6 months into EA and devs still do not understand what ruins their game.

Currently viewing this thread:

DainMorgot

Veteran
Best answers
0
If they had dropped a Persistent Kingdom mode done by them, with the support of the original mod developers since it was their idea, RP elements, allow players to play instruments and a proximity voice chat, Bannerlord would have been so popular between streamers.
I mean, we have the football player Kun Agüero playing GTA V RP streaming to thousands of people, I doubt a medieval RP mode would have got so far, but man it would have got together people for sure, and it would have been fun. Instead they just focused into their niche competitive scene and they didn't even got that right! That's laughable. I love SP but the MP I can't stand it, and I used to play Warband with my own clan lmao.
If PW is done right and simple this game will get hyped and popular in a matter of months. What people look for is to interact with others in dumb ways, competitive games exist obviously, but Bannerlord can serve both, for sure


I agree, games that promote drama and engaging gameplay always are watched by people and played by streamers. Bannerlord tried to go the CSGO route of e-sports, but they forgot that CSGO became massive because it was fun as hell first as a game. Persistent mount and blade would have huge potential among the market since it would be different, a small scale hardcore mmo if you will.
 

Revverie

Knight at Arms
Best answers
0
I agree, games that promote drama and engaging gameplay always are watched by people and played by streamers. Bannerlord tried to go the CSGO route of e-sports, but they forgot that CSGO became massive because it was fun as hell first as a game. Persistent mount and blade would have huge potential among the market since it would be different, a small scale hardcore mmo if you will.
Yeah, and not only that but CSGO is the sequel of an already succesful competitive game, and consider this: CS GO IS EASY FOR BEGGINERS. You get guns, and start shooting, thats it. You dont need to know how to block or which stance are you in, how much does it matter what armour you're getting, etc. Starting CSGO as a noob and starting Bannerlord as a noob are soo much different, and at least CS GO even allows you to play with bots to at least have a taste of it.

And no one wants to play as a trashy peasent Taleworlds, its the worst experience getting into with a piece of gardening tool to fight, and not being able to choose what to play. The only thing they have done with this multiplayer class system is limit EVERYONE, and the worst part is interconnected, every game mode is connected and tied to the same system. The multiplayer in this game is the most frustrating event I have seen happening in my life.
 

Dead End

Recruit
Best answers
0
Yeah, and not only that but CSGO is the sequel of an already succesful competitive game, and consider this: CS GO IS EASY FOR BEGGINERS. You get guns, and start shooting, thats it. You dont need to know how to block or which stance are you in, how much does it matter what armour you're getting, etc. Starting CSGO as a noob and starting Bannerlord as a noob are soo much different, and at least CS GO even allows you to play with bots to at least have a taste of it.

And no one wants to play as a trashy peasent Taleworlds, its the worst experience getting into with a piece of gardening tool to fight, and not being able to choose what to play. The only thing they have done with this multiplayer class system is limit EVERYONE, and the worst part is interconnected, every game mode is connected and tied to the same system. The multiplayer in this game is the most frustrating event I have seen happening in my life.
“You get blades you swing at people” not that I like CSGO compared to my wonderful experience with the previous titles, mind you. I don’t think your points are nearly as poorly worded as the other people on this thread, but I really don’t get it. The most people can do is ask for changes from the devs and see what they do. It’s annoying, sure but you people paid for this game no one forced you to. Also eternally lul at the people who get mad at SP players for having fun
 

Roadpork

Regular
Best answers
0
Yeah, and not only that but CSGO is the sequel of an already succesful competitive game, and consider this: CS GO IS EASY FOR BEGGINERS. You get guns, and start shooting, thats it. You dont need to know how to block or which stance are you in, how much does it matter what armour you're getting, etc. Starting CSGO as a noob and starting Bannerlord as a noob are soo much different, and at least CS GO even allows you to play with bots to at least have a taste of it.

And no one wants to play as a trashy peasent Taleworlds, its the worst experience getting into with a piece of gardening tool to fight, and not being able to choose what to play. The only thing they have done with this multiplayer class system is limit EVERYONE, and the worst part is interconnected, every game mode is connected and tied to the same system. The multiplayer in this game is the most frustrating event I have seen happening in my life.
6 v 6 skirmish is a totally wrong idea.
Might be the issue right now is about competitive games, I mean it has a deeper problem.

CSGO follows the basic FPS game rule which exists long before CS: aim, click the mouse button.

DOTA, LOL, similar. they have their core gameplays.

However, Mount & Blade follows 3 different play rules: 4-directional combat, shot, ride ---- nontransferable skill sets.

