User talk:Regina Buenaobra/Archive Product Information/Sep 2009

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

The Art of Guild Wars 2

After the book was introduced on the official site and Facebook, some gaming site reports that it will be available at PAX for giveaway and signing. I suspect publication date, pricing and availability will be announced later on the Website or will it be only available at PAX or some to-be-determined-later form of distribution (AKA a collector's edition or something similar - yes, I know you cannot answer this part... yet). Thx. Jaxom 01:41, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Though it will be for sale at a later date, it would also be nice to know if it'll be included in the CE, as I don't want to end up paying for it if I would get it by purchasing the CE.-- File:User Shewmake 1.jpghew 02:49, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

If I was a fan of the GW art style, I'd really be pissed if that was a Con-book only. Many Years back I bought the special edition War3 just to get the full sized coffee-table Artbook and ended up paying way too much. The more accessible they can make those things right off the bat, the better. --ilr 19:26, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

The art book will be sold later, so people who can't make it to PAX, or people who are at PAX but can't get one (supplies are limited), will be able to purchase it. More details about pricing, etc. will be available later, and you will see that on the official web site. =) --Regina Buenaobra 18:10, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Probably a stupid question, but i'll ask anyway...

→ moved from User talk:Linsey Murdock

So, are guns completely taking over in GW2, no bows? Or is it gonna have both? This is probably been answered somewhere before. I'm not feeling well right now, not thinking clearly, but I looked around a bit and didn't see much on this. Just somethin I've been wondering though. personn5 07:42, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Both. In trailer I guess there is one gun and at least 3 bows. So yes, we're gonna have bows and guns. --Sharkinutalk 08:01, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

also: WRONG DEV. Lin doesn't have anything to do with this topic,...You want Flannum. But don't you dare try to talk him out it. I wanna carry a steampunk RAWKET LAWNCHAIR while using FireWalk. ..Can't bet it --ilr 09:46, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm guessing "guns" are mostly going to consist of ranged, devastating-but-wildly-inaccurate attacks. Otherwise it's hard to justify why anyone would use bows at all. Pure speculation, of course. -- MrSmiles 17:02, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm guessing that bows & guns will be balanced, and not in the devastating-but-wildly-inaccurate kind of way. Guns may be slightly slower attack rate, with slightly higher damage, and possibly its own set of skills. Time will tell. -- Alaris 17:21, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

So instead of Hornbows we get shotguns, no big deal, just change of skins and probably different skills requiring different weapons. Come on, I doubt you'll be able to daze someone with a gun, at least not as effectively as with a bow... or crossbow... that would be great, I loved that Crossbow series when I was a kid: "Uh, Ih, Ah...". MithTalk 17:31, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

AFAIK, the last time Flannus had to balance Guns against Bows was in Sacrifice. And the most direct comparison would be Persephone's Rangers versus her Gnomes. Rangers were level-2, cost 300 mana, and 1 "soul". Gnomes were level-6, cost 1000 mana, and 2 "souls" (same as Deadeyes). Gnomes had a significantly longer range that couldn't be Dodged, but long reload times. Therefore rangers clearly outdamaged them in D.P.S. at mid-range as long as you had more souls than time(Mana recharged over time). The only aberration IIRC was that Deadeyes caused the Poison effect which made them even better for hit-and-run which is why I always picked them instead in Multiplayer. But for prolonged fights, Rangers were the best. Many ranged weapons in GW are already balanced almost solely around Range and Activation. If that isn't enough to balance Gun VS Bows, then I'm sure Eric will figure out one more resource that does just like how some Ele skills cause exhaustion in GW1. --ilr 22:50, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Guns are just another option in terms of weapons, so assuming guns are "taking over" would be inaccurate. There will be many weapons for players to choose from. --Regina Buenaobra 19:25, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

