"They're not needed". I'm sure very few things in the game are actually *needed* but people can still enjoy them. Mounts help define your image, they're rewarding and can be fun.
"If you want mounts, play x other game". Ok...can we assume that if you don't like 100% of GW2 features you should play another game?
"There is teleportation" + "Mounts make you skip over content": Seems these are contradicatory. Regardless, I can see that flying mounts as 'content skippers' but I actually find land mounts to encourage more exploration. When you don't have a speed boost you're more likely to stick to a safe path, where with a mount you can more easily explore more. Also, I imagine there will be some sort of speed boost in GW2 that you can obtain. Does that count as 'content skipping'?
¨Mounts do allow you to "drop" into target areas while skipping periferies". Agree with that.
"The game isn't designed for mounts": Seems one concern here is crowding, but are areas really that crowded after the initial city levels? You could also just ban mounts in cities. Other games do that. In any case the came could have been designed to account for mounts.
"Mounts take away from specialized vehicles in events or PVP": I don't agree because I haven't seen that in other games, but ok.
A lot of the arguments seem to boil down to GW1 didn't have mounts and it was fun, WoW has mounts and it sucks. So the argument ends up being less about the mounts themselves and more about an allegiance. If GW2 didn't have jumping like GW1 didn't, we could probably have a similar discussion.
I love mounts. I love the feeling of accomplishment when you obtain your first mount or a mount that requires a lot of work to obtain. I like trying to get or build a unique mount. I like having something that I can't have in real life (maybe a horse) which is such a big factor of MMOs. I see no need for mounts in GW2 and I'll play it regardless, but I would've loved to have them. Everyone has their preferences and those against mounts have their reasons, nothing wrong with that.
1. I think it's less that they're 'not needed' and more that they'd be actively detrimental to the game's design, as has been covered on a billion pages, if you add mounts with varriable speeds, you have huge areas with no content, and those are areas which people with slower mounts have to cross over at excruciatingly slow speeds. They'd also have to space out the waypoints, too. So if I'm travelling from point A to poitn B and I've been travelling for 10 minutes, I'm five minutes away from the next waypoint and I die, that's 10 minutes of my life I'm never getting back, all because I didn't grind for the fastest mount. And that's why mounts can actively harm game design. Every game with mounts proves this to be true
2. You're creating a false dichotomy between existing features and non-existing features. That's like saying that grind should be a feature just because it isn't in Guild Wars 2. It's nonsense. You've serruptitiously slipped in the idea there that mounts are or will be in Guild Wars 2. They won't be in at launch, and ArenaNet don't seem too keen on just ramming them in there ever. Why? See 1.
3. Incorrect! They aren't contradictory because a fast mount will just speed you past stuff without any restrictions, whereas the waypoint system means that you have to find the next waypoint before you can teleport to that system. How is that contradictory? It's not. I think you're just creating a fallacy here by misrepresenting how the teleportation system works. You can't just teleport to any waypoint from the beginniing of the game, which is what you're saying there. That's wrong. But with a mount you could speed travel past content, yes.
4. This seems a pointless inclusion considering what you said about point 3.
5. Yes. If the game isn't designed to have wide, open, empty, blank, boring, and dull spaces that are purely meant for mounts to run across a la WoW (see: Barrens) then where do you expect all those mounts to go? Instead of looking at WoW, think of City of Heroes. Where would you park a crapload of mounts in City of Heroes without them getting in someone's way? You wouldn't, they'd always be in someone's way. Your brain is using the incorrect example. The layout of content in Guild Wars 2 isn't going to be like WoW. The demo has proved this.
6. Yes, they do take away from it. If you have a mount that allows you to race alongside a mob for a while in a moving dynamic event, then you get the thrill of speed for a short time in a dynamic event area that's meant for that. But if you're constantly travelling everywhere at the same speed, then it makes the atmosphere and feel of that dynamic event worthless. It's the same as if you had flying mounts (which I'm adamant you'd demand next if you got mounts, more entitled gamers never stop with just one inclusion), any events in which you flew then become uninteresting, because well, hey, you can fly all the time on your flying mount. So of course it negatively impacts dynamic events!
"I love the feeling of accomplishment when you obtain your first mount or a mount that requires a lot of work to obtain."
(Emphasis is mine.)
