Guild Wars 2

Astralporing.1957:

Yes, that’s pretty much it. Of course, anti-mount people do not need to come up with any reasons why mounts should not be introduced (beyond “cuz we don’t like them”). Pro-mount people however do need exactly that.

They may need to in order to convince the anti-mount crowd, but that’s not going to happen.

They don’t really need to in order to convince ArenaNet.

All ArenaNet needs is an indication that there would be a reasonable return on investment from adding them to the game. How they determine that, I don’t now.

I wonder how much a ’Add Mounts" kickstarter campaign would need to bring in to convince them.

Gibson.4036:

Astralporing.1957:

Yes, that’s pretty much it. Of course, anti-mount people do not need to come up with any reasons why mounts should not be introduced (beyond “cuz we don’t like them”). Pro-mount people however do need exactly that.

They may need to in order to convince the anti-mount crowd, but that’s not going to happen.

I already have provided every reason under the sun in 2 different posts.

And I never said “because WoW” or “because I don’t want them”. But you and others keep repeating those 2 lines as “the only thing anti-mount people are saying”.

The reasons I wrote, are exactly what will happen. Every single one of them.

The horse is dead, bury it.

Also, in order to have a constructive conversation/argument, dismissing the oppositions logical reasoning and saying, “that doesn’t count, null and void, lies and slander, what else you got?”, just because it isn’t convenient for you or agree with you, does not add anything to your side of the lake, it simply shows you are never willing to accept the flaws of the proposal. Like a bull, if you will, once its eyes are focused, anything can happen around it and it will never notice.

You know where else one side dismisses logic that isn’t convenient to them? Science vs religion.

thaooo.5320:

I already have provided every reason under the sun in 2 different posts.

And I wrote a line by line response to one of them. If I remember correctly, I acknowledged merit in one of the reasons, but didn’t find any of the others compelling. Just like you don’t find any of our responses compelling.

We’re not ignoring your points. We’re disagreeing with them. Just like you disagree with ours.

And I never said “because WoW” or “because I don’t want them”. But you and others keep repeating those 2 lines as “the only thing anti-mount people are saying”.

No. There was a post that said ’because WoW", and that was responded to.

Your points, without going back and looking, included “breaks lore”, “poorly designed”, “poorly implemented”.

I disagree that they will necessarily be poorly designed or implemented, and the lore argument has been repeatedly debunked starting way back when we were discussing mounts in GW2 on Guru years before the game even launched.

Nevertheless, the time has probably come to present an organized debunking of it again. I need to get a few screenshots, in game, and get back to you no that.

The reasons I wrote, are exactly what will happen. Every single one of them.

Some of us don’t agree. I can accept that you think they will. Can you accept that I don’t?

The horse is dead, bury it.

Ah, but in Tyria, dead horses can be used as mounts.

thaooo.5320:

Also, in order to have a constructive conversation/argument, dismissing the oppositions logical reasoning and saying, “that doesn’t count, null and void, lies and slander, what else you got?”, just because it isn’t convenient for you or agree with you, does not add anything to your side of the lake, it simply shows you are never willing to accept the flaws of the proposal. Like a bull, if you will, once its eyes are focused, anything can happen around it and it will never notice.

You know where else one side dismisses logic that isn’t convenient to them? Science vs religion.

When we disagree with your points, it’s blind religion, but when you dismiss ours, it’s SCIENCE!

Amirite?

Yes, those were topics that will be affected, and I then also listed very specific points under those topics, and all of them WILL happen.

Your line by line responses consisted of:
“I don’t agree”
“I don’t see how that would happen”
“They wouldn’t have to do that”

Take one look at the “finishers”.

There is stupid crap like the “cow falling butt first onto the corpse”, and “dancing quaggans with mobile water theme park”.

You really don’t agree if mounts are introduced they won’t make stupid crap like flying quaggans? I call that being naive.

Same goes for quip/dreamer as a precedent of how stupid the mount designs will be. And just because these exist, it does not mean they should add more toy theme park candy crap.

As for the ‘mount’ standing on completely broken angles, even upside down, on certain slopes and ledges and objects, I don’t even have to point out which other games these problems exist in, because I can just point out that these problems exist with tonic transformations in GW2 already. Feel free to try.

And a third one from ‘immersion breaking’. As for mounts appearing out of thin air, and disappearing instantly like a fart in a strong breeze, this one will certainly happen.

As for doing instant 90 degree turns and 180 degree turns, the mechanics already exist like this for players, as well as siege golems. They would not change this for mounts, and it will look highly ridiculous and lower the aesthetic quality of the game significantly. It already looks broken when golems do it.

Not being able to agree with all of these points taking place, just points to ignorance and naivety.

I’ll finish with a question, so the ‘pro mount’ side can add something a bit more substantial to the debate.

