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

[rektasaurus]

I had some Ideas how to make the game more interesting and bring some live and immersion into interactions with other npcs. Especiall about villages and villagers, so I made a thread about it. Check it out and tell me what you think about my ideas. Thread

All excellent ideas. They’re like the frosting on the cake though. I would be more okay with seeing these in mods than vanilla but it would definitely be really cool to enjoy passing time in the villages or towns in interactive ways.

Maybe we’re reaching a little far with our ideas and yours are a bit more attainable. I think tuning the way we gain and spend influence might be more in line with giving the game a soul. I think fighting is the only way to gain influence atm. I think policies might be half-baked and what they tried to implement is what we’re looking for. Minus all of the eye candy things. I think CptData hit the nail on the head when he said we need more ways of interacting with nobles and clan development outside of combat. That would for sure give the game soul. An activity that’s not fighting (or “crafting” please don’t jump that bad wagon) that can be immersive and influence the balance of power between clans or kingdoms would be really cool.

 

[SirLoin]

Bannerlord is my first M&B game and I really enjoyed it... thinking OH BOY, everyone is right M&B is so good and drank the Kool aid. Just out of curiosity and because Bannerlord is still in EA, I bought Viking Conquest and oh boy, I've been playing it for 2 months straight... IMO, while VC is pretty janky but it has PLENTY more of whatever makes it so much more fun than Bannerlord. Even with the ****ty sieges, VC tops Bannerlord. In VC, it just feels once you establish yourself in the world, even for a little bit, you feel like you matter and people know you. If you take someone's army it feels like you've made a dent on someone's kingdom and when you upgrade units you actually feel their durability and effectivity rise. It was surprising that you could spread rumors about a kingdom to weaken em. It also surprised me how much of a difference armor made. I come back to BL every "major" patch to see if it is any closer to VC but it isn't, I'm sure down the line it hopefully will be but for now, I'll be trading with the tax money I stole from the Irish Lords and raiding monasteries with my peasant women and sail back to Denmark and have a party in my camp. VC got some soul.

 

[dr4gunov]

Bannerlord is my first M&B game and I really enjoyed it... thinking OH BOY, everyone is right M&B is so good and drank the Kool aid. Just out of curiosity and because Bannerlord is still in EA, I bought Viking Conquest and oh boy, I've been playing it for 2 months straight... IMO, while VC is pretty janky but it has PLENTY more of whatever makes it so much more fun than Bannerlord. Even with the ****ty sieges, VC tops Bannerlord. In VC, it just feels once you establish yourself in the world, even for a little bit, you feel like you matter and people know you. If you take someone's army it feels like you've made a dent on someone's kingdom and when you upgrade units you actually feel their durability and effectivity rise. It was surprising that you could spread rumors about a kingdom to weaken em. It also surprised me how much of a difference armor made. I come back to BL every "major" patch to see if it is any closer to VC but it isn't, I'm sure down the line it hopefully will be but for now, I'll be trading with the tax money I stole from the Irish Lords and raiding monasteries with my peasant women and sail back to Denmark and have a party in my camp. VC got some soul.

Bad news is : Bannerlord will never be like VC.
VC started as a mod, that was called Brytenwalda. It eventually got upgraded to fully fledged DLC, but you still gotta treat it as a mod. Bannerlord in its design is more like original M&B or Warband. It's supposed to be a framework. So yeah, if you want another experience simillar to VC, give it couple of years and wait for something like Brytenwalda 2.

 

[Dionaea]

What I'm missing is ways to make the individual play style where you don't join a faction viable. Right now if you choose to that way it's a huge grind, especially with some perks not working yet, or not being effective like "raise the meek" and some skills upgrading possibilities needing mechanics only accessible via joining a faction as a full fledged vassal (leadership and creating an army)

 

[Pythagoras]

Bad news is : Bannerlord will never be like VC.
VC started as a mod, that was called Brytenwalda. It eventually got upgraded to fully fledged DLC, but you still gotta treat it as a mod. Bannerlord in its design is more like original M&B or Warband. It's supposed to be a framework. So yeah, if you want another experience simillar to VC, give it couple of years and wait for something like Brytenwalda 2.

Doesn't matter where VC came from. We can expect TW to include the quality and features of a DLC to an "M&B 2", especially after 8 years and with that price - for which we can expect much more than just a framework, btw.

 

[dr4gunov]

Doesn't matter where VC came from. We can expect TW to include the quality and features of a DLC to an "M&B 2", especially after 8 years and with that price - for which we can expect much more than just a framework, btw.

You could, if that was their intent. However, I do not believe that's the case. I would advise curbing expectations a bit.

 

[Because]

You could, if that was their intent. However, I do not believe that's the case. I would advise curbing expectations a bit.

Agreed and to a certain extent I don't even think it should be their intent. I'm happy for them to just build the framework and let mods do the rest. Like Skyrim the base game will be playable, but it's the fact that it is open to modders that will make it truly excellent. I don't think though that TW should be doing much more than the framework as things get contentious enough just getting the basics right. While there are many amazing bits in mods, they aren't for all tastes and so I think TW are right not to worry about including too many additional features in from mods. Just get the basic game playable for those who don't want to mod it and make sure that for those that do it is as easy as it can be.

