Bannerlord Worries

[BlazingScribe]

Concerns about the direction of this product and whether or not it will ever reach it's ideal form are fair. And it would not be the first time a community has grown rather jaded. Fans have been waiting for this game for a long time after all.

That being said, not two months ago the most common joke on these forums was that Bannerlord would be seen by our grandchildren, if that. And I find it amusing that now that the game has a specific date of release of any kind, almost immediately a different faction has popped up wondering if it would be worth it. Or are upset that something releasing in a declared, unfinished state does not have everything they wanted. Or that a beta for testing purposes doesn't have enough polish.

This isn't even entitled, it's just weird. For all intents and purposes, the game that we all WANT to play does not exist. What IS here is a product that is actively being modified and revised to better match that ideal, at least in theory. Until the point in time where there is solid evidence that ideal has been failed or compromised, and cannot be fixed, declaring failure and/or betrayal is just unproductive.

What is productive on the other hand, is keeping at an arms length and making practical observations that can be acted upon. With any luck any and all doubts will be proven baseless and we get a really great game on our hands. Until then, we've been patient this long right? What's another six months?

 

[Kentucky 『 ＨＥＩＧＵＩ 』 James]

And I find it amusing that now that the game has a specific date of release of any kind, almost immediately a different faction has popped up wondering if it would be worth it. Or are upset that something releasing in a declared, unfinished state does not have everything they wanted. Or that a beta for testing purposes doesn't have enough polish.

People have been criticising the state of the game since 2015, the difference is that people clamouring for a release date to "prove" that the game will eventually come out have been much more common.
The reason a lot of people in the beta are unhappy is because the developers are currently taking the game in a direction mechanically which most of the testers completely disagree with. The combat is currently a huge step down from warband and the developers seem dead-set on continuing down that path. You can't "fix" a game when the developers basically disagree with all the criticism levelled against it.

 

[BlazingScribe]

The combat is currently a huge step down from warband and the developers seem dead-set on continuing down that path. You can't "fix" a game when the developers basically disagree with all the criticism levelled against it.

Not entirely sure where that's coming from. From what I've observed the only differences in terms of how combat works are that localized damage isn't a thing (I think). And shields can be angled somewhat now. Also the way equipment is bought online is different but I think what you're talking about is the core mechanics of how one swings or blocks a sword.

Did I miss something else?

'

 

[VVyrd]

The combat is currently a huge step down from warband and the developers seem dead-set on continuing down that path. You can't "fix" a game when the developers basically disagree with all the criticism levelled against it.

Not entirely sure where that's coming from. From what I've observed the only differences in terms of how combat works are that localized damage isn't a thing (I think). And shields can be angled somewhat now. Also the way equipment is bought online is different but I think what you're talking about is the core mechanics of how one swings or blocks a sword.

Did I miss something else?

'

If you are any decent at Warband and try out the beta you'll understand what a massive step backwards Bannerlord is right now. It's not as easy to appreciate in videos.

Can it be fixed? Yes
Will they? We'll have to wait and see

 

[BlazingScribe]

If you are any decent at Warband and try out the beta you'll understand what a massive step backwards Bannerlord is right now. It's not as easy to appreciate in videos.

Can it be fixed? Yes
Will they? We'll have to wait and see

Thanks. That clears up a lot.

 

[Abelardo]

All I know is that if you're going to charge me to help you test your game, at least give me a bit of a discount...

 

[Ragratt]

M&B 1 and 2 were improved long after release such that mods were incompatible w earlier versions.  I don’t se this much differently.  TW has rebuilt the engine and vastly expanded systems, that takes time.  They’ve been building this game for a long time.

What do they owe you, really?  My playtime and quality of experience w M&B and warband has been solid value for money spent.  You want the product, you buy it. That monies supports development.  They are likely running low on funds so this EA will enable them to make the game better faster longer.  I have no issues with this, especially if it is at a reasonable cost.

I see the vast potential of the new engine and am most excited for larger battles, renewed graphics and role playing possibilities impossible on such a scale or depth on other games.  I want to see what game worlds mods will offer 5-10 years from now.  The possibilities will soon be much larger.

Change will happen, the game not going to be the same. I doubt I’ll have issue w it but hopefully they can / will accommodate those who can’t be satisfied with anything other than controls they know by offering a classic mode for SP or private servers.

People want games released ASAP, with a laundry list of features and they want it complete. You can’t have it all.

 

[Cilcain]

What proportion of serious M&B fans -- people pretty much guaranteed to be day one purchasers -- would snap up a cheap EA copy? TW has to consider the commercial impact on early full-price sales. They'd be mad IMO to give away EA licences at a significant discount.

So I don't think they're doing anything wrong or unwise here. It's not a typical EA situation where punters have to be tempted in to fund development.

