Bannerlord was a grift

Users who are viewing this thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
I do! Yet another thing people can have different views on, isn't the world wonderful?

I absolutely despise Bannerlord. I was a big proponent of the "let them work" line of thought at EA launch day, disappointed as I was with the state of the day, but it seems to me that they are not going to accomplish much at this point.

With that said, there's plenty of people who for some unfathomable reason like this game. Just take a look at Steam reviews. You can make the argument that they did not play very long, you can say that they are just shallow people, they don't know any better, you can make all sorts of excuses and I will even agree with you on most of them. But it is a fact that this game was generally well received by the people who bought it.

Bannerlord is not an objectively terrible game. There are some games for which that might hold true (if we were talking about movies I would bring up Eragon but I can't think of any game I played that was quite that bad), this is not one of them. I think the closest approximation that would match reality would be saying that it is an objectively mediocre game.
I completely agree with what you have to say. I thought you meant to say that there is no point in debating anything because people have different viewpoints. A misunderstanding.

I think it is a good question as to why people review the game well. Mainly it is incompetence/ignorance, they don't know what they are playing and why it is bad. If you don't have anything to compare to, what you get seems pretty alright. I've made this comparison many times on this forum (and perhaps on this thread, I can't exactly remember), but seeing Seasons 8-9 of The Office (US) is really good, unless you have the full context of the series as a whole. Once you see the episodes with Michael Scott, those last seasons just aren't really that good. Still watchable, but now that you have something to compare it to, its just not at the same level as it once was.
 
Objectively not terrible and approximately mediocre, but factually not worth £40/$50-5.

If you're going to sell the game for triple-a price, you ought to have triple-a content.
It is also not objectively not terrible. Not objectively terrible and objectively not terrible do not meant the same thing :smile:. It sure is a terrible game to me at least in it's current state.

Hard to disagree with your comment on the price. The only reason why I am not upset about that is that Warband was ridiculously underpriced for what it offered, so in the end it evened out for me. I will be very wary about buying games from TW in the future though.
 
I don't actually believe this is true. I can't think of any person outside of a focus group who would say "that game isn't simple enough, I won't buy it". Some of the most popular games of the last few decade have been complex genre breakouts like HoI4 and Minecraft. What's more, the dreaded oversimplified sequels are also accompanied by massive advertising campaigns. HoI4 is way simpler than HoI3, but the former had a very large promotional campaign by strategy game standards. It's the same with Skyrim / Oblivion vs Morrowind, newer Total War vs older Total War and so on. And above all else, advertising is what sells games. The vast majority of buyers don't even see the game mechanics or how complex it is before buying.

Just like in Hollywood it's a self-fulfilling prophecy of big, broad projects propped up by advertising campaigns, and when it sells well the publishers praise the broader appeal rather than the gigantic advertising campaign that made up 70% of the budget. Remember that superhero nerd films were a weird niche until Raimi's Spiderman came out.
The advertisment thing is certainly true. No doubt about that.

But I doubt that complex games get a wider target audience then easily accessible ones.
I don't have concrete evidence for that, since advertisement correlates both well with sales and accessibilty. There are just a few outliers.

But I think Kingdom Come Deliverance could be named as a good exemple. It was hyped quite a bit before release and thus sales were high.
But if you look at reviews and what people complain about, its mostly about the complex combat system, tedious quests, the almost non-existant opportunities to save and not enough hand holding. Whilst the game has its fair share of problems, none of these are accidental nor are these hated by everybody. These features are part of the design of the game and what "cRPG" (whatever that means) enthusiasts like about it.

My girlfriend loves playing nintendo games, but wouldn't touch Age of Empires with a 3 meter stick (not to talk about a paradox game).
Its not only the theme which puts her off, but the complexity as well. For her this seems to be too much work / stress where as a video game for her should be about relaxation and quick gratification. I feel like she is in the majority (mostly) and we are the minority.
 
But if you look at reviews and what people complain about, its mostly about the complex combat system, tedious quests, the almost non-existant opportunities to save and not enough hand holding.

Doesn't matter, they already bought the game. Almost nobody was talking or asking about the combat before release.

My girlfriend loves playing nintendo games, but wouldn't touch Age of Empires with a 3 meter stick (not to talk about a paradox game).
Its not only the theme which puts her off, but the complexity as well. For her this seems to be too much work / stress where as a video game for her should be about relaxation and quick gratification. I feel like she is in the majority (mostly) and we are the minority.

My sister is like this too, but she also plays Binding of Isaac to a semi-competitive level, and has played almost every Asian MMO under the sun. Personally I agree with your gf, most paradox games and traditional RTS games are not fun on their own.
I think what makes a lot of people avoid them is that they are reliant on you being interested in the history or spectacle behind them, otherwise they're just stressful, time-consuming resource grindfests until you get really good at them. The newer paradox games are especially bad at this, with the possible exception of Crusader Kings which is more like The Sims.
 
