Taleworlds, this is false advertising and you know it

[safe]

I'm fed up with the whole "competitive players opinions are more valuable than common players" fallacy.

Competitive players buy the copy for the same price as the regular player.

We get you all love the clunky PVP in Warband, with all those strange robot-like movements in the competitive scene. You can always stick to Warband in that case.

Bannerlord has its own flaws, of course. Being different from Warband isn't one of them though.

But Multiplayer community is this part of M&B community that made the game alive for 10 years. Im sure there are barely any people who spend more than 1 000 hours on playing singleplayer, and im pretty sure that M&B got so popular only because of the huge multiplayer events, not because of the empty singlplayer world.

"Bannerlord has its own flaws, of course. Being different from Warband isn't one of them though."
And here we go again, man seems to not understand any arguments xddd. Who said that being different from Warband is a flaw, can you read?

 

[FBohler]

But Multiplayer community is this part of M&B community that made the game alive for 10 years. Im sure there are barely any people who spend more than 1 000 hours on playing singleplayer, and im pretty sure that M&B got so popular only because of the huge multiplayer events, not because of the empty singlplayer world.

Have you ever heard about mods?
Your info is off. Many, many players in these forums never scratched beyond the surface of multiplayer.

 

[부부를 넘어서 가자]

I'm fed up with the whole "competitive players opinions are more valuable than common players" fallacy.

Competitive players buy the copy for the same price as the regular player.

We get you all love the clunky PVP in Warband, with all those strange robot-like movements in the competitive scene. You can always stick to Warband in that case.

Bannerlord has its own flaws, of course. Being different from Warband isn't one of them though.

It's not about having a more valuable opinion, but the fact that they simply know the game better than your average Deathmatch or siege player. People that don't use chambers won't miss then in bannerlord, same for people that don't kick etc.

 

[FBohler]

It's not about having a more valuable opinion, but the fact that they simply know the game better than your average Deathmatch or siege player. People that don't use chambers won't miss then in bannerlord, same for people that don't kick etc.

Chambers being broken is one o the flaws of the new combat system and I'm confident TaleWorlds will eventually fix it.

Beside some issues, the system is a huge step forward to the series.

 

[Rinnspeed]

Is anyone out there who can also remember these two tracks?

Spoiler

It was back in the Classic M&B Beta in 2008, when people where just happy diving into a medieval sandbox and having some fun with the overall gameplay. (Can't believe it's 2020 now, God I'm getting old)
The old Beta was fun and so was the Game after release. I think same will go for Bannerlord and I have no doubt TW will fix Noudelle's mentioned Issues in the Stage of EA when more and more people will agree to them.

See you on the battlefield.

 

[부부를 넘어서 가자]

Chambers being broken is one o the flaws of the new combat system and I'm confident TaleWorlds will eventually fix it.

Beside some issues, the system is a huge step forward to the series.

For people that don't want to put in alot of effort to become good/decent at the game, yes.

 

[safe]

It's not about having a more valuable opinion, but the fact that they simply know the game better than your average Deathmatch or siege player. People that don't use chambers won't miss then in bannerlord, same for people that don't kick etc.

+1
This is pointless, i would be more successful with trying to explain it to the pigeons outside. Experienced players are critisizing some aspects of the combat or trying to give any suggestions and then some fan boys come and just try to depreciate any suggestion by saying "get back to Warband", "BL is not WB" "they just want BL to be the same as WB" as if they were completely blind and deaf. The only thing that upsets me is that TW seems to pay more attention to what such people are saying instead of loyal community members that have been playing their games for the last 10 years.

 

[FBohler]

For people that don't want to put in alot of effort to become good/decent at the game, yes.

Yes, another use of the fallacy.

Please understand: the game is made for both pro players and casuals, both opinions are equally worth.

 

[부부를 넘어서 가자]

Yes, another use of the fallacy.

Please understand: the game is made for both pro players and casuals, both opinions are equally worth.

