I'm sorry but I finally give up, what the hell are TW doing? Nothing new in 3 weeks. Whoever is managing this team needs the boot.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
babelfisch said:
If you want to know the difference between utterly broken and unfinished, take a hammer, go to the next window and demolish it. That's utterly broken.
Take a screw driver, go to the next window and remove the handle. That's unfinished.
Both windows don't fulfill their purpose but they are clearly in a different state...
Click to expand...
I am pretty sure that utterly broken in terms of game development can be clearly understood in a different way. Regardless. My statement stands, a decade for something like this is ridiculous
 
Dhamon said:
Having to perform a 1-month-long code refactoring after 4 months into early access tells a lot about the lack of a clear developing roadmap.

Having an EA tag is not an excuse for this, especially it it comes with an AAA price. Quoting the Steam store page:


A flaw in the code that requires 1-month-long code refactoring does not sound very stable.

That said, I'm happy that they are taking the time to fix whatever trashcode they wrote, rather than continue developing on unstable foundations. But if things continue like this, it seems to me that it will take 3-4 years before the game has some better playable value over Warband.

What disappoints me most is the lack of new features and innovations with respect to Warband. The game feels very shallow, with dialogues exactly lifted from Warband or shabby placeholder dialogue that shows how little effort they are putting into the game ("insert generic backstory").

I expected something more than Warband: better tactical layer in battles, better dialogue options, more immersive, reactive world. Better quests. Not to mention better AI.

What we got? A crafting minigame that has the depth of a mobile phone game. Same old boring quests, some new boring ones - when they do not break. Same stupid AI - except that now can grab ammo from the ground. Same blob fights.
Most of the RPG progression is broken - which for an RPG game, even in Early Access - is ludicrous.

The few new good gameplay elements (more companion options, caravans, ...?) do not offset the general lack of new features.

Hell, they did not even "get inspired" (read: copy successful elements) from great mods for Warband, like Prophesy of Pendor, or the Viking Conquest DLC.
There is not even seafaring in Bannerlord, nor it seems it will be ever introduced (leaving it for some DLC maybe?).
Ship battles in VC weren't the most fun and streamlined experience, but at least they were a fresh novelty from the base game.

Sure, hopefully all the bugs will be fixed and new content and mechanics will come, because - thank god - the game is in EA. But given the current state, surely not within the proposed 1 year.
And from the released "development plans" it does not look like any new content/gameplay mechanics will come.

I am not bashing the game for the sake of bashing it. I really do hope it will get improved in the future. I am just starting to lose hopes on how and when this will happen. The game has potential. Hopefully the developers will act on this, not just the modders.

In the meanwhile, I'll resort to play VC, which even with its 2000-and-late-graphics feels way more immersive and engaging.
Click to expand...

While I still hold out hope for the game, I think this about sums it up.
 
8 years and the sequel does not offer much compared to warband, hell it even lacks game modes and private servers. And what did we get? A cosmetic level progression.
 
I sincerely don’t believe we’re playing something which has 8 years of full time development behind it. It’s just not possible. It’s probably more like 6.5 years of two dudes working in the evening. So calling for someone to get the boot isn’t appropriate.

I think that the game is actually better than the previous titles. I urge everyone who still plays m&b to switch to blord. It is much better than it gets credit for. I have a strange feeling that it’s one of those things that the more people who play it, the faster it will get done.

That said, if tw builds it, they will come.
 
rektasaurus said:
I think that the game is actually better than the previous titles. I urge everyone who still plays m&b to switch to blord. It is much better than it gets credit for. I have a strange feeling that it’s one of those things that the more people who play it, the faster it will get done.
Click to expand...

If you haven't noticed, TW doesn't compare warband or take the best out of warband. They reinvented the wheel for things that didn't require it.
 
Dhamon said:
Having to perform a 1-month-long code refactoring after 4 months into early access tells a lot about the lack of a clear developing roadmap.

Having an EA tag is not an excuse for this, especially it it comes with an AAA price. Quoting the Steam store page:


A flaw in the code that requires 1-month-long code refactoring does not sound very stable.

