It needs to be stated.

[WHAT THE FLAGNARD!]

Honestly you have no one to blame but yourself when a developer put on the store page that ****s not gonna work the way you expect and you should probably expect to lose save games also, then it’s on you buddy. their actual recommendation is to not buy if you want a complete game. Wait to buy the game. it’s an early access from a small studio so to expect anything other than that is entitlement. they warned you and told you flat out. if you didn’t read that’s your fault. As if Ark survival evolved was any better. I think certainly wasn’t. Helluva game though. Post what bugs you can. Hope they fix it.

I don't think it's an unreasonable expectation, early access or not, to expect a game to be playable.

 

[PenisMightier]

EARLY ACCESS

Oh really?

 

[Hearsties]

I tried to give a lot of constructive feedback in my thread and I honestly think you guys should be doing the same. Just saying you're disappointed isn't really enough. And maybe it isn't fair that we paid to playtest this for them, maybe it's not fair at all and it's dishonest of them too. But whatever the case, I think most of us are posting here because we love Mount & Blade and we recognize the potential in this game, deeply flawed though it currently is, to be what we all want it to be, what we hoped it to be.

So, I'd encourage you all to make threads talking about specific issues, giving feedback. It doesn't matter how we got in this mess. We're in it, so we might as well help them make the game what we want it to be because we love it and no other game offers a remotely similar experience. Sure, they probably should've had a single player beta. Sure, we could've figured most of these problems out years ago. But the least we can do is try and point them out now and give some solid feedback on how we think the game could be improved.

And honestly, this isn't me being a fanboy. This is just trying to make the best of the situation because, well, 8 bloody years, man.

 

[PenisMightier]

I tried to give a lot of constructive feedback in my thread and I honestly think you guys should be doing the same. Just saying you're disappointed isn't really enough. And maybe it isn't fair that we paid to playtest this for them, maybe it's not fair at all and it's dishonest of them too. But whatever the case, I think most of us are posting here because we love Mount & Blade and we recognize the potential in this game, deeply flawed though it currently is, to be what we all want it to be, what we hoped it to be.

So, I'd encourage you all to make threads talking about specific issues, giving feedback. It doesn't matter how we got in this mess. We're in it, so we might as well help them make the game what we want it to be because we love it and no other game offers a remotely similar experience. Sure, they probably should've had a single player beta. Sure, we could've figured most of these problems out years ago. But the least we can do is try and point them out now and give some solid feedback on how we think the game could be improved.

And honestly, this isn't me being a fanboy. This is just trying to make the best of the situation because, well, 8 bloody years, man.

Well said, this should be stickied somewhere.

 

[Twezie]

I don't think it's an unreasonable expectation, early access or not, to expect a game to be playable.

It is completely playable, except for this save issue which I believe will be fixed in a day or two.

What is ridiculous is these people saying "OO they released it bcuz they wanted to grab all the cashzz from de corona quarantine people" Seriously?

But yes I agree, there is a lot of issues right now, and I can only hope the missing features and numerous bugs are due to the developers focusing on multiplayer the recent years.

 

[Jhaerik]

I am pretty sure that they did not do much in depth play testing. They could have, and then the game would have been released in another 3 to 4 years. Would that have been preferable? I am not persuaded.

It is also much easier to find all the bugs when you have a large playerbase testing your product. Can you imagine how many hours of testing it would have taken to have data comparable to what they are receiving now from us?

I would take issue with this if they were just ignoring the problems, but from what I am seeing they are working to fix them (e.g., the save corruption bug). Admittedly some more communication on the forum would be nice.

About 20-50 because we are all saying the exact same things.

 

[GravenAshe]

I was actually just thinking that they released this because there is a record number of people on unemployment all at home right now....

I'm actually not incredibly disappointed by what they've accomplished so far in the game. With that being said I AM worried about the future of it all. It just seems like it's...barren...? The systems that they do have in place right now I like, or at least I like the idea of them because they're all broken at the moment. What I'm more worried about is if this is all we're going to be getting and all future DLC will just be extra factions and stuff like that. There simply just needs to be more systems and events and diplomacy and a better economy and the ability to roleplay, oh and intrigue too and on and on we go...

