What is it about this site that causes people to be so inflammatory against those who see things differently? I can see both sides to this one, and it seems like such a simple case of base preference, I don’t understand why there needs to be 33 pages of mud slinging. Let’s break this down really simple.
Fast travel in the form of increased ground speed is in the game. Therefore this is not an argument about game mechanics, world size or any of that because the fast movement is there.
Therefore this is an aesthetic preference issue. Some people like that you just put away your weapons and run faster, others want a mount to ride on. Neither is right or wrong, but to put a simple way to help you see the other side’s PoV:
Having no mount is similar to not having your avatar change appearance when you equip a breastplate to some. Sure mechanically it is the same but they want a graphical representation other than sheathing weapons.
Others feel that whipping a mount out of thin air is a half assed job of doing mounts and that if mounts are to be in a game it should be it’s own separate system.
Some feel it breaks immersion that there is no mount you are riding on.
Some feel it breaks immersion if they put in mounts when the lore has no horses or any other mounts in the past (that I can recall), and that it breaks immersion in many games when a mount appears out of no where.
Some people like collecting things for prestige/vanity and like collecting different mounts even if the difference between them is just visual .
Some people think something like this creates a divide and an artificial social class which is based nearly primarily on time spent in the game and that there is already enough elitism in mmo’s.
I mean really. Why is it so hard to see the other side. There is no “right” side. To most on either side (I really hope) this isn’t game breaking any way, and certainly not worth 33 pages that has a high content of insults and belittling.
I agree with a lot of your analysis, but I don't think it's entirely an aesthetic issue.
I think mounts cause issues that don't happen otherwise, and I think they're potentially even more problematic with GW2's DE system.
With any mount or speed boost, there's the potential to skip content. Often you can ride right by something until it stops chasing you. It makes the environment less scary. Flying mounts are even worse. An enemy fort on the hill is silly if you can just drop down on the leader's head, kill him and take off.
You have to address kiting or training. This I think has very big implications in GW2's system. First, GW2's DEs are designed to be basically impossible to grief other players. If you can mess up the event with a mount, that's a huge problem. DEs are also designed to reward people for participating. Is the person who is kiting mobs around on a mount contributing? How does the game know if they're griefing, kiting or just riding around not contributing?
You could get around this issue by having people automatically dismount when they approach a DE but that seems like it's not going to make anybody happy. At least having people draw their weapons and slow down is more natural than just having a mount disappear from out from under you.
People in general get annoyed when they get dismounted so every other game has ways to keep low level mobs from dismounting you. I imagine GW2's system could be equally annoying if you have to slow down and draw weapons at every mob you come across. At least with GW2 though, you'll be able to teleport to any waypoint you've been to, and you'll mentally know that anything that comes past this will be a battle until you reach the next one.
I have no idea why I replied here. This thread really needs to die.
"Gamers will no longer buy the argument that every MMO requires a subscription fee to offset server and bandwidth costs. It's not true you know it, and they know it."-Jeff Strain, co-founder of ArenaNet, 2007
I do not want to use the "breaking of immersion" argument like some of the others. It's not quite fair I think.
With that said, I have problems with the mount implementation in many other games I have played.
1) It's annoying when they are all over the place. In World of Warcraft, if you go into Stormwind on a populated server, you will see a zoo that has run amok. People flying, running and blocking everything on gigantic crazy looking dragons. Personally I don't see anything cool about them. They look and sound the same with different skins. All the drakes feel like different colored versions of each other. You cannot alter their appereance, name them, give them unique armor, fight on them with their own combat system. They are just these generic 3d models that are often much larger than the players. Complaining about lack of variaty in end game armors are one thing, but the genericness of the static mounts is a completely different one.
2) I do not like the unimaginative thing with that mounts just appear and dissapear out of thin air. An interesting mount design would be to have a mount, where you last "Parked it". where you had to fed it, where it could die, where it could grow and level and change... it's a role playing game after all. But these mounts are just increased movement speed for your shoes. not an organic worthwhile companion.
In Zelda the Twilight Priness, I remember when you called for your Horse, it came from like 100 meters away, which was really cool. A bit like when Gandalf calls for his horse in Lord of the Rings.
3) Once you put in Mounts you can't go back. I disliked WoW battlegrounds for their way of always making you go on your mount to go places, until you would auto-dismount in midair(looks crazy and dumb) due to being attacked or on purpose. The sense of being part of an army was replaced by being some pokemon breeder.
