Two crucial reasons Warband has so much more personality compared to Bannerlord

Users who are viewing this thread

I agree with 1 & 2, number 3 on the other hand is too extreme. They should give some incentives to go into towns and villages rather than making the player go through a loading screen to do basic stuff. I suggested that the devs add upgrading function for getting higher tier of positive modifiers (or getting rid of negative ones) from weapon, armor & shield/ranged weapon vendors via talking in towns. They should also add prostitutes that temporarily increases your party morale for a cost in towns. They will also be adding back alley management, which will need the players to walk through towns to do battle in a back alley.

I really can't think of anything for castles and villages besides adding new quests that force you to walk in the scenes (like family feud and missing daughter) and maybe improving prison breaks so that we have the option of fighting when we're caught by the guards and after leaving the prison/keep. I would welcome any additional suggestions on incentives to go into towns, castles and villages.

I agree with character creation choices giving more, I would say maybe +20 though. We should also be able to allocate the extra focus and attribute points we get when we choose our age and level up to lvl1 during character creation (and also increase/decrease the attribute points - that actually give some benefits like +2 health for each point in endurance). Character creation itself can use so much work honestly. If they want to call this game sandbox, we should be able to choose our social status in character creation (normal start, trader, criminal, mercenary, lord, ruler) our marital status (random spouse from same culture), number of kids (randomly generated) and whether we own a fief (semi randomly generated, start with a random castle if starting as a lord, get a random town if you're the ruler).
Yes, it would be great to pick your starting position/progression. It would make it a lot easier to test the late game without going through the early and middle game which are the best parts at the moment.
 
Hopefully the character voiceovers won't be bland. That's also a key reason why Warband had more character. Now only if they brought back the death sounds from Warband...
When I started playing Warband, finding a sound mod (more metal sounds it was called) is the first thing I did as I really did not like Warband's original sound design. If they do bring back the old death sounds then I hope they also keep the option to have the current ones. Now with the voiceovers, I do agree that if they would be bad it would be better to have only text like it always was.
 
Yeah the repetition is really doing more damage than the quality of the soundtrack itself.

"The first thing that must be established is that 'objective' doesn't necessarily mean factual. It simply means your reference used for assessing a film was solely based on what is on the text of the film."

The video doesn't claim that there's no such thing as subjective quality. In fact, it's the opposite. The video is simply reminding people that there are objective elements in art, along with the subjective elements. It doesn't deny the existence of the subjective elements or undermine their value. In fact, the video even said it's the subjective qualities that make art what it is.

It's good to see that you've started citing references after I ripped your ass in that other thread, but your sources need to actually prove your points instead of undermining it. You can't just reference a single part of it (in this case, the title of the video) and ignore the rest. You're saying, "Look there's a video titled 'art is not subjective' so my argument is correct," while the video's intent is not that. Pushing out reference alone is not enough to increase your credibility. You need to cite the actual content. Another example, which paragraph in Homo Ludens supported your argument that art is objective? You cited none. You just claimed that it supported your idea and boasted about other books. Besides, youtube is not even a credible source for citation.

To return your words, you'd have known this if you were better educated.
yes I was highlighting the objectivity on Art in general - games aren't art although they comprise art elements - the intention of exposing that pov was to give more depth of thinking when it comes to art related spheres of a game - which includes atmosphere / lighting / 3d artwork / 2d artwork and the likings.

If you've ever sat down to read about UX - UX isn't art but rather objectively factual - it translates into how well a human can interact with a machine - as such UI, controls and player interactions within a game are made automatically factual - logically objective.

The fog you'll lift once you study GD is that GD on itself is factually objective and it has hints of artistry - yet it can still be measured mathematically - GD ends up being a full merge of all elements into a single sphere and as such some details might be considered non-factual while the majority of what comprises it is. Interestingly, if I were to give classes on GD I'd compare it directly with narrative writing / creative writing - in which there are fundamentals that if avoided or skipped will completely destroy the final work.

After that we can debate philosophical instances over precise and very specific parts of the GD as to how one should or prefers to approach it when trying to go for comparisons - that doesn't make the numerical value of it disappear, it simply makes relative referencing - when you apply relativity towards an equation that doesn't make the raw equation non-factual or non-objective, it simply changes the pov so one can more easily understand how relative interactions work - in the case of measurements towards quality that would be simply to properly compare one thing to another whilst one may or may not consider all variables when doing it.

Anteus' specifically choosing to discard all variables and compare the games at face value, while also falling victim of preferences, making his entire argument a bit weird - doing that doesn't detract their quality, instead it's like trying to compare a 1500s technology with a 2000s technology - not very honest, but objectively not incorrect neither. - In sum, if he removes his emotions from the analyzis while also considering variables, he won't be able to disagree with what I said - although we can all honestly admit that these games are dated, they did present higher value in quality than more recent games.

