Talk:Guild Wars 2/Archive10

races?

gief me moar... only 5? where are the margonites, centaurs, tengus, wardens??? also i'd love to be an Aatx :P:P - Wuhy 22:33, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

I'd like to see dwarfs. "They all turned to stone" is just an excuse, because there are tons of dwarves still running around, namely the Stone Summit. If they aren't in GW2, it's because anet just didn't want them.Vidal 14:07, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

It all depends Race wise...see if they do it Tyria, Cantha, Elona the an EoTN style thing like GW1 they could unlock new races for each area like Tengu come along in GW2 faction etc...hmmm Mursaat would be cool...wow Mursaat Sin Zachariah Zuan. 15:16, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

TRU! i forgot mursaat! - Wuhy 19:32, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Tengu are in Kryta and the Shiverpeaks, so they've been around since before Factions, Factions was just the first time we knew they could be friendly at all, or even talk for that matter. And since ANet has indicated that each species will have their own main quest tree (a la, GWEN), it is no surprise to me at all that they have limited the first installment to 5, as that is easily enough for a full game/campaign. My guess is we get Tengu when we get to go to Cantha, maybe we get undead or something in Elona, I'm not sure about mursaat. They have said mursaat will be part of future stories, but we don't really know what, when, or how. On the other hand, they have said that the 5 they have announced is only a minimum, I suppose it is possible they will surprise us someday with more... (Satanael 20:15, 17 June 2009 (UTC))

Regarding the Margonites - technically they are all either dead or jailed in the Realm of Torment (which might be called Redeemed Realm in GW2 from what was found in the GW.dat). As for "additional races when we get the Canthan expansion" - Cantha was rid of all non-human races. So there are no longer any Tengu in cantha, same with Wardens, Naga, Dredge, and Yeti. Or, if they actually are still there, they would most likely be slaves or out of the empire's reach (which, the empire's reach is pretty darn big). -- Azazel the Assassin/talk 21:32, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

...You'd think after 250 years that some of the Margonites would actually come around to the idea of having <you know who> as their "new God". I'm sure the Charr definitely wouldn't mind, especially since the previous God played such a nasty trick on them. And don't give me that "there are No Gods for the Charr" BS, we all know Pyre is just the crankiest malcontent in GW history and eventually those overgrown LoLCats will 'find religion' again. --ilr 01:17, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Margonites eat souls and can only reproduce through hideous mindraping rituals that cause all sorts of insanity (probably why so many are unfriendly). This is not behavior normally associated with good things, despite my adoration for mah munky. That said, I hope the Lost and the Apostate are featured in GW2, they were cool. Not really important, though. I won't be playing it. --Jette 03:34, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Eating eyeballs could = Chaotic-Good if it lead to the creation of another Ray Charles --ilr 03:54, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

WHATABOUTTHEMINDFLAYMONSTeRZthatgotnerfed. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by 87.113.137.37 (talk).

Hey i was just wondering has anyone found anything about wether or not you cna be human but then choose like wether your like AmFaa or Corsiar cause in the trialer its like say how most everyone like joined together tofight as one wouldnt that mean corsiar Amfaa and all that kind of stuff just joined together t be one human race...and i think it would be awsome that like the human races say didnt join together and be one race but just joined and had seperate outposts over the world and deppending on what Race and Part of that race (ei;Corsiar,Amfaa and what not)you start off in a different place and had different small quests leading up to the main quests where all the seperate parts of the races join to fight the main storyline through shendo

I just noticed Apostate again, so for those looking for justification for making Margonites playable, there you go. Let's be honest, Anet can make anything they want to be playable, and then come up with a backstory for it. I suspect the reason why Dwarves supposedly won't be in GW2 is that they're trying to figure out a way to veer away from other games, which is frustrating, since everyone knows Asurans are a rip-off from WoW.Vidal 17:38, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Everything is a rip-off from WoW. Even the grass. Mini Me 17:53, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

And WoW is a rip-off from DnD! </endsarcasm> How are the asurans rip-offs from WoW? x.x; --Elven Chaos 21:51, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Asurans are a rip-off from the gnomes in WoW. Both are really small, and technologically far advanced beyond the other races. Also, both originated from underground tunnels, but were driven to the surface by an invasion of whatevers. Their originality isn't really a concern for me though; I plan on making at least one asuran character. My point is that Anet shouldn't eliminate the dwarves just for originality when they are so blatantly ripping off the Asurans.Vidal 06:32, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

WoW is a rip-off from D&D, the way D&D4e was a rip-off of WoW. --Jette 06:37, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Since when did butt-ugly little Gnomes ever have the POWER GLOVE? And in GW2, they're obviously trying to improve their aesthetic a bit to some kinda Chibi with sleeker features that has mastered magic with a mathematical approach. read: Not just a "Tinkering" cartoonish human with stubby legs and no abdomen. IF they're a comparable rip off of anything, then it's probably something from George Lucas' universe, not the traditional fantasy ones (which means it'll only be a matter of time before someone makes /34/ of them and unfortunately it won't just be the Ironic kind like Gnomes get) --ilr 21:25, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Racial bonuses?

Who the fuck thought those were a good idea? The balance team can't find their ass with both hands and a spotter as it is. --97.124.181.248 09:56, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Al Sharpton and Jessie Jackson.

What part of "wowclone" are you not getting here? --Jette 10:24, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

No one said anything about racial bonuses... apart from Bear form for Norns. Biz 10:27, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Oh, so they're only going to give racial bonuses to one race? that's cool, i guess. --97.124.181.248 10:30, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Myabe summon GOLEM for Asuras, Power of The Forest for Sylvari (<spelt that wrong I guess) Burning Hatred for Charr? just seems unfair to give one race a bonus and the others get nothing. Zachariah Zuan. 10:44, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Of course every race will get something, otherwise everyone will play Norn. But we don't know what they'll be getting. -- Alaris 13:16, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

no, you just make it so that the bonuses make up for an otherwise comparatively weak race/skillset/whatever anet has in mind for each race; then theoretically (i.e. in the long term) people will still play the classes evenly. -- Mafaraxas 17:07, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

I like the ideas, but why are you guys arguing about something that I doubt Anet has figured out yet? I mean yeah, we can speculate, but don't go accusing Anet of doing something when we have no idea what they're planning. Sure, argue about it for skill balance when it comes out aif they did it badly, but don't go saying this is a wow copier when next to NOTHING has been released about the gameplay. ~Farlo Talk 20:35, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm sure they've figured it out; they just haven't said anything. 2010-'11 would be way too early if they hadn't figured out how the game works.-- Shewmake 20:43, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, they probably have, but that's not the point I was trying to make, so hush :P ~Farlo Talk 04:55, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

lol, ok :P-- Shewmake 05:08, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Post-Apoalyptic Setting

For some reason whenever I think of the setting I think everything will be in shambles and ruin in GW224.139.103.22 15:27, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Indeed! We've taken the opportunity to adjust the game's flavor and fluff to more accurately reflect its state of balance. We hope you enjoy this fun feature. --Jette 17:47, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

lol Vael Victus 21:20, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Couldn't have said it better myself... --Gah_ 17:51, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Ascalon yes... very much so, and surrounded by ruin the last settlement of those remaining natives Ebonhawke, and mayeb the few tengu and other non-humans are still in some abandoned province in Cantha

So what that race of Lolicon Plant-people supposed to represent then? --ilr 01:28, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

new life? being forged during a time of war? (Dwarves vs Destroyers) Zachariah Zuan. 01:38, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

