User talk:Regina Buenaobra/Archive Game Related Topics/July 2008

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

GW2 FAQs

So, I read the GW2 FAQ page that was put up today. It was mostly stuff we have already heard, but 2 things stuck out in my mind, and they each concern me greatly

1: The phrase "find equipment". I understand weapons, but does the finding part include armor? I sure hope not.

2: "With Guild Wars 2 we will commence beta testing closer to the game's release. With that in mind, we will not start beta testing in 2008 as we had originally planned." So, is there not gunna be anything new GW2 related at PAX if your gunna keep us in suspense then?

I'm a little more concerned by those questions than reassured..... --Wolf 21:05, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Pathetic. -- Brains12 \ talk 21:10, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Care to explain your statement? --Wolf 21:18, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Personally, I'd like to thank ANet for at least posting something reminding players who don't visit the wiki on a daily basis or talk on the talk pages like this all the time that they are still working on GW2 and that it hasn't just disappeared completely off the map. I personally was excited to see that there was a new post to the GW RSS feed (which I check fairly often) regarding GW2, and even though there wasn't a whole lot of new information, it was nice to see that ANet is being honest with the player base and letting us all know that the schedule for the project has been pushed back. Sure, this means no beta testing in 08, but I like the honesty that ANet is projecting here. In summary, kudos to you folk for reminding the player base that GW2 hasn't disappeared entirely. --Ang 21:29, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

This is one of those little things that will sit there and nibble at the back of my brain making it even harder to Wait for PAX ( I WANNF FREAKIN GO! =D ), and GW2...... But yeah, bit of a bummer that GW2 beta got pushed back, but thanks for letting us knwo that it did get pushed back before we made it inot Q3 08 and people started asking, "WTF? Where is the GW2 beta?". The loop may not be as big as I (and probably everyone else) would like, but you are keeping us in it, and thats a very good thing, thanks for that, and don't let us fall out of it. --Wolf 21:40, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Almost all information on Guild Wars 2 had been released last year along with the EoTN news. All the FAQ listed was what we already know, along with the fact that we probably won't be hearing more until it's released. It seems that even a rough release estimate (even the year) is not known by ArenaNet -- "when it's finished" is hardly showing your confidence in a 2009/2010 release. What with the beta being close to the actual release, it seems that Guild Wars 2 information will be coming along with it, and not before. Why the Guild Wars 2 Wiki was opened in December 2007, I do not know -- especially considering there won't even be a beta this year, and it will probably be in late 2009 at the very best. The beta was the only thing about Guild Wars I was looking forward to this year (even the hope of having one this year). All they've done is simply removed that hope and replaced it with nothing -- we do not have any sort of time scale whatsoever in regards to Guild Wars 2. That is, simply put, pathetic. -- Brains12 \ talk 21:46, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

And there isnt coming a update to gw1 either I think many people go play other games now:/, guildies of my play AoC instead of guildwars at the moment. I think it only will become more, now we know there is no beta this year. 145.53.242.142 22:25, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

On the other hand, i would prefer to wait a little longer (as long as it's not a w:Duke Nukem Forever-like "longer") than having the game next year at the price of having half of the content bugged, and the other half not even being "live" in the game (something that has already happened in "Other games"(tm)). Besides, i think SG-Worlds comes this year, so we can still use Asura Gates there :).--Fighterdoken 22:31, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

OMG OMG OMG OMG STARGATE. -- Brains12 \ talk 22:32, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

I am very pleased A'net announced that beta will not be held in 2008, not because I like the delay, but because I know there is one. Now I can take up all my holidays at work this year without worrying. I hope this FAQ is a start of little pieces of information, story teaser, eye candy, to be announced. The FAQ says indeed a lot that wiki users already know long time (and other fansites), but it's nice that they post something indeed! I do believe GW2 will be awesome, like they state here again, but I also hope enough information is going to be released for fansites and gwwiki2 to be ready for the game. Gogo A'net =) -- (Tribina / talk) 22:49, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

I sure hope they either do some stuff for Guild Wars or at least dribble out information here and there for Guild Wars 2 otherwise I believe my motivation to go out and buy Guild Wars 2 will be diminished by the time its released. One of the many 'make or break' elements for me is going to be what from Guild Wars is actually going to be returning for Guild Wars 2. Where in the world the Guild Wars 2 storyline(s) will be taking place. The professions (or whatever system they are going to be using to represent what we have in Guild Wars). For me if I wait until its released and find out its a newer version of the Proph and Eye of the North map I'm going to be severely displeased, as well as if only the core professions return. One of my main fears is that Arenanet is going to basically do a new engine revamp of Guild Wars, releasing the Proph map first (with the Eye of the North), then Factions or Nightfall maps to follow. So far no imformation were are given really motivates me to really care about Guild Wars 2. Presistent areas are always a concern and the longer we have to wait for 'not completely game revealing information' the more I feel my decision to go out and buy the game will be swayed to not. 000.00.00.00 23:18, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

(RI) "What with the beta being close to the actual release, it seems that Guild Wars 2 information will be coming along with it, and not before"...What? So wait, despite how we had plenty of information about Guild Wars 1 well before the open beta, and how we know as a fact that Arena Net will be at PAX this august, and despite the fact that many games actually deliver a lot of information about their games before beta...You suddenly comes to the conclusion that GW2 information will only be given to us when the beta begins? Right. I'm curious of what do you expect Arena Net to do at PAX - do you see them in front of an empty stand, with James Phinney giving a speech saying "Nope, nothing new to say"? Please, less empty assumptions, more discussion. Erasculio 00:47, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

"despite how we had plenty of information about Guild Wars 1 well before the open beta" - somewhat irrelevant and proven otherwise in this case. We've had no information for over a year and they don't seem to want to give us any in the meantime. "that Arena Net will be at PAX this august" - that was not in my mind, but it seems more likely that they'll release information in a magazine; it seems very ArenaNet, and it's how the initial information came about. Not sure what they'll be doing at PAX, but I doubt it will be a Guild Wars 2 information day. "the fact that many games actually deliver a lot of information about their games before beta" - see point 1. If they want to give players a surprised and blown-away experience at release, it's unlikely that they'll release a huge amount of info before the beta. -- Brains12 \ talk 00:55, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

i agree with brains12 i couldn't have said it better my self.75.165.110.13 03:18, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Yay to more empty assumptions! "We've had no information for over a year and they don't seem to want to give us any in the meantime" - yet we just got a FAQ. "but it seems more likely that they'll release information in a magazine" - yet they have already done that (twice, hello?). "Not sure what they'll be doing at PAX, but I doubt it will be a Guild Wars 2 information day" - so you don't know what they will be doing, but for absolutely no reason at all, you decided to go against all logic and imagine that Arena Net won't be talking about the only thing they're currenty working at. Right. "If they want to give players a surprised and blown-away experience at release, it's unlikely that they'll release a huge amount of info before the beta" - oh, so now it's all or nothing, either "any" or "a huge amount of info". Right.

IMO, regardless of how frustrated you may feel, this page isn't the place to be rumor mongering without any resemblance of arguments about assumptions you have made up from thin air. Erasculio 04:23, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Erasculio, I believe most of the FAQ only relates to information we were given almost a year ago. The FAQ also isn't official. 000.00.00.00 07:02, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Zero (mind if I adress you in that way? It's a bit simpler than using your full username), I think we're talking about two different FAQs. This FAQ isn't official, it's just something the community made. But this FAQ is, indeed, official. Erasculio 12:02, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Zero or 000 is fine. Thanks for the official link, Erasculio, but oh my, it looks fancier but doesn't really say anything that the non-fancy player made one hasn't got. 000.00.00.00 21:12, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

So let’s reflect on that a little: ANet puts grind title after grind title in to GW. With NF even starts to link skills to titles that become more powerful the higher the title rank gets. They even expand on that with GWEN and put more titles, Zaishen being the last, in to the game. With GWEN they also started to make title rank a requirement to use merchants. Yet they have a “anti-grind design philosophy“ and try to slip out of the lie filled hole they just created by saying that they consider grind being linked to a high character level cap …. Aha so lets drop a high level cap… get massive GWEN style title grind (rank 25 for armour merchant…?) and we still wont have any forced grind in our game up holding the “anti-grind design philosophy”… yeah … right. Please explain to me: where is the difference if I need to level my character to get stronger, or level a title to get stronger? I see none at all. Split tongue speech par excellence! And besides that, I wonder how ANet is going to keep their players play a game for more then SIX MONTH (no beta this year) that has NOTHING new to offer PvE and PvP game wise, since there are NO plans to add any new expansion, quests, or FoW style update to GW1. In my opinion you’ll loos a hell of a lot of long time players within the next 6 month if you don’t add new playable, non grind (read title) related content! And this GW2 FAQ obviously was to serve one reason only: ppl where whining loudly that they wanted to get new GW2 information. So you cleverly assembled a FAQ list containing almost 12 month old information aka ... NOTHING new at all… and released it as GW2 FAQ! What a lousy move! Regards ~Garbaron~ ; 28th Jun 2008

You are new ? Yseron - 90.28.84.167 10:43, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

What will a designer who's assigned to GW1 full time be doing if absolutely nothing will be added? Fixing hiccups doesn't seem to warrant that. --24.179.151.252 10:40, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Regina gave the slightest wind of hope that there might be 7 heroes available in parties. At which point I will return to PvE. Vael Victus 16:08, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Its fully possible staff will be hired for caretaker positions whilst the rest of Arenanet tackle Guild Wars 2. This staff could primarily be maintaining the game; organising skill updates, fixing bugs, handling Guild Wars related areas such as the community. Implimenting approved changes to the game; not limited to just skills but also to such things as the Hall of Monuments, adding new content in sense of weapons crafters if such thing was warranted for places such as Hall of Monuments. Could also trial changes or test out improvements to Guild Wars. [Hoping for an attempt at a Minion/Spirit window for Minion Masters and Ritualists]

The Guild Wars~staff would also maintain the weekend events, special events as were normally held. There is much that is involved at the developers end that isn't related to adding tremendous amounts of new content. Upkeep can be a challenge unto itself, and if the number is small they could easily have their hands full. Also comes down to what they're hired for, their individual talents. If they're just coders/programmers I wouldn't imagine much new content being added beyond a few NPCs here and there. 000.00.00.00 11:06, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Plus, we already got some more content for GW: not only the Zaishen titles (which had out-of-game reasons for existing, so I don't really think it counts), but also the new ending for Prophecies and its new weapons. Given how the designer that will be responsible for GW1 is the same that made said ending, and who made the quest line about the Black Moa Chick, I would not be surprised if we get new content for GW1. Of course, if your entire definition of "new content" is a new chapter, you're likely going to be disappointed, but... Erasculio 12:06, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

"yet we just got a FAQ" -- an FAQ comprised of information we already know, but in compacted form for those who don't read the wikis or magazines. Actually, they did give us one new thing. No beta this year.. hurrah! "yet they have already done that (twice, hello?)" ... is that supposed to be refuting my argument? Magazine information seems to be a trend. "but for absolutely no reason at all" -- uh no, I have provided reason; might want to read above. Also, considering the assumption that they'll release information in a magazine, it seems unlikely that they'll reveal the same/more information at PAX. "oh, so now it's all or nothing, either "any" or "a huge amount of info" -- again, that seems to be their current process. A huge amount of information last year, none since then. I'm not frustrated, simply disappointed. And no arguments for my assumptions? Right... which is why you just quoted a bunch of my reasons and arguments. Made up from thin air? No actually, I've based my arguments on previous ArenaNet actions, their trends, the amount (or lack) of information, and generally what makes sense. I've course, I do hope I'm proven wrong by ArenaNet. -- Brains12 \ talk 12:47, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it makes a lot of sense to have Arena Net at PAX in front of an empty stand : P I understand that you may be angry at Arena Net for moving the Beta past, but this is the worst page in the wiki to be posting baseless rants. As soon as someone begins the "I saw in Regina's page that we won't get any information about GW2 until at least the second half of 2009", the community will get the usual levels of e-drama up.

And really, all your arguments don't make sense. We just got a FAQ with information that wasn't available at the official site, and we know that a FAQ was wanted (given how the community here had already done one itself; Arena Net was kind enough to make an official one for us). The argument that Arena Net is going to wait for a magazine in order to release information about GW2 is also meanginless - they have already used a magazine to release information about GW2, twice even. Unless you really believe that Arena Net is only going to release GW2 information through magazines (going against what they have done for every single thing they have released), we will get more about GW2 from other sources - in fact, we just got more information from the official site. In the end, you have no basis, no arguments other than a "because I have said so" for many of your statements, such as...

• "along with the fact that we probably won't be hearing more until it's released"
• "it seems that Guild Wars 2 information will be coming along with it, and not before"
• "especially considering there won't even be a beta this year, and it will probably be in late 2009 at the very best"

As long as you want to rant emptily here, I'll just continue to point how you don't have any reasonable way to defend your claims. Erasculio 13:09, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Though I'm of course happy to hear anything GW2-related, I have to say that if the beta will be pushed back to such an extent you (meaning ArenaNet) really ought to keep up some work on GW1. Of course, you're not obligated to, but your players will be so much happier...! :) -- Sirius (talk) 13:25, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Erasculio, you seem to have ignored the reasoning behind my claims. I don't want this to delve deeper into a circular argument, so I'll refrain from further attempts to get you to understand those reasonings. Oh what the heck, one more thing; none of the information on the FAQ were new details (as I said, apart from the beta delay). -- Brains12 \ talk 16:44, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

There was no reasoning to be ignored, as I have said repeteadely, and demonstrated also repeteadely. There's no shame in making rants after being frustrated with something, this page just isn't the one in which to do so. We also got new information in the FAQ that was previously unknown, such as the "extensive instanced gameplay" (some players were guessing that only a very few high end areas - iow raids - would be instanced), the reply of how possible it would be to solo the game ("Yes. You will be able to advance your character to the maximum level without ever joining a group if you so desire"), and the following comment about how the difficulty of parts of the game will scale depending on party size ("Most content will be designed in a solo-friendly way, though often with mechanisms for scaling up in difficulty when more players are involved"). It was also good to read Arena Net reiterating the "anti-grind design philosophy", something that has often been discussed by the community. Erasculio 21:09, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Some of you seem to feel that ArenaNet is deliberately witholding information from you personally. Why is there not enough GW2 information? The game is in development. A lot of things could change from now until the beta. In fact, you all know that features for Nightfall were in development close to its release date. Things are subject to change, and game development studios don't want to relase information that could change down the road. The community would be let down and feel betrayed in that instance. It's happened to a lot of studios before. For everyone presumptuously speaking for the entire Guild Wars community, claiming that everyone knew all the information in the FAQ, that's not true. One of the reasons the FAQ exists in the first place is because players _don't_ know everything that's in there. They're Frequently Asked Questions, meaning we're getting asked these questions all the time. --Regina Buenaobra 16:31, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

A link to the FAQ on the Guild Wars 2 Wiki would have achieved the same purpose. -- Brains12 \ talk 16:44, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

A web page housing the FAQ is perceived as more official to those players who are not used to relying on information published in a wiki format. --Regina Buenaobra 16:48, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

You may want to improve the way Developer Updates are released if that's the case. -- Brains12 \ talk 16:51, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Awesome idea. What suggestions do you have? --Regina Buenaobra 16:53, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps release them the same way as your other press releases and bits of info are released? Basically use the same content as you would on the wiki, but modify the format so it stays consistent with the rest of the website articles, i.e. headers, paragraphical presentation, that sort of thing. -- Brains12 \ talk 16:55, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

So, similar in style and presentation as the Game Update notes, which are currently archived on the website? With an RSS feed to match? --Regina Buenaobra 17:12, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, although those nice new wiki links for those people that like looking for extra information on the wiki, and also to make for easier copy+paste, would be useful. -- Brains12 \ talk 17:15, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

IMO, it's also worth noting that the current wiki FAQ has been made by the community, and therefore it's prone to having mistakes, even if just thanks to a matter of interpretation. An official FAQ is far more reliable than something done by the community based on indirect and different sources, be it hosted in the official webpage or inside the wiki. Erasculio 21:14, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

This probably will get drowned in comments but *shrug*. Just wanted to say proper nouns need to be captialized on that FAQ (the Charr, not the charr). – Barinthus 19:17, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

one point i would like to make directly at regina is that i think people feel the way they do about information about guildwars2 because of the announcements of such games as starfcraft2 and diablo 3 and redalert3 there has been a wealth of information about those games and even hole sites dedicated to them and there info. especially with starcraft2 so far there was a lot of info released about units and game play that has changed dermaticly. and the wonder is why isn't there this openness with guild wars2? people know that things are going to change if you tell them that. also i think if you don't want to "disappoint people" you already have with the false announcement of the beta. take a chapter out of these other game company's that have for the most part done relay well. i haven't been disappointed with any of the info that had to be taken back. i was glad to see that they were giving us info. there is so much little stuff that you could give us like what your guys thoughts are on what the profession system for gw2 and lore in general. hec i think a lot of people would be happy to see a very basic screen shot. 75.165.110.13 20:34, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

The amount of times you go down the road of "The community would be let down and feel betrayed" when referring to releasing information that is released and might be changed, it starting to get belittling. Its very simple to make a Developers Page for Guild Wars 2 where information can be released; information not giving away the 'good stuff' Arenanet would like to keep in the bag. And a very simple way of getting around possible upsets due to time changes would be a warning at the top of the page explaining the changeable nature and people should be aware of it. No matter what some people will always get their noses bent out of shape, with or without warnings, but the opportuntity to hook us deeper into Guild Wars 2 shouldn't be missed, or milked.

• Screenshots and concept art would be appreciated, seeing the style Arenanet is going for would also be nice.
• One thing I see missed in your FAQ is the 'professions', are thats a big factor people are itching to hear about. Guild Wars has ten established professions to play and hearing "Guild Wars 2 is a whole new game with different professions and races" can be quite disheartening some. Arenanet has quite an opportuntity to really milk the community's attention draw to the fact there is actually a lot of stuff that can be released that doesn't really give too much away.
• What part of the Guild Wars world the game will take place in Guild Wars 2; the The Movement of the World article it suggests quite an interesting world, where Guild Wars 2 is going to take place is a very big question my Guild and others I know of are big things were interested in knowing.
• I could go and last literally the dozens of questions I know I would like answers for and I know others would love to hear something on.

I lot of time has past since we were really given any sort of information, some little bits and pieces every now and then would be nice. I'm sure Arenanet wants to keep us hooked, no? 000.00.00.00 21:28, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. I don't care if it's "subject to change" and may be a "potential letdown". Something. Anything. Please. When I first got GW, I thought it was a great game, and I've been playing for coming up on three years. Well, suddenly, there's nothing to look forward to, and I'm firing up the GW client less and less. My point is, when it comes to making games, Anet is excellent, but when it comes to maintaining a player base, well... there's a lot to be desired. A few months ago, with the first rush of info, I was glued to the screen ogling over it, saying "I'm definitely going to get GW2 the day it comes out". Now... I'm not so sure. And I know I'm not the only one who feels this way. Calor 21:47, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

IMO, some players are already going to feel betrayed; even by simply saying nothing, Arena Net is not denying what often are unrealistic expectations that will lead to disappointment for some players, especially regarding the HoM (does anyone have any doubt that, no matter what the rewards will be, someone will be disapointed claiming that he/she grinded 20 hours per day for nothing?). Giving us some information would not hurt considerably more than the silence, and it would help a bit, even.

