Guild Wars 2

Immortal.3647:

mounts are for little girls

So are pokemon. Still like them as well. At least he first 250

Skan.5301:

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.

Ok let’s agree they can put 5 in the cash-shop. All other mounts (at least 35, but the more the better) should be available ingame. A few just at an NPC for a few gold for those who don’t really care, the rest in dungeons, from events or quest (if ever implemented) from world-bosses and so on.

They want more money, they release another batch of mounts in the second expansion.

Gibson.4036:

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.

It doesn’t matter if it’s not a big deal for you or for me. It’s sloppy design to release something that clips. Especially when it’s going to clip so badly.
Dolyak riders don’t have clipping problems because their armor doesn’t flow around.

And Rift didn’t have skirts that could carry an asuran family on it. They didn’t have any problems because from the looks of it, their designers aren’t fond of huge skirts.

Gibson.4036:

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….

Log in and creating the fattest norn in the bulkiest clothes to prove my point. Or the fattest Charr for some added weirdness. Their feet (or paws) will be on the ground. Except maybe if they sit on its head…

Devata.6589:

Immortal.3647:

mounts are for little girls

So are pokemon. Still like them as well. At least he first 250

mounts are st00pid

Immortal.3647:

Devata.6589:

Immortal.3647:

mounts are for little girls

So are pokemon. Still like them as well. At least he first 250

mounts are st00pid

Overall I would indeed not consider mounts the most smart animals on Tyria, and then there are the mechanical mounts, those don’t even have a brain. So yes they are st00pid. I still want them.

but they make 0 sense in the gw universe ^^
go back to Wow or whatever ^^

Devata.6589:

Immortal.3647:

mounts are for little girls

So are pokemon. Still like them as well. At least he first 250

Pokemon aren’t only for little girls. And in a game where part of the plot and some pokemon revolves around death, stealing, torture, world domination and hauntings, I’m not sure if Nintendo is really aiming the game at little kids.

Gibson.4036:

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.

And again we get to the point where you need to make a convincing argument why those resources should be allocated to this project, that would outweight arguments why they shouldn’t. Arguments “because i like them” do not outweight “and we do not”.

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.

And now you see why i don’t want mounts in the game.

Devata.6589:

I also want them to get rid of the cash-shop focus.

Dream on ;P
Yeah, i’d wish they’d do that, but somehow i don’t believe i will ever see it. We keep asking for new skins in the game, and what we get is new gemshop armor sets. This pretty much tells me all i want to know how might the mounts get handled if they were ever implemented.

Conncept.7638:

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.

Good. You have just agreed with what i was saying. Since arguments of both sides are worths the same, according to you, and the number of people wanting mounts is not greater than people that do not want them, and the difficulty of implementing mounts is not zero…
You see where i am going?

Conncept.7638:

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.

Oh, please, and the pro-mount crowd knows better how those mounts would be implemented? When they are even unable to agree what they want and for what reason?

RedStar.4218:

Log in and creating the fattest norn in the bulkiest clothes to prove my point.

Challenge accepted. Well, I didn’t search out bulky clothes, because there’s only so much time I want to spend on this, but I did create the tallest, bulkiest Norn I could.

Looks like she could easily serve as a mount.

I also stopped for a photo op with a few other creatures that could work.

No. This isn’t WoW. Stop trying to turn it into that.

Astralporing.1957:

And again we get to the point where you need to make a convincing argument why those resources should be allocated to this project, that would outweight arguments why they shouldn’t.

No. I don’t need to do that any more than you need to make a convincing argument as to why they shouldn’t.

Arguments “because i like them” do not outweight “and we do not”.

And the converse is equally true.

The only thing that really has weight is whether ArenaNet could get a reasonable return on investment from implementing them in game.

Gibson.4036:

Gibson.4036:

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

And now you see why i don’t want mounts in the game.

I don’t want 2/3rds of all waypoints removed from the game so there can be mounts. I would like them removed because it would make people have to cross the open world more rather than simply porting to their destination as even timers dictate and porting back out for the next item on their farming checklist.

So to be against mounts because I, and others, would like the game to have fewer waypoints doesn’t make much sense.

the number of people wanting mounts is not greater than people that do not want them

Where is your evidence for this?

AtlasSi.9130:

No. This isn’t WoW. Stop trying to turn it into that.

Because WoW invented the idea of mounts, amirite?

For the record, I’ve never played Wow. And don’t intend to start.

Gibson.4036:

AtlasSi.9130:

No. This isn’t WoW. Stop trying to turn it into that.

For the record, I’ve never played Wow. And don’t intend to start.

Good. You’re better that way.

Mounts encourage open world exploration.

Instantly teleporting somewhere doesn’t.

Interesting idea. But if Anet implemented mounts, would you trust buying one?

It might be fun buying a horse and zipping around for the first few months. But then there would be this one patch where your mount gets changed into a horsehead mask tonic. Would it feel the same after that?

Devata.6589:

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.

EQ Next is a totally different game, that is designed differently. If Mounts fit EQ Next’s design then I have to decide. Do I want to play a game with Multi-classing… sub-classes, etc… enough that i put up with Mounts? Maybe I will. But Gw1 never had player Mounts outside of a mission as far as I recall. And waypoints make Mounts unnecessary.

So since they are 1. Unnecessary, and 2. Undesired. Except for some that either want a speed boost … or just visual bling… In gw2, Mounts …no….

In eq next? maybe, but simply because EQ Next is a different game entirely.

As to " because… WoW." You need to see if from our perspective. This is thread number “587,908” that seeks to make GW2 more like WoW.

If you count the " Holy Trinity" threads… the “End game Raiding” threads… the " Mounts" threads… The " I wanna be a dedicated Healer" threads… the " I wanna be a dedicated tank with my own pocket healer" threads… etc etc etc etc….

it amounts to people basically trying to turn this game into a WoW clone.

World of Warcraft is a game that is still around, for people that want World of Warcraft or a WoW clone…this is Not it. I am sure that no one does WoW as well as WoW.