I don't see this as a apocalyptic-anything kind of setting. Charr have reclaimed their land and are prospering, Asura are prospering with their merchandising and mercantilism, and the Sylvari are on the rise. Tengu are in an unknown state, Centaurs have not changed, Norn got pushed south (not very apocalyptic), and the Dredge are freed. Only Humans, and in some ways Centaur and Norn, are in anything close to a "bad" state - humans being in the worse state with 2 of 3 nations being removed off the map, but Kryta seems to be holding strong. Excluding, of course, the Dragon threat, which I still kind of see as an indirect assault - excluding the Charr which have to fight the Desert Dragon's minions (and it doesn't say they are having a hard time with that either). Sure, if you look at just Humans, it's very Apocalyptic, but looking at the whole of Tyria, not so much. Elona is just a switch of power from Human to Undead, but humans still live in some kind of peace - Kourna has probably improved due to Joko (since during Varesh, they were oppressed, and after her, they were in a state of Civil War). Cantha is only bad for the non-human races, which are of an unknown fate. So, again, not very apocalyptic, or post-apocalyptic. -- Azazel the Assassin/talk 04:59, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Better off under Joko? LOL, that's a good one! --ilr 02:06, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Am I the only one that (kinda) whishes this game was during the actual guild wars? If for no other reason than pre-searing was pretty >.> Sharpie 06:51, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

I wish it was during the guild wars, yeah. The game looked nicer in pre-searing, and the game's title shouldn't be Guild Wars 2, as those happened 300 years before the story takes place and have no bearing upon it. --Jette 07:03, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Maybe the dragons will start their own Guilds. And to join them you'll have to give yourself up to them...sekshually.
        Wat? --ilr 05:29, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Ok #1 its 258 years not 300 and #2 its a continuation of the series so it has to be Guild Wars 2 and #3 Anet has already made the design for the logo so I think it would be much easier to not have to create a whole team to think of a new name and logo (which would take away from them making the actual game or game balancing of Guild Wars 1) - Giant Nuker 14:24, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
"its 258 years"

APOSTROPHE MOTHERFUCKER, LEARN TO USE IT!

I'm fine.

"continuation of the series"

Let's discuss what they have changed, shall we?

1. Cantha and Elona are, for all practical purposes, gone.
2. The Crystal Desert is lush and green.
3. Orr has risen from the sea.
4. Kryta sank.
5. Ascalon is lush and green.
   OKAY, SURE, IT SOUNDS LIKE EXACTLY THE SAME SETTING.
6. Two THREE new races got pulled out of ANet's ass, despite having absolutely no references whatsoever made to them throughout the entirety of the original campaigns.
   Right, okay, I see where you're coming from, this is totally Guild Wars, with no elves or other stupid fantasy stereotypes running around. I could continue, but I believe I have sufficiently established my point. --Jette 06:02, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

What I mean by continuation of series is it's the same World (look I used an apostrophe it doesn't matter we are on the internet) and a continuation of a world means it EVOLVES and Cantha and Elona are not gone just we can't go to them yet and they have EVOLVED. - Giant Nuker 15:12, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Guild Wars 2 still has the lore established and built through Guild Wars 1, and has many (if not all) of the locations established in GW1 play and lore. Thus, it is a continuity despite most aspects of said locations have changed, as events and time would change locations for better or worse sensibly anyways. --Elven Chaos 18:33, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Professions vs. Races

So far, Anet has told us that armor and weapons will not be tied to profession. Since secondaries can be switched at will after having been unlocked, secondaries really only serve to give us the choice of skills from a profession other than our primary, but only one. In other words, a given character can use any skill in the game, but only skills from 2 professions at a given time. Consequently, in the context of GW2, the entire primary/secondary system serves only to limit our skill combinations, rather than define our characters.

Given that each race in GW2 will have its own benefits, it's sounding more and more like those racial benefits are going to take the place of professions and/or primary attributes, and I'm hoping that's true. When I think of "professions" or "classes", it reminds me of when I used to play the arcade version of Gauntlet back in the early 80's. As best as I can remember, you could be a warrior, archer, or a magician. These titles were used because they sound so much better than "guy who used an axe" and "guy who shoots fireballs". But I bring up Gauntlet, a game that's over 20 years old because that's how old and outmoded the idea of "professions" is to me. Several games have scrapped this system; Oblivion in particular has moved past it.

With weapons and armor no longer being tied to profession, and since skills are available to every profession, I'm hoping that the new races are going to take the place of professions in the new game.Vidal 12:25, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

diaf. --Jette 12:29, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Well, I have to admit, you pose a most thoughtful and effective counter-argument. But you're pretty typical of what I see as a stubborn latching on to an outdated idea. I understand that people fear change, like when they switched from candles to lightbulbs...I just can't help but feel that all of this waiting and all the effort spent on developing this new game, and world, and lore, only to have characters pre-categorized into this 20+ year old system, will be a waste.Vidal 21:35, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

I would have no problem with your transparent rehash of the current system if all the new races weren't abortively underdeveloped and stale, not to mention ugly as all hell. --Jette 23:27, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Underdeveloped? You mean, to date? I guess you mean in GW1, a game that we're not talking about, since GW2 hasn't come out yet. Keep in mind, I'm not making suggestions about the game (since that would belong on a different page). I'm just drawing conclusions from what Anet has already said. So far, we have weapons not being tied to profession, armor not being tied to profession, and in GW1 anyway(we don't know yet if this will change) all skills can be used by any profession. So basically, the only difference between professions is the primary attribute, but the primary attribute sounds an awful lot like the "racial benefits". With the changes to weapons and armor, Anet has basically eliminated any need for professions, so it'd be a shame if they stubbornly stuck to this system.

And all of this "diaf" and "transparent rehash" business is typical of the hostility that most people give when someone is discussing a big change. I just wonder why most people are so against this idea, when it's been a big success in other games like Oblivion or Fable, games that were released years ago. I think most people want this without knowing it, evidenced by the numerous posts suggesting "multiple professions" and "switchable professions" on the old suggestions page before it was moved.Vidal 08:30, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

No, I'm against this idea because GW2 races are bad. They have no character development whatsoever; typical of the poor writing that seems to accompany tolkienesque fantasy games. EVERY Norn is a retarded hunter Viking with the IQ of a house plant, EVERY Asura is a supposedly superintelligent freak that shows no application of this intelligence, EVERY elf or whatever they're called is going to be a tree-hugging sap who "loves the forest" and all that other bullshit. It's like in science fiction how people make a "jungle planet" or an "ice planet" or a "water planet" when that is not how real planets develop. It's bad character development, it's bad species design, and perhaps worst of all, it's just a shoddy rehash of other races. Asura are gnomes, vikings are really fucking tall dwarves, and sylvani or whatever are going to be elves. I guarantee it. What happened to the Mursaat, who were actually mildly interesting? What happened to the Tengu, and the Centaurs? What happened to all the races that were actually at least somewhat unique as opposed to the same old BS you see in every bad Tolkien rip-off?

Worse yet, you're perpetuating this bullshit. You're saying "okay guise, let's make it so that every member of every race is going to be good at exactly the same thing and nothing else!" Okay, sure, so... all humans are going to be monks, all norn will be warriors, all elves will be rangers, etc... what is that? That is not how it works. I, for balance reasons as well as the fact that players are faggots, believe that races should be functionally identical (or, better yet, still only humans). The only semi-unique race is the Charr, which are still just a blend of the always chaotic evil and proud warrior race guy tropes.

tl;dr diaf. --Jette 08:48, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

You make some good points. The races aren't anything new or original, but that in itself isn't a bad thing, and it can't really be avoided. Almost no games are truly original, because we will always want our swords and fire magic to use against whatever monsters are put into the game. In defense of Anet, they have said that more races will be announced later, so don't throw too big of a fit about the ones announced so far. Also, the bottom line is that the new races are coming and there isn't anything anyone can do about it. That said...certain races should be better at some things. Norn are going to be better warriors than asurans for example. To have all the races the same is to basically make it a choice of aesthetics. Players don't want that and it doesn't really make sense anyway.

Since you didn't get it the first time, I'll explain again why it's ok that there hasn't been much character development for these new races. Here it is: the game hasn't come out yet. Sure, there could have been more in GWEN, but in regards to these races as playable races, you can't complain about lack of character development when the game hasn't come out yet. That's just stupid. And speaking of poor character development, how stupid is it that there are such things as "rangers" and "warriors". I can only assume that a warrior became a warrior through practice/experience and because of the equipment that he chooses to use. A ranger became a ranger the same way. Getting back to my original point, why not let the players make the decisions about who their character is to become, rather than forcing everyone to pick from a pre-made category?

