GuildWiki has been locked down: anonymous editing and account creation are disabled. Current registered users are unaffected. Leave any comments on the Community Portal.

Talk:Guild Wars 2/Archive2

From GuildWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

For discussion of the Trailer, please visit here

Archived[edit source]

Nice and fresh. --Warwick sig.JPG Warwick (Talk) (Contr.) 21:47, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Post link to archive RT | Talk 21:48, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
Oh come on, a show/hide box? --- VipermagiSig.JPG -- (s)talkpage 22:01, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

OK I LIKE GUILDWARS AND EVERYTHING BUT IF THE LEVELS ARE UP TO 100 THAT WOULD JUST RUIN IT AND IF IT WERE INFINITE IT WOULD SUCK SINCE ADDICTED MORONS WOULD OWN EVERYONE.

Calm down - I for one would prefer a more traditional MMO. Anet have some great Ideas, and GW1 was entirely skill based - I don't think they are going to turn it into a entirely gear/level based system overnight. RT 22:30, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Persistent..[edit source]

Sigh thats what I hate about other games.. where maps are shared by everyone. "whats that, you're waiting for a quest monter? TOO BAD BWAHAH!" Everyones waiting for the same boss, waiting for the same monsters to spawn. It just gets over crowded and boring... ANet better hope they can do a good job of these persistent areas.

They say the'll be able to open new ones at will, and that you'll be able to switch. Moar instancing plz RT | Talk 14:15, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
It would be awesome if like you could invite people to join in on an instance which you have already started or a public button so everyone can joinHapsta 19:44, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
Doesn't every other online game do this, like WoW. So, Gw is turning into WoW? I like the idea of having a choice, either persistent or instanced. I mean, towns a persistent and you kinda get sick of hearing idiots standing around going on about rape, sex and other immature behaviour, ANET wants to make this the standard? As an early stage I'm disappointed ANET is moving away from its original ideas to the more carbon copy ideas, but then again, ANET founders came from WoW 203.173.225.42 13:23, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
Missions and dungeons shall be instanced however. And who knows what will become of these 'new explorable, persistent areas'? Maybe there won't be bosses(which drop greens) at all, just quests and so on exploring the land. But it's impossible to tell before beta is out or ANet decides to deliver us some exact information. J Striker 06:17, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
The persistent areas of WoW are one of the reasons why I quit. If ganking is possible, then I'm out. Nazgramin 21:06, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

system reqs[edit source]

heres my system: 2 gigs of RAM, 8600 GeForce, 2.2 ghz will my comp handle gw2?The preceding unsigned comment was added by 209.202.63.142 (talk • contribs) 04:04, 2 January 2008 (UTC).

we can't answer specific questions about the requirements of guild wars or guild wars 2. Anet will surely release specs when the box hits stores, but that expected to be late 08. --Honorable Sarah Honorable Icon.gif 09:07, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes your comp will be able to handle it, since its driven by directx 10

You can't say yet. And it dosn't need DX10 (thank goodness, vista ftl) RT | Talk 15:24, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Well, the main question to ask before anything else is your definition of "handle." If you mean running a game at lowest graphical settings with possibly glitched textures, then yes, my 10 year old VAIO still "handles" GW like a champ. But if you want highest settings, good load times, 60 fps, etc, you might need to wait and see. You also forgot to mention your OS (XP?) and your GPU RAM (512?). Also, the fact that it doesn't need DX10 doesn't mean that it won't look better and have more effects specific to DX10 only, like many other games out there. (Yes, I know I'm late.) RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 18:24, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

So GW1 was for nothing?[edit source]

I mean all this history, were for nothing? Ascalon conquered (Ebon Vanguard did nothing), Cathan isolated, no more Factions, no more Tengu(all of Togo's effort gone to waste), Sunspears defeated, Elona controlled by Undead (might as well let abaddon take over). I think we've been playing on the wrong side. 75.9.232.33 23:33, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

haha excellent point well put--Chris1645.JPG 23:39, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Think of it this way... that's what happened when we WERE fighting for the good guys. How screwed would they be if we hadn't? I doubt there'd even BE a GW2 lol. Sloth 02:56, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
There still woulda been it'd be more, your a slave to abbadon the ruler, um survive long enough to GET heros dumb enough to help you (companions) and try and fail and crap your pants facing abbadon fully powered up.--Holy Sig.jpg (talk) 03:01, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
GW1 was to show us all the races that WON'T be in GW2. Felix Omni Signature.png 03:02, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
We did revive Palawa Joko but everything else was for nothing. 222.153.227.37 00:14, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
Thats true. We actually did nothing but awaken all the bad guys (Palawa AND the Dragons).Entrea SumataeEntrea Sumatae [Talk] 05:14, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
And we made Glint happy! And we helped the Lich unleash the frikken Titans! OMG, we are evil :D --- VipermagiSig.JPG-- (s)talkpage 05:17, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

O, I forgot to add that the Dwarves became sexless unhappy stone creatures so they wouldn't fall prey to the Dragon's minions (destroyers), just to the Dragons themselves. Plus thanks to the heroes in EON, we freed the Charr from their Shaman leaders, which they in return, conquered Ascalon. Great job people.75.9.232.33 00:03, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

It's just another way to release guild wars factions 2! and nightfall 2! eye of the north 2!

Come on people, it should be great to see how all the lands have changed, which aspects of Original GW still exsist, all the new skills and storylines, PvP fun, better game engine and so on. I sure want to know what became of Mursaat, Forgotten, visit Ascalon City once more, slay some dragons and become a bear. And since all of you have protected Tyria until now, why not 250 years later? J Striker 06:26, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
All I know is that they better damn well let us liberate Ascalon, if they let the most beautiful area in game be burnt down by a pack of cats they better let us go on a fur rampage. I hate cats by the way, the other day my sister's peed on me....
As for the results of GW1, well how interesting would it be if everyone simply rebuilt the old towns with no challenges. --AlariSig.jpg 06:46, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
What, you want GW2 to consist of, all the bad guys are dead? What are we supposed to do then, if there is nothing that needs to be killed? Go around admiring the flowers? I realize that it's quite possible to make a good game without a heavy emphasis on combat, but it wouldn't be a successor to Guild Wars any more than Mario Paint was a successor to Super Mario World. Quizzical 18:05, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
"Subsequently a number of other dragons resurface; one rises about the sunken holy city of Arah in the ruined kingdom of Orr, simultaneously raising the entire region from below the water level and creating an undead armada that severs the sea route between continent of Tyria and the Factions continent of Cantha; another arises to the south of the Crystal Desert, cutting off the link to the Nightfall continent of Elona; a third arises in the Far Shiverpeaks and uses its icy minions to push the Norn south into the land previously occupied by the Dwarves."
Oh, how convenient!, I fear for the originality of GW 2 expansions, if their idea of an expalnation for why we cant access the expansion areas of GW is to think up 3 different events all simulataneously closing off those areas is anything to go by. Also the prospects for getting access to the unexplored areas of tyria (e.g. north of kryta - all that green stuff) look somewhat bleak. They should have asked me to write the plot, dragons indeed--Cobalt | Talk 18:54, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
I think of it like this: The Heroes of 1078 AE fought their battles, and saved humanity. Though things may seem bad in GW2, there is still a small thread of hope(A few remaining Sunspears, Fort Ebonhawk, the new capital of Kryta). If it were not for the Heroes of GW1, such hope would not have existed at all.
"I think of it like this: The Heroes of 1078 AE fought their battles, and saved humanity. Though things may seem bad in GW2, there is still a small thread of hope(A few remaining Sunspears, Fort Ebonhawk, the new capital of Kryta). If it were not for the Heroes of GW1, such hope would not have existed at all." Exactly, Anets plot writers ftl. Anyways, if it were not for the "Heroes" of GW1 there wouldn't have been the titan problem, the abaddon problem, the petrified dwarf problem and the world would be a better place--Cobalt6.jpg - (Talk/Contribs) 11:59, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
To be fair, we did take the time to rectify the titan problem after our admittedly poor desicions regarding the Scepter, and the post-petrified dwarves were valuable in holding back destroyers that would otherwise have run amok and wiped them out anyway.Sloth 18:07, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
Bleh, if Abbadon had been in charge none of this would have happened!--Cobalt6.jpg - (Talk/Contribs) 18:51, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
Wasnt it Abaddon that planned all this to happen? --- Ohaider!-- (s)talkpage 18:53, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
No, abaddon had nothing to do with destroyers, or the subsequent dragon uprising. All abaddon did was unleash the char on ascalon, kryta and orr, unleash the searing on ascalon and the cataclysm on orr, plot to have the lich conquer tyria with a titan army, have a canthan emperorr assasinated, set the luxons and kurzicks against each other, bring plague to cantha, attempt to have shiro tagachi conquer tyria with an army of costructs, screw up tombs with chaos creatures, corrupt varesh into attempting to conquer elona, and try to unleash nightfall on the world. Other than those minor misdemeanors, abaddon has done nothing wrong.--Cobalt6.jpg - (Talk/Contribs) 18:57, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
In fact, even if Abaddon had taken over the world, if I remember the lore correctly, the Ancient Dragons would've wiped the floor with him anyway. And you know, the method of ANet giving us these plots kinda reminds me of the way Star Wars did. Star Wars is actually a story about Anakin: his discovery, falling to the dark side, and eventual redemption. Prophecies and Factions really are just telling the story of what Abaddon did, since he was the one that instigated ALL of that, and Nightfall was just the finisher for that story --Gimmethegepgun 04:27, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
No, no. The gods could take out an ancient dragon easy. It's just that all the non-destroy-the-world-and-rebuild-it-in-his-dark-image gods all /ragequit, so they don't have ultimate power over the world anymore.Entrea SumataeEntrea [T] 04:35, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
Exactly! Thats why I voted for Abaddon. Besides, if we'd just sealed up the destroyers in their cave with cement or the tyrian equivalent, we wouldn't of disturbed those nasty dragons anyway. Alternatively, we could of just left a couble of Base Defenders outside the entrances to the destroyer's lair. That would of fixed the problem up fairly quick--Cobalt6.jpg - (Talk/Contribs) 14:06, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
Abaddon4prez.gif Boredom FTW!Entrea SumataeEntrea [T] 16:07, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
Exactly! Thats why I voted for Abaddon. Well, you got your wish. Abaddon won the '08 election. :oP --OBloodyHell 06:00, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Actually, the ancient drags are about as strong as a god, as well as the fact there is more than one of them. so they would've killed abbadon.--142.22.16.55 18:44, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

