Guild Wars 2

Talyn.3295:

Seven Star Stalker.1740:

Astralporing.1957:

Rovaeden.8546:

I don’t understand why so many people in the community seem to have zero imagination, vision or creativity.

Oh, i agree. Mounts are so cliche… can’t we ask for something new and creative instead?

Seven Star Stalker.1740:

None of you have provided a reasonable basis for them to not be on the game.

It’s not like people asking for mounts supply any reasonable reasons for their inclusion.

Except none of the reasons have been any more acceptable than those for them.

“I don’t like mounts” Yeah well, some people do. So that’s not a reason.

“Other games have mounts, play those” Other games have quests! And maps! And load screens! And PVP! And levels! Lets remove all those too! Or rather, why don’t people leave for WoW/Tera/Whatever the hell else for those features too!

“Mounts and anti-immersive, clunky, badly implemented, Lore defying” Really? Really now? Show me the proof for where in GW2 Mount use hasn’t been allowed. Maybe no one thought of it yet lore wise? We’ve already had unorthodox mounts on the form of ships in missions, golems, portals/elevators/lift systems and others. And as for anti-immersive, well, what about minis, many legendaries and skins, many NPC joke quotes, tonics and many other features like Candy-Cane weapons and the like? What makes any of those immersive? Find me the line in Lore that says that Minis are actually a in game lore feature, that are central to the story. I challenge you.

“Clutter and clipping” Yeah well, Norn and Charr can do that solely from existing so the last thing on your mind should be mounts when two races cause that issue already.

“We already have waypoints” right, so let’s remove speed boosting abilities and stuff that grants swiftness.

The only basis I’ve seen is, “There’s too many things ANet needs to do first”, which doesn’t really disqualify them, rather, it just sets back their prioritisation. In terms of reasoning for removing them, there is nothing stopping ANet from implementing them aside from, “We don’t want to” or “It’d require more resources than it’s worth”, the latter of which I can sort of understand I guess.

If you want to play that card. I got one better.

I have yet to read one good or compelling reason to add them. NOT a single one. The game was built around not needing them. Sorry.

My issue is that people say, “No we don’t want mounts, nobody likes them, they suck, they’re bad” for reasons equally silly as asking for them. Asking for them however gets away with it because there’s no harm in simply asking. If you’re going to say no, however, provide a reasonable basis as to why. Imagine what this game would be like if everything was decided on what forumers did and didn’t like? Good grief.

If you’re just simply asking for mounts there’s no need to shove it in folks face about why mounts would be good for them.
Not gonna sell that to everyone.

All it does is lead to is this senseless spiral on whether mounts are good or bad. Like this thread and every other mounts thread.

Don’t try to make arguments for mounts if simply asking for mounts, simply because of “why.”

Why isn’t this thread not merged into the previous one yet? Any of the previous ones but this was the most recent, started only 8 days previously and was still going strong.

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/Mounts-in-Gw2-1/first

And since my previous two posts pointing to the other thread were deleted for not being “constructive”, here’s some constructive for you.

So the pro people, why? If the broom is an example then it’s not going to be faster than on foot. So it’ll literally be a “show pony”. No benefits in combat or in travel speed. It’ll be the equivalent of the Commander Badge (when it was just gold), look what I bought! I’m better than you.

The devs when designing the game chose that by foot is the primary mode of movement. No flight, no faster mounts. WvW isn’t going to get cavalry (someone suggested weapon use while on mounts for WvW).

So if they aren’t going to be for speed, if they vanish every time you go into a combat stance, then they are meaningless. So you are asking the devs to add a major feature that has no impact whatsoever to gameplay. It’s not like skins because that’s just the art department. You are asking for a feature that requires animation as well as coding to make it work.

Most of the criticism against mounts probably stems from an emotional knee-jerk response. Most run of the mill MMO’s out there likes to emphasize mounts and cosmetics over gameplay.

Having mounts in this game would somehow make a false association with the other mediocre MMOs. It’s not really the idea of mounts itself that’s horrible. It’s the implicit association with other MMO’s that leaves a bad taste in people’s mouths.

I guess this emotional response to mounts is a valid reason not to have it. It’s a bit silly, but I really don’t think it is such of a big deal either way.

I am not going to relist the reasons previous posters from previous threads previously posted and the repercussions they describe because the OP, like previous OPs before him, will not consider them.

Therefore I post this.

Also this.

AwkwardStarfish.1827:

Dusty Moon.4382:

A.Net already said no mounts. What part of that don’t y’all understand?

Just link the statement then from Anet.

Here ya go – as plain as the nose on your face.

Here is a 2011 interview with Colin Johanson – HE SAYS NO MOUNTS!

Also from GW2 WIKI

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Frequently_Asked_Questions#Gameplay

Will there be mounts?
No. For traveling long distance, the game will offer the two types of teleports above (waypoints and asura gates), but the initial release does not have any other methods, i.e. there are no mounts or ships.

I hope this closes this issue – DONE! Straight from the horse’s mouth.

Eh, I’m afraid this doesn’t close the issue. They only said there would be no mounts for the initial release.

Interesting points from the video. I especially like the part where they describe what type of company they are: One that tries new ideas and innovates things. They take chances and give everyone a chance to develop and innovate something. The video said, and I quote, “There will be no mounts on the release of GW2”. They did NOT say “No mounts, ever.”

Do you have anything more recent, or perhaps that clearly states that they will never have mounts? It really sounds like they left the door open should they want to add mounts in the future.

