Guild Wars 2

Esplen.3940:

Devata.6589:

Esplen.3940:

Not to mention more data because of files, assets in addition to making them all work with game physics, jumping, clipping, animations, racial animations, idle animations (which also have to be done for character models in addition to mount models), and then there’s other issues such as size. A Norn would not be able to ride something that a Human, Sylvari, or Asura would be able to ride because of weights. A Charr would not be able to ride most things because of their body shapes.

Thats all not lag.

And where, pray tell, did I even mention the slightest reference of lag?

Your reaction was an ‘agreement’ or extension (however you want to name it) to Harper who was talking about lag. That is you reference to lag.

You see thats why your sentence begins with “Not to mention more data because..” Thats a reference to Harper’s reaction. But then again. You know that because you typed it yourself.

Harper.4173:

Devata.6589:

Harper.4173:

Stuff

Not really going in to it because it would be to much a mount discussion. I guess everybody can make up the flaws for themselves. But this is exactly what I reffed to before.

You seem to have your own view what the game / lore / core should be for you. Then you act as if that it is that way (maybe you even manage to convince yourself) and so if anybody wants to add something that does not fits in your idea they should go play another game meanwhile coming up with excuses why it really does not belong in the game. Not why you don’t like it but why it does not belong in the game.

While you could of course also just say you don’t like mounts in stead of having to try to make it so it would not fit in the game while it very much does.

Here’s the funny part :
I don’t care about mounts. I don’t like and I don’t dislike them either.

I do care about poor game performance. I also think that not every idea someone thinks up should be in the game should actually be in the game just because it works in other games MMOs.

As a general rule of thumb if the only answer to the question " Why should it be in the game" falls along the lines of " Why not" then that thing should probably not be in the game adding to the clutter.

True, luckily there are many reason here to put them in. Like because it’s fun (and thats what a game is all about). Because of the cosmetic value, because mounts give a more immersion way of traveling and does not shrink the world as much as way-points do and because collecting them (when implemented correctly) is a hole type of end-content by itself.

But what I am not getting at is why you give this reaction. Nobody said mounts should be put in because ‘why not’.

And to get back to the real subject. Same for most of those suggestions that get as answer “Leave this game is not for you”. There are usually multiple reasons why they should be put in.

Roybe.5896:

You guys do realize the game is overtaxed with minipets…right? Mounts area real problem and not in a personal annoyance way, but in serious gameplay ways.

Mounted players could be able to grief people, by standing around fights so that players behind them could not see AoE tells, walking over players and hiding their sight, just basically be in the way.

Permanent speed buffs while on mounts would be a poor choice for the devs, as this game is not designed to be run through quickly to get quests done and return to the quest giver to get your rewards. By speeding through an area a newly implanted NPC interaction, that triggers new dynamic events, would surely be missed.

Blocking sight like you can do with a norn and a char you mean?
And speeding through an area like you can already do with the speed buffs?

Not to mention that all your suggested problems have already been solved in other games.

But with any addition (because mounts where just an example here) you are right. It should be implemented correctly. Take your mini’s for example. They do not add as much to the game as they could. They are mainly there to try and get people to buy gems. Getting them is mainly grinding gold or buying with cash. So it’s an example of a bad implementation (from a gamers perspective) while it could have added much more to the game and with any new addition it should be implemented in a good way where you think how to solve possible negatives and where it created new game-play in a fun way.

I think everybody agrees with you on that.

But just because somebody who makes a suggestion does not also details how to solve all possible problems does not mean anybody should tell him to go play another game.

IndigoSundown.5419:

phys.7689:

Behellagh.1468:

I’m with Vayne on this. I play games to relax and enjoy myself, not to treat it as a job or as a way to measure my self-worth.

