Talk:Guild Wars 2

From Guild Wars Wiki

Note: If you would like to make a suggestion for Guild Wars 2 go to this page

Contents 1 Guild Wars 2 Professions 2 We want to be WoW? 3 Friendly to Dial-Up? 4 concerns for gw2 5 New Races 6 OpenGL 7 Im pumped 8 Maps 9 Depends On How well u play or how long u played? 10 Lore VS Equality 11 Idea 12 Vandals 13 Names 14 Beta question 15 so many people have said this but.. 16 Facial Expression Progression 17 Here's what I'm going to be scared of 18 More Free Roam 19 One of the most problematic worries 20 Races 21 New Info? 22 Spoiler? 23 An idea for a custom skill creator I have... 24 Customizing ur weapon's name 25 Dualwiedling & Two-handed 26 Guild Wars 2 engine

[edit] Guild Wars 2 Professions

Quote GW2 Wiki art: Professions from the original Guild Wars are being redesigned but there is no information on these yet. Would you confirm that? I thinked there gonna be more than 8 profesions --Grethort 15:03, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

We don't have any information to share about Guild Wars 2's professions. They will not be the professions of Guild Wars, it's true, but beyond that, their types or numbers or other details are not being discussed. --Gaile 15:55, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

While cleaning up the Guild Wars 2 article, "the professions" was replaced with "professions from the original Guild Wars" and "designed" was replaced with "redesigned", I have corrected the misunderstanding. By the way, does "They will not be the professions of Guild Wars" just mean that any hypothetical returning professions will be different from their GW1 counterparts, or does it mean that the secret GW2 profession list doesn't share any names with the GW1 list? -- Gordon Ecker 01:41, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Nope - that paragraph was new since I reorganized the page. Allocate blame if it pleases you. :) I didn't mean for it to imply any form of decision on the final state, merely that the professions what ever they were were going to be different from what we have now. What you've changed it to is clearer on that. I'd swear that I've read an interview which said that but can I find it... no. sigh --Aspectacle 02:07, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

The parapgraph in question was expanded from a single sentence to three sentences in this edit. -- Gordon Ecker 02:40, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Here's my guess. (1) The archetypical roles will remain, monk, tank, ele, etc. Because you just need those. But they will be redesigned to be playable solo as well as within groups. (2) Professions that were less popular in GW1 will be modified most. I'm thinking mesmers, assassins, and maybe even paragons. (3) Those professions that are similar enough in GW1 and GW2 will probably keep the same name. Alaris 22:36, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

One more guess: (4) we might see some professions that were meant for Utopia come out in GW2 instead. Alaris 22:15, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Like maybe...(i have been going on and on about this..) a..Chronomancer?? Possibly?--Raph 18:35, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

I'd like to see all of the GW1 human professions to still be there, even just giving them a face lift perhaps but with the Monument on Valor in the Hall of Monument one can guess the GW professions will be there in GW2 (they can't get rid of dervish). I'd expect Norn to say as they are in GWEN but have cooler animations and beast effects :D Asura I'd at least like to see some kind of spellsword class so they're not just spellcasters or summon up big robots or whatever to do their work - maybe some kind of teleportation spells (I cast on you, you go to random local and burn :P). It's a pity the Centuars aren't going to be a main race, that'd be fun. Charr, I'm looking forward to seeing, but would imagine that'd follow the same ways as in GW1. This other race, the tree people whoever you call them, I'm also excited about seeing. Main thing Anet, don't drop any human professions especially dervish ... I want my Avatars :D House Of Furyan

Yea. I sure hope Dervishes are in Guild Wars 2 because thats my main profession in Guildwars one, and I would be so sad (aww man!) if the dervish doesnt come back. 2) It will be cool to play as a four-legs ^^. 3) If they do come back with avatars, will they have an Avatar of Kormir (A.K.A., the sixth god??)?? 4) I thought of a support profession that could take the form of animals (lots) and energy bond spells (Spells that affect you and the target/ally). This was just an idea i came up with. 5) ok, im done! TitanSacranus 00:21, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

chronomancer time changes, that would own being able to bring your team back 5-10 secs so retry something that would be so fun. imagine fore solo sins, kill get drop, change time, kill, lol profession r realeased in pairs, so maybe another support char, probly like a warrior spellscaster one, that kinda like a paragon and dervish combined with more emphasis on the team than a paragon but less relying on enchants for survival than a derv Annoying And Deadly 00:48, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

I imagine the future professions won't be as limited as they were in GW1. The current classes are fairy stereotypical, and so it's difficult to allow them to have any leadway in how skills function. I hope in GW2 we'll see a more open system of how classes function, and what you can do with your secondary rather than allocating a meager amount of points into an attribute. The design behind GW2 seems to be context-sensitive applications. In modern GW, if you want to be a warrior with a scythe, you're going to be laughed at, and for good reason. Hopefully there will be a wide variety of options in GW2. Instead of picking a "warrior model" and a "necromancer model" for your character, it's quite possible (and hopeful) that you can have a warrior that's actually lean and fast looking instead of a massive, barrel-chested, hideous man with a face that looks like a cutting board. Rather than a Necromancer that is gangly, unkempt and hideous, you may be able to have... well, someone that looks a little more normal. Hopefully in all things, GW2 will not be so limited by its art assets and its game design that it specifically needs to shove players into niches they can't escape from, when choosing a profession. Rather than "Monk" and "Warrior" and "Elementalist," perhaps we'll just see "Male" and "Female" with profession classes like "Hexer" or "Enchanter" or "Stealth," that have the potential to span skill types across multiples of what we'd consider profession skills. Attributes might be general across all professions and read something more like "Weapon Mastery" or "Stance Mastery." I really don't know. But I do hope ANet does something a little more interesting than "Healing Prayers" and "Sword Mastery," forcing professions into simple role characters that are blamed for trying something new. I'd like my character to be able to learn to be just as proficient in hitting someone with a hammer as being able to summon the undead for once. I think GW1 failed in this regard. If I saw a W/N trying to raise minions, I'd want to leave the group as soon as possible. If I see a monk actually trying to damage someone, I'd think the same thing. It was one of the major failings of GW1, since having a secondary profession was supposed to be an incredibly big deal, and that needs to change. Long gone are the post-Prophecies release, pre-Searing days of wandering the countryside on a Ranger that kills enemies with a bow, and then raises minions at range. It sounded so good when you were a noob, and when the game was first released, but now... now it's just an idea that never panned out in execution, mainly due to the current rune and attribute system. That, in turn, had a big effect on how professions are perceived in the game. --Reklaw 08:34, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't know why but I get the strange feeling in my gut that Guild Wars 2 is going to be like Oblivion, where you choose core elements of your 'class' and are shaped that way, not with set professions. Don't know why but can't shake that feeling...118.92.12.97 08:18, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Maybe you are playing too much oblivion? :P--Raph Talky 21:24, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Whatever you do Anet, do not introduce a healing class. Give players the ability to be self sufficient to heal themselves. Healing should be left up to themselves, the npc's or environment not to other players. If you need healing, run back to base or find a strategic location giving an environmental effect or cap a shrine that gives regen or somethin...just do something that does not put healing power in the hands of other players. Healing classes ruin this game; if you have a skill that can heal others then it is a healing class even though Paragon is support. Man, I have seen Dervs and Rits act as better healers than Monks. If GW already has a Monk, then what in the world is the Rits role??? Healing?...we have a Monk for that. Lightning damage?...we have an Ele for that even though the Rit does a better job at it. Support?...we have a Paragon for that. What is the role? It all boils down to this --If you have a hierarchy or food-chain(attack Monks first then Rits>Paragons>Mesmers>etc), then a game is unbalanced...common sense 101.

