Mount & Blade: Warband PC

User Score
8.7

Generally favorable reviews- based on 799 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 42 out of 799
Buy On

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Nov 26, 2013
    7
    An unique experience unlike any other that is available. If you're looking for a medieval combat simulator, there is simply no other choice. It's a huge and imaginative game that is well worth the money. Unfortunately it has numerous glaring flaws. The graphics are not good. They get the job done, but they aren't nice to look at, especially the campaign map. Serious works needs to be doneAn unique experience unlike any other that is available. If you're looking for a medieval combat simulator, there is simply no other choice. It's a huge and imaginative game that is well worth the money. Unfortunately it has numerous glaring flaws. The graphics are not good. They get the job done, but they aren't nice to look at, especially the campaign map. Serious works needs to be done to fix the graphics in a sequel. The AI is terrible. They will often ignore you or leave themselves wide open to be attacked. During siege battles you will often see enemies simply standing in place staring into oblivion for no reason. The diplomacy and relations part of the game is very poorly fleshed out. As a ruler, it is impossible to stay in good standing with your vassals. There are like a million ways to lose relation, but only about 3 ways to gain it. These flaws are huge, but they don't prevent the game from being a enjoyable experience. Expand
  2. Jul 4, 2012
    7
    Very nice game. But make sure you immediately install a set of mods - like Floris. It's really a free-lance game: you start with a sword, and do whatever you want - either serve under a King, or become one yourself. All is possible. Some controls might require getting used to - but don't give up, give this game a go, and you'll enjoy it for several dozens of hours.
  3. Oct 29, 2014
    5
    Mount & Blade: Warband is frustrating game because at the heart it has a great idea, but in practice it is poorly implemented. The game reminds me a bit of that old game Lords of Midnight, that combined role play game aspects with a war game mechanism.
    At first the game looks promising. You start out with only a few weapons, a horse and some money and you take it from there. You do some
    Mount & Blade: Warband is frustrating game because at the heart it has a great idea, but in practice it is poorly implemented. The game reminds me a bit of that old game Lords of Midnight, that combined role play game aspects with a war game mechanism.
    At first the game looks promising. You start out with only a few weapons, a horse and some money and you take it from there. You do some quests, recruit some troops, invite some npc heroes and slowly improve your small army.
    A first you are involved in dealing with brigands, ruffians, looters and deserters. Nothing that would bring down the wrath of some local lord on you. Eventually you join one side or another as a mercenary so you have an idea of how combat with regular troops works.
    Once you have done some battles you will be eventually involved in a siege.. either as the assaulting party or as the defending party.
    It is all exciting at first.
    At first..
    But after a while this game starts to bore. It bores because it doesn't offer much more than this,
    There is no story line. Conversations with characters have at the best three options and are quickly explored. Once you start your own empire you find out that diplomacy has only four options: declare war, ask for a truce, submit to an adversary or say hello.
    Handling the affairs of you own empire is equally rudimentary implemented. Taxes you have no control over. Handling your lords comes down to giving them a fief, which will increase your influence with them, but decreases your influence with all your other lords. This limits the amount of lord you actually can handle to below ten.
    There is a kind of romance system, which I didn't explore.
    There is a rudimentary trade system, which is useless. Useless because it involves you in buying goods at town a to sell them at town b for a small profit. But given the limited inventory, the limited amount of goods at town a and the fact that town b always is at the other side of the map and thus takes a long time to travel to, it hardly makes give you enough profit to even cover the expense of the army you need to protect you.
    The only other economical thing you can do is buying a factory.. only one per city. The factory brings in money and you have almost no control over the production.
    And that is about it.
    The game then excels in boring repetition.
    Sieges are probably the worst aspect in the game. You can't let the AI handle them as your losses will increase tenfold, so you have to do every siege of every castle and town yourself. These sieges come down to shooting matches which go on until the enemy has no more people left of so few you can ask them to surrender. Which only happens when you have around five time the troops. Consider this: at the max you have around 150 men. The usual castle has around 150 to 200 men. To get them to surrender you have to kill around 130 to 170 men.
    Cities are even worst, some have like 400 men and even more if a lord is also defending that city.
    What is even worse is that these lords regenerate troops very fast. I once had to assault a town containing 5 lords.. and when I marched off to get new troops I found upon returning that they had regenerated fifty troops.. including some elite troops.
    The fact that things look refreshing from a 1st/3rd person view at first and that each castle and city seem to be unique doesn't make the boring tedious sieges any better to bear.
    Recruiting is another woefully boring part in the game. You will be needing a lot of troops to man your castles and towns and you get most of them by recruiting them from the villages. This involves you in travelling around the map recruiting villagers and then transport them to a town or castle to garrison them. Since the amount of villagers you can recruit is limited you will be doing a lot travelling around the map. The game has no automated mechanism to handle recruiting.
    The AI also never gives up. Once you have conquered almost all the cities and castles of an enemy you might think he will surrender, but no way. They all go on until you have capture everything he owns.
    So the game thus boils down to doing sieges and more sieges and even more sieges. Perhaps do some battles in between before doing more sieges and even more sieges. And once you have captured enough castles you have to recruit and recruit and recruit to collect a garrison to protect them.

