Palawa Joko keeps referring to Zhed as "Horse" and makes several snide remarks about his ancestors being cavalry in the NF cutscenes. Taking into account that he was just awoken from 200+ years of banishment implies that horses at least exist and have been known to be rideable animals since then.
Edit:
Also, the Equine Aegis, a shield that pretty clearly depicts some sort of horse.
Unfortunately, so far as I can tell, they are all dead. Maybe all the horses were on Orr, and are now extinct, since people TALK about horses, and seem to have an idea of what they are, but you never see a living specimen.
Originally posted by Ablestron also not to mention that there are no horses in GW lore, so unless you want your heroic charactor to be riding a moa, then your out of luck
Palawa Joko keeps referring to Zhed as "Horse" and makes several snide remarks about his ancestors being cavalry in the NF cutscenes. Taking into account that he was just awoken from 200+ years of banishment implies that horses at least exist and have been known to be rideable animals since then. Edit: Also, the Equine Aegis, a shield that pretty clearly depicts some sort of horse.
well, then i think we all need to learn more about the fascinating guild wars lore before taking everything for granted
I'd like to point out that there are no current world (GW1 era) instances of horses being used in the GW lore. There are place-name uses (Iron Horse Mine), some artistry (Equine Aegis), a religious phenom (Celestial Horse (summon)), and historical references (Palawa Joko, some Canthan history). There is no evidence of horses existing in GW1 era; for all we know they may be extinct.
Edit: ninja'd. Forgot about the necrid horsemen, but those still kinda fall into a historical kind of use... and would support the extinction theory.
I'd like to point out that there are no current world (GW1 era) instances of horses being used in the GW lore. There are place-name uses (Iron Horse Mine), some artistry (Equine Aegis), a religious phenom (Celestial Horse (summon)), and historical references (Palawa Joko, some Canthan history). There is no evidence of horses existing in GW1 era; for all we know they may be extinct.
Edit: ninja'd. Forgot about the necrid horsemen, but those still kinda fall into a historical kind of use... and would support the extinction theory.
A possibility but even if horses are extinct there are other things you could use as mounts if you felt for it.
I guess you seen the picture from GW: Utopia where a human is riding a beetle.
Mounts are not against the lore but the question is if they would make GW2 a better game or not. I am not so sure they would because the reasons I stated earlier in the thread.
Flying mounts is truly a bad idea, they makes the game really small and is worse than teleporting, I actually like the exploring part and flying mounts totally take that away.
The only typ of game that would do fine with flying mounts would be if anyone made a Dragonlance MMO where flying mounts and flying combat actually were an important part of the game instead of a way to lessen travel time.
The main point of mounts is not to lessen travel time, the Roman legion proved that foot soldiers actually could move a lot faster long distances than mounted could. The only times you use mounts for fast travel long distances if when you have couriers who exchange their horse every 2 hours or so.
The main historical point of a horse is either for heavy work (plowing and similar) or in combat. Mounted knights and war chariots are effective.
If there's any sort of mounts in the game, I'm assuming they'll be more something you use temporarily, and gives you another set of skills, just like if you pick up an environmental weapon.
Good example is getting into a turret. Something with different controls (Just an object that moves, instead of being locked into place)
It could work within the lore, and could do little bits of quick gameplay changes for a nice change of pace. I wouldn't mind that sort of thing at all.
There is a lot of evidence pointing towards mounts being a possibility. From a lore perspective, (as others have pointed out already) we have Dolyaks, Aurochs, ice-drakes (THK mission), turtles, oxen, devourers, and Junundu wurms (just to name a few) are mounts--using the term loosely--in GW1. So given the time-gap, we could probably see many more beasts becoming domesticated.
As was in GW1 when you used a siege mount, they swapped your bar with different skills. And in GW2 with environmental weapons your bar would probably change too when you got on a mount; so it is in the scope of the game mechanics to have mounts.
How likely is it for the game to launch with them though... my guess would be that they won't be in the base-game at launch. I could see it being a fun DLC pack, but I have a feeling many people would object to that on the basis of 'but the DLC gives different skills, and thats not fair. q.q' So we might see mounts show up eventually in small number roaming the map with a live patch, or as a new thing for an expansion.