BL/M&B tries to put all three kinds of players together. In that complexity, now we only get a poorly 6 v 6 player skirmish mode...

So the problem of 6 players is: lack of robustness.

Even though we have a rank system or some pre-group thing to help players to build their team in the future, we still need a huge population to build the category-based team (2-2-2 or 1-2-3 or something).
Otherwise, you will miss some key roles and lose a skirmish. (assuming everyone has the equal ability on their favorite role).

Not to mention the actual gameplay types are more than 3. x-bow vs archer vs horse archer, shield vs 2h...


It is ok for professional players to fit but it's not likely a normal player willing to fit a missing role too often.
Compare to Overwatch, it's basically an FPS game(aim and shot). It just has additional abilities, people still not willing to fit.
 

Revverie

Knight at Arms
Best answers
0
“You get blades you swing at people” not that I like CSGO compared to my wonderful experience with the previous titles, mind you. I don’t think your points are nearly as poorly worded as the other people on this thread, but I really don’t get it. The most people can do is ask for changes from the devs and see what they do. It’s annoying, sure but you people paid for this game no one forced you to. Also eternally lul at the people who get mad at SP players for having fun
What I want is game modes that are easy to get into that do not require you to be a professional in this game, you don't just get blades you swing at people, and let me quote the comment avobe that summed up perfectly.
CSGO follows the basic FPS game rule which exists long before CS: aim, click the mouse button.

DOTA, LOL, similar. they have their core gameplays.

However, Mount & Blade follows 3 different play rules: 4-directional combat, shot, ride ---- nontransferable skill sets.
Combat in this game is extensive, deep and that is good, but it's also a problem because they don't teach new players correctly, because current game modes forces you to face completely skilled players and even against noob players is problematic, because you don't raise your skill just by playing against another bad player who has no idea of what he's doing. You need a base to learn from, footing, how lengths and handling works, how to ride a goddamn horse properly, you can learn on the run, but you will get frustrated in the way and sometime just stop playing completely.
Warband had battle and duel, and in those you could either practice your skill or have fun while watch others play with you, that way you learn from the high skilled players without getting smashed in a 3-0 set.

I really don't know what you get, this game is just not beginner friendly and the game modes encourage you to just leave the game forever or spend months trying to learn something.
 

Dead End

Recruit
Best answers
0
What I want is game modes that are easy to get into that do not require you to be a professional in this game, you don't just get blades you swing at people, and let me quote the comment avobe that summed up perfectly.

Combat in this game is extensive, deep and that is good, but it's also a problem because they don't teach new players correctly, because current game modes forces you to face completely skilled players and even against noob players is problematic, because you don't raise your skill just by playing against another bad player who has no idea of what he's doing. You need a base to learn from, footing, how lengths and handling works, how to ride a goddamn horse properly, you can learn on the run, but you will get frustrated in the way and sometime just stop playing completely.
Warband had battle and duel, and in those you could either practice your skill or have fun while watch others play with you, that way you learn from the high skilled players without getting smashed in a 3-0 set.

I really don't know what you get, this game is just not beginner friendly and the game modes encourage you to just leave the game forever or spend months trying to learn something.
I think all those problems are valid, just consider that the same way you consider other games could be applied to this game. It’s easy to say games don’t have depth if you have 0 involvement in their competitive communities. That being said I would prefer to play competitive bannerlord than DOTA. It’s not there yet. I’ll come back in a few months and see how it is then
 

DainMorgot

Veteran
Best answers
0
I think all those problems are valid, just consider that the same way you consider other games could be applied to this game. It’s easy to say games don’t have depth if you have 0 involvement in their competitive communities. That being said I would prefer to play competitive bannerlord than DOTA. It’s not there yet. I’ll come back in a few months and see how it is then

There game, if anything, is anti-competitive. Warband is 10 times more competitive friendly than bannerlord will ever be (without mods). Stances system make the game to be less deep in the combat because you actually have to move a certain way to use the full potential speed of your swings, in warband it was totally free form. Fighting styles and personality existed in combat in warband. In Bannerlord the way to play the game is rather generic. The TTK of the game is atrociously long for infantry and there are several issues with how things work in its core. For example, how easy archery is for a game like mount and blade. I won't speak about the horrible class system again, we all know it sucks ass. Bannerlord will never fly with the mindset that the devs have. DOTA on the other hand is what complexity and depth should be.
 

