Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Sordid]

Okay guys, if I just gets Warband am I missing anything from the original game?

there is no features or content from original m&b missing in warband. Basically warband is just an improved mount&blade.

Exactly. Basically, TW got greedy and declared M&B 'finished' so that they could continue working on it under a different name and sell it again as a separate product, even though to anyone with half a brain it's just a further development.

[freeformschooler]

Ah, well alright then. Thanks everyone.

[Rakonas]

Okay guys, if I just gets Warband am I missing anything from the original game?

there is no features or content from original m&b missing in warband. Basically warband is just an improved mount&blade.

Exactly. Basically, TW got greedy and declared M&B 'finished' so that they could continue working on it under a different name and sell it again as a separate product, even though to anyone with half a brain it's just a further development.

So if an expansion is a complete improvement from the original with no features removed, and it doesn't even require the original, it's a ripoff on the part of the devs? Man, complain about with fire and sword being marketed as an
improvement if you want to rip on the lazy devs.
On another note, is there anything good about the black knights at all? It seems to me that they serve only to completely mess up everything. Other than that native expansion is tempting.

[dogstile]

Okay guys, if I just gets Warband am I missing anything from the original game?

there is no features or content from original m&b missing in warband. Basically warband is just an improved mount&blade.

Exactly. Basically, TW got greedy and declared M&B 'finished' so that they could continue working on it under a different name and sell it again as a separate product, even though to anyone with half a brain it's just a further development.

So if an expansion is a complete improvement from the original with no features removed, and it doesn't even require the original, it's a ripoff on the part of the devs? Man, complain about with fire and sword being marketed as an
improvement if you want to rip on the lazy devs.
On another note, is there anything good about the black knights at all? It seems to me that they serve only to completely mess up everything. Other than that native expansion is tempting.

I distinctly remember when I brought M&B that they said on their website that buying it early would entitle me to all the extra stuff they intended to put in, which was why it was cheap.

This might explain why some people felt a little annoyed when they pulled out warband and told the ones playing normal M&B that they get no more.

Anyway, you can turn off dark knights, i'm doing so in my next run

[NewsMuffin]

I'm pretty sure they did take some stuff out of M&B when they made WarBand.
I don't remember what they were. However, when I started up M&B the first time I remember thinking 'Wow, that wasn't in WarBand!' at quite a few things. Those things weren't very good, which is why they weren't in WarBand.

Also, a reason to get the original is that the mounted combat is a lot easier. I can't hit shit in WarBand while I wreck everybody's day in the original.

[Krelian]

I have played 3 mods so far

Native expansion; Sword of damocles; and Floris

and I can say with conviction, that the best one is.....
Diplomacy

lol... both SoD and Floris seemed better than native expansion in my opinion, but after noticing that both mod's best features where identical, I realized that it was actually diplomacy features, which is integrated into those two mods.

Native expansion is nice, but the other two mods kinda offer the same, and more. They lack something like the dark invasion tho, but IMO it doesnt counterweight the other mods features. Plus a dark invasion feels nothing like native xD

Now, betwen those two; IMo both are better than native expansion, but are not perfect.
A small comparison.

As I said, both includes Diplomacy.  Also, both have "after death cam". Both are kinda "must have" for me.

SoD:
-Introduces a huge new map (like 4 times bigger than vanilla, with more towns castles and villages obviously)
-6 new factions, plus the old 6 factions. Of those, two are quite original, and feel new, the other 4 are just too similar to another already existing faction.
-New items. Less than floris tho. It has some fireweapons, but very balanced, they are usefull but doesnt break the game at all (unlike "with fire and sword")
-The bad:
-still on the making, so right know is very unbalanced. Wars and alliances are declared all the time, the world politics are just a huge caos. Also, the bandit guys are either nonexistant, or appears en mass (prepare to fight 200 bandits at once) so its very hard to start a game.
-Lots of repeated castles and towns (in sieges). I had to do the same siege like 3 times in a row conquering 3 different castles. Kinda boring.
-The game loads quick (almost like vanilla), but once playing, the world map tends to lag (you see "jumps" while traveling). This is due to the huge map and 12-13 factions doing stuff.


Floris:
-Vanilla map. If you like native expansion, this one is like it, but with even more stuff.
-You can tell your companions to pick the loot for you. Their inventory skill is actually usefull now! They can also be told to auto update their stuff with the loot.
-New troop tree. A bit chaotic, but there are submods with nice alternatives.
-New arenas (actually fun now), new siege scenarios. Some are quite awesome.
-More eye candy. More tall grass, better sky, better terrain overall, etc.
-Huge amount of new items. More than in SoD, no firearms tho, but it have new mounts (donkeys, mules, and cammels), and more helmets. Some are kite awesome.
-Ability to set amount of reinforcing waves. I set to about 50, so a 800 vs 800 men fight is just one big long fight. Really awesome.
-New musics.
-Minimap on battles.
-The bad:
-Its a mod compilation, so the credit goes to other people actually.
-It is buggy. There are some armors that look awefull (too bright). Some helmet overlap with the armors. Seems like they just added all the stuff they found without filtering to much.
-The sounds are a mess, I have to play with native sounds or the game wont start. But I still have a couple of bugged sounds, including a world map loud noise instead of the traveling horse sound. Super annoying!
-There seem to be a lot of people with that problem, and the support from the mod just ignores us.
-The game tend to lag a lot, specially on loading. Once playing tho, it doesnt lag that much.


Currently Im playing Floris, but only until SoD get more work on it. Once the world in SoD doesnt behave as chaotically as now, and once they add some more contect (lots of mercenaries factions) I will start playing SoD.

Some SS of my current floris game


Example of shinning armor bug

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

My team of bodyguards (another feature). Bunduk, Katrin, Desvali and Nizar. Just took care of a drunk bastard

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Some general ss I found nice.

I have always hated Rolf, so I gave him a donkey for a mount so he can feel noble enough

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

This is how you usually look when you fight nords xD

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Calvary charge

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

My character

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Delivered 500 damage to that poor horse. A two handed sword swing with both horses running at full speed in opossite directions I guess. If this were DF, we would have horse vomit everywhere xD

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

[KaelGotDwarves]

... I thought they introduced Polished Landscapes or Graphical Enhancement mods to Floris? I forgot how much the base game's landscape causes me to cringe.

[Flare]

Okay guys, if I just gets Warband am I missing anything from the original game?

there is no features or content from original m&b missing in warband. Basically warband is just an improved mount&blade.

Exactly. Basically, TW got greedy and declared M&B 'finished' so that they could continue working on it under a different name and sell it again as a separate product, even though to anyone with half a brain it's just a further development.

So if an expansion is a complete improvement from the original with no features removed, and it doesn't even require the original, it's a ripoff on the part of the devs? Man, complain about with fire and sword being marketed as an
improvement if you want to rip on the lazy devs.
On another note, is there anything good about the black knights at all? It seems to me that they serve only to completely mess up everything. Other than that native expansion is tempting.

I distinctly remember when I brought M&B that they said on their website that buying it early would entitle me to all the extra stuff they intended to put in, which was why it was cheap.

Actually, all it said was that they would keep adding things until it was finished. It is also them that decides when it is actually finished as well. Everything above 1.000 is gratuitous bonus material, they were not legally bound, nor personally do I think they or any other product producer be bound by decency to provide extra features beyond the contract.

Not to be purposefully offensive, but a lot of the people on the M&B forums that do say this seems to exhibit a bit of an entitlement complex.

[KaelGotDwarves]

To be fair though, there's people who have supported the game for years and bought it in very early beta and we were promised by Armagan an actual sort of "game" within the sandbox.

Nope, we never got one. Instead the devs basically told us that we had paid for a base for mods and we were lucky to get anything beyond version 1's buggy release.

I mean, anyone else remember how bad castle sieges were?

