Just realized how disappointed I was in the lack of strategic gameplay.

Currently viewing this thread:

Somehow this very vocal minority has convinced the devs to dumb down the game to the detriment of everyone else.

Everything I've heard about the development is that Taleworlds makes these decisions basically on their own and then uses player complaints to justify it. For example the ridiculous limit of 6 colours for banners was solely Armagan's idea. The Class System that is the root of so many issues in bannerlord was implemented despite half the (outspoken) developers and the majority of the playerbase thinking it was a terrible idea. One of the MP devs even said that "the VAST majority of players loved it", only for Callum himself to say "where on earth are you getting that figure from". This was during the Beta.

Most development studios are stubborn, insular and basically shut off from the outside world. It's just the nature of closed team-based development. What this means though is that whenever you hear about a "vocal minority" influencing the way a game is developed, that is basically never true. The decisions are never made by looking through forum posts or twitter threads or whatever, they're made in endless meetings between a small handful of people who have their own goals in mind (sometimes petty rivalries or personal ego). They might abstractly consider what their customers want, but this is usually through their own lenses rather than from actual feedback.

From the outside, when a nonsensical decision is made its easy to point the finger at some group of people who it seems have twisted the developer's hands, but this is almost never the case.
 
I´m not sure about the colours though. I mean 6 are still a lot! It´s sometimes hard for me to decide which one to choose.

I would prefer 2 colours, maybe even just 1 so I have to take less decisions, this also would fit the overall gameplay better too!
 

Fate

Regular
I´m not sure about the colours though. I mean 6 are still a lot! It´s sometimes hard for me to decide which one to choose.

I would prefer 2 colours, maybe even just 1 so I have to take less decisions, this also would fit the overall gameplay better too!
Was probably a strategic decision, I can't imagine the FPS drop or the intense development needed to add more colors.

It would be insanity if we got a custom color selection tool
 
It would be insanity if we got a custom color selection tool
tenor.gif
 
I am actually low IQ (99), so I would prefer it if Bannerlord became like cookie clicker. How about I mash the left mouse button and cutscenes of cool action play for me? 1 click = 1 frame (capped at 30fps). Anything more than this would confuse and, in a very short while, infuriate me. Unless Taleworlds wants me to punch a hole in my monitor, they must simplify the game to this point. I represent 50% of the population, and I deserve to be acknowledged.
 
I actually love how game companies have gotten away with lazy game design by stroking idiots' ego.

"Oh no, the reason why the game is boring is so that those other plebs can handle it. You're so clever for noticing that the game is unresponsive and dull! If everyone was like you, we could make better games."

If you believe this for a second, you are a chump. The plebs who need a dumber game don't exist outside of your imagination. This is textbook manipulation.
 

Apocal

Master Knight
I actually love how game companies have gotten away with lazy game design by stroking idiots' ego.

"Oh no, the reason why the game is boring is so that those other plebs can handle it. You're so clever for noticing that the game is unresponsive and dull! If everyone was like you, we could make better games."

If you believe this for a second, you are a chump. The plebs who need a dumber game don't exist outside of your imagination. This is textbook manipulation.
I doubt it is like this and more like, "If we sell more copies, we'll make more money."
 
I doubt it is like this and more like, "If we sell more copies, we'll make more money."

Making lazy games is far more profitable assuming you can convince people to buy it. We see the same thing in the film industry: schlock is made, not because audiences prefer that to an interesting production, but because it saves on time, money, and effort. If you convince people that films must become dumber to cater to a wide audience, then you, as a producer, can abdicate all responsibility for producing trash. However, intelligent films can, and do, perform incredibly well. Most valuable intellectual property comes from productions that are clever—not esoteric art films, but movies made with passion and depth like The Godfather. The problem is that it's expensive and hard to be talented. It is far easier to just jerk off your audience by assuring them that "if everyone was as clever as you, we wouldn't need to produce crap." Dumb games sell worse than deep ones, but they're far easier to make, especially when you're a hack.
 
