What do u think is missing for this game to have a soul?

[a_ver_est]

I dont think Taleworlds planned just to do the framework of this game, they made a whole lore, a story campaign, they made their own engine from scratch so they could make their own vision and put it in the game.

IMHO right know they are trying to make the game base playable... solve most of CTD, balance economy, balance armor/weapon damage, and such kind of things. After that they would add more content like quest, family management, etc.

But I don't have big hopes, M&B and Warband lacked some basic features that modders had to add. I can't imagine playing warband without the diplomacy mod for example. So I expect something similar with bannerlord

 

[dr4gunov]

I dont think Taleworlds planned just to do the framework of this game, they made a whole lore, a story campaign, they made their own engine from scratch so they could make their own vision and put it in the game. The problem I think there is... is that their own vision doesnt reach that far in my opinion. I mean, look at warband, yes it survived by mods but man the native game needed way more work and way more expansion but they decided not to improve it anymore, this game isnt pushing it any further than Warband in some aspects and in others some times it even takes steps back *cough*encyclopedia*cough*, the same thing it's with Skyrim, I truly dont believe they just laid back and said **** it, let's just let the modders fix it and add new content, they were done with it and pushed the release button, and cmon guys, Todd Howard vision even in the Fallout 3 era was full of crap, I'm not saying TW suffers exactly the same problems as that ****ty company but it suffers from a lack of imagination in the aspects we as players think the game lacks of, and that's where modders come in, I mean look at the suggestions threads they're full of great ideas I have no doubt they will add when they can, Taleworlds cares about other aspects of the game and I don't think they will truly make a full fledged RPG, but I'm not hopeless though, we're still in EA and maybe just MAYBE TW still has some content they're waiting to release that we haven't seen yet, I mean, there is no scene for marriage? That HAS to be missing, it's impossible its NOT missing RIGHT??? (Please time dont prove me wrong)
Also excuse my terrible grammar its 5 am and I'm using this forum to escape my work that is already due

Oh, they started with something more ambitious, that's for sure. But AFAIK, during game development things get dropped. Sometimes they are too difficult to implement (reward not worth it's time), other times they do not work as good as predicted or just feel wrong to beta testers so on... Some changes might be loved by part of the audience, but hated by the rest.

Take VC for example. I loved it's shieldwall on shieldwall battle mechanics, stronger push for realism, camps and so on. But there are people that feel quite the opposite. When TW told us that spears will not be magically held on the back, but rather dropped to the ground while switching to secondary weaponary I was thrilled. But some users of this forum (3 guys AFAIR) always contested any remark about increasing realism.

So somewhere along the line TW abandoned some of game features. But to say Bannerlord has less features than Warband is simply not fair. You have clans, kingdom politics, influence system, mercenary groups, crafting (dunno how it works really), kids, better leveling system, hell, even semblence of main quest... Sure, some of those things are still in early form, but to say game has no new features comparing to it's predacessor is simply a lie.

And btw, you are right. Bannerlord will never be fully fledged RPG. Unless some modders will make it so.

 

[Pythagoras]

So somewhere along the line TW abandoned some of game features. But to say Bannerlord has less features than Warband is simply not fair. You have clans, kingdom politics, influence system, mercenary groups, crafting (dunno how it works really), kids, better leveling system, hell, even semblence of main quest... Sure, some of those things are still in early form, but to say game has no new features comparing to it's predacessor is simply a lie.

The problem for me here is, that those are nice things, but don't improve what was there. It's just some new stuff thrown in randomly. Combat e.g. didn't change, it even got worse and more superficial (although i really love the riding!). All those things make the game more good looking, but even more they make it more superficial, too easy and soulless because they are not implemented along with an improved and deepend core gameplay. Like a beautiful roof built upon an old, rotting basement.
And what bothers me even more: Those are things that you expect from a dlc or an inexpensive new version, that took 1-2 years.

