What we have in Bannerlord pre-release dev diaries but not in game by now

Currently viewing this thread:

Bloc

Duke
WB
The design can change quickly and drastically before we release the feature as part of Beta and we don't want to build false expectations or otherwise mislead players about it. At the same time, there is typically only a very small window between a prototype that has addressed the major challenges that may lead to such drastic changes and our actual release of it to the beta branch. That is to say, that we do seek to get content into the players' hands as soon as possible so that we may see and respond to their thoughts (part of the reason why we have a beta branch).

Once released, the feedback and suggestions that players provide for a feature are relayed to the developers and designers (both by developers directly browsing through it as well as through more structured suggestion meetings). That form of feedback is a result of direct in-game experience and we believe it to be the most effective with our design and implementation process. We also haven't had a case where feedback wasn't included because it wasn't received prior to the feature going to the Beta branch - obviously, this doesn't concern design decisions made long before we went into early access.

Having said that, we do encourage community members to engage with and share their thoughts on our statements for SP and MP. Similarly, we very much appreciate feedback threads in the appropriate sections or suggestion threads in the designated areas where users share their own ideas. I can assure you that these areas are being checked and that relevant feedback is being reviewed.
That's quite a long way of saying 'no' :razz:

But jokes aside, I do get what you mean. But what I was suggesting wasn't actually getting the one-o-one direct opinion of player base but rather more like a heads-up with details for upcoming major changes before it already hit the plate to get super early feedback. Because no one knows what's planned for the future as major changes, what we should expect in the next quarter at the moment with some details.

For example, let's assume that TW has plans on sailing/ship feature, rather than saying "We will be working on it"(which is also something we rarely see for major features, they usually came out from nowhere once implementation is halfway through) it would be better to know more or less what's on the team's mind for a prototype before actual implementation so that people can suggest and react based on their expectations to shape the idea. We will hopefully see a small version of this with Village Upgrade thingy.
This can save a lot of time for developers for complex features that might backfire and it also shows the value of community to community - because right now, many people feel like they left alone with the game. I know that's not true, you know that's not true, but that's the impression many have.

What I think would also help is having a feedback loop for the features/suggestions from the community. There are a lot of great and small improvement suggestions in the forum that doesn't look like even considered by the team. I know it's almost impossible to consider all of them since TW isn't a superhuman company, but having an official thread where which ideas on which thread is actually considered and rejected/accepted/will be worked on as POC would be a great organized way of showing the community effect on the game. What I'm saying is the official version of this thread ( This is 12 years old thread btw and there are still ideas which could be used for Bannerlord )
If there is a thread like that I'm missing, feel free to dismiss what I said - but I didn't see any so far.
 

kreamy

Veteran
I just wish @armagan would return to the forums and let us know what his vision of the game is currently (hasn't posted since EA released). I always appreciated his explanations of decisions during the closed beta for MP.

Yes we have what the plans are for what they are currently working on and we got some more hints during gamescon, but we havent heard from the decision maker himself about what his current vision is of a complete bannerlord. I don't expect him to respond to suggestion posts or anything like that (he has a company to run and life to live), but a small update about how things are going every month or two would be great. Sure 9 months has passed of silence but its never too late to start (especially with them coming up on their supposed release).
That's quite a long way of saying 'no' :razz:

But jokes aside, I do get what you mean. But what I was suggesting wasn't actually getting the one-o-one direct opinion of player base but rather more like a heads-up with details for upcoming major changes before it already hit the plate to get super early feedback. Because no one knows what's planned for the future as major changes, what we should expect in the next quarter at the moment with some details.

For example, let's assume that TW has plans on sailing/ship feature, rather than saying "We will be working on it"(which is also something we rarely see for major features, they usually came out from nowhere once implementation is halfway through) it would be better to know more or less what's on the team's mind for a prototype before actual implementation so that people can suggest and react based on their expectations to shape the idea. We will hopefully see a small version of this with Village Upgrade thingy.
This can save a lot of time for developers for complex features that might backfire and it also shows the value of community to community - because right now, many people feel like they left alone with the game. I know that's not true, you know that's not true, but that's the impression many have.