In PvE, you can't do anything unless you are a "glf 2 monks then we go! We don't want to use henchies we prefer real peeps." Alas, a chain effect happens and all you see now are peeps taking only henchies/heroes and not bothering with real peeps. It's not that they don't want to use real peeps, its just that healers are soooooooo crucial in Guild Wars that you can't go anywhere without them unless its a gimmick build farming a tiny section on the map. Can I go without an Assassin? Sure. Can I go without a Mesmer? Sure. Can I go without a Monk? Hell no. That, my friends is the beginning of the unbalancing act.

In PvP, that is the only problem with Random Arenas. It not the randomizing that's the problem...it's the healing class especially if your team doesn't have one (notice that statement, "if your team doesn't have one"). If you have only 2 in your group and go against 4 peeps, you can be the noobiest sob out there and have the crappiest build but can still win if your healer can keep you alive long enough to kill something...hmmm, sounds unbalanced to me. When was the last time you saw a group in the Halls or GvG or arenas not needing a healing class? IWAY? at least they had a way to be self sufficient without relying on a healing class. Do you realize how diverse a group can be if you aren't worried about a mandatory healer?

It appears Anet has listened since GW2 allows for solo play. That's right, no need to depend on a healing class to survive. If you lose, its your own fault for not have the skills to survive. If they have a Monk this time, it may focus on smite and martial arts instead of being at the top of the food chain. 24.106.177.50 13:26, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

About Rts, they were meant to be a hybrid class, giving players an alternative to the Mo for healing. As for Paragon & Dervish, I guess that with enough support, you could do without dedicated healers. And enough players enjoy playing a healing / prot profession to justify it. Of course, in GW2 with solo content, the healing class(es) will have to be revised. But the problem is not so much that the monk (& Rt) has healing spells, but rather that the other classes lack good ways to heal themselves and others. -- Alaris 14:00, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Mesmers are not popular?!?!?! oh they are hard to use... but yea that's what makes them fun. They interrupt and sorta like some area spells make people move, I mean their meant for CHAOS and for pissing the monks and elementalists off. They don't do much direct damage though, but it's good to couple it. The fast casting dont help in lag either, lol oh yea please add some cool stuff for Monks, they are a cool class but their smiting capabilities can be somewhat limited. [[User:leoleez|leoleez]

[edit] We want to be WoW?

At least that's how the whole article reads to me. I doubt I'm the only one who feels like all the "additions" mentioned are the things I hate most about all the MMORPGs out there. GWs won for me specifically because it wasn't an MMORPG at all, but looks like they're going to fix that for GW 2. Hope there will be a free trial, because looking at the changes, I wouldn't buy it, not matter how pretty the screen shots were, and that's just sad considering that I own the collectors edition of every Guild Wars campaign. Can we get some good news on this page? Seriously, anything that doesn't make a real GWs fan taste bile would be fine. If the developers read this stuff, then let us know what's going to be the same, so we'll know why we would want to play it at all. 68.229.245.110 07:28, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes, some stuff will change, but I still have faith in ANet and think the result will be great. Since you seem to be passionate about GW I think you can take the time to read through the various interviews and other stuff that is linked to at the bottom and form an image of the possible future of GW2. If you really try to catch every thing they hint to you might notice how much the game might improve with GW2 instead of being 'another WoW' or something. -- (gem / talk) 10:58, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

You assume I haven't read them. Look, I was an ArenaNet fanboy. I recommended GW to all my friends, I STILL recommend it to people. What I want is some info that says why a GW fan would want to play GW2, because the info out there right now doesn't tell me. Instead it tells me we will have persistent game areas and world messages when dragons respawn, which is something I just do not want, at all, ever, under any circumstances. It sounds like every MMORPG my friends ever whined me into playing with them, and if it is like that then I'd like to know now. That way I can save my money and keep playing GW instead of quitting GW2 after two or three weeks and hating ArenaNet. I could see ArenaNet pulling it off, don't get me wrong, but it would take a lot of positive info to offset all of the, admittedly in my opinion, horribly disgusting changes I've read about so far. 68.229.245.110 18:32, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Well, there certainly isn't more info available atm and the designers will most likely not tell us more too soon since they are in pretty erly stages of development and many things haven't been set to stone. I wouldn't worry about losing money with GW2 though since more information will certainly be availble before the game is finally released. Betas are next year and we'll surely get a lot of info from the beta testing phase and that might still be long before actual release. -- (gem / talk) 21:39, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Apparently, Yes we do! They arn't changing GW2 because they want it changed. If Anet had its way they could just add new campaigns with little or no extra skills, no new professions and so on as long as some one pays for it. They didn't, instead they listen to what people ( GW 1 owners ) want changed and implemented as good as everything you could possibly ask. Changes may seem like WoWclone but its not, it will never be, its still same good old GW with all its glory of party based combat and abnormaly diminished solitary play style. Biz 11:31, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

And in addition to the above comment, they have said they are very committed to keeping the aspects of Guild Wars that made GW1 so popular, so don't worry too much about it being entirely different--while they are more likely to announce the differences, the similarities will still be there. -- Frozzen 21:31, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

All I have to say is SO FAR GW2 looks like a WOW clone. It looks grim and scary, and it seems like a step in the wrong direction. I used to be like Anon. However, at so point I realized tis just too soon to be sure of anything. I don't know what to think right now. Anyone that says that it will DEFINITELY be a great game is kidding themselves. Anyone that says it will suck is too. The fact is, we don't know and won't until the Beta. We'll all just have to wait until then to make any good decisions about this game. --Mortazo 02:02, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. The general description of the additions to GW2 makes it sound like the more traditional MMORPG. Because as the interviews explained, I believe that's exactly what ArenaNet is trying to incorporate. To add elements that are more familiar to the MMORPGers at large, and then ease them into the GW-style of play. I feel that ArenaNet can be trusted to keep the GW feel in GW2. So until we know more, everything is just speculation. I doubt even the ArenaNet developers have much to tell. It's far too early in development. -- ab.er.rant 08:34, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Even though WoW requires a greater financial investment than GW, it is by FAAAAR more popular. You are being selfish if you think what a clear minority of the gaming community want to remain as opposed to moving into the superior WoW model. People obviously want to play a game like WoW and the biggest flaws in PvE guild wars are non issues in WoW. A move towards WoW is a move in the right direction, I just hope they focus a little less on PvP and realise a MMORPG is about PvE first. Anon

Basically your argument is that popularity is equivalent to quality. This is obviously not the case so I feel no need to repudiate you. I will say that WoW is a dull, insidiously boring grindfest, and the 2 weeks I tried to make myself play it made a petite piece of my soul die, every day. So you're opinion is not fact, and say the WoW model is superior will not make it so. If the development team for GW2 is thinking the same way, they are being stupid. They will alienate their existing fanbase, atleast the part of it like me that will not play a game at all similar to WoW, and they would be going into direct competition with Blizzard for their fans, and guess who's going to win with the WoW junkies?68.229.245.110 16:11, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Having played WoW admittedly only 10 days, but almost full time 10 days, I can say that WoW has several gameplay flaws that GW has avoided. I can easily afford the WoW fees, but I choose to play GW because the gameplay is more refined. I'm optimistic in thinking that GW will build the persistent areas such that these flaws will not be present in GW2. Personally, I am looking forward to having persistency and solo added to the gameplay, in addition to instances and party play. But I see why some people are concerned: it all depends on whether ANet solves the problems that Blizzard haven't solved. I think they'll solve it, but that remains to be seen. Alaris 15:29, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

