Man, I agree with so many of the points you've made, and I've said many of them myself but,
I criticize TW on so many things but them being unambitious is not one of them. The truth is, while the leadership is probably suboptimal and the game is likely mismanaged, in the end, it is expensive, time consuming and overall hard to make a game. Calling this game "bad" I understand, but calling it "unambitious" is probably the most braindead take I've seen in this forum, and believe me, that is an achievement.
Seriously? This game is unambitious of all things? Of course, it's only one of the hundreds, if not thousands of games on the market where you can command 1000 troops simultaneously on the battlefield and on siege maps that you also take part in, with all towns and a good chunk of castles having unique scenes, all the overworld map locations (probably around 50-60% now) having unique battlefield maps that corresponds to your location and position on the overworld, as well as being a medieval sim sandbox game with its own economy and lifecycle, taking place on a map roughly the size of Europe and north Africa combined, where you can build your character and have a family. Such a common thing to find in games right now.Then again, the whole game is just unambitious to the point of being a pile of wasted potential, and what's there doesn't even work that well.
Meh.
I criticize TW on so many things but them being unambitious is not one of them. The truth is, while the leadership is probably suboptimal and the game is likely mismanaged, in the end, it is expensive, time consuming and overall hard to make a game. Calling this game "bad" I understand, but calling it "unambitious" is probably the most braindead take I've seen in this forum, and believe me, that is an achievement.