As for citing references that has nothing to do with your insane tantrum, but rather with my level of patience to give ppl information - obviously if I think someone isn't worth my time I'm not going out of my way to give them references or point them towards the right direction. Human interactions are funny like that.

I'm not serious about Warband's death sounds, but the terrible sounds in Warband also gave it part of its charm.

That's a really good example!!! Although the quality of the sounds was crap, we loved it - While Bannerlord's higher quality audio doesn't give the same feeling and we dislike it or don't care for it at all
 
Last edited:
Anteus' specifically choosing to discard all variables and compare the games at face value, while also falling victim of preferences, making his entire argument a bit weird - doing that doesn't detract their quality, instead it's like trying to compare a 1500s technology with a 2000s technology - not very honest, but objectively not incorrect neither. - In sum, if he removes his emotions from the analyzis while also considering variables, he won't be able to disagree with what I said - although we can all honestly admit that these games are dated, they did present higher value in quality than more recent games.

Antaeus is responding specifically to the claim:
Everyone agrees that (Singleplayer) Warband had a certain charm to it that (Singleplayer) Bannerlord just doesn't, ...and it's not (just) nostalgia. The 2 biggest reasons in my opinion are things that I don't see people talking about: The music and the Npc voice lines (also the incessant yelling during battle).

Xdj1nn decided to challenge the assertion that this statement is illogical. As of yet, Xdj1nn has managed to make several erroneous assumptions and propose several logical fallacies along the way, as well as step in their own mess in the process.

By the way, how is that "end of discussion" tantrum going?
 
Antaeus is responding specifically to the claim:


Xdj1nn decided to challenge the assertion that this statement is illogical. As of yet, Xdj1nn has managed to make several erroneous assumptions and propose several logical fallacies along the way, as well as step in their own mess in the process.

By the way, how is that "end of discussion" tantrum going?
no tantrum, I pointed you towards the information - if you chew it or not isn't my problem - I've only moved on to explain to Grank my thoughts, not you, to me the discussion ended there - if you fail to understand the ideias I've conveyed, it isn't my problem - if you want to continue raging on it, it isn't my problem - making you able to understand it, also no my problem!
good luck
 
It would be great to have really good cultural music that fades and changes per faction owned area on the campaign map. With a musical score in battles that also reflect this. Total Rome 1 and 2 did this so well. The other thing that would be good is companion missions, similar to the players starting mission recuing their family. I would be put off if a companion had family to rescue for instance. There could lots of different missions they could be added as part of the companion's story which i hardly ever read, but if they had a quest tide in i would read it.
 
no tantrum, I pointed you towards the information - if you chew it or not isn't my problem - I've only moved on to explain to Grank my thoughts, not you, to me the discussion ended there - if you fail to understand the ideias I've conveyed, it isn't my problem - if you want to continue raging on it, it isn't my problem - making you able to understand it, also no my problem!
good luck

And how is that end of discussion going for you?

I'll allow you the comfort of agreeing with your point - in a direct comparison, the 10 year old game will come up short, but within the context of their times, the 10 year old game might be better relatively. But in this conversation, the OP presents us with the idea that it isn't just nostalgia - they aren't just looking at the games contextually. They're making a direct comparison. Which is where the logic slips.


It would be great to have really good cultural music that fades and changes per faction owned area on the campaign map. With a musical score in battles that also reflect this. Total Rome 1 and 2 did this so well. The other thing that would be good is companion missions, similar to the players starting mission recuing their family. I would be put off if a companion had family to rescue for instance. There could lots of different missions they could be added as part of the companion's story which i hardly ever read, but if they had a quest tide in i would read it.

There are lots of things that could make the game more immersive. But I'm not certain that is the intent. Bannerlord is much more of a crossover jack-of-all trades game that attempts to do a lot of things, but not too deeply. There are better FPS combat games, better RTS tactical battle games, better medieval simulators. But Bannerlord has more breadth than most of those. E.g. Total War games are the best of the medieval tactical battlefield simulators, but they don't have a real time campaign, or the full blooded emersion of Bannerlord's FPS battles. The same is true of other games that focus on other specialities.

Within that context, I think adding too many immersive elements such as deeper companion interactions or broader quests and mission might go against the intent of the game, which is to offer a little of a whole lot. Rather than a lot of very little. They simply couldn't compete with those games that specialise in medieval role playing without sacrificing what those other games sacrifice.

It's also the double-edged sword for Bannerlord (and to a lesser extent - due to it's slightly more traditional RPG elements, Warband). We all play those other games, so we expect more depth in the parts of Bannerlord that are shared with our favourite games. I play a lot of Total War, and would love more sophisticated tactical commands. Others play more RPG games and want more of that in Bannerlord. In this respect Bannerlord is always going to struggle with player demands.

