I'll keep the confusing red thingies tyvm. They bring back fond memories of my debate classes ^^; Feels like I'm arguing with an online fallacy generator.
Anyhow, the other "fluff" features you mentioned were written into the design from the get-go and it's taking them over 3 years to get all of it done, each of those should be argued on their own merit. Features you're in favor of have not been allocated any resources as of yet, and allocating those resources now will lead to a net increase in development time.
That's the harm done to me, longer wait. I could care less if I get to hop on some creature for a ride as a result.
This will probably be my last response, not seeing any new arguments, just reorganized old ones.
It's boggling how you can call fallacy something that is explained, logical, and very much in context with a sword and board fantasy world, when you, in fact, are just using your "fallacy generator" as counter argument without really having anything to say. Your mouth moves and noise comes out yet you manage to say absolutely nothing. If that's your goal, alright, I got trolled, but it just proves my point since I've yet to see a counter arguments to any of my points.
Welcome to the next gen immersive dynamic fantasy world where invisible wall prevents you from hopping onto the back of a horse! Well, as I've stated, it's not a make it or break it situation, just plain silly
So you are saying that all sword and board fantasy worlds have to have people riding around on animals? So there could never be a deviation from this that would be logical? The only thing I have to say is I am glad I do not have your limited imagination. That you cannot possible think of a reason why everyone does not learn how to ride a domesticated animal is actually kind of sad.
As for your silly comment, I have not played a MMO in the last five years that once I learn a riding skill I can go hop on any horse just sitting around. So I guess they are all silly, since I can only ride ones that I can magically summon out of my butt (Especially since I can catch and break any horse in RDR, and apparently MMO designers cannot manage to do this).
I actually hope horses are added in as a mini game where you get to race them. But since I do not see a Norn ever riding on anything, if they add in mounts they better only be as fast as my run speed. I should not be forced to have to use a mount, to keep up with the people I play with. You can have your mount for your fluff that moves as fast as the characters run, and I can play the way I want. There we both have options.
Norns wouldn't need mounts since they are able to shape into faster creatures than their original humanoid form, Charr run on fours, Azuras got golems and divices i can't imagine. But, what about Humans and Sylvary?
With the amount of waypoints and how fast you actually move in the game, there's no need. I love mounts in general, but if there not needed, I will be fine without them.
I can't wait till this game release
Wildstar (2013) & Elder Scroll Online (2013)
Playing: Diablo 3, WOW, Far Cry 3 & X-Com.
Enjoyed: WOW 5 1/2 yrs, LOTRO 3yrs, GW 1/2yr, DFO 1yr, EVE Online 3yrs, and Huxley (Beta).
Failed to impress: GW2 3months, Tera Online 6 months (best combat system in any MMO I've played) STO 1/4yr, Aion 1/2yr, AoC 1yr, CO, Fallen Earth, DDO, EQ2 1/2yr, WAR 1/2yr, Lineage 2 and FF XI 1/2yr, FF XIV.
If a Sylvari has the knowledge to tame forest creatures like this one, what's stopping her from using them to travel or fight at her side. I'll tell ya: deadlines, impatient players, investment, lack of imagination, represents more work in design and development and habit of not having this before, be it for lacks in the technology of 2005 and the complicated thing to tolerate changes and evolution in mmorpg genre.
I'll keep the confusing red thingies tyvm. They bring back fond memories of my debate classes ^^; Feels like I'm arguing with an online fallacy generator.
Anyhow, the other "fluff" features you mentioned were written into the design from the get-go and it's taking them over 3 years to get all of it done, each of those should be argued on their own merit. Features you're in favor of have not been allocated any resources as of yet, and allocating those resources now will lead to a net increase in development time.
That's the harm done to me, longer wait. I could care less if I get to hop on some creature for a ride as a result.
This will probably be my last response, not seeing any new arguments, just reorganized old ones.
It's boggling how you can call fallacy something that is explained, logical, and very much in context with a sword and board fantasy world, when you, in fact, are just using your "fallacy generator" as counter argument without really having anything to say. Your mouth moves and noise comes out yet you manage to say absolutely nothing. If that's your goal, alright, I got trolled, but it just proves my point since I've yet to see a counter arguments to any of my points.
Welcome to the next gen immersive dynamic fantasy world where invisible wall prevents you from hopping onto the back of a horse! Well, as I've stated, it's not a make it or break it situation, just plain silly
A.) So you are saying that all sword and board fantasy worlds have to have people riding around on animals? So there could never be a deviation from this that would be logical? The only thing I have to say is I am glad I do not have your limited imagination. That you cannot possible think of a reason why everyone does not learn how to ride a domesticated animal is actually kind of sad.
B.) As for your silly comment, I have not played a MMO in the last five years that once I learn a riding skill I can go hop on any horse just sitting around. So I guess they are all silly, since I can only ride ones that I can magically summon out of my butt (Especially since I can catch and break any horse in RDR, and apparently MMO designers cannot manage to do this).
C.) I actually hope horses are added in as a mini game where you get to race them. But since I do not see a Norn ever riding on anything, if they add in mounts they better only be as fast as my run speed. I should not be forced to have to use a mount, to keep up with the people I play with. You can have your mount for your fluff that moves as fast as the characters run, and I can play the way I want. There we both have options.
A.) You think I lack imagination and I'm sad, when you dont give anykind of counter argument? I guess I'd have awesome imagination if I'd support "only on foot" ideology. Here's the logic applied to combat: Combat only without gear, if you use gear and weapons you lack imagination!
B.) Point is, and has been, if you can, or cannot ride a creature. When ever you take your equipment from your inventory, change gear etc, you basically summon them out of your butt. No one can see them before you do this. So this "out of butt" argument is invalid unless you also support inventory that is a huge 2 x 2 meter bag you drag around the world with full of armor, weapons, potions, junk, quest items, a ton of gold, etc and whatever.
C.) And you are welcome to not ride anything if you wish to do just that. I dont see why Charr and Norn wouldnt have somekind of "extended" running ability/training anyway to go faster than the smaller races. At the moment the Charr looks kinda stupid on the gameplay vids when they run on all four but go so slow.
Norns wouldn't need mounts since they are able to shape into faster creatures than their original humanoid form, Charr run on fours, Azuras got golems and divices i can't imagine. But, what about Humans and Sylvary?
Ah just No, and I mean No on using the Norn sprit forms as a faster means of travel. Norn would not call on the sprits for something as mundane as traveling. There sprit forms should travel at the same speed as they do in their regular form (no WoW druid fast travel form here please), since they do not actual turn into a Snow Leopard or a bear. They still have human qualities when they take on a sprit. So please Anet do not give the sprit forms a travel boast, I will sacrifice one thousand chickens to the spirit of the bear if you keep it true to the lore from GW. Please bear do not let them turn your fellow spirits into a shallow imitation of the druid from world of warcraft.
Originally posted by Kuinn
A.) You think I lack imagination and I'm sad, when you dont give anykind of counter argument? I guess I'd have awesome imagination if I'd support "only on foot" ideology. Here's the logic applied to combat: Combat only without gear, if you use gear and weapons you lack imagination!
B.) Point is, and has been, if you can, or cannot ride a creature. When ever you take your equipment from your inventory, change gear etc, you basically summon them out of your butt. No one can see them before you do this. So this "out of butt" argument is invalid unless you also support inventory that is a huge 2 x 2 meter bag you drag around the world with full of armor, weapons, potions, junk, quest items, a ton of gold, etc and whatever.
C.) And you are welcome to not ride anything if you wish to do just that. I dont see why Charr and Norn wouldnt have somekind of "extended" running ability/training anyway to go faster than the smaller races. At the moment the Charr looks kinda stupid on the gameplay vids when they run on all four but go so slow.
A.) Well for starters that has nothing to do with being an only on foot supporter or a mount supporter. And since it is not about that, why do I have to provide a counter argument? You are the one said and I quote “it would be illogical to not use animals as mounts”, so shouldn’t the burden of proof be on you? I have not made such claims, so I have nothing to defend. And yes because of that statement I think you have a lack of imagination. But let’s put what I said to the test, so if we locked you in a room and made you design ten million worlds that are all in a medieval time period. You honestly could not come up with one logical reason why the people on the planet do not use mounts. Now remember answer honestly, could you come up with a logical reason?
And just for the record if your answer is No, then I stand by my statement that you have a severe lack of imagination I can think of 3 plausible scenarios just off the top of my head.