Also, I'm pretty f'ing sure that I never said I wanted all characters of a given race to be identical. These racial benefits are like anything else; they can be done well, or they can be done poorly. Abilities can overlap between races or races could have multiple bonuses, and since the folks at Anet make their living making games, I'm fairly certain that they are going to try to do it well. Also, are all warriors the same? Are all necros the same? There is variation and room for multiple uses in any given class (and race, I hope). But what the hell, keep the typed temper tantrums coming.Vidal 09:46, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Alright, getting into the long posts here.

"that in itself isn't a bad thing"

Agreed. But it is when they don't bother making any originality. Tropes, stereotypes, literary devices, etc. are all just tools for portraying a story in some way or another, but they should be the grounds for your own development, not the be-all end-all that they so often become when writers are just lazy or unoriginal.

"certain races should be better at certain things"

From a fluff perspective, I agree with you wholeheartedly. From a mechanics perspective, it wouldn't really be a problem, per say, but it means each class will have a "set" race that it must pick in order to be effective or find a group, which means that if you happen to simply not like the race in question, you can't play the class in question (and expect to get to play with anyone other than yourself). And here's a general rule of game design: even though you base the whole game around it, fluff should never, ever, ever, ever come before crunch. If Norn get to turn into bears and do +25% damage with melee attacks and have huge health boosts, do you honestly think anyone will play non-Norn warriors in serious competitive format? What if Asura get +30 energy? Why would anyone want a caster with a lower energy pool? If you don't pick the race for your profession, you get screwed. It's really that simple.

"the game hasn't come out yet"

GW2 has not come out yet, no. And if, in GW2, they have genuine character development and individualities and quirks and actual personalities instead of recycled stereotypes, I will be somewhat pleased (I still think Norn and Asura are ugly to the point of inducing illness, but that's beside the point). But the writing team has not changed, which means that from what I can tell, the content will be the same.

"decisions character become etc"

I think either you misposted or I misinterpreted the original intent of your post, because from what I can tell it looks like you want races to replace professions. In any case, while I agree with you in this respect, I also feel I should point out allowing too much customization makes a game hard as hell to balance, the same way putting in too many skills makes it hard to balance. Ultimately, Guild Wars is a PvP game, not a role-playing game like Fable and Oblivion were -- indeed, those games didn't even have a multiplayer facet. They were fun, but were never meant for competitive play.

"never said all characters etc"

Yeah, but drawing it to its logical conclusion... See, the fact is, nobody is going to play a Norn spellcaster if Asura get bonus energy, or a Sylvari warrior if their projectiles are fifty times faster, which means that all of the races will be identical. They may have different skills or builds, they might have different armor, but ultimately, they will be the same. If you think a Wounding Strike dervish is all that different from a Melandru dervish because they're both using imbalanced BS skills to inflict deep wound every other attack, then you're fooling yourself.

I don't know why I'm bothering to really think about this, I shouldn't be expect even semi-decent plot from the Guild Wars writing team, tbfh, but this setting had more potential than ANet has so far bothered to exploit.

"temper tantrums"

I'm quite calm, believe it or not. I rage more at people who use "you're" to refer to ownership than I do at people who bother to make decent posts. --Jette 10:12, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

I think we're essentially on the same page. No one wants race to determine class, and I'm sure anet won't make it so. The whole classless system is just kind of my pipe dream. It would be great, but it just may not be practical in this type of game. It's a shame though. I've never played WoW, but I know they have a multiple race set up with each having its own benefits. While class is limited I think, it seems to work and if they have balancing problems, I think it's more from laziness on the party of the management, rather than a screwed up system. In other words, some races may be better at certain things, but with each class filling multiple roles, there is still room for variety. Let's hope. By the by, on GW2 wiki, they have released an article about Charr lore. I couldn't be less interested in the charr, but it's good to see a bit of new info, even if it's just a crumb.Vidal 08:15, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

"No one wants race to determine class, and I'm sure anet won't make it so."

I want race to determine class. ~Shard 00:54, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

That is seriously the most stupid thing I have ever heard in my life... --Saberhagen (My Talk) 16:48, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Letting race determine classes and having unoriginal races will always turn out better than

• pink smurfs being as strong as a five times taller viking
• "original" playable races like 4-legged centaurs or levitating mursaat.

doing things for for the sake of originallity and equallity/listen to fans with "amazing fan ideas"(lol irony) who know shit about the game industri and think it'd be cool being a naga with a giant nuclearbomb launcher and lazer swords is retarded. --Cursed Angel 17:20, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

I just hope there are no perma sins of any race. Perma sins are ruining GW. Can't form a group to do elite missions because too many people are lazy, rather pay a perma sin to do it for them, then actually play the game. The irony is the perma sins don't always work. Tried 3 times to do Tombs with my monk maintaing SOH on perma sins, we couldn't get past 2nd level. Finally found balanced team and we had no trouble beating Tombs. 98.16.183.113 16:08, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

You seriously don't get it

PEOPLE! Do you think this Z-axis system or the mmorpg style will ruin guild wars? NO! This will:

"The skill system will be modified. There will be fewer, less complex skills which may behave differently in different situations, such as if the character is jumping or is surrounded by monsters. A system similar to the limited 8 skill system will be used. "

Seriously... Guild Wars is about skills. If ArenaNet will put only a few simple skills the whole game will loose its magic.--Graahk 16:13, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

How do you know? It's not going to be "a few simple skills," it'll be "fewer, less complex skills."-- Shew 16:23, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

I actually think this is more logical. Due to the z-axis, you can't really have all skills affecting everyone. For instance, some aoe magic spells, if transferred to GW2, wouldn't have a logical effect on those in the air, while others such as Firestorm, would. Then there is the case of knockdown - if in the air, wouldn't that make a big difference? A need for how skills act is needed. And nothing said anything about the number of skills, just that the number of simple skills will be shortened - but this is logic really, due to the change of so many mechanics, the kind of simple skills needs to be changed. But, as Shewmake said, nothing said "a few simple skills" but fewer simple skills. And, if you really think about it, most of GW1 skills are rather simple. It also doesn't say anything about the total number of skills. So they may be knocking out simple skills, adding in some new kinds of simple skills, and then adding more complex skills. The game could easily be about skill still. -- Azazel the Assassin/talk 22:37, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Uh, hello? "There will be fewer, less complex skills"? That's clearly a statement about there being fewer and less complex skills, not fewer less complex skills. Which is what the game needs - with too many skills like we have now it's impossible to balance the game, so we end with a lot of useless things and a few viable skills. If we had (far) less skills, the game would be entirely balanced, so everything would be useful. Between having 1000 skills, with only one third of those being really viable, and 450 balanced and viable skills, the latter is better (which happens to be more or less the number of skills Prophecies had, and it was still about skill; in fact, it was more about "skill", as opposed to "skills", than the game is today). Erasculio 22:53, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Idea was to remove many permutations of same basic skill to first reduce overall complexity of the game and then allow developers to expand on the game regardless of whether the game becomes more complex or not. Removing skill clones and similar skills greatly lowers number of skills overall. Warriors for instance now have over 50 attack skills, they can be made into some 4-5 skills with conditional effects. If you can reduce overall number of skills 5-10 times you will have a game with some 200 - 400 skills not some 2k. Not to mention the fact that as others have pointed out that lower number of skills not only makes them all worth while but also makes balancing them far easier as number of skill combinations drops exponentially. Biz 08:02, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Everyone Calm Down!

picture Charr Paragon... XD Zachariah Zuan. 08:37, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

lol115.64.157.4 09:01, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

A Charr in a skirt would be hilarious. --Elven Chaos 19:18, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

too true....also Badass Asuran Dervish XD or even Norn Assassin? Zachariah Zuan. 00:43, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

lol i want an asuran sin that would look funny doing back flips --Nick123 16:00, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Yoda style ftw! Sneaker 01:08, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

FTW!!! LMAO!! Sneaker, I hereby nominate myself, you, or whoever reads this, to make an Asuran assassin and name it Yoda, if the assassin class returns in some form or fashion. --Elven Chaos 05:45, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Flippy Yoda xD ... FTW! Sneaker 19:16, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

ROFLMAO!!! charr paragon xD I would like to have a charr sin :P — The preceding unsigned comment was added by 92.83.242.158 (talk) at 17:13, 21 October 2009 (UTC).

