-
If you are reporting a bug, please head over to our Technical Support section for Bannerlord.
Patch Notes v1.2.10-1.2.11
- Thread starter Piconi
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
I was referencing series/ips that were 'good' (pre-butchered) during that 'pre-internet only' time, as in when discs/cassettes/CDs/etc were the main and only accessible option.
I'm not talking about the latest iterations of each of those games or others, and as you agree too, the new ones are easier to somewhat 'objectively' say as being bad (ie Andromeda, AoE3+, ACs, post-TW:Rome, etc...).
But, I have an easier time accepting the failure of those examples than BL. Simply because the game is not yet done developing; heck, it's latest updates are not even accessible yet to all the platforms they've sold it to; 2 years ago.
Yes, I was not implying that all games prior to "X" year were good as a blanket vs games post "X" year. Games are good, or bad, subjective.
But I'm pretty sure I'm not expecting/getting some patch to Kenshi, Andromeda, CP77, AOE4, FF16, BG3, KC
, or any other non-GAAS, non-MMO, or non-EA game that was released and sold 2+ years ago.That's the difference, and the main issue; regardless whether said game is good or bad.
Yes, if you want to strike the black&white, any game that gets a patch after release is not complete, by definition. And sure, the 'complete' state changes, even if I were to get a patch to Diablo 2 today; it was complete prior, until it wasn't because of said patch, then it's back to being complete thereafter.
If Kenshi gets a patch that has 3 line items of bug fixes, game is now complete again, until otherwise.
We have a pending 1.3 patch with BL; game is not complete, and even TW knows it's not complete as they are still 'working' on it. Whatever this 1.3 patch is (as we know ****-all), it's holding up the game from being complete.
This isn't a live-GAAS model. If they want that to wipe away that angle of criticism, maybe they should change it in their descriptor for the game, much like they did already a couple times.
@Piconi @Dejan
Two questions:
1) Any plans to fix native light baking for some city scenes like Danustica or Car Ban? The cities are gorgeous, but some of them have no shadows at all.
2) On the modding side, mobileParty.StationaryStartTime doesn't seem to work properly. I've tested the scout perk Vantage Point (which uses the same property) in a clean fresh start and the result is the same. Condition mobileParty.StationaryStartTime.ElapsedHoursUntilNow seems to be bugged.
Two questions:
1) Any plans to fix native light baking for some city scenes like Danustica or Car Ban? The cities are gorgeous, but some of them have no shadows at all.
2) On the modding side, mobileParty.StationaryStartTime doesn't seem to work properly. I've tested the scout perk Vantage Point (which uses the same property) in a clean fresh start and the result is the same. Condition mobileParty.StationaryStartTime.ElapsedHoursUntilNow seems to be bugged.
I'm gonna stop you right there. Deciding to leave early access was an entirely arbitrary label. It had nothing to do with the state of the game or how complete it was. The game barely changed in the transition from early access to "full release". If I slap a label on a car saying "finished" when its still missing a wheel, I shouldn't be praised for continuing to work on it after its "done"
The only reason they did a full release is because the game needed to go to consoles. There is no significant changes in gameplay or features since from before and after the arbitary "early access" label. Continuing to work on the game afterwards isn't praiseworthy, its the bare minimum of whats to be expected.
And giving them more money for this horrible treatment? Will I at least get an answer when things dont work? Does TW has any respect for their players? This is straight up insulting man.
Gadheras
Squire
Bad example, as a car with 3 wheels isn't useable. You could fine play the game at release. It had bugs and issues, but you could fine complete a run on the campaign. As with most open world games of this nature it suffers late game, it all become about paint the map. Just as with any Total War game I got or similar games. If you define a game how complete it is based on what things you want to see in it or not, then no game out there would really be complete.
Gadheras
Squire
I was referencing series/ips that were 'good' (pre-butchered) during that 'pre-internet only' time, as in when discs/cassettes/CDs/etc were the main and only accessible option.
I'm not talking about the latest iterations of each of those games or others, and as you agree too, the new ones are easier to somewhat 'objectively' say as being bad (ie Andromeda, AoE3+, ACs, post-TW:Rome, etc...).
But, I have an easier time accepting the failure of those examples than BL. Simply because the game is not yet done developing; heck, it's latest updates are not even accessible yet to all the platforms they've sold it to; 2 years ago.