B.) Hey you’re the one that brought silly into this conversation of MMOs, I did not. So please do not jump all over me about how silly the inventory system is in MMOs. Remember you are the one that brought up silly not me. There are tons of things silly in MMOs, so why would a game without mounts be anymore silly then the magical back pack you brought up?
C.) And why would my Charr or Norn need an extended running ability. I thought this was about options, so everyone can play the game the way they want. My Norn should travel at the same rate the human travels, the human just walks faster. Then your mount should travel at the same rate my Norn does, why should I have to change how my character functions so you can have your mount? After all this is about everyone playing the way they want, well my Norn does not ride mounts. And humans can keep up with him just find. After all people keep saying the mount is needed for fluff, then why does it have to travel faster than a human runs and a Norn walking fast? Or is this just more about the fact that you want mounts in the game no matter what changes it causes to the game, even if everyone might not want it.
A.) Well for starters that has nothing to do with being an only on foot supporter or a mount supporter. And since it is not about that, why do I have to provide a counter argument? You are the one said and I quote “it would be illogical to not use animals as mounts”, so shouldn’t the burden of proof be on you? I have not made such claims, so I have nothing to defend. And yes because of that statement I think you have a lack of imagination. But let’s put what I said to the test, so if we locked you in a room and made you design ten million worlds that are all in a medieval time period. You honestly could not come up with one logical reason why the people on the planet do not use mounts. Now remember answer honestly, could you come up with a logical reason?
And just for the record if your answer is No, then I stand by my statement that you have a severe lack of imagination I can think of 3 plausible scenarios just off the top of my head.
B.) Hey you’re the one that brought silly into this conversation of MMOs, I did not. So please do not jump all over me about how silly the inventory system is in MMOs. Remember you are the one that brought up silly not me. There are tons of things silly in MMOs, so why would a game without mounts be anymore silly then the magical back pack you brought up?
C.) And why would my Charr or Norn need an extended running ability. I thought this was about options, so everyone can play the game the way they want. My Norn should travel at the same rate the human travels, the human just walks faster. Then your mount should travel at the same rate my Norn does, why should I have to change how my character functions so you can have your mount? After all this is about everyone playing the way they want, well my Norn does not ride mounts. And humans can keep up with him just find. After all people keep saying the mount is needed for fluff, then why does it have to travel faster than a human runs and a Norn walking fast? Or is this just more about the fact that you want mounts in the game no matter what changes it causes to the game, even if everyone might not want it.
A.) Yet you avoided again to explain why people would not use mounts. But ofcourse you did, because there is no excuse to that. Thank you for proving my point about mounts being logical choise when it comes to travel, in just about any setting.
B.) You said it your self, there are tons of silly things in MMOs, yet it is so horrible if someone summons a mount out of nothing, when they summon items and whatnot ALL THE TIME out of nothing. Thank you for proving again that it is totally fine to pull mount from out of nothing.
C.) Yes it is about options, if you have a choise to run or mount up you have a choise. If you can only run and not mount up you dont have a choise. You can choose to run slowly as a Norn or not use a mount as a human/some other race if you want to. You have the option.
D.) "Please bear do not let them turn your fellow spirits into a shallow imitation of the druid from world of warcraft."
Leave WoW out of this, it has nothing to do with this, it did not invent fantasy. You could say "leave ZXY out of this game it's similar in WoW" from about a thousand things that will be in GW2, that are common fantasy. It's kinda sad that your hate towards WoW reflects how you perceive other titles. Just try not to think WoW when talking about GW2 and look at the suggestions objectively rather than something that you dont like because something similar are in some other title you do not like.
WoW didnt invent fantasy or this genre, dont try to deify it to seem like such a title. /end of wow in this thread ty.
A.) Yet you avoided again to explain why people would not use mounts. But ofcourse you did, because there is no excuse to that. Thank you for proving my point about mounts being logical choise when it comes to travel, in just about any setting.
Stop using that word, it doesn't mean what you think it means, and you're incapable of it.
You're arguing about a fantasy setting, which by it's very definition the setting makes up it's own rules. It can not have mounts if it wants to. Logic has about as much place in a fantasy world as it has in your arguments.
Also, congradulations, you've failed the turing test.
The only reason why mounts should even be added to this game is for looks only if that. In GW1 we had no mounts and it was fine. In other games names not needed cause we all know which ones offer mounts and what lvl there offered. But this isnt your normal fantasy mmo nethier was the first GW. So in my opinion no mounts are needed maybe the only mounts where the giant ox that the dwarfs rode. But lets be truthful do you always need a mount in any game really no because there not needed if all they allow is faster travel and you cant fight from it. Only a handful of games have ever had mounted combat and to me this is the only reason it would need mounts to begin with. So no mounts needed sense this is a world like no other even tho everyone will say its like all others.
So if you feel the game needs mounts then ok but I think the 6 million+ people who played it before will say otherwise and so shall I. One the game has fast travel in it so why use a mount other then for looks. Two the game is set in a different world so yeah again they might only have one mount type and thats an ox. Three well who needs a mount when you can run to where you need to go this way you dont have to constantly summon/unsummon your mount all the time. And yes even UO had no mounts that I remember. Alot of games never had mounts in them and played fine without. So again why are the needed oh so you look cool on a mount and thats it. In fact I have only used a mount in one game to date and that was Lotro even in EQ2 or WoW I ran every where cause I was fighting to often to need my mount.
So yeah mounts not needed unless you want to summon or unsummon it to the point of not enjoying playing. I enjoy the look of mounts in some games but like some games take AoC why do you need a mount in a game where the maps are not that big for looks to say hey i got a mount. Sorry I dont see the need for mounts unless you have a huge open world and not one thats path dependent on lvling but a true open world.
Sherman's Gaming
Youtube Content creator for The Elder Scrolls Online
A.) Yet you avoided again to explain why people would not use mounts. But ofcourse you did, because there is no excuse to that. Thank you for proving my point about mounts being logical choise when it comes to travel, in just about any setting.
Stop using that word, it doesn't mean what you think it means, and you're incapable of it.
You're arguing about a fantasy setting, which by it's very definition the setting makes up it's own rules. It can not have mounts if it wants to. Logic has about as much place in a fantasy world as it has in your arguments.
Also, congradulations, you've failed the turing test.
The word means what it means.
If logic has as much place in fantasy world as it has in my arguments, then fantasy worlds are quite logical places. Anyway, as GW2 does not seem to be based on pure elements of chaos and disorder, but organized civilizations that can be closely modeled to real world civilizations of different parts of the world, logic is very present there. This is not an opinion, it's a fact.
Stop trying so hard sound like things are what you decide them to be. You've yet to explain anything in this thread, all you do is say "no".
Grats, you simply just seem to fail post after post, with nothing concrete. I wish this would not be the case since I'm actually trying to have a discussion here, and explain my views, all I get in return is "QQ' no, QQ' no". Why? /sigh
The only reason why mounts should even be added to this game is for looks only if that. In GW1 we had no mounts and it was fine. In other games names not needed cause we all know which ones offer mounts and what lvl there offered. But this isnt your normal fantasy mmo nethier was the first GW. So in my opinion no mounts are needed maybe the only mounts where the giant ox that the dwarfs rode. But lets be truthful do you always need a mount in any game really no because there not needed if all they allow is faster travel and you cant fight from it. Only a handful of games have ever had mounted combat and to me this is the only reason it would need mounts to begin with. So no mounts needed sense this is a world like no other even tho everyone will say its like all others.
So if you feel the game needs mounts then ok but I think the 6 million+ people who played it before will say otherwise and so shall I. One the game has fast travel in it so why use a mount other then for looks. Two the game is set in a different world so yeah again they might only have one mount type and thats an ox. Three well who needs a mount when you can run to where you need to go this way you dont have to constantly summon/unsummon your mount all the time. And yes even UO had no mounts that I remember. Alot of games never had mounts in them and played fine without. So again why are the needed oh so you look cool on a mount and thats it. In fact I have only used a mount in one game to date and that was Lotro even in EQ2 or WoW I ran every where cause I was fighting to often to need my mount.
So yeah mounts not needed unless you want to summon or unsummon it to the point of not enjoying playing. I enjoy the look of mounts in some games but like some games take AoC why do you need a mount in a game where the maps are not that big for looks to say hey i got a mount. Sorry I dont see the need for mounts unless you have a huge open world and not one thats path dependent on lvling but a true open world.
1) GW1 actually did have mounts. Did you forget about the Wurms in Nightfall's Wastes regions? The rest of the content did not have mounts, because it was not needed. GW1 was an instanced world, the maps were relatively small. GW2 is an open world with much MUCH larger maps and longer distances to travel.
