Guild Wars 2

Nerelith.7360:

So imagine our reaction when someone comes over with " hey, we need feature # 345,982 from World of Warcraft, what do you guys think?"

I think anyone that says " Most players want mounts" just does Not realize How much the very mention of the name World of Warcraft or any of it’s salient features…Like…. speed boost mounts, brings out the worst in many players In Gw2.

I’m completely flabbergasted that with thousands of years of human history and a huge body of fantasy literature the idea of having a mount to ride somehow gets identified as a “WoW thing.”

Nerelith.7360:

So imagine our reaction when someone comes over with " hey, we need feature # 345,982 from World of Warcraft, what do you guys think?"

LFG tool would like to say hi to all of you WoWphobics out there.

Gibson.4036:

If people would just let the occasional person say, “Mounts would be great in GW2!” and a few people chime in with “Yeah!” then the thread would sink back down once again.

So The only people that should post are the ones that think Mounts would be a good idea. While those of us that utterly hate the idea so much.( I admit I am one.)… might be thinking…" wait if NO one ever responds How they feel to these people…Anet might get the mistaken idea that the majority wants mounts.", should just…remain silent?

I don’t think that is how human nature works.

How about this idea. Instead of you trying to get those of us that hate mounts to stop posting rebuttals so the thread dies…. how about those of you that want mounts,, just…. stop posting?

PS You say Anet never said they did Not want Mounts. They simply said they considered it. And here we are How long since release? and still no mounts? What does that tell you?

You also say that Anet said…“If we do it, we want to do it right”… doesn’t the fact that this late in the game ( pardon the pun)… the fact that they have not done it yet, and have never mentioned that they were even considering it since release… tell you that they cannot do it right…? Jus’ sayin.

Nerelith.7360:

How about this idea. Instead of you trying to get those of us that hate mounts to stop posting rebuttals so the thread dies…. how about those of you that want mounts,, just…. stop posting?

That defeats the purpose of a forum. Who knows. Maybe sometime in the future, a Dev will go through this thread and actually read and understand what was said enough to either dismiss or approve the notion of having mounts and we will finally have a clear yes or no on the subject.

I’m laughing while posting this.

How about you haters back off from this SUGGESTION thread?

hell yeah mount please!

Skan.5301:

Nerelith.7360:

How about this idea. Instead of you trying to get those of us that hate mounts to stop posting rebuttals so the thread dies…. how about those of you that want mounts,, just…. stop posting?

That defeats the purpose of a forum. Who knows. Maybe sometime in the future, a Dev will go through this thread and actually read and understand what was said enough to either dismiss or approve the notion of having mounts and we will finally have a clear yes or no on the subject.

I’m laughing while posting this.

You clearly missed the Post I was responding to. The person suggested that those of us disliking Mounts should simply allow someone to say " hey mounts would be cool." and NOT respond, so that the thread can sink back to pages 3 o r whatever.

So If you actually read what i posted you see the person before me was trying to squelchj discussion and free Interchange of opposing ideas. I answered with sarcasm… and basically said ’ well if your idea that we Not respond is a good one, from our perspective..the idea " you stop posting" is equally as good." The problem with print is ..sometimes sarcasm is lost.

Valento.9852:

How about you haters back off from this SUGGESTION thread?

How about not? And bringing discussions to the metaplane is really an old trick by now. And anyway, scheduling is wrong, today is “wherez dualing?” day. Mounts are more mid-weekish, followed by trinity friday.

thaooo.5320:

Gibson.4036:

thaooo.5320:

They add mounts and over 90% of the player base never plays this game again.

Like mounts have killed other mmorpgs by driving off all but 10% of the population! Amirite?

Those games launched with mounts, not introduced them.

Those games launched with mounts, and people who are into that kind of unpleasant garbage went there and stayed there (until they realised the core of GW2 is better than that game and came here and made these threads).

Those games launched with mounts, and people like me didn’t go near them simply because it had pointless mounts in the game serving no purpose.

I’m not against mounts when the game is designed around mounts being a big integral part for whatever reason, and it makes sense. Like a medieval combat game where mounted combat exists inside a trinity of melee/ranged/mounted combat and each has its strengths and weaknesses in different situations. It makes sense from a lore standpoint, and it doesn’t break immersion, and it doesn’t reek of weirdo kiddies.

But I am strongly against:
- “Becuz addin it wud b kewl”
- “Becuz I alwaiiz wanted 2 own a pony but my parents sed no”
- 0 practicality within the game
- Poorly animated
- Poor design
- Poor mechanics
- Lore destroying
- Immersion breaking
- STUPID MODELS
- Insert other reasons I’ve written 200 times before.

“Those games launched with mounts, and people like me didn’t go near them simply because it had pointless mounts in the game serving no purpose.”
Define pointless? It’s a game so it’s completely pointless, all just for fun just like mounts are mainly for fun and to travel faster in the world in a realistic way that still let you see things of the world.

So looking at it from that way a skin for armor or weapons are far more pointless.

Besides if you did not want mounts you should also not have started playing GW2 as Colin only stated they did not want flying mounts but ground-mounts was an option, likely combat-mounts. It would not be in at release.

And of course there are all the mounts in the game, have a look in Black Citadel, there are some nice cars parked. There are even flying mounts in the game. We can’t use them yes but they are in the game.

So if you wanted a game they would never get mounts and that was the thing you selected on you might have selected the wrong game.

To address you list why you are against:
“Becuz addin it wud b kewl”: So you are against the whole game?
“Becuz I alwaiiz wanted 2 own a pony but my parents sed no”: So you play this game because you wanted to life in a fantasy world?
0 practicality within the game: While not true, so you want them to remove mini’s, skins, most armors (you would only need 1 set really), well what would be lest really?
Poorly animated: We will see, you don’t trust Anet to animate then good? Possible.
Poor design: You don’t like the way the game is designed? Likely that gives an idea for how mounts would be designed. To bad you don’t like the way the world is designed.
Poor mechanics: Not sure what mechanics, when using combat mounts? So you also dislike the mechanics in GW2?
Lore destroying: Waypoints are lore-destroying just as having no mounts. Mounts make total sense and have been in the lore for a long time.
Immersion breaking: A loading-screen when you enter or leave a map, a button you click on to teleport to somewhere else and once again the loading screen, invisible walls.. all immersion breaking stuff but mounts??
STUPID MODELS: So you dislike the models in this game as one again they can give an idea of the mount models.

