Originally posted by xenogias

Originally posted by Pivotelite

Originally posted by gainesvilleg

Originally posted by Dekarx12

Hey guys, with GW2 around the corner and looking at all the new innovative things It's bringing to the table... I'm seeing people worrying about things like no mounts and no trinity no instant raids/endgame things along that line, which are game breakers for some..  so this game will fail blah blah blah... I for one am excited for change... cause I'm tired of the same old... so

two Questions

Why is it so hard for people to try something new and change things up a bit? is it addiction? or dedication cause of the time invested into a toon?

and why would people think because it not molded around the same formula like successes like wow,  games that try something new would fail?

thoughts?

You are right.  I'm so inadequate for not accepting the fact that they want to charge me money to buy keys in order to open chests I find in the game.  I'm just so closed minded I guess for not liking that brilliant innovation.

Not everything about GW2 is innovative, and not all the innovations will be for the better.  In fact, some of their proposed cash shop innovations are down right insulting.

Dynamic events and RvRvR are innovating yes.  But failing to include mounts and only including small-team coop instances I fail to see as innovations but more simply things they didn't bother to include.  That's like saying SWTOR was innovative for not including macros.

This, I do not fear change, I am completely open to it, I just will not instantly accept any change as "good". Whether I like GW2 or not only time will tell but I won't be parading on about the game like it is the second coming of Jesus all over forums until I have thoroughly played it.

 

We do not fear change, we just know what to expect as change is not always good and totally preferential based to boot.

 

For example, being against the lack of mounts is not fear of change, it's removing a feature, whether they are useful or not, it's a feature and one that is common in most game, this is only one example amongst others.

I wouldnt use fear when it comes to the mounts personally. Like you guys have pointed out mounts are a feature. While some like them others find them irritating. I'm holding out hope thier waypoint system works bettter (for me) than a mount travel system. Others will prefer the fluff of a mount getting them around. Neither side is right or wrong really its all personal preference.

See, this is an example of not totally understanding why many wanted mounts.  Sure, there is the fluff factor of getting a rare mount and visually it is cool.  But to me the biggest dissapointment is that the need for mounts is obsoleted by putting in a teleport system.  A teleport system is not an innovation (this concept has been around for decades) but rather they are dropping the immersive aspect of a world where distance and travel is a factor.  Teleportation and loading screens in general is a real immersion breaker for many.

Originally posted by cyress8

 

---

Originally posted by gainesvilleg

 

...Teleportation and loading screens in general is a real immersion breaker for many.

---

Understandable, however, while I was playing the game, my immersion factor was skyhigh. While I was in Diessa in the charr lands. I was constantly seeing things that looked natural. Watching charr guards fighting off separatists, watching them revive fallen comrades on their own, (NPCs can revive each other) within that same area seeing more separatists jump out of bushes and the trees to attack the charr guards again as they continue their patrol. I've seen stuff like this all over the place. Wish I could show the pic of the Giant that wiped out a whole town, and not just a little town with 5 or 6 npcs but a big town with 50-60 npcs. Also, I stayed the loading screens are really not bad at all. You will probably explore a zone for at least a day before you might want to change. Furthermore, zones have multiple types of scenery, so you will see varying enviroments while staying in that 1 zone.

 

I also need to add, I do not tp around that often, I play the game like skyrim and just go randomly around and find things to do. Tping does not help in that regard since you might miss some DEs.

I have no doubt the dynamic events and local environments are more immersive than many other MMOs.  I just wish they found a way to make travel and distance more meaningful as well.  I've posted about this before, but sometimes a feature we all use and that makes life easier is not necessarily something they should give us.  I think teleportation is one of those features.  Teleportation becomes too convenient not to use, but once you start using it the game changes from a living breathing continuous world to a series of disconnected adventures.  To me, long term it reduces immersion.

Originally posted by gainesvilleg

See, this is an example of not totally understanding why many wanted mounts.  Sure, there is the fluff factor of getting a rare mount and visually it is cool.  But to me the biggest dissapointment is that the need for mounts is obsoleted by putting in a teleport system.  A teleport system is not an innovation (this concept has been around for decades) but rather they are dropping the immersive aspect of a world where distance and travel is a factor.  Teleportation and loading screens in general is a real immersion breaker for many.