 

[Captain Obvious]

M&B 1 and 2 were improved long after release such that mods were incompatible w earlier versions.  I don’t se this much differently.  TW has rebuilt the engine and vastly expanded systems, that takes time.  They’ve been building this game for a long time.

What do they owe you, really?  My playtime and quality of experience w M&B and warband has been solid value for money spent.  You want the product, you buy it. That monies supports development.  They are likely running low on funds so this EA will enable them to make the game better faster longer.  I have no issues with this, especially if it is at a reasonable cost.

I see the vast potential of the new engine and am most excited for larger battles, renewed graphics and role playing possibilities impossible on such a scale or depth on other games.  I want to see what game worlds mods will offer 5-10 years from now.  The possibilities will soon be much larger.

Change will happen, the game not going to be the same. I doubt I’ll have issue w it but hopefully they can / will accommodate those who can’t be satisfied with anything other than controls they know by offering a classic mode for SP or private servers.

People want games released ASAP, with a laundry list of features and they want it complete. You can’t have it all.

Couldn't put it better myself. Should note TW has done similiar things with their other games and successed so I think there isn't anything to worry about really.

In the end, don't want to buy EA? No one is forcing you to, you're more than entitled to wait until full release to play the game.

 

[JustinTime49]

M&B 1 and 2 were improved long after release such that mods were incompatible w earlier versions.  I don’t se this much differently.  TW has rebuilt the engine and vastly expanded systems, that takes time.  They’ve been building this game for a long time.

What do they owe you, really?  My playtime and quality of experience w M&B and warband has been solid value for money spent.  You want the product, you buy it. That monies supports development.  They are likely running low on funds so this EA will enable them to make the game better faster longer.  I have no issues with this, especially if it is at a reasonable cost.

I see the vast potential of the new engine and am most excited for larger battles, renewed graphics and role playing possibilities impossible on such a scale or depth on other games.  I want to see what game worlds mods will offer 5-10 years from now.  The possibilities will soon be much larger.

Change will happen, the game not going to be the same. I doubt I’ll have issue w it but hopefully they can / will accommodate those who can’t be satisfied with anything other than controls they know by offering a classic mode for SP or private servers.

People want games released ASAP, with a laundry list of features and they want it complete. You can’t have it all.

Couldn't put it better myself. Should note TW has done similiar things with their other games and successed so I think there isn't anything to worry about really.

In the end, don't want to buy EA? No one is forcing you to, you're more than entitled to wait until full release to play the game.

Please do not get me wrong, I agree with most everything here. The problem I have is that TW back then isn't the same now. Ik the devs are passionate and are working to create an amazing product(better than any AAA competition in my opinion) but I think I have the right to be worried about their approach to EA. Especially when the devs literally dismiss mostly unanimously agreed upon issues as nostalgia for past games or arguing people don't like it because its different argument.

For years they have been putting off beta and/or release because they rightfully so want to create an amazing bug free product. With EA being sold at full price however, whether you like/dislike the idea, it restricts the amount of people who WILL play the game. These tens of thousands of potential players would've been able to help out with bugs, either making development that much more efficient or decreasing the chance of weird bugs emerging in the final product that may have been missed because of limited testing.

I trust taleworlds, but I hope that that one year of development after early access dosen't postpone to two years.

 

[Captain Obvious]

I really honestly think that the game being sold at full price or at a reduced price will make no difference to the capability to report bugs.

 

[killer-blead]

I think the people who say that Bannerlord is looking too much like Warband are very much exaggerating it. It's like comparing Warband to Mount&blade.

Mount&Blade had 2 factions (Swadia vs Veagir) You couldn't really siege fiefs it was just an endless battle with lords, patrols and prison trains. You had 2/3 companions, you could only do the black fortress siege (which, while epic then fails miserably by Warband's standards).

If the difference between Bannerlord and Warband is as big as Warband vs Mount&Blade then we have nothing to worry about.

Spoiler

Even better if it is the difference between Warband and Warrider.

 

[Is Milse Póg]

I think the people who say that Bannerlord is looking too much like Warband are very much exaggerating it. It's like comparing Warband to Mount&blade.

Mount&Blade had 2 factions (Swadia vs Veagir) You couldn't really siege fiefs it was just an endless battle with lords, patrols and prison trains. You had 2/3 companions, you could only do the black fortress siege (which, while epic then fails miserably by Warband's standards).

If the difference between Bannerlord and Warband is as big as Warband vs Mount&Blade then we have nothing to worry about.

Spoiler

Even better if it is the difference between Warband and Warrider.

But M&B came out in September 16th, 2008 and Warband in March 30th 2010 - just a year and a half.  On the other, between Warband and Bannerlord 10 years would have passed by 2020, and even that just for the early access. If Bannerlord would have been released in 2012 looking like this, I doubt there would have been any disappointment of complaints at all.

