User talk:Regina Buenaobra/Archive Game Related Topics/Mar 2009

Archives by Topic
Random Chatter Wiki Topics Game Related Topics Community & Website Product Information Misplaced Topics, Etc.

Retro

Hello Regina, if this is in the wrong place please feel free to move it. A bit late on this question I know but I'm wondering if Anet has any plans to award at least partial retro on the Unlucky title for those of us who completed Treasure Hunter 1+ years ago. Going by the new math I see that r7 Cursed by Fate is a virtually guaranteed max along the way to r7 Grandmaster. This was obviously not the case a year ago and most of us old grinders are stuck somewhere between r5 and r6 nowhere even near the half way point. Reluctantly I would be willing to attempt it again although I'm looking at the bare minimum of ~7200 chests to finish, nearly a second Grandmaster, a huge investment of both time and money. Looking forward to your reply. 76.20.238.253 15:41, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Lol, a year? The update was only 3 months ago; you had me trawling through ancient update archives looking for the update you were referencing until I realised what you meant. -_- Anyway, I find it unlikely they'll change it. Linsey has mentioned several times that she thoroughly reviewed balance issues relating to various titles and changes of the Nov 08 update prior to its release, and has no plans to review them again. So retroactive rewarding of new unlucky points is almost certainly something she's already considered, and rejected. You might want to contact her for more info on this, although I believe her talk page is locked atm because it was getting too full. --Mme. Donelle 21:32, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Not to mention that it's possible the game simply doesn't keep track of how many picks you've broken, in which case they couldn't give you your missing points even if they wanted to. --Mme. Donelle 21:48, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

I've had Grandmaster at least a year so I don't know what you are talking about. I was around for the last rebalancing update. The only change to this specific track was 2.5x(retention%)=unlucky as opposed to 25pt unlucky always. It may not keep track of broken picks but it does keep track of opened chests. Even if they gave HM retention across the board, the lowest point figure with no lucky included, (31%(2.5)(1053 picks))= 81,607 it would still be something to bridge the massive gulf in points brand new GMTH will have and us legacies. I can't expect anyone who hasn't put the work or money in on this title to understand. 76.20.238.253 22:00, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

You worded your original comment confusingly -- it implied there was some update to the title a year ago. Seeing as how I didn't recall any unlucky rebalances from one year ago, I went to the update archives to double check, and was halfway through doing so when I realised you had simply failed to do your own research and had used the date you'd completed the title as reference instead of the actual update in which the title was rebalanced. And yes, I know what the last rebalancing update was: it was the Nov 08 update. You know, the one I mentioned in my reply, that you probably should have taken a moment to look up instead of idly wondering what I was talking about.

As for the title: That you spent an extraordinary amount of time maxing a title does not mean you are entitled to getting another one maxed for free. Take it up with Linsey if it bothers you that much, but if she says no, then all the QQing and elitist remarks in the world won't get you your retroactive points. --Mme. Donelle 22:51, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

How you turned a simple, polite question addressed to someone else into an argument with you is beyond my comprehension. This isn't even your talk page. More to the point, you don't work for Anet and therefore can't accurately speak to the issue or answer my question. If there was a better way to get in contact with staff than the wiki I'd be all over it. Things like this are probably why their staff is rarely around or commenting to begin with. 76.20.238.253 23:33, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Believe it or not, I was attempting to be helpful. I know that Linsey has already answered similar questions to this, and her words can be trusted as accurate, so I mentioned her answer to those questions and directed you to her for an official answer on yours. At no point did I claim to know for certain what ANet's answer will be, as you will notice by the use of phrases such as "I find it unlikely" and "it's possible." I don't see what the problem with that is, and I find it amusing that you're accusing me of picking fights when you're the one who began arguing with me. --Mme. Donelle 23:49, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps you thought I was attacking you based on my first sentence? I should point out that that was intended as a friendly joke at my expense, not an attack on you. I guess it's not a phrase used outside of Britain much, but "you had me doing x" means "I did something dumb due to misinterpreting a misinterpretable comment you made". --Mme. Donelle 00:35, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

There are no plans to retroactively award points for Titles. --Regina Buenaobra 05:19, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Xunlai Points

Hey Ms Regina, Good day to you.

