monster blood?

when some monsters die do you think that they should squirt out blood?

well i think only the charr should.black blood....

waddyo think?

/notsigned

This isn't killbill and shouldn't be made into it in my opinion.

Majority of monsters doesn't even look like it has blood.

And adding blood would certainly push the rating into R or PG-18, thereby eliminating large portions of younger audience.

On the other hand, it would do wonders for general population maturity...

Yes, add blood. Lots and lots of blood. Lets have some use of ESRB rating for once.

/signed

Other wise, as it is now, the game contradicts it self.

What happens when you kill say... a bandit while having Bleeding on it?

Sure, as long as it's optional to switch it on and off

/halfsigned

/signed, purely for the reason it would increase the minimum age in America so we have less brats to take care off.

/SIGNED only if they allow it ti be turned on or off. Have a setting that asks your birthday to be able to turn it on.

Mega Mouse

/not signed

Don't see the need for it

/signed

Simply to reduce the ammount of younger gamers. Yes I know most are fine but if you can think of a better way to weed out the black sheep then please share!

We were talking about this yesterday on #GWP. The scythes make a lame "Woooshhh shhhhh" sound. It would be much better if they made a "Woooshhh shpltsjjjjjjj" sound.

Then we started talking about how brutal Backbreaker, Decapitate, Dismember and Final thrust would be.

/signed.

Disgusting topic of discussion. It really is.

We don't 'spurt blood', the monsters don't 'spurt blood'. The only 'blood' there should be visible is a necromancer being of the blood line of his or her attributes.

And as for the maturity? I think it would make this game far more mature in rating and having to loose a great deal of audience because of it. No blood = larger audience = more for us and ANET in whole.

Bankai, your line of " Then we started talking about how brutal Backbreaker, Decapitate, Dismember and Final thrust would be." is exactly why I don't want to see blood involved into this game. We're meant to feel that this game is "real", yes, but involving blood for those such skills would turn me off in a heart beat, and I'm a 19 year old male player.

It'd be cool to see the the white floor of the troll cave soaked in red after you slaughter them.

isnt by the rules you are not allowed t oplay if youre under 18 anyways?

/notsigned

cuz it will clutter the screen even more and will not bring any good to the game. the wammos might get more aggressive

Thirteen, actually.

I don't support this idea in the slighest. Would it look "cool"? Probably so. Would it make the player base more mature? Quite the opposite, I'd say. There are plenty of young children playing Grand Theft Auto, so what makes anyone think that adding gore to Guild Wars will weed out the younger players? If anything, it will introduce even more waves of immatuiry to the game populous.

/not sign

Blood has no place in this game, however scared armor, or players based on exp or other should be allowed, I for one am tired of seeing my players perfectly toned with no damage and looking like they just stepped off an assenbly line.

If noone grasped my sarcasm, the /signed was sarcasm.

The rest of the post wasn't.

Well I'd like this if they were 'bleeding'. but not if they just died. And it seems that the wurms in this game spit out green blood. lol.

/signed for blood when under the condition of 'bleeding' and with a toggle on/off.

GW is rated teen because there is no blood.
Blood = Mature

Adding blood to the game won't get rid of players. Games that are 18+ are still played by people younger. All it takes is the parents to buy them. How many people under 18 do you know play Doom 3? Although it might get rid of the few players that are squeamish around blood and don't like the idea of decapitation.

/notsigned

Guild Wars is one of those games where it proves that you don't need blood to have a great game.