To some, it is. Do I think BL has better graphics, yes, but I wouldn't call someone an idiot if they say that they prefer the graphics of WB.
Well, they would be, because Bannerlord's graphics are just...better. They are more polished, better quality, etc. Warband looks a step up from minecraft for all its brilliance. That's not up for debate.
Except for that the entire conversation up until this point has been explaining to you that people can prefer BL to WB, and you refusing to accept that.
I'm not saying they can't have it, I'm just saying that opinion is dumb.
There isn't an argument when it comes to which game people are free to prefer.
We are literally having that argument at this very moment? I am talking about things that make Warband better, those are arguments!
Except you're literally policing people's opinions. You're not having a healthy conversation, you're mind is literally shut.
My mind isn't shut, if people brought reasons as to why Bannerlord is better, I'd analyze them and see if they are correct. However, since almost nobody has done so -- they just whine and complain about me being close-minded or "get a life loser hahahaha", without actually saying anything. I think you'd be surprised if you re-read this entire thread to see that there's very little points being made by the TW simp camp, if you want you can try to argue about some reasons as to why Bannerlord is better, I'd love to look at them.
Not everyone is a reviewer. People can like the games that they buy with their own money for any reason that they see fit.
I'm not saying they can't, but what I am saying is that there are certain facts about Bannerlord that make it inferior to warband, regardless of what people's opinion on Bannerlord is. If people take these into account that's great. They don't have to, but it would be good for them to be informed and understand why it is garbage.
Most of the sales sold from the other franchises on M&B were from WB. According to SteamDB, it has sold roughly 5,000,000 copies, yet still retains a smaller player base than what you think a successful game should have. Either you're completely wrong, or the M&B fanbase was never as strong as you thought it was.
The estimates being thrown around are pretty rough. First, we are told that M&B series has sold 6 million copies, now Warband has sold 5, yet Bannerlord has sold 3-5? That doesn't add up. Either way, its kind of irrelevant so moving on.
Gaming wasn't smaller if WB was able to sell millions of copies. Your excuse falls flat.
Gaming back in the early 2010's was much smaller than it is today, and the fact that there is anyone even still playing the game regularly (not for "oh, Haven't played that in a few years, mine as well give it another run" nostalgia reasons) is a pretty strong victory in Warband's regard. I would have expected it to be completely dead by 2014-2015 if I was TW, and yet it still lives. That means my excuse actually doesn't fall flat, but is instead a estimate to Warband's popularity and competency.
Like I said, either you're wrong or WB is also pitiful. My argument is neither are.
I don't think you understand that a game that is as old as warband with the type of company that produces it (not Valve where they can pump trillions into marketing and regular game-sized updates) should not be getting as many players as it does today. Again, this is a victory in my view, especially for how bad Warband's graphics really are. Its hard to rope in new fans when your game looks like garbage, and yet Warband still seems to be attracting new buyers.
And WB is getting 1/4, of the players that BL is getting, not one half. And older games can still remain active even as newer ones come out, just look at the Company of Heroes series.
I'm not saying that older games can't receive a cult following, however, as with the previous paragraph, this game logically should have died out years ago. It is inconceivable to think that Warband is still alive, but I don't need to repeat myself.
There is nothing wrong with the fanbase for BL. Actually, I take that back, there is something wrong with the fanbase that has been made obvious by this thread.
If you think that people who are not satisfied with an unfinished, falsely advertised product that took a decade to develop are a "problem" with the fanbase, then I suppose you are correct. Unfortunately, the problem is the other way around. It's not our fault the game has a mountain of issues, we didn't create it.
You're not helping this franchise. Don't place yourself on a pedestal above other people when you've done literally nothing but complain about pointless things.
Well, see, I can understand from your perspective why you'd think that, but you know little to nothing about me, and vise versa. I have kept the Persistent World/Kingdoms module alive for many years longer than it was supposed to, and whether or not you like me, that is a positive, no? Either way, clan leaders objectively keep the modules they are on alive by continuing to foster a community for members to join. Without these types of communities, the servers inevitably shrink or even disappear entirely due to the lack of interest. How do you think Napoleonic Wars has lasted so long? Because of random people joining a TDM server? Admittedly, that is a part of the community, however is a very small part and inevitably, those people are picked up and recruited into regiments every now and then.
