Guild Wars 2

I would like to see more modern looking pistol skins.
The majority of the pistol skins look like 13th century pistols, cowboy revolvers,
pirate pistols, handheld cannons, 18th- early 19th century pistols or faraway imitations of a raygun.

And then you have a bunch of pistols that are just artifacts with a grip (and something that acts as a barrel) that are supposed to be pistols.

The majority has a cowboy style cylinder to hold ammo, if anything at all.
No pistol has its ammo(clip/magazine) in the grip, even the asuran pistols don’t have it.

So the only modern looking pistols are the Pact handgun (chaos gun shares same skin), Guild quick shot, Glyphic/Dark asuran pistol(but they are huge) and perhaps fractal pistol. A pretty small choice, compared to the options of old fashioned pistols.

Thats why I would like to see a bigger choice!

That is because it would look stupid? Yeah it’s not that hard is it…

Every class that uses a rifle or pistol should have a forced hobosack with a belt of ammo feeding into their weapon, it’s the only way to explain the rof they have without needing to reload.

aspirine.6852:

That is because it would look stupid? Yeah it’s not that hard is it…

Thanks for your personal opinion, I on the other hand don’t like the way 95% of the pistol look like because they look oldfashioned.

In Tyria there are alot technological advanced gadgets, so I don’t see why modern looking pistols wouldn’t fit.

And if you like the oldfashioned pistols then you have a big choice, so I don’t see why you would care if modern skins would be added.

Add to that there are already 3-4 modern looking skins, so your argument is weak.

luzt.7692:

I would like to see more modern looking pistol skins.
The majority of the pistol skins look like 13th century pistols…

There’s no such thing as a 13th century pistol. The first pistols weren’t developed until the 16th century.

NewTrain.7549:

luzt.7692:

I would like to see more modern looking pistol skins.
The majority of the pistol skins look like 13th century pistols…

There’s no such thing as a 13th century pistol. The first pistols weren’t developed until the 16th century.

Wiki tells me otherwise, althought it’s a vague depiction of a pistol/firearm, this actually correlates with gw2 pistols.

luzt.7692:

NewTrain.7549:

luzt.7692:

I would like to see more modern looking pistol skins.
The majority of the pistol skins look like 13th century pistols…

There’s no such thing as a 13th century pistol. The first pistols weren’t developed until the 16th century.

Wiki tells me otherwise, althought it’s a vague depiction of a pistol/firearm.

No it doesn’t. From Wikipedia:

“The pistol originates in the 16th century, when early handguns were produced in Europe. The English word was introduced in ca. 1570 from the Middle French pistolet (ca. 1550).”

You’ve attempted to suggest that pistols existed in the 1200s (13th century) when cannons had just barely been introduced to the Asian battlefield. Europe didn’t see cannons until the Siege of Cordoba in 1280CE. The first “hand-held” firearm used in Europe was the hand cannon, which was in the 1300s (14th century) and that’s a far cry from a pistol.

Pistols did not exist prior to the 1500s. Fact.

If there were modern pistols then there would be modern firearms such as machine guns which would look ridiculous and make GW2 look like an FPS

I support the idea of modern rifle and pistol skins. Gw2 is not a medieval themed game, dont see why we cant have modern skins here.

NewTrain.7549:

luzt.7692:

NewTrain.7549:

luzt.7692:

I would like to see more modern looking pistol skins.
The majority of the pistol skins look like 13th century pistols…

There’s no such thing as a 13th century pistol. The first pistols weren’t developed until the 16th century.

Wiki tells me otherwise, althought it’s a vague depiction of a pistol/firearm.

No it doesn’t. From Wikipedia:

“The pistol originates in the 16th century, when early handguns were produced in Europe. The English word was introduced in ca. 1570 from the Middle French pistolet (ca. 1550).”

You’ve attempted to suggest that pistols existed in the 1200s (13th century) when cannons had just barely been introduced to the Asian battlefield. Europe didn’t see cannons until the Siege of Cordoba in 1280CE. The first “hand-held” firearm used in Europe was the hand cannon, which was in the 1300s (14th century) and that’s a far cry from a pistol.

Pistols did not exist prior to the 1500s. Fact.

“The oldest surviving gun, made of bronze, has been dated to 1288 because it was discovered at a site in modern-day Acheng District, Heilongjiang, China,…”

Eitherway not claiming to be an expert or anything, but thats what I’ve read.

