Is Mount&Blade too one dimensional?

[jrawlings]

Let's be honest. Mount&Blade is an excellent game for doing mounted/unmounted combat. Going into battle makes this game. Everything else, is ancillary to this. I'm not saying this as a criticism! I say that if you are going to do something do it well, and M&B has done just that with the combat. Perusing the suggestions forum I've seen ideas on expanding the # of factions and the quests, linking faction quests to real-time changes on the world map, making the mercantile industry more provocative etc etc...

So, given what M&B is and what it may become (I'm sure we all have our view of it) should Armagan and co focus their efforts on refining the combat system even more, or add to the depth of the game in other areas?

I realize that these options may not be mutually exclusive, but I do hope it sparks discussion!

 

[Reinhart]

I like you, you're well spoken.

I've wanted to see a more involving trade model. Being a long time fan of most mercantile games, going back to Uncharted Waters on the Sega Genesis, there has always been a soft spot in my heart for the merchant's life in a video game. I see no glaring problem with the combat, and it is actually quite refreshing and just plain fun.

More elements such as factions and a coherant story may rear their head as Armagan moves farther into the development cycle. As of right now it seems that he is honing the game's engine and combat balance which is without a doubt the central point of this game, if a good story and involving faction interactions are added this game could easily stand with some of the better PC games on the market.

 

[Archonsod]

It would be nice for another area to get some attention in the next release. The combat is good at the moment, and I would say that further development in any of the areas mentioned is past due.
Even some cosmetic improvements (such as fleshing out one or two more towns) would be appreciated.

 

[Reinhart]

Agreed. As much as I am used to, and tolerate well a game which is driven by menus (I play Romance of the Three Kingdoms.) I would like some visual elements to the town.

 

[Sir Prince]

I say, finish and polish the combat, improve the trade and then finish off the ''filler'' eg story, details, etc etc... etc

 

[Narcissus]

PrinceScamp is right on the money with this one.

Get the combat perfect (the main core of the game) ... then add the nice improvements such as better world map, more fleshed out towns, complete storyline or two, quests ... etc.

Don't get in such a rush, guys. The game is coming along very nicely. Armagan is methodically getting combat perfect. When that is done, I'm sure he will expand the game in other directions, also.

Narcissus

 

[The Pope]

I'd say work on making the mechanics excellent. Thats the only thing modders can't change.

 

[Apex]

The way it looks is not as much Armagan is trucking full speed in one direction (ie combat, for instance), but rather he's splitting up additions everywhere. It seems with each new patch he adds a bit of each spice: better AI, visual improvements, economic reforms, as well as combat.

I think Armagan is doing a really good job of spreading tweaks out among every aspect of the game as he goes. I don't really see how you're getting the idea the process is becoming one sided at all, but maybe the topic is a bit misleading

 

[Keemo]

build a full 3d world with everything and put M&B realistic combat/weapon/armor in it

Have several different char classes you can be, each one entails a complete "life" that you live.

Like a knight for instance: You can build your own house and earn your own land and you have to show up for service to your lord, daily service might be guard duty, or it might be a full on war 100s of miles away

thats what M&B needs lol

 

[barbaros]

Good combat and combat related features is the heart of this game. They should have #1 priority for devs. Everything else is detail (except a few very important things, more detailed better world map for example). My list of combat related functions are; better combat animations, dodging, sprinting, stamina, better gore effects, improved group commands, formations, improved combat sounds (warcries etc.), better effects (arrow trails, sparks when the swords clash etc.), more weapons and armors, better horses (in all aspects especially horse idle animations).

After doing those listed, if the devs still have time they should do other things like a detailed good story. We must face an obvious fact; combat alone is the primary reason for all of us to play this game like hell, become addicts. Its the star of this game. Devs can't do everything good with their limited resources. They should focus all their power on a few things. Think of yourself as a medieval commander, if you divide your single army into 5 and send each part against different strong enemies, they will all be destroyed without a chance. Which one do you prefer; a game tries to do everything but none is very good or a game with excellent combat and few other moderate features.

 

[jknemesis]

I originally read that M&B was a "medieval life simulation". Now, finding out that the combat system was incredible was a wonderful thing, but it would be even more wonderful if there were a mercantile system, political system, property/manor system and a lot of auxiliary parts to the game that made it more of a "sim" and more of a "toybox" game than it already is.