2) You can't speak for 6million + people, so don't try to. And it doesn't matter how many people have played GW1, none of them have played GW2, unless they were fortunate enough to get momentary access at the various conventions (not including of course, those that are in the friends & family betas)
3) There are plenty of games where mounts are necessary, and plenty of games where you can fight from those mounts. At this point it sounds like you're pulling facts from your arse. No offense.
4) For everyone else, there's going to be extremely liberal use of map travel, so I don't know that mounts are necessary since you can pretty much teleport everywhere, sort of like Oblivion's map but with a very small fee. That said, I'm not anti-mounts. They could be a fun addition, and just one other cool thing to try and collect. I'm fine either way.
"Forums aren't for intelligent discussion; they're for blow-hards with unwavering opinions."
A.) Yet you avoided again to explain why people would not use mounts. But ofcourse you did, because there is no excuse to that. Thank you for proving my point about mounts being logical choise when it comes to travel, in just about any setting.
B.) You said it your self, there are tons of silly things in MMOs, yet it is so horrible if someone summons a mount out of nothing, when they summon items and whatnot ALL THE TIME out of nothing. Thank you for proving again that it is totally fine to pull mount from out of nothing.
C.) Yes it is about options, if you have a choise to run or mount up you have a choise. If you can only run and not mount up you dont have a choise. You can choose to run slowly as a Norn or not use a mount as a human/some other race if you want to. You have the option.
D.) "Please bear do not let them turn your fellow spirits into a shallow imitation of the druid from world of warcraft."
Leave WoW out of this, it has nothing to do with this, it did not invent fantasy. You could say "leave ZXY out of this game it's similar in WoW" from about a thousand things that will be in GW2, that are common fantasy. It's kinda sad that your hate towards WoW reflects how you perceive other titles. Just try not to think WoW when talking about GW2 and look at the suggestions objectively rather than something that you dont like because something similar are in some other title you do not like.
WoW didnt invent fantasy or this genre, dont try to deify it to seem like such a title. /end of wow in this thread ty.
A.) Again why do I have to explain why people would not use mounts, you are the one that is saying that they always would. This is your holy crusade not mine! So how about you answer your own question and see if you can come up with an answer for that riddle. Or would you honestly design a million worlds all the same, because your view on logic cannot see any other possibility.
B.) You seem to talk in circles; you are the one that said it was silly for a game to not have mounts. Now you say there is tons of silly things in MMOs, then I guess they do not need mounts. By your own logic.
C.) Well then we agree, as long as mounts are fluff and are not required for a speed boost. I say have a million different mounts in the game, since it is up to the player to use them or not.
D.) Did I strike a nerve here? Is world of warcraft your girlfriend, the way you rushed to the games defense I would swear you and blizzard are BFFs. Where do you get off assuming you know my mind and that what I said was because of my hate for WoW (get off your high horse)? Man what I said here was not even directed at you, it was at the guy saying that Norn could get speed buffs when they shape change. My response was a sarcastic reply to that saying that Norn does not become the animal, they become more like a were-version of that animal. Part animalpart man, I am sorry my sarcastic comments on WoW offended you. I will leave all games out of the topic so you have no other reason to freak out because someone you do not even know might hate on a game.
A.) Again why do I have to explain why people would not use mounts, you are the one that is saying that they always would. This is your holy crusade not mine! So how about you answer your own question and see if you can come up with an answer for that riddle. Or would you honestly design a million worlds all the same, because your view on logic cannot see any other possibility.
B.) You seem to talk in circles; you are the one that said it was silly for a game to not have mounts. Now you say there is tons of silly things in MMOs, then I guess they do not need mounts. By your own logic.
C.) Well then we agree, as long as mounts are fluff and are not required for a speed boost. I say have a million different mounts in the game, since it is up to the player to use them or not.
D.) Did I strike a nerve here? Is world of warcraft your girlfriend, the way you rushed to the games defense I would swear you and blizzard are BFFs. Where do you get off assuming you know my mind and that what I said was because of my hate for WoW (get off your high horse)? Man what I said here was not even directed at you, it was at the guy saying that Norn could get speed buffs when they shape change. My response was a sarcastic reply to that saying that Norn does not become the animal, they become more like a were-version of that animal. Part animalpart man, I am sorry my sarcastic comments on WoW offended you. I will leave all games out of the topic so you have no other reason to freak out because someone you do not even know might hate on a game.
A.) It's not my holy crusade, the fact just stands that civilizations through history has always used animals to work and travel. Irl and in fantasy. Wonder why.
B.) You are not making any sense. You said against "pulling mounts from no where" but it's totally fine for you to pull other stuff out of no where. Yes there is tons of silly things in games like pulling a weapon out of no where, why not a mount? Make sense please.
D.) No you didnt strike a nerve. You are not making sense again, since I didnt even defend WoW like you claim. I actually said "WoW did not invent fantasy or this genre" how is that "rushing into defense"? I have nothing against it but I also dont think it's anything fancy, and certainly has nothing to do in this topic, but you need to pull it into this, you, not me, obviously since you have nothing meaningful to say? I'm sorry to dissapoint you but you need a bit more than "is WoW your GF lol I'm 16 year old. Blizz is your BFFs" - listen to your self seriously, you sound like a teen, and if you are one, try to grow up just a little bit. Ty.
A.) Yet you avoided again to explain why people would not use mounts. But ofcourse you did, because there is no excuse to that. Thank you for proving my point about mounts being logical choise when it comes to travel, in just about any setting.
Stop using that word, it doesn't mean what you think it means, and you're incapable of it.
You're arguing about a fantasy setting, which by it's very definition the setting makes up it's own rules. It can not have mounts if it wants to. Logic has about as much place in a fantasy world as it has in your arguments.
Also, congradulations, you've failed the turing test.
The word means what it means.
If logic has as much place in fantasy world as it has in my arguments, then fantasy worlds are quite logical places. Anyway, as GW2 does not seem to be based on pure elements of chaos and disorder, but organized civilizations that can be closely modeled to real world civilizations of different parts of the world, logic is very present there. This is not an opinion, it's a fact.
Stop trying so hard sound like things are what you decide them to be. You've yet to explain anything in this thread, all you do is say "no".
Grats, you simply just seem to fail post after post, with nothing concrete. I wish this would not be the case since I'm actually trying to have a discussion here, and explain my views, all I get in return is "QQ' no, QQ' no". Why? /sigh
Yep, they took this personal and want to look good to peers, also, they're clearly wow haters therefore mounts haters, eventhough, they think WoW invented riding skills, they are unable to accept that GW2 is not anymore the instanced game they knew, where waypoints fitted pretty well, but a mmorpg in a persistent open world and as a result GW2 is attracting the attention of other players foreign to the community of GW1 and foreign to their establishments and last, they speak as if the game belonged exclusively to them and tend to put in developer's mouth words they didn't say
I really don't understand what's not to like about riding a mount in a large, open world.
The "summoning out of thin air being unimersive" argument is silly really, not only is teleporting your way across the world just as unrealistic but mounts can be implemented without summoning. Anyone played fallen earth? Log in to the game and you'll find your mount at the spot where you last left it, they can be killed, revived and recalled at garages/stables. Also they need food/fuel. Very nicely done that.
Also, like some other games, the world was so large, with towns so far away from eachother, that you really, really, didn't want to go back to running once you acquired a ride, which made a really nice asset to have.
If GW2 isn't going to have mounts it either means that teleporting can take you near whatever destination you have in mind, like GW1. Or that the world or better said, certain areas aren't large enough to support mounts / faster player traveling without feeling small.
I don't know which idea I find less appealing.
In an open world setting I'm a huge fan of limted fast travel and have the players in control of local transport, meaning mounts. This gives the world another, logistic meaning next to offering fighting content, you might meet new people out in the wilds, find a stunning vista or have other unexpected encounters while traveling from A to B, and it offers some really nice meta incentives to work for next to standard gear, armor and other itemz.
A.) It's not my holy crusade, the fact just stands that civilizations through history has always used animals to work and travel. Irl and in fantasy. Wonder why.
B.) You are not making any sense. You said against "pulling mounts from no where" but it's totally fine for you to pull other stuff out of no where. Yes there is tons of silly things in games like pulling a weapon out of no where, why not a mount? Make sense please.
