t just idly accept mediocrity, but I also don’t want to have unrealistic expectations. With those, no matter what happens you will be disappointed. I try to keep my expectations realistic, with that I can’t really be let down all too often. If you’re a pessimist, you’re either right or pleasantly surprised.

You can think amazing things are gonna happen, that doesn’t mean they will and that will negatively edfect your view on the game. Of course, this stance may seem hypocritical with my beliefs on post-launch content, which it very well may be, however given that its happened before I have little reason to doubt it happening again.
I would have been perfectly happy with a Warband 2.0. I don't think these are unrealistic expectations. I also wasn't expecting the game to be perfect right after release. I was very patient during the first year. At this point the situation is just ridiculous though.
 
I would have been perfectly happy with a Warband 2.0. I don't think these are unrealistic expectations. I also wasn't expecting the game to be perfect right after release. I was very patient during the first year. At this point the situation is just ridiculous though.
If I'm being honest, I kinda expected a Warband 2.0, and that's what I see in BL. The changes are small, and while it isn't perfect it is mostly there. I also didn't expect the game to be whole after only one year. Most of the missing features that are spoken about are pretty minor if I'm being entirely honest. Again, doesn't mean that they deserve to be ignored, but that doesn't mean the game isn't a sequel.

Looking at this thread:
Honestly, the biggest feature that is missing is the Court system, which should be added to the game. If there are more features that are missing, point them out, but most of them don't seem to be massive differences.
 
If I'm being honest, I kinda expected a Warband 2.0, and that's what I see in BL. The changes are small, and while it isn't perfect it is mostly there. I also didn't expect the game to be whole after only one year. Most of the missing features that are spoken about are pretty minor if I'm being entirely honest. Again, doesn't mean that they deserve to be ignored, but that doesn't mean the game isn't a sequel.

Looking at this thread:
Honestly, the biggest feature that is missing is the Court system, which should be added to the game. If there are more features that are missing, point them out, but most of them don't seem to be massive differences.
Combat is broken, armor is useless, there is no sense of progression, no real kingdom/town management and I am not even getting into villages and castles. And do try to hit something from a horse with a sword in WB and Bannerlord and then tell me that Bannerlord is Warband 2.0. Come on now.

It's not the missing features, it's the rotten foundation.
 
And do try to hit something from a horse with a sword in WB and Bannerlord and then tell me that Bannerlord is Warband 2.0.
Ngl, I haven't had this issue happen to me. Just build longer swords I guess lol.
I'm joking please don't kill me
Combat is broken, armor is useless, there is no sense of progression, no real kingdom/town management and I am not even getting into villages and castles.
Yeah, but the base can be built upon. I understand combat and armor, those are prevailing issues, however, could you elaborate on the progression? I tend to treat it like a Paradox game, where the more power and wealth I amass that's the progression that I feel in a game like WB or BL.
 
The steam reviews are so good because the M&B game concept is good and still quite unique.

I think people understand the game is in EA, and most people value entertainment (whats not entertaining about having your own warband and fighting!?)

- that said, positive reviews dont make the game "good" , it just means people enjoyed it... I have 500 game hours, and i enjoyed it - but I have 500 hours and got totally frustrated with the game and havent played since 1.5.7, and will not play for a long time still..

Also I left a negative review.
 
Ngl, I haven't had this issue happen to me. Just build longer swords I guess lol.
I'm joking please don't kill me

Yeah, but the base can be built upon. I understand combat and armor, those are prevailing issues, however, could you elaborate on the progression? I tend to treat it like a Paradox game, where the more power and wealth I amass that's the progression that I feel in a game like WB or BL.
There is no consequence to the increase in power and money. Nothing really matters in Bannerlord. Buying better armor doesn't matter, upgrading troops doesn't matter all that much, defeating enemy lord's doesn't matter, being king even doesn't matter when you can't actually decide what happens in your kingdom.

And "the base can be built upon" worked after the game came out, not so much now. What makes you expect that they actually will build upon that base after all this time? I thought you had realistic expectations :smile:. Also, the base is rotten, once more. There fundamental issues with the way combat works in Bannerlord. They are not going to fix those at this point.
 
There is no consequence to the increase in power and money. Nothing really matters in Bannerlord. Buying better armor doesn't matter, upgrading troops doesn't matter all that much, defeating enemy lord's doesn't matter, being king even doesn't matter when you can't actually decide what happens in your kingdom.
That's fair, although I somewhat disagree with that. At least when I play I've felt as if I gained more power as I played through it. Gaining things like towns and fiefs felt as if I did something. And it felt nice seeing my Banner on the map as I scrolled out.
Also, the base is rotten, once more. There fundamental issues with the way combat works in Bannerlord. They are not going to fix those at this point.
If I'm being honest, I just fundamentally disagree with this. At least when I've played BL, the core gameplay that was there is pretty decently fun. Of course, Sieges are a mess, however when I get into a big battle I tend to find myself having fun, not the other way around. My realistic expectations come from me thinking that the base of the game isn't rotten. There are issues, yeah, but those issues can and are being worked on.

To break it down, I really don't understand the massive amount of pushback that BL gets on issues like Combat and Armor. I haven't had those issues, or at least experienced them to a massive degree. I'm not denying that they're not there, but I don't see them as being so massive as to call the core of the game rotten.
 
Back
Top Bottom