Actions, not words.
Remember, remember, 15th of November
Remember, remember, 15th of November
[Suggestion] Mounts?
Also when introducing them for new maps they can decrease waypoints so they would make the world feel bigger.
That’s an argument against introducing mounts. I like waypoints.
Also, i have noticed that you silently assumed that mounts would grant some sort of movement/speed bonus. This is bad, because it means they would become obligatory – also for the people that do not want them.
Which is why i don’t want mounts in the game – i would have no problem with them being only cosmetic, but talk long enough and all the people that want them eventually admit that they are after something more.It doesn’t become obligatory, you don’t need to use them if you don’t want to, nobody would stop you.
Yeah, right. Nobody would stop me from not using any armor at all as well – and yet armor is obligatory, because it offers significant advantage.
The majority of people do not want mounts that do nothing, of course people want them to do something more.
And if they did something more, people that do not like them would have to use them or willingly cripple themselves. No, thank you.
What this whole argument boils down to is can Arenanet make mounts fun while also being balanced? I think that they can.
Uhm, so far they did not manage to make classes fun while being balanced, so i would be highly suspicious of them being able to do that with mounts. Especially since i haven’t seen any MMO which did it right yet.
I believe they have long considered mounts for the game and they’ve got some pretty solid idea’s for using them.
From what we know they did consider them (back in the GW1 times, even), and then promptly discarded the idea. It is currently pretty much incompatible with the system, and would require some serious rebuilding to the engine (especially if you wanted to have mounts be combat-usable).
And here we have the ultimate aim of Incremental-ism. First state it is “comsetics” only. Then say that " maybe a temporary speed boost that uses adrenaline." then it’s " a permanent speed boost. while ridden."
I think I read someone wanted a “188 % speed boost but only as it is ridden , and cannot be used in combat.”
I Just wonder How soon they will start other arguments… say " the downside is the cost needs to be high and prohibitive."
See this is the other reason they want mounts… Visible Bling. Some people need to have something they can shove in other players faces that show how much money they can afford to spend.
And then they say " we are spending ALL this money… we are entitled to bigger speed Boosts… make them … flying Mounts…and…we should be able to fight while riding them….. and .. harvest while riding them…etc…etc….etc…."
You drop a frog in boiling water he jumps out. You put him in a pot of tepid water… then incrementally… raise the heat…. By the time he thinks to jump out… pardon the mixed metaphor… his goose is cooked.
No thanks. The ONLY thing that makes sense is to nip this in the bud. Which is why so many players are against " cosmetics only" mounts…..
We realize that it is Just like letting the door-to-door salesman wedge his foot in the door… best thing to do is plant your stiletto firmly on his instep.
The mind is its own place and in itself, can make a Heaven of Hell, a Hell of Heaven.
(edited by Nerelith.7360)
As I said earlier in this thread, we have the way point and Portal system. It was established in in GW1 and continued in GW2. There were ‘situational’ mounts in GW1, such as the wurm in the Desolation but you could not cross that area without them, so it was mandatory and you could not use them in any other area.
Mounts are unnecessary in this game and more than likely a distraction. We will be moving to ‘megaservers’ and that means they need to make sure that the game code is even more optimized. All this is MORE important than some trinket that people use to say ‘LOOK AT ME!’.
Your priorities are not universal. Distractions are my priority.
Personally I’d love a mount system similar to FFXI’s, with a proper breeding/maintenance mini-game. I couldn’t care less for a speed boost but mounts would really add to my immersion (as a roleplayer, I’d be ecstatic) and would offer interesting opportunities.
http://wiki.ffxiclopedia.org/wiki/Chocobo_Raising
http://wiki.ffxiclopedia.org/wiki/The_Chocobo_Hot_and_Cold_Game
Another pro-mounts argument: people love collecting stuff. But simple, racial mounts could also add a whole new layer to the cosmetic game, in the form of:
http://www.lotro.com/forums/showthread.php?484123-Show-us-your-favorite-war-steed-outfit
As I said earlier in this thread, we have the way point and Portal system. It was established in in GW1 and continued in GW2. There were ‘situational’ mounts in GW1, such as the wurm in the Desolation but you could not cross that area without them, so it was mandatory and you could not use them in any other area.
Mounts are unnecessary in this game and more than likely a distraction. We will be moving to ‘megaservers’ and that means they need to make sure that the game code is even more optimized. All this is MORE important than some trinket that people use to say ‘LOOK AT ME!’.
Your priorities are not universal. Distractions are my priority.
Personally I’d love a mount system similar to FFXI’s, with a proper breeding/maintenance mini-game. I couldn’t care less for a speed boost but mounts would really add to my immersion (as a roleplayer, I’d be ecstatic) and would offer interesting opportunities.
http://wiki.ffxiclopedia.org/wiki/Chocobo_Raising
http://wiki.ffxiclopedia.org/wiki/The_Chocobo_Hot_and_Cold_GameAnother pro-mounts argument: people love collecting stuff. But simple, racial mounts could also add a whole new layer to the cosmetic game, in the form of:
http://www.lotro.com/forums/showthread.php?484123-Show-us-your-favorite-war-steed-outfit
Another " because I want them" post. No, you need something stronger to justify all the changes that would have to be coded to the game, changes that are Upsetting a LARGE part of the player base…that goes against the stated Intention of the developers…
you need better arguments than " this is what I want, and I want it, and I don’t care that you don’t want it, and I want it coded in the game, and I do not care that the devs have said they don’t…I want it"
since this is Nothing More than " because I want it. " it’s not a good enough reason.
The mind is its own place and in itself, can make a Heaven of Hell, a Hell of Heaven.
As I said earlier in this thread, we have the way point and Portal system. It was established in in GW1 and continued in GW2. There were ‘situational’ mounts in GW1, such as the wurm in the Desolation but you could not cross that area without them, so it was mandatory and you could not use them in any other area.
Mounts are unnecessary in this game and more than likely a distraction. We will be moving to ‘megaservers’ and that means they need to make sure that the game code is even more optimized. All this is MORE important than some trinket that people use to say ‘LOOK AT ME!’.
Your priorities are not universal. Distractions are my priority.
