Talk:Guild Wars 2

From GuildWiki

Contents 1 Archived 2 Persistent.. 3 system reqs 4 So GW1 was for nothing? 5 Release Date 6 So basically.... 7 Mechanics of transfer 8 who's looking forword to GW 2 9 Question about World PvP 10 hell 11 Lore VS Equality 12 Ideas on the professions 13 55 14 Idea 15 just a thought 16 Lead Concepts artist 17 Nerf lameness 18 GW2 logo

[edit] Archived

Nice and fresh. -- Warwick (Talk) (Contr.) 21:47, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Post link to archive RT | Talk 21:48, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Oh come on, a show/hide box? --- -- (s)talkpage 22:01, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

OK I LIKE GUILDWARS AND EVERYTHING BUT IF THE LEVELS ARE UP TO 100 THAT WOULD JUST RUIN IT AND IF IT WERE INFINITE IT WOULD SUCK SINCE ADDICTED MORONS WOULD OWN EVERYONE.

Calm down - I for one would prefer a more traditional MMO. Anet have some great Ideas, and GW1 was entirely skill based - I don't think they are going to turn it into a entirely gear/level based system overnight. RT 22:30, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Persistent..

Sigh thats what I hate about other games.. where maps are shared by everyone. "whats that, you're waiting for a quest monter? TOO BAD BWAHAH!" Everyones waiting for the same boss, waiting for the same monsters to spawn. It just gets over crowded and boring... ANet better hope they can do a good job of these persistent areas.

They say the'll be able to open new ones at will, and that you'll be able to switch. Moar instancing plz RT | Talk 14:15, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

It would be awesome if like you could invite people to join in on an instance which you have already started or a public button so everyone can joinHapsta 19:44, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Doesn't every other online game do this, like WoW. So, Gw is turning into WoW? I like the idea of having a choice, either persistent or instanced. I mean, towns a persistent and you kinda get sick of hearing idiots standing around going on about rape, sex and other immature behaviour, ANET wants to make this the standard? As an early stage I'm disappointed ANET is moving away from its original ideas to the more carbon copy ideas, but then again, ANET founders came from WoW 203.173.225.42 13:23, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Missions and dungeons shall be instanced however. And who knows what will become of these 'new explorable, persistent areas'? Maybe there won't be bosses(which drop greens) at all, just quests and so on exploring the land. But it's impossible to tell before beta is out or ANet decides to deliver us some exact information. J Striker 06:17, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

The persistent areas of WoW are one of the reasons why I quit. If ganking is possible, then I'm out. Nazgramin 21:06, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

[edit] system reqs

heres my system: 2 gigs of RAM, 8600 GeForce, 2.2 ghz will my comp handle gw2?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 209.202.63.142 (talk • contribs) 04:04, 2 January 2008 (UTC).

we can't answer specific questions about the requirements of guild wars or guild wars 2. Anet will surely release specs when the box hits stores, but that expected to be late 08. --Honorable Sarah 09:07, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes your comp will be able to handle it, since its driven by directx 10

You can't say yet. And it dosn't need DX10 (thank goodness, vista ftl) RT | Talk 15:24, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] So GW1 was for nothing?

I mean all this history, were for nothing? Ascalon conquered (Ebon Vanguard did nothing), Cathan isolated, no more Factions, no more Tengu(all of Togo's effort gone to waste), Sunspears defeated, Elona controlled by Undead (might as well let abaddon take over). I think we've been playing on the wrong side. 75.9.232.33 23:33, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

haha excellent point well put-- 23:39, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Think of it this way... that's what happened when we WERE fighting for the good guys. How screwed would they be if we hadn't? I doubt there'd even BE a GW2 lol. Sloth 02:56, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

There still woulda been it'd be more, your a slave to abbadon the ruler, um survive long enough to GET heros dumb enough to help you (companions) and try and fail and crap your pants facing abbadon fully powered up.-- (talk) 03:01, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

