Guild Wars 2

The only question I can answer is mounts: I want them because I just love sitting on one and looking all glam. I purely want them visually, not for the speed. That said, I don’t NEED them – if GW2 never has them, I can easily live with it.

Nat.4029:

Chyanne Waters.8719:

Why do people see the need in trying to change the game into what they think they want?
Why do people complain about the game so much?
Why do people want mounts?
Why can’t people let Anet do their jobs instead of trying to do it for them?
Why do people want to make this game into their old game?
Why do people want expansions, When living story will add more content for free over time? https://www.guildwars2.com/en/the-game/releases/

This game has taken a new route on MMO’s that others are afraid of. GW1 did the same thing. This game has to be different from all other games including GW1. From what I understand about GW1 is this. If Anet had the resources to create GW1 as they wanted to, GW2 is what it was suppose to be. They did not have the resources so they created a great game GW1 using instanced content instead. Now they have that ability and have learned a lot from GW1 in how to back ground updates, make changes without kicking everyone off for hours, and giving us a great game to play.

Do they take ideas from other games well yeah of course. All games do this, but are not always successful. Does GW2 work with other games on how people play yes of course, there is no subscription fee. This gives anyone who plays and does not have the money to play two sub games a lot of choice.

Stop trying to make GW2 into other games. Make suggestions that work with this game not because it comes from another game, but because it will work with this game. Suggestions Like new weapon skills (not weapons) with existing weapon skills giving new builds to try. Not suggestions like we need the holy trinity back. *

GW2 has the most potential for changes over any game out there because of design. Changes pretty much on the fly any time they want. Sometimes announced sometimes not. If you want to farm constantly in the same place Aka endgame this game may not be for you. If you like a constantly changing game with new things to farm or do then this game is for you.

P.S. Anet or any other MMO developer does not owe the players anything in particular to what they think they deserve. They only try to give them the best experience they can for the type of MMO it is.

This is not being a fanboy I have respect for all games, because I know I do not have the ability to make them. I also know that to develop them it takes a lot of people.

I’ve said before that I don’t really mind losing the Holy Trinity. What I hate is the lack of build diversity that stems from weapon skills. This is a spot that could use a major overhaul in my opinion. GW1 had it right. Each weapon had multiple skills that could be swapped out. This is what GW2 needs. Using the same 5 two handed sword skills with my Guardian becomes very tedious after a while. It’d be nice to be able to swap them out. I understand that it would be a kitten to balance when adding several more skills for each weapon (for each class), but it would be awesome to have that option.

I too feel that the weapon skill do hinder the diversity a good bit but i think they could remedy that by opening classes up with access to new weapons like put in a two-handed axe ( pre-launch they hinted this) or allow classes to use weps that hey couldnt use before (ex mesmer with a dagger) doing that would open the pool up a good bit in my opinion.

I do have one more question that has always bothered me. Why do people complain about using the one button so much? Once you start using it as long as your on automatic you can use your other weapons skills.

Guild wars 2 does have two mounts in the game. The Witches broom, and the Tunneling thing (sorry to lazy to look up the correct name for it). So there you go we do have mounts. No Majestic Beasts or Fancy Vehicles, but mounts just the same.

Thank you for all the responses Although I do not agree with them all they are important to all. If it wasn’t for the input of all the forums things would not change for the better. Like I have said Anet wants to do the game their way not Blizzards or any other developers way.

So there is a type of compromise they do to add things without being exactly the same as the others. They probably could of easily made GW1 a WoW clone. Would that of been fun? Would anyone of bought it? (ok maybe a few). Now some GW1 people do not like GW2, because it is not like GW1 what they are used to.

Ok I agree the game needs some help to some a lot to others some and to still others the game is fine. This game has no quests (personal story ok now LS2, but they are more like dynamic events than quests). It has no gear grind, no holy trinity, dynamic events. A few select games have one or two of those things, but this one makes them all work together.

