• If you are reporting a bug, please head over to our Technical Support section for Bannerlord.
  • Please note that the developer team will be on leave until 26th of July. All technical support tickets will be handled when we're back in action. Thank you for understanding.

King Harlaus > Bannerlord: what is this game missing?

Currently viewing this thread:

"With the massive increase in settlements that we have in Bannerlord, we felt that having to micromanage settlements all the way down to the village level would, over time (as your territory grows), become overbearing and tiresome to manage."

This right here is the killer philosophy, the flat line pulse of this game. They did not listen to any of us, nobody wanted this.
Nobody is a very strong word.

While I would love to be able to own a village only and work up, but we are suppose to be Nobles not common scum. Bannerlord is the game name after all. Why would I want to micro mang a village when I have a head man/shierf to do so? Whcih honestly that part I wouldn't mind being able to higher or appoint who you want to run it like governors. There also should be two types of governors, the Towns and the Castles (more military minded) while the Castle lords are there to protect the land they rule over while the Towns governor is there to deal more with economic backing of the trade of towns/cities.
 
Nobody is a very strong word.

While I would love to be able to own a village only and work up, but we are suppose to be Nobles not common scum. Bannerlord is the game name after all. Why would I want to micro mang a village when I have a head man/shierf to do so? Whcih honestly that part I wouldn't mind being able to higher or appoint who you want to run it like governors. There also should be two types of governors, the Towns and the Castles (more military minded) while the Castle lords are there to protect the land they rule over while the Towns governor is there to deal more with economic backing of the trade of towns/cities.
There's no reason to visit a village at the moment, none. Find someone in here who wanted this.
 
There's no reason to visit a village at the moment, none. Find someone in here who wanted this.
You do know the game doesn't revolved around YOU or any other player that is on the furoms. To say find some one in there who wanted something means your speaking for all players. Maybe there is some one one that wanted this or something else. Does it mean it will get implomented? Prob not, but just cause you think some one doesn't want it doesn't mean some else doesn't want it.

Also this is not your game, if you think or want something than go mod it as you stated before you got 20 years of modding experience, that is what is great about games like this. The modding community is what actually brings the games alive from there original from. The Devs are building a game they want to build, so that is what they will build. Yes they will put some of our feed back into it, but a lot of times they will do what ever THEY want to do.

By the way I would love to test out any of your mods as I do a lot of that and leave feed back when I can.
 

five bucks

Sergeant at Arms
In Warband: Got a quest to free a village from bandits? The village isn't infested by bandits because of the quest. You got the quest because it is.
Do you free the village? Yes? Not only you will get a reward for doing so but the gameworld will change as well as a result. (higher income for the owner of the village, recruits being available there, goods being sent again to the nearest town, goods being for sale there again)

Bannerlord is different. The quests arent a connection to the gameworld, but are there to accomodate the player. They are generated for the player and are there to "entertain" and benefit the player.

To conclude the point here:
Bannerlord is a game which revolves noticably around the player. Features / Quests are there to serve the Player.
In Warband the gameworld takes center stage. Features and Quests are almost all linked to that gameworld and work a) by its rule and b) influence that gameworld.

I think this is the reason why Warband for a lot of players feels more immersive opposed to Bannerlord.
I criticize TW a lot but I'll stick up for them in this regard. Bannerlord is actually very good at obsessively simulating the game world down to every last detail. It isn't fair or accurate to say that the game world is only there to serve the player. Bannerlord could actually do with more of that. Right now, Bannerlord is a highly simulated game world that doesn't serve the player and isn't "game-y" enough to be fun.

Regarding your example of freeing a village from bandits, Bannerlord simulates those things too. You have to solve issues like that or your fiefs' prosperity will drop. If you do free a village from (deserters) in Bannerlord, that does impact the world economy too.

Warband actually simulates less things than Bannerlord does. Bannerlord's problem is that while the game world simulation is very complex and good, the stuff connecting it back to the player and making your impact noticeable is highly lacking.

And that is half of why it feels un-immersive and feels more shallow than it actually is. The other half is the number of things missing from Warband which put "meat on the bones" which I've mentioned earlier in this thread.
 
You do know the game doesn't revolved around YOU or any other player that is on the furoms.

TaleWorlds is making that painstakingly clear every time theres a new update. This game does not revolve around its playerbase. Interesting choice though.. Most companies would like to develop something their players want to have, since they are the recurring customers.
 

WhyAmIHere

You do know the game doesn't revolved around YOU or any other player that is on the furoms.
no ****

they've made that very clear by ignoring the **** out of us this last year

if it did we might have a good game by now
 
Last edited:

Life_Erikson

Master Knight
M&BWBNWVC
Warband actually simulates less things than Bannerlord does. Bannerlord's problem is that while the game world simulation is very complex and good, the stuff connecting it back to the player and making your impact noticeable is highly lacking.

