Mount & Blade 2: Bannerlord Video Review by IGN

[Ser Jon]

If someone can see all of the problems, and they know the game isn't great, but they still claim all of those things do not make it a "bad" game, what in the world is ever going to convince that person that said game is bad? The car's salesman probably gets them good all of the time. "Yo, this car ain't got breaks and it's tires are old as dirt, but it's got a new oil change and headlights. Enjoy!"

 

[five bucks]

It is clear the reviewer in one of the linked articles didn't actually play the release version of BL because they are still complaining about broken perks...

"Perks from leveling up, constructing buildings, or enacting kingdom laws sometimes just… have no effect at all" is the statement you're referring to and it is technically correct for the most part.

Multiple kingdom laws have no effect, or no positive effect (see Strat's channel).

A handful of player perks don't work unless these have been fixed since 1.7 (which I have not seen in the patch notes). https://www.bannerlordperks.com/perk;skill=charm;perk=tribute

In terms of what the reviewer probably actually means, they're right too. Many perks' or buldings' or kingdom laws' effect on gameplay is so small it feels almost nonexistent.

 

[Apocal]

"Perks from leveling up, constructing buildings, or enacting kingdom laws sometimes just… have no effect at all" is the statement you're referring to and it is technically correct for the most part.

Multiple kingdom laws have no effect, or no positive effect (see Strat's channel).

A handful of player perks don't work unless these have been fixed since 1.7 (which I have not seen in the patch notes). https://www.bannerlordperks.com/perk;skill=charm;perk=tribute

Color me skeptical that the reviewer actually went through the grind to Charm 175 then chose Tribute instead of Good-Natured (one of the no-brainer perk choices) during the few hours they played Bannerlord post-release or actually sat there and watched the impact of kingdom decisions for themselves.

In terms of what the reviewer probably actually means, they're right too. Many perks' or buldings' or kingdom laws' effect on gameplay is so small it feels almost nonexistent.

That could be what they mean, but in that case they worded themselves badly enough that most would think it would get fixed by post-release bug-fixes (very likely) and not actual balance adjustments to give meaningful bonuses (very unlikely).

 

[vito397]

"Perks from leveling up, constructing buildings, or enacting kingdom laws sometimes just… have no effect at all" is the statement you're referring to and it is technically correct for the most part.

Multiple kingdom laws have no effect, or no positive effect (see Strat's channel).

A handful of player perks don't work unless these have been fixed since 1.7 (which I have not seen in the patch notes). https://www.bannerlordperks.com/perk;skill=charm;perk=tribute

In terms of what the reviewer probably actually means, they're right too. Many perks' or buldings' or kingdom laws' effect on gameplay is so small it feels almost nonexistent.

That is why im baffled by this game. The kingdom laws in the game files, if i recall correctly, regulated succession, womens participation etc. Now that would be a game changing mechanic

 

[babelfisch]

This is at the crux of the major disagreement. You consider it a "good game" regardless of its flaws- that is your base judgement of the game and its hard for you to comprehend that other just dont. Trust me, im no hater (used to be called a TW White Knighter around here) - but there is zero "hook" for me in this game. The fighting is pretty great but feels like its without point as the world has no pulse. Theres nothing worth fighting for but to try and paint a map. No sense of ownership or player leaving a mark on the world no sense of real directional pull no sense of fighting for some kind of glorious ending. Sorry but that makes it a dud as far as im concered. If I just wanna fight medieval il throw on my quest 2 and play VR M&B in Tales of Glory. Had 100 x the WOW factor of something new and next level even with its playstation 2 graphics -its all made by 1 guy. thats a game I can support as he put real love into that cookin.

So to me, its a bad game because as much as I try and find a reason to give it another chance -its just not there. As far as the Steam argument,look I post plenty on Steam as Im sure so do many of the detractors here. Are there some really well thought out well written reviews for this and all games there? Absolutely but they are without question the exception not the rule. The majority imo are more like "Gud Game. Get gud. Kill wit sword" -style critics

If you put it like that I absolutely respect your opinion. I am in no position to tell you what you need to like or dislike. As I already said, I actually do agree with lots of the criticism you and others post and if I wouldn't be so lazy I would probably do the same.
As long as everyone agrees that our opinions are subjective it's not a problem. But if someone tells me that my opinion is worth less because I would be a newcomer (which isn't true) or that I am dishonest when I like the game or that people give it a positive review because they are idiots I am going to argue about it.

 

[danEN]

6/10 is a fair score I reckon.
Hopefully, devs (especially their managers) take this into account.

narrator is a common forums whiner