Dance, people, DANCE!

Well, since this is the GW2 talkpage, I will post this here...

I'm one of those people who think new races are a great idea, however, something conserns me. In the original games, you play as a human, but the humans are all different, since they have different professions. And I'm not just talking about armors and looks, I'm also talking about the way they dance. Yes, dance. I have always been a fan of the GW dances, they are fun, and very mixed. However, when new races are introduced to the game, maybe Anet will take the "easy" way, and make all (for example) norn males dance the same, and not dance different from profession to profession. GW have 20 different dances today (player dances...), and if races dance like each other, it would only be 10 (!) different dances in GW2.

Why is this a problem, you may ask? Well, I have seen many arguments about the new races is making a whole people, like the Asurans, have one personality, and not many different ones. And I think the fact that a whole race dance the same is contributing to this. If all male Asurans dance the same, they will almost have no personality at all. And, as a fan of GW dances, I personally think it would be extremely boring. In GW, big dance parties starts often; it's a fun way to interact with people. But how fun is a whole district with just, for example, warriors? All dancing the same way? Pretty boring. And think, how the towns for new norn, asurans, humans, charrs and sylvari, it would be just like the district full of warriors.

I do realize that all races having a different dance for ewery profession and gender, is impossible. If all the GW professions is still in GW2 (which they won't, I know...) It would be around 50 different dances, and that would be A LOT of work programing. However, one idea is to let some professions dance the same, like the male norn ranger and warrior, but the male norn monks dance different. A change like that, that just not all norn males dance the same, would atleast make me feel the race has more than one personality.

I think the dances are so original and fun in GW, and the fan made GW MV's are always better than other mmos. So please consider this idea, if anyone reads it, and don't destroy such a good part of GW, the big, different, and fun, dance parties! :DD (I know, I can't spell, but I'm swedish...) Charocles 11:15, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Anet is lazy. suck it up and dance on your own time. 71.15.47.30 22:53, 15 August 2009 (UTC) forgot to sign.

You're assuming that the 10 professions that exist now will still exist in GW2, and that all professions will be available to all races. I highly doubt that either of these things will happen. In any case, you're speculating out your ass regardless of what eventually happens, either way. You may as well have said "dear anet, please make many unique dances in GW2" and have been done with it. — μαφλεσ 14:44, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

In reference to the above section - as long as I can have an oversized kitten in a skirt doing Napleon Dynamite's dance, I couldn't give less of a fuck about much else in the game. 128.255.216.144 16:17, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Question

The picture in Notes showing a guild wars gm saying more info about gw 2 will be given till the end of 2009 where was it takes because I rarely see gw gm's talking in districts? I'm just curious.

See ArenaNet:In-game talk -- Wyn talk 01:58, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Hello

← moved to User talk:Jette

10 minutes...

For the trailer. It may be possible to see it here. Erasculio 09:53, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Or you can watch HD version of it here :) --Шзвч [TALK] @ 10:19, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

It's on the website right now. I just watched it. 58.110.138.75 10:39, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

EFFING AWESOME!!!! --195.181.32.133 10:41, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

I know GW is graphical a nice looking game, anyone else watch it and think it didn't look graphically all that advanced from EotN? I looks like swimming is possible though so that will be cool. The giant city they showed gave me goosebumps when it switched from the art work to in game footage. 58.110.138.75 10:46, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Some parts were reminiscent of EotN's visuals, yes. But other areas (and characters, definitely) were much improved. Plus the sense of scale is amazingly done. GW2's world as shown in the trailer feels massive compared to GW1. --Goteki-45 11:14, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

I saw Asuran gates but I dont think I noticed transitions when they were flying thru that city... inside = outside? 65.6.156.101 11:16, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

I must admit I believe the words that came out of my mouth at what I hope is totally ingame graphic: SWEET MERCIFUL CRAP (which means 'very good') ^_^ That was a really nice first look (from a purely graphics stand-point), loved the transition from art to in-game graphics. 118.92.166.13 12:05, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Yeah the graphics were really advanced, well atleast improved compared to OGW, but whatever. The background, environment was beautiful! Makes me so IMPATIENT for GW2. You guys saw that Asura Gate right that lead from outside to the city inside? That part was in-game as well, right? But the epic part was Charr summmoning Charr Effigy at the end of the trailer. EPIC!!! Uncomparable. Aion, you're a good game, but get ready along side with World of Warcraft, to get knocked out of the place for MMO of the year or whatever! GW2 will own! --Warnlord 13:21, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Really liked the trailer, sylvari looks very cool, and charr looks cooler than in GW! :) Norn also looks badass:) However, i must say, I do NOT like the changes done to the Asuran... think the smaller eyes make em look... creepy... o.O But overall very nice^^Charocles 17:18, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Oh...My...God!!! That trailer was awesome. Me and my friends had pretty much lost hope for this game, atleast for anything in the near future, but DAMN! The graphics look amazing, and if the storyline is as well driven as it was in the trailer and GW1, this will certainly be a kick ass game! :DDDDD ~Farlo Talk 20:27, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

They showed it on X-Play. ...well a shorter version without the actual city scapes in it, boooo. But it sounds like Morgan Webb was a fan of the game --ilr 09:34, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Zhaitan

I added the name of the Undead dragon Zhaitan to the settings and the name and spelling are correct read the writing under the GW2 trailer on the GW2 official website - Giant Nuker 14:07, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Ah, good. Wasn't sure how it was spelled. The name sounded cheesy at first (a bit of forced medevial), but the spelling isn't so bad. I guess.-- anguard 01:15, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm just gonna keep referring to it as the Lich Dragon b/c that's who it resembles. --ilr 04:43, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Zhaitan sounds like Satan ^^ 81.206.253.73

I am certain that the sound relation is distant enough to where Zhaitan is not a reference to satan, nor any similarities made intentional. --Elven Chaos 23:52, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

You may find this interesting. – Emmett 02:16, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

I stand corrected. --Elven Chaos 03:18, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Video

Is just amazing. Anet knows how to make things look pretty and original. ^^ --Super Igor flame my shove sin bar! 15:46, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

I think the main point of this Video was to assure us that they wouldn't be pulling a Diablo3. ...Which I personally take a lot of comfort in. I dunno what the 2nd point of it is, but the Tertiary of it likewise appears to be assuring us that it's not WoW either. ...also good. --ilr 20:07, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

I was a great fan of Diablo 1 and 2 and I think Guild Wars series won't ever 'pull a Diablo 3', simply because Guild Wars is superior nearly every aspect. And I'm talking about Guild Wars 1. Guild Wars 2 will be miles, MILES better than Diablo 3 if everything continues to go this way. I was deeply disappointed with the way Diablo 3 was presented - isometric view (seriously WTF, WTF Blizzard?), no customizable character looks, the PvP won't ever have the depth or (attempt-of-)balance of GW (hell even WoW doesn't have it). I think Guild Wars 'spoiled me' in a good way - it has set my RPG standars very, very high, in a way I don't even anticipate Diablo 3 as much as I did before knowing GW.--Sensei 11:51, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

MAC os x

Will gw 2 also be available on mac? Please??? --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:84.196.126.75 (talk).

Anet has said they will try to make GW2 availaible on Mac os X (not leopard) and all windows versions. --DAVA 21:14, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Source? As its the otherway around. GW2 will have no mac/linux compatability beside the wine/cedega project which is comminity based. --Dominator Matrix 22:11, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Keep on Galloping

Did anyone else notice how the Charr were running? :D Awesome! Imagine a team of 8 galloping charrs closing in! Simply amazing!

