Talk:Guild Wars 2/Archive1

Wiki Coverage
Im wondering if this actually ends up to be a game, will the wiki cover it? Hoax 16:46, 13 March 2007 (CDT)


 * I bet it will, or it will at least have a GW2 sister project. Besides, who said that Guild Wiki was only for Guild Wars 1? Guild Wars 2 is still a Guild Wars game in my book. Alreajk 19:11, 20 March 2007 (CDT)


 * I suppose you could use the official wiki, so we don't end up with 2 separate ones. 132.203.83.38 08:04, 22 March 2007 (CDT)

More Info
I guess people had better start writing articles for GW2 now. The name has been confirmed by PC Gamer, and the Beta is allegly going to start in 2008. Trogam 21:09, 20 March 2007 (CDT)

Races
"Humans, Charr, Norns, Asurians and Sylvarians"

We know right now what Charr, Humans and Asuras are, but any ideas on what Norns and Sylvarians are? I'm guessing Norns might be Shiverpeak-like Dwarfs, but Sylvarians could be anything. I'm hoping for something Tengu-like. Concerned Citizen 23:54, 20 March 2007 (CDT)
 * As for Tengu-like, we already have Tengu. I cannot fathom what the Sylvarians will be like but I'm pretty sure every Sylvarian character will be named Something Legolas or Arwen Something :P Ishmaeel 00:06, 21 March 2007 (CDT)
 * My personal guess is that the sylvarians are going to be some kind of elf or tree-creature lookalike. Mostly because of etymology of the name - "sylvarian" most likely comes from "sylvan", an adjective meaning "of the forest", although it can also refer to a wood spirit. Just my 2 cents. Phydeaux 04:42, 21 March 2007 (CDT)
 * Well, it was an easy guess was it not? Lookie-look (Check the external link to Sylvari there) --[[Image:lazyeyes.png]]Ishmaeel .ping ; .peek; 06:33, 21 March 2007 (CDT)
 * I remember reading from the article ANet are a bit tight lipped about races and stuff. Perhaps that means there are other races available that they haven't announced. So that could mean Tengu and maybe even Dwarves will be there. 132.203.83.38 08:06, 22 March 2007 (CDT)

Level cap
After reading the summaries and the post of Gaile, I came to the conclusion that PvP will probably have a low level cap, something like lvl 20, to keep the battles easily balancable. PvE however will go up to 100 or even uncapped because players have wished for it. It seems that all levels will make your character tougher so that high level chars are incompatible with low level ones, otherwise they wouldn't need 'events that allow low and high level players to play together'. -- (talk) 03:49, 21 March 2007 (CDT)

That's pretty bad IMO, the level cap made Gw's unique. Solus  03:53, 21 March 2007 (CDT)
 * Yea I agree, but I think they are trying to compete more directly with mmorpgs such as WoW and EQ2 with this game, so a lot of the things that made Guild Wars 1 unique will not be seen in the new game. I don't think the target audience is precisely the same as the first game, which means quite a few of us here won't be enjoying Guild War's future.  :-( :-( :-( --Wormy 04:25, 21 March 2007 (CDT)
 * I'm personally in favor of a higher PvE level cap... it feels like the plotlines could have used a higher level cap. I mean, maybe up to level 40 or so, simply to allow more progression in character power as you move through the game. I wasn't a fan of "level 20, now start the real game" design of Factions, and to a lesser extend, Nightfall. Phydeaux 04:45, 21 March 2007 (CDT)
 * Whilst I would like to see a level cap higher than 20 I am now glad there isn't, since I like to have one of each profession on my character selection screen. Having the low level cap of 20 helps to let people experiment with what other professions have to offer.  GuildWars is unique. Lets keep it that way. --SK [[Image:Assassin-icon-small.png]]  06:50, 21 March 2007 (CDT)
 * For every game I've played, I always liked gaining levels. However, if this does happen, I hope that they come up with a level decreaser when entering PvP areas. I used to use my PvE characters, though I have a PvP slot at times and now I hope I will keep this new PvP slot. I am sure other players use PvE character for PvP as well.
 * Also, it makes going back to other campaigns way to easy. DoA with level 100 would be a joke as will the lesser areas. And how would this level cap affect GW2? Assuming our characters will still be accessible with the new full game. &mdash; Gares 11:24, 21 March 2007 (CDT)
 * I thought that I read that the original guild wars characters would not be playable in GW2? Then again, I've been reading so much, it could've easilly been speculation one way or another - I can't recall now where I read it (one of Gaile's posts, or just something on a forum - no idea now).  --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 11:32, 21 March 2007 (CDT)
 * Gaile said that the new level cap is for GW2, not GWEN; and that characters aren't transferrable to GW2 but there will be a sort of reward for having had achievements in GW1. &mdash; [[Image:Fin_sig.gif|User:Kyrasantae]] kyrasantae   11:33, 21 March 2007 (CDT)
 * I'm trying to contain my anger for the hours I've spent playing GW. :P If money and items aren't transferrable at least, look for me in Ascalon ID 1 the day before GW2 comes out. I will be giving out around 2000k and around 400 different greens :( &mdash; Gares 11:38, 21 March 2007 (CDT)
 * I am a little out of touch with the new news regarding both GW:EN and GW2. GW2 seems to be set 100 years in the future. I doubt Gares will be much of a warrior at the age of around 125. :p &mdash; Gares 11:53, 21 March 2007 (CDT)