I would be forced to see mounts.
I would be forced to see their massive flaws, poor designs etc etc all my points from before.
It would burn my retinas.

What do you suggest could happen so I and others do not have to bear witness to this apocalyptic tragedy?

Devata.6589:

Nerelith.7360:

Temperess Midnight.8326:

well all keep dreaming i like to see how this game would do mounts and how they would implument them and it should be are choice to have one or not and it be cool to vote on the subjet to see how me ppl in the game would like to see mount brought in to the world of GW2

The Only vote that counts is that of the developers, and they don’t want mounts. They implement a Waypoint System to NOT have Mounts.,

Personally I have no interest in seeing how they might be implemented. I have less than zero desire to see a mount On gw2.

Colin said that they would look into mounts. So if you say they absolutely do not want mounts you wrong.

No, what Colin said was, ‘Mounts would be terribly hard to do right and that is the only way they would do them so they decided not to have mounts’. That includes skills, etc. They would be hard to add now and with China also on the forefront (May 15), I doubt mounts are important anymore. Most people want to see new content not fluff.

In this post, you definitely stepped up your game.

thaooo.5320:

"
Same goes for quip/dreamer as a precedent of how stupid the mount designs will be. And just because these exist, it does not mean they should add more toy theme park candy crap.

I would prefer a more immersive world, myself. I’m not fond of plushie backpacks and boom-boxes.

Unfortunately, I don’t want them to stop adding anything to the game because there will be Theme-Park Candy Crap® in the mix.

There will undoubtedly be TPCC weapons and armor added in the future. Would you argue that no new weapons and armor should be added to the game to avoid this?

There will definitely be TPCC living story rewards added in the future. Should we put a moratorium on all LS rewards to avoid that?

You have a problem with non-immersive designs in game. I don’t like them either. If I felt like paying a sub I’d be playing a more consistent game right now. But your problem here is not with mounts. It’s with the TPCC, so this isn’t a useful argument against mounts.

As for the ‘mount’ standing on completely broken angles, even upside down, on certain slopes and ledges and objects, I don’t even have to point out which other games these problems exist in, because I can just point out that these problems exist with tonic transformations in GW2 already. Feel free to try.

And if mounts were restricted to flat, open areas? I’ve already brought up the idea that they might only be used on roads.

And a third one from ‘immersion breaking’. As for mounts appearing out of thin air, and disappearing instantly like a fart in a strong breeze, this one will certainly happen.

This doesn’t really bother me. My weapons appear from thin air every time I switch them. Characters disappear around me when they log off or WP. Mobs suddenly appear when their respawn timer comes up. There are plenty of things we disregard in game because it’s a game.

However, since it does bother you, what if mounts had an arrival animation? You whistle for your horse and it comes galloping from the distance. You drop a small thumper device and your devour burrows up from the earth. This could even be part of a balancing mechanic, as you would have a second or two of arrival animation before actually being mounted. A trade-off for the speed boost you get from the mount, and a discouragement from constantly mounting and dismounting for short travel distances.

As for doing instant 90 degree turns and 180 degree turns, the mechanics already exist like this for players, as well as siege golems. They would not change this for mounts, and it will look highly ridiculous and lower the aesthetic quality of the game significantly. It already looks broken when golems do it.

I know people have had a problem with the “floaty” movement animations and abrupt turns of GW2. This is another function trumps form choice. Turn animations and momentum trade off control for aesthetics. They chose to give us the ability to abruptly turn.

Again, you are applying a problem you have with an overall design choice to mounts. It’s not a mount problem. It’s a game-wide problem. I can’t see how having mounts do exactly what other creatures do in game lowers the aesthetic quality. The aesthetic quality is already at that level. How can it be lowered by keeping it consistent?

Not being able to agree with all of these points taking place, just points to ignorance and naivety.

You were doing so well. Then you had to revert to “if you don’t agree with me your stupid”.

I’ll finish with a question, so the ‘pro mount’ side can add something a bit more substantial to the debate.

I would be forced to see mounts.

As we are forced not to have them currently.

I would be forced to see their massive flaws, poor designs etc etc all my points from before.

If those flaws and poor designs actually came about. Most of which you acknowledge are already in the game in other forms.

It would burn my retinas.

The lack of mounts burns my retinas.

It’s no less true than your statement, and keeps the conversation symmetrical.

What do you suggest could happen so I and others do not have to bear witness to this apocalyptic tragedy?

Nothing.

Like everyone, if it ever got implemented, you would have to decide if it was gamebreaking enough to make you seek out another game or not. Just like every change they make, we decide whether it impacts our enjoyment either for the better or worse, and we decide if we want to continue to support ArenaNet by paying and/or playing.

You seem to have survived disco llamas and gravity defying ruminant players. You’d have to decide if the most hideously designed and implemented mounts in the history of MMORPGs would be the straw that broke the dolyak’s back.