GW1 was to show us all the races that WON'T be in GW2. 03:02, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

We did revive Palawa Joko but everything else was for nothing. 222.153.227.37 00:14, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Thats true. We actually did nothing but awaken all the bad guys (Palawa AND the Dragons).Entrea Sumatae [Talk] 05:14, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

And we made Glint happy! And we helped the Lich unleash the frikken Titans! OMG, we are evil :D --- -- (s)talkpage 05:17, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

O, I forgot to add that the Dwarves became sexless unhappy stone creatures so they wouldn't fall prey to the Dragon's minions (destroyers), just to the Dragons themselves. Plus thanks to the heroes in EON, we freed the Charr from their Shaman leaders, which they in return, conquered Ascalon. Great job people.75.9.232.33 00:03, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

It's just another way to release guild wars factions 2! and nightfall 2! eye of the north 2!

Come on people, it should be great to see how all the lands have changed, which aspects of Original GW still exsist, all the new skills and storylines, PvP fun, better game engine and so on. I sure want to know what became of Mursaat, Forgotten, visit Ascalon City once more, slay some dragons and become a bear. And since all of you have protected Tyria until now, why not 250 years later? J Striker 06:26, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

All I know is that they better damn well let us liberate Ascalon, if they let the most beautiful area in game be burnt down by a pack of cats they better let us go on a fur rampage. I hate cats by the way, the other day my sister's peed on me....

As for the results of GW1, well how interesting would it be if everyone simply rebuilt the old towns with no challenges. -- 06:46, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

What, you want GW2 to consist of, all the bad guys are dead? What are we supposed to do then, if there is nothing that needs to be killed? Go around admiring the flowers? I realize that it's quite possible to make a good game without a heavy emphasis on combat, but it wouldn't be a successor to Guild Wars any more than Mario Paint was a successor to Super Mario World. Quizzical 18:05, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

"Subsequently a number of other dragons resurface; one rises about the sunken holy city of Arah in the ruined kingdom of Orr, simultaneously raising the entire region from below the water level and creating an undead armada that severs the sea route between continent of Tyria and the Factions continent of Cantha; another arises to the south of the Crystal Desert, cutting off the link to the Nightfall continent of Elona; a third arises in the Far Shiverpeaks and uses its icy minions to push the Norn south into the land previously occupied by the Dwarves."

Oh, how convenient!, I fear for the originality of GW 2 expansions, if their idea of an expalnation for why we cant access the expansion areas of GW is to think up 3 different events all simulataneously closing off those areas is anything to go by. Also the prospects for getting access to the unexplored areas of tyria (e.g. north of kryta - all that green stuff) look somewhat bleak. They should have asked me to write the plot, dragons indeed--Cobalt | Talk 18:54, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

I think of it like this: The Heroes of 1078 AE fought their battles, and saved humanity. Though things may seem bad in GW2, there is still a small thread of hope(A few remaining Sunspears, Fort Ebonhawk, the new capital of Kryta). If it were not for the Heroes of GW1, such hope would not have existed at all.

"I think of it like this: The Heroes of 1078 AE fought their battles, and saved humanity. Though things may seem bad in GW2, there is still a small thread of hope(A few remaining Sunspears, Fort Ebonhawk, the new capital of Kryta). If it were not for the Heroes of GW1, such hope would not have existed at all." Exactly, Anets plot writers ftl. Anyways, if it were not for the "Heroes" of GW1 there wouldn't have been the titan problem, the abaddon problem, the petrified dwarf problem and the world would be a better place-- - (Talk/Contribs) 11:59, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

To be fair, we did take the time to rectify the titan problem after our admittedly poor desicions regarding the Scepter, and the post-petrified dwarves were valuable in holding back destroyers that would otherwise have run amok and wiped them out anyway.Sloth 18:07, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Bleh, if Abbadon had been in charge none of this would have happened!-- - (Talk/Contribs) 18:51, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Wasnt it Abaddon that planned all this to happen? --- -- (s)talkpage 18:53, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