I can enjoy WoW, but its primary problem, imho, is the grind. If Anet can someone make leveling feel like its part of the game, and not part of a grind, and make it fun to do more than once (anyone that has played diablo can tell you, leveling is only fun once, after that, its just a race), then I have no problem with GW being a bit like WoW. It doesnt have 9 million players for nothing.(alleged players I should add, no telling how many of those are actually active.)--Ryudo 00:53, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

And how many of them are farmers :) The problem with the grind is the time investment, and since there's a huge time investment, qutting it, even stopping temporarily, becomes all the more harder. -- ab.er.rant 05:35, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Everyone who has played an MMO will understand that PvP on MMOs is usually rubbish for several reasons-Favoritism toward people who pay more, elitism, grinding, mobbing,.... MMO = PvE, if you want PvP get an FPS.

IMO the PvP is what sets GW apart from every other MMO, and it appears they will be both maintaining the current type of PvP as well as intoroducing new more casual world based PvP, which in my opinion would make it an exceptional game, because some of the time I love getting a GvG group formed up with set builds and heavy tactics, but sometimes just raiding a city would be really fun too. I hope GW 2 will prove to be a combination of the best of both worlds.-- Frozzen 07:09, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

I think a good indication of the understanding and direction of ANet can be found in Jeff Strain's speech earlier this year (Find it here[1]). I also think it's important to note that a lot of the things ANet is talking about adding in GW2 are not unique to WoW, e.g., more persistance. This is something that I think I lot of people really like about MMORPGs in general. For example, with heavily instanced games like GW1, there's just too many loading screens, it reminds me of FF7. Great game, but over half my hours spent "playing" were actually just sitting there waiting for it to load. Anyone with a slow connection speed will fully appreciate my sentiment on this. And persistance has the advantage of less loading. Plus, I think a lot of people like the ability to see other players play, see knew build ideas and strategies in use, rather than just talking about it. Persistance allows for all of this, and therefore has some great advantages over instanced areas. Of course, instanced areas have their advantages too, such as preventing kill stealing and things like that. That is why ANet has clearly stated it will not totally remove instanced areas. My own personal imagination on this envisions persistant areas covering the "non-essential" aspects of the game such as the explorable areas and towns/cities, with some special events in it such as the famous dragon-bridge example. Whereas instanced areas will likely be used for the more "essential" areas such as story/mission areas (such as a place where Primordius is fought, for example), and elite areas like today's FOW and Underworld where high level drops occur. This way, there's no line to kill the end boss, and no one steals your green-drop kill, but we can still all hang out together and have fun killing random stuff and finding cool parts of the world. (Satanael 07:29, 7 December 2007 (UTC))

There is limited info out about GW2, yet everyone is passing judgement. Comparing it to what is currently out, and existing. We have seen from GW, that Anet isn't about copying what is existing. Lets give their track record a little credibility, and wait for the game to come out before we pass judgement on peoples opions and preception of what they think the game might be.Med Luvin 15:09, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Too many loading screens? What are you serious? The instanced areas in GW1 are massive compared to games such as Final Fantasy where you only have to go ten spaces into a new area. It seems ANET's originality came from giving the player the choice to either do their own things in areas with heroes / henchies, or add players and experience it on that level. Changing a very successful formula, which is what GW has, and turning it into a format such as WoW just makes it that, WoW. As it stands to me, and a lot of my GW friends it appears that GW2= WoW with just a few more bells. I think its a shame to see that general GW gameplay is being morphed into WoW gameplay for GW2. Come on ANET, continue being original not just copying what everyone else does. 203.173.225.42 13:44, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

I imagine that "grind" in GW2 will be much like it is post-GWEN. Grind will be limited to meaningless achievements rather than player development. The level system sounds like it has a "true" cap at 20, but will barely push your attributes (whatever system that they use) up by meager amounts in PvE as you continue to gain experience. Basically, the game will likely resemble a standard MMORPG while lacking all of the failings of the genre. Guild Wars' problem was attempting to EMULATE standard MMORPGs on a much smaller scale, so that grind is fast and there's not much content. GW2 will be a MMORPG but will leave out standard practices. It will be an evolution of the genre, into a pick up and play game that also has a reward system to enable over-achievers. Don't wet yourself just yet. GW2 will be fine. I'm more concerned about the skill system, and whether companions will be allowed in PvP, if anything. --Reklaw 06:48, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

To all the players that say gw2 being like WoW would be a good thing please buy WoW and leave us alone. Seriously. Some people play guild wars because they like it. The reason GW has been such a success was because it got business from the players that WoW alienated. and to that guy that said that PvE is all that matters in mmos, are you crazy? Just because you like pvp in fps better doesn't mean that some people don't like combat in rpgs better. I would think that all the guilds that focus specifically on pvp would show you that some people like that.--Yankeefan984 22:01, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

It has been 6 months+ since the announcement of GW2...in that six months, I, and my entire household have completely switched to playing WoW. I see no sense in wasting any time, effort or money on GuildWars, ArenaNet or PlayNC if they wish to simply abandon the game. As for GuildWars2, I won't play a clone, and I won't buy a clone. It has been stated that they'll keep the GuildWars1 servers running until...when??? Has anyone out there played Auto Assault? No thanks, nonspecific answers don't get my money, loyalty or support. I'd rather pay every month for continued service that is demanded by my monthly fees, and I'll play the original WoW as opposed to this copycat so-called GuildWars2 version, any day, hands-down. Blizzard is getting my gaming dollars from here on out. I miss GuildWars, and I truly believe that it was the greatest MMORPG ever made, with customer support second to none, beautiful graphics, great speed and interface, but I simply will not dump any more time and effort into a game that is going to vanish at some vague point in the future, now lacks the support and updates that are currently devoted to v2.0, and that will not allow my efforts to continue into the new version. In this household, I have spent in excess $3000 on accounts, expansions, campaigns, mission/skill packs, and character slots...all spent in good faith on a game that was IMHO worth it...and all wasted to a very flawed business decision, that is obviously targeted at creating a duplicate of WoW in the hope that they can draw some of that market (can anyone remember "New Coke"?).