In the immortal words of vipermagi, 'Fromage!'--Cobalt6.jpg - (Talk/Contribs) 18:47, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

When you look at the grand scheme of things, we actually accomplished a lot more plot-wise than you're giving them credit. We thwarted an uprising of Dhuum's influence in the Underworld, helped Balthazar gain a slight advantage over Menzies in the Fissure of Woe, and pummeled a god into submission; successfully straining that 'evil' alliance. We also witnessed the searing of Ascalon, early sings of unification between the Luxons & Kurzicks, the fall of the White Mantle and reinstatement of the Royal Family in Kryta, and we also unleashed a musky scourge on Elona. Don't undermined the story just yet, I'm sure things are going to get way more interesting once they get the ball rolling again. ;D --72.220.205.44 09:14, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Release Date[edit source]

CMON! ANET! HURRY UP! When does think come out? Its 2008. Cmon, wating...tick,tock,tick,tock. I like Potatoes. Tick, Tock, Tick Tock, Fire, Tock. Tick, Tock.--

Error creating thumbnail: File missing

FireTock 22:14, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

The War beta went public 6 months ago and they're not expected to release until Q3/4 this year. Delays are likely. GW2 has a beta plan that at least I haven't heard anything from in ~10 months. GW2 isn't Warhammer but if it's going to release this year it's got a whole lot of ground to make up. They did get the other campaigns done quickly but those were in the works for a long time and done on an existing engine and whatnot. It doesn't look great for a GW2 release this year. 74.129.243.37 00:22, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
okay, so they said a long, long, long, long time ago that is was set for release in 2009/2010 I think - Fred The Second 05:07, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
I heard betas begin this summer sometime. --Shadowcrest 05:10, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
I thought the beta began in last quarter of 08? But yea, it would be nice with at least some screens or something from ANet... DriXiLB 17:43, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

LOL u have a point evrything seems F up in the world of GW sunspears are either dead or inprisoned lol id like to see an Unded Koss like Rurik LOL but yeah im realy curious how the story is gunna pla out since evrything is messed up should be a realy good game-Pedro Cts Ur Cokies

they REALLY need to give more information. i am sure, they have the whole concept, professions, since the game should be released in 2009 (or at least beta). imo they always knew it never would be released in 2008, that's marketing. it will still take months. i hardly can't explain why they don't show ANY in game pictures, besides this explanation. i mean other projects show at least 1 (if not 2) year(s) before release some in-game stuff. The preceding unsigned comment was added by 213.160.57.11 (talk • contribs) 12:41, 12 July 2008 (UTC).

So basically....[edit source]

The bad guys win at everything. That's a bit depressing isn't it? 222.153.227.37 03:16, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Unless you're pvp only, but yeh pretty much. But at least we stop it in GW2! (presumably). For at least a little while like GW1, lol --Shadowcrest 03:31, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
Stop it? One will be able to play the damned Char, I was looking forward to burning char forts to ashes in GW2....--Alari 00:18, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, you will still probobly be able to burn charr forts, it's just they'll be fighting back with human intelligence. --71.112.87.56 17:18, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

IMO charr are more intelligent than Humans. RT | Talk 17:19, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
They managed to burn down a whole country, yeah you gotta be a genious for that. - Yikey
Or just have a giant bomb. Which is what the charr did.--Marcopolo47 signature new.jpg (Talk) (Contr.) 17:42, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
The titans burned down Ascalon, the char just followed the the religious fanatic shamans to use the titans power.--Alari 21:06, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Mechanics of transfer[edit source]

I wonder about the mechanics of this. I heard that guilds will be transferable, characters, of course, will not. Will it use the same client, like the chapters/expansion did? Will we use a linked account? Will we be able to play in the GW1 areas with our GW1 characters once we switch to GW2? Will the guild and guild halls be persistent between GW1 and GW2? How much of a separate game is this going to be? 24.0.64.193 11:47, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

The mechanics of transfer will be very clever, I think. Here's my view on it: Guild Wars 2 will be a COMPLETE seperate version, not linked to Guild Wars 1 at all. But if you want to use your Hall of Monuments to transfer a title, armour set or mini pet you can go to your HoM and talk to the corresponding shrine. Then you'll get a key code, only usable by YOUR account so it can't be sold. Then, you put in the code in your Guild Wars 2 menu and the item'll be transfered. - Yikey


who's looking forword to GW 2[edit source]

just wanted other peoples opinion bus is any one realy happy about GW2. cause i know im not--Keanwood 00:56, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

I am really looking forward to GW2 :)-- Austy 10:46, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
I am, so I can get back into GuildWars again. RT | Talk 10:49, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
Depends on how addicting Fable 2 will be by then, actually :) But I'll probably buy GW 2 anyways, cause hey, it's still GW ^^ --- VipermagiSig.JPG-- (s)talkpage 11:11, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
You're on a guildwars fansite... Do you expect enyone would nót be looking forward to gw2? xD -{[ PUL ]}- 19:15, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
Well... If you look to the pages at the previous archive, and the ones on the official wiki, there are some not looking forward to it... but i can only really say, ''oh well, their choice-- Austy 18:07, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
There's actually quite some people ranting about hatng GW 2... Fools :) --- VipermagiSig.JPG-- (s)talkpage 18:09, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Oh me oh my, I wish people would lighten up a bit about the whole changes with GW2. I mean can't we trust Anet to come out with another gem *like* Guild Wars 1? If there weren't any changes then we would simply have a rehashed, reskinned game that would quickly stagnate. Also there's the whole angle of Zomfgit'saWOWcloneeventhoughweknownexttonothingabouttheactualgameihateyouarenanetandalwayswill **GASP** andihopeyourotinhellcosyou'velostanothercustomerduetothefactthatibelieveWOWpatentedeverythingthereistommorpgs **GASP** anthusanythingvaguelysimilarisacheapimitation!!!1! Listen to the voices of reason scattered throughout this discussion. Anet will do a fantastic job im sure. And if they don't when we actually play the game ah well it's up to them to save face. So don't start playing your vein violins just yet fanboiz. I shall retain my anonimity lest anyone come for me with pitchforks. Don't let us down Anet. The preceding unsigned comment was added by Rhym Soulreaper (contribs) .
The original Guild Wars (campaigns 1-3) was a gem. The game really went south with EotN...or rather, with the focus turning more towards idiotic PvE title grinding/buying, overpowered PvE skills to remove any semblance of real challenge, and some things that were just plain stupid. (read: Great Destroyer) So far I can't tell whether or not GW2 will end up that way; there have been some things which look good (revised and expanded plot is nice after the idiocy of EotN plot; even if overused plots are overused), others which look bad {jumping! zOMG!), and some things which are just strange (increased level cap). I'm still skeptical of ANet, but I am no longer so deadset against GW2 that I will completely write it off. I have to see it first, I think. (Account wide HoM would be nice incentive too.) Entropy Sig.jpg (T/C) 15:34, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
Frankly I'm looking at GW1 right now and if that's the future of GW2 after 4 years I think ill save myself the disappointment and simply forget guild wars all together but hey Anet "HAD" a good game now its time that they do like Blizzard and Fail for 11+ (still counting) years. Black_Lurker 03:05, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Question about World PvP[edit source]

How is that going to work exactly? Normally "World PvP" is you run into someone and start whacking them. According to this is just sounds like Random Arenas, where you enter some sort of queue and are sent off to The Mists. If it is a normal "World PvP" (sort of like WoW's system) what is going to prevent us from going to starting areas and smashing smaller players? Will there be some sort of Faction difference, AKA Horde & Alliance. This is going to be the biggest factor in my buying or not buying GW2 so I'm really interested. Nilator 21:24, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

If we knew, we would have it up there all we can do is speculate. Lost-Blue 21:35, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Man there isnt going to be any hero battles great


world pvp sounds much like city of heroes recluse's victory, where people from two sides come and go fighting over territory, think alliance battles but with like unlimited players :D

I think it is just Like WoW, that you can kill anyone of another race who stands in your way... Not realy something Im going to like...