EDIT: Through a little more reading, discovered that there was some speculation that mounts were going to be added in a Guild Wars expansion that was later cancelled, due to the mounts that were present in the concept art.

http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Guild_Wars_Utopia
http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/File:%22Beach_Mounts%22_concept_art.jpg
http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/File:%22Mount%22_concept_art_2.jpg

I understand that ArenaNet has a lot on their plate, but I wouldn’t rule out that they have mounts tucked away in the back of their minds when planning new content. They haven’t completely ruled mounts out in their interviews. Maybe they’re just waiting for an amazing new way to implement it, or trying to find a way to fit it into a future change. I’ve heard whispers of an expansion coming so perhaps new races, new professions, new areas to explore, and a sprinkling of mounts could come with such a large amount of content.

Dusty Moon.4382:

Will there be mounts?
No. For traveling long distance, the game will offer the two types of teleports above (waypoints and asura gates), but the INITIAL RELEASE does not have any other methods, i.e. there are no mounts or ships.

I hope this closes this issue – DONE! Straight from the horse’s mouth.

I notice you chose to completely ignore the words “initial release”. Funny, that.

It’s pretty obvious by the words “initial release” that he is not saying “no mounts EVER”. Nice try, though.

minbariguy.7504:

Dusty Moon.4382:

Will there be mounts?
No. For traveling long distance, the game will offer the two types of teleports above (waypoints and asura gates), but the INITIAL RELEASE does not have any other methods, i.e. there are no mounts or ships.

I hope this closes this issue – DONE! Straight from the horse’s mouth.

I notice you chose to completely ignore the words “initial release”. Funny, that.

It’s pretty obvious by the words “initial release” that he is not saying “no mounts EVER”. Nice try, though.

They haven’t said anything different and I would expect MOUNTS are a waste of resources used for more important things like game balance and playability. The mounts in GW2 that are in are very area specific, like in GW1 meaning they serve an actual purpose.

Mounts don’t serve a purpose in this game since I can keep a 33% speed boost on my Engineer and with the way points get around faster also.

Dusty Moon.4382:

AwkwardStarfish.1827:

Dusty Moon.4382:

A.Net already said no mounts. What part of that don’t y’all understand?

Just link the statement then from Anet.

Here ya go – as plain as the nose on your face.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uXCh3pw0wmM

Here is a 2011 interview with Colin Johanson – HE SAYS NO MOUNTS!

Also from GW2 WIKI

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Frequently_Asked_Questions#Gameplay

Will there be mounts?
No. For traveling long distance, the game will offer the two types of teleports above (waypoints and asura gates), but the initial release does not have any other methods, i.e. there are no mounts or ships.

I hope this closes this issue – DONE! Straight from the horse’s mouth.

Lol… you take things that have been said around 3 years ago, before the game wasn’t even released still as like promises, that should count in your own personal wish dream forever???

Just look at the Manifesto they did roughly year ago and look at what the game is now…
Things can change over time. Decisions you made several years ago, can get changed over time.
Nothing is set in stone forever. At the time when that interview was made, people also all lived in the dream worlld, that GW2 would never ever get a new equipment tier and see, what happened later – ascended equipment got introduced.

If somebody really doesn#t understand something here, then i guess its you Dusty, who doesn’t want to understand, whats the meaning of the word INITIAL.
At the time when that Interview was made, all questions were pointed towards, what ANet will do with the game and what we can expect from it, once the game finally releases !!

I was on both Gamescom Tradefares as its where my hometown is and I was able to have also some chitchat with the Devs at that time (Greetings to Ree especially here and Isaiah, @ Ree, still waiting to get to hear the Sea Dragons official Name, talking with lots of Quaggan brought me not further :P)

So its natural, that Colin could answer all the questions only, what their plans are for THE MOMENT when the game releases.
They still have kept the possibility, the door as like I’d say open, to be able to add at any given time when they think its the right time mounts into the game.

There was until today never a single official interview with Colin or anyone else of the Devs that would be responsible for adding a feature like Mounts, who said officially, that we will never see something like Ground Mounts.
They are only definetively against Flying Mounts, what I can understand in review of how the game world is designed, even if that doesn’t would rule open theoretically instanced Flying Mount Game Content similar to the Drakengard Games…which would be basically the only way how I could think of such content ever finding a way into GW2, perhaps as a unique kind of Fractal or so as there is Anet free to create, whatever they want, Fractals are like a sandbox….with lots of sand that you can form to whatever you want to build…

But Ground Mounts on the other hand are just basically possible still to get announced as a new feature at any given time principally when nobody would expect on something like that.
However, as much as I want Ground Mounts, you have to be realistical.
There are naturally things currently that are of higher priority first.
But the option, that Anet could put Mounts on their list of To do’s is still always there, as long we get no official statement in an blogpost or interview, where Ground Mounts get a reasoned permanent no….

And I guess this will never happen, simply due to the fact, that Naet/NCSoft would most likely want to keep this “trump card” as warm as possible until the right moment has come to add such kind of Content features via Expansions.

And the first expansion based on rumors from NCSoft business facts is first to come 2015 and I guess rather at summer or nearing the end of 2015 and not earlier.
But we’ll see …

Anet would never do it for several reasons. The first and foremost reason is that it would remove one of the main gold sinks, WP costs, from the game.

And Dusty Moon has a good point above as one of the several reasons.

The Queensdale train all on mounts…
I’ll just leave that here.

Anet is on the powerful lever to add whenever they want new money sinks >.>
So thats is absolutely no problem at all.