At this point, there is considerable investment made in WoW (with it's pitiful customer support, gastly "child-like" graphics, horrid storyline, poor interface, high latency, 10 million (minus the 4 million bot/farmer) accounts and ridiculous maintenence schedule). With 8 WoW accounts now maintained in this household...I seriously doubt that there is anything that can be done to draw us back to GuildWars for v2.0... Thank you PlayNC/ArenaNet, I really enjoyed playing GuildWars. Good luck, and farewell. Gwynna Vive 19:44, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

So? Stop investing in games, and instead play them for fun. That's what GW is all about in the first place. From your post, it sounds like you're playing WoW, but you'd rather be playing GW. So play GW. Simple. -- Alaris 20:42, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Agreed Alaris. If games are an investment you're playing them wrong - they're your life and not a game any longer. From my point of view abandon GW for GW2 or abandon for WoW - what's the difference? At least GW2 will be a new game and likely won't have any of those things which leave you scathing WoW. I seriously wish people would stop making assumptions about GW2 when we know close to nothing about it. -_- --Aspectacle 21:54, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

So you stopped playing GW, a game you supposedly love, because GW2 is "copying" WoW? Do you actually think that WoW didn't "copy" anyone else? It's not like it invented the genre, and your assertion of it being "the original WoW" is ridiculous. ANet are simply implementing features that they think will improve the game. Given that, the fact ANet stated that GW would continue running as long as there's players playing it, and that no one has any idea how they're actually going to implement these supposedly "stolen" features in GW2, I can't help but wonder what you were smoking when you came to the decision you did. Capcom 02:01, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Strange isn't it? The conclusions that people come to by reading just a small part of a big whole. The moment they see "introduce persistent areas", they conclude it's a WoW clone. The moment they read "higher level cap" and "playable races", that's it. The "WoW clone" theory is stuck in their heads and they don't bother trying to read more. The fact that it still has GW elements in it no longer of matters, all that matters is that it has WoW elements in it, therefore, it's a WoW clone. Never mind the fact that most all existing MMORPGs has WoW elements in them, or rather, WoW shares certain elements with most MMORPGs... But kudos to the makers of WoW for being so successful to have established itself as the de facto standard in the world in MMORPG, where everything that even remotely resembles WoW is decried a WoW clone. -- ab.er.rant 03:17, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps you should look at what ANet has done. They took the best of MMO's and fixed their problems. I see adding instancing, races, and higher level cap as a continuation of just that. Except... well... ANet will find a way to make it work. My hunch anyway. -- Alaris 04:40, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

OK, just a note before I interject my opinion here - I haven't read everything that has been said here down to the last word - but there is something I want to point out. Jeff Strain was originally Lead Programmer for WoW, but left, because he didn't like the way the game was going. Do you think he would ever let a Guild Wars sequel become resemblant of a game he chose to stop working on due to it being, in his eyes, the wrong kind of game? I will admit there are a few aspects about Guild Wars 2 that frighten me somewhat as a GW fan, such as the higher level cap, where the whole point of GW1 was to put the player's skills to the test, not the number of hours they spent grinding. But I doubt very much GW2 will be any kind of WoW clone - and in case anyone's wondering, yes, I have read up on pretty much all the publicly available material regarding GW2 in any way. I still think saying it's a "WoW clone" is a little far-fetched. Oh, and to those who are saying GW1 is being abandoned; wrong. ANet didn't plan GW2 just to copy Blizz (or however you want to put it). I suggest you read up about Guild Wars Utopia, as it explains how GW2 is only in the works because there was a wide array of new content and features that couldn't be introduced to GW1 without making it too bloated. In any case, once GW2 is out, GW1 will not be neglected. I specifically remember ANet stating they would continue to provide improvements and new content for GW1 in the form of updates. -- Slarynn 00:33, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

The higer level cap is like, After 20 you get very small rewards, such as mabe one skill point, or mabe hero skill points, or something else entirley. a level 22 will be able to beat a level 44 with barely any trouble. in fact, If you want, you will be able to stay at level 20 forever. The persistance will not allow people to kill jump, or loot, or crap like that. somehow A-net is going to keep away from that. and they won't have persistance EVERYWHERE, most likeley there will be instanced missions or dungeons, as well as persistance area's with little to no monsters. It's giving you WOW features and original features withought the boring learning curve or the complexity.--70.71.240.170 03:58, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Seems to me actually that GW has a pretty good plan, adding in persistant areas makes the game more interactive, but how persistant are these "Mythos-like" areas (they seem to be like the overworld addition to that game). I mean sometimes I just don't want to deal with people that are farming and stuff, but it overall seems to be good. I was wondering if there was a possibility of making your own voluntary copy of the graph so you can complete a quest or to vanquish a map

Also is the title system gonna be like GW1? I like it alot, its something to do and a good track on people who want to complete something wholesomely like me.

Also how simple are skills going to be? It is nice to have a plethora of skills I do not like wow for the overly simplistic skills, the GW skills are fun to me because I like to find out good builds and not spam like in WoW. I mean the copy skills with different names are a little too far, and some were almost the same but had enough differences.

How is the elite skills going to work in persistant zones? I mean pretty much you can hire people to kill the boss, or you'll find him killed when you want a challenge, it seems like it would become really easy to get them.

--[[leoleez|leoleez]

[edit] Friendly to Dial-Up?

This is usually a moot point in games these days since you have to be out in the backwoods or be pretty poor not to be able to get / afford broadband. I live in the backwoods.) But, in GW1, I can amazingly play competitively in PvP (HA, GvG even) on just 21.6k, which always impressed me. I only experience lag on three team battles, and only when a lot of NPCs (pets, minions, spirits) are all in the vicinity at the same time. So, GW1 was very good in this respect. I fully expected when I bought the game two years ago to be returning it the next day. Will GW2 be using the same networking mannerisms, or will it be using a completely new system? How much focus is being lent towards allowing dial up users to play alongside everyone else? --Reklaw 02:37, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

No official word yet, unfortunately. Very little has been said about the network side of things in the press so far. --Aspectacle 03:25, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Nicely worded question, by the way.  :) --Aspectacle 03:30, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Every MMO I played so far claims it can run on a 56k modem. Even if you can run it, you are still very likely to experience longer then average load times, lag etc. Biz 22:26, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Even if it can, if you cant afford low lvl broadband internet, then you probably shouldnt be playing online games. Unless your one of the people in the very few areas left w/o broadband access.--Ryudo 23:12, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Actually Ryudo, there's quite more than a few places that doesn't support broadband. Though I'm running DSL for MMO's and Xbox Live, 3 years ago I was running on dial-up. And I'm in the burbs. Not because I couldn't afford it, I just wasn't able to get it. - Zelyoniy --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:71.52.221.17 (talk).

Agreed. It's always a plus to support dial-up. The "very few areas left w/o broadband access" probably applies to very few countries. -- ab.er.rant 03:06, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] concerns for gw2

→ moved from Talk:Main Page#concerns for gw2

first of all, this is my first post so im not sure if i went about this right. getting use to wiki takes time.

back to topic at hand. if anyone has information that can help or want to discuss other concerns please feel free to do so here.

my biggest concern, and pretty much only one, is the raising of level caps. lets face it, what i love about GW is that everyone is at an even keel. 20 is set in stone and i do not have to worry about a level 40. however now it seems that they wanna raise it and also talkin about a no level limit. where would it end for supreme dominance? the high end will get ruined because obviously more people have time than others. so the game would slide to those people. guildwars as it is is a game i hadn't played in about a year, since factions. but i came back with eye of the north and having a blast. the only things i had to do, which were alot, is get all my new skills. but if i have to catch up in levels as well. it would never end. mmo's are fun due to its never ending story and something always to do but in an aspect of pvp where the par is set at a distance never to be able to catch up is crazy.

as for everything else the game sounds amazing. i hope when they add the items they are planning to the work the way they are intended. if it does this game will probably be owned by the entire us military because i will go around and make everyone get it if i have to. we will be a guild called DoD or something. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:Armyguy463 (talk).

