Guild Wars 2

I cant understand why people would play a game thats advertised as having no mounts in it , and then keep complaining about theres no mounts in the game.
Why not simply play a game thats got mounts in it?

I’ve always thought mounts would be a good addition to this game. Not because I want to get places faster, but as something else I can use to customize my character. Some characters would have one type of mount and some would have another.

And it’s another thing to collect, which is fun for me.

That said, I doubt we’ll ever see mounts in this game.

Ryou.2398:

I thought the argument was we dont need mounts, of course I want one for style, but I dont know it might look wierd considering the height of the world/landscapes, and the map size.

Need is such an odd word in a game like GW2. There is so much we have, use, enjoy, and pay for, that we never Needed to start with.

And I agree, a Mount is about style and look, not Need, thus keeping Mounts as a Cosmetic Toy, is what would make them Amazing and enjoyable.

I have thought of the height issue, was wondering about that, had a discussion with a friend about it, and that all “mounts” should not give a player added height, as that could mess up the camera angels and such. But I guess if a player is cool with their character taking up more visual real estate, I guess it’s not a problem.

mauried.5608:

I cant understand why people would play a game thats advertised as having no mounts in it , and then keep complaining about theres no mounts in the game.
Why not simply play a game thats got mounts in it?

Why should a person stop playing a game just because there might be something about it they wouldn’t mind seeing changed? Your suggestion is completely bizarre. And anyway, a lot of gamers play multiple games, so the likelihood is that they already play multiple games with mounts. Doesn’t mean they can’t ask on a forum why there isn’t mounts and it certainly doesn’t mean that alone is worth ditching the entire game for. Seriously.

If I had access to teleporters, I would probably only know what a horse is if I saw one in a book. Sturdy animals like an ox find a use in agriculture, and some horses of course too, so that use is still there, but this also screams “Job for a golem!” for me. And why take an unconvenient ride if you can just teleport, or feed a horse if the friendly Golem can do the job? The technic affirmity surely is someday a running buzzsaw falling into the lap of man, but it is how it is.^^

Riding a horse for the sake of reaching a place does simply not make sense for me in Tyria, sry.

Einlanzer.1627:

Not only are they perhaps the funnest collection item in a lot of MMOs, but they also enrich the setting and make it feel more immersive. There’s no reason not to have both waypoints and collectible mounts.

The only possible drawback they could have would be being resource-intensive, but all they really need to do to make that a non-issue make them not usable in combat or in certain areas.

Are there reasons why Anet and GW2 players are opposed to them that I’m missing? Wanting to be different isn’t really a good enough one.

Probably because people automatically think the mounts need to have speeds of 100-310% like WoW or something. When you can just have mounts to be another vanity item, put them at run speed or at most 25% which most classes have access to or 33% swiftness speed.

It’s also another vanity area for Anet to sell items, like you know what they’re doing with gliders now. Still find it funny people hate mounts but are ok with gliding.

Torolan.5816:

If I had access to teleporters, I would probably only know what a horse is if I saw one in a book. Sturdy animals like an ox find a use in agriculture, and some horses of course too, so that use is still there, but this also screams “Job for a golem!” for me. And why take an unconvenient ride if you can just teleport, or feed a horse if the friendly Golem can do the job? The technic affirmity surely is someday a running buzzsaw falling into the lap of man, but it is how it is.^^

Riding a horse for the sake of reaching a place does simply not make sense for me in Tyria, sry.

Well such lore based arguments as this one have convinced me enough now to accept that Tyria is a successful, believable world WITHOUT mounts.

If they indeed discovered magic and magical driven mechanics and because of this taming and riding ride-able mounts became unpopular, then that’s a reasonably valid explanation for me.

Still it’s a bit strange then that they still rely on swords and such and not 100% on magic driven rifles, canons and rockets etc. And that they did not develop individual transport by magical means. But yeah maybe the government wants to control all distance travel, so they just prohibited individual controlled transport. They probably register every movement in and out a portal

If someone has an idea why primitive weaponry is still being used in Tyria, please add this to the discussion!

Cheers!

Gray

Ryou.2398:

IndigoSundown.5419:

Immersion is subjective. Magic mounts that disappear and appear at my whim are not in any way immersive to me.

I dont agree this mmorpg needs mounts, maybe if it didnt have waypoints, but do not use the argument of immersive when you can go to a map screen and click the waypoint to instant travel lol that makes no sense.

I could make a rationale for either if I wanted to, but that was not my purpose. For instance, there’s Asuran tech embedded in the character’s map that allows her/him to access a WP of choice as long as s/he’s attuned the map to it. What I was arguing is that mounts as implemented in MMO’s are not immersive, not that map travel is.

graymouser.4698:

If someone has an idea why primitive weaponry is still being used in Tyria, please add this to the discussion!