Personally I’d love a mount system similar to FFXI’s, with a proper breeding/maintenance mini-game. I couldn’t care less for a speed boost but mounts would really add to my immersion (as a roleplayer, I’d be ecstatic) and would offer interesting opportunities.
http://wiki.ffxiclopedia.org/wiki/Chocobo_Raising
http://wiki.ffxiclopedia.org/wiki/The_Chocobo_Hot_and_Cold_GameAnother pro-mounts argument: people love collecting stuff. But simple, racial mounts could also add a whole new layer to the cosmetic game, in the form of:
http://www.lotro.com/forums/showthread.php?484123-Show-us-your-favorite-war-steed-outfit
Lore breaking should be a universal no no. Mounts in this game would be lore breaking.
This is not an FF game, this is a Guild Wars game. They do not have the same lore or even races (thank the Six Gods there are no elves in GW). Just because you want them does not mean they should be in the game. Do you ALWAYS get everything you want in life?
i belive that if 1 guy go away becose mounts 10 will come
No one’s going to leave the game just because of mounts, but neither is it going to bring in any new players. Do you really think anyone has been holding off on buying GW2, just because they heard it doesn’t have mounts in it? Please.
so +1 for mounts… or flying mounts.
This would ruin so much of the open world. The significance of terrain & elevation would be completely obliterated. The challenge of reaching vistas and out-of-reach locations would be null. Jumping puzzles are basically no more. ANet would have to waste so much time redesigning and reprogramming the environments for every place a character isn’t supposed to be able to enter. And then there are zone boundaries to consider.
“Because I want it.” is good enough reason for me.
If you don’t like mounts, don’t use them.
Simple, really.
“Because I want it.” is good enough reason for me.
If you don’t like mounts, don’t use them.
Simple, really.
If you do like mounts, go play a game that has them.
SIMPLER, really, is to not add them at all.
Mud Bone – Sylvari Ranger
“Because I want it.” is good enough reason for me.
If you don’t like mounts, don’t use them.
Simple, really.
On that note, “Because I don’t want it.” is just as valid a reason.
Not using them is only an option if there is no benefit to using them. Once there is a benefit, that option is out the window.
This is my opinion about mounts in Gw2- I don’t really care for mounts, but I don’t want Gw2 to turn out like WoW, I, personally, like Gw2 the way it is now, I don’t mind the WP, and even if it contested, players gotta keep an eye on events that they wanna do. So I say no to mounts because, it wouldn’t feel like Guild Wars. Gw1 never had mounts and it was “is” an awesome game, without mounts. So yeah, no to mounts. I’m fine with just the WP’s.
Groll of Ascalon:
Guild Leader of “Starkillers Reign-STAR-”
Guild Leader of “Starkillers Reign-STAR-”
There are GW2 players who claim they don’t like mounts. And they’re all like, “I don’t want mounts.” And when you think about it, they’re right. It’s like, “What are mounts? A definite solution to a problem?”
Oh, I’m walking. Click I’m on a mount. That does suck. It reminds me of that time I was hungry and I ate that food.
As I said earlier in this thread, we have the way point and Portal system. It was established in in GW1 and continued in GW2. There were ‘situational’ mounts in GW1, such as the wurm in the Desolation but you could not cross that area without them, so it was mandatory and you could not use them in any other area.
Mounts are unnecessary in this game and more than likely a distraction. We will be moving to ‘megaservers’ and that means they need to make sure that the game code is even more optimized. All this is MORE important than some trinket that people use to say ‘LOOK AT ME!’.
Your priorities are not universal. Distractions are my priority.
Personally I’d love a mount system similar to FFXI’s, with a proper breeding/maintenance mini-game. I couldn’t care less for a speed boost but mounts would really add to my immersion (as a roleplayer, I’d be ecstatic) and would offer interesting opportunities.
http://wiki.ffxiclopedia.org/wiki/Chocobo_Raising
http://wiki.ffxiclopedia.org/wiki/The_Chocobo_Hot_and_Cold_GameAnother pro-mounts argument: people love collecting stuff. But simple, racial mounts could also add a whole new layer to the cosmetic game, in the form of:
http://www.lotro.com/forums/showthread.php?484123-Show-us-your-favorite-war-steed-outfitAnother " because I want them" post. No, you need something stronger to justify all the changes that would have to be coded to the game, changes that are Upsetting a LARGE part of the player base…that goes against the stated Intention of the developers…
you need better arguments than " this is what I want, and I want it, and I don’t care that you don’t want it, and I want it coded in the game, and I do not care that the devs have said they don’t…I want it"
since this is Nothing More than " because I want it. " it’s not a good enough reason.
Lore breaking should be a universal no no. Mounts in this game would be lore breaking.
This is not an FF game, this is a Guild Wars game. They do not have the same lore or even races (thank the Six Gods there are no elves in GW). Just because you want them does not mean they should be in the game. Do you ALWAYS get everything you want in life?
It has already been argued several times that mounts are not lore-breaking. Those links I provided were simply examples of ways mounts could add depth and visual variety to the game. People have expressed some valid concerns against them (their redundancy and the visual clutter, for example) but being lore-breaking is not one of them.
(edited by Kiayin.3427)
There is no hate, I just can’t justify wasting precious A.Net resources on mounts. There is so much to fix in the game.
As for as lore breaking – it is. I disagree with you. Hence why way points were made.
I fell just saying. ‘I want mounts!’ sounds like a 2 yr. old stomping his feet when he can’t have his way.
As I said before, since they don’t have the physics (yes game physics) built in for mounts, that has to be added, as does the modeling of the various mounts to the various races on mounts (with all the different armor, also). That is a ton of work. And don’t point to GW1, with the necrid horsemen, as they were modeled as one piece. Same can be said for the Stone Summit.
It is not a one click add for mounts. I would rather them spend time on new areas to explore, since mounts will be about the same amount of work but fewer people will use them and enjoy them.
The broom is a perfect example.
(edited by Dusty Moon.4382)
If there would be no hate or prejudices about them, then you’d just accept their existance in the game. Then you wouln’t compare them with how the feature worked in way older games, without even knowing and and having tested it out for yourself, how mounts would functionate in GW2.
Something what you simply can’t do at all, if you just are so intolerant to give Anet not even the chance to proof it, that they can do it better than everyone else before of them.
Waypoints aren’t in the game, because of lore. Waypoints are mainly in the game, because they make just the game mainly for most of all players more comfortable.
The lore around them exists justz only to describe their existance, how they functionate and how it can be, that they are there.
But just by rationally speaking, they are just there only on purpose for player convenience and nothing else.
Your own’s personal dream lore is just not whats the real lore of the game, that exactly tells us, that our characters from Destinies Edge saw wild horses through an Asura gate at the times when they tried to fight against Kralkatorrik with the help of Glint.