Last month one of my account did not get the points. This month all my accounts did not get the points.

This is getting a little frustrating. Last month I submitted all pridiction on all accounts one day before the closing date, this month I submitted my predictions right after the web pages problem was fixed, if you remember, Ms Regina you announced that the web page was down. Since the web page says the points will be given on the 28th February its 2nd of March today, so where are the points?

what can i do to find out about this? Thanks Pumpkin pie 15:10, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Points always come with a build, there has been no build now. When points are available it is mentioned in the update notes. Misery 15:27, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

I think it shall be noted in an update on 5 march |Cyan LightHere!| 15:28, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Tournament House

I don't know if this is the right place to put this; I'm posting this here because I feel it is a community matter. Right now I am trying to post my predictions for the upcoming tournaments in March. I've read through the rules and it says "Once you finish making your predictions, please click the Save Predictions button at the bottom of the predictions page.": I don't have that link/button on the page. I can only choose "cancel" or "reset". Am I trying to predict too early? Is the "Save Predictions" option not available yet? King Neoterikos 10:24, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Seeing as last months rewards have not even been given out yet your probably too early. i would try again around the 18th of this month.75.172.46.207 13:38, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Is there an approximate date when the reward points generally become available? Is it usually around the middle of the month? 24.188.207.20 20:55, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the help. King Neoterikos 21:14, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure when predictions can start to be placed, but they stop taking them exactly when the tournament begins. You can find that information on the top of the Xunlai Tournament House Rules. I suggest setting your predictions as close to the closing as possible as because then you'll have a full selection of guilds. The list does grow as more guilds qualify. So guild that may actually win may not be on your list of choices. What I normally do is set my tickets up early, then come back later in the month to modify as they let you change prediction up till closing. That way I have a chance even if I forget later on. --Dunyas 21:30, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Leeching in Fort Aspenwood

Hi Regina. I do not know if I posted in the right place but I try.

It really must you find a solution on the leeching frequently used in Fort Aspenwood. It is unplayable there is a leecheur each party. Find something, I do not know me something to ban for life missions competitive.

Thank you in advance for your reply and sorry for the understanding, my English is not perfect. [[1]]Anvar

They're 'aware' of the situation, yet with an extremely limited staff on hand in regards to Guild Wars don't expect direction from Arenanet until much later. 000.00.00.00 18:36, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

The world record was beaten the morning of March 19 at 10am : 11 leechers and 1 player (me)among luxons. The Fort Aspenwood is finally lost [[2]]Anvar

The Guild Wars live team is an ineffective size to handle all the issues of Guild Wars. Gotta give them time to get around to it, sadly. Give it a couple of more months. 000.00.00.00 09:49, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Or make rewards completely individualized?71.174.22.127 21:55, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Based on what? 000.00.00.00 22:36, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Just wanted to add that I find it absurdly ironic that someone named "I Hate Stupid Leech" is leeching... *blink*... - Satanael 16:59, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Anvar, this is the not the correct place to report this. Please use the in-game report function. We are aware of issues with the report function and I've flagged this for the Live Team's attention. --Regina Buenaobra 02:55, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Lockpick drop rate.

is this Really increased? if so, then this increase needs to be permanent. because i vanquished earlier this week and got more lockpicks then then i have vanquishing the same amount of zones during this weekend.75.172.46.207 13:37, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

When talking about random drop chance, having a higher chance of getting some item does not mean you will get more of such item.