Yes, I was not implying that all games prior to "X" year were good as a blanket vs games post "X" year. Games are good, or bad, subjective.
But I'm pretty sure I'm not expecting/getting some patch to Kenshi, Andromeda, CP77, AOE4, FF16, BG3, KC
That's the difference, and the main issue; regardless whether said game is good or bad.
Yes, if you want to strike the black&white, any game that gets a patch after release is not complete, by definition. And sure, the 'complete' state changes, even if I were to get a patch to Diablo 2 today; it was complete prior, until it wasn't because of said patch, then it's back to being complete thereafter.
If Kenshi gets a patch that has 3 line items of bug fixes, game is now complete again, until otherwise.
We have a pending 1.3 patch with BL; game is not complete, and even TW knows it's not complete as they are still 'working' on it. Whatever this 1.3 patch is (as we know ****-all), it's holding up the game from being complete.
This isn't a live-GAAS model. If they want that to wipe away that angle of criticism, maybe they should change it in their descriptor for the game, much like they did already a couple times.
I find it funny when you mention Kenshi, as it had a MAJOR update February 6 and show another 5 updates/hotfixes between experimental and main after that. (yes, I play Kenshi a bit as well).
Would Bannerlord been more complete if they said they where working on a dlc, rather than a 1.3.x? How about Paradox games, such as Stellaris, CK series etc. Are they incomplete at all times? They keep release dlc's for those games, and with every release of the dlc's your main game get updated with features from the dlc's even you want them or not.
VVL99
Knight
You better ask TW, you have entered into an offer agreement with them and they are obliged to give you an answer.
It is very important what is written in your license agreement, there is a chance that no one owes you anything, it even happens that the seller may revoke the license and you will not be able to officially use this game.
Last edited:
Then replace 'missing wheel' with 'no ac, radio that only plays am stations, a bluetooth system that never works, seats with no coverings, and no cupholders'. Whats everyone complaining about? You can drive the drive the car, don't you know cars didn't always have things like radios and ac as standard. You guys are just ungratful and have ridiculous standards. Be happy you got a car at all.
As somone else said, the Day Before was playable at launch. So nobody should have complained about it, right? Just a bunch of entitled manbabies. The game was "complete"
Lets say I tell you I'm opening up an amusement park. We'll call it... Calradialand. I show you a map of the grounds, tell you that it will have a hot dog stand, a tilt-a-whirl, a ferris wheel, a full experience with classic amusment park stuff!
We'll put aside that for some reason it takes me the better part of a decade to get it completed. But when it does finally open up you and many others excitedly buy tickets. When you get there you see that the grounds are almost entirely empty save for a ferris wheel, a hot dog stand, and a titl-a-whirl.
"Where's the rest of it?" You ask.
"What rest?" I say. "That's everything I told you was going to be here. its not my fault you expected there to be more."
You're frustrated, but you already bought your ticket so you decide to go for a ride on the tilt-a-whirl. So you get in and you sit down and wait. And wait. And wait. And nothings happening. Angry, you ask me what gives.
"What do you mean?" I say. "You're on the tilt-a-whirl."
"When does the ride start?"
"It doesn't have any power." I tell you. "I said there'd be a tilt-a-whirl, i never said it would be on. That's your fault for having expectations beyond what I told you."
On it goes. You go to the hot dog stand and there's no hot dogs. 'I never said it would serve food. I only said there would be a hot dog stand. You just got these big ideas in your head beyond what I promised' you go to the ferris wheel and there's nobody working it. 'When did I tell you there would be workers? I just said a ferris wheel would be here. You read more into it than what I said that's on you.'
By now all of my customers are angry. Many are wondering why it took me so long to make this place when its clearly unfinished. To address those issues, I take the flyer and cross out where it says 'a full experience' and hand it back to you. Safe in the knowledge that I've now amended what I said and nobody should be mad anymore. I have done nothing wrong, any frustration rests solely on the entitled customers whose money I took for having expectations for what an amusment park should have. If people still complain to me, I can simply tell them that not every amusment park needs to offer the same things, and if you aren't satisfied with Calradialand then you should go to six flags or cedar point instead.
By your arguments. I did nothing wrong with my amusment park, and my paying customers should be thanking me for the park existing at all. And besides, they spent all day there, and the amount of hours they spent at the park means they got their money's worth.