Read as: I want grind to be in Guild Wars 2 so I can grind to get a status symbol to rub in someone's face. Despite what I say, I just really, really want this damned game to be World of Warcraft 2. I'm going to ignore the name, it is WoW 2. LA LA LA, NOT LISTENING.
My response: This is exactly why mounts shouldn't be in the game, they're an artifact of an old dinosaur of a MMORPG and one that did a lot of things wrong, but people have their heads stuck so far in the past that they can't accept a game trying to do something new and different. It's not WoW 2. There is no 'grinding' there is no 'feel/touch/sense/smell of the epic grind achievements' (though I'd not call grinding an achievement). So let's not try and force ArenaNet to add any. See, I knew it would come down to this.
I knew it all bloody comes back to grind and status symbols for grind. People with too much time want something to show for playing the game 24/7. I know you don't like people saying this to you, but I don't think that Guild Wars 2 will be your game. Something like Mortal Online might suit you better.
Sometimes you just have to prove that what people are saying, despite their own claims, is "I want Guild Wars 2 to be WoW 2." Except it isn't, it never will be, it can't be. They're such completely different beasts, it's like comparing ARMA iI with Doom II. Sure, they're both conceptually FPS games, but they're also as different as chalk and cheese.
Guild Wars 2 is more of a Doom II, so to speak, it's designed around fun, not grind, not status symbols, and it won't be anything like WoW. Anyone thinking that this is going to be their next WoW fix (since they've now played WoW content to death and are bored of it) are going to be sorely disappointed. This isn't WoW, and in my opinion, that's a good thing. Like I've said and keep saying - when WoW was released, it was experimental, but now it's a dinosaur. We can see what experiments went right (an open world, instanced PvP, working story into the experience, a wide variety of races), and we can see what experiments went horribly wrong (grind, raids, status symbols for grind, content amounting to kill X of Y for Z, overall sameyness in art direction and content, mounts adding artificial amounts of space to various areas, letting statistics rule over fun).
Guild Wars 2 is diametrically opposed to World of Warcraft in that it wholeheartedly and earnestly embraces the Rule of Fun, the closest thing to WoW's heart being Stat Grinding and gear grinding often resulting in Rainbow Pimp Gear until people could gather a whole set to use as a status symbol. Guild Wars 2 is nothing like that, and that's one of the most important reasons as to why mounts are not present. GW2 is not WoW, to say it one last time, and some people need to either look elsewhere or accept that it's time for something new, something that doesn't involve grinding and status symbols.
I'm not going to even attempt to read all 28 pages, so if this was posted before you can just skip over it:
Will be there any other kind of traveling across long distances apart from asura gates (e.g. ship)?
Eric: Any of the major (non-capturable) waypoints that a player has unlocked can be travelled to regardless of the distance involved. Prices do vary depending on distance though, and asura gates are free, so a player might find it advantageous to use asura gates in some circumstances. Other than waypoints and asura gates, there will be no other methods of long distance travel such as mounts, ships, etc in Guild Wars 2 upon initial release.
Though I'm completely fine without mounts, I still am kind of upset... It just isn't realistic without mounts. Not that pulling a mount out of your pocket is realistic (as I stated way before, they should be different/you have to take care of them and pull them out of stables in home instances, and a number of other things), but what about before there were ever asuran gates? I'm sure they used animals to get around, not just walk everywhere...
There's a reason we used to use horses (and some still do) before there were cars. There's a reason we use cars instead of airplanes.
I'm not going to even attempt to read all 28 pages, so if this was posted before you can just skip over it:
Will be there any other kind of traveling across long distances apart from asura gates (e.g. ship)?
Eric: Any of the major (non-capturable) waypoints that a player has unlocked can be travelled to regardless of the distance involved. Prices do vary depending on distance though, and asura gates are free, so a player might find it advantageous to use asura gates in some circumstances. Other than waypoints and asura gates, there will be no other methods of long distance travel such as mounts, ships, etc in Guild Wars 2upon initial release.
I'm not going to even attempt to read all 28 pages, so if this was posted before you can just skip over it:
Will be there any other kind of traveling across long distances apart from asura gates (e.g. ship)?
Eric: Any of the major (non-capturable) waypoints that a player has unlocked can be travelled to regardless of the distance involved. Prices do vary depending on distance though, and asura gates are free, so a player might find it advantageous to use asura gates in some circumstances. Other than waypoints and asura gates, there will be no other methods of long distance travel such as mounts, ships, etc in Guild Wars 2upon initial release.
