No to mounts. I do not wish for my favorite game to be like everyone else's.
GW2 is going to have classes, levels, fantasy races and all the rest. In many ways it is already going to be like everyone else's. Adding mounts won't make that much of a difference.
I just don't see the point of having mounts if fast travel is in place. If they take out fast travel, then we'll need some new way to get around and mounts would be an option they could use. I just don't see the point of having both.
I think mounts should be implemented, not now though.
Mounts should be personal and while mounted we should change skill bar, like when we are mounted on siege devourer... i really think they will implement something like this in future expansions. They have the mechanics to do it, but they need to think it very well so they don't do it wrong.
Omg, I've been wrong about mounts all this time, I'm so sorry, no one should ever use one
I'll go now and sell my car and tell everyone I know to do the same and then form a political party to push "no cars, anywhere, ever again" cause.
Thank you for making me see through my own villainy!
Here's the problem with what you just did.
He was making fun of the idea that mounts are always needed, no matter what, in any civilization that hits a certain level of development. He was suggesting that if there are millions of worlds, surely it can be okay if a fantasy author can make at least one without mounts, without being penalized and called illogical.
You were making fun of the idea that mounts are never needed, no matter what, in any civilization. You are suggesting that surely mounts and vehicles should be allowed in at least some sort of context, perhaps in the real world, and that they shouldn't be banned everywhere.
Sure. There can be universes without mounts. I can create one in my mind just now, it's called Mountia. No one ever uses mounts there, for whatever reason. Let's say the reason is because the fantasy author, me, decided there is nothing suitable in that world, that you could use as mounts. There.
I suppose it's too much to say "If there's the mount, and the need, why not use it?"
This thread is about GW2 and it seems like a world where it would be perfectly justified to use something as a mount, and surely would make sense, even in some situations. There's also lore to support this like others have said in this topic.
But anyway, yes, I can come up with a world that has no mounts in it. My point kind of was, if Star Trek has a place where there is no mounts, I dont see why Gw2 should have them restricted when it has something suitable for mounting. If that post was simply to find out if I can imagine a world without mounts, sure, I can, but it's not GW2.
Anyway, mounts are not going to be in the game and it does not break it. Also there's the Charr/Norn debate about mounts and so forth. Still, it's just my opinion that I'd like mounts in Gw2, being suitable in it, and only adding to the experience. The more mounting has functionality the better. There's no need for it to be just for the basic advantage: Speed.
OT: Anyway, try to have discussion here... Your reply and quote in #155 at me, you ignore half of what I said, then say a lot of people complain about mounts (but nothing specific), pick a horse to represent a mount in a magical fantasy game full of creatures, ask why anyone would use mounts as if you would not, so no one else should either (personal), call mounts lame over portals if they are only for traveling (personal + I'm not asking them to be only for travel). #157 I try to talk about it, and explain my self which you completely ignore, and go on to try to make it something personal in your next reply, half the time talk as mounts are useless and not needed and adding here and there that they would actually be cool if made the right way. #163 You are outright twisting my words and lying there. Incite chaos.
I should have dropped it there since you didnt give a crap about anything else than what you said, arguing against me just for the sake of it and then call mounts alright as longs as they had some certain conditions. Or do you have some certain image in mind of the mounts I am talking about and dont like it? Or simply the reason "if the creature is there, is viable, and I have the need" is not enough? I havent exactly said anything very specific about mounts other than there should be a choise. Oh I did actually say I'd like to see more functionality in the mounts, some sort of "minigames" in them. Maybe it's a better topic for you to sort out with no one else in it.
Omg, I've been wrong about mounts all this time, I'm so sorry, no one should ever use one
I'll go now and sell my car and tell everyone I know to do the same and then form a political party to push "no cars, anywhere, ever again" cause.
Thank you for making me see through my own villainy!
Here's the problem with what you just did.
He was making fun of the idea that mounts are always needed, no matter what, in any civilization that hits a certain level of development. He was suggesting that if there are millions of worlds, surely it can be okay if a fantasy author can make at least one without mounts, without being penalized and called illogical.
You were making fun of the idea that mounts are never needed, no matter what, in any civilization. You are suggesting that surely mounts and vehicles should be allowed in at least some sort of context, perhaps in the real world, and that they shouldn't be banned everywhere.
Sure. There can be universes without mounts. I can create one in my mind just now, it's called Mountia. No one ever uses mounts there, for whatever reason. Let's say the reason is because the fantasy author, me, decided there is nothing suitable in that world, that you could use as mounts. There.
I suppose it's too much to say "If there's the mount, and the need, why not use it?"