Dante.8456:

If there were modern pistols then there would be modern firearms such as machine guns which would look ridiculous and make GW2 look like an FPS

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/images/2/2d/Guild_Quick_Shot.jpg
http://wiki.guildwars2.com/images/6/67/Pact_Handgun.jpg

So apparently these pistols have already tainted the sovereignty of the holy grounds.
And you are saying that if modern pistol skins would be added, that every single person would use them and every single person would instantly play Mesmer/Engi/Thief ? And if everyone would immediatly use that skins it would mean that everyone actually wanted it, right?

Serval.6458:

Every class that uses a rifle of pistol should have a forced hobosack with a belt of ammo feeding into their weapon, it’s the only way to explain the rof they have without needing to reload.

I wasn’t trying to discusse the realism of the weapons.
I was approaching it from a design point of view, because nearly every pistol has a cylinder ammo chamber the base of the design is very similair.

Those two are still rather fitting for the setting of GW2. I can’t imagine anybody walking around with a straight up Glock would look appropriate to their surroundings. But I think there might be a misunderstanding in this thread.

More modern doesn’t necessarily mean exactly like real-world modern pistols, which, in my opinion, would be atrocious to see in GW2, but as shown in the examples you gave, it is very possible to have more modern-influenced skins in the game that look just fine, and I think that may be more what you are asking for.

NewTrain.7549:

luzt.7692:

I would like to see more modern looking pistol skins.
The majority of the pistol skins look like 13th century pistols…

There’s no such thing as a 13th century pistol. The first pistols weren’t developed until the 16th century.

please dont hate me..but that here in the attachment is a chinese handgun from the yuan dynasty (1279-1368). Yea.. pretty much just a tube with one closed end filled with gunpowder and a stone but its a gun nonetheless. Sorry for nerding about >_<

luzt.7692:

The majority has a cowboy style cylinder to hold ammo, if anything at all.

What? There are like 3 revolvers in game…Aether, Ascended and Chaos. And no, I do not count each ascended revolver as it’s own, they’re recolorations (some have minor tweaks, so generously 5-6). That does not constitute a majority.

luzt.7692:

So the only modern looking pistols are the Pact handgun (chaos gun shares same skin), Guild quick shot, Glyphic/Dark asuran pistol(but they are huge) and perhaps fractal pistol. A pretty small choice, compared to the options of old fashioned pistols.

+ Legionnaire, Vigil, Inquest/Mystic (it does indeed have a hammer in the side like a flintlock, but looks very modern), SAB supers, Lovestruck, Pact Fleet, Peacemaker, and maybe Krytan.

luzt.7692:

Thats why I would like to see a bigger choice!

Although I am not disagreeing to this! Always support more options.

luzt.7692:

Dante.8456:

If there were modern pistols then there would be modern firearms such as machine guns which would look ridiculous and make GW2 look like an FPS

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/images/2/2d/Guild_Quick_Shot.jpg
http://wiki.guildwars2.com/images/6/67/Pact_Handgun.jpg

So apparently these pistols have already tainted the sovereignty of the holy grounds.
And you are saying that if modern pistol skins would be added, that every single person would use them and every single person would instantly play Mesmer/Engi/Thief ? And if everyone would immediatly use that skins it would mean that everyone actually wanted it, right?

I don’t know how you managed to invent that I said anything along those lines. I didn’t even reference who would use them or anything to do with classes so I think you should probably re-evaluate your point there.
My point is that contemporary weapon skins ruin the immersion of the game. Much the same like the explorer outfit that was added to the gemstone. Gw2 is not a medieval game, true, but i’m pretty sure you don’t feel very immersed holding a sceptre when there is a thief next to you dual-wielding Colts.
There are some more modern skins and to be quite honest I think they tow the line a little between being damaging to immersion.
Rifles etc. are okay because they were around when swords etc. were still being used. But very modern guns just make everything else feel dated.

would rather see lazer guns feels more involved in the game considering the technology gap between asurans and the rest of the world

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/File:Super_Pistol_Skin.jpg

pew, pew…

Basaltface.2786:

NewTrain.7549:

luzt.7692:

I would like to see more modern looking pistol skins.
The majority of the pistol skins look like 13th century pistols…