You're making the mistaken assumption that people won't ever stop getting more powerful. Imagine GW1 if they raised the level cap to 100 tomorrow. Would anyone be any more powerful? No, because all of your attributes max out at level 20. It's just a number. It's a tired, old subject. --Reklaw 10:46, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

what about hit points? they go up as you level. yes i took into consideration that they can cap attribute points. i would even like the possibility to max out more attributes. however the it becomes less strategic. but my main concern is hit points. a lvl 20 obviously has more than a level 5, and a level 100 would have more than 20. --Armyguy463 10:52, 22 February 2008 (UTC) armyguy463

If you can accept a cap for attributes, isn't it logical to just assume they'll put in a cap for health and energy as well? -- ab.er.rant 10:54, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

true, so we assuming the level up is just for braggin rights? hey i got a level 100 necromancer. --Armyguy463 10:56, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

That's probably the only thing I'd accept in GW2 if they want to put in a ridiculously high level cap. -- ab.er.rant 11:00, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

likewise. but knowing me i'll still want lvl 100. --Armyguy463 11:05, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Either that, or less xp required to gain the levels? More xp rewarded? In the long run I've always had the same opinion as Reklaw. It's just a number. Raising the max level to 100 would achieve nothing if they also raised the xp gained or decreased the xp required. I couldn't care less about what the max level ends up being, what matters is how long it takes to reach said level. Also, GW never was about the levels in the first place. — Galil 14:12, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

From what I've heard it's less of a cap and more of a decreasing returns, so that the same number of levels will give you much less of whatever levels will give you if you are a higher lvl, so someone level 50 might be only marginally better than lvl 20 (the 50 to 20 example is my own, I'm not sure how steep the scale is) and still quite within the lvl range to compete. So, this is essentially the same as a cap, except with marginal benefits beyond that cap.-- Frozzen 23:29, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Would you still be able to use other char from GW1? king 02:46, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Were all just going to act like you actually read the main article, and ignore that last comment. Trust me, its better for you (thats a NO! old chars are gw1 not gw2... its in the main article)-68.44.237.208 06:10, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

On the Subject of level cap, i think they main problem here will be prejudice. Example: level 55 Sylvari Monk asks to join your group, as well as a level 21 human monk. The Sylvari is much higher leveled, but his build sucks, where as the level 21 human monk has a very effective and useful build (think a bonder or healer or something...) Which one does your prejudice leader pick? The level 55 Sylvari Monk with the crappy build!--Raph Talky 22:44, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Unlikely. The more likely scenario is that the current trends for discrimination based on builds will live onwards. -- Alaris 14:20, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

• Beg*Beg*Beg* Please don't raise the level cap. If the effect is just cosmetic then why do they want to make it and stir up the community? GW to me is the best online game out there because they emphasize on fairness among player. We don't need to spent 24/7 to become a godlike hero. I love the low level cap concept and so that it's easier for player to get into the game anytime and still manage their life. Green item and stuff is a great system implemented by arena net as it allow casual player to be able to afford max perfect item for low cost. Arena net offer the world a revolutionary online game where there's only minimal grind (lv20 cap is unheard of) and that player depend on their team combo and brain to make the kill rather than grinding and hording epic item...yuack... IMHO arena net should perhaps consider totally destroy the c2pig leveling system that is feeding on the life of innocent gamer in dark single bedroom everywhere in the world. Reward teamwork and smart player....Discourage ant worker from hogging the game. -channel --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:60.53.50.192 (talk).

Try to read more regarding the proposed higher level cap before worrying about it. -- ab.er.rant 02:50, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Personally, I would welcome a higher level limit but this side-kick system seems really unfair to me. Basically, it seems to me that players will be able to have all the benefits of a max level charachter, without needing to spend the time to actually become max level, which is completely unfair on those who do spend time leveling up. Just another thing that seems that GW will turn into a game where it is so focused on making the game fair, the actual level of skill and determination of the players simply doesn't matter anymore.--Neyon 10:48, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

They do have to team up with someone of a higher level to get the benefit. So that benefit disappears once they are back on their own. Higher-level chars often won't put up with leeches unless he's a friend, or he pays. -- Alaris 13:22, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

If you read that feature a little deeper, you'd realise that the focus is not on allowing the lower-level player to level up faster, but to allow the lower-level player to play with those of a higher level (such as a new player tagging along with a bunch of friends). Also, given GW's success at removing the problems of actually leveling up, have faith that they won't screw it up for GW2. -- ab.er.rant 14:48, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

If something like the current system remains, whereby the experience gained from kills is based on your level against foes level and number of party members, then the higher you get the more pointless it will be to fight lower level enemies. ie currently you get no exp from monsters 5 levels or more below you. My biggest concern as a pve only player is wether ganking will be introduced into the persistent world as its the one thing i hate about other games and love how GW's appeases both sides and yet manages to keep them seperate. User:BogusDude

[edit] New Races

I would really really like to see undead and tengue as a playble races in guild wars 2. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:King dude (talk).

Why play undead when you got charr people. In fact the should just forget about all the other races and make GW2 charr only. Charr ftw! Antiarchangel

Lol I think that the currently known starter races have a good variety of diverse races (asura is currently my favorite)... -- Frozzen 23:30, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Tengu yes! Probably would be a better fit for when we get to Cantha. Undead... I'd rather something original, uniquely GW, if it will be something roughly undead. Perhaps Ghosts would be fun. You could even have creepy vengeful ghosts as well as good-looking benevolent ones. -- Alaris 17:06, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

What about Forgotten they are definitely a GW thing and they are an organized race--Spartiatai 21:32, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

I'd like to see Undead as well, but in relation to Palawa Joko. --Valentein 21:45, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

I'd totally love to see the Forgotten as a playable race. I'd play one for sure. 4 arms, and snake body? Ancient race to boot? Nice... -- Alaris 16:11, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

LOL, think of when christmas comes, chars with christmas hats on! xD I canni wait :) --Alien 16:23, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

I wonder if the Asuras will like be able to jump into their crafted golem thingies for PvE that would be intense, and like get special golem skills. --Ja 16:56, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Nothing says that there will not be more races in following expansions of GW2, still, undead? why not Nornmancharr ? =) Biz 11:58, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

If you notice, currently all of the races except for human in GW2 are unique to guild wars--therefore I think that tengu and forgotten are more likely than undead. -- Frozzen 15:15, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

I feel like I want them to add the Devourers. They are cool and awesome and are just plain addable! and it wont feel weird melee-ing or casting if you play them, cause they can already do that. especially if you plan on being a ranger or para-like character. User:Kiega123456789ooo 8 June 2008

[edit] OpenGL

I hope this time they'll base the graphics on OpenGL, so there's at least a _REMOTE_ chance of getting Guild Wars to work with non-microsoft operating systems. On a second thought, no they probably *WON'T*. So much about trying something new... --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:84.135.72.57 (talk).

Well, GW has been working on Linux for quite a while now. Take a look at Guild Wars on Wine. Unless you'd like it to run on Mac. Unless ArenaNet is rewriting a whole new graphics engine with no plans to reuse GW stuff, I doubt they'll switch wholly to OpenGL. To switch to a different graphics library you'd need to train existing people or hire new ones, so there's a cost and time factor involved. -- ab.er.rant 01:22, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

GW won't run under wine on every system (as is the case with mine.) OpenGL support or improved virtual machine software would allow almost everyone to play GW under linux. If only ANet would release a Linux version, they don't HAVE to release it under GNU. --Znof 06:47, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

You mean GPL. GNU is something completely different. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:84.135.119.223 (talk).

