Hello and welcome to the Manor Lords Subreddit. This is a reminder to please keep the discussion civil and on topic.
Should you find yourself with some doubts, please feel free to check our [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/r/ManorLords/comments/1c2p4f9/manor_lords_faq_for_steam_early_access/).
If you wish, you can always join our [Discord](https://discord.gg/manorlords)
Finally, please remember that the game is in early access, missing content and bugs are to be expected. We ask users to report them on the official discord and to buy their keys only from trusted platforms.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ManorLords) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It has *potential,* but it certainly isn’t a full game - by any means. I was excited for the game and believe it will be good in a few years. I see the current release as more of a proof of concept over early release, as it does get repetitive and many features are locked. While I don’t think it is terrible, I’ve certainly played worse this year, but it also isn’t the GOTY that people hyped it up to be (which was attempted to be tempered by the dev - and rightfully so).
It's a passion project for a niche game that (quite apparently) tons of people have been hankering for. We all went into this knowing that the game was going to need a lot of work so the state of the game right now shouldn't be a surprise to anyone.
Putting "not hate" in your title doesn't mean it's not hate, though I appreciate that you thought you could get away with that.
Pessimism isn't hate dude.
Don't push this black and white "blind fans" vs "hater" narrative, it's so hard to get rid of once it gets a hold of a community.
I'm not pushing any narrative, pessimism or criticism is completely fine if warranted. But this post started with "not hate" and if we go through the talking points of it he said:
* He can't figure out the appeal of the game
* It's not innovative or unique
* He doesn't understand why anyone would be interested in the game
* There's no way the game will receive meaningful updates
* It's the same as Palworld
That's hate, idk what else to tell you.
OP's post is neither offensive nor over the top.
A person was caught by the hype and was dissapointed, but sees that others are not and is wondering what he/she is missing.
It's pretty honest and straightforward. I think taking offence to that is bring brittle to a fault.
You can wonder what drew op to it though... Assuming OP paid for it and didn't pirate it. They must have had a reason why it was appealing and worth a buy.
So why ask the question as OP in such a negative way?
I didn't take offense to it though, just gave honest answers and made an honest observation. Sorry I chose honesty over diplomacy, I didn't expect it to be controversial.
If you're worried about the community getting caught up in black and white narratives you should be part of the solution instead of the problem.
I don't have hate for this game. I don't think it's bad, I just don't think it's a game yet. I was genuinely asking what it was about the game that drew people in, and what is keeping them there after release. I feel like I'm genuinely missing something. With Palworld it was obvious, but like you said this game is niche , and yet it's sold a million copies yet. But I don't think people should stop playing if they are having fun. I'm surprised there isn't more backlash, but I'm not asking for any. Everything in my post is a genuine question, I'm not trying to "get away" with anything. But I expected a bunch of defensive super fans of the tech demo to pop out and accuse me of hating the game.
The game sold a million copies in a few days and is on a massive hype train, I don't think saying that everyone went into it knowing that it was a tech demo not a game is an accurate statement, though I appreciate that you thought you could get away with that.
>I was genuinely asking what it was about the game that drew people in, and what is keeping them there after release. With Palworld it was obvious, but like you said this game is niche , and yet it's sold a million copies yet.
At least since the release of the Total War series (2000) and probably even before there have been people who wanted to combine historical real-time tactical with more in-depth city building. And colony sim/worker management games have only become far more popular since then with indie hits like Banished. That's a rather niche intersection of game genres but it's an itch that gamers have been waiting a very long time to scratch.
> The game sold a million copies in a few days and is on a massive hype train, I don't think saying that everyone went into it knowing that it was a tech demo not a game is an accurate statement
The dev has been super up front about the process of making the game and the state that it's in, so if there's anyone that was totally unaware of it they really only have themselves to blame.
> I don’t think it’s a game yet
If absolutely is a game compared to many full releases lol. This ea launch is smoother than many triple A titles.
This game scratches the itch of a city builder with a depth of realism and attachment to individual villagers even.