 * Very simular to Fallout 2 rants about not being able to use same character in a game set ~75 years from the first. How fun is it to hunt rats with mini guns and plasma rifles on a 93 year old character =D. Im sure there will be a limit (lets say 100) to where level will acctualy have a function in the game mechanics above that might be purly visual effect, sort of title. Biz 14:17, 21 March 2007 (CDT)


 * It's the usual reaction to putting aside something that you've invested a lot of time into. If you think, players have to do it all the time. I know I lost thousands of hours when I stopped playing on a NWN persistant world. It seems like this has been a fast run through the GW1 series, but I guess a recorded 3500+ hours is far from a fast run. :P &mdash; Gares 15:05, 22 March 2007 (CDT)

From what I've read from gaile's posts and people's summaries of fromt he magazine. There is two type of PvP. One where every llv fights any lvl with your PvE chars (so the lvl 100's will just take out everhting so non-lvl 100s will prolyl not bother). The other will be like the current PvP every1 is max lvl. The PvP is meant to be more like WoW (i have not played WoW) but its like massive unorganised teams on massive battle grounds which people come in and out of an last days (like real battles). And when the battle ends (after days of bloodshed) it get reset and teams are set evenlyish by the game, or something. Jupsto 16:23, 21 March 2007 (CDT)
 * Un-equalized PvP (ab style) in other games where levels range from 20s to 120s have minimum level requirement to enter the battle, while higher levels do have certain advantages they do not exactly sweep the floor whit mid levels due to sheer number of opponents. Biz 16:32, 21 March 2007 (CDT)

I wonder what is the relation between lvl and the usefulness of skills? I hope they don't balance it like blizzard with their each profession/race is better than another. What I'm trying to say is that they will be most likely be focusing on balancing race/proffesions rather than balancing skills. I dislike this quite a bit.

What I'm really interested is how do they plan to get money?? I mean they made a perfect subscribe to play environment. They will lose money if they have no monthly fees because servers will need support, paying etc... Only way i see is to overpay for the starting package or earn rl money on game money or upgrades (latter seems more eligible. Like a 5lvl boost for only 2.99$). Sith 10:48, 22 March 2007 (CDT)
 * Apparently they're doing fine money-wise atm, so why wouldn't they for GW2? Don't see your point. --&#91;riVen] 11:00, 22 March 2007 (CDT)
 * Hmm obviously they are abandoning the campaigns because they don't have enough ideas for one race. Seeing each chapter would have to add new places/storyline/professions for each race that would be even harder. Ok lets say they have expansions:

1. You make each expansion seperate but each has a requirement of earlier game and/or expansion(s). Next worst after monthly subscription. 2. You make each expansion separate and no requirements of later games... this would be best scenario but the income isn't good enough unless you make some pretty cool addition (level caps higher/new proffesions/new battle types/new skills...)

On the other hand seeing this an open environment where players will spend many (more) hours/days/months playing. I mean it just like leaving 1000 dollars on a road. Someone will get the idea to pick it up... Dunno if they can hold on their corporate money sucking demons away from GW forever. Sith 14:19, 22 March 2007 (CDT)


 * They said that they will release expansions to GW2, that should make them more money from the game. --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 17:49, 22 March 2007 (CDT)


 * Hmm how will expansions be implemented? If each expansion requires all previous expansions thats about as same as the monthly fee. Maybe if each expansion only requires one previous expansion it would be tollerable. Dunno this smells fishy but only time will tell. And the wait will be long. Sith 08:33, 23 March 2007 (CDT)

Playeble?
Just wondering, playeble stands here for just seeing them as foe's or you can actually BECOME one? InfestedHydralisk  11:04, 21 March 2007 (CDT)