Gw2 saught to provide us with a game that wasn’t a WoW clone. That is how we like it. For those wanting a WoW experience…. Go Play WoW. If you want something similar but not WoW I am sure there are many WoW clones out there, with mounts.

All we are saying is..the less Like WoW this game plays the better we like it. So when someone presents a " Suggestion: WoW clone?" Thread…some of us… get a Little… adversarial.

Astralporing.1957:

Skan.5301:

In this whole thread of clever word play and non existent problems, there isn’t anything that’s really a compelling reason as to why mounts can’t exist other than those who don’t want it saying “WoW has them, GW2 is different, and we can’t have them because of that reason.” The game isn’t as different as you think.

Neither is there any compelling reason to have them beyond “i think they are cool”. In the end, it just comes down to “i like mounts” vs “i don’t like mounts”. Except of course the first group seems to be in minority, and the second groups stands on a very secure defensible position of Status Quo. The second group can afford to just state their dislike. It’s the first group that needs to find some compelling reasons for this change – and so far they are failing.

QFT!

Gibson.4036:

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.

Here is how to not get into the " should this place be auto-dismount? maybe that Place shouldn’t?" and all the threads that will be about " I don’t think such and such should be auto-dismount."

Make all of Tyria auto-dismount. I can support that.

Immortal.3647:

but they make 0 sense in the gw universe ^^
go back to Wow or whatever ^^

Yeah they do. There where mounts in GW1, there are mounts in GW2, you just can’t ride them (yet). We use animals to transport goods, so why not ourself. There are horse carriages.

Of all mounts we even have one of the least fitting already ingame, the riding broom.(yeah that one does not give you any speed boost but in many other ways it’s the same as other mounts would be)

We have racing moa’s, something Asura would easily fit on. We have Zeppelins, we have helicopters (including non-combat, pure transport helicopters like the one that is linked to an event), we have ships, we have beast we train to figt, so why not train to ride? We have stables and horse carriages at bars.

We have golem suits, the char have badmobiles (as I name them).

Everything in this game screams ‘mounts’ we just can’t ride / use most of them as a good way of transport yet. What does not really fit with everything we see ingame.

People have addressed the aesthetics of the thing.

There is also how some players will use mounts to grief other players. And the headaches this will cause Not only the players, but the devs that then have to address complaints, and cross complaints, and fake complaints by people that don’t Like Mounts etc…

The thing is…

Most players that want mounts want them to " do something". Someone said they were not going to pay money for a cosmetic mount. ( See reasons why anti-mount players do not even wish to look at mounts.)

So the Mnute you have a mount that " does something" that means everyone, even players that do not want mounts MUST also have a mount. I need Not explain this. Unless you are disengenuous you can fill in the blanks.

As I see it. There are a few ways this can actually work.

Aesthetically, give everyone on log in the Option to choose to see or Hide mounts.

Make it so that No mount can Block anyone from interacting with NPC’s etc…

No perma-speed boost.

If there is to be any type of speed boost it must be:

1. Temporary
2. use up a utility slot.
3. Change your 1 to 5 attack skills, to only 1 usueable skill… Dismount.
4. Not auto-dismount in combat. As Long as you are mounted you will get hit, and take damage, you will have to actually click the dismount skill to climb off the Mount.

5. Vulnerable to stuns, confuses, etc… a person on a mount unless he is an expert rider, is likely to be easilly confused, and dismounted….but if dismounted they usually fall on the kitten id Lucky, taking damage…or… their necks… dieing.

I feel a speed boost mount HAS to be balanced against all other player skills. Developers Put time into developing sleed boost skills, a perma-speed boost would make all that irrelevant.

As Astropoling said. Which everyone pro speed Boost simply said ’ Null and void."

1. Is it necessary? No.
2. Is it desired….or is it something a Lot of people will also not want? Is it controversial? yes.

3. Does it take any effort on the part of developers? is the effort desired greater than zero? yes.

For this to be acceptable,…factors 1, and 2, need to outweigh factor 3.

And so far the pro-mount reasons are not compelling.

PS: When the mount reasons = the anti-moutn reasons, since anti-mount are arguing for the status quo, The anti-mount carry the argument. Since they are basically saying" we want things to remain as they are."

The ONLY time that that is not true is if Anet comes On and says " we are On the fence on this, of two minds, and cannot decide…. convince us."

Only then… can the pro-mount say " your reasons are no better than ours. " Until Anet asks, they do not need to be. And Anet has not asked.

Astralporing.1957:

Gibson.4036:

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.

And again we get to the point where you need to make a convincing argument why those resources should be allocated to this project, that would outweight arguments why they shouldn’t. Arguments “because i like them” do not outweight “and we do not”.

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.

And now you see why i don’t want mounts in the game.

That would be good in general, unrelated to mounts but yes it would be the perfect change to implement at the same time as implementing mounts. Still I would love to see the number of way-points being reduced even without mounts.
Just leave some at important places like little villages and where world-bosses spawn. Or even better replace them with mini portals. Lore wise portals need to be attuned to each other (you see how way-points don’t fit in the lore at all) so you can’t just travel from one portal to any other portal. However maybe an Asura can discover a portal that is able to attune to multiple portals but can only be used in a shorter distance. That would be great to replace way-points in a less lore-braking way. However then you have the problem of going form one map to another without having to see multiple loading-screens because you are passing maps. What would only be really fixed when they would have seamless zones. I really can only see waypoints as a way to fix a problem (instanced maps), not as this great innovative invention from Anet. Letting people portal all over the place is easy to make, there is a reason why most games do NOT have it.

Astralporing.1957:

Devata.6589:

I also want them to get rid of the cash-shop focus.

Dream on ;P
Yeah, i’d wish they’d do that, but somehow i don’t believe i will ever see it. We keep asking for new skins in the game, and what we get is new gemshop armor sets. This pretty much tells me all i want to know how might the mounts get handled if they were ever implemented.

