Ehh refunded it.

[Revverie]

Again nearly EVERY game that comes out on steam is early access now.

How is this even an excuse. See you're so impulsive you felt the controls werent right and instantly refunded the game? Like how much time was that 30 minutes? Jesus christ

 

[BayBear]

Every game that comes out on steam is "early access" now. It's a marketing strat.

Sorry to burst your bubble but Bannerlord early access is actually early access.

 

[ChaosDragonBorn]

Again nearly EVERY game that comes out on steam is early access now.

On the Steam page, they say you should wait for full release. Early Access is for ironing out issues. It's basically "we are ready to sell our game, but we still need your feedback". It's a monetized public beta testing kind of thing as I'm sure they really wanted to get this game out to the public at this point. Say what you want about the strategy of calling it early access, you can wait for full release as they recommend highlighted on the Steam page.
(I understand you said you will wait for a sale years from now though lol)

 

[Twezie]

EDIT: pretty much a repeat of above message from ChaosDragonBorn

They said very early on that there will be issues and bugs and performance issues and missing features in EA, if you dont want to play it now, they recommend looking back when the full release comes in a year or so. Why not do that?

 

[safe]

"we are ready to sell our game, but we still need your feedback" biggest bs ever. They had tons of feedback in beta and they ignored it. They just went for ez money. And sure EA is an excuse for everything, it's not like they had 8+ years and 6 months of beta to polish it.

 

[Twezie]

"we are ready to sell our game, but we still need your feedback" biggest bs ever. They had tons of feedback in beta and they ignored it. They just went for ez money.

What are you even talking about? They improved on tons of issues in the beta. Yes, they also left out tons of issues, but they've been fixing them so far, so likely will in the future too.

 

[Ragemaster9999]

I'm running a 2nd generation amd ryzen 5 with a gtx 1060 and and 16 gb of ram and I dont have any performance issues in single player or multiplayer. It might be that the game isnt optimized for all builds yet.

Have you tried playing with your settings? Lower the battle size? Also make sure if you have one of those intel cpus with integrated graphics GPU make sure its using the dedicated graphics card.

My biggest complaint so far is the 3 second loading time when you talk to a lord or another party. Pretty annoying but it's on a ssd so hopefully that's helping.

 

[Princess Mikoto]

No such thing.

I know a galactic burn when I see one.

 

[sniparsexe]

Only since 2005 or so

But your "Total time spent online" is 1 days, 18 hours, 47 minutes in 15 years(this is completely okay, not meaning offense). Looks like you didn't read so much about Early Access.

If you've truely been lurking here for a while, you would've known what to expect.

so this is true.

 

[safe]

What are you even talking about? They improved on tons of issues in the beta. Yes, they also left out tons of issues, but they've been fixing them so far, so likely will in the future too.

the fact that they have done something doesnt mean that they have done enough, there are many essential issues that should have been fixed months ago, like broken mm that makes people wait despite having proper amount of players to start a game, like random game crashes, like not saving statistics etc. etc. These are old issues that havent been fixed, not to mention extremly clunky combat.

 

[Osseric]

Running a i9-7869 and 2080 graphics cards here with no issues. Did you think about checking your drivers?

 

[Matteroflight]

Haha very funny.
I'm running a i7-2600k (below minimum rec I believe) + GTX titan (old one, not the new ones) and I can still play highest graphic settings, 1000 battlesize at 50-60fps, with dipping into 30 when its 1000 man cav battles.

You hardly need the best pc

 

[Twezie]

the fact that they have done something doesnt mean that they have done enough, there are many essential issues that should have been fixed months ago, like broken mm that makes people wait despite having proper amount of players to start a game, like random game crashes, like not saving statistics etc. etc. These are old issues that havent been fixed, not to mention extremly clunky combat.

Im pretty sure they issued fixes for the matchmaking, numerous fixes for multiple different crash causes, and some fixes to combat aswell. If you think it is too rough right now, wait for full release

 

[Lornloth00]

After many tweaks I have got my rig and the game to compromise. Its not perfect but its better than warband in many ways. So I am mostly happy with my purchase. There are still problems with performance but I think Taleworlds will fix them.

 

[urugamer5]

Well in his defence i have big stuttering too.Even when its 70-80 fps looks laggy and i trieed put graphics in medium and low battles to 350 and still not really smooth. Lower battle size will be as warband almost and didnt tried yet XD
My rig is ryzen 3600, 16 ram and gtx 1660. Im playing 2k and my grphic card its not great but should handle a medium with decent battle size.

 

[crimsonfilms]

Check your Frame limit settings. I would start at 60 FPS with VSync and work from there.

 

[Schmutz]

I'm sure the 470+ other negative reviews having the exact same issues are full of it as well? The frame rate is great, the damn thing just hiccup-lags every few seconds.

As for the controls... directional blocking only and no inverse mouse movement? (The only option I ever used.) The controls are basically a less responsive Mordhau at this point, and I refunded that one as well.

sounds like a cpu problem, have you tried limiting your cpu to 98%?

 

[BonerLord]

I was "signing up" for a game with a $50 price tag assigned to it that was supposed to be an improvement on Warband. What I got was a buggy mess with bad controls, horrible lag issues, and that special kind of "made for consoles" feel that plagues most newer games. I might pick it up again in a few years if it ever hits $10 or so and has most of it's issues fixed.

McCrybaby... Grow up first then play Bannerlord.

 

[Silver Knight]

Provide your full computer spec please.

 

[World's Coolest Old Guy]

I really doubt it man. I've never been as instantly disappointed with a game in my life. The controls are just unplayable. Also even on a rather new machine the hiccups are constant and annoying. i9 with a gtx 2080 ect.

I'm playing it, as are dozens of others, so it's clearly not unplayable. To be honest it feels about the same as Warband, controls-wise.

That 2080 might be your issue. 2080s have problems with all kinds of games because they have a bunch of new tech that most games haven't been built to interface with. Might want to consider coming back when the video drivers have updated to accommodate Bannerlord. Source: I have a 1080Ti and an i7 CPU and experience zero hiccups, short of during battle with full troop counts (and even then, they're very minor).

I was "signing up" for a game with a $50 price tag assigned to it that was supposed to be an improvement on Warband. What I got was a buggy mess with bad controls, horrible lag issues, and that special kind of "made for consoles" feel that plagues most newer games. I might pick it up again in a few years if it ever hits $10 or so and has most of it's issues fixed.

Now I just feel like you're baiting. "Made for consoles"? It's not even on console yet, and doesn't plan to be until development is finished or near to it. I've been playing for 8 hours straight now and the only bugs I've experienced have been tiny graphical things, so to call it a "buggy mess" is either an exaggeration or a case of extremely bad luck on your part (or good luck on mine).

I don't particularly like to assume the worst about these kinds of posts, but this one here really has me thinking you're just having us on and trying to start an argument.