    So if you like to sit through dozens upon dozens of battles and sieges, most of which are totally irrelevant but which you have to do yourself because the AI is to inept to handle things well, than this is the game for you.
    If you are looking for a game with a good story line, interesting conversations and a involved background - the things that you associate with a good role play game- than this is definitely not the game for you.
    All in all a mediocre warfare game that gets boring fast.
    Expand
  4. Rem
    Jul 10, 2013
    6
    Warband is a step-up from the original Mount and Blade, but it does not warrant enough for it to stand on its own. Once again it is a simulation type game with you traveling a world map doing quests or joining factions till you eventually become ruler of the land. It doesn't deter from anything more than that, but it sure is addicting. In the end the multiplayer is great if not for theWarband is a step-up from the original Mount and Blade, but it does not warrant enough for it to stand on its own. Once again it is a simulation type game with you traveling a world map doing quests or joining factions till you eventually become ruler of the land. It doesn't deter from anything more than that, but it sure is addicting. In the end the multiplayer is great if not for the intuitive medieval swordplay mechanic. A prettier update is nice, but I don't see much to convince of $10 when I can go back to the original and have the same experience. Expand
  5. Apr 15, 2016
    5
    Well, i've come to conclusion that undeveloped games can get positive feedback unless expectations are high. But they weren't, mount and blade was very weak game, thus people got excited for improvements. Still, this game doesn't fulfill MY expectations, graphic is horrible, AI is nearly as much bad, whole game is full of elements that weren't taken care of in production. It deserves aWell, i've come to conclusion that undeveloped games can get positive feedback unless expectations are high. But they weren't, mount and blade was very weak game, thus people got excited for improvements. Still, this game doesn't fulfill MY expectations, graphic is horrible, AI is nearly as much bad, whole game is full of elements that weren't taken care of in production. It deserves a weak 5 for good fight feeling and interesting solutions like isometric view combined with map walking. Expand
  6. Jun 9, 2012
    6
    After watching my cousin play M&BW on his PC, I eventually decided to seek out a copy. On paper, this game sounds brilliant: 64 players siege battles, variety of weapons and tactical combat. In execution though, M&B is merely a good game which is only let down by some glaring faults. The most predominant fault is the rather obnoxious imbalance of weapons; two-handed weapons swing at almostAfter watching my cousin play M&BW on his PC, I eventually decided to seek out a copy. On paper, this game sounds brilliant: 64 players siege battles, variety of weapons and tactical combat. In execution though, M&B is merely a good game which is only let down by some glaring faults. The most predominant fault is the rather obnoxious imbalance of weapons; two-handed weapons swing at almost exactly the same speed as one-handed weapons, making the multiplayer somewhat frustrating. Another problem is team marking: yes, I know that team mates have circles above their heads but wouldn't it make more sense to have the two teams colour coded so you don't keep killing yourself by accidentally attacking teammates. The graphics are dated, but that's not important, what is important is that Warband is still quite a good game which could become a proper classic if the balancing and gameplay were smoothed out a bit. Expand
  7. Jul 26, 2014
    6
    The amount of attention a game like Mount and Blade has received has been both positive and negative, but strangely, even years after its release, its still positive. Having barely attempted the Multiplayer aspect or many of the overhaul gameplay mods available, I strictly turn my attention over to "vanilla" Mount & Blade: Warband and its singleplayer campaign- if you can honestly call itThe amount of attention a game like Mount and Blade has received has been both positive and negative, but strangely, even years after its release, its still positive. Having barely attempted the Multiplayer aspect or many of the overhaul gameplay mods available, I strictly turn my attention over to "vanilla" Mount & Blade: Warband and its singleplayer campaign- if you can honestly call it that. You are dumped in a world known as "Calradia", and after a rather brief role