@ Gibson

Thanks for responding. I guess we can agree to agree.

Jump animations… why’d you have to get me thinking about the jump animations in AoC? Like you, I have little reason to believe ANet would get movement animations wrong. Now, if mounts had attacks, I might expect some wonky there.

Dusty Moon.4382:

No, what Colin said was, ‘Mounts would be terribly hard to do right and that is the only way they would do them so they decided not to have mounts’. That includes skills, etc. They would be hard to add now and with China also on the forefront (May 15), I doubt mounts are important anymore. Most people want to see new content not fluff.

Things change. I don’t think anyone expects or is asking that they be implemented by the end of May. But that doesn’t mean people who want mounts shouldn’t ask that they be implemented and hope for 2015 or 2016.

It took a year to get LFG. Over a year and a half to get account bound dyes. Account wide WXP.

They said no mounts at launch. They said they don’t have plans to implement mounts at this time. They’ve said that they considered adding mounts, but want to do them right if they do them.

Which all adds up to the fact that mounts are still a possibility at some time in the lifetime of GW2. So why shouldn’t a person ask?

:) Would not even have to make much new animations.
i would be happy to ride a tiny Asura as a xl size Charr. ^^

Y’all forgot swimming – how would mounts do that?

Y’all keep questioning and coming up with more issues as to why it is hard to put mounts in a game that does not have them already. That is probably why it hasn’t been done and won’t be done.

Dusty Moon.4382:

Y’all forgot swimming – how would mounts do that?

Y’all keep questioning and coming up with more issues as to why it is hard to put mounts in a game that does not have them already. That is probably why it hasn’t been done and won’t be done.

Isn’t the standard in games with mounts that you simply dismount upon entering water? The game already recognizes that state change and unequips your weapons. There’s even a transitional phase where you are on top of the water and haven’t yet equipped your underwater weapon.

There’s also the potential to include underwater mounts, similar to the way Rangers switch between terrestrial and aquatic pets. It could be pretty sweet being pulled along by a shark with a harness to grip.

If one was trying to solve Thaooo’s problem with vanishing mounts by animating mounting and dismounting, it’d be more problematic.

Truth be told, I’m already playing less and less these days. Lets call “playing the game a lot” 100%, right now I’d be playing at 5-10%.

The main thing that has kept me playing for a long time is WvW, though I’ve always been PvX.

But one can only play the same mechanics/strategies/metas for so long before it gets boring, despite the awesome community and player interactions that exist.

What I’m hoping for is the company to decide on a clear direction, and to get its priorities sorted. Which means working on the game by adding content, fixing content, constantly shaking up the meta every month amongst others. They also need to divide staff evenly among the game modes.

Actual meaningful changes. WvW has lacked a dedicated developer team since launch. With 80% of staff allocated to brain storming for the gem store, these things cannot happen.

But what I know for certain is, the longer the company focuses on fluff (which mounts definitely fall under), the less and less I’ll be logging in until big changes come.

But mounts? That would be a point of no return.

Dusty Moon.4382:

Y’all forgot swimming – how would mounts do that?

Y’all keep questioning and coming up with more issues as to why it is hard to put mounts in a game that does not have them already. That is probably why it hasn’t been done and won’t be done.

Seahorses… feck- Squid-mounts- would absolutely buy a squid mount. Tiny steam driven subs—
if we can change weapons and abilities based on water/land- clearly a mount can change.

Gearbox.2748:

Dusty Moon.4382:

Y’all forgot swimming – how would mounts do that?

Y’all keep questioning and coming up with more issues as to why it is hard to put mounts in a game that does not have them already. That is probably why it hasn’t been done and won’t be done.

Seahorses… feck- Squid-mounts- would absolutely buy a squid mount. Tiny steam driven subs—
if we can change weapons and abilities based on water/land- clearly a mount can change.

Again they would have to model and test. It is not like putting a new weapon in. It is more like putting in a new race/profession – that is a lot of work.

No mounts for one simple reason:

You think it’s hard to target the bank person because some jerk put a box of fun under him…how bad do you think it’s going to be when there are 20+ people all standing on top of the NPC you want to talk to and they AND the mounts are all stacked on top…AND some jerk put a box of fun down there too.

Then there will be people coming to the forums requesting that mounts go away, that you can’t be on a mount in a city or within 20 feet of an NPC or near any interactable object…

So no. No mounts, not now, not ever.

Fastest travel is always going to be to waypoint.

Every class has some form of a speed boost (though some better than others) and there are several rune sets that boost your speed as well.

Mounts would do nothing but clutter up already busy areas and add nothing to the game (other than the obvious thing of there being mounts….which we don’t need).

if CN gets cosmetic mounts I want cosmetic mounts in NA version as well

just saying cause we all know asians love mounts.

what I wouldn’t want to see is lore breaking mounts ala FF reborn or Archage style !