I can understand not liking the teleport system. I can understand liking it. However, I don't understand the concept that someone doesn't like the teleport system so they complain about mounts instead of teleport system. That logic to me does not hold water. 

That being said, can someone explain to me how not having mounts is missing a 'feature' and not simply doing something a different way visually, a choice in art and effects? All the same gameplay functionality of a mount is there. You sheathe your weapon and you run faster, the same speed bonus as a mount. The difference is you do not visually pull a horse out of your pocket.

mount system for most mmos: you are out of combat, you click on your mount and after a moment you poof on a mount that appeared out of thin air. you then move faster, but if you enter combat you are slowed back down and the mount vanishes

GW2 system: you are out of combat, you sheathe your weapons and when that animation is done you then move faster. But if you enter combat, you draw your weapons and are slowed back down.

I can completely understand if you like the mount visually as opposed to the weapons drawn/put away. Cool. However what functionality of the game is missing?

Originally posted by JesseBFox

Originally posted by gainesvilleg

See, this is an example of not totally understanding why many wanted mounts.  Sure, there is the fluff factor of getting a rare mount and visually it is cool.  But to me the biggest dissapointment is that the need for mounts is obsoleted by putting in a teleport system.  A teleport system is not an innovation (this concept has been around for decades) but rather they are dropping the immersive aspect of a world where distance and travel is a factor.  Teleportation and loading screens in general is a real immersion breaker for many.

I can understand not liking the teleport system. I can understand liking it. However, I don't understand the concept that someone doesn't like the teleport system so they complain about mounts instead of teleport system. That logic to me does not hold water. 

That being said, can someone explain to me how not having mounts is missing a 'feature' ...

You missed my point then.  The teleport system negated the need for mounts because travel becomes trivial.  If travel is trivial, then mounts are pointless other than "fluff."  In fact, with a teleport system there is almost no need for a world map either.  Why not just have a list of areas to go since the geographical relationship of areas is pointless with a teleport system.  So GW2 could get rid of the world map as well.  If they did, people would then complain of the missing world map feature and backers of GW2 would say "it is just fluff:  you can teleport anywhere you want it doesn't matter what the world map says"

So that is why not liking the teleport system can have one complaining about mounts because that is a secondary effect.  But some people also like the "fluff" aspect of mounts as well that have nothing to do with teleport so complaining about mounts becomes even more popular.

And yes, mounts are most definately a feature so not having mounts is missing a feature.  To me, the teleportation issue is even bigger, because it has a ripple effect on other things like mounts and world map...

GW2 didn't break any real molds... you will see when you see...

Originally posted by Dekarx12

Hey guys, with GW2 around the corner and looking at all the new innovative things It's bringing to the table... I'm seeing people worrying about things like no mounts and no trinity no instant raids/endgame things along that line, which are game breakers for some..  so this game will fail blah blah blah... I for one am excited for change... cause I'm tired of the same old... so

two Questions

Why is it so hard for people to try something new and change things up a bit? is it addiction? or dedication cause of the time invested into a toon?

and why would people think because it not molded around the same formula like successes like wow,  games that try something new would fail?

thoughts?

Some people on these forums just want games to fail that they don't want to play. It's weird that people who don't work for these companies and don't have family that works there would just suddenly want this when a game is launched. The second crowd are those who don't have reading comprehension, don't pay any attention to facts, and have no sense of logical thought progression who just jump on here with wild specualative single sentence non-sense and tell everyone that certain features are horrible, these features they claim will rape and pillage and kill small children. It's just as bad as the first kind of poster.

The rest of us who are honestly having real conversations about how nice it is that a gaming company isn't copying everyone else and is thinking for a change, are sitting around facepalming and shaking our heads at the spectacle of it all.