Cheers!

Gray

I’m guessing they aren’t obsolete because it’s fantasy. For whatever reason(magic, materials, “Human’s” not being “Earthlings” and being harder to penetrate with projectiles for whatever reason, etc), there isn’t the gulf between the levels of effectiveness that exists in our world.

Basically the math of the game accurately represents the effectiveness of the weapons in Tyria. If a sword is as effective or more than a rifle in Tyria, the fact that a sword isn’t as effective as a rifle on earth is irrelevant. Therefore, they are still modern weapons on Tyria.

And that may seem like a total handwave and copout, but according to the lore; it’s unusual for Tyrians to NOT fully manifest magical ability by the age of 5. In a fantasy world that throws our basic model of metphysics out the window, our assuption of them are absolutely worthless.

People still use knives and machetes now to kill and mutilate each so it’s not much of a stretch to think they may still be popular in a fantasy game with megalaser cannons. It’s just one of those things.

graymouser.4698:

Torolan.5816:

If I had access to teleporters, I would probably only know what a horse is if I saw one in a book. Sturdy animals like an ox find a use in agriculture, and some horses of course too, so that use is still there, but this also screams “Job for a golem!” for me. And why take an unconvenient ride if you can just teleport, or feed a horse if the friendly Golem can do the job? The technic affirmity surely is someday a running buzzsaw falling into the lap of man, but it is how it is.^^

Riding a horse for the sake of reaching a place does simply not make sense for me in Tyria, sry.

Well such lore based arguments as this one have convinced me enough now to accept that Tyria is a successful, believable world WITHOUT mounts.

If they indeed discovered magic and magical driven mechanics and because of this taming and riding ride-able mounts became unpopular, then that’s a reasonably valid explanation for me.

Still it’s a bit strange then that they still rely on swords and such and not 100% on magic driven rifles, canons and rockets etc. And that they did not develop individual transport by magical means. But yeah maybe the government wants to control all distance travel, so they just prohibited individual controlled transport. They probably register every movement in and out a portal

If someone has an idea why primitive weaponry is still being used in Tyria, please add this to the discussion!

Cheers!

Gray

I am with you if you want to imply that that Tyria does not make much sense technology wise, although only if you take basic weapons without magical properties. Police also has battons today to defend themselves in close combat, but I agree with you when you say that people should be primarily armed with guns instead of close combat weapons if they can´t stealth.

I also really think that creatures like Asura are kitten to every fantasy game with their high technology level.

Personal teleportation could just not be possible yet maybe.

It’s not even that I’m strictly opposed to the idea, I’d just much rather the devs be working on the current systems and S3 than starting yet another new feature.

graymouser.4698:

If someone has an idea why primitive weaponry is still being used in Tyria, please add this to the discussion!

Cheers!

Gray

My thought is that the primary damaging force in a weapon in Tyria is the magic contained therein. The magic is delivered via the weapon strike. The amount of magic is directly proportional to the mass of the weapon. In the case of a missile weapon the mass of the projectile is used. This means that a sword, axe, etc will do more damage than an aarrow. Since magical armor, or the magic infused hides of monsters, outmass an arrow by a greater margin than they do a greatsword, the arrow will do less damage than will a greatsword strike.

This mass to magical force theory would also explain why so many of the most powerful weapons, those of, “Legendary,” power are crafted to be so very large. They need to be big in order to contain legendary levels of magic. Why else would anyone want to use a sword the size and shape of an unwieldy surfboard?

Now wait a moment.

Lets talk travel.

Ok we have Teleporters, and we can Run faster then any land animal, as well as being able to swim faster then sharks, and the like.

So, yes, it seems kinda silly to want a mount, and I would agree with you, if there was some move to make the mounts functional.

However, in today’s world, I can ride a motorcycle yet, I have ridden horses for the fun of riding a horse. I ride my bike for exercise and fun. I’ve ridden a horse drawn carriage, a dog drawn carriage, and used a pogo stick, stilts, unicycle (which I an not good at, at all), I have face plated into a Surfboard, belly flopped into a boogy board, rode a paddle boat, canoe, and tube down a river, all in all, these things I used were for the fun of just using them. I have a Truck for when I need to get to work, or somewhere, I have access to a Motorboat if I need to go on water. So, I don’t need to use any of those things, I used them because they were fun things to use.

Mounts should be treated the same way.

In Tyria, GW2, Mounts should be something that really has no practical use, and is done purely for the fun of it or for the show.