Fair point and Warband does exactly that. Easy to learn and understand the mechanics yet hard to master, making it a fun casual game while providing the option to go for a more competetive approach. Bannerlord does currently not do that.

 

[Rangah]

Warband unintenionally let good and dedicated PvP players learn and exploit the janky, bad looking mechanics to their advantage.

Bannerlord seems to be going too much in the opposite route, making the combat too "safe" where someone like Silen with 900 hours in the beta didn't stand out when fighting vs someone with 100 hours. Granted, he'd still win in the end, simply due to experience and not "skill" per se. While it's visually appealing, it's very streamlined and doesn't reward mechanical skill as much as Warband did. Which is exactly what made it appealing to so many online players in the first place.

No one (well maybe Shin) wants Warband combat just straight up copied in BL. Please keep that in mind. Also, of course multiplayer balance is going to be seperated from singleplayer, how is this even a potential issue in people's minds? Even such a basic concept as armor is confirmed to already work differently in both modes, this should be a big hint to quake such fears.

I don't see how having more responsive and consistent combat (which is the main thing what the people advocating changes are striving for) is going to dampen people's SP or even MP experience.

 

[Caius_III]

Very good argument, keep 'em coming
?

It's not like I wrote ****loads of arguments earlier, read them, come back to me and then we'll discuss, even though I'm still waiting for people to explain to me exactly how the combat is a " a huge step forward to the series " as you say. In fact, I'm sure you just don't know why, you can't explain it, that's your problem, because you don't know what to say, pretty sure the only thing you see is how good it looks, you don't care about how it feels like, how responsive it is,...

 

[The Bowman]

Just posting here to leave a mark in history.
...and holy mother, what a gem of a thread.

 

[Jezze]

Is anyone out there who can also remember these two tracks?

Spoiler

It was back in the Classic M&B Beta in 2008, when people where just happy diving into a medieval sandbox and having some fun with the overall gameplay. (Can't believe it's 2020 now, God I'm getting old)
The old Beta was fun and so was the Game after release. I think same will go for Bannerlord and I have no doubt TW will fix Noudelle's mentioned Issues in the Stage of EA when more and more people will agree to them.

See you on the battlefield.

Hear, hear! Good ol'times. The forum was already quite alive back then. Modding scene was big too.

I haven't played Bannerlord yet. Either way, I am looking forward to it! Maybe wait a bit before playing, so most of the bugs are fixed .

 

[Kentucky 『 ＨＥＩＧＵＩ 』 James]

I'm fed up with the whole "competitive players opinions are more valuable than common players" fallacy.

It's not a fallacy. People who are skilled at something give better more useful feedback than people who aren't as skilled. A game designed by casual players would play terribly and not be fun for anyone. And I say this as someone who isn't great at multiplayer.
It may feel like unfair elitism, but the fact is that people who are skilled at something have much more valuable insight than people who aren't. It's a kind of nice but false anti-intellectual myth that somehow skilled people are too set in their ways and need a newcomer to make the game fun for other newcomers.

 

[Emil]

Fair point and Warband does exactly that. Easy to learn and understand the mechanics yet hard to master, making it a fun casual game while providing the option to go for a more competetive approach. Bannerlord does currently not do that.

Excellent remark. No-one should have to go look in the server/game files for the exact 0.001 slash/hack-difference on weapons, do a forensics on boot-marks left on the ground or run super-computers to analyse the best character length or the most efficient riding speed for attacks. You should be capable of getting good at the game just by playing the game casually and getting a sense for it, instead of exploiting the game files, manipulating the developers or running background checks on your opponents in a public death-match server.