You mix this with TW's history of not listening to their own fanbase and well, it just makes me nervous is all because of how much I've loved the M&B series so far. I know it's early access but that's exactly why I'm worried. I've seen so many early access games premier with amazing potential only for it to be released with nothing extra inside of it.

I mean...THEY TOOK OUT FEASTS MAN, AREN'T YOU WORRIED!?

No King Harlaus = No Feasts

 

[PenisMightier]

No King Harlaus = No Feasts

you wound me

 

[cornergraf]

I don't think it's an unreasonable expectation, early access or not, to expect a game to be playable.

Depending on your definition of playable, I would disagree. I find it playable, playable enough for early access.

While I too was hoping that the game would be in a better state by now, I think this game is exactly spot on for early access. That is the point of early access, it is NOT a finished game, and it is not even nearly finished. It is EARLY access.

 

[VincentNZ]

Hmm, while I do think Bannerlord has quite a few very unnerving bugs like crashes (although I had only one in two days), corrupted saves and the steamroll, I have played a few Early Access games and can say that it is in a comparably good state right now.
The base sandbox is complete and working. Once they patched the steamrolling and the corrupted saves, everyone can spend 100 hours into one campaign and experience every aspect. This is likely the next patch and rolling out in the next couple of days.
Other than that the only things missing right now is what I call "fluff", the stuffing around the edges. There are many quests missing, the leveling system needs balance tweaking, the general game world and mechanics (hideouts) need adjustments and some mechanics appear to miss or are not deep enough (clan tab). Also the optimisation is poor right now with too many and too long loading times, I do not know if this will improve significantly.
.
Now the most obvious comparison is with DayZ, that was released as basically just a sandbox and many more placeholders, which turned the game into a 3rd person hardcore shooter, I mean they had to remove zombies, the staple of the game, for multiple months.
SCUM is a similar game in that genre, and while more feature-complete than DayZ has a lot to do and is also months and months away from full-release.
Ark released in a similar state as Bannerlord, yet I dare say Bannerlord is more feature complete, and Ark did only receive patches every month or so, while some core mechanics are rather broken (path-finding, collision and the resulting over-importance of flyers), with no real ability to be fixed.
Subnautica launched with a bare minimum of area to explore and features implemented, however, the core experience was so new and beautiful, that people hardly realized and checked in every month to be continually amazed.
Minecraft release just as a barebones sandbox, with basically no features, yet the base sandbox is entirely what is the core and what keeps people playing and had constant fluff updates that only add to the basegame.
Rimworld, probably the most comparable of the bunch, started also with core sandbox that was working, was very attractive to play and constant patches added content that would make you not only see whats new, but also play what's new.
Bannerlord sits, in my opinion, in a similar niche, the base sandbox is the core and works fine at the moment, every patch will just continually add to it (and fast too, it appears) and when the two major things are sorted out you can enjoy that indefinitely and every patch will just generate more content.

 

[InfinityFire]

Depending on your definition of playable, I would disagree. I find it playable, playable enough for early access.

While I too was hoping that the game would be in a better state by now, I think this game is exactly spot on for early access. That is the point of early access, it is NOT a finished game, and it is not even nearly finished. It is EARLY access.

To quote the OP: "Early Access doesn't cut it when there are flaws that can only be chalked up to either incompetence or intentional deception-"

 

[VALN3R]

Fact: Bannerlord status right now is way better than the rest of EA titles in the steamstore.
Fact: they release EVERY DAY a patch or FIX.
Fact: you can refund the game if you want to wait for a full release :=)
Fact: even with this version of the game everyone of us will have HUNDRED of HOURS of GAMEPLAY! 50€?worth it and sorry everyone who is fan got it for 40€.

 

[cornergraf]

To quote the OP: "Early Access doesn't cut it when there are flaws that can only be chalked up to either incompetence or intentional deception-"

That the developers have not achieved feature parity with warband does not make them incompetent or deceptive. They clearly have prioritized work on other areas (there is a lot of new stuff compared to warband), and therefore a lot of things right now are placeholders or "good enough for now" (even if they are not actually good). So what? That is what early access is all about.