In that vein, I could so see the following kinds of Mounts Put into the Game.

• Hover Board (as in the floating Skateboard that was used in “Back to the Future”) with an Asura flair to it, perhaps, other skins could be added later. Add in some fun features, like do a 720 spin and face plant.

• Motorcycle. There are so many amazing designs that could be used for this already, like Carr inspired salvage steam punk, give it a smoke trail, tire tracks, and add in some funky abilities like, “do a wheelie” “Rev Engine” or “crash and burn” and people would be all over this.

• Hobby Horse: Oh come on, we all know people would buy something like this, have a whole series of heads, everything from a rainbow Horse (To Match Dreamer), to a Palomino, Maybe reuse the heads from the Plush Mini’s. Have it make the clopping coconut sound as you ride around, give it a few emotions like “Whinny” “Buck” and “Dismount”.

• Hover Rider (Imagine Hobgoblins Rider, from Spiderman Comics/Movie), use existing Mini Teq as the base, give it some flapping and roaring sound. Emotes: “Spin in Circle” “Land” “Roar” “Fire”(This shoots the breath weapon, but does no damage). You could re-skin this would The Shatter, Shadow of the Dragon, Glint, also a Asura design, this list could go on.

• Pogo Stick, well there has to be some silly in this list. Would need to have that “boing” sound, and a few emotes, like “Jack Hammer” where you bounce really fast in a tight location, maybe wobble around a bit.

• Unicycle, because, yah. Add in a Ability like “Juggle” “Fall” and “Spin”
• Rock/War Dog. The large glowing Dogs. Simply because I think these would be a cool looking mount.

• Cloud or Mini-Twister, The idea here, would be to the turn the lower half of the character into a cloud, or mini-twister, to give them the effect of looking like a Genie, or something. Have emotes for the cloud like “Thunder Storm” where it turns dark, and shoots small bolts of lighting, maybe makes thunder noises, “Rain” where it rains and leaves a puddle, LOL! Anyway you get the idea, I think this might go well with the Wings we already have in game.

• Mechanical Legs. This could take many forms, like have the lower half of a player turn into a Mechanical Horse, they become centaur looking, or just turn the legs into mechanized legs. A lot of options with this one, and a ton of styles that could be used.

• The Horse, Ok, yah, the Traditional “Horse”, same idea, clopping hoofs, a few emotes, like “Rear Up” “Whinny” “Dance” and of course “Dismount”

There is a lot that could be done with this, and with the new expansion coming up, might be an idea to test the waters with something better then what they already put in.

Einlanzer.1627:

Subjective, yes, but a commonly held opinion. Not just mine. Try seeing what would happen if they removed mounts from WoW, they most popular MMO of all time.

Also, “immersive” doesn’t mean the same thing as “realistic”. It means that it helps serve as an anchor for the setting.

Romoving a feature is far from equivalent to not adding one.

For me, and judging by the replies at least some other people, immersion requires realism, or at least some internal consistency.

DoctorDing.5890:

All arguments against mounts in game were invalidated when gliders were introduced.

No they weren’t.
If you’re not even gonna give arguments I’m not even gonna bother figuring out why you may think so in order to respond properly.

graymouser.4698:

Lore needs horses. Lore without horse is incomplete lore. It makes GW 2 much less valid for RP.

Why?
And just to note, the lore has horses in some capacity (GW: Iron Horse Mine and Necrid Horsemen, skeletons on skeletal horses; GW2: Rocking Horse Ornament), it’s just that we’ve never seen a living one. My best guess it they all died (possibly of some kind of plague) prior to Guild Wars.

The broomstick, magic carpet, and drilling machine are all mounts.

There you go.

Zoltar MacRoth.7146:

Another thought…. I’m not a broom or carpet guy, but a skateboard. Yes, I’d buy one. It would work just like the broom. No animations needed. Have the character stand in the standard “in combat” stance but without weapon. You’re still running everywhere but now it looks so much cooler, especially when you “ride” off a cliff and switch to glider. xD

And then we’d get YouTube videos of people popping sick tricks, grinding rails in Divinity’s Reach, and other skating jargon in jumping puzzles.
Yeah, I’d buy that. XD

With more items like broom/carpet and a shared inventory slot, I can see a market for utility mounts. Make an original buyable as an in-game item (10g? 100g?) and sell other versions in the gem store.
It’d be a mild power creep, but also a solid QoL increase and it would open up PvE build selection. No using ‘mount’ items in WvW/PvP or in combat, obviously.