Just say you don’t like them but don’t try to make up excuses because they make no sense at all. Even if you say them another 200 times.

Castrin.8972:

Devata.6589:

nibblesalil.3561:

the majority rules no mounts i think this should end there , the devs dont want them the majority doesnt want them there for the answer is no

you can take it or leave it not gona make a diffrence

the answer is nope , no and long answer noooooooooooooooooo

Pretty sure the majority rules mounts.

No, we don’t.

Peace.

Yes we do.

Nothing but love!

Im Mudbone.1437:

thaooo.5320:

Gibson.4036:

thaooo.5320:

They add mounts and over 90% of the player base never plays this game again.

Like mounts have killed other mmorpgs by driving off all but 10% of the population! Amirite?

Those games launched with mounts, not introduced them.

Those games launched with mounts, and people who are into that kind of unpleasant garbage went there and stayed there (until they realised the core of GW2 is better than that game and came here and made these threads).

Those games launched with mounts, and people like me didn’t go near them simply because it had pointless mounts in the game serving no purpose.

I’m not against mounts when the game is designed around mounts being a big integral part for whatever reason, and it makes sense. Like a medieval combat game where mounted combat exists inside a trinity of melee/ranged/mounted combat and each has its strengths and weaknesses in different situations. It makes sense from a lore standpoint, and it doesn’t break immersion, and it doesn’t reek of weirdo kiddies.

But I am strongly against:
- “Becuz addin it wud b kewl”
- “Becuz I alwaiiz wanted 2 own a pony but my parents sed no”
- 0 practicality within the game
- Poorly animated
- Poor design
- Poor mechanics
- Lore destroying
- Immersion breaking
- STUPID MODELS
- Insert other reasons I’ve written 200 times before.

^^^^This sums it up very nicely. +1

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/Suggestion-Mounts/page/13#post3992513

Nerelith.7360:

Gibson.4036:

If people would just let the occasional person say, “Mounts would be great in GW2!” and a few people chime in with “Yeah!” then the thread would sink back down once again.

So The only people that should post are the ones that think Mounts would be a good idea. While those of us that utterly hate the idea so much.( I admit I am one.)… might be thinking…" wait if NO one ever responds How they feel to these people…Anet might get the mistaken idea that the majority wants mounts.", should just…remain silent?

I don’t think that is how human nature works.

I’m not saying no-one should post the anti-mount argument. They shouldn’t, however, complain about the thread continuing to grow if they do.

It’s hypocritical to complain that people keep talking about it while simultaneously continuing the conversation.

How about this idea. Instead of you trying to get those of us that hate mounts to stop posting rebuttals so the thread dies…. how about those of you that want mounts,, just…. stop posting?

We’re not the ones posting dead-horse beating gifs and rolling our eyes in disgust that the topic hasn’t gone away.

PS You say Anet never said they did Not want Mounts. They simply said they considered it. And here we are How long since release? and still no mounts? What does that tell you?

It tells me that they have not yet decided that they would receive enough reward for the expense of developing them. That can certainly change.

How long did it take them to finally get LFG in the game? People could have posted “hey, they haven’t implemented LFG, yet, so clearly they’ve decided not to”.

Or how about account bound dyes? They specifically changed them not to be account bound. Then a year and half later made them account bound again. What about “look, they used to be account bound and ArenaNet decided to change that, why do you think they’ll change them back?”

You also say that Anet said…“If we do it, we want to do it right”… doesn’t the fact that this late in the game ( pardon the pun)… the fact that they have not done it yet, and have never mentioned that they were even considering it since release… tell you that they cannot do it right…? Jus’ sayin.

Nope, just that it hasn’t become a priority, yet. If they perceive a desire for them that warrants the development time, I expect they will get right to work on it.

Logically speaking, if “they haven’t done it yet” is equal to “they are never going to”, then the game will remain exactly as it is right now. You do expect that they plan to add something new to the game between now and when they close the servers, rigth? Jus’ sayin. ;-)

Gibson.4036:

Every time, however, someone says they want mounts, people who rage against the idea post their same old tired reasons why it is a terrible idea that would destroy the game and anyone who asks for mounts should be ashamed at their stupidity, which calls for those of us who would like them and don’t agree with the arguments against to defend the person who pulled it back to page one.

So disagreement based on personal feelings is only from the anti-mount group??

Sorry but the pro-mount side is just as empty of real reasons as to why they want it other than they can jump over peoples’ heads in town. I.e. “it’s kewl!”

The issue is that mounts add nothing, NOTHING, to the game. Every character class has a speed skill/spell/buff that is +25% to +33% of move rate. Those that really want to move through maps quickly DO NOT NEED MOUNTS.

Since we have now dispensed with the movement argument that leaves the aesthetic side. I will grant you that mounts can be done very nicely but they are fluff. I think all would agree that I want Anet working on ANYTHING other than fluff. Content is (or should be) #1 priority, then bug fixes, honing the megaserver (give up on it going away), and the next living story line are the rest in that order (personally).

So with all the above I think it’s time to move on.

Gibson.4036:

If people would just let the occasional person say, “Mounts would be great in GW2!” and a few people chime in with “Yeah!” then the thread would sink back down once again.

Let one side say all and the rest just let it go … you do know what a discussion forum is for right?

Peace.

Nerelith.7360:

Skan.5301:

Nerelith.7360:

How about this idea. Instead of you trying to get those of us that hate mounts to stop posting rebuttals so the thread dies…. how about those of you that want mounts,, just…. stop posting?

That defeats the purpose of a forum. Who knows. Maybe sometime in the future, a Dev will go through this thread and actually read and understand what was said enough to either dismiss or approve the notion of having mounts and we will finally have a clear yes or no on the subject.

I’m laughing while posting this.

You clearly missed the Post I was responding to. The person suggested that those of us disliking Mounts should simply allow someone to say " hey mounts would be cool." and NOT respond, so that the thread can sink back to pages 3 o r whatever.

So If you actually read what i posted you see the person before me was trying to squelchj discussion and free Interchange of opposing ideas. I answered with sarcasm… and basically said ’ well if your idea that we Not respond is a good one, from our perspective..the idea " you stop posting" is equally as good." The problem with print is ..sometimes sarcasm is lost.

