Yes, Mack is a true review God.I won't dispute that everyone has their own unique taste, but I want to express some points. I see that cod bo3 right now is 60 euro on steam, and bannerlord 50. Cod bo3 is a 2015 game, and it's still so expensive. Also the COD franchise is notorious for copy-pasting their game yearly just to grab more money, basically reuploading the same game with not much effort. I didn't play much CoD, but I remember some were good and also fun to watch on youtube (especially the old zombies series with plenty of youtubers, really fun), but to me the old games look better than cod bo3 at least.
Anyhow, bannerlord is a now 1-year early access game, so it's not fair to compare the 2. I don't know how CoD BO3 is right now, but I'm sure it got its fair share of updates. The game has only 78% reviews of all time, but it has 91% in the last 30 days, so you can be sure it was way worse in the beginning as well (I can see it got some zombie updates throughout time, as an example).
Here's a review from 2015 from a guy that's really into good/immersive games.But for more casual gamers he may not be the best to watch, yet take it as another perspective. Personally I love the guy.
So what I want to say is, in 1-2 years Bannerlord will be an amazing, and way more fun game and optimized than it is now. The modding possibility will create some really good things for the game too. You may even have zombies But if you're not into this kind of game, sure, a refund would be a good idea. Yet if you do like the game, or warband, but you just don't like the lack of polish or optimization on your machine, it may be worth not refunding. But, you can always buy it back if anything, so do what you think is best.
Ah insults and calling people names now hmm?Shut up idiot. This game is already 1 year in development and we still have unfinished and broken product despite they promised us, that EA would be only during 1y. I have broken and dead MP, insufficient optimization, which is worse then on EA release and poor support.
I get conflicting messages from Bannerlord. On one hand we have a feature to continue playing as an heir, which would indicate that the plan was for us to spend a lot of time on a single save, but on the other hand, it looks like no effort was really put in on anything past early game, I end up abandoning saves before getting to experience the heir feature as I get bored by fighting AI lords over and over again.
It would give me some peace of mind if they said they planned to focus development on adding stuff for early, then mid and then work on late game activities.
As for feature complete, we have no way of knowing what TaleWorlds considers feature complete, we only get a list for what they will work on during this cycle (Statement for Single Player thread).
On the hard code complaint, there is some stuff that it would be nice to have a proper way of doing, instead of finding a work around, like custom skeletons for races other than human and there is poorly written code and parts of code that aren't easily accessible, but it does not make modding impossible, it just requires a lot more work and the bigger the changes the more fragile they are to changes in code.
As an example of what I meant, some time ago I was looking into replacing troops equipment and I found out that copying the entry that defined a soldier and changing its equipment wasn't enough, it wouldn't prevent the previous equipment from being loaded and it would mix both my changes and the default. If I wanted only my version to be considered, I would have to find where it was being loaded and rewrite that part of the code to clear the equipment list before adding mine. It worked but rewriting it was annoying because there was plenty of poorly written code (like variables with undescriptive names such as flag1, flag2, node1, node2) and I had to make sure it was working exactly as the original plus + changes. One or two patches later they changed the format and code for equipment and I would have to do the same thing over again.
Yeah, I agree with everything in your post. Thanks for the reply.Native M&B is barebones there is no denying it, warband improved a few things but never claimed to be M&B2 just an upgraded version.
My problem with Bannerlord is that it tries to be extremely deep in some things (economy) which is great but it's almost all under the hood while in other things much more visible to the players (dialogues, diplomacy, ai, immersion in general etc) it manages to be even more barebones than warband in certain places.
They should have taken warband as a base and built upon it, adding more, improving or overhauling existing features instead of axing them if they can't fit it into a boring button.
After the wonderful Viking Conquest DLC that focused heavy on immersion and QoL features i was sure they would follow that route but unfortunately i was wrong, from multiplayer to singleplayer in general there a more misses than hits from TW with what the community expected from the game.
Now about the thread's question, i'm not sure but do hope they will listen to the community and improve Bannerlord more until the end of EA, some things it does great but many others are very underwhelming, time will tell.
Yeah, That's what I heard from some others. In a way, it gives me hope for the game.Native Warband was extremely barebones to me, if Bannerlord can't improve on that then the game is a joke.