RIP Warband on consoles

[Gundabad]

If you want decent competitive MP I wouldn't really be looking at the console version at all. The controller just isn't suited to it, and servers won't go above 64. Furthermore the real meat of Warband's multiplayer (Napoleonic Wars, PW, cRPG/Mercs etc) are not going to make it on console. Even the hardware of the consoles themselves aren't suited to big Warband battles, due to their crappy CPUs. For this reason and many others I'm also doubtful Bannerlord will ever make it to console.

I wouldn't have had your hopes too high in the first place, OP.  You are completely right to believe the multiplayer on console Warband is utter crap, but what do you expect the devs to do? If you believe the port is a cash grab (which it probably is) it's not like you should really expect them to do much. I mean in its current state the multiplayer is completely broken, the menus are completely glitched and never work, and the servers themselves are awful and have like a 200ms+ delay (even though they report like 30ping). I think that should tell you something about how high of a priority the console port is to Taleworlds.

My advice is to go play the far superior PC version.

WOW! That's some great advice there! I didn't even know you could play Warband on the PC.

 

[Cyndro]

It appears the children inhabiting this ant mound of a board feel inclined to defend a mediocre port of a computer game because it's on their precious console. Whatever, I won't degenerate to this pointless tribalism, or become triggered at the mere mention of a mysterious "PC". I'm probably the only person bringing any life to this dead board outside of the monthly post complaining about the lack of patches. Ironic considering the topic of this thread. I think I'll just say good riddance and let the board die.

have a clue about the HUGE amount of lag in the 200ms+ range.

Yes, and that is precisely the amount of huge lag present on the console Warband servers. It appears you don't have a clue what you're talking about. A game can easily report a ping of """"30ms"""" but still suffer from large amounts of packet loss. Conversely the server itself could also have a very low tickrate. Maybe you don't notice it because you don't know any better. Or perhaps the European servers are different from the North American servers. In fact, that is a very probable possibility.

WOW! That's some great advice there! I didn't even know you could play Warband on the PC.

autism

 

[InvalidSloth]

It appears the children inhabiting this ant mound of a board feel inclined to defend a mediocre port of a computer game because it's on their precious console. Whatever, I won't degenerate to this pointless tribalism, or become triggered at the mere mention of a mysterious "PC". I'm probably the only person bringing any life to this dead board outside of the monthly post complaining about the lack of patches. Ironic considering the topic of this thread. I think I'll just say good riddance and let the board die.

have a clue about the HUGE amount of lag in the 200ms+ range.

Yes, and that is precisely the amount of lag present on console Warband servers. It appears you don't have a clue what you're talking about. A game can easily report a ping of """"30ms"""" but still suffer from large amounts of packet loss. Conversely the server itself could also have a very low tickrate. Maybe you don't notice it because you don't know any better. Or perhaps the European servers are different from the North American ones. In fact, that is a very probable possibility.

WOW! That's some great advice there! I didn't even know you could play Warband on the PC.

autism

I don't know what triggers me the most. The fact that you use complex vocabulary as a way to seem intelligent when forming your arguments, regardless if they are valid or not you still come across as a ****, and then the fact that when you actually go to insult someone you let the mask slip and reveal your ignorant 12 year old self by calling them out on a disability which they likey don't have. Or maybe you are quite smart, just immature. Believe it or not some people in here have no choice but to play the console version. I myself was quite content playing ACOK until my pc broke. Now this version is all I have. It is demoralising when I come in here and all I see are these posts, and the moderators are complete ignoring it. Therefore, I believe perhaps this port was just a cash grab which is also very depressing. But I'll wait and see what happens.

 

[Alene]

It is demoralising when I come in here and all I see are these posts, and the moderators are complete ignoring it.

We can't read every thread in the forum. If you find someone breaking the rules, feel free to press the report button and we'll come to check it out.

 

[InvalidSloth]

Well okay then just made an account for this particular thread. Suppose I'll leave now, doubt I'm wanted anyway

 

[Darkenmal]

I'm sorry, but I guess the console community is much more misinformed than I thought. To be honest, your statement about Native Multiplayer is just completely wrong. Warband became such a success literally because of its multiplayer. The reason it is still played today on the PC is, once again, literally because of its multiplayer. Your opinion that it is dull, while you are entitled to that opinion, is shared by a very small minority, such as the two gentlemen who posted on this thread as well.

If you compare Steam stats to the multiplayer population of Warband, I don't think that's the case. I also don't think threads like this are particularly constructive in any case.

One issue is that Warband lacks matchmaking, which is a staple for most console games nowadays. I think it's hard to convince an audience to use a server list. The problem for us is that we want to keep each version equal and most of our resources are focused on developing Bannerlord. I don't think you have any foundation to describe Warband's console release as a cash grab. It was worked on for a long time, polished and is a full port of the game, which was working well at release. We are also continuing to work on it and release patches, to support those who purchased the game.