So if you want your former game because you think GW2 is not up to your “HIGH” standards in gameplay then by all means go play them. GW2 will not cry if you are gone. GW2 will be here waiting for you to get back and play again. You do not lose GW2 it is still available even if you have to redownload it (which with the size of the harddrives these days is silly to delete anyway). And you will be back in due time, because Anet will put something in the game you will have to do. Then you will get bored again and go back to that decrepit old game you were playing that is so cool until you get bored with that one again and come back.

Chyanne Waters.8719:

So if you want your former game because you think GW2 is not up to your “HIGH” standards in gameplay then by all means go play them. GW2 will not cry if you are gone. GW2 will be here waiting for you to get back and play again. You do not lose GW2 it is still available even if you have to redownload it (which with the size of the harddrives these days is silly to delete anyway). And you will be back in due time, because Anet will put something in the game you will have to do. Then you will get bored again and go back to that decrepit old game you were playing that is so cool until you get bored with that one again and come back.

Keep in mind that this game is the successor to that popular and highly successful “decrepit old game”. So do players really have high standards, when they want the successor to at least equal or surpass the “former game”?

Is it really unreasonable when players point out that GW2’s camera system is inferior to the camera in the original Tombraider? (Pc or PS1 version)

Is it unreasonable when they point out that GW2’s targeting system is inferior to GW1’s targeting system?

Chyanne Waters.8719:

Why do people see the need in trying to change the game into what they think they want?
Why do people complain about the game so much?
Why can’t people let Anet do their jobs instead of trying to do it for them?

These really all fall under the same blanket. Playerbases are opinionated. Severely, in most cases! It’s pretty much the norm now, since the days of open-channel communication with developers has come around. It’s not always a bad thing, as devs are not infallible, and sometimes suggestions and desires become changes and additions for the best. More often than not, though, those suggestions and desires are not in the game’s best interests.

Why do people want mounts?

This is actually sort of an interesting one. GW has gone to such lengths to make mounts a non-entity in the game, including NPC forms of mounting, that it becomes awkward for immersion instead of supportive. Caravans are still needed, apparently, so warp-point/gate technology is not the be-all and end-all solution for transport. So it becomes strange that there are no ridden creatures. Not everyone apparently gets to ride inside powered armor, a golem, or a seige devourer, so the lack of cavalry presence in combat is doubly awkward. The centaurs effectively being their own cavalry is a portion of what makes them such a threat (thematically) in warfare, is it not?

I’ve introduced a friend of mine to the game who has never played the big name MMOs, just a couple of B/C type titles, which did not use any particular mount system. So no previous exposure or innate desire for a WoWlike mount. One of the first questions was, why no mounts? It wasn’t about the instant waypoint travel supplanting it (which I have loved since GW 1). It was about…style, theme, immersion.

Would I like mounts? Yes, but only if they were done right. Not a waggling of fingers, a puff of smoke, and then zipping around at 3x walking speed. Something more akin to a singleplayer TES game (albeit not horses). A small increase in speed for a sacrifice of combat capability and maneuverability. A separate, slayable, possibly combative entity of its own.

For all that, I don’t think mounts would work in GW. They’ve been so aggressively designed against. Plus the amount of work required to make them a useful, functional, balanced portion of the game. Not going to happen.

Though, I suppose a well-designed cavalry-based class could be good…

Why do people want to make this game into their old game?

Old game familiar. Familiar good. Unfamiliar bad. FIRE BAD. Nostalgia goggles and duckling imprints are powerful things. Though in some cases, older games may do certain things better. I tend to think GW1 handled certain features better.

Why do people want expansions, When living story will add more content for free over time?

LS1 being temporary content is a double-edged sword. Temporary, evolving content can indeed make the game’s world feel as though it isn’t so static, and that is a good and rare thing in a by-the-books MMO. But it’s fleeting, so it plays against one of GW’s classic strengths — being absent doesn’t leave you behind the curve, but in this case, it does mean you’ve missed out on LS events.

LS2 is apparently going to try and make things a bit more substantial. We’ll see how that goes.

Teofa Tsavo.9863:

Galphar.3901:

They weren’t mounts. Mounts aren’t Zone specific and don’t have damage skills. Mounts are used to get from point A to point B quicker than on foot. We don’t need mounts because we have Waypoints.