That, however, may be too ambitious. The development team is small and private, so it's not the type of formal, industrial programming environment that Electronic Arts or Rockstar is.

Unfortunately, with demand the way it is in the gaming industry today, I'm not sure that M&B can compete with other games at a price of $25 if it doesn't develop much further beyond the way it exists today. So, in the end, I would definitely like to see M&B develop into a more multidimensional, multifaceted game with nuanced interactions between military, economic, political and 'personal' parts of the game (how about a medieval romance aspect to the game? Maybe i just need to get laid).

That being said, I would have also liked to have voted for a more developed plotline, more tweaks to combat and all of that. M&B is still a great beta indie game, but it could be a lot more. It is definitely a shining diamond in the rough.

If I had a hand in a project like this, I would try to figure out a way to move it to MMO as soon as possible, but that carries its own logistical nightmares with it.

 

[Boris]

It would all be good (Except your definition of rpg elements...).
Oh and except for trade, in a land where you can ride from one end to the other in a day trade should not be a issue.

 

[Manitas]

I'd love some purpose.
Like several AI driven invisible hands that move the pawns on the world map, in attempt to acheve something (eg. subdue the other AI and the like).
And more sophisticated party behaviors, something more than 'I will kill you because you are there'.

 

[skorulis]

I would really like to see a way to win, I get bored too quickly when there isn't an end goal to work for. This could be as simple as giving towns a garison and letting factions fight for control, once your faction has all the towns you win. This would lead to more intricate plots later on, but for now it would just give the player something to work towards.

 

[Morbo]

vote combat

Atm I mainly play M&B for the part where it really shines, the combat. So, before anything else, I'd like to see the combat get as good as humanly possible. Maybe put a secondary focus on the trade and economic parts as they are a bit lacklustre atm, especially compared to the combat.
Then once that's done (the core of the game), the game could be made more and RPGy by doing things like making the classes more distinct and creating some sort of epic story.

 

[mfberg]

I just came here to kill people.

That aside, a bit more economic work would be nice, and some more consequence for aiding allies, the ability to choose enemies (temporary truce) in a neutral fight, or three way battles (Dark Hunters in one corner, Swadian Army in another, Hero in a third). Varying relations (and battles) between the different bandit factions because as we know those Swadian deserters can't stand those steppe bandits, and the khergits think the dark knights are wimps. But these only as side projects, the real work is in the combat, and needs to be kept there.

mfberg

 

[SirBobTheMerciless]

You know, I was cruising along just dandy, with a mean posse of banditos that had thus far made short work of several Khergit groups, some Dark Hunters, and whole warbands of Swadians, when something truly shocking happened. I got my a$$ handed to me on a plate by a lowly Swadian prisoner convoy.

In hindsight a number of sequential bad decisions were responsible for this. Not the least of which was arrogantly engaging them in a forest (where my sharp shooters' skills were compromised); leading my cavalry gung-ho style right into a ditch full of swadian infantry; and finally having too much pride to cut my losses and run, and engaging them to be beaten a second time. I'm gutted. It's now just me, Borcha and Marnid stuck way out West (we chased that Swadian Caravan all the way from Praven) with no horses and no friends.

By all accounts I should be depressed; and I am a bit, it took me ages trying to raise a gang like that. But the fact that this game can turn around like that is what makes it so appealing. And it all comes down to the AI and the engine. Obviously the AI is never going to be as astute as a player, but in Mount and Blade it's good enough to force the player not to take it for granted, as I did. I think this is the strong point of the game, and one that I think is worth the lions share of the development strategy. I appreciate that many want to see more time spent on the RPG/story aspects of the game, but I would argue that there are a ton of games like that out there, and the framework in Mount And Blade as it stands is pretty good. Even without a cohesive story line.

So my vote certainly goes for concentrating on the cavalry simulation aspects of the game. Diversifying the command options for different units etc, and beefing up the AI to deal with more complex tactics as well as the more basic tactics (such as ranged units seeking high ground; one aspect where players have a severe advantage over the AI). I notice that the AI already knows something of flanking (or at least appears to) and I like that.

Anyway, that's my tuppence worth.