Talk:Guild Wars 2

From Guild Wars Wiki

Contents 1 Explorable Areas 2 What could you see/guess in the video? 3 Profession accidentally announced... well I think anyway 4 Underwater Exploration 5 Dual profession? 6 please no farm builds 7 Smaller Expansions 8 Events 9 Directx 11? 10 release date?

[edit] Explorable Areas

Am i the only one who doesn't like that Anet are join Runscape and WoW (and other MMORPGS) in the new explorable areas? it annoys me to no end...i love how GW is set in this aspect...there'd be no runs...enemies could be killed no problem..i could change how the game i done hugely... i love it being just me and my Guildies on our own...not some 1337est stealing our drops and kills Zachariah Zuan. 22:50, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

I was disappointed as well. I liked playing on my own or with friends. Forcing people to socialize is a bad thing when your target market is asocial and/or antisocial gamers. --Jette 22:58, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Part of the reason I came to Guild Wars was because it handled things differently, explorables being one of these aspects, now going persistent takes that away and a very large amount of my interest in GW2. ~~000.00.00.00~~ 23:11, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Depends how it's done. Bad interactions can mostly be avoided by doing a good implementation. -- Alaris 13:57, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

"good implementation"

Oh, you mean Blizzard's taken over the project? --Jette 19:16, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm guessing that "good implementation" would mean a mix between "Persistent" and "Instanced" zones, which is exactly what they have planned IIRC. For obvious reasons, places that get "farmed" would likely be Persistent to make farming harder. ...while newby areas with specific Item-based objectives would probably be instanced to keep those newbies from being Griefed. And yeah, some quests send us into explorable areas for Item objectives and that likely won't change in GW2. If it still had missions too, then there's some more zones that will always be scripted and therefore Instanced. ...And missions are usually where the majority of players team up together anyway. Infact the only time people team up to enter Explorables in this game that doesn't involve a quest, is when they're getting a "Run", so I don't see what all this worrying is about... (yes I've run professionally, no I wouldn't really care if running becomes unnecessary). --ilr 19:40, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

I think they should have a combination too. Have the open world persistent, but all major dungeons, quests, missions, etc. be instanced, perhaps like WoW, but different, if that make sense. I would love to be able to run around the GW world and meet other people and group up, but there are also times you want to do something alone with your group. ~Farlo Talk 20:29, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

"Oh, you mean Blizzard's taken over the project?"

If they do I eat up my shoes (and God, they smell like rotting rats!) -- BlackHoleSun 20:45, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Guys, stop the panic! I remember reading somewhere in an official post of ArenaNet that, yhes, we will be able to see other peoples in explorable areas, it won't be only us and our group. But, the other persons, the one who won't be in this group, won,t be able to attack OUR MONSTERS, as well as taking OUR DROPS. 1 player and his group will have his own monster, and the other players will act like ghosts in racing games: they can't block you or influence your game. They put this to put more social live in specific area and, maybe, request writing support of other players when you are stuck. Finally, I guess that if you don,t want to see some jerks or young kids writing anything on your chat, you will have the possibility to hide this (maybe even hide the "ghosts" :)... --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:PatouPower (talk).

I don't recall that at all PatouPower. Source? As for the whole Explorable Area thing, I never had an issue with persistent areas, but I do hope for more instances than just dungeons and missions. -- Azazel the Assassin/talk 01:27, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

YA I'll RAEG if that's true... I got so sick of Ghost Toad always beating me on all the Mario Circuits. Shells just passed through that smug little prick --ilr 02:29, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Persistent world is the reason why some areas of traditional mmos can be considered problematic, possible issues were addressed a bit overzealously in gw1 by making Everything instanced. Adding a buffer zone with mobs and players between outposts and fully instanced maps isn't exactly opposite of what was done in gw1, but rather a move to compliment current system and broaden the scope of players that might start playing the game. Besides persistent area are only problematic when you compete with other players, If there is no need to kill over 9000 boars for next level or to finish a quest you might acctualy enjoy help from others in... say... retaking an outpost or killing a boss. Biz