There’s no such thing as a 13th century pistol. The first pistols weren’t developed until the 16th century.

please dont hate me..but that here in the attachment is a chinese handgun from the yuan dynasty (1279-1368). Yea.. pretty much just a tube with one closed end filled with gunpowder and a stone but its a gun nonetheless. Sorry for nerding about >_<

Must get that Chinese handgun skin

Killface.1896:

Basaltface.2786:

NewTrain.7549:

luzt.7692:

I would like to see more modern looking pistol skins.
The majority of the pistol skins look like 13th century pistols…

There’s no such thing as a 13th century pistol. The first pistols weren’t developed until the 16th century.

please dont hate me..but that here in the attachment is a chinese handgun from the yuan dynasty (1279-1368). Yea.. pretty much just a tube with one closed end filled with gunpowder and a stone but its a gun nonetheless. Sorry for nerding about >_<

Must get that Chinese handgun skin

the dragon jade skins are pretty darn close (also one of my favourites cause of the burning fuse, love small details like that)

The game has tanks, helicopters, robots, mecha, autopistols with a rate of fire that put modern submachineguns to shame, and more….

More modern looking firearm skins are not all that out of place.

Ashen.2907:

The game has tanks, helicopters, robots, mecha, autopistols with a rate of fire that put modern submachineguns to shame, and more….

More modern looking firearm skins are not all that out of place.

well to be fair.. the mechs and robots\golems work on magical basis…but yea i can see some more “modern” shaped guns in game…just no need to go call of duty…keep it arround the pact gun and it wouldnt be out of place at all

I’m all for more pistol skins… but how exactly are you defining ‘modern’?

Cause I mean, just slapping a desert eagle skin in game or something is something I’m definitely against. More then anything the skins should not look out of place in this game.

The reason why the pistols look so “dated” to us is because the hand-held gun weaponry is still in its infancy. They’re less than 200 years old, so if we use that 13th century for the oldest gun (which is basically just a hand-held cannon and not really a pistol), then GW2 should be roughly at the equivalent of 15th century guns. Arguably up to 17th or 18th due to magitech advancements allowing a faster progress than on Earth; arguably so also due to a faster development rate by the charr whom are perpetually in war and perpetually trying to improve their own stuff (even the Black Citadel is continuously in construction due to continuous improvements).

Modern guns in GW2 would look terribly out of place.

“Modern guns in GW2 would look terribly out of place.”
“More then anything the skins should not look out of place in this game.”

out of place, now, im new but ive seen swords eternity, dawn, twilight, and ive looked into them, and other legendary weapons.
they are out of place, they are awesome and actually

PISTOLS NEED TO LOOK AWESOME
SO SLAM A MODERN DESIGN ON LEGENDARY PISTOL.
please.

because it would be legendary (and not so common), that would compromise the arguments i borrowed.
this is of course just a suggestion and support for OP.

edit: not to forget the rifles. THE LEGENDARY RIFLES 2.

Konig Des Todes.2086:

The reason why the pistols look so “dated” to us is because the hand-held gun weaponry is still in its infancy. They’re less than 200 years old, so if we use that 13th century for the oldest gun (which is basically just a hand-held cannon and not really a pistol), then GW2 should be roughly at the equivalent of 15th century guns. Arguably up to 17th or 18th due to magitech advancements allowing a faster progress than on Earth; arguably so also due to a faster development rate by the charr whom are perpetually in war and perpetually trying to improve their own stuff (even the Black Citadel is continuously in construction due to continuous improvements).

Modern guns in GW2 would look terribly out of place.

If you want to compare tech timelines the game already includes 20th century military technology. As magitech is part of the game setting ’s tech base the game also includes 21st century developments.

Basaltface.2786:

NewTrain.7549:

luzt.7692:

I would like to see more modern looking pistol skins.
The majority of the pistol skins look like 13th century pistols…

There’s no such thing as a 13th century pistol. The first pistols weren’t developed until the 16th century.

please dont hate me..but that here in the attachment is a chinese handgun from the yuan dynasty (1279-1368). Yea.. pretty much just a tube with one closed end filled with gunpowder and a stone but its a gun nonetheless. Sorry for nerding about >_<

Yes it is a gun. It is a hand cannon, designed to be used with two hands. It is not a pistol. There is a huge difference.

luzt.7692:

“The oldest surviving gun, made of bronze, has been dated to 1288 because it was discovered at a site in modern-day Acheng District, Heilongjiang, China,…”

Eitherway not claiming to be an expert or anything, but thats what I’ve read.