Well if you want to be exact then I mean the GNU GPL. --Znof 13:55, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

I see, didn't know that. As for the licensing... I don't think they're worried about GNU. It's more about whether they would be willing to spend additional resources to support another operating system. That's even more unlikely if they plan on reusing or evolving parts of the existing GW engine. -- ab.er.rant 09:45, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Agreed, there is no reason they should spend the extra resources, but a man can dream can't he? :D --Znof 17:59, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

I hope to god they do!!! 68.204.198.205 17:53, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, one can hope and one can just go and dualboot XP just for sake of GW2, 1min restart and you went from flaming MS on a IRC, talking about how opengl is so much better, to playing the game =) Biz 11:53, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Im pumped

Im so excited about GW2....but im kind of nervous to see if it will be as good as the others...i hope arenanet doesnt mess it up --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:70.110.29.216 (talk).

Lets hope they don't mess it up, Arenanet is a small company, messing up could mean their end. House Of Furyan 03:24, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Hate to agree with them being small, but i guess i have to. Good news is most of us are in good spirits about how ArenaNet will make GW2. /goteam!--Raph Talky 18:29, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Maps

Can someone tell me, how is it like in WoW and how it'll be like in GW2 with monsters? I mean, when u kill monsters, will they be gone for ever or will they just pop out so u can kill them all the time? and will there be quests like "kill an evil king and his army"? because if someone else will be doing that, where will they be if u killed them before? Plohek 11:55, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Sorry but we don't know that yet. -- Mepp 11:58, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Try going through the talk archives. There's lots of speculation on this already. -- ab.er.rant 01:33, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Or You can go under Guild Wars 2 Suggestions on Gailes Page and Suggest it and hope Anet will Look at it. I already posted something up about that but no one is sure defiantly what the monster respawn system is. --Mithos Agar 13:32, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

I hope monsters don't spawn, I hated sitting in one place waiting for monsters to spawn in other games, then killing them over and over...or minding my own business, when suddenly a monster pops out of nowhere and kills me. - Elder Angelus 22:04, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Without some form of spawning or respawning, there would be no way to replace dead monsters. IMO the best solution would be to have a number of obvious fixed monster spawn points which patrols originate from, for example spiders might spawn from a mass of webbing, while skelk might spawn out of a cave entrance, elementals might spawn out of volcanic vents and waterfalls, humanoids might spawn out of building entrances and demons might spawn out of portals. -- Gordon Ecker 23:05, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

I like that idea... one of the things that really bugged me when I played WoW was that there was obviously no time put into the spawn system: creeps just appeared in front of your eyes... -- Frozzen 03:08, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Depends On How well u play or how long u played?

so yeah, does GW2 still gonna be still depends how well u play or how long long you played? i think GW2 should balance the "well" and "time", or half and half. instead of only just on how weel u played. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:67.66.51.15 (talk).

Supposedly, players new to Guild Wars picking up with GW2 will be at no disadvantage to the veterans from GW1. The Hall of Monuments supposedly gives only aesthetic benefits, to make your character(s) look good. Calor 02:51, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

what's so scarry about starting from the beginning? it's actually fun.. Plohek 10:31, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah i'm looking forward to everyone starting a new - that way you see who the REAl good players are.--Neyon 20:08, 5 May 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 20:40, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

I think there's gonna be an inherent benefit for each race. Calor 20:43, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Equality. It'll be no fun if all Norn are warriors, all Asuras are casters, etc. There should be good reasons to combine most races with most professions. -- Alaris 21:44, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

As long as the benefits to each race are not specifically about a profession then I think they'll be fine, even if it does not initially appear that they are suited to a certain profession... For example, if the Norn have a temporary armor, attack, and maximum health buff for bear form, while it may appear that it would initially be suited to a warrior or other melee class, it could also be used by casters with spike dmg to protect them as they go into a spike... Whereas other casters might opt for the more obvious (but also more defenseless) extra spell damage, etc... -- Frozzen 23:18, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

I can see a Norn earth ele doing that just well and being a very viable build. But I still feel that there should be enough variety in what racial bonuses you get to benefit most professions. It'll be really difficult to justify added health & armor for a fire ele build. -- Alaris 23:51, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

I can imagine them giving advantages to certain styles of each profeession for each race, so charr mages are destructive, and the asuran magi given mroe "subtle" advantages =) --TimOfDoom 19:28, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Equal, I hate playing anything but humans in any game and I would hate to be forced to in order to be upto par with everyone else =\ and half their size as a caster...74.229.66.241 14:43, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm a bit "rasist" (more correct then when referign to white/black humans) in the fact that I'm bit stuck ont he Humanoids I won't play an Asura, mostlikely not a Charr, and the Norn are a bit too freakishly tall for me. My chars will be vastly human with maybe a silvari or two. --Wolf 14:53, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Unlike Wolf, I am pretty happy playing different races. I just don't like it when the profession of that race is pre-determined or restricted, or even slightly encouraged. It's only ok if different races are equally viable with different professions, so any combo is good. I'm happy if they play differently, as long as they are equally viable (i.e. balanced). -- Alaris 02:46, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

I agree with Alaris, but this comes into play a bit more when you have people like myself who will only play one race or mostly one race, so every profession must be a viable and balanced option for every race. Although you can;t avoid the fact that most people probably will make norn warriors and asuran spellcasters and stuff like that. Although, I greatly look forward to see people who will break the mold and dp something creative and see where that leads. --Wolf 13:38, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. And then again, when looking at races in the GW universe, they usually have a good mix of professions. Djinns come in ele, dervish, paragon; Dwarves come in ranger, warrior, ele, monk, mesmer; humans can be any profession; even bugs can be different professions. -- Alaris 20:25, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

I might add that Char do it all, Norn do Warrior, Ranger, and Paragon, I've seen Asuran elementalists, and mesmers, but not realy anything else, could easily be more of the little fellas. --Wolf 20:28, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

You forgot Asuran warriors: Commander Hixx, Hudd, and Vask. Yes, there actually ARE Asuran Warriors in GW1! -- Alaris 00:39, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

There's also Oola, the necromancer with ritualist items named after her, Blimm, who owns a ritualist staff, Lork, who wields a spear and shield, the rangers in O Brave New World and the dagger-wielding Krewe members. The only Asura professions we haven't seen yet are monk and dervish. There's also at least one Norn ritualist: Hogni Truthseeker. -- Gordon Ecker 03:07, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing those out, and now I remember running into most of them. The norn are they only ones that seem to stick to one general area with the warriors, rangers and paras. We haven't seen a lot of the Sylvari, but I can see them being vastly ranger, monk and dervish oriented. --Wolf 14:01, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Correction, we have not seen a single Sylvari. The only thing we saw of them is the tree that will eventually give them life. -- Alaris 04:14, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

You know what I mean...... Besides, none still constiuteds as not a lot =D --Wolf 13:29, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

=D -- Alaris 17:02, 27 June 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!--‎FireTock 22:42, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

heh good one, they will actually remove click to walk feature from the GW2 Biz 20:55, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

I couldn't understand a word he said. 68.204.198.205 17:57, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I guess we could do without the mouse walking, but I have some other ideas of my own. lol az :D 01:35, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Vandals

Is it just me or is this page a hot target? Dominator Matrix 06:18, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Your feeling is correct. I suggest semi protection. Come on, admins, use Protective admin already!--Raph Talky 21:33, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

ITT this page is turning into a forum, not a wiki entry, needs massive cleanup. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:24.176.56.121 (talk).