Oh god, please don't take out server lists and force us to use matchmaking. Just include more filters and make the server list more accessible. Console players don't know any better, but we do.

 

[carlos1879]

Actually I think a good chunk console players would love server lists and its not like we haven't seen them before (the battlefield series being the obvious example) having servers makes it easier to group up with your friends and it is a lot less random and prone to idiocy like matchmaking can be from time to time. Cant count how many times I have gone into a matchmaking lobby and it drops me into a game where everyone else is half way around the globe and playing is like watching a slideshow. I can think of atleast one game with match making that has a tendency to throw you and your group into a match and put people on opposing sides give you a message saying that at the start of the next match the teams will change so you will all be on the the same side then in the next match you still have people on opposite sides and the only difference is maybe a bit of juggling. Just joining a server is so much easier better at keeping everyone together and if anyone drops out easier to get them back in and while probably slower in most cases it feels quicker because you are looking not staring at a screen waiting for it to do it for you.

Now if the UI for them was a bit better it would obviously be much better only crashes I have had in my admittedly limited time in this game was when looking at the MP section.

 

[Madnes5]

If you compare Steam stats to the multiplayer population of Warband, I don't think that's the case. I also don't think threads like this are particularly constructive in any case.

隐藏

Warband is and has always been first and foremost a singleplayer game. Even at the height of MP's popularity there were likely equal or greater numbers of players in SP. Threads like this do indeed blow, since they amount to nothing more than whining about a lack of patches. You've been around long enough to know that patches are slow in coming from TW, Letholdus. I'm not saying that's a good thing, but it's not out of the ordinary here.

The thing about this game that people dont understand is that there was literally no game out there like it for single player.

And there was no game out there like it for multiplayer.

Everyone that made this game made it for the single player.
Multiplayer is what attracted the dedicated competitive players that stayed online.
Multiplayer is what makes people like orion post in bks threads, because they have someone to hate, because they enjoy a battle.
In single player you can reload and repeat until you win, there is no losing.
In multiplayer you lose, and theres no going back, all you can do is practice.
If you have matchmaking online for consoles, i dont know what to say..
You should let people choose where to play. Sometimes fighting a losing battle is the only way to win in the long run.
Anyways sorry for jabbing at marnid haha
and i dont think console warband can be anything like pc warband.
The amount of precision the mouse gives compared to a thumb pad is incredible.
So for the console it really is only about the single player.
Multiplayer cant be fun, to me at least.
I still see warband being better than chivalry..

 

[Jarl Thunderpants]

I understand you guys are a busy bunch at Taleworlds, and I always try to see the other side of things before complaining, but do you guys even care about the success of Warband on consoles?

Seems like everyone at Taleworlds is pretty content with letting this game die on consoles. It's a damn shame, cus it's a lot of fun when the servers are populated. Guess this whole charade was a cash grab after all.

I Agree. but i have a different outlook on the whole "cash grab"
it annoys me when most other devolopers do this, when they release a product simply to get the money, but i dont mind it this time, because warband is awesome and im glad they brought it to console, and they id so for 2 reasons.

1. to introduce the console community to the m&b franchise, and ready them for bannerlord.
2. For money, there a small outfit of devolopers and bannerlord is a very big and pricey project that most would say is out of there abilitys.

So i dont mind it tbh, and they have released a thew updates here and there, unlike 7 DAYS TO DIE and other games devolopers who just competly abondon there projects

 

[Yozzer]

Just popped back to this thread to see if there was anything new about the Nvidia Shield version of Warband. I note it is still advertised on the Taleworlds opening home page, but still shows not available on the App store for the Nvidia Shield.
Any hopes for it? or is the advert on the home page out of date?
Anyone know of any patches available to make it work on the Nvidia Shield?
I play this on my PC, (two versions, one steam the other Windows).

 

[JReece50]

Thirded.

fourthded lol

 

[DoHope]

We did release a patch early on I believe and the next one is on its way. Unfortunately, releasing a patch to consoles is not like releasing patches on Steam. You are required to wait a certain amount of time and receive approval before releasing the patch. With Steam, you have full control.

It's not a lack of support from us it's simply the result of working on a different platform with different requirements. You're not ever going to have the exact same version of a game on two different platforms.

We worked to add nice features to the console versions, including higher res textures and improved rendering. We also spent a lot of time on the UI and in game controls, adding additional options to guarantee a good experience on controllers, which the game wasn't originally designed for. This was tested by our own QA team, and myself, and our partners. Changes were added based on feedback, such as speeding up the world map gradually with the analogue trigger.

As I've said, I believe that to sustain an active multiplayer population on consoles would require *more* work than PC, simply because that user based is used to a more streamlined experience, something like matchmaking in a lobby. It's not because the game is incomplete but simply there are a different set of expectations. We're working to find the best compromises but it's not our fault that players on the consoles don't want to play the game under the same conditions that our PC players are willing to and I don't think it's completely fair to take that out on us.