See my answer above. Hand cannons are not pistols.

NewTrain.7549:

See my answer above. Hand cannons are not pistols.

This is just a silly quibble. Handguns (the correct terminology for what we’re talking about) can require the use of two hands. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Handgun (first sentence). If you have any doubts, trying firing http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/Category4_750001_750051_775664_-1_775655_757896_image with one hand.

I agree with OP. My dream is to wield dual .45’s or something that resembles a .45. The legendary skin Quip has got to be the dumbest legendary out there. It is a literal joke with pop gun sounds and confetti. It looks like a ray pistol from a 1950s sci fi flick. Right now I’m using the Citrine skin, which looks like a Colt Peacemaker. It’s better than most, but still isn’t as comparably “cool” as most of the greatsword skins.

edit: also, this game is anything but “medieval.” It also doesn’t take place on this planet or in this time line or in this universe. Let’s not forget all of the robots running around while we’re busy arguing about 18th century pistol skins vs 20th century pistol skins.

luzt.7692:

aspirine.6852:

That is because it would look stupid? Yeah it’s not that hard is it…

Thanks for your personal opinion, I on the other hand don’t like the way 95% of the pistol look like because they look oldfashioned.

In Tyria there are alot technological advanced gadgets, so I don’t see why modern looking pistols wouldn’t fit.

And if you like the oldfashioned pistols then you have a big choice, so I don’t see why you would care if modern skins would be added.

Add to that there are already 3-4 modern looking skins, so your argument is weak.

‘because they look old fashioned’ ‘your argument is weak’
the ‘irl timeline of guild wars 2 technology’ is pretty much best equated to the 16th century(pistols weren’t even a thought in the 13th century as you described in the op) and almost all of them then were mostly match or flint locks. thanks to glorious magic and charr ingenuity, guild wars 2’s pistols are somehow magazine fed. I don’t want these pistols or rifles looking any more modern than the late 1800’s. otherwise things will just get flat out ridiculous.
with that said, we have peacemakers and something that looks like a winchester ‘76. is more of those types what you’re looking for?

I’d buy a colt .45 from the gem shop in a heartbeat.

And I don’t even have a thief or an engi…

Black Frog.9274:

This is just a silly quibble. Handguns (the correct terminology for what we’re talking about) can require the use of two hands. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Handgun (first sentence). If you have any doubts, trying firing http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/Category4_750001_750051_775664_-1_775655_757896_image with one hand.

We’re not talking about handguns, we’re talking about pistols. Did you not read any of the posts you responded to? Here, this is from your own link:

“Some handgun experts make a technical distinction that views pistols as a subset of handguns. Sometimes in American usage, the term “pistol” refers to a handgun having one chamber integral with the barrel, making pistols distinct from the other main type of handgun, the revolver, which has a revolving cylinder containing multiple chambers."

And

“The first handheld firearms that might better be called “pistols” were made as early as the 15th century, but their creator is unknown."

Maybe in the future not only read what you’re responding to, but also the links you post as, in this case, they might refute your argument.
Despite this, the fact remains there were no pistols in the 13th century. You can argue semantics all you want, but you’re not correct. No one with any shred of historical knowledge or firearms knowledge would make such an inaccurate statement and trying to defend the existence of 13th century pistols is like trying to argue that the Mughal Empire had tanks because they armored elephants and mounted guns on their backs. It’s simply not true.

NewTrain.7549:

Black Frog.9274:

This is just a silly quibble. Handguns (the correct terminology for what we’re talking about) can require the use of two hands. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Handgun (first sentence). If you have any doubts, trying firing http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/Category4_750001_750051_775664_-1_775655_757896_image with one hand.

We’re not talking about handguns, we’re talking about pistols. Did you not read any of the posts you responded to? Here, this is from your own link:

“Some handgun experts make a technical distinction that views pistols as a subset of handguns. Sometimes in American usage, the term “pistol” refers to a handgun having one chamber integral with the barrel, making pistols distinct from the other main type of handgun, the revolver, which has a revolving cylinder containing multiple chambers."