Well if you want that then ask for it. It’s all a matter of money. Many people convinced themselves that the cash-shop was great in GW2 because it was not P2W (read P2Kill) while in the meanwhile it was simply effecting the game, maybe even mainly for those interested in skins, the thing they monetize. Luckily more and more people seem to realize this. So simply ask for expansions and don’t buy gems. The maybe they will (have to) make the shift.

Astralporing.1957:

Conncept.7638:

~ 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.

Good. You have just agreed with what i was saying. Since arguments of both sides are worths the same, according to you, and the number of people wanting mounts is not greater than people that do not want them, and the difficulty of implementing mounts is not zero…
You see where i am going?

I am not sure if the it’s 50 / 50. There is a group extremely against it but I am pretty sure that a huge group of players would love to see mounts. At least most casual players. And no, nobody is saying it will not cost time. Everything I would love to see ingame cost time. If it does not cost a lot of time it means we already have it or it’s of low quality.

Astralporing.1957:

Conncept.7638:

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.

Oh, please, and the pro-mount crowd knows better how those mounts would be implemented? When they are even unable to agree what they want and for what reason?

Not how they would be implemented.. This is a suggestion-thread and they know how they would want them to be implemented. Sorry but I can’t see the argument “they will be implemented bad” as a valid argument. And when I say I want mounts I obvious want them to be implemented in a good way.

AtlasSi.9130:

No. because WoW. This isn’t WoW. Stop trying to turn it into that.
No, because WoW.

Your welcome.

Porterhouse.6304:

Interesting idea. But if Anet implemented mounts, would you trust buying one?

It might be fun buying a horse and zipping around for the first few months. But then there would be this one patch where your mount gets changed into a horsehead mask tonic. Would it feel the same after that?

I would trust buying a good big full expansion that includes many things, including putting many mounts in the world for me to hunt down and collect.

Would I buy it if it was a cash-shop item? No. I would most likely grind gold to get one and not bother about all the other mounts. Taking away 90% of the fun of mounts.

AtlasSi.9130:

No. This isn’t WoW. Stop trying to turn it into that.

Rogue to Thief
Paladin to Guardian
Warrior to Warrior
Warlock to Necromancer
Hunter to Ranger
Mage to Elementalist

Dagger, bow, GS, staff, shield, sword, 1h axe, gun, 2h mace (hammer), wand (scepter)

Hearthstone to Waypoint

light, medium, heavy armor

Transmog to Wardrobe

I think the devs already beat the players when it comes to taking a concept from WoW. Lets not pretend this is a unique snowflake to the mmo genre, taking an idea from another game that has worked well is nothing new, WoW has done it and so has GW2.

Mounts would be a great addition to GW2.

Nerelith.7360:

Devata.6589:

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

PS: Expect mounts in EQ:Next.

~

So since they are 1. Unnecessary, and 2. Undesired. Except for some that either want a speed boost … or just visual bling… In gw2, Mounts …no….

In eq next? maybe, but simply because EQ Next is a different game entirely.

As to " because… WoW." You need to see if from our perspective. This is thread number “587,908” that seeks to make GW2 more like WoW.

If you count the " Holy Trinity" threads… the “End game Raiding” threads… the " Mounts" threads… The " I wanna be a dedicated Healer" threads… the " I wanna be a dedicated tank with my own pocket healer" threads… etc etc etc etc….

it amounts to people basically trying to turn this game into a WoW clone.

World of Warcraft is a game that is still around, for people that want World of Warcraft or a WoW clone…this is Not it. I am sure that no one does WoW as well as WoW.

Gw2 saught to provide us with a game that wasn’t a WoW clone. That is how we like it. For those wanting a WoW experience…. Go Play WoW. If you want something similar but not WoW I am sure there are many WoW clones out there, with mounts.

All we are saying is..the less Like WoW this game plays the better we like it. So when someone presents a " Suggestion: WoW clone?" Thread…some of us… get a Little… adversarial.

With all due respect, imho you don’t want mounts to fit GW2 because of hat WoW-hate, and I come back to that later. Yes there where mounts in GW1 during mission but then again, GW1 was mainly about doing missions. So when you stretch that to GW2 open world mounts make sense.

Unnecessary, like I said before it’s a game so it’s completely unnecessary it’s all there just for fun.
Undesired is only buy a few people who mainly seem to dislike it because of the WoW idea. What makes no sense for multiple reasons, one of them being that WoW was not the first to have them. It’s not a WoW invention it’s something that comes from many fantasies worlds.

No this thread is not about making it more like WoW, that is really how the WoW haters see it but it’s invalid. Yes people ask for things they like and seem to be missing in GW2 and many of those things you can find in WoW just like in many other games. I know because I have been active in multiple of those thread.

While I have never asked to get the holy trinity back to get more specific roles. Not because WoW has that but because dungeons and gameplay will require more teamwork and is more profession specific. It would then become more as stack, dps and heal a downed players. That is why people ask for it, not because it is WoW.

As for end-game raid. As leader of a guild I would love to see some dungeons that require more tactics (also see the more specific roles) and a lager group of players. So we have more (and chaleging) stuff to do with the guild. Not because WoW (or any other MMO) has that. I would not want them to remove JP’s because WoW has not because I would want this game to be a WoW-clone or anything.

I would love to have guilds being able to build castles in WvW and defend them, not to make it a more WoW-clone because WoW don’t even has that (ArcheAge does). So no those people are not asking for a clone, they are simply asking for elements they like. Yes WoW happens to be one of the many MMO’s that indeed ALSO has mounts and raids and other stuff, some of what people do ask for. That does not mean those people ask or want a WoW-clone.

“All we are saying is..the less Like WoW this game plays the better we like it.”
Well nice that you are honest about it but I think it a total void reason and so is everything that is based on it. I’s why I came up with the “because WoW” to tease people a little. It’s pure hate, everything you guys (WoW haters) see that only remotely lets YOU think of WoW is bad just because it’s WoW oow and those people suggesting it must be wanting a WoW clone. No offence but that’s just stupid imho and no good reason.