Also, how exactly is this weekend event supposed to be related to Regina's talk page? --NIN37 14:07, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Gaile would have answered IP. <3 Vael Victus 02:24, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

i posted this on her page because the last time i checked she is a Community Manager and this last weekend was dubble drop rate and she would be able to check. also the drop rate for lock picks and suck seemed very low.75.172.46.207 05:26, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

The drop rates are the same as always. --Regina Buenaobra 21:08, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

I don't think that was the question. I believe the op wanted to know if the lockpick drop rates were actually increased over the weekend when the event was on. As he found more picks one evening after the event had finished than during the entire weekend. And I didn't notice any significant increase in drop rates myself personally. 81.108.21.92 23:55, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Future update

I have been reading the information on the future update due to come in April and just had to ask about the storage. Is the storage update going to be worth the wait or is it going to be some puny update that will leave most people that are really waiting for this update wondering why the devs even bothered wasting their time adding it in the first place? Is the stack rate going to at least be updated to 500 or 1000 instead of the measly 250? I'm not even sure why its limited to 250 anyway as the data "250" don't take up any more space in the MySQL database where it displays how many in is that storage slot any more than the data "999" would. Please tell me this update is going to be worthwhile. -- Cynical -- 09:51, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Worth the 'wait'? Why would you wait for an update. Just play the game like you've always done, and if the update is any good, well, lucky us. If not, no tears from me. --Arduinna 10:05, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

its supposedly a month away. and im not getting my hopes up, i am guessing all we will see from that update is some book storage and a doubling of the material storage, and that's about it. Truthfully i think the account wide storage needs to be doubled so go from what it is now. so you would have 8 tabs of 40 squares each thats a lot of storage. and i think that they need to factor in that any update to storage they do needs to be larger then someone just getting a new character slot, that gives you 45 squares of storage. if they cant improve it enough to were you dont have to buy mules i dont think the up date will be worth it. another thing i think is a character takes up more server space then just storage. because the server needs to keep track of what quests that character if any, it has to remember the armor and skills it has unlocked if it has a hom it has to remember that info as well.... sorry for the long winded post i just hope that this storage update isnt a joke, and they really do improve storage enough to where i can get rid of at least one of my mules.75.172.46.207 11:32, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

In answer to the why 250 question, that has been discussed before. You are wrong in saying that 999 would be the same amount of storage space. Remember that computers work in binary. In binary, 255 is 11111111, and going higher than that would require another digit. 999 in binary is 1111100111, obviously a lot more digits to store (when you include everyones' stacks, the extra 2 bits adds up). Ashes Of Doom 13:20, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Coder here, in case anyone is wondering, that's shit. Just shit. The extra binaries are not going to matter as much as, say, a single new player signing up and adding their overhead to the database. Realistically, 999 is silly anyway and 500 would acceptable. Vael Victus 14:46, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

I think there was a small math error in IP's post as well. If you doubled the amount of storage we have now, you'd get 8 tabs of 20 slots each, not 8 of 40. Unless IP wants 8 tabs of 40 slots each, in which case the word should be "quadrupled". Anyway, I'd be glad with any bit of extra storage ANet offered me. I didn't think they'd expand it any further, so it's nice to know they will, even though it may not be by much. -- Elv 16:14, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Adding more storage slots for items indeed will cause a lot more data in the database. This is a valid claim and something people should actually care about. Vael Victus 14:46, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

That's why unlocking it's the way to go. If you use one bit for each different unique type of item without properties or upgrades, you can save 8 items in one byte: 11111111. That could be used for perfect equipment without upgrades, miniatures, green items, everlasting tonics and I bet something like that it's used for hats too. Any storage you add will get filled eventually, so the way to go is adding a way for items so you don't need to store those anymore, and then, the storage could be used for expendable items and items with variable properties, like equipment with upgrades added, trophies, consumables, kits, etc...MithTalk 17:11, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Whether you think that the April update is "worth the wait" is dependent upon your own evaluation of the contents of the update when it's released, and on what you personally consider desirable. Someone who values some additional storage is probably going to like the April update more than another player who doesn't have the same concerns. Every player is different, and for me to tell you whether it's worth your while, well... I'd rather not do that and just let you form your own opinion. Me personally? I'm looking forward to it. --Regina Buenaobra 18:08, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

(Reset indent) I hope it's a constructive improvement to storage. More account wide storage is what I'm after. Storybook storage isn't something I'm looking forward to, that is an issue Arenanet should have addressed when releasing the books originally. If Arenanet were more open to us during development of what they are working on in regards to this you might already have that answer, Cynical. 000.00.00.00 18:49, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

