Bannerlord was a grift

Users who are viewing this thread

Status
Not open for further replies.

eddiemccandless

Knight at Arms
WBNWVC
I would say that the elephant leak is promising (I don't particularly care for them, but at least it is something big)
It sure is. It's an elephant after all, not some half assed sheep with a great texture.

@Phantom425 I find it interesting that despite seemingly opposing the message from this thread, you pretty much singlehandedly kept it alive for an ungodly amount of time. It would have been buried for a while without you constantly bumping it :smile:
 

MadVader

Duke
M&BWB
It took eight years to get to EA, yes, however they also had to build an engine from scratch which can take a while. If anything, I would say maybe 3-4 years would be spent on that alone.
Is this in your expert opinion or based on evidence? Remember that they built an engine once (or twice) before - they are the experts in developing mass combat engines and should have done it quickly the third time.
The realistic estimate for developing Bannerlord, including its engine, is (based on other games) 3-5 years TOTAL.
If you read their Glassdoor reviews, there's an impression that the problem is management not managing the people and the project, which explains the slow development. This continues in all likelihood and no amount of fan patience would change that.
Stop inventing excuses, or at least try to back them up with evidence.
And the whole "next big release" thing is just not true, and unless it is specifically stated really shouldn't be thought of. That is both a product of bad communication and also on the forum's end in terms of what is going to come out when. Games take a while to develop, especially when a year of development had been during a global pandemic, and when there will be a massive patch they may, or may not, drum up support for it. Literally all that the fanbase can and should do at this point is be patient, wait for patches to come out and then give feedback.
The only factual statement here is that their development was slowed down a bit by Covid, they are still mostly working from home. On the other hand, Covid helped their EA sales a lot. They are swimming in money and there are many ways how to spend money to speed up development, the main one being contracting expensive expert devs. There is no evidence they invested in people as they still have documented hiring problems and experienced people keep leaving.
"Be patient and don't complain" won't do a thing. Keeping up the pressure on issues important to the player base (but unimportant to TW) is the only way to get results.
 
No, it isn't a scam.
tumblr_mfmipc4c9x1rye7joo4_250.gifv
We've been through this about the game being a scam/grift or not before, and I don't think arguing about it in another massive cycle is going to change anything. We should agree to disagree.
A scam would be to release the game and no longer even work on it.
This is effectively going to be the case when the game is out of "EA", by my observation.
A scam would be to release the game and no longer even work on it. BL has been having a troubled development period, yes, but it is incredibly far from a scam. While you may feel as if you have been scammed, that is different from the developers actually looking to scam players out of the game.
For the fourth time, I don't think the game was intended to be a scam. Nevertheless, greed, cheapness, and deceit are afoot.
Just because a game is in EA does not mean that it will be a dishonest venture.
Definitely, although most of the time it is. One of my favorite games these days (Deep Rock Galactic) was an EA game from a small developer for a while, and it was a very good EA run. Lots of communication, roadmaps, transparency, listening to player feedback and consistently adding brand new features and content in timely updates. Game came out of EA about a year ago, and it's awesome and has never been better! So I don't think EA is always a bad thing. Only that it usually isn't that great.
Secondly, they haven't run off with the money. They are continuing to work on the game, and the recent elephant leak shows that they are already planning on post-release content for the game. This isn't one dev scamming people then leaving, this is a company that wanted to put their game out in EA in order to get feedback and also income to help them further development.
Only adding substantial features in DLC is ****ty and proves that they care less about the game and their community and more about money, and we barely know anything about future DLC. You say that they "put their game out in EA in order to get feedback", yet they don't listen to feedback unless it's for a simple matter or a bug fix. How many threads of constructive feedback are there? Countless numbers. Very few of them have gotten a shred of acknowledgment in any form.
Well for the tip on posts from the devs etc, that was nice. Tnx.

While alot of the other games EA stuff have been sketchy, I still think you judge and alot of others abit unfairly.
They didnt really give an offical timeline per se, I think it was semi-conducted that it was 1 years or so, but not directly set in stone?
I could be mistaken, but thats what I got the feeling from them.

Then you have covid that threw all the plans out of the window, in general for game development, and alot of projects have been delayed, even scrapped(not to sure if it was just cause of Covid or something else though)

I think my point was more about the its not that you cant say anything etc, but its how you say it(so yes semantics).
Thus atleast here if you say a statement about intent/purpose behind an action like a deliberate scam is, then its defamation or what its called(English not 1st language so I'm not always 100% sure on all the terms and or if they apply to corporations like they do to a person).