I'm not too worried, though, as I see the FAQ more as a way to increase the playerbase's awareness about GW2 than anything else. With PAX coming, confirmation that Arena Net will be there and the probability that we will get GW2 news in such event, I would expect more information soon anyway.

(As a sidenote: it does not bother me the least if people stop playing GW for now. The old idea that "out of sight, out of mind" is, IMO, underestimating players - I don't know a single person who re-reads a book every single day while waiting for its sequel, I can't remember anyone who watches a movie weekly while waiting for its continuation to be released. If GW is really trying to keep an "anti-grind design philosophy", it cannot be expected to keep players glued to their computers for months and months. Unlike, say, WoW, it's not a lifestyle, it's just a game.) Erasculio 22:17, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Silence can be more hurtful and deafening than a shout, just as emotional abuse can be more destructive than physical. There is always the notion of managing expectations but what do players really expect of Arenanet at the moment? Expectations are quite low for a lot of people it seems when it comes to Arenanet and Guild Wars/Guild Wars 2.

People are excepting a really vamped up Guild Wars 2, and the lack of information can be seen as Arenanet trying to keep all their cards up their sleeves - or also the managing of expection - which in itself generally isn't always a very good idea, there are always exceptions to this but if there are changes to what we know from Guild Wars, what we have spent - for a large number of us - 3 years immersed in it can be quite devastating on how people think of developers if we're only made aware of them at release, etc.

A major concern I share are the human professions, and their still up in the air at the moment. Yes, you're adding new races but what returns is a big factor personally; we have 10 professions at the moment and I really enjoy most of them, but if my personal favourite doesn't return its one of my make or break elements. Yes, you can manage expectation but can also throw us a bone here and there. Even if people aren't playing they're still watching, waiting for some news. Thats why they're fans.

The journey is also very nice, people like the behind the scenes stuff, its just like how people buy the collector's edition of a movie/game to watch all the behind the scenes, commentaries and deleted or uncompleted stuff. People not involved in such things, but with a passion for the end product can truly relate to that kind of thing.

There is much that can be done, I'm all for milking the time between now and release, I'm a fan, I'm always watching but nearly a year without anything really new? I mean, its a year, thats a lot of time and there's nothing to show for it? Yes, you're going to conventions but there's no word if anything will be there.

A developers diary would be awesome, you could even make it video, now that would be sweet. There is a lot that can be done this day in age. 000.00.00.00 23:47, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

"find equipment" sounds great, as long as they still have the same armor system and any armor found is more or less worse than the armor u can buy. --Cursed Angel 02:55, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

I think concept art would be the best thing Anet could release right now to stir/renew community interest in GW2. There must be dozens, if not hundreds, of pieces of concept art floating around for GW2 already; enough to post one per week until the release of GW2, perhaps? Most people in the community understand that concept art comes with no promises, thus the risk of the community feeling betrayed is at a minimum. A piece of art released once a week, maybe with a short blurb from the artist or a designer (spoiler-free, of course) would be wonderful. Can you suggest such a thing to your co-workers, Regina? -- MrSmiles 05:47, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

It's been suggested many times by me and others in the company. I've been asking for it, but the people who make the calls on these decisons are very cautious about releasing any information. --Regina Buenaobra 19:37, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Wow, I asked two yes/no/idk questions and I get all this that doens't even remotely relate? What the heck guys? Anyway, I'm gunna ask them again and pray that they are actualy answered.

• Armor still has to be crafted and not found in GW2 right?

• Is there a CHANCE of New GW2 stuff being at PAX?

--Wolf 19:20, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

I must apologise, Wolf, I unintentionally helped in a redirect, but I too would like to know what the 'find equipment' reference is for; armour in itself or just say similiar to what we have now referring to runes, insignias, off hands, shields and weapons.

They've already announced they're at PAX, and been asked if info in coming out, and said nothing. Its either safe to assume one of two things: Nothing will be shown or they won't say because they want it to be a surprise. 000.00.00.00 20:37, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Quite the contrary wolf why it went the way it did is because of the topic that you put your questions under. Also when you put something on the wiki its no longer yours its everyone's. i have noticed that happens a lot, for some of the stuff that you bring up. if you want things to stay on your topic make the header a bit more directed in what your talking about GW2 FAQs implys that you want to talk about the gw2 faq's that just came out and you kind of did. maybe a more apropet topic would have been '2 qustions that were not on the gw2 Faq's' also to answer your qustions 1. i dont know havent seen anything realy to suport eather way i think its like 000.000 said. also 2 yes there is a "chance" that anet will say something new at pax though the way they have been going with info and gw2 i also think no they will just be there at the ncsoft both talking about guildwars but will be lesser then the other games that ncsoft made. unlike last year. 75.165.110.13 04:01, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Regina, am sure you guys at ANet are aware of the latest Blizzard News: Diablo 3 is coming. The game is in development, even so far, that they don’t have any release date. Yet Blizzard took a step towards the public and announced the game! Despite being “work in progress”! There is an entire home page devoted to the news and information. There is a 20 minute game play video. There are screenshots and concept arts. Two of the five professions have already been revealed. And am damn sure that a lot will change from what we have seen now. Yet Blizzard published the information! We now have a glimps on the game and most really liked what they saw. Why cant Anet take a leap of faith in there player base and just trust us that we KNOW “this might not be like this in the final game” but we also know the direction things are taking! As of now ANet treats its players like little children that are too dump to understand what the grown ups are talking about! Be brave! Come out of hiding and sow the world what you’ve got! Because this utter silence and repeating of 12 month old information could very well be interpreted, that you have not advanced in developing the game at all and are still pushing concepts and ideas around the table! Regards ~Garbaron~; 30th Jun 2008

Diablo III also began to be developed years ago (at least 2005), and it has been through many overhalus ("'We probably did three rev[ision]s on the visual direction until we got to this and now we're really happy with it,' said Pardo", "The gameplay was also given several overhauls. 'We were pretty heavily influenced by some of the games that were coming out like God of War, a very visceral game,' said Pardo") until its developers settled down on the current incarnation of the game. In other words, are you willing to wait until 2010 to get information about GW2, given how Arena Net began working on it on 2007? No? So try to realize that comparing a game years in the making with a game in production for a single year is ridiculous. Erasculio 12:38, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm gunna start this of by saying, yes I know I'm getting off topic when I just scolded you guys for doing it, but there are larger issues at work here, and this thread keeps quickly getting off topic and I don't think I can keep bringing it back on topic much longer.

Regina, would it be an unfair assumption to make to say that GW2 has been in the works since around before Nightfall was released? Besides, you general don't announce a game just because you think you want to make it, you anounce it because it has become concrete and you what direction-ish its going and have some solid details ironed out and have SOMETHING. I've made several pushes for this and I think I'm gunna make one again. Arenanet, please, Take the leap of faith. The amount of people you would disapoint or bum out because something they liked changed is NOTHING compared to the amount of people (on the wiki alone) you may never see again as they are getting VERY pissed of at the lack of information. There was some small game a while back that I followed from announcement to release (forgot the name, was years ago). The devs gave out nothing gameplay related, only a few basic mechanics and fluff and stuff like we have now, except a bit less, but they gave us concept art, gobs and gobs and gobs of concept art, every week they would add about 20 peices of concept art to thier site. And ya know what? When the game did finally come out, I was totally blown away by it, and didn't expect ANY of what was in the game, but it was still reflected quite well in the concept art given to us. The Project Lead for the game said in an interview that they didn't realy hold back any concept art, they jujst published it out as it was made, the only peices they held back were a few things that were scrapped pretty much imediately. Seriously, Give us something. Yes, I understand you want players to be comepletely blown away qand suprised by GW2 when you finally get it out, but seriously, People need something, anything new, or they are going to be blown away in the sense that they probably won't come back. I understand the whole managing expectations and suprising us shtick, but look, you already gave us this, why not something more? I have said it once, and I will say it again, concept are is a great way to give us something, and at the same time say "this is not final" or show us something without realy telling us anything about the game, For example, there are going to be Dragons, why not a look at some of your ideas you had for then, And I know you have some or you wouldin't put 3 in EotN within full ans easy view and told us their names (Drakkar here, Grothmar here and Primordus who I can not find a picture of but IS there in VERY plain view in A Time for Heroes ). Heck I can find conept art on Utopia and that was cancled! Also, some random landscape screenshots would be nice. That also gives us something without actualy giving anything away, and the only way that can be remotely disapointing is if someone goes looking for it and doesnt find it. (Heck, I'm just the person to do that, and I wouldn't care if it wasn;t actauly in the game) Some more backsroy would even be nice. To recap a little, there are plenty of good wasys to give us something but not give anything about the game away, Like concept art, Landscape shots, and backstory, but goin Cold Turkey on us is not cool, and is getting a lot of people very angry. The community seems to expect a certain level of information flow about GW2, and part of managing expectations should be keeping that flow going that the players are expecting from you more than anything. You can't just stick a cork in the bottleneck and expect people to not get thirsty. Please, we are thirsty, give us something to drink. Please, we are hungry, give us something to eat. For I don't believe we can survive the fast much longer. --Wolf 14:44, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Remember that StarCraft 2 was announced years after its production began, and the same for Diablo 3. Both games (just like many other examples) were already developed enough, and "stable" enough, that their developers knew some core features would not be removed, and therefore those could be discussed with the community. The problem is that Arena Net is a small company - they don't have resources to work on Chapter 4 or expansion 2 or whatever while working on GW2, so they could not do the same thing Blizzard did (keep a project hidden for years) - they told us why they were to almost stop working on GW1. Letting players know so much about a game so early in said game's development is, IMO, the exception, not the rule; and while I would like to know more about GW2, I know (we all know) that a bunch of vocal players are going to whine against whatever it is Arena Net announces, and are likely going to whine if any of those announcements are changed later, no matter how many disclaimers Arena Net gives us (I could give you a list of those players, at least from GWO; they're the same who complain no matter what happens to GW1). Erasculio 17:12, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

If there is a group of people that whine about everything, and will no-matter what you do, why should thier whining matter? Besides, this group of people is FAR OUTNUMBERED by the amount of people that are completely and utterly put-off by the lack of GW2 info. All of my guild and its sister guild are all very frustrated with the lack of info flow, and so are all my GW playing friends. I think it would be a safe assumtion to make when I say that a VERY great part of the player base is atleast a disappointed by the lack of new info. Anet has put themselves between a rock and a hard place, with no non-damaging way out. At this point I see two choices for them, they can either give us something and risk disapointing people or continue to not tell us anything and alienate a very good chunk fo the player-base, and have them possibly not come back for GW2. Which is the lesser of the two evils Anet? A few disapointed players or a very large group of pissed off players? A disapointed player will generaly get over the disapointment shortly and be back to normal and not care too much aabout it. When you piss off players, you something akin to the ursan situation, something that WILL NOT get any better until you DO SOMETHING. People want solid proof that GW2 is actualy going to happen, and since you removed their hope of a beta this year, they are getting farther away and their loyalty is getting very stretched. If something doesn;t change soon, you WILL start to loose people, and you WILL start to get lots of angry people with nothing better to do then spout out flame and vent themselves in what ever way or on who-ever possible. You tell us over and over again that your hard at work on GW2, but your work isn't going to cut it much longer for a lot of these people. A friend of mine said this in response to me telling him about the beta being postponed (or would that be postpwned?) : "WTF? A beta isn't a show-off look how cool I am, it's a debug. Its not make sure your basic game mechanics are working and that people like the direction its going and to get feed-back. It is NOT a chance for you to say, hey check it out, this is the game your going to get, and not have a chance to change anything without serious delays." I think he just about hit the mark, I understand if the game in general needs more time, and enough wont be read to go to beta 2nd half 08, but pushing it back just for the sake of it and for the surprise has got to be the WORST move you could possible think of. This "We want the players to be surprised and blown away" BS is NOT going to cut it any more. People don't WANT to be blown away and surprised. People want safety and security and to know that a game they have invested so much time and interest is not going to end up being (God forbid) a totaly peice of trash. What you are doign with GW2 is something like this. Someone goes online to a site like [www.newegg.com newegg] and buys parts for a computer. Upon checking out and paying for their purchase, they get a message that says, "Well, this may be what YOU want, but we are going to have a whack this and send you want WE think you want and not tell you what it is untill it gets un your doorstep. Infact we aren't going to tell you when it's getting there at all, your just going to have to wait and find out. Oh, and one more thing, your not going to get to track the shipping info either, so you won;t knwo when it is finally on its way untill we thnk you should know." Thats not safety and security, thats like playing a game of Russian Roulette wiht yourself and hoping you pull the trigger on the empty chamber. This is the vibe I'm getting from Anet about GW2 and I AM NOT liking it. Anet, your holding a lit stick of Dynamite and time is running out. I trust you to do the right thing. --Wolf 18:17, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

I agree with your friend, Beta Testing is for finding bugs and alikes. However, if the game is nowhere to finished, there's no point in having a Beta, IMO - the game would change so much that the bugs found now would become pointless, and new bugs would be created and require more testing later on.

As far as releasing information about GW2 goes, I'm not sure about the numbers - just like we could say it's a few vocal players who whine about everything (and said players will claim that all their friends agree with them), one could say that it's just a few vocal players who are complaining about the lack of info on GW2 (and that those players would of course be claiming that all their friends agree with them). I do believe that giving us more information now would be better (or rather, "less worse") than no information - but then again, I'm expecting to get more info about GW2 at PAX, and since that event is coming soon anyway...

(Does anyone remember when sequels took years to be released, like The Longest Journey and Dreamfall, or Wizardry 7 and Wizardry 8, yet people were less demanding about that sort of thing?) Erasculio 18:31, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

I think Regina has already summed everything up with the generic 'managing expectations' line - which in itself isn't a bad thing - but also its Arenanet's game not the community's; we could sit here and state ideas and really interesting stuff we ourselves as a community can think up, and its a resource that could be tremendous for brainstorming which isn't really utilised at Arenanet end. But then again the community can state things which many could question why it wasn't implimented developer side but it still wouldn't matter to Arenanet. To be honest if they're having issues at their end now do you really think they reading what hundreds of others have to say, there are many posts, many sites with many people saying what they as an individual want, you'll have to forgive me if I can't see people such as Regina seeing it all bar more of the generic stuff, which doesn't necessarily mean the generic stuff is the more important.

I could go on all day about things that could be done by Arenanet, milking the community's desire for information but then again I can say that for most developers. I haven't really followed many games so its difficult to say but its the same for movies. Some companies release information at early stages some don't. Popular serieses or movies generally have information coming out every now and then, even if things changes. Sometimes movies have elemented changed based on fan response. Look at latest Transformer movie that was brought out, concept work of Megaton's face was released but the end product was changed because the community didn't relate or like what they saw.

Also, more of a personal note, find the terms 'crying' and 'whining' continuely used by the community for people wanting information or having very strong views on a subject starting to get a little old. People who want Shadow Form changed a whiners. People who want Ursan changed are either crying or whining or elistist [I myself have been called elistist but then never refused a person based on any title track and have only ever done UW or other places once]. People who want information on Guild Wars 2 are both as well. This is what I see happening when look at conversations on here in or Local in game. If you want information or have a view on something its considered whining and its getting quite old. 000.00.00.00 19:15, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

@Zero: There is a very good number of people who come here and are able to state their views and say what they want to say without reaching the whining point. The people I would lable as "whiners" and "complainers" just generaly seem to be the ones that are the loadest and most bend on making themselves heard, and so easily over power the other more respectful people that come here, say what they need to and are gone. It can get to the point that some don't even come back, Its for reasons like this that I stay out of Ursan Threads and will probably stay out of any SF or skill balanced related threqad now.

@Erasculio: Testing game mechanics is not about finding bugs, its about making sure they work the way you want them too, and when players play the game, they don't see these mechanics in a differen't ligh and use them in an entirely different way and break something. If the GW2 beta ended up as stick figures and everything was a smple untexted mesh, I would still be pretty jazzed, as I would get to try out the GW2 mechanics and such. Mechanics make a game, graphics don't. WoW, D2, and Star Craft have to have someof the worst graphics for a non-browser based game still played today. If there graphics are so bad and outdated then how can people stand to play them still? Mechanics. It's just so much dang fun to play the game that it's easy to look over the lack of graphical quality. I play Crysis on a not so impressive system with everything but the Physics on low, and ya know what? I may not look very good, but It's still so much fun to play that it's easy for me to look past that.

There are 3 things I look for in pre-release content for a game they are:

1: Demonstration (and/or explenation) of basic game mechanics, preferably detailed.

2: Back-story, fluff, something that lets me in on the game's world

3: Gaphical demonstarion. Usualy screnshots or gameplay footage which would tie #1 & #3 togther.

optional: (but prefered) A list of some key features of the game (usualy tied in with #1

A game that lacks in one or more of those 3 areas usualy does not hold my attention and I probably would not buy it. If I had not played GW1, off of what has been Given to us on GW2, Its safe to say that It would not capture my interest at all and I probably would not think to buy it. D3 was just anounced, and they have already met all 3 conditions and a but of the optional. Yes I know it has been in the works for a while. On GW2, we have been given a good part of 2, almost enough to be satisfying, and a very small amount of the optional, but hey, its optional for a reason, features also don;t make a game, but they help. Those 3 listed above are something you can expect from just about every game, and something I have gotten from pretty much every game I have looked into whether it interested me or not. Those 3 things (specifical #1 and #3 at this point) are what I will be looking for. Also, I think It's a bad move to hold the Beta back until GW2 release is in sight. When its ready to beta, put it into beta and get it out there. If people don't like what they see, then its not going to matter how long after it GW2 comes out. If the beta is a success and people love it, then as long as GW2 isnt much more than a year away, you will pretty much have their interest and their devotion. Back before LotR online came out, I got in on a very early closed beta, I played it, and didn;t like much what I saw, played the open Beta, definately didn't like it, and never put another thought to the game again. When GW1 went into beta, I knew nothing about the game except I had the beta and I was playing it. From what I saw, I absolutely loved the game, and with nothing but the beta under my belt, was so jazzed about the game for the 6 months before it came out, that I nearly shot someone when my CPU died a few days before it came out, and nearly shot someone again when i learned it was going to be a few months before I could aford a replacement. The beta is going to be your focal point. You need something to capture and hold everyone's interest and soon. I know I can wait for PAX and if you have something new on GW2, it will hold me over to the beta if it isnt too far away, but I don't think some people here can wait that long. Right now we are stuck in the dark with no hope and no way of finding our way out and some are on the edge of insanity. Please, Arenanet, put a light at the end of the tunnel for us. For a light, no matter how dim, gives hope and will guide the lost and the hopless home. Lead Us Home. --Wolf 19:54, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

The problem is that testing mechanics now, when those mechanics may be completely changed, would be a waste. To give one more example: when WarCraft 3 was being created, Blizzard announced that the Undead faction would not harvest gold, rather it would only use bodies as resources, and they would have no buildings other than the center of their base, rather relying on upgrades that would change the environment around said base. Eventually both these aspects were completely removed from the game (after which some complaining issued), and so a Beta Test aiming at finding bugs in those mechanics would have been for nothing.