Yeah, I noticed a lot of things about the charr. I'm obviously not biased towards charr in any way, as my signature doesn't have one in it. Charr are great. -~=Sparky (talk) 21:31, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm not too fond of Charr myself, but yes they surely have a sparking personality. Looking forward to kicking Charr ass in PvP in GW2. :D I keep on imagining the chars I'll make. Asuran 'mage/ele/mesmer', Norn Amazon-like 'warrior/ranger', Human 'monk'. Oh man I can't wait. --Sensei 11:55, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

update the logo?

Since it seems they are using a new one? The one with the words Guild Wars, and the Dragon in the shape of a 2 behind it? personn5 21:35, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Graphics

I was hoping the GW2 would look waaay better than GW. They look the same right now. I guess My expectations were too high

See an eye doctor. If there's one good thing about this game, it's the graphics. --Jette 22:00, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

In the trailer you can't see the physics or just how many triangles DX9/10 will have to spit out. That and the better lighting/shadows that is noticable. --Dominator Matrix 22:04, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

The look and style of the graphics look very similar it has to be said, but the graphics are definitly better. It looks amazing, I can't wait! The bit shown underwater got me thinking.. Would be awsome if we can go underwater, if we can I can see some awsome quests/missions happening :) --Alien 00:20, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Hmm, very nice graphics, it DID improve, looks like not a lot, but that's probably because we haven't played it yet. What might happen is that it might be like OGW. Like when Guild Wars was originally more like WoW graphics, but then they improved it dramatecically, so i might be like that. --Warnlord 00:56, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Even GW1's current graphics aren't "Dated" yet. All GW2 has to do is improve their Bloom filters and Aliasing a bit. If they "improve" the graphics too much, they'll lose customers b/c it won't be playable on "Mid Range" machines like they promised it would. --ilr 04:20, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

@Alien: We are going to have underwater quests and stuff, see the eurogamer article, they talk about it. Plus, the new event system sounds more awesome every time they talk about it, I'm way more excited about that than graphics. (Satanael 05:00, 21 August 2009 (UTC))

Also, it's very hard to see details that would really show the detail in the video. On top of that, the engine is still very young, and I'm sure they will be improving the hell out of it. ~Farlo Talk 05:18, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

GW1 is still one of the best looking mmos out there. oO --Super Igor flame my shove sin bar! 10:05, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

what everyone meant to say is, this isn't a fucking fps or a single player game, it's an mmo (or whatever they're going to call gw2). — μαφλεσ 15:07, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Agree, MMO that is meant to run moderately well on existing "mid range" hardware can never hold a candle to FPS that is made for hardware that doesn't even exist when it is released. Still, we are seeing here (probably) prebeta screen captures, work in progress so to say, this isn't how game will look a month from now, never mind on release. Biz 16:38, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Logo

I so like the new logo, great design. When I saw the first one I got kinda disappointed coz it was so wow-like, glad they changed it. ^^ --Super Igor flame my shove sin bar! 14:19, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

I agree, the new GW2 logo is quite simply awesome. Shadow Runner 14:20, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Me thinks some one really doesn't like the fact that his legacy might just be lending his face to a support character in a unrelated fps game, so Art in Gw2 is far better then anything Ive ever seen in any MMO. Biz 16:21, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

So i suppose that was the gw2 peek that should carry us over for the next 1-2 years right? Justice 17:26, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

I don't know, the guildwars.com website has lately been a bit more active with news updates, they may possibly start releasing a bit more information than beforehand(which was basically repeats of the same information in different interviews).(marsc 17:39, 21 August 2009 (UTC))

Actually they said that they will be releasing more lore type info later this year yet and game play info early next year. GW2 is like 1-3 years away with 1 year being unlikely. Hope the info helps you. Justice 17:49, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Could you please post a link of the source of this info? I haven't seen that bit of information before and would like to look at it for myself. --Elven Chaos 22:22, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Rule #76, everything is instantly cooler when it looks like a Dragon or Shark. If they ever make Nagas a playable race, they should make some of them half-breeds with sharks for the Trifecta of Epic'ness --ilr 22:32, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Sharks arent cool. Dragons are. --Super Igor flame my shove sin bar! 23:47, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

@Elven Chaos: You can find the information on the new FAQ that is part of the official Guild Wars 2 website right here --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:Ryan Galen (talk).

Thank you, that cleared my misconcetion of that faq being the same as the earlier one copied and pasted, so I missed that source. --Elven Chaos 05:31, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Peace and Harmony

I'm tired of all the "you're going to have to work together" and "the different races have realized that they will have to unite to survive" overtones. I don't play video games to be educated about racial equality or cultural tolerance. I would think that it would be better for the game if Anet cultivated more conflict between the different races.Vidal 04:18, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Darker themes in a 12+ game are bad. Who knew? calor (talk) 04:28, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

It's not a choice between a peace and harmony hippie commune and making it too dark for kids. I don't play Guild Wars to "overcome diversity" in an imaginary world.Vidal 08:59, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Then only play the beginning parts of it when everyone hates eachother. --ilr 09:21, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

That's another problem. We already watched the characters learn these stupid ass life lessons in GWEN. Vekk stops calling us bookah, Gwen and the two legged kitty come to respect each other, the Norns realize they aren't the only ones who can fight. And now, for the sake of the story we go right back to squabbling with each other, so we can now do the same thing over again. Not only does it suck, but it's the second time I have to sit through it. And yes, I will sit through it. This is a minor gripe. I'm looking forward to GW2 just as much as anyone, but if I want to hear preaching, I'll go to a church.Vidal 09:49, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Yeah just live in pre searing. Hear they dont mind replaying the same old content over and over and over for the past 4+ years killing charr and weak races in general... Justice 09:48, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

There will be no pre-searing in GW2, the game we are talking about, so your comment is invalid and pointless.Vidal 09:49, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Vidal, I somehow doubt they are doing this in an attempt to teach cultural tolerance (although that's always good fun in a game played by impressionable teenagers); I think it's more about making the game fair on people who want to be able to play the race that they want and play with their friends. If you want conflict, there's always PvP. --Mme. Donelle 12:09, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Yet another problem with this. Will we have to have a party made up of at least one of each of the races in order to face the dragons? I highly doubt it, so it in no way affects gameplay. It just makes the story and cinematics dumb.Vidal 09:49, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

...dumb in your opinion. In mine, there's nothing wrong with it, so I guess we cancel each other out. --Mme. Donelle 18:05, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Well, sure. Just about everything I type is my opinion =)Vidal 12:31, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

I just finished watching the trailer and I love it115.64.157.4 20:24, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

No the real narrative in all of this is that every group that's culturally different will immediately return to distrust and violence against other groups as soon as the bigger Threat is dealt with. It happened immediately after EotN's storyline. Vidal's grinching about a temporary anomaly of cooperation that will likely be over with as soon as it begins. Big whoop. --ilr 21:21, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

This is a pattern found in almost every campaign I think. In Prophecies, Rurik told us that Ascalonians should ally with Krytans For Great Justice and stuff, cause Ascalon was lost. In Factions we see Luxons and Kurzicks forgetting about their differences to face a common enemy. I'm not sure about Nightfall. In EotN the players try to unite the Deldrimor Dwarves, Norn, Asura and Ebon Vanguard against the destroyers. - Reanimated X 18:54, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

In Nightfall, didnt the player have to Unite the Sunspears of Istan with the Kournans and the Vabbians? or am i just making that up?Damien Hellchaser 16:16, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Vabbi and Istan were already Allies. The only thing that changed was Varesh starting a war between Kourna and Istan/Vabbi. Though it's very doubtful Vabbi would have continued to be allies with Istan after the Sunspears had been seen as responsible for returning Joko to power. ...rather pointless discussion though since we won't even be stepping foot into Elona again if the entirety of the first GW2 chapter revolves solely around Orr and the Lich Dragon. ...as you can see from this "Scaling-Compensated" Map... there's atleast 2 whole Regions (extremely mountainous regions) separating Orr from the Elonian mainland. And we also have confirmation from either Flannus or Docui that regions will be much larger now b/c the focus of GW2 is supposed to put "Exploration" on even keel with Combat. IE: everything will be more open and spread out (no more 20 minute Drok runs, LoL) but likely just as detailed (a big part of the reason they started over was to improve their design tools and expansion process). --ilr 21:39, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Graphics compared to Guild Wars 1