It's weird, but the more fantasy you blow into it, the less fantastical it gets. Less is more.
I don't buy the arguments that they look cool. there is nothing cool about every human character having a horse. or every norn having some ram or whatever-animal-their-race-likes in some fluffy variations.
And how about all the animations? These things are going to take considerable amount of time and money - resources that could be used on other projects. Many other MMOs have mounts. I frankly don't see the appeal in them unless they can do something truly cool with them.
One thing I agree with is that this thread just needs to die. it really does.
So many old, regurgitated arguments, no real, new counters to the factual problems with mounts that ArenaNet would have to face if they included them, and about 10 detrimental cons to every player for the perceived pro to the mount-fan. Having to stretch out content or being able to skip content is something that really ticks me off. In other games, someone with more time than I have has spent time grinding for mounts, so I either have to walk across areas designed for mounts on foot, which takes forever and looks incredibly boring and ugly at my speed, or they can just skip content.
This is an issue with mounts that cannot be solved, it is at the core of all mount issues, there is no counter, there is no option, and the only solution was the one adopted by ArenaNet: Remove mounts.
Anyone who doesn't fetishise (and it is fetishising, let's be honest, it's a mount fetish) can plainly see what I've just spelled out above. Mounts are nothing more than a vanity item that allows people to move fast. They're better off saved for dynamic events where you can do fun mounted combat stuff, and the mounts are kept for that event, which is meant to be a mounted event. Having mounts outside of that just means that mounts are getting in the way of the flow of the game.
I don't want to have to walk through a big, boring area just so that someone can fetishise a mount. I don't want to see someone on a mount skip the dynamic event that I have to play through, either. Mounts are game breaking by their very nature. You cannot include a mount without breaking the game.
As I've said a billion times before...
Can we please stop fetishising over vanity items that would ruin this game, and just let it be a good game? Please? Please?
Thank you.
Mounts are horrible things. Yes, some people fetishise over them and this thread makes that all too obvious, but they'd also ruin a good game. No one with an ounce of sense wants them in Guild Wars 2. And Guild Wars 2 does not need to be WoW or similar. Guild Wars 2 is a better game without mounts. I just want Guild Wars 2 to be allowed to be Guild Wars 2. If you don't want to play Guild Wars 2 because you need your mount fix, then look elsewhere.
To be honest, if mounts are going to be nothing but a speed buff with an added animation, then I could care less if they're in the game.
IMO, people "think" mounts should be cool in MMORPGs because of how cool/influential they were in reality. In reality, mounted combat was an art, and mounted troops changed the face of battles.
But in an MMORPG, mounts are usually a stupid speed buff that gets dispelled if you get hit. I can really live without this.
If GW2 DOES implement mounts, then I hope they make them more than a speed buff. It would be nice to have some skills that could only be used while mounted.
I would like mounts in the game. See, to me, mounts are another way to customize your toon. And, it adds a collection mini game. In my other games I collect mounts. In WoW i had 100 mounts. In rift I have 10. For me its an alternative path at endgame, along with crafting, raiding, solciazing and collecting. But, I do understand the purist crowd who dont want mounts. The issue is there will be A LOT of players coming to GW2 who have never played GW. Those folks are used to certain things, like mounts, which are prevelant in almost every mmo. I would imagine at some point n the games life cycle they will introduce mounts (ground mounts). Just my OP.
To be honest, if mounts are going to be nothing but a speed buff with an added animation, then I could care less if they're in the game.
IMO, people "think" mounts should be cool in MMORPGs because of how cool/influential they were in reality. In reality, mounted combat was an art, and mounted troops changed the face of battles.
But in an MMORPG, mounts are usually a stupid speed buff that gets dispelled if you get hit. I can really live without this.
If GW2 DOES implement mounts, then I hope they make them more than a speed buff. It would be nice to have some skills that could only be used while mounted.
Along those lines, make the mounts a mobile bank for your charchter. In Vanguard you can have saddles attached to your mount to use as bag space. Or make mounts capable of carrying two ppl.
To be honest, if mounts are going to be nothing but a speed buff with an added animation, then I could care less if they're in the game.
IMO, people "think" mounts should be cool in MMORPGs because of how cool/influential they were in reality. In reality, mounted combat was an art, and mounted troops changed the face of battles.
But in an MMORPG, mounts are usually a stupid speed buff that gets dispelled if you get hit. I can really live without this.
If GW2 DOES implement mounts, then I hope they make them more than a speed buff. It would be nice to have some skills that could only be used while mounted.
