The game still massively resembles Warband. It just has some very questionable differences towards handling extremely similar functions in gameplay.
Also, the game could run like a slug and someone could potentially say: "Just adapt, it's something new, I'm the best at it, gneh."
The "it's not Warband" sentiment is a baseless cop-out. Taking the best things from Bannerlord's EA and the best things from Warband is perfectly reasonable in trying to make M&BII the best it can be. We don't need this averse "that's how Warband did it, we don't want that" approach. It's simply a matter of rollback in some instances, which can be very effective in design.
You can talk up your achievements (in Asia) all you want. If that's your criteria for validity of opinion on the game, you should look up what Arni has said. Some of the most fanatic players of Bannerlord, and people who have played it the most (e.g. members of DM), have taken issue with the TW developers more than I ever have. I've merely pointed things out on the messageboards. It's not like I've ever said "**** you" to TW, whereas that's exactly what was said by the winning team of a Grand Final earlier this year.
I can live with it, but the end of the kick animation (and the animation of getting up from a knocked-over state) does indeed look rushed and un-organic sometimes, as if it's just a slapdash band-aid patch rather than a satisfying overhaul. I don't know whether it's because changing stuff is really difficult (especially if they're extensively using IK effectors) or they're just uneager to change what they've already made. We've already seen them re-integrate stuff that was booted out (due to feedback) before, so it could be that they only change stuff by tiny amounts because it makes the eventual plan of putting it back how it was originally easier.
In any case, the developer also mentioned that very little of their animation uses motion-capture - the tools of which they don't have access to right now.
