guild-wars-2-advert-pokes-enjoyable-at-wow’s-dragonriding–’why-wait-to-experience-a-dragon?’

ArenaNet is attempting one thing to entice individuals into its MMO: dragons. Particularly, jokingly telling you that Guild Warfare 2’s dragons are superior to World of Warcraft’s with a cheeky new advert.

Whereas World of Warcraft is not particularly talked about, it is fairly apparent that the advert is winking at enlargement Dragonflight. The quick 30-second clip exhibits off the skyscale mount in a myriad of various skins, together with a griffon, the game’s different mount kind, prompting the query: “Why wait to experience a dragon?” A little bit of a cocky query, contemplating the time-gating on really unlocking the skyscale. It is a fairly lengthy quest, taking a minimal of 4 days to finish. Little or no in MMO time, however nonetheless requires a good quantity of dedication and supplies. Then once more, that is even if you happen to meet the stipulations of hitting max stage and unlocking all of Dwelling World Season 4. It is a number of work.

Sarcastically, as many identified in a submit on the subreddit, your probabilities of getting a dragon-themed mount in World of Warcraft earlier than Guild Wars 2 are considerably increased. The game has a handful of dragon mounts you need to use as quickly as you unlock flying at stage 30. These common flying mounts are distinct from Dragonflight’s drake, however nonetheless very a lot dragons. 

I do not assume it is ArenaNet’s intention to attract individuals in on the idea of dragons alone although—it is only a little bit of enjoyable. The advert is a lighthearted strategy to poke enjoyable at a competitor by honing in on a shared function. It’s the first time the developer has famous the similarity in type between its dragons and those coming to World of Warcraft, however our editor-in-chief Phil Savage seen them when he wrote about Dragonlfight’s new mounts earlier this yr. He did level out, nevertheless, that whereas there’s a number of mechanical overlap, they don’t seem to be equivalent.