"Summon" horses?

I think the summonable pets and pet bonding that were added to UO can be lumped in with the ability to view pet's stats, as being things that hurt sense of immersion. The latter 2 created an opportunity to power-game pets as well, which to me is a distraction from role-playing and adventuring. That said, once these things were put in place, I was unable to resist partaking in full force. I would spend many hours trying to find a dragon with perfect stats, then when I was done, I'd ask myself, "Why did I do that? That wasn't fun!" .

I would rather see pets needing to be stabled, than having them summonable. Since they are non-combatants, I don't see why they can't be immortal, and just log out with you if you don't stable them. But that is just a preference. I will enjoy them being added to the game either way. Besides, I don't know which would be more immersion killing: having summoned mounts, or having everyone crossing the continents on foot!

 

You know, I've been playing Assassin's Creed Brotherhood with my kids and I have to say I really like how they implemented mounts in their game. You character whistles (summon spell) and anywhere outdoors on accessible terrain the horse comes running up to you.

You can fight from horseback and you can even dismount+attack or dismount+jump.

The horse disappears off and on though. Sometimes he hangs around while you fight or do something and follows you for a bit. But its one of the better implementations of a mount that I have seen that doesn't seem fake or forced.



You can also hijack another npc's mount, mow over npc's, be pulled off your horse etc. They have it nicely polished.

 

sigh...we wanted the Ultimate RPG...we will probably get another WoW with horses from nowhere and no full looting.

what is even more horrible is that there are tons of people on this forum who love what we're heading towards.

 

I'm fine with the horse coming from nowhere. I mean this could take several seconds and you could show it running to your side.

WoW didn't have taming mounts because only hunters could tame. But there's no reason a similar taming mechanism couldn't be used for mounts as well as and number of pet types. I'm still hoping I can tame sheep for wool.

 

I'm being sarcastic here, but this could happen:

I didn't like our horse disappearing in WoW, because something hit us. That means if we are riding a horse and trying to avoid a rather weak group you don't want to wast time with because you're a bad-ass, but one of them happens to be an archer and scratches you for 1 point of nonlethal damage that is completely absorbed by your armor but your horse disappears and you have to run on foot, and maybe have to turn around and kill the archer before moving along to where you need to go. LoL

 

lol. Great video. I got a good chuckle on the part where they kept pulling each other off.

I could live with the horses being summoned in this way, since you don't really see it "poof" into existence. I'd far rather have them persistent until stabled, but this would be the next best thing.

 

If the Ultimate RPG was about full loot, the Shards Kickstarter wouldn't be failing.

And Darkstarr said that instead of horses "poofing" and disappearing, there will be animations for being knocked off them.

 

I agree that would be a better way of doing it rather than just having them magically appear. It would at least retain some believability that way even if it does still eliminate the role of stables, tamers and player pet sellers. (I was very fond of being able to go to the bank in UO and see players who had tamed several ostards in various colours selling them to other people - that was until everyone in the game had an ethereal mount which was basically a summonable mount)

 

Shards KS fails cause it's an ugly 2d game with an overhead view like it's from the 2000's.

SotA's KS didn't fail, because
1. its 3D 3rd person view
2. caters to casuals
3. who knows how much money was actually donated by the devs themselves from several paypal accounts.
4. Garriott and Starr are famous.
5. Most people thought it was gonna be a real RPG like pre-tram UO was.

See, so many reasons.

And what's shards?
1. Uhhmmm...
2.Uhhhh..
3. view from above like it's 1999 and the era of Diablo 2
4. Some PvP stuff
5. no real hardcore cause it's SHARDS, it's a ton of servers, so it is basically more like some Diablo 2-3/Torchlight playing Online, not a god damn persistent world
6. uhhhmmm....I don't know these guys, why should I donate...
7. Again, no persistent world to live and RP in? Meh

Many reasons for failure.

 

we should not be able to bring a horse out of our pocket.

I would be fine if we have to go to the city stable to claim our horse, ride for adventure, then go back to the stable to store the horse.


An alternative would be to "call" the horse and when we are dismounted in battle our horse should run away in fear. If we dismount in a scene not in combat, the horse should wait for us in place until we return from the dungeon.

 

It occurs to me that Grand Theft Auto is massively successful. Perhaps horses could be designed to take a bit of a beating and that PvP is really just about stealing each others horses.

 

I also think the horses should also move like horses too. In some games they are basically just a speed buff which I suppose is easy to implement but never felt quite right. I always thought they were done better in games where it felt like you were mounted and controlling a horse.

Given that mounts are a stretch goal store thing they should at least be done right. They shouldn't just effectively be a replacement graphic for your avatar that appears with the click of a button and just makes you move faster. =P

 

Why should other people fund your entertainment?

I bought 4 Foal's today. The entire reason I bought them now was the selling point that I couldn't be guaranteed access later if the goal was met. I LOVE rare items. There's nothing less interesting to me than everyone having the same thing. So instead of buying an extra pizza or purchasing something else in life...I've just ensured that if there are rideable mounts in the game, I and my family members will have access to them.

What I didn't buy were the riding outfits and the house decorations. Perhaps I'd care more about those if they had some kind of functionality, but since they don't I'm not about to waste money on them. To each their own.

 

I am not a fan of mounts appearing out of nowhere... Sacred had a great system, you could call your horse and it would run towards to, but it took some time before it reached you. I think it would be better, more realistic and of course not as immersion breaking if it would take a few seconds for your horse to run towards you after you called it and not suddenly appear out of nowhere.

 

I gotta say, the mounts they have pictured must not be fully grown. There is quite a lot of mass still to be developed on the rear end. Those animals look like a cross between hyenas and horses.

 

I'd prefer that horses be kept in a Stable, always. This would act as a type of "mount bank" that players could buy to collect money from other players for the use of this service.

While your mount was outside of a bank....it could not be stored in a backpack and would instead be required to tie to a tree so that you could explore dungeons or whatever. Over time, the mount would require rest and would require a stable - so back to civilization you'd go.

I really like this type of solution because while horses would be faster and easier forms of transportation (a huge advantage) as well as a nice status symbol....making them tied to stables would keep their use in check while also creating more immersion.

 

I like this idea in general.

I would add that we should be able to treat horses as regular Pets/followers too, so we could add saddles and bags to carry heavy objects around and walk/ride beside them.

 

I would like that too however there's another stretch goal for "pack animals" and I wouldn't want to undercut that.

 

You do realise at the end of the day we all receive the same end product right? Regardless of the investment. I'm not asking for people to fund my entertainment. I'm questioning how features are now becoming extremely exclusive. We've gone from recognition of people's contributions to outright segregation based on people's ability to contribute. Players will now become superior and inferior to one another based on their contributions. And I have no doubt this pay to win attitude is going to persist after release. I just know it.

Those people who purchased towns, did they "fund my entertainment" too? Technically they did. Because they have invested thousands in light of my hundreds. And all they get extra is a town, that I have every ability to earn in-game myself.

We're probably in the wrong thread. It seems we're absolutely polar opposite and expressing my opinion regarding rares would be wasted.

But according to the stretch goal, all items do. So those outfits have some unknown functionality as well. Which again is part of my concern. The ambiguity.

 

I would like to see more realistic functionality in SotA for mounts. However, I think if we continue to express this opinion through the development process while supporting the stretch goal, we'll eventually see the mounts we desire.

I'd like to see mounted combat by E3