A lot of people enjoy themselves by meeting challenges. In fact the large majority of games created by man have some element of difficulty or challenge, or it becomes boring.
Tag? run around chasing people avoiding you. If they are just gonna stand there, its pretty boring.
darts, could be just hit the wall, but having things to aim for makes it fun.
pacman? dodge these guys and eat everything on the map.

let me try to think of games that dont have this element, playing house, peek a boo. Kinda drawing a blank on others.

I suppose its not a gaming joy people get from this game. Its more of a do something and see result joy? like spinning a top?

regardless, people who want games with some sort of challenge or difficulty or goal are not really the exception.

Some Facebook games argue otherwise.

I havent done a survey of popular facebook games, but lets look

top game in 2013 list is candy crush saga with 11 million daily users, its got 2000 levels of difficulty, the hardest levels people attempt to play for days. This game is probably more difficult than gw2. looks like the number 2 game is a similar type.

Now, there are some games that are more about just getting a stimulation response, but those are really not that common. Then there are games which rely on creativity over challenge, they work by having an interesting creative content, and depend on new experiences. Like telling ghost stories, or minecraft.
GW2, was creative and new 2 years ago, but if they want the main selling point of gw2 to be that type of game, they will have to either create a wealth of content, or somehow give users more ability to create an interesting world. And lets be honest, users/players have less control over the world now with mega server. Its fairly difficult to organize people now.

but yeah, even facebook games generally have some form of depth, which is what keeps people coming back

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

When suggestions pop up for things like “open world PvP” or “remove all waypoints, then add mounts” . . . no, I’m still going to respond with that statement. Because this game is clearly not the one they’re looking for.

I have to second this. I do not toss the phrase " Maybe this game is not for you" Indiscriminately. But there are some things thta are a core element of gameplay.

When players ask for some changes to the game, if they are minor, then hey, that is Just " I feel that this would improve the game… without drastically changing it."

Maybe they want stealth to last a few seconds longer. Or maybe they want to change How Much damage retaliation reflects.

These are basically adjustments.

But then you have players as Tobias mentioned that want " Waypoints removed and mounts added because that would be cool."

Or " add Open World PvP, because I liked that on this other game"

Those players are not asking for the game to be adjusted, those players want to change the game, to another game entirely.

Those need to be reminded there are plenty of players that are happy with gw2 as it is. And when it is clear that they are not, it’s simply reasonable to remind them, that they are not being forced to play a game they are not content with.

There are players that have to be reminded " maybe this game is not for you."

Devata.6589:

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

When suggestions pop up for things like “open world PvP” or “remove all waypoints, then add mounts” . . . no, I’m still going to respond with that statement. Because this game is clearly not the one they’re looking for.

For a world that’s not really a open world but has instanced maps WvW is as much open world PvP as about any MMO out there with open world PvP.

So what would open world PvP in GW2 mean.. adding a new map where people can fight with each other (like in WvW) but without the camps, towers and keeps as in WvW?

And about way-points and mounts. GW1 had mounts (sure not exactly the way we know them from some other MMO’s but they do have mounts). The world is filled with mounts just none we can ride on (well even one of those.. riding broom) and Anet did state mounts where for sure an option. So also that is not so much ‘not GW’ as you seem to think.

Way-points seem to be a way to overcome the problem of not having mounts but don’t really fit in the lore (portals do and you might see how the two sort of don’t match) and have only recently been put into the story as a way to reduce them, in a more story like way.

So I am sorry but if you are going to say that GW2 is not for people who like mounts and open world PvP I am going to assume thats something you very much want from a game and I need to conclude that maybe GW2 is not the game for you. Because those things are not so much in the GW core as you seem to think and so it could easily change in a expansion. In fact they are already reducing the number of way-points so it seems.

Maybe this game is Not for you?

Nerelith.7360:

Devata.6589:

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

When suggestions pop up for things like “open world PvP” or “remove all waypoints, then add mounts” . . . no, I’m still going to respond with that statement. Because this game is clearly not the one they’re looking for.

For a world that’s not really a open world but has instanced maps WvW is as much open world PvP as about any MMO out there with open world PvP.