Last edited:

Apocal

Master Knight
Making lazy games is far more profitable assuming you can convince people to buy it. We see the same thing in the film industry: schlock is made, not because audiences prefer that to an interesting production, but because it saves on time, money, and effort. If you convince people that films must become dumber to cater to a wide audience, then you, as a producer, can abdicate all responsibility for producing trash. However, intelligent films can, and do, perform incredibly well. Most valuable intellectual property comes from productions that are clever—not esoteric art films, but movies made with passion and depth like The Godfather. The problem is that it's expensive and hard to be talented. It is far easier to just jerk off your audience by assuring them that "if everyone was as clever as you, we wouldn't need to produce crap." Dumb games sell worse than deep ones, but they're far easier to make, especially when you're a hack.
I honestly can't tell if you're trolling, Canton.
 

AnandaShanti

Sergeant Knight at Arms
I'm also inclined to think its more laziness or weird fixation then deliberately trying to make it more simple thinking it will appeal to more people that way. Although if they're making console version there could be some things that might be to much computer power that they've backed off of. SO far it's just the radial deigned and the removal of the battle size slider, which if they add one more change like that it can't be coincidence anymore.

I mean lazy more as in a hurry to get the project done and not wanting to add more and more things to it or over haul the crappy stuff we've got. Or a fixation like "NO, the player's faction MUST behave just like the AI faction NO NO NO I don't care if it would make the game fun, interesting and "game like" it has to all be the same!". "What do you mean option and player agency...he has the OPTION to ride over there and attack the enemy.... OR NOT!"

I know they've made comment that implied choosing to keep it simple, but I think it's just a bad attempt to cope with it. It just saves more face to act like "Oh we don't want it to be too bogged down in strategy and menu options" rather then "we want to finish this and make a different game".

If they wanted more or different players they really needed to add in some dodge rolls, health potions and montsers and stuff.

They've already got all of the "I wana be a midevil army man and take over the world" players, but
 

Apocal

Master Knight
I could say the same for you.
I'm not trolling. But if I asked this forum's collective opinion of Call of Duty, they'd probably rate it much lower than Warband but Call of Duty consistently breaks tens of millions in sales. It isn't trying to be anything other than exactly what it is -- no crisis of identity or failure of vision there.
 
I'm not trolling. But if I asked this forum's collective opinion of Call of Duty, they'd probably rate it much lower than Warband but Call of Duty consistently breaks tens of millions in sales. It isn't trying to be anything other than exactly what it is -- no crisis of identity or failure of vision there.

You are conflating mainstream with dumb and niche with intelligent. How are you not trolling when your arguments are this inept?
 

Apocal

Master Knight
I don't understand what you are trying to say. Your thoughts aren't clear enough for this level of brevity.
Most people on this forum use Call of Duty as an example of a dumb, shallow game, yet it sells extremely well. I don't personally think CoD is dumb but it is intentionally made as a straight-forward and very forgiving gameplay loop for people who just want a game they can fire up and play for a few hours. Nothing wrong with that, in my eyes, but mine is the, uh, minority position on this forum.

Anyway, to my broader point, personally I don't think depth matters much to sales but hype matters a lot. Battle Brothers is a much deeper game than Bannerlord but the latter outsold the former by millions, basically off the hype of the 2016-era siege videos. Viking Conquest was a deeper experience than Warband but it had relatively poor sales.
 
Last edited:
Once again you are conflating dumb with mainstream and niche with intelligent. Of course Call of Duty sells more copies—it is a massive IP. Battle Brothers (which I love, btw) is a small, niche indie game, so it's unlikely to be a big seller.

On balance, however, a mainstream game with a solid design will outperform mass produced crap. I bought RDR2, even though I don't really care for games like that, because I knew that it was special. I have never bought a FIFA, though. Similarly, indie games which are innovative can become big IP's in their own right, see: Mount and Blade, Rimworld, Minecraft.

You are refusing to understand what I am saying: a game made with a cohesive and creative vision, all other things held equal, can outperform crap. However, being creative is expensive, difficult, and risky; most companies either can't or don't want to take that on. The easiest way to cope with that, and avoid criticism which hurts their sales and reputation, is to tell idiots that they're dumbing their games down for the sake of other idiots.
 
Top Bottom