Rofl this thread is still going. Seriously mounts ain’t happening they make 0 sense in a game with 100s of Way points zones that are instanced. Plus it would be a waste of resources which could be used elsewhere. Strong logic about mounts in other games so we should have them in gw2. Oh and can you imagine how ridiculous a norn would look ingame on a horse? Yes there are concept arts but they are just that concepts

khani.4786:

You think it’s hard to target the bank person because some jerk put a box of fun under him…how bad do you think it’s going to be when there are 20+ people all standing on top of the NPC you want to talk to and they AND the mounts are all stacked on top…AND some jerk put a box of fun down there too.

Then there will be people coming to the forums requesting that mounts go away, that you can’t be on a mount in a city or within 20 feet of an NPC or near any interactable object…

Rift had griefers like this at the start. Then they made cities auto-dismount you.

I expect most mount advocates would agree with auto-dismount in cities, towns and interior spaces. Sure, you couldn’t cover every interactable object in Tyria with a no-mount zone, but I doubt a griefer is going to find much satisfaction blocking a random heart npc in a corner of Brisban Wildlands.

Many games have mounts and have had this problem, and some have found ways to deal with it.

Gibson.4036:

khani.4786:

You think it’s hard to target the bank person because some jerk put a box of fun under him…how bad do you think it’s going to be when there are 20+ people all standing on top of the NPC you want to talk to and they AND the mounts are all stacked on top…AND some jerk put a box of fun down there too.

Then there will be people coming to the forums requesting that mounts go away, that you can’t be on a mount in a city or within 20 feet of an NPC or near any interactable object…

Rift had griefers like this at the start. Then they made cities auto-dismount you.

I expect most mount advocates would agree with auto-dismount in cities, towns and interior spaces. Sure, you couldn’t cover every interactable object in Tyria with a no-mount zone, but I doubt a griefer is going to find much satisfaction blocking a random heart npc in a corner of Brisban Wildlands.

Many games have mounts and have had this problem, and some have found ways to deal with it.

Griefers would not care about hearts. they would care about the temples, perferably Balthazar. So if they add mounts and griefers start messing up balthazar, we know who to blame.

And just to add my 2 cents to “auto-dismounting”, having the mount suddenly change into something different or suddenly disappear is as obnoxious and immersion breaking as legendaries. Very little to no lore, more unnecessary pixels everywhere and the only thing it does is clutter up my screen.

RoRo.8270:

Plus it would be a waste of resources which could be used elsewhere.

It’s only a waste if you don’t want them. For people who do, it would be appropriately used resources.

Strong logic about mounts in other games so we should have them in gw2.

This is largely a strawman used to try and discredit the pro-mount position. People who want mounts don’t want them “because WoW”. On the other hand, we’ve had at least one person who doesn’t want them claim that one of the reasons people don’t want them is “because WoW”.

Oh and can you imagine how ridiculous a norn would look ingame on a horse?

Can you imagine how epic a Norn could look ingame on a Riverdrake Broodmother? Or a Treant?

Zacchary.6183:

Griefers would not care about hearts. they would care about the temples, perferably Balthazar. So if they add mounts and griefers start messing up balthazar, we know who to blame.

If we ever get mounts, I’ll make sure to stand in LA repeatedly saying, “Hey guys, it’s my fault.” ;-)

But yeah, it shouldn’t be too hard to identify the prime grief locations and make them auto-dismount zones. Temples would be great candidates for that.

Not to mention, at least recently, we’ve been talking non-combat mounts, so you wouldn’t be able to grief temple events with them. The big concern would be blocking the karma vendor when the temple is peaceful.

RoRo.8270:

Rofl this thread is still going. Seriously mounts ain’t happening they make 0 sense in a game with 100s of Way points zones that are instanced. Plus it would be a waste of resources which could be used elsewhere. Strong logic about mounts in other games so we should have them in gw2. Oh and can you imagine how ridiculous a norn would look ingame on a horse? Yes there are concept arts but they are just that concepts

Drop a few waypoints and add mounts. Because you really don’t need 20 – 30 waypoints in a zone.

You amused me when you said “it would be a waste of resources which could be used elsewhere”. Do you mean more temporary content? Or more Gem store items? Or maybe you mean rehashed content with a skin throw over it and zone change?

The anti – mount crowd is the one whose stuck on other games having mounts. Good try though.

I’m sure the creative minds at ANet can figure something out that would work for all races.

Skan.5301:

Drop a few waypoints and add mounts. Because you really don’t need 20 – 30 waypoints in a zone.

I imagine about 2/3rds of all waypoints removed.