Think for yourself, do you really dislike mounts or raids or holy trinity or healers or tanks (taking your examples) because of what it is or simply because of your hate of WoW. In many cases including the mount thread for many of the people who don’t want it it seems to boil down to the “because WoW” reason. And because even they understand it’s a bad reason they come up with excuses because mostly it’s indeed just that, excuses as to why not do something. However they usually can’t leave out the “don’t make this WoW” what shows there real agenda. And if you really dislike something fine, just say way but sorry “because WoW” is a totally void reason for me.

Devata.6589:

I believe that including mounts would take away the fun. I would trust buying a good big full expansion that includes many things, including putting many mounts in the world for me to hunt down and collect.

Would I buy it if it was a cash-shop item? No. I would most likely grind gold to get one and not bother about all the other mounts. Taking away 90% of the fun of mounts.

Fixed. Your welcome babe. Call me anytime.

Wetpaw.3487:

AtlasSi.9130:

No. This isn’t WoW. Stop trying to turn it into that.

Rogue to Thief
Paladin to Guardian
Warrior to Warrior
Warlock to Necromancer
Hunter to Ranger
Mage to Elementalist

Dagger, bow, GS, staff, shield, sword, 1h axe, gun, 2h mace (hammer), wand (scepter)

Hearthstone to Waypoint

light, medium, heavy armor

Transmog to Wardrobe

I think the devs already beat the players when it comes to taking a concept from WoW. Lets not pretend this is a unique snowflake to the mmo genre, taking an idea from another game that has worked well is nothing new, WoW has done it and so has GW2.

Mounts would be a great addition to GW2.

Not really adding to the discussion but when I did see our list I had to add one.
You forgot Shaman –> Engineer.

AtlasSi.9130:

Devata.6589:

I believe that including mounts would take away the fun. I would trust buying a good big full expansion that includes many things, including putting many mounts in the world for me to hunt down and collect.

Would I buy it if it was a cash-shop item? No. I would most likely grind gold to get one and not bother about all the other mounts. Taking away 90% of the fun of mounts.

Fixed. Your welcome babe. Call me anytime.

Dear WoW,

You did that wrong.

Wetpaw.3487:

Mounts would be a great addition to GW2.

And this is were the discussion fails. From one side there are those who say “Mounts would be great in GW2” and on the other side there are those who say “Mounts would be bad in GW2”

Both sides of the argument, on almost every thread about mounts, fail to provide at least some reasoning, just a blind yes/no. And when reasons are offered, they are pretty much silly, like the old “But WoW does it so it’s good” or “But WoW does it so it’s bad”.

15 pages of going back and forth… and in recent pages we got the Trinity in, expansions, gem store and personal attacks, going further and further away of the topic, which is, if you all remember, mounts.

Let’s get back on track, no I won’t create a new thread on mounts, we can just use this one, relax, breath and have a conversation without bringing in off-topic discussions.

So, back to basics, before discussing HOW the mounts will be implemented (gem store / expansion / raid) let’s talk about something simpler. WHY do you want mounts?

It’s fair to assume, that those who WANT mounts (since they don’t exist at the moment) must first provide some reasoning about why they want them in… then the anti-mount crowd can turn it down or agree with it.

The OP started the thread rather well, providing some actual reasons, good or bad, on WHY GW2 would benefit from mounts:

1) WPs cost money, so mounts can be used to get to events on time
2) Mounts make your character look cool

Gibson.4036:

Astralporing.1957:

And again we get to the point where you need to make a convincing argument why those resources should be allocated to this project, that would outweight arguments why they shouldn’t.

No. I don’t need to do that any more than you need to make a convincing argument as to why they shouldn’t.

I am not proposing a work-intensive game change. I don’t need to make any arguments. And if both sides arguments cancel out (because they are equally weak), then the things are going to stay as they are now – which suits me fine.
So, if you want a change, you do need to put more effort in arguments than i do.

Gibson.4036:

Arguments “because i like them” do not outweight “and we do not”.

And the converse is equally true.

Indeed. And since they are equal, there’s no reason for a change.

Gibson.4036:

The only thing that really has weight is whether ArenaNet could get a reasonable return on investment from implementing them in game.

Yes. That’s where (again) you need to supply compelling arguments. Which you didn’t.

Gibson.4036:

So to be against mounts because I, and others, would like the game to have fewer waypoints doesn’t make much sense.

I wasn’t the person that tied one to the other.

Gibson.4036:

the number of people wanting mounts is not greater than people that do not want them

Where is your evidence for this?

Okay, let me rephrase. “the number of people wanting mounts does not seem greater than people that do not want them”. And i base that on the only source i have – pro-mounts threads. In which the pro-mount supporters are always in the minority.
If you have any other data, please, post it, but until you do, that is the only base of approximating mount approval that we can have.

maddoctor.2738:

Wetpaw.3487:

Mounts would be a great addition to GW2.

And this is were the discussion fails. From one side there are those who say “Mounts would be great in GW2” and on the other side there are those who say “Mounts would be bad in GW2”

Both sides of the argument, on almost every thread about mounts, fail to provide at least some reasoning, just a blind yes/no. And when reasons are offered, they are pretty much silly, like the old “But WoW does it so it’s good” or “But WoW does it so it’s bad”.

15 pages of going back and forth… and in recent pages we got the Trinity in, expansions, gem store and personal attacks, going further and further away of the topic, which is, if you all remember, mounts.

Let’s get back on track, no I won’t create a new thread on mounts, we can just use this one, relax, breath and have a conversation without bringing in off-topic discussions.

So, back to basics, before discussing HOW the mounts will be implemented (gem store / expansion / raid) let’s talk about something simpler. WHY do you want mounts?

It’s fair to assume, that those who WANT mounts (since they don’t exist at the moment) must first provide some reasoning about why they want them in… then the anti-mount crowd can turn it down or agree with it.

