Talk:Guild Wars 2/Archive13

old quotes incoming

The reason that mechanics and gameplay are inseparable is that mechanics shape ALL of your tactics... even broken mechanics (case in pont: shadoform lulz). In essence, every time you expend effort to take your character to the next level, it's because (or smetimes in spite of) the fact that it's not doing one particular mechanic well enough. Beating missions to get to new areas to access more skill trainers, better armor, or new Heroes is all a function of customizing your tool-belt to better respond to a particular area's mechanics. Another example: Before the ice imps were added to Droks, runs were cheap and done almost exclusively by warriors. After that point, the cost of runs went up for everyone. It impacted every aspect of the PvE economy, even for people who never got runs. In one fell swoop, the mechanic of hex-based snaring brought "altitus" to a screeching halt. Even more brazen changes have happened in PvP, with even stronger potential for bigger impacts than those to be felt by everyone who participates in Guildwars2 solely by the mechanics that will be used or abused in World PvP.

Why?? --> "Victory in World versus World will confer benefits to your world. This may include improved drop rates, better energy regeneration or other bonuses.". That's no microcosm either, it's direct impact on every level of Crafting, PvE, and character progression. ...furthermore: "it's both more approachable for casual players and more of an e-sport for the hard core. It takes the unique skill deck system of the original and makes it more comprehensible, with a focus on quality of skills instead of quantity." ...that's a pretty bold claim as far as mechanics go because more direct counters means a more diverse metagame while more adaptable mechanics that cover more bases simply caters to the fastest twitch players so it would seem these two propositions are at direct odds with each other. ..and while Class-specific mechanics are said to "slightly weaker than equivalent skills determined by profession", they too should allow for specific "min-maxing" of certain Uber-Builds that exploit access to mechanics that a combinations of classes aren't supposed to have access to ...for example Warrior/Dervish with strong Hex/Condition removal capabilities or Smiter's Boon + Tactics "strongmonk" who also gets some sort of Soul-Reaping or Expertise Energy buff. These kinds of things are the biggest questions on a competitive GW1 player's lips when they're trying to decide if they should keep working on their Titles in preparation for a transition to GW2. They don't know if the HoM's will bestow any kind of slight bonus but if they do, then they need to know all about it right now.

Then there's people who've given up on GW1 for now. They go to the official webpage looking for info on mechanics because it was a number of changes to the current mechanics (or proficiency there-of) their characters had access to that drove them away in the first place or simply made the game less fun. They're waiting with abated breath for the details that were advertised to be released early this year to figure out how they want to plan out the rest of this year: IoW: should they try to find their old guildmates and get involved in planning for this game or should they just spend their reserve resources on something else that's available now or becoming available (SwTOR, BC2, GlAg, another WoW expansion, Sc2, DiabloIII, etc etc). Plus there's upgrade costs that might be required for the next generation MMO that might be coming out the same time Gw2 is supposed to. They have to plan for that stuff now based on whether GW2 looks like it will be fun. Flannum has stated there will be "a less complex combat system" while the weather or a character's movement might impact the mechanics of skills. There will also be more area to cover with (hopefully faster) travel mechanics: "Tyria in Guild Wars 2 covers a significantly larger area than in Guild Wars, and at the same time contains much more playable space in each area.". These things have a huge impact on the "fun" factor and we should have had full info on them last year, not this summer.

And there's also supposed to be Non-Combat Mechanics involved in player interaction. If such interactions can contribute to character progression in any way then it's important to reveal those ASAP too. So much of what they've said time and again has paralleled Mike'O'brien's own statement that: "I think that we allowed GW1 to get too complex, and with GW2 we have a new opportunity to make it a game that's easy to get into but which has the depth of mechanics that keeps people interested over a long time" and right now they're just dawdling on giving us the proof that this is actually the case. They've run it down to the wire when you look at 5 years in development but less than 9 months to tell us how they actually plan on making that all happen. The mechanics WILL determine whether or not the gameplay is "addictive" and engrossing. And if they aren't, then players will look elsewhere for that sort of gameplay and some already have b/c Gw2 still hasn't proven that it even has that potential. Everything has basically been fluff up to this point and anything that we could possibly gleen info about the mechanics off of, has been said under their breath or so understated that re-locating it in these interviews takes the entire day. They've drowned us in fluff about the races and storyline and when it finally comes time to explain the combat... all we're hearing is silence over a missed deadline. That's not exactly an encouraging pattern to see happen on a game that's selling itself as a major improvement over it's previous incarnation on the basis that Mike stated.... --ilr 21:46, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Why hello there, fansite material wall-o-text. --Kyoshi (Talk) 21:03, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Information about game mechanics will be released sooner or later, as most of us counted on beta some two years ago, waiting few more weeks on info wont make much difference. There is no real benefit in releasing information early, unless you are constantly releasing more info you wont keep any one interested all the way to the release and as game is still under development it would be much worse to say something that will later end up being changed substantially, scrapped or used only once during a single mission. Biz 22:08, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

In Case any of you game Admin's actually read your fan mail here, which i doubt, It seems to me like your taking many of the old GW assets and throwing them into a whole different world, it seems like your taking a lot of designs from Perfect World International, but adding the GW touch to them, seeing as you have more money and investments to be made in it, not that i am calling you a plagiarizer, which i certainly am not, I think the new Gw will be very interesting to play and the new character designs will be very nice, especially the new races, besides a few minor differences that i agree with here, i believe GW 2 will be, overall, a very enjoyable and realistically fun experience for any hardened gamer.~ Alice Uley, Necro at heart.

Devs do read it, well, not all of them, but some of them, those who are paid specifically to read and at times respond to our poorly articulated rants. But, if issue brought up is legitimate it will be addressed eventually. Biz 00:01, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Are you insinuating that i am not very articulate or do you mean in general?

Well, proper spelling and grammar may not mean anything on the internet, but they generally do help you get noticed by "devs" and such people. Vili 点 03:24, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Personally, I take more interest in those who try to best other people's grammar D: | 72 | 03:27, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

It's the title of a well-known (okay, maybe somewhat old) grammar book. I thought that you would have recognized the joke given your stellar mental faculties. Vili 点 03:33, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Speaking of obsolete, this section should have been archived by now. We're done with 2nd quarter and details about gameplay and physics engine stuff are actually starting to come out. --ilr 10:01, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Hall of monuments relations

So i kind of have a question. i've been searching all over the wiki and i can't really seem to find anything on this. What kind of relations do the various monuments in the hall of monuments have? Like say if i maxed out the weapons monument in the hall, would i get a sweet awesome weapon in guild wars 2? Or something. I haven't heard anything about it. --Funkyguy4000 19:46, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Neither has anyone else. :P Rose Of Kali 20:16, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, they've been very hush hush about exactly how the HoM will translate to goodies or whatever in GW2, so... none of us have any idea beyond what could be logically assumed. (Satanael | talk) 21:08, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Other than it's supposed to be purely cosmetic, no functional advantage over items that can be obtained normally. So, the HoM is like Viagra for your GW2 e-peen. :] Rose Of Kali 21:32, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Wait, Viagra only works on the aesthetics? WELL, THAT SUCKS! (no pun intended... okay maybe it was) (Satanael | talk) 22:56, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Oops, sorry for your disappointment. Have you tried herbal remedies? Rose Of Kali 12:16, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

What he meant to say is that we will get weapons and armour that is no better then ordinary GW2 weapons and armour (no in-game advantage) but it will have an exclusive look that is only available to people with Halls of Monuments. Biz 21:45, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Do I really make the impression of a fa.. dude who signs with a blue rose and calls himself "Rose?" O_O Rose Of Kali 00:50, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Well I didn't want to be the one to say it but... Tidas 06:07, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Girls on the Internets are just like Cake. Biz 19:03, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

NOW what did I do? >_< Rose Of Kali 21:20, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Elementalist

Should we mention something about the Elementalist announcement? -- Phnzdvn 19:37, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

...All we know right now is the current name of their GW1 Predecessors which is the most likely reason for Mike's word choice. HURF DURF <-- disregard that i suck ... --ilr 23:03, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

http://www.flickr.com/photos/arenanet/4558240121/ "Screen shot from Guild Wars 2. An Elementalist casts the Static Field spell." Manifold 23:23, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

10-slot Skillbar

The real details on how we'll put our builds together is finally coming out and it's still very "MtG"'y but there's so much confusion on it that Martin had to post a follow up to try and clear it up. ...so make sure to read it before even attempting to add any declaritives to this page. I'd recommend waiting a little bit longer infact before trying to nail it down since it sounds like character RACE plays an even bigger part in your ideal build now. (IE: think EotN PvE-only skills big) --ilr 20:34, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

It lists how having a different weapon set will change the skill bar for sword or axe for example. But it also sounds like some of the skill game play elements aren't completely nailed down yet... but it sounds quite exciting. So far it sounds like 5 optional, 1 healing, 1 elite, and 3 weapon specific, and 2 offhand specific (or 5 if twohanded)? So it sounds like you get 12 slots total? that doesn't make sense--Lania Elderfire 21:57, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

What that post translates into is this: 3 Main-Hand Determined slots, 2 Off-hand Determined Slots (Or those same 5 slots are changed by a single two-hand weapon), 5 Optional slots where one of the 5 is reserved for a healing skill of choice, and one of the optional slots is reserved for an elite skill of choice. That is how the 10-slot skill bar is (currently) setup. --Elven Chaos 22:16, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for proving my case: IoW, how much confusion there still is. Let's look at an Axe War's example bar:

			...that's with 1h Axe and 1 Shield for the Offhand
			...<--- wielding a dagger in his off-hand
			...<--- wielding a giant 2-handed Axe
			...<--- picking up a Giant Snowball some Mage shot at you
			...<--- and finally, switching to a Bow

And yes, that's what the Article implies: Your first weapon automatically assigns your first 3 skill slots with skills tailored to your Primary both in raw power and compliance with your Class' Energy management (IE: Wars having lots of Adren skills). Then your next 2 are based on your Off-hand... which if you don't have b/c you're a 2H weap, changes all 5 of your first skills. And if you change to a weapon your class isn't specialized for, you gain 5 skills tailored to their interpretation of how that primary class should be played from a Secondary class' Attributes. IoW: a Bow Warrior's skill bar would never contain more expensive stuff like Oath Shot or Concussion Shot b/c it would totally "gimp" you against energy denial. Furthermore, most skills considered Elites in GW1, will no longer be Elites in GW2. Instead Elites will become the new Long-Recharging "Ultimates" that may not even be affected by Recharge Buffs/Cons. IoW: They're attempting to balance most of the Abuseable mechanics they revealed yesterday, by assigning half your skill-bar based on the weapon (and mods?) you're wielding so that it's instantly apparent to your Opponents what kind of bar you're running which levels the playing field quite a bit and satisfies their new approach of making skill-usage much more visible to all participants so it feels less like you're playing the GW1 spreadsheet of keyboard facerolling --ilr 23:51, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

furthermore, there are no Secondary Professions... instead you rely on other players to provide environmental objects that your primary skills interact directly with, granting your skills secondary effects. Now will it be possible for your "Companion NPC" to be a separate class than you are? If so, then that's how you would effectively be granted direct access to a "secondary profession"s skills and attribute allocation. --ilr 23:51, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