That said, I'm happy that they are taking the time to fix whatever trashcode they wrote, rather than continue developing on unstable foundations. But if things continue like this, it seems to me that it will take 3-4 years before the game has some better playable value over Warband.
Click to expand...

*Dhamon drops mic* - Well said.
 
Dhamon said:
Having to perform a 1-month-long code refactoring after 4 months into early access tells a lot about the lack of a clear developing roadmap.

Having an EA tag is not an excuse for this, especially it it comes with an AAA price. Quoting the Steam store page:


A flaw in the code that requires 1-month-long code refactoring does not sound very stable.

That said, I'm happy that they are taking the time to fix whatever trashcode they wrote, rather than continue developing on unstable foundations. But if things continue like this, it seems to me that it will take 3-4 years before the game has some better playable value over Warband.

What disappoints me most is the lack of new features and innovations with respect to Warband. The game feels very shallow, with dialogues exactly lifted from Warband or shabby placeholder dialogue that shows how little effort they are putting into the game ("insert generic backstory").

I expected something more than Warband: better tactical layer in battles, better dialogue options, more immersive, reactive world. Better quests. Not to mention better AI.

What we got? A crafting minigame that has the depth of a mobile phone game. Same old boring quests, some new boring ones - when they do not break. Same stupid AI - except that now can grab ammo from the ground. Same blob fights.
Most of the RPG progression is broken - which for an RPG game, even in Early Access - is ludicrous.

The few new good gameplay elements (more companion options, caravans, ...?) do not offset the general lack of new features.

Hell, they did not even "get inspired" (read: copy successful elements) from great mods for Warband, like Prophesy of Pendor, or the Viking Conquest DLC.
There is not even seafaring in Bannerlord, nor it seems it will be ever introduced (leaving it for some DLC maybe?).
Ship battles in VC weren't the most fun and streamlined experience, but at least they were a fresh novelty from the base game.

Sure, hopefully all the bugs will be fixed and new content and mechanics will come, because - thank god - the game is in EA. But given the current state, surely not within the proposed 1 year.
And from the released "development plans" it does not look like any new content/gameplay mechanics will come.

I am not bashing the game for the sake of bashing it. I really do hope it will get improved in the future. I am just starting to lose hopes on how and when this will happen. The game has potential. Hopefully the developers will act on this, not just the modders.

In the meanwhile, I'll resort to play VC, which even with its 2000-and-late-graphics feels way more immersive and engaging.
Click to expand...

Concur, 100%

The disappointment is most acute because it feels like even the most logical steps to be taken after Warband have somehow not been taken in EIGHT YEARS.

  1. How is there no battle strategy after all this time? That's just logical progression for a game where the strength is in battles

  2. How are sieges and battles just blob fests with virtually no AI? The square that forms behind the gatehouse defending sieges just gets picked off from the side. The pathfinding of attackers beneath the gates is woeful.

  3. RPG - as mentioned, skills that do nothing, skills that are barely able to be trained, illogical 'learning points' or you just get absolutely roadblocked from learning basic skills. That's not code, that's bad design.

  4. How are companion and lord interactions somehow even worse than they were in Warband? You can't even ask a lord what they're doing, you can't figure any of it out.

  5. How is diplomacy/war dec still a complete lottery? Playing under Vlandia, they got into a war with Aserai, then Khuzait (standard map gainz) declare war, so what is the logical step that Vlandia take? DECLARE WAR ON BATTANIA. Yeah alright lads, 20k vs 60k strength.

  6. Quests and depth - there is no story, no game, no follow-up, no context, no recognition, no particular benefits of knowing someone or helping them, no indication of real world events (barring perfunctory 'I hear you took castle X' dialogues that have no meaning). Companions don't do anything notable even when they have skills, they're just Mr Potato Head style knights that you get to dress up.
The scary thing is how broken this game is from a fundamental standpoint. There are some nice graphical moments, the castles look much nicer, but they play worse than the old ones which offsets it. Same for the battle maps and campaign map. The townspeople look awful, genuinely 2008 graphics.