The OP started the thread rather well, providing some actual reasons, good or bad, on WHY GW2 would benefit from mounts:

1) WPs cost money, so mounts can be used to get to events on time
2) Mounts make your character look cool

It’s a game so it all boils down to, is it fun? Many people think it is other think it’s not.
Then you could ask, why do you find it fun (with is interesting but not the reason to put it in, the fact that it is fun is the reason).

The side conversations as gem-store vs expansions are there because people say ‘I like to do x with them’ and then somebody else says.. That is not possible because they will be in the cash-shop and so on.

But I am willing to brake it down for you to the basics again.

Reason to add mounts.
Because it’s fun for many people.

Why do I find it fun?
It can add nice game-play. Put mounts in dungeons, behind mobs and so on and we ‘the players’ can go hunt them down. Collect them all or try to get that one rare because it’s behind hard content or because it drops in a remote area very rarely from a mob or whatever.

Because I like to explore the map riding on on mount. I see something in the distance and like to go there. Then it’s great that you are on a mounts back.

I like it because it gives more the feeling of an open world when you travel on a mount then when you travel on a waypoint. By food it sometimes takes to ling.

I like it because of the skin value. Try tog et the nice looking, cool looking, special looking or the ones you almost never see. So the skin value.

In Tyria, beasts are used to transport goods (dolyaks) or as offensive weapons (charr chuggers, golems). They are too slow to rival asura gates and waypoints as a personal transportation system. Simply put, the people of Tyria have no need for personal mounts at this time.

Lore aside, mounts are a feature that would greatly upset me. I find them cumbersome and irritating in other MMOs, where they’re often required in order to maintain reasonable transportation times. As an aesthetic, there are few games where the mounts provided fit the design of more maps than they don’t and that is disruptive to the landscape and immersion.

To those who say that mounts would encourage exploration: speaking as someone who’s 80% of the way towards a fifth map completion, I can say it’d kill my own interest. The only thing that ever makes exploration in an MMO fun is a world worth exploring, with plenty to do and lots of great things to see. Guild Wars 2, in my opinion, has that. It rewards exploration. Heck, the landscape itself is playable (jumping puzzles).

Most annoyingly of all, mounts would demand an incredible amount of developer resources. While there are various models that could be repurposed as mounts in theory, they would all need to be reanimated. Every race that could use them would need to have its own set of animations. Things like mounted combat and speed boosts would require the reworking of stats and runes in an overhall the likes of which we’ve only just had, no doubt having a knock-on effect for skills. Armour and clipping issues would be horrible to manage and then there’s the logistics of where to allow mounts to roam to avoid the inevitable griefing. To say nothing of waypoints. It’s all too much work for something much of the playerbase actively dislikes, especially when those resources could be put into things most of the playerbase have already been conditioned to investigate, like new Living Story stuff (maps, dungeons etc.).

Astralporing.1957:

Gibson.4036:

Astralporing.1957:

And again we get to the point where you need to make a convincing argument why those resources should be allocated to this project, that would outweight arguments why they shouldn’t.

No. I don’t need to do that any more than you need to make a convincing argument as to why they shouldn’t.

I am not proposing a work-intensive game change. I don’t need to make any arguments. And if both sides arguments cancel out (because they are equally weak), then the things are going to stay as they are now – which suits me fine.
So, if you want a change, you do need to put more effort in arguments than i do.

Gibson.4036:

Arguments “because i like them” do not outweight “and we do not”.

And the converse is equally true.

Indeed. And since they are equal, there’s no reason for a change.

Gibson.4036:

The only thing that really has weight is whether ArenaNet could get a reasonable return on investment from implementing them in game.

Yes. That’s where (again) you need to supply compelling arguments. Which you didn’t.

Gibson.4036:

So to be against mounts because I, and others, would like the game to have fewer waypoints doesn’t make much sense.

I wasn’t the person that tied one to the other.

Gibson.4036:

the number of people wanting mounts is not greater than people that do not want them

Where is your evidence for this?

Okay, let me rephrase. “the number of people wanting mounts does not seem greater than people that do not want them”. And i base that on the only source i have – pro-mounts threads. In which the pro-mount supporters are always in the minority.
If you have any other data, please, post it, but until you do, that is the only base of approximating mount approval that we can have.

With your argument there would be no reason to add any new fun content and all we get would be for QoL patches.

Because there are always people who do not want some of the new content (because they don’t consider it fun or maybe even bad) and there are always people who will like it. In that scenario if where to follow you nothing would be added.

So no new content (for fun) should be added.

And yes the mount threads are for the WoW haters as honey is for bees but if I just ask around ingame many people seem to be wanting mounts and I am also pretty sure that if Anet would use mounts as one of the advertisement values for an expansion it would also attack a lot of new players. Mounts are simply very much wanted in MMO’s in general.

Devata.6589:

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.

The riding broom is not core and to do mounts right takes 100’s of hours testing. modeling. etc. YOU don’t want a new race but many do and a new race is not just another skin – background, etc is put in as well as the starter area, PS, and race main city. I think you do, your ‘I want mounts’ campaign a disservice by your last post.

That is one mount and each mount needs to be tested with each race and size of race as well as with each type of armor. It is NOT SIMPLE to do.

Devata.6589:

With all due respect, imho you don’t want mounts to fit GW2 because of hat WoW-hate, and I come back to that later. Yes there where mounts in GW1 during mission but then again, GW1 was mainly about doing missions. So when you stretch that to GW2 open world mounts make sense.

Unnecessary, like I said before it’s a game so it’s completely unnecessary it’s all there just for fun.
Undesired is only buy a few people who mainly seem to dislike it because of the WoW idea. What makes no sense for multiple reasons, one of them being that WoW was not the first to have them. It’s not a WoW invention it’s something that comes from many fantasies worlds.

Mounts in GW1? Hm..I really don’t remember anything a player could get…even after spending 7 years on the game nothing comes to mind. So, would you be so kind as to enlighten me where these “mounts in missions” are in GW1 please.