No, abaddon had nothing to do with destroyers, or the subsequent dragon uprising. All abaddon did was unleash the char on ascalon, kryta and orr, unleash the searing on ascalon and the cataclysm on orr, plot to have the lich conquer tyria with a titan army, have a canthan emperorr assasinated, set the luxons and kurzicks against each other, bring plague to cantha, attempt to have shiro tagachi conquer tyria with an army of costructs, screw up tombs with chaos creatures, corrupt varesh into attempting to conquer elona, and try to unleash nightfall on the world. Other than those minor misdemeanors, abaddon has done nothing wrong.-- - (Talk/Contribs) 18:57, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

In fact, even if Abaddon had taken over the world, if I remember the lore correctly, the Ancient Dragons would've wiped the floor with him anyway. And you know, the method of ANet giving us these plots kinda reminds me of the way Star Wars did. Star Wars is actually a story about Anakin: his discovery, falling to the dark side, and eventual redemption. Prophecies and Factions really are just telling the story of what Abaddon did, since he was the one that instigated ALL of that, and Nightfall was just the finisher for that story --Gimmethegepgun 04:27, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

No, no. The gods could take out an ancient dragon easy. It's just that all the non-destroy-the-world-and-rebuild-it-in-his-dark-image gods all /ragequit, so they don't have ultimate power over the world anymore.Entrea [T] 04:35, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Exactly! Thats why I voted for Abaddon. Besides, if we'd just sealed up the destroyers in their cave with cement or the tyrian equivalent, we wouldn't of disturbed those nasty dragons anyway. Alternatively, we could of just left a couble of Base Defenders outside the entrances to the destroyer's lair. That would of fixed the problem up fairly quick-- - (Talk/Contribs) 14:06, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Boredom FTW!Entrea [T] 16:07, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Actually, the ancient drags are about as strong as a god, as well as the fact there is more than one of them. so they would've killed abbadon.--142.22.16.55 18:44, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

In the immortal words of vipermagi, 'Fromage!'-- - (Talk/Contribs) 18:47, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

When you look at the grand scheme of things, we actually accomplished a lot more plot-wise than you're giving them credit. We thwarted an uprising of Dhuum's influence in the Underworld, helped Balthazar gain a slight advantage over Menzies in the Fissure of Woe, and pummeled a god into submission; successfully straining that 'evil' alliance. We also witnessed the searing of Ascalon, early sings of unification between the Luxons & Kurzicks, the fall of the White Mantle and reinstatement of the Royal Family in Kryta, and we also unleashed a musky scourge on Elona. Don't undermined the story just yet, I'm sure things are going to get way more interesting once they get the ball rolling again. ;D --72.220.205.44 09:14, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Release Date

CMON! ANET! HURRY UP! When does think come out? Its 2008. Cmon, wating...tick,tock,tick,tock. I like Potatoes. Tick, Tock, Tick Tock, Fire, Tock. Tick, Tock.--‎FireTock 22:14, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

The War beta went public 6 months ago and they're not expected to release until Q3/4 this year. Delays are likely. GW2 has a beta plan that at least I haven't heard anything from in ~10 months. GW2 isn't Warhammer but if it's going to release this year it's got a whole lot of ground to make up. They did get the other campaigns done quickly but those were in the works for a long time and done on an existing engine and whatnot. It doesn't look great for a GW2 release this year. 74.129.243.37 00:22, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

okay, so they said a long, long, long, long time ago that is was set for release in 2009/2010 I think - Fred The Second 05:07, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

I heard betas begin this summer sometime. --Shadowcrest 05:10, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

I thought the beta began in last quarter of 08? But yea, it would be nice with at least some screens or something from ANet... DriXiLB 17:43, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

LOL u have a point evrything seems F up in the world of GW sunspears are either dead or inprisoned lol id like to see an Unded Koss like Rurik LOL but yeah im realy curious how the story is gunna pla out since evrything is messed up should be a realy good game-Pedro Cts Ur Cokies

they REALLY need to give more information. i am sure, they have the whole concept, professions, since the game should be released in 2009 (or at least beta). imo they always knew it never would be released in 2008, that's marketing. it will still take months. i hardly can't explain why they don't show ANY in game pictures, besides this explanation. i mean other projects show at least 1 (if not 2) year(s) before release some in-game stuff. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 213.160.57.11 (talk • contribs) 12:41, 12 July 2008 (UTC).