In other words, I think it's too soon for a Beta Test now. IMO, Arena Net should give us information about Guild Wars 2 without a Beta; and since we're likely going to get more information in two months, it's good enough for me. Erasculio 21:08, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Some Info should come soon, quite soon. As for the Beta, It should be when they have the mechanics fairly Ironed out, not before, not after. GW1 when into beta 6 months before the game came out, and nothing major in mechanics changed between then. Also, betas serve to find those mechanics which sound cool and fun, but just don't quite work how the devs want them too. However, Anet stated that the GW2 beta would come much closer to the release than GW1 beta did. Im thinking thats a month or two before release, and that is just too late. A beta is the best weapon in your arsenal as a game dev, and something you don't want to hold back once it is ready. If you fear loosing people because they don't like the beta, well that sucks, your going to loose them no matter how close the beta is to release. A beta is easily the BEST way to cement people's interest in a game and enable them to stand the long haul for the game getting finished as they have played the game and know that yes, it is awsome. If I had onyl read everythign there was out on GW1 and not played the beta, I would have passed it by, in fact, I almost did. A friend of ine asked me if I wanted to play GW, I read on it, and said nah, I dont think so. He then said, well, the beta starts in a few days, atleast give that a try, so I did and was hooked. A beta is a tool for both holding on to current players, and gathering new ones. While I can see the benifits of waiting untill you can put lots of content into the beta, and excite new comers, int he time that would take, you will have already lost your current players.

3 Steps I would like to see taken twards the GW2 release:

1: Some concept art and maybe more story soon, like before July is out

2: A short demo of the current state of GW2 mechanics at PAX

3: Beta around mid-late of the first half of 2009

?: Release before 2011......

--Wolf 21:25, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

So, do we know what professions/classes are in Guild Wars 2 yet? 000.00.00.00 07:30, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

all we really know about gw2 is that you will be able to play as Asura, Charr, Human, Norn, and Sylvari gaile said on the guildwars2 talk page "We don't have any information to share about Guild Wars 2's professions. They will not be the professions of Guild Wars, it's true, but beyond that, their types or numbers or other details are not being discussed" we also know that cantha fallows the history of the real china and closes up shop to foreigners and elona gets wtfpwend by the undead king Palawa Joko, and that there are dragons. and orr has risen from the sea and that you will be able to play pvp right out of the box. oh and that you will be able to run and jump and swim. and that the kruzicks and luxons are no more. and the all of that happens in about 200 years...75.165.110.13 09:09, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

I think the first Beta began on the E3 for Everyone event in April 2004, when players were allowed to play the game both in E3 and at home. The World Preview Event was the next open beta event, but I don't think it was the beginning of testing. Under those circunstances, I'm not surprised that GW2's beta won't begin one year before the release of the game.

IMO, "losing" current players is hardly a concern. Like I said somewhere else, I don't know anyone who reads a book every day while waiting for its sequel to arrive, or who watches a movie every week while waiting for its continuation. If people choose to wait for GW2 while not playing GW1, I'm perfectly fine with that - it's not like we're paying a monthly fee, and less players in GW1 means less money for Arena Net. I would actually hope players stop playing after they have done everything they wanted in the game - the only thing that could keep people busy for so long with minimal effort by Arena Net is grind, and we already got more than enough of that in GW1. Erasculio 11:11, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Excuse me to say so Erasculio, but all you said just confirms what I said earlier: ANet seems to be withholding information on GW2 because of a single reason: it’s NO WHERE NEAR as complete as they thought they would be at this time in 2008! Taking the just released FAQ GW2 appears to still be in an early planning stage! They still have not settled on a high or none level cap for player characters. This in turn means players skill power is completely undefined since noone know what max power is going to be. This in turn means no monster groups can be devised since it not known how strong the player will be. This in turn means quest and missions can not be devised except for main story concepts. Maybe all ANet is doing right now and ever since the first bits of GW2 information was released, is testing their net code to see if the changed engine for a “persistent yet heavily instanced” GW2 world can stream to a host as smoothly as GW1 can do right now. Perhaps level designer have just started putting things together. Maby Izzy just finalized his first ideas of the GW2 skill sets? To me the FAQ shows us that ANet has NOT moved forward with GW2 in nearly 12 Month! GW2 is still at the very same status it had when the PCGamer article was released! THAT’S my impression I get form the FAQ! And even if only a part of what I said is true ANet lied to its community and GW2 won’t see the day of light any time soon! If I am wrong the ANet is behaving rather stupid! If the decision on a high level cap or none has been made… why not tell us? If the decisions on the professions have been made…why not tell us? Will we be required to climb title ranks to be allowed to talk to merchants like in GWEN? If so why not tell us? Noone expects ANet to tell us the whole story GW2 is telling. But telling us bits and pieces on core concepts that SHOULD already be there must be possible. IF ANet has hit its GW2 milestones as planned there should be TONS of information ANet could share with his customers! Withholding those information’s, as Wolf pointed out, is starting to seriously damage their reputation and player confidence is falling to abysmal levels! Its close to high noone for ANet to react and release new information as well as take action to provide players with new GW1 content other wise a large number of players is going to leave, since the guild/alliance situation Wolf described is happening all over the place!! Regards ~Garbaron~ ;1th July 2008

In other words, the game is in early development, and since it's likely going through many changes, Arena Net does not want to give us specifics about the game yet. That's the same thing that happened to Diablo 3, the same thing that happened with StarCraft 2, and the same thing that happens to plenty of games, especially this early in game development (slightly more than one year). I don't see the reason for surprise much less anguish there. If anything, Arena Net is being far more open to the community than Blizzard - despite how players had been asking for Diablo 3 and StarCraft 2 over and over, Blizzard chose to keep the production of both games as a secret for years. Arena Net, in other hand, told us about GW2 as soon as they began working on it. Erasculio 11:11, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

They had to though because ANet promised us a service when we bought into Guild Wars. They promised an addition every 6 months, which still I would gladly pay for. This is dissimilar to Blizzard because the only service Blizzard promised for D2 and SC was existing BattleNet... not new content every so often. This is also why ANet needs to be more open about things... the promised service of continuously new content is near desert dry (yes, I am sure Linsey has some awesome stuff in the pipeline, which she can't talk about), whereas before we had something to look forward to short-term. --Ravious 11:36, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Shouldn't it be the other way around? If players are taking Arena Net's original proposition of releasing new chapters every 6 months as a literal promise (regardless of how impossible that would be - sooner or later they would have to stop making GW1), and thus their expectations were frustrated, wouldn't it be wiser to, as far as "managing expectations" go, say as little as possible in order to avoid further frustrating the players? IMO, that's exactly the kind of argument why Arena Net is not saying anything now - players claiming that Arena Net "promised" something they mentioned as part of their plans some time ago. Erasculio 11:43, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

You probably are correct. ANet is taking time to re-invent themselves, their service, and how they deal with customers. This is a good thing, but things are going to hit static as they change...and it is hard to change... for all parties involved, methinks. --Ravious 12:23, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Note to All: People have been Demanding SC2 and D3 from Bliazzard for almost TEN YEARS! Also, on the high/no level cap. I believe they have settled on a 100/or no cap. No Cap meaning once you hit a certain level (like lvl 100) at which would stop getting more powerful (gaining health, atts ect.) but you could keep leveling by collection XP. It would be like in GW when you gain a skill point after your lvl 20, except you would be lvl 21, 22, ect but only as strong as a 20. Besides, knowing the level cap means nothing if oyu don't know how powerful that level is going to be, or don't have a power standard. You can set the standards for about how powerfull a max lvl char is going to be without deciding on lvl. I thing re need s sitrep from Anet on some things, Time for me to formulate a list fo questions. --Wolf 13:53, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Diablo III has been in development for at least three years. The same cannot be said for GW2. Guild Wars 2 has not been in development since "before Nightfall was released". Development started some time after Nightfall's release.

One of the things someone said is that we should never have announced GW2 so early in its development cycle. What would you have done if, after GW:EN, you realized ArenaNet was no longer releasing substantial game content, but we didn't explain why?

To address the question of what betas are for. Remember back to when GW1 was in beta. Now compare how beta events today take place in comparison to what the online gaming scene was like back then. Look at the beta events for Lord of the Rings Online, Hellgate: London, Tabula Rasa, and Age of Conan. If you played in those betas, didn't your experience help form your opinion of the game? Even if you knew you were in a beta and the game was subject to a lot of flaws or bugs, didn't your experience during the beta help inform your decision on whether to purchase/subcribe or not? They sure did with me (except Age of Conan which I did not participate in and have no desire to play). The MMO game market is very different to what it was like when GW1 was in beta. With that in mind, we stand by our decision to wait until further along in the development cycle to have a beta. --Regina Buenaobra 19:37, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

We need something to look forward to and keep us playing, "wait and see" doesnt cut it. With the Diablo 3 announcement we were not only given detail about the story and an faq, but also shown gameplay footage. We all know that footage is just a taste of things to come, theres still plenty of development time, things are changed and improved. It was only a small part of the whole, a few classes but it was still something to get the buzz going and people interested in the game again and looking forward to future news. In contrast, we havent even had 1 screenshot from GW2 over a year since announcement. We know theres not going to be any more expansions for GW1, its done, we know it, but for heavens sake at least show us something about the new game. --92.235.8.13 20:19, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Question: how much of Diablo 3 had you seen two years ago? (Aiiane - talk - contribs) 20:29, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

It's not entirely fair to compare a game that's being released by Blizzard to one by ArenaNet in several ways. Firstly their business models are different. Blizzard's games like Diablo or Warcraft are basically fire and forget, there's little in the way of significant, free additons to these games after release. Major content additions are via expasions players pay for. WoW is a subscription based MMO, where individuals continue to pay after purchasing the games. ANet, on the other hand has in GW, a trilogy of interlinked games that has continued to be altered and added on to with content and drastic changes since it's release of GW: Prophecies. Most of ANets income has been from the sales of games, until the recent addition of online merchandise like the skill packs and extra character slots. Secondly, Blizzard has a reputation and long established place in the computer game industry, most of the people who play computers games at least know who Blizzard is. Blizzard also has a large, devoted, possible obsessive fan base. ANet has developed a fan base, but lacks anything near the size and scope of what Blizzard has. This all contributes to ANet being very sensitive, in my opinion, to possible buyer's perceptions of the games they make. If they open a beta, they need to have players be impressed/enjoy/etc the beta to want to go and buy GW2. That's what most Beta have become - free trials to lure new people into buying and playing. I agree that some new information or art or something would be nice, I just don't need to get constant updates to be interested in a game. 75.146.48.190 20:47, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Plus, adding a bit to what the anon above said, Blizzard is big enough in order to be able to manage producing some games while keeping some and releasing others, which allows them to keep a project hidden until it's almost finished and only announce it after years of development, when there's plenty of information to share with the public (again, see Diablo 3 and StarCraft 2). Arena Net does not have enough staff to do that - they simply couldn't keep releasing new GW1 stuff and work on GW2 at the same time. Hence, like Regina said, they had to stop releasing new GW1 chapters, and so they decided to let we know why - GW2. Erasculio 21:06, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Regina, here is what should have happen, gwen should have been released as an expansion for all of the campaigns, and what i mean buy that is there still should have been the stuff that happened in gwen now but there should also have been little mini expansion for what happens in cantha and elona may be it should have been secpret stuff and had gwen be sold at like $15, and then have each little expansion be sold like wise. there is a lot of stuff that you guys could have made into little expansions to really make the game ready for guild wars2 and you did kind of do that with the bmp and gwen but both were way to short. not all of the new races had to be from Tyria. and then wile you were making this stuff in the background you could have been making guildwars2 and then just gone quite for a wile, until you had enough of a base for guildwars2 that you could realse things like screen shots and game play video. the other way you could have gone is made gwen a chapter that incorporates everything that i just talked about and just led us to believe that another chapter was on the way. because lets face it gwen was a little rushed. this is evident in a lot of things like armor, and story line.75.165.110.13 21:34, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

@ IP, BS, What should have happened? Forget that, It already has, your words fall on deaf ears.

@Regina: Sorry, I had a lapse in my mental GW timeline, and It's been quite a long time since I read the PCGamer articles on GW2. I knew GW2 when into developement someth=ime around NF's release, just wasn;t sure when. Also, I understand if the game is not in the shape you want it to be by the time to wanted to release the beta, so you delay it, thats cool. Just don't hold the beta back any longer than you have to. Yes, I played the Beta's for LotR Online, a bit of Tebula Rasa and Hellgate, (I also choose not to take part in the Conan Beta for my own reasons) and the GW1 Beta seemed a lot less developed, but was the most outstanding and well executed beta I have ever done. All you need is something play-able that you can hand to the players. Heck, look at the Halo 3 Beta, they had the player model, weapons, mechanics and one map done. All you need from a beta is a sense of how the game plays and looks. When I played a WoW trial (yes I know, and I regret it to this day), No amount of things you could do, or cool armor could persuade me to continue to play, as I could just nto stand how the game played and looked. Heck, look at the factions beta, each profession has one set of armor done, a few faces, and a small collection of skills, and a few areas ready, plus a revision of alliance battles. Not much is needed. All you realy need to be able to get out of a beta is how the game looks and plays, mainly how it plays, I can over look some graphical short-commings even in a final release. To put it simply, when GW2 is ready for beta, by God, get it out the door, don't hold it back any long then you have to. --Wolf 21:48, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

@wolf its called learning from your mistakes.75.165.110.13

I actually played in one of the Guild Wars Betaas, and I didn't really care for it much. Sure, I kick my self for that now, but at the time I was more interested in City of Heroes, and the beta did nothing to change that. So it's not true that just having something now is better than nothing now. I've played in betas from several of the now older MMOs, and my opinions formed during them made a lot of difference. And in regards to the Factions and Nightfall previews, they weren't trying to create an entirely different game, they were using an existing engine, and adding improvements. Yukiko 02:53, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Changes to Shadow Form

These are the sort of balance changes I like to see; not simple nerfs, but well thought-out and comprehensive alterations that address the problem. This demonstrates Anet's commitment to supporting smart gameplay. Please let the relevant parties over there know that at least one player is thrilled with the upcoming change, and I hope it sets a new standard for all skill-related changes to come. -- MrSmiles 21:58, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Make that 2 players. Changing the creatures instead of the skill was a smart move. --Xeeron 22:05, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Many thanks on that as well. I farmed the area many times, but even so, I did not like how easy it was. Thanks for making it more difficult to get my stuff ^.^. yes, that was completely serious. :D -- Wandering Traveler 22:06, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Add one more to that list =D I'm with these guys. --Wolf 22:11, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

They did change the skill and not just the creatures in UW. It was an overkill of SF. Plain and simple. had no problems with the additions in UW, but I do have problems with the overkill of SF. BTW next time Anet should start using Vasiline on some of there changes.

Err, no matter that I whined all over gw as many of other people and gww, no matter how sick it felt after this nerf was done leaving Ursan as it is I still do like the whole method of this change nbeing implemented, dont just nerf a skill, change the whole game as you have preciously done with arrival of queen of scarabs, e.g. adapt all the areas. Infact such method could be used to nerf Ursan. --Super IgorUser:Super Igor 23:59, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Fifthed or sixthed or seventhed here. Calor 00:17, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

The update/nerf/additional content was okay, but why did you add that favor. I know its stuff that went missing way back in the day but the game is missing something by always having favor. We'd gotten used to the idea that the 30k minutes was gone for good, nobody would have missed it. Sadie2k 00:31, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

The loss of favor was unintentional. It's what players are owed and what should not have been lost in the first place. We had a discussion today and thought that since favor was running a little low, it would be a good time to restore what you had lost.--Regina Buenaobra 00:55, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Is that relating to the Sunspear/Lightbringer weekend where we went over the ceiling of the favor system? 000.00.00.00 01:00, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

"it would be a good time to restore what you had lost", sorry, but 75% of time in last 11 months we had favor, isnt it enough? it would be even more, if no reducing it and now u adding additional 2 months of free favor. sorry for word, but thats stupiud. Ocravia Deathblade 08:52, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

That's it!!! I have had it with this! I can't farm bosses and the Uw with this nerf! Regina, if you are going to listen. And I specifically warned you that I WILL protest against the nerf (Did you even bother reading the letter?). I'm going to start a RIOT against this nerf!! Everyone come to Temple of Ages and riot with me against the nerf of the Underworld and Shadow Form. Who's with me? (GW name:Ninja Hiro Kitano)--Dark Paladin X 00:54, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

As much as I think you're trolling if you actually wanted to do something to get Arenanet to pay real attention getting people to actually stop playing, in large numbers, would be more constructive. Rioting you are still in the game and subject to their banning rules. You could also go to Temple of Ages but you'll quickly realise the community adapts to any new changes and will find a newer productive way of farming that will adapt to the changes. 000.00.00.00 00:59, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) Not me. I'm pleased by this update, because it still allows me to farm all these areas solo with relative ease, but few others can. Calor 01:00, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

SF and Ursan are two completely different things. One was an overly effective solo farming build, and the other is one part of an efficient team build that requires human players to co-operate to succeed. If your main concern is finding a PuG in a high end area that doesn't want a specific build, then your solution doesn't solve anything. The next most efficient build will just take its place. If your main concern is that Ursan stagnates creative build making, then a duration nerf might be justified, so that Ursan becomes just one part of a player's skill bar, instead of the focus.--Skye Marin 02:04, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Ursan and SF are similar in the way that they're both considerably better options than their alternatives, in other words they're both overpowered. That's enough reason to nerf them to the point where there are at least a few alternative builds that can compete with them. --Draikin 06:37, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes, they're better options than their alternatives but Skye is very much so correct that Ursan is the greater evil here. If you want to do a high-end mission or area and don't have EoTN, you're screwed basically. While if you want to farm and don't have SF, there are alteratives that can get results. Nevertheless, props to Anet for changes regarding SF. – Barinthus 07:41, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

/don't care. for the most part me and my guild run killdoser and tarchage though everything so these nerfs and non nerfs dont effect me at all. i will how ever say that who cares about the economy if your smart you can get a lot of money with out farming. i think i have "farmed" maybe 3-4 times ever in my gws gaming life. but after about 200k+ there really isnt anything to spend your money on besides armor and titles most of which i already have.75.165.110.13 08:21, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

SF allowed sins to farm at a much faster rate than any other profession, and it could be used in a much wider range of locations too. It was nerfed so that it could farm at the same rate. Ursan allows players of any profession to get into groups and get elite things done. It's a necessary evil in the sense that it goes a long way to remove discrimination against given professions. Better solutions would be good, but until then, Ursan has some positive outcomes. -- Alaris 13:53, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Only problem with Ursan is it's just a wee bit too powerful. Its kinda like SF in that it gets things done insanely fast. Sf was not a hard solo to run and niether is Ursan. Both of which I was sure were in for a tone down. SF just went first as it has been a problem longer and is doing much more direct dmg to the economy (ecto prices anyone?) SF still works, its now just as viable as any other solo out there. Heck most of the good ones arent even solos. (600/Smite/Famine FTW!) Ursan needs kinda the same thing, it needs to be just as viable as any other option, and after their hit on SF, I'm confident Anet will find that middle gorund. Anyway, this isn;t an Ursan thread, so back on topic. The SF change was much needed, and I'm confident that the economy will start to recover soon. Thanks Anet for a good balance, and keep up the good work. --Wolf 14:11, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

@Alaris, what profs are disriminated against?--Sum Mesmer Guy contribs 15:18, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, judging from forums, people complain that it's *much* harder to get into PvE PUG groups as a mesmer or assassin. Before Ursan, also, it was apparently very difficult to get into a group if you were not using one of the standard builds needed (e.g. barrage pet team in tombs, waaay back when). I don't speak out of personal experience TBH, as I'm part of a Guild where such discriminations don't occur (we work with what we have). -- Alaris 15:35, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

that's odd, cos i've never had a problem with PuGs--Sum Mesmer Guy contribs 15:41, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

O rly? Good for you. But is your experience representative of the masses? -- Alaris 15:51, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

From my expirences with the masses, everyone expirences things differently. o.O Chew on that for a bit. Did you brain just flip over inside your head there? Mine almost did. --Wolf 16:19, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

This discussion about Shadow Form has derailed into a discussion about Ursan Blessing, so I'm closing it. --Regina Buenaobra 16:33, 3 July 2008 (UT

What is going to happen to those who don't have FoW armour after GW 2 is released

I would like to know what is going to happen to those who don't have FoW armour afer GW2 is released?This is so they can get a set put in thier Hall of Monuments as an achievment.I would like to know what is going to happen to the UW and FoW after GW2 is released as there won't be to much life there.I have suggestion and that is to turn into like The Catacombs is like in presearing making it free accessible and having res shrines in them this is so those that are still playing in GW1 can have fun place to go similar to Surrows Furnace.It would be nice to see something like added after GW 2 is out.This may help others get thier sets of FoW for thier HoM which maybe an unresolved goal.I am hoping that the elite areas can become fun areas and to explore these ereas.I hope something is done so that others may optain thier FoW who aren't hard core farmers and may not buy GW2 untill this goal is met after all the support they gave you in playing the game by your own rules.