"You will also be able to use different weapon combinations: If for example, you have an axe in your main hand, this will define your first three skills. Pick up a shield – this defines the next 2 skills. Switch to a mace in your offhand – those skills change, basically giving you a different set of combinations. (Martin Kerstein)"

That might as well confirm dual-wielding for all one-handed weapons, too (without stating that you can wield 2 of the same weapon). Now I'm wondering if you can use a shield in your main hand for a more defensive character? I don't see why it wouldn't. Can't wait to see, this looks interesting! -~=Ϛρѧякγ (τѧιк) 00:03, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

The one thing I hope is that they make the predefs (predefined slots, I mean) either very dynamic, updating them as they see fit, or damn good, or turn them off for PvP or something... the amount of predictable, yet unavoidable, countering that's going to go on based on what weapon a guy has will be phenomenal. | 72 (UTC) 00:40, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

You have free rain over 5 skills (that you can swap outside of combat) and 5 other skills will be changing depending on what Object/weapon/offhand +attunement you use... so... Who ever was looking at Chromatic Drakes in GW1 and secretly wished they could swap their skill sets depending on enemies you face... now you can... Biz 23:25, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Seems like a huge increase in freedom to me... right now on all my builds I got like SIX mandatory powers just to fill each roll or solo ...I'm lucky if I can change 1 or 2 skills out for something else most of the time... You're telling me I get THREE to FIVE moar now?! --ilr 02:04, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

That would be the point (along with better control of balance). Moar skillz total, "must haves" mostly/all-the-way already provided. I remember many times when I wished for one or two more slots in GW1 to better round off my character >.>; --Elven Chaos 20:26, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

OK how can this be anymore misrepresented??? 10 slot skillbar? Where? LMAO! Ok , lets see, instead of shield or weapon have +1 skill 20% chance, they added a skill in its place,...nothing changed, required heal slot [so thats where they deleted healers and forced you to use a new slot?], some type of defensive slot? ok, ok....now lets see where that leaves us??? We get to pick and use and arrange a whole 3 skills now!!!!!!! Instead of the 8 we had before! Wow, now thats progress, thats more control for the player........ OK, lets add this all up now

3 skill slots no heroes no henchies no more mouse controlled movement forced open environmet, pug interaction no longer have dungeons and such to go for you have "raids" [wow anyone?] um the addition of a secondary profession WAS a step forward [so take that away and it is a step backward yet again, right?] add guns!! [how friggin ghetto can you get?]

....ok, ok, now where does that put us? Duke 4? wow3? so where in the hell is it GW2? The name?

Guys, geez use what ya got and stop trying to exceed what you really can do....GW was terrific and ran great. Either use the damned asuran portals to time warp us further into the storyline for true GW2 or call it what it really is wow3? You're insulting us! [and yes, I fully expect fan-boi attacks] Oliasys

Books

The section on this page says that the book is called Guild Wars: Ghosts of Ascalon while the linked page says Guild Wars: Fall of Ascalon. Do we know which one is right? --Kyoshi (Talk) 21:30, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Ghosts is the more recent title. FAQ -- FreedomBound 23:01, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. --Kyoshi (Talk) 01:41, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Whats the second one about? It doesn't say.

It's about Destiny's Edge and their coming together, and falling apart with their successful adventures in between. It's set around 4 years before the game so 3 years before the first book. Sneaker 01:38, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Companion System

How come the companion system was scrapped? Anyone have the source that I could check out, please? -- Lacky 02:39, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Some translation oddities and not terribly specific: [1] Manifold 02:40, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. -- Lacky 02:42, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

I'm glad that it's gone. WvW would have been annoying. Though, WvW still looks like it's just going to be "whoever has more people can crush the other side" thing. -~=Ϛρѧякγ (τѧιк) 13:33, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

I'm calling bullshit... They may think they've already got classes balanced out enough but if their current track record on solo content is anything like their previous track record then they're making a big mistake here by not allowing a safety net for their repetition of imminent & notoriously short sighted PvE failures. --ilr 18:04, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

The GW2 classes are designed differently. In GW1, your party is screwed 99.9% of the time if you don't have monks or restoration Rts (or N/Rts). In GW2, your skill bar requires you to take a healing skill of some sort, and it sounds like there won't be a dedicated healing monk-type profession, as they intend to not require partying of any kind, so each class has to be a self-sufficient healer and killer for common encounters (obviously, not big castle sieges, etc.). The skills will also be balanced differently, since there will be no fucked up dual profession gimmicks to worry about, so you only have to balance combinations within one profession, not with every other skill in the game, and there will be fewer skills total. There's a big difference between balancing a skill (and by extension, the profession itself) against 1300 other skills, or against like a max of 50. Don't call bullshit if there's no bull to shit on you yet. Rose Of Kali 18:28, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

No I'm pretty darn sure at this point I can keep calling bullshit on this one. You'll notice on the follow-up Blog that Flannum still didn't put this one to bed. IE: Some professions will get Pets, some inherently just based on Race. This still results in situations just like the Norn Fighting Tourney where an Engineer type class like a spirit spammer complete /w Fire Djinni throws off the entire curve while your average dagger assassin or paragon fails it 40 times in a row. And what happens when events DO scale dynamically? I've been there and done that already for over 5 years in City of Heroes. You still need dedicated tankers and dedicated healers b/c all of the extra mobs that spawn need something to aggro on. They won't just play nice and spread their aggro evenly, they'll pick whatever's the squishiest front-liner and devour him in 0.75¾ of a second. If you happen to be that Spiker on the front line who's constantly getting spiked himself b/c of "the Flannum Donctrine" (IE: Overwhelmed by the Minions of Marduk) then you'll wish you still had a companion too who could act as a bonder ...or at the least, teleport your ass out of there. 1 self-preservation skill won't fix that situation, infact not even 4 of them will unless they allow some +++ H4X or some ++++ bologny. --ilr 20:51, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Most of the actual game play elements haven't been released out in the wild yet. It's just way too early to speculate what removing the companion system will to do how the game plays. --Lania Elderfire 21:01, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

The Old enemys...

"The battle can erupt in any area, even in the territory controlled by a World. Capturing the scene and control territories will bring bonuses to your world. At the end of the week, the world will be declared the winner and three new worlds will be chosen to compete. "

Original idea from Old HA anyone? >_> --Neil2250 , Render Lord 23:16, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Old what? They kind of already did some of that with Faction territories/town ownership bonuses, and "world" bonuses used to apply in the old favor/HA system. This concept is rather old in general. Rose Of Kali 23:37, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Sorry.ment Old HA, ive been filling it too much ever since the GW2 videos came out >_> --Neil2250 , Render Lord 23:43, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

They should trying to be cute calling it "WvW", and just call it what it really is, "RvR"... --ilr 20:40, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Actually, it's not the same. When was the last time you could switch "R's" any time at will for free? What was that? Rose Of Kali 20:56, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

That's retarded for two reasons: #1: too many server tranfers puts too much stress on the databases leading to way too many server rollbacks. ...and #2 farmers will all transfer to whichever realm has the most bonuses leading to an unfair economical advantage. ...at the very least, the Incumbent server should only get Diminishing rewards for consecutive wins & it should cost 10% of your currency savings & stockpiled materials to transfer each time otherwise one single consortium of douchebags will monopolize the entire fukkin enchilada year-round. --ilr 21:17, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Y'know, there are a lot of ways you could limit the "realm monopolizing", and a feedback page could sum them up quite nicely. --Kyoshi (Talk) 21:32, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) Whoever said the "benefits" will be monetary? They could be events you don't get to see otherwise, cosmetic things you can't access otherwise, etc. And they did say that you can always get together with your friends, no matter what world you started on, which implies unrestricted switching. It could also be that you can play anywhere, but only your home world bestows benefits when it wins. Kind of sort of like you can go to any Luxon city, but only the one owned by your alliance will give you the discounted merchant access. So, you choose a world, and it's your "home" world, and you get benefits if it wins WvW, but you can also go play in any other world at will any time, you just don't get their WvW win benefits if they win, because they're not your "home." I'm just guessing, though. Rose Of Kali 21:36, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) Oh god plz no, the purely cosmetic things can lead to even greater amounts of greed & exploiting. --ilr 21:44, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

I think worlds are just districts, and will be separated by region (HoH-style). Then, you just gain the benefits of whatever region your game is from, and can switch between them at will. -~=Ϛρѧякγ (τѧιк) 21:42, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Pistols?!? Rifles?!? What's going on here?!?!?

Introducing guns into the game seems totally ridiculous to me.

don't worry it's not gonna be like MW2 settle down Zachariah Zuan. 01:16, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

That's what they said in North America when the Europeans came | 72 (UTC) 01:16, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Actually it isn't. --Kyoshi (Talk) 01:34, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Isn't ridiculous, or isn't what they said? To both: ORLY? | 72 (UTC) 02:43, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

I meant it isn't what they said. I agree it's just a little bit ridiculous.

And ya rly, as soon as the Native Americans saw what guns could do, Powhatan pretty much expected they would lose in a fight and that the Europeans weren't gonna stay friendly unless they were allowed to take pretty much everything. Digression, though. --Kyoshi (Talk) 02:52, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Well they wouldn't have spoken English. elix Omni 02:52, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Not initially, no. They also wouldn't know what MW2 is, if we're going to be nit-picky. --Kyoshi (Talk) 02:55, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Semantics, sir. 141.165.171.12 02:56, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

"nit-picky" --Kyoshi (Talk) 02:57, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

How is it ridiculous? It has been 250 years, technology is bound to develop over time. I applaud Arenanet for allowing the MMO to go out of the Traditional medieval only time. --hnzdvn 03:17, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

It'd be a little out of the scope of that development if guns were to be accurate enough to be viable in a world of magic. The guns used in the time of the American Revolutionary War, for example, would cause bullets to spiral outward from the gun, almost never hitting the desired target. I don't remember how long before that guns started to be developed, though.

That said, I don't actually care that much. It's certainly an inventive addition, and I also applaud them for it. --Kyoshi (Talk) 03:22, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Well, the irony you see is precisely why I brought it up: in the world of guns, what quickly happens is everyone picks them up and after a fight, is sure glad they had one; no one, certainly not the Native Americans, really say "guns are ridiculous, not gonna play" ... Point being, it's a bit silly to say exactly that for guns in GW2. (Summary? I agree) | 72 (UTC) 04:26, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Kyoshi, you're assuming technology and innovations would develop in the exact same procedure that they did in the real world, which would be unlikely given the Asuras' involvement. elix Omni 04:55, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

@72: I wasn't saying "not gonna play", just "is ridiculous"; nobody said "not gonna play" in this section, though it may have been implied.

@Felix: point. --Kyoshi (Talk) 06:18, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Exactly my thinking, Felix. Perhaps I should have said that :P --hnzdvn 10:14, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Actually it would probably be the charr who invented guns as they became a military race. - Giant Nuker 11:13, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

(Reset indent) Why are we having this discussion again now? Guns were announced like a year ago, there should be no surprise here. (Satanael | talk) 16:31, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

< OLD NEWS IS EXCITING.JPG > --ilr 19:33, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

There was already the basis for guns in GW1 (trebuchets, ballistae, and even cannons), it's very reasonable that guns would become effective over 250 years. P.S., the statement "accurate enough to be viable in a world of magic" kinda contradicts itself - being a world of magic, guns could have advanced much more quickly or be magically enhanced. :P -~=Ϛρѧякγ (τѧιк) 01:42, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Also point. Ignore what I said; I'm going to go sit myself in the corner now. --Kyoshi (Talk) 03:30, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

That's what Moctezuma II said after Tenochtitlan | 72 (UTC) 12:37, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

ZOMG DAT CHARR IZ CAMPIN' STUPID ASURA AIMBOT in other words don't get into a pissy fit over something so small it's not gonna be like FPS it won't ruin the game and it wont be overpowered Zachariah Zuan. 21:50, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Yeah you keep saying that, meanwhile I'm gonna dump all my Stats in Charr Balistics so I can rocket jump 60ft over a tree, weapon-swap while air-strafing, and then land on ya with a pick axe Critical. --ilr 22:07, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

pfft, just how much damage could that even do to an intergalactic space shuttle | 72 (UTC) 23:02, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

WoW has guns and you dont seee them beeing over powered n every 1 is QQ about them. 77.102.52.40

lol tf2, rocket jumping soldiers arent that bad, people just cant handle new playstyles. 68.94.187.216 00:35, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

i just shat brix that someone actually GOT that reference... --ilr 00:54, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

I've never been big on Guns in games like this either, i love the older weapons, swords bows, mixed with magic, something we all enjoy, however, many games have melded it before with some fantastic results, plus, "the original guns weren't accurate", its a game, we can shoot fireballs for heaven's sake, i don't think they will make half our shots miss if we do use guns. just a thought though~ "Main Character: Alice Uley. Necro, hopes to find GW 2 very enjoyable, currently only owns Nightfall D:"

I personally hope it's not like it was in Fable II. I did not care for the guns in that game...--Saera Serena 04:19, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry, guns are too modern, but metallic golems running on electricity is acceptable? Seems like we've got some double standards running around. --Lustre Of Havoc 話 16:41, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

I don't recall guns and dragons ever being in the same era? Maybe I am wrong..... So, less skills, less intelligence, less help, add guns....we going "ghetto hood punk"? Oliasys

I don't recall dragons ever existing. --ஸ Kyoshi 20:36, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

so laziness in programming [i.e. less skills available, less ability to arrange skills to suit player and not programmer], less options and more control by proammer, less freedom, less ability to actually move in general, no heroes, no henchies, forced pug grouping, open environment [so we have PvP in PvE and unwanted player attacks like Diablo?] add in guns.....first person shooter anyone? We are now much, much closer to the new duke nukem .... oh wait they're called raids, so now its wow3? Oliasys

There will be no PvP in PvE or unwanted player attacks. And the skill bar is not laziness in programming, in fact it is far more intricate than in GW. The combinations of possible skills numbers somewhere in the area of tens of thousands I believe they said. This format will be more newbie-friendly while still allowing massive customization. I don't know why you think there will be less freedom and less ability to "move in general" - there will be far more freedom and movement in this game than in GW. Heroes/hench will be unnecessary.--Xidon Rayn 23:46, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

I think this is probably the biggest mistake Anet is making in the development of GW2. And no, I don't buy the whole "250 years have passed so guns are inevitable" argument. Technology is driven by necessity and superiority. The whole reasons guns exist is because they ARE overpowered in relation to more traditional weapons. If we admit that guns will not be "overpowered" in the game then there is no reason why guns would have been developed in a world where magic and traditional ballistic weapons are just as good. I also do not relish the thought of exploring a world full of explosions and gunfire - this was a fantasy/magic based realm - magic, swords and arrows should rule the day, not bullets (Twangs and Clangs, not Bangs and Booms!). I was looking forward to a truly great MMO that was medieval/magic based - now GW2 no longer qualifies. My best friend who introduced me to this game (I've been playing for 4 years) and has played since it was first released has been extremely disappointed and depressed by the recent disrespect Anet has shown to veteran players in the recent updates, and by many of the announcements for GW2. The Engineer was the last straw for him. Now he is not even sure he will buy the game (though i will likely force him). If you wanted an engineer-type class you could easily have done one without landmines, grenades and gun turrets. When my guild-mates found out about this class their first reaction was "Is this a joke? This isn't much different from their April-Fools-Comando prank." Not all progress is progress - but yes, opinions are like assholes - I just thought Anet should know lots of long-time, dedicated players are very depressed at many of these announcements, particularly this one (and the Engineer).--Xidon Rayn 23:46, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

You've stated every argument that's been stated already about guns, but again. Leave it alone. --ஸ Kyoshi 02:35, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Learning Skills?

I know, there will be a lot less skills for a player to choose from, but will we know them from the beginning, or learn them, like in GW1? I kind of want to learn or get them, but I'm not familiar with any other MMO, so I don't really know, how can it be.... Does anybody know anything about this? - Well, I don't really know how they can make it... Learning the "weapon skills" too? Or they simply come with the weapon... (the second choise is more likely... for me) And the elites? AAAhhhh.... It's bugging me, pls tell me, if you know! Thanks! 188.36.140.239 21:42, 8 May 2010 (UTC)Demoninmysoul

The only people who know for sure, are in the Alpha so you're wasting your time even asking for a definite answer. Simple processing of what we know already however should lead you to some kind of conclusion: 1> "These skills are affected by Traits" ...similar (but different in some way) to our current Attribute system. 2> As early as 2007 we were told there wouldn't be traditional level caps or caps at all. Therefore learning a new skill won't be nearly as "sustaining" as improving your actual USE of that skill. Besides, GW1 is already plagued with skills you get and play around with for 1 hour and then never use again unless they get powercrept to stupidity. I doubt they'll be making that design mistake exactly the same way twice --ilr 22:10, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

My assumption was actually that traits were similar to talents in other MMOs. Meaning, for those who don't know, they're basically passive skills, which you put points into individually (usually with a limit on those points, so you have to pick and choose), and which have more specific passive benefits than attribute allocation.

The level cap is going to be higher, but from what we've been told, after a certain point a character's level won't increase their power at all, it'll just be another title, basically. (For example, to project it in to GW1, you'd get to lvl 21 and you wouldn't have more attribute points or health, but you'd be level 21 and have another skill point.)

As far as the original question; I assume you won't know all the skills immediately, because in all organized PvP (read: probably the equivalent of HA or GvG) your level is set and you have access to all skills and weapons (and weapon mods? not sure how they're doing that yet) available in the game. So if that's significant, then you'd have to obtain them in PvE somehow. We don't know the method by which skills will be learned, but I assume you won't be able to learn "weapon skills", that they'll only be accessible from that weapon, but always be accessible with that weapon equipped. --Kyoshi (Talk) 00:10, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure if you can take someone who thinks Frenzy is a trash skill seriously. -~=Ϛρѧякγ (τѧιк) 01:13, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

No second profession, no heroes?

Guild wars is fun and addictive because of the flexible second profession and Heroes. They add depth and at the same time allow players to understand the game without going through the repeating process of starting from beginning. Although, only 20 levels, the second profession and hero adds complexity. Titan quest was not played as much because of inflexible profession system, just do not have the time to start from the beginning and go through the same leveling process again and again. Hopefully, the new event system would be designed to make the leveling process less repetitive. If no second profession, no hero, why should a player be motivated to know anything about other professions? On the other hand, if GW2 is designed for players to have many characters, hopefully there is an unified way to identify the different charators created by the same player in the game.

One solution is to make the companion system like a second profession and Hero combine where the companion can be any race and profession. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by 96.224.166.183 (talk).

Companion system has been removed (for some reason concerning balance, no doubt). Lack of second profession is what allows the creators to make professions versatile without being overpowered because of badly designed primary attributes.

And yes, characters will be unified in terms of friends lists, and can be in the case of guilds, though the latter is an individual player's choice. We don't know quite how that's going to work yet. --Kyoshi (Talk) 02:51, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

I think it's safe to say that combat is going to be so significantly different that it may be unrecognizable. From what they have said, the game play IMO is going to be similar to the diablo type solo to small party to WoW-like massive raids, minus the mindless skill spamming...hopefully. --Lania Elderfire 19:03, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Considering the potential synergy between skills we've seen, I think it's safe to hope. --Kyoshi (Talk) 19:05, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

That's also just on a small portions of skills seen so far, so hopefully there are more impressive combinations and planned synergies going on... unlike accidental synergies in GW1 just because of the sheer volume of skills. --Lania Elderfire 19:09, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Exactly. --Kyoshi (Talk) 19:18, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

It's a cool enough idea, though I dislike planned synergies to a degree -- the more "built-in", the more "predictable" and the more predictable the more counterable. Of course, this system, even if it creates planned synergies, certainly doesn't sound like it would disallow unplanned synergies, so what've I got to complain about? | 72 (UTC) 20:51, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

There are already a lot of skills that explicitly power other skills (see gw2:Signet of Fire) and unplanned synergies are what the creators said they loved about GW1. I doubt they'll completely exclude the ability to create synergy where none was planned, but hopefully such synergy will be a little less overpowered compared to GW1. --Kyoshi (Talk) 21:51, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

(Reset indent) Do you guys (and ladies) honestly believe all that or are you just trying to convince yourselves all these new restrictions are acceptable? You know what "soloing" against 2 or 3 mobs at a time feels like? It's like watching paint dry b/c there's atleast 100 square miles to cover and no matter what, we're gonna be stuck with only 15 skills in GW2 (5 we pick, and 10 that depend on our weopons & swap-weapon slots). ...compared to the 32 we have now (plus up to 32 more from Henchmen) when we go Caravan vanquishing. And that's exactly what it's gonna be in GW2, like Vanquishing. Much larger areas, endless level grind, and all the focus put on rolling Alt after Alt after alt b/c we have to roll a new alt everytime we want to try a new profression. What part of --> It's a Step Backwards <-- aren't you folks seeing yet? So what if it helps the social aspect? In GW1 we could basically make any kind of Hybrid-class we wanted to and then shoe-horn it into a wide variety of activities anyway thanks to our Hero support, regardless of how bad it mighta been at the highest levels of player-only challenge. It was and still is fun. We're basically losing ALL OF THAT in Gw2 just so it can play like every other MMO without any promises or indications that twitch skill or tactics will really matter in the long run. They still haven't revealed how combat will ACTUALLY work, only how many slots we get which has been a big let down so far. Everything about it so far screams less meaningful "customization" ...maybe not less customization, but definitely less meaningful.
...and I don't wanna be down on it either I NEEEED this game to succeed, but I feel like they're giving us the double talk... --ilr 22:40, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

"You know what "soloing" against 2 or 3 mobs at a time feels like?" You know what "anti-grind philosophy" means? Presumably you won't HAVE to solo 2-3 mobs at a time. And presumably, fighting with friends (or passers-by) will be more fun.