Azazel, I swear I read it somewhere. I am gonna search for the source, and come back with it after, here :)! PatouPower

I support this 100% ^^ I've always wanted to see people more often around GW Power WM 16:21, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Just wondering how PatouPower works that one out? One reason I hated WoW was that while out exploring and killing stuff for XP some higher level would come along and steal my loot. If drops are still going to be assigned to character, that's fine, but what if we are farming particular areas for something in particular - feathers or special items. Gone will be the days of zoning and doing the area again. And what about runs - are they going to be a thing of the past? I can't wait for GW2, but I have my trepidations about it. :S ~ Twisties34

Still here, still loathing it, it's a terrible idea, I hate crowded districts and GW2 is going to be like that....everywhere, I loathe people begging for gold, selling items, and flaming, sure you can change distric (I hope) but you'll still have those people, Outposts and Explorable areas made GW unique, taking that away makes it like RS and WOW, another thing, they say it'll allow gamers to socialise with friends, and meet people, when I want to do that, I go to an outpost, it's alot more of a personal experiance taking you friends out to vq or explore, also if there are going to be outposts and explorable areas in GW2...whats the difference? minus merchants and storage (I presume) Zachariah Zuan. 16:18, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

is there a mounts when gw2 comes out? — The preceding unsigned comment was added by 99.243.162.52 (talk) at 02:26, 19 October 2009 (UTC).

Nothing about mounts is guaranteed or denied, but they are kinda saying map travel will still be there so I am 99% sure that the answer to your question is No and probably mounts will never be in GW2. - Giant Nuker 11:17, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

[edit] What could you see/guess in the video?

I'm wondering if that large gate at the start would be Ascalon's Ebonhawke fortress. Looks like it, the gates are like wings and there are some eagle/hawk heads at the top. Also the Sylvari was animating a creature that looked like a Juggernaut. So exciting. :) What other details did you people see?? --Sensei 12:47, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

OMG YAY! The changes from day to night. The underwater mobs and pov. YAY swimming! The gentler look of the asura, the awsome head armor for the charr, the flowing robes and hood of the sylvari, the norn white polar bear FTW! LOVE IT! Siadina 12:55, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Im amazed by the different lands of the 5 races: really beautiful and very variated.. |Cyan LightLive!| 12:59, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

I saw the following

• Underwater (near what we know as old ascalon)
• Orr revived (undead)
• Asuran Gates
• Charr still liking the whole fire thang...
• Golem assisting Ausran player
• Norn in Bear Form
• Silvani reviving some plant thingy...
• day-night transitions
• Hammer and sword still a weapons (think I saw the hammer in the norn's hands)
• Capt. Obvious but there are dragons

MrPaladin talk 13:07, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

All i can say that the trailer was great. And in-game clips was just what i wanted. If all what MrPaladin said is going to be true, this is gonna be one hell of a game! - J.P.Talk 13:44, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

I really am looking forward to this game! The trailer was just beautiful. I still have chills! Blessed Jade Wind 13:48, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

I think that the plant thing the sylvari revived was a really old golem - Giant Nuker 14:03, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Some of the races have a lot more Cultural flavor(afterall it's been 250 years). The necro Dragon has a name now and an army that looks more like "it". --- Humans: umm? Giant dams? and WTH's with the ships being built in the air?, Norn: Taking over where the dwarves left off, same Architecture and massive advancements in their Iron Work. Asuran: A lot more detail to their facial structure, big adavanced Protoss/StarWarzy Cities. Char: Heavily Industrial / Sauran's Army look to them. Sylvari: retaining the Druid surroundings, but looking more like Ritualist/Mancers. (I still think they're going to end up being the Zerg) Naga: May have an expanded role now? --ilr 21:00, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

I saw some concept art of a charr with a flamethrower! Also, at some point there was a charr that burst into flames and turned into a giant firey charr thing. Hopefully, in addition to the night/day patterns it will have weather cycling! It seemed like the norn were all polar bears and they just walked around in bear form all the time (except in like one or two scenes). -~=Sparky (talk) 21:22, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

In regard to the ships built in the air, I think that was the rebuilt Lions Ark; I recall some details about it using the flotsam of crashed ships when the smugglers rebuilt it. The naga were a definate curve ball, though. The Naga aren't native to Tyria, they're native to Cantha. With the "purification" of all nonhuman species in Cantha going on, the only thing that surprising me about them is how did they cross an entire ocean.