(Shouldn’t this have been merged already? >.>)

Substance E.4852:

Glass Hand.7306:

I have no particular bias for or against mounts. If the time was put into them the could be a nice feature. However the time to do that has come and gone. With all the existing stuff there really isn’t a place or the development resources available to add mounts.

So I’d much rather Anet put their development efforts into other areas of the game such as improving WVW, adding fractals, etc.

Different people do different things to be honest. Animators aren’t going to have anything to do with WvW revitalization or most of the content in new fractals for instance.

We also know there is a new xpack in early’ish development right now. This is really the best time to be voicing opinions on what kinds of new novelty things we want to see in the next xpack.

Animators are far from the only people needed to add mounts to GW2. The reality is that mounts will need behaviors to go along with their animation, and there will need to be stories to go along with their acquisition. Basically this means every development skill that goes into the building of the game will be needed to implement mounts.

As far as your xpac idea goes, I am extending it further. The time to do this is when GW2 was first written. Instead Anet chose to go with waypoints. Adding mounts now would come at the cost of adding other content that extends the endgame, something I’m much more interested in than mounts.

The time for mounts has come and gone. That horse has ridden off into the sunset and isn’t coming back.

Einlanzer.1627:

Not only are they perhaps the funnest collection item in a lot of MMOs, but they also enrich the setting and make it feel more immersive. There’s no reason not to have both waypoints and collectible mounts.

The only possible drawback they could have would be being resource-intensive, but all they really need to do to make that a non-issue make them not usable in combat or in certain areas.

Are there reasons why Anet and GW2 players are opposed to them that I’m missing? Wanting to be different isn’t really a good enough one.

It is all about personal feelings. It can be difficult to put yourself in another person’s perspective on any topic. This one just seems to be more pro-con than a lot of other topics.

For any person wanting mounts, my suggestion is to go to the thread about gem store suggestions and suggest a new toy that would provide the visual representation that you want in the game. The devs seems to like reskinning things that have already been done to provide an easy and cost effective way to introduce something new. Review the three toys that function as mounts and retrofit the best one to your design.

As an example, the broom could be used as the basis for a Charr motorcycle. Not being a dev though, I couldn’t say whether this suggestion would be workable due to the interaction with terrain that the broom avoids by floating. Now, it might be more feasible if it was a motorcycle-turned-hovercraft design.

Just saying you want mounts, asking why others don’t want mounts, etc, really doesn’t provide any input that can be useful to the devs to determine if it is something that can be done.

I confess to not reading all of this, but did read some and skim some, so apologize if it has already been said.

I already dislike the overly-huge models such as a charr or norn with widespread wings. Now take a norn and sit it atop a scaled-up-to-fit dolyak. I would be running right past a cave, harvest node, or other such location if that giant model was standing there blocking my view. You don’t see the yellow labels such as nodes through such models. Just this one aspect makes me not want them.

Add to that the already provided fact that Anet hasn’t been able to make their character models sit, and now you want to sit a horse, kick back on a Harley, or whatever other poses are needed to fit mount models? That’s way more dev work than it’d be worth.

In highly populated areas mini’s are culled to help the engine handle all the graphics. Mounts would be culled too. So would you rather be riding an imaginary mount that isn’t there, or abruptly fall to the ground?

And if they didn’t do that, then idiots and trolls would just use them as a source of clutter. It would be impossible to see and bank tellers, vendors, etc… for all the mounts.

And it’s against lore. Since GW1, only the bad guys have had mounts. And those are rare. I can think of two examples of this in GW1. HoT has two or maybe three?

Mounts wouldn’t serve any purpose in Gw2. The run speed is much faster than most over mmos and you have waypoints all over already. Besides there would be some transistion issues going from mount to glider? I prefer glider. Besides the mount collection in wow was stupid. What gw needs is more gliders like pvp and ad infinitum that isn’t gem based. If you want Mounts go play another game.

Ashen.2907:

graymouser.4698:

If someone has an idea why primitive weaponry is still being used in Tyria, please add this to the discussion!

Cheers!

Gray

My thought is that the primary damaging force in a weapon in Tyria is the magic contained therein. The magic is delivered via the weapon strike. The amount of magic is directly proportional to the mass of the weapon. In the case of a missile weapon the mass of the projectile is used. This means that a sword, axe, etc will do more damage than an aarrow. Since magical armor, or the magic infused hides of monsters, outmass an arrow by a greater margin than they do a greatsword, the arrow will do less damage than will a greatsword strike.

This mass to magical force theory would also explain why so many of the most powerful weapons, those of, “Legendary,” power are crafted to be so very large. They need to be big in order to contain legendary levels of magic. Why else would anyone want to use a sword the size and shape of an unwieldy surfboard?