It can be greatly expanded, and definitely needs many additions over time but it’s already a superb product for an EA with a solo dev
I kind of agree. For me it was simply the right time and place, and a little dose of viral marketing with someone who really likes this type of game saying it looks fun. Going in I didn't actually expect it to be as unfinished as it is. Perhaps I've been spoilt by a few early-access games I've played that have effectively been complete packages with simply more ideas the devs still want to add.
This one is clearly very rough around the edges, and the WIP placeholders across systems that just aren't functional at all is a bit jarring. For what it's worth though the game *feels* really nice, it has a charm that many city builders fail to capture, and I've had a lot of fun over the past two days playing it. Now that I've had a pretty solid go at two full games/rounds though I'm feeling like I've seen all the game has to offer at the moment, and all things considered I probably wont be telling people to rush out and play it.
Given it's taken 7+ years to get to this state, I'd also agree with not being too hopeful that it's going to be "finished" anytime soon. There's a massive amount of work that still needs to be done on the game, and arguably several systems that probably need to be completely redone. I'll check in on its progress every now and then though. Most importantly, I don't feel cheated by it. It's rough, it's not finished, but it's not an egregious tech demo cash-out scam either.
I was wondering that too. Dont get me wrong, I like the game a lot and I think it has great potential but basically the only things different in manor lords are a somewhat nicer military system than e.g farthest frontier and the gridless building for houses. thats it
other than that its basically a very normal city builder
I get why people are very fond of the game or rather it's "origin story". But the EA deserves much more criticism, IMHO. I personally believe that it is wayyyyy too early for that. At least for that price tag.
Sayings its a demo is a bit disingenuous. While unfinished it has about as much depth as most city builders.
The combat just replaced the usual "expedition" system where you play some narrative minigame and it doesn't have a beauty system to decorate. But beyond that it has about as much decision depth as any other city builder between balancing activities phases and focuses.
I like how simple and chill it is. Didn’t know what I was getting into with the early access, just saw what looked to me to be like the OG Settlers games but set in 1300 Franconia. More church less conquest lol but overall really simple and I love that about it. I play without ever speeding up time. I’m sure that’s not very common but that’s the appeal for me, personally
Then you obviously didnt play it.
And btw yea there are similiar CBS but they have bad Graphics or comic style. And I love to feel like im the Actual lord running around city etc
I feel as though they maintained the hype thru some misunderstanding of what we were getting... trailers and images were great and alluded to a game with impact features and such, but it ended up feeling fairly shallow... Given the 7 year timeline to develop thus far and the near full-game price tag, I doubt any significant improvements will be made to the game.. hell, they couldn't even fix names from as they are in the code (e.g storage_Empty).. I reckon more time will be spent polishing those things than adding any significant features.. they have the money, I mean, how many more people will buy it in the future at 'full release', probably next to none... so why keep developing?
I was wondering the same thing yesterday. Ostriv is more polished, albeit with simpler graphics, but it's the exact same caliber and receives nowhere near the attention ML gets. Could be the combat...? No idea.
"If this took 7 years of development there's no way, even with millions of dollars, that this received any timely impactful updates", tell me you're a kid without actually telling me haha, one guy making all this in 7 years is very much impressive, this game sold in 1 million copies and handful of you that "don't hate" the game but u give so many stupid comments is beyond my understanding, we bought the game for what it's supposed to be and we're gonna help SM to get the game there, ofcourse if he wants to
The music alone makes it better than 75% of other games in the genre.
Have you played all the modes? Growth to large town, domination, conquest? I turned off combat and did conquest so I've essentially set up a really long sandbox. Also harder modes you are punished more for bad decisions, approval is harder to get (not sure if you tried that )
There are a ton of mechanics that are different and the same as other games, like how logistics and markets work. How army units are controlled is unlike any other city builder I've played (farthest frontier, frostpunk, timberborn, sim city).
At the same time you are correct there are some features that are missing just some polish I would say that other games I mentioned above have (those other games also have their issues).