As for my own personal reactions... I am a little giddy. The act of putting some of their award winning concept artists to work making a trailer was brilliant. The transition from still frame to gameplay engine was masterfully timed with the narrative, and the ending rang true to the closing of the article we've read before: "Those of you who would be heroes, your time is now!" and "Now is the time! Claim your destiny. Forge your legend." Both are lines that I think are setting the feel for Guild Wars 2. A small part of me wants more, but at least we have an idea of when we're going to get more and of what.--Ryan Galen 22:10, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

The Naga could have came across the entire ocean resting at The Battle Isles and in Elona because the Emperor started getting rid of the non-humans almost 100 years before Zhaitan rose and sunk The Battle Isles and blocked the way to Kryta so they could have made it - Giant Nuker 23:02, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Anyone else notice at the end when the Norn woman was as tall as or even shorter than the Human guy?

Camera angles. --smøni 04:03, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

1. @3.00 Asura running towards the camera has blue goggles, one asura to the right had yellow goggles of same design - possible dye system same as in GW1. 2. @3:19 - Norns morphed into polarbears - Ursan will change ur player model. 3. @3:22 Norn warrior wears exactly the same armor design as a charr (iron scales) @3:44 - universal "paper doll" armor design, same look for all races, changes size/shape depending on who wears it. 4. @3:44 Shield is on the Charr's back - holstered shields (possibly weapons) will appear on your body. 5. 3 Movement speeds, walking, running and "faster" running. 6. Just about every weapon held by some one in the concept art is in their left hand - possible dual wield of two different weapon types? 7.@1.57 - Charr has an Ammo belt from the shoulder down and holding something that can be described a iron pipe with a vertical protrusion with a bolt on it - possible Guns. 8. @1.48 Sylvari animates wooden construct, @1.54 Asura powers up Golem construct using his "power glove/omni tool" - races will be able to use constructs possibly in battle (think a flesh golem). 9. @1.58 FDS - now with solid flame and a burning effect 10. @2.24 - Poorly synchronized leaping motion of the Charr it's hine legs slipng on every leap =P. 11 @3:11 - Sylvari "warrior" running across the bridge with a two handed axe weapon - possible pole arms or two handed axes. Biz 10:22, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Actually, about guns - in a short "interview" after the trailer premiere, Martin Kerstein asked some of the developers on-stage at GamesCom some questions. One of them was something like "Did I see a Charr with a gun there?" and a developer confirmed: "Yes, there will be firearms." ... and something about the Charr being very advanced in warfare technology. The interview, sadly, suffered from numerous long sound glitches - at least for those of us watching the live stream - so I hope we'll find the detailed answers in transcribed form at some point, but firearms/guns were confirmed. - 84.178.56.79 13:38, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Baw, I don't think guns fit. Why run up to someone with a sword when I can just shoot them from afar? --smøni 13:52, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Early gun history tells us they were made to combat armor worn by knights and samurai and were able to be used by those of less intelegence and training... inital guns also had accuracy problems... being a fiction game I think they will tone down the damage when compared to a real life gun to be more like what we see in ranged combat in GW... I'm constantly surprised that Asuran tech has not developed weapons better then the Golem Melee type MrPaladin talk 13:57, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

