What makes Bannerlord dull

Users who are viewing this thread

Goyyyio

Sergeant
People often ask in this forums, why does Bannerlord feels like it lacks a souls, what could Bannerlord do to feel alive? I think as much as we crack open our heads and make suggestions, devs are beyond listening, and after playing this game for 2 years I feel I can approximate myself to answer a different, but similar question:

What makes Bannerlord dull

Warband and Bannerlord may seem similar, have this big campaign map, different lands to travel to, lords to talk to and then battles to play, "it's the same game but prettier!" Yes in the basics, it is, but there are a couple of additions and removals in Bannerlord, that even if unnoticed to the eye, they're noticed in subconsciouly, small pieces of a big puzzle that made it a whole, now gone, pieces that weren't even completed in Warband but that were discarded instead of investigated upon, and left a void in Bannerlord that translates into a boring and dull world.

In my opinion, among many others, this is the worst offender: The encyclopedia. The encyclopedia makes this game dull. When you make an RPG, a roleplaying game, it's important you make a world where a role can be effectively played, that means that every decision you take to give a player information, counts on how immersed will the player be while taking that role. Imagine if Skyrim started and the first thing it told you was that you were the dragonborn, right from the go, through a line of text in the menu and when you press "Tab" it gives you all the information of every character in the game? Sure you can play the game anyways, but you are being robbed of the mistery of knowing people, discovering a world, and to effectively, playing a role, a huntsman build wouldn't be an omnipresent being.
In Bannerlord, you're forced to be an omnipresent being, because the encyclopedia is the main, and only source of information for the player. That means that now making relationships with lords is completely useless. Making a conversation system where you HAD to get to know lords, to know their attitudes? No, press one button in the encyclopedia and you now know. Getting to know people in the game doesn't exists, because you don't need to. In Warband, the only way you had was to make quests for them or to plot against other lords they didn't like. It was a rudimentary system that needed improvement, but instead Bannerlord throws an interesting but flawed system out of the window and just says "eh here it is, press a button, this lord is... Devious".
Let's imagine a little bit here: What if skill points, like charisma, or roguery (either ours or our companions') allowed us to unlock Lords' traits, that would mean you need to get resourceful to get information, and its not just magically thrown into you. Maybe, knowing the location of every lord withouth asking could be a spymaster perk, because you get information from anywhere and you just know things, but nope, you just know everything the second you set foot in a town.

The next thread is Influence, but I think I'll just write on it in the comments when I feel like it. Sometimes writing about Bannerlord I get frustrated halfway through, because is completely useless to think of this game or to suggest anything at all since devs don't care about it.
 

Honved

Knight
This is just one piece of a much bigger problem. Aside from the battles, there is very little point in doing anything else, with the exception of crafting to raise obscene amounts of cash (as if there's a whole lot of stuff worth spending it on).

Diplomacy? All but non-existent, mostly RNG driven. War and peace are random.
Economy and Trade? Everything appears and disappears by magic, and are not actually "used" by the NPCs.
Relations? No effect outside of a few specific actions. They'll still attack your villages.
Interesting Companions? Now they're just randomized collections of stats, with no personality and no background story.
Ruling a faction? You have virtually no control. You can't increase the prosperity of your kingdom by governing, only conquer more.
Playing "dress-up doll" with your Companions? Better and more expensive armor has almost no effect.

In short, it's nothing more than a battle generator. After you've fought a few battles, it gets dull, not surprisingly. Warband was a bit thin on the non-combat aspects, but Bannerlord has managed to remove most of what little was there. In exchange, we got the ability to raise a successor, it you've got the patience to stick with a long, boring campaign long enough for that to matter.
 

vito397

Sergeant Knight
WBWF&SNWVC
Interesting Companions? Now they're just randomized collections of stats, with no personality and no background story.
I agree with everything except for partly this. I dont think the system in Warband was that much better, or rather, I think that the system of BL has vastly more potential.

What could be a simple solution to this is to make companion reactions and relations trait based. Say you are in a battle, and a companion with a deceitful trait could perhaps trashtalk the performance of other companions in a battle. Morr could be done on the comments about sacking cities and raiding villages.
 

