Tell me about it. If you have worked in customer service, you will be amazed at how many people are fine to the most atrocious corporate actions.
-
If you are reporting a bug, please head over to our Technical Support section for Bannerlord.
Question about this 8 years of Development thing
- Thread starter Savagecanadian43
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
Don't explain something by cynicism if it can be explained by ineptness.
I believe they actually did want to make a great game, but some bad luck and ineptness at all levels prevented that.
The only business savvy decision they made was when they were forced by fans into EA, they took a calculated risk and charged a full price to capitalize on the hype frenzy at the time. This may seem unfair price for the state of the game, but it's perfectly sensible business decision.
I believe they are still trying to deliver a game worth the full price most of you paid then, but they can only do so much with a diminished and demoralized team.
Paradox usually delivers a core game that is interesting, but pretty lacking and barebone, and manages to bloat it into something completely unrecognizable which ends up looking like an haphazard weird clutter of unrelated features.But we don´t get neither as it seems. Paradox usually delivers a good core game and expands it with DLC while TW....I don´t want to get banned
Also, their games are a mess of bugs of which only half gets patched, in a patch that also adds a new batch of bugs and includes lots of "features" one not necessarily want.
Having a Paradox game is just jumping for a set of bugs to a different set of bugs while the game becomes a mess. I loved their early games, but now I've simply stopped buying any new, precisely because they felt like the EA of Bannerlord, but spread over the actual shelf life of the game.
That's the thing, they, in most cases and scenarios, should *not* be moving independently, and a lot of the issues with the AI stem from the fact that they can.
This means that the "impressive" part of it is actually part of the very problem with it.
In my opinion, you described a Paradox game; they have some interesting mechanics and concepts but the games lack depth. I also take issue with your claim that, by disliking Paradox's development strategy, I am some sort of idiot. My problem with Paradox is that their games aren't deep enough. CK3 was fine, but you'd have to be delusional to call it a "deep" game. Its most intricate features—like the way characters' motivations and goals are modeled—remind me of Bannerlord's economy system. Sure, the system is complex, but I can't do a whole lot with it.
In any case, it's fine to enjoy a Pdx game and to say it's more cerebral than Call of Duty (what an accomplishment). However, you can't pretend that they are making masterpieces. Their model is to create the skeleton of a masterpiece, then develop it with DLC. The problem is that this is like a long EA, where features are added, removed, and awkwardly slotted in. There is an ugly conflict between the community, the developer, and financial incentives. Look at Stellaris: that game gets reworked every 6 months. Monetizing a game while it's in development is a sound business move, but it does not lead to good games. Paradox has proven that with EU4, Stellaris, Imperator: Rome, and HOI4. Those are all games with a sound concept and plenty of potential, but they're also a mix of bloated and barebones.
Tell me deeper games in the same genre/settings than:
CK
Stellaris
EU
HoI
I would like to play them. I´m not saying that Paradox games are perfect, but the best you can get in this genre when it comes down to depth/options.
Sure you can say that those games don´t have depth but in all of those games you have a lot of options how to approach them. No playthrough is the same. It makes a huge different if you start as Germany or Poland or whatever country in HoI. Same goes for most Paradox games.
What options does Bannerlord offer us? A simple faction bonus, and some of them are clearly better than others. Also they don´t make any difference at all overall. I can start as an Empire dude and can still have an army of Khuzait OP (horse archer) troops or whatever. It just has no impact.
I know those "board" kind of wargames, but those are a different genre in my opinion. And most of them focus on WW1/WW2. They are also very niche.
I also don´t expect to have Bannerlord the same "depth/options" as Paradox games, but at least more options than a CoD Medieval Warfare Sandbox game. You can´t control **** in Bannerlord but your own army. Sure as a King you can veto with your influence, but it´s like:
- Your faction is at war with 2 other factions and suggest to start another war, even if you´re on the losing side right now
- You veto with your influence
- A few ingame days later they suggest again to start another war
- You veto with your influence
- A few ingame days later they suggest again to start another war
- You have no influence left
- WAR!
You can beat the same lord over and over again who tries to raid your village/whatever, it gives you a small time frame after you defeated his army but he´ll back soon doing the same stuff over and over again. And it´s not just one lord. You can´t even say your friendly armies stuff like "defend/patrol" area X. They do whatever they like and most of their decisions doesn´t make even sense...
Bannerlord is just a random game where you have no control about anything but your own army. No matter what you do.
You can marry the daughter of Lord X, will Lord X give a **** about it? Nope, he´ll still try to raid your villages over and over again...
If you know what I mean...
Last edited:
How about you tell me a deeper game than Bannerlord in the same genre/setting. Does that make Bannerlord deep? The fact that PDX dominates the market for map painters does not negate the fact that their games are shallow. I would also disagree that the difference in options are that meaningful. I've played HOI4 and my Spain playthrough played roughly the same as my Yugoslavia playthrough played roughly the same as my France playthrough. The mechanics in Pdx titles are quite rigid. For example, the difference between a Muslim Caliphate and a Christian Kingdom are mostly aesthetic in CK3. They are fun games, but a studio with a less cynical business model could make a far better title. The problem is that neither Taleworlds nor PDX have heart.
M&B Warband + Mods.
