Hmm? He has a history of smugly criticizing TW's coding work and revealed that he can't even code. All I did was pointing it out. If anything, he put himself down.
-
If you are reporting a bug, please head over to our Technical Support section for Bannerlord.
I have some questions about Bloc
- Thread starter MostBlunted
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
I´m not aware about "your" sword fighting skills. I would suggest a spear fight with Bannerlords logic, so it would last 5min or more.
BTW, are the mods now gone? Can I say that TW ****ed it up? Do we even need mods in this case? I think it´s more entertaining than the last bugs TW added with 1.8.1.
that's an old issue of which nobody has come with a proper solution due to current political stances which wiill remain plaguing any form of social platform as long as said platforms remain trying to cater towards a majority - each attempt generated different and yet very interesting results, like reddit's up and down voting which was meant to signify relevance towards a discussion but became ultimately a "like/dislike" democracy in which somem pretty in depth and educated informatives often get obscured due to heavy downvoting from masses - facebook & instagram likes which often are given totally unrelated to the subject or object of debate, so some really wrong thing (like fake news) might be caught and spread either due to imagery (like the picture's something sexually suggestive) or because it holds strong echo-chamber clickbaiting imagery/title - twitter which's gains momentum through both tagging and retweeting which often becomes a mass parroting of wrong information... All of which disconsidering in-house bots / political bots and other shenanigans.
It's incredibly hard to regulate such a thing without putting lots of effort + somewhat menacing free-speech and other so strongly defended values by western society - and even when regulated there's also a cost (you can often see it in more formal and classical social circles including academia), in which the validity of a precise new discovery or information can be tanked due to those with strong or seasoned credits allowing themselves to either get emotionally motivated or trying to protect their status and prestige. - If you read history about some of the greatest minds you'll often find this kind of issue happening repeatedly and extremely often. - The reality is that the problem lies on people, not the structure or sphere created or formed to convey it. The solutions might exist but none of them were properly explored nor do they lie on the objective means but rather on how people think and act - it's much more a matter of ethics and self-control than a regulatory logistic.
finally I didn't bring up any bs to the table, I'm actually very secure of what I said and who I am, oddly the thing that allows me that is by keeping an open mind - and having a open mind doesn't mean you have to become a yes-man towards any criticism at an immediate tat-a-tat exchance - it is important to defend your pov to extract more information, specially when the person opposing you keeps closeting it - unfortunately that often means that they actually don't have it and that's just another piece of the puzzle one must take into account before mutating their initial conceived thinking. - the issue with the whole discussion here's that at any given point actual useful information was presented by him or the other guy - they were simply trying to discredit and flame me for what it seems very immature reasons propelled by purely emotional reaction of which they also refuse to share - being sensitive and fearful doesn't help on growth, it can actually bring it into a complete halt.
On a side note, the remak over having fun was a bit too harsh, no need for that
I was "always" able to identify both bryo and unreal - there's a very hard to describe graphical difference between them, and games made under one or another have some very noticeable traits among them - it is the rendering but how it works I'm not sure - I doubt 3d artists would have a problem seeing what I see considering it's simply a matter of observable details. - Unity on the other hand seems much more "ecletic" when it comes down to that and I was never able to identify a game being made under it just from looking at it's graphics.
You can doubt me all you want, but if you show me a footage of a game under certain engines, I often can tell which - Those I'm likely able to recognize easily (Unreal and Bryo) due to having spent tons of time in them. I'd probably not be able to tell if it was an engine I had little or no contact with playing. - The reason why I'm overconfident about recognizing those 2 engines' because I never guessed wrong - be doumbfounded as you wish, I'm able to do that and there must be a logical explanation as to why (and I wasn't talking about shininess but rather an observable feeling you get out of the engines' graphics - I was simply trying to explain how it ticks on me) - in the end I'm not the one coming out as arrogant, am I?
The little technical info I've mentined there, though, is precise and correct - engine architecture defines it's limits towards features. Examples you've given yourself show that - say that someone tries to place X feature but the engine wasn't built with it in mind - the result's that X feature might either not be possible due to going over processing power limits - or it'll have to be "limited" by cuts so the game can handle those without performance issues. Often when a modder does that (go over it's limitations) you'll get both performance issues and possibly crashes. The odd part's that you seem pretty headstrong at denying it for some reason. - and why can I affirm that secure of what I'm saying? Because I've studied it in college, it's that simple.
Regardless, my affirmations there have nothing to do with coding, I explicitly went for guessing and hearsay and kept very open about it - one must be better at differenciating opinions and actual technical affirmations when interpreting text - still not my fault you felt offended by it and refused to ask questions instead opting to go into full denial - again, I can see those differences, but I do not not really know why they happen. And I'm only really answering this because I'm trying to level your head a bit - if I didn't give a fk or had zero respect for you I'd simply shrug and say nothing - to me this entire discussion's waste of time because I'm not learning anything here other than both of your personalities and psychological traits - I'm not really interested in that - I'm already done with the other guy, and this was my last reply to you - the derailing of the thread and nonsensical reading we are putting other ppl through in here has went beyond any acceptable lengths already.
that would be unfair - take my word for it
idk, but I've been facing a lot of issues since 1.8.1 came out yet my game's still playable despite the few crashes.
sorry for that
Last edited:
So same **** as with every update, I´m still with 1.8.0., this minor cav improvement isn´t worth the hassle for me.
Same. I tried it out but then realized it was easier to go back to 1.8 then to check for/install mod updates. The day of the Cav is coming, but it's not 1.8.1.
I've been continuing my save from 1.8.0 with some mods and haven't had any issue with them. RBM, Fourberie, Serve as Soldier, Realm of Thrones and the like.
there's a mod that pushes AI parties to sell those, said mod also carries a custom console command for emergency clean-up on already effed up saves
You really gonna eat all of that (Parties sell food)
Allows ai parties to sell food they dont need to prevent them from getting fat and lazy. Gameversion 1.8.0 (obviously)Added a console command to immediately remove all surplus food (beyond 30 da
www.nexusmods.com
I watched some of Bloc's mods videos.
Then I watched some Manor Lords videos.
( Does Bloc perhaps work with Slavic Magic, and doodles with Bannerlord mods just for fun ? )
I am starting to doubt that TW - Bannerlord will be competitive in this market, over the next few years. Even though they seemingly had such a good R and D head start over Slavic Magic, whoever they are.
My impression is that most customers are really looking for something with RPG etc depth, not so much what we have here with Bannerlord, a still - unpolished so - called medieval battle simulator ( the fruit of, apparently, modest " Shooter " aspirations, and this after Warband, and its mods, and ? 10 years of TW development, and now two and a half years of EA feedback ).
Slow TW must be looking over their shoulder even now ........
Even their game title - is Slavic Magic taking the piss ?
Then I watched some Manor Lords videos.
( Does Bloc perhaps work with Slavic Magic, and doodles with Bannerlord mods just for fun ? )
I am starting to doubt that TW - Bannerlord will be competitive in this market, over the next few years. Even though they seemingly had such a good R and D head start over Slavic Magic, whoever they are.
My impression is that most customers are really looking for something with RPG etc depth, not so much what we have here with Bannerlord, a still - unpolished so - called medieval battle simulator ( the fruit of, apparently, modest " Shooter " aspirations, and this after Warband, and its mods, and ? 10 years of TW development, and now two and a half years of EA feedback ).
Slow TW must be looking over their shoulder even now ........
Even their game title - is Slavic Magic taking the piss ?
Last edited:
again, M&B isn't an RPG and never was, it was always a Sandbox with RPG elements.. The complaining we're doing here is that they've almost removed the RPG elements while also dumbing down the simulation traits and the sandboxing depth - sandboxing depth being entirely dependent over supporting multi-faceted approaches towards the core aspects or the entirety of the game's elements...
BL basically dictates that we play under a very restrictive and narrowed path while providing multiple paths, most of them being inefficient requiring tons of extra effort than others. In WB we had the choice of doing anything at any point and still progressing towards something unrelated. So you'd kill bandits to gain levels and apply skill-points unrelated to combat, in BL we are forced to stick to our focus&attribute choices, otherwise the progression comes into a complete halt. - I consider that exceptionally poor design for a sandbox or even an RPG - if you want to kill stuff you're stuck into speccing exclusively on combat related pts, but you can't diverge it later, you cannot switch into a utility role afterwards because there aren't enough pts for that nor there are mechanics that support it.
The second layer of complaint comes from the lack of immersion caused by the NPCs being both forgettable and having absolutely zero interactions with the player outside of meta-gaming.
Trying to make a distinction of whether it's an rpg open world game or an open world game with rpg elements is splitting hairs in my book. Does the game need more rp? Yes, but honestly Warband only had a smattering of rp elements in it, just enough to give it variety. Taleworlds has no real experience with making an rpg. They wouldn't actually know what an rpg was if it bit them on the ass.
The leveling process is poorly thought out for sure but then so are many core mechanics in this game. I would rather Bannerlord added depth to a few key systems instead of having so many half baked ideas that are crammed into this game to make it more like an rpg. The old saying of if you're going to do one thing then do it well should apply to this game. They should've decided what direction they wanted to game to go and focused on that instead of worrying about things like smithing, perks, board games etc and made the battle simulations fun and engaging but it is what it is. The only way this game is ever going to be more is if modders do it, because Taleworlds doesn't care and I doubt if they actually know how to add substantial engaging rpg content.
Yes, I agree, of course.
What I said was " RPG etc depth ", with emphasis also on "etc" and, mostly, "depth".
Anyway, we all here agree TW seems, perplexingly, to have not much of an idea about improving their own product. Even just so it works as whatever it is meant to be .......
In contrast, do you believe that Bloc and co - modders, Slavic Magic, etc, will turn out State of the Art quality product that the market will be impressed with ?
So why is TW now losing this race ?
Last edited:
It really isn't that hard to make those distinctions because there are documented objective traits regarding game genres, it is however very annoying to explain because it's so extensive and covers so much detail that I'd write a practical bible on the subject just to introce ppl to it.
Anyway, the levling on WB was governed by RPG, in BL it isn't governed by anything really - that because what defines an RPG lvling system's not simply choice like they provide us with 2 perks per tier on skill lvls, but rather the ability to fit roles.
A game that ppl believe to be an RPG but isn't at all is Skyrim, for instance, while Oblivion had really heavy RPG elements to it but was also not an RPG. Idk if you notice the difference in them, but the defining characteristics are basically the ability to fill a role while games with RPG elements that aren't RPG will have systems in which we don't actually fill any role at all, we have meta gaming and that's it. The best RPGs, arguably, will not only carry the power to put us into a role but also give us a thematic role in conjunction to it.
As for the half-baked ideas, it's totally possible to add depth to them without having to remove anything at all, it's just lengthy work.
I don't really believe any specific modders will pull that off, instead I believe overtime creative and talented ppl will rise up to the challenge and bring numerous mods and overhauls much like we saw with Warband. Bloc's a talented coder but I'm not really sure he has the creativity to pull some miracle mod alone, maybe if he teams up with someone!? Idk, but that's just my personal observations so far with his mods in general (they seem to always copy pre-existing stuff rather than being entirely creative, and some feel wonky at times too, not much of an UX mindset I'd say)
As for other games, I have absolutely no clue because I haven't even looked them up, I only really saw that Manor Lord once and it didn't compell me in any way shape or form, it's just a indy RTS from what I gather, not even relatable to M&B
TW isn't really racing against anyone because nobody so far tried to make a game into their odd little genre style, there are absolutely zero games M&B style except for a chinese rip-off I saw ages ago and of which I can't even remember the name or how to find it
Does the Mount & Blade franchise fall into these definitions? Yes. You assume the role of your original character, there are stories to follow in the forms of game-lore and quests (and even a main quest in Bannerlord), and there's freedom to make your own story in an imaginary environment akin to traditional tabletop RPG.
Formal definitions in this field are broad because it has to capture all the valid scenarios that exist in the industry, which vary greatly. If one wants to narrow a definition, one has to test and argue against those real-life scenarios by providing sound arguments backed by a proper scientific study. Otherwise they're just talking out of their own asses. Assuming you've actually done that, it shouldn't be that hard to cite your sources, but I'm not expecting anything from someone with zero credibility.
RPG elements - never said it doesn't have it but it's core design is a sandbox - BL removed enough of the Role supporting features enough to lose the status as an RPG - the core element being the progression system which provides narrowed choices without successfully allowing for role gaming - instead we have a meta of which's the most efficient while the choices for different roles are relegated as either secondary or inefficient.
That's what marketing has been using to justify their lies, but essentially a game's defined by it's core design, which must have the appropriate elements to be called that.
An RPG would be Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, having a hard time remembering other titles... Oh, The Witcher 3 - on each and every one of these you are not only limited by Role Playing a character, your progression choices also put you into a specific role. TW3 you have alchemy - so your entire playstyle will change and remain efficient to do everything in the game itself - if you pick melee, same logic applies - if you pick magic, same logic applies.
In Bannerlord you can't accomplish certain things without banking on the meta - you'll always NEED to fight, although we have an illusion of a trader choice. You will always NEED to trade, although you wanted to just fight. That's rather a shallow example, but if you are genuinelly interested in understanding this I think you got it already no need to keep going.
Now, for Warband, you had more freedom of choice in which you could always level weapon proficiency freely and skills would define your playstyle - so you could have good melee or archery skills while being a surgeon, but you didn't need massive amounts of unrelated pts to unlock some perk that's linked to your primary role inside a secondary or even non-picked role. - The best example in BL that makes this difference would be Steward with Trading where over 40% of the entire Trading tree is locked into Quartermaster role - making it not a choice but a meta - this happens with countless perks where they are locked into governor / party leader / clan leader / etc. That's not RPG because it denies both player and NPCs to fill roles properly, that's just arcade meta in which you don't really have a choice about role but rather a pre-defined path that you must take to achieve your desired role / efficiency.