I agree. When you get on a mount your skill bar should change just like underwater, and just like there you should also be able to have special weapons, like lance.
Mounts would make a epic expansions, with steppes and a bit of Genghis feeling to it.
But we aren't really sure that mounts isn't in the game, Jeff Grubb said he couldn't comment on it in that 1 hour event vid, but he refused to confirm that they would be missing. To me it sounds like it is one of those things they might add if they have time for it or to sell an expansion later.
@ Cali59: Your concern is valid of whether they keep the current speed boost or add a mount graphic to it. Either way it is a valid concern, but not one relevant to a mount because if they added mounts speed in game wouldn’t change, it would be an alternative to sheathing weapons.
Flying Mounts are another can of worms and I think separate from this mess of a thread.
So essentially what I am saying is it is still an aesthetic. GW has a system exactly like mounts in many other games with the difference being graphical representation, sheathing a weapon instead of pulling the horse out. Speed issues would have to be delt with either way.
Summary after that:
Kalfer: It’s aesthetics. Your opinion is noted, why argue an opinion? Cake or Pie anyone?
Dream_Chaser: wow. I don’t read a ton of posts here but I remember you as usually being logical and at least somewhat respectful. What happened? If the speed is the same as current running and they add a mount graphic, how is that game breaking? The only difference would be graphics. I understand not wanting it. But saying they are “horrible” is a stretch. You know that they already have the speed boost ni that when you sheath you run faster exactly like mounts in most games, just minus the eyesore/shiney. It is just aesthetics and you prefer no mount. Why argue opinion? Cake or Pie? Like you said it is just a vanity item. Is the festival mask I got last night in GW1 “horrible” and “game breaking”?
Creslin: It’s aesthetics. Your opinion is noted, why argue an opinion? Cake or Pie anyone?
Monarc333: It’s aesthetics. But your second post you gave alternative functions for mounts that could make it more than aesthetics, which is constructive and good. I would have to say that bag space is a part of game balance and unless the mount system is something like fallen earth’s I would prefer no inventory on them. But you know what? That is my opinion so it’s not worth much. The 2 people ride could be interesting, but with the map move system not a big deal to me. I can see arguments going both ways.
Loke666: I agree and figure if they ever do something with mounts it would be like this.
Howardb: a smart ass answer to a smart assish answer does nothing constructive but raise your post count and cost me bandwidth to download the useless bytes of non-information. I am the pot calling the kettle black by even putting this in there though
I should know better than try to be Switzerland. For the record I prefer the sheath the weapons system to popping a mount out of thin air, but it is such a meaningless distinction to me I wouldn’t care too much if they changed it.
1. A baked food composed of a pastry shell filled with fruit, meat, cheese, or other ingredients, and usually covered with a pastry crust.
2. A layer cake having cream, custard, or jelly filling.
3. A whole that can be shared: "That would . . . enlarge the economic pie by making the most productive use of every investment dollar" (New York Times).
Idiom:
pie in the sky
An empty wish or promise: "To outlaw deficits . . . is pie in the sky" (Howard H. Baker, Jr.)
To be honest, if mounts are going to be nothing but a speed buff with an added animation, then I could care less if they're in the game.
IMO, people "think" mounts should be cool in MMORPGs because of how cool/influential they were in reality. In reality, mounted combat was an art, and mounted troops changed the face of battles.
But in an MMORPG, mounts are usually a stupid speed buff that gets dispelled if you get hit. I can really live without this.
If GW2 DOES implement mounts, then I hope they make them more than a speed buff. It would be nice to have some skills that could only be used while mounted.
I agree. When you get on a mount your skill bar should change just like underwater, and just like there you should also be able to have special weapons, like lance.
Mounts would make a epic expansions, with steppes and a bit of Genghis feeling to it.
But we aren't really sure that mounts isn't in the game, Jeff Grubb said he couldn't comment on it in that 1 hour event vid, but he refused to confirm that they would be missing. To me it sounds like it is one of those things they might add if they have time for it or to sell an expansion later.
That would definitely be cool. I would even be happy if mounts acted like a "weapon" where they replace skills 1-4 with canned skills like charge, kick, leap, etc. Different mounts could even have different skills.
In this way, they would kind of function like vehicles from the Battlefield series. Where once you get in one, you kind of "become" the vehicle until you exit with its own unique abilities.
To be honest, if mounts are going to be nothing but a speed buff with an added animation, then I could care less if they're in the game.