This is a Mastercard post… priceless.

Meanwhile, back at the topic, I think it’s safe to say that it’s possible — as Ashen just did up above with the tangent — to explain a lot of things that seem outlandish if one is sufficiently creative. It’s also possible to reject such explanations, no matter how apropos they are. Thus, immersion is in the eye of the beholder, and should only be used as a rationale for why a poster likes or dislikes the idea of mounts in GW2. Immersion is not a factor that can be objectively determined — at least not in the case of mounts.

GW2 where 90% of everyone hating mounts came to avoid them like a its a zombie apocalypse. ( Of Course I love mounts so go ahead and throw tomatoes at me for loving them and even if there not in GW2 it’s not the main reason why I joined GW2 anyways not to avoid mounts.)

And where only 1 mind & 1 comment is needed to speak for everyone but for themselves. “We don’t want mounts” ends all discussions.

The End. Haters gonna hate.

Anyway, I don’t mind if they was gonna add mounts at sometime at a later future if they ever changed there minds about it. But I doubt people are “Forced” to buy mounts even if it was added to GW2, If someone is holding a gun to your head and forcing you to buy something or get shot for not buying then there is something wrong with the picture.

Elden Arnaas.4870:

In highly populated areas mini’s are culled to help the engine handle all the graphics. Mounts would be culled too.

Would mounts be culled if, as pointed out earlier in this thread (without a supporting quote unfortunately), a single mounted character model would replace the unmounted character, resulting in the same number of models, rather than adding an additional model due to the nature of how such can be handled by the GW2 engine?

Ticky.5831:

graymouser.4698:

If someone has an idea why primitive weaponry is still being used in Tyria, please add this to the discussion!

Cheers!

Gray

I’m guessing they aren’t obsolete because it’s fantasy. For whatever reason(magic, materials, “Human’s” not being “Earthlings” and being harder to penetrate with projectiles for whatever reason, etc), there isn’t the gulf between the levels of effectiveness that exists in our world.

Basically the math of the game accurately represents the effectiveness of the weapons in Tyria. If a sword is as effective or more than a rifle in Tyria, the fact that a sword isn’t as effective as a rifle on earth is irrelevant. Therefore, they are still modern weapons on Tyria.

And that may seem like a total handwave and copout, but according to the lore; it’s unusual for Tyrians to NOT fully manifest magical ability by the age of 5. In a fantasy world that throws our basic model of metphysics out the window, our assuption of them are absolutely worthless.

Good explanations…

Yeah, if I speak of “realism” I do not mean the game world has to comply to Newtonian physics as we know them on our version of “Earth”, but that we have Tyrian lore that explains things in a believable, logical way. Where things have reasons why they are as they are.

Logical lore makes a world “believable” to me, and that’s what I call “realistic”. If there is no logic behind manifestations then they loose reality value. And reality value is what makes a world come to life, otherwise it remains the ramblings of a psychotic.

We need the logical ramblings of a mage not the irrational ramblings of a psychiatric patient. Although the two are very close, they are not the same…

Very interesting tread here, and I now completely accept the absence of horses and the magical strength of iron weaponry…

G. Mouser

graymouser.4698:

If someone has an idea why primitive weaponry is still being used in Tyria, please add this to the discussion!

There are several reasons. The main is that most of the past and present dominant races of the settings were really strong in magic, and thus had no reason to push the boundaries of science.

Currently, there are two races that are at the spearhead of scientific invention. Asuras are strongly magical, but they also seem to posess curiosity and need to improve and tweak things as a racial trait. They are also physically weak. Charr on the other hand took to machines because they have turned their backs on magic and religion. For comparison, see Flame Legion – they are still set in the old ways, and don’t seem to rely on or use new charr-styled machines and weapons at all. Their weapons are magical flame effigies, old artifacts and magical rituals, not tanks.

Humans are now following those two races, but that may be because they have lost their leading role in the world, and, what’s worse, lost the active patronage of their gods that apparently gave them a massive advantage in earlier times.

Also, as someone pointed out before, according to lore, human warriors are also specialized mages. Their fighting ability is partially magical, and at the height of their skill and power they can likely really cleave opponents in two and deflect bullets with a wave of their weapon. The same most likely holds true for many other races of Tyria.

Guns are not as big an equalizer here as in real world.

Etienne.3049:

And just to note, the lore has horses in some capacity (GW: Iron Horse Mine and Necrid Horsemen, skeletons on skeletal horses; GW2: Rocking Horse Ornament), it’s just that we’ve never seen a living one. My best guess it they all died (possibly of some kind of plague) prior to Guild Wars.