Originally posted by gainesvilleg

Originally posted by JesseBFox

Originally posted by gainesvilleg

See, this is an example of not totally understanding why many wanted mounts.  Sure, there is the fluff factor of getting a rare mount and visually it is cool.  But to me the biggest dissapointment is that the need for mounts is obsoleted by putting in a teleport system.  A teleport system is not an innovation (this concept has been around for decades) but rather they are dropping the immersive aspect of a world where distance and travel is a factor.  Teleportation and loading screens in general is a real immersion breaker for many.

I can understand not liking the teleport system. I can understand liking it. However, I don't understand the concept that someone doesn't like the teleport system so they complain about mounts instead of teleport system. That logic to me does not hold water. 

That being said, can someone explain to me how not having mounts is missing a 'feature' ...

You missed my point then.  The teleport system negated the need for mounts because travel becomes trivial.  If travel is trivial, then mounts are pointless other than "fluff."  In fact, with a teleport system there is almost no need for a world map either.  Why not just have a list of areas to go since the geographical relationship of areas is pointless with a teleport system.  So GW2 could get rid of the world map as well.  If they did, people would then complain of the missing world map feature and backers of GW2 would say "it is just fluff:  you can teleport anywhere you want it doesn't matter what the world map says"

So that is why not liking the teleport system can have one complaining about mounts because that is a secondary effect.  But some people also like the "fluff" aspect of mounts as well that have nothing to do with teleport so complaining about mounts becomes even more popular.

And yes, mounts are most definately a feature so not having mounts is missing a feature.  To me, the teleportation issue is even bigger, because it has a ripple effect on other things like mounts and world map...

You never explained how not having mounts is missing a feature if the same gameplay mechanic is in play, and the difference is only cosmetic. 

I get your point about how if you do not like the teleport system it could trickle down to not liking mounts. However that only makes sense if mounts have a gameplay mechanic that makes them obsolete by teleportation. In otherwords if the game is missing a way to speed up your movement out of combat via mounts. The fact is your movement is increased out of combat, the mechanics of a mount system is there. So the people complaining about no mounts has nothing to do with the lack of a speed buff, since the speed buff is in game. The difference is purely cosmetic, and has nothing to do with the teleport system.

Your jumping to conclusions about not needing a world map also holds water only if either teleport can take you anywhere or if the waypoints are so abundant that faster movement is not needed at all. Since they have had faster movement out of combat all along they clearly felt there was a need. If there is a need to move faster then the waypoints really can't be overabundant. If they were, I imagine there will be a ton of complaints from their testers. Whether there are too many for your personal taste is up to you to decide but your example of not needing a world map, imho, is incredibly extreme and borders on hyperbole to make a point.

So I will ask again, if all the mechanics of a mount system are there and the difference is just cosmetic (put away weapons vs sitting on a mount) how is it a missing feature and how is it impacted by other features (teleporting)? I can totally understand wanting the graphic of the mount, and not liking their choice but how is it a feature?

Originally posted by kabitoshin

Finally a game that did away with the trinity system, no more looking for tanks and healers! The no mounts kinda sucks but we got fast travel.

One reason they mentioend they didn't want mounts, especially flying ones is that it disconnects you and makes you miss a lot. But if immersion and community were paramount, a simple horse at 2x speed vs teleporting would fit that bill much more. For communities sake that is better then fast travel. With only fast travel between major ports.

Originally posted by HorrorScope

Originally posted by kabitoshin

Finally a game that did away with the trinity system, no more looking for tanks and healers! The no mounts kinda sucks but we got fast travel.

 

One reason they mentioend they didn't want mounts, especially flying ones is that it disconnects you and makes you miss a lot. But if immersion and community were paramount, a simple horse at 2x speed vs teleporting would fit that bill much more. For communities sake that is better then fast travel. With only fast travel between major ports.

I believe what they said was, and I don't have the link right here, that they didn't want a way to fly because it disrupts the perceived scale of the game and the game world. They never mentioned not wanting mounts, they said if they did mounts they would want to do them right. I suspect with how the rest of the game is done that they would make them like an environmental weapon or a siege engine in that it changes your first 5 slots on your hotbar when you are on a mount. This is just speculation and reading between lines. They also insinuated that they may put mounts in after release.