Which implies that they're keeping their options open. It sells copies of the game and they can just say later that they tried it and it doesn't fit their game. >_>
I'm not going to even attempt to read all 28 pages, so if this was posted before you can just skip over it:
Will be there any other kind of traveling across long distances apart from asura gates (e.g. ship)?
Eric: Any of the major (non-capturable) waypoints that a player has unlocked can be travelled to regardless of the distance involved. Prices do vary depending on distance though, and asura gates are free, so a player might find it advantageous to use asura gates in some circumstances. Other than waypoints and asura gates, there will be no other methods of long distance travel such as mounts, ships, etc in Guild Wars 2upon initial release.
Which implies that they're keeping their options open. It sells copies of the game and they can just say later that they tried it and it doesn't fit their game. >_>
Yeah i think that Anet is keeping their options open. Maybe theyll listen to the player feedback, and see what the players want Anet to add to the game. Or maybe mounts will be a part of a expansion pack, who knows?
In World of Warcraft i used alot of time gathering mounts. Aslong as the waypoint system Anet has implemented into their game works well, i shouldnt have any problem with the lack of mounts. Abit sad though, i want my guardian to ride on a badass horse.. well well
My son. The day you were born the very staff of Blizzard whispered the name, profit.
I'd prefer to use Asuran portals and mounts rather than the fast-travel system, but it does make well for the dynamic events. Like if there's something going on near LA and you're really far in another direction, you can skidaddle really fast over there and help out.
Mounts only make real sense if they have mounted combat. Think of mounts that change your weapon abilities. That would be pretty cool. It would also be a lot of work to develop, so I understand them not being in at release. Mounts that just increase speed and have no use in combat are ridiculous.
Which implies that they're keeping their options open. It sells copies of the game and they can just say later that they tried it and it doesn't fit their game. >_>
QFE- anyone that's watched the Rift boards knows this tactic.
my question in the mount discussion is, isnt there tanks that there showing in the game videos but we dont get to drive em? why even bother showing them if you can't use em. jsut my 2 sense
http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Rollerbeetle_Racing is in GW1 and there's going to be 5-6 minigames per capital city. Racing in those charr cars or perhaps even some kind of mounted combat is all but guaranteed.
"Gamers will no longer buy the argument that every MMO requires a subscription fee to offset server and bandwidth costs. It's not true you know it, and they know it."-Jeff Strain, co-founder of ArenaNet, 2007
I love mounts. I love the feeling of accomplishment when you obtain your first mount or a mount that requires a lot of work to obtain. I like trying to get or build a unique mount. I like having something that I can't have in real life (maybe a horse) which is such a big factor of MMOs. I see no need for mounts in GW2 and I'll play it regardless, but I would've loved to have them. Everyone has their preferences and those against mounts have their reasons, nothing wrong with that.
I totally agree with this thread THERE SHOULD BE MOUNTS. Mounts show power and authority as do armors and weapons and ranks etc.
Mounts don't show crap , They are simply a method of transportation and an unnecessary money sink which this game does not need.
Games like Wow / Warhammer ect need mounts so you can speed through the bland lifeless game world , Guild wars 2 was made to be appreciated and Explored down to the last detail .. not sped through or flown over on a mount.
I'm glad there won't be mounts in this game, but thats just me.
With fast travel trough map & world scaled in way that you can explore enough well and fast with your feet equals no mounts needed.
If you want mounts to collect, there will be other things to collect such as rare and unique armor models. And since you can replace model of armor with other armor you have you can rlly make unique and different looking character from other players.
Also I was a bit dissapointed that you can just map travel around, but Devs said you will get rewarded for exploring places and things, so you defo are not walking around for nothing. 4example there are items you can pick up which might trigger an event etc. etc.
With fast travel trough map & world scaled in way that you can explore enough well and fast with your feet equals no mounts needed.
If you want mounts to collect, there will be other things to collect such as rare and unique armor models. And since you can replace model of armor with other armor you have you can rlly make unique and different looking character from other players.
Also I was a bit dissapointed that you can just map travel around, but Devs said you will get rewarded for exploring places and things, so you defo are not walking around for nothing. 4example there are items you can pick up which might trigger an event etc. etc.