[edit] So basically....

The bad guys win at everything. That's a bit depressing isn't it? 222.153.227.37 03:16, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Unless you're pvp only, but yeh pretty much. But at least we stop it in GW2! (presumably). For at least a little while like GW1, lol --Shadowcrest 03:31, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Stop it? One will be able to play the damned Char, I was looking forward to burning char forts to ashes in GW2....--Alari 00:18, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, you will still probobly be able to burn charr forts, it's just they'll be fighting back with human intelligence. --71.112.87.56 17:18, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

IMO charr are more intelligent than Humans. RT | Talk 17:19, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

They managed to burn down a whole country, yeah you gotta be a genious for that. - Yikey

Or just have a giant bomb. Which is what the charr did.-- (Talk) (Contr.) 17:42, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

The titans burned down Ascalon, the char just followed the the religious fanatic shamans to use the titans power.--Alari 21:06, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Mechanics of transfer

I wonder about the mechanics of this. I heard that guilds will be transferable, characters, of course, will not. Will it use the same client, like the chapters/expansion did? Will we use a linked account? Will we be able to play in the GW1 areas with our GW1 characters once we switch to GW2? Will the guild and guild halls be persistent between GW1 and GW2? How much of a separate game is this going to be? 24.0.64.193 11:47, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

The mechanics of transfer will be very clever, I think. Here's my view on it: Guild Wars 2 will be a COMPLETE seperate version, not linked to Guild Wars 1 at all. But if you want to use your Hall of Monuments to transfer a title, armour set or mini pet you can go to your HoM and talk to the corresponding shrine. Then you'll get a key code, only usable by YOUR account so it can't be sold. Then, you put in the code in your Guild Wars 2 menu and the item'll be transfered. - Yikey

[edit] who's looking forword to GW 2

just wanted other peoples opinion bus is any one realy happy about GW2. cause i know im not--Keanwood 00:56, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

I am really looking forward to GW2 :)-- Austy 10:46, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

I am, so I can get back into GuildWars again. RT | Talk 10:49, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Depends on how addicting Fable 2 will be by then, actually :) But I'll probably buy GW 2 anyways, cause hey, it's still GW ^^ --- -- (s)talkpage 11:11, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

You're on a guildwars fansite... Do you expect enyone would nót be looking forward to gw2? xD -{[ PUL ]}- 19:15, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Well... If you look to the pages at the previous archive, and the ones on the official wiki, there are some not looking forward to it... but i can only really say, ''oh well, their choice-- Austy 18:07, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

There's actually quite some people ranting about hatng GW 2... Fools :) --- -- (s)talkpage 18:09, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Oh me oh my, I wish people would lighten up a bit about the whole changes with GW2. I mean can't we trust Anet to come out with another gem *like* Guild Wars 1? If there weren't any changes then we would simply have a rehashed, reskinned game that would quickly stagnate. Also there's the whole angle of Zomfgit'saWOWcloneeventhoughweknownexttonothingabouttheactualgameihateyouarenanetandalwayswill **GASP** andihopeyourotinhellcosyou'velostanothercustomerduetothefactthatibelieveWOWpatentedeverythingthereistommorpgs **GASP** anthusanythingvaguelysimilarisacheapimitation!!!1! Listen to the voices of reason scattered throughout this discussion. Anet will do a fantastic job im sure. And if they don't when we actually play the game ah well it's up to them to save face. So don't start playing your vein violins just yet fanboiz. I shall retain my anonimity lest anyone come for me with pitchforks. Don't let us down Anet. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Rhym Soulreaper (contribs) .