"we're gonna be stuck with only 15 skills in GW2 (5 we pick, and 10 that depend on our weopons & swap-weapon slots)" At LEAST 15. Some professions will have more weapon swaps.

"compared to the 32 we have now" On a single character? I think you're doing the argument thing wrong.

"Much larger areas," This we know. "endless level grind" Levels don't increase your power after a point, and again, anti-grind philosophy. "we have to roll a new alt everytime we want to try a new profression" And that's different from GW1 how, exactly? Sure, you can play secondary builds, but you're not actually playing that profession, and honestly you can't run a Ranger well without it being a Ranger, so you have to roll a ranger. (The only real exception is fast-casting, which makes almost every spell a mesmer spell.)

"We're basically losing ALL OF THAT in Gw2 just so it can play like every other MMO without any promises or indications that twitch skill or tactics will really matter in the long run." They've released a single profession and some general mechanics.

Chill out. --Kyoshi (Talk) 23:01, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

To be honest, if GW2 ends up completely sucking beyond belief, which is improbable... or if it's just plain unenjoyable... I'll probably just move on to something else or do something other than computer games. There "is" an entire world out there ya know. --Lania Elderfire 23:05, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

People used to be forced to play with each other when they needed help, because there weren't enough henchmen and/or henchmen sucked. Heroes made it possible to do difficult material without the help of other people. If you don't call yourself plus three heroes and four henchmen "playing on your own", I don't know what world you're from... It seems to me like parts of GW2 remove the props that made it possible for tons of people to be doing the same mission and none of them ever to see, interact, or talk with each other. That's a change that, personally, I prefer. | 72 (UTC) 02:07, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

I would love to see the day when Ilr actually has something positive to say about something that ANet does or says. Because I don't think I've ever seen it... (Satanael | talk) 03:18, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

....but atleast we have the option of getting away from every leeroy jenkins wammo in GW1. In GW2 we'll be stuck "carrying" them and getting aggro pulled on us by their stupid asses in every exporable event whether we got our Guildmates with us or not. Have any of you actually been to a "public raid" before?? It don't sound like it, I'm just hearing blind optimism instead --ilr 05:12, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

The thing is, GW2 is going to be a significantly different game from the original. While I am disappointed that some of the better features of GW are being changed to (most likely) dumb down the game, because the gameplay will be so different it's hard to say how it will work out. I think it's important to keep that in mind if you want to take an objective look at GW2 in the same way that it's not realistic to always support the dev choices. --67.240.88.57 03:36, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

"I'm just hearing blind optimism instead"

^ This. "Oh sure GW2 is gonna be different but theres no WAY it can be bad" "Oh they'll find some way to make all this work out" Etc. All I hear about it. Personally doubt it'll be any good, but we'll see. personn5 06:01, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

"blind optimism" Excuse me for providing a counterpoint to the overwhelming amounts of pessimism. ANet has done things wrong, sure, but not everything. (Remember how GW was kinda balanced that one time? Yeah, they kinda remember that too. They specifically said they made mistakes.) All we have to go on for GW2 is what they're telling us. Y'know, believe what you want, because if all you're going to do is say I'm blind when I make a legitimate argument based on what we've been told, what reason do I have to care? --Kyoshi (Talk) 06:31, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

As far as I know, the mistakes they've made are fairly easily rectified and learned from, so maybe in some kind of twisted way they're going to learn from mistakes they made in GW and make GW2 better. Then again, if they learned anything at all, they wouldn't come out with things likes this, so who knows. I'm going to do a wait and see kind of thing, let someone I trust buy it, and see how it is, though I'm slightly pessimistic about it. Anyway, bottom line is that speculation makes a fine mental exercise, but we can't know for sure whether or not it will be shit. Wait and see. -- Tha Reckoning 07:08, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

[ Boy, to think one can place "blind" before optimism IS pessimism, and, of course, vice versa; I think calling "a tendency to look to the favourable side" "blind" is semantically meaningless | 72 (UTC) 16:06, 12 May 2010 (UTC) ]

You complain about blind optimism by displaying your blind pessimism, "Have any of you actually been to a "public raid" before??" This quote, and others I won't bother to innumerate, shows how you assume that much of what ANet is doing with GW2 is just taking what other games have already done and re-mixing them into a new game, when everything they have been saying for the last 3 years demonstrates how they are developing (or at least trying to develop) something never done before in other MMOs (see here, here, and here). Also, most of the games that have "public raids" and things like that were created 5 years ago or more, so to assume (even after accepting the absurd assumption that ANet is doing exactly what other games have already done) that ANet has learned nothing from that is the height of blind pessimism, and flies in the face of everything they have been saying for years now.

I understand the compulsion to be skeptical when game companies come out with lots of promises about grand and ambitious plans for their games (see Fable), and I, too, prefer to believe it when I see it, but deriding other people for getting excited about it, or calling them blindly optimistic when they take a game company's assertions and promises at face value serves no purpose. Being blindly optimistic or blindly pessimistic is each equally as valid, the only difference is that the blind optimist spends a lot more time being happy and dreaming of how cool things could be than they do crying and moaning and berating others for not doing the same. (Satanael | talk) 21:17, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Hahaha! Amen. *continues craving more GW2 updates* Rose Of Kali 21:26, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

"New"?? It's really hard to discuss this with you when you act clinically deaf at the same time. If you read what said before instead of just generalizing it, you'd notice I didn't go after some "grand ambitious" plans... I pointed at the most fundamental and finite details concerning how our character must deal with "being alone". You can make all the excuses you want but you can't change the fact that most people were REALLY looking forward to having the option of a companion for power-synergies or just sentimental reasons. ....AND their proposal for balancing it was very well accepted. Their recent decision to remove it, deserved criticism and I simply fired back at anyone who justified it around "balance issues" they have no evidence for, by raising quality of life issues that I've already experienced first hand. If that's blind pessimism to you then this debate is already over with. --ilr 22:59, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Exhibit A: self-serving bias. (P.S.: Here, we call "blind optimism" ignorance. I'm certainly not ignorant of my bliss!) -~=Ϛρѧякγ (τѧιк) 23:16, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

"I simply fired back at anyone who justified it around "balance issues" they have no evidence for" And which you have no evidence against. We know just as much about the game as you do, and it's time you stopped raging at us for being hopeful and coming up with different speculation from the same facts. --Kyoshi (Talk) 00:01, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

"Encounters scale dynamically" -- describing event system and/or mobs encountered while playing alone. ...what part of that are you saying I couldn't possibly know anything about by now? And I expect you to understand it's a system specifically designed and balanced to meter out GRIND. The only reason I call you "blindly" anything is that you refuse to see this link as Anet's reasoning for these new restrictions. Again: I'M ASSUMING you already KNOW how this mechanic functions, IoW: I'm assuming you're the OPPOSITE of ignorant on this subject but want to keep praising it for some reason I might not understand? --ilr 04:10, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Ilr, you really need to stop acting like you're smarter than the entire GW2 team, and that all the devs are a bunch of blind idiots and all these "excited fans" are also a bunch of blind idiots and you're the only one who "sees the evil truth" or someshit. Go make a better game or stfu already. Rose Of Kali 07:26, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

(Reset indent) Funny how the only person not looking through rose-colored classes is ilr. Funny that people think requiring and forcing grouping with random people is a good thing. Apparently, none of you have ever played with any PuG in GW, and realized how retarded 90% of the playerbase human population really is. Or maybe the people here ARE the players who cannot get through content without a group. --98.100.248.75 19:21, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Please read the articles more carefully before disagreeing with them. To remind you, one of the big changes in GW2 is that you are no longer required or forced to group with random people any more; there is no longer any penalty to soloing, unlike in GW where a lot of areas -- particularly before you have your heroes -- are impossible to do alone and difficult with a group. Another change is that for those who do choose to play in groups, there is no longer any penalty for sharing gameplay. If these sound to you like bad changes, then you have reason to argue, even if it's one I and all of us here respectfully disagree with. But you seem to be saying you don't believe those are the intended changes, in which case the only prescription I can give you is a rereading (or, it seems, first reading) of the articles. | 72 (UTC) 19:53, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

How is Playing along side them not still playing with them?? Instead of revealing more combat, This entire past 2 weeks has been nothing but Eric & Co. hashing and rehashing how new & different their event system is . It's not. It might be a combination of mostly GOOD things, like multple_Cap-Point zones, "Onslaught", CTFs, Public Raids, and "Karma" rewards. But Karma is just a reskin of Z-Coins, and anyone who's not a shitter always ends up carrying everyone else who is in public raids & RvR's. And since the event scales up for every extra shitter who shows up to leach, there's a very big question mark over whether or not the actual reward will. And Hell, let's even be carebear about it and assume for a second the shitter player is just on a profession that is the wet Paper to an event filled with Scissors and it's not technically his fault ..that's when that player NEEDs a companion. --ilr 20:53, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