All you see is the movement mechanic. I guess you can’t grasp that a player would want a mount to.. gasp… ride around on. Options, immersion, RP?

Done well a mount can be immersive. For instance the horses in Red Dead Redemption were well done, and fully integrated into the game. For instance you didn’t magically appear on your horse, you whistled, and the horse came running, and if you timed it right you could vault into the saddle and ride off without stopping. The animation was very smooth.

Your could fight from the horse, And there were tricks you could do, like lasso people and drag them behind your horse. Even taming horses had a part in the game, and trying to stay on a wild horse was a mini game in itself.

On the other hand if the animation was of the standard used in WoW, with no combat and no options but sitting there, then it’s not worth having.

Just riding around on the back of a Dolyak would be very immersive to me, even if the Dolyak was summoned out of thin air. I never asked for mounts, but if they were implemented, I think that would be my favorite way to traverse the Shiverpeaks. It’s an extra, like so many things in the game are extras. And whether I like their addition would rely entirely on the implementation.

I’ve mentioned before how I really liked how they were implemented in GW1. The Junundu Wurms were a requirement to cross otherwise impassable regions. For technical reasons, they were also a transform, but that was okay. The designers did their best with what they had. I could see a possibility to implement Dolyak mounts in a similar way. Dolyaks are naturally highly resistant to cold. Maybe the Far Shiverpeaks are now so cold due to Jormag’s influence, that a Dolyak is required to pass certain areas. And maybe Dolyaks are available for free at various outposts. That would be tremendously immersive, to see many players travel on the back of a Dolyak. I could see it working.

speed buff + mobility skills > mount

Aeolus.3615:

speed buff + mobility skills > mount

Speed Buffs + Mobility Skills = Mounts + Money for Anet + End Game Cosmetic Item

If implemented correctly they could be a nice addition to the game. I’m not sure on the time and resources required to make them though. If it’s too much I’ rather just see some more zones added and save the mounts for later down the road.

Mad Queen Malafide.7512:

I’ve mentioned before how I really liked how they were implemented in GW1. The Junundu Wurms were a requirement to cross otherwise impassable regions. For technical reasons, they were also a transform, but that was okay. The designers did their best with what they had.

Technology has changed since GW1, and I think player expectations have as well. If consoles with hardware that’s several years out of date can have proper seamless animations, I think GW2 running on a modern PC should have them too.

I agree. It should be perfectly possible in the current engine. For me it’s all about the implementation though, and not the looks.

Come on guys!

There are a lot of trolls in this forum, and a loot of people too who believe to be able to be great developers because they think to be great player.

I bet a lot of people will complain about personal story of living 2 before ls 3 will start.

That’s it.

And then there are a lot of serious people who try to bring an evidence of a problem to devs, and have respect in their suggestions.

Who the hell can really start a topic with “meta berserker suck” kind of title or “lack of build diversity” while you can really play the way you want.

It is quite obvious that if you want to do a dungeon with me, and you run tanky in ac anypath, I will obvioustly kick you istant. Cause you’re tank? no, cause you’re useless.

You don’t have to ask for build diversity, you have to ask for dungeons that require different builds.

In all the rest of the game, you play the build you want, if you’re able to.

And this is just to make an example of what trolls and playerthinkingtobedevs do.

CureForLiving.5360:

Chyanne Waters.8719:

Why do people see the need in trying to change the game into what they think they want?

If the game changed in a matter that they want then they might have more fun. This might not be true, some people might not know what they like, or the change might only be to their enjoyment. However since the idea exists the action follows.

Chyanne Waters.8719:

Why do people complain about the game so much?

It’s the forums, that’s what people do here. Happy people are busy playing the game.

Chyanne Waters.8719:

Why do people want mounts?

Probably bragging rights.

Chyanne Waters.8719:

Why can’t people let Anet do their jobs instead of trying to do it for them?
Why do people want to make this game into their old game?

Pretty much for the same reason as the first question.

