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

Users who are viewing this thread

Its clear you are not a M&B player. Its supposed to be a sandbox, not a themepark and there is already a deep detailed Diplomacy mod adding a lot of content, just like before...and that is without detailed tools and knowledge of how things work. We do not need the developers for it.

A sandbox only requires a box and the sand. WE use the tools, to make the content. Just like the previous games. The originals and their expansions had LESS than this game already has. That, is reality. That is what made this series great...the MODDERS. Deal with it.

A sandbox game does not (and never did!) mean that it's supposed to be a playground for modders! Sandbox means a place for the player to do and become what he wants, with all the possibilities and depth to do so.

I don't know why this doesn't go into the heads of all you mod fanatics - we payed for a game, not for a development toolbox for some modders!
 
Yes. A game lacking features and being moddable does not make it "sandbox".

"Sandbox" means it's not focused on a linear story or progressing through the game in a predetermined.way. A sandbox game is an open world game, which gives players a lot of freedom. That does not make it ok for the game to be void of content and features.
 
I miss the voice and artwork from Warband. "I will drink from your skull!" was the game.

Also, you interacted with the NPCs more in Warband. You became familiar with all the unique characters in a faction. The predesigned companions were also more interesting than Bannerlord's random ones.

Factions get obliterated too fast. I started up a new game last night, and two factions were on their final 1-2 cities, within the first 200 days.

Siege defenses are extremely rare, unless you have no chance of winning. They were some of the most fun parts of Warband.
 
A sandbox game does not (and never did!) mean

Except when it did which is more often than not. I am not going to toss out 15+ years of Mount and Blade history because you bought a game without knowing what you were buying.

"Sandbox" means it's not focused on a linear story or progressing through the game in a predetermined.way. A sandbox game is an open world game, which gives players a lot of freedom. That does not make it ok for the game to be void of content and features.

Nope. Sandbox means just what it means. I bet you believe Skyrim was a sandbox because you didnt "have to" do quests. By your definition, World of Warcraft was a sandbox just because it was open world...lol. No. Wurm Online and Eve were 2 of the extremely few actual sandbox MMOs and M&B IS one of the few actual sandbox games there are. Total War is that way ----->
 
Except when it did which is more often than not. I am not going to toss out 15+ years of Mount and Blade history because you bought a game without knowing what you were buying.



Nope. Sandbox means just what it means. I bet you believe Skyrim was a sandbox because you didnt "have to" do quests. By your definition, World of Warcraft was a sandbox just because it was open world...lol. No. Wurm Online and Eve were 2 of the extremely few actual sandbox MMOs and M&B IS one of the few actual sandbox games there are. Total War is that way ----->
You have no idea what you´re talking about.

And yes, Skyrim is a sandbox game. You can do whatever you want in the sandbox. Of course you won´t be able to defeat all enemies or do all available quests at level 1 or whatever. But you have at least the freedom to try it. Like in Bannerlord, I can try to siege a castle with my first 10 recruits, won´t work of course.

WoW is a mmorpg, a completly different genre.

BTW, when the next battlefield/call of duty/fifa game comes out, do you compare them to their first games? Then you should be happy with all games which are not the first of their serie...
 
I don't know if any of you have played "crusader kings II" but I guess there will be some here who have. I think it would be awesome if the NPC system in bannerlord could just be anywhere close to being as complex as it is in crusader kings. The fact that marriage and character relation control so much - from diplomacy to inheritance of fiefs - makes it so that basically every NPC - from the king down to the commoner - can be important and even dangerous. Currently it feels like none of the NPCs really matter. You just marry because its possible, you just increase relation to get better troops, you don't remember any of the other Lords and especially not of any commoner. Crusader Kings does a really good job in making you care for other NPCs because of how useful or annoying they can be in supporting or thwarting your goals. I wish a little bit of this dynamic was also present in bannerlords. Finally succeeding in your year-long intrigue against your foe by cleverly siding with your enemy's enemy. It feels so much more rewarding than having to rely solely on battle.
 
It would be awesome if the NPC system would be close to Crusader Kings, but we have to be realistic here. CK has a totally different focus than Bannerlord.

Bannerlord fighting and CK NPC system = Shut up and take my money! But this won´t happen, and I don´t blame TW for this.

But it would be cool, if there would be more depth in Bannerlord. Right now family/children/relations really doesn´t matter. And before TW needs to make the traits working. They´re far from it.
 
I don't know if any of you have played "crusader kings II" but I guess there will be some here who have. I think it would be awesome if the NPC system in bannerlord could just be anywhere close to being as complex as it is in crusader kings. The fact that marriage and character relation control so much - from diplomacy to inheritance of fiefs - makes it so that basically every NPC - from the king down to the commoner - can be important and even dangerous. Currently it feels like none of the NPCs really matter. You just marry because its possible, you just increase relation to get better troops, you don't remember any of the other Lords and especially not of any commoner. Crusader Kings does a really good job in making you care for other NPCs because of how useful or annoying they can be in supporting or thwarting your goals. I wish a little bit of this dynamic was also present in bannerlords. Finally succeeding in your year-long intrigue against your foe by cleverly siding with your enemy's enemy. It feels so much more rewarding than having to rely solely on battle.