Last edited:
'Major' if you count all the FCS stuff. I understand needing to address mod-related things as that has its own host of bugs/issues typically reactionary to modders; I don't take issue with that nor count that as holding a game as incomplete.
Take out all the FCS stuff, and you'll see the content/context of those patches (localizations and minute bug fixes) over the span of time as comparison to whatever mystical 1.3 patch.
BL is far from complete, and every patch update shows how off the mark and more work they still need to address before it's even remotely close to the 'completeness' of something like Kenshi.
We have zero idea what 1.3.0 is, TW sure as hell doesn't want us to know. Is it big? Or is it bugfixes only like the patches? Requires resetting playthrough? What bugs/crashes will this patch bring back? Armour/weapon sets? New maps?
If TW said they are working on a DLC and that's what 1.1 / 1.2 / 1.3 are "supposed" to be, then they should've say so. They aren't as they are still developing BL; not BL:F&S, not BL:VC, etc...They aren't even doing DLCs anymore, they've completely walked back from that commitment early on even before the game was released.
This pending patch is not a DLC, not in the sense most have an understanding of what that means/entails; free or otherwise. If they are still developing a game, it's incomplete.
If a site has construction/trades working on the house still, it's incomplete; regardless if you've moved in 2 years ago and regardless if the utilities all work. Many countries have rules that dissuade this for legal/safety/financial reasons, something the gaming industry is happy to avoid; and we all see the results of that in the last decade plus.
We're not dealing with just warranty calls (bugfixes) or maintenance calls (GAAS) here. Nor are we dealing with a Phase 2 addition (DLC/expansion). They are still working on Phase 1, the house. House isn't complete until the trades leave.
That's the difference, you're content to live in the house with trades coming in/out at random times to fix things, I don't. I'm at the point where they need to just ****-off, and I'll get my own trade (modders) to finish what they couldn't.
To add to this; in this analogy just because we brought in new builders (modders) to do the rest of the work does not mean the original workers can consider that they 'finished the project'. They left a mess that somone else has to finish for them.
Gadheras
Squire
Why would modders have to wait until the game doesn't get updates any longer, is complete, etc though? Could just as well lock yourself to a set version of the game and keep mod for that version. The whole concept of they need to be done with the game so modders can have their time seems far fetched to me. It's done with other games.
I didn't say that 1.2.x or 1.3.x should be a dlc or not. I said would you consider the game complete, if 1.3.x was a dlc? I find the whole game is not complete because it get updates baffling. I have games on steam that keep throw updates at me all the time. Games I completed long time ago, some several times. For me a incomplete game would be something similar to when BG3 was in early access and we had just the first chapter available.
VVL99
Knight
There is a law that provides for the content of the transaction and the obligations of the parties, but the game is creativity and what it should be depends only on the developer, if the game does not work or works with errors, then the developer must fulfill these obligations, but no more, if he does not have any plans and he did not include them in the contract.
Baulder's Gate 3 is still incomplete. The third act was rushed, and the scars from its cut content are clearly visible in game, and from what I've heard they don't intend to go back and finish that.
But even when it was only the first act. From a complexity, depth, and featute standpoint, Baulder's Gate 3 was a far more complete game then than Bannerlord is now. All of this is to say nothing of the levels and frequency of updates and support since each game's "full release."
I don't even like BG3 and this is blatantly obvious. Maybe once this game has gotten an equivalent of 2 more acts worth of content since "full release" we can revisit this comparison.
Last edited:
And the whole, "just play an older version for mods" only makes sense with how it currently is, you know, with fact BL isn't finished yet. People are fixed on old versions because certain mods they prioritize haven't updated or it would break compatibility; or, compatibility is broken regardless because one dependent mod decided to update and not deploy backwards compatibility.
You can see how unstable/uncertain this environment can be. Sure, and your answer would be "player/modders risk, not TW problem". Cool. Will TW keep those versions alive or remove them?
They need to be done so we get a complete game; modders can do with that what they will/want or stick to old versions from there as is their want.
If 1.3 was a DLC, then whatever version prior (ie thread 1.2.10) would be the most complete version of the game. No new development expected, no patch planned/intended (different from returning to fix a bug or two), no missing content, features are 'done', elements balanced, complete. Can you say BL is complete, while we have this 1.3 patch "cooking" for almost 6+months (untested as will be beta and a bugfest)? 1.3 is "cooking" and actively (if) being developed as they say. So, is the game complete, or not?