 

[stevehoos]

So, what is the new big feature that Bannerlord has that Mount and Blade doesn't? I am not really seeing anything besides graphic updates.

 

[Revverie]

But to say Bannerlord has less features than Warband is simply not fair.

I want to remark that I've said in some aspects is less, not in all of them, I do agree they've added a lot of stuff and I think I should have said it in my op, even though, I still think the game lacks in my own vision of what the perfect mount and blade would be

So, what is the new big feature that Bannerlord has that Mount and Blade doesn't? I am not really seeing anything besides graphic updates.

Clans, better castle/town/village management, building armies without being Marshall, sieges, descendants, executions, recruiters?, more quests, I mean it's a long list but I will agree I liked how Warband handled a lot of stuff that Bannerlord handles poorly, like dating ladies, politics and intrigue and all that stuff. Like I've said before, I think they will add more of this later

 

[Lord Irontoe]

So, what is the new big feature that Bannerlord has that Mount and Blade doesn't? I am not really seeing anything besides graphic updates.

You can't really be serious. Bannerlord has orders of magnitude more complexity than Warband did. Most of the new features aren't working properly so it might seem like its not much, but there are a crapton of new features over Warband

 

[ZydrateTheSmoothCriminal]

Clans

I mean we sorta had that in Warband as well. They were simply noble families though. And since clans lack depth in every aspect, I don't see how that's even an improvement.

better castle/town/village management

Really? A few more bonuses and upgrades and that's it, can you ask the alderman to tell you about the current status of the village, can you ask them whether they're having shortages of goods so you can help them out? Oh and they don't even address you with your proper title of the lord of the village.

building armies without being Marshall

Well I guess that's one thing better, although I don't like the idea of every lord being able to raise an army anytime they feel like it, I also don't like the dictatorial marshal system Warband had; if Bannerlord had more lords and noble houses than Warband I could see how multiple "consuls" could significantly improve wars and logistics... Problem is that it doesn't.

sieges

Oh no, not.. NOT SIEGES OH GOODNESS

descendants

An average campaign is over in like a decade at best my man, say you marry and have your first kids in the initial 2-5 years, you still don't get to interact with them or anything.. Actually even as or when they grow up they literally just turn into companions soooo what the **** this is a bad sequel holy ****

executions

Good in theory, may not exactly work as one mightve imagined given that each faction has 20-30 something lords.

recruiters?

Recruiters?

more quests

Felt to me like less quests, could be wrong though.

I mean it's a long list

Of complete bull****.



Warband is just better. Fight me.

 

[Lord Irontoe]

 

[stevehoos]

You can't really be serious. Bannerlord has orders of magnitude more complexity than Warband did. Most of the new features aren't working properly so it might seem like its not much, but there are a crapton of new features over Warband

I am talking about a big feature?

 

[Bob Gnarly]

I love Warband too, but it's dated. Bannerlord is where it's at, let the devs actually complete the game and release the mod tools.

 

[Novubey]

I love Warband too, but it's dated. Bannerlord is where it's at, let the devs actually complete the game and release the mod tools.

So all arguments end with mod. Comparing Bannerlord with warband is like comparing GTA5 with San Andreas. It's almost 3 months they released the game and they're still struggling with something which wasn't even an issue at the first place and modders already solve that. At this rate it will be needing another 2-3 years to complete the game.

 

[Bob Gnarly]

So all arguments end with mod. Comparing Bannerlord with warband is like comparing GTA5 with San Andreas. It's almost 3 months they released the game and they're still struggling with something which wasn't even an issue at the first place and modders already solve that. At this rate it will be needing another 2-3 years to complete the game.

That's not what I said.

I said let the devs finish the game, which is still approximately a year off and also release the mod tools so modders can work their magic just like they did with Warband and then we'll have a game.

 

[Revverie]

Warband is just better. Fight me.