The trailer was very impressive to say the least. So much potential here and yet we’re just seeing the tip of the iceberg. I can’t wait for the books to come out and fill in what the trailer hinted at. But right off seeing Orr rise and Zhaitan’s undead army rise reminded me of Cthulhu and R'lyeh and armies of fish-men. Then seeing the battle scene, I noticed a follower of King Jalis Ironhammer right next to the fellow wearing the eye patch. A rare sight at that time which makes me wonder if we might see an occasional “forever transformed” dwarf now and again in GW2. Humans appear at Ebonhawke next, then the Norn. The Sylvari appear next with the ability to animate plant life to fight. The Asura look very cool (Mega Man?). The Charr look like they’ve made some advances in siege warfare and in weapons in general. Then Divinity's Reach appears. Then glimpses of each cultures surroundings. Why does the Norn area remind me of Kashyyyk architecturally? Oh, and flamethrower anyone? Awesome!!! :D Sardaukar 14:29, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

@3:33 Did the right most sylvari have a hood resembling a GW1 Dervish Hood? @3:02 & 1:55 Different golem models than of GW1 @2:49 Anyone see a way that the characters travel down from the portal into the asuran construct? Perhaps straight down the slope? --Elven Chaos 17:09, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

In response to the portal question I reviewed the video. The inside portions of the construct (city?) are hollowed out starting at the corners with a portal at the top of each corner. (We see at least three) While we can't see the decent of the one that gets the most screen time on our approach, we do see two portals across from it that appear to have what might be stairs descending from them. Though they weren't in the grand design my memory actually recalled, making it a good thing I checked. They're shown only briefly, and I didn't take any screen shots, just watched the scene over and over again, but those corners right under the portals made me think of train station stairs.--Ryan Galen 00:47, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

I think the ships in the air may have been the corsairs from Elona. perhaps the sea is no longer safe due to those undead Orrians, so the Corsairs made hot air balloon ships. Maybe? EDIT: forgot to sign Damien Hellchaser 15:47, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Or maybe the flying ships are a way of traveling from 1 place to another? Similar to the Flight Path in WoW. --MageMontu 16:00, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

At 3:25 there is what looks like a norn in the old female starting armor in Pre-Searing and what looks to be a norn with old gw1 ranger armor i cant tell which because he has his back facing us (I assume they are norn because they are in the norn main town).At 3:32 a Sylvari with shield on his back as noted above with a charr and the 2-handed axe or pole arm looks more like a staff.At 3:35-3:37 on the bridge at the top of the screen the 3 or 4 creatures walking across don't look like sylvari they look more like Ettins from GW1.At 3:46 I am 95% sure that if they keep every thing they showed in this video stays that we will get to holster weapons because of the lead charr with his sword in his holster on his left side.At 4:27 there is what appears to be electricity shooting from roof top to roof top (pause in the end fast moving pictures).The only other things I saw didn't seem important because they have already been noticed or were kick ass looking enemies (e.g. the nornbear thing with wings @ 4:29) - Giant Nuker 20:40, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

maybe it was just the direction of the video but i noticed that only one of many dragons appeared in the video. got me wondering maybe they decided to break it up into smaller releases with only one dragon to each one? i hope not but i would have thought the others would get a mention in the video.58.96.85.7 21:51, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Only one was a prominent feature of the video. In the rapid screen flashes that appear before the conclusion, after it's transformed from game engine back to concept art, I recall seeing at least two dragons. One anyone who has finished GWEN should recognize well enough. The other appeared to be in a desert canyon, suggesting the dragon who was mentioned fleeing to the crystal desert. They're only afterthoughts, though, so which ones make it into the final product are unknown. I have a gut feeling, though, that the dragons in general will be the big bad in the first release of Guild Wars 2. Logically it would be followed by the armies of Palawa Joko since he's right next door and is by reasonable estimation only being kept at bay by the awakened dragons, and then whatever unknown threat will draw us to back to Cantha. Mostly just gut predictions, of course.--Ryan Galen 22:20, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

I could guess that, like the first game, GW2 will have nice graphics and bad gameplay. ~Shard 02:12, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

You are so good at raining on people's parade. You should work at a funeral home or something, you can be the guy that makes sure no one has any fun or feels hopeful or excited about anything. (Satanael | talk) 03:32, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