There’s a theory that horses were brought from the same world humans originated in, but for one reason or another didn’t manage to survive long in Tyria.

Ashen.2907:

graymouser.4698:

If someone has an idea why primitive weaponry is still being used in Tyria, please add this to the discussion!

Cheers!

Gray

My thought is that the primary damaging force in a weapon in Tyria is the magic contained therein. The magic is delivered via the weapon strike. The amount of magic is directly proportional to the mass of the weapon. In the case of a missile weapon the mass of the projectile is used. This means that a sword, axe, etc will do more damage than an aarrow. Since magical armor, or the magic infused hides of monsters, outmass an arrow by a greater margin than they do a greatsword, the arrow will do less damage than will a greatsword strike.

This mass to magical force theory would also explain why so many of the most powerful weapons, those of, “Legendary,” power are crafted to be so very large. They need to be big in order to contain legendary levels of magic. Why else would anyone want to use a sword the size and shape of an unwieldy surfboard?

Good Lore explanation! Do official resources exist on this subject (the magical strength of iron weaponry)?

Thanks

Cheers

G. Mouser

Opposed. Not because I care if mounts exist. I care because development resources would be used that I feel that could be used in better places.

graymouser.4698:

Ashen.2907:

graymouser.4698:

If someone has an idea why primitive weaponry is still being used in Tyria, please add this to the discussion!

Cheers!

Gray

My thought is that the primary damaging force in a weapon in Tyria is the magic contained therein. The magic is delivered via the weapon strike. The amount of magic is directly proportional to the mass of the weapon. In the case of a missile weapon the mass of the projectile is used. This means that a sword, axe, etc will do more damage than an aarrow. Since magical armor, or the magic infused hides of monsters, outmass an arrow by a greater margin than they do a greatsword, the arrow will do less damage than will a greatsword strike.

This mass to magical force theory would also explain why so many of the most powerful weapons, those of, “Legendary,” power are crafted to be so very large. They need to be big in order to contain legendary levels of magic. Why else would anyone want to use a sword the size and shape of an unwieldy surfboard?

Good Lore explanation! Do official resources exist on this subject (the magical strength of iron weaponry)?

Thanks

Cheers

G. Mouser

Nothing oficial. I just tended to get annoyed at the idea that swords and bows would continue to be primary weapons of war in a setting with assault rifles, auto cannon, automortars, flamethrowers, grenades, machinegus, tanks, helicopters, etc without some sort of explanation….so I invented one that seemed to fit the available data (projectiles do less damage than melee weapons, the supposedly most powerful melee weapos are often oversized)

Keep in mind that it isnt just iron, its the mass of whatever construction material is used. There are swords made of bone, glass, etc that gain this magical mass effect ; )

Of course, Asura would be able to store bigger amount of mass/magical power in more compact structures, making their own weapons easier to wield for them…

Einlanzer.1627:

Not only are they perhaps the funnest collection item in a lot of MMOs, but they also enrich the setting and make it feel more immersive. There’s no reason not to have both waypoints and collectible mounts.

The only possible drawback they could have would be being resource-intensive, but all they really need to do to make that a non-issue make them not usable in combat or in certain areas.

Are there reasons why Anet and GW2 players are opposed to them that I’m missing? Wanting to be different isn’t really a good enough one.

The only mount I want is a beetle in HoT that is only usable in the Nuhoch lane. Like a reward for doing that beetle raising meta, the one where you protect their larvae, take them out hunting, etc etc etc. I love the way that NPCs look on those beetles, and it would be fun to ride one, but only to do that fight meta – kinda like the Exalted suits.

Ardid.7203:

Of course, Asura would be able to store bigger amount of mass/magical power in more compact structures, making their own weapons easier to wield for them…

Of course. If anyone could come up with a way to bend the metaphysical laws of the universe it would an asura.

Endless Soul.5178:

I don’t understand the desire to want mounts just because every other game out there has them.

Some people just want a pony for Christmas

Maybe they’ll have mounts in the next expansion. Anet’s missing out on real world funds from customers who’d buy an expansion filled with horses and other types of mounts, whether the mounts were achievable via game play or in the Gem Store. The re-skinning potential would be immense, and a continuing source of income.

They’d also fulfill a type of content role in the sense that new collection achievements could be tied to them, just as there are achievements associated with collecting armors, mini’s, weapons, etc.

(I’m neutral on the subject of adding them to the game, but I’m surprised they haven’t been due to the income implications.)

Gwynnifer.2497:

Maybe they’ll have mounts in the next expansion. Anet’s missing out on real world funds from customers who’d buy an expansion filled with horses and other types of mounts, whether the mounts were achievable via game play or in the Gem Store. The re-skinning potential would be immense, and a continuing source of income.