But I love how we were told for years that multiplayer would be impossible and then out of nowhere Warband announcement.

That was a nice touch.

[Flare]

As far as I recall, sieges didn't change all that much between Warband and the original.

In any case, I think what you're describing there isn't indicative of a game itself, but rather a good game. But whatever the intangible support a game developer may have, I don't think it would ever reach the level of obligating them to make a good game. And while I agree that I'm part of the group that never touches the original native if mods are available, I would still think that they did deliver what can be called a game at the release. Not calling Mount and Blade a game due to its bugs would be like not calling the earlier versions of dwarf fortress due to the bugs.

It makes the original Mount and Blade a bad game no doubt, but I don't think there are good justifications for people who claim that they deserve better. Have they let down people? Yes. But to say that I deserve a better game than this is like a rugby fan declaring to her losing team that she deserves a victory from them simply for the level of her support and the fact that she bought tickets to the final match.

[KaelGotDwarves]

As far as I recall, sieges didn't change all that much between Warband and the original.

There's your problem.

The actual version 1.000 of Mount and Blade didn't have functional siege ladders, yet you were expected to win castle sieges.

Before that there was just what With Fire and Sword has now when you blow the fort with gunpowder, just run up with a hole in the wall.

That was more functional than the broken ladders that didn't even work. Took awhile but it got patched. The modders fixed it actually, and added the siege towers we have today..

The justification for claiming that they deserve better is because people bought the game when Armagan gave lofty goals for his game, and then decided "fuck it" release version 1.000 and you guys are lucky to get anything else. Also I promised you wouldn't have to pay for anymore content but I'm releasing Warband as a separate game, which is basically the first game with Multiplayer and a few tweaks. Oh, and we're asking you to pay for With Fire and Sword when there are better free mods out there.

Basically, I and many others are not nearly as psyched for M&B2 as I was for M&B. I'll wait for it to be on sale, and I was a early beta tester for the original.

[Vibhor]

Games with the "Pay for Beta" type of business models usually pull that one out.
Minecraft seems to be doing that now. It completely fucks over the "indie" tag.

[KaelGotDwarves]

Yeah, please do not take it as bitching- I have gotten my money's worth out of M&B and have bought 3 copies over the years of the original for myself and others. I was instantly invited to the Warband beta because of having supported M&B in the original beta and bought that when it was released too.

I got involved ... back in 2004/2005. I do not even remember anymore.

All I'm saying is that Taleworlds pulled some pretty douche moves on the old fanbase, while relying on the fanbase to provide them with mods, bugfixes, and gameplay that have helped them sell the game.

EDIT: I mean, you can read my first post on the first page of this thread and my posts in the first M&B thread we had on bay12 back in 2008. That makes me lol looking back.

[Flare]

As far as I recall, sieges didn't change all that much between Warband and the original.

There's your problem.

The actual version 1.000 of Mount and Blade didn't have functional siege ladders, yet you were expected to win castle sieges.

Before that there was just what With Fire and Sword has now when you blow the fort with gunpowder, just run up with a hole in the wall.[/quote]

That was more functional than the broken ladders that didn't even work. Took awhile but it got patched. The modders fixed it actually, and added the siege towers we have today..[/quote]

Some towns and castle did have sieges where troops can join in if I recall correctly, some however weren't aligned properly meaning that your troops couldn't get over the ankle high lip of displacement. You could, and some people did, win those sieges by sitting back and plinking the troops with crossbowmen and archers from afar, others went rambo and slaughtered the garrisons single-handedly.

In any case, refer back to the distinguishment between a whether a game is good or bad, and what is a game. The original Mount and Blade was bad at the release, but it was still a finished game nonetheless.

The justification for claiming that they deserve better is because people bought the game when Armagan gave lofty goals for his game, and then decided "fuck it" release version 1.000 and you guys are lucky to get anything else. Also I promised you wouldn't have to pay for anymore content but I'm releasing Warband as a separate game, which is basically the first game with Multiplayer and a few tweaks. Oh, and we're asking you to pay for With Fire and Sword when there are better free mods out there.