Yes mounts should definately be in. I took it as granted there would be mounts in this game and this feels like GW2 is taking one step forward in most of it's aspects but two steps backward in some, sadly.
It's not about fast travel only, mounts are logical part of any game with a big free world to explore, there's really no excuse why the intelligent races in any fantasy games would have never realized they can use creatures as pack animals or means to travel. It's irrelevant if there are teleports or the like, there's a bunch of games out there with fast travel + mounts. I cant believe ANet is making me to say this regarding GW2...
Besides mounts being logical, they are also fun for tons of people, in some games I want to ride a mount without destination just because it's fun to ride something. Latest and very fun thing about mount equivalent, as travel powers in DCUO, are races, there's a path you need to beat faster than the clock / other players with your travel power. It would be sweet to see such a minigame in a game like GW2 with horses or some other mount creatures. ANet's been promoting the minigames that are going to be in GW2 and a mount races would be a very cool one, it could even count as end game content with prizes and titles, if done well enough.
Also the claims of "skipping content" in some replies here, it's totally bs. I can skip content on foot too. If you want to force content on people, just make a game that's a straight pipe like most singleplayers where it is impossible to skip content, oh wait, it's not the purpose of this game the devs have said I get to choose if I want to help town or do this or do that..
Seriously, bring mounts in for us who love them and make them even meaningful content by minigames and such. No harm done, only gives credit to the game. No mounts might even sound low-budget to many who are observing GW2 from a bit further without proper knowledge of the game.
People who find mounts not neccesary dont have to use them and can stick solely to portals. More than one race is not neccesary, you can play with just one. More than one class is not neccesary, you can play with just one. More than one area is not neccesary, you can play in just one. More than one ability is not neccesary, you can use the one you have. See what I did there, the more options in a game, the better.
All fantasy MMORPGs should have mounts, it is an inherent part of the genre. Flying mounts, on the other hand, should be severly restricted as that is really something special.
I would say yes ,if only combat was EXACTLY like mount and blade ,where also the horse animations/movement are excellent(decreasing-increasing speed accelerate etc) ,and having a horse there actually has a meaning..
I would say yes ,if only combat was EXACTLY like mount and blade ,where also the horse animations/movement are excellent(decreasing-increasing speed accelerate etc) ,and having a horse there actually has a meaning..
I would say at least as good.
A horse should be something you jump on when you go to battle, not something you jump off. With right mechanics mounted combat could add to the game but I have not played a single MMO that is even acceptable and I rather have no mounts than that.
People citing the 'no need' because of map-travel need to step outside of the small instanced zones of Guild Wars and into the bigger world of large open zones that are part of the rest of the MMO world. You may change your tune when it takes you 10-12 minutes to cross a zone on foot just to get your map-travel point.
When you hear in global chat that an event has spawned on the other side of an outpost that you can't travel to yet, you are going to want a mount to get their as fast as possible if you want to take part in it.
People citing the 'no need' because of map-travel need to step outside of the small instanced zones of Guild Wars and into the bigger world of large open zones that are part of the rest of the MMO world. You may change your tune when it takes you 10-12 minutes to cross a zone on foot just to get your map-travel point.
When you hear in global chat that an event has spawned on the other side of an outpost that you can't travel to yet, you are going to want a mount to get their as fast as possible if you want to take part in it.
i don't think you get the time right - 10 12 minutes to cross a zone, does NOT equal 10-12 minutess to get to a map-trawel point at all. what we have seen from demo is alot af map trawel points in each zone .... and it is alot !
People citing the 'no need' because of map-travel need to step outside of the small instanced zones of Guild Wars and into the bigger world of large open zones that are part of the rest of the MMO world. You may change your tune when it takes you 10-12 minutes to cross a zone on foot just to get your map-travel point.
When you hear in global chat that an event has spawned on the other side of an outpost that you can't travel to yet, you are going to want a mount to get their as fast as possible if you want to take part in it.
i don't think you get the time right - 10 12 minutes to cross a zone, does NOT equal 10-12 minutess to get to a map-trawel point at all. what we have seen from demo is alot af map trawel points in each zone .... and it is alot !
Yay for tel-tel-teleporting everywhere! Cheap. Meh. Look an event started, let's just teleport near it. Then teleport into city to sort loot. Then teleport back to quest location.