Skan.5301:

RoRo.8270:

Rofl this thread is still going. Seriously mounts ain’t happening they make 0 sense in a game with 100s of Way points zones that are instanced. Plus it would be a waste of resources which could be used elsewhere. Strong logic about mounts in other games so we should have them in gw2. Oh and can you imagine how ridiculous a norn would look ingame on a horse? Yes there are concept arts but they are just that concepts

Drop a few waypoints and add mounts. Because you really don’t need 20 – 30 waypoints in a zone.

You amused me when you said “it would be a waste of resources which could be used elsewhere”. Do you mean more temporary content? Or more Gem store items? Or maybe you mean rehashed content with a skin throw over it and zone change?

The anti – mount crowd is the one whose stuck on other games having mounts. Good try though.

I’m sure the creative minds at ANet can figure something out that would work for all races.

Mounts are not something, like armor skins that are just different drawings on the same backbone. You need to deal with how a character is mounted (look at the difference between Asura and Norn or even Charr) all that would need to be modeled in. Then the balance of mounted versus unmounted battle, etc. I would rather have another area or another Race to play than mounts. People that want mounts say they are for looks, etc. But if the game engine doesn’t have them built in, modifying that engine just to appease a vocal minority makes no sense as it would almost have to be totally rewritten.

Here is an idea that will appease everyone!

Mounts get added with every generic mount rule the videogame world has for them except speed boosts. (because that would be considered an unfair advantage and kitten alot of players off).

Everyone gets the option to hide all mounts so if someone is on a mount they appear as though they aren’t on one.

Those who want mounts get their mount and those who don’t want to see them don’t have to. Everyone is happy.

Gibson.4036:

Skan.5301:

Drop a few waypoints and add mounts. Because you really don’t need 20 – 30 waypoints in a zone.

I imagine about 2/3rds of all waypoints removed.

That seems sensible. Except in cities. Keep the city waypoints as they are. The maze that is the Black Citadel and the labyrinth that is the Grove tend to be quite confusing at times.

Skan.5301:

Gibson.4036:

Skan.5301:

Drop a few waypoints and add mounts. Because you really don’t need 20 – 30 waypoints in a zone.

I imagine about 2/3rds of all waypoints removed.

That seems sensible. Except in cities. Keep the city waypoints as they are. The maze that is the Black Citadel and the labyrinth that is the Grove tend to be quite confusing at times.

Good point.

Skan.5301:

RoRo.8270:

Rofl this thread is still going. Seriously mounts ain’t happening they make 0 sense in a game with 100s of Way points zones that are instanced. Plus it would be a waste of resources which could be used elsewhere. Strong logic about mounts in other games so we should have them in gw2. Oh and can you imagine how ridiculous a norn would look ingame on a horse? Yes there are concept arts but they are just that concepts

Drop a few waypoints and add mounts. Because you really don’t need 20 – 30 waypoints in a zone.

You amused me when you said “it would be a waste of resources which could be used elsewhere”. Do you mean more temporary content? Or more Gem store items? Or maybe you mean rehashed content with a skin throw over it and zone change?

The anti – mount crowd is the one whose stuck on other games having mounts. Good try though.

I’m sure the creative minds at ANet can figure something out that would work for all races.

I can’t stand mounts in an MMO, but, on a lighter note, I got this in my email today, if mounts were added you could incorporate horsey races. http://img.photobucket.com/albums/0703/MudBone/GW2esports_zpsa00e4dad.jpg

July.5361:

As much as I want mounts for purely aesthetic reasons, I don’t see them fit in GW2. When I was playing Warhammer Online I loved all my mounts. Each of them was connected with the lore of my class, but in GW2 there is no lore and there are no vast empty spaces to travel. Plus I smell Black Lion tickets/chests abuse from Anet. This game is not meant to have mounts.

Well I also want big open maps, preferably seamless zones. I also want them to get rid of the cash-shop focus. Then they can even implement the mounts in an expansion.

So maybe we have some common ground here and can come to a deal. Yes mounts but also big open maps and no cash-shop focus.

I’m not like.. Well I like X and I like Y but we don’t have X so can’t have Y. I stay make that I want X and Y

Gibson.4036:

Can you imagine how epic a Norn could look ingame on a Riverdrake Broodmother? Or a Treant?

Like a grown adult sitting on a gecko ? And imagine an Asura on a Treant ?
Will they scale it down depending on race (like weapons) and face the cries of players unsatisfied that their mount is tiny when compared to a Norn ?

And don’t forget the clipping or how they will try to get around it. Like a Female norn wearing the masquerade skirt sitting on a treant. Where’s the skirt going to go ? And the treant’s body ?

They didn’t create their game with the idea of adding real mounts one day (the riding broom doesn’t count because it’s a stick…a small and slim stick your character sits on).

tigirius.9014:

These changes should improve what people who want mounts typically would use them for, major events arrivals, time to arrival vs boss death problems, general speed issues when traveling from waypoints to locations with events.