It should have been like that. Otherwise, what is even the point of a dynasty system and marriages? It seems like the developers don't have any interest in immersion or complex features.

Don't worry though. CKIII comes out this September. I suspect by then many people will be saying Banner what?
 
Lords missing their personality- that's the severe problem. An honorable lord and the devious and cruel one will do exactly the same things, they will act in one and the same way.

Also lords do not interact to each other. Inside the Kingdom they belong to they do not have any enemies (well, the Encyclopedia may tell you that they do, but it will be no more than an Encyclopedia entry - no gameplay effect from that). There are no quarrels inside the Kingdom, if you gather an army and call every lord that hates you (-100 relationship) - they will come like a good boys and girls, no objections - nothing. They obey like sheep.

Right now, if you cut out wars from the game - it will be dead. There will be simply nothing to do.
 
Don't worry though. CKIII comes out this September. I suspect by then many people will be saying Banner what?

Not for me, I´ll buy CKIII on release. But if offers a different experience than Bannerlord. The battles in CK2 are quite dull, in 99% of the battles the bigger army just wins. But this isn´t the main focus for CK so I don´t care.

When/if Bannerlord is playable, I´ll play both games, depends on my mood. A best of both of them would be the perfect game for me, but this won´t happen ever I guess.
 
Bannerlord focuses on tactical combat, Crusader Kings focuses on dynastic struggles and politics. Each does its own thing well, but the other's aspect poorly. Put both sets of expertise in the same game and you've got more than a game, it's an alternate world.

Bethesda's Elder Scrolls games (Skyrim, Oblivion, Morrowind) involve fantastic worlds, but the combat is sub-par, the NPC interactions are shallow, and there's no economy. Put Bannerlord's combat into an Elder Scrolls game and you've got something amazing; add in Paradox's diplomacy and economic complexity behind the scenes, and you have a fully fleshed-out fantasy world that should keep you happily playing for the rest of your life.

Excuse me if I'd like at least a small piece of that dream to be real. I somehow doubt that Taleworlds has the talent and experience to pull off those other aspects, but at least they're trying. Unfortunately, Bannerlord still has a long way to go.
 
Nope. Sandbox means just what it means. I bet you believe Skyrim was a sandbox because you didnt "have to" do quests. By your definition, World of Warcraft was a sandbox just because it was open world...lol. No. Wurm Online and Eve were 2 of the extremely few actual sandbox MMOs and M&B IS one of the few actual sandbox games there are. Total War is that way ----->

I like how you never actually said what makes a game sandbox.

What makes Eve sandbox, but not other open world MMOs? The fact it lacks content and players have to come up with it themselves?
 
Last edited:
Except when it did which is more often than not. I am not going to toss out 15+ years of Mount and Blade history because you bought a game without knowing what you were buying.

This is just utterly wrong. Sandbox refers to a game genre, and that never in history meant the way how and by whom a game is developed.

I played the series since Mount & Blade, i played (and loved!) wF&S, Warband, VC and several mods. I know what i did when i bought Bannerlord - or at least i thought i would. This is an enormous downgrade gameplaywise, even if i enjoyed it the first hours. Only when you try to delve deeper into the world and try to do things that were possible in the previous versions you realize that there are none. And that it will take them years to even reintroduce what is missing compared to the old games, not to mention to actually introduce some necessary leaps to make it worth its price and waiting time.
 
Its clear you are not a M&B player. Its supposed to be a sandbox, not a themepark and there is already a deep detailed Diplomacy mod adding a lot of content, just like before...and that is without detailed tools and knowledge of how things work. We do not need the developers for it.

The most stupid nonsense I've ever heard in my whole life. First of all, I DON'T CARE ABOUT MODS AT ALL ATM, if every bit of freaking content is to be added in by modders why the hell am I paying the premium price to TW? Detailed Diplomacy was being hyped by them since Day 1. "It's supposed to be a sandbox", so if there's a detailed Diplomacy, is it no longer a "sandbox"? Jeez, you really have no idea, do you. It only means that the gameplay doesn't have a story fixed into the game, that makes the players follow a storyline. It's not a label for "bare-bones content".

A sandbox only requires a box and the sand. WE use the tools, to make the content. Just like the previous games. The originals and their expansions had LESS than this game already has. That, is reality. That is what made this series great...the MODDERS. Deal with it.

Sounds a lot like trolling.
 
As The Sign of 33 points out, "Sandbox" merely refers to the game not railroading you into a linear story line with only one course of action (or a limited set of parallel courses). It means you are free to pursue your own agenda, go where you want, and do or not do quests, regardless of whether or not there is a main quest or story line. M&B is definitely a series of sandbox games, although Bannerlord appears to be a bit short on sand at the moment (not many things to do in the sandbox)....but the sandbox itself is certainly there.
 