But I would not suspect them being any faster than a player with their weapons sheathed. It just would be different. Who knows they made have a radically different idea of mounts.

Originally posted by HorrorScope

Originally posted by kabitoshin

Finally a game that did away with the trinity system, no more looking for tanks and healers! The no mounts kinda sucks but we got fast travel.

 

One reason they mentioend they didn't want mounts, especially flying ones is that it disconnects you and makes you miss a lot. But if immersion and community were paramount, a simple horse at 2x speed vs teleporting would fit that bill much more. For communities sake that is better then fast travel. With only fast travel between major ports.

True the fallacy of that logic is obvious:

1) "Having mounts, especially flying ones is that it disconnects you and makes you miss a lot"

2) "So we have decided to implement teleporting instead"

LOL

Originally posted by gainesvilleg

Originally posted by HorrorScope

Originally posted by kabitoshin

Finally a game that did away with the trinity system, no more looking for tanks and healers! The no mounts kinda sucks but we got fast travel.

 

One reason they mentioend they didn't want mounts, especially flying ones is that it disconnects you and makes you miss a lot. But if immersion and community were paramount, a simple horse at 2x speed vs teleporting would fit that bill much more. For communities sake that is better then fast travel. With only fast travel between major ports.

True the fallacy of that logic is obvious:

1) "Having mounts, especially flying ones is that it disconnects you and makes you miss a lot"

2) "So we have decided to implement teleporting instead"

LOL

This would make sense if that was indeed the quote. The reference is to an interview Martin Kerstein did for Wartower, in german. In the transcript of the translation to english Martin can be quoted (if you can really quote a translation)

"My opinion is that while flying on mounts one loses a bit of the perspective for the world. If you are on ground level, you see how huge that charr citadel is, when it rises before you. If you fly over it with your flying mount, well, then it is just a building there on the ground. The perspective on the sheer size of the world is lost if you simply fly over everything. But that is just personal opinion. Mounts, like I said, not at launch, but we never said never. If we want to introduce mounts, we want to make it right."

That is where this reference is from. As you can see it is perspective. Look, I understand and can sympathize that this dev team made a design choice you do not agree with. This happens every day. Please be objective on other aspects of the game rather than enter it with a bias. There are many things they did that I do not agree with but can understand why they made their choices and I will reserve my personal overall opinion of the game until I play it. Nothing so far for me is a deal breaker so I will at least try it out. But really, let's keep a level head and be rational adults about discusssion.

edit for source of interview: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eSZpEhlb2W0&feature=&hl=en

No mounts encourages us to explore the zones more and not just race through it. We are all lazy buggers sitting at our computers playing games anyways so maybe watching our toons run will be like a workout.

Originally posted by Kyleran

To address the points in the OP.

Regarding mounts (or lack thereof).  I was playing the Tera beta this weekend and specifically made sure I got to level 11 (bless the Dev's there) to see what it was like to get a mount.  People like mounts.  I like mounts.  Removing them has nothing to do with fear of change, I just enjoy mounts. (esp flying ones)

Regarding the trinity.  OK, you got me here. Since I've not played a MMORPG that didn't employ some form of trinity mechanic, I remain wary of this change. Did I mention my preferred class is Dedicated Healer?  So it might be understandable that I'm not looking forward to this "improvement" in MMORPG gaming, but hey, I'll give it a shot and see how it goes.

Raiding - I hate raiding with a passion, so no love lost from me on this front.  I'm looking forward to the Dynamic content and some of the other innovative content the game is bringing to replace it, so I'm happy with this development.

One the OP didn't really mention, the flat progresssion curve at the top, where in terms of character power everyone can be "equal".  I'm really skeptical about this one, because to me MMORPG's are all about continuous character advancement, particuarly in terms of actual power (vs fluff/cosmetics/titles) and it's this aspect of GW2 that makes me think its more of a short term game for me.

