Jump to content
  • Sign Up

Would you want Branded theme weapons and armor?


Recommended Posts

I wouldn't mind it. I've already got a deadeye who uses the bounty hunter set dyed to look like purple crystals with the shatterer backpack (Helps him blend in with the branded environment when he goes out to hunt for bounties or take out a particularly pesky critter ;3)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I loved how well the mounts go with glacial gauntlets, fractal capacitor and Ad Infinitum with correct dyes and would extra most definitely love to see an armor set with the same design idea and dye slot patterns!Just please... no more weird naked spots, like bellies or chests, ok? They look ridiculous regardless of gender, race or style and way too many armor sets and outfits have them. -__-"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well black and purple are two of my favourite colours, and I like crystals so I'd probably like more branded themed items.

But it depends on what exactly they look like. I don't like the Crystal Arbiter, Nomad and Savant outfits because they have too many big chunky pieces sticking out in all directions, they just look messy and too bulky for most my characters. Likewise I thought the Branded wings would be a bit much for my characters. (Also I don't like wing-shaped gliders which flap because it just looks weird to me when the flap animation plays but you keep going down).

But I do use some of the Nightmare weapons from Twilight Arbor, which are black and pink/purple (a bit pink for me, but other people call them purple) and spiky. I like the shade of purple used on the branded more, so if the branded weapons looked like that I'd probably use them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Oglaf.1074 said:The Branded mounts were a horrible lore-breaking mistake. Let’s not expand on that mistake.

So what? What about the gliders and minis if you want to go into cosmetic things that break the lore. What about the other mount skins like Wintersday skin line or the Demon skimmer skin? It isn't important for skins to fit the lore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@ArbiterofTruth.2390 said:

@Oglaf.1074 said:The Branded mounts were a horrible lore-breaking mistake. Let’s not expand on that mistake.

So what? What about the gliders and minis if you want to go into cosmetic things that break the lore. What about the other mount skins like Wintersday skin line or the Demon skimmer skin? It isn't important for skins to fit the lore.

It used to be important. Back when Anet cared about such matters. It is still important to me, which is why I stand firmly against this idea.

Your character wearing Branded “gunk” or friggin’ riding on a Branded creature is, dareIsay, stupid. Everything they’ve established about Branded lore has it being a death sentence. Yes, it is stupid. Stupid I say.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd rather have some armor and weapons being made of actual metal and not crystals, candy cane or laser beams. It's funny how everybody is running around shining, blinking and jingling like a x-mas tree while some or us are having a hard time finding just one look that's not gimmicky, JRPG style or outrageously ugly (another buttcape, yay). Of course, YMMV.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They can add whatever they want...

... they should just give us the possibility to set separately

  • Standard gliders
  • Standard mounts
  • Standard armor/weapons
  • Standard dyes
  • Minis YES/NO

I'm ok with ppl buying flashy skins, dyes or troll skins like golemancer glider, sab, etc... but ANET should give us the possibility to set standard models for every single category separately.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Arrow.9031 said:I personally think they would be a good addition to the game.. we just got branded theme mounts so would you want to see armor and weapons that follow this theme be incorporated? Post your thoughts!

Followed up by branded-themed reskin of our skills. We're becoming disciples of Kralkatorrik, I'm telling ya!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Crystal_Arbiter_Outfithttps://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Crystal_Nomad_Outfithttps://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Crystal_Savant_Outfit

Weren't these supposed to be our "crystal themed" outfits?

Personally, I don't see any problem with Branded stuff - either in lore or in-game. The Black Lion isn't actually going to brand your clothes or your mounts, just give it a branded-like appearance - just like how the Black Lion wouldn't sell weaponry made out of actual Bloodstone (made very clear in the disclaimers when it came out). So, in short, I don't see what people are kicking up a fuss about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"Oglaf.1074" said:The Branded mounts were a horrible lore-breaking mistake. Let’s not expand on that mistake.

I mean... the branded mounts were not the only "lore-breaking" thing they've added to the game. I'm willing to bet just about every major update has some kind of "lore-breaking" thing added. Hell, in the same update that brought the branded mounts they also added the Claw of Khan-Ur. In case you don't know what that is, it was the weapon wielded by the Khan-Ur(that is only a title, the one that owned the weapon has not had his name revealed yet) and in order for a Charr to be considered a Khan-Ur they both have to wield that weapon and performing a great act that show's that individual's power. Yet, in the video showing it off, it has an Asura wielding the legendary weapon of the Charr. Not exactly very lore appropriate that literally, any race can wield it as if it's just some common dagger.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@ImTasty.2163 said:

@Oglaf.1074 said:The Branded mounts were a horrible lore-breaking mistake. Let’s not expand on that mistake.