IMO, people "think" mounts should be cool in MMORPGs because of how cool/influential they were in reality. In reality, mounted combat was an art, and mounted troops changed the face of battles.
But in an MMORPG, mounts are usually a stupid speed buff that gets dispelled if you get hit. I can really live without this.
If GW2 DOES implement mounts, then I hope they make them more than a speed buff. It would be nice to have some skills that could only be used while mounted.
Along those lines, make the mounts a mobile bank for your charchter. In Vanguard you can have saddles attached to your mount to use as bag space. Or make mounts capable of carrying two ppl.
Yah that could work. UO had this with pack mules. I remember seeing people mining with two pack mules to carry all of their ore. Made the whole thing seem more realistic . Of course, when the game was full FFA PvP, doing that could be pretty dangerous lol.
Originally posted by JesseBFoxDream_Chaser: wow. I don’t read a ton of posts here but I remember you as usually being logical and at least somewhat respectful. What happened?
The tone of his posts is inflammatory to say the least.
I don't know why anyone would openly state in an MMORPG forum, that EVE Online is a "glorified spreadsheet for people who lack imagination and creative vision" and that Dragon Age is a "shallow RPG for the younger audience". That's just asking for trouble.
One thing I agree with is that this thread just needs to die. it really does.
So many old, regurgitated arguments, no real, new counters to the factual problems with mounts that ArenaNet would have to face if they included them, and about 10 detrimental cons to every player for the perceived pro to the mount-fan. Having to stretch out content or being able to skip content is something that really ticks me off. In other games, someone with more time than I have has spent time grinding for mounts, so I either have to walk across areas designed for mounts on foot, which takes forever and looks incredibly boring and ugly at my speed, or they can just skip content.
This is an issue with mounts that cannot be solved, it is at the core of all mount issues, there is no counter, there is no option, and the only solution was the one adopted by ArenaNet: Remove mounts.
Anyone who doesn't fetishise (and it is fetishising, let's be honest, it's a mount fetish) can plainly see what I've just spelled out above. Mounts are nothing more than a vanity item that allows people to move fast. They're better off saved for dynamic events where you can do fun mounted combat stuff, and the mounts are kept for that event, which is meant to be a mounted event. Having mounts outside of that just means that mounts are getting in the way of the flow of the game.
I don't want to have to walk through a big, boring area just so that someone can fetishise a mount. I don't want to see someone on a mount skip the dynamic event that I have to play through, either. Mounts are game breaking by their very nature. You cannot include a mount without breaking the game.
As I've said a billion times before...
Can we please stop fetishising over vanity items that would ruin this game, and just let it be a good game? Please? Please?
Thank you.
Mounts are horrible things. Yes, some people fetishise over them and this thread makes that all too obvious, but they'd also ruin a good game. No one with an ounce of sense wants them in Guild Wars 2. And Guild Wars 2 does not need to be WoW or similar. Guild Wars 2 is a better game without mounts. I just want Guild Wars 2 to be allowed to be Guild Wars 2. If you don't want to play Guild Wars 2 because you need your mount fix, then look elsewhere.
Again belittling the opposing opinion doesn't justify yours in anyway. If anything it shows you're completely incapable of understanding people want different things than you do.
Does the exclusion of mounts make GW2 a bad game? No.
Would the inclusion of mounts make GW2 a bad game? No.
Would the inclusion of mounts make the game anymore similar to WOW? No.
This is a discussion forum everyone is entitled to giving their opinion, yours carries no more weight than anyone elses. No matter how long winded or full of hot air it is.
Step off your high horse and back away from the ad-hominem attacks on everyone who disagrees with you. Remove these two aspects of your last two posts, there's really not much there at all.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
In all honesty, I couldnt care less about no mounts. As far as we know, anet devs arent stupid, theres reasons for not having mounts in their game, atleast at launch. What I think would be cool and add a little more realism is if they implemented a system like in TES or in Assassins Creed II, where the mounts are in stables outside of cities, and you could even own one if you wanted to, just have him in a personal stables or something in your home instance. None of this half-assed crap where you pull a horse out of your pocket, I mean come on. But having no mounts is in no way a game-breaker for me.
From what I've seen so far, this game is a potential saviour, who the heck cares if theres no mounts?!
Alot wonders why this thread is still going on, since the subject has been discussed to death, brought back to life, and discussed back to death too many times already.
Alot wonders why this thread is still going on, since the subject has been discussed to death, brought back to life, and discussed back to death too many times already.