I have played a bit more single player recently but it is just... pointless. Nothing matters. They forgot to add most of the game, even when I'm enjoying it, it's always tinged with the disappointment that I will never really enjoy a feeling of immersion because <default text should not appear>
 
Argel said:
  1. How are sieges and battles just blob fests with virtually no AI? The square that forms behind the gatehouse defending sieges just gets picked off from the side. The pathfinding of attackers beneath the gates is woeful.
Click to expand...

In ancient and classical times battles started off with a bit of tactics but would always end up a blobfest. How are you supposed to give orders once things are in motion? Everyone is too busy fighting. At some point the defeated army is surrounded and either gaps are opened to let them flee or they are massacred.

In later times things improved a bit but not by much. The fact that you can give orders to troops that are across the map, to me, is actually absurd. At least without having messengers to go around and tell different parts of the army what to do.

I'm mostly OK with the current order system. I'd like to see armies be more organized though in terms of committing troops. Seeing reinforcements just run in without formations is off.
 
I have the same experience as Argel, i'm losing hope too. It has been said 1000 thousand of times, peoples just wanted Warband with this new engine: an improved Warband.
 
Just annoying for I can't play my current game as there is surely going to be a huge change, and this update just don't come :???:
About losing hope, it won't reach that far for me, though I am not satisified with how TW is managing the game, I can sure bannerlord would have a long and shining future, as tons of amazing mods would improve this game, especially consider how warband mod saved warband.
 
I went back to Warband two months ago. I think that says it all. I am hopeful for the future of this game, but I think it will be years until it can replace Warband, unless they release the refactor plus modding tools right now.
 
veryalien said:
In ancient and classical times battles started off with a bit of tactics but would always end up a blobfest. How are you supposed to give orders once things are in motion? Everyone is too busy fighting. At some point the defeated army is surrounded and either gaps are opened to let them flee or they are massacred.
Click to expand...

I think what he means is that the NPCs just let themselves get surrounded and massacred and behave like robots. It's even worse that they are somehow ominscient and can turn around instantly when you try to sneak up behind them, perfectly blocking your hits before turning around again, as if to say "Go away, we're busy being massacred".

It's true that ancient and medieval commanders didn't have the kind of precise control over the battlefield that the player does, but to describe them as "blobfests" and compare them to bannerlord is a bit ridiculous. Even the largest battles were gradual engagements where only a portion of an army was ever engaged at one time. Compare this to bannerlord where the NPCs all rush to the front of the formation and get so cramped that they can hardly move.
 
I think this code refactor is most likely incredibly important. Look at it this way. What we were given on release day was very much unfinished. There were so many missing features that I'd say it had barely any play testing. However they have had a very long time to play test it and some of the bugs etc would surely have been found. This would lead to the logical conclusion that they hadn't had that build for very long. The game lacks features such as a crime system shown in 2016. This suggests that they might have had such buggy underlying code that when add a new feature it breaks everything else. Remember the patches were often broken.
Them having to redo everything in the game matches with what we've seen from the graphics of the game. They started of with a very dull unit composition and progressed to something more colorful. The map changed 3 times(from what we saw) throughout development yet has many problems. This suggests they are perfectionists with a broken engine.
 
Seleucid said:
I think this code refactor is most likely incredibly important. Look at it this way. What we were given on release day was very much unfinished. There were so many missing features that I'd say it had barely any play testing. However they have had a very long time to play test it and some of the bugs etc would surely have been found. This would lead to the logical conclusion that they hadn't had that build for very long. The game lacks features such as a crime system shown in 2016. This suggests that they might have had such buggy underlying code that when add a new feature it breaks everything else. Remember the patches were often broken.
Them having to redo everything in the game matches with what we've seen from the graphics of the game. They started of with a very dull unit composition and progressed to something more colorful. The map changed 3 times(from what we saw) throughout development yet has many problems. This suggests they are perfectionists with a broken engine.
Click to expand...
tbh this as bad as it sounds makes me hopeful For the Games future.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom