Holy shit that looks so awesome.
It keeps the style of Warband but improves the graphics majorly.
Looks amazing. Try the M&B franchise if you haven't, it's so good.
Fuck me with a rake, I want this so bad.
[QUOTE=roxter;42334458]Looks amazing. Try the M&B franchise if you haven't, it's so good.[/QUOTE]
The Mount and Blade franchise is terrible. Mount and Blade vanilla is a waste of your money, Warband is basically M&B1 with some improved features and multiplayer, With Fire and Sword is alright I suppose, and Napoleonic Wars is just a Warband multiplayer add on.
A bunch of expansions that hardly add anything new to the series and only exist for the purpose of extracting as much money as possible from the fans. The screenshots so far show literally the exact same engine just with some improved graphics and bloom.
[QUOTE=Pat4ever;42334649]The Mount and Blade franchise is terrible. Mount and Blade vanilla is a waste of your money, Warband is basically M&B1 with some improved features and multiplayer, With Fire and Sword is alright I suppose, and Napoleonic Wars is just a Warband multiplayer add on.
A bunch of expansions that hardly add anything new to the series and only exist for the purpose of extracting as much money as possible from the fans. The screenshots so far show literally the exact same engine just with some improved graphics and bloom.[/QUOTE]
That's extra heretical
[QUOTE=Pat4ever;42334649]The Mount and Blade franchise is terrible. Mount and Blade vanilla is a waste of your money, Warband is basically M&B1 with some improved features and multiplayer, With Fire and Sword is alright I suppose, and Napoleonic Wars is just a Warband multiplayer add on.
A bunch of expansions that hardly add anything new to the series and only exist for the purpose of extracting as much money as possible from the fans. [B]The screenshots so far show literally the exact same engine just with some improved graphics and bloom.[/B][/QUOTE]
How can you extract that from the images exactly? :v:
[U]You can't.
[/U]
Theres going to be more information released about the game, so wait with the sweeping generalizations until you actually have something to base them on.
[QUOTE=Pat4ever;42334649]The Mount and Blade franchise is terrible.[/QUOTE]
Looks like someone couldn't get past Sea Raiders
[QUOTE=Pat4ever;42334649]The Mount and Blade franchise is terrible. Mount and Blade vanilla is a waste of your money, Warband is basically M&B1 with some improved features and multiplayer, With Fire and Sword is alright I suppose, and Napoleonic Wars is just a Warband multiplayer add on.
A bunch of expansions that hardly add anything new to the series and only exist for the purpose of extracting as much money as possible from the fans. The screenshots so far show literally the exact same engine just with some improved graphics and bloom.[/QUOTE]
You've played all the M&B games despite not liking any of them and come onto a discussion thread of its sequel to talk about a series you don't like? That's dedication!
[QUOTE=Pat4ever;42334649]A bunch of expansions that hardly add anything new to the series and only exist for the purpose of extracting as much money as possible from the fans.[/QUOTE]
Lol and all together they probably cost one normal new game. When they were released. Not on sale.
[editline]28th September 2013[/editline]
Napoleonic Wars didn't capture my interest, so I actually came up with a pretty ingenious solution: I didn't buy it and continued to play Warband.
Can't wait for this, I'm hoping the multiplayer will be in a bit more depth even though I loved it in Warband... Co-op campaign maybe?
[editline]28th September 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=Pat4ever;42334649]...[B]Warband is basically M&B1 with some improved features and multiplayer[/B]... ...[B]Napoleonic Wars is just a Warband multiplayer add on[/B]...[/QUOTE]
I'm not disagreeing with this, but nobody has ever claimed anything else so how are these bad things? :v:
Mount & Blade vanilla isn't really necessary to get just like Fable isn't really necessary to get because you have Fable: Lost Chapters... Do you think the M&B games are actually bad? Maybe explain why?
[QUOTE=MrJazzy;42335216]Can't wait for this, I'm hoping the multiplayer will be in a bit more depth even though I loved it in Warband... Co-op campaign maybe?
[/QUOTE]
Co-op campaign would be the absolute best, but I'm not sure how they would implement it. Would the other player be in the host player's party as a companion, or would he have his own army to command? Or perhaps the second player would have his own troops, but would move with the main player everywhere as a mix of the two.
[QUOTE=Boba_Fett;42335290]Co-op campaign would be the absolute best, but I'm not sure how they would implement it. Would the other player be in the host player's party as a companion, or would he have his own army to command? Or perhaps the second player would have his own troops, but would move with the main player everywhere as a mix of the two.[/QUOTE]
I can't think of any other way than for them to be in the same party to be honest - but I don't mind that.
I absolutely love the M&B games! Graphics look top notch, I hope we can see some gameplay videos soon and not have to wait another year.
[QUOTE=Colossal_Dragon;42335330]I absolutely love the M&B games! Graphics look top notch, I hope we can see some gameplay videos soon and not have to wait another year.[/QUOTE]
Lol, I wouldn't really say "top notch" but M&B has never been strong on graphics so I don't mind. The gameplay is where it shines.