You will be able to update your achievements in Guild Wars 2, so if you haven't finished everything you wanted to finish in GW1 when GW2 is released, you shouldn't worry. --Regina Buenaobra 00:13, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

If thats the case, then that would make the rewards completly useless as then people can just go back and get the certin special rewards. Dominator Matrix 00:19, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

To whom would it make the achievements "useless"? --Regina Buenaobra 00:35, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

To the people who worked for them. Before GW2 realise. Though denying this would be unfair to those who want something -- or new comers. Dominator Matrix 00:41, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Only for the easy achievements, it is not like someone could go, "oh the reward for legendary vanquisher is awesome, I am just going to pop back to GW1 and snap that title up". --Lemming 00:44, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Its not impossible, and not highly unlikely. Dominator Matrix 00:48, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Allowing players the freedom to complete GW1 achievements and update them in GW2 is "useless" to other, completely different players, who have already completed these achievements before Guild Wars 2? How does giving players the flexibility to update achivements in GW2 have any impact on the achievements of those who have already earned them? Giving other players this option takes nothing away from the people who have already completed titles. --Regina Buenaobra 01:07, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Lets say the end reward is a certin amour. A lot of people like that amour, people will go back to GW1, max the required title, and make that amour common enough to make that amour no longer special. Dominator Matrix 01:19, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Uh, alright? So there's a really good title, and people spend time on GW1 to farm for it. Or you know they could alternatively just play GW2 and get better armor anyway. This is ANet we're talking about, Mr. Matrix, do you really think they're going to give us physical (in-game) items that actually do something? I'm expecting to carry all my minipets around, and wear my useless hat I got for beating all the campaigns. I'd be very surprised if there was a reward that actually rewarded us, before people start baaaaaawwing about inbalance and "fairness". Vael Victus 13:36, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Beat me to it Dominator. Guess great minds think alike. The main concern is the unknown nature of the rewards. Players previously felt that there would only be so many "awesome" rewards and that it was a shot in the dark which achievements would unlock them. A frenzy to fill out their halls ensued. Now that this has come to light, some feel like their hard work to get that 'special' reward has gone to waste because anyone can aim for the 'one reward' and make the players who already have it feel less "I'm the only one in the game with this..."ness. On the bright side, the hom fillers shouldn't need to return to GW1 and have a head start on getting the next uber-rare shiny thing. 76.120.124.95 01:32, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Er, didn't this come to light, like, months ago? O_o. --Star Weaver 01:47, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, the fact that you would be able to go back and add to a HoM was stated probably a few months after HoM was added. Yukiko 02:38, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

(Reset indent) The overall game is game aimed towards being friendly to casual play. If you're looking to be the player who has something few if any other players can get, chances are you're playing the wrong game. (Aiiane - talk - contribs) 07:24, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Aiiane Win. Can we make this really large and put it on the front page and the top of all the important talk pages? ^_^ --Star Weaver 16:37, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

I for one am glad HoM rewards will be still attainable after GW2 release because it means GW will continue to be in play and will be continued to be supported by Anet. – Barinthus 07:37, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

There's still many open questions relating to the Hall of Monuments and any Guild Wars 2 related rewards. I'm still wondering what a 'completed monument' actually is, and for example, with the Resilence monument will different armour sets give different rewards, or it is just based on 'a displayable set is a displayable set'? Also will people with 5 armour sets in the monument for a single character, or as an account get a lesser reward for Guild Wars 2 vs someone who has 10 sets of armour for that profession, or all the armour sets avaliable to that profession? Many questions, very few answers. 000.00.00.00 08:02, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm personally all for the HoM being updatable after GW2 release / after you get your GW2 account. Exclusive armour sets were never all that big in GW (just think of how many people have FoW nowadays, I myself am saving up for my 4th set), so it never was that special. It might have been if you were one of the first to get it, way back in the day, but that special meaning isn't gone just because people ended up acquiring some themselves. Kudos to them, if you ask me. The same goes for Legendary Vanquisher. I finished one, I'm well on my way to a second. I really don't care if someone gets the reward for that title after GW2 release. It's still a lot of time and effort into the title to obtain it (maybe a little less now because of Ursan, but they're no lamer after GW2 release than they are now), and I see no reason why someone who finishes it later than me should be left out just because they finished later. Some people have busy lives, you know? I work, I go to Uni, and- gaspohnoes- I have a social life as well. Needless to say I can't play 8 hours a day to be the first to max all my titles. It's a shame it takes me longer than others, but I'm just happy that I can finish, say, my Kurzick title, even after GW2 comes out. If in the end I spend the same amount of time and effort (or, in some cases, horrible grind) on a title, I think I deserve it just as much as someone who just happened to max the title two months before me. -- Elv 08:11, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

What, people are complaining that they are allowed to do accomplishment later and not now? What's wrong with you people? -- (gem / talk) 11:58, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Maybe you think that people can now do nothing and just hoard money, and do the things that would provide them stuff after they know which things will. But that makes not much sense. Because if you thinjgs later, you'll take more time to get the stuff, while people that makes things NOW will get the benefits instantly after linking the character. MithTalk 13:55, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Its true, I mean even if ppve is easy and things it would still take those players some time to get the stuff they didnt wile players who did it already can instantly progress thru gw2, invent stuffs, find stuff out and get famous and things. --Super IgorUser:Super Igor 14:10, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

I agree with you guys, and like Elv, my "real life" takes up most of my time, and I really don't see any crime and letting people keep working (or start for that matter) on GW1 once GW2 comes out. Yet, I think that the main concern, for many players (although personally it doesn't matter to me) is not the tecnical part (to accomplish or not) but to be able to have a distinctive uhm... something which displays if you have x accomplisments or have played for x amount of time. For example, how can you tell if a character is ascended or not? Has his armor infused or not? Accomplished things the easy way or the hard way? Accomplished things during the last few months vs accomplished things during the past 2 or 3 years? Has been playing since beta? I keep reading diffrent topics (and rants) in this wiki and I think it all comes down to this, some people want recognition for hard work, time and maybe "loayalty" to GW. Personally, I'm ok how things are and still am looking forward to GW2 (and probably will have to continue working my HOM in GW1). Peace! --Nekki 14:26, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

I think this is where people, for want of a better term, want to feel special. From what I get ingame a lot of people, to whom generally have a lot of, a or several, Hall of Monuments completed want to have that fully recognised and can get quite iffy over the option to go back and finish things later.

Another trend I've noticed when it comes to the Hall is that some people [I can't say this is everyone] are under the impression different things will mean something different. For example using the Fissure of Woe armor: some people believe that with this armour in their monument their reward will be different, more 'prestigious' than say someone who only has the 'cheaper prestige armour' standing on their Resilence monument. People also do not know if having 10 sets will provide more, or more prestigious rewards than say someone with only 5, which many believe in the generic number of armour required to get that Guild Wars 2 reward [I haven't seen any information defining what is defines full]. I'm sure where people got them from the monument only displaying 5 at a time but then again Arenanet has released the Hall of Monument's and not really provided players with any relevant information [this may not be the case but I don't know personally]. Many questions that are still impacting gameplay are, I think, still bringing the whole Hall of Monuments down.

I believe Arenanet needs to release the reward relating answers to the questions we have now, not what the rewards will be, that can definately be a Guild Wars 2 surprise, but they should give us information related to what it means to have a complete monument [in sense of not needing any more to get the reward] or further monuments have different levels of rewards, for example the Honour Monument, if someone only has People Know Me will they get a reward and will it be different that someone who has fully revealed the Monument completely? And with the Hall also going Account Based as well I think should fine detail needs to be defined and released to the players.

Going back and finishing the Hall after Guild Wars 2 is released is a very good option for these who are more the casual player and don't spend multiple hours a day on Guild Wars, and I for one fall into this grouping.

From what I am seeing the lure of the Hall of Monuments in Guild Wars 2 is starting to lose its luster. People have too many questions about it that don't have any answers, and I believe making people wait until closer to release date is going to turn the whole subject sour. People are now thinking the rewards won't be so unique; having several thousands, ten of thousands, even hundreds of thousands of players running around with the same stuff isn't exactly unique now is it? 000.00.00.00 19:04, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Personally, I am pretty happy with the announcement that the HoM rewards will be account-based. This means I can build 1 HoM (as I have been mostly doing all along), and get the goods in GW2 for all my GW2 chars. As for going back to work on the HoM, this is very unlikely to happen for me. I fully plan to switch over to GW2 when it comes out, and I don't see myself grinding GW1 for cosmetic rewards in GW2 once GW2 is out. But if people want to go back to GW1 and work on their HoM, I have no problem with that. If anything, it might boost sales of GW1 games beyond GW2 hitting the shelves. The only problems I can see are (1) the GW1 population will likely be very scarce at that time making it hard to PUG, and (2) it would mean that ANet would have to maintain GW1 servers for much longer to accomodate the rare players who want to work on their HoM. -- Alaris 19:16, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't think you understand what I was trying to say and that is when GW2 does come out GW1 will be rather scarce in poplulation as we know when a game come almost to the end of its life.The players move on in this case over to GW2.It will be hard to find other to go down there to both places and getting 105 ectos and shards takes time.This is why I suggested turning it into a fun zone instead of an elite area like The Catacombs of presearing.How will you get parties togeter aloow the use of 7 heros or lvl up the henchies and allow them to go down there?I do have real life to and can't devote all my time to this.I see the update today not bad but changes to the UW make this even harder and to explore it.I am not sure what the sole designer will be doing or what is up his sleeve.It is getting tougher today to get the ectos and shards for this armour unless you have a Assassin even with the change to SF.I don't know The UW and FoW that well not as good as I know the RA pvp maps.I am a lot older than most of the players as well.I would just like to know can you for see any changes to The elite areas being tunred into fun areas getting closer to GW2.What I mean by this is no entrace fee,favour and res shrines would be nice.Thanks--

Changing UW and FoW into fun zones isn't really worth doing, if since you're relating it to the Hall we also have to consider that FoW armor isn't really relevant at the moment, since we don't know how exactly the Monument of Resilence functions; we don't know if its 'quality over quanity'. If the monument's reward is based on 'Quality' then the more expensive elite armours, like FoW armour, will have relevances but making them easier to get is counterproductive, but if its just the qauntity then it really doesn't matter. That would just come down to personal preference, a personal achievement over what Arenanet defines as an achievement. 000.00.00.00 01:09, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Corsair Prisoner

Regenia, I'd like to bring to your attention a concern I have with the depiction of human torture of captives in Guild Wars. In particular, I bought Prophesies 2 years ago, and then Factions. A few months back I bought Nightfall for my nephew (at that time 13), since he enjoyed playing on my guild wars account -- especially in pre-searing Ascelon (supervised at 11 and 12). Anyway... what caught my by surprise was the depiction of Corsair Prisoner, in particular, where the player was actively encouraged to harm and even kill a human who was completely defenseless. My nephew was curious if the individual depicted had been captured and if it was right to kill someone who was captured, cuz they were "evil anyway". In the user talk, Michael had suggested that a simple rename would help, I'd also prefer a change of dress from a corsair to a sunspear gear. I had made a support request for this item a while back, but I did not get a response. I am rather serious about making this as stinky as I can if the issue is not resolved. Torture is a big social these days and it is completely out of line for a game developer to be selling torture to children. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 76.208.248.249 (talk • contribs) at 02:03, 7 July 2008 (UTC).

I noticed this after I replied on the prisoner talk page. May I suggest that you take this concern outside of this wiki? Try emailing them and communicating with them directly (yes I know you have, ArenaNet isn't exactly known for speedy responses, try emailing Regina) rather than indirectly involving the wiki community. -- ab.er.rant 02:30, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

GW is rated T for teen, meaning Arenanet is not catering to children. They're catering for teenagers and adults. The box clearly states that there is animated violence. Even though the ESRB is full of itself, it's a very good indicator of whether or not a game is appropriate for people of certain ages. ~Shard (talk) 02:35, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Teenagers are children. The child in question was thirteen, and yes, supervised which is probably why I noticed. I still think that it is absolutely unnecessary for Guild Wars to depict human torture in a manner that the player is actively encouraged to participate as part of the normal course of the game -- and especially in a newbie area of the game. I like Michael's suggestion of replacing this creature with an "Enchanted Target" dummy similar to what's in the other area. All you libertairan nut jobs can keep your comments to slashdot. Yes, I have contacted Arena Net on this issue a while back but didn't get a response -- I do hope it is resolved promptly. It is completely unnecessary for Guild Wars to go here.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 76.208.248.249 (talk • contribs) at 02:03, 7 July 2008 (UTC).

How about everyone just drops the subject, as he should contact anet directly if he's serious and there's a good chance he's just trolling. Lord Belar 02:38, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

LOL — Skakid 03:12, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Agreed with Shard, Lord Belar and Skakid, ip the game is rated T if your letting your kids play a game rated as such dont go after the game developers because you didn't take the time to make sure this game was appropriate for your kid. its not there fault that you cant read a box. i bet your one of the same people who complains about how people use bad language in game. and dont use the chat filter. 75.172.47.75 03:46, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

I know it's not really that important, but just for clarification, when I said that it should be changed from Corsair Prisoner to Enchanted Target, I meant to actually turn it into a target like the ones on Isle of the Nameless. Just wanted to make sure that was clear. --Michael the Perfectionist 03:51, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

QFT @ Skakid. -- nüklaer | VII | Selfless self promotion 07:29, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

If you bought this game for your nephew, you're more complicit in him seeing it than Anet is. Funny how responsibility works, eh? --76.25.197.215 07:34, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

If you'll forgive the terrible grammer, Overreaction much? Hexing a prisoner that can't do anything is just like barring level 20's from going to places like Sunqua Vale or Tsumei Village because they would be unfairly overpowered compared to the mantid population. Besides, I'm really suprised you're complaining about this, when our own characters are being mercilessly cut up, shot through the head with arrows, burned to a crisp, unfairly imprisoned, summoning slaves to do their dirty work, Binding a soul to slavery, Ordering people around like its none of their business, and Tearing monsters to shreds with giant bear claws. If thats not character abuse and torture, then I don't know what is. If you want this game to be such a happy-ponies-no-violence game, then you probably should not have picked it up in the first place. I don't see why people have to raise a fuss over the smallest things. If you don't like seeing the prisoner, don't go there. Its that simple. Don't go huffing and puffing trying to get something removed for your own sake.

Forgive my bluntness, but this kind of thing is not very fun for me. -- Wandering Traveler 14:36, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

All of the above things are fine; none of them are torture of captive humans. I'm not someone wearing a pinko peace symbol. In guild wars, RED things are "evil", it's cut and dry. Ya kill monsters and evil people. What is problematic is that once someone allows themselves to be captured (rather than fighting to the death), there is a contract made about human rights. This game actively encourages players to torture human captives. It's wrong and should be removed from the game. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 76.208.248.249 (talk • contribs) at 02:03, 7 July 2008 (UTC).

Haha oh wow. Summoning decaying minions from your foes' flesh and bones and ordering them around? OK! Decapitation? Great! Killing a prisoner of the evil side when playing the good? Bad. Man, wait 'till he gets to the Realm of Torment. There's like eyes and ripped open mouths everywhere. He'll probably shit himself. Did you know you can get drunk in Guild Wars too? Oh and you can get a sugar rush which I'm sure you can stretch to taking speed IRL. (that's a drug, btw) Are you Christian? If so, there's multiple gods being worshipped here. I think all that's missing in GW is rape and moving blood. Vael Victus 15:18, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

I'll be even more blunt. If you don't like it, don't go there, or don't play. I'm sure the computer coding doesnt mind, and I'm pretty darn sure the geneva convention didnt exist back then. If its that much of a problem, don't go there. Plain and simple. -- Wandering Traveler 15:26, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) You may as well shout out your complaint to the media and politicians and see how they respond to your accusation of "actively encourages players to torture human captives" and save Regina the trouble of formulating a polite response. Your arguments are getting more and more ridiculous.

First you go and agree that "in guild wars, RED things are "evil", it's cut and dry" thereby agreeing that it's a game that clearly identifies enemies and allies. Then you go talk about "a contract made about human rights" concerning a entity which you just termed as a "thing" as well as an "enemy"... trouble is, he's still red, and therefore it's "cut and dry" that he's still an evil person that, as you said, should be killed by you. But no, you choose to label this sort of killing as "torture"... I suppose you should also call up animal rights groups and tell them ArenaNet encourages the torture of wildlife... remember all those animals and insects in all parts of the GW world that don't attack you until you attack them? Yea, they do kind of encourage people to "torture" them, don't they? Yep, tell that to the media too. Or are digital animal depictions "less real" compared to digital human depictions? Oh, what about the violence and total lack of sportsmanship in skills of Rollerbeetle Racing? The Wintersday quests that encourage people to steal and destroy presents? The encouragement of alcohol abuse? The encouragement of sugar overdose? The use of dangerous fireworks? The exposure of too much flesh on the characters?

I can probably come up with more if I try harder. Thing is, everything can be warped depending on how you look at it. It is a parent's duty to properly guide children and make sure they learn the proper things; it is not a parent's duty to shield children from some harsh facts of life. If you insist on this "torture encouragement", when in truth, there's nothing that even tells you that you should repeatedly curse the guy or to kill the guy to "torture" him with the "pain" of hexes and repeated death, I'm gonna look forward to another Jack Thompson news article (should you manage to convince him to take up your cause). And btw, if you look at the GTA series, negative publicity isn't necessarily a bad thing for a game company. -- ab.er.rant 15:39, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

76.208.248.249, Michael the Perfectionist: could you contact me directly by email? Thanks. --Regina Buenaobra 19:12, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

lol u forgot about the christmas dwarf that gets killed over and over again --Cursed Angel 19:18, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm still waiting for Regina's response and I'd like to detail a bit more. I'm talking about incitement to torture. In the Churrhir Fields "newbie" training area, the player encounters a gentleman named Rafiki who goes on a bit of a rant: "Cursing, that's my specialty. Painful, long-lasting, agonizing,..." He then goes on to say: "These corsairs are like a plague... and not the good kind." He teaches the student Life Siphon. This so much is fine. However, adjacent to this fella is a Corsair Prisoner, who is *red*, meaning that he shows up as a target. The prisoner may not run, may not fight back or attack the student and is physically restrained. At that point, to a Teen, it's probably not a huge leap, and it seems to be actively encouraged, for the player to cast the newly learned "agonizing" skill on the "prisoner". I find this horribly objectionable and recommend the course of action suggested by Michael, which is to change the Corsiar Prisoner to a Enchanted Target. I'd note that Guild Wars has done this much better -- this particular sequence is very much unlike "The Interrogation" in Marga Coast, where the decision of what to do with the prisoner is explicit, and with a choice for the PC. This particular scene is distrubing since it does not invite reflection -- the new player is literally encouraged to torture a captive human. I greatly appreciate the respondents above who have suggested that I take this up with the ESRB, I think that's a great start. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 76.208.248.249 (talk • contribs) at 02:03, 7 July 2008 (UTC).