So what would open world PvP in GW2 mean.. adding a new map where people can fight with each other (like in WvW) but without the camps, towers and keeps as in WvW?

And about way-points and mounts. GW1 had mounts (sure not exactly the way we know them from some other MMO’s but they do have mounts). The world is filled with mounts just none we can ride on (well even one of those.. riding broom) and Anet did state mounts where for sure an option. So also that is not so much ‘not GW’ as you seem to think.

Way-points seem to be a way to overcome the problem of not having mounts but don’t really fit in the lore (portals do and you might see how the two sort of don’t match) and have only recently been put into the story as a way to reduce them, in a more story like way.

So I am sorry but if you are going to say that GW2 is not for people who like mounts and open world PvP I am going to assume thats something you very much want from a game and I need to conclude that maybe GW2 is not the game for you. Because those things are not so much in the GW core as you seem to think and so it could easily change in a expansion. In fact they are already reducing the number of way-points so it seems.

Maybe this game is Not for you?

Or not for you if you are looking for a game where No mounts (as an example again) is so much core of the game philosophy. Because thats not the case in GW2 seeing as how even Colin talked about how mounts could be implemented.

And open world PvP. Well Edge of the mist comes very close to what would be open world PvP in a MMO that is not really open world but works with instanced maps.

You are exactly doing (in the post before) what I talked about. You do not like something and then act as if it’s in the core of the game philosophy that it should not be in the game. What is complete nonsense of course (at least with this example).

You may disagree on putting it in but don’t try to change what the core of the game is about as it is not about no mounts (coming back to that example again).

In fact, during the launch they said there would be no mounts at launch. That ‘at launch’ was not added for nothing. They can be introduced at any patch or expansion. You know, maybe that is even the reason they are now reducing waypoints? who knows. Considering ‘no mounts’ is NOT part of the core game philosophy they could be added any moment.

http://guildwars2.cz/otazky-odpovedi-pro-guildwars2-cz/2/
“Will be there any other kind of traveling across long distances apart from asura gates (e.g. ship)?
Eric: Any of the major (non-capturable) waypoints that a player has unlocked can be travelled to regardless of the distance involved. Prices do vary depending on distance though, and asura gates are free, so a player might find it advantageous to use asura gates in some circumstances. Other than waypoints and asura gates, there will be no other methods of long distance travel such as mounts, ships, etc inGuild Wars 2 upon initial release.”

So if you did expect them on initial release this game is maybe not for you, if you expect them to never be added because of some design philosophy then this game is also maybe not for you.

If you are really looking for a game where those things are the core game philosophy then maybe this game is not for you?

Ashen.2907:

Harper.4173:

So how come people can suggest changing huge parts of the game that I love and/or overhauling it completely and I shouldn’t feel offended at all .

No you probably should not be offended because someone else likes something somewhat different than you. Feel free to take offense if you choose of course, but player X’s preference for something that you do not want is not an insult to you.

Harper.4173:

since it’s their right to ask for whatever they want but when I tell them it’s not a good idea and maybe they should consider that instead of changing 80% of what this game is maybe it’d be easier to leave the game as it is for those of us who enjoy it and seek out a different game that already caters to their wishes they’re allowed to be super offended because apparently I shouldn’t have any say on whether the game is or not for them.

You do not have any say whether the game is or not for them. There is a huge difference between a customer expressing how a given product might be more appealing to them and you making judgement calls about another player.

No one is SAYING the game is Not for them. But am I not allowed to ask them to consider that " Maybe this game is not for you?"

Nerelith.7360:

Ashen.2907:

Harper.4173:

So how come people can suggest changing huge parts of the game that I love and/or overhauling it completely and I shouldn’t feel offended at all .

No you probably should not be offended because someone else likes something somewhat different than you. Feel free to take offense if you choose of course, but player X’s preference for something that you do not want is not an insult to you.