Well I dont want to fight you, I agree that Warband is better in basically everything, but you have to be fair there are new mechanics and the game UI looks better in a lot of ways, Clans were in warband as families but you didn't had your own and you couldn't manage it really well, now it feels more connected and talking to the head of the clan makes a lot of sense, even though they should expand even more into it. I dont know what is wrong with sieges, I really dont think 1 ladder is better than what we have in Bannerlord.
I do agree that descendants are a wasted potential, there is so much that could be done. Dont try to fight me because I know the things that are wrong with this game, people asked for "what is new" and I've answered, just because they're bad or poorly implemented doesnt mean they're not there, and I still think a lot of stuff in this game is subject to change, care or not this is still an early access. But yeah, we can only wait for the modders gods to hand us down their blessings. In our mouths ?

Also, yes Warband is dated as ****, maybe I've played so much I got tired of it, but it's just plain ugly, Bannerlord is, and I'm being fully honest, beautiful, its gorgeous its immersive, most of my playthroughs were me just walking from town to town enjoying the atmosphere, I cant go back to Warband after this ****ing beautiful improvement, of course IF TOWNS HAD SOMETHING OF INTEREST TO DO I WOULD ENJOY IT MORE TW, this game should be a 3rd rpg I cant believe these towns look so good and are wasted on robots that say nothing

 

[StewVader]

soul: emotional or intellectual energy or intensity, especially as revealed in a work of art or an artistic performance.

That's the perfect word choice of what it's missing.

• Player time to die is too short. You get hit once or twice and you're dead, at least until you have top end gear. That doesn't leave much room to actually fight. Maybe on easy difficulty this is improved. I found myself avoiding fighting in combat sometimes, knowing that if I fall to 0% that I wouldn't be able to lead troops in the next engagement that I knew was coming right after the one I'm fighting now. I know that's somewhat "realistic" and all, but that doesn't mean it makes for good play when you are emotionally numb waiting for the battle to end.
• Doing the same set of tasks over and over and over and over. Recruit, battle (siege), loot, sell and supply, repeat. That cycle is 90% of the game. This saps intellectual energy from what you are doing and is emotionally boring. There is so much mindless killing required to tier up and train troops that I think I'm playing Call of Duty sometimes.
• Conversation isn't meaningful at all. You just reload your save until you pass a bad system or live without what you want or face a harsh consequence. It's not good for the soul.
• The quest system isn't. From broken quests to boring quests, I can't name a single one that is actually good. For all the crap they took for the Folly quest at least that added some color to the game and taught you to track down lords you want to find the first time you did it. I played WoW for a long time and I'm not really a fan of doing quests anymore, maybe you can relate. That said, good quests do add to the soul of a game like this. They shouldn't be there just to be there, though, it should be a quest, not a job. It should add to the story being told. Having to get the banner to form your own kingdom is a good thing, it adds to the story. Clicking a button to form an empire is soulless by comparison.
• Workshops are fire and forget. No real interaction. Change production? You clicks a button and pays your moneys.
• Companions are just caravan and party leaders most of the time. Having them in the party is far more engaging. Customizing what they have and how they fight adds to the intellectual investment. Sending them off to do other things does not, really. It would be fine once in a while but it is sort of sad that opportunity gets wasted most of the time in the name of passive income. At least as party leaders they are in your army a lot, and very useful to you in the middle to late game. But when you nerf the economy down, and workshops down, now you need them all making denars instead of being interesting. They are just templates with a broken attribute system that differs from the player.
• No interaction with your troops. Default groups, default weapons, default armor, I hit an upgrade button a thousand times, that's it.
• Culture is pretty meaningless beyond your initial bonus and skill choices. You start in the same place no matter what, you aren't encouraged to be invested in your culture at all.
• The AI isn't playing the same game. Recruits at it's own difficulty, has knowledge without scouting, doesn't have to track down lords to talk to, gets map speed without buying horses, respawns with 10% of its troop limit while you get 0%, escapes from capture faster than you do, just grabs a party from a fief when it needs one, and so on.
• Diplomacy, mercenaries, clans, and war have more flip flops than a beach at spring break.
• Not enough parties late game. You somehow can't have an army in your clan more than you and 3 leaders. This must be so that you can't actually build an army big enough to compete on your own. That might sound realistic but again, it's not fun.
• Progression stagnates mid game. You feel like you're progressing so slowly if at all.