Malickie wonders why people care what others decide to post about, or which debates they feel like contributing to? Seems to me that many here in the GW2 section have no tolerance of any thread that questions design decisions A-net have made in the development of GW2.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Alot wonders why this thread is still going on, since the subject has been discussed to death, brought back to life, and discussed back to death too many times already.
Malickie wonders why people care what others decide to post about, or which debates they feel like contributing to? Seems to me that many here in the GW2 section have no tolerance of any thread that questions design decisions A-net have made in the development of GW2.
Many here in the GW2 section have tolerated this thread for 34+ pages. There is no point in discussing the topic, every argument in this thread has been used over a million times already. And we're still at the same point as we were when this thread started: Mount haters versus Mount lovers.
If you intent to discuss the tolerance of the people posting in the GW2 section to threads questioning design decisions made by ArenaNet you should make a new thread.
Alot wonders why this thread is still going on, since the subject has been discussed to death, brought back to life, and discussed back to death too many times already.
Malickie wonders why people care what others decide to post about, or which debates they feel like contributing to? Seems to me that many here in the GW2 section have no tolerance of any thread that questions design decisions A-net have made in the development of GW2.
Many here in the GW2 section have tolerated this thread for 34+ pages. There is no point in discussing the topic, every argument in this thread has been used over a million times already. And we're still at the same point as we were when this thread started: Mount haters versus Mount lovers.
And? This is how every thread on a discusion forum goes, rarely do the two sides come to a consensus.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Again belittling the opposing opinion doesn't justify yours in anyway. If anything it shows you're completely incapable of understanding people want different things than you do.
Does the exclusion of mounts make GW2 a bad game? No.
Would the inclusion of mounts make GW2 a bad game? No.
Would the inclusion of mounts make the game anymore similar to WOW? No.
This is a discussion forum everyone is entitled to giving their opinion, yours carries no more weight than anyone elses. No matter how long winded or full of hot air it is.
Step off your high horse and back away from the ad-hominem attacks on everyone who disagrees with you. Remove these two aspects of your last two posts, there's really not much there at all.
How do you know that? I think ANet has a liiittle better perspective on their game don't you agree? And if mounts would contribute to a better gaming experience in any way, I'm positive they would implement them in a heart beat.
But don't mind me.. they just don't want you to have fun.. right?
Alot wonders why this thread is still going on, since the subject has been discussed to death, brought back to life, and discussed back to death too many times already.
Malickie wonders why people care what others decide to post about, or which debates they feel like contributing to? Seems to me that many here in the GW2 section have no tolerance of any thread that questions design decisions A-net have made in the development of GW2.
Many here in the GW2 section have tolerated this thread for 34+ pages. There is no point in discussing the topic, every argument in this thread has been used over a million times already. And we're still at the same point as we were when this thread started: Mount haters versus Mount lovers.
And? This is how every thread on a discusion forum goes, rarely do the two sides come to a consensus.
Rarely do threads (on this forum at least) reach 34 pages. Rarely do threads get killed and necro'd as much as this particular thread.
Well, the point of that thread is reaching the 10.000th post, as long as it hasn't reached that, the thread should continue. But once it reaches 10000 or GW2 releases, it should be closed or be ignored.
Comments
33 pages, really?
What is it about this site that causes people to be so inflammatory against those who see things differently? I can see both sides to this one, and it seems like such a simple case of base preference, I don’t understand why there needs to be 33 pages of mud slinging. Let’s break this down really simple.
Fast travel in the form of increased ground speed is in the game. Therefore this is not an argument about game mechanics, world size or any of that because the fast movement is there.
Therefore this is an aesthetic preference issue. Some people like that you just put away your weapons and run faster, others want a mount to ride on. Neither is right or wrong, but to put a simple way to help you see the other side’s PoV:
Having no mount is similar to not having your avatar change appearance when you equip a breastplate to some. Sure mechanically it is the same but they want a graphical representation other than sheathing weapons.
Others feel that whipping a mount out of thin air is a half assed job of doing mounts and that if mounts are to be in a game it should be it’s own separate system.
Some feel it breaks immersion that there is no mount you are riding on.
Some feel it breaks immersion if they put in mounts when the lore has no horses or any other mounts in the past (that I can recall), and that it breaks immersion in many games when a mount appears out of no where.
Some people like collecting things for prestige/vanity and like collecting different mounts even if the difference between them is just visual .
Some people think something like this creates a divide and an artificial social class which is based nearly primarily on time spent in the game and that there is already enough elitism in mmo’s.
