Fly

[Tails.9372]

> @"Ayrilana.1396" said:

> Read the context and not cherrypick. Thanks.

Except you're the one ignoring the context here, you complained about people being able do skip content on their way to X wich would be true for both cases.

 

> @"Ayrilana.1396" said:

> It would better than all of them and be BiS. There would be no reason to use the other ones.

That couldn't be further from the truth, the beetle would get you over half the map before you even reached the height required for the level 2 boost and the other mounts would still be better for short distances, level gimmicks or instances were you can't use the griffon.

 

 

[Balsa.3951]

> @"Palador.2170" said:

> As a widespread idea, I think this will run into too many issues and dev time costs to make it worth doing on old maps. A new map could pull this off if it's designed with this in mind, but you run into two problems:

>

> In PoF (current expansion):

> * Glider can not be required for anything. (It's from the previous expansion, which they can't assume everyone has.)

> * Griffon is an optional mount, and not everyone has it.

>

> Spending a large amount of time on developing something that requires you to have at least one of the two is a non-starter for the devs. And while I can see future expansions maybe bringing back the gliding mastery again, you can't count on that either.

 

easy to solve problem next xpact comes with older x pacts in a bundle older x pact cost zero money if u buy the new one... U welcome i just solved all ur troubles

[Palador.2170]

> @"Balsa.3951" said:

 

> U welcome i just solved all ur troubles

 

Oh, how I wish that was true. ::sad laugh::

 

But yes, I did consider this and you're right. That's an option once they put the next expansion out. But that'll be after this season of LS ends, and then Season 5. So it'll be a few years before that's even an possible. Right now, in the PoF "age" of GW2, it's not.

[Ayrilana.1396]

> @"Tails.9372" said:

> > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:

> > Read the context and not cherrypick. Thanks.

> Except you're the one ignoring the context here, you complained about people being able do skip content on their way to X wich would be true for both cases.

 

Yes they could skip over content by flying and by teleporting directly to and from specific content. What’s your point?

 

> > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:

> > It would better than all of them and be BiS. There would be no reason to use the other ones.

> That couldn't be further from the truth, the beetle would get you over half the map before you even reached the height required for the level 2 boost and the other mounts would still be better for short distances, level gimmicks or instances were you can't use the griffon.

 

For the beetle, you’re assuming that the terrain is flat and that you don’t run into obstacles. Flying doesn’t have that issue. Do you see players routinely using beetle to traverse content or do you see them using others? For all we know, a flying mount could have a takeoff ability. I mean, the vigor boost does make it easier for griffons to get up higher in the air.

 

Edit: typo

[Aavataris.5720]

> @"Palador.2170" said:

 

 

Do you understand that it is a game and a business at the same time?

You have to buy the expansion to access certain things (such as maps, objects, etc.) and, also, this purchase gives you access to UNLOCK the content (you can pay it separately, but you can PLAY to achieve it).They will not give you the best.

 

In addition, it has a very low production cost, because it IS ALREADY MADE, only that it has been implemented ONLY in the most recent maps and in very limited areas (so that it does not collide with glide zones ... that impact does not exist if in maps old ones where there are no gliding areas).

[MokahTGS.7850]

> @"Palador.2170" said:

> As a widespread idea, I think this will run into too many issues and dev time costs to make it worth doing on old maps. A new map could pull this off if it's designed with this in mind, but you run into two problems:

>

> In PoF (current expansion):

> * Glider can not be required for anything. (It's from the previous expansion, which they can't assume everyone has.)

> * Griffon is an optional mount, and not everyone has it.

>

> Spending a large amount of time on developing something that requires you to have at least one of the two is a non-starter for the devs. And while I can see future expansions maybe bringing back the gliding mastery again, you can't count on that either.

