Why Is This Forum Section So Toxic?

Currently viewing this thread:

Maroon

Grandmaster Knight
WBWF&SNW
Please guys for the love of god think of Early Access as a demo, not an official release.

The developers should not have used it here and it has given many the impression that this is a full release when it is clearly not.

Right, it's clearly not the full release. That's not an excuse, though. To reiterate: in this industry, Early Access is your release. There is no misconception by the community on that, only on TW's side. Do you expect everyone to just fully ignore this game until the EA label is removed? No, of course not. Clans have been formed, events have been run, a community has been created (and died, by now) around the game. It's not a paid demo, and to argue that it is requires massive blinders. A demo contains a slice of gameplay, made to entice your potential players into buying the full version. EA is a label slapped on unfinished games to release them prematurely. If the full game is available to the public, it is released.

But even ignoring all that, Bannerlord had an multiplayer alpha and beta before EA, during which TW fixed bugs we found, and categorically ignored all feedback on the gameplay, because they had it all figured out, and once they release it to the public, we'd see how we were wrong to doubt. Yet here we are, nearly 2 years later, still with the same garbage.

If TW truly wanted player feedback while they develop the game, they would not have released the game into EA. They would have expanded the beta to include singleplayer content, and worked with that. Instead, they deliberately chose to release the entire thing to the public. This. Is. A. Release.
TW is entirely to blame for that decision, and the community is right to throw that in their faces, especially when even now, more than a year after EA release, they still haven't told us what will be in the final game.
 

WMorton

Sergeant
WBWF&SNW
Yeah, Taleworlds lack of listening to their player base especially during the Beta was just idiotic. What was the point of putting the game in Alpha, Beta and now EA if your just going to ignore us. I understand that stuff like Duel and Battle mode are on their way but it is still ridiculous how late it is coming. I don't blame the MP devs, in my opinion they are neglected and under resourced and that vast majority of the blame should be placed on the higher ups.
 

JaroX

Recruit
I was referring to the "teenagers" bit. I can't fathom why he felt the need to add that.
I think (speaking from experience), 5-15 year olds have stronger need to comment on things, to give reviews, to let the world know what they feel/think/experienced, while they decide to do so after spending only a short time with that activity. Older guys (like myself) tend to withheld feedback, they dont need to raise their voice so often and so loud, especially if the feedback would be negative. Once the older guy decides to give a written negative review, he usually takes much more time to think it through (compared to teenagers), the text is longer and structured, he highlights or repeats the most important ideas in the text, he usually reads it after himself and makes changes before giving it out.

Why I wrote that: If I were an owner/manager of a company producing a game like Bannerlord, I would definitely look more for feedback from guys 25+ years old, than from teenagers. I would read the reviews that are long, ignore the reviews consisting of only one sentence (even so if not complete). Also, I would focus on negative reviews. Why? Because I would want to make my product better and not to look for ways to confort my ego.
 

Corsair831

Sergeant
WF&S
Right, it's clearly not the full release. That's not an excuse, though. To reiterate: in this industry, Early Access is your release. There is no misconception by the community on that, only on TW's side. Do you expect everyone to just fully ignore this game until the EA label is removed? No, of course not. Clans have been formed, events have been run, a community has been created (and died, by now) around the game. It's not a paid demo, and to argue that it is requires massive blinders. A demo contains a slice of gameplay, made to entice your potential players into buying the full version. EA is a label slapped on unfinished games to release them prematurely. If the full game is available to the public, it is released.

But even ignoring all that, Bannerlord had an multiplayer alpha and beta before EA, during which TW fixed bugs we found, and categorically ignored all feedback on the gameplay, because they had it all figured out, and once they release it to the public, we'd see how we were wrong to doubt. Yet here we are, nearly 2 years later, still with the same garbage.

If TW truly wanted player feedback while they develop the game, they would not have released the game into EA. They would have expanded the beta to include singleplayer content, and worked with that. Instead, they deliberately chose to release the entire thing to the public. This. Is. A. Release.
TW is entirely to blame for that decision, and the community is right to throw that in their faces, especially when even now, more than a year after EA release, they still haven't told us what will be in the final game.