It sounds not like that at all, it sounds like 2 servers orginise teams and go head to head in a battle RT 20:39, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
As much as Id enjoy going on a killing rampage against any cat I see, RT probably has it right.--AlariSig.jpg 21:15, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
If the players are free to join and leave every time, WvW will probaly suffer from lots of leeching etc. similiar. But I like this scale of battles. There should be much more things to do in a single brawl than just cap shrines, annhilate team or capture altar. Another thing I'm bit worried about is, how ANet is going to handle, say 32 or 64 player matches within their servers... It'll probably mean that there won't be very much games and that they're laggy. However I'm really looking forward to it. J Striker 06:12, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

I think the there are three main complications that need to be dealt with if you've got a World PvP.

  • 1) Number of players; this is usually not very hard in GW since the arenas are on fixed numbers. Letting people come and go however means you'd need some system of auto-balancing. If you've got an autobalancing system then it's hard to build up rivalry (luxon/kurzick) since you might be forced to the other team suddenly (if changing is not like that then you can have uneven teams).
  • 2) Where the PvP is; They've already said that world pvp is in the mists. I mention this because it means that you will most likely have pvp divorced from pve, in such a way that player killing doesn't happen in pve and high level characters can't gank low ones (unless the low ones went into a no limits pvp).
  • 3) Difference in skill; with structured pvp the teams are presumably matched by rank (like the current GvG) or some other equivalent system. Structured also raises everyone to the same level and gives all skill access. Essentially making it pure metagaming. What about world then? If you compete with whatever skills you have, coupled with people being able to come and go, you could end up with the situation similar to when a RA team hits TA (or when a new RA team hits a team with a 9 kill streak) new players with little choice of skills or poor builds up against people who compete at a guild level.
Anyway, depending on how they deal with those things affects other aspects, and these all hinge on how they build the professions and races. Bah, what do I know anyway, just some things to think about. -Ezekiel [Talk] 06:43, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

hell[edit source]

the story sounds abit desperate doesnt it? no contact with cantha for a generation ascalon ruled by charr sppoked by rurik and adelburn and joko once an "ally" conquering elona. the campain sounds pretty big if its gonna get all this **** right again Aliblaster 22:25, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

"ascalon ruled by charr" <- It's not desperate for people who want to play as charrs :) --Scol 17:44, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

It'll be desperate for the people playing as Charr when the Ascalonian players want their land back. ;P - Zelyoniy

I still don't understand why people would want to be giant cats.....--AlariSig.jpg 20:20, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
I would much prefer it if ascalon had rebuilt itself and ejected the char from it's territory and their own homeland. Then we could have witnessed ascalon as the almighty, evil capitalist superpower it once was. It would also be more plausible considering that the char were in open revolt against the shamans at the end of EotN--Cobalt | Talk 20:24, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
But that @#$%^ granddaughter of pyre made the warbands rule strong again.--AlariSig.jpg 20:27, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
granddaughter? did i miss something? (note i have read this talkpage far more than the actual article, it's more interesting)--Cobalt | Talk 20:28, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
/agree with Cobalt. Lost-Blue 20:30, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
[1]--AlariSig.jpg 20:31, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
It was in the Pcgamer that had the destroyer mini.--Gigathrash sig G.jpgìğá†ħŕášħTalk 20:32, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
Ill probably play human, I like making my chars look "real" thats one thing I like about this game. I can be as creative as possible but I prefer "human" looking chars (no offense to anyon with spiky green mohawks :P) but idk Charr seems fun <3 Lost-Blue 20:34, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Either i've missed something again or your referring to the US issue of pcg?--Cobalt | Talk 20:35, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
I'm going to make a norn caster, just for the irony, that is assuming they don't change the attribute spread for different races like in other mmos--AlariSig.jpg 20:36, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
lol Lost-Blue 20:37, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
Assuran hammer warriors FTW!--Cobalt | Talk 20:38, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
Bug squashing!--AlariSig.jpg 20:40, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
lol....Charr Dervishes ftw!Hellz Mailman 15:49, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Lore VS Equality[edit source]

Should GW follow lore and make Norn "better" for Warrior like profession and Asura "better" for caster like professions; or should it follow equality and be fair? I think that equality is the way Aney should go, even if it doesn't make any sense to have a giant norn charcater rasining minoins and having 60armor or a tiny asura sin spiking (that would be sweet) I think more people will be upset if they follow lore instead of equailty. Lost-Blue 20:39, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Ive always hated advantages, like Asuran being better Eles. Bah. --- VipermagiSig.JPG-- (s)talkpage 20:40, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
Hell no, your not going to nerf my norn mesmer!--AlariSig.jpg 20:41, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
I say lore for pve, but make only 1 race available in competetive PvP--Cobalt | Talk 20:56, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
If they go for lore, I'll stop playing. I refuse to play if I can't have an asura sin. Piggyboy 20:59, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
And a norn mesmer who does riverdance?--Cobalt | Talk 21:01, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
Considering there are a few (hundred?) years between GW:Dark Evil Beings and GW2:Dark Evil Dragons, it's not that hard to imagine that most races have adapted and learned new professions. Thus, equality and lore might just fit in. (BTW, the Asura have a major advantage as assassins, they're much harder to notice ;).)--OrgXSignature.jpg 21:03, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
Asura gate shadowstep will be imba? Gank another match entirely. Lord of all tyria 21:04, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
Asuras harder to notice? They may be smaller but they're still goblin things, it's hard not to notice them! Piggyboy 21:07, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
If one crept into my garden i think i would notice it (plank of asura slaying ftw)--Cobalt | Talk 21:08, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
lol Lost-Blue 21:09, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
(edit conflict) If you look at eye-height, you won't spot them immediately. If you look at the ground, you're hammered by a warrior, yeah... They do have an advantage. --OrgXSignature.jpg 21:10, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
Asurans would make perfect sins, those fast little egotistical buggers fit the profile perfectly.--AlariSig.jpg 21:12, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
Suitable mesmers too. --OrgXSignature.jpg 21:16, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
lol and this has co comments on the offcial GWwiki pfft we own them :LD Lost-Blue 21:19, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
It is possible that assasins won't be available in GW2 as cantha is closed of (thank you very much arena net), so we may not get to see asuras flying at people with daggers :(--Cobalt | Talk 11:55, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
That's not entirely true. Just because Cantha is "closed" doesn't mean there won't be assassins. We just don't know and anything else is pure speculation. Ranger-tango-icon-200.pngMaeve 02:11, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Ideas on the professions[edit source]

Well they claim that "No one is aware if any of the current GW1 professions will enter GW2". I guess that if ANY do re-appear, I'm quite sure the 3 most likely will be elementalist (might be called sorcerer, witch, mage, magician, wizard etc), Monk (might be called priest, healer), and most definitely warrior. Anyone have any other ideas to what professions there might be? 65.34.193.183 02:11, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, MMO developers are notoriously un-original, so the proffesions in the first release of GW2 (i assume there will be expansions) will likely follow the patter of almost all MMOs:

  • A Martial Melee Tank (Warrior)
  • A Ranged Martial Attacker (Ranger)
  • A High Damage but Weak Armour Spell Caster (Elementalist)
  • A Healing/Protection Spell Caster (Monk)
  • An Anti-Martial Spell Caster (Necromancer)
  • An Anti-Spell Caster Spell Caster (Mesmer)

Notice that there are essentailly 2 martials and 2 casters with a counter for each, and that both counters are casters. Likely additions in expansion packs will be:

Well thats what my moneys on anyway--Cobalt | Talk 14:26, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

