Dev Blog 21/12/17

[parsehtml]<p><img class="frame" src="http://www.taleworlds.com/Images/News/blog_post_21_taleworldswebsite_575.jpg" alt="" width="575" height="290" /></p> <p>We are back with our series of interviews with TaleWorlds’ team. Today we want to introduce you to a very important role in every development team. Every time a game designer thinks of a cool feature or an animator creates a beautiful movement, there’s someone who has to find a way to make it happen and implement everything in the actual game. You are right, we are talking about the programmers, those code magicians that turn designers’ wishes into reality – and then fix all the issues that usually follow every change: a video game is a very complex system, and changing even the smallest thing can create unexpected problems!</p></br> [/parsehtml]Read more at: http://www.taleworlds.com/en/Games/Bannerlord/Blog/40

 

[KhergitLancer80]

I am always sided with the fun over realism but I dont get it.
How does having back scabbards will make the gameplay more entertaining ?

 

[578]

I started to play mount and blade warband because the combat system which is mainly about distance and timing is realistic. most of the games out there does not have these simple qualities. what I want from bannerlod is that it just sould be more advanced version of warband. yes I want realism when it comes to weapon carrying but if they do not do it, most probably they will not, I am okay with that. what is wrong with demanding it.
@578

If you honestly believe that Warband's combat is realistic, other than the aspect that it only needs a physical weapon and has physics based combat, you are wrong. Warband's combat is not realistic to real world standards, it's down the earth and bare bones compared to other games. And that is why it's popular, it's simple and fun. Realistic? Not even close.

Its not realistic, but its very much better than pressing a button and having your character spin into tornadoes and hit multiple enemies.

How exactly would YOU translate realistic sword fighting into a keyboard and mouse? Warband is by far the best we have right now in terms of melee weapon control. Sorry but you are wrong and I agree with bjorntheconqueror.

Kingdom come: deliverance is far more realistic. And its boring as hell. Warband is far more arcadey in nature. It's very down to earth, realistic is not something I would call it. Lack of stamina, its movement, the pace and amount of spam possible does not bring it close to realism. And thank god for that.

 

[kalarhan]

TW has never labeled their games with "fantasy". We have to take it for what it is: a game set in a fictional Medieval world.

Mount and Blade's Calradia is a low-fantasy setting that we think gains from cleaving fairly closely to history

source: blog https://www.taleworlds.com/en/Games/Bannerlord/Blog/30

 

[lolbash]

Kingdom come: deliverance is far more realistic. And its boring as hell. Warband is far more arcadey in nature. It's very down to earth, realistic is not something I would call it. Lack of stamina, its movement, the pace and amount of spam possible does not bring it close to realism. And thank god for that.

KCD's combat is not realistic. Sure you can feint, attack and stab in 5 directions, and they have armor that blocks sword cuts, but it has 3 fatal flaws that prevent it from being realistic:

1: The combat has locking on opponents. This is terrible. No real combat with multiple people would have you focusing on ond person while his friend would throw jabs at you while you cant do anything about it.

2: the ai is terrible. Skip to 24:04 and you will see why.


3: Stamina. Kingdom come's implementation us stamina is not realistic. First, the player will never feel tired while playing combat. Maybe adreneline and anger, but never fatigue from mashing buttons and moving mouse.

Kingdom come has failed on many aspects and thats why I refuse to call it realistic.

I am always sided with the fun over realism but I dont get it.
How does having back scabbards will make the gameplay more entertaining ?

Because the minute you mention the word realism, the mass hordes of people here on the forums rush to the comments to yell at people for even bringing the word up, because "warband is a fantasy game!!!"

 

[Duh]

More realistic != realistic

Because the minute you mention the word realism, the mass hordes of people here on the forums rush to the comments to yell at people for even bringing the word up, because "warband is a fantasy game!!!"

Please refrain from flame-baiting.

 

[fedeita]

Watching gameplay videos suggests formations are held reasonably well. Also, TW have stated that individual bots now have a sense of self preservation, which guides them back into formation. The Bannerlord formations include a solid square, which should be perfect for pike blocks or a phalanx. 

I just hope you're right because in the last videos I've seen the AI breaking instantly the formation when colliding with the enemies.

 

[The Bowman]

People always seem to get "realism" wrong when it comes to describing games. The simple fact that the word has such a broad meaning makes it easy to be manipulated in every way possible, especially by those people who argue against it.

When we approach the topic of realism in games, it is essential to understand what one really means by "realism". What usually happens is that many people simply take the word out of context, chew it to their liking and then throw an argument against that particular person without any regard of what he really meant to say. The result is, as we can see, quite a load of unnecessary hostility between two groups of people.