And

“The first handheld firearms that might better be called “pistols” were made as early as the 15th century, but their creator is unknown."

Maybe in the future not only read what you’re responding to, but also the links you post as, in this case, they might refute your argument.
Despite this, the fact remains there were no pistols in the 13th century. You can argue semantics all you want, but you’re not correct. No one with any shred of historical knowledge or firearms knowledge would make such an inaccurate statement and trying to defend the existence of 13th century pistols is like trying to argue that the Mughal Empire had tanks because they armored elephants and mounted guns on their backs. It’s simply not true.

Just to be clear and have our facts straight, as wikipedia says also:

“The word “pistol” is often synonymous with the word “handgun”. "

In general usage they can be used to refer to the same thing.

And no I am not arguing about the timeline of their creation at all. But if you are going to tell people to get their facts straight, you should do the same.

Ashen.2907:

The game has tanks, helicopters, robots, mecha, autopistols with a rate of fire that put modern submachineguns to shame, and more….

More modern looking firearm skins are not all that out of place.

This argument might hold water if the tanks or helicopters or robots looked even remotely like modern tanks or helicopters or robots.

Or if mecha weren’t entirely from science fiction, and therefore not “modern.”

Or if any of the pistols in game could fire at 700+ rounds/min. Not that rate of fire really has anything to do with skins.

Wolfheart.7483:

NewTrain.7549:

Black Frog.9274:

This is just a silly quibble. Handguns (the correct terminology for what we’re talking about) can require the use of two hands. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Handgun (first sentence). If you have any doubts, trying firing http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/Category4_750001_750051_775664_-1_775655_757896_image with one hand.

We’re not talking about handguns, we’re talking about pistols. Did you not read any of the posts you responded to? Here, this is from your own link:

“Some handgun experts make a technical distinction that views pistols as a subset of handguns. Sometimes in American usage, the term “pistol” refers to a handgun having one chamber integral with the barrel, making pistols distinct from the other main type of handgun, the revolver, which has a revolving cylinder containing multiple chambers."

And

“The first handheld firearms that might better be called “pistols” were made as early as the 15th century, but their creator is unknown."

Maybe in the future not only read what you’re responding to, but also the links you post as, in this case, they might refute your argument.
Despite this, the fact remains there were no pistols in the 13th century. You can argue semantics all you want, but you’re not correct. No one with any shred of historical knowledge or firearms knowledge would make such an inaccurate statement and trying to defend the existence of 13th century pistols is like trying to argue that the Mughal Empire had tanks because they armored elephants and mounted guns on their backs. It’s simply not true.

Just to be clear and have our facts straight, as wikipedia says also:

“The word “pistol” is often synonymous with the word “handgun”. "

In general usage they can be used to refer to the same thing.

And no I am not arguing about the timeline of their creation at all. But if you are going to tell people to get their facts straight, you should do the same.

And then the rest of that paragraph (and the page) go on to state why the words are actually not synonymous and why experts make a distinction. So yeah, I have my facts straight. You may want to do the same.

Here’s something for you to read:

“A pistol is a handgun – but not all handguns are pistols.”

http://hunting.about.com/od/guns/g/glossary-definition-of-pistol.htm

Furthermore it seems you’re unaware that the OP specifically stated pistol and not handgun. Again, facts are useful.

The last thing we need is a bunch of Max Payne lookalike thieves running around dualwielding Desert Eagles and a bunch of Engis with AWPs.

Isn’t it enough that we have wooden swords, slingshots and giant candy canes?

NewTrain.7549:

Wolfheart.7483:

NewTrain.7549:

Black Frog.9274:

This is just a silly quibble. Handguns (the correct terminology for what we’re talking about) can require the use of two hands. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Handgun (first sentence). If you have any doubts, trying firing http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/Category4_750001_750051_775664_-1_775655_757896_image with one hand.

We’re not talking about handguns, we’re talking about pistols. Did you not read any of the posts you responded to? Here, this is from your own link:

“Some handgun experts make a technical distinction that views pistols as a subset of handguns. Sometimes in American usage, the term “pistol” refers to a handgun having one chamber integral with the barrel, making pistols distinct from the other main type of handgun, the revolver, which has a revolving cylinder containing multiple chambers."