People citing the 'no need' because of map-travel need to step outside of the small instanced zones of Guild Wars and into the bigger world of large open zones that are part of the rest of the MMO world. You may change your tune when it takes you 10-12 minutes to cross a zone on foot just to get your map-travel point.
When you hear in global chat that an event has spawned on the other side of an outpost that you can't travel to yet, you are going to want a mount to get their as fast as possible if you want to take part in it.
i don't think you get the time right - 10 12 minutes to cross a zone, does NOT equal 10-12 minutess to get to a map-trawel point at all. what we have seen from demo is alot af map trawel points in each zone .... and it is alot !
Yeah, and for the purpose for the demo, the map-travel locations were more than likely already unlocked. When you play the game you are still going to have to physically visit each of those locations to unlock them. Which is travel on foot, which is going to take time. Time that can be reduced by implementing a mount system.
Mounts are not some sort of evil bogeyman that will destroy the game and can quite easily be used in conjunction with the fast travel system without impacting or diminishing the effect of either of them.
Yay for tel-tel-teleporting everywhere! Cheap. Meh. Look an event started, let's just teleport near it. Then teleport into city to sort loot. Then teleport back to quest location.
Originally posted by Kuinn
People who find mounts not neccesary dont have to use them and can stick solely to portals. More than one race is not neccesary, you can play with just one. More than one class is not neccesary, you can play with just one. More than one area is not neccesary, you can play in just one. More than one ability is not neccesary, you can use the one you have. See what I did there, the more options in a game, the better.
Dude, I love this! Thanks for the laugh. First you say more options the better, then you go on to bash teleporting in your later post. What happened to more options the better? Or did you mean to say the more options that you like the better?
Anyone else sees the hypocrisy here, or is just me?
Anyway thanks for the laugh, being bored at work I needed a good belly laugh.
Yay for tel-tel-teleporting everywhere! Cheap. Meh. Look an event started, let's just teleport near it. Then teleport into city to sort loot. Then teleport back to quest location.
Originally posted by Kuinn
People who find mounts not neccesary dont have to use them and can stick solely to portals. More than one race is not neccesary, you can play with just one. More than one class is not neccesary, you can play with just one. More than one area is not neccesary, you can play in just one. More than one ability is not neccesary, you can use the one you have. See what I did there, the more options in a game, the better.
Dude, I love this! Thanks for the laugh. First you say more options the better, then you go on to bash teleporting in your later post. What happened to more options the better? Or did you mean to say the more options that you like the better?
Anyone else sees the hypocrisy here, or is just me?
Anyway thanks for the laugh, being bored at work I needed a good belly laugh.
OH! I see what you did there. You could easily replace the teleporting bits with riding. Explain yourself Kuinn!
Yay for tel-tel-teleporting everywhere! Cheap. Meh. Look an event started, let's just teleport near it. Then teleport into city to sort loot. Then teleport back to quest location.
Originally posted by Kuinn
People who find mounts not neccesary dont have to use them and can stick solely to portals. More than one race is not neccesary, you can play with just one. More than one class is not neccesary, you can play with just one. More than one area is not neccesary, you can play in just one. More than one ability is not neccesary, you can use the one you have. See what I did there, the more options in a game, the better.
Dude, I love this! Thanks for the laugh. First you say more options the better, then you go on to bash teleporting in your later post. What happened to more options the better? Or did you mean to say the more options that you like the better?
Anyone else sees the hypocrisy here, or is just me?
Anyway thanks for the laugh, being bored at work I needed a good belly laugh.
Yay for tel-tel-teleporting everywhere! Cheap. Meh. Look an event started, let's just teleport near it. Then teleport into city to sort loot. Then teleport back to quest location.
Originally posted by Kuinn
People who find mounts not neccesary dont have to use them and can stick solely to portals. More than one race is not neccesary, you can play with just one. More than one class is not neccesary, you can play with just one. More than one area is not neccesary, you can play in just one. More than one ability is not neccesary, you can use the one you have. See what I did there, the more options in a game, the better.
Dude, I love this! Thanks for the laugh. First you say more options the better, then you go on to bash teleporting in your later post. What happened to more options the better? Or did you mean to say the more options that you like the better?
Anyone else sees the hypocrisy here, or is just me?