NOO/Linarks

Are there any plans to support Guild Wars 2 on Linux? I understand most of the target audience can barely manage the basic installation, but I'm pretty sure there are a lot of other users who would love to have it natively supported, rather than work through Wine. --Jette 10:43, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Don't count on it. Most companies prefer to use Microsoft's DirectX over OpenGL because it allows for faster graphics and I believe easier programming. DirextX allows for more direct used of a computers video card. This also allows companies to create a better looking game with lower computer hardware requirements. Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see GW2 go cross platform, but I really can't see it happening. --Dunyas 13:04, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Not worth it, if you make something for Windows then ~90%* of all users can run it, if you spend time and money on making a Linux port then you can reach 94%*. You have to ask yourself, how much money will reaching 4 additional percent units of population cost you and how you could use those founds to improve the game instead, something that could possibly get you a lot more players. * - percentages taken from w3 site. Biz 17:17, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

All but 2% of that ninety are going to be bad, though. The four percent you get from lonikz is almost guaranteed to be more tolerable players because you have to have a certain degree of intelligence and technical finesse to figure out how to use it, as opposed to Windows, which any 13-year-old can figure out. Isn't quality more important than quantity? Eghad. I just realized there are people who are regular users of the internet who were born in a different millenium than I was. It shows in PUGs, too. —Jette 17:28, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Isn't quality more important than quantity <---Windows offers both (direct X > OpenGL) ~ PheNaxKian 18:57, 30 August 2009

I was referring to the players, not the software. —Jette 19:12, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

ok then, ANets a company, I think the quantity of players they get is more important than the quality =p (more £££). ~ PheNaxKian 19:43, 30 August 2009

But linux players compared to windows players is like Space marines(supersoldiers in superheavy armor and with best guns) compared to chaos cultists(weakest units ever) --Boro 20:05, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

hwee weel kapt-choor eet fooor kay-oossss! —Jette 20:25, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

DirectX isn't in any way better than OpenGL 3.x. It's just that OpenGL 2.0 was frozen for too long and DirectX quickly took over Athariel 22:20, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

(Reset indent) Microsoft is a tough competitor who doesn't play fair. Simple as that. They influence Engine designers just like the media to suppress competition. They run in the red constantly with Console making expenses just to try and muscle Sony out of that business (which itself is an even more Evil Empire of it's own accord if you ask enough Musicians). They even influence and manipulate immigration & trade politics to make sure have a never ending supply of skilled but cheap labor just so they can further undercut any competition. In other words: A better product and even profits themselves doesn't seem to be their primary goal... no their goal is more like China's... Suppression of their own resources just to eliminate all competitors, and DirectX is no different. It has always been an inferior alternative to any pure-Hardware solution. ...making a Linux option with fewer "software layers" in between is the obviously superior choice that will obviously never come to pass. IE: by even petitioning for a Linux version, you're figuratively(read: massive exaggeration incoming) standing in front of a Tank that MS's "market forces" are instructing Anet's commanders to pilot right over the top of you b/c their own family is being held hostage by those same market pressures. "Commercial Viability" and Profit has little to do with it --ilr 00:12, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

TL;DR summary: I'm saying the exact opposite of what Dunyas said b/c there is no such thing as a more-general application software layer that actually INCREASES performance. It's impossible. --ilr 00:22, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

If by that you mean "the userbase is too stupid to handle CLI and Microsoft takes advantage of that," then yes, I agree with you. —Jette 01:09, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Two words, ilr: tank man. But I agree with you, its kinda sad... Underated 02:14, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

MS does what it is supposed to. There is no shame in that. And eople, more than stupid, is LAZY, and MS takes advantage on that too, which is as smart as logical. And if they end up ruling the world, both MS and the human race deserve it. What goes around comes around, XD. By the way, I know a few people that is or used to be in the Demo scene, and if you suggest doing a 64Kb demo in anything but MS+DirectX+nVidia, they will laugh at you LOUDLY. If you base your work in that, you can do things like this: [1]. Nice, eh? MithTalk 17:40, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Well, looks like I'll be needing to keep this stupid virtual machine (wine is bad for you). —Jette 17:52, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Oh I couldn't agree more actually. What really frighten me is the thought of a world full of Macintosh users so I'm totally rooting for MS. I just pity Linux users for being the little ants that constantly get squashed in this eternal battle. --ilr 22:10, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

(ri)I would love to see GW2 go native on linux. Wine works (kinda, that disappearing mouse business is really annoying), but it does hog a lot of power. I really do not think going by os world market shares alone is very smart. You should also account for the likelihood of a linux user buying GW2 compared to that of your average windows user. Also, the linux share is continuously growing, so what is 4% today might not be 4% tomorrow. I have personally noticed a big increase of people using linux among my friends and colleagues just during the last year. The future is in open source, and I think that if one of the large game developers were to release native for linux, we may see some significant shifts in market shares.--Lensor (talk) 09:56, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

I just answered the OP's question in another topic the OP created, asking the same question. :-P The answer is the same: As far as I am aware, there are no plans to make GW2 compatible with Linux. --Regina Buenaobra 19:59, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Moar Linucks

→ moved from User talk:Joe Kimmes

Not sure if you're the right person to ask this (I never am, tbh, but it seems like all the people whose titles shout "yes, this is the person to ask" haven't made any contributions since '07, SO...), but since there's a similar section at the top of the page atm, I thought I might ask: are there any plans to make GW2 officially compatible with Linux? After much deliberation (none whatsoever), I got rid of my Windows partition for good today, and haven't been more pleased. GW works fine with Wine (TexMod does not, but I'm griping about that with somebody else entirely), but it would be really great if GW2 was made to work natively with most distros of GNU/Linux. In the event you're not even close to the right person to ask this, might you direct me to someone who could? --Jette 01:52, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Joe's strictly GW1. Regina's probably the best to ask, but I wouldn't get your hopes up. Usual responses in the past have been along the lines of they'll consider it if/when there's sufficient demand to warrant it, and general extolling the shininess of DirectX. Congratulations on ridding yourself of Windows btw, and if you figure out a way to get Texmod to work in Wine, share with the class. - Tanetris 10:29, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm bugging Kuntz in his thread at the Community Works section on Guru, I'm fairly certain his program that was written strictly for GW works just fine using Linux, since it doesn't need DX9 to work the way TMod does. Unfortunately, he has so far refrained from releasing it for the past 4 years, and that's not likely to change -- if worst comes to worst, I may try writing something of my own to do it, but I can barely blunder my way through CLIs as it is, so it definitely wouldn't be a quick project. I'll go ahead and poke Regina about it though. --Jette 10:40, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I only work with GW1 so I'm not really in a position to answer. Asking Regina sounds like a good idea. - Joe Kimmes 15:59, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

As far as I am aware, there are no plans to make GW2 officially compatible with Linux. --Regina Buenaobra 19:57, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

y u do dis? ;_; —Jette 06:01, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

GW2 persistence and zones

Hi Regina and wiki'ers,

I was wondering if you could comment on how zones work in GW2, compared to GW. Obviously the world is persistent, but is it broken up into zones in the same way as GW or are there no zones at all?! Perhaps this is one for FAQ as well :) Thanks. 218.214.126.215 01:25, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

From what I've heard, most areas will be persistent (like towns in GW1 are now), but there will be some instanced area (like combat zones in GW1 are now). Presumably, the instanced zones will function like GW1's instanced zones, while persistent zones will function like every other MMO's persistent zones. —Jette 01:42, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm not familiar with other MMOs, is the persistent world broken up into zones? So for example, you zone out of town to enter an adjacent persistent area? Or is the transition seamless?218.214.126.215 02:20, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

I guess I can ask a simpler question: Are there still loading screens when exploring the world? 218.214.126.215 02:24, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

If it works the same way other MMOs do, then there will be load screens, but explorable zones will be much larger, monsters will respawn on their own, there will be many other players in the same zone with you, and when you're not going between those very large areas, everything will be seamless. —Jette 03:35, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Oh. And Dungeons will be instanced areas ....I think.Remember reading something like that somewhere. personn5 03:39, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

If it was going to be Seamless, wouldn't they have already told us? ...b/c a feature like that is definitely prime grounds for hyping right from the start. And due to the way entities are tracked or occluded within 3D geometry, it could put a lot more stress on both the servers and a client's computer. It's a good question though, I wondered it myself before seeing that second video of the new zone designs. --ilr 08:53, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure Jette, in Lineage 2 for example the world is persistent but there are absolutely no load screens. - Reanimated X 10:01, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

I guess there wil be loadscreens since the want to use the artwork which is one of the bests.Death Sligher 14:06, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I can't answer that question at this point. Sorry. --Regina Buenaobra 19:51, 1 September 2009 (UTC)