Harper.4173:

since it’s their right to ask for whatever they want but when I tell them it’s not a good idea and maybe they should consider that instead of changing 80% of what this game is maybe it’d be easier to leave the game as it is for those of us who enjoy it and seek out a different game that already caters to their wishes they’re allowed to be super offended because apparently I shouldn’t have any say on whether the game is or not for them.

You do not have any say whether the game is or not for them. There is a huge difference between a customer expressing how a given product might be more appealing to them and you making judgement calls about another player.

No one is SAYING the game is Not for them. But am I not allowed to ask them to consider that " Maybe this game is not for you?"

You must know .. Ashen mostly isn’t talking about the actual content of a post but only about semantics ..

Devata.6589:

Or not for you if you are looking for a game where No mounts (as an example again) is so much core of the game philosophy. Because thats not the case in GW2 seeing as how even Colin talked about how mounts could be implemented.

And open world PvP. Well Edge of the mist comes very close to what would be open world PvP in a MMO that is not really open world but works with instanced maps.

You are exactly doing (in the post before) what I talked about. You do not like something and then act as if it’s in the core of the game philosophy that it should not be in the game. What is complete nonsense of course (at least with this example).

You may disagree on putting it in but don’t try to change what the core of the game is about as it is not about no mounts (coming back to that example again).

In fact, during the launch they said there would be no mounts at launch. That ‘at launch’ was not added for nothing. They can be introduced at any patch or expansion. You know, maybe that is even the reason they are now reducing waypoints? who knows. Considering ‘no mounts’ is NOT part of the core game philosophy they could be added any moment.

http://guildwars2.cz/otazky-odpovedi-pro-guildwars2-cz/2/
“Will be there any other kind of traveling across long distances apart from asura gates (e.g. ship)?
Eric: Any of the major (non-capturable) waypoints that a player has unlocked can be travelled to regardless of the distance involved. Prices do vary depending on distance though, and asura gates are free, so a player might find it advantageous to use asura gates in some circumstances. Other than waypoints and asura gates, there will be no other methods of long distance travel such as mounts, ships, etc inGuild Wars 2 upon initial release.”

So if you did expect them on initial release this game is maybe not for you, if you expect them to never be added because of some design philosophy then this game is also maybe not for you.

If you are really looking for a game where those things are the core game philosophy then maybe this game is not for you?

Except in it’s current Iteration, this game has no mounts. it has costumes. The witch’s Broom is a costume toy, not a mount, the Kite is the same.

Secondly, even the Pack herder’s walk beside the beasts of burden. I have yet to see any pack herder that is part of our culture in the game, ride a Mount.

The game was designed to make Mounts irrelevant. ALL of this tells me that Mounts are more than likely, NOT a part of this game’s future.

You can say endlessly " Mounts are a part of Gw1 Lore" but that doesn’t make it so.

if it is, give examples of where in Gw1, the current HUMAN culture, Not mobs they fought…. or History they outgrew… used mounts?

be specific.

Lastly, Point to where in Gw2, Lore…Mounts ar ereferenced as being a form of transport for Players..and the culture players belong to.

Lastly. I have been here less, because, I have been Playing another game, that has mounts, combat pets, speed boost, Player housing, and Open World PvP.

See I have decided….. when I want Mounts… Maybe this game is NOT for me.

When I don’t want mounts. it is.

Instead of trying to change this game into something it is Not, because you have a desire for something many players have no taste for…why Not just play Archeage or World of Warcraft?

As I said. When I want Mounts I have realized… Gw2 is not for me. Maybe you should as well.

Just an Fyi: You cannot Point to “Instanced PvP” and then say " it’s almost like Open World PvP". totally different dynamics.

Instanced PvP means everyone in the instance has consented to PvP. Otherwise they would not be In the Instance.

Open World PvP, means that … you can be PvP’d whether you want to or not. The Opposite of Instanced PvP, since it can be and often is, Non-consensual.

This is Like saying " Black is ..almost like white."