If WP’s should ever become less of a money sink (what the Mega Server System effectively will prevent soon, by doubling all our WP costs …)
ANet could for example raise the money sink by increase the TP Tax from 15% to like 16 or 17%

Or Anet could raise prises for various Crafting Materials, or Anet could add new Features that require of the player to spent lots of Gold to get what you want, stuff liek Housing, Mounts self could become also a Money sink if it must be, by having to feed your mounts for example every now and then sometimes…

So this reason is invalid.
if we all would argumentate so lousy, like Dusty, we could rename soon this game to Engineer Wars 2

… rolleyes

Orpheal.8263:

Anet is on the powerful lever to add whenever they want new money sinks >.>
So thats is absolutely no problem at all.

If WP’s should ever become less of a money sink (what the Mega Server System effectively will prevent soon, by doubling all our WP costs …)
ANet could for example raise the money sink by increase the TP Tax from 15% to like 16 or 17%

Or Anet could raise prises for various Crafting Materials, or Anet could add new Features that require of the player to spent lots of Gold to get what you want, stuff liek Housing, Mounts self could become also a Money sink if it must be, by having to feed your mounts for example every now and then sometimes…

So this reason is invalid.
if we all would argumentate so lousy, like Dusty, we could rename soon this game to Engineer Wars 2

… rolleyes

Not lousy at all – it is a nice build that works well in WvW. Don’t like it don’t use it but it is not lousy. If you never played it how do you know?

But, you are one of the mount mavens so anything that takes away from your ’ precious’ mounts is lousy.

Game doesn’t need ’em and the game will be terribad if they are put in.

We don’t need mounts in the game, we have all the waypoints, sometimes 15 in an area. You can port to the closest area and then run in. It doesn’t take much time at all. What would mounts give over that? Other than more stuff to have around. I don’t even have any Legendary’s or Ascended items on any of my toons since they are more about bragging rather than playing.

And don’t get me started about mounts in WvW. It is already a crapshoot with the performance, try a 200 vs 200 battle and every computer grinds to a halt. Add mounts on top of that you are asking for more trouble and more complaints. They should fix the performance above all, first. Add new areas to explore, maybe a new race and/or profession or two. Put in Guild Halls and GvG. Put in Polymock, it is there already. If they get ALL that done, then maybe they could waste some time with mounts. Before that no, not for a fluff item.

Realist.5812:

Stop making these stupid threads.

By the way, there is nothing cool about mounts.

How about you stop making stupid comments? Some of us would like mounts, if you don’t like it don’t ruin it for the ones that do.

GET ON YOUR TINFOIL HATS FOLKS! I’m gonna stab at this mounts bubble.

Realist.5812:

Stop making these stupid threads.

By the way, there is nothing cool about mounts.

uknortherner.2670:

Oh, for Grenth’s sake…

uknortherner.2670:

You have the broom. There’s your mount.

These three posts have the most thumbs in the shortest amount of time. And the first two are the first and second replies. Compared to the other posts this shows that more people are against the idea as well as the thread itself than for it.

The first 2 mounts (technically animation skins) were a broom and a drill. Like the first Molten Pickaxe, this was a test to see how popular a mount-like object would be and how well it would sell in GW2. Granted they intentionally made them small because they couldn’t predict the amount of buyer for them as well as the amount of strain these players would put on the game if most of them had them out at once. However, unlike the Molten Pickaxe the broom didn’t sell as well. There were not alot of people seen using the broom and and even less people using the drill while the molten pickaxe became a common occurrence. The numbers of players seen using them has dropped ever since.

This at least shows that the players who want mounts are really just a small minority using resources to design mounts would not be profitable.

Another thing I have noticed are the methods of counterargument amongst those for mounts. The biggest tactic being:

“moving the goal post” where one side dismisses evidence given by demanding greater evidence thereby invalidating someone’s point(s). This is just one of the examples:

There is literally no legitimate reason why we can’t have mounts.

I’m indifferent, but all these ‘reasons’ sum upto, ‘Every other game has mounts, and Guildwars2 doesn’t need them because everyone else has one’.

Not only is this counterproductive to coming to a conclusion but it also shows that this is a one-way argument. “Either you give us mounts or we get mounts” basically.

If anything is to be resolved BOTH SIDES have to compromise. However, it won’t be anywhere near a 50/50 split.

Seven Star Stalker.1740:

Talyn.3295:

Seven Star Stalker.1740:

Astralporing.1957:

Rovaeden.8546:

I don’t understand why so many people in the community seem to have zero imagination, vision or creativity.

Oh, i agree. Mounts are so cliche… can’t we ask for something new and creative instead?

Seven Star Stalker.1740:

None of you have provided a reasonable basis for them to not be on the game.

It’s not like people asking for mounts supply any reasonable reasons for their inclusion.

Except none of the reasons have been any more acceptable than those for them.

“I don’t like mounts” Yeah well, some people do. So that’s not a reason.

“Other games have mounts, play those” Other games have quests! And maps! And load screens! And PVP! And levels! Lets remove all those too! Or rather, why don’t people leave for WoW/Tera/Whatever the hell else for those features too!

“Mounts and anti-immersive, clunky, badly implemented, Lore defying” Really? Really now? Show me the proof for where in GW2 Mount use hasn’t been allowed. Maybe no one thought of it yet lore wise? We’ve already had unorthodox mounts on the form of ships in missions, golems, portals/elevators/lift systems and others. And as for anti-immersive, well, what about minis, many legendaries and skins, many NPC joke quotes, tonics and many other features like Candy-Cane weapons and the like? What makes any of those immersive? Find me the line in Lore that says that Minis are actually a in game lore feature, that are central to the story. I challenge you.