Lore, that exactly tells use, that in the canthan lore of the past existed horses and people there were educated in horsemanship
Lore, that exactly lets us fight also in Guild Wars against dead forms of horsemen, undead as like spiritual forms in the underworld.
How many proofs do you freaking need more???? There even exist picture arts, that show them.
http://www.art-spire.com/wp-content/gallery/novembre_2009/28-11-09_kekai_kotaki/Cowboy.jpg < AND HES ONE OF THE GAME’s LEAD ARTISTS !!
http://img265.imageshack.us/img265/4959/mount2.jpg
Yes, thats from Eye of the North, however, its unmissunderstandable
http://gw2.gameguyz.com/sites/default/files/pictures/1343371347_4.jpg
Only because ANet didn’t used mounts in GW1 as a playable feature, means not, that Mounts are lore breaking, if they appear now as playable feature in GW2, because Anet was simply technically completely unable to implement mounts in GW1 as a playable feature, like how we would expect them to work, due to GW1 having no Z-axis at all. It was just an illusional 3D game, which in fact was technically just a 2D game.
Technically would be playable mounts just now possible at all in GW2, because GW2 supports the z-achsis and is technically cause of that fact a real 3D game, which is also the reason why we can have features in GW2 like underwater battles, what would have been for GW1 totally unthinkable.
However, I agree with you that mounts wouldn’t be an easy thing and nobody suggests here, that Anet should let just everything fall down to concentrate only onto implementing ASAP now Mounts.
But time doesn’t stop. The moment will come, when Anet will have done the things that they have currently on their priority list, what could lead to the point, that mounts could rise higher on their list of “To do” or better said “Want to do”-List.
Do you honestly think, that this will stop people from postign daily new Mount Threads, if ANet just focuses now on adding new zones ect. for the next years, without ever mentioning any words about other possible features, mounts included?
No, It won’t let it stop, until we either get an official interview or blogpost about Mounts, in this case especially Ground Mounds, saying that they will never be implemented.
Or until ANet officially tells us something, what their actual development plans are and what priorities they have for a certain next time on which features and which content they have high priority working on.
Because if they would do that, as said, we all would instantly know, where we are standing with the topic and Anet could easily buy themself with that step alot of time, if they need it.
When you know, that it doesn’t make sense to discuss mounts any further, before ANet hasn’t implemented first Feature A, B, C and D as like they have announced it, that these things are their current top priorities without any doubt, then will people automatically stop on posting daily new Mount Threads and no day earlier, because the first thing that you will get quoted for sure will be then the link to that announced things and a few words, that the OP should shut up with the topic and be patient, until Anet has done first, what they have set themself as top priority.
Personally I like the idea behind sub classes ~ quoted from Chris Whiteside
There is no hate, I just can’t justify wasting precious A.Net resources on mounts. There is so much to fix in the game.
As for as lore breaking – it is. I disagree with you. Hence why way points were made.
I fell just saying. ‘I want mounts!’ sounds like a 2 yr. old stomping his feet when he can’t have his way.
As I said before, since they don’t have the physics (yes game physics) built in for mounts, that has to be added, as does the modeling of the various mounts to the various races on mounts (with all the different armor, also). That is a ton of work. And don’t point to GW1, with the necrid horsemen, as they were modeled as one piece. Same can be said for the Stone Summit.
It is not a one click add for mounts. I would rather them spend time on new areas to explore, since mounts will be about the same amount of work but fewer people will use them and enjoy them.
The broom is a perfect example.
Alright. Could you then please point me to the source where it’s stated that riding a doliak or a golem is lore-breaking? Is riding horses and bicycles in real life reality-breaking now, since we have cars and planes? I’m really not understanding where the lore-breaking argument came from.
People don’t simply want them for the sake of wanting of them. I’ve stated multiple times (and so have others) that we feel that mounts would add an interesting dimension to gameplay. I’ve linked examples of activities/systems that other games have used and that I’ve personally enjoyed. They added variety.
I can perfectly understand why some people are against them and I respect their opinion. You feel that there are more important things A-net should work on and have no interest in mounts, that’s a perfectly valid point of view. But so is ours ^^;.
(edited by Kiayin.3427)
while i’m 100% against mounts for numerous reasons, claiming horses are lore-breaking is strange at best. as for why they are not in the game? well… i’ll misquote one of the writers of Dragon Age (David Gaider i think, but i’m probably wrong)
“writing a horse into a book set in the game’s world is a matter of putting a few words on paper. adding the same horse in the game is a lot more complicated and costly than that”
Server: Kaineng | Guild: Blackflame Legion [BFL]
Perhaps the only RP-oriented guild on the server
Main Character: Farathnor (sylvari ranger) 1 of 22
Perhaps the only RP-oriented guild on the server
Main Character: Farathnor (sylvari ranger) 1 of 22
Mounts would just add to lag. Lag is bad enough as it is. Ask any ranger what a pet does to their speed when they get attacked.
As I said earlier in this thread, we have the way point and Portal system. It was established in in GW1 and continued in GW2. There were ‘situational’ mounts in GW1, such as the wurm in the Desolation but you could not cross that area without them, so it was mandatory and you could not use them in any other area.
Mounts are unnecessary in this game and more than likely a distraction. We will be moving to ‘megaservers’ and that means they need to make sure that the game code is even more optimized. All this is MORE important than some trinket that people use to say ‘LOOK AT ME!’.
Your priorities are not universal. Distractions are my priority.
Personally I’d love a mount system similar to FFXI’s, with a proper breeding/maintenance mini-game. I couldn’t care less for a speed boost but mounts would really add to my immersion (as a roleplayer, I’d be ecstatic) and would offer interesting opportunities.
http://wiki.ffxiclopedia.org/wiki/Chocobo_Raising
http://wiki.ffxiclopedia.org/wiki/The_Chocobo_Hot_and_Cold_GameAnother pro-mounts argument: people love collecting stuff. But simple, racial mounts could also add a whole new layer to the cosmetic game, in the form of:
http://www.lotro.com/forums/showthread.php?484123-Show-us-your-favorite-war-steed-outfitAnother " because I want them" post. No, you need something stronger to justify all the changes that would have to be coded to the game, changes that are Upsetting a LARGE part of the player base…that goes against the stated Intention of the developers…
you need better arguments than " this is what I want, and I want it, and I don’t care that you don’t want it, and I want it coded in the game, and I do not care that the devs have said they don’t…I want it"
since this is Nothing More than " because I want it. " it’s not a good enough reason.