And

“The first handheld firearms that might better be called “pistols” were made as early as the 15th century, but their creator is unknown."

Maybe in the future not only read what you’re responding to, but also the links you post as, in this case, they might refute your argument.
Despite this, the fact remains there were no pistols in the 13th century. You can argue semantics all you want, but you’re not correct. No one with any shred of historical knowledge or firearms knowledge would make such an inaccurate statement and trying to defend the existence of 13th century pistols is like trying to argue that the Mughal Empire had tanks because they armored elephants and mounted guns on their backs. It’s simply not true.

Just to be clear and have our facts straight, as wikipedia says also:

“The word “pistol” is often synonymous with the word “handgun”. "

In general usage they can be used to refer to the same thing.

And no I am not arguing about the timeline of their creation at all. But if you are going to tell people to get their facts straight, you should do the same.

And then the rest of that paragraph (and the page) go on to state why the words are actually not synonymous and why experts make a distinction. So yeah, I have my facts straight. You may want to do the same.

Here’s something for you to read:

“A pistol is a handgun – but not all handguns are pistols.”

http://hunting.about.com/od/guns/g/glossary-definition-of-pistol.htm

Furthermore it seems you’re unaware that the OP specifically stated pistol and not handgun. Again, facts are useful.

Except that these facts have close to zero relevance for what the OP is talking about. He wants more modern style pistols regardless of when the first pistols were created. Also, don’t forget that definitions differ from source to source and are subject to change at the whims of the populace.

On topic, I agree. I wouldn’t mind seeing some more modern, futuristic, or magitechy pistols. I didn’t really want to take the pact gun for my first story completion but I wanted to have a skin like that.

NewTrain.7549:

Wolfheart.7483:

NewTrain.7549:

Black Frog.9274:

This is just a silly quibble. Handguns (the correct terminology for what we’re talking about) can require the use of two hands. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Handgun (first sentence). If you have any doubts, trying firing http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/Category4_750001_750051_775664_-1_775655_757896_image with one hand.

We’re not talking about handguns, we’re talking about pistols. Did you not read any of the posts you responded to? Here, this is from your own link:

“Some handgun experts make a technical distinction that views pistols as a subset of handguns. Sometimes in American usage, the term “pistol” refers to a handgun having one chamber integral with the barrel, making pistols distinct from the other main type of handgun, the revolver, which has a revolving cylinder containing multiple chambers."

And

“The first handheld firearms that might better be called “pistols” were made as early as the 15th century, but their creator is unknown."

Maybe in the future not only read what you’re responding to, but also the links you post as, in this case, they might refute your argument.
Despite this, the fact remains there were no pistols in the 13th century. You can argue semantics all you want, but you’re not correct. No one with any shred of historical knowledge or firearms knowledge would make such an inaccurate statement and trying to defend the existence of 13th century pistols is like trying to argue that the Mughal Empire had tanks because they armored elephants and mounted guns on their backs. It’s simply not true.

Just to be clear and have our facts straight, as wikipedia says also:

“The word “pistol” is often synonymous with the word “handgun”. "

In general usage they can be used to refer to the same thing.

And no I am not arguing about the timeline of their creation at all. But if you are going to tell people to get their facts straight, you should do the same.

And then the rest of that paragraph (and the page) go on to state why the words are actually not synonymous and why experts make a distinction. So yeah, I have my facts straight. You may want to do the same.

Here’s something for you to read:

“A pistol is a handgun – but not all handguns are pistols.”

http://hunting.about.com/od/guns/g/glossary-definition-of-pistol.htm

Furthermore it seems you’re unaware that the OP specifically stated pistol and not handgun. Again, facts are useful.

From that paragraph:
Some handgun experts make a technical distinction that views pistols as a subset of handguns. Sometimes in usage, the term “pistol” refers to a handgun having one chamber integral with the barrel, making pistols distinct from the other main type of handgun, the revolver, which has a revolving cylinder containing multiple chambers. But UK/Commonwealth usage often does not make this distinction.

So, “some”, “sometimes” but often does not. My only point here is that in general usage/conversation many people use the words interchangeably. I, personally, do not. I actually do make a distinction between the words. So, if someone used the words as synonyms, referring to the first pistol being from the time period where the first handgun was made, would be correct.