“Clutter and clipping” Yeah well, Norn and Charr can do that solely from existing so the last thing on your mind should be mounts when two races cause that issue already.

“We already have waypoints” right, so let’s remove speed boosting abilities and stuff that grants swiftness.

The only basis I’ve seen is, “There’s too many things ANet needs to do first”, which doesn’t really disqualify them, rather, it just sets back their prioritisation. In terms of reasoning for removing them, there is nothing stopping ANet from implementing them aside from, “We don’t want to” or “It’d require more resources than it’s worth”, the latter of which I can sort of understand I guess.

If you want to play that card. I got one better.

I have yet to read one good or compelling reason to add them. NOT a single one. The game was built around not needing them. Sorry.

My issue is that people say, “No we don’t want mounts, nobody likes them, they suck, they’re bad” for reasons equally silly as asking for them. Asking for them however gets away with it because there’s no harm in simply asking. If you’re going to say no, however, provide a reasonable basis as to why. Imagine what this game would be like if everything was decided on what forumers did and didn’t like? Good grief.

Except since you are the one that wants a change to Gw2. A change that makes some people actually sick to just think about…..

The Burden is on you to give reasons that overcome the objections of others.

I prefer the status quo. I do not need reasons to prefer that things remain as they are other than.." because I Like things as they are."

You are the one that wants a change. You need reasons more compelling than " because..I think mounts are cool.. and I want it."

ProphetSword.5427:

In this game, mounts would be nothing but trouble. If you are someone who wants mounts, answer these important questions:

1) How would mounts affect WvW? Have you given any thought to how it might change the landscape of how things work in that portion of the game?

Doesn’t matter, They want it. This is irrelevant to them.

2) If people are riding mounts through an area, how will that effect the scaling of dynamic events when the event registers more people are in the area?

Doesn’t matter, They want it. This is irrelevant to them.

3) How would you handle players on mounts being hit by enemies? Are they thrown from their mount? Dismounted? Can they fight from the mount?

Doesn’t matter, They want it. This is irrelevant to them.

4) How would you be affected if you were in the middle of a jumping puzzle and someone attempted to do it with a mount and was blocking your view?

Doesn’t matter, They want it. This is irrelevant to them.

5) What happens when you go underwater? Are there going to be underwater mounts too?

Doesn’t matter, They want it. This is irrelevant to them.

6) How do you deal with the added animations needed in heavy areas (like world bosses) when people have mounts? The resources for the mounts aren’t free.

Doesn’t matter, They want it. This is irrelevant to them.

7) How do you deal with the issue of people’s mounts blocking important NPCs (I’ve seen this issue in many other MMOs, and it’s a real pain).

Doesn’t matter, They want it. This is irrelevant to them.

8) Besides looking cool, what is the distinct advantage of having a mount over not having a mount? If you get no speed boost, why is it important?

Doesn’t matter, They want it. This is irrelevant to them. AND THEY LOOK COOL!!!!

9) The development time used to create decent mounts would likely take away from other features or additional content in GW2. How do you justify that mounts are more important than other things?

Doesn’t matter, They want it. This is irrelevant to them. PLUS THEY WANT THEM… AND THEY LOOK COOL… AND THEY WOULD LOOK COOL RIDING THEM, AND THEY WANT THEM

Answer these questions and let me know.

Basically the main reason boils down to " Because I want them. I think I would look cool riding a mount. it’s BLING… and BLING is COOL!!!!!"

Zacchary.6183:

GET ON YOUR TINFOIL HATS FOLKS! I’m gonna stab at this mounts bubble.

Realist.5812:

Stop making these stupid threads.

By the way, there is nothing cool about mounts.

uknortherner.2670:

Oh, for Grenth’s sake…

uknortherner.2670:

You have the broom. There’s your mount.

These three posts have the most thumbs in the shortest amount of time. And the first two are the first and second replies. Compared to the other posts this shows that more people are against the idea as well as the thread itself than for it.

---

The first 2 mounts (technically animation skins) were a broom and a drill. Like the first Molten Pickaxe, this was a test to see how popular a mount-like object would be and how well it would sell in GW2. Granted they intentionally made them small because they couldn’t predict the amount of buyer for them as well as the amount of strain these players would put on the game if most of them had them out at once. However, unlike the Molten Pickaxe the broom didn’t sell as well. There were not alot of people seen using the broom and and even less people using the drill while the molten pickaxe became a common occurrence. The numbers of players seen using them has dropped ever since.

This at least shows that the players who want mounts are really just a small minority using resources to design mounts would not be profitable.

---

Another thing I have noticed are the methods of counterargument amongst those for mounts. The biggest tactic being:

“moving the goal post” where one side dismisses evidence given by demanding greater evidence thereby invalidating someone’s point(s). This is just one of the examples:

There is literally no legitimate reason why we can’t have mounts.

I’m indifferent, but all these ‘reasons’ sum upto, ‘Every other game has mounts, and Guildwars2 doesn’t need them because everyone else has one’.

Not only is this counterproductive to coming to a conclusion but it also shows that this is a one-way argument. “Either you give us mounts or we get mounts” basically.

If anything is to be resolved BOTH SIDES have to compromise. However, it won’t be anywhere near a 50/50 split.

We don’t have to compromise. The Devs want what we want…. No mounts. Why compromise when the devs want what we want?