Another thing, like Jacob pointed out earlier, the media they release now seems to show a more rudimentary and feature-limited game than the one we saw in 2016, especially graphics-wise. And finally, the game looks in many ways like a product that you would have expected from 2015, not an up-to-date 2019 game developed by an already established studio. It seems to me that Taleworlds somehow messed up at every possible opportunity with BL.

 

[Kazzan]

I see the vast potential of the new engine and am most excited for larger battles, renewed graphics and role playing possibilities impossible on such a scale or depth on other games.  I want to see what game worlds mods will offer 5-10 years from now.  The possibilities will soon be much larger.

No doubt people will mod the game. But if the base game itself is not enjoyable to play then don't expect modders to want to fix or mod it either.

Also Mod tools don't seem likely to come out before the game comes out of Early Access by the looks of things. 

 

[John_M]

Mount&Blade had 2 factions (Swadia vs Veagir) You couldn't really siege fiefs it was just an endless battle with lords, patrols and prison trains. You had 2/3 companions, you could only do the black fortress siege (which, while epic then fails miserably by Warband's standards).

When was the last time you played Mount and Blade? As that certainly isn't the case. The only faction it didn't have was the Saranids, there are plenty of companions, and you could siege settlements.

 

[AmateurHetman]

Mount&Blade had 2 factions (Swadia vs Veagir) You couldn't really siege fiefs it was just an endless battle with lords, patrols and prison trains. You had 2/3 companions, you could only do the black fortress siege (which, while epic then fails miserably by Warband's standards).

When was the last time you played Mount and Blade? As that certainly isn't the case. The only faction it didn't have was the Saranids, there are plenty of companions, and you could siege settlements.

Yeah it sounds to me like they were talking about the early build. But that is not mount & blade in full release.

 

[JustinTime49]

If the difference between Bannerlord and Warband is as big as Warband vs Mount&Blade then we have nothing to worry about.

I think we would have A LOT to worry about if that is the case. What you said about M&B is just plain wrong(earlier version?) but one of the main differences between warband and M&B is the combat and slightly geographical change to the map along with the introduction of the sarranids.

Obviously we have seen a lot of improvements over warband in bannerlord, but if we were to follow your logic then at release there would be an outright riot.

 

[danEN]

After they added some text to the Steam Page I was feeling similarly. Reusing scenes isnt as huge of a deal as removing Kingdom Management or Weapon Crafting. Also it is going to be quite difficult to enjoy the game knowing that key features at early access will be missing. Features that make the entirety of the game fun.  It does not seem appealing to dive into a 600+ day campaign save when a good chunk of core features are not included at launch. At this point my feelings are, get early access for multiplayer and save the single player experience for when kingdom management, weapon crafting, siege weapons and whatever else ends up not being included in the upcoming EA launch are polished and implemented.

Crazy idea, but if you're worried about playing a game that isn't fully finished yet, don't buy it until it's complete?

 

[xdj1nn]

Am I the only one who is just continuously losing faith in the game? Don't get me wrong I am still excited and support the devs, but recently over the last 2 years of gamescom everything they've shown feels EXTREMELY underwhelming.

Now before anyone says "its a passion project", or "you sound entitled" you must realize that with the announcement of early access being paid in full price, we are now customers, not just criticizers. People should expect feature complete game.

I am going to quote some things said by the official early access info list on steam to show some inconsistencies:

"The early access version will be reusing scenes for different towns, may lack some supporting features, may have a limited number of quests, voice-overs, etc."

This is simply irritating, and even though it dosen't directly mean anything, it makes you wonder just what went on from early 2016-2020 to release the game in a completely unfinished state. That etc is the real worry, as it seems they decided to be very selective and vague about what they DON'T plan on releasing. Still, the things they did say are just annoying, like reusing scenes. Remember the video they released a few weeks back, how the castle siege scene was completely off from its geographical location on the map? Well, I guess a lot more of that is coming our way in 2020!

"command and fight alongside their troops in large scale battles using the game’s extensive command system and intuitive skill-based directional combat system"

While the complaints on combat and the damage calculations are just shown everywhere throughout the forum, this 'extensive command system' seems so silly and provides virtually no good thing from it. What do I mean? How about the fact I can't tell my soldiers what equipment to prioritize which ties into the AI. Incoming cavalry charge? Spears on your backs boys, take out them swords! The cavalry charges rip right through thick heldfast infantry lines like a hot knife through butter, and don't get me started on infantry vs infantry.

Spoiler

SKIP TO 22:10!

Why are the infantry lines walking into their death? Based on what they described in terms of formations, AI in shieldwall formations will move very slowly. You can tell these dozen AI ARE in that formation, as they are walking, but for whatever reason they lagged so far behind they were easy pickings for the cavalry.