In Warband, one can argue that many, if not all the aspects of the game don't correspond their real life counterparts, which is indeed true, but there's a catch: you need to understand what the game is trying to achieve. Mount&Blade is a franchise that emulates real-life processes in the context of a game, which means that total realism cannot be achieved and is not even desired. Some elements are distorted here and there to make things dynamic and fun, without all these boring peculiarities that we all know in real life, like dropping your pike on the ground or having battles that last for entire weeks. What can't be argued against though is that the developers are trying their best to immerse you into a specific time frame and make you taste all the little aspects of the Medieval life, by miniaturizing them and presenting them in an intuitive and practical way for you to enjoy. Therefore, I'm inclined to think that the intention of those people around here suggesting for more "realism" isn't to add some unnecessary detail that would eventually force you to click twice as much just to achieve the same thing, but to enhance that exact feeling I have explained in the phrase above, by correcting some things that may eventually look more or less ridiculous. A compromise can always be achieved by having the game play the same, and yet make it look and feel believable. I suppose this is exactly what the people mean by "realism".

Edit: And **** my spelling.

 

[lolbash]

Because the minute you mention the word realism, the mass hordes of people here on the forums rush to the comments to yell at people for even bringing the word up, because "warband is a fantasy game!!!"

Please refrain from flame-baiting.

sorry

People always seem to get the wrong "realism" wrong when it comes to describing games or people who want them to feel more "realistic". The simple fact that the word has such a broad meaning makes it easy to be manipulated in every way possible, especially by those people who argue against it.

When we approach the topic of realism in games, it is essential to understand what one really means by "realism". What usually happens is that many people simply take the word out of context, chew it to their liking and then throw an argument against that particular person without any regard of what he really meant to say. The result is, as we can see, quite a load of unnecessary hostility between two groups of people.

In Warband, one can argue that many, if not all the aspects of the game don't correspond their real life counterparts, which is indeed true, but there's a catch: you need to understand what the game is trying to achieve. Mount&Blade is a franchise that emulates real-life processes in the context of a game, which means that total realism cannot be achieved and is not even desired. Some elements are distorted here and there to make things dynamic and fun, without all these boring peculiarities that we all know in real life, like dropping your pike on the ground or having battles that last for entire weeks. What can't be argued against though is that they developers are trying their best to immerse you into a specific time frame and make you taste all the little aspects of the Medieval life, bu miniaturizing them and presenting them in an intuitive and practical way for you to enjoy. Therefore, I'm inclined to think that the intention of those people around here suggesting for more "realism" isn't to add some unnecessary detail that would eventually force you to click twice as much just to achieve the same thing, but to enhance that exact feeling I have explained in the phrase above, by correcting some things that may eventually look more or less ridiculous. A compromise can always be achieved by having the game play the same, and yet make it look and feel believable. I suppose this is exactly what the people mean by "realism".

+1

Honestly, we should stop saying "realistic" and start saying "believable"

Are dragons, magic spells and 369 noscoping crossbow men believable in the MNB universe? Hell no.


Is having different shield positions when choosing blocking direction believable? Yes.

 

[Yaga]

Second - in the early video of the siege (and then on other videos), the character makes such a gesture - rotates the weapon over the head, probably summoning the fighters to himself. This is a modern gesture of special forces. Maybe you should replace this gesture? For example - just poke the weapon (or empty hand) over your head from side to side. (for example - left to right)

Are you honestly saying that swinging an object above your head has never happened before in all of history? Swinging a weapon above your head in a circle motion is not a modern thing.

Age of Empires II: The Densetsu, created by Westwood Studios, can modern, and maybe not modern - we do not know for sure. But it's not just that.

The gesture suggested by me is much simpler. Try yourself to wave over your head in a circular motion and from side to side - the difference is immediately noticeable.

On the video, a man waves around his head holding a weapon in his hand, which is even more difficult to do.
With weapons it is all the more easier to just poke left, right or forward, back.

Mount&Blade is a mild fantasy game, set on a fictional world that was inspired by middle ages real world.
We need to stop feeding the realism trolls for good. No need for HEMA, real fencing, realistic geography, accurate arquitecture, etc.

FBohler, and if you select the text like this ?!  Sense completely changed! 




I will also answer my critics - realism is not an end in itself.
I want a good immersion in the game and that's it. I think my suggestions can help this immersion in the atmosphere of the game.

 

[578]

Kingdom come: deliverance is far more realistic. And its boring as hell. Warband is far more arcadey in nature. It's very down to earth, realistic is not something I would call it. Lack of stamina, its movement, the pace and amount of spam possible does not bring it close to realism. And thank god for that.

KCD's combat is not realistic. Sure you can feint, attack and stab in 5 directions, and they have armor that blocks sword cuts bla bla bla bla bla bla bla

Your opinion does not matter, KC is still far more realistic than warband. I said its more realistic THAN WARBAND not an extreme realism game. The lock on combat makes no sense, its a target focus mechanic, you cannot call it realistic or not, because its a targeting mechanic. And that is for 1v1s.

 

[supersayen121]

Having something complexly realistic is boring, also by definition Bannerlord is low fantasy.

 

[gypsydevil]

Well I just popped in to say great blog!! I didn't think you'd have one this week, and a great one at that.  Keep up the good work Callum!

Boy this 'Realism' war reminds me of the daily check in on the old super thread.. I remember when that's all we had to talk about ;D

 

[FBohler]

I'm not asking the game to be less realistic, I'm just stating the obvious: TaleWorlds knows the right amount of realism for their game, period.
Please stop asking for MORE realism, Mount&Blade isn't about realism, it is a (low) fantasy game!!