Regina just asked you for direct email contact, I assume any answer you get will come via that path. --Star Weaver 20:01, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm not Michael; although Michael was kind enough to take my suggestion seriously and propose a viable solution. I hope he is able to talk to Regina to work out a decent fix.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 76.208.248.249 (talk • contribs) at 02:03, 7 July 2008 (UTC).

I figured the comma meant 'and', as in 'both of you contact me by email'. ^_^. --Star Weaver 20:23, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

I so loled at this, hope anet will not have to go in Court for Satanism or should I say Dragonisim :P (The Enemy of God is Satan, as the dragons are the enemies of the gods) :P --MageMontu 19:50, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Public acceptance of torture these days is very disturbing, from shows like 22 to the new Star Trek movie (http://againsttorture.com/). Now even in Guild Wars, we've gone from Charr who were doing the torturing in Prophecies, to player characters doing it in Nightfall. If you don't find this trend of public acceptance disturbing, you really should do some reading about the corrosive effects that torture has on a society. Laugh all you want, it ain't funny. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 76.208.248.249 (talk • contribs) at 02:03, 7 July 2008 (UTC).

I demand Anet take out these dragons right away, as they scare my 13 year old brother and it's obviously not my fault! -- Mini Me 19:55, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

PS: I hope this is some bad joke...-- Mini Me 19:56, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

O_o. Anyway, the restrained guys were a little disturbing, though I didn't really pay any attention to them until my third or so character through that area; I might have cast a spell on one once just to probe the game design. I honestly found the Wounded Corsair much more disturbing, even creepy, the way the interaction is set up. Honestly, the quest says the sword is sticking out of his back, and he's kneeled over with his back exposed and motionless; I was expecting a clickable thing where you just yank the sword out and he dies or thanks you or turns hostile or whatever, what really happens reminds me more of the last player action in silent hill 2 . . . . . . . --Star Weaver 20:01, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

If you guys get so disturbed at violence, why buying a game with the name Wars in it. Seriously a war is not something with flowers and candy. --MageMontu 20:06, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Hey, I burn the white mantle to death all day long on a fairly nice character but I find it a little creepy when there's a hunched guy ignoring me and the only way to interact with him is by stabbing him. I think it could have been scripted better, but I don't think it needs to be changed, either, it just feels more 'gamey' than most stuff in the game. (I've played a fair selection of FPSs, too. I blow up people shooting at me all the time. I still found it kinda blah in Quake 2 that there were human prisoners (from the player's attack fleet or whatever) and your interaction choices with them were: ignore, kill.)) --Star Weaver 20:23, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

The game has a Teen rating which means "Titles rated T (Teen) have content that may be suitable for ages 13 and older. Titles in this category may contain violence, suggestive themes, crude humor, minimal blood, simulated gambling, and/or infrequent use of strong language." directly quoted from ESRB.org. So there is violence is this game, as well as suggestive themes, simulated gambling and strong language. The rating system was correct in it's assumption, wasn't it? Unless you're saying that the ESRB were mistaken and that Guild Wars should have a mature rating? Mature games are Age of Conan were delicate woman parts are shown in game and are definitely NSFW. Renin 20:09, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm putting together a hand-written letter to the ESRB to be signed by Vietnam vetrans in the area. Having games where "our side" is doing the torturing should definitely be considered for "mature" rating. It is far worse than an exposed breast (which I think should be Teen, BTW). I think it is a problem with their rating scale, and hopefully it can be addressed. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 76.208.248.249 (talk • contribs) at 02:03, 7 July 2008 (UTC).

You realize that your basically saying "violent video games promote violence" which has been dismissed repeatedly as a load of bull. I'm not saying i condone torture, but you have to realize it's a game if your unable to discern the difference between a game and real life you really shouldn't be playing games anyway (or doing a lot of other stuff for that matter). Hell, me and my brother's grew up playing FPS's such as doom and quake, we don't go around shooting each other, we don't worry about the morality of what happens in a game. Yes some things shouldn't be put in a game, but what your bitching about is pointless and irrelevant. It makes no difference in this kind of a game, i'm not denying that, but this isn't one of those things. If your saying torture is bad, then the whole concept of killing people should be an issue, you can't pick and chose with such a thing, someone near the top mentioned about being level 20 and going to a training area to kill monsters. It;s a similar concept, the monsters have no way of defending or fighting back against such a powerful opponent, i don't see anyone complaining about that. honestly, you'll have as much luck as me sprouting wings from my back and being able to fly in the next 24 hours. ~PheNaxKian Talk 20:56, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

I know that I'm a little late in posting this, but I don't have this page watched, so I have a tendency to come into the discussion a bit late. To make myself clear, I am not 76.208.248.249, and I am not interested in taking this matter up with ArenaNet. I personally don't find it that big of a deal; I was just trying to propose a solution that would make everyone go, "Hmm, I guess that would help," and then the matter would be over. I understand how this might offend people, but at the same time, I have a hard time understanding how these people can be so offended when it's really just a video game. If you don't like it, don't play it. Seriously, it's not that big of a deal. --Michael the Perfectionist 21:08, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Seriously, It's not ANet fault if your nephew grows up to be violent, after all it was you, his dear uncle/auntie, that bought him a fantasy WAR game, keep that in mind. --MageMontu 21:20, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

I'd rather create a 'Free The Winter Dwarf' platform than care about this. MithTalk 21:23, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

If you can't make a clear difference between video games and real life at age of 13 I'm not sure having a PC, especially with internet available, would be a good idea...--Dragonstorm|Talk 21:29, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

It's not healthy to fantasize about torturing a human, sorry.

Regina, thank you for your private response. You're welcome to delete this topic since I'm confident that ArenaNet will take my concern seriously. I appreciate your time, and Michael's suggestion to address my request. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 76.208.248.249 (talk • contribs) at 02:03, 7 July 2008 (UTC).

PS: This is a freakin game, if it's too violent for you and your nephew, stop playing, jeez it's not a must do in life, don't ruin the fun of others with your stupid requests. --MageMontu 21:57, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Removing the ability to torture a corsair prisoner is going to "ruin the fun" for you? Wow. There are some truly sick children these days. Get medical help.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 76.208.248.249 (talk • contribs) at 02:03, 7 July 2008 (UTC).

First of all i'm 22 and independent not like you 14 or 15 year old nephew who is still scared of violence, second yes it will ruin my fun because if they do what u want, after you will start asking more stuff, like spirit slavery, desturbing the death, setting ppl on fire and killing animals if u see a ranger with a pet, jeez just confiscate your nephew's account and shut the hell up. --MageMontu 22:06, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

read what i posted on ur talk page 76.208, and then respond on my or your talk, cuz im not gonna repeat it here. But i will repeat that if you cant handle it, 1. ur a pansie, and 2. stop playing gw, cuz theres much worse stuff out there. Also, some find it fun to kill a helpless NPC to learn how to use skills effectively or in chains. Quit being some "oh look a spider, eeeee, its eating a fly, thats not right, even though it needs food to survive..*faint*" style of wimpy protester--Raph Talky 22:09, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Considering how you can handle fantasizing about murdering several large groups of humans, but not one thats just sitting there....thats just wrong. I'd like to reiterate that its just a bloody game. If its that offensive, don't play it. -- Wandering Traveler 22:11, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

I would like to take the tame to make a link to Here to show you many other important facts such as "it is not a games fault if you raise your child wrong, children know a game is a game, and if they don't the parent is not raising them up properly and shouldn't have the child in the first place" and "the game is not real life, real life is not a game, and intellegent people approach this fact intellegently instead of disregarding it as a real teacher teaching and telling you things it doesn't teach or do". Honestly, if you think that a TEENAGER is too immature to handle the fact people hurt you people, then your hiding the real world from him. And sence when did chunks of data gain human rights? I'm sorry if my comment sounds angry but simply put it is not the video game's fault you let your child play it if you think it will "corrupt" his more-matured-than-child mind, it is how the parent raises the child. Would you care to argue that no matter how a parent raises a child it is the video game's job to make your child prosporous in life? --Elven Chaos 22:12, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

I just think that if you're that concerned about your children or nephews or whever you're responsible for comming in contact with violence in video games (which is the same old issue about videogames and well known around the world) you shouldreally check the age ratings and try the game yourself or get oppinions about the game before buying any type of game. Guild Wars has violence in it and that's exactly what they say it has. It's a war-themed game and in almost every war there has been innocents killed. Torture has been there and if you're saying that "our" side never tortured the "enemy" I'd say you're a true hipocryte (or mentally shortsided). I dispise violence in real life, though I'd gladly slash my opponent's head off in any videogame. I myself am 24 years old and I play along with people of many ages, and in my area there's a few 13-16 year olds I sometimes hang out with coz we share interests (videogames, beach, swimming, ...) and these "kids" still are kids though never showed any type of odd behaviour eventhough they've played and killed (a lot) in videogames. ...Maybe, just MAYBE, instead of trying to change a game, you should give better guidance for your nephew to make it clear that the real world and the video game world are two different worlds and they can not be mixed up...ever... Anyway, I hope you at least take these words into considderation and I hope you take a wise desission --Dragonstorm|Talk 22:27, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Guys, we are getting too personal here. As this is Regina's talk page, and Regina requested an email be sent to her, this discussion should be ending. Considering we're going into circular arguments and accusing people of being pansies or telling them not to play, I suggest we move on. -- Brains12 \ talk 22:15, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't agree with how dismissive you all are being of 76.208.248.249's opinions regarding the depiction of torture in Guild Wars. I'd hoped to leave this section on the page for a bit, for reference, but since the discussion is going off-topic towards parenting advice, I am going to archive. --Regina Buenaobra 22:37, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

(continuation)

The problem is, the issue with the Corsair Prisoner is interesting lore-wise because it shows the Sunspear not really being the "avatar of all that is good and kind in the world". I don't think removing or changing it just because a user protesting is the right course of action. I could agree, thought, if it were removed because it is not, in fact, following the Sunspear lore.--Fighterdoken 22:40, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Indeed, the other interesting one in Nightfall is the Father of Daughter vs Courting Man conflict -- I'd love to have the stats on which decision most users take, to let the fight play out, or to solve by assisting in one way or the other. I know of a few psychologists that would love to have the information, pity one would need IRB approval and informed consent from the test subjects, er, sorry, users. What would be especially cool is to see what sort of moral choices players make, and if they are consistent. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 76.208.248.249 (talk • contribs) at 02:03, 7 July 2008 (UTC).

er.....anon..forget my past posts, and explain to me, in layman's, what both of you are trying to say?--Raph Talky 23:17, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Unlike other Chapters of Guild Wars, Nightfall is particularly dark and has a very dim view of humanity. It's not good vs evil, the player character is actually encouraged to do evil (killing a wounded soldier, corsair prisoner). For Leap of Faith, to complete the request either the father or the boyfriend have to die... and the player character must make a choice (there is no option for both to live). Finally, in the Interrogation, although Nerashi gives the player character the option to kill or spare the Koronan Soldier, from her dialog it's clear she's going to spill his blood regardless. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 76.208.248.249 (talk • contribs) at 02:03, 7 July 2008 (UTC).

I never expected to see "IRB approval" on my talk page, or discussions of depictions of torture, or discussions about gender and armor design. The intelligently written perspectives here on these social issues related to games and game design has pleasantly surprised me. --Regina Buenaobra 23:54, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

i am sorry but this isn't that big of a deal like post previous the game is RATED T FOR TEENS. if you want your kids to play the game then that's your responsibility as a parent to look at the game and think about it its not Regina's. further more life dosnt always give you a clear cut situations sometimes you have to make discussions that might be harmful.75.172.47.75 23:58, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Errr... but nightfall isnt the first game in the series that required you to do some extremely morally questionable actions. Take Factions for example. You had to choose to side yourself in a tribal civil war, where the hatred seems to be based on nothing more than simple racism. (a stance which at the time i found extermly distasteful and put me off the game completly as I would have far prefered being a neutral force trying to bring about peace.) However You didn't get to choose not to side with either. All i'm saying is that nightfall did not set the precedent for morally questionable game elements. -- Salome 00:04, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

I agree that Nightfall is the darkest of the three campaigns. HOWEVER, The world isn't Cut and Dry as many would wish to believe, and NF shows just that. If someone wants to complain about a part of gameplay, they shouldn't play. It is rated T for a reason, as stated above. Besides, it isn't like they actually show Nareshi actually murdering the Kourman anyway.Amazing Steve , 00:05:30, july 7, 2008

75.172.47.75, that isn't actually an apology, so please don't say you're sorry and pretend like it is. Dismissing this person's concern about what the game says about torture by saing "It's just a game" or something along those lines is not constructive. Many different types of feedback come across this wiki, through the forums, and in email. Just because their question discusses social implications of game content rather than implications about skill balance and the meta game does not mean that it's less valid. As I am already dealing with this privately, I am again going to archive this discussion. --Regina Buenaobra 00:06, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

However, Regina saying that it is a parents responsibility to protect their child from elements they find offensive or damaging, not the corporation is also a very valid point. I'm not saying i agree with either, but just saying that you kinda overlooked the main gist of what the ip was saying and you we'rejust asguilty of being dismissive of someone's opinions as he was, by overlooking the main point he made. -- Salome 00:10, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) Take also the example from Prophecies' White Mantle. They didn't really sacrifice peasants just because they were "evil". They thought they were doing so to protect their gods, their way of life and the life of the rest of the people of Kryta. I would actually love to see in GW2 that small stuff as this (Sunspear torturing people) derived with the time in something like totalitarian fascism. Small stuff like this can't happend without a reason, and i would like to think that the devs added it in-game because it was intended to happend.--Fighterdoken 00:12, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

I didn't overlook 75's point. I disagreed with the delivery. I know that 75 and a whole host of others disagreed with 76, and I understand why. What I didn't like was the fact that 75 basically got dogpiled by everyone and dismissed because they were taking a game "too seriously", when the same accusation could be leveled at the people giving feedback and criticism about Ursan Blessing. My point is, 75 was being dismissive specifically by apologizing, but not really apologizing and also by saying that 76's concern wasn't a big deal. --Regina Buenaobra 00:15, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

I would like to close public discussion about this torture depiction issue, because I'm already dealing with it privately. If you would like to voice counter arguments to 76's feedback to the creative team, please let me know in private as well. I will compile the arguments and counter arguments to the team and let them deal with it. Though, my gut feeling is that they won't do anything because the priority is on creating for GW2 and not on making these kinds of changes in GW1. --Regina Buenaobra 00:25, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

(continuation)

I'm not saying I agree with either point Regina and I do think its an interesting discussion. However it does simply boil down to the question of should a software company bare a moral obligation to cast it's heros in a good light and not force them to do things which could be considered evil or is it the indivduals/parents responsibility to shield themselves and their dependants from it? This then leads to the age old debate of censorship. My personal stance is that as i understand it (as its been a long time since i did the starting area of nightfall) that one is not forced into roles of torture,instead they are simply given the option to. None of the primary quests require you to kill the prisoners,you are simply given the option and if it is so repugnant to ones beliefs then it stands to reason that the person should opt to not partake in the none essential torture. As for the intellectual theory behind the specifics of this debate,personally I am uncomfortable with this form of censorship. As the logical conclusion would be that what someone considers evil varies greatly. If one thinks that torture should not be shown as they consider it evil, which is a very straight forward clear cut thing, but what then happens if another person thinks homosexuality is evil or interracial relationships? Should we then forbid games from displaying those kinds of relationships? Censorship of this variety personally makes me very uncomfortable. I am not dismissing the ip's opinion however as they are entitled to it, but personally I think its a slippery and very dangerous slope to get on. If anet starts to censor like this, they will be like Blizzard where one can't even say gay. (which as a gay man myself I find incredibly offensive, despite them saying they are doing it to protect me from the big bad world). Sorry for the repost but it my computer lagged and did something odd with the posting. -- Salome 00:36, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

The core problem with the Corsair Prisoner is that a roleplayer is under the impression that he's the good guy, fighting deamons and all, yet, she's encouraged to commit war crimes and has no indication in the game that he's making a moral error. I'm now convinced that the writer of Nightfall intended to add moral complexity to the game, but, I think that it was done carelessly. I have no problem with "cops and robbers" style games, where a roll player picks a car thief or what not. In that case the context is clear. However, the Corsair Prisoner is different -- a teenager which has not been exposed to this moral issue will be blind to it, and accept torture of corsair prisoner without any understanding of the broader issue. To me, that's frightening situation in a broader social context. For this reason Nightfall should be rated Mature and not Teens. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 76.208.248.249 (talk • contribs) at 02:03, 7 July 2008 (UTC).

ESRB makes teen 14+. (theres a Everyone 13+ for a reason). No teenager that old would be blind to it. Its not part of the main story line, plus parents are responcible for what there children are exposed to. Dominator Matrix 01:28, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Making a game where one can choose to do moral or immoral actions, or even with complex grey areas is social commentary and worthy of free speech. Making a game where there are only options are immoral is propaganda. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 76.208.248.249 (talk • contribs) at 02:03, 7 July 2008 (UTC).

I feel you're underestimating teenagers somewhat. Most teens, particularly (in general) those who play RPGs, are quite bright, and have a solid ability to seperate fact from fiction. Most kids who would commit torture in real-life are already messed up: they may have been taught or inspired by games and TV, but only because they were already very receptive to that sort of material (and, indeed, probably sought it out specifically because the violence in them appealed to their twisted psyche). A normal kid will, eventually, think to question the validity of a concept submitted to them. I wouldn't trust a child to do that, but certainly a teenager. (Apologies if I've repeated something already mentioned in this discussion; I haven't read all the archives.) --Mme. Donelle 01:42, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

I think your level of writing demonstrates that you are well beyond the mental age that I'm concerned about. Cheers. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 76.208.248.249 (talk • contribs) at 02:03, 7 July 2008 (UTC).

Okay. If my opinion on the matter is invalid because I'm not a teenager, then the same applies to you. --Mme. Donelle 01:47, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Hah, wow. Owned. Seriously man are you for real? (edit: what a silly question, of course he is for real) Vael Victus 02:00, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't know. Are you accusing me of trolling again? --Mme. Donelle 02:01, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

You're a man? Just because I accused you once doesn't mean I have anything against you, but apparently you think I do! :( Because I wasn't talking to you, I was assuming the IP was a man. Your words, right there, owned him. What else do you need? Vael Victus 02:05, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Lol, I'm sorry. I realised straight after posting that that I was being paranoid and you were really talking to anon. You replied before I could fix my comment. :( (And no, I'm female, but people are generally assumed to be male on the internet, so I automatically assumed you were making that assumption. Heh.) --Mme. Donelle 02:09, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

I may be underestimating some teenagers somewhat, but a great many adults in the United States are now on the "it is OK to torture" bandwagon, and this public opinion is shifting. Culture moves in small babysteps with little changes, unthinkable a few years ago -- where a teenager makes their avatar commit a war crime, and since it's a "bad Corsair" it is OK. Well, it's not OK. Does torture happen? Sure. Should it be protrayed? Sure. Should games where the player is an assumed "good guy" be put in a position where a war crime is part of the game flow? Absolutely Not.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 76.208.248.249 (talk • contribs) at 02:03, 7 July 2008 (UTC).