D.) No you didnt strike a nerve. . I actually said "WoW did not invent fantasy or this genre" how is that "rushing into defense"? I have nothing against it but I also dont think it's anything fancy, and certainly has nothing to do in this topic, but you need to pull it into this, you, not me, obviously since you have nothing meaningful to say? I'm sorry to dissapoint you but you need a bit more than "is WoW your GF lol I'm 16 year old. Blizz is your BFFs" - listen to your self seriously, you sound like a teen, and if you are one, try to grow up just a little bit. Ty.
A.) Yes it is your holy crusade! The fact that you cannot come up with a single reason why a society would, in the medieval era would stop looking as mounts as the only true means of travel, shows that your mind is completely and utterly made up. There would be no point in bringing up any other possibility to you, because according to you that is just not logical. See I never once said they never developed the ability to ride, I just said can you think of a reason why they would look at it as something that has been surpassed and would choice not to learn the skill. And your response is always it is not logical for people in that type of setting to not want to ride a mount. So there is no further point in this conversation, your mind has been made up, no matter what is ever said, you will always think this!
B.) Well since you cannot understand sarcasm, let me put this in Barney style so you cannot be confused. The reason why I brought up the summoning was because you said it was silly to not have mounts in game. So I was trying to prove that there are tons of things that are silly in MMOs, so I do not give a damn about summoning mounts it was just a point of something that is silly (so drop it already). The point I was sarcastically trying to make is that using a argument that something a game without something is silly and therefore should be in a game is absolutely stupid, since MMO design is silly. See the sarcasm or do I need to break it down to one syllable words, and talk like a cave man here?
D.) “You are not making sense again, since I didnt even defend WoW like you claim”. Oh really, what was your response to me sarcastically brining up WoW in my post. Well let’s see you said the following and I quote “It's kinda sad that your hate towards WoW reflects how you perceive other titles.” So you are saying you did not automatically assume that I hated WoW and that my hater for Wow clouds my perspective of other games? But you did assume without knowing me, and without putting thought into what I was saying that I was a Wow hater. This was the whole bases for your reply to me, so yes you defended WoW, because you just assumed that I am blinded by a hatred for WoW. SO don’t tell me I need to grow up and look at what I am posting. When you apparently can assume you know my mind and not even try to look at what I saying. So again that is why I asked if I struck a nerve, and sarcastically made fun of your response. Since you apparently can assume that you know my mind, and berate everything I said based on that assumption. So who here needs to grow up and learn what sarcasm is and learn not to assume what other people think? So don’t even try to lecture me buddy about needed to grow up!
Originally posted by shere
Yep, they took this personal and want to look good to peers, also, they're clearly wow haters therefore mounts haters, eventhough, they think WoW invented riding skills, they are unable to accept that GW2 is not anymore the instanced game they knew, where waypoints fitted pretty well, but a mmorpg in a persistent open world and as a result GW2 is attracting the attention of other players foreign to the community of GW1 and foreign to their establishments and last, they speak as if the game belonged exclusively to them and tend to put in developer's mouth words they didn't say
Oh goody another person just assuming that people are WoW haters. I wish I was so perfect that I could know exactly the way other people think! Because it makes total since that if someone said WoW, they must think that WoW invented riding skills.
Originally posted by DarkPony
Also, like some other games, the world was so large, with towns so far away from eachother, that you really, really, didn't want to go back to running once you acquired a ride, which made a really nice asset to have.
So you want mounts to be speed buffs in every MMO, so everyone no matter what has to use them? That is awesome, so it is not really about people having a choice in how they play the game, with mounts being fluff. They need be a speed buff so everyone no matter what race or class they play has to buy one. That definitely sounds like choice in game design to me! I like mounts so they need to be in game and everyone is forced to use them as a speed buff. I can see all the options I have there, oh wait I only have one!
I can see all the options I have there, oh wait I only have one!
What do you mean no choice? You could always run. Having mounts shouldn't mean that there are no alternatives either. Maybe magic running speedbuffs or certain athletic skills could offer alternatives. *shrugs*
It's having NO mounts whatsoever equalling having no choice; Run or run versus run or ride ...
There will be plenty of "beam me up Scotty" locations anyway so it wont matter much in GW2 anyway.
But feel free to take a hike and shake your fist at your blissful equestrian server buddies as they swoop past whilst you struggle to make anything resembling a steady pace while being weighed down by at least a hundred pounds of sword, shield and heavy armor ;-)
^Having mounts makes a lot of sense in a large, open fantasy world attempting to offer an immersive experience.
I don't see the point of having mounts in GW2 because like someone mentioned earlier there will be waypoints for teleportation, granted you have to explore to find them, but your character will be moving at a fast enough pace that you can cover the map decently well. If they implemented them it wouldn't bother me either way, I just find them unnecessary given the game world we're going to be presented. I figure you mount lovers could perhaps play an asura and use their golem racial ability as mounts?
A.) It's not my holy crusade, the fact just stands that civilizations through history has always used animals to work and travel. Irl and in fantasy. Wonder why.
B.) You are not making any sense. You said against "pulling mounts from no where" but it's totally fine for you to pull other stuff out of no where. Yes there is tons of silly things in games like pulling a weapon out of no where, why not a mount? Make sense please.
D.) No you didnt strike a nerve. . I actually said "WoW did not invent fantasy or this genre" how is that "rushing into defense"? I have nothing against it but I also dont think it's anything fancy, and certainly has nothing to do in this topic, but you need to pull it into this, you, not me, obviously since you have nothing meaningful to say? I'm sorry to dissapoint you but you need a bit more than "is WoW your GF lol I'm 16 year old. Blizz is your BFFs" - listen to your self seriously, you sound like a teen, and if you are one, try to grow up just a little bit. Ty.
A.) Yes it is your holy crusade! The fact that you cannot come up with a single reason why a society would, in the medieval era would stop looking as mounts as the only true means of travel, shows that your mind is completely and utterly made up. There would be no point in bringing up any other possibility to you, because according to you that is just not logical. See I never once said they never developed the ability to ride, I just said can you think of a reason why they would look at it as something that has been surpassed and would choice not to learn the skill. And your response is always it is not logical for people in that type of setting to not want to ride a mount. So there is no further point in this conversation, your mind has been made up, no matter what is ever said, you will always think this!
B.) Well since you cannot understand sarcasm, let me put this in Barney style so you cannot be confused. The reason why I brought up the summoning was because you said it was silly to not have mounts in game. So I was trying to prove that there are tons of things that are silly in MMOs, so I do not give a damn about summoning mounts it was just a point of something that is silly (so drop it already). The point I was sarcastically trying to make is that using a argument that something a game without something is silly and therefore should be in a game is absolutely stupid, since MMO design is silly. See the sarcasm or do I need to break it down to one syllable words, and talk like a cave man here?
D.) “You are not making sense again, since I didnt even defend WoW like you claim”. Oh really, what was your response to me sarcastically brining up WoW in my post. Well let’s see you said the following and I quote “It's kinda sad that your hate towards WoW reflects how you perceive other titles.” So you are saying you did not automatically assume that I hated WoW and that my hater for Wow clouds my perspective of other games? But you did assume without knowing me, and without putting thought into what I was saying that I was a Wow hater. This was the whole bases for your reply to me, so yes you defended WoW, because you just assumed that I am blinded by a hatred for WoW. SO don’t tell me I need to grow up and look at what I am posting. When you apparently can assume you know my mind and not even try to look at what I saying. So again that is why I asked if I struck a nerve, and sarcastically made fun of your response. Since you apparently can assume that you know my mind, and berate everything I said based on that assumption. So who here needs to grow up and learn what sarcasm is and learn not to assume what other people think? So don’t even try to lecture me buddy about needed to grow up!
Originally posted by shere
Yep, they took this personal and want to look good to peers, also, they're clearly wow haters therefore mounts haters, eventhough, they think WoW invented riding skills, they are unable to accept that GW2 is not anymore the instanced game they knew, where waypoints fitted pretty well, but a mmorpg in a persistent open world and as a result GW2 is attracting the attention of other players foreign to the community of GW1 and foreign to their establishments and last, they speak as if the game belonged exclusively to them and tend to put in developer's mouth words they didn't say
Oh goody another person just assuming that people are WoW haters. I wish I was so perfect that I could know exactly the way other people think! Because it makes total since that if someone said WoW, they must think that WoW invented riding skills.
Originally posted by DarkPony
Also, like some other games, the world was so large, with towns so far away from eachother, that you really, really, didn't want to go back to running once you acquired a ride, which made a really nice asset to have.