There really isn’t much good in all of us going on about this. It is obvious that people on each side of the debate don’t care for the other side. If you think Anet has not already considered mounts then I don’t know what to tell you. You all can keep beating up on each other over it and the end result won’t change. This isn’t a thread started by Anet saying, “Do you want mounts? Vote ‘yes’ or ‘no’ or convince us.” So you can either just say you want mounts or you don’t want mounts., it won’t really matter anyway. Everything in between is a waste of your time.

There really isn’t much good in all of us going on about this. It is obvious that people on each side of the debate don’t care for the other side. If you think Anet has not already considered mounts then I don’t know what to tell you. You all can keep beating up on each other over it and the end result won’t change. This isn’t a thread started by Anet saying, “Do you want mounts? Vote ‘yes’ or ‘no’ or convince us.” So you can either just say you want mounts or you don’t want mounts., it won’t really matter anyway. Everything in between is a waste of your time.

XApocalypse.8739:

Realist.5812:

Stop making these stupid threads.

By the way, there is nothing cool about mounts.

How about you stop making stupid comments? Some of us would like mounts, if you don’t like it don’t ruin it for the ones that do.

Opening new threads on existing topics is against forum rules, so he has a point there.

Aidan Savage.2078:

Nike.2631:

Oranisagu.3706:

why are people so fiercely against mounts? I mean, I think I haven’t seen a single reason in this thread except people screaming no louder and louder.

Then you skipped over my post. Scroll up. You’ll find it .

I’ve yet to see anyone post a gameplay reason for including mounts as well. Of course, most of the posts asking for mounts I barely skim because they’re just people screaming yes louder and louder like a child throwing a tantrum. It’s simply going to go back and forth and people asking for mounts adamantly refuse to realize the devs are (for all intents) never going to budge from their “we arent adding mounts” stance.

They can’t ‘refuse to budge’ on a stance they’v never taken.

If Anet has ever stated they will never add mounts, prove it with a quote, because I can guarantee you they haven’t, they only stated they will never add flying mounts and that they have no plans to add terrestrial mounts.

And any content is adding to gameplay, the question is whether it would improve on gameplay, and since you haven’t any idea how it would play, you have neither right nor ability to say whether it would or would not.

Dusty Moon.4382:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uXCh3pw0wmM

Here is a 2011 interview with Colin Johanson – HE SAYS NO MOUNTS!

Nice spin story, you’d make a fine lobbyist. That question asked whether there would be mounts on release, not whether there would be any ever. Whether there would be mounts ever was asked later, and I already stated ANets answer above. No flying mounts, ever, and no current plans for ground mounts. Spit and cuss and lie all you want and that’ll still be the truth.

Conncept.7638:

Aidan Savage.2078:

Nike.2631:

Oranisagu.3706:

why are people so fiercely against mounts? I mean, I think I haven’t seen a single reason in this thread except people screaming no louder and louder.

Then you skipped over my post. Scroll up. You’ll find it .

I’ve yet to see anyone post a gameplay reason for including mounts as well. Of course, most of the posts asking for mounts I barely skim because they’re just people screaming yes louder and louder like a child throwing a tantrum. It’s simply going to go back and forth and people asking for mounts adamantly refuse to realize the devs are (for all intents) never going to budge from their “we arent adding mounts” stance.

They can’t ‘refuse to budge’ on a stance they’v never taken.

If Anet has ever stated they will never add mounts, prove it with a quote, because I can guarantee you they haven’t, they only stated they will never add flying mounts and that they have no plans to add terrestrial mounts.

And any content is adding to gameplay, the question is whether it would improve on gameplay, and since you haven’t any idea how it would play, you have neither right nor ability to say whether it would or would not.

Dusty Moon.4382:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uXCh3pw0wmM

Here is a 2011 interview with Colin Johanson – HE SAYS NO MOUNTS!

Nice spin story, you’d make a fine lobbyist. That question asked whether there would be mounts on release, not whether there would be any ever. Whether there would be mounts ever was asked later, and I already stated ANets answer above. No flying mounts, ever, and no current plans for ground mounts. Spit and cuss and lie all you want and that’ll still be the truth.

“No current plans for ground mounts.” = " we reserve the right to keep our options open about ground Mounts… but,….do not hold your breath… if you are gonna bet an organ on whether there will be ground mounts this decade… bet on… Not likely."

Any other Interpretation is simply… wishful thinking.

i like the idea of flying mounts (with no m. speed bonus), so u can fight in the air, but the problem is that the garrisons on wvw lol, they can can make a “Strengh generator” instead a “door” so plp can be strenghed who are in garrison and if they kill the “strengh generator” they power go down for those foes. And they can put npc enemies in the clifts of mountains that are very agresive (more than 1200 range of agresiveness) so plp ll not travel too fast on wvw.

other fix can be make the flying mount slower than the normal speed, like 33% less, so people will die be rangers after can reash a generator. Or they can be slower if the high is highter, from 5% to 50% of slowness, they can call it “high air presion” or somthing like that.

and the FINAL fix that i got is the aoes: when u are flying make to them the posibility of atack the enemy in the air just like a “one target” skill, and the aoe spread around the target.

If u got ur opinon pls post it and meaby u can help me adding new “fixes”

EDIT: lol i forgot a important fix: IF the generator is alive the garrison lord ll be inmortal, and 4x generators on great garrison but with 50% less hp each.

Dusty Moon.4382:

runeblade.7514:

Dusty Moon.4382:

runeblade.7514:

Dusty Moon.4382:

runeblade.7514:

Nerelith.7360:

runeblade.7514:

And I get to decide what is ugly for me. Not you. Therefore, There is no reason for GW2 to not have mounts.

Your argument needs to be better than, “I disagree because it is ugly.”