playing game configuration character screen, you'll pick skills that will effect how you'll play, how you'll fight, or how you'll manipulate the economy or control your band of would-be-rent-a-warriors throughout the experience. Trouble is, their is only but so much you actually need to get through Warband as far as the actual "game" is concerned. Strictly speaking, you should either be a melee character i.e. swords and shields, an archer i.e. crossbows or bows, or an intelligent merciless mercenary i.e. medic skills or being (at times hard to believe) immensely influential over various NPC's- which is apparently a skill a person can "level up" as well. First things first, if you don't trade, build enterprises or loot, you will be fighting all manner of bandits till the end of time. Nord bandits make the most money, hand out the most experience, and ultimately produce the most valuable loot to sell off to various city markets. You can easily a quire ten or so Knights from any faction (aside from the Nords and Rhodoks) and commence this endless harvest of Denars, (the games term for "gold" or money) experience and some of the best armor and weapons in what I'd like the call "the mid-game" period. After this, you simply become a mercenary for a faction, help out here and there and "poof" you can join up and become a semi-permanent addition to a kingdom. This is where the game crawls to a halt. If you're not at war, you will be scavenging for money and loot, if you are at war you will be scavenging for villages to plunder and enemy lords to battle. If you're not doing any of those things, than it means you were trying to protect the many fiefs, Castles or cities that have suddenly been given to by your King for likely being such an awesome person or maybe he just thinks your a swell guy/ gal for having more renown and honor than any other lord in his cabinet. Politics aside, Mount & Blade is fun. Its "simulation" fun, its "babysit army" fun, its tedious battle fun, but it has a combat system not seen since "Dark Souls" and it does having a learning curve. That's more than a lot of titles can claim these days. However, once you've effectively broken the game, this skill ceiling literally collapses under the weight of an antiquated engine, terrible artificial intelligence, and a random sequence of events that can suddenly cause two even three kingdoms to declare war on yours and wreck everything you've been working towards in a matter of weeks. To "break" this game, all you need are all the major medic skills and your intelligence up to 30, once this is complete, you can commence leveling up your Charisma and begin to drag around hundreds of men to do whatever you need at that point. After this, battles become a breeze (even your armies configuration hardly matters) and near one hundred Swadian Knights, for instance, suddenly become your best friends in all the world. This strategy also works with Rhodoks infamous "Sharpshooter" crossbow infantry. Who, as long as they have a hill to perch upon or any elevation whatsoever, are practically invincible and tear apart armies double yours. The true failing of the game, is that after awhile, money stops mattering, skills you once thought about investing in become pointless as you already have enough men to fight without you ever being involved. It eventually does become "babysitting" and no their isn't a better way of putting it. Their is supposedly an automated battle system that is very poorly programmed and tends to output miserable losses on your side, so it best not ever be used unless you have no choice obviously. However this brings up an even worse problem for when you have the ability to heal your army in a matter of half a day the NPC lords are suddenly not particularly scary. Even if you "lose" and "leave" a battle, but take no losses of your own you can march right back up that same enemy army and annihilate them as they've been unable to recover from their losses as quickly as you've been able to. This works for Castle sieges, 2-1 battles, and even looting villages. I understand the game is old, but the developers need to consider putting more effort into a singleplayer experience that is actually fun, not tedious or repetitive and ultimately easily abused. Its a shame, as most of the game is quite well designed even for not having an actual goal to work towards or a story to follow. The more you play the sooner things begin to stagnate. Expand
  8. Mar 29, 2015
    6
    Hated this game at first not at all amazing to me, just seems like a rather terrible game. Not sure why so many people like this game. It's a sort of ok game.