Revverie

Knight at Arms
Best answers
0
I think all those problems are valid, just consider that the same way you consider other games could be applied to this game. It’s easy to say games don’t have depth if you have 0 involvement in their competitive communities. That being said I would prefer to play competitive bannerlord than DOTA. It’s not there yet. I’ll come back in a few months and see how it is then
I didn't said other games are not deep, I've said other games are more approachable for newbies, I know DOTA and LOL and every other competitive MP are deep, but they teach their mechanics in a friendlier way, and you have a sense of progression. I know, Bannerlord has little people so we can sort by rank, but thats exactly why a battle mode is so necessary, because rank doesn't reaaaally matter there,
 

Lord Bryggan

Knight
WB
Best answers
0
Bannerlord is just as noob unfriendly as Warband; maybe even more so since Cav is nastier. You can pretty much tell who is a new player in a second, and unfortunately you have to destroy them quickly before other enemies catch up. I was fortunate enough to have my own clan in Warband (cRpg mod), and my members were good enough to train me a little on duel servers (I know, it's backwards. but I was a better leader than a fighter).

Battle was the best training for noobs. You follow the bulk and try get a few hits in here and there. You play more cautiously since you only got one life. In Siege and TDM its no big deal to run in, die, rinse and repeat. For awhile cRpg had an excellent system for training noobs, which was proximity XP. You got XP from just being near kills, so just staying close to the good players and trying to help best you could levelled you up, got you gold, and taught you a bit about the game. Unfortunately the ranged and cav complained, and for some reason somebody listened to them.

But I am waiting for cRpg mod again, specifically Strat. If you want drama, there it is. I could watch a well played and well captured strat battle from start to finish over and over again.
 

Revverie

Knight at Arms
Best answers
0
Bannerlord is just as noob unfriendly as Warband; maybe even more so since Cav is nastier. You can pretty much tell who is a new player in a second, and unfortunately you have to destroy them quickly before other enemies catch up. I was fortunate enough to have my own clan in Warband (cRpg mod), and my members were good enough to train me a little on duel servers (I know, it's backwards. but I was a better leader than a fighter).

Battle was the best training for noobs. You follow the bulk and try get a few hits in here and there. You play more cautiously since you only got one life. In Siege and TDM its no big deal to run in, die, rinse and repeat. For awhile cRpg had an excellent system for training noobs, which was proximity XP. You got XP from just being near kills, so just staying close to the good players and trying to help best you could levelled you up, got you gold, and taught you a bit about the game. Unfortunately the ranged and cav complained, and for some reason somebody listened to them.

But I am waiting for cRpg mod again, specifically Strat. If you want drama, there it is. I could watch a well played and well captured strat battle from start to finish over and over again.
Yeah, same for me, but I never got into cRPG, instead I used to get into the battle server, fool around a little bit, and players themselves started giving me tips on this and that, and then I got recruited by a clan that taught me how to play more properly, but I have to say my first experience was great and fun in the battle server. Here I cant see anyone teaching something in 3 rounds compared to the 10 we played in Warband, I cant see clans playing with noobs in 6vs6 aimed to be competitive, I cant see players giving tips in TDM where everything is a mess and you just spawn to kill and die.
The lack of noob friendly games is ruining it for everyone
 

Roadpork

Regular
Best answers
0
Yeah, same for me, but I never got into cRPG, instead I used to get into the battle server, fool around a little bit, and players themselves started giving me tips on this and that, and then I got recruited by a clan that taught me how to play more properly, but I have to say my first experience was great and fun in the battle server. Here I cant see anyone teaching something in 3 rounds compared to the 10 we played in Warband, I cant see clans playing with noobs in 6vs6 aimed to be competitive, I cant see players giving tips in TDM where everything is a mess and you just spawn to kill and die.
The lack of noob friendly games is ruining it for everyone
And the stance system is a total noob unfriendly system. Ironically I heard they introduced this for noobs.
Obviously they have no idea what noob thinking. Then we know developers are not gamers. Because gamers try new games. We are noobs often.
 

DainMorgot

Veteran
Best answers
0
Its noob unfriendly and at the same time limits the skill ceiling. It's literally a clunky **** mechanic.
 

Alyss

Grandmaster Knight
Best answers
0
Yes it's kinda ironic that they tried to make it more noob friendly even though I believe warband was really noob friendly. There are great casuals servers on warband that don't require skill to enjoy (US GK tdm, mount&siege or even full invasion mod or PW) but at the same time you could have really competitive servers. And by trying to be noob friendly (even though they already were), they made unfun for casuals and unfun for competitive players. Warband system was so much better.
 