Nerelith.7360:

~

“Except in it’s current Iteration, this game has no mounts.” At this moment we do not have mounts no. How is that relevant when people suggest for them being added and then some people (including you) say it’s should not be in GW because it’s not part of the core philosophy or however you might put it. No it’s not there, that is why some people suggest it. With any of these things.

“The witch’s Broom is a costume toy, not a mount, the Kite is the same.” It’s a toy but still irrelevant.

Oow I have see many mounts, from choppers to bad-mobile-like vehicles to submarines and some in use but mostly you indeed don’t see them being in use. However now you are turning it to much to the hole discussion as to of we have mounts and if or how they fit.

I said enough about that in this thread here:
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/Maybe-GW2-is-not-the-game-for-you/page/2#post4441133 including some of the questions you ask here.

but that is not what this thread is about. What the thread is about is that some people (like you) don’t like something and then act as if it’s in the core philosophy of the game and so it should not be added and so if people want that they should look for another game. That while the idea that it’s not in the core philosophy is part of there own imagination.

I would even agree with you that mounts would have some problems in the way the current game works. Maps being instances in stead of an open world is one of those problem. If you would go from map a to map c crossing map b that would mean 3 loading screens. But that does not say much. In fact if you look at some old trailers and screenshots it looks like Anet did try to make a true open world but somehow eventually had to go for instanced maps. That would likely also more explain waypoints that don’t really fit the rest of the world and all the mounts we see but never see being used. Maybe this what we see is the compromise, not the original goal.

Nonetheless it’s just not true that ‘no mounts’ is like a core philosophy for this game and so the argument that if people suggest them being added should look for another argument is invalid.

“Just an Fyi: You cannot Point to “Instanced PvP” and then say " it’s almost like Open World PvP". totally different dynamics.” Lol and then what the heck would Open World PvP in GW2 be? GW2 has only Instanced maps as you might have noticed. That what Anet names “open world” so if you would and ’Open World PvP” but also would assume there would be friendly maps that is the closes you will come.

Until they maybe at some point would make it a seamless world. Who knows, that might be the big thing they are working on, in the background. But for now this is pretyt much how open world PvP would look like in GW2.

About those other games. I did try AA and it’s nice, will likely hop in there again. Just to bad of the LP. WoW also nice but don’t like a timer over my head.

Devata.6589:

Nerelith.7360:

~

“Except in it’s current Iteration, this game has no mounts.” At this moment we do not have mounts no. How is that relevant when people suggest for them being added and then some people (including you) say it’s should not be in GW because it’s not part of the core philosophy or however you might put it. No it’s not there, that is why some people suggest it. With any of these things.

“The witch’s Broom is a costume toy, not a mount, the Kite is the same.” It’s a toy but still irrelevant.

Oow I have see many mounts, from choppers to bad-mobile-like vehicles to submarines and some in use but mostly you indeed don’t see them being in use. However now you are turning it to much to the hole discussion as to of we have mounts and if or how they fit.

I said enough about that in this thread here:
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/Maybe-GW2-is-not-the-game-for-you/page/2#post4441133 including some of the questions you ask here.

but that is not what this thread is about. What the thread is about is that some people (like you) don’t like something and then act as if it’s in the core philosophy of the game and so it should not be added and so if people want that they should look for another game. That while the idea that it’s not in the core philosophy is part of there own imagination.

I would even agree with you that mounts would have some problems in the way the current game works. Maps being instances in stead of an open world is one of those problem. If you would go from map a to map c crossing map b that would mean 3 loading screens. But that does not say much. In fact if you look at some old trailers and screenshots it looks like Anet did try to make a true open world but somehow eventually had to go for instanced maps. That would likely also more explain waypoints that don’t really fit the rest of the world and all the mounts we see but never see being used. Maybe this what we see is the compromise, not the original goal.

Nonetheless it’s just not true that ‘no mounts’ is like a core philosophy for this game and so the argument that if people suggest them being added should look for another argument is invalid.