While your dividion of classes seems logical and generally archtipical of fantasy-genre games, I am going to hope beyond all hope that there are NO dedicated support classes. Support roles are fine, but part of the issue with balance in GW1 right now is that monks are the one and only purely healer class. this is a problem, because everyone relies on them, meaning that the only way for them to be good is to have them be overpowered. i.e. a monk must be able to undo, with 5 energy, 3/4 second, and 3 second recharge, the damage that 2 warriors and 1 ele have spent a cumulative 50 energy, 20 strikes of adrenaline and a good 5 seonds, causing. you see what I mean? I want to see each class have more self-heal abilities, each being more self-sufficient, thus removing the need for "that one class" that is a healer. Thats not to say that we couldnt see GW2 have a healy-ish class, thats fine, but it should not be restricted to that role, nor should the other roles be entirely dependent on it. Shadowshear 15:29, November 17, 2009 (UTC)
Well, I do recall reading somewhere that they will push MUCH more for the ability to do things on your own/with your single Hero-like-entity-thing, which would mean much greater self-sustainability, as well as certain classes being given offensive capability as well --Gimmethegepgun 17:57, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

55[edit source]

  • Since there is a really high lv cap or no lv cap, wont that make 55 monks epic fail now? Not to mention 600 monks, 55 necros, and 130 dervs. Maybe theyll have some totally leet new skill to replace this stuff. Also, since the ancient dragons' powers probably rival the gods, and Abaddon was 11 levels higher than us, wont the enemies have to be on insanely high levels if there's no lv cap? *Überness* 68.196 *Überness* 21:22, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

We don't even know if any of the skills that make 55's will exist in GW2 and I recall mention that the higher lvl cap was more for prestige than function...

Maybe then the the economy will survive longer then 1 week?--AlariSig.png 21:39, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
Hmm I wonder. It will be interesting to find out. Ranger-tango-icon-200.pngMaeve 02:09, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
I bet you anything that at higher levels you will get like next to no returns for each level. All you get is the level number to show off. +0.5 HP and +0.05 Energy per level anyone? RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.jpg 20:38, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
I don't see why you should be complaining about the non-existence of certain farming archetypes, seeing as the game will be COMPLETELY different. It is based mainly on exploiting the game system (not wanting to insult 55hp Monks in any way, but that IS what it is) and gamers will always find another way to get past game constraints. In any case, you shouldn't hope for GW2 to be a copy of GW1 with the same builds, advantages, disadvantages... --Darrenjaguar 12:07, December 29, 2009 (UTC)
55s and 130s are dead as it is. Every farming spot is taken by either permas or 600s, who do it much more efficiently, and can farm areas a 55 can't. (also, you commented on something over a year old) --TalkpageEl_Nazgir 12:22, December 29, 2009 (UTC)
I keep missing the dates on comments around the wiki xD I really AM blind. --Darrenjaguar 15:40, December 29, 2009 (UTC)

Idea[edit source]

I havce an idea on why you basically never use the mosue in this game... Anyone ever play on the Orange Box (HL2, Portal, TF2)? You use the mouse so much in that game that i had to move almost all my controls to near the arrows keys unlike GW where most of the stuff is on the keyboard that you sit in front of it. SO.... since you'll be able to run, jump, swim, climb, scale, etc you had to use more buttons and unless they make it where you press like shift or something to change from jumping to swimming and it's all done on the space bar then being in front of the mouse the whole time would make it a pain to reach everywhere at once. SO for all of you complaining about how the use mouse clicking to go everywhere and one... TAKE THAT!!! I FIGURED IT OUT!--

Error creating thumbnail: File missing

FireTock 22:42, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

What are you talking about? Felix Omni Signature.png 22:46, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
They say that mouse clicking will be gone.--
Error creating thumbnail: File missing
FireTock 22:46, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
SO i think i figured out why.--
Error creating thumbnail: File missing
FireTock 22:47, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
I'd just assume it was to remove auto-pathing, which becomes really annoying to script if you need to account for jumping/climbing/swimming. Height in general makes autopathing complicated, but GW hasn't really had a problem since there's little use of the y-axis. Ezekiel [Talk] 03:19, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
I hope they still have mouse targeting for players in your party window, i need that for infusing. Also firetock, i play TF2 and i manage fine with the vast majority of keys bound to their default. In portal you only need WASD, Ctrl,E, Space and the mouse anyway. And btw, you seem to have contracted sig-fail on your first post there =P--Cobalt | Talk 12:31, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
Ezekiel: In a 3D world, height is the Z-Axis :P --- Ohaider!-- (s)talkpage 13:13, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
That's just convention, it's an entirely arbitrary letter. I'm a firm believer in the idea that the dealer chooses the variant and when I do editing in 3D I refer to up as y. Also; :P. Ezekiel [Talk] 16:39, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
Well if you want to use another letter than the "standard" one why not use one that won't infuse confusion in the rest of us? Like say q :) (User:Winterbay who just can't be arsed to log in from work) 134.146.218.3 02:39, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
HL2 is a shooter - and yes - E for use/medic, G for taunt Q for weapon swich - close to WSAD for controls - seems like it RandomTime 17:56, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

just a thought[edit source]

so what i understood is that the playable races will be charr asura sylvari norn and human but what about the dwarves?they live in tyria too wouldnt they be a playable race too? The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.230.116.202 (talk • contribs) 09:50, 17 April 2008 (UTC).

They are turned to stone, there are hardly any dwarves left. --OrgXSignature.jpg 10:07, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

We could tell you why but It would be a plot spoiler so all I can say is complete Eye of the North if you own it...Big B 10:08, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

oh ok thanks The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.225.54.251 (talk • contribs) 13:10, 12 May 2008 (UTC).

Lead Concepts artist[edit source]

Lead concepts artist of GW2 is Kekai Kotaki, who has worked on all Guild Wars 1 campaigns. I can't say if there are other lead concepts artists. --◄mendel► 19:50, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Art Director Daniel Dociu. Source: Kekai's blog. --◄mendel► 23:23, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Big surprise? I don't see why they wouldn't want to keep the main crew that kept GW1 running. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.jpg 01:40, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
Didn't say it was a surprise; see it as more of a confirmation. ;-) --◄mendel► 10:29, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Nerf lameness[edit source]

All the lameness that's currently happening in GW1 should be nerfed for GW2. This being shadowstepping monk shit, Mo/W shit, all the other secondary profession shit, solo farming shit, gimmick shit and so on. Please Anet, make non lame game this time. The preceding unsigned comment was added by 88.85.130.12 (contribs) .

QQ moar? And this is the wrong place anyway. Send them an e-mail or something. --JonTheMon 15:49, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for your insightful and constructive criticism! Unfortunately ANet does not deign to notice this Wiki. Perhaps you would have more luck editing this page? Also, you can sign your comments with four tildes ~~~~ , it is common courtesy, even if you are not logged in. Thanks! Entropy Sig.jpg (T/C) 17:47, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
Why are you bothering with a troll? Just tell him to go back to WoW, seems like that's what he wants. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.jpg 17:55, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
Wow, there is apparently an abundance of "shit" in Guild Wars. By the way, I loved Entropy's response. Spikeicon.pngTenetke Mekko 23:29, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
What they need to do with GW2 is, plain and simple, DON'T put in Assassin or anything like it. Also, don't make extremely abusable primary attributes *cough*LEADERSHIP*cough*. But by far most importantly for GW: 8 SKILLS AT A TIME! --Gimmethegepgun 23:46, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

[edit source]

Tenetke's take (work in progress?)

It exists, no? Why isn't it on this page? I don't want to mess with copyrights, so I dunno where to get one that we can use. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.jpg 17:57, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Do you mean this? If it's on Anets website, by their terms, we can use it if we attribute it properly. --◄mendel► 22:24, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
The logo-demigod has tried his hand on the ANet image. --◄mendel► 01:25, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
Definitely a work in progress, I saw my name on the changes and thought for sure I had done something wrong again. I don't know if I should include the entire logo or not. It is easy enough to add in the "world" image they have, but it doesn't look very good when put into an image with transparency. I am going to use a mask and layer on it to see if it will work better. That image was me working on the same shadow technique they use on their GW art. It does look o.k. with the GWWiki but there are way too many errors in it. Spikeicon.pngTenetke Mekko 03:32, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
Let me know what you think about this one. It is similar I made a few corrections and it has the "world" shown on it. It is a fairly quick edit and there are plenty of improvements needed.It has been resized down, there is a larger version available for you to take a look at. Spikeicon.pngTenetke Mekko 04:21, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
GW2 logo, work in progress
The one with the world definitely looks better. But still, isn't there one we can just use? I thought there was. O_o RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.jpg 05:43, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
According to their site we can use it as long as it is attributed correctly. The ones above were just edited versions of their logo, but I did credit them appropriately I think. I don't want to add it to the page though, mainly because I am not very good at that sort of thing. Well that and I don't think mine are very good. Spikeicon.pngTenetke Mekko 06:29, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

is this site going to also do gw2?[edit source]

been wondering for a while now (about 15 seconds really) are we going to expand this wiki to gw2, or relly on the new official wiki, or w/e. so pretty much :