If I remember correctly, Linsey mentioned that some sort of storage specifically for story books would be quite complex and difficult to create, much more difficult than just greater storage over-all, I'm gathering. Creating a storage device just for story books has programming difficulties, where as additional storage as a whole just requires more server space. — Jon Lupen 20:00, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Regina, I don't mean to come off in a bad way or mean to complain like many other players have. I remember in that huge announcement on Jan15th at the beginning of this year that "We want players to feel connected to what we are developing even though it may be months away from release, so during development we will be more open about our process and what we are working on." Now I'm only posting this strictly for the fact that this info was posting on the website to the players as a pretty bold statement, and I'm not sure what to expect from this. I think what confuses and/or frustrates other players and myself, is exactly the extent to what that statement really meant; how far does "we will be more open" mean? To what extent? And to some players and myself, we feel it to be difficult to recognize if Anet is fulfilling their statements or not, because we don't understand exactly the extent to what that statement means. Does it mean being more open in the developer's blogs in how they share general things around the office, or does it mean a preview of the content you guys are working on. I know alot of players feel that they are being short-changed due to the april update being only one month away, and to them, their interpretation of that statement is not being hold up to. The players and Anet, I feel may have two different understandings of this posted statement in the Jan15th announcement. Maybe you guys (ANET) feel you have fulfilled your statement and have been more open to us the players since Jan 15th, but most players feel that being more open means sharing or giving a preview of what it is at least that you are working on. If there is any clarification that can be said to help close the gap in the different understandings/interpretations, it would be most appreciated. Thanks Wetwillyhip 21:07, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Linsey and I have been working together on ensuring that her wiki journal provides some insight and information on her progress. We've been working on her balancing her design duties with posting on her journal. Right now she is incredibly swamped with work. She's been working weekends and evenings after she goes home. Any time that she does spend on the wiki is a bonus. We can't reveal much concrete information until much closer to the April update. We are not going to do previews so far off from the scheduled release of this update, but there will be some previews. I'd also like to note that the big April update will be released at a different time from the regular monthly maintenance build, which happens at the beginning of the month. --Regina Buenaobra 02:37, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Regina for your response, I appreciate it. It helps me understand more of what is to come and more of Anet's interpretation to the statement. Wetwillyhip 02:47, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

@Elv there are 4 storage tabs right now not including the material storage. and one of those tabs has 20 squares so 2X4=8 and 20X2=40.75.165.120.89 23:37, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Actually Elv is correct. By doubling the tabs and the slots, you are quadrupling the storage space. 4 tabs of 20 is 80 (4x20=80). Double 80 is 160 (80x2=160). Doubling tabs to 8 or the slots to 40 will double the size. (8x20=160 and 4x40=160) Doubling both would give 320 slots (8x40=320), which is 4 times the original 80 slots (4x80=320). If you have any questions, ask your math teacher about area. --Dunyas 00:08, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Hm... now I wonder if that account-wide stuff is talking about letting characters manipulate other character's inventories... htat would sure be an account-wide storage improvement. MithTalk 14:37, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

[sits wondering what Arenanet is thinking for storage improvements] It's nice us discussing ideas but we could be so far off the mark. Love to pick Arenanet's brain on it. I would doubt they'd double storage sizes, server space has been mentioned as being limited a few times. Something like what Mith mentioned has been mentioned before: allowing a character to access inventories of multiple character on the account, but I think Linsey shot that idea down. However, there has been a couple, what am I talking about, a lot of times Arenanet has gone against what it's said. [shrugs].

Love to know the processes they're exploring, even if it doesn't get into the final build. You never know, they became open to the idea of discussion with us, we all start talking all on the same level of discussion you never know what might happen: someone might give someone on staff an idea. [shrugs]. 000.00.00.00 20:08, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

sorry i don't claim to be good at maths. and yes then if that math is right i want them to quadrupling storage, i think it would be the only way for them to make worth wile because as it is you can go buy a $9.99 toon slot and get about 45 slots. so any update they make should factor that in. that is a interesting thought MithranArkanere i also wonder if they will make it so you can see all of your storage one box at once (with the exception of martial storage) Wouldn't it be nice if they would throw us a bone here or at least tell us "these are the updates that we are thinking about and are still subject to change:__________ " another Account wide storage improvement would be adding a /storage. who of us knows as usual we are left with frustration because of a lack of information. and its worse imo because i got my hopes up or more storage ie storage slots and tabs. but these other ideas are simi lame (but not unwanted) so gg anet and saying nothing "some times its worse to say and do nothing then to say something and to do something". 75.165.120.89 20:59, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

^This whole thread was a huge abortion. Everyone who has an opinion about storage should put it in their own userspace from now on b/c there's clearly never going to be any kind of public consensus on the matter --ilr 21:53, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Play nice, Ilr. besides, any improvement, big or small to storage is a welcome improvement. I for one applaud Anet-Dev for this, how ever it may come to be.. MystiLefemEle 06:54, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Ilr there isnt that much bickering going on. its more speculation then anything.75.165.102.233 23:20, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

quick question.

hello regina, do you know whether or not it will be possible to play nightfall or somethat and guildwars 2 at the same time (say one character is in nightfall and the other in guild wars 2) on the same account?

hope so, I've invested too much time in the original GW to not be able to play nightfall or prophecies after I get GW2

It has been announced somewhere that your character will be able to return to GW1 from GW2 at your request. Ill just pop off to get that reference. --Burning Freebies 19:04, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

You want to be able to play your Guild Wars game, and Guild Wars 2 at the same time. I'm assuming login information will be left largely independent of the other so you could play both games at the same time if you really want to. Though, this is all just a guess.. [shrugs] Regina can't say anything anyone, NDA and all. 000.00.00.00 19:40, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Why wouldn't it be? Aside from linking your account and game achievements there's really nothing else. What, you're afraid that once you create a GW2 account, your GW1 account will get deleted? No, that will certainly not be the case. — Poki#3 23:55, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Your character will not be transfered from GW to GW2; only achievements will (if your accounts are linked).

Can I play my original Guild Wars character in Guild Wars 2?

Because Guild Wars 2 is a whole new game with different professions and races, new technology, and expanded gameplay, it would not be possible to directly use an original Guild Wars character.

However, your original Guild Wars character names will be reserved for your use in Guild Wars 2. In addition, Guild Wars 2 recognizes the accomplishments commemorated by your original Guild Wars characters in the Hall of Monuments and provides you with unique rewards to showcase those achievements.

Source GW2FAQ

So, since you won't move your character from one game to the other, you should be able to keep playing as long as there is a GW server running. --NIN37 02:25, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

As I can read from FAQs and the GW2 wiki, it seems that your characters won't actually move. You register your things in the HoM, and that's what move. So you can keep playing GWO and keep adding stuff to the HoM, while the 'descendant' character or account or whatever it would be, will keep receiving the results of those achievements. MithTalk 20:21, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Burning Freebies, GW1 and GW2 are going to be separate games with completely different systems for everything. The only things that will transfer from GW1 to GW2 are some achievements from GW1. We will keep the servers open for people can play GW1 as long as people keep playing it. --Regina Buenaobra 03:05, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Guild transfer from gw1 to gw2

Hi Regina, When Guild Wars 2 will be released the guilds from GW1 will be formed again in GW2 (if that is one of the features) and all players from part 1 will join in part 2 again. Due to the fact that in GW1 an invitation costs 100gold each, for a guild of 80-100 people that is quit a lot of money in the beginning. This could mean that forming the guild, and playing the game together with the guild (read friends) is postponed till enough money is gathered. I am not looking forward in first farming in the beginning for the money when i really like to play the game with my friends. Or all guilds will be migrated to GW2 from the beginning, so my worry is not necessary. I hope this is being considered by the developers. Due to the information-silence i don't expect an answer. Just thinking with you guys. Didis 19:22, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

She can't answer this. NDA and all.