Lore breaking should be a universal no no. Mounts in this game would be lore breaking.
This is not an FF game, this is a Guild Wars game. They do not have the same lore or even races (thank the Six Gods there are no elves in GW). Just because you want them does not mean they should be in the game. Do you ALWAYS get everything you want in life?
It has already been argued several times that mounts are not lore-breaking. Those links I provided were simply examples of ways mounts could add depth and visual variety to the game. People have expressed some valid concerns against them (their redundancy and the visual clutter, for example) but being lore-breaking is not one of them.
In My opinion, the only opinion that matters to me, it is Not about Lore breaking. it is simply.." I do Not want it."
Since that is the status quo, that is the only reason I need. Since you want it, you need something stronger than " I want it, because it would Look cool." which is what this seems to be.
Sorry, this doesn’t convince me that mounts are worth the recoding needed for the game. I do not want them.
The devs have no intention to provide it, and I applaud them for stating, and standing by their decision to not provide them.
YOU need a stronger reason. " I want it, and it would look cool." is Not good enough to warrant all the changes to the game to allow the mounts.
Call me prejudiced if you wish, I don’t care. but…. i do care about something:
I don’t care for mounts, never did. and this game is perfectly fine without them.
The mind is its own place and in itself, can make a Heaven of Hell, a Hell of Heaven.
There is no hate, I just can’t justify wasting precious A.Net resources on mounts. There is so much to fix in the game.
As for as lore breaking – it is. I disagree with you. Hence why way points were made.
I fell just saying. ‘I want mounts!’ sounds like a 2 yr. old stomping his feet when he can’t have his way.
As I said before, since they don’t have the physics (yes game physics) built in for mounts, that has to be added, as does the modeling of the various mounts to the various races on mounts (with all the different armor, also). That is a ton of work. And don’t point to GW1, with the necrid horsemen, as they were modeled as one piece. Same can be said for the Stone Summit.
It is not a one click add for mounts. I would rather them spend time on new areas to explore, since mounts will be about the same amount of work but fewer people will use them and enjoy them.
The broom is a perfect example.
Alright. Could you then please point me to the source where it’s stated that riding a doliak or a golem is lore-breaking? Is riding horses and bicycles in real life reality-breaking now, since we have cars and planes? I’m really not understanding where the lore-breaking argument came from.
People don’t simply want them for the sake of wanting of them. I’ve stated multiple times (and so have others) that we feel that mounts would add an interesting dimension to gameplay. I’ve linked examples of activities/systems that other games have used and that I’ve personally enjoyed. They added variety.
I can perfectly understand why some people are against them and I respect their opinion. You feel that there are more important things A-net should work on and have no interest in mounts, that’s a perfectly valid point of view. But so is ours ^^;.
The amouunt of interest that your Mounts would add… as an additioonal dimension to gameplay are not enough to overcome My serious dislike of mounts.
I don’t want them, neither do many of the others, and neither do the developers…
close this thread already geeeeeze……
The mind is its own place and in itself, can make a Heaven of Hell, a Hell of Heaven.
There are GW2 players who claim they don’t like mounts. And they’re all like, “I don’t want mounts.” And when you think about it, they’re right. It’s like, “What are mounts? A definite solution to a problem?”
Oh, I’m walking. Click I’m on a mount. That does suck. It reminds me of that time I was hungry and I ate that food.
Oh I’m walking… click..hmm Nothing.. hey developers how about totally changing your game’s waypoint system, so that there are mounts because I don’t want to click on a waypoint…which is a better solution than.." click mount" but .." click waypoint"…doesn’t let me show off all the Money I have… "click waypoint " doesn’t let me show off My visual Bling!!!!"….
hmmm… “click ..mount”..compared to " click WP" is Like.." Click “frozen caca sandwich on a stick” compared to “Click Sirloin!!!”
It is Not about " gee..there is a problem..Mount is the solution." it is " gee we have a problem, and we already have a solution, that solution is called " The Waypoint System." "
The mind is its own place and in itself, can make a Heaven of Hell, a Hell of Heaven.
(edited by Nerelith.7360)
Again, the reason I am against mounts is that I don’t care for the visual experience they create. In a game that is valued on visuals I would find mounts as a distraction, ugly, and unnecessary screen clutter.
I see arguments from some saying, “If you don’t like mounts don’t use them.” That is fine and all aside from the fact that I have to see them everywhere I go and depreciating my in game experience. I have yet to see a game where mounts were not intrusive visually. That is my opinion and it is just as valid as the, “Mounts are cool!” argument.
A few people did mention that if there were cosmetic mounts that there might be an option to disable viewing them. In that case I would be fine with it. However, if I log in and am forced to see a bunch of players sitting around on Moas, bears, spiders or what not then it intrudes on my experience. That is my opinion and is as very much valid as,“Mounts look cool.”
I’ve also seen few posts from people discussing visuals and saying, “We already have bows that shoot unicorns so why not mounts,” and so forth? Just because something like that already exists doesn’t mean Anet shout add more things that are visually unappealing.
Then again this isn’t a thread started by Anet saying, “Do you want mounts? Vote yes or no and convince us.” So all of these walls of text people are throwing in here on both sides of the issue is really just a waste of time. I’m almost certain that Anet has heard of mounts before and thought about it.
The Burninator
(edited by JustTrogdor.7892)
Actually there is lore about it- The Centaurs? They are basically part horse and in LA before it was destroyed – there were several NPCs who reference horses. If you stand near the Dwayna Waypoint in Divinity’s Reach, there are two Seraph talking smack about centaurs and one of them says, “Horses are for riding” in disgust. A lot of the derogatory things humans say about centaurs revolve around comparing them to horses or ponies. So, I think the Centaurs rescued the horses, so there is none in GW, that one can see alive.
There is your lore about no horses.
…how exactly do you get “no horses” from what you just posted? i’m either missing something or i am not as smart as i thought i was. i’m getting the exact opposite
Server: Kaineng | Guild: Blackflame Legion [BFL]
Perhaps the only RP-oriented guild on the server
Main Character: Farathnor (sylvari ranger) 1 of 22
Perhaps the only RP-oriented guild on the server
Main Character: Farathnor (sylvari ranger) 1 of 22
…how exactly do you get “no horses” from what you just posted? i’m either missing something or i am not as smart as i thought i was. i’m getting the exact opposite
Why did the Centaurs attack the humans so much and basically almost crushed them under hoove? It might be due to using the horses as beasts of burden, which would be considered an insult to the Centaurs….
yeah, still not seeing it. even if the centaurs DID attack the humans for that reason, nothing says there are no more horses in human lands, or that humans stopped using them.