You have no idea what you´re talking about.

You have no ground to stand on. M&B came out in 2005. 4 expansions. All of them are what I say they are. you are clearly not a M&B fan, you made a blind purchase and want a Total War game. It is not nor ever will be and I really do not care what you believe it should be. This thread asked a question, I answered. Your support is not required.

Sounds a lot like trolling.

No argument, dismissing. Clear troll. I have the entire series history behind me which is why you cant actually say anything...otherwise prove me wrong.What did the previous M&Bs have that this one does not that would give it soul...troll.

I like how you never actually said what makes a game sandbox.

What makes Eve sandbox, but not other open world MMOs? The fact it lacks content and players have to come up with it themselves?
A sandbox only requires a box and the sand. WE use the tools, to make the content. Just like the previous games. The originals and their expansions had LESS than this game already has. That, is reality. That is what made this series great...the MODDERS. Deal with it.
:roll:

This is an enormous downgrade gameplaywise, even if i enjoyed it the first hours. Only when you try to delve deeper into the world and try to do things that were possible in the previous versions you realize that there are none.

Name one single thing that was in M&B that is not in Bannerlord.
Name one single thing that was in Warband that is not in Bannerlord.
Name one single thing that was in NW that is not in Bannerlord other than guns and cannons which has not place in this games storyline
Name one single thing other than religions and ships that was in VC that is not in Bannerlord...

Where are the things in the other games that did NOT come from mods that would give this game soul? No where. Because they all came from mods. You go on a try to find a SINGLE PERSON that played any of the old games for more than 200 hours that did NOT play with mods...have fun with that. This series is all about modding and not the base game and there is no argument you can make that is going to change it for the vast majority of M&B fans.
 
No argument, dismissing. Clear troll. I have the entire series history behind me which is why you cant actually say anything...otherwise prove me wrong.What did the previous M&Bs have that this one does not that would give it soul...troll.
Here we go.

Its clear you are not a M&B player. Its supposed to be a sandbox, not a themepark and there is already a deep detailed Diplomacy mod adding a lot of content, just like before...and that is without detailed tools and knowledge of how things work. We do not need the developers for it.

It's funny that I encounter so many elitist losers that think everyone but themselves have known about M&B and everyone else just learned about it yesterday. I've been playing M&B since 2010, I still have the DVD. Nope, I wasn't aware at all of its' existence before 2009 (when I got the copy but couldn't play it) because they basically had minimal advertising for their own country, my fault? Don't think so. Here is my old reply to the same kind of stupid mentality. "I've played the game earlier than you guys!" isn't an argument you can use to claim you're right, good for you anyways.

What?! You didn't join the forums while playing the game?! To waste your time with idiots like me?!
Damn right, I didn't.
2Lgb0cP

Would also share a reddit link with more info about me being a 10 years fan since I got a copy of M&B 1.1011 as magazine promotion but that's probably forbidden on the forums. You got the idea, nice try tho. I love seeing fanboys trying to silence everyone else because they got to know about the game 1-2 years sooner, good for you buddy. But please, get out that "EvERyOnE Is LyIng, I aM tHe onLy OnE!" mindset, makes you look pathetic.

That settles it I guess.

A sandbox only requires a box and the sand. WE use the tools, to make the content. Just like the previous games. The originals and their expansions had LESS than this game already has. That, is reality. That is what made this series great...the MODDERS. Deal with it.
A box and the sand.. Righhhtt, it doesn't sound like you're trolling at all buddy, my fault.. We already made our arguments that you obviously skipped because it suits your purpose, trolling or otherwise. You clearly don't know the definition of "sandbox" and just expect people to go along with your own made up definition of it. Reliance on modders for content isn't called "sandbox", it's called "incompetence". The reason why I won't compare previous titles is that they were made with much lower resources and it got our attention and we just ignored of its' shortcomings because It was unique, not because it was a super rich game in terms of content so nope, the previous titles too didn't have much of a "soul" that we're talking about anyways but it still had more interactions when compared to current state of the game. Did some mods help? Yeah. Does it justify we don't have interactions in the base game? Nope. I wonder if it's a good analogy for you to understand but it's like going into a very classy restaurant, paying the premium price and being forced to expecting some street sellers to provide the spice and the sauce that you'ld like. I don't want to go through a dozen mods which could have terrible problems on its' own, just to have an experience that was advertised by the company itself.
 
You have no ground to stand on. M&B came out in 2005. 4 expansions. All of them are what I say they are. you are clearly not a M&B fan, you made a blind purchase and want a Total War game. It is not nor ever will be and I really do not care what you believe it should be. This thread asked a question, I answered. Your support is not required.

Damn you got me!

kg8kbnqm.png


Now stfu please.
 
Back
Top Bottom