Also the AI in this game shows very little improvement towards warband, so this 'skill-based directional combat system' I guess is only told towards the multiplayer spectrum. In fact, because of the faster movement of the player, it feels like the player is a god as opposed to one man on the battlefield, so on horse he is practically invincible with the way cavalry is.

"Our focus is on ensuring that the game is fun and enjoyable rather than imposing a deadline that might have a negative impact on the final product.”

As someone who has been following Bannerlord for a long while now, this is practically a slap in the face. Why? Taleworlds should take all the time they need to make this game, I agree! It is what they have been saying for years, wanting to prove themselves to everyone that they can create a feature complete game, only to pull off a 180 and charge people to help fix their game by giving them an incomplete version charged at full price. A lot of people are going to buy it, and love it, me included, but now I am shifting towards more of a M&B fan as opposed to a taleworlds one.

You can argue that only people who want to help will buy it, and while that is true, its the fact they kept shoving down our throats that a great game takes time, and they would rather make a complete game for all to love as opposed to an unfinished one is kind of ironic considering everything above. We are now consumers, costumers, and especially since gamescom the devs don't even seem to take many criticisms seriously, so what makes anyone think that any feature the community unanimously agrees should be reworked or removed actually even be discussed by the devs. Class system receiving mostly negative feedback? Nah, keep it in the game.

Seems like this early access is just a way to fill their pockets, because if they actually stood by what they said, they would put this game out as an open beta, get all hands on deck for maximum bug extermination. Heck, or even just a closed beta to a few thousand chosen members to dispatch bugs. Especially with what they descried to be the main staples of the game, this EA title is looking more and more like a glorified warband mod as opposed to a full different game.

This game isn't a kickstarter, so why is it being treated as one?

OH NO YOU DIDN'T! hahahaha

We've got an ETA, please quit the whining for now, leave it to when the game is actually in EA and judge it after the fact.

My only complaint about TW regarding M&B2 BL has always been a lack of ETA or even a somewhat unofficial guess of an ETA. That translates into absolute lack of Deadlines, which translates into Infinite Loop Development: "do stuff, stuff gives new ideas, remove stuff, do new stuff, new stuff give new ideas, remove new stuff, do new new stuff..." You get the point.

As for quality, M&B turned out pretty good, and it has been one of the pioneer games to actually use Early Access since ever, and it was done right. If you are worried about that, for real, you're but a fool, if not I'd say you're a troll

After they added some text to the Steam Page I was feeling similarly. Reusing scenes isnt as huge of a deal as removing Kingdom Management or Weapon Crafting. Also it is going to be quite difficult to enjoy the game knowing that key features at early access will be missing. Features that make the entirety of the game fun.  It does not seem appealing to dive into a 600+ day campaign save when a good chunk of core features are not included at launch. At this point my feelings are, get early access for multiplayer and save the single player experience for when kingdom management, weapon crafting, siege weapons and whatever else ends up not being included in the upcoming EA launch are polished and implemented.

Crazy idea, but if you're worried about playing a game that isn't fully finished yet, don't buy it until it's complete?

Basic logic behind ETA, I really can't understand the massive whining over it, really... I'll probably not purchase BL until it's fully finished, and I don't give a single effe about waiting more. Changes nothing at this point.

 

[JustinTime49]

snip

OH NO YOU DIDN'T! hahahaha

We've got an ETA, please quit the whining for now, leave it to when the game is actually in EA and judge it after the fact.

My only complaint about TW regarding M&B2 BL has always been a lack of ETA or even a somewhat unofficial guess of an ETA. That translates into absolute lack of Deadlines, which translates into Infinite Loop Development: "do stuff, stuff gives new ideas, remove stuff, do new stuff, new stuff give new ideas, remove new stuff, do new new stuff..." You get the point.

As for quality, M&B turned out pretty good, and it has been one of the pioneer games to actually use Early Access since ever, and it was done right. If you are worried about that, for real, you're but a fool, if not I'd say you're a troll

Ok, where to start.

If the only problem you had with the current state of the game was the lack of ETA, thats fine! If everything checks out on your bucket list gameplay wise, thats fine! I don't think its fair to call people 'foolish' for worrying about the current state of gameplay though, especially when many concerns voiced throughout the forums have been confirmed to be features.

Take the class system for example, regardless of the continuous negativity towards the its implementation, TW have decided to stick with the system, to the dismay of many. I could go on with formations, encyclopedia... but you get the point. Your opinions aren't fact, which is why this thread is called 'Bannerlord Worries'.

"As for quality, M&B turned out pretty good" I more or less agree, and i'm sure bannerlord will be even better content wise, but the irony is still present(if you bothered to read the point of the OP anyway).

Years of like you said, infinite loop of development, claiming to release a full complete product only to sell off an incomplete game at full price so that the community can help fix it sounds awfully desperate in the context of potential development hell.