Server: Kaineng | Guild: Blackflame Legion [BFL]
Perhaps the only RP-oriented guild on the server
Main Character: Farathnor (sylvari ranger) 1 of 22
Perhaps the only RP-oriented guild on the server
Main Character: Farathnor (sylvari ranger) 1 of 22
…how exactly do you get “no horses” from what you just posted? i’m either missing something or i am not as smart as i thought i was. i’m getting the exact opposite
Why did the Centaurs attack the humans so much and basically almost crushed them under hoove? It might be due to using the horses as beasts of burden, which would be considered an insult to the Centaurs….
You are wasting your time with…Logic… and… intelligence. this responce to your argument is being greeted with wilfull obtuseness..( is that a word? not sure..Ok, I Just made it up.) " but..I do not understand you, and I disagree explain it again…. "( rince and repeat)… til you are blue in the face.
They want mounts. They don’t care about anything else. They do Not care that no one else wants them. They do not care that people are actually totally against them, …including the developers.
Anything you can find that would back up your Position that the Lore is also anti-mount will be completely ignored.
They want mounts.
The mind is its own place and in itself, can make a Heaven of Hell, a Hell of Heaven.
(edited by Nerelith.7360)
No mounts please. Coding mounts take work, a lot of it, and when it’s done, people go, mount on it, and it’s done. Do something we can actually …. you know …. play, and if posible replay.
um… Nerelith, just to clarify. i’m arguing against mounts being counter to lore, at least based on what Dusty says, but i am also against mounts ever becoming a part of gw2 in general
Server: Kaineng | Guild: Blackflame Legion [BFL]
Perhaps the only RP-oriented guild on the server
Main Character: Farathnor (sylvari ranger) 1 of 22
Perhaps the only RP-oriented guild on the server
Main Character: Farathnor (sylvari ranger) 1 of 22
um… Nerelith, just to clarify. i’m arguing against mounts being counter to lore, at least based on what Dusty says, but i am also against mounts ever becoming a part of gw2 in general
Sometimes when someone takes a " Devil’s advocate" Position, Just for the heck of it. As it now seems this is. Or decides to argue for mounts By arguing against " it’s against Lore." it is easy for someone to confuse your Position.
Your position seemed to be “pro-mount” you were arguing it was not part of the Lore that the game is anti-mount. Dusty showed you where it was.. and yet you are displaying the same bias as those that are pro-mount.
" I don’t Understand it, because I do not wish to understand it."… don’t blame me if I cannot follow what your actual position is, when the little I see of it, seems to be pro-mount.
The mind is its own place and in itself, can make a Heaven of Hell, a Hell of Heaven.
no, i am just pointing out that he is using a flawed argument. if he wants to argue against mounts (and in my opinion mounts have no place at all in gw2) then he should do so without using a weak argument like “lore is against mounts” when every example of lore he gave can be taken as an argument -for- mounts
counterproductive a bit, don’t you think?
Server: Kaineng | Guild: Blackflame Legion [BFL]
Perhaps the only RP-oriented guild on the server
Main Character: Farathnor (sylvari ranger) 1 of 22
Perhaps the only RP-oriented guild on the server
Main Character: Farathnor (sylvari ranger) 1 of 22
no, i am just pointing out that he is using a flawed argument. if he wants to argue against mounts (and in my opinion mounts have no place at all in gw2) then he should do so without using a weak argument like “lore is against mounts” when every example of lore he gave can be taken as an argument -for- mounts
counterproductive a bit, don’t you think?
I can understand your position, I am simply saying taking what you are arguing it can be very easilly believed you are pro-mounts.
that is all I said.
As to needing a rationale to be anti-mount. I do not need lore, although I can see How Dusty got to the Position that the Lore is anti-mount, Not pro-mount.
All I need is.." the devs are against mounts, so am I."
The mind is its own place and in itself, can make a Heaven of Hell, a Hell of Heaven.
People don’t simply want them for the sake of wanting of them. I’ve stated multiple times (and so have others) that we feel that mounts would add an interesting dimension to gameplay. I’ve linked examples of activities/systems that other games have used and that I’ve personally enjoyed. They added variety.
I can perfectly understand why some people are against them and I respect their opinion. You feel that there are more important things A-net should work on and have no interest in mounts, that’s a perfectly valid point of view. But so is ours ^^;.
The amouunt of interest that your Mounts would add… as an additioonal dimension to gameplay are not enough to overcome My serious dislike of mounts.
I don’t want them, neither do many of the others, and neither do the developers…
close this thread already geeeeeze……
Well, that’s okay. You dislike them. You made your point. I don’t care about balance issues and ascended gear either, but I don’t ask the mods to close those threads. Just state your opinion and treat other people’s with respect. You’re entitled to yours and we’re entitled to ours. There are pros to having mounts and there are cons. Can’t seem to get this across.
each armor, including heavy, medium, and light for EACH race would have to work with the horse model, which does not exist.
I never once said they would have to redo armor.
?
I am not entirely sure what you are missing. I never said armor would be redone for the mount. The mount model, however, would have to work with every race’s armor (light, medium, and heavy) to avoid clipping, which is already an issue. (Look at Charr armor, for instance).
Not once did I state that any armor would have to be redone. Maybe you should squeeze a few language courses into your studies.
So, in other words, you said major work would need to be done on already completed armor models (read your own post)… Because I can tell you not only would armor not have to be ‘redone’, there would not need to be any work on any armor models at all.
I am honestly surprised you managed to write an Abraham Lincoln quote without misquoting him. Go back and read my post, which you so obviously love to bring attention to. Never do I say that armor needs to be edited. Quite the opposite, actually. What I was saying was that the mount model would have to reflect a wide variety of armor types. Making the mount work for each unedited armor type per race would be difficult to make aesthetically pleasing.
This has nothing to do with changing already existing armor, which you decided to fabricate in your first reply. (Go back and read the thread, as you advised me to do).
And if you are going to pretend you are literate enough to quote a historical leader, at least pretend you pulled your head out of the sand long enough to read my post as well, the next time you decide to misquote me.
And again arguing a semantical choice of words (on both your part for saying ‘armor’, and mine for saying ‘redo’) rather than actually defending what you said on the issue. Simple fact is, adding mounts would not require the work you claimed it would have, and you don’t know that because you don’t know anything concerning the subject at all.