Don't forget that you can't map-travel to a location if you haven't explored it. Makes me wonder how many times people plan to explore a location.
There's no logical point to have cool looking gear either. But its still in there for ppl to have something to do. Mounts is a good way to customize a character. Just saying
I wouldn't be surprised if Arenanet does at one point after release add mounts ((Which would make a lot of people on this thread look like idiots...But;)) I don't really mind. Like a lot mentioned, the game doesn't really need mounts and I'm sure that as a collector, you'll have tons of OTHER stuff to collect.
________________________ "If RL was an MMO, I'd probably be getting laid more often..."
GW2 Is an open world game with a heavy emphesis on PvE, story, and dynamic content/events unlike the first game. So I don't see any reason why there wouldn't be mounts at one point. But they probably won't be necessary right at launch if they have other forms of fast travel and they probably chose to use their resources and time developing other things that add more to the game.
Comments
Some arguments I've seen an my thoughts.
"They're not needed". I'm sure very few things in the game are actually *needed* but people can still enjoy them. Mounts help define your image, they're rewarding and can be fun.
"If you want mounts, play x other game". Ok...can we assume that if you don't like 100% of GW2 features you should play another game?
"There is teleportation" + "Mounts make you skip over content": Seems these are contradicatory. Regardless, I can see that flying mounts as 'content skippers' but I actually find land mounts to encourage more exploration. When you don't have a speed boost you're more likely to stick to a safe path, where with a mount you can more easily explore more. Also, I imagine there will be some sort of speed boost in GW2 that you can obtain. Does that count as 'content skipping'?
¨Mounts do allow you to "drop" into target areas while skipping periferies". Agree with that.
"The game isn't designed for mounts": Seems one concern here is crowding, but are areas really that crowded after the initial city levels? You could also just ban mounts in cities. Other games do that. In any case the came could have been designed to account for mounts.
"Mounts take away from specialized vehicles in events or PVP": I don't agree because I haven't seen that in other games, but ok.
A lot of the arguments seem to boil down to GW1 didn't have mounts and it was fun, WoW has mounts and it sucks. So the argument ends up being less about the mounts themselves and more about an allegiance. If GW2 didn't have jumping like GW1 didn't, we could probably have a similar discussion.
I love mounts. I love the feeling of accomplishment when you obtain your first mount or a mount that requires a lot of work to obtain. I like trying to get or build a unique mount. I like having something that I can't have in real life (maybe a horse) which is such a big factor of MMOs. I see no need for mounts in GW2 and I'll play it regardless, but I would've loved to have them. Everyone has their preferences and those against mounts have their reasons, nothing wrong with that.
@galahan
1. I think it's less that they're 'not needed' and more that they'd be actively detrimental to the game's design, as has been covered on a billion pages, if you add mounts with varriable speeds, you have huge areas with no content, and those are areas which people with slower mounts have to cross over at excruciatingly slow speeds. They'd also have to space out the waypoints, too. So if I'm travelling from point A to poitn B and I've been travelling for 10 minutes, I'm five minutes away from the next waypoint and I die, that's 10 minutes of my life I'm never getting back, all because I didn't grind for the fastest mount. And that's why mounts can actively harm game design. Every game with mounts proves this to be true
2. You're creating a false dichotomy between existing features and non-existing features. That's like saying that grind should be a feature just because it isn't in Guild Wars 2. It's nonsense. You've serruptitiously slipped in the idea there that mounts are or will be in Guild Wars 2. They won't be in at launch, and ArenaNet don't seem too keen on just ramming them in there ever. Why? See 1.
3. Incorrect! They aren't contradictory because a fast mount will just speed you past stuff without any restrictions, whereas the waypoint system means that you have to find the next waypoint before you can teleport to that system. How is that contradictory? It's not. I think you're just creating a fallacy here by misrepresenting how the teleportation system works. You can't just teleport to any waypoint from the beginniing of the game, which is what you're saying there. That's wrong. But with a mount you could speed travel past content, yes.
4. This seems a pointless inclusion considering what you said about point 3.
5. Yes. If the game isn't designed to have wide, open, empty, blank, boring, and dull spaces that are purely meant for mounts to run across a la WoW (see: Barrens) then where do you expect all those mounts to go? Instead of looking at WoW, think of City of Heroes. Where would you park a crapload of mounts in City of Heroes without them getting in someone's way? You wouldn't, they'd always be in someone's way. Your brain is using the incorrect example. The layout of content in Guild Wars 2 isn't going to be like WoW. The demo has proved this.