The original Guild Wars (campaigns 1-3) was a gem. The game really went south with EotN...or rather, with the focus turning more towards idiotic PvE title grinding/buying, overpowered PvE skills to remove any semblance of real challenge, and some things that were just plain stupid. (read: Great Destroyer) So far I can't tell whether or not GW2 will end up that way; there have been some things which look good (revised and expanded plot is nice after the idiocy of EotN plot; even if overused plots are overused), others which look bad {jumping! zOMG!), and some things which are just strange (increased level cap). I'm still skeptical of ANet, but I am no longer so deadset against GW2 that I will completely write it off. I have to see it first, I think. (Account wide HoM would be nice incentive too.) (T/C) 15:34, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Question about World PvP

How is that going to work exactly? Normally "World PvP" is you run into someone and start whacking them. According to this is just sounds like Random Arenas, where you enter some sort of queue and are sent off to The Mists. If it is a normal "World PvP" (sort of like WoW's system) what is going to prevent us from going to starting areas and smashing smaller players? Will there be some sort of Faction difference, AKA Horde & Alliance. This is going to be the biggest factor in my buying or not buying GW2 so I'm really interested. Nilator 21:24, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

If we knew, we would have it up there all we can do is speculate. Lost-Blue 21:35, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Man there isnt going to be any hero battles great

world pvp sounds much like city of heroes recluse's victory, where people from two sides come and go fighting over territory, think alliance battles but with like unlimited players :D

I think it is just Like WoW, that you can kill anyone of another race who stands in your way... Not realy something Im going to like...

It sounds not like that at all, it sounds like 2 servers orginise teams and go head to head in a battle RT 20:39, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

As much as Id enjoy going on a killing rampage against any cat I see, RT probably has it right.-- 21:15, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

If the players are free to join and leave every time, WvW will probaly suffer from lots of leeching etc. similiar. But I like this scale of battles. There should be much more things to do in a single brawl than just cap shrines, annhilate team or capture altar. Another thing I'm bit worried about is, how ANet is going to handle, say 32 or 64 player matches within their servers... It'll probably mean that there won't be very much games and that they're laggy. However I'm really looking forward to it. J Striker 06:12, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

I think the there are three main complications that need to be dealt with if you've got a World PvP.

• 1) Number of players; this is usually not very hard in GW since the arenas are on fixed numbers. Letting people come and go however means you'd need some system of auto-balancing. If you've got an autobalancing system then it's hard to build up rivalry (luxon/kurzick) since you might be forced to the other team suddenly (if changing is not like that then you can have uneven teams).
• 2) Where the PvP is; They've already said that world pvp is in the mists. I mention this because it means that you will most likely have pvp divorced from pve, in such a way that player killing doesn't happen in pve and high level characters can't gank low ones (unless the low ones went into a no limits pvp).
• 3) Difference in skill; with structured pvp the teams are presumably matched by rank (like the current GvG) or some other equivalent system. Structured also raises everyone to the same level and gives all skill access. Essentially making it pure metagaming. What about world then? If you compete with whatever skills you have, coupled with people being able to come and go, you could end up with the situation similar to when a RA team hits TA (or when a new RA team hits a team with a 9 kill streak) new players with little choice of skills or poor builds up against people who compete at a guild level.

Anyway, depending on how they deal with those things affects other aspects, and these all hinge on how they build the professions and races. Bah, what do I know anyway, just some things to think about. -Ezekiel [Talk] 06:43, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] hell

the story sounds abit desperate doesnt it? no contact with cantha for a generation ascalon ruled by charr sppoked by rurik and adelburn and joko once an "ally" conquering elona. the campain sounds pretty big if its gonna get all this **** right again Aliblaster 22:25, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

"ascalon ruled by charr" <- It's not desperate for people who want to play as charrs :) --Scol 17:44, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

It'll be desperate for the people playing as Charr when the Ascalonian players want their land back. ;P - Zelyoniy