I assure you that I read what Gibson said before you. And I also understood that your reply was just his parroted in the opposite.

As you will notice if you read my post again, I didn’t say “The ones who want mounts dropping off from the forums defeats the purpose.” I admit it was my fault for not quoting both of you. I was simply saying that either side just dropping off isn’t a discussion, which defeats a forum’s purpose.

Nerelith.7360:

You clearly missed the Post I was responding to. The person suggested that those of us disliking Mounts complaining that the mount thread hasn’t died off should simply allow someone to say " hey mounts would be cool." and NOT respond, so that the thread can sink back to pages 3 o r whatever.

So If you actually read what i posted you see the person before me was trying to squelchj discussion and free Interchange of opposing ideas point out the hypocrisy of complaining about a discussion continuing while still contributing to it. I answered with sarcasm… and basically said ’ well if your idea that we Not respond is a good one, from our perspective..the idea " you stop posting" is equally as good." The problem with print is ..sometimes sarcasm is lost.
[/quote]

Fixed that for you.

Nerelith.7360:

Gibson.4036:

Nerelith.7360:

Those that want Mounts should just play another game. OMG who necroed this thread? I thought it was dead Long ago.

Should we all wander over to your sub/multi class thread and tell you that if you want multi-classing you should just play a game that already has it?

In a way, it was the forum moderators who necroed this thread, because they consolidated a new mount thread into here to keep things tidy.

And there will continue to be people wanting mounts because they are intrinsic to human history and fantasy literature. ArenaNet has not definitively said there will be no mounts, and there are occasional mounts sprinkled throughout Tyria in both GW1 and GW2.

Imagine a fantasy game that had no swords. Every other type of weapon, but no swords. Except there are a few NPCs in game that have dialogue that talks about swords. And some monsters that have swords instead of hands. And undead NPCs who wield swords. But no swords for PCs. And all the developers have said on the subject is “we don’t have plans to add swords at this time”.

Do you think the “Can we have swords” threads would ever end?

The difference is. I Listened to what the people that argued against Multi-classing had to say, and admitted they had a point, something I fail to see even ONE " we want mounts" proponent do. And when I was convinced that it was a bad idea….I stopped Pushing for it.

Oow I do listen. The problem is that only reason against mounts seems to be “because I don’t want” and when digging deeper the real reason in many cases is “because WoW”.

But all the so-called arguments are nothing but bad excuses. It’s not necessary.. The whole game is not.

It breaks the lore.. untrue, way-points brake the lore, mounts fit the lore.

They make the world smaller, yes but not as much as way-points do.

I haven’t seen one real valid argument against it.. well I do accept the argument “i don’t like them” and then I agree to disagree but all the other stuff people keep coming up with are just bad excuses.

Well maybe clutter, then again, you can easily get rid of that by auto dismounting in city’s.

Sorry bu no I can’t say they are correct there.

Maybe you should consider you also fail to see some stuff if it comes to mounts?

PS: Expect mounts in EQ:Next.

runeblade.7514:

yolo swaggins.2570:

runeblade.7514:

yolo swaggins.2570:

Mounts do not work in this game because of waypoints.

Brooms/Dredge tunneling device do not work?

I wouldn’t consider those as mounts. They are purely cosmetic and do not provide any boost like mounts normally do. You could call them animation overrides or something.

So, if ANet put in mounts, then they can’t make it work the same way as those?

Well, no, not really. They’d have to at the very least change collision boxes (or you’d get only very tiny, tiny mounts). The both current “mounts” do not affect character movement in any way.

Also, as it has already been acknowledged, most of the people that want mounts are not interested in merely visual ones. They want them to bestow advantages.

Gibson.4036:

Nerelith.7360:

Those that want Mounts should just play another game. OMG who necroed this thread? I thought it was dead Long ago.

Should we all wander over to your sub/multi class thread and tell you that if you want multi-classing you should just play a game that already has it?

In a way, it was the forum moderators who necroed this thread, because they consolidated a new mount thread into here to keep things tidy.

And there will continue to be people wanting mounts because they are intrinsic to human history and fantasy literature. ArenaNet has not definitively said there will be no mounts, and there are occasional mounts sprinkled throughout Tyria in both GW1 and GW2.

Imagine a fantasy game that had no swords. Every other type of weapon, but no swords. Except there are a few NPCs in game that have dialogue that talks about swords. And some monsters that have swords instead of hands. And undead NPCs who wield swords. But no swords for PCs. And all the developers have said on the subject is “we don’t have plans to add swords at this time”.

Do you think the “Can we have swords” threads would ever end?

We don’t need swords. We have other weapons. Other weapons make swords useless.

Castrin.8972:

Gibson.4036:

Every time, however, someone says they want mounts, people who rage against the idea post their same old tired reasons why it is a terrible idea that would destroy the game and anyone who asks for mounts should be ashamed at their stupidity, which calls for those of us who would like them and don’t agree with the arguments against to defend the person who pulled it back to page one.

So disagreement based on personal feelings is only from the anti-mount group??

Sorry but the pro-mount side is just as empty of real reasons as to why they want it other than they can jump over peoples’ heads in town. I.e. “it’s kewl!”

The issue is that mounts add nothing, NOTHING, to the game. Every character class has a speed skill/spell/buff that is +25% to +33% of move rate. Those that really want to move through maps quickly DO NOT NEED MOUNTS.

Since we have now dispensed with the movement argument that leaves the aesthetic side. I will grant you that mounts can be done very nicely but they are fluff. I think all would agree that I want Anet working on ANYTHING other than fluff. Content is (or should be) #1 priority, then bug fixes, honing the megaserver (give up on it going away), and the next living story line are the rest in that order (personally).

So with all the above I think it’s time to move on.

Gibson.4036:

If people would just let the occasional person say, “Mounts would be great in GW2!” and a few people chime in with “Yeah!” then the thread would sink back down once again.

Let one side say all and the rest just let it go … you do know what a discussion forum is for right?

Peace.

I am fine with Mounts adding NOTHING to the game. I just want a horse to ride around in.

Players do not need ANYTHING from the gemshop. Should ANet just remove everything from the gemshop and sell +200 permanent power boost, Ascended/Legendary weapons, a level 200 cap increase because of that logic?

Nerelith.7360:

Skan.5301:

thaooo.5320:

They add mounts and over 90% of the player base never plays this game again.