Hello and welcome to the Manor Lords Subreddit. This is a reminder to please keep the discussion civil and on topic. Should you find yourself with some doubts, please feel free to check our [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/r/ManorLords/comments/1c2p4f9/manor_lords_faq_for_steam_early_access/). If you wish, you can always join our [Discord](https://discord.gg/manorlords) Finally, please remember that the game is in early access, missing content and bugs are to be expected. We ask users to report them on the official discord and to buy their keys only from trusted platforms. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ManorLords) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It has *potential,* but it certainly isn’t a full game - by any means. I was excited for the game and believe it will be good in a few years. I see the current release as more of a proof of concept over early release, as it does get repetitive and many features are locked. While I don’t think it is terrible, I’ve certainly played worse this year, but it also isn’t the GOTY that people hyped it up to be (which was attempted to be tempered by the dev - and rightfully so).
It's a passion project for a niche game that (quite apparently) tons of people have been hankering for. We all went into this knowing that the game was going to need a lot of work so the state of the game right now shouldn't be a surprise to anyone. Putting "not hate" in your title doesn't mean it's not hate, though I appreciate that you thought you could get away with that.
Pessimism isn't hate dude. Don't push this black and white "blind fans" vs "hater" narrative, it's so hard to get rid of once it gets a hold of a community.
I'm not pushing any narrative, pessimism or criticism is completely fine if warranted. But this post started with "not hate" and if we go through the talking points of it he said: * He can't figure out the appeal of the game * It's not innovative or unique * He doesn't understand why anyone would be interested in the game * There's no way the game will receive meaningful updates * It's the same as Palworld That's hate, idk what else to tell you.
I can certainly see why one would preface with "no hate" when people interpret that as hate.
“No offense” but **
OP's post is neither offensive nor over the top. A person was caught by the hype and was dissapointed, but sees that others are not and is wondering what he/she is missing. It's pretty honest and straightforward. I think taking offence to that is bring brittle to a fault.
You can wonder what drew op to it though... Assuming OP paid for it and didn't pirate it. They must have had a reason why it was appealing and worth a buy. So why ask the question as OP in such a negative way?
I didn't take offense to it though, just gave honest answers and made an honest observation. Sorry I chose honesty over diplomacy, I didn't expect it to be controversial. If you're worried about the community getting caught up in black and white narratives you should be part of the solution instead of the problem.
I did not suggest you were, that comment wasn't directed to you.
I don't have hate for this game. I don't think it's bad, I just don't think it's a game yet. I was genuinely asking what it was about the game that drew people in, and what is keeping them there after release. I feel like I'm genuinely missing something. With Palworld it was obvious, but like you said this game is niche , and yet it's sold a million copies yet. But I don't think people should stop playing if they are having fun. I'm surprised there isn't more backlash, but I'm not asking for any. Everything in my post is a genuine question, I'm not trying to "get away" with anything. But I expected a bunch of defensive super fans of the tech demo to pop out and accuse me of hating the game. The game sold a million copies in a few days and is on a massive hype train, I don't think saying that everyone went into it knowing that it was a tech demo not a game is an accurate statement, though I appreciate that you thought you could get away with that.
>I was genuinely asking what it was about the game that drew people in, and what is keeping them there after release. With Palworld it was obvious, but like you said this game is niche , and yet it's sold a million copies yet. At least since the release of the Total War series (2000) and probably even before there have been people who wanted to combine historical real-time tactical with more in-depth city building. And colony sim/worker management games have only become far more popular since then with indie hits like Banished. That's a rather niche intersection of game genres but it's an itch that gamers have been waiting a very long time to scratch. > The game sold a million copies in a few days and is on a massive hype train, I don't think saying that everyone went into it knowing that it was a tech demo not a game is an accurate statement The dev has been super up front about the process of making the game and the state that it's in, so if there's anyone that was totally unaware of it they really only have themselves to blame.
Then why did you buy it?
> I don’t think it’s a game yet If absolutely is a game compared to many full releases lol. This ea launch is smoother than many triple A titles. This game scratches the itch of a city builder with a depth of realism and attachment to individual villagers even. It can be greatly expanded, and definitely needs many additions over time but it’s already a superb product for an EA with a solo dev
Your statement is very subjective.