    The graphics look ugly like something from 2005 or older not such a big deal if the gameplay was good, but the combat feels horrible and clunky moving a mouse in a direction then pressing left click feels awkward. I really suck at
    Hated this game at first not at all amazing to me, just seems like a rather terrible game. Not sure why so many people like this game. It's a sort of ok game.

    The graphics look ugly like something from 2005 or older not such a big deal if the gameplay was good, but the combat feels horrible and clunky moving a mouse in a direction then pressing left click feels awkward. I really suck at the combat and keep dying all the time.
    Expand
  9. Dec 5, 2013
    7
    Mount & Blade Warband is a positive experience, one that I routinely go back too, even if just for a battle.

    The singleplayer experience is quite fun, but, being a pure sandbox game, gets boring and very repetitive quite fast. To best enjoy the singleplayer sandbox one has to play without exploiting the numerous exploit possibilities, otherwise instead of becoming a challenging
    Mount & Blade Warband is a positive experience, one that I routinely go back too, even if just for a battle.

    The singleplayer experience is quite fun, but, being a pure sandbox game, gets boring and very repetitive quite fast. To best enjoy the singleplayer sandbox one has to play without exploiting the numerous exploit possibilities, otherwise instead of becoming a challenging experience it turns into repetitive grinding and soon after unbearable boredom. So I would say that this game is better when you set some rules for your game. For example, when a warband loses a battle and I your player is made prisoner, the game setback is to remove a few ingame money from your purse and sometimes one item from your inventory, what I do in my games is to remove randomly 50% of my gear so that defeat has a big impact, this keeps my sandbox experience alive and challenging for a longer time.

    The mutiplayer experience is fun, but be prepared to run against players who know all the exploits and tricks, making the game far from the "realistic" setting you may hope for.

    Finally, there's lots of amazing mods, both multiplayer and singleplayer mods, some are very detailed and open lots of possibilities, others are simple and change some game mechanics, this mods keep the game alive for much longer and they get to the point they are much better than the vanilla game, much better.

    Emotionally I would give this game a 9, but I don't believe I can rate a game just for the good moments it provided me, so taking into account the repetitive and boring nature of it after a while, some bugs and some game mechanics I don't think are particularly very well done, I think a 7 is a good score, but keep in mind, this game will give you lots of remarkable moments, totally worth it.
    Expand
  10. Jun 5, 2014
    7
    An awesome game that is unfortunately quite ruined thanks to an very unrealistic and crude political system whereas monarchs won't "recognize" you or even sue for peace when they are inches away from dying because you lack a magical "Right to Rule" stat.. Which is gained from doing stuff like making peace.

    Multiplayer has also unfortunately turned into a "Who can spin around and swing
    An awesome game that is unfortunately quite ruined thanks to an very unrealistic and crude political system whereas monarchs won't "recognize" you or even sue for peace when they are inches away from dying because you lack a magical "Right to Rule" stat.. Which is gained from doing stuff like making peace.