Actually No, It doesn’t. See I am in the Majority, and More Importantly, I am also in agreement with the devs stated intentions.

Someone said " It hurts no one." I am showing how it hurts me.

Just because you are willing to put up with an ugly dolyack rear end in your face, doesn’t mean I have to.

You have valid objections to overcome before you can get people to agree with you. That you lable them " invalid" doesn’t make them invalid.

Just because you have differing taste about uglyness doesn’t make a dolyacks rear end beautiful.

As I said before , you want what the majority does not. You want what the devs have stated that have NO intent to implement " at this time".

YOU need better arguments than " maybe a dolyacks rear end can be beautiful… you don’t Know til you look, besides maybe I find them beautiful." and you need better arguments than " because…. I want it."

And I am saying that your “look hurts me” argument is ridiculous. The Dreamer hurts me. ANet should remove it because I don’t like looking at rainbow and unicorn flying across the screen.

Why would you be staring at animal’s rear end in the bank? I don’t know why, but I will be too busy staring at the bank UI.

You are wrong that you are the majority. I am the majority because I said so in this post and there are people that agree with mounts. Don’t think so? Then show me some proof that backs up your statement.

What valid objection?

Just because you find dolyak rear end ugly, doesn’t mean that Mounts should not be in the game.

You need better argument than “Dolyak rear end is ugly.” and you need better argument than “I don’t want it.”

I do – A.Net already said that is not going to happen (mounts). I feel they have better things they can do with their time, like Guild Halls and real GvG. More areas to explore, another race and maybe another profession are things players want more than something that strokes the ego of a few players.

ANet said they won’t do it for FLYING mounts. They have no plans for mounts.

Because then Flying mounts will have to overcome technical limits. Regular mounts don’t have technical limits.

Regular mounts do have technical limits. You have to model a player riding on them, etc. If they have not done that, that is like re-inventing the wheel. I think there are more important things A.Net can do for the game, like new exploration areas, Engine optimization (this is huge so the game doesn’t chug so much), etc. Mounts are a drain on the few resources they have.

Equally as armor/weapons, but they still exist in the gem shop.

You CAN’T EQUATE armor to mounts. The Armor shell is already in game, they just need different artwork on it. Mounts mean new physics, modeling etc. What don’t you understand about that.

Players have been crying for new content, more of the world open, etc . and all you can say is MOUNTS? Right……

What. Did someone reform the laws of physics when horses suddenly enter Earth?

Armor means new modeling too. What don’t you understand about that? Is every armor suppose to look like the Flamekissed/Flamewrath set?

Nerelith.7360:

Conncept.7638:

Aidan Savage.2078:

Nike.2631:

Oranisagu.3706:

why are people so fiercely against mounts? I mean, I think I haven’t seen a single reason in this thread except people screaming no louder and louder.

Then you skipped over my post. Scroll up. You’ll find it .

I’ve yet to see anyone post a gameplay reason for including mounts as well. Of course, most of the posts asking for mounts I barely skim because they’re just people screaming yes louder and louder like a child throwing a tantrum. It’s simply going to go back and forth and people asking for mounts adamantly refuse to realize the devs are (for all intents) never going to budge from their “we arent adding mounts” stance.

They can’t ‘refuse to budge’ on a stance they’v never taken.

If Anet has ever stated they will never add mounts, prove it with a quote, because I can guarantee you they haven’t, they only stated they will never add flying mounts and that they have no plans to add terrestrial mounts.

And any content is adding to gameplay, the question is whether it would improve on gameplay, and since you haven’t any idea how it would play, you have neither right nor ability to say whether it would or would not.

Dusty Moon.4382:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uXCh3pw0wmM

Here is a 2011 interview with Colin Johanson – HE SAYS NO MOUNTS!

Nice spin story, you’d make a fine lobbyist. That question asked whether there would be mounts on release, not whether there would be any ever. Whether there would be mounts ever was asked later, and I already stated ANets answer above. No flying mounts, ever, and no current plans for ground mounts. Spit and cuss and lie all you want and that’ll still be the truth.

“No current plans for ground mounts.” = " we reserve the right to keep our options open about ground Mounts… but,….do not hold your breath… if you are gonna bet an organ on whether there will be ground mounts this decade… bet on… Not likely."

Any other Interpretation is simply… wishful thinking.

I’m sorry I wasn’t aware you have insider information as to the ANet developers inner thoughts and opinions.

Not currently working on something, means they are not currently working on it.

And that was not only said years ago but before the game was even released, back when they also stated end-game stats would be easily obtainable and PvP/PvE progression were going to be separate.

I honestly don’t care, like I admitted earlier the game doesn’t need more travel options, but that doesn’t mean this couldn’t add a fun gameplay option to the game. What I care about is all the little sheep that only have an opinion because of herd poisoning and can’t take the time to do a two second google search before bleating out false information.

Sinbold.8723:

Anet would never do it for several reasons. The first and foremost reason is that it would remove one of the main gold sinks, WP costs, from the game.

And Dusty Moon has a good point above as one of the several reasons.

*You do know the reason why WP cost is there so that people won’t use them and actually explore.

I will still use WP regardless if there is mounts or not. I am not going to suddenly walk from Vigil Keep to CoF just because of mounts exist.

Is there a “need” for mounts? Maybe, maybe not. But is there a “need” for a broom or a witches hat? No. They are for FUN and for giving something perceived as “cool” to your characters. I am in support of mounts. I use them in other online games such as Tera and Rift and they are a lot of fun to have and to collect. There is no harm in adding another feature for players who want one.