First impressions: I don't think the graphics in this promotional video looked much better than Guild Wars 1. The character models looked stiff too me. And in the scene with the snow and trees all the trees looked the same and the leaves looked flat. The only interesting thing seemed to be the tiered dungeons and web-like cities. It seems the video focused on locations/scenery instead of characters (who the hell are these new people that we just get 1 or 2 shots of). Well the locations look pretty enough, they better come up with better character designs and storyline though or it'll be pretty boring. Loves to Sync 22:46, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

you have to remember that this is only going to get better from here on ... it is pre-beta stage, ... probably pre-alpha ... Sneaker 22:55, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Guns

Anyone have any ideas on how they could possibly be balanced? I mean, obviously (almost) everything is a lot weaker than it would be in RL, but I'm confused on how this would be useful and balanced compared to bows (which they will obviously still have) and spears (which they will most likely still have). -~=Sparky (talk) 20:50, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Slow reload time and / or recoil ? Nature / environment effects that grip the weapon ? Good 'ol blind condition / hex ? We wont know until we took one or two bullets in the patotie. Yseron - 90.9.254.156 20:53, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Sylvari with a minigun? Sounds so weird that i'd love it! - J.P.Talk 21:03, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

The thing is, bows are already the slowest weapons in the game. Since bows initially had greater range than guns, I would have no problem with guns being the same range as short bows or recurve bows... but what advantage would that leave to bring a gun over a bow or spear? More damaging and even slower than a hornbow? -~=Sparky (talk) 21:09, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

If I had to guess, it'd be that the guns will do more damage but require to be reloaded, and during that time, you are very vulnerable. Also, perhaps the bullets can't be enchanted like the arrows can. "flaming arrows" Vael Victus 21:12, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Many charr will cry if they don't have Ignite Bullets, though (including me). D: -~=Sparky (talk) 21:16, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

I call shotgun! The guns could just not deal real life amounts of damage. --smøni 21:18, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Nothing in this game deals real life ammounts of damage. There would definitely have to be some weird gun attacks or preparations to make them any different from bows. There are going to be at least two different types of guns (rifles and pistols) and, assuming they have the same damage rating and attribute, is already a step towards bows (which have four types in GW1). An obvious difference would be that guns probably won't inflict poison. -~=Sparky (talk) 21:35, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

There are 5 types of bows in Guild Wars- flatbow, longbow, recurve bow, hornbow, shortbow. – Emmett 21:45, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) Emphasis on Hornbows... A STR warrior with the right Sundering buffs and a Crit/Shout buff can 2-shot any level 20 Mob every single time. The Guns in GW2 will likely have to see atleast as many years of expansions and powercreep before they're be able to even approach that kind of damage. ...The only exception being a "Headshotting" mechanic which still sounds like a possibility but could also be Balanced as well depending on design (case in point: TF2 vs CSS) --ilr 22:08, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm pretty sure when they say "guns" they have more musket and cannon in mind than minigun. If they are musket style, then real life damage would not be too far off from where they will be balanced in game, for several hundred years getting shot by a gun, even getting shot in the face, did not mean you died. It wasn't until WW1 that bullet tech advanced to the modern era and became so incredibly deadly. (Satanael 21:57, 23 August 2009 (UTC))

I'd like to draw attention to Ebon Vanguard Sniper Support. Just to let it be known. Vael Victus 21:58, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) My bad, I only remember four because that's how many weapon slots I have. *facepalm* Still, if bows and guns are extremely similar, that flexibility in bows is what will make them shine. However, I'm thinking bows will veer off to more of a support role (with interrupts and condition pressure), while guns will be more damage-based with less utility. (I don't want to see gun-spike groups, but I believe the utility and invincibility of rangers is what made r-spike work.) -~=Sparky (talk) 22:01, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

The percentage of people shot who died from the injury or complications arising from that injury was way, waaaaaaay higher when muskets and such were around than it is with modern weaponry, a result mostly effected by extremely poor medical treatments and the completely and utter lack of general first-aid knowledge back then. Now, just about everybody knows, for example, that bleeding a person of two gallons of blood usually results in a negative outcome, and cutting a limb off is a decidedly extreme solution to a problem. Also, bullets used today are usually quite sanitary, comparatively speaking. Cleaner than the soldiers using them, anyway. Musket balls back then were gross as fuck. Of course, all of this could have ultimately been caused by the fact that people with muskets and other old rifles back then stood in a fucking line waiting to get shot. I guess Euro teams were still trash even in the fucking middle ages. --Jette 22:13, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

I remember I used to be really vulgar. Good times. Vael Victus 23:02, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

I believe that guns will be balanced by making them deal more than bows, but will have a much slower rate of fire and will be less accurate because as said above the charr did not invent guns not very long ago so they would be more like muskets then miniguns or shotguns or anything post 1904 - Giant Nuker 22:19, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

I remember I used to be classy and refined. I sipped champagne on a balcony in a palace in frickin' Italy. Then Mussolini happened and here I am. --Jette 23:18, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

"much slower rate of fire and will be less accurate"

If so, I doubt they'd see serious use unless their damage is really imbalanced enough. Obviously, muzzle-loading pistols and rifles would be slow (obviously cannot use RL nubmers for this), but the slowest bow already takes almost three seconds to shoot. If guns took four whole seconds between each shot, they would have to have a scaled damage rating of 30-56 to have the same average non-crit damage as a shortbow (and would you really only want to attack once every four seconds?). As far as inaccuracy: if it's anything more than what blind does to projectiles (not the miss chance), then they probably won't be widely used (because nobody wants an automatic "miss" or "stray" chance on an already slow-firing weapon). -~=Sparky (talk) 23:23, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Well if it was maybe 1-5% less likely to hit the target that would work or make it so you have to be Nearby and 30-56 would work because ITS A GUN!!!! and maybe 3 and 1 half to 3 and 3 quarters seconds would work between each shot. - Giant Nuker 01:24, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

1-5% chance to miss would be a useless mechanic that wouldn't do anything but be annoying occasionally (and nearby range would practically make it a melee weapon). Just remember that the most powerful weapon in the game has a damage rating of 9-41, and early guns weren't even deadlier than arrows. Even if guns would attack (slower than) every 3.7 seconds (hornbow speed) or had a lower minimum damage rating (like 6-56), they would be extremely powerful. -~=Sparky (talk) 01:59, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

/is slow on things, and couldn't pay attention to the trailer that much. When/where did they announce guns in gw2? o: personn5 02:00, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Here. -~=Sparky (talk) 02:10, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Regina confirmed it here (Satanael 02:11, 24 August 2009 (UTC))

Oh. Well then. Need to check stuff like that more often.... personn5 02:34, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

(Reset indent) Sparky's too fast for me :/ @Jette - lol, I think that's the first time I've ever seen Mussolini used as an excuse to swear. Anyway, you only prove my point. In the age of muskets, most people didn't die from the bullet, they died from the infection afterwards. This speaks to the relative ineffectiveness of the bullet itself. That all changed in WWI. People like to say it was the chemical weapons that did a lot of the killing in WWI, but it wasn't. It was the first time an effective machine gun was used (with corresponding effective machine gun tactics) in a major conflict, coupled with military leaders' refusal to change tactics away from the old cannon fodder charges. That's why WWI saw the first time (and one of the only times) that a single battle accumulated over 1 million casualties. (Satanael 02:40, 24 August 2009 (UTC))