Early Access is a paid-for beta. I don't know why Taleworlds chose to do an Early Access (perhaps they were running out of cash), but it was a bad idea. As a consumer it would be much better for you to think of this as a paid-for beta.

In that SovietWomble video the guy earlier posted he does say "Early Access is your release", however he's talking about the first impression the consumer gets. This is true, your first impresesion with an Early Access game is of a broken product (which is why I don't like Early Access as a concept), but it is better for you personally as a consumer and for community relations in general if you try and think of it not as a released product but as a paid-for beta (even though Taleworlds already had a beta).
 

Younes

Master Knight
WBWF&SNWVC
Early Access is a paid-for beta. I don't know why Taleworlds chose to do an Early Access (perhaps they were running out of cash), but it was a bad idea. As a consumer it would be much better for you to think of this as a paid-for beta.

In that SovietWomble video the guy earlier posted he does say "Early Access is your release", however he's talking about the first impression the consumer gets. This is true, your first impresesion with an Early Access game is of a broken product (which is why I don't like Early Access as a concept), but it is better for you personally as a consumer and for community relations in general if you try and think of it not as a released product but as a paid-for beta (even though Taleworlds already had a beta).
You clearly don't know TW standards, if you saw in what state they left the alpha, you would know the bar is very low. Beta is already finished. This is their intended release.
 
Why I wrote that: If I were an owner/manager of a company producing a game like Bannerlord, I would definitely look more for feedback from guys 25+ years old, than from teenagers. I would read the reviews that are long, ignore the reviews consisting of only one sentence (even so if not complete). Also, I would focus on negative reviews. Why? Because I would want to make my product better and not to look for ways to confort my ego.
That's what you or me would do if we were in charge.
Taleworlds on the other hand prioritizes the casuals, there were several examples when they said "this is too complicated/confusing for a first time player" and dumbed down a feature by limiting the player. So they prioritize the "awesome!" kids and casuals, which probably includes youtubers who are too busy to learn a game.
 

hoonii

Squire
Early Access is a paid-for beta
You are very incorrect.
A beta is like a trial version of the game to showcase the game mechanics, content and receive feedback for limited time. After the beta companies take the game away for some time again and do the final touches, consider-add-test the feedback and release it polished or semi-polished and improve it with regular patches. A splendid example is Battlefield 1 Alpha/Open Beta.

Early access is the game's release, just with fancy words to cover the idea that "We ran out of money so here is a half finished game". Correct me if I'm wrong but I've never seen any game released as early access get taken away from the stores, polished and released again. You do the early access, that's it, that IS your release and there is no turning back. After enough content/balance patches are applied, you do your full release stating that this game is complete and %100 playable and will receive fixes, updates etc etc. You would expect the game to be playable at least %70-80 so the playerbase won't get bored and "scammed".

This game is clearly half done and not suitable for early access and no for gods sake
Early Access ≠ Beta,
Early Access = Release, but,
Early Access ≠ Full Release.
 

Corsair831

Sergeant
WF&S
@Corsair831 Any regrets making this post? Lol
No, I think it's just helped me to understand the mindset of people who hang around this forum; the most toxic people appear to be people who simply hang around the forum to recreationally complain without actually playing the game, and the major problem in general seems to be not necessarily the development of the game itself so much as the concept of Early Access and it being used carelessly
 

AxiosXiphos

Sergeant Knight
M&BWBWF&SNWVC
I've had more communication with the devs of Chivalry than with Bannerlord. 🤷‍♂️
Well when you only have 20 players I guess it is easier to stay in touch with them. They probably have lunch with them. :xf-wink:

Regarding the OP - comparing this discussion to a similar discussion on reddit (a much larger platform for this games community) today is very interesting...

 
Last edited:

Corsair831

Sergeant
WF&S

Corsair831

Sergeant
WF&S
Thanks :smile:

I've just searched through the various Mount and Blade reddits where they're discussing Bannerlord and they all seem at least 10x as positive as this forum. I've had conversations with people in-game who also all seem to love Bannerlord. I'm starting to get the feeling that it is literally just this forum which is an echo chamber of people who dislike the game egging each other on, and outside of here people are actually very positive towards it
 

Zoonanay

Knight
Thanks :smile:

I've just searched through the various Mount and Blade reddits where they're discussing Bannerlord and they all seem at least 10x as positive as this forum. I've had conversations with people in-game who also all seem to love Bannerlord. I'm starting to get the feeling that it is literally just this forum which is an echo chamber of people who dislike the game egging each other on, and outside of here people are actually very positive towards it

While I think the forum can be overly negative, that is largely due to the lack of response or feedback from devs on many important topics. A few examples...

- Crushthrough (Closed Testers were adamant that this was a bad feature for MP yet it was still implemented, then continued to be in main branch for over 3 months).

- South American Servers (Had a "we're working on this" 6 months ago yet no more updates, for a fully priced game not providing half the content of your game is pretty poor practice)

- Duel Mode (While it is on-going in development, individuals made fully functional duel modes within a month of release, yet we're still waiting on even having set amounts of gold, despite dedicated dueling features)

The slow progress is tolerable (despite the misleading "1 year EA" statement), the lack of communication is not. There are dedicated managers fluent in English who should be able to provide greater insight.

This is a unique game, there are few (if any) medieval sandbox competitors, this is why the game recieves such positive reviews, in the gaming industry anything "unique" is considered "good" due to the cyclical, repetitive, nostalgically targetted nature the industry is now in. You should hold the game to your own standards, not the industries appaulingly low standards.
 

AxiosXiphos

Sergeant Knight
M&BWBWF&SNWVC
Thanks :smile:

I've just searched through the various Mount and Blade reddits where they're discussing Bannerlord and they all seem at least 10x as positive as this forum. I've had conversations with people in-game who also all seem to love Bannerlord. I'm starting to get the feeling that it is literally just this forum which is an echo chamber of people who dislike the game egging each other on, and outside of here people are actually very positive towards it
It would be easy for me to agree with you and just say - "yeah forum users are all negative nancies"...

However I think that is doing the forum an injustice. There are a few important things to remember about this community;
  1. It's the oldest M&B community.
  2. The players here are the most passionate and biggest fans of the series.
  3. TW have been extremely schizophrenic with their community content.
  4. Bannerlord progress is definitely very slow (and sometimes has gone backwards).
The fact that the users here are so bitter is because they have waited a long time for this game and really really want to love it. However they have already waited 9 years; and now any real changes seem very slow (and often we get changes no one asked for like block delay).

Yeah it's an echo chamber and yes other communities tend to be largely much more positive. Let's remember that Bannerlord has great reviews and a strong steam player count (at least for SP). But that's because many players have just discovered the M&B series and fallen in love with it. Bannerlord is still M&B; and even an unfinished M&B is much better then what other producers are throwing out these days.

As always - M&B Bannerlord is a good game; because it is still M&B. However it's not all we hoped for (at least so far); and many forum users feel like they have done their time already waiting for this game.

i actually share the exhaustion that many players feel for this series. I waited just as long as everyone else - I just refuse to be negative about it. The moment I no longer enjoy playing / talking about this game I will be long gone.
 

Gibby Jr

Marquis
Thanks :smile:

I've just searched through the various Mount and Blade reddits where they're discussing Bannerlord and they all seem at least 10x as positive as this forum. I've had conversations with people in-game who also all seem to love Bannerlord. I'm starting to get the feeling that it is literally just this forum which is an echo chamber of people who dislike the game egging each other on, and outside of here people are actually very positive towards it

Check the steam stats. Load the game up and see how many people are on the server list, then compare that to Warband. Either of these things will immediately show you that the majority of people do not like Bannerlord. This forum is constant complaints because there really hasn’t been anything positive to say about the progress of the multiplayer since... well, at all. There wasn’t anything positive to say during the alpha except when they made it so right click overrode left click, which made blocking possible in combat. Yea, before competitive players got invited to the alpha the blocking didn’t work in the game and it took them weeks after being informed to fix it. Maybe that gives you an idea of the low level of attention afforded to the MP by TW, or maybe you think they did great despite a player count that crashed through the floor in 2 weeks and long wait times for basic fixes.

