What promise are you referring to? What does it even mean "a certain sort of product"?
So your statement is that TW failed to deliver their product? I don't agree.
I'm already enjoying the game, and it is not even finished...
They promised a product with certain features and quality. They have so far not delivered on that product. That is the promise of product I am referring to.
If the developers said you could, for example, morph into a giant and eat the populace of Calradia and didn't deliver on that promise, that is exactly what it is. You don't have to agree with it for it to be accurate, and you enjoying the game doesn't mean I am wrong. It only means you don't care that it is missing large amounts of features and depth promised. All because you enjoy it as is.
Again the game is not "garbage" and it is still under development...
If you like it [the game] as is, how can you unbiasedly conclude what quality state the game is in right now? Most people would conclude a game that barely performs and lacks depth promised and was there in its older entry as "garbage". That isn't to say it cannot change or cannot be salvaged, only that it
needs to. What white knighting the game in its current state achieves is absolutely nothing. Brutal honesty helps us all. There are a lot of things Bannerlord needs to do, especially to justify a $50 price tag on an EA title that as barely any depth to it.
Your example with the TV is a little bit to simple.
Let me adapt it:
"A man buys a 4KTV because he saw a commercial saying that everything looks amazing in 4K.
But once he actually experiences it by himself, he realizes that it is not so exceptional. And he starts regretting his "old" flat screen.
He starts to get frustrated..."
A lot of people here are frustrated because they were expecting something different, they projected themself.
No. lol There is a difference in not liking 4k and not getting the 4k experience that was advertised. You can't be serious with this...
You misunderstood my point, probably because of my poor wording.
"Deal with your frustrations" may sound harsh for some people, especially if they face a lot of difficult events IRL, and I simply tried to nuance it.
It doesn't look like I misunderstood anything though? You are still pushing the same argument. That the frustrations mean nothing and customers should just "deal with it", since there are more "difficult" events IRL.
You can definitely get the full scope of Bannerlord (or Warband) in 30-50 hours, unless you're deliberately limiting yourself. Some guy managed to get to nearly the endgame (faction ruler/senior vassal = run around recruiting clans) within ten hours.
No you cannot not get the full scope of it. Rushing to end game does not mean one gets the full scope of the game. You are conflating the two. You can beat one of the Fallout games* in under 5 minutes. Doesn't mean you get the full scope of it, does it?
*my bad, it's that new game called The Outer Worlds that you can do this in. Though I think you can beat New Vegas in under an hour too, I might be recalling that incorrectly.
Yeah I wouldn't agree on that. No company can be fully responsible over the emotions of all of its consumers. You need to draw the line somewhere, and the generally accepted line is the law.
This opinion absolves all companies of any responsibility. If a person gets scammed by a misleading product, it isn't the company's responsibility for the disappointment and frustration of the customer? Clearly this argument draws the line wherever the company feet stands absolutely, because customers here in this situation have not gotten the product they were promised at purchase and somehow it is unreasonable that the line be drawn there for them to voice that frustration? Somehow it is unreasonable for these people to have that emotion in the first place?
I say malarkey to that argument, is what I say.
Imagine a good company selling a good product, and one mentally-challenged person freaks out about it. It would be nonsense to put all the blame on the company
Wait...what? How can you even reasonably say this? Someone (apparently mentally challenged?) complaining about a
good product functioning as it should, delivering on what it promised, is in no way similar to a large amount of people buying a game that promised this and that, and getting a bad product that doesn't have this and that.
This comparison is not good, at all.
Yes, I said pretty much the same thing. If they promised a feature and it's not there, that's a clear violation. However, when it comes to the more subjective words of quality, it's pretty vague on whether or not they fulfill it. There may also be disclaimers ("things may be subject to change" "toy doesn't actually fly" and stuff) on advertisement, which makes this even more difficult to define.
You are avoiding the point.
If they promised "fun features" and that was it, you have a valid point, because something so vaguely subjective cannot be held against them because not everyone agrees (and they would have been smart enough to scam people better), as what is fun to me is not fun to you.
What you guys are either not understanding or avoiding is that Tale Worlds did not simply promise "something fun" or dare promise an "amazing game". They gave road maps full of content and depth for the game, a lot of which they issued under the EA release, and so far we have gotten like what...3 of them? Other items were abandoned post EA or abandoned without even informing the customer.
That—the missing content—is not subjective, it is reality. People who say so are being dishonest by chalking it down to these things which no one argued to avoid the core of the argument which directly proves them wrong.
I suggest you guys read up on what legal false advertisement is and then perhaps you might understand the scope of the argument being laid. Within the U.S alone, civil lawsuits can be filed for false advertising that “
misrepresents the nature, characteristics, qualities, or geographic origin” of goods/services/products/etc. And Bannerlord largely does not represent the nature, characteristics and quality
originally outlined. This is again, fact. Whether or not people like it as is.
It can be argued the environment in which
early access products are sold can be questionable under this scrutiny, since it has not technically released yet and thus have time to provide the promised missing content, but only that and even so you would need to define what sort of time frame is suitable for be scammed or not.
Yes I meant something like that. Blog entries on their official website must count. Though again, disclaimers might let them get away with it. I hope you notice that I'm not just defending TW here. My whole stance here is that if Taleworlds decides to screw us up with corporate bullcrap, that will be upsetting, but I'm not gonna throw a fuss about it. I find anger harmful to myself, so I'd rather not have it. Personally I'm quite satisfied with the game, and optimistic about the mods that will come.
I could find more if you want. Also, I know
you aren't defending TW. I understood it as you explaining the argument provided by another user...was I wrong?
And okay, you (guys) not having the will power to throw a fuss about your mislead product doesn't mean you are right with your argument that TW has no responsibility and that customers frustrations are their own problems. I am also optimistic about the game's future, but having that feeling doesn't mean the game isn't in a terrible state and largely misrepresented (at least for now) what it would be.