But what does it actually need? My opinion is that overall it felt more like work than fun to play. There isn't enough variety of activity, and the activity that you can do has limits imposed that are meant to improve the game but actually take some of the fun out of the game. It needs to be engaging and fun, and everyone has some different idea of what that would be. These ideas are just some of mine, but there are a lot of great ideas on this forum.

Damn dude. This is the perfect encapsulation of whats wrong. Well done! Well ****ing said.

 

[fragtzack]

Agree with the skeleton comments. I stopped playing Bannerlord about 5 weeks ago. Sadly, I keep checking the release notes and following these forums because I want to play Bannerlord when the game has moved beyond a shell/skeleton stage.

Sadly, the truth is we have no one to blame but ourselves the players. The developers clearly and explicitly said this is "Early Access".

We didn't have to rush into playing this, but our love for M&B previous titles drove us into thinking Early Access meant "mostly finished".

Currently, Bannerlord is far from "mostly finished". The rush for the company to make some $ means they are spending more time currently squashing bugs to make the game skeleton playable, rather then continuing to add content in an "alpha stage" of development.

This squandering of development resources means this game will never have the full fledged potential if the developers had went with a more traditional alpha->beta->gold development cycle.

Early access and alpha releases are bad for game development in the long run because the developers have to spend so much time squashing current game play bugs instead of focusing on alpha stage content development. Squashing the majority bugs and "balancing" is for beta.

Early access is bad in the long run not only in this game, but all games.

However, early access for a game does provide more $ for the company to continue development.

In closing, disappointed in Bannerlord being released to Early Access at this stage of the game development where so much is missing.

 

[stevehoos]

I want to remark that I've said in some aspects is less, not in all of them, I do agree they've added a lot of stuff and I think I should have said it in my op, even though, I still think the game lacks in my own vision of what the perfect mount and blade would be



Clans, better castle/town/village management, building armies without being Marshall, sieges, descendants, executions, recruiters?, more quests, I mean it's a long list but I will agree I liked how Warband handled a lot of stuff that Bannerlord handles poorly, like dating ladies, politics and intrigue and all that stuff. Like I've said before, I think they will add more of this later

Viking Conquest had all these and more (besides descendants).

 

[ZydrateTheSmoothCriminal]

Clans were in warband as families but you didn't had your own and you couldn't manage it really well

What can you manage in Bannerlord that you can't in Warband, besides the 4 "roles"?

just because they're bad or poorly implemented doesnt mean they're not there

if they're "there", but might as well not be because they're so shallow or insignificant, I don't think that could be considered as an "improvement" or "betterment" over Warband.

but it's just plain ugly

I don't mind graphics if the core gameplay elements are actually fun, and I've only gotten more used to Warband graphics, not the opposite.

its gorgeous its immersive

sheesh dude have you ever walked outside before?
But seriously you're talking as if Bannerlord was your first ever game lol.

most of my playthroughs were me just walking from town to town enjoying the atmosphere

I've enjoyed walking and examining settlements scenes initally as well, until I eventually got bored and partly because the settlements were too small anyway. And dont get me started on the colour palette in cities ****ing hell TW should hire some specialist scene / atmosphere / ambience creators or advisors because its really ****ing bad, Warband had this also.

I cant go back to Warband after this ****ing beautiful improvement

opposite for me; been playing more Warband, Total War and Paradox games lately. I've also not touched Bannerlord for a month now and won't until I see a significant change.

And by significant change I don't mean that ****everth rare crash fix i dont give a flying **** about.