Oh and pointing out that the OP asked specifically for Pistols and not Handguns doesn’t matter. The weapon is in the game under the name Pistol, regardless of what the skin looks like or what type of real-life weapon it does/doesn’t resemble.

But this is getting rather off-topic…..

On topic, I agree with OP. I agree pistols, in general, need some more skins. “Modern” looking or otherwise.

I also think when they add new legendary weapons, they should add a new pistol to balance out Quip. Legendary weapons like Quip, the Moot and the Dreamer will only appeal to a certain niche due to their physical appearance and effects.

I’m not sure why people are nitpicking about Real World dates, but I see nothing wrong with asking for additional appearance options.

lets also add wings and glowy eyes and massive pauldrons and grenades

oh wait, we already have all those things. anet has already kittened this game hard enough, why not go all the way eh?

Crysto.7089:

lets also add wings and glowy eyes and massive pauldrons and grenades

oh wait, we already have all those things. anet has already kittened this game hard enough, why not go all the way eh?

How about jets? Already have skyships so why not jets, or spaceships….

aspirine.6852:

Crysto.7089:

lets also add wings and glowy eyes and massive pauldrons and grenades

oh wait, we already have all those things. anet has already kittened this game hard enough, why not go all the way eh?

How about jets? Already have skyships so why not jets, or spaceships….

this is a very good point, liked and subscribed

I just want a rifle that looks big, over-engineered and industrial to go with my greatsaw, jetpack and heavy aetherblade armor.

Wolfheart.7483:

NewTrain.7549:

Wolfheart.7483:

NewTrain.7549:

Black Frog.9274:

This is just a silly quibble. Handguns (the correct terminology for what we’re talking about) can require the use of two hands. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Handgun (first sentence). If you have any doubts, trying firing http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/Category4_750001_750051_775664_-1_775655_757896_image with one hand.

We’re not talking about handguns, we’re talking about pistols. Did you not read any of the posts you responded to? Here, this is from your own link:

“Some handgun experts make a technical distinction that views pistols as a subset of handguns. Sometimes in American usage, the term “pistol” refers to a handgun having one chamber integral with the barrel, making pistols distinct from the other main type of handgun, the revolver, which has a revolving cylinder containing multiple chambers."

And

“The first handheld firearms that might better be called “pistols” were made as early as the 15th century, but their creator is unknown."

Maybe in the future not only read what you’re responding to, but also the links you post as, in this case, they might refute your argument.
Despite this, the fact remains there were no pistols in the 13th century. You can argue semantics all you want, but you’re not correct. No one with any shred of historical knowledge or firearms knowledge would make such an inaccurate statement and trying to defend the existence of 13th century pistols is like trying to argue that the Mughal Empire had tanks because they armored elephants and mounted guns on their backs. It’s simply not true.

Just to be clear and have our facts straight, as wikipedia says also:

“The word “pistol” is often synonymous with the word “handgun”. "

In general usage they can be used to refer to the same thing.

And no I am not arguing about the timeline of their creation at all. But if you are going to tell people to get their facts straight, you should do the same.

And then the rest of that paragraph (and the page) go on to state why the words are actually not synonymous and why experts make a distinction. So yeah, I have my facts straight. You may want to do the same.

Here’s something for you to read:

“A pistol is a handgun – but not all handguns are pistols.”

http://hunting.about.com/od/guns/g/glossary-definition-of-pistol.htm

Furthermore it seems you’re unaware that the OP specifically stated pistol and not handgun. Again, facts are useful.

From that paragraph:
Some handgun experts make a technical distinction that views pistols as a subset of handguns. Sometimes in usage, the term “pistol” refers to a handgun having one chamber integral with the barrel, making pistols distinct from the other main type of handgun, the revolver, which has a revolving cylinder containing multiple chambers. But UK/Commonwealth usage often does not make this distinction.

So, “some”, “sometimes” but often does not. My only point here is that in general usage/conversation many people use the words interchangeably. I, personally, do not. I actually do make a distinction between the words. So, if someone used the words as synonyms, referring to the first pistol being from the time period where the first handgun was made, would be correct.

Oh and pointing out that the OP asked specifically for Pistols and not Handguns doesn’t matter. The weapon is in the game under the name Pistol, regardless of what the skin looks like or what type of real-life weapon it does/doesn’t resemble.