This argument (the actual argument, not your nitpicking about vocabulary) can be solved simply. Explain the exact technical limitations which would prevent mounts from being added if you are able. If not, then you do not know what you are talking about, and as I said, should try actually addressing the subject in a context you are capable of instead of acting as if you know something you do not in order to protect your wounded pride and irrational hatred of the subject at hand.
(edited by Conncept.7638)
each armor, including heavy, medium, and light for EACH race would have to work with the horse model, which does not exist.
I never once said they would have to redo armor.
?
I am not entirely sure what you are missing. I never said armor would be redone for the mount. The mount model, however, would have to work with every race’s armor (light, medium, and heavy) to avoid clipping, which is already an issue. (Look at Charr armor, for instance).
Not once did I state that any armor would have to be redone. Maybe you should squeeze a few language courses into your studies.
So, in other words, you said major work would need to be done on already completed armor models (read your own post)… Because I can tell you not only would armor not have to be ‘redone’, there would not need to be any work on any armor models at all.
I am honestly surprised you managed to write an Abraham Lincoln quote without misquoting him. Go back and read my post, which you so obviously love to bring attention to. Never do I say that armor needs to be edited. Quite the opposite, actually. What I was saying was that the mount model would have to reflect a wide variety of armor types. Making the mount work for each unedited armor type per race would be difficult to make aesthetically pleasing.
This has nothing to do with changing already existing armor, which you decided to fabricate in your first reply. (Go back and read the thread, as you advised me to do).
And if you are going to pretend you are literate enough to quote a historical leader, at least pretend you pulled your head out of the sand long enough to read my post as well, the next time you decide to misquote me.
And again arguing a semantical choice of words (on both your part for saying ‘armor’, and mine for saying ‘redo’) rather than actually defending what you said on the issue. Simple fact is, adding mounts would not require the work you claimed it would have, and you don’t know that because you don’t know anything concerning the subject at all.
This argument (the actual argument, not your nitpicking about vocabulary) can be solved simply. Explain the exact technical limitations which would prevent mounts from being added if you are able. If not, then you do not know what you are talking about, and as I said, should try actually addressing the subject in a context you are capable of instead of acting as if you know something you do not in order to protect your wounded pride and irrational hatred of the subject at hand.
This is a Ludicrous argument. Saying that " Unless you can state exactly what work is necessary to have mounts added to the game you cannot say how hard it would be to do."
You Know, I cannot say How to pilot a plane , from the Moment the doors are closed at one airport, until passangers are disembarked at their destination either. That doesn’t mean I cannot say that " Piloting a 777 is hard."
A player doesn’t have to be abl to state the exact steps needed to add mounts to say " adding mounts would be hard." But… adding mounts doesn’t have to be hard.
See this is another form of invalidating anti-mount arguments.
Since the devs have stated that it is NOT their intent to include ground mounts at this time, and since a LOT of the player base agrees with the devs. All we have to prove is… and PLEASE Pay attention:
" ADDING MOUNTS TO THE GAME IS HARDER THAN …NOT ADDING MOUNTS TO THE GAME."
Which is absurdly simple. If even one “Man-second” of work is required to add mounts it is harder than leaving the game exactly as it is.
The mind is its own place and in itself, can make a Heaven of Hell, a Hell of Heaven.
(edited by Nerelith.7360)
Let them have horses in EOTM as trial be fun spectator sport watching them fall off …….
each armor, including heavy, medium, and light for EACH race would have to work with the horse model, which does not exist.
I never once said they would have to redo armor.
?
I am not entirely sure what you are missing. I never said armor would be redone for the mount. The mount model, however, would have to work with every race’s armor (light, medium, and heavy) to avoid clipping, which is already an issue. (Look at Charr armor, for instance).
Not once did I state that any armor would have to be redone. Maybe you should squeeze a few language courses into your studies.
So, in other words, you said major work would need to be done on already completed armor models (read your own post)… Because I can tell you not only would armor not have to be ‘redone’, there would not need to be any work on any armor models at all.
I am honestly surprised you managed to write an Abraham Lincoln quote without misquoting him. Go back and read my post, which you so obviously love to bring attention to. Never do I say that armor needs to be edited. Quite the opposite, actually. What I was saying was that the mount model would have to reflect a wide variety of armor types. Making the mount work for each unedited armor type per race would be difficult to make aesthetically pleasing.
This has nothing to do with changing already existing armor, which you decided to fabricate in your first reply. (Go back and read the thread, as you advised me to do).
And if you are going to pretend you are literate enough to quote a historical leader, at least pretend you pulled your head out of the sand long enough to read my post as well, the next time you decide to misquote me.
And again arguing a semantical choice of words (on both your part for saying ‘armor’, and mine for saying ‘redo’) rather than actually defending what you said on the issue. Simple fact is, adding mounts would not require the work you claimed it would have, and you don’t know that because you don’t know anything concerning the subject at all.
This argument (the actual argument, not your nitpicking about vocabulary) can be solved simply. Explain the exact technical limitations which would prevent mounts from being added if you are able. If not, then you do not know what you are talking about, and as I said, should try actually addressing the subject in a context you are capable of instead of acting as if you know something you do not in order to protect your wounded pride and irrational hatred of the subject at hand.
This is a Ludicrous argument. Saying that " Unless you can state exactly what work is necessary to have mounts added to the game you cannot say how hard it would be to do."
You Know, I cannot say How to pilot a plane , from the Moment the doors are closed at one airport, until passangers are disembarked at their destination either. That doesn’t mean I cannot say that " Piloting a 777 is hard."
A player doesn’t have to be abl to state the exact steps needed to add mounts to say " adding mounts would be hard." But… adding mounts doesn’t have to be hard.
See this is another form of invalidating anti-mount arguments.
Since the devs have stated that it is NOT their intent to include ground mounts at this time, and since a LOT of the player base agrees with the devs. All we have to prove is… and PLEASE Pay attention:
" ADDING MOUNTS TO THE GAME IS HARDER THAN …NOT ADDING MOUNTS TO THE GAME."
Which is absurdly simple. If even one “Man-second” of work is required to add mounts it is harder than leaving the game exactly as it is.
I’d like to see you even TRY to elaborate on that, just too LUDICROUS, grabs popcorn.
Mud Bone – Sylvari Ranger
I’d like to see you even TRY to elaborate on that, just too LUDICROUS, grabs popcorn.