They’d also fulfill a type of content role in the sense that new collection achievements could be tied to them, just as there are achievements associated with collecting armors, mini’s, weapons, etc.

(I’m neutral on the subject of adding them to the game, but I’m surprised they haven’t been due to the income implications.)

This is why I think that Anet has done at least some sort of potential ROI analysis indicating that potential revenue might not provide sufficient return to justify the expense. Not that mounts wouldnt be potentially profitable, but that the same resources spent elsewhere would be more so.

re: Would mounts be culled if, as pointed out earlier in this thread (without a supporting quote unfortunately), a single mounted character model would replace the unmounted character, resulting in the same number of models, rather than adding an additional model due to the nature of how such can be handled by the GW2 engine? – It’s the same number of models, but some of them would be more complex. And if the engine needs to drop the amount of stuff it’s rendering, the logical choice (while in the “cull unnecessary graphics” mode) would be to drop back to the simpler, character-only model. So even given this information,(alternate, combined model used for mount/rider) I would think that mounts would still get culled, at times when the engine needs to cut down on the total amount of graphics that it’s rendering.
So probably, instead of riding an imaginary mount that isn’t there, you would abruptly fall to the ground.

The simple truth is that the majority of MMO players like mounts, even if the majority of GW2 players do not (which I doubt is true.)

They aren’t going to win many more mount-hating converts, but they have a chance to win a good slice of mount-loving converts.

Elden Arnaas.4870:

re: Would mounts be culled if, as pointed out earlier in this thread (without a supporting quote unfortunately), a single mounted character model would replace the unmounted character, resulting in the same number of models, rather than adding an additional model due to the nature of how such can be handled by the GW2 engine? – It’s the same number of models, but some of them would be more complex. And if the engine needs to drop the amount of stuff it’s rendering, the logical choice (while in the “cull unnecessary graphics” mode) would be to drop back to the simpler, character-only model. So even given this information,(alternate, combined model used for mount/rider) I would think that mounts would still get culled, at times when the engine needs to cut down on the total amount of graphics that it’s rendering.
So probably, instead of riding an imaginary mount that isn’t there, you would abruptly fall to the ground.

That… make absolutely no sense whatsoever. Culling can remove effects and characters true, but it doesnt change the fact they are there. It doesnt delete an object, it just stop/change the rendering. Your own character doesnt get culled and neither would your mount. Other peoples mounts might be, but even if you remove the visuals the players on them would just be floating midair and running around as if on a mount – which they would be on their screen. The engine would obviously cull mounts and players in sync. Players would never ever “abruptly fall to the ground” unless the game has broken code that literally delete mounts instead of culling them.

STIHL.2489:

Obtena.7952:

STIHL.2489:

Obtena.7952:

That shows a large lack of understanding. We already know that for mounts, you need more than a skin to purchase in the gem store for them to work ingame. Anet would have to charge phenomenal amounts just to cover the dev costs for mounts.

Eh? we already have a Broom, a Flying Carpet, and a tunneler, what’s the big deal?

If that’s your definition of mounts, then /thread?

I think you and everyone else are fully aware that those are not the mounts people are after, otherwise these threads would cease to exist.

The thing is, that is what should be done to resolve the entire issue.

In the current form of GW2, everything is mainly cosmetic. Why not Mounts?

Actually, I agree but that’s not what people are asking for that I and others disagree with. Simply decreeing magic carpets and brooms as mounts will not placate them.

Einlanzer.1627:

The simple truth is that the majority of MMO players like mounts, even if the majority of GW2 players do not (which I doubt is true.)

They aren’t going to win many more mount-hating converts, but they have a chance to win a good slice of mount-loving converts.

That’s assuming they don’t die when they see the price to buy one.

There must be a technical sound reason why not, that really as a player I don’t have to know, nor play jr game designer. But follow this… if they were possible they’d love to give them to you for $$$. They lose money not having them, so there must be a real sound reason why they don’t have them.

Einlanzer.1627:

The simple truth is that the majority of MMO players like mounts, even if the majority of GW2 players do not (which I doubt is true.)

They aren’t going to win many more mount-hating converts, but they have a chance to win a good slice of mount-loving converts.

thats not a simple truth, there is no demand for mounts in GW2, or was there in GW1 and that is what matters here. I for one don’t particularly want to see everyone milling about in cities on mounts, or rushing about on maps etc etc. Horses for courses, not every game has to have mounts, choice is good.

I really don’t think this is a contest about how much people love/hate mounts.