I mean really. Why is it so hard to see the other side. There is no “right” side. To most on either side (I really hope) this isn’t game breaking any way, and certainly not worth 33 pages that has a high content of insults and belittling.
That’s my $0.02, and you can keep the change.
@JesseBFox
I agree with a lot of your analysis, but I don't think it's entirely an aesthetic issue.
I think mounts cause issues that don't happen otherwise, and I think they're potentially even more problematic with GW2's DE system.
With any mount or speed boost, there's the potential to skip content. Often you can ride right by something until it stops chasing you. It makes the environment less scary. Flying mounts are even worse. An enemy fort on the hill is silly if you can just drop down on the leader's head, kill him and take off.
You have to address kiting or training. This I think has very big implications in GW2's system. First, GW2's DEs are designed to be basically impossible to grief other players. If you can mess up the event with a mount, that's a huge problem. DEs are also designed to reward people for participating. Is the person who is kiting mobs around on a mount contributing? How does the game know if they're griefing, kiting or just riding around not contributing?
You could get around this issue by having people automatically dismount when they approach a DE but that seems like it's not going to make anybody happy. At least having people draw their weapons and slow down is more natural than just having a mount disappear from out from under you.
People in general get annoyed when they get dismounted so every other game has ways to keep low level mobs from dismounting you. I imagine GW2's system could be equally annoying if you have to slow down and draw weapons at every mob you come across. At least with GW2 though, you'll be able to teleport to any waypoint you've been to, and you'll mentally know that anything that comes past this will be a battle until you reach the next one.
I have no idea why I replied here. This thread really needs to die.
"Gamers will no longer buy the argument that every MMO requires a subscription fee to offset server and bandwidth costs. It's not true you know it, and they know it." -Jeff Strain, co-founder of ArenaNet, 2007
I do not want to use the "breaking of immersion" argument like some of the others. It's not quite fair I think.
With that said, I have problems with the mount implementation in many other games I have played.
1) It's annoying when they are all over the place. In World of Warcraft, if you go into Stormwind on a populated server, you will see a zoo that has run amok. People flying, running and blocking everything on gigantic crazy looking dragons. Personally I don't see anything cool about them. They look and sound the same with different skins. All the drakes feel like different colored versions of each other. You cannot alter their appereance, name them, give them unique armor, fight on them with their own combat system. They are just these generic 3d models that are often much larger than the players. Complaining about lack of variaty in end game armors are one thing, but the genericness of the static mounts is a completely different one.
2) I do not like the unimaginative thing with that mounts just appear and dissapear out of thin air. An interesting mount design would be to have a mount, where you last "Parked it". where you had to fed it, where it could die, where it could grow and level and change... it's a role playing game after all. But these mounts are just increased movement speed for your shoes. not an organic worthwhile companion.
In Zelda the Twilight Priness, I remember when you called for your Horse, it came from like 100 meters away, which was really cool. A bit like when Gandalf calls for his horse in Lord of the Rings.
3) Once you put in Mounts you can't go back. I disliked WoW battlegrounds for their way of always making you go on your mount to go places, until you would auto-dismount in midair(looks crazy and dumb) due to being attacked or on purpose. The sense of being part of an army was replaced by being some pokemon breeder.
It's weird, but the more fantasy you blow into it, the less fantastical it gets. Less is more.
I don't buy the arguments that they look cool. there is nothing cool about every human character having a horse. or every norn having some ram or whatever-animal-their-race-likes in some fluffy variations.
And how about all the animations? These things are going to take considerable amount of time and money - resources that could be used on other projects. Many other MMOs have mounts. I frankly don't see the appeal in them unless they can do something truly cool with them.
One thing I agree with is that this thread just needs to die. it really does.
So many old, regurgitated arguments, no real, new counters to the factual problems with mounts that ArenaNet would have to face if they included them, and about 10 detrimental cons to every player for the perceived pro to the mount-fan. Having to stretch out content or being able to skip content is something that really ticks me off. In other games, someone with more time than I have has spent time grinding for mounts, so I either have to walk across areas designed for mounts on foot, which takes forever and looks incredibly boring and ugly at my speed, or they can just skip content.
This is an issue with mounts that cannot be solved, it is at the core of all mount issues, there is no counter, there is no option, and the only solution was the one adopted by ArenaNet: Remove mounts.