You are very polite about it, which is nice and everything, but at least in this thread you sometimes have a way of presenting your opinion as if it was an objective undeniable truth.
Everybody has been objective in this thread, especially because this thread started with an objective statement, that BL is a grift. If you are going to try and paint me as someone who can't comprehend differing opinions. A lot of the conversation in this thread hasn't been speaking about different opinions, it has been about the state of the game and often times how dire the situation is, and from what I know, I do believe that you are wrong. You can dislike the game, anyone can, however there are things in here where I think people are just wrong, and isn't a discussion of opinions. In those instances, speaking objectively is kinda what you're supposed to do.
Whether a game is good or bad is highly subjective. I think Bannerlord is a broken plastic hollow husk without a soul, you think it's a... Perfectly alright game I guess? And that's cool, to each their own. I can't tell you what to enjoy, but you also can't tell others what to dislike.
I also disagree with this. Like Roy said, you can have discussions on things. I disagree with plenty of people, but all of us have the right to say that we disagree and talk about it. I came into this forum thinking that BL was in much better state than it is, and being here has changed that opinion of mine. That would not have happened if we just went "to each their own".
 
Everybody has been objective in this thread, especially because this thread started with an objective statement, that BL is a grift. If you are going to try and paint me as someone who can't comprehend differing opinions. A lot of the conversation in this thread hasn't been speaking about different opinions, it has been about the state of the game and often times how dire the situation is, and from what I know, I do believe that you are wrong. You can dislike the game, anyone can, however there are things in here where I think people are just wrong, and isn't a discussion of opinions. In those instances, speaking objectively is kinda what you're supposed to do.

I also disagree with this. Like Roy said, you can have discussions on things. I disagree with plenty of people, but all of us have the right to say that we disagree and talk about it. I came into this forum thinking that BL was in much better state than it is, and being here has changed that opinion of mine. That would not have happened if we just went "to each their own".
The "BL is a grift" statement is also a silly one, and I said as much to the OP in this very thread (more than once actually). I am not sure what I am wrong on. Am I wrong when I say that Bannerlord feels like a hollow husk to me? I am pretty sure I am not, since that is what I think when I play it. What are you now the thought police? This is exactly what I was talking about :smile: .

Roy initially misunderstood what I meant, and so did you apparently, so I guess I didn't explain myself well. I am all for the discussion. What I find ridiculous is people clashing over "objective facts" that are actually opinions.
 
The "BL is a grift" statement is also a silly one, and I said as much to the OP in this very thread (more than once actually). I am not sure what I am wrong on. Am I wrong when I say that Bannerlord feels like a hollow husk to me? I am pretty sure I am not, since that is what I think when I play it. What are you now the thought police? This is exactly what I was talking about :smile: .
People have legitimately called the game a scam, that is an objective statement. My point was to show that it wasn't, objectively, a scam. You can feel scammed, but the game isn't one.
Roy initially misunderstood what I meant, and so did you apparently, so I guess I didn't explain myself well. I am all for the discussion. What I find ridiculous is people clashing over "objective facts" that are actually opinions.
I don't disagree with that, and I have misunderstood to some effect. However, I disagree with that this discussion dealt with only objective matters. It objectively has not.
I completely agree with what you have to say. I thought you meant to say that there is no point in debating anything because people have different viewpoints. A misunderstanding.

I think it is a good question as to why people review the game well. Mainly it is incompetence/ignorance, they don't know what they are playing and why it is bad.
This is genuinely one of the most insulting things that I have seen. Lumping together those who like this game as being either incompetent or ignorant really just puts down people who don't think you way.

As for why people review the game well, it is because they actually like the game.
 
I don't think, objectively speaking :iamamoron: , that we have the same thing in mind when we say objective here. The first definition on this link is what I am talking about.


People have legitimately called the game a scam, that is an objective statement.
That is not an objective statement. That is their opinion, which is fueled by anger and frustration over the state of the game.

Also, there is nothing insulting about being incompetent or ignorant (although I am not really sure how one can be incompetent when it comes to enjoying a game). I am ignorant on a great number of topics. I don't know anything about genetics, or microbiology, or about how to draw a person or how to fish at sea. There's nothing bad about that. If someone has never played Warband, I could see why they could enjoy Bannerlord. I would even go as far as saying that ignorance is bliss in that case (is a saying for a reason).

Of course what Roy says can't by itself explain why so many people like Bannerlord. Like most things in life, it's more complicated than that.
 