Since signing up with Paradox, I think their schedule has been much more rushed than when they were actually independent. I don't think it was so much as "fuck it" but the publishers breathing down their necks.

Regarding not paying for anymore content, I think it would be unreasonable to demand something that could not be upgraded. It's like demanding money from a director that remade on of his films, or from a yacht company where one bought a boat when it was not finished and demanded that it be upgraded to the latest model when only the bare skeleton was presented for approval. All in all, it's unreasonable to demand that a game be made so that in no way conceivable that anyone can better it, or that the devs not make a sequel to it or build on top of it for a sequel. Everything in Diablo 2 should have been in Diablo 1, and everything in Homeworld 2 and Cataclysm should have been in the original homeworld are not statements that, I think, you would find very intuitive nor persuasive.

That being said, the case of buying a game in beta with no real idea of when it's going to be finished or what exactly is it going to look like when it's finished is a unique example in business transactions though. No one at the time of transaction knows what the end product will be like, and because of this, neither the seller or the buyer can point back to the time of the transaction and legitimately say anything about what is expected and what wasn't (don't remember what you mean by lofty goals though, were they the ones in Armagan's posts in the turkish board?). This applies both for the consumer as well as the developer. But that the developer not know how the game is going to turn out isn't a basis in which the consumer can claim whether or not the product in question is finished. That question still is decided by the developer, and specifically in this case, the publisher.

I think the main issue here is the confusion between "finished" and "complete". Take for example, the Dawn of war games. Arguably the last expansion, soul storm, isn't all that different from the first one aside from the addition of new factions., all the expansions in between- winter assault and dark crusade just introduced new factions and campaigns. Each of these games is finished in terms of them being a product. All of them included however, represents the complete game.

The promise that the devs who made Mount and Blade, when they promised to finish the game when a person bought beta meant the former I believe. In any case, the second one would be an unreasonable interpretation of what that promise meant. That the developers make the game, in which nothing could be added to it- ever, is not a reasonable expectation. We wouldn't expect that from a ship wright that sold a boat to a person who, upon seeing the skeleton of the ship, bought it under the terms that the ship wright would finish it, that the ship wright provide unlimited and indeed, make the ship in such a way that she herself could in now way, ever better the basic design of the ship. It would be perfectly permissible to most of us that new ships, based on that model, enter into the market being better than the one sold.

[dogstile]

Okay guys, if I just gets Warband am I missing anything from the original game?

there is no features or content from original m&b missing in warband. Basically warband is just an improved mount&blade.

Exactly. Basically, TW got greedy and declared M&B 'finished' so that they could continue working on it under a different name and sell it again as a separate product, even though to anyone with half a brain it's just a further development.

So if an expansion is a complete improvement from the original with no features removed, and it doesn't even require the original, it's a ripoff on the part of the devs? Man, complain about with fire and sword being marketed as an
improvement if you want to rip on the lazy devs.
On another note, is there anything good about the black knights at all? It seems to me that they serve only to completely mess up everything. Other than that native expansion is tempting.

I distinctly remember when I brought M&B that they said on their website that buying it early would entitle me to all the extra stuff they intended to put in, which was why it was cheap.

Actually, all it said was that they would keep adding things until it was finished. It is also them that decides when it is actually finished as well. Everything above 1.000 is gratuitous bonus material, they were not legally bound, nor personally do I think they or any other product producer be bound by decency to provide extra features beyond the contract.

Not to be purposefully offensive, but a lot of the people on the M&B forums that do say this seems to exhibit a bit of an entitlement complex.

Nah, of course they'd side with the developers. There is a reason I don't go on their forums, if you disagree with the developer you get flamed, its full of fanboys.

I'm not entitled, I was just annoyed. Maybe if he outlined some actual goals and made it so everyone knew what he was attempting then I wouldn't have been as miffed when he was like "yup, that's it guys".