What I think would also help is having a feedback loop for the features/suggestions from the community. There are a lot of great and small improvement suggestions in the forum that doesn't look like even considered by the team. I know it's almost impossible to consider all of them since TW isn't a superhuman company, but having an official thread where which ideas on which thread is actually considered and rejected/accepted/will be worked on as POC would be a great organized way of showing the community effect on the game. What I'm saying is the official version of this thread ( This is 12 years old thread btw and there are still ideas which could be used for Bannerlord )
If there is a thread like that I'm missing, feel free to dismiss what I said - but I didn't see any so far.
+1 on early feedback + shape opinion


+1 this threads are eminently helpful, I was very reassured and more at ease when I understood the problem/solution + context.
 

Dejan

Community Manager
WBNWVCM&B
But what I was suggesting wasn't actually getting the one-o-one direct opinion of player base but rather more like a heads-up with details for upcoming major changes before it already hit the plate to get super early feedback.
The same applies to this version of "feedback before release". There is a significant risk that substantial parts of the feature will change until the releasable prototype is done, at which point there's very little time before it's actually given to the players. We don't want to build false expectations or otherwise mislead players about it.
Because no one knows what's planned for the future as major changes, what we should expect in the next quarter at the moment with some details.
As you know, we have the SP and MP statements that you can find in their designated areas. These statements are updated and replaced with new ones as soon as we have more to share.
What I think would also help is having a feedback loop for the features/suggestions from the community. There are a lot of great and small improvement suggestions in the forum that doesn't look like even considered by the team.
Part of my day-to-day activities is gathering suggestions from the designated areas and relaying them to the developers during dedicated suggestion meetings. There is currently no official thread listing suggestions that have been rejected or approved but I'll bring up the idea internally.
 

Shun

Squire
WB
We don't want to build false expectations or otherwise mislead players about it.

As you know, we have the SP and MP statements that you can find in their designated areas. These statements are updated and replaced with new ones as soon as we have more to share.

I do wonder where the consise information can be found about which previously announced features were scrapped, or are no longer planned in the same way. To avoid building false expectations.

Because threads like this one show that there seems to be a serious disconnect between what the community has been leed to believevia ifferent TW communication channels (video previews, blog posts, for example), and what TW is planning to implement.
 

Bloc

Duke
WB
Thanks for the reply
The same applies to this version of "feedback before release". There is a significant risk that substantial parts of the feature will change until the releasable prototype is done, at which point there's very little time before it's actually given to the players. We don't want to build false expectations or otherwise mislead players about it.
I'm aware of the fact that design and the outcome don't match sometimes ( well.. almost always actually ) but as long as it's stated that this is just an idea and you will not be promising anything at all, I think everyone will understand this. You can even put a huge header or something. I know it's still a risk, but I think it worths to that.
You are seeing some comments in here claiming that you are tearing their trust apart - but this is not because you built up false expectations but because some of them are discarded silently without any explanation. As long as you communicate, I think it's safe to assume that it won't be an issue. i.e. if you say you wanted to add ship mechanics and later realized that this is messing up with the snowballing, you can freely state that "Unfortunately it's discarded because of this and that" and if someone still cries about that, then it's his/her responsibility. But as a company, if you don't want to take that risk and don't see any extra value from this, I get it. Then it's also a decision.
As you know, we have the SP and MP statements that you can find in their designated areas. These statements are updated and replaced with new ones as soon as we have more to share.
Yes, but they are often lack of details. At least that's my opinion. Saying "We will add Rebellions" isn't giving much information apart from that there will be something you will call Rebellions. If it would be explained how you are planning to add rebellions, it would be easier for community to shape it for better ( Rebellions is just an example btw I have no issue with that )
There is currently no official thread listing suggestions that have been rejected or approved but I'll bring up the idea internally.
Please do. I think it would be great for the community to catch up with news and suggestions as well.