On the contrary, if ANet released some pretty cool mounts that fit with lore, it wouldn’t be that bad. Mounts are simply fluff, just like that sword that leaves footprints or that staff that creates rainbows. If you don’t want to use them, then the screen is there, but nothing’s making you click the icon to summon the mount.

From a personal view, I’d prefer mounts to get through those areas that I just don’t feel like killing for whatever reason I may have at the time and zoom through them on my way to the destination. Or maybe I just need to take a ride through the zone, from one end to the other, not getting stomped on by every enemy I see.

Anyways, aside from the fact that adding mounts would make GW2 more like another MMO that so many here seem to be phobic to, it’s not really a bad idea. It’s just personal preference in the end if you want to use it or not, those who want to can, and those who don’t, can choose not to.

The issue is… this game launched without mounts. Many of the players that play it, also understood that there would be zero mounts. For many it was one of the reasons they came to gw2. For those of us, that do not want mounts, it pretty much amounts to eliminating one of the reasons we enjoy Gw2.

Secondly, there is a VERY anti " wow clone" contingent here at Gw2. Fact is, that since release…. since open beta… many of us have been dealing with " we want this to be a wow clone." players.

Yes, there are times when an idea from World of warcraft pops up it’s ugly head that you will get Instant hate. Mostly because many of us came from World of Warcraft, and want to support a game that doesn’t want to be a WoW clone.

So imagine our reaction when someone comes over with " hey, we need feature # 345,982 from World of Warcraft, what do you guys think?"

I think anyone that says " Most players want mounts" just does Not realize How much the very mention of the name World of Warcraft or any of it’s salient features…Like…. speed boost mounts, brings out the worst in many players In Gw2.

I have even heard it refered to on map chat as.." That game that shall not be named."

Colin said there would not be flying mounts and not be ground-mounts at release. With that statement you should have known you could expect mounts in the future. So I can just as well say many people came expecting mounts to be implemented later. Else Colin could just have said, no mounts ever. In fact he talked about the ability of combat mounts.

Nice to see that also for you the real reason is “No because WoW”. People don’t want a WoW-clone people want a good game and like it or not, WoW is not so popular for nothing so if they ask for thinks they like they might very well also be in WoW, but also in other mmo’s. One of the big problems with GW2 is that they want to be different just for the sake of being different. That is not anymore just being innovative that is being stubborn.

“I think anyone that says " Most players want mounts" just does Not realize How much the very mention of the name World of Warcraft or any of it’s salient features…Like…. speed boost mounts, brings out the worst in many players In Gw2."
Well not with most but indeed there is a core of WoW haters here who seem to just be hating WoW to hate it. Like.. oow it’s popular so I hate it. Not a valid reason for me nor something to take into account.

And you seemed to be interested in EQ:Next. That also has a lot of things you also see in WoW.. btw just like GW2 does. And if you really can’t stand WoW think of it as being there even before WoW. WoW was not the first with mounts.

Astralporing.1957:

runeblade.7514:

yolo swaggins.2570:

runeblade.7514:

yolo swaggins.2570:

Mounts do not work in this game because of waypoints.

Brooms/Dredge tunneling device do not work?

I wouldn’t consider those as mounts. They are purely cosmetic and do not provide any boost like mounts normally do. You could call them animation overrides or something.

So, if ANet put in mounts, then they can’t make it work the same way as those?

Well, no, not really. They’d have to at the very least change collision boxes (or you’d get only very tiny, tiny mounts). The both current “mounts” do not affect character movement in any way.

Also, as it has already been acknowledged, most of the people that want mounts are not interested in merely visual ones. They want them to bestow advantages.

I don’t see why collision box should be a problem. There is no collision. It can just stay the same while the mounts stay bigger. Asura’s collision box is bigger than their size.

Wrong. The people that want mounts are people that just want mounts.

The anti-mount people are the one crying about advantages.

Castrin.8972:

So disagreement based on personal feelings is only from the anti-mount group??

No. I’ve said repeatedly that this argument really boils down to “I like mounts” versus “I don’t like mounts”. It’s pretty much all personal feelings. Though some people seem to be bent on discounting others personal feelings as somehow inferior and inflating their own personal feelings to some kind of objective reasoning.

Sorry but the pro-mount side is just as empty of real reasons as to why they want it other than they can jump over peoples’ heads in town. I.e. “it’s kewl!”

And the anti-mount side is largely empty of real reasons besides “I don’t want devs spending time on it and I don’t like mounts!”

The issue is that mounts add nothing, NOTHING, to the game. Every character class has a speed skill/spell/buff that is +25% to +33% of move rate. Those that really want to move through maps quickly DO NOT NEED MOUNTS.

Anti-mount people keep telling the pro-mount people there’s no need for mounts. For the most part, I don’t see the pro-mount people saying they need them. Just that they want them.

Since we have now dispensed with the movement argument

Except you haven’t. I dont’ see any real reason why out-of-combat movement buffs should require giving up traits or food buffs that would give in-combat bonuses. Why should players have to trait, consume, and equip just to get around the world faster rather than traiting, consuming, and equipping for adventure and relying on their mount to get them between adventures quickly? I’d love to have a 60% speed buff, non-combat, auto-unequip indoors and in cities mount.

that leaves the aesthetic side. I will grant you that mounts can be done very nicely but they are fluff. I think all would agree that I want Anet working on ANYTHING other than fluff.

Looking around the forums, I don’t think you’re right. People want player housing. They want medium armor that doesn’t look like a trenchcoat or buttcape. They want clipping issues resolved with Charr. There’s even a page-one thread asking that cat transformation be made compatible with the balloon. So clearly people still want ArenaNet working on cosmetic, fluff stuff along with other areas of development.

So with all the above I think it’s time to move on.

Gibson.4036:

If people would just let the occasional person say, “Mounts would be great in GW2!” and a few people chime in with “Yeah!” then the thread would sink back down once again.

Let one side say all and the rest just let it go … you do know what a discussion forum is for right?

Sigh. Either the context for this post got seriously lost, or I need to be more careful when writing.

I was talking about people who want the discussion to go away, not those who are against mounts (although there is plenty of overlap there).

People who are willing to respectfully argue for or against mounts, should. People who who want to complain about the mount conversation continuing should refrain from posting.

My apologies for my lack of clarity.

runeblade.7514:

We don’t need swords. We have other weapons. Other weapons make swords useless.