Also. FINALLY. Ugh. I've been waiting so long for this. I can't wait. I've played so many hundreds of hours of Warband and I can't wait to waste enormous chunks of my life in this too.
[QUOTE=MrJazzy;42335300]I can't think of any other way than for them to be in the same party to be honest - but I don't mind that.[/QUOTE]
I wouldn't mind it either.
Like a year and a half ago, they stated they would have a hard time implementing co-op, yet a modder managed to do it himself in Warband.
I'm hoping the non-combat "in-level" gameplay will be more interesting than in previous games. There was never a reason to walk around a village or a town unless you needed to like talk to the village elder, guildsman or find a murderer, and then it was just annoying to have to walk there instead of just pressing a tab in the town menu.
(I know several mods added these tabs, but I would like to have more to do on the town and village levels).
I'm also hoping they make things like,
[quote]You can be anything from a lonesome adventurer to a commander of armies or an owner of villages, castles or towns. [/quote]
, actually interesting, useful and viable. It feels like even though the game is sandboxy, the only rewarding achievment in the end is to make massive armies and join a kingdom and/or eventually make your own kingdom.
Even though I love the game it still lacks a lot of depth and immersion, in the end the reason for why I play it is because I want to become as powerful as possible. Also, maybe characters will actually have personalities and not be [I]exactly[/I] the same as everyone else.
Holy shit give me it now
[QUOTE=Pat4ever;42334649]The Mount and Blade franchise is terrible. Mount and Blade vanilla is a waste of your money, Warband is basically M&B1 with some improved features and multiplayer, With Fire and Sword is alright I suppose, and Napoleonic Wars is just a Warband multiplayer add on.
A bunch of expansions that hardly add anything new to the series and only exist for the purpose of extracting as much money as possible from the fans. The screenshots so far show literally the exact same engine just with some improved graphics and bloom.[/QUOTE]
Vanilla has mods, Multiplayer was a significant add on in Warband and the scale of the features implemented more than made up for the copied factions and re-textured armour models, which accompanied many, many new items.
Napoleonic Wars wasn't even produced by Taleworlds, and there is literally nothing in it aside from maps (and I'm fairly certain that's not necessarily true either) that has been copied from Warband other than core gameplay mechanics.
Sure, Fire and Sword was fairly mediocre, but you can't deny that had a significant amount of content for those capable of looking past its failings.
[QUOTE=MrJazzy;42335377]I'm hoping the non-combat "in-level" gameplay will be more interesting than in previous games. There was never a reason to walk around a village or a town unless you needed to like talk to the village elder, guildsman or find a murderer, and then it was just annoying to have to walk there instead of just pressing a tab in the town menu.
(I know several mods added these tabs, but I would like to have more to do on the town and village levels).[/QUOTE]
I think there was a decent amount to do with towns and villages (particularly with mods) but more is always better. I want an overhaul of the combat system. The basic combat is very good but there are some glaring problems that show up when you start to get good at it e.g. spin-thrusting (or whatever the standard term for it is) and polearms doing damage with the haft. War of the Roses, despite its many flaws, handled the polearms well. I hope they adopt a similar system.
I for one enjoyed Fire and Sword :v:
[QUOTE=RenegadeCop;42335399]I just hope they make the voices as hilarious as they are in Warband
"I WILL DRINK FROM YOUR SKAALLL"[/QUOTE]
ITS ALMOST HARVESTING SEASON
[editline]28th September 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=MrJazzy;42335433]I for one enjoyed Fire and Sword :v:[/QUOTE]
As did I. I think the setting and guns made it less well-balanced and skill-based than Warband, but other than that it was pretty good.
"You better not be a manhunter."
[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;42335428]I think there was a decent amount to do with towns and villages (particularly with mods) but more is always better.[/QUOTE]
Essnetially, the only times I ever entered villages was when I needed to talk to the elder, find that murderer or if there was a fight. I've never entered a town, encountering something unexpected or wanting to explore or something.
Owning towns and villages also never really made you feel like you owned them, you just recieved taxes from them and recruits and the only customization is less than 10 constructions/upgrades that only really had minor effects.
I would love to be able to engage in deeper politics, become a trader, manhunter, town mayor, adventurer or whatever. I mean, you could, but you could never get anywhere with it.
Interesting, seems like they narrowed it down to three major factions. They probably ended up combining the Rhodoks and the Swadians, the Vaegirs with the Nords and the Sarranids with the Khergits.
I'm not really sure how I feel about it, but I feel like it could make the conflict and the discourse between the three more forefront. I'm pretty sure they also mentioned that there will be minor sub-factions such as different noble houses.
[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;42335434]As did I. I think the setting and guns made it less well-balanced and skill-based than Warband, but other than that it was pretty good.[/QUOTE]
Yeah it's not particularily well balanced, but I love the idea of guns and being able to play as 17th century Sweden was pretty cool.
I hope the C-RPG guys mod this pretty quick.
[QUOTE=Silent-Bob;42335506]I hope the C-RPG guys mod this pretty quick.[/QUOTE]
I'd definitely pick up crpg again for M&B2.
I dont care about pretty graphics, all I want from this game is co-op campaign and more stuff to do.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.