Oh, settle down. In its current state it's abut a 7/10. The developers might get that number higher and they might not. The modders will definitely get it higher. But regardless, if all work of any kind stopped today Bannerlord would be a pretty average title.
Thank you, Oh wise and sage one and master of balance.
Which is where most of the frustration really comes to in the end, game is average at best (6/10) but could have easily been so much better. This is on the back of a very lengthy development, 2.5 years of that as EA with player feedbacks, precedence of the original WB ip + popular mods from WB and VC/F&S, etc...
I suppose I could agree with this, though cRPG has been showing that it can shine tbh. Imagine if we only had a glitchy version of native without mods on warband, we'd probably feel the same way tbh.
Yeah my bad. I wrote that wrong. I mean to say dishonor didn't make you powerful. It only made people dislike you, and thus make you lose power. My point being that in Warband, if you want to be powerful, you pretty much have to be honorable. You can't play a powerful military tyrant, but you can do it in Bannerlord.
Yes, but it's not like Bannerlord is completely lacking this. Again, I agree that Bannerlord is shallow, but it's not as bad as people are putting it out to be.
I like to think that it's akin to you asking these clans for help, and they're just sending someone to represent them in your army as a gesture of friendship. Of course, as you have pointed out, it's rather silly at times that you can order powerful clan leaders just like that. In my opinion it should be that you're calling upon a clan, and they decide who to send according to your relation with them and influence spent. If you're a nobody they will just send a second son or a young lord, for example. If you're a good friend with them, the clan leader himself might show up to help you. I imagine it would be cool to be surprised that a clan leader decides to answer your call himself.
I guess that means 87% of Steam players are dishonest?
Friendship, help? I am dragging Mesui, a clan leader, or any other her clan members, across the map, commanding her and her army on the battlefield as soon as I get 100ish influence and I am going to name this as friendship or help?
Personally I don't really care about reviews but ignoring every other review because IGN is one of the few that matches your opinion is dishonst. Metacritic is currently at 76/100 based on 11 professional reviews. Ser Jon says everyone who gives the game more than 6/10 is dishonest. Sorry but that's just a poor troll attempt and I would be shocked if someone as clever as you would agree with such nonsense.
I mean, most reviews have similar takes from the first week it came out, the combat/battles are great; the rest, not so much. Whether that review weights the combat/battle parts more heavily can mean that overall number is 8/10 but for others mean it's 6/10 as they value the other elements more.
Obviously everyone is entitled to give the game a 6/10. Saying that nobody else should give the game a better rating is the problem.
Are you genuinely trying to suggest something like IGN is more honest then 100,000 actual players? Because IGN gave battlefield 2042 a 7/10...They don't have to be aware of it, but in most cases? No, that's not entirely what I was getting at. They're just not aware of how to properly judge games or even when to, letting hype and bias and those 3-5 hours they played control everything. It's not a thing just associated to BL reviewers though, most Steam players don't know how to do it either.
Yes, if you dislike my opinion, obviously I am a troll.