Not to mention that swords have been poorly animated and rendered in other games. They add to screen clutter (one more weapon and we already have so many!). And sword-wielders in other games have been OP.

Oh, and most importantly, WoW has swords.

Gibson.4036:

runeblade.7514:

We don’t need swords. We have other weapons. Other weapons make swords useless.

Not to mention that swords have been poorly animated and rendered in other games. They add to screen clutter (one more weapon and we already have so many!). And sword-wielders in other games have been OP.

Oh, and most importantly, WoW has swords.

/\

runeblade.7514:

I am fine with Mounts adding NOTHING to the game. I just want a horse to ride around in.

Players do not need ANYTHING from the gemshop. Should ANet just remove everything from the gemshop and sell +200 permanent power boost, Ascended/Legendary weapons, a level 200 cap increase because of that logic?

Your argument is a red herring. Players do need the gem shop because boosters and kits add to game play. In your previous statement you agree that mounts add nothing to the game unlike those boosters and other items.

Your attempt to back door value for mounts was poor.

If Anet were to do mounts just like the broom or the dredge mining bore. Make them a tonic which allows use but locks out actions like jumping or use in combat (auto negation) and no effect on speed. Kept it to animals in game that have already shown to be beasts of burden (i.e. no horses, maybe a friendly/tamed centaur?), then I might say “ok.”

Would you?

Peace.

Castrin.8972:

Make them a tonic which allows use but locks out actions like jumping or use in combat (auto negation) and no effect on speed.

Why no jumping? If they were coded for automatic dismount upon entering a jumping puzzle, there wouldn’t be a problem with people griefing JPs with them. This should be an easy thing to implement, since the game already recognizes when you’ve entered a jumping puzzle (JP discoverer daily).

I imagine them as only being used out of combat. Though when Eric talked about them, he talked about implementing mounted combat.

Why no speed buff? My ideal would be a 60% speed buff. The biggest argument I can anticipate is about skipping content with it, but it skips less content than waypointing, and you can blow right past most open world comment with the swiftness buff anyway.

I wonder how hard it would be to restrict them to roads in game. I could see that as appropriate. That way you wouldn’t have mounts sliding down mountains everywhere, and the speed-buff would be offset by having to take the path of the road rather than cutting across country.

Kept it to animals in game that have already shown to be beasts of burden (i.e. no horses, maybe a friendly/tamed centaur?), then I might say “ok.”

Dolyaks, devourers, and golems. I also ran across an escort quest just recently with an NPC using a small treant as a pack animal. That would make an interesting mount.

There are NPCs who have dialogue referring to horses, even though there are none modeled in the world. The lore argument against horses has enough holes in it that I can’t see a reason to adhere to it.

Castrin.8972:

runeblade.7514:

I am fine with Mounts adding NOTHING to the game. I just want a horse to ride around in.

Players do not need ANYTHING from the gemshop. Should ANet just remove everything from the gemshop and sell +200 permanent power boost, Ascended/Legendary weapons, a level 200 cap increase because of that logic?

Your argument is a red herring. Players do need the gem shop because boosters and kits add to game play. In your previous statement you agree that mounts add nothing to the game unlike those boosters and other items.

Your attempt to back door value for mounts was poor.

If Anet were to do mounts just like the broom or the dredge mining bore. Make them a tonic which allows use but locks out actions like jumping or use in combat (auto negation) and no effect on speed. Kept it to animals in game that have already shown to be beasts of burden (i.e. no horses, maybe a friendly/tamed centaur?), then I might say “ok.”

Would you?

Peace.

The stuff you buy in the cash-shop gives you a real use. So you are saying GW2 is P2W?

and no I would prefer a mount that gives you a perma speed-boost so it can be used to better explore the world. And then in fact it has a use.. something that is important for you apparently.

Besides that I want them to be in the world, having to play to get them. Not like the broom, a cash-shop item / gold-grind item.

Dismounting in JP’s or in city’s is fine by me.

To justify the cost of developing them, but minimize grumpiness on the part of the playerbase over the cash shop, there would likely have to be a basic mount (or three) in game, and some fancier ones available in the store.

Gibson.4036:

Castrin.8972:

So disagreement based on personal feelings is only from the anti-mount group??

No. I’ve said repeatedly that this argument really boils down to “I like mounts” versus “I don’t like mounts”. It’s pretty much all personal feelings. Though some people seem to be bent on discounting others personal feelings as somehow inferior and inflating their own personal feelings to some kind of objective reasoning.

Sorry but the pro-mount side is just as empty of real reasons as to why they want it other than they can jump over peoples’ heads in town. I.e. “it’s kewl!”

And the anti-mount side is largely empty of real reasons besides “I don’t want devs spending time on it and I don’t like mounts!”

The issue is that mounts add nothing, NOTHING, to the game. Every character class has a speed skill/spell/buff that is +25% to +33% of move rate. Those that really want to move through maps quickly DO NOT NEED MOUNTS.

Anti-mount people keep telling the pro-mount people there’s no need for mounts. For the most part, I don’t see the pro-mount people saying they need them. Just that they want them.

Really!? Might want to read your own post below.

Gibson.4036:

Since we have now dispensed with the movement argument

Except you haven’t. I dont’ see any real reason why out-of-combat movement buffs should require giving up traits or food buffs that would give in-combat bonuses. Why should players have to trait, consume, and equip just to get around the world faster rather than traiting, consuming, and equipping for adventure and relying on their mount to get them between adventures quickly? I’d love to have a 60% speed buff, non-combat, auto-unequip indoors and in cities mount.

I’m glad that you agreed with my assessment. The pro-mount side want a game breaking, content by passing addition to the game. Something that will let them go across maps, very fast, free of the waypoint system that is part of the GW world setting and all those pesky restrictions (and silly nominal cost). Not to mentionn speed up exploration to irrelavance.

You are in the wrong game when you want something that will by pass those pesky food/trait/skill/spell/etc restrictions to how you want to do things. Heaven forbid that you try and deal with the mechanics of the game. No you want the “magic wand.”

In another response I noted that I’d be for mounts if they were just like the broom or dredge bore. See I’m not against mounts, sorry to suprise you. I’m agaist YOU, the player(s) that have that “we don’t want to deal with this game the way it was made” mentality.