    Multiplayer has also unfortunately turned into a "Who can spin around and swing abuse the most". But still singleplayer is great fun with some mods.
    Expand
  11. Aug 3, 2016
    7
    This is a weird one. The concept here is great and some of the execution is pretty good, too, but unfortunately the game lacks polish in many areas and comes off as a bit too ambitious for its own good. Most of the game feels like a very bare-bones experience. The music isn't particularly memorable or even enjoyable (this is actually one of the few games where I prefer to turn off theThis is a weird one. The concept here is great and some of the execution is pretty good, too, but unfortunately the game lacks polish in many areas and comes off as a bit too ambitious for its own good. Most of the game feels like a very bare-bones experience. The music isn't particularly memorable or even enjoyable (this is actually one of the few games where I prefer to turn off the in-game music and play something else in the background), NPCs keep repeating the same dialogue over and over again and there isn't any proper voice acting either. The quests are just copy/paste stuff and hardly anything surprising happens anymore after the first 20 hours. There isn't any expansive lore or interesting, well-rounded characters. It's just you and your army trying to become more and more powerful. That's literally the story of this game, so don't buy this if you're looking for a narratively driven experience. The land of Calradia looks and feels dull, you'll be spending a lot of time just traversing around the map without anything to keep you interested. None of the kingdoms have any real personality to them, making it hard to feel invested if you decide to fight for one of them.

    Would I still recommend the game, though? Surprisingly, yes. Like I said, the concept here is great and there aren't many games out there like this. I love the idea of starting from nothing and slowly becoming more and more powerful and influential. The combat system is one of the highlights of the game, even though the mostly bad AI sometimes tries its best to ruin the experience (lance fights in the arena, anyone?). It's also easier to forgive many of the flaws when taking into consideration that it's not an expensive game, currently just 20€ on Steam.

    Overall, I think this is a good game, something that will take up a lot of your time and keep you entertained for quite a while. The modding scene is also very vibrant, lot of good stuff there. This game just could be a whole lot better.
    Expand
  12. Nov 26, 2013
    7
    The idea of this game is really great. Real-time first-view medieval fight, exciting. And you can play it with joy for a while. Then it starts to get boring. The main problem: 1. No plots. Because that's something which can keep you playing. 2. Repeated wars, fights, duals with no new things coming up. 3. The graphics... 4. I don't see a new version of this game coming...
  13. May 7, 2011
    6
    Initially I was going to rate this game a very high score for its extremely fun gameplay, then I encountered a deadly gamebreaking bug that caused one of my companion to disappear. All the effort I've been putting into him in the 30 hours playing time is gone. After doing some searching on Google, I found that this is a known bug that has existed since the game's release. Therefor, a highInitially I was going to rate this game a very high score for its extremely fun gameplay, then I encountered a deadly gamebreaking bug that caused one of my companion to disappear. All the effort I've been putting into him in the 30 hours playing time is gone. After doing some searching on Google, I found that this is a known bug that has existed since the game's release. Therefor, a high score can't be justified anymore. Expand
  14. Sep 19, 2011
    7
    'Tis a great game... in single player. I give it a ten for single player (especially if you install mods, eg. Floris Expanded Mod Pack - it's truly expanded) Freeroaming, choose whatever you like, trade or fight; trade and fight; trade and pay others to do the fighting...
    But Warband was supposed to be all about multiplayer. Instead of a single-in-multi (dont know if can be done) we get
    'Tis a great game... in single player. I give it a ten for single player (especially if you install mods, eg. Floris Expanded Mod Pack - it's truly expanded) Freeroaming, choose whatever you like, trade or fight; trade and fight; trade and pay others to do the fighting...
    But Warband was supposed to be all about multiplayer. Instead of a single-in-multi (dont know if can be done) we get stupid deathmatches. Worst thing is that most of the fights you get into are ping-fights not skill-fights. You'll get killed a lot at the beginning just because you have worse ping.

