Mount & Blade 2: Bannerlord Review by RPS

Users who are viewing this thread

RobustTurd

Sergeant at Arms
Awful review. Plenty of surprises in the game as it's simulated. And using angsty complaints of other people as reason of your own review just makes it carbage bin review.
 
The none combat side of the games is not good the npc's have no personality. A good npc a bad npc both the same. No Assassins no feast no duels no interaction from wanderers. The relationship stat isn't working. I can't play the game in its current state without mods and if we did have mods it would be in my hidden folder with the other games i don't play. my steam review is a 6/10 and you will get your money's worth in play time only to find the game shallow. The game as just updated and killed my mod list and that's it i am going to waiting until the mods catch up rather than start a new playthrough. I do hope TW puts out a road map or an idea of upcoming dlc and i hope it's to fix and enhance the none combat side of the game.
 
Awful review. Plenty of surprises in the game as it's simulated. And using angsty complaints of other people as reason of your own review just makes it carbage bin review.
I guess you can call it a surprise when AI decisions are based on random chance, instead of the player being able to understand its reasoning. It's not the kind of surprise I'm looking for in an entertaining game though.
 
Awful review. Plenty of surprises in the game as it's simulated. And using angsty complaints of other people as reason of your own review just makes it carbage bin review.

A simulation is still a closed deterministic system, and it can have such low entropy that the range of possibilities is extremely small. The only "surprises" are which faction ends up painting the map after 100 years. Nobody posts screenshots of the AI doing anything interesting (that aren't bugs), so nobody else finds it surprising either.
 
A simulation is still a closed deterministic system, and it can have such low entropy that the range of possibilities is extremely small. The only "surprises" are which faction ends up painting the map after 100 years. Nobody posts screenshots of the AI doing anything interesting (that aren't bugs), so nobody else finds it surprising either.
Pretty much every playthrough I've had, has been different, a surprise. I wouldn't be surprised if this noob reviewer gave like Metro Exodus, or some other scripted **** a glowing reviews. Not complaining how every playthrough it actually has exactly same things happening.
 
Pretty much every playthrough I've had, has been different, a surprise. I wouldn't be surprised if this noob reviewer gave like Metro Exodus, or some other scripted **** a glowing reviews. Not complaining how every playthrough it actually has exactly same things happening.
I think the review was pretty honest in its assessment, the battles/combat is great (no other game close to this format), but all the rest is just barely dressing up a 'world' or RP or the strategy elements are sorely lacking any meaningful game design behind it.
They do their hardest to make the 'balance' so it's a very rare possibility though (absent player input) for surprises, especially considering the intended 'game design' was probably a single playthrough across dynastic generations.
Things like the only cause/impetus for war is that tribute calculation. The lack of any type of cultural migration factor; ie. Amprela is permanently Empire, despite being owned by Khuzait for 50+years. Town loyalty 'balance' scaling decays (all for that 'rebel' feature to reset said town back to the original 'map'). No behavior/character change if an emperor dies and new lord takes over (all AI/lords exactly the same 'traits'). Policies that essentially are just perks and more than half of them only benefit the king or don't actually impact the kingdom's outcome really.
 
Too bad none of the critics will matter when Average Joe plays for a few hours, reviews it up positively and then never plays again, or can stomach all the bad just for the few good things. This Bannerlord is tragically the one we're stuck with forever.
 
Of course it doesn't matter if you enjoy the game, online reviews have zero value anyway. Too bad warband fanboys will still be playing warband when Bannerlord 3 comes, just because it wont have all of their preferred random features done exactly the same.
 
There's a lot more that could be said but this review is very accurate to my experience in single player. Fun battles with bad AI, almost everything else is badly executed and/or horrifically boring. The leveling system is probably the worst thing in the entire game for me. As someone with hundreds of hours in Warband unmodded aside from Diplomacy, Bannerlord singleplayer bores me to tears.
 
The Game needs random events like Assassins or murders and executions. I my last game i had the True relations mod and A.I executions mod and Munchog became a beast you wouldn't want to be on his bad side. He executed more than anyone else and his traits matched his temper. Also, i have the duelling mod where some lords would accept a duel instead of a battle with conditions like if i win i can go in peace if i lose i surrender. These mods had made a massive difference to the game. TW should be adding this into the game themselves, it should have been in there on release. I hope they haven't finished adding to the game.
 
Back
Top Bottom