And I think, as a better start, many people are also wondering the state of features on OP's research. If you can, it would be better to see a statement or update about them as well. To know whether are they are planned or will be considered etc.
 

kreamy

Veteran
Thanks for the reply

I'm aware of the fact that design and the outcome don't match sometimes ( well.. almost always actually ) but as long as it's stated that this is just an idea and you will not be promising anything at all, I think everyone will understand this. You can even put a huge header or something. I know it's still a risk, but I think it worths to that.
You are seeing some comments in here claiming that you are tearing their trust apart - but this is not because you built up false expectations but because some of them are discarded silently without any explanation. As long as you communicate, I think it's safe to assume that it won't be an issue. i.e. if you say you wanted to add ship mechanics and later realized that this is messing up with the snowballing, you can freely state that "Unfortunately it's discarded because of this and that" and if someone still cries about that, then it's his/her responsibility. But as a company, if you don't want to take that risk and don't see any extra value from this, I get it. Then it's also a decision.

Yes, but they are often lack of details. At least that's my opinion. Saying "We will add Rebellions" isn't giving much information apart from that there will be something you will call Rebellions. If it would be explained how you are planning to add rebellions, it would be easier for community to shape it for better ( Rebellions is just an example btw I have no issue with that )

Please do. I think it would be great for the community to catch up with news and suggestions as well.

And I think, as a better start, many people are also wondering the state of features on OP's research. If you can, it would be better to see a statement or update about them as well. To know whether are they are planned or will be considered etc.
well said. Transparency, even for dropping features is a must. It makes everything much more understandable, and is overall better for the community (devs inclusive).
 
The design can change quickly and drastically before we release the feature as part of Beta and we don't want to build false expectations or otherwise mislead players about it. At the same time, there is typically only a very small window between a prototype that has addressed the major challenges that may lead to such drastic changes and our actual release of it to the beta branch. That is to say, that we do seek to get content into the players' hands as soon as possible so that we may see and respond to their thoughts (part of the reason why we have a beta branch).

Once released, the feedback and suggestions that players provide for a feature are relayed to the developers and designers (both by developers directly browsing through it as well as through more structured suggestion meetings). That form of feedback is a result of direct in-game experience and we believe it to be the most effective with our design and implementation process. We also haven't had a case where feedback wasn't included because it wasn't received prior to the feature going to the Beta branch - obviously, this doesn't concern design decisions made long before we went into early access.

Having said that, we do encourage community members to engage with and share their thoughts on our statements for SP and MP. Similarly, we very much appreciate feedback threads in the appropriate sections or suggestion threads in the designated areas where users share their own ideas. I can assure you that these areas are being checked and that relevant feedback is being reviewed.
The same applies to this version of "feedback before release". There is a significant risk that substantial parts of the feature will change until the releasable prototype is done, at which point there's very little time before it's actually given to the players. We don't want to build false expectations or otherwise mislead players about it.

As you know, we have the SP and MP statements that you can find in their designated areas. These statements are updated and replaced with new ones as soon as we have more to share.

Part of my day-to-day activities is gathering suggestions from the designated areas and relaying them to the developers during dedicated suggestion meetings. There is currently no official thread listing suggestions that have been rejected or approved but I'll bring up the idea internally.

Sorry but none of this appears on topic with op. Do you have any kind of statement about previously planned features? Even a simple 'no we don't plan to implement any feature on that list that we don't have in our mp/sp statements' will do.

Don't mean to be rude, have a great day.
 

froggyluv

Grandmaster Knight
NW
Sorry but none of this appears on topic with op. Do you have any kind of statement about previously planned features? Even a simple 'no we don't plan to implement any feature on that list that we don't have in our mp/sp statements' will do.

Don't mean to be rude, have a great day.
+1 Please ask the Devs to update the features we all thought were being baked in that may since have been removed - theres nothing that breeds contempt more than being led somewhere and left hanging on false expectation. Sure some people may be upset if it is announced "Feature _X was sadly discontinued due to whatever" but most of us will feel better just knowing not to expect that anymore. Just an honest follow up is alls im asking.
 

ElCrisp

Sergeant
The same applies to this version of "feedback before release". There is a significant risk that substantial parts of the feature will change until the releasable prototype is done, at which point there's very little time before it's actually given to the players. We don't want to build false expectations or otherwise mislead players about it.
This is a fundamental misunderstanding of how to deal with expectaions.
Player can have completely unrealistic expectation for a game and they can have highly reasonable expectations based in good understanding.
Players form expectations. This can not be avoided, they do it even if they themselves dont want to.

The role of a game teams communications in this regard should be to manange expectations. You should define to the playerbase what is a reasonable expectation. Players may disagree, want something to be more ambitious or fundamentally different, it is then the role of the communication team to express why they came to the conclusions they have.

Player being mad that some possible alternative feature didnt make its way into the game has little difference between them not liking currently implemented features. You cant escape critisism or disagreements all together.

You only need to enter a discussion with the disclaimer that it is just that, a discussion. Not an announcement.

Every such discussion thread with @mexxico has had only a postive tempering effect on people's expections.

If you as a game team do set expectation higher than can be achieved, and people get upset as a result, the lesson to draw from that cant be that communication is bad. The lesson is that you mismanaged expectaions. Given that expectaions exists whether or not you communicate anything, the only sollution to unrealistic expectaions is more communication.
 
Last edited:

StewVader

Veteran
+1 Please ask the Devs to update the features we all thought were being baked in that may since have been removed - theres nothing that breeds contempt more than being led somewhere and left hanging on false expectation. Sure some people may be upset if it is announced "Feature _X was sadly discontinued due to whatever" but most of us will feel better just knowing not to expect that anymore. Just an honest follow up is alls im asking.

You know they wont. Its been radio silence for months really. Very little detail, hardly any explanations, and absolutely no reliable source for the direction of the game.

They don't have the desire or the skill to make the game immersive, complex, memorable, or fun.
 

froggyluv

Grandmaster Knight
NW
You know they wont. Its been radio silence for months really. Very little detail, hardly any explanations, and absolutely no reliable source for the direction of the game.

They don't have the desire or the skill to make the game immersive, complex, memorable, or fun.

That would be a foolish squandering of Good Faith capital - a very cheap resolution when alls they'd have to do is clarify the situation but a very expensive one should they remain utterly silent. What I mean by that is -should they choose to make a follow up title -they would have zero credibility (gf capital) in the process all throughout production "yeah heres our first dev blog for WarBonnetLord!!" *crickets*
 

Rungsted93

Sergeant at Arms
WBWF&SVC
You know they wont. Its been radio silence for months really. Very little detail, hardly any explanations, and absolutely no reliable source for the direction of the game.

They don't have the desire or the skill to make the game immersive, complex, memorable, or fun.

To be honest it was always like that, also long before Bannerlord released. But yes would be nice if TW was just for once up front and honest instead of their always vague statements.
 

Piconi

Fashionista
Subforum Moderator
M&BWBWF&SNWVC
having an official thread where which ideas on which thread is actually considered and rejected/accepted/will be worked on as POC would be a great organized way of showing the community effect on the game.
You mean something like this, but posted, tracked and updated by a TW employee(s)?
SP Top Suggestions
 

Bloc

Duke
WB
You mean something like this, but posted, tracked and updated by a TW employee(s)?
SP Top Suggestions
Yes, but also with information like "Considered, declined, In Progress etc" so that people also understand the reasons/mindset behind the Game and future suggestions can follow that path. And as a side benefit, It's also good for modders as well - as you may already know, it's better to know what will be added to get saves you a lot of trouble and time waste.

But obviously, in short term, people are expecting a status statement of the OP's research.
 

froggyluv

Grandmaster Knight
NW
Its a nice idea but they (the people who constantly say no to Mexxico) will never agree to it as they will still see it as something the public could use to leverage against them as opposed to just staying really really vague.

General status statement would be nice tho..
 

Piconi

Fashionista
Subforum Moderator
M&BWBWF&SNWVC
Considered, declined, In Progress etc
Well this thread has the "implemented" and "partially implemented" tags for suggestions, which you can see if you open the top SP suggestion Battles and Sieges spoiler, in green text.
Other than that, i don't think they, nor the community for that matter, can track every single suggestion and tag even the declined ones.
Some standard ought to be in place for it to work, perhaps if a suggestion thread is very popular and has many replies (more than 50-100) but to them is not feasable for whatever reason, only then it goes into the list and tagged as "declined" and other tags...
Very difficult for them to be on top of that thread anyways.
 