But Guild Wars 1 is not Guild Wars 2. If you mean the team is the same who made both, and will end up producing a game with the same faults, compare the material released before both games and you'll see that while the team may be constant -- which it mostly isn't, since much of ArenaNet has come and gone since the making of GW1 -- there is a variable which is changed. In my opinion, that means it will be a different game. I cannot press further than that on opinion, so feel free to override it. | 72 (UTC) 21:55, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Okay, let me say 1 Good thing about Flannum before I try to deconstruct your point; 10 years ago he might have been the best level designer in the industry and maybe he can reapply that to events here. But maybe he's been at it too long 'making due' with limited resources for too long. His utilization of "BAMPH!!" skills in place of highly developed A.I. is the biggest anachronism a cynic like me could ever ask for in all his big talk about reinventing the MMO. Do you know why so many MMO's are just a long chain of stale Farms? B/c "better" AI would normally put too much stress on an MMO server. But these are supposed to be some of the best network programmers in the Biz (though you could hardly tell with all the lag and D/C's we've had this last year). And if they were working to change that, we'd have seen some prototypes of it showing up in Gw1 by now to accompany some of the new design philosophy they're already attempting to apply (LOL, mesmer update).
It's really simple, Stale AI = Stale Meta. And if you haven't experienced this high-end stuff 1st-hand, I'd highly recommend getting in a guild that does. (I know it sounds cliche` but I did and it's been worth it so far). Once you do, you'll realize that most of it's an illusion that's still being sped-thru with gimmicks and glitches and GW2 will be no different on their present course, creating yet another huge disparity between the casual players and the exploiters. Companions and complex AI were needed to close that gap a little. Thus their removal of companions directly signals further apathy & non-committal to better AI. --ilr 22:16, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

What's this mythical game you're playing, ilr, where everything is perfect and the AI is incredible and updated all of the time and the "meta" changes constantly and is so much better than Guild Wars? I'd like to play too. Manifold 22:34, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

The more the A is replaced by humans, the better the I. | 72 (UTC) 23:02, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Na, heroes were way better than almost any PuG I ever played with. The only difference between PuGs and heroes was that heroes would occasionally do things in the wrong situation, while PuGs don't do anything. And yes, whoever is acting like this dynamic event thing isn't forced PuGing is just an idiot. It will either turn out one of 2 ways, Diablo 2 where monsters are insignificant and you can wade through them regardless of the scaling (GW2 is also going to lack the customization, so don't go with "D2 was great"), or a single person isn't going to be able to carry the half a dozen window lickers, and everything is going to be impossible unless either the window lickers aren't there, or you bring your guild to outnumber the window lickers. --98.100.248.75 23:19, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Well lets look at thepattern: 1st person shooter Duke Nukem, straight up....D2 added a henchie, not much control, but a henchie, ...ok, programmers came to anet and made gw and added heroes and henchies, got better, more interaction, more control, no need be PUG dependent.....now GW2[wow3] no henchies, no heroes, less control, add in guns, open world envrironment, programmers following old programmers footsteps from D2 to WoW and now to GW2.....anyone else see this pattern and this destruction of a great game????????? Most definitely a dumbimg down if ever one was seen......oliasys

If I was less careful about what I say, I would think that ILR puts his more nonsensical replies into the mouth of a proxypuppet. | 72 (UTC) 23:40, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

I had an Alibi, I was mining moar fish b/c that's all there is to do in these kinds of games. As for the AI, don't even get me started, I programmed AI before and could ramble off atleast a dozen fixes to keep them from getting mined like fish. Infact I'll probably have to on the GW2 suggestion section eventually b/c everyone seems to think I live in some fantasy world just b/c I expect there to be ways of solving Tank&Spank abuse. It's not that difficult and it and it sure as hell wouldn't devour every last tick of every free process on the Host Server. --ilr 01:03, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

I'd be grateful if you did that. I think we would all like your feedback more if it was dedicated to making a better game, more than complaining about a bad one. | 72 (UTC) 01:33, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Dynamic Hearing

I just thought about this when I read the dynamic world a few moments ago on the Guild Wars 2 site. How about dynamic hearing? If you carry a spell book and climb to the top of a mountain, no one should be able to see your chat if they are at the bottom of the mountain. The closer you get to someone, the text can fade into view. The chat-fade depends on the distance away from someone. If you are not in range then you shouldn't see chat. If you can barely see the chat (this includes their name in the chat channel) then its like you heard someone whispering. Curiosity makes you go towards where you heard the chat (especially in the field).

A scenario could be to spy on a Dredge camp that holds a prisoner and gather information for when and where they will assault next so you can gather forces and prepare for it. Your enemy text has like a 3% opacity (you can barely see it) because you are too far away to "hear" their plans but not danger-close. You definitely can't "hear" the prisoner because he is in the back behind the guards. What will you do? Get a tad bit closer to "hear" the guards for their next assault or will you risk getting closer to "hear" the prisoner for clues about their commander...they may kill the prisoner. Maybe the prisoner is just some thug that wanted to steal some loot and got caught or maybe its a prince in beggars garbs that was placed in view to lure peeps close or maybe its a dredge undercover that lured you into their trap because some dude right before you got there on the opposite side that alerted them to the possibilities of more players coming. Maybe the dredge captured another player and needs rescuing! That would be awesome! His whisper channel is "blocked" by anet until he is rescued (if you log out, you appear unconscious to players until you log back in, haha). Then you go back to tell some peeps about this quest because you need help. Maybe he is gagged so all his channels are blocked. What if a fairy curiously comes by, examines you, hears the guards grumble, gets paranoid, sprinkles dust on your face as she flies away which gives you the ability to mentally connect (whisper) with someone for 20 seconds (short time to request help but that's what makes it intense...how fast can you type and type well?). Did you get out some good distress chat in time...dunno. You may make mistakes typing in 20 seconds. It's like, "Slow down. I don't understand anything you are saying. Grass made of fire?? Cold cave?? That doesn't make sense. Where are you? Hello? Bookah, are you there? Bookah!" Now you have to decide if you want investigate that explosion with strangers or go help a friend (the one that helped you kill an imp boss) in danger and do the best you can to figure out where he is. Maybe its the slain imp boss' brother seeking revenge and took your friend back to his hideout (uncharted territory that is now unlocked). This is like a movie!!!

For that last scenario about an actual player taken prisoner, it's like you can take a break, go to a movie, have dinner, do the family thing, come back and still be a part of Guild Wars' events even though you were logged off. Wow! Can I get a, "Yu da man" on this idea? I can go on and on about this but you get the idea. I am so psyched about GW2. 75.178.18.182 22:39, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

I believe it has already been stated that you will not be able to read text from distant players (apart from whispers) similarly to GW1. As to the real player being taken prisoner... no, that would be very annoying. People already get annoyed at 8 mins of Dishonorable, which doesn't even remove them from the whole game - much less, you're removed from the game until someone happens to wander by and save you. -~=Ϛρѧякγ (τѧιк) 01:37, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

"danger-close" does not mean what you think it means. As for Text... those few instances where you actually need to Hear, otherwise grunting, enemies speak Anet can very well just record 60 seconds of audio with two voice actors. As for semi transparent text - devs already mentioned no walls of text for quests, now why would they implement a system that is... once again... a wall of text - a text that is impossible to read unless you are close enough to potentially fail at supposedly covert mission... Biz 13:05, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Slow news day

TFL;DR --> "Personal Story Overview" ...nothing ground shattering so no point in adding it to the main article. What little news can be gotten out of it indicates that every player gets a home much like your Sunspear-Base or H.o.M. that get NPCs or trophies added as you advance in the storyline. Ree teases us with the idea that failure to unite certain groups or NPCs against the dragons could result in us losing everything but even if that was the case it looks like it would only affect instanced stuff which is no different from any other failure-to-act in Gw1 and frankly a total cop-out IMO. I know they don't want to make things griefable, but what's the point of these bigger encounters like RvR and "fight'in teh dragunz" if all the lazy n00bs who don't make it that far aren't made to suffer some kind of global loss for it eventually? It's not an emotion altering "persistent" personal ramification if you're the only person who can see it. Just like the article itself, it looks like we'll be deluged with a ton of useless "personal" info that has no impact on any other human-controlled PC's therefore making it the same exact impersonal paper-doll dressings we expect from every other MMO. The article doesn't say anything exciting but it definitely leads me to believe that there is no Culmination-Point where everyone's personal storylines converge and decide whether the world is saved or destroyed... even if it only lasts a short time and the dragons are resurrected a week later.
In short: Anything that isn't tangible to other players in a persistent public instance: Is basically intangible--Period! and they need to do a better job on their Blog & interviews from now on at discerning between those things which really are tangible (like: which Nations have Favor in GW1) and all this crap that works the same as the HoM/Base/GH --ilr 22:44, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

" I would love to see the day when Ilr actually has something positive to say about something that ANet does or says. Because I don't think I've ever seen it... (Satanael | talk) 03:18, 12 May 2010 (UTC)" <-- X 2 ((Satanael | talk) 04:35, 29 May 2010 (UTC))

Oh Hai durr ...and it's certainly not the only time or the last time. But anytime Marketing is involved, yeah I'm gonna be a curmudgeon... We'll see how it works out and I hope I'm wrong/--ilr 09:42, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

"It's not an emotion altering "persistent" personal ramification if you're the only person who can see it."

First of all you can invite other people to your instances. Apart from that, you're saying, "If a tree falls in the middle of a forest, and only you are around to see it, you don't care about it."

"Anything that isn't tangible to other players ... Is basically intangible"

There's a more literal quote. I hate to point this out Ilr, but you make minimal sense. There will be many, many people playing and finishing their storyline at staggered times, constantly. You're suggesting that you'd only be able to complete the storyline at a certain time once per week or that the world changes from being "destroyed" to "saved" and back every few seconds (or faster). -~=Ϛρѧякγ (τѧιк) 17:22, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

No not at all. To argue against my own cynicism for a minute: They might be able to save the dynamic by making a larger portion of your Bio story play out through participation in public events and coalesce at "High End" or atleast "end of campaign" story events that trigger Vulnerabilities in the Dragon's final invasion Forces... And if there isn't enough people playing through their own storylines then the impact that Invasion force has reverberates all the way down from High-end outposts to Capital cities and low-level outposts or the economy itself. Example: Players completing the main Destiny'sEdge & Orders storylines might prevent certain Triggers (on a Percentage basis) that would otherwise grant that Invasion force abilities that could outnumber or out-flank the Player Teams in the high end events. Therefore failing to do so, would ensure exactly the dynamic they promise in this article:
Real, Tangible, Loss. --ilr 17:46, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

sneak attack

anyone else hoping for it that if ur hiding behind a rock or bush that an enemy will not spot u? --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:83.81.24.86 (talk).