But this is getting rather off-topic…..

On topic, I agree with OP. I agree pistols, in general, need some more skins. “Modern” looking or otherwise.

I also think when they add new legendary weapons, they should add a new pistol to balance out Quip. Legendary weapons like Quip, the Moot and the Dreamer will only appeal to a certain niche due to their physical appearance and effects.

If you’re so confused that you’re willing to defend the labeling of a 13th century Chinese hand cannon as a pistol, despite what every historian or firearms enthusiast will tell you, I don’t think we have anything more to discuss.

Wow this thread got horribly off-topic. Quit being kittens to each other.

I am on board with more modern looking pistols. Aether is one of my favorite skins simply because it does look like a classic revolver with an added touch of..well, aether-ness!

I don’t see CoD guns ever making it in.
There are three primary types of guns in the game:

- Flintlock-like guns – justified because the humans are at this level of tech right now.
- Energy-like guns – justified because asura have the magitech theme with flashy lightning bolts and runes.
- Gritty spiky iron guns – fits the steampunk charr technology.

The modern weaponry fits none of these themes, thus it should not be in the game.

I’m not sure if I want “modern” looking pistols, but I would love one that’s all shiny metal and some glowing neon/magitech details. Chrome or shiny black metal, I’ll take either.

Basically, take the Pact handgun (pictured earlier), remove some of the extra junk, and chrome that puppy. Maybe a second one with shiny black metal and red/purple glow as well. Then again, I’d like to see a weapon set like that for ALL the weapons. Solid, practical, shiny, glowy, and deadly.

Agreed on the fact that we need more modern/high tech looking pistols and/or rifles, preferably practical and not some ethereal, glowy entity like Dreamthistle etc.

One of my favorite pistol/rifle skins is the Aetherized ones and Scarlet’s Kiss. Very detailed, practical and look like they’d function as a proper gun.

yea not a fan of pistol skins personally, would like something more glowy, not crazy about plain skins

Ashen.2907:

Konig Des Todes.2086:

The reason why the pistols look so “dated” to us is because the hand-held gun weaponry is still in its infancy. They’re less than 200 years old, so if we use that 13th century for the oldest gun (which is basically just a hand-held cannon and not really a pistol), then GW2 should be roughly at the equivalent of 15th century guns. Arguably up to 17th or 18th due to magitech advancements allowing a faster progress than on Earth; arguably so also due to a faster development rate by the charr whom are perpetually in war and perpetually trying to improve their own stuff (even the Black Citadel is continuously in construction due to continuous improvements).

Modern guns in GW2 would look terribly out of place.

If you want to compare tech timelines the game already includes 20th century military technology. As magitech is part of the game setting ’s tech base the game also includes 21st century developments.

This isn’t entirely true.

First off, we see in industrial terms, a modification of 19th century at the earliest – in some forms of charr (tanks). Magitech does allow different developments, but that would result, in regards to pistols, as “artifacts with a grip (and something that acts as a barrel) that are supposed to be pistols” as the OP puts it – because there’s a lot of magic in magitech (hence the name).

Magitech, and magic, allows leaps and bounds, but if we look at the pure technology, then the development of guns are not very old. There were vehicles even in GW1, though not automated, and tanks are basically armored automated vehicles with cannons on them – cannons are much older than pistols.

Different development timelines due to us Earthlings knowing what’s possible and what’s not, and slap in some magic and magical technology into the mix, to create the aforementioned leaps and bounds.

So not all technology is in the 20th, or 19th, or whatever-eth century of development. You have some things in some positions of development, and other things in other positions of development.

And guns are not yet at the modern timeframe. Few things are, in fact.

This thread is pointless.

The artists behind this game have something called _taste_* and aren’t going to throw in a bunch of glocks. It’s not going to happen. No matter how nice you’ve all been this year.

The art style of this game is pretty obviously influence by Renaissance through to Victorian era Europe, with a dash of Da Vinci’s notebooks, a piece of Jules Verne, and some oriental spicing . Where fantastical machines are introduced, they have a very retro styling, the sort of thing you would see in works of fiction of that era.

Did everyone forget the April Fool commando class, and the uproar it created (when people took it seriously)?

*although, some of the backpacks… shudder…

yes Im familiar with da vincis great works featuring twilight and bifrost, and not to mention the dreamer…