I personally think mounts would be a slap on the face in terms of lore. That is why I personally am against mounts in GW2 - there haven't been any in GW1, there shouldn't be any in GW2.
Sure, there's been dolyaks, siege turtles, and wagons drawn by ox - but those are slow moving beasts of burden for transportation of goods, not mounts.
GW1 had siege devourers and wurms, with their separate skill sets. Of course, normal horses would look really stupid and out of place, but ANet can always invent some exotic, lore-friendly mounts. So, I think it would be possible, but looks like it's not really needed.
Both siege devourers and wurms were very location-specific, and you actually had to fight against them to earn their respect. Once for wurms, for siege devourers every time you wanted to use them. Wurms couldn't burrow on rocky ground either, so the lore itself places pretty tight limits on using these as mounts.
I admit the wurm idea is far-fetched, but you're wrong about siege devourers. Charr used them as weapons, so you did not fight over their respect, but to knock the rider off. So, using devourers as mounts and weapons wasn't uncommon in GW1 and smaller devourers could be used as mounts in GW2 without bending the lore. They're just an example from GW1, though. There are many other creatures that could be used as mounts, such as drakes, wolves and Asuran golems. IMO the real question is whether this game needs any mounts.
Fair enough about siege devourers, but I still wouldn't even classify wurms or siege devourers as mounts in the sense that is discussed in this thread. You couldn't pull out your siege devourer in GW1 towns, or even vast majority of explorable areas, so I would rather compare them to something like the golem suits in GW2, or lightning towers, or siege cannons in charr areas. Use them in the areas where they are available, and that in my opinion is perfectly fine.
I can't agree with what you said about drakes or wolves as mounts though... asuran golems I can somehow understand, but the former two, no way. That would seriously just kill the game for me. I know I know, personal opinion and all...
I am actually quite amazed to see that so many vote for disliking mounts. Thought I was the only person who disliked them in any game.
Either way, a mount isn't needed in a game, it tends to break immersion, specially if they begin to 'fly around' the area. I do get the idea of 'just wanting to get somewhere' but I really don't think its needed if the game does it right. Does GW2 do it right? Eh.... sort of.
Comments
i wouldn't mind riding on a centaur.
I think that the centaur might mind.
Fair enough about siege devourers, but I still wouldn't even classify wurms or siege devourers as mounts in the sense that is discussed in this thread. You couldn't pull out your siege devourer in GW1 towns, or even vast majority of explorable areas, so I would rather compare them to something like the golem suits in GW2, or lightning towers, or siege cannons in charr areas. Use them in the areas where they are available, and that in my opinion is perfectly fine.
I can't agree with what you said about drakes or wolves as mounts though... asuran golems I can somehow understand, but the former two, no way. That would seriously just kill the game for me.
I know I know, personal opinion and all...
I am actually quite amazed to see that so many vote for disliking mounts. Thought I was the only person who disliked them in any game.
Either way, a mount isn't needed in a game, it tends to break immersion, specially if they begin to 'fly around' the area. I do get the idea of 'just wanting to get somewhere' but I really don't think its needed if the game does it right. Does GW2 do it right? Eh.... sort of.