So you want mounts to be speed buffs in every MMO, so everyone no matter what has to use them? That is awesome, so it is not really about people having a choice in how they play the game, with mounts being fluff. They need be a speed buff so everyone no matter what race or class they play has to buy one. That definitely sounds like choice in game design to me! I like mounts so they need to be in game and everyone is forced to use them as a speed buff. I can see all the options I have there, oh wait I only have one!
ha ha it's you against the world, i know time will prove you right and mounts will not be implementeted, congratulations, maybe gw2 will not be the messiah we are waiting for, may be we expect too much, imho waypoints suck.
I can see all the options I have there, oh wait I only have one!
What do you mean no choice? You could always run. Having mounts shouldn't mean that there are no alternatives either. Maybe magic running speedbuffs or certain athletic skills could offer alternatives. *shrugs*
It's having NO mounts whatsoever equalling having no choice; Run or run versus run or ride ...
There will be plenty of "beam me up Scotty" locations anyway so it wont matter much in GW2 anyway.
But feel free to take a hike and shake your fist at your blissful equestrian server buddies as they swoop past whilst you struggle to make anything resembling a steady pace while being weighed down by at least a hundred pounds of sword, shield and heavy armor ;-)
^Having mounts makes a lot of sense in a large, open fantasy world attempting to offer an immersive experience.
Nuff said.
Well from a cost of development stand point, it would be cheaper if the mounts did not have any game mechanics tied to it like a speed buff. For example, if the mounts were like a non-combat pet, just something to collect as fluff. To do this they could make the mounts walk so it is the same speed as a human running so it would not look stupid. For example, since a human cannot keep up with a horse running but it is easy to do with a horse walking.
If they do make mounts with speed buffs, and add in alternatives like training in an athletic skill like you suggested. To me that would be perfect, although that route it is more expensive for Anet to develop than mounts as fluff. If Anet does not offer an alternative then I am completely against mounts with a speed increase. Since I play with friends, I would have to talk them all into not using the speed increase, which would not happen. So then my choice would be to always play by myself or buy a mount on every character I make (so a choice between having fun and not having fun). To me if I have to make a Norn with a mount I am absolutely going to loath that with every fiber of my being. A Norn would not let a weaker animal carry him around like luggage. If a Norn NPC sees this, Anet should have voice actor’s lines that make fun of that character. Like for example, “Are you the Norn that was carried around by his mother till he was 12, I see you have found a replacement” *then the NPC not so subtlety laughs at the character. Or “I am going to have to tell my son about you stranger, your legacy will be a story that will scare him half to death. The story of a Norn that is carried around by a weaker animal, and becomes a laughing stock to all Norn everywhere, it will truly be a scary story for our children.”
See to me Norn is all about the legacy they can leave for future generations, and part of that legacy is the journey to get to your enemy. It does not matter how long it takes to get there, there will always be more enemies (an example of this is how the Norn looked on the Asura portal in the last book, it was not exactly favored by them). It is about strength and perseverance, and about sprits of the wild helping you to become a legend for all time. Riding an animal like a piece of luggage is against ever part of that; it is a sign of weakness because you do not have the endurance to accomplish your goal. As a Norn if I have to be carried to accomplish something then I am already dead, for my legacy will be. If Anet does like your suggestion and gives me an athletic alternative, then I am fine with it. My Norn will not be a glorified wimp being carried around like baggage. I just hope this is the path they take if they add mounts in this fashion. Although I personally would rather have the mounts be fluff and then they would not have to add any other mechanisms to the game.
Originally posted by shere
ha ha it's you against the world, i know time will prove you right and mounts will not be implementeted, congratulations, maybe gw2 will not be the messiah we are waiting for, may be we expect too much, imho waypoints suck.
Oh nice, since you dislike waypoints we all have to play the game your way or the game will suck. Well I am glad this has been clarified. Why do mounts have to be a travel option, why can’t they just be pure fluff like non-combat pets? Then you can have your mounts, and those that do not want to use them, can play the game their way. If you remove the speed increase and make the mounts walk, I am fine with them being added. I just do not want to be forced into using them to play with my friends, is that so hard to understand? It is not about not having mounts in game!
Well, I was going to browse through the 15 pages, then discovered a lot of it was ranting back and forth. Shock.
My idea: If they are bringing in guns to Guild Wars 2, this shows an increase in technology. Now, I haven't decided about mounts, just because I loved the fast travel system in the original Guild Wars. But if there is an increase in technology, that could mean a lot of things, perhaps there is some kind of flying device, something like a hot air balloon? A lot of traveling I've noticed (in persistent worlds, such as WoW or LotRO) seems to skip to a destination as well. I remember times when riding on a ship in WoW that I got on, it started sailing, then it loaded the next area and coasted in to the harbor. Why not do that trip to more locations in Guild Wars 2? It merges mounts and fast travel. Granted, you can't ride around yourself, if you want that then this option isn't for you.
A.) Yes it is your holy crusade! The fact that you cannot come up with a single reason why a society would, in the medieval era would stop looking as mounts as the only true means of travel, shows that your mind is completely and utterly made up. There would be no point in bringing up any other possibility to you, because according to you that is just not logical. See I never once said they never developed the ability to ride, I just said can you think of a reason why they would look at it as something that has been surpassed and would choice not to learn the skill. And your response is always it is not logical for people in that type of setting to not want to ride a mount. So there is no further point in this conversation, your mind has been made up, no matter what is ever said, you will always think this!
B.) Well since you cannot understand sarcasm, let me put this in Barney style so you cannot be confused. The reason why I brought up the summoning was because you said it was silly to not have mounts in game. So I was trying to prove that there are tons of things that are silly in MMOs, so I do not give a damn about summoning mounts it was just a point of something that is silly (so drop it already). The point I was sarcastically trying to make is that using a argument that something a game without something is silly and therefore should be in a game is absolutely stupid, since MMO design is silly. See the sarcasm or do I need to break it down to one syllable words, and talk like a cave man here?
D.) “You are not making sense again, since I didnt even defend WoW like you claim”. Oh really, what was your response to me sarcastically brining up WoW in my post. Well let’s see you said the following and I quote “It's kinda sad that your hate towards WoW reflects how you perceive other titles.” So you are saying you did not automatically assume that I hated WoW and that my hater for Wow clouds my perspective of other games? But you did assume without knowing me, and without putting thought into what I was saying that I was a Wow hater. This was the whole bases for your reply to me, so yes you defended WoW, because you just assumed that I am blinded by a hatred for WoW. SO don’t tell me I need to grow up and look at what I am posting. When you apparently can assume you know my mind and not even try to look at what I saying. So again that is why I asked if I struck a nerve, and sarcastically made fun of your response. Since you apparently can assume that you know my mind, and berate everything I said based on that assumption. So who here needs to grow up and learn what sarcasm is and learn not to assume what other people think? So don’t even try to lecture me buddy about needed to grow up!
A.) Ofcourse I will keep thinking like this. Why not? Why should I not? Why do you want me to think in other ways? I dont get it. Why should I not think animals as mounts before technology jumps to cars etc? Why not? Why should I not jump on a horse and ride if that's what I want to do, and if that's what people have been doing for centuries before I was born? Why? I'm not forced to do it and neither are you. Why do you have a "holy crusade" against mounts? Against a very common thing. Against it being ONLY an option besides map travel and portals. Why do you want the game be more simple and have less options? In fact it's not mine or anyones holy crusade for the sole fact that it is a common thing, and only wanted as being added option, nothing removed. Being one of few against it, proves to be a "holy crusade" tbh.
Edit: Ps. Anet has been talking about minigame where you ride horse against other player in a city. I guess the city climate is only place where the horses can live then? Also the lore has different kinds of creatures as mounts.
B.) Actually it was you who said mounts should not be in a game because it's silly to pull a horse from out of nowhere, and I replied it's also silly to pull any other stuff from out of nowhere like weapons, so why is it silly to pull mounts. It seems you are confusing yourself.
D.) You proved to be a wow hater because you said you dont want to see a mechanic in a game that is based on a wow mechanic, if you said only "I dont want to see a mechanic where shapeshifting brings extra speed" but you had to bring in wow and compare it to wow druid and say you dont want to see anything similar. Just because it is wow, is no argument, it's just dislike against the title. So let me say again, wow did not invent this genre, or fantasy, or druids. Dont deify wow to be such a messiah, it is not. And please leave it out of this discussion, it's annoying when people bring wow to irrelevant discussions.
And yes, I do tell you to grow up if you post stuff like "is wow your gf is blizz your BFFs" because it's childish. If I ever write anything like that I expect others to tell me to grow up too.