That is not an objective statement. That is their opinion, which is fueled by anger and frustration over the state of the game.
That is an objective statement. That isn't an opinion, that's calling a game a scam., which is a statement, not an opinion.
Also, there is nothing insulting about being incompetent or ignorant (although I am not really sure how one can be incompetent when it comes to enjoying a game). I am ignorant on a great number of topics. I don't know anything about genetics, or microbiology, or about how to draw a person or how to fish at sea. There's nothing bad about that. If someone has never played Warband, I could see why they could enjoy Bannerlord. I would even go as far as saying that ignorance is bliss in that case (is a saying for a reason).
It is insulting, because that means anyone who has played WB and also likes BL is incompetent, or in other terms, an idiot. Calling someone ignorant just because they like a game, going "oh they don't know what they're missing, they'd hate the game otherwise" is just not a good stance to take. Ignorance doesn't play a part in liking the game, and saying that it does kinda seems like a big seethe coming from some people that some people aren't in the whole "Bannerlords is ****" camp.

I guess I'd chalk it up to this being
Yet another thing people can have different views on, isn't the world wonderful?

And, since I've played both WB and BL, am I an idiot for liking the game? Either I'm not, or the whole "to each their own" thing comes with a stipulation that if someone thinks differently then you then they're an idiot. I can respect a lot that has been said here, but the whole "they only like it because they're ignorant" is quite handedly single stupidest opinion that can be had on BL. You can like the game, dislike the game, whatever your opinion on it is, but to label the entirety of those who disagree with you as ignorant and incompetent gets nothing done. And also it seems like you're speaking objectively on the subject of why people like games.
 
That is not an objective statement. That is their opinion, which is fueled by anger and frustration over the state of the game.
He's saying that this: "People have called this game a scam" is the objective statement. And it is, you can go and look at the posts to see people saying that.

The subjective part is that those people come across as new to high-end games where features get cut or shuffled constantly and the marketing basically lies to everyone, all the time. More or less the target audience of this sort of thing:
 
He's saying that this: "People have called this game a scam" is the objective statement. And it is, you can go and look at the posts to see people saying that.

The subjective part is that those people come across as new to high-end games where features get cut or shuffled constantly and the marketing basically lies to everyone, all the time. More or less the target audience of this sort of thing:

I mean reading his last post, that doesn't seem to be what he is saying though.

But anyway I have been on the internet long enough to know when I am talking to someone who enjoys arguing for the sake of arguing :smile:. This seems rather pointless. Kind of like this thread, and yet here we are keeping it alive.
 
This is genuinely one of the most insulting things that I have seen. Lumping together those who like this game as being either incompetent or ignorant really just puts down people who don't think you way.

As for why people review the game well, it is because they actually like the game.
Well, they are ignorant of why it is bad. Like I mentioned, when you are ignorant (lacking the knowledge) of the fact of something better (in this case Warband), it is not an insult to say you are ignorant, it is just a statement of fact. I will agree that incompetent is a bit over the line, however, it was just a hyperbolic way of extending my point of them not having any idea about why the game is bad, just enjoying their time with the blinders on. Think Plato's Allegory of the Cave.

EDIT: After scrolling up and reading a bit more again, I see that there is thought that I think that people who have played Warband and like Bannerlord are stupid. I did not make this argument, but I do agree with it. People who prefer Bannerlord to Warband are dumb and I will argue to the death about why they are stupid.

You meant the Master (OP) and his 'opponent' counterpart apprentice...
I cannot confirm nor deny that Phantom425 is controlled opposition.

The OP is keeping it alive through subtle bumping that borders on spam. We are just puppets in his scheme to feed the thread through controversy.
5e4b90430b5b8ec458f1ed519affa205.png
 
Last edited:
While yes, the ignorant part is less insulting, it stills kinda gives people a chance to feel superior.
I suppose the specific phrasing is problematic. After having googled synonyms for ignorant, if you prefer "untaught" we can use that from now on.
I also really don’t think that the second someone plays WB they will think that BL sucks. I think that this viewpoint is coming from a very heavy bias, due to the fact that a majority of forum users are M&B veterans that have spent thousands of hours in WB, so it makes sense to think that people will immediately prefer WB which I just don’t think is the case.
I don't think if you've played warband for 10 hours you will immediately hate Bannerlord, but the vast majority (I would say 90-95%) of people who have played more than 100 hours on warband and actually understand how it works will prefer Warband to Bannerlord. I know it is simply anecdotal (though some could consider it a survey), but seeing as I have had a clan on Persistent World in Warband with 100-150 people at any given time, I have quite a bit of a following, and know many people who play warband. Of the over 300 on my friends list who I have encountered on Warband, I have talked about Bannerlord to just about every one of them since the Closed Beta, and I have yet to find one of them who prefers Bannerlord. Other clan leaders I have talked to have done similar tactics and yielded similar results. I believe the total that prefer Bannerlord to Warband was 5, out of over 500 people. Barely any of them play Bannerlord at all (and if they do, it is on Bannerlord Online), and those that are on Mount and Blade are joining me in Siege Night on the GK server. Not because I asked, but because Bannerlord just doesn't have that yet.
There are reasons to prefer BL over WB, like its graphical improvements, clan system, character deaths, and other things. The game still needs work, but there are more reasons then just ignorance to prefer BL.
There are some aspects in which Bannerlord is superior to Warband, however, most of those are largely irrelevant to the overall gameplay and feel of the game. Things like Clan Systems and character families aren't going to be the make-or-break features that you care about. It would take a seriously dishonest or mentally deficient person to argue that the experience in Bannerlord is more enjoyable than Warband. Sure, its reasonable to say that your experience in Bannerlord is enjoyable, but more than Warband, if you have met the above criteria and know what you're talking about? No.
And after taking a philosophy course and college, please don’t bring philosophy into this. I swear if I hear “allegory of the cave” one more time I might die.
Fine, I'll substitute it for THX 1138, the worst film ever made.