What can I say, I enjoy the endless spiral of progression (and no, gear progression isn't at all what I'm talking about, think more along the lines of how DAOC did it with realm ranks/abilities or even EVE)

So yes, in some ways it's hard to discard conventions or even features that I've come to enjoy over the years in my favorite genre, but that doesn't mean I'm not willing to try something different to see if I'm going to like it.

 WELL SAID

The developers of GW2 hav decided to do things differently. THey have a very specific agenda as set out in their manifesto. Evidently this has resonated with many people.

Reminds me of the hippy movement of the sixties...."You just dont get it maaaaann, the trinity is whats holding us downnnn dude" LOL 

Thats cool I didnt think there was anything particularly wrong with power progression feeling powerful, lusiting after more powerful items that i worked my ass off for. Even if i dint have the skills or ability to get the most powerful item. The idea that there was a more powerful item that i may one day get KEPT ME PLAYING!

 

What they are doing with power and progression is directed at the heart of what made these games so addicting and popular to begin with. They think that this is a good business model. 

 

I can assure you that every other publisher out there is waiting to see if they are correct. 

 

Originally posted by JesseBFox

Originally posted by gainesvilleg

Originally posted by HorrorScope

Originally posted by kabitoshin

Finally a game that did away with the trinity system, no more looking for tanks and healers! The no mounts kinda sucks but we got fast travel.

 

One reason they mentioend they didn't want mounts, especially flying ones is that it disconnects you and makes you miss a lot. But if immersion and community were paramount, a simple horse at 2x speed vs teleporting would fit that bill much more. For communities sake that is better then fast travel. With only fast travel between major ports.

True the fallacy of that logic is obvious:

1) "Having mounts, especially flying ones is that it disconnects you and makes you miss a lot"

2) "So we have decided to implement teleporting instead"

LOL

This would make sense if that was indeed the quote. The reference is to an interview Martin Kerstein did for Wartower, in german. In the transcript of the translation to english Martin can be quoted (if you can really quote a translation)

"My opinion is that while flying on mounts one loses a bit of the perspective for the world. If you are on ground level, you see how huge that charr citadel is, when it rises before you. If you fly over it with your flying mount, well, then it is just a building there on the ground. The perspective on the sheer size of the world is lost if you simply fly over everything. But that is just personal opinion. Mounts, like I said, not at launch, but we never said never. If we want to introduce mounts, we want to make it right."

That is where this reference is from. As you can see it is perspective. Look, I understand and can sympathize that this dev team made a design choice you do not agree with. This happens every day. Please be objective on other aspects of the game rather than enter it with a bias. There are many things they did that I do not agree with but can understand why they made their choices and I will reserve my personal overall opinion of the game until I play it. Nothing so far for me is a deal breaker so I will at least try it out. But really, let's keep a level head and be rational adults about discusssion.

edit for source of interview: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eSZpEhlb2W0&feature=&hl=en

Don't assume bias.

I just find teleporting not that immersive either. However I will grant that you have to make it to that area at least once on foot. But if it's like typical mmo's once that is done, you will still be back and forth in the same area many times and then it's Teleport-Trade / Teleport-Fight. That's not all that perfect either. If you had a reasoably paced mount, it keeps you in the world more, witness the journey better, see others and wave.

I'm not selling this as a reason why you shouldn't play the game, just sayin.

Originally posted by kaco

No mounts encourages us to explore the zones more and not just race through it. We are all lazy buggers sitting at our computers playing games anyways so maybe watching our toons run will be like a workout.

How does that encourage exploring when in GW2 you gain a speed boost out of combat when you sheathe your weapons. This is the same speed boost you would get with a mount. So it functionality is the same. Are you saying that the lack of a horse model is what is encouraging you to explore, or are you saying you did not realize the mechanics of a mount is there just not the visual?

Originally posted by HorrorScope

Don't assume bias.

I just find teleporting not that immersive either. However I will grant that you have to make it to that area at least once on foot. But if it's like typical mmo's once that is done, you will still be back and forth in the same area many times and then it's Teleport-Trade / Teleport-Fight. That's not all that perfect either. If you had a reasoably paced mount, it keeps you in the world more, witness the journey better, see others and wave.