 

Agreed, accept what do you think about the new living world area that has HoT mastery features in it? I haven't played it myself, but found it an interesting design choice on ANet's part. WoodenPotatoes had a video discussing it a bit and noted that it might have been done to highlight that expansions features to boost sales. Interesting idea.

 

On the point of development time, I think you're spot on. I think if they add flying it will be an expansion level feature, since it would need content specifically designed for it, like PoF was done for mounts.

[Xenon.4537]

This game simply does not need flying. I vote no.

 

Flying diminishes the scale of the world and trivializes physical obstacles such as forts, mountains, walls, etc. "But muh springer!" Yeah, and you have to physically walk up to a mountain and hop up the side of it without getting shot by a sniper. If you can just fly over it 5000 feet up with griffon hyper speed, it becomes nothing. If you want an mmo with flying, go play WoW. Also talk to the WoW community about what flying did to that game. There's a reason Blizzard has been trying everything they can to get rid of flying in each expansion.

[Aavataris.5720]

> @"Xenon.4537" said:

 

 

Read, yes? It is not "flying everywhere as you please", it is "**having access to new areas taking advantage of old maps**"

Why do they have to complain about EVERYTHING, and without even reading? ¬¬

[Donari.5237]

Folks, I think a lot of the counter arguments here are missing the OP's repeated point, they are NOT asking for free flight everywhere to allow skipping over content, they are requesting designated areas be added to current and new maps that use the low gravity mechanic and add in more things to do while in that specific designated area.

 

Which I think might be fun and interesting if ANet finds a way to organically add it in. (For the record I am also strongly against free flight everywhere, but I really enjoy the occasional slipping the bonds of gravity in places like the Sandswept heart).

[MokahTGS.7850]

> @"Xenon.4537" said:

> This game simply does not need flying. I vote no.

>

> Flying diminishes the scale of the world and trivializes physical obstacles such as forts, mountains, walls, etc. "But muh springer!" Yeah, and you have to physically walk up to a mountain and hop up the side of it without getting shot by a sniper. If you can just fly over it 5000 feet up with griffon hyper speed, it becomes nothing. If you want an mmo with flying, go play WoW. Also talk to the WoW community about what flying did to that game. There's a reason Blizzard has been trying everything they can to get rid of flying in each expansion.

 

What if the sniper targets you flying above them?

 

The "go play WoW" response simply adds nothing to the debate. Another game's design has little to add to this. Lots of games have mounts, but zero other games do mounts like GW2 does mounts. GW2's game world and enemy AI works in 3D. It's designed that way. If you are in range, you get targeted.

 

But what if I'm flying 5000 feet up...they can't target me!! Oh noes...broken content!! Not remotely...Neither can they target you if you waypoint around the map...or raptor jump past them...or are gliding higher then they can see you...or stealth glide past...

[Inculpatus cedo.9234]

> @"Aavataris.5720" said:

> > @"Xenon.4537" said:

>

>

> Read, yes? It is not "flying everywhere as you please", it is "**having access to new areas taking advantage of old maps**"

> Why do they have to complain about EVERYTHING, and without even reading? ¬¬

 

I still don't see why we need a flying mount to "have access to new areas...".

Also, it would really be helpful to quote the post, rather than just the name, so it is easier to understand what one is replying to. Thx.

[MokahTGS.7850]

> @"Inculpatus cedo.9234" said:

> > @"Aavataris.5720" said:

> > > @"Xenon.4537" said:

> >

> >

> > Read, yes? It is not "flying everywhere as you please", it is "**having access to new areas taking advantage of old maps**"

> > Why do they have to complain about EVERYTHING, and without even reading? ¬¬

>

> I still don't see why we need a flying mount to "have access to new areas...".

> Also, it would really be helpful to quote the post, rather than just the name, so it is easier to understand what one is replying to. Thx.

 

As an example, you need the Jackal mount to access the flying castle and sand roads in the skies of PoF. What if you could only reach a new area by flying there?

