| Page 1 of 11 |
|
|
 Posted: Mon, 22nd Mar 2010 11:02 Post subject: Mount and Blade Warband |
|
 |
Mount&Blade: Warband
Platform(s) Microsoft Windows
Release date(s) NA March 30, 2010
Genre(s) Action RPG, Simulation
Mount&Blade: Warband is a multi-player expansion pack for action role-playing video game Mount&Blade. The game was developed by TaleWorlds and will be published by Paradox Interactive on March 30, 2010.[2] Warband is the first expansion for Mount&Blade and was first announced in January 2009.
System requirements Intel CPU- Pentium 4 2.0GHz
AMD CPU- Athlon XP 2000+
*Nvidia Graphics Card- Geforce FX 5600 XT
ATI Graphics Card- Radeon X600 Series
*RAM Memory- 1GB
Official website: http://www.taleworlds.com/main.aspx
Some screens: http://www.gamespot.com/pc/rpg/mountbladewarband/images.html?om_act=convert&om_clk=gsimage&tag=images;header;more
Mount and Blade is already out for some time, and for those who like medieval-era rpg/action games this is a must, it was made by an independent company (mainly a turkish couple) and even though it may not have HDR,AA and various other eye candy (yet) it's very promising imo.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
W123
Posts: 2496
Location: USA
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
W123
Posts: 2496
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Mon, 22nd Mar 2010 13:43 Post subject: |
|
|
Ah nice didnt realize it had a single player campaign. Hopefully it will be more varied. Have played the original for about 30+ hours and it gets repetitive as hell... quite addicting hearing the sound your sword makes when you ride past a helpless peon and whack em in the head.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon, 22nd Mar 2010 13:56 Post subject: |
|
|
the campaign does NOT contain multiplayer elements of any sort
multiplayer is strictly battle sessions
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon, 22nd Mar 2010 16:44 Post subject: |
|
|
co-op is for pussies.. real games doesnt need one.. nor should ever have one
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon, 22nd Mar 2010 16:46 Post subject: |
|
|
| Smikis. wrote: | | co-op is for pussies.. real games doesnt need one.. nor should ever have one |
lol, I would only enjoy co-op in such a game because playing alone get's boring and lame sometimes that's all
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon, 22nd Mar 2010 17:40 Post subject: |
|
|
There is co-op against AI, but no campaign. Its like you vs another army of AI etc.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon, 22nd Mar 2010 18:05 Post subject: |
|
|
It wouldn't be too unlikely for coop campaign to be modded in.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon, 22nd Mar 2010 22:19 Post subject: |
|
|
the way i understood it, you can play coop battles with friends against AI
like have a bunch of buddies defend a castle from an AI army
i doubt campaign multiplayer would be that easy to mod in
the way the campaign map and battle maps work are quite different
battle maps are realtime, campaign map is time accelerated with pause
so you would have to either have one player as the party leader and have coop players be attached as party members, or disable the pause function altogether, which would make campaign map playing frustrating as you would have to move fast as all the badguys are whizzing past all the time, or everything moves extremely slow, which isn't fun either
i think the party leader way would be the most functional, but would get boring fast as it's battles only and there's a lot of other things to do in the realm in the meanwhile
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon, 22nd Mar 2010 22:22 Post subject: |
|
|
It would in no way get boring fast. I'd love to have my friend around while we fight battles, take cities and manage everything together.
Oh, and yes, you can fight human vs. AI battles.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon, 22nd Mar 2010 23:57 Post subject: |
|
|
Give em Coop and the next thing you know it would be MMO only.Screw that.Leave it as it is.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
W123
Posts: 2496
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Tue, 23rd Mar 2010 02:26 Post subject: |
|
|
Problem with the game was the repetitive quests, and also infantry fighting, especially sieges(horseback fighting was fantastic). Your soldiers will crowd the stupid siege towers and even spill off the sides of the ramps because there are too many. If you are trying to get on there with them, good luck because you'll get shoved off by your braindead soldiers. Obviously this aspect should be better with human players.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 23rd Mar 2010 02:57 Post subject: |
|
|
| W123 wrote: | | Problem with the game was the repetitive quests, and also infantry fighting, especially sieges(horseback fighting was fantastic). Your soldiers will crowd the stupid siege towers and even spill off the sides of the ramps because there are too many. If you are trying to get on there with them, good luck because you'll get shoved off by your braindead soldiers. Obviously this aspect should be better with human players. |
Right, human players would never crowd the ramps and shove each other off.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
W123
Posts: 2496
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Tue, 23rd Mar 2010 04:16 Post subject: |
|
|
| Raap wrote: | | W123 wrote: | | Problem with the game was the repetitive quests, and also infantry fighting, especially sieges(horseback fighting was fantastic). Your soldiers will crowd the stupid siege towers and even spill off the sides of the ramps because there are too many. If you are trying to get on there with them, good luck because you'll get shoved off by your braindead soldiers. Obviously this aspect should be better with human players. |
Right, human players would never crowd the ramps and shove each other off. |
LOL.. good point.. maybe it won't be that different.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 23rd Mar 2010 08:29 Post subject: |
|
|
yes, sieges were my biggest gripe with the original
the multiplayer siege maps look much better, so it follows that they've implemented that to the singleplayer aswell
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 23rd Mar 2010 10:26 Post subject: |
|
|
Aww man, I was really hoping for that co-op campaign, I know that there might have been some issues with co-op implemented but they could have been fixed somehow by changing the game system a little, oh well... at least we get some new maps, factions weapons, etc.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
W123
Posts: 2496
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Tue, 23rd Mar 2010 11:51 Post subject: |
|
|
Looks like much improved gfx too.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 23rd Mar 2010 14:54 Post subject: |
|
|
Siege matches are actually pretty fucking awesome though. Was in one match with like 50 people, and I was attacking. I was an archer, taking cover behind one of those large wooden shields/stands with a slit in it, firing at the walls. It was epic, until I got a javelin in the eye.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 23rd Mar 2010 16:02 Post subject: |
|
|
| dezztroy wrote: | | Siege matches are actually pretty fucking awesome though. Was in one match with like 50 people, and I was attacking. I was an archer, taking cover behind one of those large wooden shields/stands with a slit in it, firing at the walls. It was epic, until I got a javelin in the eye. |
It's ALWAYS fun until someone gets an eye put out...
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 23rd Mar 2010 21:58 Post subject: |
|
|
Could I still play the beta? I suppose so. Too bad the download is slow as fucking hell :/
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 23rd Mar 2010 22:48 Post subject: |
|
|
Eh, it downloaded at about 500 kbps for me. Not too slow, as the game's only 500mb or so.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Page 1 of 11 |
All times are GMT + 1 Hour |