No reason to elaborate. it is pretty straight foreward english. The devs don’t want ground mounts, those of us that do not want ground mounts need no other reason than " we do not want them."
Even if it takes One Iota of energy to add them…. it is still One iota too much effort. Until you give compelling reasons for the devs to add mounts.
You have not given any compelling reasons. Therefore… any energy… even an erg…. is too much energy for the addition of ground mounts to this game.
The mind is its own place and in itself, can make a Heaven of Hell, a Hell of Heaven.
I’d like to see you even TRY to elaborate on that, just too LUDICROUS, grabs popcorn.
No reason to elaborate. it is pretty straight foreward english. The devs don’t want ground mounts, those of us that do not want ground mounts need no other reason than " we do not want them."
Even if it takes One Iota of energy to add them…. it is still One iota too much effort. Until you give compelling reasons for the devs to add mounts.
You have not given any compelling reasons. Therefore… any energy… even an erg…. is too much energy for the addition of ground mounts to this game.
I must be on a dislexic episode, I could have sworn it said the opposite of what I’m reading now, I am AGAINST MOUNTS as well, sorry, carry on.
Mud Bone – Sylvari Ranger
each armor, including heavy, medium, and light for EACH race would have to work with the horse model, which does not exist.
I never once said they would have to redo armor.
?
I am not entirely sure what you are missing. I never said armor would be redone for the mount. The mount model, however, would have to work with every race’s armor (light, medium, and heavy) to avoid clipping, which is already an issue. (Look at Charr armor, for instance).
Not once did I state that any armor would have to be redone. Maybe you should squeeze a few language courses into your studies.
So, in other words, you said major work would need to be done on already completed armor models (read your own post)… Because I can tell you not only would armor not have to be ‘redone’, there would not need to be any work on any armor models at all.
I am honestly surprised you managed to write an Abraham Lincoln quote without misquoting him. Go back and read my post, which you so obviously love to bring attention to. Never do I say that armor needs to be edited. Quite the opposite, actually. What I was saying was that the mount model would have to reflect a wide variety of armor types. Making the mount work for each unedited armor type per race would be difficult to make aesthetically pleasing.
This has nothing to do with changing already existing armor, which you decided to fabricate in your first reply. (Go back and read the thread, as you advised me to do).
And if you are going to pretend you are literate enough to quote a historical leader, at least pretend you pulled your head out of the sand long enough to read my post as well, the next time you decide to misquote me.
And again arguing a semantical choice of words (on both your part for saying ‘armor’, and mine for saying ‘redo’) rather than actually defending what you said on the issue. Simple fact is, adding mounts would not require the work you claimed it would have, and you don’t know that because you don’t know anything concerning the subject at all.
This argument (the actual argument, not your nitpicking about vocabulary) can be solved simply. Explain the exact technical limitations which would prevent mounts from being added if you are able. If not, then you do not know what you are talking about, and as I said, should try actually addressing the subject in a context you are capable of instead of acting as if you know something you do not in order to protect your wounded pride and irrational hatred of the subject at hand.
This is a Ludicrous argument. Saying that " Unless you can state exactly what work is necessary to have mounts added to the game you cannot say how hard it would be to do."
You Know, I cannot say How to pilot a plane , from the Moment the doors are closed at one airport, until passangers are disembarked at their destination either. That doesn’t mean I cannot say that " Piloting a 777 is hard."
A player doesn’t have to be abl to state the exact steps needed to add mounts to say " adding mounts would be hard." But… adding mounts doesn’t have to be hard.
See this is another form of invalidating anti-mount arguments.
Since the devs have stated that it is NOT their intent to include ground mounts at this time, and since a LOT of the player base agrees with the devs. All we have to prove is… and PLEASE Pay attention:
" ADDING MOUNTS TO THE GAME IS HARDER THAN …NOT ADDING MOUNTS TO THE GAME."
Which is absurdly simple. If even one “Man-second” of work is required to add mounts it is harder than leaving the game exactly as it is.
Precisely. Excellent point
Darkhaven’s giant purple cat thief thing
Devs said no.
/thread
edit; alright alright, less sarcasm. The devs saying no means you’re going to need an overwhelming amount of proof that it’s a good idea to introduce the mounts. “pro mount” players need to provide what is essentially a 20 page report on why it’s a good idea to introduce mounts. The rest of us who DONT want mounts merely have to point at the current standing statement of “devs said no.”
(edited by Aidan Savage.2078)
Mounts could potentially add a cosmetic reward beyond the scope of anything we have in game. There are no downsides to adding mount.
Correction. As stated the man power and dev time needed is a downside.
(edited by jweez.7214)
Mounts could potentially add a cosmetic reward beyond the scope of anything we have in game. There are no downsides to adding mount.
Correction. As stated the man power and dev time needed is a downside.
Congratulations, you stated something that has already been mentioned hundreds of times and contributed absolutely nothing.
Tin Foil [HATS]-Hardcore BLTC-PvP Guild
Bloin – Running around, tagging Keeps, getting whack on Scoobie Snacks.
Bloin – Running around, tagging Keeps, getting whack on Scoobie Snacks.
Also, other downsides, beyond man power and dev time needed were also mentioned many times in this thread. They do exist.
Actions, not words.
Remember, remember, 15th of November
Remember, remember, 15th of November
I have come to really dislike mounts in past games I have played. Simply put, they make you ‘consume’ the world at a quicker rate. You pause to see less people about because they too can rush from place to place to a greater extent. It has benefits, but… I just don’t think it outweighs this, it’s like starting on the path towards A sort of… lobby instead of a living world.
Though, I suppose there is ways to elude it with mount content. However, I find generally the worlds are too small for mounts. And they’re still obviously not small… it’s just if you consider scale, distances. You can’t make a game world that vast unless you go out of your way.
Also when introducing them for new maps they can decrease waypoints so they would make the world feel bigger.
That’s an argument against introducing mounts. I like waypoints.
Also, i have noticed that you silently assumed that mounts would grant some sort of movement/speed bonus. This is bad, because it means they would become obligatory – also for the people that do not want them.
Which is why i don’t want mounts in the game – i would have no problem with them being only cosmetic, but talk long enough and all the people that want them eventually admit that they are after something more.It doesn’t become obligatory, you don’t need to use them if you don’t want to, nobody would stop you. The majority of people do not want mounts that do nothing, of course people want them to do something more. What this whole argument boils down to is can Arenanet make mounts fun while also being balanced? I think that they can. I believe they have long considered mounts for the game and they’ve got some pretty solid idea’s for using them. All the hatred against this notion is pure prejudice.