Anyway thanks for the laugh, being bored at work I needed a good belly laugh.
hmm i think Kuinn only meant to say its kinda cheap to limit ourselves to teleporting and running. i really dont see where he says teleperting shouldnt be there and therefore i dont see the hypocrisy?
also someone mentions how historicaly ...blah blah (sorry just cant be bothered to quote them ) i haveta say historicaly many thing in this game dont exsit like MAGIC ,lots of the various MONSTERS etc etc . also just becuase we dont see horses in gw doesnt meant they are not there, as i highly doubt we actually saw the whole COMPLETE world but more likely only some parts of it .
hmm i wasnt really leaning on either side of the fence untill i saw all this resistance to the idea, i just dont get it why lesson the pleasure it would bring to some people, it would NOT break the game or anything of the sort so why all the negativity about it ?
Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.
People citing the 'no need' because of map-travel need to step outside of the small instanced zones of Guild Wars and into the bigger world of large open zones that are part of the rest of the MMO world. You may change your tune when it takes you 10-12 minutes to cross a zone on foot just to get your map-travel point.
When you hear in global chat that an event has spawned on the other side of an outpost that you can't travel to yet, you are going to want a mount to get their as fast as possible if you want to take part in it.
People citing 'no need' because of map travel are citing that mounts are not needed purely for travel.
The majority of people on the no mount fence don't seem to mind the idea of having mounts that can take part in combat.
Mounts are currently in a position where they'll either be a cosmetic feature that's only marginally useful to GW (a small waste of dev time), or be a whole new addition to a combat system that has the potential to delay the game by months (an extremely large investment of dev time).
Nither of those options are all that appealing. Rather have the game now and wait for the bells and whistles.
Obviously teleporting is cheap in my OPINION, and I want more choises hence I said "People who find mounts not neccesary dont have to use them and can stick solely to portals." But obviously I over estimated your comprehension capabilities guys. It's not a personal assault on you if I dont like teleporting and see it as easymode or whatever, immersion breaking etc. Certainly not hypocrisy since I'm asking mounts ALONG with the teleports, I'm not asking for the teleports to be taken away, am I?
All you need to understand about my posts is: More options are better, something for you guys who like to teleport everywhere, and something for us who want to ride to those places. Hypocrisy? Nah, just hoping for the game to be as good as possible, try to comprehend a bit better before going nuts fellas
Anet seems to be taking a step beyond every aspect that composes a mmo nowadays, so why not take a step beyond the mounts also, polish the concept and to add it more functions in the game
i dont remember where but i remember reading in one of the blogs or an interview about something at least similar to mounts (not meant for increasing travel speed tho) i dont remember what exactly but some sort of mobile mechanical construct (not a golem) if i think hard i think it may have been mentioned as a dredge siege machine of some sort, i know i dont actualy have the evidence but i figured my half there memory might help one of you find it, i personaly dont realy care enough about mounts to take the time.
im much more excited about quests being replaced and environmental weapons and such. but i thought id toss this in just in case it helps you guys out. of course i could be completely wrong so : / good luck to anyone who feels like searching for what i just described.
Comments
i think it would be cool as fluff, its not worse than some of the idiot titles u can earn presently in gw lolz
Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.
There are actually horses in Guild Wars.
http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Necrid_Horseman
Unfortunately, so far as I can tell, they are all dead. Maybe all the horses were on Orr, and are now extinct, since people TALK about horses, and seem to have an idea of what they are, but you never see a living specimen.
I'd like to point out that there are no current world (GW1 era) instances of horses being used in the GW lore. There are place-name uses (Iron Horse Mine), some artistry (Equine Aegis), a religious phenom (Celestial Horse (summon)), and historical references (Palawa Joko, some Canthan history). There is no evidence of horses existing in GW1 era; for all we know they may be extinct.
Edit: ninja'd. Forgot about the necrid horsemen, but those still kinda fall into a historical kind of use... and would support the extinction theory.
High five for teamwork! You covered everything I didn't, because all that came to mind when I thought horses was 'Weren't there some dead ones?'.
Still, by GW2 they're at least 250 years dead, so far as we know.
A possibility but even if horses are extinct there are other things you could use as mounts if you felt for it.
I guess you seen the picture from GW: Utopia where a human is riding a beetle.