(Edit conflict) You can already do that here... Team we were against in AB did that to us and won b/c of it just last week. ...ya think it's only 1 d00de b/c 4-red dots huddled together looks exactly like 1-red dot... but noooo, it was 4. Also: Lrn 2 Wiki plz and this has nothing to do with today's news b/c there isn't any new details today. --ilr 18:18, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

I think it would probably depend on your equipment/skills/environment, if at all. Also, please sign your posts. | 72 | 18:11, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

(btw, the world will be a nicer place if you ignore ilr up there O_O) | 72 | 20:33, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Okay so now Flannum is saying: ""The characters orientation currently has no effect on this block although we are planning to experiment with more directional blocking at some time in the future."" ...this could apply to other things as well such as radar detection (targeting, U.I. , whatever) and maybe even passive defenses as well. But is this a good thing? What if it applies to guns & hexes? IMO The only thing more annoying than being spiked by recall facerolling Palmasins in PvP, would be butt-sniping PvE bots you can't find, who can't miss you and do over 500 point crit-shots. Don't get me wrong, I'm in favor of them exploring this mechanic b/c it might be the only thing that keeps warriors up at the fairly high-"skillcurve". But this does present major issues when applied to other classes & mechanics.--ilr 17:28, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

I believe the OP is hoping for NPCs to not aggro to players that they do not have the line of sight to, I don't know what you other guys are talking about. I think that'd be cool, and maybe some sort of aggro "cone" in front of the enemy instead of all around, and if they do not see you, they can still hear you activating skills and will aggro for that like in GW1. -~=Ϛρѧякγ (τѧιк) 17:49, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

But that's what I just said ...passive defenses or related mechanics... detecting/crit'ing you or you detecting/crit'ing them. It's not my fault some ppl are still thinking in the flat Gw1/MMORPG box instead of a 3D Guerrilla Warfare FPS jungle. --ilr 17:56, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

What? (Are you actually responding to my post? I can't tell because it's completely unrelated to mine, but I can't see who else it could be meant for.) -~=Ϛρѧякγ (τѧιк) 01:06, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Purple Monkey Dishwasher --ilr 08:13, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

They're going out on a limb here with this new design, its risky and they could fail, but at the same time, if it works this will be one of the most ingeniously created games available, I think its worth a shot, besides, all we can do is guess, the final draft is never the same as the rough one, unless your perfect (which no one is) so all we can do is wait and see.~ Alice Uley. GW fan to the end.

New design? The only thing different here from most current MMO's (think FPS's /w melee) is that they'll have projectile collision & blindside crits without the standard definition of Player collision. I agree that's an odd choice but anything else is pretty much redundant anyway when players can jump right over or swim right under their enemies. It makes for some really fun combat by the way assuming they get their Lag-compensation coding vastly improved from the total-pisser we've had to put up with in GW1. (infact maybe that's the whole reason they're axing player collision) --ilr 21:59, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Maybe i should have clarified; new design for Arenanet, people have made games like this before, with various results, all MMorpg's are going to be alike in certain ways, its the "winning recipe" so to speak, but many of the ideas on here are different from orignal Gw. Alice~

Skill combos

The combo of sever artery+gash+final thrust looks amazing,but i was wondering what happens to it if the foe is immune to bleeding(non-fleshy creatures)...does the whole combo fall in the water or does it have some other purpose for that type of foes...95.180.76.188 15:15, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Bleeding doesn't work the same in GW2; it's actually a stacking degeneration condition, and we're not sure if they'll have others. And Gash in this case doesn't seem to depend upon the foe being bleeding; it'll stack on more bleed (if applicable, perhaps non-fleshy will be immune) and deal more damage, apparently regardless of bleed. So no, it won't fall in the water, but the bleed might not affect some enemies, and it might deal slightly less if Gash's damage does depend on bleed. But hey, there are always other combos. --Kyoshi (Talk) 16:55, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Demo??

All the lucky people that will be able to do this. Ill be jealous... ~~ 7/1/10

TY. 21st of august in Koln, Germany. --Silverleaf Don't assume, Know! 14:20, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Anybody else notice?

WoW's new cataclysm storyline is almost an exact copy of GW2? For reference, in it the world is destroyed (not literally but think of the searing from below) by a dragon,cough cough, changing the whole map including cities, cough cough, and many other not so big things that i really don't want to get into right now..... =\ ~ME --The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.241.83.124 (talk).

Please use four tildes (~) to sign your posts. And that sounds like pretty generic fantasy fare. Manifold 00:22, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

Agree w/ Manifold. The video-game-book form has existed in the strictest sense for almost 20 years, the fantasy genre (by the modern definition) has existed for about 60-70 years, and dragons/strange lands/city-destroying/earth-shaking in stories, for several thousand years... Even if these plots weren't the absolute simplest they could be, they have almost certainly been covered a hundred times already. | 72 | 01:39, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

Doesn't matter how long or common it is... the actual timing of it is beyond supsicous and likely intentional. Ask the average gamer these days which game copied which between Everquest & WoW. To them... everything is either a WoW clone or a GTA clone or a Halo clone. I'd urge the folks of this Wiki to begin archiving all the evidence they can right now nomatter how trivial b/c this will probably result in atleast a few wiki-wars over who did what first. --ilr 17:52, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

I love Ilr's excellent use of logic - Giant Nuker 20:17, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

I'm surprised that none of the words Ilr used are blue. --Elven Chaos 18:01, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

Maybe GW is stealing from Blizz? Maybe they are just using same programmers that bnet used [like it hasnt happened for 10 years]. It seems the originality of programming is gone, programmers have gotten stupid and all they do now is run around and "snippet copy" one another....any originality left out there? WoW-GW2, all the same.... sad too......oliasys

Dedicated healing class

Regarding the latest edit... this is still only info from a translated interview where the source appears to just be one of the unnamed CR's, unsurprisingly leading to almost the entirety of the interview being "we're not addressing that yet". ...In any case, this isn't reliable information and doesn't provide a stark or notable contrast to GW1 which doesn't technically have a "healer" class either. ...just more classes that are "better at it than some others" b/c of primaries like Divine / Storage / Spawning. I didn't want to just revert the edit however without stating why, and putting it up for further debate. But I do propose that all unconfirmed hearsay and speculations about the intent of a "healer" class be stricken from this Article until A> all 8 professions have been released & detailed, B> Flannum or another Dev directly addresses their intent for such in the Anet Blog, or an english language interview with no room for translation errors. --ilr 22:42, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

It was a bit of dodge to the question, so I agree it hasn't really been confirmed to the degree that it needs to be on the page. Manifold 22:45, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

K, but my biggest issue was that the Edit itself adds even less substance to the Article... How should we proceed? --ilr 22:49, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

I don't see how it's not confirmed. There is no hearsay or speculation, considering that the answers are coming from A-Net. GW1 does have dedicated healers, don't tell us some bologna about technicalities. It wasn't a question dodge (like the second to last question, lol), they clearly responded that even though there would not be a healer profession, there will still be professions that are better suited to healing than others. Basically, there will be no dedicated healers, but there will be healers. -~=Ϛρѧякγ (τѧιк) 01:20, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

They're called Shamans, Druids, Priests, and Paladins128.119.43.158 01:31, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Wrong game. --Kyoshi (Talk) 01:49, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

I have to side with Sparky here as far as it being confirmed. The edit pretty much just restates exactly what the article says, and there's nothing wrong with the translation on that particular question. But to me the question is more whether we really need it in the article. I mean, I think that gw2w has a greater responsibility to document all the information that is currently known about gw2, and not this article in a wiki for a different game. We really don't need to document every hint of information about gw2 in this article, especially since we already point people to an entire wiki on this very subject. (Satanael | talk) 06:08, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Good point. This article doesn't need to be very big at all. At most, just a quick summary of what GW2 is (i.e. it's the sequel to what this wiki is for), some GW: Beyond information, and a link to GW2W. -~=Ϛρѧякγ (τѧιк) 19:05, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

There will be no healer class. Take a look at the latest info on the GW2 site. Pariahtalk 21:50, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

I just now noticed that and am infact feeling a bit trolled here... They said they weren't going to talk about it yet... then immediately started talking about it ...I sure hope this copying ModernWarfare stuff is just more trolling too. --ilr 23:05, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Actually, the interview said they'd release more on death and resurrection soon on the GW2 website. Then, they released that information. -~=Ϛρѧякγ (τѧιк) 23:37, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Wow I totally did not make sense. They didn't say that they wouldn't talk about it, they just said they couldn't say too much more on the subject of healing, I'm assuming that it's because the article was about to be posted. -~=Ϛρѧякγ (τѧιк) 23:39, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

I hope ilr isn't thinking MW2 is the only game that has featured the partner recovery mechanic. It's actually closer to Borderlands. --Kyoshi (Talk) 01:33, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

ugh, no dedicated healers is such a load of crap. There goes my favorite class. 70.139.49.71 01:37, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

k no pvp in gw2 elix Omni 01:40, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

They said they wanted PvP in GW2 to be like RA when neither team got a healer, only organized. There will still be healers, though. -~=Ϛρѧякγ (τѧιк) 02:09, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

(Reset indent) Kind of a slap in the face to those who preferred playing as a dedicated healer, but it'd be far flung to say that people won't try to make a build for one of the professions that can serve as a half decent healer. Try being the operative word here. Pariahtalk 02:16, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

You can still be dedicated support+heal+control+whateverthey'recallingit. Isn't that pretty much what a monk did? Manifold 02:31, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, there will still be healers (mostly protters). It's just that the professions that can heal will have viable fighting abilities (i.e.: useful, unlike GW's Smiting Prayers). -~=Ϛρѧякγ (τѧιк) 16:50, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I don't really see the "no dedicated healing class" thing as that radical a change, tbh. I mean, imagine they are talking about gw1 instead of gw2, it almost fits. In gw1, all classes have self heals, all classes can rez (signet), and all classes can do damage. There are some classes that are better at support than others, but no class is pegged into a single role. All of that is technically true in gw1. I think they're really just trying to get across that there will be less reliance on support characters in gw2 than in other mmo's (or so they hope), and that the classes that are "better at support" will also be pretty good at damage. They say they are breaking up the holy trinity, but they already showed us dps and tanks, and said that some unnamed profs will be better at "support." My guess is that if you want to play with the holy trinity, you still can, but you won't have to.