As for mounts in GW2. The reason I see is they do not fit the size of the maps we have. Regardless on how far you are away from where you need to be..mounts are not needed for such small zones. Lag issues will pop up along with longer load times while getting into maps…its already bad with the megaservers. So even if you were trying to rush to a major event it would take you just the same amount of time due to longer load screens. Or you could be in WvW..with the bad lag it has now only two times worse due to 60 people zerging in on mounts. What happens if mounts are implemented and people want mounted combat? Your just setting your self up for even more lag in WvW or in major world events like Jormag.
Heh, you could even bypass hearts in zones and just gather exp from pois, vistas, wps, and sps. Is there a dev out there that doesn’t want their consumer to experience all of the content without bypassing it? It happens anyway but, the addition of this would just make it even worse.

Personally I run on a lower end machine and I’m sure many others do. It wouldn’t be enjoyable with two times longer load screens or an unplayable WvW. I view all of this just doing more harm than help to the game. Just my two cents.
Oh ye..excuse me for saying WoW. Only generic thing every mmo gamer can relate to.

Safer Saviour.9685:

~

“To those who say that mounts would encourage exploration: speaking as someone who’s 80% of the way towards a fifth map completion”
You mean world completion right? Maybe the fact that you are 80% of your fifth map-completion does show you are not the person who explores like some of do. I do like exploring and have this game since beta’s. Number of world-completions is 0. Why? Because exploring for me is not skipping of a list of vista’s, PoI’s, hearts and way-points.

Also I would not consider GW2 to have the best maps for explorers (like you do) because everything is packed together so much and every map is an instance. Yes it’s beautiful and yes they have some cool things like JP’s. But I do miss big open area’s with not much to do and then a little house in the distance, or a real forest to roam around in and so on. Then mounts are a great way of exploring.

Yes it will take time to develop, not saying it won’t. But almost everything I would like to see cost time. I may hope they will not only put in stuff that would not take a lot of time to build. I want to see some new quality stuff that all takes time. No worries however, I am willing to pay for it by buying an expansion that includes all those additions.

Dusty Moon.4382:

Devata.6589:

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.

The riding broom is not core and to do mounts right takes 100’s of hours testing. modeling. etc. YOU don’t want a new race but many do and a new race is not just another skin – background, etc is put in as well as the starter area, PS, and race main city. I think you do, your ‘I want mounts’ campaign a disservice by your last post.

That is one mount and each mount needs to be tested with each race and size of race as well as with each type of armor. It is NOT SIMPLE to do.

“The riding broom is not core”
It shows that everything that really needs to be in the core / game engine (like allowing characters to sit on an object while moving) is already there. Yes it would still take time to make mounts and good animations and so on. I am just saying that those core parts are indeed there because you said there weren’t but the broom proofs they are.

For me it would not matter either way. Was just to show you that indeed the core can already handle them.

I did not say I did not want a new race I would prefer mounts over another race because for me, the player, they would indeed not add much more.. I did forget about the starting area and the city. Give you that one.

Anyway, as you might know I would like mounts to be implemented in an expansion and I would expect there to be another race as well. However if I had to chose yes then I would say mounts because they really ad something new to the game that we do not have yet.

And again, I never said nor suggested it was simple and I might hope Anet will in the future not only put in things that are simple.

Well, as far as mounts are not so necessary while you’ve alread completed 100% of the map and can use every waypoint, it would be exremely helpful while crossing unknown places. I know that we all have some speed boosters, but still. It is even more moody.

Devata.6589:

Safer Saviour.9685:

~

“To those who say that mounts would encourage exploration: speaking as someone who’s 80% of the way towards a fifth map completion”
You mean world completion right? Maybe the fact that you are 80% of your fifth map-completion does show you are not the person who explores like some of do. I do like exploring and have this game since beta’s. Number of world-completions is 0. Why? Because exploring for me is not skipping of a list of vista’s, PoI’s, hearts and way-points.

Also I would not consider GW2 to have the best maps for explorers (like you do) because everything is packed together so much and every map is an instance. Yes it’s beautiful and yes they have some cool things like JP’s. But I do miss big open area’s with not much to do and then a little house in the distance, or a real forest to roam around in and so on. Then mounts are a great way of exploring.

Yes it will take time to develop, not saying it won’t. But almost everything I would like to see cost time. I may hope they will not only put in stuff that would not take a lot of time to build. I want to see some new quality stuff that all takes time. No worries however, I am willing to pay for it by buying an expansion that includes all those additions.

Yes, world completion. I don’t see it simply as skipping Vistas and running into Points of Interest either. I see exploration as just that. The Vistas are beautiful to watch and Points of Interest show you where interesting things might be seen. Jumping puzzles often aren’t marked at all, and there are little hidden easter egg areas and events all over that are just waiting for me to find them. I’ve ‘completed’ this world four times and every time I’ve discovered something new on almost every single map.

Unlike you, I don’t appreciate too much ‘empty space’. When there’s nothing to do or see in an area, what’s the point? All a mount does is make passing through that area of nothing a swift process. While I do miss certain geographical areas, like deserts, forests and jungles, I appreciate that the world has a lot of room for expansion.

I agree with you when it comes to development. Who doesn’t want to see features done well? However, I don’t think mounts can be done well in this game. You’re going to upset people, upset game balance and upset the landscape of the world no matter how things are implimented. I honestly don’t think the development cost is worth it when set against other options for development, like new continents and regions, which people have been screaming for since before release.

AtlasSi.9130:

~

Would not be able to tell you in what mission there where mounts but there sure where mounts in missions.

And with Halloween there was Horseman Saralim. So yes there where mounts in GW1. Not sure why people keep saying it won’t fit the lore. What because you can’t use a mount at this moment?. And then we forget about the riding broom or the flight we made in Arah.