I still don't understand why people would want to be giant cats.....-- 20:20, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

I would much prefer it if ascalon had rebuilt itself and ejected the char from it's territory and their own homeland. Then we could have witnessed ascalon as the almighty, evil capitalist superpower it once was. It would also be more plausible considering that the char were in open revolt against the shamans at the end of EotN--Cobalt | Talk 20:24, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

But that @#$%^ granddaughter of pyre made the warbands rule strong again.-- 20:27, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

granddaughter? did i miss something? (note i have read this talkpage far more than the actual article, it's more interesting)--Cobalt | Talk 20:28, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

/agree with Cobalt. Lost-Blue 20:30, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

[1]-- 20:31, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

It was in the Pcgamer that had the destroyer mini.--ìğá†ħŕášħTalk 20:32, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Ill probably play human, I like making my chars look "real" thats one thing I like about this game. I can be as creative as possible but I prefer "human" looking chars (no offense to anyon with spiky green mohawks :P) but idk Charr seems fun <3 Lost-Blue 20:34, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Either i've missed something again or your referring to the US issue of pcg?--Cobalt | Talk 20:35, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm going to make a norn caster, just for the irony, that is assuming they don't change the attribute spread for different races like in other mmos-- 20:36, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

lol Lost-Blue 20:37, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Assuran hammer warriors FTW!--Cobalt | Talk 20:38, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Bug squashing!-- 20:40, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

lol....Charr Dervishes ftw!Hellz Mailman 15:49, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Lore VS Equality

Should GW follow lore and make Norn "better" for Warrior like profession and Asura "better" for caster like professions; or should it follow equality and be fair? I think that equality is the way Aney should go, even if it doesn't make any sense to have a giant norn charcater rasining minoins and having 60armor or a tiny asura sin spiking (that would be sweet) I think more people will be upset if they follow lore instead of equailty. Lost-Blue 20:39, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Ive always hated advantages, like Asuran being better Eles. Bah. --- -- (s)talkpage 20:40, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Hell no, your not going to nerf my norn mesmer!-- 20:41, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

I say lore for pve, but make only 1 race available in competetive PvP--Cobalt | Talk 20:56, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

If they go for lore, I'll stop playing. I refuse to play if I can't have an asura sin. Piggyboy 20:59, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

And a norn mesmer who does riverdance?--Cobalt | Talk 21:01, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Considering there are a few (hundred?) years between GW:Dark Evil Beings and GW2:Dark Evil Dragons, it's not that hard to imagine that most races have adapted and learned new professions. Thus, equality and lore might just fit in. (BTW, the Asura have a major advantage as assassins, they're much harder to notice ;).)-- 21:03, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Asura gate shadowstep will be imba? Gank another match entirely. Lord of all tyria 21:04, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Asuras harder to notice? They may be smaller but they're still goblin things, it's hard not to notice them! Piggyboy 21:07, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

If one crept into my garden i think i would notice it (plank of asura slaying ftw)--Cobalt | Talk 21:08, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

lol Lost-Blue 21:09, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

(edit conflict) If you look at eye-height, you won't spot them immediately. If you look at the ground, you're hammered by a warrior, yeah... They do have an advantage. -- 21:10, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Asurans would make perfect sins, those fast little egotistical buggers fit the profile perfectly.-- 21:12, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Suitable mesmers too. -- 21:16, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

lol and this has co comments on the offcial GWwiki pfft we own them :LD Lost-Blue 21:19, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

It is possible that assasins won't be available in GW2 as cantha is closed of (thank you very much arena net), so we may not get to see asuras flying at people with daggers :(--Cobalt | Talk 11:55, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

That's not entirely true. Just because Cantha is "closed" doesn't mean there won't be assassins. We just don't know and anything else is pure speculation. Maeve 02:11, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Ideas on the professions