"Hey guys, see those other guys shooting at us? Lets walk in a line towards them until we're about 5 feet from them, THEN lets open fire! Great Idea huh?" Glad I was never in one of those old wars. personn5 02:49, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Regarding comparing guns to bows for rate of fire: there is no such thing as Reload in GW1, only activation or attack rate. If attack rate of guns required a pause in between to reload, they could then shoot farther and more accurately than bows while generally doing more damage but less DPS overall. However even varieties of modern body armor today won't protect against a Spear or a Knife as well as they stop most lead bullets so there's plenty of artistic license they could take with Guns VS. other ranged weapons when Armor & Prayers are involved. --ilr 07:12, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps not 5 feet. But if the other guys chicken out and fire too soon their accuracy and penetration power fails. While they are reloading you close the distance for an accurate and more powerful shot. Why do you think the british discipline steam rolled? Justice 06:06, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

For some of you, i wasn't serious about Sylvari with a minigun. I personally don't like the idea of having guns in GW2. - J.P.Talk 09:55, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

But Giant arthropods that could take out a Tank Column have been perfectly acceptable? Personally I think it's awesome and has Worked Fine in the past (Ps: Lead Designer wasn't Perry, but Flannum) --ilr 10:31, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

SACRIFICE, FUCK YEAH! --Jette 13:29, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

I should probably Elaborate: Eric's job there was to create and balance almost 50 unique units with up to 3 unique abilites each, in almost the exact same situation we're all in whenever we're flagging our Heroes all over the battlefield. And several of them units had Rifles or Guns that definitely had more range or frontloaded damage than other units. Did it make me pick them more often in PvP battles? Shit yeah it did! But that was b/c I was usually fighting newbs anyway and all they had to do to beat me was stop me from flanking and escaping so much with those blitzkrieg style attacks. The damn things could never stand up in a prolonged fire fight, therefore it was still really well balanced overall. And when GW2 launches, I'm sure Charr Guns will be balanced in a similar way. If they ever become "Imba" then it will only be because of typical ANET update powercreeping and metashifting that we're all already used to by now. (Or more likely... from there being too many n00bs in World PvP b/c all the pros who are supposed to keep them in check will be spending all their time in Structured) --ilr 21:40, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Or because all the non-shitters will be playing StarCraft 2 or Diablo 3. --Jette 21:42, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Starcraft invented ShitWay. ...kekeke chobo --ilr 21:48, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Point taken. --Jette 21:50, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Jette wrote: "Or because all the non-shitters will be playing StarCraft 2 or Diablo 3"...<-- True story.--*Yasmin Parvaneh* 21:58, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

I seriously consider not buying gw2 if it has guns in it, seriously, guns... --Cursed Angel 22:17, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

I agree...its a little silly with this type of game...its out of place for me in a fantasy based game. If I want to shoot guns at people, I can go play Contra or an FPS. Sorry, but seeing how well a scythe was balanced, scares me what the team will do with guns. Also, on the same topic, lets ask that our characters get cellphones, cars, helicopters, phasers, starships and so on.--*Yasmin Parvaneh* 22:26, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Dungeon Siege had Goblin Guns in it and it was just fine. of course that was gpg and not anet, so nevermind. --adrin 22:29, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Alright I'll concede that point, Scythes are WTF on some classes and I'm not sure how you'd balance them without further screwing over actual Dervishes. But guns only hit multiple targets when they're all lined up like those Nazi's in IndianaJones-3 ...lol --ilr 22:53, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

I try to picture a warrior with some leather armor running with an axe towards some high-tech pink smurf upon some robot with a fast reloading shotgun, it doesn't seem balanced at all... and there goes guild wars for me. --Cursed Angel 22:55, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Plague Bullets, Air Bullets, DirtH4X Bullets & Mind Bullets. ...Hide your Yaks --ilr 23:30, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

You forgot Jade Bullets! -~=Sparky (talk) 23:37, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Dark Ammo, Demolition ammo, AP Ammo, Fire Ammo, Shotgun Ammo... wait, when did we start playing Final Fantasy 8 again? ~~000.00.00.00~~ 23:57, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Mediaeval guns (hee hee hee, I love that stupid spelling) are stupid. I want either swords & sorcery or a fully automatic handheld railgun that doesn't actually do jack because your opponents can dodge bullets. --Jette 00:04, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

So, I heard you like guns. Erasculio 00:56, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Some of those actually look pretty interesting ... I haven't thought of the designs much up until now but what i see is mostly likeable .... but that fishgun -.- that's just flat-out ridiculous ... xD Sneaker 01:14, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Is my memory foggy or was it Gaile who said that guns would never be in guild wars? Even when asked she said something to the effect (sarcastically) yeah and why dont we just add cars and fighter jets...I cant even recall a serious thread where someone was asking for guns to be implemented and yet here they are tossing in the very thing NO ONE WANTS. Justice 06:02, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Maybe she did say that, and maybe she was wrong: Guns aren't going to be in Guild Wars. However, Guns are in Guild Wars 2. Oh, look! A quail! ~~000.00.00.00~~ 07:27, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

People evolve. Civilizations evolve. Worlds evolve. Games evolve. I can see the concern in many of the comments here, but seriously, you guys need to stop debating over a thing that is not fully implemented in a game that will not see the light till about 1 and a half year from now. The concept of guns in medieval settings has worked before, I don't see why can't it work here. Since Charr abandoned gods, it has been stated they turned to the physical world and started developing new technologies, and as can be seen in the trailer, they somehow are leading some sort of industrial revolution. What is so wrong with that? What, it took the human race about 2000 years? Yeah, we're not talking Human here, we're talking Charr. Just wait and see how they will be, and then start bitching for the so-called "unbalance", or start praising the guy who thought about putting guns in GW2. Just wait. Or go play with a gun-wielding Dwarf in WoW. See? They did that since Warcraft 2 or 3, and to my knowledge, no one has complained. -- Large 08:07, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Well as long as they balance it i have no complaints ... i expect the animations to be awesome and with that ... I'll be satisfied XD ... i don't know i think the guns will be a nice add on to the gw weapons ... :P Sneaker 10:32, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Also, some people fail to realize that because of religion, we were in our own dark ages for atleast 200 years longer than we shoulda been. Factor that into our whole 950ad to 1400ad timeline, and suddenly the Charr are right on time with their militarized renaissance and widespread production of firearms. --ilr 11:12, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

My guess is that ANet will "balance" it by making the guns do 250 damage a shot, but since they don't worship anything Charr don't get monks. Hurr. Also: religion didn't keep anything in the dark ages, it was people going MY BELIEFS AND OPINIONS ARE BETTER THAN YOUR BELIEFS AND OPINIONS! DIE!!12131! that did that. --Jette 11:55, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

From what i read ... "All races will have their guns, BUT the charr have advanced here more than others" ... so ... i don't know anymore ... we'll just have to wait and see Sneaker 13:54, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

So we can assume that the Charr will have the better guns, or they'll be better with guns? A racial benefit? ~~000.00.00.00~~ 22:27, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

...You're saying they'll just have MORE guns, Like Idaho & Alaska? w/e... If I make a sharpshooter, it'll be whichever Race gets that SteamPunk Pneumatic one the earliest --ilr 22:32, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Bows are much quieter than guns and arrows can be fitted with granades. :O Hope something like that would be implemented. Also, magic > guns.--Super Igor flame my shove sin bar! 10:31, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Fitted with grenades? What the hell? Have you ever tried shooting an arrow with a rock instead of an arrowhead? It doesn't fly, it just drops. --Jette 13:16, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Oooh let's strap tanks to the arrows too! ... maybe they'll move a nanometer ... anyway ... you probably meant dynamite ... that's more plausible XD ... imagin ... nades ... "martyr noob!!!" .. xD Sneaker 18:24, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

im thinking of making my own little spanish asuran musketeer with a curled mustache and a little hat--Hubbard The Dervish 23:29, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

NO, make a balding sneering Charr Shotgunner /w glasses and name him DICK CHARRNEY --ilr 23:47, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

badum tish -_-

Who need a gun when you can haz a bazooka? :P --Super Igor flame my shove sin bar! 10:04, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

ima firin' mah charr lazor! --adrin 10:43, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