The MP devs themselves are only partly responsible for this, and they are partly because during the beta period I remember arguing, along with others, with MP devs who were defending things like the universal implementation of a class system and block delay, but the primary target of any disappointment should be the higher up decision makers. At this point I wouldn’t be surprised if they’ve just written the MP off as a failure. I mean, they get no more than 300-500 concurrent players in MP at any one time, 500 is a very generous upper limit too, and half of that number actively dislikes the game but continues to abuse themselves by playing it anyway.

Obviously among the small number of people still playing Bannerlord now you’re more likely to encounter people that like it in game, because the people that didn’t like it have mostly stopped playing. That’s sort of how it works with any game, so not sure why encountering people with positive views of the game in game would lead you to think this forum is an echo chamber.

It’s disappointing because everyone wanted Bannerlord to be good and if it was just Warband 2.0, with custom servers, servers that didn’t crash after a game ends, warband gear selection or far better customisation options for classes, combat and balance fixes which the community has been asking for for almost 2 years, then it would have a much larger playerbase right now than it does. Warband still gets up to 1000 concurrent people in its MP at prime time in the evening, while Bannerlord can’t get half that. If you seriously think those facts can lead you to the conclusion that this is an echo chamber and that outside of the forums it’s all roses and daisies and everyone loves Bannerlord, then you’re deluded.
 

Golodir

Banned
WBM&BWF&SNWVC
Check the steam stats. Load the game up and see how many people are on the server list, then compare that to Warband. Either of these things will immediately show you that the majority of people do not like Bannerlord. This forum is constant complaints because there really hasn’t been anything positive to say about the progress of the multiplayer since... well, at all. There wasn’t anything positive to say during the alpha except when they made it so right click overrode left click, which made blocking possible in combat. Yea, before competitive players got invited to the alpha the blocking didn’t work in the game and it took them weeks after being informed to fix it. Maybe that gives you an idea of the low level of attention afforded to the MP by TW, or maybe you think they did great despite a player count that crashed through the floor in 2 weeks and long wait times for basic fixes.

The MP devs themselves are only partly responsible for this, and they are partly because during the beta period I remember arguing, along with others, with MP devs who were defending things like the universal implementation of a class system and block delay, but the primary target of any disappointment should be the higher up decision makers. At this point I wouldn’t be surprised if they’ve just written the MP off as a failure. I mean, they get no more than 300-500 concurrent players in MP at any one time, 500 is a very generous upper limit too, and half of that number actively dislikes the game but continues to abuse themselves by playing it anyway.

Obviously among the small number of people still playing Bannerlord now you’re more likely to encounter people that like it in game, because the people that didn’t like it have mostly stopped playing. That’s sort of how it works with any game, so not sure why encountering people with positive views of the game in game would lead you to think this forum is an echo chamber.

It’s disappointing because everyone wanted Bannerlord to be good and if it was just Warband 2.0, with custom servers, servers that didn’t crash after a game ends, warband gear selection or far better customisation options for classes, combat and balance fixes which the community has been asking for for almost 2 years, then it would have a much larger playerbase right now than it does. Warband still gets up to 1000 concurrent people in its MP at prime time in the evening, while Bannerlord can’t get half that. If you seriously think those facts can lead you to the conclusion that this is an echo chamber and that outside of the forums it’s all roses and daisies and everyone loves Bannerlord, then you’re deluded.
no gibby wait I got told in public skirmish that the game is great, you are deffo wrong.
 
Top Bottom