Well they claim that "No one is aware if any of the current GW1 professions will enter GW2". I guess that if ANY do re-appear, I'm quite sure the 3 most likely will be elementalist (might be called sorcerer, witch, mage, magician, wizard etc), Monk (might be called priest, healer), and most definitely warrior. Anyone have any other ideas to what professions there might be? 65.34.193.183 02:11, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, MMO developers are notoriously un-original, so the proffesions in the first release of GW2 (i assume there will be expansions) will likely follow the patter of almost all MMOs:

• A Martial Melee Tank (Warrior)
• A Ranged Martial Attacker (Ranger)
• A High Damage but Weak Armour Spell Caster (Elementalist)
• A Healing/Protection Spell Caster (Monk)
• An Anti-Martial Spell Caster (Necromancer)
• An Anti-Spell Caster Spell Caster (Mesmer)

Notice that there are essentailly 2 martials and 2 casters with a counter for each, and that both counters are casters. Likely additions in expansion packs will be:

• A Buffing Spell Caster (Ritualist)
• A Buffing Martial (Paragon)
• A Martial who also uses Spells (Assassin,Dervish)

Well thats what my moneys on anyway--Cobalt | Talk 14:26, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] 55

• Since there is a really high lv cap or no lv cap, wont that make 55 monks epic fail now? Not to mention 600 monks, 55 necros, and 130 dervs. Maybe theyll have some totally leet new skill to replace this stuff. Also, since the ancient dragons' powers probably rival the gods, and Abaddon was 11 levels higher than us, wont the enemies have to be on insanely high levels if there's no lv cap? *Überness* 68.196 *Überness* 21:22, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

We don't even know if any of the skills that make 55's will exist in GW2 and I recall mention that the higher lvl cap was more for prestige than function...

Maybe then the the economy will survive longer then 1 week?-- 21:39, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Hmm I wonder. It will be interesting to find out. Maeve 02:09, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

I bet you anything that at higher levels you will get like next to no returns for each level. All you get is the level number to show off. +0.5 HP and +0.05 Energy per level anyone? RoseOfKali 20:38, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Idea

I havce an idea on why you basically never use the mosue in this game... Anyone ever play on the Orange Box (HL2, Portal, TF2)? You use the mouse so much in that game that i had to move almost all my controls to near the arrows keys unlike GW where most of the stuff is on the keyboard that you sit in front of it. SO.... since you'll be able to run, jump, swim, climb, scale, etc you had to use more buttons and unless they make it where you press like shift or something to change from jumping to swimming and it's all done on the space bar then being in front of the mouse the whole time would make it a pain to reach everywhere at once. SO for all of you complaining about how the use mouse clicking to go everywhere and one... TAKE THAT!!! I FIGURED IT OUT!--Image:User Fire Tock sig.jpg‎FireTock 22:42, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

What are you talking about? 22:46, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

They say that mouse clicking will be gone.--‎FireTock 22:46, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

SO i think i figured out why.--‎FireTock 22:47, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

I'd just assume it was to remove auto-pathing, which becomes really annoying to script if you need to account for jumping/climbing/swimming. Height in general makes autopathing complicated, but GW hasn't really had a problem since there's little use of the y-axis. Ezekiel [Talk] 03:19, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

I hope they still have mouse targeting for players in your party window, i need that for infusing. Also firetock, i play TF2 and i manage fine with the vast majority of keys bound to their default. In portal you only need WASD, Ctrl,E, Space and the mouse anyway. And btw, you seem to have contracted sig-fail on your first post there =P--Cobalt | Talk 12:31, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Ezekiel: In a 3D world, height is the Z-Axis :P --- -- (s)talkpage 13:13, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

That's just convention, it's an entirely arbitrary letter. I'm a firm believer in the idea that the dealer chooses the variant and when I do editing in 3D I refer to up as y. Also; :P. Ezekiel [Talk] 16:39, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Well if you want to use another letter than the "standard" one why not use one that won't infuse confusion in the rest of us? Like say q :) (User:Winterbay who just can't be arsed to log in from work) 134.146.218.3 02:39, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

HL2 is a shooter - and yes - E for use/medic, G for taunt Q for weapon swich - close to WSAD for controls - seems like it RandomTime 17:56, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

[edit] just a thought

so what i understood is that the playable races will be charr asura sylvari norn and human but what about the dwarves?they live in tyria too wouldnt they be a playable race too? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.230.116.202 (talk • contribs) 09:50, 17 April 2008 (UTC).