AFAIK, most of the “mount haters” don’t even hate mounts. They simply have a more objective and holistic approuch to the theme: it don’t matter how much you “love” mounts, the problems asociated to them are too many. Unless they are exclusively cosmetic… in wich case there are still problems, just not so many… but then the mount lovers will not “love” them, because mounts require speed boost or some other advantage to justify itselves…

I would like to travel with my asura engie sitting over a nice tall wheeled fast Golem while accompanied by my personal bank Dolyak. I do recognize, however, the enormous amount of problems this could generate for everyone else.

IndigoSundown.5419:

Rhykael.1398:

IndigoSundown.5419:

1. Having a character poof them in out of thin air is not immersive. Immersive would be going to a stable to get them, having to rest them, feed them, pay for their upkeep and return them to the stable when done.

Just to make one thing clear – I’m not arguing for or against mounts here, but to make the case for ultra-realism in a game otherwise featuring magic, insta-teleportation and freaking ghosts seems a bit far-fetched to me.

Immersion is subjective. Magic mounts that disappear and appear at my whim are not in any way immersive to me.

Fair enough – to you. You didn’t specify that in your previous post.
You just stated it as fact.

But that aside, the point of my reply was that arguing for ultra-realism (i.e. having to walk to a stable, pay for the upkeep and deposit said mount again) in certain areas of the game, while ostensibly accepting zero-realism in others is indeed – as you correctly specified in your second post – a very subjective matter.

“There must be a technical sound reason why not…”

There is. All those greatswords would be embedded in the poor horses a**es.

Yeah? Well, I don’t understand why this hasn’t been merged with the mega thread.

I don’t want to see mounts as personal screen-clutter. But I wouldn’t mind seeing Planetside/Battlefield-style vehicles added to WvW, Ascalon, and other maps as part of a new expansion mastery. But those would be a pain in the kitten to balance and ensure are in limited supply for the map, without creating competition for them. Everyone wants to drive a tank out of Exterminatus HQ to run over the Flame Legion with in Ashford on the way to the Brand in Blazeridge Steppes (Or more Flame Legion or Ghosts in Iron Marches), but the map DOESN’T want to have dozens of tanks rolling over everything and clipping through the scenery and each other. And we most certainly don’t want them taking up space around the banks and Trading Posts in the Grove and Divinity’s Reach.

Rhykael.1398:

IndigoSundown.5419:

Rhykael.1398:

IndigoSundown.5419:

1. Having a character poof them in out of thin air is not immersive. Immersive would be going to a stable to get them, having to rest them, feed them, pay for their upkeep and return them to the stable when done.

Just to make one thing clear – I’m not arguing for or against mounts here, but to make the case for ultra-realism in a game otherwise featuring magic, insta-teleportation and freaking ghosts seems a bit far-fetched to me.

Immersion is subjective. Magic mounts that disappear and appear at my whim are not in any way immersive to me.

Fair enough – to you. You didn’t specify that in your previous post.
You just stated it as fact.

But that aside, the point of my reply was that arguing for ultra-realism (i.e. having to walk to a stable, pay for the upkeep and deposit said mount again) in certain areas of the game, while ostensibly accepting zero-realism in others is indeed – as you correctly specified in your second post – a very subjective matter.

I’ll usually label facts as facts, rather than opinion as opinion. After all, most of what I post is opinion. I believe that to the case for a lot of posters, though I’m not certain everyone understands the distinction..

As it is, I don’t believe “immersion” is a viable, factual rationale in favor of mounts — in the context of every player.

I don’t think there’s any opposition. Theres just no interest. And if there were to ever be a list of “things people want in GW2” mounts would be near the bottom of most people’s list. It’d be nice I guess, but it’s been stated again and again that mounts have literally no purpose in this game other than to have something pretty to sit on. Like the witch broom or magic carpet. And that’s fine if you’re into aesthetics, but there are plenty of things this game can use that actually improve the quality of the game.
We have way points everywhere, and very generous speed boosts. Mounts would not help much at all. And people have tried to prove otherwise in every way imaginable and been proven wrong at every turn.

A major thing people often overlook when discussing mounts is the amount of technical work involved. You need animations for getting your player model to sit on the creature, and you need new models and animations if the creature is going to have some kind of saddle or be unique from normal mobs. You also have to implement whatever collections or systems to acquire the mounts.

This is NOT some herculean task beyond Anet’s capability. But it is a big deal in development terms. They can’t just have a couple interns work on this in their spare time. It will take away from whatever other content the devs are busy with.

Now considering what happened with the legendary weapons… I find the addition of mounts highly unlikely in the near future.