So how long are we going to keep this up? You moving your mouth but saying nothing, and me bringing explanations, reasons and logic to the discussion? Now try to make a reply where you actually say something instead of a huge wall of text with nothing in it. Please. Please not a gain "You should walk instead of using a car. Can you come up with a reason not to use cars!?!?!" I'll drive my car and you use your legs, okay? Everyone happy and I wont be late from work
A.) Yes it is your holy crusade! The fact that you cannot come up with a single reason why a society would, in the medieval era would stop looking as mounts as the only true means of travel, shows that your mind is completely and utterly made up. There would be no point in bringing up any other possibility to you, because according to you that is just not logical. See I never once said they never developed the ability to ride, I just said can you think of a reason why they would look at it as something that has been surpassed and would choice not to learn the skill. And your response is always it is not logical for people in that type of setting to not want to ride a mount. So there is no further point in this conversation, your mind has been made up, no matter what is ever said, you will always think this!
A medieval societys main transport were boats, not mounts. The second way of transporting things and people were carts, usually oxpowered.
Horses were not really a usual way of travel, they were mainly a war machine. They were also popular for some types of hunts.
Horses were very expensive and mainly used in war even though some nobels prefered them to show their status.
You guys can go to any town in the world you already visited instantly.. and you want to add mounts on top of that? Then the whole concept of exploring becomes utterly pointless. Run to an objective really fast, return to town instantly. Run to another objective really fast, return to town instantly. Really?? The whole game will become one big race.
If Anet does that.. PvE is screwed. And the thought of everyone riding a GIANT ASS TURTLE everywhere around me is just.. ugh.
Your travel time is already minimized down to 10% or less. I've been playing GW1 since day one and I know what I'm talking about and can clearly understand why Anet is so resistant when it comes to mounts. And I hope they stay that way. Like it or not, mounts would be a really bad idea in GW2. If it works in other games, it doesn't mean it does everywhere else.
Besides, they've put a lot of work in the art and environments. Do you really want to just rush through all of that? I know I don't.
Comments
Norns wouldn't need mounts since they are able to shape into faster creatures than their original humanoid form, Charr run on fours, Azuras got golems and divices i can't imagine. But, what about Humans and Sylvary?
With the amount of waypoints and how fast you actually move in the game, there's no need. I love mounts in general, but if there not needed, I will be fine without them.
I can't wait till this game release
Wildstar (2013) & Elder Scroll Online (2013)
Playing: Diablo 3, WOW, Far Cry 3 & X-Com.
Enjoyed: WOW 5 1/2 yrs, LOTRO 3yrs, GW 1/2yr, DFO 1yr, EVE Online 3yrs, and Huxley (Beta).
Failed to impress: GW2 3months, Tera Online 6 months (best combat system in any MMO I've played) STO 1/4yr, Aion 1/2yr, AoC 1yr, CO, Fallen Earth, DDO, EQ2 1/2yr, WAR 1/2yr, Lineage 2 and FF XI 1/2yr, FF XIV.
If a Sylvari has the knowledge to tame forest creatures like this one, what's stopping her from using them to travel or fight at her side. I'll tell ya: deadlines, impatient players, investment, lack of imagination, represents more work in design and development and habit of not having this before, be it for lacks in the technology of 2005 and the complicated thing to tolerate changes and evolution in mmorpg genre.
A.) You think I lack imagination and I'm sad, when you dont give anykind of counter argument? I guess I'd have awesome imagination if I'd support "only on foot" ideology. Here's the logic applied to combat: Combat only without gear, if you use gear and weapons you lack imagination!
B.) Point is, and has been, if you can, or cannot ride a creature. When ever you take your equipment from your inventory, change gear etc, you basically summon them out of your butt. No one can see them before you do this. So this "out of butt" argument is invalid unless you also support inventory that is a huge 2 x 2 meter bag you drag around the world with full of armor, weapons, potions, junk, quest items, a ton of gold, etc and whatever.
C.) And you are welcome to not ride anything if you wish to do just that. I dont see why Charr and Norn wouldnt have somekind of "extended" running ability/training anyway to go faster than the smaller races. At the moment the Charr looks kinda stupid on the gameplay vids when they run on all four but go so slow.
Ah just No, and I mean No on using the Norn sprit forms as a faster means of travel. Norn would not call on the sprits for something as mundane as traveling. There sprit forms should travel at the same speed as they do in their regular form (no WoW druid fast travel form here please), since they do not actual turn into a Snow Leopard or a bear. They still have human qualities when they take on a sprit. So please Anet do not give the sprit forms a travel boast, I will sacrifice one thousand chickens to the spirit of the bear if you keep it true to the lore from GW. Please bear do not let them turn your fellow spirits into a shallow imitation of the druid from world of warcraft.
A.) Well for starters that has nothing to do with being an only on foot supporter or a mount supporter. And since it is not about that, why do I have to provide a counter argument? You are the one said and I quote “it would be illogical to not use animals as mounts”, so shouldn’t the burden of proof be on you? I have not made such claims, so I have nothing to defend. And yes because of that statement I think you have a lack of imagination. But let’s put what I said to the test, so if we locked you in a room and made you design ten million worlds that are all in a medieval time period. You honestly could not come up with one logical reason why the people on the planet do not use mounts. Now remember answer honestly, could you come up with a logical reason?
And just for the record if your answer is No, then I stand by my statement that you have a severe lack of imagination I can think of 3 plausible scenarios just off the top of my head.
B.) Hey you’re the one that brought silly into this conversation of MMOs, I did not. So please do not jump all over me about how silly the inventory system is in MMOs. Remember you are the one that brought up silly not me. There are tons of things silly in MMOs, so why would a game without mounts be anymore silly then the magical back pack you brought up?
C.) And why would my Charr or Norn need an extended running ability. I thought this was about options, so everyone can play the game the way they want. My Norn should travel at the same rate the human travels, the human just walks faster. Then your mount should travel at the same rate my Norn does, why should I have to change how my character functions so you can have your mount? After all this is about everyone playing the way they want, well my Norn does not ride mounts. And humans can keep up with him just find. After all people keep saying the mount is needed for fluff, then why does it have to travel faster than a human runs and a Norn walking fast? Or is this just more about the fact that you want mounts in the game no matter what changes it causes to the game, even if everyone might not want it.
A.) Yet you avoided again to explain why people would not use mounts. But ofcourse you did, because there is no excuse to that. Thank you for proving my point about mounts being logical choise when it comes to travel, in just about any setting.
B.) You said it your self, there are tons of silly things in MMOs, yet it is so horrible if someone summons a mount out of nothing, when they summon items and whatnot ALL THE TIME out of nothing. Thank you for proving again that it is totally fine to pull mount from out of nothing.
C.) Yes it is about options, if you have a choise to run or mount up you have a choise. If you can only run and not mount up you dont have a choise. You can choose to run slowly as a Norn or not use a mount as a human/some other race if you want to. You have the option.
D.) "Please bear do not let them turn your fellow spirits into a shallow imitation of the druid from world of warcraft."
Leave WoW out of this, it has nothing to do with this, it did not invent fantasy. You could say "leave ZXY out of this game it's similar in WoW" from about a thousand things that will be in GW2, that are common fantasy. It's kinda sad that your hate towards WoW reflects how you perceive other titles. Just try not to think WoW when talking about GW2 and look at the suggestions objectively rather than something that you dont like because something similar are in some other title you do not like.
WoW didnt invent fantasy or this genre, dont try to deify it to seem like such a title. /end of wow in this thread ty.
Stop using that word, it doesn't mean what you think it means, and you're incapable of it.
You're arguing about a fantasy setting, which by it's very definition the setting makes up it's own rules. It can not have mounts if it wants to. Logic has about as much place in a fantasy world as it has in your arguments.
Also, congradulations, you've failed the turing test.
The only reason why mounts should even be added to this game is for looks only if that. In GW1 we had no mounts and it was fine. In other games names not needed cause we all know which ones offer mounts and what lvl there offered. But this isnt your normal fantasy mmo nethier was the first GW. So in my opinion no mounts are needed maybe the only mounts where the giant ox that the dwarfs rode. But lets be truthful do you always need a mount in any game really no because there not needed if all they allow is faster travel and you cant fight from it. Only a handful of games have ever had mounted combat and to me this is the only reason it would need mounts to begin with. So no mounts needed sense this is a world like no other even tho everyone will say its like all others.