Gibson.4036:

that leaves the aesthetic side. I will grant you that mounts can be done very nicely but they are fluff. I think all would agree that I want Anet working on ANYTHING other than fluff.

Looking around the forums, I don’t think you’re right. People want player housing. They want medium armor that doesn’t look like a trenchcoat or buttcape. They want clipping issues resolved with Charr. There’s even a page-one thread asking that cat transformation be made compatible with the balloon. So clearly people still want ArenaNet working on cosmetic, fluff stuff along with other areas of development.

I think on the whole people want Anet to focus on content. More so the world content but I’ll grant you that people want all sorts of things. There is room for all of it just not things that will break the world setting and game mechanics.

Gibson.4036:

My apologies for my lack of clarity.

Nope you were quite clear, more so than I think you were aware of.

Peace.

Gibson.4036:

Castrin.8972:

Make them a tonic which allows use but locks out actions like jumping or use in combat (auto negation) and no effect on speed.

Why no jumping? If they were coded for automatic dismount upon entering a jumping puzzle, there wouldn’t be a problem with people griefing JPs with them. This should be an easy thing to implement, since the game already recognizes when you’ve entered a jumping puzzle (JP discoverer daily).

Even better! Have it auto dispell on any attempt to jump just like how pets pop from storage on a “combat” action/result.

Peace.

Devata.6589:

The stuff you buy in the cash-shop gives you a real use. So you are saying GW2 is P2W?

Your joking right? Hope so.

Devata.6589:

and no I would prefer a mount that gives you a perma speed-boost so it can be used to better explore the world. And then in fact it has a use.. something that is important for you apparently.

The fact that you want a shortcut to exploring implies to me your in the wrong game.

I have specifically said I don’t want them to have an in game effect …. assuming they ever get implemented at all.

Peace.

Gibson.4036:

To justify the cost of developing them, but minimize grumpiness on the part of the playerbase over the cash shop, there would likely have to be a basic mount (or three) in game, and some fancier ones available in the store.

Lets leave the store out of this. It has already done enough damage.

Just put it in an expansion and then put the mounts really ingame. I want to get them for doing a dungeon, farming a mob, doing a quest / event maybe even with some new craft. No more gold-grind / cash-shop.

Castrin.8972:

Gibson.4036:

Anti-mount people keep telling the pro-mount people there’s no need for mounts. For the most part, I don’t see the pro-mount people saying they need them. Just that they want them.

Really!? Might want to read your own post below.

Okay, I did. Can’t find the spot where I said I needed a mount.

Gibson.4036:

Except you haven’t. I dont’ see any real reason why out-of-combat movement buffs should require giving up traits or food buffs that would give in-combat bonuses. Why should players have to trait, consume, and equip just to get around the world faster rather than traiting, consuming, and equipping for adventure and relying on their mount to get them between adventures quickly? I’d love to have a 60% speed buff, non-combat, auto-unequip indoors and in cities mount.

I’m glad that you agreed with my assessment. The pro-mount side want a game breaking, content by passing addition to the game. Something that will let them go across maps, very fast, free of the waypoint system that is part of the GW world setting and all those pesky restrictions (and silly nominal cost). Not to mentionn speed up exploration to irrelavance.

Quite the opposite. I want a quick way to get across a map by actually travelling through it, rather than teleporting past it. I don’t want a mount to bypass the, as you say, silly nominal cost.

You are in the wrong game when you want something that will by pass those pesky food/trait/skill/spell/etc restrictions to how you want to do things. Heaven forbid that you try and deal with the mechanics of the game. No you want the “magic wand.”

No, I want a mount. It’s not even a huge want. There’s a long list of things I’d rather have done in the game first, but that doesn’t mean I’m not willing to defend the idea of having mounts in the game.

I don’t think having to keep a focus equipped on my Mesmer or a staff on my Guardian to switch them out as I enter combat brings anything to the game. It’s a minor QoL issue that I’d be happy if it was gone. It certainly doesn’t make the game any richer having to swap weapons before I enter combat.

You can try to paint me as some sort of lazy welfare gamer with your ad hominem attack, but I’m not looking to ezmode the game by removing meaningful obstacles with a mount. I have no problem removing meaningless obstacles with them, however.

While I’d like a 60% speed boost mount, which would put me in the world more than our current fast travel system, a post search will show you that I’ve always been against flying mounts.

In another response I noted that I’d be for mounts if they were just like the broom or dredge bore. See I’m not against mounts, sorry to suprise you. I’m agaist YOU, the player(s) that have that “we don’t want to deal with this game the way it was made” mentality.

So any request for change is a player trying to shortcut “the way this game was made”?

I suppose people shouldn’t have gotten account wide WXP, because character specific WXP was “the way this game was made!” Or no LFG tool should have been implemented because that was “the way this game was made!” Or pick whatever improvement you’ve liked since launch.

Gibson.4036:

My apologies for my lack of clarity.

Nope you were quite clear, more so than I think you were aware of.

I don’t see how that can be true, since the message I intended was not the message I gave.

VergilDeZaniah.3295:

I don’t get why people are so obsessed with mounts: “Look, I’m sitting on something” yeah rivetting…

I’m with you. Perhaps they just get a kick out of seeing something between their legs?

They waypoint system is a beautiful thing that I think people take for granted, with it and speed boosts — WHY would you need a mount for anything other than a cosmetic reason? I don’t believe mounts have any place in this game. There are plenty of games that have them… go there.

Castrin.8972:

Devata.6589:

The stuff you buy in the cash-shop gives you a real use. So you are saying GW2 is P2W?

Your joking right? Hope so.

I was quoting you saying it has use while mounts have no use. So you tell me, where you joking?

usually the story is.. it’s not P2W because it is fluff. Personally I don’t care, it is bad for the game being it fluff or ‘P2W’ but thats another discussion.

Castrin.8972:

Devata.6589:

and no I would prefer a mount that gives you a perma speed-boost so it can be used to better explore the world. And then in fact it has a use.. something that is important for you apparently.

The fact that you want a shortcut to exploring implies to me your in the wrong game.

I have specifically said I don’t want them to have an in game effect …. assuming they ever get implemented at all.

Peace.

Not really, I love to explore however with the instance maps in stead of seamless zones this is not the perfect game for that. And if it comes to a shortcut for exploring that would be way-points. First time you will still need to do most by foot, because you are a lower level more mobs will attack you.. as you maybe know. But after that waypoints let you skip everything. Mounts don’t, they just make it acceptable to travel over a longer distance without skipping.