No, I'm good at finding patterns. Anet couldn't make GW a good game given 4 years of obvious solutions being in front of their faces. The exact same team is making GW2, anyone with even half a brain can infer they won't be able to make anything better. You know why I'm excited about D3 and SC2? Because blizzard learns from its mistakes (which are few and far between to begin with) and listens to its community. Anet wanted to be a Blizzard ripoff, but they forgot about ripping off the qualities that make Blizzard a good game company. ~Shard 03:46, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Ugh, this is the start of an incredibly useless argument. You make great bait by saying absurd things about yourself... but I'm not taking it. Troll someplace else. (Satanael | talk) 03:59, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, ignoring problems doesn't make you win either. I will agree that it's useless though. ~Shard 04:01, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

"You should work at a funeral home or something, you can be the guy that makes sure no one has any fun"
But Wouldn't that be a really dickish thing to do in the first place?... going to a funeral home to have fun I mean?
XD --ilr 04:38, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

I was referring to the whole idea of like, telling funny stories about the deceased to celebrate his/her life. True, I'm not really sure I would classify that as fun, but it certainly can be funny, right? (Satanael | talk) 02:50, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Profession accidentally announced... well I think anyway

[1] "We place no restrictions on professions based on race. We are working hard to ensure that the races feel very different from each other while still allowing an asura warrior to be just as effective as a norn warrior." Safe to assume there are going to be warriors in the game? -- Phnzdvn 20:19, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I think everyone expected to see at least Warriors showing up. Hopefully it's true, I mean that all races are created equal in terms of professions. Though, I find the image funny, a tiny little Asuran with a shield and sword murdering a giant Norn with a sword and a shield. ~~000.00.00.00~~ 20:21, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

If the Asuran Warrior's got teh PowArG10v3, then of course he's going to win... --ilr 20:49, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) I think it would always have been safe to assume that there would be warriors (and rangers, and elementalists, and monks). Looks like they also confirmed no Chronomancer. -- FreedomBound 20:23, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

I thought they were just using that as a random example for the racial differences but who knows, maybe. Tidas 20:46, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Indeed. The whole GW community can grasp the concept of a "____" warrior; perhaps it was the best analogous thing to use in an example. | 72 {U|T|C} 21:33, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Of course, he could have just been using the word warrior as a general term to describe a dude with a sword. I mean, we've already seen humans with sword and shield, norn with hammer (and sword), and charr with swords as well, so it's not at all a shock that there will be some warrior-esque profession out there. Whether or not they will actually be called warriors... who knows? (besides ANet) (Satanael | talk) 22:39, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Underwater Exploration

Since that's a pretty big change, should it be noted somewhere in the article? The most recent interview also mentions that there will be a consumable item that allows players to breathe underwater for an extended period of time. Not sure where to put it and have it fit the existing flow. -- FreedomBound 15:53, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

I added a little bit of info, but someone who is more informed might want to put in more info. -- Phnzdvn 18:24, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Dual profession?

"A primary and secondary profession system will be used." - Does anybody know where that was confirmed? I don' remember seeing anybody saying anything along those lines... (Satanael | talk) 15:30, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Given --1>how tight lipped they've been about "classes" --2> racial differences and equalifiers --3> custom armor weights & --4> emphasis on crafting / new skill system... it's safe to assume dual professions would be much less consequential or speculation at this point until otherwise announced. Whoever wrote it, should have provided a real reference if they wanted it to "stay" there... --ilr 19:19, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

That information was added in this edit by Aspectacle, it seems, and appears to have no cited source. | 72 {U|T|C} 19:42, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Eurogamer 07 article. Will be used is probably too strong language to use, but it was 'almost certain' in 07. The GW2W wiki version has been restructured and kept up to date. -- Aspectacle  20:10, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Oh good... another european interview and they couldn't even Spell Eric's name right in this one. Plus it's almost 3 years old. ...Thx for staying so active dude, but I can't imagine a more ringing endorsement for tagging it as out of date. (and by that I mean read the context a bit closer, it's not clear) --ilr 20:18, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

I suppose it's possible they changed their minds about dual profs, but Eric seemed pretty sure they would keep that system, and we have no reason to believe they've changed their minds. I say we soften the wording a little, but keep the main point until we have reason to believe otherwise. I imagine they'll let us know for certain one way or the other come early 2010 when they start talking mechanics. (Satanael | talk) 20:33, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the cite :) | 72 {U|T|C} 21:41, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

No problem. I lurk and bap people over the head with references when I see the need. :) I think I was a little too enthusiastic when I wrote that profession sentence over two years ago! There are a few other bits in the article which are out of date or unconfirmed - I'll do a pass through the article and clean them up a bit. ---- Aspectacle  21:51, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

[edit] please no farm builds

I hope there are no permasins or any kind of farm builds. Encourage people to play together. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:Ramei Arashi (talk).