Zacchary.6183:

GET ON YOUR TINFOIL HATS FOLKS! I’m gonna stab at this mounts bubble.

Realist.5812:

Stop making these stupid threads.

By the way, there is nothing cool about mounts.

uknortherner.2670:

Oh, for Grenth’s sake…

uknortherner.2670:

You have the broom. There’s your mount.

These three posts have the most thumbs in the shortest amount of time. And the first two are the first and second replies. Compared to the other posts this shows that more people are against the idea as well as the thread itself than for it.

---

The first 2 mounts (technically animation skins) were a broom and a drill. Like the first Molten Pickaxe, this was a test to see how popular a mount-like object would be and how well it would sell in GW2. Granted they intentionally made them small because they couldn’t predict the amount of buyer for them as well as the amount of strain these players would put on the game if most of them had them out at once. However, unlike the Molten Pickaxe the broom didn’t sell as well. There were not alot of people seen using the broom and and even less people using the drill while the molten pickaxe became a common occurrence. The numbers of players seen using them has dropped ever since.

This at least shows that the players who want mounts are really just a small minority using resources to design mounts would not be profitable.

---

Another thing I have noticed are the methods of counterargument amongst those for mounts. The biggest tactic being:

“moving the goal post” where one side dismisses evidence given by demanding greater evidence thereby invalidating someone’s point(s). This is just one of the examples:

There is literally no legitimate reason why we can’t have mounts.

I’m indifferent, but all these ‘reasons’ sum upto, ‘Every other game has mounts, and Guildwars2 doesn’t need them because everyone else has one’.

Not only is this counterproductive to coming to a conclusion but it also shows that this is a one-way argument. “Either you give us mounts or we get mounts” basically.

If anything is to be resolved BOTH SIDES have to compromise. However, it won’t be anywhere near a 50/50 split.

How am I invalidating posts anymore than everyone else is?

If someone says “I don’t like mounts”, is that not inherently invalidated by someone who says, “Well I do”. From a numerical perspective, perhaps not, but for a reasoning perspective, yes it does. I guess if you were a dev and you said, “I don’t like it” then maybe it’d be more valid, because you run the game and realistically you don’t need to explain your decisions but otherwise, “I don’t like it, No, f@!% mounts! Go play WoW if you want mounts” – how are any of these answers productive? Or useful? What do they offer to the table?

Now, if it’s a legitimate resources issue, which you explained, fine. I can see that you’ve shown your proof – legitimate proof – and actually gone about taking the time and effort to inform yourself of how Anet’s previous examination of in-game mounts went. Credit should be given where due. Another example of a fair basis for not actually bringing them in is design issues. Is that a major reason? Perhaps not. But with the size of the maps, unless you’re in LP, yeah, sure. I agree. Most classes already have them. That’s a basis to not add mounts – why? Because design wise, they would be useless.

But simply saying, “We don’t need mounts in GW2,” offers nothing to anyone. Why not? “It’s bad” why is it bad? “it’s ugly/u!unimmersive” Yeah well, that’s just, like, your opinion man.

If the goal post is wrong I will move it. Because design decisions should not be made on fickle rationale. Design decisions should foremost put resources, cost/reward, sales interest and those sorts of features into consideration. Because they can always make mounts that fit lore, change lore, make mounts that fit immersion, disregard immersion and more. And where will those fickle opinions on the visuals be when ANet has actually made what they’re designing appealing.

This game would loose so much if devs removed everything based on form over functionality, because form can always be adjusted.

Bump with other fix: They can make weapons for flying (like there is for swiming). This should fix all thx :P

how about posting your mount ideas in those other mount threads instead of making new ones.

Nerelith.7360:

Seven Star Stalker.1740:

Talyn.3295:

Seven Star Stalker.1740:

Astralporing.1957:

Rovaeden.8546:

I don’t understand why so many people in the community seem to have zero imagination, vision or creativity.

Oh, i agree. Mounts are so cliche… can’t we ask for something new and creative instead?

Seven Star Stalker.1740:

None of you have provided a reasonable basis for them to not be on the game.

It’s not like people asking for mounts supply any reasonable reasons for their inclusion.

Except none of the reasons have been any more acceptable than those for them.

“I don’t like mounts” Yeah well, some people do. So that’s not a reason.

“Other games have mounts, play those” Other games have quests! And maps! And load screens! And PVP! And levels! Lets remove all those too! Or rather, why don’t people leave for WoW/Tera/Whatever the hell else for those features too!

“Mounts and anti-immersive, clunky, badly implemented, Lore defying” Really? Really now? Show me the proof for where in GW2 Mount use hasn’t been allowed. Maybe no one thought of it yet lore wise? We’ve already had unorthodox mounts on the form of ships in missions, golems, portals/elevators/lift systems and others. And as for anti-immersive, well, what about minis, many legendaries and skins, many NPC joke quotes, tonics and many other features like Candy-Cane weapons and the like? What makes any of those immersive? Find me the line in Lore that says that Minis are actually a in game lore feature, that are central to the story. I challenge you.

“Clutter and clipping” Yeah well, Norn and Charr can do that solely from existing so the last thing on your mind should be mounts when two races cause that issue already.

“We already have waypoints” right, so let’s remove speed boosting abilities and stuff that grants swiftness.

The only basis I’ve seen is, “There’s too many things ANet needs to do first”, which doesn’t really disqualify them, rather, it just sets back their prioritisation. In terms of reasoning for removing them, there is nothing stopping ANet from implementing them aside from, “We don’t want to” or “It’d require more resources than it’s worth”, the latter of which I can sort of understand I guess.

