TW vs. Mount&Blade...

[Condottiere SOG]

Its like this...

if Taleworlds ever gets around to fixing these factors which are not difficult, there some M&B mods which have it all except the campaign map;

1. Command and Control
2. Formations
3. Diplomacy
4. Campaign Map

CA can kiss its happy arse goodbye...the graphics detail of Mount&Blade is so much better...not to mention the models are anthropologically sound...meaning no square edges to arms or legs...


http://img23.imageshack.us/img23/7909/mb11u.png

[Kovas]

TW -> 70000-12000 soldiers in battle VS M&B -> max 100 soldiers (you can have more if you use a mod, but never more than 1000)
TW -> big strategic map VS M&B -> well, Calradia is nice, but is not so big
TW -> AI... VS M&B -> AI is ok.

[Killerbee]

Its like this...

if Taleworlds ever gets around to fixing these factors which are not difficult, there some M&B mods which have it all except the campaign map;

1. Command and Control
2. Formations
3. Diplomacy
4. Campaign Map

CA can kiss its happy arse goodbye...the graphics detail of Mount&Blade is so much better...not to mention the models are anthropologically sound...meaning no square edges to arms or legs...

I'm not sure what you're talking about. First of all, TW and M&B are totally different types of games. You can't compare 'em, so this thread is pretty much useless.

Secondly, Rome: Total War needs to be able to show a 10000 men on the battlefield, so for that, it's graphics are more than good. Not to mention the graphics were very good for the time it was released.M&B has terrible graphics in my opinion. I don't own it, but when I watch vids, I just think how ugly the graphics are. RTW dates from 2004, while Mount and Blade is released in 2008. For a game that is released 2 years ago, the graphics are terrible. Even MTW2, a game that's released in 2006, has better graphics, even though the battles feature over 5000 men at the same time.

[Finch]

both games are different im with Mr. B on this one you cant compare them both but M&B was made just for fun by a husband and wife years ago they made a game out of nothing just think about it unlike Total war with the big budget and all that

[D.B. Cooper]

Like Mr. Blackadder said they're totally different, there's no way M&B can move in on TW's fans. It just won't happen.

[Banana Jelly]

Agree with Mr B. But the graphics suck for MB for it being released only at 2008. RTW being released at 2004 with RS2 will be mind=blown

Source:
I own both games.

[Finch]

M&B started as a free game they werent after graphics and all that stuff it was made for the fun of it, if you're after graphics tons of games put tw and m&b to shame

[Condottiere SOG]

Spllbbtt!

[Condottiere SOG]

The afore-mentioned excuses are a bunch of bollocks.

All of you miss the point and are way off base.

Any game with mass combat can be compared to the next...seriously...if you can'rt see the comparison get your eyes checked!

They are totally different games,yes...however, they are also very similar, in fact it would take an expansion of Mount&Blade to put them on par!..and I have battles with 1000men - as far as all that...that s 1000 men on the battlefield and I am working on adding a zero to that, I recently had a battle involving 7800 soldiers.

The combat is intuitive and way better...not preprogrammed...

Cavalry can dismount and you watch them do it. Up close.

You command from your own person and fight! OMG THAT RULES! - aside from your character not being able to die(ok that sucks)

OMG - multiple weapons and armor - for men of the same classification -> THAT ROCKS!!! Have I gone mad?

And the only shortcomings(for Mount&Blade) are the ones I have mentioned...

As far as graphics goes, M2 and RTW suck by comparison, ETW is not far behind. Every man has a different face in M*&B and different skills and abilities

Don't just play Native...play a mod...preferably a new mod - and has anyone here seen the newest expansion called Warband - its even better!

I am mainly talking about Gamreplay, Lack of bugs, Storyline, Combat, and if you do not like the graphics get a better video card and play The Hundred Years War mod.

[Finch]

two games with great mods make them far apart from each other but for me i just play them both to have fun.

i have a nice graphics card i play NFS:Shift on highest setting, and i have been fully supporting M&B since it was ver.4X even before knowing there was a RTW game around which i played around 2005, play them both first with different mods then you yourself will realize that these 2 games offer different experiences because you cant have everything you want in a single game.

[Condottiere SOG]

That's true...but if, as I said, Taleworld's went for it...they'd own CA!

[Finch]

if you have like 20000 men on the battlefield all at once in M&B it would be chaotic and it would be really be hard surviving that battle unless you have godly items, but as what you've said i used to complain same thing on M&B about their Campaign map but again thats one thing that makes them different, thats why you gotta have them both.

[Killerbee]

Let's just put it this way :

In M&B, do you have to manage an empire on a map of europe and slowly expand while you conquer other civilizations ? No, so discussion's pretty much over.

OMG - multiple weapons and armor - for men of the same classification -> THAT ROCKS!!! Have I gone mad or are people here retarded.

What do you mean with this? Every single RPG contains multiple weapons and armour, M&B is nothing special in that case.

As far as graphics goes, M2 and RTW suck by comparison, ETW is not far behind. Every man has a different face in M*&B and different skills and abilities

Ok, let's compare :

M&B :

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

MTW :

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

I can't believe you're actually trying to compare both games, and I can't believe the arguments you use for that. Sorry, but they're worthless

[BURNY26]

the only thing i can say is : more Total Warrior games!!

[Condottiere SOG]

@Mr.Blackadder those limitations are in your game only...my biggest battle had 7800 men in it with Mount&Blade...lets compare!

Your version of M&B...unmodified and retarded!

My version of M&B...modified and excellent!

The shortcomings you mentioned begin and end there! And who needs all those marker flags...confusion is where its at...in Warband, the new expansion, even hitting your own guy in melee counts.