Suggestions can be placed in the feedback portal, no one is likely to read your recommendation here. And please sign your comments. -- FreedomBound 14:05, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

They made that feedback portal difficult to use, apparently they only want comments from wiki experts. And based on their replys to emails I doubt posting on the feedback portal would accomplish anything. Ramei Arashi 12:16, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

And no one's gonna read it there either... Go ahead, try and PROVE me wrong... --ilr 20:57, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

I assume you mean no one from ANet, since lots of people read and comment on suggestions. Also, it's impossible to prevent farming builds from appearing in an mmo where monsters drop things of value. (Satanael | talk) 02:52, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Now that you'll have a slave in GW2, people are actually less encouraged to play with other people. ~Shard 02:53, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

In what way? We have 3 slaves now. (Satanael | talk) 03:05, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

ilr ~ you're wrong. -- Wyn talk 03:11, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Linsey's inexplicable yet comforting commitment aside... she's still not a GW2 Dev --ilr 21:10, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Yet she works at Anet and probably talks to GW2 Devs plus who says GW2 Devs have to comment after looking at the page. - Giant Nuker 10:57, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

I really doubt we're going to see many comments at all. Honestly, I'm surprised that one exists. That's not the point. You can run around yelling "Nerf Shadow Form!!!!" until you're blue in the face, but unless you live by Anet's office and they have their windows open, they're not going to hear you. Same thing applies here. However slim you think the chance of Anet reading the suggestions, it's a 1000x better if you put it where it's supposed to go. -- FreedomBound 12:10, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

"You can run around yelling "Nerf Shadow Form!!!!" until you're blue in the face, but unless you live by Anet's office and they have their windows open, they're not going to hear you." Totally unfair comment. I can think of countless examples of changes that have been made to the game directly resulting from player feedback. Also, ILR, they've pretty much told us that they wanted thee feedback for GW1 and that they pretty much aren't interested in GW2 feedback at this point. Right now, GW2 is their game. A writer or an artist may want to hear what their fans or their editor think(s), but not until they've at least finished the first draft. (Satanael | talk) 15:17, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

I meant it in a "if a tree falls in the forest" kind of way, not that player feedback is not heard or used. -- FreedomBound 15:22, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Guysssssss, isn't it noted somewhere around the GW2 info that the game is designed to be both soloable and teamable, with high-end team content? ---Chaos- (talk) -- 15:40, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Every online game in history has tried to promise that. But when they put blinders on and ignore the "representatives" of the player base, they tend to be remain clueless at how exactly to strike a rewarding balance between both. --ilr 23:08, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Smaller Expansions

This quote is troubling: "Mike O'Brien has stated that expansions and/or mini-expansions are more likely than standalone campaigns, but a final decision has not been made yet."

Let's hope that the cost/content ratio isn't along the same lines as the new Xunlai Storage Panes! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by PneumaPilot (talk • contribs) at 16:33, 29 October 2009 (UTC).