If you want to play that card. I got one better.

I have yet to read one good or compelling reason to add them. NOT a single one. The game was built around not needing them. Sorry.

My issue is that people say, “No we don’t want mounts, nobody likes them, they suck, they’re bad” for reasons equally silly as asking for them. Asking for them however gets away with it because there’s no harm in simply asking. If you’re going to say no, however, provide a reasonable basis as to why. Imagine what this game would be like if everything was decided on what forumers did and didn’t like? Good grief.

Except since you are the one that wants a change to Gw2. A change that makes some people actually sick to just think about…..

The Burden is on you to give reasons that overcome the objections of others.

I prefer the status quo. I do not need reasons to prefer that things remain as they are other than.." because I Like things as they are."

You are the one that wants a change. You need reasons more compelling than " because..I think mounts are cool.. and I want it."

So your argument is simply the back-and-forth game? ’Kay then.

Definitely like the idea of mounts. It works well in other mmo’s. Just like in Tera, GW2 could sell them in the game store. Don’t want one? Don’t buy one. It is something fun for the players to collect and enjoy. It is not necessary. Costumes are not “necessary” but we have them to personalize our gaming. For some folks to make a sweeping statement like “most people don’t want them” or “no one wants them” is false. Why get upset over some players wanting a mount? I don’t get upset over players wanting quaggan backpacks or fluffy hats. I don’t get upset over folks with elite gear. I get what I like and vice versa. Everyone’s gaming experience and gaming needs/wants are different.

No. No. A million times no. Flying mounts, along with lfr and lfg ruined world of warcraft. I don’t want immersion in this game to be ruined by everyone flying around saying ‘OH LOOK I CAN GET ALL THE WAY UP HERE’ and kitten.

Imagine jumping puzzles. But it’s a definite no from me. It was mostly the entire concept but a little of actually reading through that post

Kalastraer.8264:

No. No. A million times no. Flying mounts, along with lfr and lfg ruined world of warcraft. I don’t want immersion in this game to be ruined by everyone flying around saying ‘OH LOOK I CAN GET ALL THE WAY UP HERE’ and kitten.

Yes, making it easier to group for dungeons and letting people who would ordinarily not raid see raid content are terrible, terrible things.

The chaos this would cause with vistas, jumping puzzles, WvW…

No thank you to mounts.

No ty to mounts.

If you’re going to make a game with flying mounts you need to have flying mounts in mind as soon as you start developing the world. The GW2 world was not made to support flying players, so it’s never going to happen.

No fixes necessary, it is not broken. It is not broken because it is not in the game. It is not in the game because a decision was made (rightly I think) not to have it.

Worst idea ever.

what the heck is going on this week with all the equestrian madness? Alien mindbend rays from outer space?

runeblade.7514:

Dusty Moon.4382:

You CAN’T EQUATE armor to mounts. The Armor shell is already in game, they just need different artwork on it. Mounts mean new physics, modeling etc. What don’t you understand about that.

Players have been crying for new content, more of the world open, etc . and all you can say is MOUNTS? Right……

What. Did someone reform the laws of physics when horses suddenly enter Earth?

Game engine physics, not real world ones. The horses would not enter Earth but a virtual world.

runeblade.7514:

Armor means new modeling too. What don’t you understand about that? Is every armor suppose to look like the Flamekissed/Flamewrath set?

No, new armor means new textures. Mounts mean not only new textures, but new wireframes, and many, many other things (new animations, collision boxes, new object interaction, changes to combat engine – a ton of stuff). It’s not just a matter of painting a horsie.

Seven Star Stalker.1740:

So your argument is simply the back-and-forth game? ’Kay then.

He doesn’t need to have an argument. He’s not the one arguing for a change after all.

I would love visual-based mounts, a bit like the broom on which you can ride around. You’re not faster than the buffs you receive or give yourself when walking, it’s just for fun. In WoW the mounts were very bulky but I think items like the broom are ideal.

I wouldn’t mind a purely cosmetic mounts, there is no need to boost player movement speed at all though (every profession already has an option for 25% boost, and there is a rune set that grants another 25%, yes you are sacrificing stuff for movement speed but then again life is all about choices).

Crise.9401:

I wouldn’t mind a purely cosmetic mounts, there is no need to boost player movement speed at all though (every profession already has an option for 25% boost, and there is a rune set that grants another 25%, yes you are sacrificing stuff for movement speed but then again life is all about choices).

Speed boosts are not cumulative. They simply prioritize the highest single boost. Basically if you can give yourself swiftness, you dont need any other speed boosts.

Astralporing.1957:

runeblade.7514:

Dusty Moon.4382:

You CAN’T EQUATE armor to mounts. The Armor shell is already in game, they just need different artwork on it. Mounts mean new physics, modeling etc. What don’t you understand about that.

Players have been crying for new content, more of the world open, etc . and all you can say is MOUNTS? Right……

What. Did someone reform the laws of physics when horses suddenly enter Earth?

Game engine physics, not real world ones. The horses would not enter Earth but a virtual world.

runeblade.7514:

Armor means new modeling too. What don’t you understand about that? Is every armor suppose to look like the Flamekissed/Flamewrath set?

No, new armor means new textures. Mounts mean not only new textures, but new wireframes, and many, many other things (new animations, collision boxes, new object interaction, changes to combat engine – a ton of stuff). It’s not just a matter of painting a horsie.

• Can’t think of new physics that has to be added in that isn’t in game already. So, did the laws of physic reform? No.
• I’ll take you seriously if you can prove that Phalanx armor is a carbon copy of the Orrian armor.