“Heh, you could even bypass hearts in zones and just gather exp from pois, vistas, wps, and sps. Is there a dev out there that doesn’t want their consumer to experience all of the content without bypassing it?”
If it’s a good game-designer he just wants people to have fun, not to go down a list. In that wat the poi’s, vista’s are already bad design. Oow and I already so skip them. If I see something that interest me I go there, that is exploring. If I just need a PoI I run there until I see I get the PoI and turn back. I don’t consider that fun or exploring, just crossing down a list.
The game or software is there for the players / users, not for the developers. (I am saying being a developer myself)

Overall I do think the extra loading time will not be as bad as you think. Yes you need to load in an extra model (per player) but all his skins are already models, every mob in the world is a model. So on more model will not double you loading times I think.

Safer Saviour.9685:

~

“Jumping puzzles often aren’t marked at all, and there are little hidden easter egg areas and events all over that are just waiting for me to find them.” Yeah those thinks I like. But not skipping down a list. Many PoI are not interesting and if those places are I want to come across them myself while exploring, not while skipping down a list. I guess we look different towards that.

I like ALSO open spaces because it gives you a feeling of a big place and loneliness and you see something in the distance so you want to go there to check it out. Deserts, tundra’s, savanna, forests and jungles come to mind. I see you want some of them as well, when I think of a desert it just needs a lot of empty space to really give it a desert feeling. You can still do stuff in that open place. Let one mob walk there. Because it’s big and open you might not see it a lot but when you do as ranger you might be able to tame that rare beast, or else you might be able to kill it for a change at a mini or mount or skin drop.
Yeah even maps that have a lot of empty space can be interesting.

I guess we disagree on the part of if it would fit / be word the time. Yes a drake might not fit in a snow area but as mount it makes sense, it did not go there by itself. There are already many thinks that really don’t fit, now if they would make a purple elephant then indeed it would not fit. I also don’t say, No new maps, put mounts in instead. I see it as a big list of new features and content that together would be a great addition to the game and I will pay for it if they give that in the form of an expansion.

Devata.6589:

With your argument there would be no reason to add any new fun content and all we get would be for QoL patches.

…i have already addressed that in this discussion, several pages ago. I will quote it back:

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.

What you are speaking now is the second point (desirability). Fun content worth introducing is the one that is fun to majority, or one that is fun for significant number of players and has no strong opposition.

Mounts are a content that is indeed fun to some, but so far there is nothing to suggest that it fulfills one of those criteria. Quite the opposite, in fact.

In short, you were unable to prove so far that it is indeed a fun content. Only, that it is fun personally to you. Those are not the same.

Points of Interest are designed to be interesting. If you looked at them as potential spots of lore or nice scenery rather than objectives, you would possibly find yourself enjoying the experience much more. I wouldn’t say no to a button that made Vistas, PoIs and the like invisible on the UI though. That would be cool, but that’s another matter. Adding mounts wouldn’t help or hinder the role of Points of Interest in this case.

The world of Tyria is not a lonely world. The world of Tyria is a hectic, crowded place where civilisations have been pushed back into centralised areas due to the dangers outside of city gates. Settlements are always under attack, another dragon could arise at any time and no contact has been made with another continent for fifty years (Elona). There’s no room for loneliness. Magic makes the flora and vicious, sometimes sentient, and finding an area where there are no hazards is extremely rare.

Furthermore, the idea of a big, open map with one feature is just… bad. One feature? After you’ve found it, what can you do but cross that empty space? That’s hardly a game.

Mounts would be disruptive to the maps we already have. The way a creature like a broodmother (how would that thing jump with a norn on its back?) would interact with the map would be entirely different to anything we have at present. If it adds a skills or a speedboost, how would you balance that. How would someone on a mount combat someone who wasn’t? And wouldn’t the whole idea of mounts having skills undermine the Ranger class entirely? I also seriously doubt that Anet would bother to make more than one mount for every race, due to the crazy development involved in making multiple mounts, their animations, the animations of every kitten armour set available etc.

Expansions are unlikely to happen any time soon regardless. Were mounts to be added, they’d likely be part of a ‘feature pack’. Of course, the’re unlikely to be added.

I had a reason for mounts that I wrote in other threads that are redundant due to megaservers. But as megaservers have also made waypoints broken they have brought up a new reason to have mounts, so that when people waypoint to a zone they don’t have to use a second waypoint to travel to the event they are trying to get to thus paying for two wps where they would in the past only have one to pay for.

The rich lore of the game itself with very nicely detailed diverse cultures would be enhanced with wonderful mounts that glorified each culture. Each mount could travel differently but always mathematically the speed would balance out.

• The Asura would maybe have golems that they ride inside or on the shoulders at a 35% constant speed boost and just travel like they do now
• Charr may have actual working rocket booster packs lifting them off the ground. giving very fast 90% boosts but in short bursts
• Norn could use giant wurms like that old mission in GW1 sometime travelling just under the surface at a constant 35% boost.
• Sylvari could have maybe protoypes of the little plant helicopters they use in their home zone like lifts. They would be a constant 35% boost and they hover (but don’t fly) until they stop
• Humans would ride Dolyaks and Moas bred for this purpose at a respective 40% and 60% boost but each would have a different but limited stamina that made them walk for a bit.

A player should only qualify for an account wide access to mounts after a 100% explorers on one character.

Wetpaw.3487:

AtlasSi.9130:

No. This isn’t WoW. Stop trying to turn it into that.

Rogue to Thief
Paladin to Guardian
Warrior to Warrior
Warlock to Necromancer
Hunter to Ranger
Mage to Elementalist

All of these classes existed in EverQuest before even WoW existed, so they are not a feature that would be making Gw2 More Like World of Warcraft, just more like an MMO.

Dagger, bow, GS, staff, shield, sword, 1h axe, gun, 2h mace (hammer), wand (scepter)

Hearthstone to Waypoint

light, medium, heavy armor

Similarly… all of this existed before World of warcraft.

Transmog to Wardrobe

I think the devs already beat the players when it comes to taking a concept from WoW. Lets not pretend this is a unique snowflake to the mmo genre, taking an idea from another game that has worked well is nothing new, WoW has done it and so has GW2.

Except everything you mentioned has been in MMO’s before World of warcraft. Fact is, they were in MMO’s before there were MMO Anyone remember paper and pencil games Like Dungeons and Dragons?