Music on the other hand, is definitely an easy win with regards to immersion... so I don't see why that couldn't be more impactful.
 
Last edited:
It would be great to have really good cultural music that fades and changes per faction owned area on the campaign map. With a musical score in battles that also reflect this. Total Rome 1 and 2 did this so well. The other thing that would be good is companion missions, similar to the players starting mission recuing their family. I would be put off if a companion had family to rescue for instance. There could lots of different missions they could be added as part of the companion's story which i hardly ever read, but if they had a quest tide in i would read it.
I agree, I even had the impression that was the case once when traveling in Aserai territory, but than the same "desert-ish" song played when I was in Sturgia :xf-frown:
 
I agree, I even had the impression that was the case once when traveling in Aserai territory, but than the same "desert-ish" song played when I was in Sturgia :xf-frown:
Very weird.
I definitely get the Aserai "desert" song in Aserai territory somewhat consistently, but every other region seems to play the same rotation of 3 songs.
 
yes I was highlighting the objectivity on Art in general
That's not what you were doing.
Quality is objective, what isn't are tastes/preferences, if you were better educated you would know that.
Which is flat out wrong. There are objective qualities and subjective qualities, with their own metrics. Even the video you linked agreed with this. You denying Antaeus' argument that subjectivity exists undermines your statement that you were just highlighting objectivity. If you were, you would've said something along the line of "Yes those are subjective, but there are elements that can be measured objectively." Instead, you just kept flaunting your game design bullcrap and insulting Antaeus.

As for citing references that has nothing to do with your insane tantrum, but rather with my level of patience to give ppl information - obviously if I think someone isn't worth my time I'm not going out of my way to give them references or point them towards the right direction. Human interactions are funny like that.
Yeah this won't convince anyone with a brain. Your "I'm so above all of you I won't even bother" act is so transparent. If you actually had sources, you'd have just cited them. It's so easy and quick. No patience and time you say? Then why did you keep replying to Antaeus and even me with a buttload of text? It's easier to cite something than to write all that. Hell, you even had the time to link a youtube video. Oh? Perhaps you actually didn't watch the video you were sharing? Perhaps you just typed in "art is objective" and grab the first video that validates your bias? Give me 5 seconds to test that.



What a surprise! It was the first video that validates your bias. At least from the title alone anyway, because I've actually watched the video and know it's really not about that.

If you can't even cite your sources, or doesn't even read/watch whatever it is you're referencing, why should anyone believe any claim you say? Why should I believe you actually studied anything? Your outlandish claims about game design are baseless. I'd rather listen to a random nobody talking logically and rationally than your smug, nonsensical ramblings.
 
That's not what you were doing.

Which is flat out wrong. There are objective qualities and subjective qualities, with their own metrics. Even the video you linked agreed with this. You denying Antaeus' argument that subjectivity exists undermines your statement that you were just highlighting objectivity. If you were, you would've said something along the line of "Yes those are subjective, but there are elements that can be measured objectively." Instead, you just kept flaunting your game design bullcrap and insulting Antaeus.


Yeah this won't convince anyone with a brain. Your "I'm so above all of you I won't even bother" act is so transparent. If you actually had sources, you'd have just cited them. It's so easy and quick. No patience and time you say? Then why did you keep replying to Antaeus and even me with a buttload of text? It's easier to cite something than to write all that. Hell, you even had the time to link a youtube video. Oh? Perhaps you actually didn't watch the video you were sharing? Perhaps you just typed in "art is objective" and grab the first video that validates your bias? Give me 5 seconds to test that.



What a surprise! It was the first video that validates your bias. At least from the title alone anyway, because I've actually watched the video and know it's really not about that.

If you can't even cite your sources, or doesn't even read/watch whatever it is you're referencing, why should anyone believe any claim you say? Why should I believe you actually studied anything? Your outlandish claims about game design are baseless. I'd rather listen to a random nobody talking logically and rationally than your smug, nonsensical ramblings.


I will give the two of you €10 each to stop trying to out neck-beard eachother on a game forum.
 