The early interviews they gave that talked about why they chose to make a sequel talked about how much they hated making a new campaign every time because they had to make a new beginner area every time and things like that. My guess s, when they talk about doing expansions/mini expansions rather than whole new campaigns, they aren't talking about something as small as the storage panes, but rather things like EOTN or Sorrow's Furnace. My only hope is they don't think they can charge a full $50 for expansion packs (which they didn't for GW:EN, so there's hope, but still...) (Satanael | talk) 19:03, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

EotN was pretty big but merely took on a General of one of the Dragons. Granted it might be the most badass dragon in the world for all we know but anyone who cares about Epic storylines is gonna feel really gyped if each final dragon encounter could be covered with a mini-expansion... --ilr 20:16, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Events

What it says about events sounds terrible. Why should I miss a quest because I can't be on 24 hours day? And no its not the same as festivals. Festivals are every year and announced before they start. All quests not specific to profession should be available to everyone. Ramei Arashi 12:14, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

I think that's not reffering to all the quests ... just special ones that may happen at ANY given time ... :P Sneaker 14:58, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Furthermore, the implication has been that these events will happen more than once. They've pointed out that the day/night cycle in the game will not mirror real life, so if an event only happens at "night", for example, you could still be there for it if you are playing in the morning time where you are. I think one of the interviews stated that different events will happen depending on the community base as well, for example, if the community on that server doesn't kill enough centaurs, then the centaurs will overpopulate and begin to attack villages, etc. Also, I think they have mentioned something about there being some way of announcing events, like a town crier or something. They haven't actually said town crier, that is just my interpretation, but the point is I can't imagine they would make it very difficult to find these events, at any time of the day. And sneaker is right, I doubt that everything you can do in this game, especially the stuff that you have to do to progress the plot(s), will be events. (Satanael | talk) 21:26, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) L2R. Events aren't Scheduled. Nor will they be required for full character advancement. Events are a lot more like a series of Capture the Flag games all strung together. If you want to get to a certain point in the chain of events, then you have to stay involved and influence the outcomes in that Zone or "speed up the process" any way you can (Protip: get a guild, make friends, have people to call on when you need help). In other Words: If the exact Event going on isn't the one you're trying to complete, come back the same time tomorrow and it will be at a completely different stage. --ilr 21:32, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

This sounds like a very standard feature for a lot of MMOs. An outpost can get captured by enemies, which you then have to earn back, and defend every now and then, etc. I've seen it in a few games, it's actually pretty cool, but it gets kinda old after long enough. Hopefully they'll create new events every now and then. –Jette 00:18, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Scheduled events might be standard in mmo's but I think what's different about this is the tie-in with community play style, like the example I gave above of the centaurs only attacking if the community let's their population get out of hand. I've never heard of that in other games. (Satanael | talk) 17:33, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Directx 11?

I have just installed Windows7 and it has directx11 on it. Is there any information about wether GW2 will support dx11 or not? Or should i overwrite (if thats possible) my dx11 with dx10? In advance thank you for the answer. Gabe 2009.11.04

If it is directx 10 I'm pretty sure you could just use the -dxlevel command 83.90.164.166 15:28, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Think about this: for the past year+, I've played Guild Wars on a vista system with DX10.1 installed (Crysis, and it's a DX10 game, no DX10.1 content). The past two weeks I've been playing Guild Wars on Windows 7, which is running DX11. Now, remember how Guild Wars runs off DX9? — Jon Lupen 15:47, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Gabe stated his question wrong... what he should have asked is:
"Will GW2 take advantage of any of the new features in DX_11?" --ilr 20:54, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Well considering the support for DX10 (or lack there of)... — Jon Lupen 21:08, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Sorry for the wrong question. So the right question is: Will GW2 take as much advantage from directx11 as it will from directx10 (what was already announced by ANET). Thanx, Gabe

[edit] release date?

ok so i was on ebgames and i saw a pre order for it http://www.ebgames.com/Catalog/ProductDetails.aspx?product_id=75863 is this true....cuz i want it to be lolAurenX 03:08, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

No official pre-order date has been released. Retailers are estimating the release date, in order to secure early pre-orders. I'd suggest not pre-ordering from any retailer that requires you to place a deposit, since they'll be holding on to it for some time. -- FreedomBound 12:10, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

All the different websites put some release date on to try to sell them faster like they know more than their competition, but all the websites have different dates on them that all are not true, I believe that they should just use TBA for date. If you want the real info watch the Guild Wars and Guild Wars 2 official websites and wikis. - Giant Nuker 12:16, 6 November 2009 (UTC)