I was part of the original Mount and Blade early access (way before Warband) and it wasn't so different back then. Every update added something, improved something, fixed something that was broken. That's just how early access works. The only real dealbreaker right now is the snowballing, and I am sure that it will be addressed.

 

[InfinityFire]

Fact: Bannerlord status right now is way better than the rest of EA titles in the steamstore.
Fact: they release EVERY DAY a patch or FIX.
Fact: you can refund the game if you want to wait for a full release :=)
Fact: even with this version of the game everyone of us will have HUNDRED of HOURS of GAMEPLAY! 50€?worth it and sorry everyone who is fan got it for 40€.

Well, it's pretty safe to assume that the majority of players that have taken time to post on the forums will have more than 2 hours on Bannerlord.

And as far as I'm aware, the same rules apply for early access games - so no, the greater majority of players will not be able to refund the game if they wanted to.

 

[Morbid Views]

TaleWorlds should have more to show for being in development for 8 years. No kingdom Creation on launch? No way to stop blobbing?Janky ass faces for npcs? Only like 20 emblems for your banner with like 10 colors?? It's like they were monkeying around during the development.

 

[InfinityFire]

That the developers have not achieved feature parity with warband does not make them incompetent or deceptive. They clearly have prioritized work on other areas (there is a lot of new stuff compared to warband), and therefore a lot of things right now are placeholders or "good enough for now" (even if they are not actually good). So what? That is what early access is all about.

I couldn't even play Bannerlord if I wanted to right now, in its current state. My game crashes every time I attempt to load a save or even save the game. The game is completely unplayable. So regardless if a majority of things in the game are 'placeholders' or not, releasing an unplayable game (even if its early access) for $50 is unacceptable in my honest opinion.

Yes, it has been stated that it is unfinished. Yes, I know what I signed up for with early access, and I'm aware not all the intended content will be implemented yet.

But even if, as you say "they have prioritized work in other areas" what's the point if I (and many, many others) cannot play the game due to this gamebreaking issue?

 

[VincentNZ]

I couldn't even play Bannerlord if I wanted to right now, in its current state. My game crashes every time I attempt to load a save or even save the game. The game is completely unplayable. So regardless if a majority of things in the game are 'placeholders' or not, releasing an unplayable game (even if its early access) for $50 is unacceptable in my honest opinion.

Yes, it has been stated that it is unfinished. Yes, I know what I signed up for with early access, and I'm aware not all the intended content will be implemented yet.

But even if, as you say "they have prioritized work in other areas" what's the point if I (and many, many others) cannot play the game due to this gamebreaking issue?

This can happen to anyone in any game, though. It is a rare occassion though that a game is totally broken for one person. If it happens to more people a workaround is usually found fast, as it is often a problem with the rig (like firewalls, anti-virus) or something the user is doing wrong. If it is not, then it is usually the first thing people patch, so I would advise patience or research for clues what precisely is the problem that is causing your issue.

 

[InfinityFire]

This can happen to anyone in any game, though. It is a rare occassion though that a game is totally broken for one person. If it happens to more people a workaround is usually found fast, as it is often a problem with the rig (like firewalls, anti-virus) or something the user is doing wrong. If it is not, then it is usually the first thing people patch, so I would advise patience or research for clues what precisely is the problem that is causing your issue.

First and foremost, this is NOT a "rare occassion".

If you've kept an eye on the threads, many, many others have the same or a very similar save-file corruption issue.
The game has been out for what, 4 days now and still remains in an unplayable state, for not just a single person, but for many.

To your point however, they have indeed tried to patch this in the most recent 1.0.3 patch, I believe... but the key word is "tried".

 

[CryptidByte]

I'd be careful. This might be considered as "encouraging the abuse of reviews because of an ideological opposition to EA". Which got me, apparently, kicked from the Steam Community Hub. This is the kinda topic I would come into, say something along the lines of, "EA isn't an excuse to use your customers as unpayed bug testers". Ah. Not that I'm against the developers, I usually would argue against people saying you "Have no right to complain." Or similarly, against people that asked for refunds and used inflammatory and fairly nonsense arguments for why the game "sucks".

Dunno. Watch out for mods!

 

[Brave_Lung]

Early Access = Warband enhanced in Alpha state, working worse than warband itself.

WAITING for Bannerlord - indetermined time.