Will TW do a No Mans Sky thing?

[xdj1nn]

The nms comeback story really gets overblown. Even with all it's updates it's still only a decent space exploration game, far from the 10/10 game of the decade the hype train led pepole to belive it would be. Similarly even if bannerlord pulls a "nms" and continues to get updates throught the years I don't think pepole on this forum will be satisfied because it will never be the bannerlord that we fantasied about.

I disagree, the bannerlord we all wanted was a game that features all "basic" features introduced by mods in Warband, with few additions and improvement on the engine so better more ambitious mods could be made.

They've so far been delivering on the engine, the "basic features" are no-where to be seen, we have the slap in of half-arsed crafting (weapons only and really odd to work with), we have the removal of depth from certain systems present in Warband, and we are still missing key-components from Warband. My take's that the game's "30%" done to what it must achieve so the fan-base digs into it like crack, and it's been ages under development.... Yet I cannot guess where they are really at in development for I do not know their alpha builds nor what they are actually working on (that isn't fixing) and as such I can't know for sure if they would manage or not to patch it through overtime. I don't even know what's their idea of a finished game (let's call it the game's super-ego), it could be perfection incarnate, or it could be just a lame generic platform for modding, and that I'm sure we'll never know.

 

[Lucius Confucius]

Some seem to forget that Bannerlord trumps Warband. Does anyone even remember Warband sieges, or has that memory gone to heaven?

Even a majority who voted in a certain thread thinks that Bannerlord is a better game than Warband. And that's on this forum nonetheless. Everytime I bring that up, all the naysayers and whiners go silent as though their arguments are scooped from a shallow pond.

So yeah, no. Bannerlord is objectively already better than NMS. Just look and compare the steam reviews of the games. One is still in early access and has good reviews while the other has actually released.

Not saying that Bannelord is perfect, it still has a way to go.

 

[Kentucky 『 ＨＥＩＧＵＩ 』 James]

Some seem to forget that Bannerlord trumps Warband. Does anyone even remember Warband sieges, or has that memory gone to heaven?

Theyre just different games in the same formula. Both have their issues. But having played both back to back, warband is just a lot less annoying, mainly because it's just simpler. Bannerlord adds so much ****e but it just weighs down the experience.

 

[110951667]

If TW is still based on Turkey, the economy could affect development. For example, the skilled people might be running off to another country, or TW's pay become so worthless that they'd rather take foreign online jobs, so TW is left with less skilled people.

The economy status of Turkey won't affect TW in ways that you worried about because the payment for the skeleton crews of TW don't need to be matching the local HR market, besides the majority of TW's revenue came from oversea in other currency.
What does affect TW's game development is the decision maker in case of game's design. From what I've been noticed via observing the quality of MB2, it seems that this key decision maker of TW for MB2 design tasks could be someone with a marketing researcher background/pov or a promoted fellow programmer who was a casual gamer and has played very little PC games. And this is why you can see MB2 been a game with features of great ambition and great potential, yet not good at any.

 

[Ser Jon]

I was about to say "Who is this Lucius person?" but then I read their post and the memory hit. To answer the question presented above though: Warband > Bannerlord, especially in sieges. You can say Warband's sieges were simpler and that's why it works better if you want, but it simply worked better. Which makes it less annoying and more enjoyable to get through.

And we would all be lucky if Bannerlord could become as good as No Man's Sky, even if launch is a mess. They have come such a long way, with countless massive free updates adding so much new stuff to the game. Using the two as a comparative and then leaving NMS in a negative light despite what it has achieved is absolutely comical and plays off like a typical andy view point. With Bannerlord release coming in just a few months and just how hilariously unready the game is, we all should be hoping it follows NMS's path forward.

 

[Bluko88]

Nope. They're just about to harvest the cash from the mindless console masses and leave us in the dirt.
Less coding, more whaling!

Pretty much this

No Man's Sky was an extremely ambitious game. The only thing that ever bothered me about NMS at release was the lack of actual online gameplay. Which still isn't really there BTW, you basically have to join sessions/instances. NMS was fine at launch, didn't live up to the hype, but I had fun for the 50 or so hours I played it.

While NMS has had a lot of work done to improve it, it's still basically the same game. Fun for a bit, but too grindy for me.


There's so much missing or incomplete from Bannerlord at this point; no banners (game is literally called Bannerlord), voice acting isn't finished, game isn't terribly well balanced, battle terrain isn't finished, etc. etc. etc. I get no game is ever really truly finished, but Bannerlord isn't even close. It's a disgrace. It's so pathetic that they're releasing the game just to trick more people into buying their unfinished product.

PC folks may be able to cope with mods, but console gamers are literally getting robbed here. This game is darn near Cyberpunk 2077 levels of bad. TW might see some sales, but word of mouth still matters - and this game is very lacking. I really don't see this helping them much in terms of revenue.


Whatever I guess I should be happy we finally have a "1.0" version to mod around. But I am also not happy my grim predictions have mostly come to pass. Sadly something tells this will be the last Mount & Blade game, as I can't see anyone being legitimately excited for MB3.