Mounts would be a great addition to GW2.

Simply opinion, one not shared by many.

The thing is, World of Warcraft was not the first MMO, but mounts are.

1. Unecessary
2. Undesired
3. a use of resources that can better go elsewhere.

and

4. Would make this thread # 459,862 that seeks to introduce an element that would turn this even MORE into a WoW clone.

Mounts. Trinity. End game raiding. Dedicated Healer. Dedicated tank, etc etc etc

For those that miss World of Warcraft that game is still around, go play World of warcraft.

For those that seek something close to World of Warcraft…. go play those.

I am sure there are tons of games with mounts. This isn’t one of them, and that’s the way we like it.

PS: I know many people will now say " But look at the millions that play World of Warcraft… it’s a great game." No…. it is a simple game that has appealed to the LCD.

McDonald’s has also served BILLIONS that doesn’t make it a great restaurant chain. If I had to choose between them and Red Lobster…. I would not be munchin’ down on a Big Mac.

But for those who’se first dining experience was a McDonald’s that never visited a Red Lobster, I can understand why they would walk into one, and ask.." Happy Meal?"

Astralporing.1957:

Devata.6589:

With your argument there would be no reason to add any new fun content and all we get would be for QoL patches.

…i have already addressed that in this discussion, several pages ago. I will quote it back:

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.

What you are speaking now is the second point (desirability). Fun content worth introducing is the one that is fun to majority, or one that is fun for significant number of players and has no strong opposition.

Mounts are a content that is indeed fun to some, but so far there is nothing to suggest that it fulfills one of those criteria. Quite the opposite, in fact.

In short, you were unable to prove so far that it is indeed a fun content. Only, that it is fun personally to you. Those are not the same.

Yeah and you said that if something that is not in the game and there are people who want it for fun (as with any new content except for QoL) and there are people who do not want it, the not wanting out-weighs the wanting because it’s just fun.

So again, by your definition, new content would never be introduces because there will always be people want wanting it and they outweighs those wanting it.

When you now say ”and has no strong opposition.” that means that those with the biggest mouth always git it there way… well if they do NOT want something.

“In short, you were unable to prove so far that it is indeed a fun content. Only, that it is funpersonally to you. Those are not the same.“

You see this is what I mean.. There will always be people for it and against it. Fun is subjective so you can never proof something is fun for everybody. And so you always outweigh those who scream it’s not fun for them. So again, by your definition we would never add new content.

The reason that something is fun for people is a good reason to add it. Like it or not.

Theres no reasons not to have mounts permanent. There is a lot of reasons to have them including just because people like them because then people may invest play time and money in them.

The reason of wasting development time that some give is a whole lot of dolyak dump becuse many if not most of the things are already there in the world just needing minor modificatin at most. Asura golems or pwersuits, rocket packs, wurms, the Sylvari leafy helicopter and even Dolyaks and Moas.

The reason of lore is shot down from the point of view Waypoints are broken due to the megaserver change and Anet didnt care about that. Also there werent guns in Guild Wars 1 and other things with the Guild War lore that did change with GW2. If you want to fit it into lore in your head just put it that the a disturbance in the land caused Waypoints to become unstable, unreliable and some unusable unless waypointing within a zone.

The reason it doesnt add anything is just lack of vision. With the variety and wonderful culture Anet built into Guild Wars 2 player characters there are many amazing creations of animals, rocket packs, golems, tunneling wurms, sylvari creations that would add a much better ambience and aspect than what is mostly if not completely useless minis

There is NOTHING that including mounts would break or hold back from development if just a little thought is put into it.

Safer Saviour.9685:

Points of Interest are designed to be interesting. If you looked at them as potential spots of lore or nice scenery rather than objectives, you would possibly find yourself enjoying the experience much more. I wouldn’t say no to a button that made Vistas, PoIs and the like invisible on the UI though. That would be cool, but that’s another matter. Adding mounts wouldn’t help or hinder the role of Points of Interest in this case.

The world of Tyria is not a lonely world. The world of Tyria is a hectic, crowded place where civilisations have been pushed back into centralised areas due to the dangers outside of city gates. Settlements are always under attack, another dragon could arise at any time and no contact has been made with another continent for fifty years (Elona). There’s no room for loneliness. Magic makes the flora and vicious, sometimes sentient, and finding an area where there are no hazards is extremely rare.

Furthermore, the idea of a big, open map with one feature is just… bad. One feature? After you’ve found it, what can you do but cross that empty space? That’s hardly a game.

Mounts would be disruptive to the maps we already have. The way a creature like a broodmother (how would that thing jump with a norn on its back?) would interact with the map would be entirely different to anything we have at present. If it adds a skills or a speedboost, how would you balance that. How would someone on a mount combat someone who wasn’t? And wouldn’t the whole idea of mounts having skills undermine the Ranger class entirely? I also seriously doubt that Anet would bother to make more than one mount for every race, due to the crazy development involved in making multiple mounts, their animations, the animations of every kitten armour set available etc.

Expansions are unlikely to happen any time soon regardless. Were mounts to be added, they’d likely be part of a ‘feature pack’. Of course, the’re unlikely to be added.

I never said a map only should have one thing to do. And yes it would require some new animations and so on but it does not have to be redone for all. Most you can reuse. Just like they do with many mobs and mini’s. So one you have lets say 4 type of mounts and get those to work with all races then you can more easily keep creating new mounts based on those mounts.. they would then be of the same 4 types.

The Waypoint system kind of makes mounts obsolete for traveling, and it’s already built into the game’s core. It would be useful while leveling as you generally don’t have many WPs. Once could increase the costs of WPs, but I think the solution should be do increase the need for Mounts in some way without making something else worse.
I could see myself use it for shorter distances (while easily getting the Gathering daily on the way.)

I don’t know how to make mounts practical. However their main value lies in cosmetics, which they would be great for! Their sheer size makes a lot of space for awesome details and effects!

Edit: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/Why-is-almost-EVERY-WAYPOINT-Contested