  • do i stay on this site for gw2
  • do we know of any non-official gw2 wiki? (i don't like the official gw1 wiki)
  • i had a third thing but i can't remember it, i'll prolly add it l8r when i remember it.

thanks in advancedAkbaroth 07:50, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

No. The majority of us will be going to Guild Wars 2 Wiki, or "new official wiki" as you state it (which is a bad term for a variety of reasons). There are some other wikis for Guild Wars 2 but they will not be officially promoted by nor affiliated with GuildWiki. Entropy Sig.jpg (T/C) 08:02, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
Hah. Yes. Reunite the communities. It'll be the Galactic Empire. And at the fringes, there might be a small rebel noncommercial wiki, but if the movement is to gain support, it is NEVER IN YOUR LIFE going to run on Wikia. Because, you know, having your ads technology managed by a corporation makes me hit my head on my desk sometimes is not the best experience ever, pleasant as some of their helpful staff are. --◄mendel► 23:09, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
Lol... RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 23:50, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
Personally, I don't think joining GW2W is going to work out... GWW has already ported all their sysops over, and I very much doubt whether they'll be open to any changes. But whatever. Felix Omni Signature.png 23:52, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
Well, the ONLY advantage to the official wiki is that it links from the game itself... And to me that is a HUGE advantage. Our GW.wikia did a pretty good job, in fact so good that the devs ripped us off and made their own. (I still don't know exactly what it was that was so incompatible that they couldn't use ours, but whatever, politics isn't my thing.) Now I just think it would be plain silly to continue the duplication of effort on the next game. We have lots of wonderful contributors, and it would be great if their work was accessible from the game that they love so much. As far as sysoping or whatever it is that you're worried about, I'm sure they're doing just a fine job over there. If you can contribute content, GREAT, if you can suggest to them better ways to run their wiki, I'm sure they would listen and make efforts to do a better job if needed. I thought the point of a wiki, ANY wiki, was the content, not the politics behind it. So, as much as I hate the current official GW1 wiki, I think I'm going to go with it for GW2. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 00:01, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
If you think I joined this wiki for the content you are mistaken. The product is important, but for this to be a viable hobby/avocation, the people matter more (to me, anyway). If you see things differently, why aren't you on GWW now? --◄mendel► 00:55, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
Because I put a lot of effort into GW.wikia and this was my home long before GWW1 existed. GW2 is coming soon enough, and I am hoping that GWW2 will be better, and it's the people who CAN make that difference. Do you hate the people on GWW1? I haven't edited there, so I don't know them. Enlighten me if I am being naive about them. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 01:05, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
There are certain individuals already holding power on GW2W whose company I do not relish. Felix Omni Signature.png 01:10, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
I'm a bureaucrat and a sysop on GW2W. There are currently no policies about...anything... and we won't even try to touch that again till it looks like GW2 is going to be coming soon for certain. It is just too early and there are not enough non-admin people there to even hold a real discussion. Currently it seems like all of the administrators from GWW can be grandfathered if they so wish (it's not certain that all of them will), and also any administrators from GuildWiki. Or at least, I suggested that, and no one complained. I am certain that I am free to do as I please, though, so anyone who wants to be grandfathered can just drop me a line. ;)
Mendel: I share your sentiments, even if I don't see all the technical wtf's that Wikia makes...just as a regular user there's plenty of things which makes it unfavorable. (Of course, using .css hacks to remove all the ads significantly improves one's viewing experience.) But despite that strengthening argument, my original conviction for no "GuildWiki2" remains the same as it was every other time this was brought up... it would only serve to further fragment the community. (It is highly unlikely that anyone from GWW is trying to also form a "small rebel noncommercial wiki", or at least I've yet to hear of it.)
Felix: But changes have already been made. Otherwise, all of the policies from GWW would already have been directly ported over, or an agreement to do so would already have been reached. That is hope enough for me. Besides, you know it's bound to be different anyway because I'm there to protest wtf-ery. ;) (Not that I'm important anymore or anyone gives two shits about me, but it's bound to change things to have a non-GWW person who is also able to write WoT's n stuff.) Entropy Sig.jpg (T/C) 03:08, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
Well, I'll at least be there to agitate Regina Buenaobra, since she's my arch-nemesis. Felix Omni Signature.png 03:14, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
Ideally ultimate power resides with users and their reasoning abilities. Thus I'd LOVE not getting grandfathered and ideally never have to be sysopped. -User:PanSola (talk to the Follower of Lyssa.png) 02:55, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
The reason why this wiki is better than the official one is because of content. We had a 2 year head start here, and the official wiki could never catch up. For Guild Wars 2, we have no such head start, so there's no real reason to start another Wikia wiki rather than use the official one.
Of course, it's far from automatic that everyone from here will go to the official wiki, as not everyone will play Guild Wars 2. ArenaNet is going to do some things differently in GW2 from GW1 (if they weren't, they'd just keep making content for GW1), and whatever the changes are, they're sure to alienate some of the Guild Wars playerbase.
Besides, Guild Wars 2 gives me the impression that it's going to be a good deal like Eye of the North: vaguely similar to Guild Wars, except not nearly as good. Some of the comments coming from ArenaNet have been very bad signs, such as flirting with the idea of not having a level cap at all. Quizzical 03:26, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Not having a level cap is bad, because some people out there will always compete to be the highest ever. Putting limits on EVERYthing has been a common trend in this game, and I think it will continue. I think this is what makes this game a bit more attractive to a casual player than something like WoW. Making an infinite level cap is gonna piss off a lot of GW1 players who will reconsider buying GW2. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 02:07, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, maybe just make a level cap that is tangible for most people and stop benefits at a certain point, but allow their levels that they would have gained show in the hero interface box or something.

Felix: I can't wait to see how agitated Regina Buenaobra gets because of you. Keep me informed. Ultra Dagger 02:20, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

If they make no level cap, but make it stop benefitting you at some point, then some players will be upset that they're not getting stronger and cry bloody murder over it. That will put intense pressure on ArenaNet ot make it so that players can keep getting stronger, in order to completely unbalance the game. That's how we got, for example, Ursanway. Quizzical 17:34, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
Actually, there is a way to have an infinite leveling system and make PvP fairly balanced. What you would do is, depending on the power gap between one level and the one after it, allow only people within 2-3 levels of your own to be in your party, and you and your party would be matched by the average of the levels in your party and would be pitted against a team with a level average 1-2 levels over/under yours. It would be a lot of work, but, if recent news is to be believed, those bastards have a whole extra year to work on it. RHSig.jpg talk 10:06, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
While I can appreciate that matchmaking to nearby levels would be one solution I don't think it's a practical one. I'm imagining a line; If you've got a finite playerbase, and an infinite level line, then no matter what arbitrary number of nearby levels you choose to group with you're going to get huge patches where there aren't enough to make a full game*. I know sometimes it takes a long time to get into AB, and that's without the players being split up by level. If this happened on the level split method then when you can't get a group in pvp you've got three choices; leave pvp to go and level up yourself, wait for other people below you to level up, or change who's in the party by kicking or adding. Assuming there're party size limits then the third choice isn't always there, and you get stuck with the first two. Neither of which is good. (*I'm not going to go into this unless asked, infinity's a little complicated.). Ezekiel [Talk] 03:18, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
I think "a little complicated" is rather mildly put. And in the context of this game it just makes no sense. Someone will start the game and see a dude who's level 1,452 and never start the client again. That's exactly why my husband stopped playing, actually, he said "I can never catch up to you" referring to campaign progress, skills, etc. Having a finite goal is motivating to reach it, while infinity is nothing more than a deterrent to most people. Except for the fat guy with a greasy half-bald rat tail in his mom's basement who hasn't showered for 8 days straight because he wants to be the highest level in the game and get so far ahead that nobody can catch up to him... Many bladders will explode because of that... RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 16:33, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
Need Sword of a Thousand Truths, imo. --JonTheMon 16:56, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
I'm sure they make only one in the game, and then give it to Gaile. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 19:30, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
They'd never give it to her, she would've killed us with her incompetence. RHSig.jpg talk 21:32, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
You're saying she would have figured out how to use it? RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 21:39, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

So it's coming after all.[edit source]

On January 30th Regina Buenaobra stated that she has played Guild Wars 2. The preceding unsigned comment was added by 88.85.129.179 (contribs) .