 

[MariusTitus]

Some seem to forget that Bannerlord trumps Warband. Does anyone even remember Warband sieges, or has that memory gone to heaven?

Even a majority who voted in a certain thread thinks that Bannerlord is a better game than Warband. And that's on this forum nonetheless. Everytime I bring that up, all the naysayers and whiners go silent as though their arguments are scooped from a shallow pond.

So yeah, no. Bannerlord is objectively already better than NMS. Just look and compare the steam reviews of the games. One is still in early access and has good reviews while the other has actually released.

Not saying that Bannelord is perfect, it still has a way to go.

Bannerlord sieges are newer, and still less enjoyable than old Warband ones. Bannerlord has no personalities for lords, Warband has (show me ONE of BL's lords that you remember as much as feast beast Harlaus). Bannerlord has random mooks for companions that you forget the moment you hire them, Warband has Jeremus, Ymira, Alayen, Rolf, people that mean something. Bannerlord has useless skill system that doesn't really matter, Warband had RPG way of doing things that worked perfect. Bannerlord has no difference in troops except armor (which I will again emphasize, was fixed after TWO YEARS), Warband had noticeable difference in skill of veterans and recruits (remember Huscarls, anyone?). Bannerlord has such dumb AI that soldiers get peppered with arrows unless you literally tell them, "raise your shields, you absolute, utter idiots!!!", in Warband soldiers raise shields themselves if they feel they might be shot at. I don't need to continue, the basic mechanics, the feel, the soul of the game, it isn't there. Heck even fights themselves are more enjoyable in Warband than in Bannerlord. So no, Warband >>>> Bannerlord in its current state. I am in a position to compare, 2000hrs on Warband, and nearing 1000 on Bannerlord, so **** yes I know what I'm talking about.

 

[Lucius Confucius]

Bannerlord only need Custom Troops and Banners for it to be good enough. If more features are added afterwards, only better. It does not need to make NMS journey.

Warband >>>> Bannerlord

Your opinion, which is wrong according to my opinion, and the opninion of a majority who voted in a certain thread.

Blabla bla

Ah yes, the old trollcusation. So old and repeated that it has no power or function. Go touch grass you sweet summer child.

 

[loulou76100]

Your opinion, which is wrong according to my opinion, and the opninion of a majority who voted in a certain thread.

ok now respond to the rest of his post

 

[Ser Jon]

Bannerlord sieges are newer, and still less enjoyable than old Warband ones. Bannerlord has no personalities for lords, Warband has (show me ONE of BL's lords that you remember as much as feast beast Harlaus). Bannerlord has random mooks for companions that you forget the moment you hire them, Warband has Jeremus, Ymira, Alayen, Rolf, people that mean something. Bannerlord has useless skill system that doesn't really matter, Warband had RPG way of doing things that worked perfect. Bannerlord has no difference in troops except armor (which I will again emphasize, was fixed after TWO YEARS), Warband had noticeable difference in skill of veterans and recruits (remember Huscarls, anyone?). Bannerlord has such dumb AI that soldiers get peppered with arrows unless you literally tell them, "raise your shields, you absolute, utter idiots!!!", in Warband soldiers raise shields themselves if they feel they might be shot at. I don't need to continue, the basic mechanics, the feel, the soul of the game, it isn't there. Heck even fights themselves are more enjoyable in Warband than in Bannerlord. So no, Warband >>>> Bannerlord in its current state. I am in a position to compare, 2000hrs on Warband, and nearing 1000 on Bannerlord, so **** yes I know what I'm talking about.

There's a reason Warband became so iconic, because despite its age and its looks, all of the charm and life is there. Bannerlord has not, and some people gotta start to wonder why that exactly is. If I could get a Bannerlord where the AI can climb a ladder and the lords and ladies don't feel like copy pastas but only completely not interesting, it would bring the game up in my opinion by like twenty points.

But yes, that's just my roundabout way of agreeing. Warband > Bannerlord. Especially now that we know it's releasing in its empty, broken and boring state. It will never compare to Warband, absolutely never.

Bannerlord only need Custom Troops and Banners for it to be good enough. If more features are added afterwards, only better. It does not need to make NMS journey.

Your opinion, which is wrong according to my opinion, and the opninion of a majority who voted in a certain thread.

Ah yes, the old trollcusation. So old and repeated that it has no power or function. Go touch grass you sweet summer child.

I didn't call you a troll, only said I remembered you. However, given that you cut the entirety of my post to complain about something I didn't even say and given prior history, it's now safe for me to say that you are, indeed, reacting for the same reasons a troll does.

 

[MariusTitus]

Bannerlord only need Custom Troops and Banners for it to be good enough. If more features are added afterwards, only better. It does not need to make NMS journey.

Your opinion, which is wrong according to my opinion, and the opninion of a majority who voted in a certain thread.

Ah yes, the old trollcusation. So old and repeated that it has no power or function. Go touch grass you sweet summer child.