This page is a talk page. The actual wiki entry is at Guild Wars 2. -- ab.er.rant 09:11, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Names

I am curious if we will need to have the same name in gw2 as in gw1 to benefit from the HoM. It says that the HoM reserves your name in gw2 and links with your gw account of i am not mistaken. I hope this is not true because i dont want the same name as i have now. a change would be nice. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:65.13.92.248 (talk).

Please create a new section if you're not continuing an existing discussion. As for names, you don't need to have the same name. Your GW2 character is supposed to be a descendant so it's obvious they won't force you to use the same name. -- ab.er.rant 18:04, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

"Obvious", and we all hope so, but this has certainly not been confirmed to my knowledge. They have not said how GW1 and GW2 characters will be linked. And by the same logic, the GW2 characters that inherit should be human (because they are descendants) but hopefully that won't be required either. -- Alaris 18:17, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Good point about the races. -- ab.er.rant 01:47, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Maybe somewhere along the line our drunken great granduncles er.......you know'ed...with a er.......sylvari?--Raph Talky 20:53, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Beta question

Is the beta open to anyone? Or is Anet going to assign it to people. --Own age myname(talk)

I believe the beta is open. Calor 23:14, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

(Edit conflict xCalor >.<) No one knows yet, but it has been suggested that it will be released in late 2008 --Shadowphoenix 23:14, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

No beta is NOT open. Dominator Matrix 23:17, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

He means will it be open to everyone or will it be for specific ppl --Shadowphoenix 23:19, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, that's what a meant Shadow. Own age myname(talk) 23:22, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Oh sorry by bad. There will be first a alpha beta, then a private beta, finishing off with a public beta then the release (just like how the original beta went). Dominator Matrix 23:41, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Ok thanks :] Own age myname(talk) 20:45, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

I want to be in the beta soo much :p --Neyon 20:04, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Could it be, that they send private beta keys out? --84.151.218.37 11:02, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Does anyone know whe the beta test will begin? --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:24.236.196.169 (talk).

No. -- Gordon Ecker 02:10, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] so many people have said this but..

this page NEEDS semi protection. The ratio of vandals to do-gooder ip's is like 8:2 (not to be a math geek but still......)--Raph Talky 01:56, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

This page does NOT need protection, it's a talk page that's open to all, vandalism gets reverted so fast it's surprising anyone even sees it except in RC. We have a REALLY good team of sysops.-- Wynthyst 15:20, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

And the ratio of do-gooder ips to registered users who are actually contributing is probably also 8:2 (not supported by actual numbers, but still...) -- ab.er.rant 16:04, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

It saddens me that SO MANY of the hardcore of GW don't bother to come to the wiki andempart their thoughts and opinions on us. --Wolf 16:19, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Facial Expression Progression

I got this idea reading a post about how the armour in GW2 should age taking on nicks, cuts, scratches and dents.Well what if youstarted off at the beging looking like some kind of fresh faced recruit. And then as you completed missions and quest and gradually progressed through the levels you began to look more like the battle hardened veteran that you are becoming. What I am suggesting doesn't have to be anything serious maybe like a black eye at the beginning and then a couple of scars or some shadows under the eyes if you just got done with a really long quest. This option could be completely voluntary, you could either design your won face if you wish or you could pick what is will generally look like and the let the progression part take over. Also the progression should affect the genders and races differently or it could look really strange.--A fry 02:08, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Good suggestion, but you should post it in the suggestion talk page here. Own age myname (talk)

[edit] Here's what I'm going to be scared of

Obviously, given the limited creativity of 90% of the playerbase, this is what I think the first few months of the game will be like:

• Norn will be all Warriors. All of them.
• Asuras will be nothing but Elementalists and Mesmers.
• Sylvari players will be all Rangers.
• Humans will be practically non-existent. There will be so few human players that Anet will add a little paragraph to The Movement of the World saying that there are very few humans left.

Personally, I'm getting a human for my first character. Oh, and of course, the professions I mentioned are probably not going to be in the game, or will have a different name and a slightly different role, but I'm using because they're terms we all know.

Hopefully, there will be enough with creativity and humor so that you'll see some players making unusual race-profession combinations. Hopefully, ANet will find a way to make all race-profession combinations viable. I'll have a Sylvari ranger, but I'm seriously thinking about Asuran warrior. -- Alaris 04:46, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

You can be scared all you want, people will seep trough all possible combinations and find those that are most useful. Eventually Meta will form and all who deviate will be considered inferior. Thats how things work right now and considering vast majority of dedicated members of GW2 community will be GW1 veterans, its not going to change. Personally I don't care much for all of my warrior builds from a year ago being outclassed by single skill, I realize it potential and drawbacks and embrace the changes for good or the bad. Biz 11:13, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm actually thinking of making an asuran warrior, like Alaris. Small guy with a big hammer, what's NOT to like?! :D Oh, and OP, you forgot Charr ;) -- Mini Me 11:34, 4 May 2008 (UTC) forgot to sign...

Well, I care less about what people consider inferior, as long as they are not in fact inferior. I've met my share of Mesmers and Assassins in PvE that did some truly amazing things. And yet, those would be considered inferior classes by the masses. -- Alaris 17:44, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

I think you're underestimating and misinterpreting the tendencies of players when it comes to choosing their race and profession (that is, assuming that ArenaNet is even going to adopt a similar profession system for GW2). -- ab.er.rant 06:10, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Ab.er.rant, it's not clear whom you're talking to, hence, which way we're underestimating & misinterpreting. Do you mean that people are more likely to play all kinds of race-prof combos than we assume? -- Alaris 13:50, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

I am personally going with a human Necromancer (hoping the profession is still an option) And I think you are underestimating the human player base. --Kairu 19:09, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't know what i will be yet, but me and my friend are going to do the game together, and will pick classes that should help us go through the story. Perhaps alone - just us two. We will try to be the first to finish :D.--Neyon 20:06, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

I never understood people who strive to be the first to finish. It seems so.. dull after that :P I usually check out the scenery first, make my character look good, get good skills etc. before I even bother with things. And killing random things is fun too ofcourse :D -- Mini Me 21:21, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Yep. I go slowly too. Rushing through things for the sake of rushing through just isn't fun. Some of these types of players don't even know what the story was about. -- ab.er.rant 03:50, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Rushing through gives you a sense of adventure. You are one of the first ones to see that area, it isn't documented on the wiki, theres no notes of it anywhere, and theres definitely no guides. Untraveled places are better than well documented places with a walkthrough for every step. --76.2.231.29 13:56, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

You don't *have* to use walkthroughs, you know. That sense of adventure can still be there even if you play the game long after it has been well documented at every turn. 82.26.28.168 13:37, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Alaris, my first reply was 1 indent, so I was replying to the first comment. And yes to your question. (this is 3 indents so I'm replying to you :) -- ab.er.rant 03:50, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Thx for clarification. I think you are right, there's plenty of casual players who just want to play how they want to play, and don't care about optimal builds. And there's plenty of advanced players who will find ways to make their character work even in difficult areas. I'm not worried, as long as these rare race-prof combos are viable. And with ANet's track record, I'm not really worried. -- Alaris 13:55, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

(resets indent) As several have said I think you underestimate the human player base, myself I'm going to try all the strange combinations I can think of. (Charr Mesmers, Silvari fire mages :P )--TimOfDoom 19:34, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

I sure hope that the devs read this:

"I'd like to see each race have a specific inherent buff for every class. Perhaps Asuran warriors can increase their dexterity for a bit, making them possible to psuedo-tank as it will be harder to hit them. And in the same vein, perhaps Norn's bear form could have evolved into a generalized buff over the race (as the years from GW would have evolved them or something, work with me here!) and give them +spell damage as they are bear."