Farticle

Sergeant
Unfortunately this is always just going to be a lesser singleplayer experience to warband aside from graphics. It's pretty much a battle sim with extra steps and constraints attached. Player advancement is an absolute chore, the skill systemis a total miss. Companions are soulless, nobody's gonna make memes about npc doctor: flavor 2 getting knocked unconscious. I've never felt any drive to accomplish anything because it feels so patchwork and empty. It feels pointless to do anything aside from build an army and toss it at the enemy. And even then it's not that thrilling to fight the bonehead ai. I have absolutely no faith the game will ever be finished without mods, and Taleworlds (allegedly) knows this on some level and is releasing anyway, which is pretty damn slimy (allegedly) to me. Maybe they'll shock me and turn it all around in 2 months egg on my face, but the lack of care and thoughtfulness throughout development makes me doubt.
 

Clsy

Knight
WBWF&S
Comparing BL to Warband/Skyrim is not fair because those are completely different games, One is a RPG and one is a Simulation. You should at least compare it to for example Crusader Kings. Where you can see most of the problems we have are simply because the game sucks.
 
Last edited:
Add the fact that when your caravan gets attacked or whatever and they lose, you have to physically collect them for some town in buttf**k nowhere to collect them. After one or two times you can be sure I'm not doing that. This game has not been thought out at all.

All that time spent building a new engine to play a battle simulator which in itself gets repetitive after you realise the enemy does the same thing every battle.
 

Duh_TaleWorlds

Developer
In my opinion, among many others, this is the worst offender: The encyclopedia. The encyclopedia makes this game dull. When you make an RPG, a roleplaying game, it's important you make a world where a role can be effectively played, that means that every decision you take to give a player information, counts on how immersed will the player be while taking that role. Imagine if Skyrim started and the first thing it told you was that you were the dragonborn, right from the go, through a line of text in the menu and when you press "Tab" it gives you all the information of every character in the game? Sure you can play the game anyways, but you are being robbed of the mistery of knowing people, discovering a world, and to effectively, playing a role, a huntsman build wouldn't be an omnipresent being.
I think you will like the next iteration of the encyclopedia "fog of war" - even if it doesn't completely resolve what you are describing.
 

Lord Irontoe

Master Knight
I think you will like the next iteration of the encyclopedia "fog of war" - even if it doesn't completely resolve what you are describing.
If that means what I think it does, as in the encyclopedia fills in as you meet people and visit places, then that's a nice improvement, though I'm sure there'll be folks that hate it
 

Blood Gryphon

Grandmaster Knight
WBVC
@Blood Gryphon the wise elder is back with a new riddle :unsure:
Will we ever get the answers we seek?
giphy.gif

:iamamoron:
 

Spinozart1

Knight at Arms
If that means what I think it does, as in the encyclopedia fills in as you meet people and visit places, then that's a nice improvement, though I'm sure there'll be folks that hate it
For those who got used and like current system, probably. TW can still add a console command to remove the "fog of war".
For fresh new players, that's just great...
Will we ever get the answers we seek?
giphy.gif

:iamamoron:
😜
 
Speaking of "fog of war" on a semi-related note, does the AI still magically know the troop count in every enemy settlement, which was contributing towards them attacking settlements that made absolutely no logical sense? (I haven't played in a while).
 

Sirael

Recruit
I can accept the majority of the issues this game has, but the fact talewords went out of their way to look at the multiplayer and then decide to chuck out all the fun features in favour of "balance" is frankly ridiculous, the multiplayer is dead because TW killed it, make no mistake, also i still can't figure out what the did to the combat, it feels inferior to warband
 

Apocal

Grandmaster Knight
Getting to know people in the game doesn't exists, because you don't need to. In Warband, the only way you had was to make quests for them or to plot against other lords they didn't like. In Warband, the only way you had was to make quests for them or to plot against other lords they didn't like.
lol

the first line of dialogue they spoke told you their personality in wb
 

Swyter

Grandmaster Knight
M&BWBWF&S
Even battle-wise. I don't like the new point-and-shoot arcade-y archery. I liked when I had to compensate gravity and bad stats, getting a feel for the potential arc, last time I tried it felt like a shotgun. After so many hours playing the original engine and how it was tuned I just have a very uncanny valley feel when playing the sequel. Like the inconsistent familiarity makes it worse when something deviates from what you'd normally expect. But maybe it's just me, I'll probably give it another go once the game is more ironed out.