Anyone who doesn't fetishise (and it is fetishising, let's be honest, it's a mount fetish) can plainly see what I've just spelled out above. Mounts are nothing more than a vanity item that allows people to move fast. They're better off saved for dynamic events where you can do fun mounted combat stuff, and the mounts are kept for that event, which is meant to be a mounted event. Having mounts outside of that just means that mounts are getting in the way of the flow of the game.
I don't want to have to walk through a big, boring area just so that someone can fetishise a mount. I don't want to see someone on a mount skip the dynamic event that I have to play through, either. Mounts are game breaking by their very nature. You cannot include a mount without breaking the game.
As I've said a billion times before...
Can we please stop fetishising over vanity items that would ruin this game, and just let it be a good game? Please? Please?
Thank you.
Mounts are horrible things. Yes, some people fetishise over them and this thread makes that all too obvious, but they'd also ruin a good game. No one with an ounce of sense wants them in Guild Wars 2. And Guild Wars 2 does not need to be WoW or similar. Guild Wars 2 is a better game without mounts. I just want Guild Wars 2 to be allowed to be Guild Wars 2. If you don't want to play Guild Wars 2 because you need your mount fix, then look elsewhere.
To be honest, if mounts are going to be nothing but a speed buff with an added animation, then I could care less if they're in the game.
IMO, people "think" mounts should be cool in MMORPGs because of how cool/influential they were in reality. In reality, mounted combat was an art, and mounted troops changed the face of battles.
But in an MMORPG, mounts are usually a stupid speed buff that gets dispelled if you get hit. I can really live without this.
If GW2 DOES implement mounts, then I hope they make them more than a speed buff. It would be nice to have some skills that could only be used while mounted.
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
I would like mounts in the game. See, to me, mounts are another way to customize your toon. And, it adds a collection mini game. In my other games I collect mounts. In WoW i had 100 mounts. In rift I have 10. For me its an alternative path at endgame, along with crafting, raiding, solciazing and collecting. But, I do understand the purist crowd who dont want mounts. The issue is there will be A LOT of players coming to GW2 who have never played GW. Those folks are used to certain things, like mounts, which are prevelant in almost every mmo. I would imagine at some point n the games life cycle they will introduce mounts (ground mounts). Just my OP.
Along those lines, make the mounts a mobile bank for your charchter. In Vanguard you can have saddles attached to your mount to use as bag space. Or make mounts capable of carrying two ppl.
I agree. When you get on a mount your skill bar should change just like underwater, and just like there you should also be able to have special weapons, like lance.
Mounts would make a epic expansions, with steppes and a bit of Genghis feeling to it.
But we aren't really sure that mounts isn't in the game, Jeff Grubb said he couldn't comment on it in that 1 hour event vid, but he refused to confirm that they would be missing. To me it sounds like it is one of those things they might add if they have time for it or to sell an expansion later.
They already made that game. It's called World of Warcraft.
@ Cali59: Your concern is valid of whether they keep the current speed boost or add a mount graphic to it. Either way it is a valid concern, but not one relevant to a mount because if they added mounts speed in game wouldn’t change, it would be an alternative to sheathing weapons.
Flying Mounts are another can of worms and I think separate from this mess of a thread.
So essentially what I am saying is it is still an aesthetic. GW has a system exactly like mounts in many other games with the difference being graphical representation, sheathing a weapon instead of pulling the horse out. Speed issues would have to be delt with either way.
Summary after that:
Kalfer: It’s aesthetics. Your opinion is noted, why argue an opinion? Cake or Pie anyone?
Dream_Chaser: wow. I don’t read a ton of posts here but I remember you as usually being logical and at least somewhat respectful. What happened? If the speed is the same as current running and they add a mount graphic, how is that game breaking? The only difference would be graphics. I understand not wanting it. But saying they are “horrible” is a stretch. You know that they already have the speed boost ni that when you sheath you run faster exactly like mounts in most games, just minus the eyesore/shiney. It is just aesthetics and you prefer no mount. Why argue opinion? Cake or Pie? Like you said it is just a vanity item. Is the festival mask I got last night in GW1 “horrible” and “game breaking”?
Creslin: It’s aesthetics. Your opinion is noted, why argue an opinion? Cake or Pie anyone?
Monarc333: It’s aesthetics. But your second post you gave alternative functions for mounts that could make it more than aesthetics, which is constructive and good. I would have to say that bag space is a part of game balance and unless the mount system is something like fallen earth’s I would prefer no inventory on them. But you know what? That is my opinion so it’s not worth much. The 2 people ride could be interesting, but with the map move system not a big deal to me. I can see arguments going both ways.