 

[stevehoos]

Well I dont want to fight you, I agree that Warband is better in basically everything, but you have to be fair there are new mechanics and the game UI looks better in a lot of ways, Clans were in warband as families but you didn't had your own and you couldn't manage it really well, now it feels more connected and talking to the head of the clan makes a lot of sense, even though they should expand even more into it. I dont know what is wrong with sieges, I really dont think 1 ladder is better than what we have in Bannerlord.
I do agree that descendants are a wasted potential, there is so much that could be done. Dont try to fight me because I know the things that are wrong with this game, people asked for "what is new" and I've answered, just because they're bad or poorly implemented doesnt mean they're not there, and I still think a lot of stuff in this game is subject to change, care or not this is still an early access. But yeah, we can only wait for the modders gods to hand us down their blessings. In our mouths ?

Also, yes Warband is dated as ****, maybe I've played so much I got tired of it, but it's just plain ugly, Bannerlord is, and I'm being fully honest, beautiful, its gorgeous its immersive, most of my playthroughs were me just walking from town to town enjoying the atmosphere, I cant go back to Warband after this ****ing beautiful improvement, of course IF TOWNS HAD SOMETHING OF INTEREST TO DO I WOULD ENJOY IT MORE TW, this game should be a 3rd rpg I cant believe these towns look so good and are wasted on robots that say nothing

Yeah, uh... I never posted that "fight me" phrase, that is not something I say, I don't know what happened there.

 

[Revverie]

Yeah, uh... I never posted that "fight me" phrase, that is not something I say, I don't know what happened there.

Wtf, it changed the person I was quoting. My mistake.

sheesh dude have you ever walked outside before?
But seriously you're talking as if Bannerlord was your first ever game lol.


I've enjoyed walking and examining settlements scenes initally as well, until I eventually got bored and partly because the settlements were too small anyway. And dont get me started on the colour palette in cities ****ing hell TW should hire some specialist scene / atmosphere / ambience creators or advisors because its really ****ing bad, Warband had this also.

Its definetly not my first game and I loved the color palettes and ambience, I guess its a matter of opinion and I'm done arguing with you because I feel like you just want to pick a fight and you're totally biased in your views on this game, it's not as terrible as you claim it to be. Also artstyle doesnt mean photorealistic, the art direction nailed it here. Have a nice one

 

[StewVader]

Well I dont want to fight you, I agree that Warband is better in basically everything, but you have to be fair there are new mechanics and the game UI looks better in a lot of ways, Clans were in warband as families but you didn't had your own and you couldn't manage it really well, now it feels more connected and talking to the head of the clan makes a lot of sense, even though they should expand even more into it. I dont know what is wrong with sieges, I really dont think 1 ladder is better than what we have in Bannerlord.
I do agree that descendants are a wasted potential, there is so much that could be done. Dont try to fight me because I know the things that are wrong with this game, people asked for "what is new" and I've answered, just because they're bad or poorly implemented doesnt mean they're not there, and I still think a lot of stuff in this game is subject to change, care or not this is still an early access. But yeah, we can only wait for the modders gods to hand us down their blessings. In our mouths ?

Also, yes Warband is dated as ****, maybe I've played so much I got tired of it, but it's just plain ugly, Bannerlord is, and I'm being fully honest, beautiful, its gorgeous its immersive, most of my playthroughs were me just walking from town to town enjoying the atmosphere, I cant go back to Warband after this ****ing beautiful improvement, of course IF TOWNS HAD SOMETHING OF INTEREST TO DO I WOULD ENJOY IT MORE TW, this game should be a 3rd rpg I cant believe these towns look so good and are wasted on robots that say nothing

Wtf, it changed the person I was quoting. My mistake.

Its definetly not my first game and I loved the color palettes and ambience, I guess its a matter of opinion and I'm done arguing with you because I feel like you just want to pick a fight and you're totally biased in your views on this game, it's not as terrible as you claim it to be. Also artstyle doesnt mean photorealistic, the art direction nailed it here. Have a nice one

He biased, but your not? His points seem well argued. Your position is: "ITS SHINY".