That's not what you were doing.
if you say so
Which is flat out wrong. There are objective qualities and subjective qualities, with their own metrics. Even the video you linked agreed with this. You denying Antaeus' argument that subjectivity exists undermines your statement that you were just highlighting objectivity. If you were, you would've said something along the line of "Yes those are subjective, but there are elements that can be measured objectively." Instead, you just kept flaunting your game design bullcrap and insulting Antaeus.
Am I? Or are you the one chosing to attribute quality towards a subjective preference?
Yeah this won't convince anyone with a brain. Your "I'm so above all of you I won't even bother" act is so transparent.
Never said that, nor is it what I do. If you like to preach on the desert that's up to you, I do it sometimes out of impulse but that doesn't mean it's a wise choice, it's simply a waste of time - time and time again you just prove you are a total waste of time as in constant baiting - disingenuous malice on interpretation - constant gaslighting - ignoring factual evidence when presented - constant need for validation through excessive effort of invalidating others. - In sum you seem like a very unhappy person with severe self-esteem issues - and you've shown that quite quickly, enough for me to not care to develop any sort of meaningful discussion - and even so I've tried a few times, each and every time all you did was keep your childish behavior. Funnily enough you never actually presented evidence of anything, yet you're constantly demanding it - quite curious.
Some mental disorders that carry traits like that include narcisism, bpd, bdd, it's also a common trait among ppl who develop some unhealthy personalities, all of which are explicit on the person's behavior, be it online or otherwise.
What a surprise! It was the first video that validates your bias. At least from the title alone anyway, because I've actually watched the video and know it's really not about that.
Idk if you understand how google works, but the priority of order that google searches show change from user to user - there's no absolute results to anyone unless it's a sponsored link. Which isn't the case - question is what's your point? You simply can't make me feel bad about myself, why are you insisting on it? Let's suppose your intention is purely to try and flame me to others, it's ineffective because I don't care if other people like me or not, if anyone developes any sort of dislike towards me I can easily revert it by simply meeting them face to face, and if that's not ever going to happen it remains quite irrelevant what they think of me or don't - I don't need validation, that's only a need for quite immature or young people; or at the most extreme cases a need for public people who work with public - which I don't.
 
Last edited:
Yes.
Funnily enough you never actually presented evidence of anything, yet you're constantly demanding it
You're going around wild claims, boasting about your education background, and randomly insulting people while acting like you're the authority on a given subject. Of course I'll ask you for sources. If you were respectful like most people here, I wouldn't be this much of an ass towards you. And for the record, I did cite my sources to prove you wrong when we argued in that other thread.

Seriously though, do some self-introspection. You keep projecting your own flaws it's not even funny. Just look here:
disingenuous malice on interpretation
You insulted Antaeus out of nowhere just because he said Warband is too old for his liking.

ignoring factual evidence when presented
You gave none. All your "evidence" are just you making up claims with no sources. I've asked you questions like what metric did you use, but you ignored them all. You also ignored many of Antaeus' points in this very thread. On the other hand, I have quoted your own video to prove you wrong.

constant gaslighting
You do this a lot. First you claimed quality is objective, and now you asked me "Am I?" to throw me off. You also contradicted yourself in our previous debate, calling me wrong but proceeded to list the same points I mentioned. The same points that I used against your initial proposition.

constant need for validation through excessive effort of invalidating others
You're the one who keeps mentioning your game design degree and calling other people uneducated.

question is what's your point?
I was pointing out how your attempt at citing a source was pathetic and didn't do anything to support your claims. I already stated it clearly in my previous post.
 
Yes.

You're going around wild claims, boasting about your education background, and randomly insulting people while acting like you're the authority on a given subject. Of course I'll ask you for sources. If you were respectful like most people here, I wouldn't be this much of an ass towards you. And for the record, I did cite my sources to prove you wrong when we argued in that other thread.

Seriously though, do some self-introspection. You keep projecting your own flaws it's not even funny. Just look here:

You insulted Antaeus out of nowhere just because he said Warband is too old for his liking.


You gave none. All your "evidence" are just you making up claims with no sources. I've asked you questions like what metric did you use, but you ignored them all. You also ignored many of Antaeus' points in this very thread. On the other hand, I have quoted your own video to prove you wrong.


You do this a lot. First you claimed quality is objective, and now you asked me "Am I?" to throw me off. You also contradicted yourself in our previous debate, calling me wrong but proceeded to list the same points I mentioned. The same points that I used against your initial proposition.


You're the one who keeps mentioning your game design degree and calling other people uneducated.


I was pointing out how your attempt at citing a source was pathetic and didn't do anything to support your claims. I already stated it clearly in my previous post.
sources
 
Literally this thread.
- if you tell me 1+1 = 3 I'll think you're uneducated
- if you tell me you are a prodigy child with incredible high IQ achievements yet you behave like a 2 digit IQ - I'll think you're uneducated at bare minimum
- if you fail to understand more complex and subliminal things I say, I'll think you are at bare minimum uneducated.
- If I point that out I'm being an arse, but not really wrong. If I have a more cynical and sarcastic sense of humor that's just cultural, if you can't stand it or understand it, just say so and I'll do my best not to do it (sometimes it's involuntary).

Now please stop, this is beyond ridiculous already, having a random sad person stalking me online trying everything they can to put me down while I know it's just backfiring is very unconfortable. The more you come at me the more I see you losing it. RULE OF THUMB: NEVER BE EMOTIONAL ONLINE.
 
Back
Top Bottom