Loke666: I agree and figure if they ever do something with mounts it would be like this.
Howardb: a smart ass answer to a smart assish answer does nothing constructive but raise your post count and cost me bandwidth to download the useless bytes of non-information. I am the pot calling the kettle black by even putting this in there though
I should know better than try to be Switzerland. For the record I prefer the sheath the weapons system to popping a mount out of thin air, but it is such a meaningless distinction to me I wouldn’t care too much if they changed it.
Define pie.
pie 1 (p
)
n.
1. A baked food composed of a pastry shell filled with fruit, meat, cheese, or other ingredients, and usually covered with a pastry crust.
2. A layer cake having cream, custard, or jelly filling.
3. A whole that can be shared: "That would . . . enlarge the economic pie by making the most productive use of every investment dollar" (New York Times).
Idiom:
pie in the sky
An empty wish or promise: "To outlaw deficits . . . is pie in the sky" (Howard H. Baker, Jr.)
That would definitely be cool. I would even be happy if mounts acted like a "weapon" where they replace skills 1-4 with canned skills like charge, kick, leap, etc. Different mounts could even have different skills.
In this way, they would kind of function like vehicles from the Battlefield series. Where once you get in one, you kind of "become" the vehicle until you exit with its own unique abilities.
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
Yah that could work. UO had this with pack mules. I remember seeing people mining with two pack mules to carry all of their ore. Made the whole thing seem more realistic
. Of course, when the game was full FFA PvP, doing that could be pretty dangerous lol.
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
The tone of his posts is inflammatory to say the least.
I don't know why anyone would openly state in an MMORPG forum, that EVE Online is a "glorified spreadsheet for people who lack imagination and creative vision" and that Dragon Age is a "shallow RPG for the younger audience". That's just asking for trouble.
Again belittling the opposing opinion doesn't justify yours in anyway. If anything it shows you're completely incapable of understanding people want different things than you do.
Does the exclusion of mounts make GW2 a bad game? No.
Would the inclusion of mounts make GW2 a bad game? No.
Would the inclusion of mounts make the game anymore similar to WOW? No.
This is a discussion forum everyone is entitled to giving their opinion, yours carries no more weight than anyone elses. No matter how long winded or full of hot air it is.
Step off your high horse and back away from the ad-hominem attacks on everyone who disagrees with you. Remove these two aspects of your last two posts, there's really not much there at all.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
In all honesty, I couldnt care less about no mounts. As far as we know, anet devs arent stupid, theres reasons for not having mounts in their game, atleast at launch. What I think would be cool and add a little more realism is if they implemented a system like in TES or in Assassins Creed II, where the mounts are in stables outside of cities, and you could even own one if you wanted to, just have him in a personal stables or something in your home instance. None of this half-assed crap where you pull a horse out of your pocket, I mean come on. But having no mounts is in no way a game-breaker for me.
From what I've seen so far, this game is a potential saviour, who the heck cares if theres no mounts?!
seriously guys, just let it go...
Alot wonders why this thread is still going on, since the subject has been discussed to death, brought back to life, and discussed back to death too many times already.
Malickie wonders why people care what others decide to post about, or which debates they feel like contributing to? Seems to me that many here in the GW2 section have no tolerance of any thread that questions design decisions A-net have made in the development of GW2.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Many here in the GW2 section have tolerated this thread for 34+ pages. There is no point in discussing the topic, every argument in this thread has been used over a million times already. And we're still at the same point as we were when this thread started: Mount haters versus Mount lovers.
If you intent to discuss the tolerance of the people posting in the GW2 section to threads questioning design decisions made by ArenaNet you should make a new thread.
Besides, the OP has really abandoned this topic.
And? This is how every thread on a discusion forum goes, rarely do the two sides come to a consensus.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
How do you know that? I think ANet has a liiittle better perspective on their game don't you agree? And if mounts would contribute to a better gaming experience in any way, I'm positive they would implement them in a heart beat.
But don't mind me.. they just don't want you to have fun.. right?
Haters and trolls would say yes.
Eat me!
Rarely do threads (on this forum at least) reach 34 pages. Rarely do threads get killed and necro'd as much as this particular thread.
Thread page 100 or gw2?
The following statement is false
The previous statement is true
Well, the point of that thread is reaching the 10.000th post, as long as it hasn't reached that, the thread should continue. But once it reaches 10000 or GW2 releases, it should be closed or be ignored.