Print

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

[Pandarsenic]

I've decided against buying Warband or WF&S because I already bought Vanilla M&B and I don't feel like buying it again.

[Sordid]

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.

Actually no, it isn't. Actions speak louder than words, and the fact that they continued to develop it shows quite clearly that it was not finished at all despite them saying otherwise. You can't eat your pie and have it too, it's an either/or. Either it was finished, and in that case Warband wouldn't exist, or they were lying.

[Flare]

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.

Actually no, it isn't. Actions speak louder than words, and the fact that they continued to develop it shows quite clearly that it was not finished at all despite them saying otherwise. You can't eat your pie and have it too, it's an either/or. Either it was finished, and in that case Warband wouldn't exist, or they were lying.

Why not? Does it specify that the purchaser was the one who decides when it is finished or not? You're treating games as if they actually can be fully completed, and that there are games out there that no one ever can add anything to it simply due to its completeness. There is no objective point when a game is fully completed or not, nor do I think the promise of finishing the game a clause that mandates that they put everything conceivable in the game, as well as never touching it ever again in the future.

[Micro102]

Hmmm Steam has warband for twice as much as fire and sword, but isn't fire and sword suppose to be stand alone with everything warband has but more?

[Krelian]

Hmmm Steam has warband for twice as much as fire and sword, but isn't fire and sword suppose to be stand alone with everything warband has but more?

No, 'with fire and sword' is very different from warband.
Different factions, different items, etc.
And overall, it feels like a whole different game.
In warband the battles are like in braveheart. Bowmen, then send a calvary charge, then infantry to finish the job.
With fire and sword is like battles from the patriot. Lines of musketers shooting each other from distance; and forget on even trying to do a calvary charge.

[Rakonas]

and forget on even trying to do a calvary charge.

Not true, cavalry is actually very effective most of the time.

Hmmm Steam has warband for twice as much as fire and sword, but isn't fire and sword suppose to be stand alone with everything warband has but more?

Fire and Sword is like a standalone mod that you pay for.

[Krelian]

and forget on even trying to do a calvary charge.

Not true, cavalry is actually very effective most of the time.

Yeah, but not a fraction of how it was on warband.
In warband you can field a big line of archers/crossbowmen, and if the enemy comes with a calvary charge, you are pretty much screw, even if there are much less horses than bowmen.
In fire and sword on the other hand, if you charge with a similar force of calvary against some lines of gunmen, most horses will be death before they reach.

My point is, M&B fells like the medieval times, where calavry were the rulers of the battlefield (high level swadians are scary).
In with fire and sword, calavary cant be you main force. You can use it in flanking moves, but forget to make a full charge and be economically efective.

[SalmonGod]

In fire and sword on the other hand, if you charge with a similar force of calvary against some lines of gunmen, most horses will be death before they reach.

So they're kind of like infantry delivery systems.  Riders have their horses shot out from under them, then momentum carries them sliding in underneath the musketeer's feet with smug one-liners loaded and ready.

[KaelGotDwarves]

Polish hussars can still take a point blank shot to the chest and ride on to cut down most of the enemy team.

Large amounts of them still steamroll though everything.

Seriously, whoever made the mod has a hardon for Polish Winged Hussars. It's worth riding with them at least once.

Usually I enjoy swedish musketeers and infantry because Polish just feel too gamey.

[Rakonas]

Polish hussars can still take a point blank shot to the chest and ride on to cut down most of the enemy team.

Large amounts of them still steamroll though everything.

Seriously, whoever made the mod has a hardon for Polish Winged Hussars. It's worth riding with them at least once.

Usually I enjoy swedish musketeers and infantry because Polish just feel too gamey.

These are The Winged Hussars. They're the focal point of the times, and it's no surprise they're the most elite of the elite. Winged Hussars were just as badass in real life.
Personally I marched with swedish rifles, though.

[KaelGotDwarves]

I know their grand history, but they're goddamn everywhere.

It's also a lot of fun to grab dirt cheap cossack mercenaries and outfit them as mounted dragoons with pistols and swords on horseback. They end up looking like a bunch of bloody pirates swarming all over the field. They die much more than the swedes but they're cheaper and look awesome.

[Sordid]

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.

Actually no, it isn't. Actions speak louder than words, and the fact that they continued to develop it shows quite clearly that it was not finished at all despite them saying otherwise. You can't eat your pie and have it too, it's an either/or. Either it was finished, and in that case Warband wouldn't exist, or they were lying.

Why not? Does it specify that the purchaser was the one who decides when it is finished or not? You're treating games as if they actually can be fully completed, and that there are games out there that no one ever can add anything to it simply due to its completeness. There is no objective point when a game is fully completed or not, nor do I think the promise of finishing the game a clause that mandates that they put everything conceivable in the game, as well as never touching it ever again in the future.

Like I said, actions speak louder than words, and from that point of view even the developers agree. Given that they, y'know, continued to develop it. I really don't see how you can rationalize your way around that fact.

[KaelGotDwarves]

Except as mentioned before, version 1.0 was filled with crippling bugs and could no where be considered a finished game - and it was at maybe 1/10 of the promised features of 7+ years ago.

[Sordid]

And yeah, there's that, too.

[freeformschooler]

Play-by-play of my first experience today with this odd little gem:

Joy: HOLY CARP THIS GAME RUNS AT 30 FPS ON MY NETBOOK.
Sadness: ...or at 10FPS if the graphics go anywhere past "truly horrendous".
Joy: Cool! A tutorial!
Sadness: ...that's pretty boring.
Joy: On to the new game!
Sadness: loadingloadingloading
Joy: HOLY SNAP DETAILED CHARACTER CREATION. I can play a badass female noble knight who smiths things!
Sadness: And a lot of the questions were at least half irrelevant to the gameplay.
Joy: I'm in a town! And I just defeated someone!
Sadness: ...And half of the doors don't open, and I can't interact with nearly anything.
Joy: I can talk to people.
SUPER SADNESS: And only recruit explicitly defined named people 
Joy: Alright, now I've got my team of ragtag recruits! Time to venture off into th-
Sadness: "WOULD YOU LIKE TO LEAVE THE AREA?" What!? I guess I expected more sandbox-style on-foot traveling in my sandbox game.

etc.