[MokahTGS.7850]

> @"Donari.5237" said:

> Folks, I think a lot of the counter arguments here are missing the OP's repeated point, they are NOT asking for free flight everywhere to allow skipping over content, they are requesting designated areas be added to current and new maps that use the low gravity mechanic and add in more things to do while in that specific designated area.

>

> Which I think might be fun and interesting if ANet finds a way to organically add it in. (For the record I am also strongly against free flight everywhere, but I really enjoy the occasional slipping the bonds of gravity in places like the Sandswept heart).

 

I would like to see argument points against free flying that are more than "I don't like it" statements. I understand the OP never asked for free flight, but that's where this would go, so is there some game breaking problem I'm missing?

[Aavataris.5720]

> @"Inculpatus cedo.9234" said:

 

 

I clarified exactly what it is about:

* There are many old maps that only extend horizontally and that are left behind because they are for beginners.

* There is already the dynamic that I am talking about (which is like "flying"), but only in expansions maps and limitedly so that it does not collide with gliding areas and height challenges.

 

Solution: Add on these old maps, where there are no glide areas with which the "flight" collides, areas to which the lvl 80 can access, revitalizing the maps and allowing "fly", without negatively affecting new players, nor maps.

[Inculpatus cedo.9234]

Sigh. Again, if these mechanics are in the new maps, and accessible without 'flying mounts', what need is there to introduce 'flying mounts' in the old maps. It's just the mechanic you want to access there. Use a portal to the 'high in the sky' area, and use the existing mounts with the new mechanic..._just like in the new maps_.

 

(I'm guessing which post you are referencing, of course.)

[Aavataris.5720]

> @"MokahTGS.7850" said:

 

Personally, I would not leave the free flight for:

* Economic reasons: It does not suit Anet, which has many options for sale that have to do with the transfer (unlocking routes, the object of boss events, etc.).

* The exploration of the world is an important art of the game. Flying over to discover new areas is one thing, but crossing maps as if nothing is another.

* Effectively, it damages many already established dynamics (such as puzzles, exploration, access to areas, etc.).

 

That's why I would stay just with **"having access to new areas taking advantage ABOVE old maps"**

[Aavataris.5720]

> @"Inculpatus cedo.9234" said:

 

I never talk about new flying mounts, I talk about using the Griffs as it is already used in the new maps (without portals, with mounts, overcoming obstacles or taking advantage of the dynamics), but in old ones, to take advantage of the sky and the old maps .

 

You are inventing things, it is unpleasant to have to repeat the same thing over and over again. If you're going to question me, at least read what I wrote ¬¬

[MokahTGS.7850]

> @"Aavataris.5720" said:

> > @"MokahTGS.7850" said:

>

> Personally, I would not leave the free flight for:

> * Economic reasons: It does not suit Anet, which has many options for sale that have to do with the transfer (unlocking routes, the object of boss events, etc.).

> * The exploration of the world is an important art of the game. Flying over to discover new areas is one thing, but crossing maps as if nothing is another.

> * Effectively, it damages many already established dynamics (such as puzzles, exploration, access to areas, etc.).

>

> That's why I would stay just with **"having access to new areas taking advantage ABOVE old maps"**

 

True, and agreed that the recent purchasable items support older travel mechanics. Exploration of old maps is indeed tied to travel mechanics that existed when those areas were release. It is not unprecedented that ANet will redesign an area to support newer mechanics. As an example, look at the The Labyrinthine Cliffs area and how content was added to accommodate mounts. I'm not saying that ANet would redesign everything...they don't have a history that supports that...but I don't think that really is what's being asked for. Also, there is a GW2 power creep that exists: Free Player

 

Each level of that power creep offers more advantage over the previous. This is a financial design by ANet. Whatever financial they lose from Gem Store unlocks is gained back twice over by expansion price and potential other sales from skins. I understand the puzzle damaging argument, but this can be fixed with patches. It's not a design flaw in the feature.

