Talk: Prophecies to Factions

• The 75 skills you posted for Prophecies, are actualy combined of core and Prophecies skills. a seperation should be made. remember that someone who has Factions and considering buying Prophecies might get here.
• Don't write an article in the first person, unless it's part of your user page.
• For the title "Protector of <continent>" you need to compleate ALL missions at the highest level in that continent.
• I would have added info of ascention in both continents, the diference in running or rushing them, and the starter areas.

Foo 11:49, 4 June 2006 (CDT)

Against Deletion

There isn't a good reason to delete this, it shows the main differences between the games. If anything, it should simply be enhanced with character info as well. DavimusK 23:29, 5 June 2006 (CDT)

• Vote to Keep: I agree, this page might be simple, but it does have a fair amount of useful information for someone that's might be trying to decide which chapter they might like to purchase. I think this will become even more informative once the next chapters come out.--Xis10al 06:14, 6 June 2006 (CDT)
• Vote to Keep: The page needs tidying up and more information would be nice, but the actual information is good. Diisagree that the article is 'temporal', technically every article in the wiki is 'temporal' as all it takes is an update from ANet to totally invalidate something. GregPalo 06:38, 6 June 2006 (CDT)

1. It's temporal because it assumes there is only prophecies and factions. If we'll be doing a Features by Campaign article, it needs to look at the topic from a different perspecitve. It needs to first define what are the features to be looked at and then compare the campaigns.
2. This article copies (verbatim) the Factions article. The Factions article has a section that lists the new "features" in factions.
3. There is no voting going on here, voice your opinions and make a case for and against. In the end, if an admin still thinks it gets the axe, it will. Another admin can come and resurrect it too. Deletion is an admin authority, not a congressional process.

--Karlos 07:50, 6 June 2006 (CDT)

Karlos makes good points. I don't think the article is worthless, but it shouldn't stand as it is, especially as the intent of the page seems to stand. I think a side-by-side comparison of chapters is useful, possibly even including Core (to show the things you get no matter which chapter you buy). For propsective GuildWars players, I think a page more or less dedicated to helping people figure out why they'd want one or the other is a good thing to have. (That said, the name and intent of the page would need to change.) --JoDiamonds 11:34, 6 June 2006 (CDT)

Personally, I think the stats on skills, missions, bonus reward etc, really has NO pertainent information that can help new players make anywhere near an informed decision regarding whether they should buy Guild Wars or GWF. I agree about a major cleanup (and move) for the perspective of "Differences between Campaigns" (not necessarily just features). -User:PanSola (talk to the ) 13:09, 6 June 2006 (CDT)

Well sorry. I should not have done a table. It was meant to be a list of things, a player that had been playing Prophecies some time ago (and I actually mean "some time ago", because most active players will know close to everything here), should know. It should have told him, that he will have to buy nearly all of the skills himself now. It should have told him, that he should try to do missions fast (because of the new bonus system), and stuff like that.

I remember when I started Factions, and did not know stuff like that. I noticed that I had to buy skills my self, so I did - but I did not know that there is a single person giving you quests that give you skills, so I feared I had bought skills I would have received from these quests (I think I actually did not buy any of those, gladly). I did two missions, without knowing about the new bonus system, because there is not a single fansite, that contains information about the new bonus system - at least I could not find one.

It should have been a simple list of stuff like that. I just wanted to have that information I gathered in hours of website crawling and try 'n' error, within a single page.

Sorry that it ended up in a bad article like this, and especially that I posted it in that raw and far from finished form. Maybe I will change it to such a list, but at the moment I do not feel very motivated, especially by the kind of feedback is given here. Additionally I would like to suggest, that if something is wrong, just change it, do not just post it to the talk page. That won't change it, and it is most definately not the intention of a WIKI - as far as my understanding is concerned. Br, exkalation 17:35, 7 June 2006 (CDT)

No worries; you don't have to defend yourself or the article. Take it for granted unless shown otherwise that we all Assume good faith. You intended to write something useful, some people want it changed. That's all in the spirit of the wiki, also. --JoDiamonds 12:18, 8 June 2006 (CDT)

Never appologize for an article you created, Exkalation. :) It's not like you hurt the wiki or offended anyone. What we are questioning is whether the article purpose itself is needed (i.e. an article coparing two specific campaigns), whether it is needed in the light of Factions and if needed, whether this is the way to go about it. --Karlos 19:42, 8 June 2006 (CDT)

Revisit keeping article?

I just spotted this - the above conversation seems to have gone stagnant some time ago. Given that new campaigns will come out on a regular basis, I don't feel this very limited scope article serves a useful purpose. Better to just link to the capaigns, or to totally revamp this article to include all campaigns (in which case, the table should be flipped so that capaigns are on the left instead of on the top). --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 14:41, 11 December 2006 (CST)

So ... no objections to deleting this? --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 12:33, 14 December 2006 (CST)

Nice idea, but as already commented above, the formatting needs to be reconsidered to cope with additional chapters as they are released (maybe turn the table sideways, so each chapter is above the next, and use the columns for the "Skills", Skill Acquistion", "Missions" etc details, this might be more scalable?). That's my 2 cents --Wolfie 19:59, 14 December 2006 (CST)