I mean... the branded mounts were not the only "lore-breaking" thing they've added to the game. I'm willing to bet just about every major update has some kind of "lore-breaking" thing added. Hell, in the same update that brought the branded mounts they also added the Claw of Khan-Ur. In case you don't know what that is, it was the weapon wielded by the Khan-Ur(that is only a title, the one that owned the weapon has not had his name revealed yet) and in order for a Charr to be considered a Khan-Ur they both have to wield that weapon and performing a great act that show's that individual's power. Yet, in the video showing it off, it has an Asura wielding the legendary weapon of the Charr. Not exactly very lore appropriate that literally, any race can wield it as if it's just some common dagger.

Two wrongs don’t make a right. See my second reply:

@Oglaf.1074 said:

@Oglaf.1074 said:The Branded mounts were a horrible lore-breaking mistake. Let’s not expand on that mistake.

So what? What about the gliders and minis if you want to go into cosmetic things that break the lore. What about the other mount skins like Wintersday skin line or the Demon skimmer skin? It isn't important for skins to fit the lore.

It used to be important. Back when Anet cared about such matters. It is still important to me, which is why I stand firmly against this idea.

Your character wearing Branded “gunk” or friggin’ riding on a Branded creature is, dareIsay, stupid. Everything they’ve established about Branded lore has it being a death sentence. Yes, it is stupid. Stupid I say.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Oglaf.1074 said:

@Oglaf.1074 said:The Branded mounts were a horrible lore-breaking mistake. Let’s not expand on that mistake.

I mean... the branded mounts were not the only "lore-breaking" thing they've added to the game. I'm willing to bet just about every major update has some kind of "lore-breaking" thing added. Hell, in the same update that brought the branded mounts they also added the Claw of Khan-Ur. In case you don't know what that is, it was the weapon wielded by the Khan-Ur(that is only a title, the one that owned the weapon has not had his name revealed yet) and in order for a Charr to be considered a Khan-Ur they both have to wield that weapon and performing a great act that show's that individual's power. Yet, in the video showing it off, it has an Asura wielding the legendary weapon of the Charr. Not exactly very lore appropriate that literally, any race can wield it as if it's just some common dagger.

Two wrongs don’t make a right. See my second reply:

@Oglaf.1074 said:The Branded mounts were a horrible lore-breaking mistake. Let’s not expand on that mistake.

So what? What about the gliders and minis if you want to go into cosmetic things that break the lore. What about the other mount skins like Wintersday skin line or the Demon skimmer skin? It isn't important for skins to fit the lore.

It used to be important. Back when Anet cared about such matters. It is still important to me, which is why I stand firmly against this idea.

Your character wearing Branded “gunk” or friggin’ riding on a Branded creature is, dareIsay, stupid. Everything they’ve established about Branded lore has it being a death sentence. Yes, it is stupid. Stupid I say.

It's a lot more than two wrongs. They've been doing since pretty much the launch of the game. It never used to be important. Even in GW1 you could get non lore friendly items. It's silly to be upset about it because it ultimately does not matter. Honestly, if anything is stupid it is actually being upset about something and imposing this false idea that Anet was against non lore friendly skins and items and one point when they have never been. Stupid I say.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Oglaf.1074 said:

@Oglaf.1074 said:The Branded mounts were a horrible lore-breaking mistake. Let’s not expand on that mistake.

So what? What about the gliders and minis if you want to go into cosmetic things that break the lore. What about the other mount skins like Wintersday skin line or the Demon skimmer skin? It isn't important for skins to fit the lore.

It used to be important. Back when Anet cared about such matters. It is still important to me, which is why I stand firmly against this idea.

Your character wearing Branded “gunk” or friggin’ riding on a Branded creature is, dareIsay, stupid. Everything they’ve established about Branded lore has it being a death sentence. Yes, it is stupid. Stupid I say.

You do not ride a branded creature. You ride a creature with a branded skin. A child wearing a vampire costume is not an actual undead creature with all of the fictional drawbacks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...