They are turned to stone, there are hardly any dwarves left. -- 10:07, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

We could tell you why but It would be a plot spoiler so all I can say is complete Eye of the North if you own it...Big B 10:08, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

oh ok thanks —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.225.54.251 (talk • contribs) 13:10, 12 May 2008 (UTC).

[edit] Lead Concepts artist

Lead concepts artist of GW2 is Kekai Kotaki, who has worked on all Guild Wars 1 campaigns. I can't say if there are other lead concepts artists. --◄mendel► 19:50, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Art Director Daniel Dociu. Source: Kekai's blog. --◄mendel► 23:23, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Big surprise? I don't see why they wouldn't want to keep the main crew that kept GW1 running. RoseOfKali 01:40, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Didn't say it was a surprise; see it as more of a confirmation. ;-) --◄mendel► 10:29, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Nerf lameness

All the lameness that's currently happening in GW1 should be nerfed for GW2. This being shadowstepping monk shit, Mo/W shit, all the other secondary profession shit, solo farming shit, gimmick shit and so on. Please Anet, make non lame game this time. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 88.85.130.12 (contribs) .

QQ moar? And this is the wrong place anyway. Send them an e-mail or something. --JonTheMon 15:49, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your insightful and constructive criticism! Unfortunately ANet does not deign to notice this Wiki. Perhaps you would have more luck editing this page? Also, you can sign your comments with four tildes ~~~~ , it is common courtesy, even if you are not logged in. Thanks! (T/C) 17:47, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Why are you bothering with a troll? Just tell him to go back to WoW, seems like that's what he wants. RoseOfKali 17:55, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Wow, there is apparently an abundance of "shit" in Guild Wars. By the way, I loved Entropy's response. Tenetke Mekko 23:29, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

What they need to do with GW2 is, plain and simple, DON'T put in Assassin or anything like it. Also, don't make extremely abusable primary attributes *cough*LEADERSHIP*cough*. But by far most importantly for GW: 8 SKILLS AT A TIME! --Gimmethegepgun 23:46, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

[edit] GW2 logo

It exists, no? Why isn't it on this page? I don't want to mess with copyrights, so I dunno where to get one that we can use. RoseOfKali 17:57, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Do you mean this? If it's on Anets website, by their terms, we can use it if we attribute it properly. --◄mendel► 22:24, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

The logo-demigod has tried his hand on the ANet image. --◄mendel► 01:25, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Definitely a work in progress, I saw my name on the changes and thought for sure I had done something wrong again. I don't know if I should include the entire logo or not. It is easy enough to add in the "world" image they have, but it doesn't look very good when put into an image with transparency. I am going to use a mask and layer on it to see if it will work better. That image was me working on the same shadow technique they use on their GW art. It does look o.k. with the GWWiki but there are way too many errors in it. Tenetke Mekko 03:32, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Let me know what you think about this one. It is similar I made a few corrections and it has the "world" shown on it. It is a fairly quick edit and there are plenty of improvements needed.It has been resized down, there is a larger version available for you to take a look at. Tenetke Mekko 04:21, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

GW2 logo, work in progress

The one with the world definitely looks better. But still, isn't there one we can just use? I thought there was. O_o RoseOfKali 05:43, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

According to their site we can use it as long as it is attributed correctly. The ones above were just edited versions of their logo, but I did credit them appropriately I think. I don't want to add it to the page though, mainly because I am not very good at that sort of thing. Well that and I don't think mine are very good. Tenetke Mekko 06:29, 6 December 2008 (UTC)