So if you feel the game needs mounts then ok but I think the 6 million+ people who played it before will say otherwise and so shall I. One the game has fast travel in it so why use a mount other then for looks. Two the game is set in a different world so yeah again they might only have one mount type and thats an ox. Three well who needs a mount when you can run to where you need to go this way you dont have to constantly summon/unsummon your mount all the time. And yes even UO had no mounts that I remember. Alot of games never had mounts in them and played fine without. So again why are the needed oh so you look cool on a mount and thats it. In fact I have only used a mount in one game to date and that was Lotro even in EQ2 or WoW I ran every where cause I was fighting to often to need my mount.
So yeah mounts not needed unless you want to summon or unsummon it to the point of not enjoying playing. I enjoy the look of mounts in some games but like some games take AoC why do you need a mount in a game where the maps are not that big for looks to say hey i got a mount. Sorry I dont see the need for mounts unless you have a huge open world and not one thats path dependent on lvling but a true open world.
Sherman's Gaming
Youtube Content creator for The Elder Scrolls Online
Channel:http://https//www.youtube.com/channel/UCrgYNgpFTRAl4XWz31o2emw
The word means what it means.
If logic has as much place in fantasy world as it has in my arguments, then fantasy worlds are quite logical places. Anyway, as GW2 does not seem to be based on pure elements of chaos and disorder, but organized civilizations that can be closely modeled to real world civilizations of different parts of the world, logic is very present there. This is not an opinion, it's a fact.
Stop trying so hard sound like things are what you decide them to be. You've yet to explain anything in this thread, all you do is say "no".
Grats, you simply just seem to fail post after post, with nothing concrete. I wish this would not be the case since I'm actually trying to have a discussion here, and explain my views, all I get in return is "QQ' no, QQ' no". Why? /sigh
1) GW1 actually did have mounts. Did you forget about the Wurms in Nightfall's Wastes regions? The rest of the content did not have mounts, because it was not needed. GW1 was an instanced world, the maps were relatively small. GW2 is an open world with much MUCH larger maps and longer distances to travel.
2) You can't speak for 6million + people, so don't try to. And it doesn't matter how many people have played GW1, none of them have played GW2, unless they were fortunate enough to get momentary access at the various conventions (not including of course, those that are in the friends & family betas)
3) There are plenty of games where mounts are necessary, and plenty of games where you can fight from those mounts. At this point it sounds like you're pulling facts from your arse. No offense.
4) For everyone else, there's going to be extremely liberal use of map travel, so I don't know that mounts are necessary since you can pretty much teleport everywhere, sort of like Oblivion's map but with a very small fee. That said, I'm not anti-mounts. They could be a fun addition, and just one other cool thing to try and collect. I'm fine either way.
"Forums aren't for intelligent discussion; they're for blow-hards with unwavering opinions."
plz some one doesn't need to mention that there is no mounts in GW1
Anet is trying to make GW2 better than GW first,remember we cannot even off the ground.maybe Anet will take a long time to
design the mount system cus they want to add sth new to it not juz like other MMOs,maybe mounts won't appear when GW2
released, but i'm sure that mounts should be in GW2
A.) Again why do I have to explain why people would not use mounts, you are the one that is saying that they always would. This is your holy crusade not mine! So how about you answer your own question and see if you can come up with an answer for that riddle. Or would you honestly design a million worlds all the same, because your view on logic cannot see any other possibility.
B.) You seem to talk in circles; you are the one that said it was silly for a game to not have mounts. Now you say there is tons of silly things in MMOs, then I guess they do not need mounts. By your own logic.
C.) Well then we agree, as long as mounts are fluff and are not required for a speed boost. I say have a million different mounts in the game, since it is up to the player to use them or not.
D.) Did I strike a nerve here? Is world of warcraft your girlfriend, the way you rushed to the games defense I would swear you and blizzard are BFFs. Where do you get off assuming you know my mind and that what I said was because of my hate for WoW (get off your high horse)? Man what I said here was not even directed at you, it was at the guy saying that Norn could get speed buffs when they shape change. My response was a sarcastic reply to that saying that Norn does not become the animal, they become more like a were-version of that animal. Part animalpart man, I am sorry my sarcastic comments on WoW offended you. I will leave all games out of the topic so you have no other reason to freak out because someone you do not even know might hate on a game.
A.) It's not my holy crusade, the fact just stands that civilizations through history has always used animals to work and travel. Irl and in fantasy. Wonder why.
B.) You are not making any sense. You said against "pulling mounts from no where" but it's totally fine for you to pull other stuff out of no where. Yes there is tons of silly things in games like pulling a weapon out of no where, why not a mount? Make sense please.
D.) No you didnt strike a nerve. You are not making sense again, since I didnt even defend WoW like you claim. I actually said "WoW did not invent fantasy or this genre" how is that "rushing into defense"? I have nothing against it but I also dont think it's anything fancy, and certainly has nothing to do in this topic, but you need to pull it into this, you, not me, obviously since you have nothing meaningful to say? I'm sorry to dissapoint you but you need a bit more than "is WoW your GF lol I'm 16 year old. Blizz is your BFFs" - listen to your self seriously, you sound like a teen, and if you are one, try to grow up just a little bit. Ty.
Yep, they took this personal and want to look good to peers, also, they're clearly wow haters therefore mounts haters, eventhough, they think WoW invented riding skills, they are unable to accept that GW2 is not anymore the instanced game they knew, where waypoints fitted pretty well, but a mmorpg in a persistent open world and as a result GW2 is attracting the attention of other players foreign to the community of GW1 and foreign to their establishments and last, they speak as if the game belonged exclusively to them and tend to put in developer's mouth words they didn't say
I really don't understand what's not to like about riding a mount in a large, open world.
The "summoning out of thin air being unimersive" argument is silly really, not only is teleporting your way across the world just as unrealistic but mounts can be implemented without summoning. Anyone played fallen earth? Log in to the game and you'll find your mount at the spot where you last left it, they can be killed, revived and recalled at garages/stables. Also they need food/fuel. Very nicely done that.
Also, like some other games, the world was so large, with towns so far away from eachother, that you really, really, didn't want to go back to running once you acquired a ride, which made a really nice asset to have.
If GW2 isn't going to have mounts it either means that teleporting can take you near whatever destination you have in mind, like GW1. Or that the world or better said, certain areas aren't large enough to support mounts / faster player traveling without feeling small.
I don't know which idea I find less appealing.
In an open world setting I'm a huge fan of limted fast travel and have the players in control of local transport, meaning mounts. This gives the world another, logistic meaning next to offering fighting content, you might meet new people out in the wilds, find a stunning vista or have other unexpected encounters while traveling from A to B, and it offers some really nice meta incentives to work for next to standard gear, armor and other itemz.
My brand new bloggity blog.
A.) Yes it is your holy crusade! The fact that you cannot come up with a single reason why a society would, in the medieval era would stop looking as mounts as the only true means of travel, shows that your mind is completely and utterly made up. There would be no point in bringing up any other possibility to you, because according to you that is just not logical. See I never once said they never developed the ability to ride, I just said can you think of a reason why they would look at it as something that has been surpassed and would choice not to learn the skill. And your response is always it is not logical for people in that type of setting to not want to ride a mount. So there is no further point in this conversation, your mind has been made up, no matter what is ever said, you will always think this!
B.) Well since you cannot understand sarcasm, let me put this in Barney style so you cannot be confused. The reason why I brought up the summoning was because you said it was silly to not have mounts in game. So I was trying to prove that there are tons of things that are silly in MMOs, so I do not give a damn about summoning mounts it was just a point of something that is silly (so drop it already). The point I was sarcastically trying to make is that using a argument that something a game without something is silly and therefore should be in a game is absolutely stupid, since MMO design is silly. See the sarcasm or do I need to break it down to one syllable words, and talk like a cave man here?
D.) “You are not making sense again, since I didnt even defend WoW like you claim”. Oh really, what was your response to me sarcastically brining up WoW in my post. Well let’s see you said the following and I quote “It's kinda sad that your hate towards WoW reflects how you perceive other titles.” So you are saying you did not automatically assume that I hated WoW and that my hater for Wow clouds my perspective of other games? But you did assume without knowing me, and without putting thought into what I was saying that I was a Wow hater. This was the whole bases for your reply to me, so yes you defended WoW, because you just assumed that I am blinded by a hatred for WoW. SO don’t tell me I need to grow up and look at what I am posting. When you apparently can assume you know my mind and not even try to look at what I saying. So again that is why I asked if I struck a nerve, and sarcastically made fun of your response. Since you apparently can assume that you know my mind, and berate everything I said based on that assumption. So who here needs to grow up and learn what sarcasm is and learn not to assume what other people think? So don’t even try to lecture me buddy about needed to grow up!