You have had several games in recent history that have had horrible launches but have come out fairly decent after time.
Most profiled I think was Cp2077, which even got pulled from Playstation, and only now in this latest patch was put back there to be deemed playable.

Then you have other games who's been in Early Acess for years and years now. Star Citizen for instance(I havent gotten that one, only EA I've got is this Bannerlord and BG3, I have been in other Ea's but on invites)->(SWTOR mmo).

But they should have stepped up the on communication, as its something we see being an issue again and again.
Lack of it, or the information we get is too hard to find(even if that information is good).
Steered expectations more.

I think personally, but I could be wrong, is that the lead guy/Ceo is more used to the format of developing the game solo, and not in large teams, and may lack the skills to organize such a large production.
He more or less programmed Warband with his brother and wife if I recall?
Total freedome, no expectations, no goals(as to when this and that is to be completed etc).
I think this is part of the issue in the companies culture, that its abit more "laidback" than we the customers are wanting.

Like you go to a resturant and order a pizza, you would be fine that it would take from 15-30 min on a regular nite.
A very buzy nite you'd think of 45 min is ok.
However after sitting there for 60 min your starting to get hungry for real, which leads to hangry!
Instead of the waiter telling you that there is a holdup in the kitchend due to one of the ovens haveing shutdown, serviceman is on the way, but thus all meals will be delayed, and ask if you are "ok" with this.

Thats kind of what they need to step up. Steer customer's expectations. I feel they havent done that with you and original poster and tons of others judgeing by the amount of posts on this and similar topics.

We're fairly agreeing in many things, but I still think they havent done any of this things wtih intent, but they just havent had the experience of running such a huge project and with such sucess, and or thus the negative feedback when things arent going to how the customers percive the adventure was to unfold =)
I don't know how long you've played or observed M&B, but with the prior context and history, I don't think it is an unfair judgment of the state of affairs. I care very little about how long the EA itself is supposed to be, only the actual results. And they are not satisfactory. Your observations with the problems of the company organization and culture seem to be backed by the evidence, and I think it's probably the main reason that this project is the way it is. Although I definitely think principles falling short does come into it as well. People around here wouldn't be so harsh if TW actually listened to the players and responded to feedback, and were more open about their own development of the game. Even just with acknowledgment. If many complain a year ago about the class system with MP, I think people would act more reasonable if TW doesn't respond to such things with the finger, or not at all.
 

Roy1012

Duke
It sure is. It's an elephant after all, not some half assed sheep with a great texture.

@Phantom425 I find it interesting that despite seemingly opposing the message from this thread, you pretty much singlehandedly kept it alive for an ungodly amount of time. It would have been buried for a while without you constantly bumping it :smile:
I mean, I think just letting threads you disagree with die is not a terrible strategy, but engaging with people you disagree with, especially when its most of the people posting on the thread, isn't the worst plan. Its just good to have some good arguments, which is tough when you take the opposing opinion of this thread.
 

Phantom425

Sergeant
@Phantom425 I find it interesting that despite seemingly opposing the message from this thread, you pretty much singlehandedly kept it alive for an ungodly amount of time. It would have been buried for a while without you constantly bumping it :smile:
People responded to me so I responded back to them. I don't care if it bumped the thread, I'm not going to not give a rebuttal to something.
Is this in your expert opinion or based on evidence? Remember that they built an engine once (or twice) before - they are the experts in developing mass combat engines and should have done it quickly the third time.
The realistic estimate for developing Bannerlord, including its engine, is (based on other games) 3-5 years TOTAL.
If you read their Glassdoor reviews, there's an impression that the problem is management not managing the people and the project, which explains the slow development. This continues in all likelihood and no amount of fan patience would change that.
Stop inventing excuses, or at least try to back them up with evidence.
Yeah, you're right. This is more of an assumption, but so is yours's. A game engine can take months to years, and given that this team didn't have the most experience with creating engines before WB, I would assume that it would be on the longer side. And I don't deny that there is a problem with management, as that can be clearly seen with the faulty communication and development time, which is longer then other games.
"Be patient and don't complain" won't do a thing. Keeping up the pressure on issues important to the player base (but unimportant to TW) is the only way to get results.
I specifically didn't say that. I said wait for patches and give criticism when the patches come out. While yes, the way I worded it was more passive then I would want it to be. However, the bulk of feedback should be given following a patch, as that would be when devs are most likely looking for it. It does not mean that people should wait for a patch before critiquing it, and you should also be able to raise up proper points irregardless of when a patch has been released.
I was summoned by someone posting something I disagree with. No matter who, I will find you and argue with you whenever this occurs.
We've been through this about the game being a scam/grift or not before, and I don't think arguing about it in another massive cycle is going to change anything. We should agree to disagree.
That's valid.
Definitely, although most of the time it is. One of my favorite games these days (Deep Rock Galactic) was an EA game from a small developer for a while, and it was a very good EA run. Lots of communication, roadmaps, transparency, listening to player feedback and consistently adding brand new features and content in timely updates. Game came out of EA about a year ago, and it's awesome and has never been better! So I don't think EA is always a bad thing. Only that it usually isn't that great.
I also agree with this. My point was just that just because a game is in EA does not mean that that is a bad omen, as games that are in EA can come out great.
Only adding substantial features in DLC is ****ty and proves that they care less about the game and their community and more about money, and we barely know anything about future DLC. You say that they "put their game out in EA in order to get feedback", yet they don't listen to feedback unless it's for a simple matter or a bug fix. How many threads of constructive feedback are there? Countless numbers. Very few of them have gotten a shred of acknowledgment in any form.
If TW did this, I would also be rather annoyed. However, I do not believe that we yet have that indication that they will do that. And yes, listening to feedback has been weak, but it has not been entirely avoided. Issues such as private servers have been addressed, and they are coming, just SoonTM. And a lot of the constructive criticism threads do call for adding a lot of features, and I do think that some of them will eventually be added.
 