Chyanne Waters.8719:

Why do people want expansions, When living story will add more content for free over time? https://www.guildwars2.com/en/the-game/releases/

Expansion is a loaded word, they don’t so much want an expansion as much as they assume that a expansion will include the types of content they want.

Wrong. People want an expansion because they want the game expanded. That’s what that term means. That’s its definition in this context. I don’t want an expansion’s worth of content – that’s just dancing around the subject. You can’t just dismiss the fact people are actually willing to buy an expansion, people actually want to see more than 1 new zone.

Destai.9603:

3. Why don’t want mounts? What about riding on a horse, moa, asura is unattractive to you?

Because if mounts are an actual movement buff as opposed to cosmetic then either the game needs to be built with them in mind or they become (like in WoW) a content avoider. They become the open worlder’s version of dungeon speed run groups.

5. Because previous games set standards and convention that should be followed. You shouldn’t remove basic roleplaying functionality. You shouldn’t remove role specialization. You shouldn’t remove larger group content. They didn’t build upon the lessons learned in Guild Wars 1.

So every game after Game X should be just like Game X? That’s demento-logic. I spent years in big raid guilds in other games feeling like I was in a second job. I play GW2 to avoid that BS.

I spent years playing a magician in EQ, long enough to learn all the suck involved with trinity gameplay. I play GW2 to avoid that BS.

Your idea of “standards” is the next guy’s hated trope.

Destai.9603:

Wrong. People want an expansion because they want the game expanded. That’s what that term means. That’s its definition in this context. I don’t want an expansion’s worth of content – that’s just dancing around the subject. You can’t just dismiss the fact people are actually willing to buy an expansion, people actually want to see more than 1 new zone.

That’s what the term means in the barest of definitions.

But we’re speaking of an MMO and players of MMOs who have very distinct expectations with what an “expansion” should hold. Less than that, it’s a failure of an expansion and a sign of the game dying.

There is a set of expectations which comes with the word “expansion” which is why ArenaNet only used it once in the games it released – for Eye of the North.

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

Destai.9603:

Wrong. People want an expansion because they want the game expanded. That’s what that term means. That’s its definition in this context. I don’t want an expansion’s worth of content – that’s just dancing around the subject. You can’t just dismiss the fact people are actually willing to buy an expansion, people actually want to see more than 1 new zone.

That’s what the term means in the barest of definitions.

But we’re speaking of an MMO and players of MMOs who have very distinct expectations with what an “expansion” should hold. Less than that, it’s a failure of an expansion and a sign of the game dying.

There is a set of expectations which comes with the word “expansion” which is why ArenaNet only used it once in the games it released – for Eye of the North.

I think the generally agreed upon definition, is more zones and content. They’ve a way of meeting those requirements with something no one wanted. They need to open up more zones, more instances, more weapons – see what I’m getting at here? Who disagrees that’d be an expansion?

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

The main viable reason people don’t want mounts is the lack of reasoning why they would exist. Tyria doesn’t have horses, and there’s not really many other beasts which are of the type normally ridden. Dolyaks, perhaps. Golems, but that’s really only asura.

There aren’t even horses in Cantha, or Elona.

Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh… False.

There are horses in Tyria (world), but we just don’t see them in-game. Just search the wiki for the term “horse” and you’ll get:

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/index.php?title=Special%3ASearch&search=horse
http://wiki.guildwars.com/index.php?title=Special%3ASearch&search=horse

Centaurs are constantly comapred to different breeds of horses. You have Iron Horse Mines. You have the Celestial Horse. You have mention in An Empire Divided that the first emperor of Cantha died on a horse. You have the Necrid Horsemen from Orr. You have dozens – if not hundreds – of mentions of horses throughout all three continents in both games. In Edge of Destiny, there’s a scene about horses being seen through a malfunctioning asura gate.

Horses exist in Tyria. And Cantha. Maybe not Elona, but they’re known there at least.

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

Also, I highly dislike asura. Except as catapult ammunition.

They’re not really any good at that either.

DarcShriek.5829:

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

Also, I highly dislike asura. Except as catapult ammunition.

