Bannerlord was a grift

Users who are viewing this thread

"not worth it. mods do this already and better. the new features are mostly obnoxiously overdone as well." doesn't sound like a tech support issue to me.

Like, if you think the average Steam user is some casual player who only wants a bit of swordplay and an overmap to run around on? Sure, I agree. If you want to go further and say that they also don't recognize quality games, you lost me there, but it is at least understandable. But WB blew it out of the water with not even a quarter of the features, even accounting for the terrible release.

That's why I think the new player experience (i.e. someone who doesn't know a damned thing, just picking it up and playing casually) is more important than complexity or depth.
Hmm. I don’t know. To be honest I see it as more of an hours-based assessment. What I mean by that is that the total amount of hours played should account towards your opinion or “worth”. By that I mean that someone who plays the game for 10 hours and never touches it again isn’t as valid as someone who plays it for 2000. After all, converting those few-time players into avid fans is the goal. I suppose we should be focusing on getting the average play time of all players up, and while your strategy of wowing new players at the beginning is good as a start, but it does not sustain/guarantee replayability, which is the focus. Obviously there will always be people who just play the game once or twice and don’t come back, that is inevitable. But, if we can win over just a few of them into becoming avid fans, I would consider that a victory.

@MadVader Thats something I hadn’t quite thought of. I suppose that, if I understand you correctly, could be a good argument against the “why do you want the game to improve if modders can fix it” meme: we need players to enjoy the game, get acclimated into it/the community, and seek out mods after they have enjoyed it and want more. People don’t just download full conversion mods right when they buy the game, most don’t even know they exist. However, if they ditch the game because it sucks, they won’t have the opportunity to experience them.
 

Nodice83

Knight
WBWF&SNWVC
Non-cosmetic DLCs are for players who played the original game, liked it, LEARNED IT and want more. Similarly, it would be wrong for a casual to skip Native and play a big complex mod full of new mechanics. It will look obnoxiously overdone, when in reality it's feature-rich if you are an experienced player and that's just what you need after Native.
Well said!
 

Apocal

Grandmaster Knight
To be honest I see it as more of an hours-based assessment. What I mean by that is that the total amount of hours played should account towards your opinion or “worth”. By that I mean that someone who plays the game for 10 hours and never touches it again isn’t as valid as someone who plays it for 2000.
The only people who play a game for two thousand hours are going to be the ones who already enjoy it. Meanwhile the people who quit after ten hours are going know exactly what they don't like about it.
 

julijs

Veteran
WBNWVC
The only people who play a game for two thousand hours are going to be the ones who already enjoy it. Meanwhile the people who quit after ten hours are going know exactly what they don't like about it.
people enjoy the game, people don't enjoy the game, that's entirely on their preference and opinion. However if you invest into the game more than the latter do, then that average person has more experience and say on the assessment (hours-based) of said game. (whether they enjoyed it or not.)
 

Apocal

Grandmaster Knight
people enjoy the game, people don't enjoy the game, that's entirely on their preference and opinion.
That's the thing we're trying to change, their opinion on the game.

Or let me put it in more personal terms: I've played the Bannerlord more than Kentucky James, MadVader, five bucks and bonerstorm put together. Do you think their opinions should collectively carry less weight than mine?* Because I sure as hell don't. Most of them took very few hours to figure out why they didn't enjoy the game -- schizophrenic mechanics, lack of immersive features, ahistorical battles, etc. -- and believing their assessment is less valuable because they didn't press their faces to a cheese grater for 2000 hours is insulting.

None of the issues present in Bannerlord require 2000 hours to notice and understand well enough to give good feedback. 90% of them don't even take 10 hours. The third time you get ****ing yeeted off your horse through your 30 chest armor by a farmer with a rusty scythe, you know exactly what is wrong and probably have a near-perfect way to fix it.
 
people enjoy the game, people don't enjoy the game, that's entirely on their preference and opinion. However if you invest into the game more than the latter do, then that average person has more experience and say on the assessment (hours-based) of said game. (whether they enjoyed it or not.)

Spending 1000s of hours in a game (or anything) doesn't instantly make you an expert. It doesn't even make you aware of the issues in the game.

Bannerlord came out in a unique time for games. When the pandemic started a lot of people with professional 9-5s realised that their jobs had eaten up their entire lives, and they had months of free time with nothing to do. There is a whole sociological discussion you could have about how school and work turns people into willing robots who crave mindless predictable drudgery, but for the purpose of this thread the main impact is that a lot of people wanted something repetitive and endless to fill the gap of their furloughed jobs. The stock price of most game companies skyrocketed in early 2020 while most other stock plummeted.

You saw a lot of this in the first few months of the game releasing. A lot of (clearly not young) people singing the praises of the game after 1000s of hours of vanilla. At first I didn't believe they had played the game that much, but the more I listened to them the more I realised they don't play games reflectively, they just grind for 8 hours a day to fill a job-shaped void. That also explains why they vehemently defend the game but provide no real reasons, and get mad at people for attacking a game that is basically their covid therapist.

I don't think these people's opinions are worthless, but you have to realise that they fundamentally don't care about a game's quality or playability. That sounds really weird to say out loud, but it's the only thing that explains how they can play for 1000 hours but get angry at anyone who criticises it.

Or, to put it simply:
Nqvrz.png
 
You saw a lot of this in the first few months of the game releasing. A lot of (clearly not young) people singing the praises of the game after 1000s of hours of vanilla. At first I didn't believe they had played the game that much, but the more I listened to them the more I realised they don't play games reflectively, they just grind for 8 hours a day to fill a job-shaped void. That also explains why they vehemently defend the game but provide no real reasons, and get mad at people for attacking a game that is basically their covid therapist.

I don't think these people's opinions are worthless, but you have to realise that they fundamentally don't care about a game's quality or playability. That sounds really weird to say out loud, but it's the only thing that explains how they can play for 1000 hours but get angry at anyone who criticises it.

These people like the game, they must be mindless sheep villing the void of their empty soulles existence with an equally empty and soulles videogame.

Kentucky James everyone, thanks for coming to the show, please check out our T-shirt stand on the way out and dont forget to have your parking validated.
 

Orion

Still Not Worthy
Global Moderator
M&BWBWF&SNW
It certainly seems like a stretch to me. I think there are simpler, more likely explanations for the users that defended TaleWorlds. I think a considerable portion of it was simply rationalization of spending their own time & money on the game, which is essentially what Hinds said, but I would be hesitant to ascribe some particular, wide-spread motivation to all of those people.
 
I wouldn't say the game is a "grift", as in an intentional scam. They are actively working on the game. It's just at a snail's pace, and the lack of non-battle/war orientated features is a big issue. I feel like they have all of these "little" things that they aren't prioritizing, like fleshing out the dialogue system, proper sieges and a more in-depth kingdom system, etc. that once it comes time to implement then, they'll still have their work cut out for them.
 

fragonard

Grandmaster Knight
WB
Wow, an awful lot of complaining here. Maybe for MP it's a problem but for SP, I think 1.6 is pretty good. I have thousands of hours in Warband and I think Bannerlord is almost as good with the possibility of being even better eventually. 900 hours in and no major complaints.
 
Wow, an awful lot of complaining here. Maybe for MP it's a problem but for SP, I think 1.6 is pretty good. I have thousands of hours in Warband and I think Bannerlord is almost as good with the possibility of being even better eventually. 900 hours in and no major complaints.
I'm not a singleplayer person (I have played singleplayer in the past, but meh), so I'm not good to comment on this. As for multiplayer, it is absolutely barren. It's dead, and it can't expand because of Taleworlds refusal to release private servers. It's just in a sad, pitiful state.
 

mujadaddy

Regular
WB
Wow, an awful lot of complaining here. Maybe for MP it's a problem but for SP, I think 1.6 is pretty good. I have thousands of hours in Warband and I think Bannerlord is almost as good with the possibility of being even better eventually. 900 hours in and no major complaints.
I have a few complaints, but I am largely satisfied with my EARLY ACCESS purchase, as well. There are some combat system tweaks I'd like to see before launch, and of course fleshing out missions, adding more of them, (maybe I dunno giving 200 Roguery something better than a 0% sneak chance) and stabilizing the situation for modding. But I'm here because I like the game!
 

Ragratt

Squire
WB
I'm not a singleplayer person (I have played singleplayer in the past, but meh), so I'm not good to comment on this. As for multiplayer, it is absolutely barren. It's dead, and it can't expand because of Taleworlds refusal to release private servers. It's just in a sad, pitiful state.
Whats sad is that by time game is finished there wont be enough of player base to run siege games. Maybe adding console players fill servers. Or maybe TW can add bots if they make functional ai.
 