Poddicus

Knight
M&BWBWF&SNWVC
@Phantom425
The problem isn't that the game is still in EA or that even that the development is too slow (which it is), but the fact that TW are actively making design decisions which go against what a Mount & Blade game is and what it should be.

Anything that is suggested to the devs that was in the previous M&B games is rejected as being "too complex" or not part of their "vision" and what "features" they do add in are either broken, half arsed, or both. The barebones basics of the core gameplay like sieges are barely even working, nevermind actual features.
The fact that they refuse to acknowledge that people want these aspects of M&B in the game instead of making it a boring arcadey battle simulator is why a lot of people have come to the conclusion that the people in charge of making these decisions are out of touch and/or just don't care and are having the dev team do the minimal amount of work to just get it over with and reap the sales is why it feels like a grift.
Giving feedback after a patch does nothing for us seeing as we're completely ignored, just look at the multiplayer scene. How long did it take for us to get ridiculous crush-throughs removed?
On top of that the development during this EA has been so barren that every tiny patch that adds in some new helmets, a new UI page and if we're lucky a poorly thought out feature that modders have done better. Doesn't stop these from being heralded as massive new updates. It just feels so pathetic.

If you're one of those people excitedly supporting something along the lines of an 'elephant DLC' or are okay with them seemingly planning on post-release paid content, especially with how barebones the singleplayer is atm, then I'd bet you're also one of the people who would see nothing wrong with a paradox style DLC policy for this game too.

I forgot what else I was gonna say, so here's Saint Jiub instead
yJx23pY.jpg


Also I can't find any of your posts which isn't TL;DR btw
 

Life_Erikson

Master Knight
M&BWBNWVC
@Phantom425
The problem isn't that the game is still in EA or that even that the development is too slow (which it is), but the fact that TW are actively making design decisions which go against what a Mount & Blade game is and what it should be.

Anything that is suggested to the devs that was in the previous M&B games is rejected as being "too complex" or not part of their "vision" and what "features" they do add in are either broken, half arsed, or both. The barebones basics of the core gameplay like sieges are barely even working, nevermind actual features.
The fact that they refuse to acknowledge that people want these aspects of M&B in the game instead of making it a boring arcadey battle simulator is why a lot of people have come to the conclusion that the people in charge of making these decisions are out of touch and/or just don't care and are having the dev team do the minimal amount of work to just get it over with and reap the sales is why it feels like a grift.
Giving feedback after a patch does nothing for us seeing as we're completely ignored, just look at the multiplayer scene. How long did it take for us to get ridiculous crush-throughs removed?
On top of that the development during this EA has been so barren that every tiny patch that adds in some new helmets, a new UI page and if we're lucky a poorly thought out feature that modders have done better. Doesn't stop these from being heralded as massive new updates. It just feels so pathetic.

If you're one of those people excitedly supporting something along the lines of an 'elephant DLC' or are okay with them seemingly planning on post-release paid content, especially with how barebones the singleplayer is atm, then I'd bet you're also one of the people who would see nothing wrong with a paradox style DLC policy for this game too.

I forgot what else I was gonna say, so here's Saint Jiub instead
yJx23pY.jpg


Also I can't find any of your posts which isn't TL;DR btw
This.