Mounts are not against the lore but the question is if they would make GW2 a better game or not. I am not so sure they would because the reasons I stated earlier in the thread.
Flying mounts is truly a bad idea, they makes the game really small and is worse than teleporting, I actually like the exploring part and flying mounts totally take that away.
The only typ of game that would do fine with flying mounts would be if anyone made a Dragonlance MMO where flying mounts and flying combat actually were an important part of the game instead of a way to lessen travel time.
The main point of mounts is not to lessen travel time, the Roman legion proved that foot soldiers actually could move a lot faster long distances than mounted could. The only times you use mounts for fast travel long distances if when you have couriers who exchange their horse every 2 hours or so.
The main historical point of a horse is either for heavy work (plowing and similar) or in combat. Mounted knights and war chariots are effective.
If there's any sort of mounts in the game, I'm assuming they'll be more something you use temporarily, and gives you another set of skills, just like if you pick up an environmental weapon.
Good example is getting into a turret. Something with different controls (Just an object that moves, instead of being locked into place)
It could work within the lore, and could do little bits of quick gameplay changes for a nice change of pace. I wouldn't mind that sort of thing at all.
There is a lot of evidence pointing towards mounts being a possibility. From a lore perspective, (as others have pointed out already) we have Dolyaks, Aurochs, ice-drakes (THK mission), turtles, oxen, devourers, and Junundu wurms (just to name a few) are mounts--using the term loosely--in GW1. So given the time-gap, we could probably see many more beasts becoming domesticated.
As was in GW1 when you used a siege mount, they swapped your bar with different skills. And in GW2 with environmental weapons your bar would probably change too when you got on a mount; so it is in the scope of the game mechanics to have mounts.
How likely is it for the game to launch with them though... my guess would be that they won't be in the base-game at launch. I could see it being a fun DLC pack, but I have a feeling many people would object to that on the basis of 'but the DLC gives different skills, and thats not fair. q.q' So we might see mounts show up eventually in small number roaming the map with a live patch, or as a new thing for an expansion.
Yes mounts should definately be in. I took it as granted there would be mounts in this game and this feels like GW2 is taking one step forward in most of it's aspects but two steps backward in some, sadly.
It's not about fast travel only, mounts are logical part of any game with a big free world to explore, there's really no excuse why the intelligent races in any fantasy games would have never realized they can use creatures as pack animals or means to travel. It's irrelevant if there are teleports or the like, there's a bunch of games out there with fast travel + mounts. I cant believe ANet is making me to say this regarding GW2...
Besides mounts being logical, they are also fun for tons of people, in some games I want to ride a mount without destination just because it's fun to ride something. Latest and very fun thing about mount equivalent, as travel powers in DCUO, are races, there's a path you need to beat faster than the clock / other players with your travel power. It would be sweet to see such a minigame in a game like GW2 with horses or some other mount creatures. ANet's been promoting the minigames that are going to be in GW2 and a mount races would be a very cool one, it could even count as end game content with prizes and titles, if done well enough.
Also the claims of "skipping content" in some replies here, it's totally bs. I can skip content on foot too. If you want to force content on people, just make a game that's a straight pipe like most singleplayers where it is impossible to skip content, oh wait, it's not the purpose of this game the devs have said I get to choose if I want to help town or do this or do that..
Seriously, bring mounts in for us who love them and make them even meaningful content by minigames and such. No harm done, only gives credit to the game. No mounts might even sound low-budget to many who are observing GW2 from a bit further without proper knowledge of the game.
People who find mounts not neccesary dont have to use them and can stick solely to portals. More than one race is not neccesary, you can play with just one. More than one class is not neccesary, you can play with just one. More than one area is not neccesary, you can play in just one. More than one ability is not neccesary, you can use the one you have. See what I did there, the more options in a game, the better.
All fantasy MMORPGs should have mounts, it is an inherent part of the genre. Flying mounts, on the other hand, should be severly restricted as that is really something special.
My gaming blog
I would say yes ,if only combat was EXACTLY like mount and blade ,where also the horse animations/movement are excellent(decreasing-increasing speed accelerate etc) ,and having a horse there actually has a meaning..
I would say at least as good.
A horse should be something you jump on when you go to battle, not something you jump off. With right mechanics mounted combat could add to the game but I have not played a single MMO that is even acceptable and I rather have no mounts than that.