Phantom425

Sergeant
Wow, an awful lot of complaining here. Maybe for MP it's a problem but for SP, I think 1.6 is pretty good. I have thousands of hours in Warband and I think Bannerlord is almost as good with the possibility of being even better eventually. 900 hours in and no major complaints.
In fairness, the MP scene is in dire straits right now. Although I do have to mostly agree with the SP experience. There are issues with it, such as sieges, but the SP is pretty good and nowhere as bad as some make it out to be. It could use work, but TW has not given up on the game.
 
Whats sad is that by time game is finished there wont be enough of player base to run siege games. Maybe adding console players fill servers. Or maybe TW can add bots if they make functional ai.
Is Bannerlord even planned to be inter-console compatible? I don't know.
 

julijs

Veteran
WBNWVC
these "little" things that they aren't prioritizing, like fleshing out the dialogue system, proper sieges and a more in-depth kingdom system, etc. that once it comes time to implement then, they'll still have their work cut out for them.
they're not prioritizing them because they don't have any intention to do so, during or after early access unless it comes in the form of a DLC down the line. Everyone was complaining about it's snails pace beforehand, but now the game is an intentional scam as a few developers stated that many features were "not in their idea of Bannerlord" or put it shortly, scrapped.

feature after feature, dev-blog after dev-blog and ever since their first Gamescon, a lot of what they advertised to us to sell their vision of game is predominantly abandoned, all for another fickle idea they have for the game now. As seen here:
It's hard to exactly pinpoint when Taleworlds decided that money was more important than keeping fans happy, but I would wager around 2015-2016
We can only speculate when they had made that decision, but all theories lead to that it was way before it's release, as all that time they spent glorifying the depth of the game with said dev-blogs, videos and virtually making sure it was stuffed down our throat of how complex and layered this game would be.

So when the spokesperson for Bannerlord at Gamescon said "We don't work like that. We are not a company who sets a timeline to release a product and then works to meet that deadline. We are Taleworlds Entertainment" they really weren't kidding huh.

The irony in looking back at the statements they made during Gamescon. one of the most concerning of which is "We want Bannerlord to be the best game that TaleWorlds can create, and we won’t take any shortcuts to get there." He should be choking on his own words as of yet.

they pulled off one of the most shameless marketing ploys, during a pandemic crisis and melted back into the darkness, no longer screaming how great the game is, how intricate and evolved they're making it. Spineless...
 

Apocal

Grandmaster Knight
I don't think these people's opinions are worthless, but you have to realise that they fundamentally don't care about a game's quality or playability. That sounds really weird to say out loud, but it's the only thing that explains how they can play for 1000 hours but get angry at anyone who criticises it.
This happens in basically every game community though, even pre-COVID.
 
they're not prioritizing them because they don't have any intention to do so, during or after early access unless it comes in the form of a DLC down the line. Everyone was complaining about it's snails pace beforehand, but now the game is an intentional scam as a few developers stated that many features were "not in their idea of Bannerlord" or put it shortly, scrapped.

feature after feature, dev-blog after dev-blog and ever since their first Gamescon, a lot of what they advertised to us to sell their vision of game is predominantly abandoned, all for another fickle idea they have for the game now. As seen here:

We can only speculate when they had made that decision, but all theories lead to that it was way before it's release, as all that time they spent glorifying the depth of the game with said dev-blogs, videos and virtually making sure it was stuffed down our throat of how complex and layered this game would be.

So when the spokesperson for Bannerlord at Gamescon said "We don't work like that. We are not a company who sets a timeline to release a product and then works to meet that deadline. We are Taleworlds Entertainment" they really weren't kidding huh.

The irony in looking back at the statements they made during Gamescon. one of the most concerning of which is "We want Bannerlord to be the best game that TaleWorlds can create, and we won’t take any shortcuts to get there." He should be choking on his own words as of yet.

they pulled off one of the most shameless marketing ploys, during a pandemic crisis and melted back into the darkness, no longer screaming how great the game is, how intricate and evolved they're making it. Spineless...
I shutter at the reminder of those lines. Good god have we been bent over a barrel and shown the 50 states. Sad what’s come to term. Reminds me of the years-long dev blog drought, I think from 2016-2018? Maybe it’s not because they were too busy with the game, but because they had nothing new to say.

 
Top Bottom