Some standard ought to be in place for it to work, perhaps if a suggestion thread is very popular and has many replies (more than 50-100) but to them is not feasable for whatever reason, only then it goes into the list and tagged as "declined" and other tags...
Very difficult for them to be on top of that thread anyways.
This is problematic too, threads usually grow because of controversy and not popularity. You can have a very good suggestion, 10 people reply and agree with it and you are done. There is no discussion because everyone agrees with the proposal. You can also have a very controversial topic, 10 people reply with mixed feelings but 2-3 get into circular arguments for several pages. That's how you end up with +100 reply threads most of the time...
 

Bloc

Duke
WB
Well this thread has the "implemented" and "partially implemented" tags for suggestions, which you can see if you open the top SP suggestion Battles and Sieges spoiler, in green text.
Yes but that's based on observation and update logs, not about things that have been considered by TW or stated by TW directly. I don't expect TW to track every single suggestion. But even for that thread, the following isn't hard:
Check them, separate them by the team ( not something community can do ), let them do yay-nay internally. Get nays and update thread.
As I said, even in that thread, there is a lot of super-easy stuff that can be "fixed" or simply dismissed. An example, Tournaments: Add practice armor, it basically suggests that we should have a system like Warband. But we don't. And I find it hard to believe that TW made this in this way in Bannerlord by mistake. So probably they already discussed that internally years ago and answer for this is nay.

By the way, that thread also has very basic things that are actually bugs, such as Simulated battles: being too exploitable or Looter accuracy as `feature suggestion`, which they are not, they are actually gameplay issues.

I also disagree with the possibility of having a post threshold for ideas to get into that list. It would only make people weirdly chase others for random comments like "I agree", "Yes" etc. If an idea is valid and got attention by curator, it can simply be added into list. Each week, TW person can checklist and get all the things they didn't cover for that month/week and check it with the team in a meeting which would take at most 1 hour. Half of them might be even in their backlog already.

But as froggluv said, it seems like it's more beneficial for them to radio silence for some reason since they have very little effort to correct this impression over past months. We will see if they are right or not when they are out of EA and when we see the active player count. But if they realize that this wasn't really helping them out to boost their revenue, it might be too late to turn it around when they lost their community.
 

Piconi

Fashionista
Subforum Moderator
M&BWBWF&SNWVC
This is problematic too, threads usually grow because of controversy and not popularity
This is somewhat true, and currently I do have that in mind when observing the stated reply treshold for a thread getting on the list, and some threads within the suggestion forum don't even get on neither the Top Curate nor Top Activity list because of either replies being not very organic (1v1 discussion circle), the whole thread has too much negative energy (derail, insults etc) or most of the replies are saying they are NOT in favor of the suggestion in question.
So that shouldn't be a problem for TW either, they could do an even better job.

I also disagree with the possibility of having a post threshold for ideas to get into that list[...]
[...]TW person can checklist and get all the things they didn't cover for that month/week and check it with the team in a meeting
I explained above how we (actually i alone for a long time now) currently deal currently with the set tresholds.
I must mention though, ever since Dejan joined the team, i got a great help in the Suggestions forum, as he is daily sifting through it and responding to even 0 replies threads if he thinks that is something that aligns with the team's vision (a thing us outside of TW can't know), and forwards it to the developers of the area in question.

As i've been updating the MP and SP top Suggestions for a long time, i can say to you, without any doubt, that even having these lists don't prevent many users duplicating the suggestions, as if they aren't even reading the Top Suggestions thread.
This makes people believe there are many many good suggestions, but when in reality, they are mostly duplicates, without OP even knowing about the very same suggestion already existing and sometimes even already in the Top Suggestions thread.
I have had a hard time looking for duplicate suggestions, many times having more than 5-8 duplicate threads that i was merging into one, and after a few days a couple more duplicates of that same suggestion are posted.
There are, as you said, instances of good small suggestions that have no answer to, but they are far and few in between, in my experience.

The other thing is that people suggesting now mostly in fact do get the answers by Dejan on their suggestions with "declined because of..., already planned, forwarded to developers" etc, there is only a lack of official list that would compile, sort and update all of them them in an organized and official manner.

So all in all, i am not sure that is something TW as a whole would be enthusiastic to do, but we can only hope things will get better.
 
Top Bottom