This has been explained many times in this thread. I think even to Phantom425 but people overlook this because either a) they never played Warband or followed devlogs, or b) they don't follow TW's current statements and don't know what they will not have in the game by the end because it is "too complex". What we have now is pretty much the finished product as TW sees it. Only things to come are bugfixes and some scene making.

The grift isn't that EA developement is too slow (it is) but that TW shifted the goalpost sometime before release without telling their fans.
Their target audience is a completely different one now (arcade action oriented players and consoles) than it was before and was marketed during developement. They don't have to care now since we already payed our money. So there is little to no leverage we have over them any more.

I believe mexxico when he sais there was no ill intent, as in they intentionally wanted to scam us veterans. But there must have been a lot ot indifference or unthinking at least. TW KNOWS what we want. Why do I know that they know? Because they showed us exactly what we want in their devlogs. However they cannot be bothered anymore to deliver what they promised. Thats the grift Roy1012 is talking about.
 

MadVader

Duke
M&BWB
I believe mexxico when he sais there was no ill intent, as in they intentionally wanted to scam us veterans.
He is naive and well-meaning. And he is probably not invited to meetings where senior TW staff are discussing company finances and related decisions. So I wouldn't take his impressions as evidence.
There may have been no premeditated attempt to scam people, but there was a successful opportunistic attempt to charge full price for what TW bosses knew was an inferior EA product compared to what was misleadingly marketed in devblogs.
 

Nodice83

Knight
WBWF&SNWVC
And he is probably not invited to meetings where senior TW staff are discussing company finances and related decisions.
Yup, he would finally get his conscience 'dirty' if they would need him there. You play the nasty rules of the board and drink aged brandy in the gents club with them later or do the hard work and keep your mouth shut. Can't blame him for his urge to leave, doesn't seem to be the same company that created Warband.
 

Roy1012

Duke
Yup, he would finally get his conscience 'dirty' if they would need him there. You play the nasty rules of the board and drink aged brandy in the gents club with them later or do the hard work and keep your mouth shut. Can't blame him for his urge to leave, doesn't seem to be the same company that created Warband.
All companies change with time, for the better or worse. I think tw went to the extreme in the latter category.
 

Phantom425

Sergeant
Oh shiit, here we go again.
No, don't worry, I'm not gonna do that.
If you're one of those people excitedly supporting something along the lines of an 'elephant DLC' or are okay with them seemingly planning on post-release paid content, especially with how barebones the singleplayer is atm, then I'd bet you're also one of the people who would see nothing wrong with a paradox style DLC policy for this game too.
Just to clarify, I'm not excited for it, I just used that to show that there would be more content added to the game. If there was a Paradox style DLC policy for this game I would actually kms.

And I do agree with a lot of what you said, the game is pretty barebones right now and development has been incredibly slow with a lack of good communication. While I do think you and I, and the others in this thread, will forever disagree, and I will take up Shakenspeare's agree to disagree idea, there are massive problems with Bannerlord currently and a lack of what has been promised.
Also I can't find any of your posts which isn't TL;DR btw
I get carried away when typing. I like to respond to every paragraph, and those tend to be paragraphs themselves, so my response can get long.
 

Life_Erikson

Master Knight
M&BWBNWVC
He is naive and well-meaning. And he is probably not invited to meetings where senior TW staff are discussing company finances and related decisions. So I wouldn't take his impressions as evidence.
There may have been no premeditated attempt to scam people, but there was a successful opportunistic attempt to charge full price for what TW bosses knew was an inferior EA product compared to what was misleadingly marketed in devblogs.
That may very well be the case. Mexxico really doesn't stick with me like a dishonest person, quite the opposite. But TW actions speak louder than his attemt at redeeming the company.
 

Roy1012

Duke
That may very well be the case. Mexxico really doesn't stick with me like a dishonest person, quite the opposite. But TW actions speak louder than his attemt at redeeming the company.
I totally agree, while you could make the argument he’s only doing it to protect his own reputation (ex employees who **** talk their previous company do not get good reviews), I don’t think that’s the case.
 

Alfonso_M

Squire
@Roy1012 Cannot believe its been one month since you created this thread and people is still writing in it almost everyday, non stop...

Congratulations? Happy Monthversary? :neutral:
 

Roy1012

Duke
@Roy1012 Cannot believe its been one month since you created this thread and people is still writing in it almost everyday, non stop...

Congratulations? Happy Monthversary? :neutral:
Well, it’s an interesting topic to say the least. I would be lying if I said I hadn’t been bumping it with subpar responses (like this one) to keep it alive, but in my defense people seem to be very interested and post interesting responses on both sides.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom