I agree it does ...because it didn't live up to peoples' expectations.
Once again, I disagree, this drop off still makes sense because it was hyped up and people played it, had their fun, and didn't want to come back to it. BL and WB are niche games, so it does make sense that there would be a drop off in player counts.
I have to disagree. A lot of games keep a huge percentage of their initial numbers, and even increase them pretty soon after launch when the previously suspicious to the series also decide to buy in on the fun. The game you reference to later in your post is one of them (TF2). Some games like singleplayer games with a playthroughable story naturally decline, unlike sandbox games like Garrys Mod and Mount and Blade.
You cannot compare games such as Garry's Mod and Mount and Blade for one big reason, Garry's Mod has a massive multiplayer aspect with RP servers, and had a lot of attention from massive Content Creators, bigger then those who are associated with BL. Vanoss is just one massive example, with his videos of the game consistently breaking 5 million views. Secondly, GMod and Mount and Blade are not the same type of sandbox game. Garry's Mod is a sandbox, that's what is has been made to be. You can make what you want and do what you want, be it Prop Hunt or some Medieval RPG. Mount and Blade is solely a medieval RPG with sandbox elements. Mount and Blade would always have a larger decline then games such as Garry's Mod or TF2.
Valheim is developed by a studio of 5 people, and started as a side-project from one dude. It's a massive difference to the power of TaleWorlds, which is a studio of at least 200 developers. Valheims' population is yet stable with more concurrent players, per your own rhetorics, than the aforementioned game. Valheim will take about three years to complete per their estimation, meanwhile Bannerlord still has no public roadmap.
Valheim also released this year, as opposed to Bannerlord.Secondly, it is also important to look at the gamemode. Valheim is a survival game, akin to Minecraft. That game would have massive, as it appeals to a large audience. Also, I highly doubt the roadmap would have any effect on the game, as the Valheim devs just stated that the roadmap they published is no longer applicable to the game. They too are having difficulty with development.
1.6.0 may have been a bigger update than the previously patches/hotfixes, but you'd have to be new to the whole spectacle if you're naive enough to mark that as redemption for eight years of mismanagement and ignorance. I think someone a while back stated it perfectly; some players had been hyped for years, and now they cannot fathom having wasted all those years being hyped for an underwhelming experience, thus they force themselves to play or like the game, and remain as vigilant white knights on the forums. That, if anything, hurts the strength of our feedback and power as customers.
Trust me, I am not that naïve. TW is not redeemed is terms of their communication. However, the point that I was making is that there is now a strategy that works, get prominent members of the community to create a letter, or even get some Youtubers to come together and make a video. There is a strategy that works that will get your voice heard. Because, while they should, why would TW listen to an arguably toxic forum that only makes up a small portion of the community? The strength of your feedback, when just making threads and changing your signature on your profile to a list of features that you want isn't as strong as you think. There are better strategies to use in order to get what is done.
And, my second response to this paragraph, is that I have acknowledged that I know it is frustrating, but reacting with anger isn't really going to get anything done. I have gotten burned by other series that are near and dear to my heart, series that are most likely dead now not going to see a modern game.
Oh man, you don't take into account how the release of Football Manager 2021 led to the logical decrease of players in Football Manager 2020, just as Bannerlord led to the decrease of Warband players. The difference is whilst Bannerlord decreased rapidly post-launch, Football Manager 2021 only lost 20% of it's initial concurrent players and will probably keep that stable ratio until Football Manager 2022 is released, all whilst Bannerlord only has 10% remaining of its initial concurrent players, and to add salt to the wound, led to a further decrease in Warband as well.
You're right, I didn't, and that was my fault. However, you're not taking into account another thing that I have spoken about already, genre. Football manager is a game about one of if not the most popular sports in the world, and lets you take charge of a team and manage them. For a lot of people, this is a dream game.
Also, one other thing I would like to touch on is the bringing up of how popular the game is in terms of SteamDB's most played. Firstly, the game consistently gets compared to the top games, such as TF2 and Football manager. These are not your average games, but the most successful games on Steam. The average game would likely be sitting around 3000 or less players. I will quickly respond to another point from another person before returning to your writing.
I did some digging a while back with web archive to see Warband and Bannerlord rank among most played games throughout the years
Warband rank is starting from 2015 because there is no data before this date.
I was planing to get more data on Bannerlord but for some reason steam db charts and its table stopped loading even if I enabled java script in my browser.
I don't think this drop is acceptable.
No, it is acceptable, and it is understandable. The reason for this is the amount of Steam users. Just from 2017 alone, steam has doubled its total amount of users. Secondly, using the place on the Steam rank among played games also hides something else, the actual playercount. Warband had topped BLs playercount three separate times, in 2014, 2015, and 2020. WB had always had a consistent 10k players, which is respectable, I am in no way shaming it. WB was a very successful game, however BL is just more successful then WB currently.
The drop is acceptable.
The logic in this comment. The situation might not be dire for you, if you love playing the game with all it's issues, bugs and lack of the basic things which made the Mount and Blade-series a success. Personally, I loved the full overhaul mods, and the multiplayer. I played the first game as well as Warband between the release and 2013, then got tired of the game, only to somehow happen upon a YouTube video showcasing the Napoleonic Wars DLC, and since then it's prolonged my stay in the series for an additional seven or eight years. The lack of stuff that will prolong players stay is dire, and that's clearly why the numbers dropped like never before ...Well, in the exception of No Man's Sky.
It isn't that I love the game, it isn't that I loathe the game, it is that I have patience with the game. The issues in the game will most likely be fixed at release or at some point shortly following release. TW isn't stupid, they know issues such as the Siege AI are important and things such as that, so they are going to continue to work on them until it is finished. The game is still in EA, and I know how people rightly dislike that argument, but it is looking like a game in EA right now. It isn't finished.
That is also your experience, even though it is a valid one. However, I really think that your experience here hurts you point. DLC support, such as Napoleonic Wars is going to come, just look at the recent leak. However, this support cannot and should not come until the game is released. You are not going to see support for these until the game is out of EA, as I am sure that BL does not want the game to be in EA limbo. So, this lack of stuff that will prolong players hasn't even come up yet in terms of development, as the base game is being worked on. If you would like the devs to drop the base game now, feel free to crusade on that point.
Finally, this game is no No Man's Sky. While there are a lot of features that are missing, it is nowhere near as bad as No Man's Sky. This isn't a defense of BL, this is a critique of the launch status of NMS.
Oh yes, it's great that the sequel has the same numbers after a year as the prequel had after ten years. If anything it means either not a lot of new players to the series came to remain, or old veterans didn't return. Nothing to be proud of. It's not an accomplishment.
It has larger numbers, not the same. It has nearly double the amount of players as the original. That is an accomplishment.
I do not know of these individuals. I last played, and hosted Swedish server in TF2 back in 2014. However, I've never felt the need to be kept up-to-date on the politics of that game. What I can see from Steamdb is that it's a bad comparison. TF2 has had an stable population since it's release, and as previously said, even increased it's population when it got well-received remarks. In reality, the contrast is huge between the two games.
It isn't just that TF2 has a stable population, it is that it is the seventh most played game on Steam. That is never going to be a fair comparison. The games in the multiplayer letter that were compared to BL were not a fair comparison whatsoever.
The drop would not be happening if multiplayer mods were able to be made. However, Taleworlds refusal to allow modders to use private servers (and the new flag debacle) has led to more and more dissatisfaction. Taleworlds needs to accommodate the modders rather than screwing them. As was said before, an mmo version of the game would be nice. Too bad the PW (Kingdoms) modders are being blocked from doing so. We would not be seeing a drop, we would be seeing an increase.
The drop would still be seen, as the drop was within the first month. You cannot expect the game to not have the drop, or retain the 250k players that it originally had.
Also, the point about screwing modders is getting less and less valid. Following the 1.6.0 patch, we can see that TW does want to help modders, not just screw them over. Unlike what has been stated by others on the matter, it is unlikely that TW has an inferiority complex compared to modders.
Finally, to avoid double posting, I am going to briefly go over the original post of this thread.
Part 1. The Financial Breakdown
The financial breakdown has no weight on whether this game is a grift, it only shows that it was a successful game. If you are made that this "garbage product" made so much money, that is your own grievence.
Part 2. Gameplay Features, or lack thereof
Part 3. Bannerlord Online
These two points contradict. Do you either want support for new mods coming along that TW didn't ask for or do you want them to expand on the game as it is still in EA. You cannot logically expect a game dev to drop their game in order to cater to a popular mod, not when the game isn't even out yet.
Secondly, since there is a lack of a roadmap, we do not even know what will be added in the game pre-release and post-release. If they aren't added, they aren't. If they are, they are. Personally, I believe that there is a substantial amount of gameplayer features, enough for someone to easily get their money's worth out of the product, which that alone means that it is not a grift.
Making a game takes time. Making an engine takes even more time. Just look at Halo Infinite, that game has taken a long time for development and it even still needed a delay. Speaking of delays, another game is Cyberpunk 2077. Both of these games were AAA companies, and these games have taken a long time to develop. TW is not making a CoD game every year, they are making a game that is meant to last.
So, in conclusion, no, BL is not a grift. You may feel as if you have been scammed, but that is not the intention of TW. Their intention is to make a good game and make money from that.