DainMorgot

Veteran
Best answers
0
The majority of people who did not play multiplayer was because of the lack of progression and in general whoever did not stick to warband as a whole game was mostly because of the outdated graphics and bad animations, at least this is the case for many friends of mine that i tried to introduce them to the game. Warband still had a lot of players playing MP (for a game with such bad graphics and old release date) since what, 2-3 years ago? The devs are just clowns for saying warband MP failed. Fun fact, most of the devs who said that did not even work for TW before bannerlord.
 

Younes

Master Knight
WBWF&SNWVC
Best answers
0
The majority of people who did not play multiplayer was because of the lack of progression and in general whoever did not stick to warband as a whole game was mostly because of the outdated graphics and bad animations, at least this is the case for many friends of mine that i tried to introduce them to the game. Warband still had a lot of players playing MP (for a game with such bad graphics and old release date) since what, 2-3 years ago? The devs are just clowns for saying warband MP failed. Fun fact, most of the devs who said that did not even work for TW before bannerlord.
To the studio profit makes a good game. Despite medieval games obviously not being mainstream for like ever.
 

DainMorgot

Veteran
Best answers
0
To the studio profit makes a good game. Despite medieval games obviously not being mainstream for like ever.
Definitely agree, warband has like 8 million sales as announced back in 2017(?) but it made all the sales through discounts on steam. I personally found the game when it arrived in steam and even then I was late (bought it like in 2013). Regardless, the devs have no ****ing idea what they are talking about especially when you have the audacity to call warband a 'failed' multiplayer game. All my best memories are from the game, either in IG_Battlegrounds, in PW, in mercs or CRPG. The latest are mods, but the core always was made by TW.
 

Helz

Squire
Best answers
0
Definitely agree, warband has like 8 million sales as announced back in 2017(?) but it made all the sales through discounts on steam. I personally found the game when it arrived in steam and even then I was late (bought it like in 2013). Regardless, the devs have no ****ing idea what they are talking about especially when you have the audacity to call warband a 'failed' multiplayer game. All my best memories are from the game, either in IG_Battlegrounds, in PW, in mercs or CRPG. The latest are mods, but the core always was made by TW.
[Start rant]

That's 8 million dollars even at $1 a copy. And I know they made a lot more than that because they were selling the 'Mount and Blade collection' for $30+ during sales to trick all the noobs into buying M&B (AND) Warband.

As for 'failed MP', Warband had an active community for a decade with the bare minimum of support from Taleworlds. Warband was in the top 10 hours played per player on Steam for years. Yes, that's SP and MP together, but I know I spent at least half my 3,000 hours in MP. Every regular I played with had 1000s of hours in MP.

Warband funded the development of Bannerlord for 8+ years. Most other studios would have bankrupted themselves doing that. Love for Warband is the reason Bannerlord EA sold millions of copies. Love, or at least respect, for Warband should be a job requirement for anyone working on the sequel.

[/End rant]
 
Best answers
2
It would definitely be far less annoying if the developers just came out and admitted that they made a massive mistake, or failing that just out a massive ASCII art middle finger as the patch notes of 1.5.3. But it's over a year and and there has been no official response to the complaints. It's infuriating not knowing whether to stop being emotionally invested in this game given how opaque the process is.
 

Revverie

Knight at Arms
Best answers
0
Definitely agree, warband has like 8 million sales as announced back in 2017(?) but it made all the sales through discounts on steam. I personally found the game when it arrived in steam and even then I was late (bought it like in 2013). Regardless, the devs have no ****ing idea what they are talking about especially when you have the audacity to call warband a 'failed' multiplayer game. All my best memories are from the game, either in IG_Battlegrounds, in PW, in mercs or CRPG. The latest are mods, but the core always was made by TW.
Wait did they really called Warband a failure? Literally a month ago South Americans were holding a tournament, how is that a failure? Maybe they were so angry that we were still playing Warband they just refused to give us a server in Bannerlord lmao. I bet SA is still playing Warband matchmaking, and I know because I know a lot of them, that they DO own Bannerlord
 

DainMorgot

Veteran
Best answers
0
Wait did they really called Warband a failure? Literally a month ago South Americans were holding a tournament, how is that a failure? Maybe they were so angry that we were still playing Warband they just refused to give us a server in Bannerlord lmao. I bet SA is still playing Warband matchmaking, and I know because I know a lot of them, that they DO own Bannerlord
Apparently they considered Warband's multiplayer to have 'failed' because I guess it did not attract a huge fanbase. These were the context of their words, but this dates back pre-bannerlord beta when players REALLY were heated about Classes, skirmish and the lack of battle mode.