6. Yes, they do take away from it. If you have a mount that allows you to race alongside a mob for a while in a moving dynamic event, then you get the thrill of speed for a short time in a dynamic event area that's meant for that. But if you're constantly travelling everywhere at the same speed, then it makes the atmosphere and feel of that dynamic event worthless. It's the same as if you had flying mounts (which I'm adamant you'd demand next if you got mounts, more entitled gamers never stop with just one inclusion), any events in which you flew then become uninteresting, because well, hey, you can fly all the time on your flying mount. So of course it negatively impacts dynamic events!
"I love the feeling of accomplishment when you obtain your first mount or a mount that requires a lot of work to obtain."
(Emphasis is mine.)
Read as: I want grind to be in Guild Wars 2 so I can grind to get a status symbol to rub in someone's face. Despite what I say, I just really, really want this damned game to be World of Warcraft 2. I'm going to ignore the name, it is WoW 2. LA LA LA, NOT LISTENING.
My response: This is exactly why mounts shouldn't be in the game, they're an artifact of an old dinosaur of a MMORPG and one that did a lot of things wrong, but people have their heads stuck so far in the past that they can't accept a game trying to do something new and different. It's not WoW 2. There is no 'grinding' there is no 'feel/touch/sense/smell of the epic grind achievements' (though I'd not call grinding an achievement). So let's not try and force ArenaNet to add any. See, I knew it would come down to this.
I knew it all bloody comes back to grind and status symbols for grind. People with too much time want something to show for playing the game 24/7. I know you don't like people saying this to you, but I don't think that Guild Wars 2 will be your game. Something like Mortal Online might suit you better.
ouch, painfully long read.
Chins
Sorry about that.
Sometimes you just have to prove that what people are saying, despite their own claims, is "I want Guild Wars 2 to be WoW 2." Except it isn't, it never will be, it can't be. They're such completely different beasts, it's like comparing ARMA iI with Doom II. Sure, they're both conceptually FPS games, but they're also as different as chalk and cheese.
Guild Wars 2 is more of a Doom II, so to speak, it's designed around fun, not grind, not status symbols, and it won't be anything like WoW. Anyone thinking that this is going to be their next WoW fix (since they've now played WoW content to death and are bored of it) are going to be sorely disappointed. This isn't WoW, and in my opinion, that's a good thing. Like I've said and keep saying - when WoW was released, it was experimental, but now it's a dinosaur. We can see what experiments went right (an open world, instanced PvP, working story into the experience, a wide variety of races), and we can see what experiments went horribly wrong (grind, raids, status symbols for grind, content amounting to kill X of Y for Z, overall sameyness in art direction and content, mounts adding artificial amounts of space to various areas, letting statistics rule over fun).
Guild Wars 2 is diametrically opposed to World of Warcraft in that it wholeheartedly and earnestly embraces the Rule of Fun, the closest thing to WoW's heart being Stat Grinding and gear grinding often resulting in Rainbow Pimp Gear until people could gather a whole set to use as a status symbol. Guild Wars 2 is nothing like that, and that's one of the most important reasons as to why mounts are not present. GW2 is not WoW, to say it one last time, and some people need to either look elsewhere or accept that it's time for something new, something that doesn't involve grinding and status symbols.
I'm not going to even attempt to read all 28 pages, so if this was posted before you can just skip over it:
Will be there any other kind of traveling across long distances apart from asura gates (e.g. ship)?
Eric: Any of the major (non-capturable) waypoints that a player has unlocked can be travelled to regardless of the distance involved. Prices do vary depending on distance though, and asura gates are free, so a player might find it advantageous to use asura gates in some circumstances. Other than waypoints and asura gates, there will be no other methods of long distance travel such as mounts, ships, etc in Guild Wars 2 upon initial release.
from http://guildwars2.cz/otazky-odpovedi-pro-guildwars2-cz/2/
Though I'm completely fine without mounts, I still am kind of upset... It just isn't realistic without mounts. Not that pulling a mount out of your pocket is realistic (as I stated way before, they should be different/you have to take care of them and pull them out of stables in home instances, and a number of other things), but what about before there were ever asuran gates? I'm sure they used animals to get around, not just walk everywhere...