People citing the 'no need' because of map-travel need to step outside of the small instanced zones of Guild Wars and into the bigger world of large open zones that are part of the rest of the MMO world. You may change your tune when it takes you 10-12 minutes to cross a zone on foot just to get your map-travel point.
When you hear in global chat that an event has spawned on the other side of an outpost that you can't travel to yet, you are going to want a mount to get their as fast as possible if you want to take part in it.
i don't think you get the time right - 10 12 minutes to cross a zone, does NOT equal 10-12 minutess to get to a map-trawel point at all. what we have seen from demo is alot af map trawel points in each zone .... and it is alot !
Yay for tel-tel-teleporting everywhere! Cheap. Meh. Look an event started, let's just teleport near it. Then teleport into city to sort loot. Then teleport back to quest location.
Yeah, and for the purpose for the demo, the map-travel locations were more than likely already unlocked. When you play the game you are still going to have to physically visit each of those locations to unlock them. Which is travel on foot, which is going to take time. Time that can be reduced by implementing a mount system.
Mounts are not some sort of evil bogeyman that will destroy the game and can quite easily be used in conjunction with the fast travel system without impacting or diminishing the effect of either of them.
Dude, I love this! Thanks for the laugh. First you say more options the better, then you go on to bash teleporting in your later post. What happened to more options the better? Or did you mean to say the more options that you like the better?
Anyone else sees the hypocrisy here, or is just me?
Anyway thanks for the laugh, being bored at work I needed a good belly laugh.
OH! I see what you did there. You could easily replace the teleporting bits with riding. Explain yourself Kuinn!
I don't understand this fixation about mounts.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
Well said, slappy.
hmm i think Kuinn only meant to say its kinda cheap to limit ourselves to teleporting and running. i really dont see where he says teleperting shouldnt be there and therefore i dont see the hypocrisy?
also someone mentions how historicaly ...blah blah (sorry just cant be bothered to quote them ) i haveta say historicaly many thing in this game dont exsit like MAGIC ,lots of the various MONSTERS etc etc . also just becuase we dont see horses in gw doesnt meant they are not there, as i highly doubt we actually saw the whole COMPLETE world but more likely only some parts of it .
hmm i wasnt really leaning on either side of the fence untill i saw all this resistance to the idea, i just dont get it why lesson the pleasure it would bring to some people, it would NOT break the game or anything of the sort so why all the negativity about it ?
Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.
People citing 'no need' because of map travel are citing that mounts are not needed purely for travel.
The majority of people on the no mount fence don't seem to mind the idea of having mounts that can take part in combat.
Mounts are currently in a position where they'll either be a cosmetic feature that's only marginally useful to GW (a small waste of dev time), or be a whole new addition to a combat system that has the potential to delay the game by months (an extremely large investment of dev time).
Nither of those options are all that appealing. Rather have the game now and wait for the bells and whistles.
Seriously, are you bunch just trolling?
Obviously teleporting is cheap in my OPINION, and I want more choises hence I said "People who find mounts not neccesary dont have to use them and can stick solely to portals." But obviously I over estimated your comprehension capabilities guys. It's not a personal assault on you if I dont like teleporting and see it as easymode or whatever, immersion breaking etc. Certainly not hypocrisy since I'm asking mounts ALONG with the teleports, I'm not asking for the teleports to be taken away, am I?
All you need to understand about my posts is: More options are better, something for you guys who like to teleport everywhere, and something for us who want to ride to those places. Hypocrisy? Nah, just hoping for the game to be as good as possible, try to comprehend a bit better before going nuts fellas
that‘s what i want to say
i dont remember where but i remember reading in one of the blogs or an interview about something at least similar to mounts (not meant for increasing travel speed tho) i dont remember what exactly but some sort of mobile mechanical construct (not a golem) if i think hard i think it may have been mentioned as a dredge siege machine of some sort, i know i dont actualy have the evidence but i figured my half there memory might help one of you find it, i personaly dont realy care enough about mounts to take the time.
im much more excited about quests being replaced and environmental weapons and such. but i thought id toss this in just in case it helps you guys out. of course i could be completely wrong so : / good luck to anyone who feels like searching for what i just described.
http://steamcommunity.com/id/Cloudsol/