 

[The Bowman]

I'm not asking the game to be less realistic, I'm just stating the obvious: TaleWorlds knows the right amount of realism for their game, period.
Please stop asking for MORE realism, Mount&Blade isn't about realism, it is a (low) fantasy game!!

Asking the people not to care is a big demonstration of futility. If there is a vocal part of the community who cares about one thing, the developers will most likely take their opinion in consideration. Revealing how much you don't care about one thing or another is pretty worthless to the decision factors in the dev team as long as there is a reasonable chunk of people who actually want something.

 

[lolbash]

KC is still far more realistic than warband. I said its more realistic THAN WARBAND not an extreme realism game. The lock on combat makes no sense, its a target focus mechanic, you cannot call it realistic or not, because its a targeting mechanic. And that is for 1v1s.

Thats your opinion. Congratulations, you drank the marketing koolaid. Kingdom come's combat is not realistic, I provided reasons why its worse than warband, and you still proceed to say "but its realistic because of the **** targeting mechanic that forces 1v1 in group battles"

 

[NPC99]

Watching gameplay videos suggests formations are held reasonably well. Also, TW have stated that individual bots now have a sense of self preservation, which guides them back into formation. The Bannerlord formations include a solid square, which should be perfect for pike blocks or a phalanx. 

I just hope you're right because in the last videos I've seen the AI breaking instantly the formation when colliding with the enemies.

I suspect ordering a last minute charge will break formations just as it does in Warband. The real test will be seeing large infantry formations with the depth to absorb or dish out shock tactics. The recent captain mode videos only have squad size formations, which are bound to be more fragile.
My main worry is horse AI. Bannerlord physics and horse momentum look great in collisions, but are excessively disruptive to spear formations as horses lack any sense of self preservation when charging at a wall of spikes. Hopefully, TW are still looking at this.

 

[AmateurHetman]

Watching gameplay videos suggests formations are held reasonably well. Also, TW have stated that individual bots now have a sense of self preservation, which guides them back into formation. The Bannerlord formations include a solid square, which should be perfect for pike blocks or a phalanx. 

I just hope you're right because in the last videos I've seen the AI breaking instantly the formation when colliding with the enemies.

I suspect ordering a last minute charge will break formations just as it does in Warband. The real test will be seeing large infantry formations with the depth to absorb or dish out shock tactics. The recent captain mode videos only have squad size formations, which are bound to be more fragile.
My main worry is horse AI. Bannerlord physics and horse momentum look great in collisions, but are excessively disruptive to spear formations as horses lack any sense of self preservation when charging at a wall of spikes. Hopefully, TW are still looking at this.

Shock cavalry horses would be trained not to run away from spears.

 

[Yaga]

Please stop asking for MORE realism, Mount&Blade isn't about realism, it is a (low) fantasy game!!

FBohler, I realized that you think this game is fantasy.
But I did not understand why "stop asking"? Clarify please.

 

[lolbash]

Watching gameplay videos suggests formations are held reasonably well. Also, TW have stated that individual bots now have a sense of self preservation, which guides them back into formation. The Bannerlord formations include a solid square, which should be perfect for pike blocks or a phalanx. 

I just hope you're right because in the last videos I've seen the AI breaking instantly the formation when colliding with the enemies.

If you look closely you can actually see that the AI breaks formation because the player orders them to charge

 

[NPC99]

Watching gameplay videos suggests formations are held reasonably well. Also, TW have stated that individual bots now have a sense of self preservation, which guides them back into formation. The Bannerlord formations include a solid square, which should be perfect for pike blocks or a phalanx. 

I just hope you're right because in the last videos I've seen the AI breaking instantly the formation when colliding with the enemies.

I suspect ordering a last minute charge will break formations just as it does in Warband. The real test will be seeing large infantry formations with the depth to absorb or dish out shock tactics. The recent captain mode videos only have squad size formations, which are bound to be more fragile.
My main worry is horse AI. Bannerlord physics and horse momentum look great in collisions, but are excessively disruptive to spear formations as horses lack any sense of self preservation when charging at a wall of spikes. Hopefully, TW are still looking at this.

Shock cavalry horses would be trained not to run away from spears.

10th Century Cataphracts used different tactics to breach formations:

“When the Byzantines had to make a frontal assault against a strong infantry position, the wedge was their preferred formation for charges. The Cataphract Numerus formed a wedge of around 400 men in 8 to 10 progressively larger ranks. The first three ranks were armed with lances and bows, the remainder with lance and shield. The first rank consisted of 25 soldiers, the second of 30, the third of 35 and the remainder of 40, 50, 60 etc. adding ten men per rank. When charging the enemy, the first three ranks shot arrows to create a gap in the enemy's formation then at about 100 to 200 meters from the foe the first ranks shifted to their kontarion lances, charging the line at full speed followed by the remainder of the battalion. Often these charges ended with the enemy infantry routed, at this point infantry would advance to secure the area and allow the cavalry to briefly rest and reorganize”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzantine_battle_tactics