A M&B Warband redone with the Bannerlord engine would be a deeper and better game.
But that´s the problem, Bannerlord is unique in it´s genre. If you want to play a game like this you have no other choice. Otherwise nobody would care about this game.
Play CK as an islamic state or catholic and tell me both playthroughs were even close to be the same....doesn´t even matter if you play CK2 or CK3.
You don´t have the same options in both playthroughs. The AI won´t do the same stuff in both playthrougs.
Now tell me the difference in Bannerlord if you start as Empire or Khuzait? Will the AI behave different? Will it make any difference at all....
Marry a Sturgian lady as Empire or marry a Khuzait lady as Empire? Will it make a difference?
Does the Bannerlord AI (NPCs) care if you´re married to a Sturgian lady or Empire lady? Does the Bannerlord AI cares about that you´ve crushed like their whole kingdom in open field battles when at war or will they still just try to raid some random villiages as if they do as they can crush you?
I also don´t even believe you that you´ve played a lot of the Paradox games. There is stuff you simply can´t do if you have religion X or whatever. It´s not possible within the game mechanics. There are a lot of different options if your kingdom is a feudal state or barbaric state. So stop please....
I also prefer the Paradox business model:
Release a good core game with working mechanics but bugs and balance issues. Improve it with DLCs and also support mods. Deliver the game you´ve shown in trailers.
Instead of TWs model:
Let your customers pay to test your unfinished game and have mods add the stuff that the community really wants. Release broken (game breaking bugs) updates over and over again. Don´t even care about any balance.
Show stuff in trailers that will never be in the game. Have placeholders in the game that seem to look good but don´t work. Just remove them later.
Both games cost the same!
Bannerlord isn´t a 10-20€ small indie game....it´s a full price paid broken beta with false promises if you´ve seen those trailers years ago with stuff that will never be in the game and bought it day one! They demand full price for this mess! If they would be honest to us (their Steam description still claimes this game will be released within one 1 year right now!) and the price would be 10-20€ I wouldn´t complain at all! Do you think this game is closed to be finished as they claim TODAY according to THEIR steam description.
Imagine you don´t know TW or Warband. Read their Steam description TODAY! You would expect this game closed to be finished ("around 1 year", release was 30.03.2020). Or you think that around 1 year means like at least 1 year from now on.
That´s what TW is! Paradox never did something like this. That´s Electronic Arts style! "Those aren´t lootboxes, those are surprise mechanics!".
"We said around 1 year, this could also mean like 2-3 years and it´s EA, that´s why´ve removed stuff we hyped you about! It was just a tech demo and scripted, we never said you can really do this stuff!"
Last edited:
I´m not sure how you define "around a year", for me it means like something betweed 0,5 - 1,5 years. We are at 1 year. This game won´t be even close to be finished in the next 6 months.
You might very well have a point, we shouldn't forget that both Warband and its DLC were very... rough around the edges? They had relatively simple AI, they weren't particularly ambitious and still managed to be rather clunky. They were terribly enjoyable and charming though.
To be entirely honest I'd rather think they didn't swell up their ranks with complete newbies and talentless hacks, and/or that they weren't directionless like a herd of sheep without a couple of dogs around. Don't misunderstand me, I don't pretend to know what's going on at Taleworlds, they might really be trying their best for all I know and it would make sense that they aren't communicating much or delivering much since they're above their... paygrade with this project. Economically speaking they accepted the added revenue thanks to the hype and thus they should shoulder the responsibility of delivering something good.
D0c1
Knight at Arms
you're praising a business model of making a buggy full release then fixing it. sometimes even with DLCs. while simultaneously criticising a company that is doing the same except this time, with an early access tag. and the company have stated that if you'd like a full product, wait for full release.
you buying them at the same price doesn't negate the fact that bannerlord had a 20% discount.
stop blaming other people for your failure to read and comprehend the early access description.
The description was and is just a blatant lie.
Dreed89
Squire
The sad thing is that I am afraid that stuff like these will never be in the game.
TW has not shown or even talked about plans to fix these.
All we have will be a dummy game with some more features to be implemented here and there.
D0c1
Knight at Arms
i meant the steam one. but please do point out the lies in the taleworlds description so we can call taleworlds out on them.
I don't think this is a fair comparision. Bannerlord is one of a kind. Althuogh there are other grand strategy games and devs, as of this moment, Paradox is the market leader of this genre. More importantly, I believe the reason they achieve this market leading status is that they decided to streamline their games: instead of increasing depth, they went for width. (Same could be said with CA and Total War series)
The best Paradox game I have ever played is Victoria 2. VIC2 is not driven by mana system or events, it is driven by a built-in logic that, to a large extent, conforms with the real 19th century historical logic that encompasses economic, social, and political dynamism on a historical materialism foundation.
No paradox games made afterwards had ever reached the depth of VIC2, and I don't blame them. Paradox is a business, to maximize its profit, it will try to broaden its audience, and that means 1. streamlining, make something easy to understand to underline the game logic like mana system; 2. use DLCs to add more separately functioning systems that don't really work with each other. Eventually, instead of a stew (each ingredients contribute to the flavour in a dynamic way), you have a bento box in which every small dish is in its own compartment and the flavour is largely determined by the main dish.