 

[Pythagoras]

Agreed and to a certain extent I don't even think it should be their intent. I'm happy for them to just build the framework and let mods do the rest. Like Skyrim the base game will be playable, but it's the fact that it is open to modders that will make it truly excellent. I don't think though that TW should be doing much more than the framework as things get contentious enough just getting the basics right. While there are many amazing bits in mods, they aren't for all tastes and so I think TW are right not to worry about including too many additional features in from mods. Just get the basic game playable for those who don't want to mod it and make sure that for those that do it is as easy as it can be.

This would be a totally understandable opinion, but most people don't want to pay 50 f*** euros for a mere framework! We can't just accept everything that gets thrown to us, hoping that "the modders will fix it" - at least as long as they don't see a single cent of that money. Mods are a thing that comes on top, but they don't have a place in an argument about what would make it worth its money. And certainly the "framework" won't bring the game a soul, which is what this thread is about.

 

[a_ver_est]

I also think this is actually the main reason. There is no interesting NPCs in the game. They are totally dumb and doesn't react to anything. It would be great if NPCs react to your status, achievement, dress , action. And there is nothing happening in the town. All people are moving like some mindless zombie.

yeah! my wife get pregnant and she didn´t tell me anything, I knew it by a game banner!!! come on!! this is not the way that I want to know that we are going to be parents!!!

 

[Apocal]

Bannerlord is my first M&B game and I really enjoyed it... thinking OH BOY, everyone is right M&B is so good and drank the Kool aid. Just out of curiosity and because Bannerlord is still in EA, I bought Viking Conquest and oh boy, I've been playing it for 2 months straight... IMO, while VC is pretty janky but it has PLENTY more of whatever makes it so much more fun than Bannerlord.

Then you missed out that Viking Conquest had an absolute disaster of a release. There were a lot more bugs and a lot more of them were show-stoppers too. A lot of the game systems were controversial (stamina, wounding, religion).

I come back to BL every "major" patch to see if it is any closer to VC but it isn't, I'm sure down the line it hopefully will be but for now, I'll be trading with the tax money I stole from the Irish Lords and raiding monasteries with my peasant women and sail back to Denmark and have a party in my camp. VC got some soul.

The VC you love came a year after its initial release, with Reforged Edition.

 

[froggyluv]

Normally i dont care about graphics as i appreciate functionality over form but in Bannerlord VS Older Titles its Bannerlord everytime. Those old titles have some great game features but man are they "samey" in the engine feel of the combat and pretty much everything else as Bannerlord is extremely visceral.

 

[Kreu2009]

In my opinion this game needs more
- complexity
- deepth
- gameplay variety

 

[dr4gunov]

This would be a totally understandable opinion, but most people don't want to pay 50 f*** euros for a mere framework! We can't just accept everything that gets thrown to us, hoping that "the modders will fix it" - at least as long as they don't see a single cent of that money. Mods are a thing that comes on top, but they don't have a place in an argument about what would make it worth its money. And certainly the "framework" won't bring the game a soul, which is what this thread is about.

I believe you kinda miss the point. Bannerlord has no "soul" (in your definition of the word) because it needs to be bland in order to maintain serie's formula. VC has a lot more punch because it creates entire new experience from it. It has tone, it has flavour, it even had fairly gripping storyline, which distinguished it from other m&b mods. Without Warband however, there would be no VC.

Please, refrain from generalizing what most people want or don't want. As a huge VC fan, I am happy with state of the game. It's a matter of expetations

 

[Pythagoras]

I believe you kinda miss the point. Bannerlord has no "soul" (in your definition of the word) because it needs to be bland in order to maintain serie's formula. VC has a lot more punch because it creates entire new experience from it. It has tone, it has flavour, it even had fairly gripping storyline, which distinguished it from other m&b mods. Without Warband however, there would be no VC.

Please, refrain from generalizing what most people want or don't want. As a huge VC fan, I am happy with state of the game. It's a matter of expetations

Most people here see a desperate need of something like a soul=depth (just look at those 9 pages of answers), so i don't think i am generalizing too much. The series formula is sandbox, not a superficial arcade framework. We are discussing Bannerlord here, not some mods that come after the game has reached a decent state.

 

[dr4gunov]

Most people here see a desperate need of something like a soul=depth (just look at those 9 pages of answers), so i don't think i am generalizing too much. The series formula is sandbox, not a superficial arcade framework. We are discussing Bannerlord here, not some mods that come after the game has reached a decent state.

Remember, that forums are always a fraction of general playerbase.
I believe that feeling of dissatisfaction mainly comes from unmet expectations. They were sky high during development phase, people here analayzed every pixel on every new screen, discussed and played their ideal Bannerlord in their heads for years. Some expected new and better VC, others wanted elements from Crusader Kings or Total War. But M&B in it's root is generally about riding around on your horse and cutting bandits or enemy lords. In general formula everything else is kinda fluff. It was so in original M&B, it was so in Warband and it will be in Bannerlord.