Are you seriously so full of yourself that you keep quoting your poll, that somehow ended up in favour of Bannerlord? Like it's absolute, meaning you're right and everyone is wrong? Buddy, it was 1 of many, and even in that thread, your glorious golden poll, you have people saying exact same thing as now. And yes, I'd also like you to answer to rest of my post. Otherwise you're just some fool who's full of himself and needs to prove his might and right, not a guy who wants to discuss.

btw: majority is 109 yes/95 no? That's one hell of a majority bruh

 

[Bjorn The Dead]

ok now respond to the rest of his post

That is the point, is it not? Completely ignoring all of the point Marius made and advancing to say BL is better. Well, what is this called? Oh right, a troll.

 

[CrazyElf]

The issue is how the patching is going to be after the release.

We know that Taleworlds is releasing DLC - I wonder if they will be working on the base game as well while doing more DLC.

I don't even think NMS deserves the reputation it got as some kind of super turn around. All they really did was take the game to where it should have been to begin with. Really, it deserves a lasting negative reputation for not delivering on launch what it said it would.

The issue is that once a game launches in a poor state, its reputation isn't coming back easily.

 

[Goyyyio]

I don't even think NMS deserves the reputation it got as some kind of super turn around. All they really did was take the game to where it should have been to begin with. Really, it deserves a lasting negative reputation for not delivering on launch what it said it would.

I think you're forgetting NMS was an unique situation for a small indie game dev, where things got out of hand. I'm sure, seeing how much work they've done for NMS to make it even better than what it was promised, that they do care about making a great gaming experience, and I'm 100% sure they wanted to release it that way in the first place.

NMS can't be compared to Bannerlord. Hello Games was a small, like less than 10 people company working in a AAA game, Taleworlds has way more people and resources to work on it, but they are unable to deliver a better game for a simple case of either ignorance, or lack of imagination and ambition. No man's sky was an ambitious game that could only do less because of time restriction, pressure, and a situation that was out of hands. Warband was an ambitious game, that could only do less because of lack of resources and people working, but turned out a great experience thanks to those restriction. Bannerlord, is an unambitious game that improved 2 areas of it's predecesor (graphics and combat) and turned is back on everything else, because a lack of wanting to, modders are the proof of this.

 

[MostBlunted]

So yeah, no. Bannerlord is objectively already better than NMS. Just look and compare the steam reviews of the games. One is still in early access and has good reviews while the other has actually released.

Someday I want to be as good as you in trolling

 

[five bucks]

I think you're forgetting NMS was an unique situation for a small indie game dev, where things got out of hand. I'm sure, seeing how much work they've done for NMS to make it even better than what it was promised, that they do care about making a great gaming experience, and I'm 100% sure they wanted to release it that way in the first place.

NMS can't be compared to Bannerlord. Hello Games was a small, like less than 10 people company working in a AAA game, Taleworlds has way more people and resources to work on it, but they are unable to deliver a better game for a simple case of either ignorance, or lack of imagination and ambition. No man's sky was an ambitious game that could only do less because of time restriction, pressure, and a situation that was out of hands. Warband was an ambitious game, that could only do less because of lack of resources and people working, but turned out a great experience thanks to those restriction. Bannerlord, is an unambitious game that improved 2 areas of it's predecesor (graphics and combat) and turned is back on everything else, because a lack of wanting to, modders are the proof of this.

Regardless of Hello Games' individual circumstances such as time pressure or whatever other excuse, they did the wrong thing by knowingly overpromising what would be available at release. Instead of just being up front and saying "we'll have multiplayer for you about a year from now but it won't be in launch."

 

[Embers]

Just skipped through all the comments and wanted to leave it here:

I just hope after the full release, all TW team switch back their focus on actually improving the game, so they patch more,faster and add new content, instead of dividing the team pc/console.

 

[Dodgy]

I can't believe that there's arguing about which is better between Warband and Bannerlord.

And it's not just because Warband has better features that are more fleshed out compared to Bannerlord that only has better graphics/engine.

The point in my opinion should be: how is it possible that in a sequel, made by the same studio, which was released in EA 10 years or so after Warband, after more than 2 years of EA, we get an unfinished product that is so disappointing we are comparing it to its now 12 years old predecessor, which still wins by a landslide when it comes to actual gameplay.

 

[Ser Jon]

I can't believe that there's arguing about which is better between Warband and Bannerlord.

And it's not just because Warband has better features that are more fleshed out compared to Bannerlord that only has better graphics/engine.

The point in my opinion should be: how is it possible that in a sequel, made by the same studio, which was released in EA 10 years or so after Warband, after more than 2 years of EA, we get an unfinished product that is so disappointing we are comparing it to its now 12 years old predecessor, which still wins by a landslide when it comes to actual gameplay.

I think it's safe to say why Bannerlord is the way it is now, with this release information hitting. They must have been planning this console stuff for a very long time and major focus was shifted to preparing it for porting long ago. I wouldn't be surprised if it started at EA launch.

 

[Apocal]

To answer the question presented above though: Warband > Bannerlord, especially in sieges. You can say Warband's sieges were simpler and that's why it works better if you want, but it simply worked better.

I don't think getting stuck behind dozens of AI on a ramp in order to face-smash into the wall defenders is a good example of sieges "working."