Yeah I know, one time you complain that it’s just fluff and the other time it’s a problem if they have stats. That is why I said that.

Devata.6589:

Gibson.4036:

To justify the cost of developing them, but minimize grumpiness on the part of the playerbase over the cash shop, there would likely have to be a basic mount (or three) in game, and some fancier ones available in the store.

Lets leave the store out of this. It has already done enough damage.

Just put it in an expansion and then put the mounts really ingame. I want to get them for doing a dungeon, farming a mob, doing a quest / event maybe even with some new craft. No more gold-grind / cash-shop.

While I can agree with the sentiment, you’re asking for a bigger change here than just mounts. Moving from their current cash-shop model to an expansion model would be welcome, but is a far bigger change.

With their current model, there’d have to be mounts in the CS that provide a different aesthetic for them to justify spending the time it would take to develop them.

It could make an interesting gold drain. 100g to get one. Gets one hit killed by wvw siege.

Um you know you can walk right?
I didn’t use waypoints for the first 20 levels because I love exploring the whole world. Walking is way better than mounts. Mounts would get in the way of doing things like going for vistas or certain points of interest. Or if you get attack by agros and it kicks you off your mount. Seems a bit tedious.

You don’t HAVE to use waypoints. Try walking, it’s good exercise for us heroes.

I do find it funny that I’m being accused of being anti-exploration for wanting a speed boost mount when world exploration is the bulk of what I actually do in game. The fact that most of my time is spent moving through zones, rather than zerging world bosses, farming dungeons, or running the same small circle of event chains is why I’d enjoy a 60% speed boost mount.

I criss-cross zones a lot, rather than teleporting between hotspots according to timers like much of the player base. I want a mount to enrich being out in the world, not to skip it.

I’ve had to actively ignore the fact that ArenaNet has created a reward structure that doesn’t reward level 80 characters for being in 90% of the world precisely because I’d rather immerse myself in that world than do the 10% of the game where they’ve placed endgame loot.

Mounts would be an addition to my immersive play, not a shortcut around it.

Gibson.4036:

Devata.6589:

Gibson.4036:

To justify the cost of developing them, but minimize grumpiness on the part of the playerbase over the cash shop, there would likely have to be a basic mount (or three) in game, and some fancier ones available in the store.

Lets leave the store out of this. It has already done enough damage.

Just put it in an expansion and then put the mounts really ingame. I want to get them for doing a dungeon, farming a mob, doing a quest / event maybe even with some new craft. No more gold-grind / cash-shop.

While I can agree with the sentiment, you’re asking for a bigger change here than just mounts. Moving from their current cash-shop model to an expansion model would be welcome, but is a far bigger change.

With their current model, there’d have to be mounts in the CS that provide a different aesthetic for them to justify spending the time it would take to develop them.

As a matter of fact I do indeed ask that as well.. in another thread. But if the questions comes up how to implement mounts in this thread then my answer will still be, using expansions, not using a cash-shop because for me having the mount is not the only fun part. Hunting mounts down is as well.. But it’s not if it’s just a boring gold-grind.

I used to collect mini’s in other mmo’s. Thats a game-play element taken away in this game for the same reason (gold grind because of cash-shop_.

So yes indirectly it is indeed also a question for an expansion-based model (B2P). True but seems relevant to the question how you might want mounts to be implemented.

Also, a 60% speedboost is not so fast that you don’t see your surroundings. If I remember correctly, it was the slowest mount speed in Rift, and I never felt like I missed the world as i passed through it.

As opposed to waypointing. In which I definitely miss the world.

I feel like people saying mounts would allow people to skip content are saying the equivalent of “don’t put chocolate sauce on your ice-cream, because chocolate sauce is fattening”.

Devata.6589:

But if the questions comes up how to implement mounts in this thread then my answer will still be, using expansions, not using a cash-shop because for me having the mount is not the only fun part. Hunting mounts down is as well..

Okay, gotcha. Makes sense.

vikkival.2459:

Um you know you can walk right?
I didn’t use waypoints for the first 20 levels because I love exploring the whole world. Walking is way better than mounts. Mounts would get in the way of doing things like going for vistas or certain points of interest. Or if you get attack by agros and it kicks you off your mount. Seems a bit tedious.

You don’t HAVE to use waypoints. Try walking, it’s good exercise for us heroes.

Even when exploring walking far can get boring. Some parts you want to do faster. Besides exploring for me is not skipping down a list of way-points, vista’s, hearths and PoI (like I said, this game is not great for exploring the way it is designed). For me exploring is walking into a new zone, then seeing something in the distance, going there (a little fast would be nice) seeing what is to do there and take part in the activities, quest, events whatever. Then look around again, seeing something else in the distance and heading over there. That is what is exploring for me. Mounts are then a very nice addition.

I do mist quest-lines for the same reason.

The fact that you can way-point already takes away much of the exploration.

vikkival.2459:

Mounts would get in the way of doing things like going for vistas or certain points of interest.

Dismount with a hotkey. Not to big a deal.

Or if you get attack by agros and it kicks you off your mount. Seems a bit tedious.

I know in games where they have mounts, there are usually people complaining about being dismounted by low-level mobs.

I never saw the problem with it, though. In Rift, if you wanted to cross a zone on your mount, you stuck to the roads, which were largely free of mobs. If you chose to bee-line across country and through the local fauna, being dismounted by a mob was the risk you took.

You don’t HAVE to use waypoints. Try walking, it’s good exercise for us heroes.

Yeah, and you don’t have to use swiftness either, but most people do. And it feels pretty good mounting up and galloping across the world.

Devata.6589:

The fact that you can way-point already takes away much of the exploration.

Not to mention the fact that they’ve spelled out a lot of things on the map for us.

As in many other ways, GW2 seems a bit divided on its design for exploration. The world is beautiful, and they’ve done a nice job rewarding exploration. On the other hand, there are far too many waypoints, and a little bit too much indicated by squares and triangles on the map.

Mm I really don’t see the difference between walking and mounts. Walking or riding on something would get boring just the same. Expect you’ll see the butt of an animal wiggling lol

We explore differently. I like to climb, jump, and explore every nook of the map. I love vistas and points of interesting as a guide to exploring but I don’t limit myself to that. Mounts would just hold me back and it would annoy me after a while. Just my personal opinion~ I have nothing against it but I don’t care that’s its not in game.