PS: The waxy faces, robotic blinking speed and exaggerated body shapes and sudden expressions still kind of creep me out a bit. Hope some of this can be tweaked or ameliorated. The shaders are good, I think it's a combination of art direction and geometry.
 

Ananda_The_Destroyer

Grandmaster Knight
I think you will like the next iteration of the encyclopedia "fog of war" - even if it doesn't completely resolve what you are describing.
I'm interested in how the AI comes to know the power and status of fiefs on the map. I'm also hoping we can get some change to make them not have any remote and instant actions such as marriages and hiring Mercs or receiving defecting vassals. For comparison the player must waste days doing these things (good luck getting the merc leader before he gets a new contract) and the AI can do it instantly, even when in prison.

But to answer OP, I think as long as I'm making progress I enjoy the game. This means the build up or early game then the progress of painting the map and making clans. BUT the boring and dullness creeps in when it's "oh look the 10th consecutive army is coming to siege a castle, gotta waddle over there and easily stomp them with no resistance". It should be a much bigger setback for faction to lose armies and fiefs, it should take longer and longer and longer the more they lose. I don't want groundhogs day of armies forever. I would much rather do siege's and paint the map and just start a new game if I want to fight all the same battles again, then let the AI gets so many troops endlessly and make these paper tiger armies to send at you. It just looks bad: If a faction has lost 1/2 it's fiefs it should have 1/2 the amount of units to field.. this isn't so though, they remain almost the same until wiped off the map and repeatedly ground into dust 50 times over till they finally go bankrupt. The endless AI loop also gets in the way of enjoying any of the quest content too, as once you progress even slightly you have zero time to do anything but swat down lords forever. There's a variety of quests but not a single one will be done after 30 days in game.
 
Last edited:

Bluko88

Veteran
People often ask in this forums, why does Bannerlord feels like it lacks a souls, what could Bannerlord do to feel alive? I think as much as we crack open our heads and make suggestions, devs are beyond listening, and after playing this game for 2 years I feel I can approximate myself to answer a different, but similar question:

What makes Bannerlord dull

Warband and Bannerlord may seem similar, have this big campaign map, different lands to travel to, lords to talk to and then battles to play, "it's the same game but prettier!" Yes in the basics, it is, but there are a couple of additions and removals in Bannerlord, that even if unnoticed to the eye, they're noticed in subconsciouly, small pieces of a big puzzle that made it a whole, now gone, pieces that weren't even completed in Warband but that were discarded instead of investigated upon, and left a void in Bannerlord that translates into a boring and dull world.

In my opinion, among many others, this is the worst offender: The encyclopedia
The problem isn't the encyclopedia, it's just that it's a terrible crutch in this game.

Honestly in the early days of EA it was pretty essential. I still don't see it as bad thing, since it really doesn't tell you all that much. It's not like you actually walk around Calradia either. Biggest issue is NPCs still do plenty of warping, so yeah if every NPC has a warp drive and no one or nothing will tell you where they are; you kind of need an encyclopedia.

Warband was by no means "AAA", but at least some effort was made to give the NPCs some kind of behavior - even if it was mostly basic responses. I really don't think there's any good excuse for the NPCs in Bannerlord to be as "devoid" as they are. Still find it laughable voice over is completely missing feature; Bannerlord has less voice over then Warband as is.

I think you will like the next iteration of the encyclopedia "fog of war" - even if it doesn't completely resolve what you are describing.
Please make it an option-able. Pretty sure there's just as many out there who won't appreciate such a feature.

In my experience immersion is non-existent just due to the fact NPCs will walk into chairs. Honestly you need Mr. Rogers level of imagination to head canon anything as actually happening in this game besides random color factions going to war. Not to knock those who do, but if your imagination is that great why not play with Legos? Or create a tabletop setting of Calradia?

PS: The waxy faces, robotic blinking speed and exaggerated body shapes and sudden expressions still kind of creep me out a bit. Hope some of this can be tweaked or ameliorated. The shaders are good, I think it's a combination of art direction and geometry.
"I'll teach you to be happy!"

kPkaaB6.jpg
 
Top Bottom