    so, single 10, multi 4. overall, 7.
    Expand
  15. Mar 15, 2011
    6
    Do not get me confused, this is a great game - I'm considering 10 a "nearly flawless" game. This game may not be much to look at, but the graphics are indeed wonderful, and runnable with even a normal computer. The animations are livable, nothing too fancy. The combat, it's remarkably fantastic, were I to judge the combat I'd rate it a 9 instantly (So long as the auto-defend is turnedDo not get me confused, this is a great game - I'm considering 10 a "nearly flawless" game. This game may not be much to look at, but the graphics are indeed wonderful, and runnable with even a normal computer. The animations are livable, nothing too fancy. The combat, it's remarkably fantastic, were I to judge the combat I'd rate it a 9 instantly (So long as the auto-defend is turned off). It's very immersive, and rarely do games allow you to just be some average travelling sellsword as apposed to a Legendary Dragon-Slayer. With a bounty of treasure to boot, there's sure to be no shortage of custom content with this game. Plus, the musical score is classic! Expand
  16. Jun 25, 2011
    7
    Awesome game, first of it's kind in my opinion. It's somewhere in between a Total War Battle and a FPS. You get to ride around the countryside building up a small army and working for a ruler along with other NPC characters who control their own army detachments and multiply that by about 50 and what you have is this chaotic game with factions that behave independently and creates thisAwesome game, first of it's kind in my opinion. It's somewhere in between a Total War Battle and a FPS. You get to ride around the countryside building up a small army and working for a ruler along with other NPC characters who control their own army detachments and multiply that by about 50 and what you have is this chaotic game with factions that behave independently and creates this amazing game.
    The combat system is polished and really effective, no where else have I had so much fun hacking and slashing away in fort attack or defence. Really cool skirmish system with a character building edge to it. Although, don't get too excited about the character building, it's very linear as are the options. The fun is in the battles which are really polished even thought the character side is pretty b grade.
    Expand
  17. Sep 8, 2010
    5
    Pro: This combat mechanics are quite original and the game, with mods, develops a realistic feel. The grahics are fine for most users with mid-level computer. It loads and plays quickly even on a laptop if you keep the battle sizes to under 100.
    Con: The campaign game is heavily bugged. Even a year of mods haven't been able to root them out. The diplomacy aspect is atrocious. Even
    Pro: This combat mechanics are quite original and the game, with mods, develops a realistic feel. The grahics are fine for most users with mid-level computer. It loads and plays quickly even on a laptop if you keep the battle sizes to under 100.
    Con: The campaign game is heavily bugged. Even a year of mods haven't been able to root them out. The diplomacy aspect is atrocious. Even with the best player sponsored mod, diplomacy is bizarre and unrealistic. With a campaign that's so time-consuming and tedious to improve your stats, the player expects to be able to create a semblance of a kingdom late game. Alas,it will break your heart over and over if you try to go anywhere beyond a roving mercenary band. The system of honor, right to rule, and reknown end up having minimal weight in the minds of the other kingdoms. If you enjoy endless scenes of grahic violence with a large variety of weapons, this is for you. If you want a true strategy or RPH, try something else
    Expand
  18. MooMan
    Apr 9, 2010
    7
    Being a $30 expansion, I expected Mount and Blade: Warband to be better than the first. I must say that crtl+ unit mass upgrade is by far the best improvement. Some of the castles are bugged and your men won't go up the ladder into the base more than 1 at a time. If you liked the first one, and you bought it for $8 and thought it was worth the money, DO NOT spend the $30. Wait a few Being a $30 expansion, I expected Mount and Blade: Warband to be better than the first. I must say that crtl+ unit mass upgrade is by far the best improvement. Some of the castles are bugged and your men won't go up the ladder into the base more than 1 at a time. If you liked the first one, and you bought it for $8 and thought it was worth the money, DO NOT spend the $30. Wait a few months and then it will go on 75% off sale. Mutliplayer is pretty cool, even though some of the maps have huge advantages. (they might fix the ladder problem in the future). Expand
Metascore
78

Generally favorable reviews - based on 23 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 18 out of 23
  2. Negative: 0 out of 23
  1. 80
    Although there is still room for improvement, Warband's excellent combat system, respectable multiplayer and a lifespan that will prove to be a total timesink means that the game is well worth the USD$29.99 price tag on Steam. Fans of the action RPG genre and medieval games in general would do well to pick this one up.
  2. 80
    All in all, Mount and Blade: Warband is a great game, even despite its flaws. The overall concept is satisfying, and with a more heavyweight publisher behind the team at TaleWorlds, this is one game that could be absolutely great.
  3. On the one hand, there are the open world and the freedom to do what you want to do, on the other hand, the world is lifeless. It's a great game for some people, but the opposite for most.