Since the topic is about false advertising, I wish to highlight a few sentences from the latest developers blog:

During a campaign playthrough you will do most of the things that you would expect from a Mount & Blade game, including creating your own character with their own backstory; exploring a vast, re-envisioned continent of Calradia; hiring companions to accompany you on your journey; raising warbands and armies to devastate your enemies on the battlefield; conquering towns and castles; progressing your character skills and equipment; learning and mastering the game's much-improved combat mechanics; and commanding and fighting alongside your troops

Am I supposed to have a nostalgia-moment right here? Pretty much sounds like ''we spent 10 years making a graphical overhaul''. Now again, I know that's not true, but whoever wrote this needs to learn how to do PR, advertising, whatever you want to call it. Telling us we can expect most things, not all things or new things, doesn't sit well for past players who are capable of reading between the lines. I can understand if TW is trying to reach into the pockets of players new to the series by stating old ideas as new ideas, but at the same time they're continuing the developers blog by listing what the game is vaguely lacking:

There may be bugs and glitches, there will certainly be balancing issues, some features may be missing or currently disabled, and certain aspects of the game might not receive full-support until later down the line. You can expect to see reused scenes (our eventual aim is that each town and castle will have its own unique scene) as well as other types of placeholder content, such as voice lines, animations, quests, etc.

Rather than strongly announcing what we're able to do as for new features, whether it be customisable weapons, and so forth. Customisable castles has been sneakily removed from the game/roadmap in an earlier devblog, but the list goes on. They vaguely tell us about new stuff, and strongly tell us about what's lacking. Nonetheless, it should be possible to give a clear answer whether we can make babies one day prior to launch. Armagan can't truly be expecting things upon launch to change drastically in a week.

 

[Bran34]

Yes, another use of the fallacy.

Please understand: the game is made for both pro players and casuals, both opinions are equally worth.

Safe actually made a perfectly good argument in the post above your first, the one the guy replied to with "Nonsense". He literally talked about the exact thing you complained about with this fallacy, presented a perfectly good argument, and you seem to have completely ignored it.

 

[froggyluv]

It's not a fallacy. People who are skilled at something give better more useful feedback than people who aren't as skilled. A game designed by casual players would play terribly and not be fun for anyone. And I say this as someone who isn't great at multiplayer.
It may feel like unfair elitism, but the fact is that people who are skilled at something have much more valuable insight than people who aren't. It's a kind of nice but false anti-intellectual myth that somehow skilled people are too set in their ways and need a newcomer to make the game fun for other newcomers.

While I get what you're saying thats not always the case. The "expert" can also be a purist tied to the past - meaning they may see legacy code/rules as the definition of perfection thereby always resisting change as it strays to far from their idea of 'excellent'.

 

[Bran34]

While I get what you're saying thats not always the case. The "expert" can also be a purist tied to the past - meaning they may see legacy code/rules as the definition of perfection thereby always resisting change as it strays to far from their idea of 'excellent'.

Yes, that's true, but in this case, even OP has an enormous and comprehensive list of flaws that you are welcome to decide on if you agree with them or not yourself.

In my eyes: Stances are questionably effective. Strike windup delays make inputs strange. Kicks don't work properly still. Chambers don't work properly still. The latter two are basic mechanics that were present in Warband, and they are SUPPOSED to be present here, but they are non-functional or not functioning as they ideally should.

As safe said, it's not about a "return to warband" it's about making something BETTER than warband, and a lot of warband players think this is a downgrade, not an upgrade. It's not that it's DIFFERENT, it's that it's WORSE.

 

[Scarf Ace]

While it's visually appealing

...Is it though?
Honestly, it has all the robotic awkwardness of Warband, except this time the robots' joints aren't as well lubricated, and they're on ice skates.

 

[froggyluv]

Yes, that's true, but in this case, even OP has an enormous and comprehensive list of flaws that you are welcome to decide on if you agree with them or not yourself.

In my eyes: Stances are questionably effective. Strike windup delays make inputs strange. Kicks don't work properly still. Chambers don't work properly still. The latter two are basic mechanics that were present in Warband, and they are SUPPOSED to be present here, but they are non-functional or not functioning as they ideally should.

As safe said, it's not about a "return to warband" it's about making something BETTER than warband, and a lot of warband players think this is a downgrade, not an upgrade. It's not that it's DIFFERENT, it's that it's WORSE.

Fair points and i would agree