Considering the devs aren't involved with the console community on any level other than the complaints received through the forum, what useful perspective can you offer about multiplayer sustainability if you haven't been actively involved with the community? By 'actively involved' I'm referring to playing on the console and experiencing the pain of glitches, teamkilling or even the joy of the clans and organized events?

I've been active in the console community since its release on xbox. I've joined and created clans, organized events, seen the servers rise and die on a day to day basis.

I've experienced the frustration of small (easily fixable) glitches that could make the experience of M&B console so much better if the devs only cared enough to investigate the complaints thoroughly for once.

I embody the complaints of every M&B console player for the simple reason that I am one of them
I can tell neither you or any dev has assessed the situation on the consoles accurately because the population is active,  the population is growing (would increase if any patch were to be released) so where do you think the constant complaints are coming from?

Its not fair to release a version of the game only to ignore the faithful player base on it that is generating money for Taleworlds.. We have a right to complain as much as the PC players do.

I understand a patch on the console needs to be approved and probably requires more time to write, but its been MONTHS since anything has been fixed. Not to mention the servers start to lag and need to be reset periodically.

If private serves can't be added - fine
If singleplayer cheats can't be added - fine
If optimization is time consuming - fine

But for the love of god fix the glitches, tweak the game settings, fix the lag.
Nobody is asking for optimization of the game, just basic patches that improve quality of experience for the ever growing community on the consoles.

 

[CoolMB]

We did release a patch early on I believe and the next one is on its way. Unfortunately, releasing a patch to consoles is not like releasing patches on Steam. You are required to wait a certain amount of time and receive approval before releasing the patch. With Steam, you have full control.

It's not a lack of support from us it's simply the result of working on a different platform with different requirements. You're not ever going to have the exact same version of a game on two different platforms.

We worked to add nice features to the console versions, including higher res textures and improved rendering. We also spent a lot of time on the UI and in game controls, adding additional options to guarantee a good experience on controllers, which the game wasn't originally designed for. This was tested by our own QA team, and myself, and our partners. Changes were added based on feedback, such as speeding up the world map gradually with the analogue trigger.

As I've said, I believe that to sustain an active multiplayer population on consoles would require *more* work than PC, simply because that user based is used to a more streamlined experience, something like matchmaking in a lobby. It's not because the game is incomplete but simply there are a different set of expectations. We're working to find the best compromises but it's not our fault that players on the consoles don't want to play the game under the same conditions that our PC players are willing to and I don't think it's completely fair to take that out on us.

Considering the devs aren't involved with the console community on any level other than the complaints received through the forum, what useful perspective can you offer about multiplayer sustainability if you haven't been actively involved with the community? By 'actively involved' I'm referring to playing on the console and experiencing the pain of glitches, teamkilling or even the joy of the clans and organized events?

I've been active in the console community since its release on xbox. I've joined and created clans, organized events, seen the servers rise and die on a day to day basis.

I've experienced the frustration of small (easily fixable) glitches that could make the experience of M&B console so much better if the devs only cared enough to investigate the complaints thoroughly for once.

I embody the complaints of every M&B console player for the simple reason that I am one of them
I can tell neither you or any dev has assessed the situation on the consoles accurately because the population is active,  the population is growing (would increase if any patch were to be released) so where do you think the constant complaints are coming from?

Its not fair to release a version of the game only to ignore the faithful player base on it that is generating money for Taleworlds.. We have a right to complain as much as the PC players do.

I understand a patch on the console needs to be approved and probably requires more time to write, but its been MONTHS since anything has been fixed. Not to mention the servers start to lag and need to be reset periodically.

If private serves can't be added - fine
If singleplayer cheats can't be added - fine
If optimization is time consuming - fine

But for the love of god fix the glitches, tweak the game settings, fix the lag.
Nobody is asking for optimization of the game, just basic patches that improve quality of experience for the ever growing community on the consoles.

I mean, I started this thread a while back, and was arguing with Frank Elliott about how they released a bull****, overpriced version of the PC game. And also about how they just clearly don't care about the state of the game on consoles, and the complaints of the console community. He defended himself, and Taleworlds, and others came to his defence as well......and now he's fired.

I thought that this would change things up a bit, and maybe allow us to see more dev/moderator activity in the console community. But all we have is some random moderator telling us when various things aren't going to happen. I was a PC player as long as the game has been around, and what makes this so disheartening is the fact that the game plays well overall on console. It's just riddled with little annoying glitches, and poor servers. Not to mention a lack of player base.

If you're going to release a basic version of the game for consoles to test out the port, then don't charge $20 and ignore everyone's complaints.

 

[Cpt. Nemo]

The state of the console port is quite frustrating, but instead of venting here, you might be more productive by listing bugs and feedback in the pinned thread. It'll be in one nice, easy to read place for Taleworlds to keep track of bugs and improvements.