As long as combat part seems nice, game stays true to it's predacessors. But if you bought it thinking it's something deeper than that, I understand your lack of satisfaction.

 

[William7667]

Sure I have opinions and things I think could improve in the game and may complain about certian aspects of the game but I am far from dissatisfied with it as a whole, even in early access its better than loads of other games and any aspect of the game I find annoying can usually be addressed with a mod.

For example I was saying on a forum that what I really needed was a body guard as I would sometimes get attacked and killed while issuing orders as my troops watched without helping, when I looked at the mods what did I find but a recently released bodyguard mod I now have a few burly helpers who attack anyone who attacks me and the number grow with my level. Now I wouldnt want the develepors to stop fixing bugs to impliment bodyguards but I'm glad that a modder spent the time to do it.

There aren't that many games that I have played for hundreds of hours, this is one of them and its not even out of early access.
Skyrim, hearts of iron4 to name two

If the game was rubbish it would be siitting in my steam folder with a few dozen others with less than twenty hours played

 

[musashii89]

Nope. If the game had seen a proper development performance we would have a game rich in content by now, not the current skeleton. Mods are extra, the sauce. It could very well have a soul on its' own.

What's missing? Interactions ofc.. Emphasised relationships with Nobles and Notables, Proper Diplomacy, Political Schemes, A.I. logic on Diplomacy (sometimes factions will declare war on you because they want your land, not needing any reason, yeah, but in this state of the game it just feels so artificial), Proper combat A.I. where it won't act like a "dumb bot". List goes on and on.

How long will it take? 2 years minimum.

Largely agree here, game lacks DEPTH. Seems that TW is intent on saving money on dev costs and relying on mods to make the game half enjoyable. IMO its tragic, to me this game is unique and has the potential to be huge and immensely deep similar to skyrim. But currently there is an immense amount of work which needs doing on this game to make it playable, let alone to start adding layers of depth, and yet they are already trying (and failing miserably IMO) to balance with huge clumsy changes to combat....This game and those like it are why I am searching for other hobbies

Sure I have opinions and things I think could improve in the game and may complain about certian aspects of the game but I am far from dissatisfied with it as a whole, even in early access its better than loads of other games and any aspect of the game I find annoying can usually be addressed with a mod.

For example I was saying on a forum that what I really needed was a body guard as I would sometimes get attacked and killed while issuing orders as my troops watched without helping, when I looked at the mods what did I find but a recently released bodyguard mod I now have a few burly helpers who attack anyone who attacks me and the number grow with my level. Now I wouldnt want the develepors to stop fixing bugs to impliment bodyguards but I'm glad that a modder spent the time to do it.

There aren't that many games that I have played for hundreds of hours, this is one of them and its not even out of early access.
Skyrim, hearts of iron4 to name two

If the game was rubbish it would be siitting in my steam folder with a few dozen others with less than twenty hours played

Should this game be so completely developed by people working for free to create mods? Is it ethical for them to release a game which completely relies on mods just to make the game playable? This EA release model just sounds like slavery with extra steps

 

[Pythagoras]

Remember, that forums are always a fraction of general playerbase.
I believe that feeling of dissatisfaction mainly comes from unmet expectations. They were sky high during development phase, people here analayzed every pixel on every new screen, discussed and played their ideal Bannerlord in their heads for years. Some expected new and better VC, others wanted elements from Crusader Kings or Total War. But M&B in it's root is generally about riding around on your horse and cutting bandits or enemy lords. In general formula everything else is kinda fluff. It was so in original M&B, it was so in Warband and it will be in Bannerlord.

As long as combat part seems nice, game stays true to it's predacessors. But if you bought it thinking it's something deeper than that, I understand your lack of satisfaction.

You may be correct for some part, but talking for myself the "nonplusultra" was always M&B, because it gave me the pure satisfaction of recruiting and training an army all by myself, growing, conquering and "living" as a lord in this world. Games should improve when they release in a Version 2, that means they should have additional features that fit the game, and include all the good features of the predecessor. Here they deleted quite some, and merely included new ones (crafting? Ridiculous.).

There are many many possibilities to improve the classical M&B gameplay without dissolving it, solely because its characteristics allow for it. You can improve the strategic map with features, that stick e.g. to what would have been possible and normal in a time where the game is roughly settled (deeper diplomacy, economy, society, little features like roads...). You can improve combat with more possibilities (ambushes, more tactics, better battle map, better party organization...). That wouldn't make the game a crusader kings or a total war, all of those things would keep M&B a good old M&B, but with more to do, more features, more abilities, more customization. It wouldn't change the experience or at least wouldn't lower it for any fan, instead would make for a great game, that would show other developers how great the M&B principle can be.

 

[Revverie]

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

 

[rektasaurus]

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

Yeah agreed. Good points. Yeah the imperial civil war as a backdrop just seems like an afterthought in a mad land grab. A lot of small ui things that seem like super easy fixes to me take away from the experience too. Like the instant conversation mod totally changed the experience. It feels like I’m fighting the game to get at the content sometimes I totally get the bug chasing but I don’t understand why ui/ux is not a priority.