If public opinion as a whole is gradually shifting towards a pro-torture stance, then surely protecting teenagers from depictions of torture in an arguably acceptable light is merely delaying the inevitable? --Mme. Donelle 02:23, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

(historical copy of Corsair Prisoner page)

This particular creature should be replaced as soon as possible with small, ugly creatures. While confronting and killing other humans, and thus Corsairs in general, is socially acceptable, torture as represented here is not. The use of captured soldiers for "training" in medical camps or warrior instruction is particularly clear violation of the Geneva Convention and is quite abhorrent thought. It's very difficult to explain this away as "fantasy" since it is so obnoxious to the soul. Please remove this creature from the game. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:75.35.187.116 (talk).

I don't remember the Elonian Empire being between the signataries of the w:Geneva Convention, nor having ratified any of the conventions or protocols, so i think it's safe to assume that they aren't ruled by such. Besides, i think it's hard to impose earth's laws and regulations in another planet.

Also, remember that even for Earth history, the first convention was signed in 1864, and before that anything was a "fair game". Hell, even in medieval Japan people used to "test" their newly-acquired swords on prisoners, so i don't think it's that hard to image the Sunspear doing the same.--Fighterdoken 23:35, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Children, as early as age 12 play this game. I'm sure that the practice of torture is widespread, from Japan, to Germany, and especially today in the U.S. -- nothing like having 100's of "Enemy Combatants" in order to practice on. Bottom line... Guild Wars doesn't need to go here. It's really out of line for a game, especially one played by teenagers. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:75.35.187.116 (talk).

Let's make it clear, unless action is taken to remove the representation of human torture by the "good guys" soon, I will aim to bring it to the attention of mothers across the country, and I'll start my campaign a month or so before Christmas sales begin. The other vector (especially during an election year) are those who wish to censor video game violence, while they've been unsuccessful at preventing blood and gore, I think that representation of torture in games aimed at teens is beyond what is covered by free speech. Politicians are just waiting for a "winning" issue to rally around; within weeks this example will be the "show case" and Arena Net will be the evil bad guys in a surrogate fight against torture. It is both a conservative and liberal issue. Guild Wars will be the show case for the evil, mindless game developer focused on corrupting our children. It'll poison thousands upon thousands of potential sales. What you're doing is *wrong*. Fix it now. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:75.35.187.116 (talk).

Maybe they could change it from Corsair Prisoner to something like Enchanted Target, like the targets on the Isle of the Nameless and just have it enchant itself with Mystic Vigor every 30 seconds or so. That way, we wouldn't even have to discuss the morality of having a captured living creature. Just a suggestion. --Michael the Perfectionist 01:10, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

That'd be a hundred times better and would address my concern. The targets on the Isle of the Nameless are trainers, who have signed up for what they are doing. I'm all for having this fixed, I don't want to escalate this because I do enjoy the game, and appreciate Arena Net immensely.

However, I'm not going to stand idly by while my nephew is taught by a video game that torture of human subjects is something acceptable; and no, I don't agree that it being a fantasy game lets one off the hook -- he's playing a Sunspear, so it's his government that is violating human rights. I'll give it a few weeks, but if I don't see a game change, I'm going to bring this up with congress critters I know, with pictures of the scene so that they can introduce legislation against this sort of thing. It's an issue any politician would rally behind, especially in the current political climate. With only a slight amount of work, it'll make headline news. Major T.V. networks love the narrative of a "liberal, west coast" villain corrupting our children. This depiction is especially juicy because of our current political climate, even if people can't stop our own government from using "enhanced interrogation techniques", we can certainly do something about a game developer indoctrinating our children. Thank you for listening, and I hope to see change. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:75.35.187.116 (talk).

Wait, wait, wait. Back up. This is a game that's been out for more than three years, and this is part of an aspect of that game, out for one and a half. I'm not saying this isn't a potential issue; I bet many, like myself, haven't thought of how this NPC is treated as torture, and may be shocked by this new light. However, my first point is that this is one of few things that your politicians, mothers, and Congress would rally around. This is... just scraping the bottom of the barrel. Whatever happened to Manhunt 2? It's a terrible game, go after that! Oh, my poor, poor brain. What did it ever do to you? It says on the box: Children under 13 are not permitted to play. While it would be politically correct for Arenanet to change this, political ventures against this would be less successful than actually violent, gory video games, because it's not for kids. I think it kind of breaks the gritty realism when the prisoner is ressurected after about thirty seconds. Not to mention that there are no GW products being released in the near future, certainly not by the Christmas holiday season.

To conclude, I see your point, but the legal and political threats your making are just...hilarious. By the way, this wiki doesn't really go directly to ArenaNet. --Chaiyo Kaldor talk contribs 01:49, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

I've worked in Washington D.C., and I respectfully disagree. Stuff like this becomes a 'symbol' of what is 'wrong with this country'. While lots of other games have blood and gore, the issue du jour is torture, and this issue will resonate quite well by giving politicians a way to stand strong against torture, while still being tough on terrorism. Look at the docket of the house/senate on any given day and you'll see a bunch of lovely symbolic bills that are apple pie. This issue is apple pie. Banning video games that promote torture is good politics. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:76.208.248.249 (talk).

I would really like to believe this is some kind of put on, as this truly IS only a game, and is in no way violent enough or immoral enough to warrant ANY sort of attention by the media, or heaven forbid, the government of ANY country. If you find it so reprehensible, my only suggestion to you is stop playing it, uninstall it from your computer, and go on your merry way. I don't believe Anet is intentionally trying to promote the use of torture in any real life situation, and Tyria fortunately doesn't fall under the jurisdiction of the Geneva Convention. -- Wynthyst 02:19, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Personally I think this is a rather silly issue that's been taken out of perspective (i.e. "promotes" torture? you might be part of an extreme minority who even managed to think about it that way). Your nephew is playing a game where it starts off with happily killing humans. You think war and murder is fine for kids? But an implication of torture is a no-no? It's a little strange for me to accept, but I suppose we differ culturally, so I'm not going to argue your perspective on things.

I just like to point out that if you want to get a message to ArenaNet, have you sent them an email? They don't monitor all the pages on this wiki. Threatening a game company (that you supposedly appreciate) with political and social backlash on a wiki talk page, especially an obscure one like this is not the proper way to do it. Inform them first, wait a while, then take further action, not immediately turn to threats. (and let's stop with the Geneva Conventions; I'm assuming you are from the US? The US is not exactly a good example of a "proponent" of the Geneva Conventions) -- ab.er.rant 02:21, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

To add on to Whynthyst's comment.....my god, pull yourself together! its a bloody game! If you really don't like it, then don't play the game. Everyone these days seems to find something to get offended over. So he's named "Prisoner". So he's target practice. He is ressurected over and over and over again. This is like banning level 20's from going to sunqua vale because they're taking advantage of the mantid population. Just get over it, please. Save us some time. -- Wandering Traveler 02:24, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Apparently, he has notified them directly, so that's good. Now, I think we should just let the anon user talk to ArenaNet directly. It doesn't concern the wiki. -- ab.er.rant 02:27, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

This was being typed out for a few hours on and off, I get heavly distracted, and was ment to be after Michael's comment, so the following pays no notice to all comments before it untill Michaels comment

You're going to try to pull a Jack T. m(r?)s. (assumed from "mothers" comment) 75.35.187.116? The game is rated T for Teen, so nobody under 13 should be playing it without parental permission. For parents who do give their children to play this game, even those who meet the given age rating, it is the parents' responcibility to make sure their children are mature enough to play the game, based on knowing atleast a little about the game, and thus the decision is down to each married couple/single parent individually if the child is allowed to play the game. So if you are upset with this game, simply keep your child/children from playing it.

Also, if you are afraid that the concept of this human torture is going to poison children, please keep them out of history class, especially when they go over the holocaust, slave treatment, and prisonor's of war, because those are worse than you will ever find in GW, especially sence you find them in school.

Next, we take and give plenty of slashes, hits, and spells on the GW battlefield, and we loose more health there than the prisoner does in the beginner's area, ontop of causing severe bleeding, poison, deep wounds, disease, blindness, daze, and catching others on fire. I would say we put more pain and torture to our enemies on the field verses the prisoner. If you let your children watch alot of medieval TV shows/movies they are abound to find some kind of torture device, alot of the times in use, are you going to protest against the TV aswell? What about the music children listen to, the popular is rap, which is worse than any video game's reference to real history, and if you are not very careful rock, more or less depending on the type of rock, and not as often mayby but not likely country. Rap is all sex, drugs, guns, killing cops, and any kind of vulgarity now, that is bound to influence the children, especially sence they seem to listen to it 24/7. Will you protest against rap? There are much worse things then a 5 minute history reference in a video game that poison children, you just have to take a step back and look at culture today and if you're not trapped in it you'll figure it out quickly.

Lastly, I end with a little more of what I began with. The parent is responcible for their child's/childrens' education, well-being, and actions; as well as what they do when, such as what they listen to, what they watch, what they play, and who they hang around. As a parent you have almost complete control, as well as responcibility, for your child, and so forth, if a child is getting "poisoned" by culture today it is partly in fault of the parent, who should keep a better eye on their child (even if the child doesn't know it) and make sure they raise their child up correctly. This leads to another point, the lazy parent, or parents who do not take proper physical and/or mental care of their child, which includes monitering/restricting their children, as well as observing them to see where your child stands in maturity. As a parent you need to show the love, caring, compassion, gentleness, truthfulness, forgiveness, and patience that a child needs to grow up with, as well as the dicipline, restriction, sternness, authority, knowledge, and fairness the child needs. With these traits and many more the child will have the self-control, sanity, and respect to know and do right, and if the child lacks this maturity, it falls back on the parent to take care of the child and keep an eye on the child.

I say this not because I have doubpts of you meeting these requirements, you have monitored what your child plays and taken action for it, but the 5 min history reference will not play a difference on your child if the child is raised/being raised properly, so the poison is not just culture, but parents who don't control the amount of "poisonous" culture that gets to their child, or explains things to the child to make him/her understand what is going on, is it good/bad, and why the subject happened/did what happened in the first place. Such "lazy" or abusive parents are the leading cause of "bad" children, children that are rebelious (or in most cases "extra" rebelious), disrespectful, violent, and even murderous children.

The world is not too mature for children, rather, the children are too immature for the world. They are tought maturity by those who are responcible enough to pull and push them in the right direction, by those who make themselves a rolemodel for the future, by teachers who care, by parents who love. Do not force the world to lower itself to suit a child, rather, let the children all grow into better, stronger people by teaching them to overcome the mental trials of this world. The poison lies not withen the game, not withen history, not withen fiction, not withen TV, not withen music; it lies in the parents, who must not let this poison infect the children, and you do this by teaching them right from wrong, not only as mental laws but as motives and personalities of the heart. So do not blame games for what the parents lack in responcibility, 5 minutes of minor tortures that we have already heard of or seen of in greater detail and description and torture in other places like music and TV will not turn a child into a murderer. That is my spill, and I mean no offence in any of it, but please reconsider what is wrong in the society, the game the child plays with parent's permission or the parent who gave the child permission to play the game in the first place and without checking the game out here-and-there, after all, the parent is responcible for their own child's upbringing. --Elven Chaos 05:01, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

By the OP's logic, we should nerf about... say... all of necromancer's sacrifice skills, because they promote, you'know, self injury, examples being this and this. We may also want to censor some warrior icons, say, this and this. The logic here being "hitting people with large weapons and choping off limbs is okay".

As skakid said,LOL -- nüklaer | VII | Selfless self promotion 07:36, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Wow, Nuke, you just broke the lines. I mean, the lol is too big. Are you sure that you have had that large of a lol? I mean, Skakid only did it to the third big, and I would limit mine to two, but six? True dedication. I mean, I had to use {{clear}} to seperate this. --Chaiyo Kaldor talk contribs 17:53, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

I have a big diaphragm. -- nüklaer | VII | selfless self promotion 20:42, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

(archive merge from side-chat on 76.208.248.249 message log)

Greetings. The comment about the implications of training with prisoners was moved to the talk page of the article, since it's not relevant document-wise, but an opinion about it. Also, please note that vandalizing articles just to "make a point" is not allowed.
If you feel this is an issue it should be answered by ArenaNet, please contact them directly through e-mail or on Regina's talk page. Since the wiki is managed by users, there is little we can do about such issues.--Fighterdoken 01:43, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. I will use Regina's talk page. Prior email/support requests to Arena Net on this issue have gone without a response. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:75.35.187.116 (talk).

I've been meaning to ask a Vietnam vet this for a while, but there aren't a lot living in my area. How do you feel about waterboarding? --76.25.197.215 20:51, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm not a Vietnam vet, but my father is; and more closer to home, I have good friends who are clinical staff at the local VA hospital. The stories I hear from them make my stomach turn. I've yet to meet a Vietnam vetran who thinks torture is a good idea -- it seems mostly to be arm-chair warriors that like the idea, sociopathic males with who have been picked on their entire life, and young teenagers that don't know any better.

From my understanding, there is strong agreement that a civil people should not torture people, that the best way to extract information is to convince your captive that your side represents Justice. Torture doesn't produce valueable information, it produces gibberish and false confessions.

I've cornered one particularly honest supporter of torture (in a D.C. bar) who insists that it's valueable as an anti-terrorism measure. This gentleman was promoting the most severe forms of torture, including waterboarding and the ice box, that are meant to cause "repeatable death experiences" where you bring the subject to partial/total organ failure, and then revive him. As I understand it, the value isn't that he thinks valueable information will be extracted (although this is the public position), it's that it provides for cruel punishment that is "worse" than the death penalty. He was quite happy with 25 and how video games are starting to make his position "socially acceptable" -- since us liberals have dominated the space of ideals for so long... I guess going all the way back to Article V of the Constition of the United States (not even the bill of rights!). The justification he provided was stunning: suicide terrorists don't fear death, but they will (somehow) fear torture. ?!?!

What infuriates me is that I'm seeing this all around me. In the next movie of StarTrek, on T.V., and, now in Guild Wars? This is just.... wow. Why it's gaining in social acceptance in the United States is beyond me. Scary actually. But back on topic, for my discussions with vets, it's definitely not our professional armed forces pushing for it. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:75.35.187.116 (talk).

dude...im going be like WT and be blunt, you are taking this too frking far. THIS is a game. Every other type of torture you are referrring to and etc. etc. is REAL. I have total respect for war veterens, military personel, and especially vietnam and WW2 vets (my great granduncle was in D-Day), but this is killing a computer animated enemy WHICH LOOKS LIKE EVERY OTHER CORSAIR IN THE GAME, NOT ALL BLOODIED UP OR W/E, with magic or hexes, technicly, every necromancer and mesmer hex in the game is torturing the hexee, by your logic at least. These are my last words on the matter, deal with it, im sure your 13 year old boy, WHO HAS PROBABLY SEEN MUCH WORSE (HAS HE WATCHED ANY OF THE JASON MOVIES..THE SHINING MAYBE?!), can handle it. If you cant handle it, then 1. ...tbh...ur just a pansie...and 2. ....dont play gw anymore, cuz theres a lot of worser things in this game then repeatedly killing a lvl 0 corsair with a ball of lightning or a conjured nightmare--Raph Talky 22:02, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Look man, this has nothing to do with the violent content of the game, 99.9% of the game's content and your examples are not relevant to what I'm communicating. Violence is expected. What's unexpected is the role that player characters have in acts of torture. It's not even remotely good. If committing a war crime is absolutely needed for the story line, then the game must address the implications of that war crime. If it isn't necessary, then by all means, leave it out. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:75.35.187.116 (talk).

ok...now im going to be super blunt and short.....its not a war crime...ITS A FUCKING GAME!...there are quite a few, serious crimes that can be depicted in game. Is torture worse than brutal murder? possibly, if it isnt, you might as well as join the handful of people who protest against GTA. It's just a game, you dont like it? Gtfo, wimp.--Raph Talky 22:15, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Regardless of whether or not you agree with 76.208.248.249, leave the attacks and hostility at the door. -- Brains12 \ talk 22:16, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) Raph, your comments are starting to violate NPA. If you don't like his opinion, oppose it in a calm way without violating policy. --Shadowphoenix 22:17, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

(Edit conflict x2) ::Look...I've dealt with your kind before. I don't see anyone else on here complaining that you can do something like this. For one, there is no torture. Hell, the guys goes down in one hit and is all of a sudden alive again. I don't really think he's caring. Last I checked, computer NPC's didnt have souls. But I am just really suprised at how big of an issue you are raising with trying to remove this NPC. If you really don't like him, then don't go to him! You can't be offended by what you don't see. I pray you don't go to the Realm of Torment, because then we'll have to remove that section of the game at this rate.....-- Wandering Traveler 22:19, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Let's face it, if he wants to bring Guild Wars down for such a thing then so be it. Let that person ruin what hundreds of people around the world enjoy because of what an American thinks should be. Renin 04:23, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Anyone care to tell me whether ANet is going to do anything about this dilema. And perosnally what Renin said above disurbes me. So I would like to no the sooner the better whether anything would happen to GW.--Protector Yereton 19:23, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Believe it or not, we read pretty much everything on the Official Wiki and various fan forums. While we can't respond to every concern, we do take constructive criticism and feedback seriously. Without going into details, it's safe to say that we're looking into the matter more closely. We'll decide what, if anything, to do after some thorough examination, and will update the community accordingly. Thanks for playing. Bobby Stein 03:43, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Hall of Monument Question

There is something that has been bugging me for some time now and I'm not entirely sure if its been asked, so I'm going to ask it now.

"With the Monuments rewards what is more important the Quality of the pieces or just the Quanity?"

It may be too early to get such specific information [though I would have thought this would have been taken into consideration ages ago, but thats just my opinion] but this is something I see coming up a lot when I have ingame conversations with friends and random players.

Some are of the mindset once you 'fill' a monument that is what the reward is based on.

• Devotion you will get the reward when its full of 20 mini-pets
• Resilence you will get the reward when its full of 5 armour sets of varying values
• Valor you will get the reward when it has 11 Destroyer weapons (or Torment weapons once this function is added)
• Honor you will get a reward based on the Maxed Title Track Rank, a maximum of 6 rewards.

Some are of the mindset its the Quality of the pieces you have, the more green and gold minipets you have the better the reward, the more expensive armour sets you have the better the reward. Same with the titles; the more harder to acquire titles give you a better reward then the easier titles such as the farmable titles for example.

Others are also of the mindset you get more rewards, or a greater reward if you have more content to the monument: example I spoke to one guy who has 10 armour sets [he is working towards getting all the warrior sets] believing he'll get more of a reward then someone who just fills the five viewable slots.