I think i actually saw some concept art of a charr with a bazooka ... the new art released on the GW2 homepage ... edit: here it is Sneaker 11:04, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

It has gained the nickname Charrzooka on GW2G--92.11.171.82 11:08, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

RAWKET LAWNCHAIR! ...(yeah there's no way that won't be Imba, pfff) --ilr 20:06, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

gw2 guru

Is so gay. --Super Igor flame my shove sin bar! 20:41, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

...it's screen-spam & java demoralizes and removes your will to fight --ilr 21:53, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

"it is"

Did you perchance pass the second grade, sir? --Jette 01:38, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Yes, gw2 guru is extremely homosexual. It likes to sleep with other gw2 gurus and infringes on the sanctity of traditional guru marriage. --Mme. Donelle 04:14, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

I've actually started a summer camp for gw2 gurus to come and learn how to be straight. I use scripture to explain to them that God intended them to marry aion gurus, and their choice to commit sodomy with other gw2 gurus will only earn them an eternity in hell. (Satanael 04:40, 28 August 2009 (UTC))

Igor is just mad cuz he got banned :P --Orgeron 11:07, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Almost right. I'm never really mad about bans, but reasoning they gave was gay. --Super Igor flame my shove sin bar! 09:30, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

And this has nothing whatever to do with GW2, so enough already. -- Wyn talk 10:10, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

And the whole usage of word gay as a derrogatory term sounds overall immature and just plain stupid, pretty sick of it really.--Sensei 12:23, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

QQ moar, both of you. --Super Igor flame my shove sin bar! 23:39, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Yeah guys! Criticising homophobia is so lame. --Mme. Donelle 23:57, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Key Fobs

Can we learn from past mistakes with account stealing and offer key fobs for users? I hate to give props to WOW, but their key fob offer is a great authentication idea. 218.40.186.9 00:19, 2 September 2009 (UTC)Ryoko Yonekura

Any user dumb enough to fall for the traps people use to steal accounts isn't going to be smart enough to use the key fob thingies. —Jette 05:51, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

^ --Super Igor flame my shove sin bar! 10:01, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Have to agree with Jette here. Users are responsible for their own character security, no matter what you dream up, some users will still mess up and then blame everybody but themselves. Biz 16:40, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Rambling:

Fortunately, that's pretty silly, to associate ignorance in terms of naivety with that in terms of mechanical usage... (I say ignorance because "stupidity" would be nonsensical here - someone fully aware they're giving an account away and stupid enough to think it's beneficial probably has trouble with motor function...); the point of a key fob isn't that you know how to use it, or it wouldn't matter who had it - rather that you have it in your possession... thus even an idiot can look up how to use it in the manual or whatever and still preserve his rightful ownership. Key fobs are a good thing o.O

By the way, anyone stupid enough to get their account stolen is too stupid to have earned the money to buy the game. ;) | 72 {U|T|C} - 16:42, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

In GW, if an account is stolen, the true owner can use the activation key that comes with the game to prove ownership. I don't see the need to take further steps. Erasculio 19:09, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Since you know, a tiny slip of paper isn't easily lost. personn5 19:45, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Actually maybe retinal scans would be better. (^,,^)V Sorry, i just went thru a CISSP bootcamp. 218.40.186.9 07:24, 2 October 2009 (UTC)Ryoko Yonekura

Hero Settings in GW2

I don't know if this was said somewhere else in the wiki but I think that there should be a hero settings panel where you can manually turn on or off what the heroes can do or not do. For example: Turn off heroes constantly healing minions or turn in on if you like them doing that, assigning priority hex and condition removal like say if I play on my assassin and I get blinded or crippled I could choose the settings on my healer hero to have me as priority for the removal of those specific conditions and if a healer gets hexed that they would have priority with hex removal and so on. This is obviously not easy to program but just that little added touch would help greatly at dmg dealing and saving healers and energy management.

1) Suggestions go here, 2) it seems GW2 won't have heroes. —Jette 00:50, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Release Date Information

Although an actual release date has yet to be posted I did find this on the Barnes and Noble Website. It gives a general timeframe for release. HOWEVER, this is not concrete and can very easily be changed. Just throwing something out there to shoot for! http://videogames.barnesandnoble.com/Video-game/Guild-Wars-2/e/14633143614/?itm=4 -Yama

thank you, any and all help is appreciated Zachariah Zuan. 14:52, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Online stores always do that, though; it's easier to make people preorder something when you show them a release date than when showing just a TBA. I would expect GW2's release date to be either on April 28th or on October 28th (of 2011). Erasculio 15:00, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

You can pre-order it already? How come? - J.P.Talk 15:05, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Heh, it has been available for preorder (there and in many other places, like Amazon) for quite some time now. Receiving payment three years in advance isn't a bad deal. Erasculio 15:08, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

You don't pay for the whole thing when you preorder it... -~=Sparky (talk) 23:19, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Often, you do. Or at least can. If I were to talk down to EB Games and preorder GW2, I could put down the full estimated price. If it's more then the estimated price, I pay the rest. If it's less, I get money in return. --Kairu 05:30, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Hmm... explorable persistent areas + z-axis = No monthly fee???

Or... Persistence + z-axis = more lag?? --35.8.131.149 18:03, 30 September 2009 (UTC)boobs

Just having an extra coordinate or extra memory allocation for scripted event flags doesn't add that much to Server wear and tear. It's basically like adding a small radio clock & schedule "app" to your desktop and removing it again wouldn't even get you 1 more FPS on core programs. The BIG ticket items that really put wear & tear on the server are going to be larger Inventory slots, Advanced AI scripts, Packet sniff & Anti-H4X coding (usually used against lag-dodging, auto-targeting & wallhacking), Any main meeting zone/instance that allows more than 60 players, movement prediction(also for AI scripts) and Lag "compensation", ...and pretty much anything that gives a character TOO much "customization" of their Gear, Base(guild hall), or "Particles". --ilr 21:11, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

I would hardly call the standard MMO AI "advanced". I think a lot goes into GM salaries & customer support, and content updates. Content updates you pay for by buying expansions. -- Alaris 22:32, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Fan Sites

is it Necessary to have these? I see this as soon to be flooded with fan links. ♥ Ariyen ♀ 07:59, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

With 10 000 000 external links, I don't even see the point of adding what--so far--are probably just mirrors and collections of the information and concept art assembled here.

Perhaps the Guru link may stay eventually due to its relative significance in the community right now, but right now they're all just blog posts speculating on GW2 or delighting in their own site:

 Our first Day [as a site] was very successful!We had like 1200 Visitors. [...in Downloads,] You will find many Stuff about GW2!

So, no. Not terribly relevant or necessary | 72 {U|T|C} 11:40, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

As the GW2 Wiki expands in popularity, more people will be going there for their information and will be using this to find the fansites, but for now I don't see any harm in leaving them here. Also, the External links section is for links to interviews and other non-ArenaNet owned, yet official sources of information regarding GW2. That's different than fansites. -- Wyn talk 11:50, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

"the External links section is for links to interviews and other non-ArenaNet owned, yet official sources of information regarding GW2" ... Which is why the size of that section is relevant to the likelihood of fansites mirroring, that is, being collections of the same information/links, you see | 72 {U|T|C} 19:15, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

I can see the reasoning to External Links, as long as it's to actual Interviews, etc. done by ArenaNet, but I don't see the reasoning for Fan Sites, which can just contain false speculation. To me, you'd want as much of the 'real' information as possible, not stuff that others may want to believe are true, but may end up not being so. ♥ Ariyen ♀ 20:46, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

NO, No Guru, get it gone... the wiki is not here to pander --ilr 21:54, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

New information

Apparently there will be RTS elements in GW2. Plus there's some stuff about GW2 PvP mentioned. - Reanimated X 18:11, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Why does information like this keep getting filtered through euro interviews first where it has to be translated back into english? ...and before anyone even whines about it, yeah the entire point of RvR is to devolve into zergfests. If that's not good enough, Anet could use the event system to break the battles up and shift momentum --ilr 08:46, 9 October 2009 (UTC)