Oh goody another person just assuming that people are WoW haters. I wish I was so perfect that I could know exactly the way other people think! Because it makes total since that if someone said WoW, they must think that WoW invented riding skills.
So you want mounts to be speed buffs in every MMO, so everyone no matter what has to use them? That is awesome, so it is not really about people having a choice in how they play the game, with mounts being fluff. They need be a speed buff so everyone no matter what race or class they play has to buy one. That definitely sounds like choice in game design to me! I like mounts so they need to be in game and everyone is forced to use them as a speed buff. I can see all the options I have there, oh wait I only have one!
What do you mean no choice? You could always run. Having mounts shouldn't mean that there are no alternatives either. Maybe magic running speedbuffs or certain athletic skills could offer alternatives. *shrugs*
It's having NO mounts whatsoever equalling having no choice; Run or run versus run or ride ...
There will be plenty of "beam me up Scotty" locations anyway so it wont matter much in GW2 anyway.
But feel free to take a hike and shake your fist at your blissful equestrian server buddies as they swoop past whilst you struggle to make anything resembling a steady pace while being weighed down by at least a hundred pounds of sword, shield and heavy armor ;-)
^Having mounts makes a lot of sense in a large, open fantasy world attempting to offer an immersive experience.
Nuff said.
My brand new bloggity blog.
I don't see the point of having mounts in GW2 because like someone mentioned earlier there will be waypoints for teleportation, granted you have to explore to find them, but your character will be moving at a fast enough pace that you can cover the map decently well. If they implemented them it wouldn't bother me either way, I just find them unnecessary given the game world we're going to be presented. I figure you mount lovers could perhaps play an asura and use their golem racial ability as mounts?
ha ha it's you against the world, i know time will prove you right and mounts will not be implementeted, congratulations, maybe gw2 will not be the messiah we are waiting for, may be we expect too much, imho waypoints suck.
Well from a cost of development stand point, it would be cheaper if the mounts did not have any game mechanics tied to it like a speed buff. For example, if the mounts were like a non-combat pet, just something to collect as fluff. To do this they could make the mounts walk so it is the same speed as a human running so it would not look stupid. For example, since a human cannot keep up with a horse running but it is easy to do with a horse walking.
If they do make mounts with speed buffs, and add in alternatives like training in an athletic skill like you suggested. To me that would be perfect, although that route it is more expensive for Anet to develop than mounts as fluff. If Anet does not offer an alternative then I am completely against mounts with a speed increase. Since I play with friends, I would have to talk them all into not using the speed increase, which would not happen. So then my choice would be to always play by myself or buy a mount on every character I make (so a choice between having fun and not having fun). To me if I have to make a Norn with a mount I am absolutely going to loath that with every fiber of my being. A Norn would not let a weaker animal carry him around like luggage. If a Norn NPC sees this, Anet should have voice actor’s lines that make fun of that character. Like for example, “Are you the Norn that was carried around by his mother till he was 12, I see you have found a replacement” *then the NPC not so subtlety laughs at the character. Or “I am going to have to tell my son about you stranger, your legacy will be a story that will scare him half to death. The story of a Norn that is carried around by a weaker animal, and becomes a laughing stock to all Norn everywhere, it will truly be a scary story for our children.”
See to me Norn is all about the legacy they can leave for future generations, and part of that legacy is the journey to get to your enemy. It does not matter how long it takes to get there, there will always be more enemies (an example of this is how the Norn looked on the Asura portal in the last book, it was not exactly favored by them). It is about strength and perseverance, and about sprits of the wild helping you to become a legend for all time. Riding an animal like a piece of luggage is against ever part of that; it is a sign of weakness because you do not have the endurance to accomplish your goal. As a Norn if I have to be carried to accomplish something then I am already dead, for my legacy will be. If Anet does like your suggestion and gives me an athletic alternative, then I am fine with it. My Norn will not be a glorified wimp being carried around like baggage. I just hope this is the path they take if they add mounts in this fashion. Although I personally would rather have the mounts be fluff and then they would not have to add any other mechanisms to the game.
Oh nice, since you dislike waypoints we all have to play the game your way or the game will suck. Well I am glad this has been clarified. Why do mounts have to be a travel option, why can’t they just be pure fluff like non-combat pets? Then you can have your mounts, and those that do not want to use them, can play the game their way. If you remove the speed increase and make the mounts walk, I am fine with them being added. I just do not want to be forced into using them to play with my friends, is that so hard to understand? It is not about not having mounts in game!
Well, I was going to browse through the 15 pages, then discovered a lot of it was ranting back and forth. Shock.
My idea: If they are bringing in guns to Guild Wars 2, this shows an increase in technology. Now, I haven't decided about mounts, just because I loved the fast travel system in the original Guild Wars. But if there is an increase in technology, that could mean a lot of things, perhaps there is some kind of flying device, something like a hot air balloon? A lot of traveling I've noticed (in persistent worlds, such as WoW or LotRO) seems to skip to a destination as well. I remember times when riding on a ship in WoW that I got on, it started sailing, then it loaded the next area and coasted in to the harbor. Why not do that trip to more locations in Guild Wars 2? It merges mounts and fast travel. Granted, you can't ride around yourself, if you want that then this option isn't for you.
A.) Ofcourse I will keep thinking like this. Why not? Why should I not? Why do you want me to think in other ways? I dont get it. Why should I not think animals as mounts before technology jumps to cars etc? Why not? Why should I not jump on a horse and ride if that's what I want to do, and if that's what people have been doing for centuries before I was born? Why? I'm not forced to do it and neither are you. Why do you have a "holy crusade" against mounts? Against a very common thing. Against it being ONLY an option besides map travel and portals. Why do you want the game be more simple and have less options? In fact it's not mine or anyones holy crusade for the sole fact that it is a common thing, and only wanted as being added option, nothing removed. Being one of few against it, proves to be a "holy crusade" tbh.
Edit: Ps. Anet has been talking about minigame where you ride horse against other player in a city. I guess the city climate is only place where the horses can live then? Also the lore has different kinds of creatures as mounts.
B.) Actually it was you who said mounts should not be in a game because it's silly to pull a horse from out of nowhere, and I replied it's also silly to pull any other stuff from out of nowhere like weapons, so why is it silly to pull mounts. It seems you are confusing yourself.
D.) You proved to be a wow hater because you said you dont want to see a mechanic in a game that is based on a wow mechanic, if you said only "I dont want to see a mechanic where shapeshifting brings extra speed" but you had to bring in wow and compare it to wow druid and say you dont want to see anything similar. Just because it is wow, is no argument, it's just dislike against the title. So let me say again, wow did not invent this genre, or fantasy, or druids. Dont deify wow to be such a messiah, it is not. And please leave it out of this discussion, it's annoying when people bring wow to irrelevant discussions.
And yes, I do tell you to grow up if you post stuff like "is wow your gf is blizz your BFFs" because it's childish. If I ever write anything like that I expect others to tell me to grow up too.
So how long are we going to keep this up? You moving your mouth but saying nothing, and me bringing explanations, reasons and logic to the discussion? Now try to make a reply where you actually say something instead of a huge wall of text with nothing in it. Please. Please not a gain "You should walk instead of using a car. Can you come up with a reason not to use cars!?!?!" I'll drive my car and you use your legs, okay? Everyone happy and I wont be late from work
A medieval societys main transport were boats, not mounts. The second way of transporting things and people were carts, usually oxpowered.
Horses were not really a usual way of travel, they were mainly a war machine. They were also popular for some types of hunts.
Horses were very expensive and mainly used in war even though some nobels prefered them to show their status.
You guys can go to any town in the world you already visited instantly.. and you want to add mounts on top of that? Then the whole concept of exploring becomes utterly pointless. Run to an objective really fast, return to town instantly. Run to another objective really fast, return to town instantly. Really?? The whole game will become one big race.
If Anet does that.. PvE is screwed. And the thought of everyone riding a GIANT ASS TURTLE everywhere around me is just.. ugh.
Your travel time is already minimized down to 10% or less. I've been playing GW1 since day one and I know what I'm talking about and can clearly understand why Anet is so resistant when it comes to mounts. And I hope they stay that way. Like it or not, mounts would be a really bad idea in GW2. If it works in other games, it doesn't mean it does everywhere else.
Besides, they've put a lot of work in the art and environments. Do you really want to just rush through all of that? I know I don't.
Eat me!
I paid hard cold cash for my BIG ASS TURTLE thank you.