They’re not really any good at that either.

Asura warriors are . . .

Chyanne Waters.8719:

1
Why do people want expansions, When living story will add more content for free over time?

It’s not free. it’s at the expense of putting stuff in the Gem Store & removing rewards & skins from being earnable in game. It’s not more content, it’s far far less content then we got in the 1st 2 years of GW1.

The fact that people can’t see how much less content we’re getting from the Living Story than from expansions is mind blowing. The Living Story is a solution that provides about 30% of the content that expansions did in GW1. It’s slow as balls & it moves minis & armor & weapon skins rewards to the Gem Store.

Wizzey.7845:

Vissarion.6509:

Chyanne Waters.8719:

Why do people want mounts?

Because they are awesome???

Ok I can get behind this. Although I prefer waypoints over depending on them mechanically, purely cosmetic mounts are awesome (there’s already a few).

I’ve always liked going places on a mount. It’s much more fun to me than using a waypoint. The waypoints are a convenience for sure, but I’d much rather have mounts to travel on. Of course, GW2 isn’t a seamless world so mounts will probably never be, at least flying mounts that is.

Flying mounts would indeed be a problem, since not a single explorable is decorated beyond what we can see from the ground. They are basically just giant boxes, surrounded by an empty void with water beneath it. That is why we have gateways to adjacent explorables; because they aren’t really adjacent at all. If you were to fly up into the air in Queensdale, you wouldn’t be able to see Kessex Hills in the distance.

Mad Queen Malafide.7512:

Flying mounts would indeed be a problem, since not a single explorable is decorated beyond what we can see from the ground. They are basically just giant boxes, surrounded by an empty void with water beneath it. That is why we have gateways to adjacent explorables; because they aren’t really adjacent at all. If you were to fly up into the air in Queensdale, you wouldn’t be able to see Kessex Hills in the distance.

Yeah that’s the sad part. I think most people hate mounts just because they are in other games, particularly WoW, and they’ve never even played it. I love taking off on a dragon in WoW and checking out the world from up there. And it doesn’t “kill the exploration” for me. I explore everything on foot before I ever take off on a mount in WoW. But like we’ve said, flying mounts will never exist in GW2 because it’s not seamless. Ground mounts would be possible, but they’ll most likely never exist either.

I wouldn’t be too sure about land mounts though. Mounts have been introduced in GW1 after all, even if they were restricted to specific zones. There is no reason why that wouldn’t work in GW2. But I think you’re right that a lot of people are set in this “Mounts = WOW” mindset. It’s very narrow minded thinking really, since there are infinite alternative ways in which mounts could function.

Mad Queen Malafide.7512:

I wouldn’t be too sure about land mounts though. Mounts have been introduced in GW1 after all, even if they were restricted to specific zones. There is no reason why that wouldn’t work in GW2. But I think you’re right that a lot of people are set in this “Mounts = WOW” mindset. It’s very narrow minded thinking really, since there are infinite alternative ways in which mounts could function.

That’s the only logical reason I can think of as to why people HATE the idea of mounts so much. I guess the other reason being, would be the mount clutter, which I can understand some people hating. I love mounts though. It was fun riding them and also fun collecting them from certain achievements, dungeons, or raids. It adds a lot more fun to the end-game.

Nat.4029:

That’s the only logical reason I can think of as to why people HATE the idea of mounts so much. I guess the other reason being, would be the mount clutter, which I can understand some people hating. I love mounts though. It was fun riding them and also fun collecting them from certain achievements, dungeons, or raids. It adds a lot more fun to the end-game.

I totally agree. For me it would mostly be for roleplaying purposes though. It’s immersive. But I can understand the fear for screen-clutter. Also, I can understand if people are afraid of another required gem-store purchase, or something they have to grind for to obtain. Those are valid complaints. I don’t share those fears, because Anet so far has a habit of making most content accessible for free. But I can understand where those fears are coming from.

I’d much rather have a “reputation-type” grind for a mount than a gem store purchase. Doesn’t feel like I’ve earned it, if I just purchase it.