I think you have a wrong view of why people want mounts. increasing speed and more fun exploring is one element that fits sort of in your explanation. But there still is the skin reason (its fun, or looks nice or whatever) and the game-play element.. Go into the world to collect the. Of course to do that they should leave the cash-shop out of the picture. Else they destroy that game-play element just as they did with skins, mini’s and dyes.

GummiArms.5368:

And naturally, people will want to invest in better looking mounts given the chance. Adds another source source of revenue for the game, or another gold sink depending on how this is approached.

Well if they address it like that there are less people interested in it. It’s just fun like that.

But it would be a good eye-catcher for an expansion. So they can use it that way to get revenue.

mounts are for little girls

Gibson.4036:

The should be exactly the same from a game mechanic standpoint no matter where you get them. A plain brown horse, devourer, and dolyak would be available for a modest amount of gold (or reasonable quest line) in game. Spectral horses, treants, and flaming dolyaks could be available from the cash shop. Watchwork devourers and infinity golems could be a limited time LS reward.

Again, all exactly the same in their game mechanics.

No no no, why add something to then destroy >50% of the fun of it?. Because that’s the way they do it now? Thats not a good reason to me.

I stay at.. Release an expansion and use the mounts as one of the eye catches for the expansions. Thne you can put everything really ingame, where it belongs. Not in a cash-shop and no temporary available “do it now or lose out forever” stuff anymore please.

thaooo.5320:

Also, in order to have a constructive conversation/argument, dismissing the oppositions logical reasoning and saying, “that doesn’t count, null and void, lies and slander, what else you got?”, just because it isn’t convenient for you or agree with you, does not add anything to your side of the lake, it simply shows you are never willing to accept the flaws of the proposal. Like a bull, if you will, once its eyes are focused, anything can happen around it and it will never notice.

You know where else one side dismisses logic that isn’t convenient to them? Science vs religion.

I am pretty sure I addressing all of your points. People say they are void because they (most) are.

Devata.6589:

Gibson.4036:

The should be exactly the same from a game mechanic standpoint no matter where you get them. A plain brown horse, devourer, and dolyak would be available for a modest amount of gold (or reasonable quest line) in game. Spectral horses, treants, and flaming dolyaks could be available from the cash shop. Watchwork devourers and infinity golems could be a limited time LS reward.

Again, all exactly the same in their game mechanics.

No no no, why add something to then destroy >50% of the fun of it?. Because that’s the way they do it now? Thats not a good reason to me.

I stay at.. Release an expansion and use the mounts as one of the eye catches for the expansions. The you can put everything really ingame, where it belongs. Not in a cash-shop and no more temporary available “do it now or lose out forever” stuff anymore please.

I say using it as eye candy for an expansion would work pretty well.

Some mounts should be added to the cash shop just as a way to generate some income. After all, I’m sure those of us who can see past the false glamour of the LS would like another expansion after the initial one.

Make them drop from world bosses, dungeon end chest, and from doing quest. That adds a reason toplay the game for those who want to be rewarded for their efforts.

Skan.5301:

Make them drop from world bosses, dungeon end chest, and from doing quest. That adds a reason toplay the game for those who want to be rewarded for their efforts.

And people who want mounts. Which doesn’t seem to be everyone.

RedStar.4218:

And imagine an Asura on a Treant ?
Will they scale it down depending on race (like weapons) and face the cries of players unsatisfied that their mount is tiny when compared to a Norn ?

Good question. I know Asura players already complain that their cosmetic clothes and weapons are largely lost due to scaling. And locking particular mounts to particular races would also cause an uproar, but I personally like the idea of more differentiation between the races other than the toons appearance.

And don’t forget the clipping or how they will try to get around it. Like a Female norn wearing the masquerade skirt sitting on a treant. Where’s the skirt going to go ? And the treant’s body ?

Definitely haven’t forgotten. It’s not that big of a deal to me, though I know it bugs some people that there is already a lot of clipping in the game. Some mounts would definitely be more suited to a palanquin style of riding rather than astride their back like you would ride a horse. Dolyak Riders for example, don’t sit astride a saddle, and wouldn’t have problems with skirts clipping.

Rift had its share of skirts and robes, and I don’t remember a great hue and cry about how terrible they looked on mounts. I also don’t, however, remember how they dealt with the issue visually, either.

Astralporing.1957:

Conncept.7638:

Astralporing.1957:

What Nerelith wanted to say is that people that are satisfied with the status quo do not need to supply any reason beyond “we like things as they are” because they are not trying to convince anyone. People that want change however do need to supply reason for it. And if there is a large part of community that doesn’t want that change, the reason must be really good. No such reason has been supplied so far.