“Just an Fyi: You cannot Point to “Instanced PvP” and then say " it’s almost like Open World PvP". totally different dynamics.” Lol and then what the heck would Open World PvP in GW2 be? GW2 has only Instanced maps as you might have noticed. That what Anet names “open world” so if you would and ’Open World PvP” but also would assume there would be friendly maps that is the closes you will come.

Until they maybe at some point would make it a seamless world. Who knows, that might be the big thing they are working on, in the background. But for now this is pretyt much how open world PvP would look like in GW2.

About those other games. I did try AA and it’s nice, will likely hop in there again. Just to bad of the LP. WoW also nice but don’t like a timer over my head.

You like to assume a Lot based on zero evidence and silence.

Maybe they are working on a seamless world? based On what? Maybe they add Mounts? again..based On what?

I saw Colin’s video of almost 20 months ago… wow… Mounts are Impending according to you based On a video full of " provisos…quid pro quo’s… addendas… "< Genie> etc etc etc…

it sounded to me Like he was keeping his options Open without making any statement of intent whatsoever.

I asked you to include examples of Mounts In Guild wars Lore. You made an assertion. Back it up. Show where In GW, humans used mounts in the then ..current day and culture. Not mounts they fought, ..Not history they outgrew.

you made assertions that mounts were a part of Gw Lore, when asked to give an example, you try to deflect.

I also asked you to do the same for Gw2. You also failed to provide one.

I said it before, I’ll say it again. if you want mounts In gw2, this game is not for you.

Secondly… about Open World PvP, if I need to explain it to you, maybe it’s best you google it, because if you think " Instanced PvP is almost like Open world PvP" you clearly have no clue what you are talking about. But basically Open World PvP means you are not safe anywhere on the server, you can be attacked at will, even if you don’t desire PvP. AA is a compromise since while there are areas you are safe from PvP… to get past level 30, you more than likely need to go into PvP free for all zones, where you may be ganked by a few level 50’s at level 31.

PS: if you do go back, and try AA, I am on Inoch and part of an awesome Guild…send me a letter… name is of course…Nerelith :-)

Nerelith.7360:

You like to assume a Lot based on zero evidence and silence.

Maybe they are working on a seamless world? based On what? Maybe they add Mounts? again..based On what?

I saw Colin’s video of almost 20 months ago… wow… Mounts are Impending according to you based On a video full of " provisos…quid pro quo’s… addendas… "< Genie> etc etc etc…

it sounded to me Like he was keeping his options Open without making any statement of intent whatsoever.

I asked you to include examples of Mounts In Guild wars Lore. You made an assertion. Back it up. Show where In GW, humans used mounts in the then ..current day and culture. Not mounts they fought, ..Not history they outgrew.

you made assertions that mounts were a part of Gw Lore, when asked to give an example, you try to deflect.

I also asked you to do the same for Gw2. You also failed to provide one.

I said it before, I’ll say it again. if you want mounts In gw2, this game is not for you.

Secondly… about Open World PvP, if I need to explain it to you, maybe it’s best you google it, because if you think " Instanced PvP is almost like Open world PvP" you clearly have no clue what you are talking about. But basically Open World PvP means you are not safe anywhere on the server, you can be attacked at will, even if you don’t desire PvP. AA is a compromise since while there are areas you are safe from PvP… to get past level 30, you more than likely need to go into PvP free for all zones, where you may be ganked by a few level 50’s at level 31.

PS: if you do go back, and try AA, I am on Inoch and part of an awesome Guild…send me a letter… name is of course…Nerelith :-)

Only thing I did assume was how open world PvP would look like in GW2 that does not have an open world, but it looks like you also assumed something about that else you would not say you could not compare open world PvP in GW2 to the EotM we have now?

“Maybe they are working on a seamless world? based On what? Maybe they add Mounts? again..based On what?” That was not an assumption. What I say there is that thats all possible, Not that I assume any of it! You beleef (or so it seems) as if that would be impossible because it would go against the core of the game or whatever.

