HugoTheFrenchMan
Grandmaster Knight
Why you don't run skyrim on 800 mods
-
If you are reporting a bug, please head over to our Technical Support section for Bannerlord.
Taleworlds™ starts making another game/dlc before Bannerlord is finished. "Unannounced Project™"
- Thread starter Errayn
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
Grandmaster Knight
![Andrei[beast]](/data/avatars/m/556/556652.jpg?1589629811){kind=avatar}
Yes yes sry, always forget that the forest is made by 3 guys(think they're more now actually as i saw a q&a about their new game and it mentioned something about their number).I love the game to bits, it's a great game and a great example to what an EA game is, but point is, i mentioned it as a time factor, game having 4 years of EA and i know it looks as i'm insulting it at the bugs part but i'm not, i just got annoyed by some of them while playing multiplayer and felt bad that the devs have no more time to fix them.
Its alright i don't have any ties to the game, but it sounded like you took that game as a bad example for EA. But i give you that, their netcode is garbage. Still well made for such a small team, where other studios would have just said that MP is not possible. But if you not consider the small size of it, its horrible MP experience.
And i get all the time arguments, but TW is not some game developer that doesn't have any money, Subnautica, The Forest and Scrap Mechanic were all made by small indie teams (Scrap Mechanic not quite sure tho). So their EA was more like a needed financial Aid.
TW on the other Hand had and especially now is quite wealthy. Otherwise they wouldn't have been able to develop this game for such a long time.
And the longer the EA goes on, the more i have to admit feels like they knew that they had to start selling the game as EA to not get into the position of a barebone 1.0 version that no one would have bought.
And the snail pace that TW is having rn makes it feel that even if they game is in EA for another 3-4 years, there won't be much coming.
I wouldn't be surprised if rebellions are the only "major" thing that gets added in 12 months of EA.
Well The Forest didn't get that many new thing in their first updates. Correct me if i'm wrong but the giant hole got added like a year after and still you couldn't enter it so they took their pace too.
But yeah, understandable for just 3 guys.
Same, my first review was after an hour of playtime saying "best game ever". But now I see. Can't even go back to warband because I've seen what could be...
Yep, rebellions and that's it.
No way, dude, it's a turtle. There's another turtle holding up the first one, too. It's turtles all the way down.
Have we forgotten already that player death & heirs were introduced after EA launched? Like it or not, that's a major feature.
I was pointing out new features that were not known prior, it is a major feature, but not one I did not know about, it was just activated. The barber is the only "new" feature introduced aside from weapon sighting adjustments.
Oh yea the barber, that reignited my passion for the game, how could i have forgotten about it
Knowing they gonna rework the smithy function, i am ngl a bit excited for it.
But only if its actually a decent rework and not just some fixing and tuning. Because as i said in another post the smithing rn is so halfbaked. And feels weird that it is only limited to Melee Weapons and throwables.
Armour would have been a hundred times more exciting.
The smithy feature in the Nova Aetas mod is way better in some ways. Just my opinion, but it does not feel disconnected from the rest of the game.
All these examples are made by Commercial Engines tho. And the gameplay features aren't even comparable with Mount&Blade series. You can claim that engine decision isn't something you should worry about as a customer, and you would be right. But gameplay/featurewise, you are comparing apples and rocks.
Well you kinda gave the answer. TW was quite wealthy because they got quite a lot from Warband and it's DLC's. However, that's exactly the reason why TW had the chance to say bugger off to Paradox when they rush them to make Mount&Blade II to avoid internal publisher competition between War of Roses and then War of Vikings that failed miserably.
And throughout the years of development and starting overs etc, they ran out of money. The situation that coronavirus created "stay at home and play/consume" was a golden shot for them and for any company that could sell something, and they took it. Their pricing was weird - game definitely doesn't deserve AAA price tag and probably will never be.
Apart from this, to OP, game companies do work on different projects from time to time. They create POC's and such to see what's possible for the future. And Taleworlds have a brand new game engine on their hand which they can experiment on. Or they can even say hell no we are dropping this and switching to Unreal for next game. Who knows? So no need to jump into any conclusion about the job openings you see on their page. Honestly, It would be better to see more vacancies, since it's clear that they do need more people.
Also, for Taleworlds, it's literally required to work on something else that they can state as R&D on paperwork, to stay in the central office in METU Teknokent area. So it could be even related to that.
Yes, there's no way with the content that Bannerlord deserved an AAA price. I will happily eat crow if I am proved wrong in the future.
Last edited:
You only say that because you crave a burger, its a win-win
Are burgers made of crows? ):
That's just a boat prop though; you can see them in various singleplayer scenes too. They've just made them move around on pre-defined paths as part of the background scenery, and in no way does that mean naval warfare has been implemented (or even worked on). The guy in the video just teleported players onto the boat somehow to show them off.
Where'd you find that number? Steam lets you sort reviews by hours of playtime at the time the review was written, and it appears only about 3% of people who reviewed the game had < 1 hour of playtime at the time of their review (3340 / 114394 = 0.029). I don't know how Steam counts people who changed their review later though.
(Sorry for being kind of petty haha, 90% just seems way off base)
It's always cool when someone actually researches and proves their point fair. Thank you sir.That's just a boat prop though; you can see them in various singleplayer scenes too. They've just made them move around on pre-defined paths as part of the background scenery, and in no way does that mean naval warfare has been implemented (or even worked on). The guy in the video just teleported players onto the boat somehow to show them off.
Where'd you find that number? Steam lets you sort reviews by hours of playtime at the time the review was written, and it appears only about 3% of people who reviewed the game had < 1 hour of playtime at the time of their review (3340 / 114394 = 0.029). I don't know how Steam counts people who changed their review later though.
There are quite a few more reviews from people with 100+ hrs playtime, and those reviews are actually more positive than the ones with < 1 hr of playtime (85% positive vs 71% for < 1 hr playtime).
(Sorry for being kind of petty haha, 90% just seems way off base)
You do notice that reviewing an unfinished game is kinda pointless anyway?That's just a boat prop though; you can see them in various singleplayer scenes too. They've just made them move around on pre-defined paths as part of the background scenery, and in no way does that mean naval warfare has been implemented (or even worked on). The guy in the video just teleported players onto the boat somehow to show them off.
Where'd you find that number? Steam lets you sort reviews by hours of playtime at the time the review was written, and it appears only about 3% of people who reviewed the game had < 1 hour of playtime at the time of their review (3340 / 114394 = 0.029). I don't know how Steam counts people who changed their review later though.
There are quite a few more reviews from people with 100+ hrs playtime, and those reviews are actually more positive than the ones with < 1 hr of playtime (85% positive vs 71% for < 1 hr playtime).
(Sorry for being kind of petty haha, 90% just seems way off base)
Well it shows other f it's worth to get the game even if it's unfinished. If players are getting fooled by the 1h reviews then it's their fault smh