[Fenom.9457]

I'd love a dragon mount that's like griffon, but while griffon's specialty is speed, dragon's is maintained flight

[Ayrilana.1396]

> @"Aavataris.5720" said:

> > @"Xenon.4537" said:

>

>

> Read, yes? It is not "flying everywhere as you please", it is "**having access to new areas taking advantage of old maps**"

> Why do they have to complain about EVERYTHING, and without even reading? ¬¬

 

So long as these specific areas don’t extend any benefits to players outside of the designated areas then I don’t care.

 

I see this more as being a possible map mastery similar to what we got with gliding during S3E1.

[Aavataris.5720]

> @"Ayrilana.1396" said:

 

That is: Have you complained, ALL the time, for nothing (**without reading**, without paying attention to **what it was about** or **how it was supposed to affect the game**)? ;)

¬¬

[Ayrilana.1396]

> @"Aavataris.5720" said:

> > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:

>

> That is: Have you complained, ALL the time, for nothing (**without reading**, without paying attention to **what it was about** or **how it was supposed to affect the game**)? ;)

> ¬¬

 

Your initial post didn’t make that clear.

[Tails.9372]

> @"Ayrilana.1396" said:

> For the beetle, you’re assuming that the terrain is flat and that you don’t run into obstacles. Flying doesn’t have that issue. Do you see players routinely using beetle to traverse content or do you see them using others? For all we know, a flying mount could have a takeoff ability. I mean, the vigor boost does make it easier for griffons to get up higher in the air.

Which means both would have their usage depending on the situation, that's exactly the kind of diversity that doesn't invalidate other mounts. I asked which mount would be invalidated and you couldn't make your case for a single one despide claiming that somehow all of them would be. Also, I talked about giving the low gravity mechanics to the griffon (no need to reinvent the wheel) and not inventing a new mount / takeoff ability, even with the vigor boost the griffon doesn't gain hight fast enough to outperform either the beetle on flat terrain or the other mounts on short distances.

[Ayrilana.1396]

> @"Tails.9372" said:

> > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:

> > For the beetle, you’re assuming that the terrain is flat and that you don’t run into obstacles. Flying doesn’t have that issue. Do you see players routinely using beetle to traverse content or do you see them using others? For all we know, a flying mount could have a takeoff ability. I mean, the vigor boost does make it easier for griffons to get up higher in the air.

> Which means both would have their usage depending on the situation, that's exactly the kind of diversity that doesn't invalidate other mounts. I asked which mount would be invalidated and you couldn't make your case for a single one despide claiming that somehow all of them would be. Also, I talked about giving the low gravity mechanics to the griffon (no need to reinvent the wheel) and not inventing a new mount / takeoff ability, even with the vigor boost the griffon doesn't gain hight fast enough to outperform either the beetle on flat terrain or the other mounts on short distances.

 

Springer would be invalidated as you could fly instead of hopping up.

 

Skimmer would be invalidated as you could fly over the water instead of gliding across.

 

Raptor/beetle/jackal would be invalidated as you can fly over the terrain that would slow them down.

 

All of these would be invalidated as flying would allow you to avoid enemies which you would normally encounter when using these mounts.

[GreyWolf.8670]

> @"Ayrilana.1396" said:

> > @"Aavataris.5720" said:

> > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:

> >

> > The fact of your just complaining, without giving arguments, and forcing "problems" does not cause them to destroy the whole game just to extend an interaction that they are already using in certain maps ¬¬

>

> Allows you to essentially skip over large parts of the game world making it smaller. Imagine me being able to do map completion by just flying around to avoid all mobs and obstacles and only coming down to do something I need before going back up into the sky. It’d be similar to just having the ability to just teleport from point to point. You’d lose the connection with the gameworld.

>

>

 

I always find this a strange argument. If I'm skipping mobs or areas it's probably because I don't want to encounter them. Why force it?