I was just wondering if this has been addressed of if you can bring the question to the developers attention as knowing if its one or the other would help a lot of people with their play-time. 000.00.00.00 01:23, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

for some things i would say yes quality over quantity and somethings i would say no, mini pets no, armor yes, weapons no, titles yes. heros/pets who cares there also there isnt a real system to it. 75.165.110.13 03:33, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

I thought that HoM was for letting current players get little extras GW for having done certain things in GW. Nothing was supposed to give older players an edge over new players. Then too, was that HoM let you show off what you have done. So it may just be that a full monument is a full monument is a full monument. So that one player with 20 white minis and another with 20 gold and green ones both get the same extra in GW2 since they both filled their monument, but one has a lot more Ooh and Aaah showing off their HoM. After all what's "better" is still a matter of individual preference. So who's to say that a FoW armor set should earn a player better rewards just because it's FoW? I'm a fairly atypical player in taste, I dislike a lot of the armor sets, so why would I have to get penalized for not getting armor that's a better quality but that I hate the look of? Yukiko 03:41, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

To be fair, I don't think that's really consistent with the nature of rewards already in GW, or indeed MMOs in general. Saying that you shouldn't be penalised for not buying the expensive armour you thought was ugly, is like saying that players who think FoW is pretty are being penalised for having to spend lots of gold on that, instead of something cheaper but (in their opinion) uglier. The value of FoW is lower than it used to be, but it's still the ultimate in prestige armour, and more to the point, takes a lot more effort to obtain than any others; I think the GW2 reward for FoW should reflect that. --Mme. Donelle 15:11, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

I was very surprised when I first saw people "filling" their HoM (exactly 5 armour sets, exactly 20 minpets, etc). I always figured that the limit of 5 viewable statues was simply a space-saving issue, and I can't really imagine that rewards will be based on what you can see. I think the system will be more along the lines of a reward for everything you've put in the HoM. So, for example: there are 20 armour sets that can be put into the HoM. It's unlikely that ANet will bother making 20 matching armour sets for GW2, but perhaps each set rewards a piece of armour -- so if you've got the Norn set, you get a Viking helm. If you've got the Kurzick set, you get amber-encrusted boots. I could be wrong of course, but that just makes more sense to me than simply "reward if you have 5 armours and nothing if you don't". --Mme. Donelle 15:04, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

There needs to be a bit more defination. 000.00.00.00 04:14, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

I find it funny when people hide their ips. Anyway, it has been said before and it will be said again. aNet has no definite "rewards" as to what kind of HoM reward, it will give to it's player who'll stay on and play GW2; nor a definitive "how much" and "which XXXXX item/title is more important to post". They're simply at that stage where not alot of things can clearly be defined because they do want to manage expectation. What if they prematurely announce that you'll get a +1 attribute boost on a GW2 armor if you have a GW1 FoW armor + 5 other prestige armor posted on your HoM; and then months later only to announce that instead of a ground breaking armor, we're given a minipet of our miniselves with interchangable mini armors? What then would the player base say? So until such time that we'll have a definite answer, we CANNOT demand an answer. Alot of people have tried, alot of people complained, alot of people simply posted the same issue once it's archived. It just depends on what the higher ups of aNet decides what to say, not us, not Gaile, and definitely not Regina. Renin 04:30, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Renin, its a nickname, not an ip. Secondly, rewards be damned, the rewards are for Guild Wars 2, I'm just asking for more defination to the Guild Wars aspects of the Hall of Monuments. I would like to know, for our Halls in Guild Wars, what is actually considered full or complete, if its just the visual aspect then say that, or if its "Every minipet, every title, every set of armour for that profession, every hero and every Destroyer weapon and Torment weapon" say that. 000.00.00.00 04:57, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

In the end, the rewards immaterial, they will mean nothing really, just like the bonuses of Collectors editions, since they will not impact the game for the player. Most of my questions are related to the now, not the later. 000.00.00.00 05:01, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

As far as what i've read and what i've said earlier, they don't have " a definitive "how much" and "which XXXXX item/title is more important to post"." Renin 05:05, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Essentially, 000, ANet don't want to risk making a promise they can't keep, so they're keeping quiet about the HoM until they've finished it, or reached a point of no return. It's frustrating, especially since one would think that basic information such as what you're requesting has already been permanently decided, but we don't know that for sure. MMOs aren't called "massive" without good reason -- I'm willing to bet they simply haven't had time to work on HoM specifics inbetween creating an entire world. --Mme. Donelle 05:19, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Very true, Mme. Donelle. 000.00.00.00 05:21, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Dragon Festival quests/missions

→ moved from User talk:Regina Buenaobra/Journal

Hi Regina - would you happen to be able to advise whether the missions being advertised for this year's Dragon Festival are new content, or just re-runs of past years' missions? Cheers -- Sirius (talk) 04:26, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

I would hope that at the very least they updated the missions so that they're worth attempting. They're on the slightly harder side of missions, and only reward 50 tokens. Which makes the reward seem out of balance for the effort it has taken in the past. But I wouldn't expect the quests to be change or any added myself. 75.146.48.190 17:32, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Shadow Form Damage Reduction Change? Possibly?

Hi, just offering some un-raging feedback and suggestions!

-The update said the changes to Shadow Form and UW were to reduce the easiness and efficiency of farming that area, but the 50% damage reduction has already been circumvented in a new farming build, and the new build doesn't work that great for farming anywhere other than UW. This leaves a lot of people upset that they cannot farm many bosses for greens (boss regen or healing out-heals build) and even something with low payout like raptor farming is much more difficult since the enemies die very slowly and/or scatter constantly. Many users feel that using the new UW farming build and avoiding the new disenchantment enemies in UW is now the only effective way to farm with their Assassin, therefore more Assassins than ever are going to farm UW, which seems a bit contrary to the purpose of the update.

-Is it possible to just turn all the dream riders into the Cursed Dream Riders -> Mindflay Spectres and then remove the damage reduction while in Shadow Form? Or reduce the skill's damage reduction to maybe 25% after changing the enemies? This would reduce the UW farm's power much more, while not drastically nerfing dozens of other types of Assassin farming that have minimal impact to the economy. UW could still be farmed by SF, but much less profitably, and traditional SF farms could still be done, although slightly slower. It seems like a win-win situation for everyone.

Please consider this alternate adjustment to the skill and the UW enemies, even having you read this at all is much appreciated!

Hey, thanks for your feedback. I've gotten a few emails expressing disappointment about the SF nerf, and the design team is also quite aware of the issue of hitting other farming builds. We're keeping an eye on this one, so there may be changes ahead, depending on what they feel would be the best course of action. --Regina Buenaobra 19:56, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for that Regina, although, I have some input I would liek to give. This does sound like a very viable option, as the UW SF farm is realy the only thing having a negative hit on the economy, and if the cut-back of SF power has already been curcumventing, bad things are in store. Altough, the swap on all enemies would be devestating peroid, that many anti enchant enemies would just demolish even a standard party, as close to half the skills used for keeping parties alive in HM are enchantments. I would say a mix. I have the Banished Dream Riders and Cursed Dream Riders spawn a fair mix of Mindflay Spectres and Mindblade Spectres with Mindflay Spectres having a somewhat low chance of spawning but will sitll spawn somewhat often. There are plenty of good and reasonable Duels and Trios out there that rely on LOTS of enchantments to egt things done, and too many anti-enchanters would simply ruin it for everyone. Having it randomized leaves that element of danger to everyone, but it still leaves it possible for everyone. Myself and two friends frequent to UW on a 600/Smite/Famine team, and we can clear most fo the UW thats worth clearing (Twin Serpent Mountans suck to get through) but it takes us and rather long time, but is a fun expierence, and has it's share of dangers and such, and we have tanked a good number of times and gotten thrown out to our dismay. The three of us are saving to get Obsidian armor at some point and are worried that our only good, viabl eand non-cheese route to ecto could easily be cut off. The introduction of Sig of Disenchant realy shook things up, and has almost made the Bone Pits and Spawnign Pools inaccessable. I have a good compromize. Reduce the damage reduction of SF to 25%, remove Cursed Dream Riders. as it stands, spawns of Mindblades come at 3, 6 then 9. Group of 3 has a 50% of spawning one mindflay, group of 6 has 50% of one and 25% chance of a second, group of nine has 75% chance of one, 50% chance of a second and 25% chance of a 3rd mindflay. The high level of disenchantment brought about by Cursed Dreamriders and groups of Mindflay Spectres is at an almost uncool level for everyone. As it stands, all an SF has to do is avoid cursed dreamriders and all is ok, there is STILL no real danger to them. SF's need DANGER! Thanks again for your time Regina, keep up the good work. --Wolf 20:03, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

I would just make SF back to normal (without 50%) and give the choas plane enemy's some ele dmg reduce of 50%(in there armor or give them a monster skill only), then the problem is away of other farm builds nerfed. Btw people can still farm the first three groups of choas planes because they dont have cursed horsemen in it. And people kill them with a new degen fire build more info on pvx wiki about this farm, maybe a anti fire contion in that new monster armor or skill would be great too. 145.53.242.142 21:10, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Reducing the duration of SF back to pre buff status (max duration 20 secs instead of 30, 50% less dmg clause removed) and changing all the Banished Dream Riders to Cursed Dream Riders on the chaos plains in UW would be a more effective solution. That way, permanent SF would no longer available in UW and those who used SF to farm elsewhere wouldnt be effected. --92.235.8.13 22:34, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Regina, I am angry at the fact not only you completely ignored my warning letter sent to you, but you let Izzy completely nerf Shadow Form where solo farming bosses is now completely impossible (50% less damage won't go anywhere here). The nerf in the Underworld was enough, but going to the extent to nerfing Shadow Form is too much! As such, the community will hold a protest against this nerf and you will see the consequences. Because greens are worthless nowadays, people mostly use them to equip their heroes. So, you want me to equip my warrior hero Koss with a non-max damage staff made from Shing Jea? I think that's what you want. And how will I ever going to forgive for this, nothing! Change Shadow Form back! There is no way for me to give elite tomes to my heroes so they can learn elite skills early in the game and allow certain builds in the ease. Thanks a lot! You ruined the entire gameplay, not just farming and the economy!--Dark Paladin X 04:18, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Why don't you hit Glyph of Swiftness instead, it's that skill's fault that the perma sf exist anyway. Make it effect elementalist skills only, or put it in energy storage and make the recharge scale. --MageMontu 22:40, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Or as a very small nerf, 4 points in air magic or better to use the skill. Vael Victus 22:59, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

I know this might have been suggested, but errr... why can't we just revert the skill to what it was before it got buffed and make it identical to it's PvP compatriot without the 50% less dmg and leave everything else as is. Also Paladin, will you stop ranting?! No one else seems to care as much as you do. Skills get nerfed and buffed all the time, it's just part of GW life, adapt and get used to it. -- Salome 04:36, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

I like Salome's suggestion but maybe not as short as PvP and definitely not as long as the PvE one either. Making sure that the recent combos of GoS + DP + SF and comsumable does not indeed make a perma protection. Renin 04:43, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

How about just remove the 50% reduction and leave everything else as it is. If you're taht worried about your ectos, remember they were never supposed to be used as currency. Yes that is from ANET. The thing about changing the others to all mindflayers and cursed riders will also make it near impossible for any group to finish UW. But hey if thats all you want for having clearing teams of nothing but full blown full consets URSAN teams then keep those suggestions up as that is all that will be able to finish UW. It was able to be maintained permenately before the buff. So its not the Sins that have devauled your ectos. There was one thing else that happened and thats where you want to have things changed. When ectos started to be used for trading 1 on 1 for Zkeys. Then those people unloading them. That is whaat brought the prices down. You're either a whinner you're losing value on an item that wasnt supposed to used as a currency. BTW I have more than you and I couldnt careless if they went all the way down to 1k or even less. Yes I am one of the ones that made the new builds to still be able to solo UW. Manitoba1073

How about you keep your ego out off the discussion mate as its not very constructive. -- Salome 19:46, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Why because I dont agree with ruining the house while trying to swat a fly. There is a much better way to have fixed it, but since people like you just wanna jump without thinking through things it screws alot of ppl over. Just like the current change to SF did. And its more of a minority that is crying for the nerf. So how about you actually think things around instead of crying about something that shouldnt even be a currency.Manitoba1073

Needless anger much? I'm not crying or anythingof the type. I think the current nerf is flawed in that i think a duration nerf was needed rather than a dmg nerf as all this does is make SF no longer viable to none primary sins. As for your belief that I'm moaning about ecto's, i'm not. I feel, like many others, that the game should be balanced in such a way as for it not to be viable to farm end game areas by oneself. If your all upset about that, well honestly that's not really my concern. Ultimately though keep your opinions constructive and civil, as aggression towards your fellow community members will earn you neither respect or understanding and will probably only eventually get you a ban. -- Salome 03:30, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

No anger at all. As Ive said Its not balance when you bring the whole house down when you try to swat a fly. Whether you and some others seem to think that others shouldnt be able to enjoy the game the way they want to with out using exploits or hacks legitimately is also not a want for balance. Its simple nothing more than a whine. perfect example of how to have done it is like when I gave Anet the idea for the dyeing nightmares. No its not many others just a few majorly vocal bunch on guru. That where whining about the drop in prices of ectos and thats all it was. Because the simple fact is that PERMA-SIN was possible for year before the buff to it. The moment the prices on ectos went down is when the crys for the nerf happened. Which resulted in the death of many other farms that people were doing. As far as being viable to non primary sins it had to be watch very closely even a mistep to any class besides a sin or even mesmer was fatal. So once again the so called crying was wrong. If someone wants to enjoy Soloing end game areas why shouldnt they. Have you even tried it yourself? Manitoba1073 03:48, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

I used to trap UW by myself. Do I think i should have been able to, no probably not. I'm not bothered about ecto prices, i'm bothered about faulty gaming mechanics, which makes running uw by yourself a more profitable experience than forming a party. If, as you said, perma-sf farming has been doable for ages, than my suggestion for the skill to be reverted back to what it was pre-buff, is actually in accordance with your stance as well. So i'm failing to see your point now. -- Salome 04:15, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Exactly what faulty mechanics was there. None. It had nothing to do with anything being faulty in the skill or its uses. It worked as it was intended to work. And Anet even made sure that it would stay more profitable when soloing when they did the loot scaling update. So that is what its about for you, that its unfair taht someone was making more soloing than you were in a party, if thats the case then your in the wrong discussion. That was Anets decision . On the skill prebuff it was only doable on 2 classes, now after the buff and before the recent nerf it opened up more variety to running sins than just A/Me and A/Ele. Allowing a class to be used fully with its secondaries is what made GW great for whatever you wanted to do including farming. However taking even back to prebuff state still wouldnt work for what you are trying to have done is what Im getting at. Nerfing the skil wasnt and still isnt the way to go. And trapping UW solo isnt even close to doing it as a Sin. So no then you havent even tried it yet you're commenting on it. Manitoba1073 04:36, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm failing to see how having a permenant semi-invincible build can be ranked as something harder that trapping where you actually do have a chance of dying. Anyway, nay offense, but it has been nerfed and thus anet thinks it deserved a nerf, which is really all that matters in the final analysis. Thus if we're debating the intents of anet being valid as to its purpose, then anet has deemed that it needed a nerf. So using that logic, we should just abide by said nerf. -- Salome 16:06, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

But they actually didnt nerf the duration so by your own logic now that the duration is just fine, Thanks for agreeing with me on that part now. They in essence nerfed almost all the skills used with it leaving the actual skill for the most part intact.No offense taken, But there is a highly big difference from solo trapping and SF sin farming. I've done both and know the differences. Manitoba1073 16:52, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Manitoba1073, haven't you ever thought of Shadow Form being used outside "SF Sin Farming?" As far as I know, they rebuffed PvE Shadow Form because it's one of the elite skills that an Assassin can use effectively to finish the game and enjoy the game? WHY type-cast or box Shadow Form as a sole reason for farming. They do have other reasons why they did such a thing. Keep an open mind, even though main reason they nerfed it is that because the economy has become unstable during that time. Shadow Form STILL have other use when played solo and playing through campaigns. Renin 17:00, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

yes I have but thats not where the discussion is talking about. It makes a good running skill. If you believe the update notes it had nothing to do with the economy but with its effeciency. But truelly the only economy taht some where complaining about was the prices of ectos where going down. Yes I play my sin other than just to farm with her. she was created during the preview event. One of the most unique and fun chars to play. Manitoba1073 17:35, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

But wasn't most of your/everyone's complain was about it making the economy unstable? That it has hurt alot of "industry" within the game? So really, what are you really complaining about then? Renin 17:40, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Wasnt my complaint to begin with. It was others problem that they considered things such as ecto a currency when it really shouldnt have been. I believe that it was actually helping the economy of the game the way it was after the buff. It was a vocal minority on guru that were whinning. Thats the only thing it was doing was bringing the price down. Manitoba1073 18:40, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Why not changing it to a form? They just need to make the caster change appearance (the char will turn black and have a transparent effect) and give it the characteristics of a form. Elite Form. For 5...25...30 seconds, all hostile Spells that target you fail and all attacks against you miss. This Skill is disabled for 60 seconds. or something along those lines. --MageMontu 20:12, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Why the need to have it changed? Is more of a better question. Change it back to its original form. There really isnt anything that is needed else at all. There was no threat to the economy. Like all builds it helped to make it more efficient is all. So what is your reasoning for wanting it changed to a form? Manitoba1073 22:28, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Because forms are one of the few type of skills which the duration cannot be lengthen by another skill. Also it fits with the name. Also don't tell me you are one of hose ppl who want forms to be dervish only --MageMontu 23:05, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

That still doesnt explain why you want it done which is what I asked. Since Dervs are the only ones taht have forms since they change, kinda obvious on that not to mention UB,Wolven,Raven. I could careless who forms are for. What about Mist Form then too. So whats the reason why you want it that way? And no copping out on claiming because forms cant be lengthened. Why do you want it to be impossible to be maintained perma? Simple question.Manitoba1073 01:09, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

SF was over-powered from the moment it was created. No profession should be able to become that close to invincible. --Wolf 01:16, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

People should not be able to mindlessly farm high-end areas. It turns prestige items to worthless items. Thats why. — Teh Uber Pwnzer 01:20, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Now we are getting to the real Problem as I stated earlier it was. Other classes already are and was more invincible than SF ever could even begin to be, Sorry on taht one. Try again. Mindlessly farming high-end areas devauluing items. Those items are nothing more than vanity not an actual commodity. So its about gold. Yeah thats always a good reason to nerf something. Seriously if that was a reason just to nerf it or close it off none of you be allowed into FoW or UW at all to reasoning like that. Come on now taht cant be the only reasons guys.Manitoba1073 01:39, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

And yet the ecto prices stayed reasonably stable over all those years until Shadow Form was buffed... HeavenMonkey 01:50, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

there was something else that was happening at the same time. That is also when Zkeys went to 5k a pop or 1/1 to ecto and the numbers that were offloaded for them. Many of the rich unloaded the E's to get the title quickly. The ones taht sold off the Zkeys then dumped the ectos at the traders. And when anet did the nerf to SF ppl bought ectos thinking they would go back up, well since me and another came up with builds to keep SF UW They panicked again and now its back to 3.7k at the trader right now. So once again if that was the intention well it didnt work now did it.Manitoba1073 04:48, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh I understand, you don't like the form suggestion cause otherwise you can't use perma sf. Btw Mist Form is not overpowered as your beloved skill. --MageMontu 09:17, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Dont forget Obs Flesh too now and Spell Breaker. all which can also be kept up perma too. I already said I didnt care if it was made into a form I asked for what was your reason for it and all you said was so taht it couldnt be kept up permanately, Lets say anet did make into a form, doesnt mean it wouldnt be able to be kept up perma, as it may not work like the dervishes forms. I didnt say it was my beloved skill. But it is many others.Manitoba1073 09:51, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

But unlike Shadow Form, with Obsidian Flesh and/or Spell Breaker up one can still take physical dmg. --MageMontu 10:22, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

A different suggestion: I liked the nerf to Shadow Form, I agree with Arena Net that it was needed. However, my concern with this nerf is that it hurts Shadow Form not only for farming, but also for common gameplay. The skill could be used by an assassin to quickly enter an enemy group and kill a high damaging enemy before allowing said enemy to kill his party; today, with the 50% damage reduction, that strategy isn't really viable. The long duration of the enchantment also prevents it from being an "escape" skill. In other words, the current change has hurt farming (yay!) but also common uses of the skill.