That's what I'd like love to see. Vael Victus 20:10, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

I, personaly, am probably going to end up with a vastly human collection of chars with 2-3 sylvari. I'm realy not that bif of a fan of playing a non-humanoid race, and I kinda don't wanna be a massive giant thing of a norn. I will, however, enjoy very much to see people making the oddest of race/profession combinations and making them work. Asuran melee, Norn caster, or sylvari caster/melee. If your observant, Charr are not in the list, they already do it all in GW1, so any prof as a charr will not be out of the ordinary. The devs are a smart bunch, they will figure out something fun and creative. Half the skills in GW may be ignored, but that doesn't mean you can't make some amazingly fun to play builds out of them. Still rootin for ya devs! --Wolf 16:32, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] More Free Roam

Nearly all areas in Guild Wars 1 were littered with literally hundreds of adversaries, ancient evils and even wild animals that thirst for your blood. Why? Who knows. Animals don't seem to attack one another, so I assume Wammos are most animals' primary source of nutrition. It was very rare to come across an area that you could actually freely explore or admire without the constant harassment of being attacked. I believe this mainly goes back to Prophecies and Factions, especially, in that the developers didn't want players to be able to easily move on to new areas. There's certainly nothing in most places worth protecting. Zones in Guild Wars are simply areas where quests are placed, or areas you must fight through to earn the right to get to a new town. There's normally no treasure, no secrets - nothing of consequence that would warrant aggressive monsters beyond the need to protect new towns, and the forseen challenge of handling aggro.

I'd like to see more areas like pre-searing Ascalon, in which there are some animals that are very aggressive, and others that may be only mildly aggressive (and won't sprint full force after you for miles, frothing out the mouth and screeching for your flesh as you just try to walk back to town), and plenty that aren't aggressive at all. Still others would become aggressive if you attack one of their species. Etc. I miss being able to walk amongst the wildlife without it developing a massive erection for violence just because I'm nearby.

So depending on how things are designed, I'd like to be able to be part of the environment rather than having to conquer the environment, just to enjoy what little I've left of it. I think it would definitely help the presentation of the game. In GW1, there is a distance that most players have between themselves and the world, as a result of how the atmosphere of the game is formatted. There are static towns full of other heroes (even if you're, according to the story, the only hero there), and about 12 NPCs, and then there is everything else: a world of wildlife that would love nothing more than to slaughter you, and completely ignore everything else. I believe removing this separation of player from the overall world he's in would go a long way towards uniting the player with the atmosphere. --Reklaw 12:41, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Bah... there is nothing that can survive on wammos, how ever I do know entire tribes of Charr who only eat squishy casters. Having instant travel means that if getting to a new town creates no resistance at all u are left with walking trough the game. Biz 20:18, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Personally, I am going to make an asuran dervish or something. Same idea as the person who said little asuran with a big hammer, but what im more afraid of is the lack of new content. I don't wan tthis to be one of those games where they promise a lot of changes, but it is all the same thing just with different names. That would just not be fun at all. I would rather something like the warrior name stays a warrior, but they have dual wielding or something like it. One thing that would be awesome is a perfect auctioning system like the auction house in WoW, but theres talk it won't happen... [Vincent Ill:Celestial Order of Light[Cool]]

Indeed, less professions that can do more stuff is a lot better then having 4 (W,D,A,P)melee/warrior like professions. From information I have it seems like its something they are trying todo, still free roam is only good when you compleated storyline. Biz 15:00, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] One of the most problematic worries

I hope that with all the new graphics and downloading and with all the people storming into the store to buy the game that the LAGG wont be so horrible that people will be warping or just frozen like the time during Christmas when all the presents are given out and people are just frozen... waiting to move and stuff. User:Kiega123456789ooo 6-8-2008

[edit] Races

Are we certain that "the Norn will be able to shapeshift into a half-bear half-human, with increased health and melee damage" as it says under the races section? -- Frozzen 21:47, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

I believe that a memeber of Arenanet staff released that info. --Shadowphoenix 21:48, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm fairly sure that was simply used as an example and not necessarily a truth by Jeff Strain, but I may be wrong... -- Frozzen 21:52, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

We want races to really have a pretty big impact on the way characters play. For example, the Norns, who are the big, burly, half-giant Viking guys from up in the North, all have the ability to shape-shift into a were-bear form; giving them more health and making them stronger, that sort of thing.

So a Norn warrior is going to have this were-bear ability, while a Human warrior will have a completely different ability just as significant - though we're still throwing around exactly what it will be. That's from Eric Flannum, lead designer for GW2 here. The information is so old that it is wrinkled, has a hunchback and is starting to collect dust, but it is the best we have. --Aspectacle 22:51, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] New Info?

I was wondering, since there hasn't been an news update since alot of days ago, there might come some new info about GW2 to us very soon?Dutch Sunshine 21:13, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

I hope they say when the beta will be open for playing. TitanSacranus 13:24, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

PAX 08 and the Beta are our two only bets on GW2 info atm. --Wolf 13:52, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Spoiler?

I'm not sure, but could someone check if this article needs a spoiler tag? << horsedrowner | talk | guild >> 12:36, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

No, there's no need for spoiler, since all these are published information. And there isn't really a game for it to spoil. -- ab.er.rant 07:03, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

True << horsedrowner | talk | guild >> 08:16, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] An idea for a custom skill creator I have...

Well, guys, I'm not exactly sure if i'm typing it the right way (as in editing to make my own post :P) But i've been watching this forum for some time. I've come up with a bit of an idea for a custom skill creator. Here's how it would work:

The Profession type: Let's say this will be Elementalist. Skill Type: Since I love to air spike, it'll be a cast, dealing air damage. Attribute Corresnpondance: Air Magic. Wow, what a shocker. :P Effect/Damage: Hmm... Causes Knockdown. Does 80 damage. Ignores Armor. (Yes, I know, it's stacked, but just wait...) And, if the attack has several positive effects... Downsides!: 25 energy consumption. You are exhausted.

They could have a little scrolly thing that tells you what you can have, such as the diseases, interrupt/knockdown, etc. And there is a balancer that tells how unfairly strong or laughably weak it is. If it isn't even, then you can't make it.

This came to me, ironically, when I was complaining about how there isn't enough variation for some of the skills. Go figure.

Well, There you have it. I'm done.

Also, if you want to add me, my main's name is Golden Gauntlets. (Sorry if this isn't allowed :P)

-MahmaLooeegee --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:MahmaLooeegee (talk).

New sections go to the bottom :) You may also find Help:Editing