If my argument is flawed yours is as well, in the exact same way in fact. The developers are working on something, and will be doing so continually until the day the GW2 servers shut down. You could just as easily say that because something is being worked on, “we’d like that work the be spent on this”, and be just as justified in that desire for action as anyone be in their desire for any other action, ambiguity does not make one thing more valid that another, less if it has any affect at all.

You’d be right only if the developers actually worked on mounts, or already planned to work on mounts. Otherwise my reasoning still stands.

Any new introduction to the game needs to be weighted in terms of necessity (does the game needs it?), desirability (do the people want it? are the people against it?) and difficulty (how hard it is to implement). For something to be done, the first two need to outweight the third. In the case of mounts, you failed to supply any valid reason for first, and are losing on second (more people seem to be against it than for it). The difficulty is also definitely not zero.

Deciding to introduce something new and not introducing it are not equal options as far as supplying reason for either is concerned . The second will always be easier.

And you’d be right only if any body of proof had to be given at all. And as neither side has any idea how mounts would be implemented, neither side can make any legitimate argument, even stating whether or not they would enjoy it is based on nothing, or at best the works of completely different developers which do not reflect on ANets potential work at all. Therefore as neither side has any idea or evidence of how mounts would be implemented, all arguments of whether they should or should not be implemented are based on assumption and heresay and can’t go beyond that, giving neither side the opportunity to provide a body of proof, and therefore certainly not requiring either side to do so.

However, were I a developer, looking at this thread, I certainly wouldn’t want to cater to a playgoup who has managed to fill fifteen pages of blindly hateful and fanatical speculations and assumptions against an idea they know absolutely nothing about. The conduct of the anti-mount crowd in this thread is sickening.

Mounts have to not obsolete the effort/expense people have put in to get permanent speed bonuses within the game that exists now.

My usual suggestion is IF mounts were introduced they should occupy the Elite Skill slot. So that having the advantage of mounted travel comes at a commiserate cost.

Devata.6589:

No no no, why add something to then destroy >50% of the fun of it?. Because that’s the way they do it now? Thats not a good reason to me.

I stay at.. Release an expansion and use the mounts as one of the eye catches for the expansions. The you can put everything really ingame, where it belongs. Not in a cash-shop and no more temporary available “do it now or lose out forever” stuff anymore please.

Yeah, I know. I’d rather it come with an expansion, too, but I just can’t help feel it’s out of the scope of this thread to suggest reworking the financial model along with adding mounts.

I understand why you present them hand-in-hand. I agree with it. But I feel the need to personally stick with how mounts might be implemented without reworking other major areas of the game.

Dusty Moon.4382:

Y’all forgot swimming – how would mounts do that?

Y’all keep questioning and coming up with more issues as to why it is hard to put mounts in a game that does not have them already. That is probably why it hasn’t been done and won’t be done.

In fact I did think about that. Love to sit on a dolphins back.

And why would they not be able to while all other are able to. Well they where not able to make seamless zones at launch and most other mmo’s where so maybe you have a point but I prefer to think that do have the skills to make mounts work.

thaooo.5320:

Truth be told, I’m already playing less and less these days. Lets call “playing the game a lot” 100%, right now I’d be playing at 5-10%.

The main thing that has kept me playing for a long time is WvW, though I’ve always been PvX.

But one can only play the same mechanics/strategies/metas for so long before it gets boring, despite the awesome community and player interactions that exist.

What I’m hoping for is the company to decide on a clear direction, and to get its priorities sorted. Which means working on the game by adding content, fixing content, constantly shaking up the meta every month amongst others. They also need to divide staff evenly among the game modes.

Actual meaningful changes. WvW has lacked a dedicated developer team since launch. With 80% of staff allocated to brain storming for the gem store, these things cannot happen.

But what I know for certain is, the longer the company focuses on fluff (which mounts definitely fall under), the less and less I’ll be logging in until big changes come.

But mounts? That would be a point of no return.

None of us is paying they should not be working on those other thinks. We just also like mounts.

Besides, mounts are content. Hunting them down is content and for WvW they can make mounted combat. So there are many options, it does not only have to be fluff.

Anyway, if you want real content the whole cash-shop focus is the problem. That makes them being more interested in cash-shop items and temporary grinds with temporary available cash-shop items..

Nike.2631:

Mounts have to not obsolete the effort/expense people have put in to get permanent speed bonuses within the game that exists now.

Always a tricky area. How much do you let previous investment limit what you can do going forward? It’s certainly an issue that has come up many times so far in the relatively short life of GW2. I was a condition Mesmer player who had invested a significant amount of gold (to me) in exotic and ascended condi gear shortly before the big confusion nerf.