Where is your evidence that the developers have long considered mounts? The game was designed with zero mounts. They would have to totally re-invent the WP system to Include mounts that grant a speed boost which seems to be what you want.
I Just do not understand how there can be players that do Not see that the Moment any Mount is added to the game, that grants even a 25 % speed boost while Mounted… suddenly it becomes mandatory for everyone in the game to have that mount… even if they never wanted Mounts In the game to begin with.
This is so clear that it doesn’t need explanation since it is clearly a case of being wilfully obtuse…. repeating over and over and over " I don’t understand that, and I disagree." til the other side tires.
Here are the facts. The developers have stated there is no intent to include any sort of mount at this time.
A large Portion of the playerbase agrees with the developers.
That means that the ONLY reason we need to NOT want Mounts is.." because we do not want them." We do not need any other reason. We like the status quo. Therefore the burden of coming up with decent reasons for their Inclusion is yours.
Next:
“We want them” is not enough. You need better reasons.
Next:
Saying " you need better reasons to exclude them. to keep us from having them." is totally untrue. All we need is." we don’t want them." That ’s it.
Last:
Your main argument seems to be " we want them Inspite of Developer stated Intentions, and we want them even if no one else wants them."
No one is saying you cannot want things… after all…
The dead men in hell want snow-cones.
make mounts with no m speed bonus (or flying mounts), and make some of them crafteables to increase the economy. so the wp problem is solved
rly? people have no mind for mounts or flying mounts on this game?
PD: meaby first of many times i will suggest this but check last post to know about my idea about flying mounts.
the problem i see for mounts is that they will deface the style of the game if u for example make a dodo for mount or other things like others mmo but have hope that they will use gw2 style to make theyr own mounts.
The fantasy absorb the happyness, and the
happyness absorb the fantasy.
If not, how u can be in one world at the same time?
happyness absorb the fantasy.
If not, how u can be in one world at the same time?
(edited by UnYoYo.7402)
I keep seeing people state the developers themselves are against mounts. Can someone link me to an official statement from ANet? The only thing I can find is a comment that they don’t have plans to implement mounts at this time.
I also keep seeing people assert that most GW2 players don’t want mounts. I’d also like a link to something that demonstrates this.
There isn’t any proof anywhere that the devs are against mounts. What’s wrong with the TERA method of using mounts? You still see plenty of the world on riding mounts, they look cool as heck, don’t go too fast either so you are able to explore and they don’t clutter up anything imo. They would not ruin anything if you asked me.
There isn’t any proof anywhere that the devs are against mounts. What’s wrong with the TERA method of using mounts? You still see plenty of the world on riding mounts, they look cool as heck, don’t go too fast either so you are able to explore and they don’t clutter up anything imo. They would not ruin anything if you asked me.
There is evidence that the developers do not have any intention of adding mounts at this time.
There is also a LOT of evidence that the developers are doing everything they can think of to make ground mounts completely, and totally unnecessary.
It’s called " The Waypoint System"
What is wrong with the Tera method of using mounts is simple.
1. This is Not Tera.
2. We do not wish any ground mounts in any way, shape, or form. Tera mounts, WoW mounts, Uncle Jo Shmo’s used mounts….
That is what is wrong with Tera’s way of using mounts…they are mounts. We do not want mounts.
The mind is its own place and in itself, can make a Heaven of Hell, a Hell of Heaven.
Also when introducing them for new maps they can decrease waypoints so they would make the world feel bigger.
That’s an argument against introducing mounts. I like waypoints.
Also, i have noticed that you silently assumed that mounts would grant some sort of movement/speed bonus. This is bad, because it means they would become obligatory – also for the people that do not want them.
Which is why i don’t want mounts in the game – i would have no problem with them being only cosmetic, but talk long enough and all the people that want them eventually admit that they are after something more.It doesn’t become obligatory, you don’t need to use them if you don’t want to, nobody would stop you. The majority of people do not want mounts that do nothing, of course people want them to do something more. What this whole argument boils down to is can Arenanet make mounts fun while also being balanced? I think that they can. I believe they have long considered mounts for the game and they’ve got some pretty solid idea’s for using them. All the hatred against this notion is pure prejudice.
Where is your evidence that the developers have long considered mounts? The game was designed with zero mounts. They would have to totally re-invent the WP system to Include mounts that grant a speed boost which seems to be what you want.
I Just do not understand how there can be players that do Not see that the Moment any Mount is added to the game, that grants even a 25 % speed boost while Mounted… suddenly it becomes mandatory for everyone in the game to have that mount… even if they never wanted Mounts In the game to begin with.
This is so clear that it doesn’t need explanation since it is clearly a case of being wilfully obtuse…. repeating over and over and over " I don’t understand that, and I disagree." til the other side tires.
Here are the facts. The developers have stated there is no intent to include any sort of mount at this time.
A large Portion of the playerbase agrees with the developers.
That means that the ONLY reason we need to NOT want Mounts is.." because we do not want them." We do not need any other reason. We like the status quo. Therefore the burden of coming up with decent reasons for their Inclusion is yours.
Next:
“We want them” is not enough. You need better reasons.
Next:
Saying " you need better reasons to exclude them. to keep us from having them." is totally untrue. All we need is." we don’t want them." That ’s it.
Last:
Your main argument seems to be " we want them Inspite of Developer stated Intentions, and we want them even if no one else wants them."
No one is saying you cannot want things… after all…
The dead men in hell want snow-cones.
make mounts with no m speed bonus (or flying mounts), and make some of them crafteables to increase the economy. so the wp problem is solved
rly? people have no mind for mounts or flying mounts on this game?
PD: meaby first of many times i will suggest this but check last post to know about my idea about flying mounts.
the problem i see for mounts is that they will deface the style of the game if u for example make a dodo for mount or other things like others mmo but have hope that they will use gw2 style to make theyr own mounts.
We do not want mounts of any sort. Craftable, …not-craftable… gem shop purchased… quest reward mounts… we do not want any mounts.
PS There is No WP problem, there are just players that have a problem with WP’s. But that is a personal problem that players have. Not a WP problem.
The mind is its own place and in itself, can make a Heaven of Hell, a Hell of Heaven.
(edited by Nerelith.7360)
ok i guess we won’t have mounts then since people are so against it lolz