If 1.3 is just a list of bug/crash fixes, then sure, I'll give you that (but that's just 1.2.11 as versioning goes); TW does not offer any communication. Whatever last 'major' update would be the complete game (besides bugfixes) and subsequent 'major' patches would/should be designated DLCs/expansions or shift that completion date. But TW hasn't gone that route; they've actually walked back on that. Nor have they acknowledged the game is complete in development, they even announced prior to labelling the game 'official' they still have work to be done on the game; and keep linking us to that May 2022 'roadmap' as what's to come. Or are you supposing that everything we got since since 1.1.0 is bonus freebies?
BG3 as Act 1 only was incomplete, no doubt, they probably stated as such during the early access. Were there some major patches to BG3 to date as needed since their 'official' release too? Of course, and yes, that means the game wasn't complete too and was rushed out. Their last major update 1."6" (so to speak) back in Feb would be the 'complete' game to date. I have every intention of returning to that game for a last hurrah as well once they complete it; but at least, based on actual proof (communication and updates), they're pretty much there and satisfied with their planned results, within a year of their 'official' release too. They also had to put in consideration for story spoilers with how they release patches; something BL/TW doesn't need to contend with.
TW? We have zero clue what they consider to be a complete game, I guess 1.0 since it's 'official'; as that's the only information we got. Then what the hell are 1.1, and 1.2? DLCs? Free content? Bonus features? Have their PR 'team' come out and say so.
They're hiding because they know it's not done, release was pushed for financial reasons, and I'm sure there's staffing/skill degradation issues in the studio and we're stuck with 1.3 simmering in a pot for too long it's become rotten.
@Duh_TaleWorlds
I started playing again after a veeery long break and noticed that my other clan party totally ignores bandit parties although having the speed advantage and enough troops to confront them. Every time my wife sees some looters, she follows them for 1/10th of a second and then turns away like "oh you are looters, you are our friends lol".. It is absolutely impossible to level up companions tactics because of this.
There are also many other unfixed bugs and problems that got reported as long ago as 1.0.1, but this one is probably the most annoying.
I started playing again after a veeery long break and noticed that my other clan party totally ignores bandit parties although having the speed advantage and enough troops to confront them. Every time my wife sees some looters, she follows them for 1/10th of a second and then turns away like "oh you are looters, you are our friends lol".. It is absolutely impossible to level up companions tactics because of this.
There are also many other unfixed bugs and problems that got reported as long ago as 1.0.1, but this one is probably the most annoying.
Gadheras
Squire
I see whatever we got since release version is what they said they would do, I don't see it as freebies. Whatever they come up with outside of that, would be extra. When I buy a game on steam (wherever), I buy the game as is. if it's early access or not doesn't matter. I don't buy the game for what it can be in 2-3 whatever years into the future. Like when I got into 7days to die some 10 years ago I didn't expect it to be what it is today.
What they said they would do and what people want them to do is another thing though. The closest thing to a roadmap would be the post release section of their release plans October 2022, which is quite a while ago. I'm sure people would love a bullet point roadmap, but from a devs perspective that could just as well be a roadmap to kick themselves in the groin. A bit like you promise your wife to do something and fail to deliver on it in time (or at all), and then you have it going...
Sure, you buy a game valued on what it was at whatever time you purchased it. But that's just as subjective as my perspective (and a majority of others). Early access, fair; I've invested into that risk as some kickstart/gofundme. I bought it in the expectation that I get a completed game; absent 'major' or pending patches; and it seems like that is taking 2-3+ more years than when they slapped the 'official release' sticker onto whatever version it was 2 years ago.
I don't see this 1.1 / 1.2 / 1.3 as extra, particular when they stated as such 'there's more work to be done' when they sold the game. I'm still waiting for that work to be done; and not even sure there will be, given they have nothing to share.
We don't need a roadmap (ie calendar chore list), we need communication. What is going on with 1.3? What is going on with this current 1.2.10 not being accessible to a bunch of player/platforms? Is this patch going to be addressing many issues? Will there be more after or will they move on developing something else and just tackle bugs? Are they complete with their post-release roadmap development of the game?
judgementt
Recruit
taleworlf pls respond to us when the update is coming to epic ??!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