Which, btw, I think is cool. I have to say that one of my favorite moments in GW was in the early days of tombs, I was playing with a pug and our monk left half-way through the second level. A bunch of other players left but 4 of us decided to give it a shot anyway. We had 2 MS echo nukers (of which I was one) and 2 trapping rangers, one of whom had healing breeze and rebirth, and we ended up beating the whole thing with nothing but tactics. If they are trying to replicate that kind of fun in GW2, I'm all for it. (Satanael | talk) 18:34, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

...and since there's 10 skill slots, there's nothing stopping the Meta from looking like this:

which looks too much like a dedicated one to me for the flimsy opinion of "no healers" to hold any water. Infact that might be a better dedicated heal bar than what I have to run for DoA & UW b/c I don't have to be the only Rezzer and switching to a staff might give me even more "control" or "buff" skills that make the other 5 heal skills even easier to spam. ...which means I'd still be dedicated to healing --ilr 21:49, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

"nothing"

Except bound skill slots. -~=Ϛρѧякγ (τѧιк) 21:52, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Bound Skills = weapon, Right? That's what that bar has... 5 shitty protection+control+damage skills likely to appear on a wand & offhand. In Some MMO's, the "healer" class is only given ONE method of healing but it becomes their primary role anyway b/c there's no downside to spamming O^P heals as far as PuGs & most guilds are concerned. Everything else on their skill bar is effectively there to enhance their use of that one healing skill, or in the GW2 case; monk/rit/derv/plantmancer/fuckingdruid or whatever-the-hell-it'll-be, "Support class" with 5 heals and 5 controls/buff/and-or/debuffs. --ilr 23:07, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

I highly doubt that skills like Spirit Bond and Protective Spirit would both be available in one weapon set. Also, you're forgetting that at least the elite skill will have a very long recharge, and heal skills will be very scarce and weak. -~=Ϛρѧякγ (τѧιк) 02:07, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

SAUCE?!? --ilr 01:22, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Hmm, tough question. I'd have to go with either peanut or hollandaise. -~=Ϛρѧякγ (τѧιк) 16:04, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Either tomato or fish, just for the sheer versatility of them both. (Satanael | talk) 21:26, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

My query was actually about "source?" but the issue has cleared itself up. As I suspected though, Sparky was pulling Malarky out of his Ether Orifice. --ilr 14:01, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

I don't care enough to find the sources, you know you could easily find them if you looked. First guess would be Part 1: Skills and Healing and Death. Do you not read the major articles? -~=Ϛρѧякγ (τѧιк) 20:59, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Professions Found!

Hi, I'm Mistah Yebba, Guild Wars addict and game fanatic. Like most of you, I cannot wait for Guild Wars 2 to come out, and with all of this teasing with the professions slowly being released, I could not help myself but to research closely and carefully at anything and everything that the Guild Wars devs have given us so far. Upon about 5 hours of looking I found a lot of evidence to support my profession predictions. So here they are!

In one of the videos, it shows a group of Sylvaris, one of which is wearing ritualist armor. There is concept art of a girl with an arm on her side, which fits perfectly with the outline in the unfilled professions picture. Who is the girl next to? Logan Thackeray, who is stated to be a "knight" on the website. The left hand side is clearly a Charr race, and charrs are stated as hunters. There is then a crouched image next to the elementalist, which is clearly something sitting on roots, which is where I think the Ritualist will be that I stated earlier. Above the Ritualist is an Assassin, as shown in GDC screenshots. There was also a picture of a mesmer, fighting in above the Ranger. So all together you have this

Scholars: 1. Elementalist (Confirmed) 2. Mesmer (Pictures in GDC) 3. Ritualist (Clearly shown Ritualist styled armor in official video on Slyvari)

Adventurers: 1. Ranger (Confirmed) 2. Hunter (Large Norn, Remember, it's just a race, so size doesn't determine it to be a soldier. A human Hunter would be a much better example) 3. Assassin (Shown in GDC and clear daggers in professions picture)

Solders: 1. Warrior (Confirmed) 2. Knight (Perfect fitting image in Wallpaper on official website near Logan Thackeray)

Thank you for taking the time to read this. I feel pretty good about these predictions! Please check out my YouTube page at www.youtube.com/pianomanyebba if you enjoyed my predictions! Feel free to copy and paste this onto any website you would like to, as I want the word to spread! --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:Yebba (talk).

You based all your predictions on the ideas that 1. The professions will more or less line up with those of GW1, 2. The correspondence of Armour:Class in GW1 is the same as Armour:Class in GW2, and 3. that armour is even used to represent class in GW2. Because we have no idea if any of these are true, I bite my thumb at you. | 72 | 03:11, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

You forgot necromancer, specifically mentioned in the first chapter of the Ghosts of Ascalon, and golemancer (or whatever they're going to call it), also alluded to in the first chapter. Anyway, wait a week and I'm sure the rest of the professions will be revealed in the book. -- FreedomBound 10:10, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Golemancer isnt ever going to be a prof. Norn Golemancer = "How the hell do i work this thing" . And He said necromancer when he said ritulist.those two profs are getting the merge. While i dont agree with hunter. it seems mostly right.--Neil2250 10:15, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

He said "ritualist", the book specifically says "sylvari necromancer". Might change, but it's not called a ritualist in the first chapter of the book. As far as the golemancer, there's an asuran riding around on a golem he created... Not sure what else you'd call it, but there's going to be something like that. There also is going to be some kind of engineer, I think. -- FreedomBound 10:31, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

remember Asura also get an ability to make a battlesuit or something, that could be the inbook version of it. --112.213.182.141 10:35, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) Well none the less, rit and nec are bound to be getting a merge. as for golemancer, all prof. are the same for every race. so i realy dout golemancer is one. contrary to what anet once said. im sure as hell there'l be mounts.--Neil2250 10:46, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

I disagree with Hunter, it's too similar to ranger. I think the charr silhouette there is some sort of gun specialist, maybe a heavy gunner that fires artillery like things (we've seen charr firing big guns in one of the trailers, and they were aiming up like they were arcing their shot) and blunderbusts, so call them grenadiers or something like that. I agree with assassins coming back (maybe able to dual wield pistols?), and the necro/ritualist merge (there is just no way they are going to get rid of minion masters, they're just way too cool an innovation of theirs). I disagree with knight being a profession, I think Thackeray is a warrior, and is designated a Knight as part of his position within human society. Despite them saying that they will not have a dedicated healing class (which I remain skeptical about), I think the monk comes back, but they make them more martial, maybe give them some martial arts style combos, weapons like a bo staff or something, and give them a variety of protection prayers, mostly for themselves and a little for others. I also think the engineer/technician or something similar is a strong possibility, and would likely have some strong support abilities.

I am curious exactly how they are going to handle golems with the asura, it obviously can't be a profession since it's race specific, and they need races to be balanced, so I think there is some other major system or play mechanic that they haven't fully revealed to us yet that will be race specific. For example, we know that norn shapeshift, asura have golems, and there was that part of the teaser trailer when a sylvari seemed to create some sort of plant golem thing. We've seen walking charr effigies (though those could be evil) and they seem to talk a lot about the humans' faith as being key to what separates them from the other races, so maybe they can call on the 6 gods in some way to assist them? (Satanael | talk) 03:00, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

The plant golem thing (druid) was also shown with a human, and is believed to have more to do with the ranger profession. The charr effigies 'n' burning charr are part of the Gold Legion (aka shaman/bad guys). Yeah, so far the humans only have god-related racial skills. Also, there has been one golem racial skill announced, which is basically a form (however, the skills that it gives you have not been even hinted at, one of which could let the asura hop out and have the golem fight on its own for you). -~=Ϛρѧякγ (τѧιк) 03:23, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Not to necro this stupid topic... but gameplay videos coming out today are showing "Player character" casters with what is unmistakably the Necromancer Seal as casting animation overlays while being accompanied by "bony" servants . Do we go ahead and call it by adding the prof to this page, or wait until an official GW2 website announces them with spotlight vids? --ilr 15:29, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

It's been officially announced by Regina B. and another person before her (unfamiliar name, so I don't remember it). It's already been added to Professions, Professions Reveal, and the professions nav., so I'll add it here. -~=Ϛρѧякγ (τѧιк) 16:05, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Ah okay thx. ...I really don't pay much attention to the CR's so I missed that... --ilr 17:12, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Look at -- http://forum.univers-virtuels.net/uploads/1251190963/med_gallery_60_28931.jpg -- these blue icones especially this one : (L3C1) This is Shield of Absorbtion casting symbol. (The animation on tageted ally shows 4 of these exact icones) And skills (L3C3-4) look like RC to me... So i bet Monks will be around :D --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:78.237.125.40 (talk).

B.M.L. > --ilr 22:26, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Mesmers

I have looked at this and what i thought the rest wud be was that sylvari looks like is walking is maybe a mesmer(scholar), the charr with the gun as maybe sum sort of heavy gunner like that other guy said or maybe a demolition kind of guy(soldier or adventurer), assassin like you mentioned(adventurer), golemancer might be a skill in a way or maybe asurans have a skill which creates a golem and you jump into it and you get golem skills(because ANET said they aren't restricting proffessions to races) and the guy with the staff i don't have a clue of. Hope this helped!

Mesmer looks like either it will be heavily changed or gone. A lot of people think a profession with mainly guns. A lot of people think an assassin type with a new name. The golem you saw the Asura in was a Racial elite skill where they enter a golem battle suit. Also people think the BlueMaceLady will be the last profession, suited towards a monk protection style support. - Giant Nuker 13:28, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

That's *almost* accurate but let me condense some of the guru findings in with it: (underlined = dev confirmed)

• There is no "Gunner" class. & The charr in the manifesto Trailer with the rifle had Scholar armor on.
• Every major playstyles/meta from every Gw1 class will return in some fashion through atleast 1 of the Gw2 classes
• There's only 2 classes that will be all-new. 4 have already returned. leaving 2 more 'recycles'
• The 2 most likely names to be recycled when you look at the concept art, are &
• The 3 tossups if one of those don't return, are , , & .
  • Ironically all 3 tossups apply to the same class, IE: the "Blue Mace Lady"
• Since there's supposed to be less Spike damage due to there being no "Healers", an may change drastically.
• Hexes will not be returning in GW2 but that doesn't mean Mesmers won't return. Hexway was the most degenerate way you could play a Mesmer and certainly didn't constitute or epitomize everything that the Mesmer was "all about".
  • If Mesmer returns, it could just as easily be an Adventurer that uses a Foil/Saber/Rapier & ...(*groan*) a pistol...
  • Some skills can be held down or charged... as such, they could replace Punishment hexes & Interrupts
  • All other hexes could be replaced with summoned Phantoms or mesh entities similar to Grasping Dead

So basically, the is still the most likely to return without requiring the largest overhaul. is the most likely to be renamed b/c it has a negative stigmata /w Gw1 players and needs a new more team-friendly role. But at the same time, most posters also believe the B.M.L. (which were seen in the human Demos) could be renamed something like Knight, Paladin, or Crusader and be the second "Soldier" class. The 8th class, the iconic Charr Farthest Left in the Reveal Flash, is believed to be a new Engineer class as it appears to be surrounded by pieces of equipment... and is also the most likely scholar candidate holding the rifle in the manifesto trailer (unless Mesmers get rifles too...which would frankly be retarded). HTH. --ilr 18:58, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Dude1 said : "the charr with the gun as maybe sum sort of heavy gunner like that other guy said or maybe a demolition kind of guy" ... *erm* Assassins... (Snipers ? --> Maybe rifles are for Sins ???) --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:78.237.125.40 (talk).