At the same time, have people invested that much to get swiftness access? On guardian it’s a matter of keeping a staff in one weapon set and a few utilities. Mesmer can tote around a focus, but permaswiftness does entail an investment in some runes. Eles can get it pretty easily with a few traits, though maintaining the constant rotation as you travel can be tedious. Engies can get it pretty easily with a trait.

I’d think most people who have built for speed would be glad to free up some trait points or be able to slot some combat oriented runes, in spite of previous investment.

Of course, that would mean giving up in-combat swiftness gained because mounts would only be able to be used out of combat.

My usual suggestion is IF mounts were introduced they should occupy the Elite Skill slot. So that having the advantage of mounted travel comes at a commiserate cost.

Interesting suggestion, though it’d take some thinking about the repercussions. Some professions tend to value their elites more than others. Would this help or just increase profession disparity when it comes to speed boosts?

None of the Ele elites are so wonderful that I wouldn’t mind. In fact, many Eles already use their elite slot for mobility with Conjure Fiery Greatsword.

None of the Mesmer elites are all that valuable for general open world, so no loss there.

Supply crate can be useful for general open world use, but I could definitely live without it on my Engi.

Renewed Focus is handy, but far from necessary for Guardian in general PvE.

Those are the professions I’m most familiar with. Not sure if Thief, Ranger, or Necro would feel shortchanged.

On the whole, I expect giving up an elite to get ooc perma-swiftness but freeing up utilities, traits and gear for other things would be a net gain.

khani.4786:

No mounts for one simple reason:

You think it’s hard to target the bank person because some jerk put a box of fun under him…how bad do you think it’s going to be when there are 20+ people all standing on top of the NPC you want to talk to and they AND the mounts are all stacked on top…AND some jerk put a box of fun down there too.

Then there will be people coming to the forums requesting that mounts go away, that you can’t be on a mount in a city or within 20 feet of an NPC or near any interactable object…

So no. No mounts, not now, not ever.

Fastest travel is always going to be to waypoint.

Every class has some form of a speed boost (though some better than others) and there are several rune sets that boost your speed as well.

Mounts would do nothing but clutter up already busy areas and add nothing to the game (other than the obvious thing of there being mounts….which we don’t need).

Most cluttered area’s are zergs and city’s. Simply require to dismount in city’s and if you don’t want them in zerg don’t allow mounted combat in PvE. That would solve about all your problems. Besides I never had that problem in other mmo’s, even not when they did allow mounts in city’s.

Latinkuro.9420:

if CN gets cosmetic mounts I want cosmetic mounts in NA version as well

just saying cause we all know asians love mounts.

what I wouldn’t want to see is lore breaking mounts ala FF reborn or Archage style !

The steam-punk trucks from ArcheAge would fit in GW2’s lore but most of them would indeed not. They do fit in ArchAge. Not sure if you mend those would not fit in GW2 or they don’t fit in ArcheAge.

RedStar.4218:

Like a grown adult sitting on a gecko ?

https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTk_zAJXFcnzLxgKQTh-w8E2K3VVgk48MskiUecF25xV5qs4T8M

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/images/thumb/b/b8/River_Drake.jpg/240px-River_Drake.jpg

Hmmm….

Dusty Moon.4382:

Skan.5301:

RoRo.8270:

Rofl this thread is still going. Seriously mounts ain’t happening they make 0 sense in a game with 100s of Way points zones that are instanced. Plus it would be a waste of resources which could be used elsewhere. Strong logic about mounts in other games so we should have them in gw2. Oh and can you imagine how ridiculous a norn would look ingame on a horse? Yes there are concept arts but they are just that concepts

Drop a few waypoints and add mounts. Because you really don’t need 20 – 30 waypoints in a zone.

You amused me when you said “it would be a waste of resources which could be used elsewhere”. Do you mean more temporary content? Or more Gem store items? Or maybe you mean rehashed content with a skin throw over it and zone change?

The anti – mount crowd is the one whose stuck on other games having mounts. Good try though.

I’m sure the creative minds at ANet can figure something out that would work for all races.

Mounts are not something, like armor skins that are just different drawings on the same backbone. You need to deal with how a character is mounted (look at the difference between Asura and Norn or even Charr) all that would need to be modeled in. Then the balance of mounted versus unmounted battle, etc. I would rather have another area or another Race to play than mounts. People that want mounts say they are for looks, etc. But if the game engine doesn’t have them built in, modifying that engine just to appease a vocal minority makes no sense as it would almost have to be totally rewritten.

I would prefer mounts over another race. In the end a race would also just be a skin. Only real new content that had to come with them would be the personal story. And maybe not even that depending on the lore.

Also I don’t think it would be as much of a problem as many people think simply because it is already in the core (what might proof that indeed they did plan to put in mounts at some point). The riding-broom shows that is is already in the core. Of course for every new mount it would be additional work but the core has most of what it needs.