Deleted his post. Not sure why. Though it lives forever in memoriam in this post.
 
Last edited:
The OP is keeping it alive through subtle bumping that borders on spam. We are just puppets in his scheme to feed the thread through controversy.
Don’t forget me.
I mean reading his last post, that doesn't seem to be what he is saying though.
It is precisely what I am saying.
But anyway I have been on the internet long enough to know when I am talking to someone who enjoys arguing for the sake of arguing :smile:. This seems rather pointless. Kind of like this thread, and yet here we are keeping it alive.
I argue because I care about the game and I don’t want to conversation to be dominated by faulty points. There are valid critiques to be made, and there is a reason why I don’t argue with those.
Well, they are ignorant of why it is bad. Like I mentioned, when you are ignorant (lacking the knowledge) of the fact of something better (in this case Warband), it is not an insult to say you are ignorant, it is just a statement of fact. I will agree that incompetent is a bit over the line, however, it was just a hyperbolic way of extending my point of them not having any idea about why the game is bad, just enjoying their time with the blinders on. Think Plato's Allegory of the Cave.
Edit: This was in response to Roy, not Eddie. I’m an idiot.

While yes, the ignorant part is less insulting, it stills kinda gives people a chance to feel superior. I also really don’t think that the second someone plays WB they will think that BL sucks. I think that this viewpoint is coming from a very heavy bias, due to the fact that a majority of forum users are M&B veterans that have spent thousands of hours in WB, so it makes sense to think that people will immediately prefer WB which I just don’t think is the case. There are reasons to prefer BL over WB, like its graphical improvements, clan system, character deaths, and other things. The game still needs work, but there are more reasons then just ignorance to prefer BL.

And after taking a philosophy course and college, please don’t bring philosophy into this. I swear if I hear “allegory of the cave” one more time I might die.
After scrolling up and reading a bit more again, I see that there is thought that I think that people who have played Warband and like Bannerlord are stupid. I did not make this argument, but I do agree with it. People who prefer Bannerlord to Warband are dumb and I will argue to the death about why they are stupid.
I really cannot disagree with that more. People can like different things and not be stupid. It literally comes down to subjective tastes.
I suppose the specific phrasing is problematic. After having googled synonyms for ignorant, if you prefer "untaught" we can use that from now on.
I'd prefer neither honestly.
I don't think if you've played warband for 10 hours you will immediately hate Bannerlord, but the vast majority (I would say 90-95%) of people who have played more than 100 hours on warband and actually understand how it works will prefer Warband to Bannerlord.
Yeah, your evidence doesn't really hold up. This is because you are asking questions to WB players who, after having put a lot of time into the game and BL not being finished, will most likely prefer WB. This evidence doesn't really represent the whole of the M&B community, it represents the "old guard" of WB. This evidence doesn't really prove anything.
There are some aspects in which Bannerlord is superior to Warband, however, most of those are largely irrelevant to the overall gameplay and feel of the game. Things like Clan Systems and character families aren't going to be the make-or-break features that you care about. It would take a seriously dishonest or mentally deficient person to argue that the experience in Bannerlord is more enjoyable than Warband. Sure, its reasonable to say that your experience in Bannerlord is enjoyable, but more than Warband, if you have met the above criteria and know what you're talking about? No.
And a lot of the requests that people have for what they want in BL that are in WB, such as lord duels, manhunters, and feasts aren't going to be make or break features for a large portion of the playerbase.

And no, it wouldn't take a mentally deficient person to argue that the experience in BL is more enjoyable than that of WB, because that is a subjective opinion and you are clearly showing your bias right now. To say that the entirety of those who disagree with you on which game they prefer are mentally deficient shows that you simply just do not want to have an actual conversation. You like WB, I like BL. Neither game is perfect, and neither game is leagues better than the other. Both have their pros and their cons, but one can prefer one over the other.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom