I really didn't want to be this disappointed

[ShaneRoach]

Not at all sure why you made this comment, as it seems more or less the exact opposite of what I said.

I am not shocked TaleWorlds was not able to do more with the engine. What I hope for is that it is good enough for the modders to add enough content to keep it interesting over time. Stating that none of the big box developers want to take on this project is as much as to say no one with the resources to crank a truly awesome engine wants to make it available to modders.

They want to monetize the modding as well. even though a ton of truly awesome stuff can be modded, because, as you say, the technical difficulty of it is much reduced, they want that easy money locked away behind a proprietary licensing agreement. So of course they are not going to build an easy modding tool and then make it available to the community attached to a top of the line engine.

Although modders clearly made warband better, I think you really underestimate what kind of effort it takes to create a game like this.
People seems to forget that modders build on an entire already existing complex infrasctructure that is the game itself.

Don't get me wrong i'm not undermining the modders work one bit, they put crazy amount of hours and effort to make these awesome mods, but it's still different than creating an engine and an entire fonctionning game.

 

[Landoe]

7 years of development and it simply feels like a graphical update from the first M&B.
I really, really wish I could fathom what the devs spent their time on.
Sure, the graphical upgrade is nice but hardly AAA.

Let me list a few reasons for my disappointment:
- Combat is clunky and lackluster. While this was true for the older games I'm sure most of us expected some innovation on this front.
- The menu-based system for commanding troops is cumbersome - again, I expected this to be improved.
- Gameplay-wise it feels like very little was improved upon from the original games. This feels more like a new map with some mods.
- Which brings me to the cost. Why on earth would you charge so much for a title that is in all respects simply v1.5 of your original game?

Minor complaints:
- Certain cities/towns have no ambient sounds making them rather lifeless.
- Town/City NPC's are as cookie cutter as you can get...and not in a good way.
- The Character Creator doesn't seem nearly as inspired and versatile as they lead us to believe during previous gameplay demos.

Again 7 years? As a fan and a paying customer I truly believe the community deserves some insight into how so much time could have been wasted on something that you had almost the entire blueprint for already? Don't get me wrong, I will still play and enjoy this game...but no more than the previous one as it is in many ways the same product and certainly not what anyone would have expected nearly a decade later.

I have never played the first one. Didn't even know the game existed until last night. Bought it this morning, and the game feels like something from 2010. The graphics are horrible. Skyrim looks better and it came out 9 years ago.
I am sure I'll get a lot of hate from the people that were going to love it no matter what. I don't care.
Are they using graphics from 2012 too?!

 

[Dianoctis]

Not at all sure why you made this comment, as it seems more or less the exact opposite of what I said.

I am not shocked TaleWorlds was not able to do more with the engine. What I hope for is that it is good enough for the modders to add enough content to keep it interesting over time. Stating that none of the big box developers want to take on this project is as much as to say no one with the resources to crank a truly awesome engine wants to make it available to modders.

They want to monetize the modding as well. even though a ton of truly awesome stuff can be modded, because, as you say, the technical difficulty of it is much reduced, they want that easy money locked away behind a proprietary licensing agreement. So of course they are not going to build an easy modding tool and then make it available to the community attached to a top of the line engine.

Sorry I have misread what you said. I think the general negativity of many people here and the constant "devs are lazy" talk is getting to my head.
And yes I agree with you on the whole thing, and i'm certainly exited to see those modding tools to come and what the modding community will do.

 

[ricewind]

If it's not in Early Access at the moment, it is missing. Intended or not it's not a thing yet so you can't say it is. It's either in the game or it's not so pick one.

Dude I really can't understand your point of view, it has been said a 1000 times that this release is NOT the final release. So you can understand it: many things will be added/fixed before the final release. You can't treat an EA like a full release its just straight forward stupid and even more when the devs actually said that people should understand that before purchasing the game in EA. I would understand you if this where the final release but is not, the features you complained about not being in the game are actually still under developement.
We don't really know why they decided to launch EA, but my bet is that fans where getting pretty fed up about the game being so much time under developement. Guess what, they have been working on a new Engine, expanded their team from 10 guys to a 100 (with the management issues that brings, because more people doesn't mean is going to be more easy) so you have to understand that they are developing a brand new game that is in fact really ambitious and they aren't a company that is used to that so you can't expect them to work like Ubisoft launching games every ****ing year because they are not.
If you aren't liking the game sorry, you where warned this was not the full release, so stop complaining about stupid things and appreciate the good ones that you already have.
- Compare this graphics to warband, damnit have you even watched the details in it? (the horses have ****ing sweat)
- Compare the map to warband
- Compare the AI to warband
- Compare the new systems they have added (again not fully developed because its EA -.-)
- Compare the new animations
- Compare the new sieges (siege engines, destructive objects, destructive walls)
- Compare the new Clan systems
- Compare the new personality systems
- Compare the new cities and the life in them ( no more random peasant just wandering around )
and i could go on and on on how many new things they have implemented and more to come for the final release.

So yes in my opinion Bannerlord has great potential, and the ones that are saying that it doesn't add nothing are just ****ing blind or plain stupid. You can like these new features more or less but don't you dare to say it doesn't add new things.

Only TaleWorlds know the real reason behind launching the EA, was it because fans where getting mad? Was it because as they said, they wanted to get feedback from the fans so they can improve the game (add/remove/change features), was it because they needed the money (you have to think about maintining a team of 100 and the $ that takes), we don't know but personally I am really thankfull to be able to play the game even in EA

 

[Pinocchio]

I have never played the first one. Didn't even know the game existed until last night. Bought it this morning, and the game feels like something from 2010. The graphics are horrible. Skyrim looks better and it came out 9 years ago.
I am sure I'll get a lot of hate from the people that were going to love it no matter what. I don't care.
Are they using graphics from 2012 too?!

they are getting bad reviews by ppl like you who can't read a single dev blog or watch a single video before buying... I don't need you in the ea, you can come back later.... graphic mods will also draw beautiful things like u see in fully modded skyrim. btw I like Skyrim too and I like M&B and heard over the last 6 months what to expect from the early stage of early access.....

 

[naiski3]

- Compare this graphics to warband, damnit have you even watched the details in it? (the horses have ****ing sweat)
- Compare the map to warband
- Compare the AI to warband
- Compare the new systems they have added (again not fully developed because its EA -.-)
- Compare the new animations
- Compare the new sieges (siege engines, destructive objects, destructive walls)
- Compare the new Clan systems
- Compare the new personality systems
- Compare the new cities and the life in them ( no more random peasant just wandering around )
and i could go on and on on how many new things they have implemented and more to come for the final release.

- The graphics look a little better and the game runs way worse. The graphics still look pretty bad but that was never the appeal of this game and I couldn't care less what the graphics look like.
- The map is basically the same. Fields, mountains, deserts, water, and snow.
- The Warband AI is way better. The siege AI in Bannerlord is practically non-existent.
- I haven't seen any of these new systems since they are, as you said, not yet developed so I have nothing to compare.
- The animations seem the same as Warband.
- The sieges are totally broken right now due to the AI.
- The clan stuff seems cool.
- The personality stuff seems inconsequential.
- The AI in the cities seem broken. After a few minutes I see most of the NPCs just walking into walls and stuff.

 

[Tukata]

What they really need to fix quickly, apart from the bugs and balance issues with money, how long you need to upgrade your skills, etc... are the soulless and ultra repetitive quests, the non-existent interactions with NPCs ("I have a few questions to ask. -> Oh, nevermind") and the lifeless towns with almost no one in the streets. I don't know if any of this is planned in the finale release.

 

[Landoe]

they are getting bad reviews by ppl like you who can't read a single dev blog or watch a single video before buying... I don't need you in the ea, you can come back later.... graphic mods will also draw beautiful things like u see in fully modded skyrim. btw I like Skyrim too and I like M&B and heard over the last 6 months what to expect from the early stage of early access.....

So the devs expect others to make their game better? Sounds like this was just a money grab then

 

[naiski3]

So the devs expect others to make their game better? Sounds like this was just a money grab then

They're trying to make a sequel to a legendary game that pushed the boundaries in a lot of ways. I don't think its a money grab, I just think there are huge shoes to fill and thus far they've only been able to fill a fraction of them.

 

[BlackRainZ]

Just so everyone Knows. I just worked my way through the MAIN QUEST LINE and created my own kingdom and all the kingdom management stuff is there. All the info from the Kingdom management screen are present. I can enact policies, shows clans, etc.I can create armies too

 

[Lord of Shadows]

You guys are complaining that the game is unfinished when the devs themselves said it's unfinished...
The only mistake the devs made IMO is announcing the game so early.

 

[Noviix]

- Compare this graphics to warband, damnit have you even watched the details in it? (the horses have ****ing sweat)
- Compare the map to warband
- Compare the AI to warband
- Compare the new systems they have added (again not fully developed because its EA -.-)
- Compare the new animations
- Compare the new sieges (siege engines, destructive objects, destructive walls)
- Compare the new Clan systems
- Compare the new personality systems
- Compare the new cities and the life in them ( no more random peasant just wandering around )

Ask and you shall receive.

Graphics are good but nothing crazy compared to any modern title nowadays, it's just kind of expected at this point. These graphics were the same graphics shown off years ago in this video from 2016, recorded probably earlier.

The map is literally Warband + and many modders have done similar feats, not that the map is bad, definitely it's an improvement but come on the map? It's got better graphics and other than that it runs the same way as Warband, functions the same way as Warband, it is the same as Warband.

The AI, sure it's far improved and far harder to cheese. But they are not free of critique, the AI for archers are aimbots. If you ever fight the Khuzait Horse Archers I wish you the best of luck unless you have a lot of archers of your own or a lot of fast cavalry.

Considering you didn't really name any systems I'm just going to skip this one because I don't feel like they've really added a whole lot in the vague systems category.

The new animations are good yes, you would hope that the sword swinging and thrusting and the like would look far cleaner and smoother than that of it's decade old counter-part.

The sieges are without a doubt a cool addition but lack the polish needed to really emphasize them as a prominent feature in the game. I was in a 1600 stack Empire army about to siege a Sturgian castle, we built the siege camp and all that, and then the army disbanded and left without a siege. That's not very inspiring.

The clan system is kinda just the same as Warband lol idk what you mean.

The personality systems? Oh you mean when I do the 30th blood feud quest for random named citizen so they give me gold and I can recruit more troops from them. Yes very cool, better than Warband's lack of one no doubt, but come on bruh it's not that crazy.

The new cities... Half the time they're bugged and everyone is in the same spot. Yeah I've seen the same woman walking around with a basket over her head like 500 times now. They're cool yes, better than Warband slightly yes, but they lack actual content aside from the nice visuals.

Dude I really can't understand your point of view, it has been said a 1000 times that this release is NOT the final release.

My point of view is that Early Access is simply a term. The game is made by a group of hardworking individuals who had the capacity in my opinion to create something greater in the span of time provided but they didn't. I understand that that point can have a "YET" added to it and a lot of people will start cheering that the game is in a good state and TW did it again, Warband mk 2. But looking in the future I just don't see the same success chance as I saw in Warband and that's where I'm coming from. I think far too many people are just excusing criticism and not criticizing at all simply because it's early access. I don't think the game should have 20,000 positive ratings right now, I think it's misleading as to what's actually there. It's a hype train. The same hype train of No Man's Sky.

Basically, don't shut down criticism just because it's early access and because they've made a few dev blogs regarding what will be there and what won't. Their lack of transparency on certain topics is driving people crazy. Singleplayer got way more coverage than MP even during the MP beta.

My prime example is going to be the MP class discussion thread. There were pages upon pages of well put responses as to what could have been done to improve or substitute the class system to be way more viable for what people wanted, and we barely got answers. The only thing that I can vividly recall being repeated is that it will not change and that the devs thought this was the best decision. How can I argue with that? I can't. And that's annoying to me. If you have entrusted people to come and test your game for you and the majority of people who are playing it are telling you they prefer the old way and you tell them "No this is our decision sorry" yeah people are going to be upset.

I'm not sitting on the forums writing paragraph after paragraph because I don't like the game or TW and I don't want it to succeed, I'm doing it because all I want is a good game state fit to count as a sequel to the great Warband. If you think I want anything less, I'm sorry but you're dead wrong.

 

[naiski3]

Just so everyone Knows. I just worked my way through the MAIN QUEST LINE and created my own kingdom and all the kingdom management stuff is there. All the info from the Kingdom management screen are present. I can enact policies, shows clans, etc.I can create armies too

Some of it is there but a lot of stuff like voting on fiefs does not exist.

 

[BlackRainZ]

Some of it is there but a lot of stuff like voting on fiefs does not exist.

How do you know it isn't? Did you get that far? I just finally cheated to get through the quest. I don't have any vassals yet.

 

[Lord of Shadows]

My point of view is that Early Access is simply a term.

"Early access, also known as early funding, alpha-access, alpha founding, or paid-alpha, is a funding model in the video game industry by which consumers can purchase and play a game in the various pre-release development cycles, such as pre-alpha, alpha, and/or beta, while the developer is able to use those funds to continue further development on the game." - Wikipedia

The game is still very much in development. You're criticizing it for not having the features they promised to be in full release. There's a big difference.

 

[ricewind]

- The graphics look a little better and the game runs way worse. The graphics still look pretty bad but that was never the appeal of this game and I couldn't care less what the graphics look like.
- The map is basically the same. Fields, mountains, deserts, water, and snow.
- The Warband AI is way better. The siege AI in Bannerlord is practically non-existent.
- I haven't seen any of these new systems since they are, as you said, not yet developed so I have nothing to compare.
- The animations seem the same as Warband.
- The sieges are totally broken right now due to the AI.
- The clan stuff seems cool.
- The personality stuff seems inconsequential.
- The AI in the cities seem broken. After a few minutes I see most of the NPCs just walking into walls and stuff.

I think the issue with you is that you haven't played much of it or you haven't been paying attention:

1. No bad perfomance for me, my game runs smoothly, of course is hasnt been optimiced for low-mid build pc's i highly doubt they where plannign to do it before full release, first you write the code then you optimice it
2. They have added many many more castles, villages, hideouts appear more often so yeah invalid point
3. AI in Warband is NOT better, in Bannerlord infantry protects archers, they try to get to high ground if they see enemy cavalry going their way or they get into the water so the cavalry looses their speed buff. Im just thinking you haven't played that much so you made up your mind on this one...
4. Gang system, caravan system, army system, romours on where to buy/sell system, hereditary system, dead system, growing system, having babys, and much more i dont remember or i didnt found out
5. I don't even know what to say to the animations being the same as warband... have you played bannerlord even? Hair physics, cloth physics, death animations completly new (now it actually shows where you did that killing blow aka different death animations for different parts of the body)
6. That might be true for some people, i have done like 10 sieges and have had 0 errors of that sort so maybe im just lucky
7. Personality is not inconsequential, I agree with you that now it is like 20% if what it should be, but lords have different dialogs depending on their personality (again, we dont have in EA all the dialogs there would be in the full release), you have that mini game where you try to charm or convince an NPC about something and the right answers relates with their personality, so yep i think you are wrong there.
8. Again its because of the EA, devs said that castles and towns are not done so you can get that "bug" in a few towns but there are others (likely the ones that are 90% developed) that feel preety much alive to me, with NPCs doing animations like speeking with each other, a captain Guard giving orders or complaining to his guards, etc.

 

[BlackRainZ]

I love how we have now gone to "NO KINGDOM MANAGEMENT" to some of it is there but not all. lol

 

[naiski3]

How do you know it isn't? Did you get that far? I just finally cheated to get through the quest. I don't have any vassals yet.

Yes I cheated to check it out as well. You also can't declare war or make peace, you just have to wait for other factions to start a war with you. I also can't access any of the options like creating armies etc because I don't have influence. I don't know if it is possible to get influence yet or if this is missing, too.

 

[Yabloko]

The game's only been out for 2 days and people already complain as if they'd been scammed. They've been fairly transparent as far as I can tell, they were clear that this is an ealy access and that many features, models, etc are lacking or placeholders. That's not to say I don't expect more from Bannerlord, but the game is not yet 'officially' out. Wait for the actual, non EA release and see where the game is.
I've more thant gotten my money's worth from Warband, and see no issue in spending 40€ on the 'promise' of a better game, TW has so far not disappointed me. That vote of confidence should of course always be within one's own risk tolerance.

 

[Tukata]

Ask and you shall receive.

Graphics are good but nothing crazy compared to any modern title nowadays, it's just kind of expected at this point. These graphics were the same graphics shown off years ago in this video from 2016, recorded probably earlier.

The map is literally Warband + and many modders have done similar feats, not that the map is bad, definitely it's an improvement but come on the map? It's got better graphics and other than that it runs the same way as Warband, functions the same way as Warband, it is the same as Warband.

The AI, sure it's far improved and far harder to cheese. But they are not free of critique, the AI for archers are aimbots. If you ever fight the Khuzait Horse Archers I wish you the best of luck unless you have a lot of archers of your own or a lot of fast cavalry.

Considering you didn't really name any systems I'm just going to skip this one because I don't feel like they've really added a whole lot in the vague systems category.

The new animations are good yes, you would hope that the sword swinging and thrusting and the like would look far cleaner and smoother than that of it's decade old counter-part.

The sieges are without a doubt a cool addition but lack the polish needed to really emphasize them as a prominent feature in the game. I was in a 1600 stack Empire army about to siege a Sturgian castle, we built the siege camp and all that, and then the army disbanded and left without a siege. That's not very inspiring.

The clan system is kinda just the same as Warband lol idk what you mean.

The personality systems? Oh you mean when I do the 30th blood feud quest for random named citizen so they give me gold and I can recruit more troops from them. Yes very cool, better than Warband's lack of one no doubt, but come on bruh it's not that crazy.

The new cities... Half the time they're bugged and everyone is in the same spot. Yeah I've seen the same woman walking around with a basket over her head like 500 times now. They're cool yes, better than Warband slightly yes, but they lack actual content aside from the nice visuals.



My point of view is that Early Access is simply a term. The game is made by a group of hardworking individuals who had the capacity in my opinion to create something greater in the span of time provided but they didn't. I understand that that point can have a "YET" added to it and a lot of people will start cheering that the game is in a good state and TW did it again, Warband mk 2. But looking in the future I just don't see the same success chance as I saw in Warband and that's where I'm coming from. I think far too many people are just excusing criticism and not criticizing at all simply because it's early access. I don't think the game should have 20,000 positive ratings right now, I think it's misleading as to what's actually there. It's a hype train. The same hype train of No Man's Sky.

Basically, don't shut down criticism just because it's early access and because they've made a few dev blogs regarding what will be there and what won't. Their lack of transparency on certain topics is driving people crazy. Singleplayer got way more coverage than MP even during the MP beta.

My prime example is going to be the MP class discussion thread. There were pages upon pages of well put responses as to what could have been done to improve or substitute the class system to be way more viable for what people wanted, and we barely got answers. The only thing that I can vividly recall being repeated is that it will not change and that the devs thought this was the best decision. How can I argue with that? I can't. And that's annoying to me. If you have entrusted people to come and test your game for you and the majority of people who are playing it are telling you they prefer the old way and you tell them "No this is our decision sorry" yeah people are going to be upset.

I'm not sitting on the forums writing paragraph after paragraph because I don't like the game or TW and I don't want it to succeed, I'm doing it because all I want is a good game state fit to count as a sequel to the great Warband. If you think I want anything less, I'm sorry but you're dead wrong.

You nailed it. I agree with everything you said.