This thread is about GW2 and it seems like a world where it would be perfectly justified to use something as a mount, and surely would make sense, even in some situations. There's also lore to support this like others have said in this topic.
But anyway, yes, I can come up with a world that has no mounts in it. My point kind of was, if Star Trek has a place where there is no mounts, I dont see why Gw2 should have them restricted when it has something suitable for mounting. If that post was simply to find out if I can imagine a world without mounts, sure, I can, but it's not GW2.
Anyway, mounts are not going to be in the game and it does not break it. Also there's the Charr/Norn debate about mounts and so forth. Still, it's just my opinion that I'd like mounts in Gw2, being suitable in it, and only adding to the experience. The more mounting has functionality the better. There's no need for it to be just for the basic advantage: Speed.
OT: Anyway, try to have discussion here... Your reply and quote in #155 at me, you ignore half of what I said, then say a lot of people complain about mounts (but nothing specific), pick a horse to represent a mount in a magical fantasy game full of creatures, ask why anyone would use mounts as if you would not, so no one else should either (personal), call mounts lame over portals if they are only for traveling (personal + I'm not asking them to be only for travel). #157 I try to talk about it, and explain my self which you completely ignore, and go on to try to make it something personal in your next reply, half the time talk as mounts are useless and not needed and adding here and there that they would actually be cool if made the right way. #163 You are outright twisting my words and lying there. Incite chaos.
I should have dropped it there since you didnt give a crap about anything else than what you said, arguing against me just for the sake of it and then call mounts alright as longs as they had some certain conditions. Or do you have some certain image in mind of the mounts I am talking about and dont like it? Or simply the reason "if the creature is there, is viable, and I have the need" is not enough? I havent exactly said anything very specific about mounts other than there should be a choise. Oh I did actually say I'd like to see more functionality in the mounts, some sort of "minigames" in them. Maybe it's a better topic for you to sort out with no one else in it.
I notice that you did the same with Meowhead's post. What does that say about the points you are trying to make I wonder?
Comments
I just don't see the point of having mounts if fast travel is in place. If they take out fast travel, then we'll need some new way to get around and mounts would be an option they could use. I just don't see the point of having both.
I think mounts should be implemented, not now though.
Mounts should be personal and while mounted we should change skill bar, like when we are mounted on siege devourer... i really think they will implement something like this in future expansions. They have the mechanics to do it, but they need to think it very well so they don't do it wrong.
Sure. There can be universes without mounts. I can create one in my mind just now, it's called Mountia. No one ever uses mounts there, for whatever reason. Let's say the reason is because the fantasy author, me, decided there is nothing suitable in that world, that you could use as mounts. There.
I suppose it's too much to say "If there's the mount, and the need, why not use it?"
This thread is about GW2 and it seems like a world where it would be perfectly justified to use something as a mount, and surely would make sense, even in some situations. There's also lore to support this like others have said in this topic.
But anyway, yes, I can come up with a world that has no mounts in it. My point kind of was, if Star Trek has a place where there is no mounts, I dont see why Gw2 should have them restricted when it has something suitable for mounting. If that post was simply to find out if I can imagine a world without mounts, sure, I can, but it's not GW2.
Anyway, mounts are not going to be in the game and it does not break it. Also there's the Charr/Norn debate about mounts and so forth. Still, it's just my opinion that I'd like mounts in Gw2, being suitable in it, and only adding to the experience. The more mounting has functionality the better. There's no need for it to be just for the basic advantage: Speed.
OT: Anyway, try to have discussion here... Your reply and quote in #155 at me, you ignore half of what I said, then say a lot of people complain about mounts (but nothing specific), pick a horse to represent a mount in a magical fantasy game full of creatures, ask why anyone would use mounts as if you would not, so no one else should either (personal), call mounts lame over portals if they are only for traveling (personal + I'm not asking them to be only for travel). #157 I try to talk about it, and explain my self which you completely ignore, and go on to try to make it something personal in your next reply, half the time talk as mounts are useless and not needed and adding here and there that they would actually be cool if made the right way. #163 You are outright twisting my words and lying there. Incite chaos.
I should have dropped it there since you didnt give a crap about anything else than what you said, arguing against me just for the sake of it and then call mounts alright as longs as they had some certain conditions. Or do you have some certain image in mind of the mounts I am talking about and dont like it? Or simply the reason "if the creature is there, is viable, and I have the need" is not enough? I havent exactly said anything very specific about mounts other than there should be a choise. Oh I did actually say I'd like to see more functionality in the mounts, some sort of "minigames" in them. Maybe it's a better topic for you to sort out with no one else in it.
I notice that you did the same with Meowhead's post. What does that say about the points you are trying to make I wonder?