Finally, M&B winds up as a Sandbox because we aren't actually filling a role where we seek the success of the charcter on a campaign - you can literally fire up the game and just kill looters - there's no winning or ending to it, nor rules that define a clear objective - as such your role playing's entirely created by you much like playing with action figures. That's the definition of a sandbox -> it's more or less the same as we did as kids with our toys. - One of the most wild late genre classes that appeared in GD theory, though, was actually The Sims which's Game-Toy (the creator even called it a "doll-house game") - it also carries similarities to Sandboxes but it's classification's much more specific. Game-Toys are essentially mimicking real toys in a virtual environment - but I always crack some laughs whenever I talk about it because it's weird, at least I think it is
That, however, doesn't stop some devs from completely disregarding the theory books and concepts - since there are no mandatory regulations on the field, there are a few bad apples who resent all of the theory and go for "free-style" - inevitably their games also fall into classifications because those were very well thought when first created.
Last edited:
What's your source on this? Do you have a statement from TW that its core design is a sandbox? Taleworlds usually use "strategy" or "action RPG" to describe the game. If it's not TW's statement, what methodology did you use to conclude that its core design is a sandbox? Besides, why would "its core design is a sandbox" make "it's an RPG" to be wrong? How would you prove that your statement is true?
What I gave you was several definitions on what an RPG is. Role Playing Game. The definitions encompass the whole game, not just parts or "elements" of the game, and Mount&Blade fits those definitions. Therefore, Mount&Blade is an RPG.
According to what metric? Give me a number on how many of these "role supporting features" does a game need to qualify as an RPG. 5? 10? 50? Again, according to those definitions I cited, Bannerlord still fits that "status as an RPG". I gave my source. Where's yours?
The first definition I cited includes meta. Historically, there's always been a meta in tabletop RPG too. There's no formal definition, theory, or even logic that says a game having a meta means it's not an RPG.
Look, if I go through your whole post it's going to be exhausting. It's pretty much the same thing. You make an outlandish claim based on your personal and biased nitpicking with no source or convincing argument to back it up. It's just elitist boasting. You think claiming that "it's not real X" means it's objectively true. It's not. That's not how knowledge works, especially in engineering, which is a field that focuses more on practicality than "absolute truths". What you're doing is akin to a pretentious artist calling a piece of music "not a real music", but that piece is, in fact, still music.
M&B games have always included a large element of dressing up dolls. Why do you think one of the most active parts of modding is making 3D armours? Cosmetic appearance is often as important or more important than armour values.
Brano
Sergeant at Arms
Speaking for myself, Manor Lord pre alfa demo or whatever it is called, made a very positive impression on me. I have visited dev site and read about all kind if techniques he is using. It is obvious, why BL is where it is. TWs game production is largely based on obsolete procedures/technologies.
I was able, in less than 2 hours of gameplay in ML , to create a lively and believable village with houses,farms, fort ,church, tavern.... Looks beautiful, people are moving around doing their daily routines. And I could switch to 3rd person view as a lord and walk thru the streets.
Now imagine doing this in Modding kit of BL. No way if you are not a dedicated developer. Because it is a developer tool. Not for casual players. Everything needs to be placed manualy, every tree, every house, every piece of anything.
That takes tremendous amount of time to do.
In BL you have static map which I hate since february 2020 when I saw it first time. Nothing is being destroyed. Nothing is being built new. It is nonsensical, colors are off, like in some fairytale cartoon, terrain elevation is terrible to look at. It is not even good for a full fantasy game.
In ML, the map is probably proceduraly generated, forrest are so nice with dense areas switching to nice meadows with deers and river bends. There are roads people actually use. You can seamlessly zoom out from your village map out to world map. Wow
Cant wait for proper EA for Manor Lords. Mostly for military implementation. Who knows, maybe it will be possible to fight in 3rd person as a lord. And that will be bye-bye time to this TW franchise for good.
I feel pretty much the same.
To me it is like TW has led the race ( for years ) but is now being overtaken even as they sprint down the straight to the finish line.
There are no hard and fast rules for what makes an rpg. Those kinds of labels are used to help consumers have a general idea of what the game is about but rpg is such a broad term for gaming that if you go to Steam and search by the tag "rpg" you get over 24k hits. Most gamers are going to call Skyrim an rpg and just because you believe it's not doesn't change anything. It's a label just like shooter, or souls-borne, or looter or any of a dozen tags that game companies and consumers use to help identify what they're buying.
If you want to call Diablo II a looter, an rpg or an action you'd be right on all accounts. As I said there are no industry standards or rules for what is and what isn't an rpg those terms developed over time and if a company wants to call their game an rpg but you think it's not, well you're entitled to your own opinion. This distinction of what makes an rpg exists in your own head everyone has their own idea of what an rpg is and what should and shouldn't be in an rpg game.
I've seen some videos of Manor Lord but I haven't really looked to deeply at it. Does it have combat? If so is it important to the game or is it just there for the player to do if he/she chooses?
Similar threads