There's a reason we used to use horses (and some still do) before there were cars. There's a reason we use cars instead of airplanes.
Which implies mounts may be added in the future.
Which implies that they're keeping their options open. It sells copies of the game and they can just say later that they tried it and it doesn't fit their game. >_>
Yeah i think that Anet is keeping their options open. Maybe theyll listen to the player feedback, and see what the players want Anet to add to the game. Or maybe mounts will be a part of a expansion pack, who knows?
In World of Warcraft i used alot of time gathering mounts. Aslong as the waypoint system Anet has implemented into their game works well, i shouldnt have any problem with the lack of mounts. Abit sad though, i want my guardian to ride on a badass horse.. well well
My son. The day you were born the very staff of Blizzard whispered the name, profit.
I'd prefer to use Asuran portals and mounts rather than the fast-travel system, but it does make well for the dynamic events. Like if there's something going on near LA and you're really far in another direction, you can skidaddle really fast over there and help out.
Mounts only make real sense if they have mounted combat. Think of mounts that change your weapon abilities. That would be pretty cool. It would also be a lot of work to develop, so I understand them not being in at release. Mounts that just increase speed and have no use in combat are ridiculous.
QFE- anyone that's watched the Rift boards knows this tactic.
my question in the mount discussion is, isnt there tanks that there showing in the game videos but we dont get to drive em? why even bother showing them if you can't use em. jsut my 2 sense
kevin ripka
I want to ride around in one of those Charr Cars with the spike wheels.
All of my posts are either intelligent, thought provoking, funny, satirical, sarcastic or intentionally disrespectful. Take your pick.
I get banned in the forums for games I love, so lets see if I do better in the forums for games I hate.
I enjoy the serenity of not caring what your opinion is.
I don't hate much, but I hate Apple© with a passion. If Steve Jobs was alive, I would punch him in the face.
http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Rollerbeetle_Racing is in GW1 and there's going to be 5-6 minigames per capital city. Racing in those charr cars or perhaps even some kind of mounted combat is all but guaranteed.
"Gamers will no longer buy the argument that every MMO requires a subscription fee to offset server and bandwidth costs. It's not true you know it, and they know it." -Jeff Strain, co-founder of ArenaNet, 2007
I totally agree with this thread THERE SHOULD BE MOUNTS. Mounts show power and authority as do armors and weapons and ranks etc.
^ This. 1++
Mounts don't show crap , They are simply a method of transportation and an unnecessary money sink which this game does not need.
Games like Wow / Warhammer ect need mounts so you can speed through the bland lifeless game world , Guild wars 2 was made to be appreciated and Explored down to the last detail .. not sped through or flown over on a mount.
I'm glad there won't be mounts in this game, but thats just me.
With fast travel trough map & world scaled in way that you can explore enough well and fast with your feet equals no mounts needed.
If you want mounts to collect, there will be other things to collect such as rare and unique armor models. And since you can replace model of armor with other armor you have you can rlly make unique and different looking character from other players.
Also I was a bit dissapointed that you can just map travel around, but Devs said you will get rewarded for exploring places and things, so you defo are not walking around for nothing. 4example there are items you can pick up which might trigger an event etc. etc.
Don't forget that you can't map-travel to a location if you haven't explored it. Makes me wonder how many times people plan to explore a location.
Ah well that closes the deal then.
All things I have had conserns on GW2 have actually been better than I tought or I just missed something in it.
If all turns out as they should, the game will be so amazing.
There's no logical point to have cool looking gear either. But its still in there for ppl to have something to do. Mounts is a good way to customize a character. Just saying
save something for expansions /cash shops
I wouldn't be surprised if Arenanet does at one point after release add mounts ((Which would make a lot of people on this thread look like idiots...But;)) I don't really mind. Like a lot mentioned, the game doesn't really need mounts and I'm sure that as a collector, you'll have tons of OTHER stuff to collect.
________________________
"If RL was an MMO, I'd probably be getting laid more often..."
GW2 Is an open world game with a heavy emphesis on PvE, story, and dynamic content/events unlike the first game. So I don't see any reason why there wouldn't be mounts at one point. But they probably won't be necessary right at launch if they have other forms of fast travel and they probably chose to use their resources and time developing other things that add more to the game.