You would be right, if you were right, but you are wrong. There are plenty of fine games underneath the 80% opinion based personal benchmark you're laying out.Bannerlord has 85% positive reviews, which is about average. For a game on steam to get below 80% it has to be basically unplayable, while only anime games get higher than 95%. To really judge a game you have to read the negative reviews and judge for yourself whether the negatives listed are dealbreakers, and not just look at the number.
The game is doing better than Warband. Don't make me bring out The Thread...The game is doing well...?
In other words people's opinions are so stop worrying about reviews and stop quoting meaningless stats. If someone likes the game great if someone hates the game great. It's all opinion and in the end the only opinion that should matter to you is yours so maybe focus on that instead of validating your p.o.v. with Steam reviews.You would be right, if you were right, but you are wrong. There are plenty of fine games underneath the 80% opinion based personal benchmark you're laying out.
The handbook of Epictetus is short and quite easy to read.Agreed. But reading and understanding is one thing, turning theory into practice and putting in the work to embody the philosophy is a completely different thing. Any book advice?
You would be right, if you were right, but you are wrong. There are plenty of fine games underneath the 80% opinion based personal benchmark you're laying out.
According to this (and steamdb), the average steam review score is between 80 and 85%
Really the only thing you can gather from low scores is if the game is functional or not. If you read most negative reviews, they're about technical issues, not how the game plays (someone who dislikes a genre isn't going to buy it anyway)
On the other hand, the games with the highest scores are the ones with dedicated/insane fanbases (like warband, which has 98% positive). Just about every anime game has over 90% score, regardless of quality.
The rating system is qualitative, not quantitative. What the 85% positive reviews for bannerlord should tell you is that it has neither an dedicated fanbase nor is it unplayable.
The number of hours of play is not a guarantee of quality or success. I sometimes made games that lasted about ten hours and I really enjoyed it because it was really very good. And especially because I didn't expect more from this game.The thing with the negative steam reviews is that literally every single one is by someone who's played 100+ hours. That's heaps! and heaps more hours than most people play a game for. So it's pretty clear that the negative steam reviews are by ppl wanting/expecting a game they can sink endless amounts of their time into. And totally fair enough that they feel disappointed.
But be real, the vast majority of ppl will spend maybe 40-60 hours on any given game? And that's about perfect for Bannerlord. It's a great game for that long.
Expecting a company to pour its time and $$ into making the game that only a top-end niche of it's consumers are demanding is just naive if you ask me. It's not like ppl who play the game for 1000 hours pay any more than a typical person who plays for 40 hours.
I like your signature!The number of hours of play is not a guarantee of quality or success. I sometimes made games that lasted about ten hours and I really enjoyed it because it was really very good. And especially because I didn't expect more from this game.
Conversely, I spent a lot of time with friends on "Bannerlord" on a joint account, and we are very disappointed because the game does not live up to its promises. Time spent on this game is time spent by buddies doing battles. But normally, this game is more than a battle game. This game is a scam like many Early Access. He's not the first "fake" Early Access. We will never buy a game from EA again.
However, this is the first time I have been scammed. I think that sentiment is shared by many players, especially those who have been waiting for this game for a long time because they played Warband.
They would have published a battle game, without map, without sandbox, without campaign, at a reasonable price, we would have accepted it. But there they announced a complete game, but it is not and it will never be. It is therefore a huge scam and false advertising.
He deserves to be sued for breach of trust and false advertising.
It is a well "thought out" scam because it would be difficult in court to say that the game does not correspond to what is advertised.
But it's still a scam in the sense that they needed the money and they used the Early Access procedure to bring in the money, more than to produce a good game.
For my part, I received this game as a "gift". The person who gave it to me doesn't know the world of games very well but knew my taste for the "medieval". But we were disappointed together. Because this game does not describe the medieval world in any way. Even that failed.
This game is totally useless except for the battles which amuse the "children" for a few hours.
This signature dates from my registration on the forum, a long time ago. I still believed that this game would evolve. But I quickly understood that it was a scam, you just have to play the campaign to understand that it's a "fake game", a fake game, in short, a magnificent scam with a fake campaign and sandbox process. The game will never be ready, everything is wrong. Taleworld has hijacked the Early Access procedure to make easy money fast. They are not the first to do this. They are probably not the last. But we should collectively press charges, because until there are judgments, there will be more “Early Access” scams. The problem is that legally it is difficult to prove that a game is a "fake game" and that the advertising is false.I like your signature!
I'm so defeated in regards to Bannerlord, I would've been happier if they just remastered Warband with this engine. But they didn't even manage to accomplish that either.
It's such a surreal journey..