That's an interesting point actually. Warband had the same problem.

I think there is truth to that point, but i think part of the reason why I felt like Bannerlord doesn't integrate its quests into the gameworld is, that a lot of the quests feel arbitrary and more RPG like. These RPG like quests are there to put some "meat" into the early game (if they succeed at that is questionable). But I don't think they are designed around the mid to late game very well. Examples are all the gang leader quests and all the village issue quests (except the bandit one).
There are no reasons both from a gameplay standpoint (they aren't worth your time) and from a roleplaying standpoint (as a lord why would you do jobs for gang leaders?) to engage with them once you reach mid game. And if you aren't doing them who is?

So if the only person who is engaging in these quests is you (and only in the early game) and they do effect the gameworld still, isn't that a bit strange?

In Warband there were quests which only were for the early game too. For exemple bringing letters to other lords or bringing a criminal to justice. These quests were very similar to the quests in Bannerlord with the exception that the game stopped giving you these quests once you become a lord. If you ask for a quest lords will even tell you that: "I may have a few tasks to do but nothing that would suit someone of your status."
These quests didn't have an impact on the gameworld. And thats alright because they served the early game before the player had a big impact on the gameworld and is more centered around improving his skills, money and reputation.
 

bonerstorm

Veteran
Sorry but that doesnt make any sense. If TW cared about the online MP community they would have invested a little more in that game aspect..
That's why I said "trying". I think they're trying and failing to appeal to a target demographic, but are only barely aware of how much they're f***ing the family dog on that account. Most of the devs didn't work on MB/WB/VC/FS and are only tangentially aware of what made them work.

I loved your rant and now I want to meet Autistic Kyle, we have much in common.
But anyway, why wouldn't Taleworlds make a Witcher-like game? It's not much more expensive to make than your action game and it still can be an action game if played superficially.
People playing immersive Warband mods found out that the battles became more satisfactory and meaningful as they were invested in the battle outcome, their allies and their enemies. It's a step in the right direction from the forever grind that is vanilla Warband/Bannerlord.
How is this a bad thing that may hurt profits? It's just a lazy excuse to do less.
My brother is Autistic Kyle. I love him to pieces, but he's a handful.

Making the Witcher 3 requires hiring more writers - and expensive ones at that. Probably ones who are more than a little rusty on their Turkish. It also requires a decent amount of research. And - speaking as a pro writer - we're a cantankerous and unreliable bunch of prima donnas with poor work ethics... that's why I'm ****posting in TW forums right now instead of doing my actual job.

The one talented team they had were the Brytenwalda modders, who are apparently working pro on a post-apocalyptic RPG right now. If TW had any sense, they'd just hire them to flesh out the entire SP campaign. Maybe they asked and said no. Who knows? The failure of BL to implement the basic QOL and story improvements that existed in VC is the most frustrating part of this game.
 

bonerstorm

Veteran
I think there is truth to that point, but i think part of the reason why I felt like Bannerlord doesn't integrate its quests into the gameworld is, that a lot of the quests feel arbitrary and more RPG like. These RPG like quests are there to put some "meat" into the early game (if they succeed at that is questionable). But I don't think they are designed around the mid to late game very well. Examples are all the gang leader quests and all the village issue quests (except the bandit one).
I think a way to summarize my above post about "Kyle" is that someone high up in the dev process decided to make BL into something like an MMO, because MMO's make tons of money - not realizing how that doesn't work in a SP/MP mass combat RPG.

Most of the failures of this game boil down to that: MMO grind + MMO "balancing" + MMO story + MMO AI.

The "balancing" is the most annoying. Spears and shields and swords and polearms should not be "balanced" because they aren't "balanced" IRL. Every medieval weapon had strengths and drawbacks and reasons for being deployed.
 
TaleWorlds is making that painstakingly clear every time theres a new update. This game does not revolve around its playerbase. Interesting choice though.. Most companies would like to develop something their players want to have, since they are the recurring customers.
no ****

they've made that very clear by ignoring the **** out of us this last year

if it did we might have a good game by now
You also need to understand that the forums of games is prob only visited by less than 10% of the actual player base, so your not speaking for every one and they don't have to listen to the minority few. It is their game after all, but does it help to listen to feed back? Oh hell yah as long as it's in reason and I have seen them add things to patches that was modded in or mention as better improvements over the game. It seems todays biggest ***** with gamers is how long it takes to make any improvements from a small dev team compared to say a AAA studio that has hundreds of employees and even they take forever to do updates.