LETS PUT IT THIS WAY...when it comes to comparison...you hardly make an argument.

@Coma...survival on an M&B battlefield has been similar to watching/playing a battle from Braveheart...it is chaotic even with 7800 men...in waves of 1000...but way realistic.

[Hader]

@Mr.Blackadder those limitations are in your game only...my biggest battle had 7800 men in it with Mount&Blade...lets compare!

Your version of M&B...unmodified and retarded!

My version of M&B...modified and excellent!

The shortcomings you mentioned begin and end there! And who needs all those marker flags...confusion is where its at...in Warband, the new expansion, even hitting your own guy in melee counts.

LETS PUT IT THIS WAY...when it comes to comparison...you hardly make an argument.

@Coma...survival on an M&B battlefield has been similar to watching/playing a battle from Braveheart...it is chaotic even with 7800 men...in waves of 1000...but way realistic.

You hardly do either, to be painfully honest. You actually contradicted yourself once in there, I can see. Do you?

But you are not looking at what should be compared between the two games, as their differences and similarities are unique on a case by case basis and really should be interpreted so generally if you really do wish to make a fair comparison of the two.

For the record, I own RTW, M2TW, ETW, and M&B. I haven't played ETW much, and considering it doesn't seem to be much of a strong point for anyone's arguments here, I will not talk about it either. But I have had RTW for many years, and M&B almost as long as it has been out. I love both games. They are both very good in their respective fields.

So let's get some things out of the way here. First off, you need to keep in mind how different RTW (and/or just TW games in general) and M&B are, both generally and specifically. M&B is more RPG-like, with a good strong mix of RTS. And RTW is a very pure RTS, with emphasis put on the bigger picture, the larger battles, etc. Do not try to compare these games on these levels. These core differences exist and are what make each game unique.

Mount and Blade places its emphasis on your one character. This is obviously an RPG element. This, mixed with some RTS elements, have blended quite well to make a very interesting and unique game. Strictly sticking to gameplay, that is. Yes, the graphics are not top of the notch. Nothing too beautiful for such a fairly new game, by comparison to RTW. But you can argue about graphics all you want, that's not going to affect the gameplay.

Rome Total War is our pure RTS game, where strategy is obviously the main element of gameplay, both on and off the campaign map. Though M&B does show a more 'true' real time system in its campaign map, that is just what fits well for its unique style of gameplay. For RTW, turn based works well. Real time could do it some justice, one may argue, but it was turn based and you still see plenty of people playing it 6 years later.


So what is there to compare really? Graphics is about the only one thing you could compare between the two (or nearly any game for that matter) without interfering with the other elements that make each game unique.

I am mainly talking about Gamreplay, Lack of bugs, Storyline, Combat, and if you do not like the graphics get a better video card and play The Hundred Years War mod.

Gameplay is, at the core of both games, different, and justifiably different at that, as I have explained.

Lack of bugs now? Hey, both games have their fair share, it is an unavoidable part of game development, and that's fact.

Storyline isn't too prevalent in either game you know. In Total War, you got these certain people and armies, and you conquer stuff. You just create your own history. In M&B, you can do anything from roaming around killing things, to taking up a claimant's cause or starting your own empire. In native that is. Yes, I have played mods, and I know what they can do. But you are forgetting here that RTW is just as moddable in its own respects. Don't compare M&B mods to RTW vanilla and call that fair, because it's not.

And lastly combat? Once again, a core difference in the games. M&B gives you the choice to go in there on your own and hack things to bits. Yes, this is fun. But it can take away from the more RTS element of the game if you do this. Not entirely, but somewhat. Total War gives you the full strategy element, and though you can have a character to play hero all the time, it still justifies its own unique bit of fun to command those thousands of troops at once, all on your own. It depends on what the player is looking for in gameplay.

Just don't forget what a comparison actually is. Don't be bias.

[Condottiere SOG]

Blah, Blah, Blah...contradictions abound...

http://img697.imageshack.us/img697/318/mb10t.png
http://img14.imageshack.us/img14/5271/mb6e.png

Shot at 2010-01-12


Shot at 2010-01-12

I can't help but be biased to some degree...the problems that come with the favored game outweigh the lesser favored problems...I think the bias is on your part. I am not attacking the forums rather I attack the impetus to continue to produce work that gets worse with each release.

Comparing RTW to M&B is like comparing a toddler with a soldier...you'll note that each soldier in the first pic has a different set of weapons and armor...each one...and a different face.

[Banana Jelly]

Blah, Blah, Blah...contradictions abound...

http://img697.imageshack.us/img697/318/mb10t.png
http://img14.imageshack.us/img14/5271/mb6e.png

Shot at 2010-01-12


Shot at 2010-01-12

I can't help but be biased to some degree...the problems that come with the favored game outweigh the lesser favored problems...I think the bias is on your part. I am not attacking the forums rather I attack the impetus to continue to produce work that gets worse with each release.

Comparing RTW to M&B is like comparing a toddler with a soldier...you'll note that each soldier in the first pic has a different set of weapons and armor...each one...and a different face.

Dude that will kill any computer. Trust me. That's why RTW let me field 7k soldier at once. And, you get battles one by one, the battle resizer only goes to 1000 at one time. So you can't have a 3k man army.

[BURNY26]

since ive read bout m&b here on this forum ,ive bought m&b and i have to say that ,the graphics are very nice (even better than m2tw!),gameplay is simple and addictive!! but to make a comparison bout the tactical aspect phew... one on one AI is good ,but group AI sucks. So if they could work on that and on the command aspect. It could be maybe even more sensational than tw.

[Hader]

Haha, I doubt you even read anything I said.

So are you done bragging about your high spec computer?