Um, yeah...? Why would anyone be doubting its existence? o.O —Dr Ishmael Diablo the chicken.gif 17:12, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
It's funny because Regina doesn't play GW1. Felix Omni Signature.png 17:15, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
Many are. 88.85.129.179 18:24, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

=([edit source]

[2] Cress Arvein Cress sig.JPG 06:59, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

WTF is all this crap about "delayed"? There was never a concrete release date for GW2, and anyone who takes this latest news as ANet "delaying" the game is being overly critical imo. (And you all know how little of an ANet apologist I am.) Entropy Sig.jpg (T/C) 07:33, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
There was a release date of sorts, they said it would be either this year or next. They threw the deadline ahead by a year, I think that counts as a delay. Also, NCSoft better be making the best damned MMO since Ultima Online, or I'm personally going over to Korea to beat their asses. RHSig.jpg talk 10:02, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
Great. That means we'll only have a year to play it before the world ends. Why are people making plans for things like 2014? It's like they think if they ignore the apocalypse, it won't happen. --Macros 22:17, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
Do not talk about religious ideas in a game or a game fansite. I find it annoying enough the people I have to deal with in Guild Wars who obsess over their religion/apocalypse idea. Anyone can intrepet a religious text any way they want. Go talk about it somewhere else. Ultra Dagger 22:26, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
Did you really think he was being serious? Chill out, dude. ShidoSig moebius2.gif 22:36, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
He is being serious as far as I can tell. Re-read it. Ultra Dagger 22:52, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
Methinks Macros has an odd sense of humor. Anyways, planning by the day > planning ahead for a multitude of years imo :) --- Ohaider! -- (contribs) (talk) 22:56, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
But Viper, it's only 1395 days away! We must plan ahead NOW or it'll be too late! --Macros 23:09, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
Needs moar userbox. --◄mendel► 01:44, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
GW2 If the apocalypse is in 2014 and Guild Wars 2 comes out in 2013, we'll only have a year to play it!

Something like that, perhaps? ShidoSig moebius2.gif 20:29, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

I thought the Apocalypse was in December 2012... RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 20:51, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure it is, atleast by aztecs.. besides 2013? shouldn't it come out late this year or early next year? if u have any plans of opening in 2k8 (even though they didnt they said they might) i highly doubt its coming out 5 yrs later 2010 at latest - Rabus 21:32, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
That was their original plan. Apparently it didn't pan out as they had anticipated. I still say this thing better be polished better than Flava Flav's gold clock, or some Koreans are gonna get their tiny balls smashed with a sledgehammer. RHSig.jpg talk 08:12, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Well I don't really give an F-word about apocalypse (at least I'll have something to talk about in the Mists (something like: you know, I was there when the world was over)) but I seriously want GW2 soon. I'm getting freakin' old and the best age for computer games is long gone... really just... damn, I don't want to scratch my grey beard over thinking which skill to fill my last empty spot just to forget what does the first skill do... --T-pack 21:42, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Userbox[edit source]

Give me the date for the apocalypse and the estimated date for GW2 to be out (day-month-year), and I'll make you a box that counts down both dates and computes how many days we can play GW2. Of course the computation resutl should remain constant, but if the GW2 release dates slips... --◄mendel► 13:08, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Haha, that would be nice. Too bad we have not a slightest clue about the release date yet... Better be before Dec 21, 2012, though. :P RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 17:59, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Possibilities for Races[edit source]

I know this is going to spark a LOT of controversy and a lot of name calling at my expense... BUt I've looked at this from a writer's point of view... And decided on some logical and enjoyable playable races for Guild Wars 2. We've got the Mursaat, first of all. Plenty of reason there, considering Lazarus claims that they'll return, and if we can be Charr, why not Mursaat? Second is the Margonite race. I'm a little fuzzy on the Lore here, but there was a Margonite who was against Abbadon, you quest with him in the realm of torment. Perhaps a detachment of Margonites who just want to regain their honor? Playable. Looking at the way Anet does this, I predict we'll be seeing an expansion of sorts involving Cantha and another involving Elona. (Forgive me if I'm missing something). This means, perhaps, we'll eventually see Tengu as a playable race? Maybe, maybe not. And the Margonite thing? Perhaps we'll see that in the GW2 equivalent of NIghtfall. If anyone has any LOGICAL, not OPINIONATED reason that these three races would never appear as playable, please speak now.  :P WE all know we wanna be Mursaat... ~Sir Guerbe~

Mursaat are always evil, always been, and always will be. They have no reason to be playable, but may reappear as foes again. They tricked D'Alessio and the White Mantle and have eradicated the Seer's race from Tyria, why would they all of a sudden want to help destroy the ancient dragons? For all you know, they may be indirectly serving them from the start.
The Charr, otoh, have overturned their false gods and became sort of like the Norn, fending each for themselves or their pride, so I can see how that can be possible.
One "good" Margonite is hardly enough, considering the rest of them were serving an evil god, but now that he's gone, they may as well be lost and looking for another puspose.
Tengu are a possibility, as long as they don't make those horrid noises I hear from Talon...
One I personally would like to see are Centaurs. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 03:05, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
Personally I wish they'd abandon races and stick to just humans. Races are going to be such a pain in the ass for pve players. Right now, one Ranger is as good as another; if you have a Ranger, you can use it for anything that Rangers can do. With races, a Charr Ranger will be different from a Sylvari Ranger which will be different from a Human Ranger, and if it turns out one does a certain role better than the others (and it will turn out that way, that's what race-specific characteristics do), your options will be to make a new character or try to fill the role with your sub-par character and not get in any groups. Felix Omni Signature.png 03:15, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
Okay, totally shot down my Mursaat idea. Margonites are possible, but not probable. Tengu I hope for, and considering the fact that little has been mentioned about Centaurs, that's possible as well. Oh and btw, one person is enough to make HUGE differences, who's not to say this one Margonite started a revolution among Margonites? Oh and I really don't mind the noise Talon makes... As long as they don't make the noise with EVERY action they make, I'm okay. Small doses, Anet, small doses... And I agree with Felix... I truly hope Race differences are not on that drastic of a level. THings like Norn having Bear Form, I'm okay with. Charr being better Rangers than Humans? Not so much. Let the races have their own SKILLS, not their own increased expertise with one specific class. AS if getting a group for elite missions wasn't getting difficult enough, imagine if only a certain RACE and class could get a position ina group? Eew. Guerbe no likey. ~SIr Guerbe~
Agreed with Felix, too. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 03:33, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
I just had an idea... What if the races themselves replace the current primary attribute idea (like Norn have more armor, Sylvari have more energy, etc. whatever it comes out to be) and the professions will be switchable, without having a permanent primary? OHMIGOSH! THAT WOULD BE SO AWESOME. Of course, some races would then be better at running some professions, but they have the choice to switch, and the only permanent thing is the race itself. That's how I would do it. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 03:40, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
I like the idea a lot. Sounds a little like the Final Fantasy MMO they have. Runescape-esque style of play without professions is great too, but then it wouldn't be Guild Wars....209.195.94.104 23:35, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
That's true. It would be Guild Wars 2.

I would like to take this time to recognise the true "bad guys" of Prophecies. You. yep, you. The Mursaat are the good guys. For the entirity of the campaign, the viser had you tricked into believing that the only way to defeat the Charr lay behing the door of Komalie, when actually he wanted to open the door so he could destroy the world. The Mursaat were only trying to stop you, the evil bad guys, from opening the door that would release the titans. Certainly, they were a bit deceptive, but the human sacrifices were necesary to keep the titans back, they were only doing it to keep the world from being destroyed. Maybe they arent saints, but they were/are by no means the bad guys. Shadowshear 22:54, February 4, 2010 (UTC)

GW2 and E3?[edit source]

I'm sure there are people besides myself who would Love love <3 to see some new GW2 media at E3 this year. Seeing as how the event is already past it's halfway point and we've still heard nothing, do you think we're going to hear anything? Also, is the lack of any material to release at such a large event a sign of GW2 still lacking any real content or is Anet just being COMPLETELY tight lipped? 24.15.93.154 05:02, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

They're claiming the latter, that's all we get for now. <3 Natal! RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 05:36, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
Seeing that some of their primary applications (for other games) such as the NCLauncher are written under .Net (probably VB.Net, knowing those skilless scumbags), I wouldn't be much surprised at all if they come out and admit they're re-writing it all in COBOL or Brainfuck, which is why it's taking so damn long. RHSig.jpg talk 08:13, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
Also possible that they think GW2 is rly going to be the best MMO ever made (so far) and don't whant to show any content for long time so Blizzard can't make even better one xD. Well, personally i hope that GW2 will be good enaugh to beat WoW finally. Btw a friend of mine told that the "delay" in GW2 relase is coused by the new MMO of NCsoft (AIUR if i remeber corectly) but I think it has nothing to do with it as GW2 is beeing developed by ArenaNet not NCsoft, I don't know where he took such informations from. Whay you think? Alex1991gw 22:28, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
Well to be simple about it... NCSoft is ArenaNet. :P
On other news, with different teams and whatnot no, I don't see why it would have an impact barring some strange marketing scheme... I'd have guessed it was the whole patenting issue they got slapped with, but if NCSoft are releasing a new one... hard to tell, in short. A F K sig 2.jpg A F K When Needed 22:48, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
That is wrong. ArenaNet developed Guild Wars. NCsoft is simply their parent/umbrella company; they have very little to do with any of the individual games under them. Entropy Entropy Sig 2.jpg (C) 23:34, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
To be simple about it A F K sig 2.jpg A F K When Needed 11:08, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
(In response to Alex1991gw #1): You actually think Blizzard has two brain cells in their whole company? Sure, they could make a good game, barring their innate inability to cognate rational...thunk. RHSig.jpg talk 18:25, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
Ummm... Are you saying blizzard doesn't make good games? WoW is the exeption. Just look at starcraft. It's about 10 years old and still brilliant.--TalkpageEl_Nazgir 19:11, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
I meant they don't have any good talent any more. Their earlier games are actually pretty decent (re Diablo I), but their latter games (WoW, Diablo II, et cetera) are pretty much crap. That and I have a moral thing against them. Rainbows belong in Diablo about as much as sparkling belongs ANYWHERE in a vampire novel. RHSig.jpg talk 05:35, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
I don't recall any rainbows in Diablo 2 :S BTW, warcraft 3 is also a great game, and many people still play it too (although DotA screwed up online play of custom maps imo). It's true that they went a bit too far with the RPG elements, but otherwise, still great. I just hope GW2 will be at least as good as most blizzard games.--TalkpageEl_Nazgir 10:00, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
Diablo II was one big rainbow (go to Act 5, kill Baals minions with, say, a Poison Nec, Meteor/FOrb sorc or what have you...). Btw; D3 trailer featured a rainbow. It looked quite nice, imo. If you want a dark game, don't choose an action-RPG >.>" </1-line-rant> --- Ohaider! -- (contribs) (talk) 15:14, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, diablo 3 looks nice. BTW, when I tried killing Baal's minions with a poison necro, I failed miserably, as they healed too fast and kept killing me. That necro has sadly dissapeared shortly afterwards, and I haven't got a clue how the hell that happened :-( --TalkpageEl_Nazgir 16:44, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
Sure, it looks good, but it still feels at least somewhat out of place. Also, are you implying action-RPG's can't be dark? I call bullshit. And no, I wasn't talking about D2 with the rainbow comment, pay more attention to current events, foo. Also, trying to aim to be what Blizzard is not what it was (which was good) is like expecting a princess to be a coprophiliac. Sure, she might turn out to be one, but do you really want it? RHSig.jpg talk 19:18, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
Well,SC2 and Diablo 3 look very promising, so I'm not sure what you don't like about Blizzard "now".--TalkpageEl_Nazgir 19:28, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
Not going into that. I'd rather not get into trouble with any of the higher-ups here. RHSig.jpg talk 03:02, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
What do you mean? Trouble with higher ups? Don't forget GW:YAV...--TalkpageEl_Nazgir 09:47, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
This Higher-Up editor says you can discuss Blizzard on your user talkpages all you want. :) If I were you, I'd move everything from "(In response to Alex1991gw #1)" on to R.H.'s talk and continue there. --◄mendel► 10:18, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
Pfft, this isn't GWW. We're not afraid of off-topic discussion. Entropy Entropy Sig 2.jpg (C) 23:36, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
We're not afraid of higher-ups here, either. But as an editor, I still recommend moving it to a personal talkpage. :) --◄mendel► 23:39, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
I could debate how YAV is a bunch of malarkey, if ya want. RHSig.jpg talk 15:27, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Do it! (on someone's talkpage, feel free to use mine) --◄mendel► 10:55, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

reset indent How about I use my own instead, hmm? RHSig.jpg talk 22:19, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

GW2 Playable Races[edit source]

GW2 Playable Races.jpg

Any use for this Image? -- F1Sig.png † F1© Talk 13:02, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

I just wish there was a Mursaat floating behind them... *sigh* :P --TalkpageEl_Nazgir 15:39, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
It was. But it was killed and eaten by that nasty Asura -- F1Sig.png † F1© Talk 15:48, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
Holy crap that Asura looks weird... O_o RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 16:52, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
And f'ning pissed. --- VipermagiSig.JPG -- (contribs) (talk) 16:56, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
Indeed, that Asura looks like its about to beat the everloving crap outta you if you so much as look at it funny. RHSig.jpg rede | beiträge 18:18, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
It seems it's a girl... Witch makes her even more dangers once a month. Lets hope to the gods that it's not this week. Or we are doomed... DOOMED I TELL YOU! -- F1Sig.png † F1© Talk 18:31, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
lol black asura. Entropy Sig.jpg (T/C) 22:58, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
it seems odd, but expand the image a to a full size, he looks less angry. or she.
Is that charr... standing... straight?
A lot can happen in 250 years, it seems. Seems the Gods have accelerated evolution somewhat in Tyria. RHSig.jpg rede | beiträge 09:55, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
The Norn and the human are almost the same size? and what happend to those long asura ears? Lยкץ๒๏ץ talk 10:26, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
Perspective is your friend.--Łô√ë Roar.îğá†ħŕášħ 02:15, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
RONG! The Norn is closer to the screen, therefore perspective states that she should seem larger, and therefore the Norn is probably smaller than that human despite looking the same size. If the human had been the close one, then yes, you'd be correct. But you aren't --Gimmethegepgun 02:17, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
Perspective can be fucked with just as easily as humans.--Łô√ë Roar.îğá†ħŕášħ 02:52, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
As such, in a world of magic, your point is rendered moot, as is mine. However, since I declared it moot, I also declare myself the victor! Yay me! --Gimmethegepgun 02:57, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
They're folded back to the side, got some sort of flaps over them (presumably a helmet) --Gimmethegepgun 01:52, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
There are Charr that stand straight - see Charr Martyr. Jink 02:32, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
If you look at their knees, the human's are way higher than the norn's. Ypu can't see it very well in the picture tho, but I'm pretty sure the human is standing on a ledge or something elevated of the sort. Never fear! Norn are still taller! Shadowshear 13:48, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Palawa Joko[edit source]

Lol I'm surprised this guy has suddenly become the uber evil baddy that he is. In GW:Nightfall he was pretty much chucked into the game for the comedy value, but now he's a monster! Is it just me, or does the current story of GW2 seem much heavier and more brutal than the happy, relaxed tale of GW1?--81.158.59.134 23:07, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

It would be so great if ANet made it an R or M-rated game by including awesome content, but I'll settle for a less silly storyline as a compromise, too. Entropy Sig.jpg (T/C) 23:10, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Money level[edit source]

There should be a unlimited money level where it can be actually over 100k. Just hate it when using ectos as money!

Well I think it gets more fun with trading and a more linging trade econemi thingy. But it would be a lot handyer if you could trade over 100k yes -- F1Sig.png † F1© Talk 10:34, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Would be easier but its also too easy. ..┼User:Mushroomed ┼.. 13:36, April 11, 2010 (UTC)

Easier, the 100k limit is a hassle, nothing else. RandomTime 14:51, April 11, 2010 (UTC)
Was, at the release of GW. Now it's an integral part of the GW economy. Dunno how good it would be to make it limitless, but here's to hoping that the limit is much higher in GW2, for example 10 mil on character (in GW1 economic range) and 50 mil in storage. This would remove any need for "substitute" currency for 99.9% of items traded in the game. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 15:42, April 12, 2010 (UTC)
At least until the pricks come in and start selling their shit for exorbitant prices... RHSig.jpg rede | beiträge 14:33, April 13, 2010 (UTC)
Hopefully they don't make it too easy to get money like it was in Tabula Rasa. That game's economy failed because it was just too fucking easy to get money, and so everything cost a fortune. Oh, and I might add that it was mainly easy to get money as guardian or spy, but others chewed up a lot of money. The reason? Guardian and Spah didn't need ammo. But anyway, that's what happens when you have too much money flowing into the system and not enough money sinks to remove it --Gimmethegepgun 18:21, April 13, 2010 (UTC)
Well, I think GW1 did a good job with the economy, I think it's the most balanced I've heard of in an MMO, and without lame shit like buying potions, ammo, or repairing stuff all the time (ID/salv kits are dirt cheap, and pay for themselves anyway). Here's to hoping GW2 does even better. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 23:42, April 13, 2010 (UTC)
Trying to do better than "good" causes "shit". See also: WoW/D2/HL(2)/etc. clones. <ot>That's why I'm not sure about GW2 in whole, with the world going persistant over instanced.</ot> --- VipermagiSig.JPG -- (contribs) (talk) 12:45, April 14, 2010 (UTC)
That's a good point, a lot of MMOs that come out, are specifically targeting themselves as the "next WoW" - which is an impossible task at the moment. You can still make money without being WoW. Having played both persistent and non-persistent MMOs, I can say that persistent adds a sense of being in a massive world, but in exchange, you loose the localized storyline/plot that Guild Wars had. Back to the economy - I think a more important economy measure would be the inclusion of map travel or not, that's what's really balanced the GW economy today (as there's no penalty to get to/from higher level areas once you've been there once to sell stuff). It'll be interesting to see the travel system in GW2, and how that effects the economy RandomTime 13:17, April 14, 2010 (UTC)
I hadn't thought of travel as part of the economy but you're quite right. They do have the precedent of UW and FoW entry fees, but by Slaver's that'd dropped. (I don't consider Urgoz/Deep to be quite the same because those can be more easily entered with faction than cash, and given faction's limited uses and natural accumulation in their areas they're basically free entry if you play factions) -Ezekiel [Talk] 14:28, April 14, 2010 (UTC)
They had better not switch over to real-time travel. That would be a huge dealbreaker for me - I will NOT play a game where >50% of my playtime consists of forced marches between places. —Dr Ishmael Diablo the chicken.gif 14:26, April 14, 2010 (UTC)
Oh god, don't even say that. I've seen my cousin play Perfect World, and I thought I was gonna cry every time she set up her character to fly over for 30 minutes at a time. >_< RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 14:43, April 14, 2010 (UTC)
At least in EVE the travel time is actually an important part of the economy: If traveling too slowly through 0.0 space you don't own you might get jumped :P But then again, that's what warp freighters and blockade runners are for --Gimmethegepgun 17:16, April 14, 2010 (UTC)

[edit source]

I think we can use this image as a logo for now, since it's from Facebook, which to me screams public use (but I may be wrong, so I'm asking here first). Couldn't find one with the Guild Wars text outside of the official wiki, which is copyrighted and does not allow public use. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 05:59, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Other races..[edit source]

"It is currently not known if there will be additional races" I think there won't be additional races because they allready released the trailer with only thesse 5 races...82.73.139.17 10:06, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Well maybe if they make other campaigns like Factions and Nightfall. Than there will maybe be new playable races. Like Dredge, Tengu, Naga, Forgotten, Undead, Centaur or Margonite who knows... -- F1Sig.png † F1© Talk 15:29, September 1, 2009 (UTC)

Gods[edit source]

Just was thinking how many Gods there will be? I guess atleast same five gods, maybe more?.. abaddons gone. but what happened/happens to Kormir, Goddess of Truth. Charr's had "gods" but I think they were told they should not have gods.. And how will Favor-thingie going to work.. Anyone have ideas? I'm going reading.. --Crare 14:45, September 1, 2009 (UTC)

Hey wait.. were those ancient dragons older than gods..? --Crare 14:50, September 1, 2009 (UTC)
Kormir will be one of the (by then) 6 true gods I think. And yes, the dragons are older than the gods.--TalkpageEl_Nazgir 15:02, September 1, 2009 (UTC)
A bit weird the Dragons were first. But the gods created magic. Soo They kind of doomed the world by giving the dragons there power -- F1Sig.png † F1© Talk 15:22, September 1, 2009 (UTC)
The Ancient Dragons were in Tyria LONG before the Gods arrived. Don't know if they're older than the Gods, but they were HERE first --Gimmethegepgun 15:28, September 1, 2009 (UTC)
Looking at the Timeline, I see no evidence of this, guess I got some Warcraft lore mixed in (NOT WoW, you fools, Warcraft III) --Gimmethegepgun 15:31, September 1, 2009 (UTC)
I remember somthing that it was writen somewere that the dragons were first but I don't remember were or when I wrote that -- F1Sig.png † F1© Talk 16:09, September 1, 2009 (UTC)
MotW is always a good place to start. --- VipermagiSig.JPG -- (contribs) (talk) 16:24, September 1, 2009 (UTC)

Comparison of Playable Races[edit source]

The following is largely subjective, but I've come up with a chart comparing various aspects that the races seem to differ in. I'm curious as to how others would differentiate the races from each other.

Human Charr Norn Asura Sylvari
Essence Society; Order Primal Force; Chaos Individual Valor; Heraldry Scientific Understanding Harmonious Hivemind
Derive Power from Established state; Indomitable Faith Primal Force; unhindered by morality Spiritual Connection with Wilderness;

forged by harsh environment and inspired by native beasts;

physically embody powerful spirits to overcome challenges

Technological Advancement;

Create tools to overcome challenges

Unity
Culture Alluded to Arthurian Society Genghis Khan's Mongol Empire Norse Mythos (Heroic Heraldry) /

Native American (Animal Spirituality + Totems)

Mesoamerica some borg elements
Government Feudal Monarchy Unstable Federation of Legions None; Isolationists/Small Communes Technocracy None; Natural Harmony

--No man 18:00, December 10, 2009 (UTC)

I lolled at the "borg elements" (which ones actually?). I think we don't know enough about the Silvari to draw much conclusions though. For the rest, seems nice and correct.--TalkpageEl_Nazgir 18:06, December 10, 2009 (UTC)
I think the only borg element that applies to the sylvari is the hive mind aspect. The concept has been done many times in many different ways, but I can understand the borg being the easiest example to think of. —Dr Ishmael Diablo the chicken.gif 18:55, December 10, 2009 (UTC)
Hmmm... If the first example I think of is from one of the (many) Star Wars books pre-dating Episode 1's creation, does that mean I'm a freakish nerd? :S --TalkpageEl_Nazgir 19:28, December 10, 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, I was clutching at straws when I was trying to pin the Sylvari hivemind to an established culture. Interestingly enough, they really do seem to be essentially fresh and new as the writers intended. As for which borg elements I'd have to concede that the only way they're similar so far is the collective consciousness aspect. What's interesting about the Sylvari's spin on the idea is that they appear to be a benevolent, peaceful race, as opposed to practically most of the more prominent hiveminds I've heard of. The Borg, Zerg, and Tyranids are all basically hellbent on assimilating and subjugating the entire universe to their collective, which consists of drones incapable of individual thought and lack any sort of free will. The Sylvari, while sharing the same "dream," appear to have the ability to make their own decisions. In fact, they're a collective of premature beings still struggling to find their identity, whereas every other race seems to have its identity established after millenia. They seem to in part be a play on the idea of the limitless potential that comes with new creation still in development. I suppose I would think of the Sylvari as an allusion to the "Green" Generation (pun intended).
That aside, religious zealots, tree huggers, and midgets with superiority complexes rub me the wrong way. I suppose I'll be playing Charr/Norn unless the other races become dramatically more appealing. No man 19:42, December 11, 2009 (UTC)
Hehe. I'll get at least a character of each, but I think I'll play Sylvari mostly. You pretty much just described why I like them so much.--TalkpageEl_Nazgir 20:33, December 11, 2009 (UTC)
I can't stand the Asuras, Gadd is a good example of why. :P Since I have to play everything, I'll play them last. My first will be Sylvari and Charr. Zerg were also my favorite, balance issues aside. :] RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 16:16, December 29, 2009 (UTC)
I think the best way to describe any potential Norn government would probably be a Meritocracy. Basically, you have to actually earn your power, instead of either taking it (dictatorship), inheriting it (monarchy), or by being popular (democracy). Although the same might be said about the Asura... RHSig.jpg rede | beiträge 16:57, March 26, 2010 (UTC)
Technocracies are typically thought of as meritocracies. And yeah, I'd say that's a good description of any potential Norn government --Gimmethegepgun 17:04, March 26, 2010 (UTC)

Guild Wars 2 concept art collections[edit source]

Here is 3 Concept art collections of GW2

Guild Wars 2: GDC 2010 - YouTube Edition - Part 1
Guild Wars 2: GDC 2010 - YouTube Edition - Part 2
Guild Wars 2: GDC 2010 - YouTube Edition - Part 3

Man there is a lot of interesting stuff here. Still can't wait for GW2 -- F1Sig.png † F1© Talk 14:08, March 25, 2010 (UTC)


And of course part 4, the last part:

Guild Wars 2: GDC 2010 - YouTube Edition - Part 4


Those weapon sets look cool. And not to forget, after them weapon sets, the moment when the cutscene starts at 3:26, we are spoiled with 'You've finally made it. Eir has stirred up every'. I guess we can assume (rumor, maybe, perhaps) that Guild Wars 2 cutscene's will be shown in this style of art. 77.164.17.245 07:08, March 26, 2010 (UTC)

They already said that the cutscene's whil be concept art like ingame ;P (See first GW movie) -- F1Sig.png † F1© Talk 16:59, April 15, 2010 (UTC)