One can guess though that guilds will need to be started again, Guild Wars guilds needing to reform in Guild Wars 2. There is, however, no information as to if Guilds will function the same way in Guild Wars 2 as they do in Guild Wars.

It's one of those "wait and see" situations that Arenanet loves. 000.00.00.00 19:24, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Actually, I'm quite curious about this as well.. Since were in the NiTe guild, having 10 kurzick guilds and some luxon guilds as well.. All of which (supposed to) have 80+ members.. Go figure.. Joetjah 22:11, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

We have not finalized how guild-joining will happen in GW2. They are different games, so it's possible that it will be different in GW2. --Regina Buenaobra 02:57, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Competition Blasons

Go get organized a Competition Blasons for new ideas capes ? Please, will be great and could introduce blazons for Guild Wars Eye Of The North and his play on the artistic imagination of players now. Thank you in advance for your reply and sorry if my English is not terrible. --Anvar Le Barbare 15:13, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Can somebody translate this?

He's asking if ArenaNet will make a contest for guild cape designs, I think. DarkNecrid 18:05, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes, that's right. When I told you that I speak little English, I'm not kidding^^. --Anvar Le Barbare 18:36, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

It's a good idea, but right now we don't have plans to add new cape designs to GW1. The issue is resources and whether it's a good idea to use them for this (art resources, programmer, time, etc.) or whether our resources are better used on other game features. --Regina Buenaobra 03:37, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Quick GW2 question

Ok I am not asking for anything that will be a spoiler or anything like that so I really hope you can give a clear answer about this. Now that GW2 is clearly up and running, (as stated by I believe Lindsey on guru) Can the GW2 FAQ be updated at least a little bit? In particular the technical section, because after several years of development there should at least be a clear idea of the technical aspects of the game. Mainly though I think it would be nice to know at least a predicted range for system requirements, because if a game prototype is running I would guess that the system reqs would be available. And as I said it would not really be a spoiler, just then players could say "great my computer should run this just fine" or "oh I need to get a better graphics card if I want to play this on the night of it's release." So once again could we Please please pleasepleaseplease get a little update to the GW2 FAQ? Kraken 02:50, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Companies usually announce specs near the release date so it'll work out :) – Barinthus 04:51, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Even IF GW2 is "up and running" like you said It's a very safe bet, that it still has a lot of code optimizing to go through yet. And we can debate what we consider "up and running". Because one would say that about the final game, one about the beta, and one when he is able to see naked wireframes. If your computer can sun, say Call of Duty 4, then I don't see why it shouldn't run GW2 though. — Poki#3 06:19, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Put your computer through the Crysis test, if it passes that, you'll be fine. — Jon Lupen 20:44, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

AH-HA!!!! Jon, just as I thought, you ARE working for Electronic Arts??!? :P Ok, I've had my moment. 000.00.00.00 00:55, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

I got a good laugh out of that. =D Well, consider that fact that Crysis is the most graphicaly intense and demanding game out there at the moment.... — Jon Lupen 01:05, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

wasn't it mentioned officially somewhere, something along the lines of 'if your computer can run GW, then it can run GW2'? -- Mafaraxas 06:47, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes, in the FAQ or an interview. And I bet it'll look Worse than GW1 with the settings that Low since it sounded like their point was to expand the top-end; which probably entails deeper base textures, lighting, and more realistic Bloom effects. Without those "intended" extras, you'd probably lose nearly all the world detail and particle effects that make navigation and combat less confusing. I was a bit worried about it myself since I got a 7-year old comp, but then I heard they're looking to integrate Dual-Core options and i nerdgasm'd and everything was cool again --ilr 11:20, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

If I remember correctly, what we have said in the past regarding the minimum requirements for GW2 is that we intend for it to run on medium range systems. We're adopting a similar approach for GW2 as we did for GW1 in terms of trying to make the requirements modest enough that as many configurations as possible can play it. We don't have any new information to add to the FAQ at the moment. When we do, we will let you know. --Regina Buenaobra 02:34, 28 March 2009 (UTC)