Maybe I missed/forgot this, but why is the Blue Mace Lady not a warrior? I mean I'm not discounting the idea that there is some sort of crusader or monk warrior type class, but when I look at the BML I just see a warrior with a different color aura than we normally associate with warriors... (Satanael | talk) 00:29, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Because of that aura. Every other profession picture (that I know of, and that everyone else seems to know of, and that we've identified) is in keeping with the color coding. --Kyoshi (Talk) 03:10, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Whatever the other soldier profession is, it will have the exact same armor as warriors. As for use of a Mace: So far there's only 1 mace user and that's the . There has to be one more among the 3 unrevealed classes to justify the weapon's existence. There's one other Gw1 class returning but no other classes in Gw1 are known for using blunts. IoW: The picture is definitely showing a new profession and not a warrior. --ilr 15:54, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Okay, so it's not definite, but the aura suggests it is something else. I can see that. Just a side note, ILR the stuff you mentioned only proves it could be a different profession, not that it is not a war. So saying "The picture is definitely showing a new profession and not a warrior" is not true, because it could be a warrior, just with a different background. (Satanael | talk) 20:38, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

One of your three tossups, the monk, is deffinitely not gonna be in gw2... according to one of the articles, a monk or "support" class will no longer be included in the game.

You mean "a monk or "healer"", right? Every class has support options. --ஸ Kyoshi 18:55, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Class with support options =X= support class. –~=Ϛρѧякγ (τѧιк) ←♥– 01:26, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

"It was hinted that energy mechanics might work differently in PVP"

Why is this added as an invisible note and not on the actual page? Seems relevant enough to me, and hints are a lot of what we have at this point. --Kyoshi (Talk) 20:27, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

B/c it's speculative and only a Note for future editors explaining why this section was specifically added in the PvE section instead of to the general PvE+PvP game mechanics above it... HtH --ilr 20:37, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Fair enough, I guess. Just curious. --Kyoshi (Talk) 22:12, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Considering there are NO dedicated healers, this is not speculation, this is a fact. GW2's PvP will work differently than GW1's PVP.--174.101.255.217 20:23, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

I think the hint was that it would work differently in GW2 PvP as opposed to GW2 PvE, not to GW1. ~Farlo Talk 20:37, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Yes. --Kyoshi (Talk) 00:23, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Yeah that is indeed what I meant. ...waiting for Anet to specify. Izzy had the chance to delineate that in the 2 interviews I just linked to, but he didn't go there. All they're telling us so far is that WvW *might* work closer to PvE than 5v5 organized does b/c WvW is "the next evolution of DAoC's PvP" ...whatever that means. --ilr 03:33, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Give it time. The game has to come out sooner or later. --ஸ Kyoshi 21:37, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Will it be "free roam?"

Will GW2 have a "gating" system like GW1 as in, do you have to pass thru a gate to get to the next area or will it be "free roam" where there are no gates that you have to pass thru, just a loading time for the new area (one that will temperairly pause the gameplay and you will simply see a loading bar pop up on your screen much like Perfect World International, Requiem, or Silkroad Online)? --The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.20.22.203 (talk).

Free roam, sandbox, persistent: yes. No zoning except for dungeons and storyline-based missions. We don't know as far as loading screens and whatnot, though they do have loading screens for waypoint use, apparently. --ஸ Kyoshi 21:35, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Oh, but I assume like other MMOs, much of the world will load automatically when you log in, and the specific elements will load as you approach. At least I think that's how they work. --ஸ Kyoshi 21:39, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

The capital cities of the main races are also instanced because there will most likely be large volumes of people in the in city. - Giant Nuker 11:00, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Right, forgot about that. --ஸ Kyoshi 13:36, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

pre-order

Where to pre-order? I would like the benifits of the pre-order package this time around. Anyone know which particular site/store has the pre-order package, as opposed to pre-ordering the game in its regular form? Like "Guild Wars 2: Pre-order edition" as opposed to pre-ordering Guild wars 2. --Master Briar 10:55, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

No order information has been released to anyone. Several of the game sites are reporting a release date, but it's not official, just their wishful thinking. -- Wyn talk 11:29, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Ah. KK. thank ye--Master Briar 11:39, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

I think some of those pre-order dates have actually passed already. But yeah, no final date yet. Just keep their blog bookmarked or something. --ஸ Kyoshi 18:35, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Funny side note about Pre-Orders: ...many Retailers were quoting Dec 10th as their fake expected release... so DerpTick made blizzard set Cataclysm's release for Dec 7th. Lol he gonna be mad when it actually gets released 2 or more months after that right as WoW's new coat of paint starts getting dull again. (IoW: there's no rush Briar. Infact rushing might bite you in the ass) --ilr 19:26, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Hah, he should have read the blog. --ஸ Kyoshi 16:54, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

The story

I can't say I'm fond of the story at the moment. So Ascalon has almost entirely fallen to the Charr - what was the point of all the work and sacrifices made in Guild Wars? Where is the hope? I find this very depressing. The searing of Eden is bad enough, but this? And do the designers have it in for the human race? It feels a bit multi-culti to me that people can now play other races, including the evil Charr. As it is, I'm considering sticking with the original Guild Wars and giving the second in the series a miss. --La Visiteuse 07:17, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

We helped save a generation of Ascalonians, from the Charr. Then in Kryta we helped bring back the monarchy. In the Shiverpeaks we assisted in the civil war allowing the Dwarves to help us in EotN. Also with the Titans defeated it sowed the seeds of rebellion in the Charr that lead to what they are today. We had a big impact in Guild Wars from what I understand. - Giant Nuker 11:14, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Don't forget killing Shiro and ending the plague in cantha, destroying the great destroyer and delaying the dragon's wakeup call,saving many many people from the mantle, exterminating the Mursaat, killing abbadon and making Kormir a goddess.. Yeah, if we didnt do all that, the lich would rule prophecies,the titans would have destroyed all of tyria, Shiro would rule Cantha, Nightfall would happen and the beforementioned rulers would.. die and be enslaved and not to mention the world would be ended because nobody killed Abbadon. So you can safely say, your actions are a big deal. DemonicFahrir 11:28, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

And besides that, "evil charr" is a bit much. You do realize the early Ascalonian humans crusaded the land away from the charr, right? They just wanted it back. And what the hell do you mean by "multi-culti"?

The hope is in that the humans aren't all exterminated yet, and they're holding out. I thought that would be obvious. --ஸ Kyoshi 13:40, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Ascalon was nothin but hillbilly rednecks ... good riddance to it. And I can say that cuz I's raised rural as cowshit. Ever heard of punctured equilibrium? I dunno what it means either but they say it's the only way a species evolves and ya want that dumbass human culture to evolve don't ya? ...Can't be lettin' them Charr & rat people do all the innovating while your race falls further behind... But that's exactly what happens when half your culture only cares about more wars, less taxes, & too many foreigners. --ilr 18:40, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

"So Ascalon has almost entirely fallen to the Charr - what was the point of all the work and sacrifices made in Guild Wars?"

All of the work and sacrifices made in GW were to flee Ascalon before getting completely destroyed by the charr. Hope was pretty much destroyed with the Great Northern Wall. –~=Ϛρѧякγ (τѧιк) ←♥– 23:47, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

In Ascalon, maybe, but that's why they ran to Kryta. New hope. --ஸ Kyoshi 04:13, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

At any rate, if I understand it right, then long story short: there wouldn't be survivors for GW2 if we hadn't stopped the world from destruction in GW1 | 72 | 19:24, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

We did it guys, we saved the guild wars world from destruction. high five. MAFARAXAS 00:45, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

DirectX

Ok just noticed something "Gaile Gray has indicated the game will support DirectX 10, but not require it to play. Guild Wars 2 will use the Havok physics engine and occlusion culling technology licensed from Umbra Software." Erm news flash direct x10 is ACIENT! what about directX 11? will guild wars 2 have this feature also????? --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:82.36.129.107 (talk).

...Believe they said they'd talk more about that and other recommended specs near release... --ilr 04:35, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, DirectX10 is pretty "old" now, but I'm sure they'll build DirectX11 support or already have, but just haven't bothered to announce it or will with other Requirement Specs as said above. ~Farlo Talk 06:19, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

SWEET JESUS I NEED MY MARGINALLY BETTER GRAPHICS MAFARAXAS 15:18, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

GW -> GW WoW 2?

Am I the only one getting a bad feeling when I read some of the differences between the two games

• Energy will replenish slower as well as implementing energy potions into pvp
• Fewer skills and back to a single profession system = less customization (while I do understand why they would do this I think this removes one of the aspects of what made GW my favourite game of all time. The thing I enjoyed most in Guild Wars was making my own build that made my character feel really unique but at the same time not unbalanced as others had the same options)
• More PvE such as crafting (ok this one may not be an entirely bad thing but I dislike crafting Uber equip and consumables as it usually gives edge to grinders in pvp)
• Higher max level (I as long as level mainly is focused on pve stats Im ok with this)

I really hope they don't ruin it, I hope that they allow a lvl 40 with the right equipped skills to kill a lvl 80 with poor skill selection. I also hope that it doesn't take 200 years to reach level 80 unless the level difference doesn't increase damage vs lower leveled players or increase hp if that is the case then, I dont mind if they increase pve stats but let the pvp stats be equal.--83.178.101.228 01:42, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Guild wars sales, ~3.5 Million
WoW Sales, 9 Million+
I'd be surprised if they weren't taking pages out of WoW's book. --BriarThe Spider 11:27, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

← moved to User talk:83.178.101.228

Nvida 3D vision Window Mode

Nvidas latest graphics driver has brought along with it support for 3D Vision Window Mode for Guild Wars 2 http://www.nvidia.com/object/win7-winvista-32bit-266.58-whql-driver.html

What The Hell

I've been playing Guild Wars quite a bit recently,and I think GW2 may be a bit too different from GW.I think guns don't really fit with GW(2) and I like the way energy regen works in GW,although jumping and underwater combat would to the gameplay.--75.36.152.93 15:55, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

, , <-- O HAI DER --ilr 22:05, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Lol. Pwnt.--BriarThe Spider 17:26, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

← moved to User talk:Oliasys