 * Playable race means a race that can be played. They will be introduced as NPC (non-playable) races is GW:EN, so they will get familiar... and in GW2, yes, yo will be able to play them. --Deadly Lollipop 11:41, 21 March 2007 (CDT)


 * Cool, very cool :D InfestedHydralisk  [[image:Shadow_Prison.jpg|19px]] 12:40, 21 March 2007 (CDT)

requirments?
if ther are any infos about the system requirements, please tell me <.< if you dont have info, what do you think? will the reqs increase dramatically or just a bit? will you be able to gw2 on a gw1-able pc?
 * Gaile previously had said that today's mid-range PC's would be able to run GW2 just fine. She said those that have higher-end machines would have extra eye candy but those would not be min or recommended reqs. She also said that DX10 would be supported but not req'd. --[[Image:lazyeyes.png]]Ishmaeel .ping ; .peek; 11:13, 21 March 2007 (CDT)

ah thx :D and what is a todays's mid range PC? sorry, i dont know much about pcs <.< >.>
 * My Sempron 1.74, 768MB, 128MB Radeon 9550 is able (but struggles) to play Stalker (Dx9 Game released in 2 days on the 23d) witch would be something to expect from GW2 as well. I would just quess that mid range pc in a year will at least 1gig ram, 256 MB Dx9 card and 3Gig Intel or equivalent AMD cpu. Not dual core just yet. Biz 13:54, 21 March 2007 (CDT)

I always thought my PC sux, but it seems to be not that bad then :D Best way is probably to wait for Beta. 19:27, 21 March 2007 (CDT)

Tradeskills, please?
Seriously, if we're gonna have a huge/no level cap, there's gonna be people who want to do something else for a while, and not PVP. This holds true in WoW too, the game GW2 keeps getting compared to. If there's one thing that I've noticed through the campaigns, finding that base equipment you want with the right mods is mostly based on luck, or even more rarely, hoping for a green drop, if there's a good one. Combined with an Auction House, this will buff quality PVE play through the roof. I mean, 90% of my salvaged materials just sit in my Storage, useless. Why not put it to good use? BarGamer 12:41, 21 March 2007 (CDT)
 * Just becouse GW is steping away from formula that put them on the map does not mean they will make it just like WoW, auction houses are useless to say the least, good/popular upgrades will be flying off your hands if you put reasonable price on them in a populated district. You have guild mates, allaince and even heros to upgrade, if none can use/whant what you keep in the storage then its not worth keeping in first place. Biz
 * I agree. I bet a-net does also so no worries. Jupsto [[image:Feck_Off.jpg|19px]] 16:24, 21 March 2007 (CDT)

Norns & Sylvari?
Neither of these are a mob or a piece of art in any of the existing manuals? --198.254.16.201 15:26, 21 March 2007 (CDT)
 * That's why they're new.. --[[User:Sigm@|Sig mA

]] 15:27, 21 March 2007 (CDT)
 * Ive seen high res concept of Norn on http://community.guildwarshelp.com/ posted by one of the admins so there is concepts of them floating on the net =D Biz 16:22, 21 March 2007 (CDT)
 * They'll be in GW:EN so not completely new by the time GW2 rolls around. 132.203.83.38 08:10, 22 March 2007 (CDT)

PC Gamer
I added the same link somebody put on the Eye of the north talk page. Not sure its 100% legal. Who ever scanned the magazine breached copyright, but we are just linking people to the site where somebody has hosted the images. Anyhow, mods you decide. Jupsto 11:37, 22 March 2007 (CDT)

what happens to razah?
&rArr; moved to talk:Razah

Good Idea or Bad Idea
Do you think this game is a good idea destined for greatness or a bad idea that will screw anet over?--68.192.188.142 18:10, 22 March 2007 (CDT)

Great. Jupsto 07:30, 23 March 2007 (CDT)

Its GREAT IDEA! How many times I was depressed over not being able to get higher level or jump off the ledge in the Bloodstone fen and finish the mission before its started, or swim in the tar -.- no... not the tar. Biz 08:12, 23 March 2007 (CDT)

Smells Bad. Oh an biz if you like jumping and sliding go get yourself a platform game (there you even have double or even triple and quadruple jump and super fun happy slide)... I hate bliping jumping and sliding. Now GW will look like it is infested with rabbits... Same as WoW... sigh. Curse you WoW and blind ANet copycats. Maybe Anet could make a spell that instantly kills persons in 1000mile radius that jump or are jumping. Then it would be playable.Sith 08:39, 23 March 2007 (CDT)

Destined for greatness. 132.203.83.38 16:18, 23 March 2007 (CDT)