I'm not selling this as a reason why you shouldn't play the game, just sayin.

The bias I am talking about is if you don't like design decision A (teleporting for example) then poo pooing and trying to make devs look like idiots about design decision B which is unrelated. It was referencing a specific juvenile and misinformed post.

As for your comment, I don't consider that a bias just your own personal opinion. It is hard to say how much teleporting there will be until we actually play it. If it is too much I wouldn't like it either. However, keep in mind that the SPEED part of a mount system is in the game, so the functionality of that is in along with teleporting. Whether you are TPing too much or not we have to wait to see. 

I have no issue with someone saying I don't like teleporting. However when you try to correlate other peoples (valid) opinion that they want the graphic of the mount somehow to the teleporting then you are either misinformed on the fast movement system or just grasping at straws.

It seems maybe a lot of people do not understand that there is a method in game to move faster out of combat that is very similar to mounts in most MMOs and the difference is pretty much cosmetic.

Originally posted by JesseBFox

Originally posted by HorrorScope

Don't assume bias.

I just find teleporting not that immersive either. However I will grant that you have to make it to that area at least once on foot. But if it's like typical mmo's once that is done, you will still be back and forth in the same area many times and then it's Teleport-Trade / Teleport-Fight. That's not all that perfect either. If you had a reasoably paced mount, it keeps you in the world more, witness the journey better, see others and wave.

I'm not selling this as a reason why you shouldn't play the game, just sayin.

The bias I am talking about is if you don't like design decision A (teleporting for example) then poo pooing and trying to make devs look like idiots about design decision B which is unrelated. It was referencing a specific juvenile and misinformed post.

 

As for your comment, I don't consider that a bias just your own personal opinion. It is hard to say how much teleporting there will be until we actually play it. If it is too much I wouldn't like it either. However, keep in mind that the SPEED part of a mount system is in the game, so the functionality of that is in along with teleporting. Whether you are TPing too much or not we have to wait to see. 

I have no issue with someone saying I don't like teleporting. However when you try to correlate other peoples (valid) opinion that they want the graphic of the mount somehow to the teleporting then you are either misinformed on the fast movement system or just grasping at straws.

It seems maybe a lot of people do not understand that there is a method in game to move faster out of combat that is very similar to mounts in most MMOs and the difference is pretty much cosmetic.

Right then I'm missinformed. I am not aware of any faster way of moving in game, less transporting.

If I'm miss informed that is fine, correct that. That is why I am here, to get more information. Is there a movie showing what you are talking about?

I'm just saying there are ways you can get players from A to B and Teleporting isn't always the healthiest method either. It is the fastest, but has side affects. And no I'm not looking for a total borefest of long travels back and forth either. Teleporting is probably one of the most non-immesrive forms of traveling.

This isn't a game critical issue, just one to understand and discuss.

The reason there are no mounts is so they can include them in the cash shop a month or so after launch when people start whinging about no mounts...

You mark my words, mounts will be in the cash shop. Because there is already a mechanism for people to increase movement speed out of combat this allows Anet to say that it is "just a cosmetic item"

@HorrorScope: Then I think we have a similar view. There has to be a happy medium. And in some games I wouldn't want fast transit at all, but it fits the design philosophy in gw2.

Anyhow, many videos show it just isn't always obvious to notice, and has been discussed by devs before (I can probably dig out  a link with a lot of searching) But essentially it goes like this: when you are out of combat you can sheath your weapons, putting them away. While your weapons are away you get a moderate speed boost that is in line with speed boosts mounts usually give. 

So if you are watching a video of someone running around with weapons put away, they are getting a speed boost. then they pull out their weapons when they get in combat and they move a bit slower. 

So essentially it works the same, functionality wise, just without the pretty animal/vehicle you are mounted on. The difference is purely cosmetic. I don't hold it against anyone to want or not want mounts in GW2 as long as they understand it really is only about the looks. To me either way is no big deal at all. 

^ Good to know, thanks. Yeah mounts per se to me aren't importat, but it would be nice to move through the world at a reasonable pace when traveling.