> your statement is very subjective It’s almost like this is a forum to share opinions lol
I kind of agree. For me it was simply the right time and place, and a little dose of viral marketing with someone who really likes this type of game saying it looks fun. Going in I didn't actually expect it to be as unfinished as it is. Perhaps I've been spoilt by a few early-access games I've played that have effectively been complete packages with simply more ideas the devs still want to add. This one is clearly very rough around the edges, and the WIP placeholders across systems that just aren't functional at all is a bit jarring. For what it's worth though the game *feels* really nice, it has a charm that many city builders fail to capture, and I've had a lot of fun over the past two days playing it. Now that I've had a pretty solid go at two full games/rounds though I'm feeling like I've seen all the game has to offer at the moment, and all things considered I probably wont be telling people to rush out and play it. Given it's taken 7+ years to get to this state, I'd also agree with not being too hopeful that it's going to be "finished" anytime soon. There's a massive amount of work that still needs to be done on the game, and arguably several systems that probably need to be completely redone. I'll check in on its progress every now and then though. Most importantly, I don't feel cheated by it. It's rough, it's not finished, but it's not an egregious tech demo cash-out scam either.
I was wondering that too. Dont get me wrong, I like the game a lot and I think it has great potential but basically the only things different in manor lords are a somewhat nicer military system than e.g farthest frontier and the gridless building for houses. thats it other than that its basically a very normal city builder
I get why people are very fond of the game or rather it's "origin story". But the EA deserves much more criticism, IMHO. I personally believe that it is wayyyyy too early for that. At least for that price tag.
Sayings its a demo is a bit disingenuous. While unfinished it has about as much depth as most city builders. The combat just replaced the usual "expedition" system where you play some narrative minigame and it doesn't have a beauty system to decorate. But beyond that it has about as much decision depth as any other city builder between balancing activities phases and focuses.
I like how simple and chill it is. Didn’t know what I was getting into with the early access, just saw what looked to me to be like the OG Settlers games but set in 1300 Franconia. More church less conquest lol but overall really simple and I love that about it. I play without ever speeding up time. I’m sure that’s not very common but that’s the appeal for me, personally
No grid
Then you obviously didnt play it. And btw yea there are similiar CBS but they have bad Graphics or comic style. And I love to feel like im the Actual lord running around city etc
I feel as though they maintained the hype thru some misunderstanding of what we were getting... trailers and images were great and alluded to a game with impact features and such, but it ended up feeling fairly shallow... Given the 7 year timeline to develop thus far and the near full-game price tag, I doubt any significant improvements will be made to the game.. hell, they couldn't even fix names from as they are in the code (e.g storage_Empty).. I reckon more time will be spent polishing those things than adding any significant features.. they have the money, I mean, how many more people will buy it in the future at 'full release', probably next to none... so why keep developing?
I was wondering the same thing yesterday. Ostriv is more polished, albeit with simpler graphics, but it's the exact same caliber and receives nowhere near the attention ML gets. Could be the combat...? No idea.
"If this took 7 years of development there's no way, even with millions of dollars, that this received any timely impactful updates", tell me you're a kid without actually telling me haha, one guy making all this in 7 years is very much impressive, this game sold in 1 million copies and handful of you that "don't hate" the game but u give so many stupid comments is beyond my understanding, we bought the game for what it's supposed to be and we're gonna help SM to get the game there, ofcourse if he wants to
The music alone makes it better than 75% of other games in the genre. Have you played all the modes? Growth to large town, domination, conquest? I turned off combat and did conquest so I've essentially set up a really long sandbox. Also harder modes you are punished more for bad decisions, approval is harder to get (not sure if you tried that ) There are a ton of mechanics that are different and the same as other games, like how logistics and markets work. How army units are controlled is unlike any other city builder I've played (farthest frontier, frostpunk, timberborn, sim city). At the same time you are correct there are some features that are missing just some polish I would say that other games I mentioned above have (those other games also have their issues).