So to ask that question back. Based on what do you assume / think / believe ‘no mounts’ are part of the core design of what GW2 is and so it would be unthinkable they would be added? Even tho Anet only said they would not be there at release and Colin talked about how they could be implemented. So tell me why are they against the core design / where did you get that information? I am really interesting to that because I see statements like that a lot. While I never did see Anet make a statement like that and I see many references to mounts in the game.

“Mounts are Impending according to you” I never said that. All I say it’s possible while you seem to believe as if it’s impossible because it would go against the core of what GW is. So if anybody is making assumption here it’s you isn’kitten Asuming it’s against the core idea of what GW is I mean.

“it sounded to me Like he was keeping his options Open without making any statement of intent whatsoever.”
Ah there you go. That option is open!
So it is possible they would implement it (just what I was saying) and that would also mean it does not go against the core design philosophy of the game! Would it?

That is exactly what I have been saying here all the time(or trying to say) and why I say a reaction like “maybe this game is not for you” to somebody suggesting it is nonsense imho. You know, exactly what you where trying to defend. So then we could end this there?

Mounts can be worked on (not assuming they are or are not working on it.. but they can be working on.), they can be added to the game and they are not against the core of the game, so suggesting them is completely fine and would not mean he or she should better go play another game. Right..?

That was my hole point here, not more, not less.

About the rest of your post. going into that would derail it to much to a mount discussion. The above is also true for many other times the “maybe you should look for another game” argument is used. But where there are mounts in the lore is more fitting for a mount thread imho.

However just a few references to mounts in GW2. http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/File:Thunder_Ridge_Camp_2.jpg horse carriage that did bring that team there. Choppers and zeppelins in Orr / arah, combat mounts parked and being build in black citadel and so on)

Iason Evan.3806:

I had friends that got broken phones to replace their perfectly working phones and they were still defending the broken phones like their new broken iphone was a family member or something. They stood in line for hours

I am sorry to put it this way, but your friends, got to be idiots then.

#androidforlyfe
#bendgate
#yuputsuperthinglassallover
#gettinginfractedbeforenextreply

….so this DID devolve into a Mount discussion….a dead horse snuck in your house disguised as a marriage counselor still smells the same….(but continues to be flogged).

Devata,

Lots of things are possible. but some are more probable than others.

It is possible that Anet will add sentient multi-colored jello, as a new playable race.
Nowhere has a-net said they never would, and the Lore does NOT say that Multi-colored jello sentient Organisms are never gonna be In the game world.

It is Possible that the new expansion pack will allow all players in WvW to be able to summon their own Dirigible, filled with Keep-door buster bombs.. The players would fly over the keep, and be able to target players IN the keeps from th sky, while being out of reach. Nowhere has Anet said that this would never be added to the game, and the Lore is silent on the matter.

It is possible that The New expansion will allow players to jump onto personal space ships, that will have a combo of Player housing..and transportation craft, that will take players to new planets. One of which is a sentient Computer. Named " Blarghofestum" And there will be an opposite faction, when they add 6 playable races, all based on sentient computers.

It is Possible they have a new map..On another planet where the Planet is a Hive Mind. The mobs all grow stronger and stronger as More come near you.

A lot of things are possible. Since A-net has not said they will never add any if the above, I should simply think that it could happen.

A lot of things are possible but… some things are more probable than others.

I believe it is More probable that they will launch yet another armor skin on the AH, before we see planets with hive minds, Artificially intelligent computer playable races, personal dirigibles with Keep door Buster bombs On them…or sentient Multi-colored jello playable races.

Brother Grimm.5176:

….so this DID devolve into a Mount discussion….a dead horse snuck in your house disguised as a marriage counselor still smells the same….(but continues to be flogged).

Some Players seem to have some skill, you could start a thread about How cool a certain idea for an armor skin would be…

and they can turn it into a Mount thread.