Gibson.4036:

Castrin.8972:

Gibson.4036:

Anti-mount people keep telling the pro-mount people there’s no need for mounts. For the most part, I don’t see the pro-mount people saying they need them. Just that they want them.

Really!? Might want to read your own post below.

Okay, I did. Can’t find the spot where I said I needed a mount.

I’m glad that you agreed with my assessment. The pro-mount side want a game breaking, content by passing addition to the game. Something that will let them go across maps, very fast, free of the waypoint system that is part of the GW world setting and all those pesky restrictions (and silly nominal cost). Not to mentionn speed up exploration to irrelavance.

Quite the opposite. I want a quick way to get across a map by actually travelling through it, rather than teleporting past it. I don’t want a mount to bypass the, as you say, silly nominal cost.

You can’t teleport past it till you explore it. You want to “power gamer” through all that intervening terrain that is in your way.

Then you want it so you can move from event to event, after way-pointing in, so you can farm even harder core than you already are.

Point out where I’m wrong or why exactly you need a perm +60% move bonus between map ends?

Gibson.4036:

No, I want a mount. It’s not even a huge want. There’s a long list of things I’d rather have done in the game first, but that doesn’t mean I’m not willing to defend the idea of having mounts in the game.

I don’t think having to keep a focus equipped on my Mesmer or a staff on my Guardian to switch them out as I enter combat brings anything to the game. It’s a minor QoL issue that I’d be happy if it was gone. It certainly doesn’t make the game any richer having to swap weapons before I enter combat.

You can try to paint me as some sort of lazy welfare gamer with your ad hominem attack, but I’m not looking to ezmode the game by removing meaningful obstacles with a mount. I have no problem removing meaningless obstacles with them, however.

Actually I had you pegged for a power gamer. There was no attack directed (ad hominem or in general) to your gaming style. Only on the concept of needing something that’s only needed for those not happy with how things work in the game currently.

Gibson.4036:

While I’d like a 60% speed boost mount, which would put me in the world more than our current fast travel system, a post search will show you that I’ve always been against flying mounts.

Well thanks that you can see how that would truly break things. Hope spring eternal.

Gibson.4036:

In another response I noted that I’d be for mounts if they were just like the broom or dredge bore. See I’m not against mounts, sorry to suprise you. I’m agaist YOU, the player(s) that have that “we don’t want to deal with this game the way it was made” mentality.

So any request for change is a player trying to shortcut “the way this game was made”?

I suppose people shouldn’t have gotten account wide WXP, because character specific WXP was “the way this game was made!” Or no LFG tool should have been implemented because that was “the way this game was made!” Or pick whatever improvement you’ve liked since launch.

Red herring attack on the argument. The incompatibility of one doesn’t preclude another. For example, the LFG tool was needed to help the community out and make PUG groups easier to organize. It’s a tool that is in many (most?) MMORPG games out. It does not run counter to any game mechanic or change how the world setting continues.

The fact that there is all ready a way to move through map content quickly means the developers already dealt with the speed/mount issue from a game mechanics point of view. They might revise it later but wishing they would give you a method to rip through constant even faster is poor form. To say it should be added because of all these other additions to the game is disingenuous.

Gibson.4036:

Gibson.4036:

My apologies for my lack of clarity.

Nope you were quite clear, more so than I think you were aware of.

I don’t see how that can be true, since the message I intended was not the message I gave.

Maybe you are just saying things the way you meant and not the way you want.

Peace.

Devata.6589:

But if the questions comes up how to implement mounts in this thread then my answer will still be, using expansions, not using a cash-shop because for me having the mount is not the only fun part. Hunting mounts down is as well..

What if every CS mount was available in game, but you could still short-cut the acquisition process through the gems? So you could still get your exploration/collecting enjoyment, but ArenNet could also get a direct return on them without reworking their financial model.

Just to be clear, I’d love for them to shift to an expansion model. Before launch, I thought that’s what they were going for. Box price as main income, CS as supplemental, but it’s clear that Box price was just initial cash infusion, with CS as their man income model. I’m just trying to imagine mounts getting added, which I don’t think is realistically going to happen any time soon, without adding a switch to expansions, which I also don’t think is realistically going to happen any time soon. It’s just too much for my willing suspension of disbelief.

Gibson.4036:

Devata.6589:

The fact that you can way-point already takes away much of the exploration.

Not to mention the fact that they’ve spelled out a lot of things on the map for us.

As in many other ways, GW2 seems a bit divided on its design for exploration. The world is beautiful, and they’ve done a nice job rewarding exploration. On the other hand, there are far too many waypoints, and a little bit too much indicated by squares and triangles on the map.

Isn’t that entirely up to the player?
I don’t think you are giving people like me enough credit. I love exploring and I will not use waypoints unless i’m in a hurry to get somewhere.
Other people just don’t care about exploring. They want to get where they want to go fast and simple. Waypoints are great for that. I don’t want to spend 10 minute trying to get to the nearest bank to empty my bag or craft. But if I want to enjoy the world. I walk~ I don’t think that you guys should hold the lack of mounts as missing the world and not experiencing it. It’s not a good enough excuse

Gibson.4036:

Devata.6589:

The fact that you can way-point already takes away much of the exploration.

Not to mention the fact that they’ve spelled out a lot of things on the map for us.

As in many other ways, GW2 seems a bit divided on its design for exploration. The world is beautiful, and they’ve done a nice job rewarding exploration. On the other hand, there are far too many waypoints, and a little bit too much indicated by squares and triangles on the map.

Yeah it becomes, skipping down a list in stead of really exploring. The world is indeed beautifully. I do mis some atmosphere. But I can’t say exploring is great for me in this game.

How awesome it is to go from one zone into another walking into this new place. That has become a loading-screen in GW2. Also how awesome is it to be in a big stretched empty map and there is a house in the distance, go there to have a look. But we don’t really have big empty stretched maps.

I think it has something to do with there core. I also have the idea that the reason they use waypoints (that don’t even exist in the lore) in stead of mounts is mainly because they where not able to make seamless zones. Waypoints do help you to skip the loading-screens you would get when traveling door multiple zones. I have no idea if they are still working on that core to allow for bigger maps or even seamless zones but one can hope.