Take MP for example, I think it's a complete waist of resources and should not been touch until the SP parts of the game was done and mostly released. I prob will never play the MP, but some folks liked that part of the game and I won't talk over and over how bad it was to have added it so early. It's just a waist of time cause they added it and they have split there resources to work on both SP and MP.

Now give me a Co-Op option and me and some of my friends would be totally down for that in the make sandbox. So to say some one didn't want or asked for something just cause you don't want something doens't mean there wasn't some one that wanted it. Maybe one of the devs wanted that one feature in there, it's his game after all.......
 
I think a way to summarize my above post about "Kyle" is that someone high up in the dev process decided to make BL into something like an MMO, because MMO's make tons of money - not realizing how that doesn't work in a SP/MP mass combat RPG.

Most of the failures of this game boil down to that: MMO grind + MMO "balancing" + MMO story + MMO AI.

The "balancing" is the most annoying. Spears and shields and swords and polearms should not be "balanced" because they aren't "balanced" IRL. Every medieval weapon had strengths and drawbacks and reasons for being deployed.
We where just talking about this in a discord for another game when some one asked if the new game will have MMO cause MMO's are the only thing that sales now a days. NO they aren't to many games have stop making RPG and such of good quality cause they are just trying to jump in on the quick cash MMO or Survival style games. That Dev Company has a lot of the same issues as TW, actually it's prob 100 times worse, but they learned from making a MMO like game that you can't make every one happy and there next game in that line of game style is going to be SP only with maybe some MP added later but it will be you joining a friends world (co-op) and not a true MMO.
 

bonerstorm

Veteran
You also need to understand that the forums of games is prob only visited by less than 10% of the actual player base, so your not speaking for every one and they don't have to listen to the minority few. It is their game after all, but does it help to listen to feed back? Oh hell yah as long as it's in reason and I have seen them add things to patches that was modded in or mention as better improvements over the game. It seems todays biggest ***** with gamers is how long it takes to make any improvements from a small dev team compared to say a AAA studio that has hundreds of employees and even they take forever to do updates.
I stopped reading everything you said after this.

You have to be trolling with this bull****.

The idea that the 90% of Bannerlord players aren't complaining in the forums because they're HAPPY with the game is pure fantasy. If you look at the steam usage stats, they're not even PLAYING the game. To the extent that they're upvoting and white-knighting, it's because most of them have no clue that there are no actual plans to implement any of the features they want.

Nowhere else but the TaleWorlds forums have I ever seen people arguing that the forums being in a constant state of rage at devs for failing to communicate is actually an indication that the broader fanbase is happy.

And give me a break about this "small team" crap. TW is officially a medium-sized company now. This is not some mom-and-pop dev studio operating out of a garage.
 
I stopped reading everything you said after this.

You have to be trolling with this bull****.

The idea that the 90% of Bannerlord players aren't complaining in the forums because they're HAPPY with the game is pure fantasy. If you look at the steam usage stats, they're not even PLAYING the game.

A tiny fraction of the people playing the game use the forums. I'm just here to enjoy watching people cry and occasiobally check for patch notes.

Also, perhaps people have stopped playing because they are waiting for a few patches. I haven't played since 1.5.7 and will likely return in 2-3 months.

Either way, have fun doing whatever it is you do.
 

WhyAmIHere

You also need to understand that the forums of games is prob only visited by less than 10% of the actual player base, so your not speaking for every one and they don't have to listen to the minority few. It is their game after all, but does it help to listen to feed back? Oh hell yah as long as it's in reason and I have seen them add things to patches that was modded in or mention as better improvements over the game. It seems todays biggest ***** with gamers is how long it takes to make any improvements from a small dev team compared to say a AAA studio that has hundreds of employees and even they take forever to do updates.
oh i see the problem

you still think taleworlds is an indie company run out of a basement.

this is not the case. Taleworlds has over 100 employees. They are solidly a AA game company. We are allowed to have concrete expectations of a AA company after 9 years of work.
 

Sigaretovic

Sergeant at Arms
You also need to understand that the forums of games is prob only visited by less than 10% of the actual player base, so your not speaking for every one and they don't have to listen to the minority few.
Interesting. So let me try to understand what you are saying :

-The vast (i mean vast) majority is loving the game, but not playing it and give no feedback because they love it, and taleworlds should listen to this signal (what signal is the fact that they aren't playing?)

-The minority (the remaining playerbase) which is playing the game and leaving feedback should be ignored according to you.

Can you share some of your drugs with me?
 
The vast (i mean vast) majority is loving the game
zoe9s.png
 
Top Bottom