My suggestion would be to change the skill into "Your spells also deal 50% less damage" - this would hurt the farming builds, but would allow common assassins (that rely on dagger attacks) to use the skill in normal gameplay. Another option would be to change the skill into "Elite Enchantment Spell. (5...25...30 seconds.) Hostile spells targeting you fail, and attacks against you miss. You also cannot cast spells, and your dagger attacks deal 50% more damage" - this would hurt the most common farming builds, while still allowing people to farm with dagger attacks (but slower than using AoE spells) and turning the skill into something very useful for common, non-farming gameplay. Erasculio 15:10, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

The only issue I have with that suggestion is that it basically kills any if not all synergies it has with any other casting professions. Renin 15:24, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Mage I suggest you go learn something about Shadow Form. It is not invincible like you think it is.You do still take damage from stuff. Its just from a different way.And Escrulio leave your hate for farmers on GWOManitoba1073 18:48, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

But shadow form does indeed out perform Spell Breaker and Obsidian Flesh. You need a lot of other protection via prot spirit or stoneflesh aura for you to survive when using Obby FLesh and Spell Breaker; while in Shadow Form, you just need it to survive 95% of the common attacks/spells. The nerf should just be enough that it does not create a perma protection with the popular combination. Renin 18:55, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Let's see, Touch Skills, Signets, pbaoe and some wells degen. I suggest you go take a quick tutorial about game balance and as HW I would like you to ask yourself, did Spell Breaker and Obsidian Flesh (add Mist Form if you like aswell) hurt the economy before the May Update? Write me an essay of 500 words on that :P --MageMontu 18:55, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Chew on this, Consider the fact that there is NOTHING that can touch someone in SF in any place worth farming. There are a few wells in FoW, but thats nothing. Mandragors will mess up any permasin, but do you seen them hanging around anywhere a Permasin would wanna farm? Nope. There is just no DANGER to a permasin in the UW. Myself and 2 other friends frequent to UW under a 600/Smite/Famine build and we wipe easily, heck, who-ever is the 600 goes down plenty of times. Until todays update there was ntohing in any area worth farming that could realy potentialy kill a permasin. Even now, all that happened as they took a cut on how many mobs they could take in the UW and thats it... --Wolf 21:25, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Mage I hate to break the news to you but in PvE the balance is different that what it is in PvP.Let me ask you this mage. Why was Perma sins runnign UW for almost a yr before the buff and wheres the drop from that. There wasnt one. It wasnt permasin that dropped the price of ectos. PERIOD get it got it. THEY WERE RUNNING A YEAR BEFREO THE BUFF. No dropping the prices of any materials isnt hurting the economoy it actually helps it. Manitoba1073 23:09, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Erm Flash News, deadly paradox got nerved long time ago cause of that, and Glyph of Swiftness + consumes were added with eotn which was released less than a year (31st August). I don't see how 1 could maintain sf + farm effectivly. --MageMontu 23:58, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Because they werent A/E that were doing it. But it was still able to be maintained perma and be used effectively. Consums have been in game alot longer than just EoTN. You had shrines and cupcakes and all of them. Manitoba1073 01:24, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Except the consumables around before EotN weren't so overpowered and weren't so easy to get. Also, the old perma build was WAY less efficient and was a lot harder to use (you had about a half second to get it right). Because it was so hard to time correctly, less idiots were able to use it and thus it was not being used to over farm UW. And no dropping the prices of materials for vanity items isn't helping the economy its hurting it. If the prices drop soooo low, they are no longer vanity items and there isn't much of a point to get them. — Teh Uber Pwnzer 01:49, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Just so you know, I'm not just another farmer trying to defend my stacks of ectos. I actually have only 75k in my storage, 4 ectos and I only have two sets of 15k armor. — Teh Uber Pwnzer 01:51, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

They were still cosnumables though, It wasnt as less effecient as you think it was. It really wasnt that hard to time it. Just so you know I am a farmer with stacks of ectos. It is helping the economy. Its a flea market economy. You can always get them because maybe you like them instead of the reason of them being "prestige".Manitoba1073 03:22, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes, there were still consumables, but if they weren't so overpowered, why does it matter? It doesn't really. Its like trying to argue that all skills are bad because some are way overpowered. If the old perma sin was easy to time and just as efficient, it would have been used just as much as the current perma builds. The thing is, it wasn't. There were hardly any perma sins farming the UW. Sure you may have been able to do it easily, but the masses who suck could not. Thats the key difference between the two perma builds. That is why it did not drop the ecto prices. That is why the current perma sins are dropping the ecto prices. The masses of idiots playing are able to farm efficiently. I believe that obsidian armor was supposed to be prestige though. I mean, why else would Anet put the needed crafting materials only in what was at the time the hardest of all areas in the game? Anyways, neither of us can prove that ANet meant it to be prestige or armor that anybody could pick up because they like it, we can only assume, so lets agree to disagree. One final request: if your going to respond to this, please use colons correctly instead of indenting a random number of times. — Teh Uber Pwnzer 07:04, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Actually, I do have an idea on how to see if Obsidian Armor was supposed to be prestige... — Teh Uber Pwnzer 08:25, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Meh I give up trying to reason with this guy/girl so believe what you like but the majority always win. PS: neither I am a farmer, I have 5k in my storage atm and the prestige armors i have, were earned by doing quests, missions, vanquish areas, completing elite areas before the ursan thing and selling my drops (+Keeping all materials i find as reserve funds). The only times i farm is when a boss has a green weapon i want, but not to sell. So you see, I don't rly mind if sf stays like this or not but I also don't like seeing skills nerved to oblivion just because some greedy kids wants to be virtually rich. --MageMontu 09:13, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

So you agree with me then Mage, serious that is what Ive been saying it was nerfed for those reasons and it was not a good thing. Whne there was no need to do it. Others here are the ones being that way, just read Teh's posts and you wwill see that.Manitoba1073 16:27, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

A quote

On the Prophecies box: "You'll prove your worth with every battle as skill, not hours played decides your fate." Numerous updates took us in the exact opposite direction, or have done nothing at all to solve this problem. See here and here for the top two updates that promote skill-less play in PvE. I am well aware of the time cramp you're in and that you're hiring a new programmer and designer, but are they really needed to balance skills? You would think that a skill balancer and his team would be able to do that. Saying that he didn't have time is completely off, considering that there have been tons of other skill updates since the problems started. The fact that a large number of people are using the imbalanced skills hasn't stopped you in the past, either. So I was wondering, does this phrase still mean anything to you at ANet? — Teh Uber Pwnzer 20:15, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

This isn't Counter-Strike. This isn't StarCraft. WoW takes more skill to aim an AoE attack in. I'm sorry, you were expecting skill, or something? Perhaps you meant skill bar? Vael Victus 14:08, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

from there it went downwards --Cursed Angel 20:27, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

I believe it there is some confusion; I too believe skill was more important than time but it seems this is wrong or misunderstood. Regina, has stated this, and I quote "The core philosophy behind GW design, which is "have fun now" was behind those decisions." 000.00.00.00 20:45, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Grinding and "have fun now" kinda clash imo. And guess what, just about every PvE skill gets a lot better with grinding. — Teh Uber Pwnzer 02:49, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, true, but some are good, some can be considered not so good. I think Sunspear Rebirth is a version of a good PvE only skill. Takes something thats already established and makes it worth while having, even at low rank levels. 000.00.00.00 02:55, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

It's common knowledge by now that Arenanet tried to make a good game, came halfway, then gave up and ruined every aspect of it. ~Shard (talk) 08:47, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Prophecies WAS good. It still IS good. They just went downhill from there. They didn't come half way, they made it all the way. Then they got complacent and said 'Stuff it, let's take the Nexon/Wizet/Jagex route. 82.34.128.95 12:56, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

@Shard: I'm not so sure that IS common knowledge. A lot of the comments I'm seeing here are the same gripes taken up by the same people, just reworded and repackaged for a different thread. Sure GWO and GWG have their own set of detractors, but I guarantee that forumers and wikians are a vocal minority. A lot of very content people are playing this game and don't even think about the forums or the wiki. Why? Because they have nothing to complain about. Typically, people only show up to be vocal if they are upset, which some clearly are. But by and large, people are still playing, still buying the game, and still getting into the world. Just because Guild Wars wasn't the game you thought it should be doesn't make it "failed" or "ruined." Aside @Pwnzer: I'm also confused as to why grinding is so horrible. MMO = Grind, unless you just wanted an avatar with a chat window. Which some people do. Antialias02 14:29, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Guild Wars still is an awesome game, and yeah, Im sure we can all find things to complain about, including ANet developers themselves. There are many great aspects to GW, starting with Prophecies. Both Factions and Nightfall were great concepts (I mean, I sometimes just stroll around to view the scenery), but, as the team has already stated, there were many many things they wanted to implement or do better in GW which under the current model was not possible. Happens all the time, when you implement ideas that go out into production, you get to actually see what works and what doesn't. So I imagine that the dedicated GW Devs had some frustrations with what they wanted to deliver through GW which they couldn't which all lead up to (thankfully) GW-2. Now they have the chance to do all the things they and us the players wanted that just isn't possible in GW1. I also imagine that GW2 will be a more scalable game, meaning it wll permit the devs to implement new tecnology over time. Again, GW1 is still an awesome game which I play whenever I get a chance, but of course has its limitations. I think A-Net is doing a great job, and have even more respect for their decision to bare with the community so actively as they do (That is a lot of unnecessary Heat they take for free). Peace - --Nekki 15:19, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Gender and the new masks

May I ask what the reasoning behind the gender differences in the new mask is? I'm hoping there was some technical issue which forced the designers to adjust the shape of the female mask (which seems unlikely, given that female NPCs wear the male version, though for all I know player character models work in a different way from NPC models), because otherwise this seems needlessly sexist. --Mme. Donelle 12:18, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I just really don't get why it's "sexist" maybe the term unfair but to use the sexist term, I really don't get why. Renin 13:31, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm not accusing ANet of trying to opress women or anything like that. :P But it strikes me as odd that they should make this particular mask gendered. The only other time they did it was with the Wicked hat, which was justifiable because it played with the wizard/witch concept; this is just a generic demon with changes in shape for no obvious reason. Plus, males get the original version of the mask. I don't understand that -- the original mask was worn by female NPCs, yet male players get the original and females get the altered version? What? I would have expected it to be the other way round. I hope this isn't the case, but it feels like they've just given the original to males because it's big: men get big, awesome things, while women have to make do with cute, petit things. Because they're women. --Mme. Donelle 13:56, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

User:Mme. Donelle "I'm really sorry." Forgiven. Please don't troll the wiki. :'( And if you do, make sure it's obvious you're trolling so we can get some laughs. Vael Victus 14:10, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

And just because they made an alteration without prior warning or prior justification that they're needlessly called sexists? Renin 14:20, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Why don't you check my contribs for trolling, instead of assuming I must be a troll because I have a dumb userpage? This thing with the masks genuinely bothers me -- am I coming across as a crazy bitchass lesbian feminist for using the word "sexist"? Fine. I mean "unfair". The is no hint of anything resembling sexism anywhere in Guild Wars and clearly I am insane for suggesting it. Happy? --Mme. Donelle 14:28, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes. I am happy. Vael Victus 15:08, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

calm down, vael like to accuse others for trolling when they dont --Cursed Angel 14:37, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

You're just a passive troll and you don't realize it yet. Vael Victus 15:08, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Renin: First of all, note the way in which I'm using the word sexist. It just means "unfair inequality between the sexes" and I am not using any particularly "charged" version of the word, one which implies oppression or whatnot. I just mean that females get different masks and there doesn't seem to be any reason why that should be the case. Is it necessary they justify it? No. But I happen to be curious, thus my request (as opposed to demand or accusation) for information. Jeez. If I'd known people would be so offended by the word I wouldn't have used it. --Mme. Donelle 14:50, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Not insane nor crazy bitchass lesbian feminist, just that it was unwarranted because GW has never been such nor will they (as I believe and my opinion) cross the line of political incorrectness. I do not question that it genuinely disturbs you, as so many activist and enthusiast probably do; but there is always a better way to saying thing and still convey the real message. Like I said, just because they made an alteration that irked you without prior warning / justification doesn't warrant them being needlessly called sexist. I'm sure they never meant to cause such "issue" with individuals like you but they also doesn't deserve such strong words. Renin 14:56, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

@Renin "GW has never been such nor will they" Are you out of your mind? Have you not seen some of the female armor vs. male armor? I mean.. give me a break, this game and it's designers are about as sexist as it gets... What Elite level ranger in their right mind would run around in a string bikin (Elite Grotto armor)? I mean... the majority of female armor in this game gets more revealing the more you have to spend on it. Don't try passing off that Anet's designers are NOT sexist, or geared to what they consider the male preference to appearance in this game.-- Wynthyst 15:23, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Like I said as "(I believe and my opinion)" so basically all games out there are sexist if we're just going to rant about all the female armors as compared to male armors? WoW suffers from it too, so does Final Fantasy Games, especially those games by them hentai-tentacle japanese orgs? and why box only certain armors as sexist? You are given choices to dress up your avatar with other more less revealing armors. Some women prefer to dress sexy and as some guys who plays women who likes to play dress up with their avatar do. So you're going to call those ladies sexist too just because they prefer revealing outfits? Renin 15:28, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

(The following was written before the above two comments were posted; I don't feel like rewriting)** Trust me, I'm already well aware that I made a mistake. Though one could aruge that ANet (as with many other game developers) are in fact guilty of political incorrectness: soldiers do not have inflated tree-trunks for torsos and limbs; women do not look like Barbie. There are worse offenses one could make, certainly, but it's a lie to claim that a sexism and/or stereotyping of some degree in Guild Wars and other games is entirely non-existant, so I would aruge that my claims are not "unwarrented", per se. But I digress: I didn't mean to insult anyone, and I'm honestly not implying anything bad about Anet or its staff. I posted that original comment in the hope of proving that I was wrong in my initial assumptions. And my assumptions weren't that bad to begin with -- I just find it mildly tastless and I'm more vocal about it than I might ordinarily be because I just really want a male mask for my female character and I made the mistake of venting it on wiki; I'm not hugely offended by some percieved political statement against womankind. --Mme. Donelle 15:40, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Maybe what you really want is to be offered to have a choice between the cute mask and the big mask instead of being pigeon holed. Renin 15:47, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

I would not have minded if the masks where equel. As for now i think they are cute. And again a topic that is flamed by "more regular wiki users". I think it is a legit question to ask and i don't understand why Personal attacks are used here against a simple question about mask size. --Silverleaf 15:54, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Renin: that is a fair point. It's aways nice to have choice. Though I'm still curious as to the reasoning behind the descision to make two versions of the mask. Not implying anything: just curious. --Mme. Donelle 15:58, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

As I would like the reason behind it too, some guys can see what they did as unfair as someone might want to have a smaller mask. Who knows, right? I mean maybe someone out there wants an aerodynamic assassin with a small mask to make him more aerodynamically looking. hahaha Renin 16:04, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

The sleek mask is totally the real male mask anyway! Females were already wearing the big one, rawr. --Mme. Donelle 16:06, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

I personally don't see any personal attacks here Silverleaf.(edit) Questioning someone's sanity because they don't recognize the inherent sexism in the overall design of this game is not a NPA violation.-- Wynthyst 16:25, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

I think he was referring to the accusation by Vael that I was trolling. --Mme. Donelle 16:48, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Wynthyst, if GW "suffers" from a sexist point of view in the overall design of this game but more specifically the armor, then it could also be argued that most real life fashion designers suffers from an overall sexist point of view; even if the lead design is a woman. They made bikini tops as armor as any real life fashion designer would create barely there clothes for women. Just because they design those doesn't mean they're sexist, they are merely catering to the part of the demography of women that does indeed enjoy wearing "Barely there" armors / clothes. Renin 16:57, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

There is really no way to compare armor designed in a rpg with real world clothing design. If you are talking about ARMOR, it's purpose is protection, and functionality. The ONLY purpose for creating a string bikini armor for the female rangers is to give the male players eye candy. I don't see them doing the same for the male characters with us female players in mind, except for possibly the Gladiator armor with the full bare chest. Yet almost ALL of the female armor is intended to show off body parts. So.. again, I am using the term 'sexist' in being unequal in treatment of the different genders.-- Wynthyst 17:04, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

(resetting indent) Renin, you're making the false assumption that accepted by society = correct. Modern culture is rampant with sexism; that a company decides to conform to that is perhaps understandable, but not excusable. Socially acceptable sexism is still sexism. --Mme. Donelle 17:05, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Pardon my generalization then, as far as I know we're all given CHOICES. Choice to keep our / your lady parts hidden and a choice to show off such parts. Everyone's given a choice to bare it all or hide it all but it also does not give anyone the right (for those people who want to keep them hidden) to hammer those people who want to show off. Can't we all just live and let live instead of constantly wringing each other's throat? Wynthyst, I'm sure you're not the only one who feels violated with such armor designs of the gaming industry but there are also ladies out there who likes such armor, daring as it seem. They are not ONLY designed for the male eyes, they do think that SOME ladies out there likes to show off something with their virtual selves where their real selves cant. Renin 17:13, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Sure we have choices, which is why if you look at my Armor Gallery you will see that very few of my characters have the more provocative armor, but if I want to fill my HoM with elite sets, I am NOT going to have any choice for at least a few.-- Wynthyst 17:19, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Why not clamor then for a more conservatively designed armor sets instead of saying that such a game is sexist? Can't we all be creative in TRYING to get their attention? As I hope this firey discussion would, especially for those activist. Maybe another reason why they have more barely-there armor is because the demographic of men and women is bigger than the numbers of those more conservative ones? Renin 17:26, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Because getting any new armor in this game at this point is beyond hope... but I really am only trying to say that blasting Donelle for asking why the female mask is smaller/different than the male mask, and denying that there is a fairly large element of sexism in the inherent design of the game is really just turning a blind eye to the reality of the situation.-- Wynthyst 17:31, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Agree --Silverleaf 17:37, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

I do agree that we may never ever get any new armors, but that does not mean that they won't hear you and really consider it for the upcoming GW2. And just because you think that there is a blatant sexism of the armor / mask designs doesn't mean there really is. What if the reason was that the art designers consulted the ladies of aNet and that it was the ladies who decided such a design would look "cute" on their avatars hence the decision. Would that then be sexist? Would you consider the ladies of aNet sexist because they preferred what they prefer? In the end, Wouldn't it be better to call it unfair first, hear the reason second and then blast them if the reason was truly sexist? Instead of saying it's sexist first then to be proven that you might be wrong with the explanation later? Renin 17:39, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Again, you're basing your argument around a fallacy. A woman being sexist doesn't nullify that sexism: it makes her a sexist. So yes, if ANet made the desicion to create revealing armour because of females who thought revealing armour was the only option worth persuing, it's still sexist. All humans think the same way, more or less, and human nature is such that it likes to conform with the majority. There's huge pressure from society to accept its inherent sexism, against both sexes, regardless of gender. Women are often critical of other women who don't wear make-up. Men like to tease other men who are fond of ballet. It's common but that doesn't make it okay. --Mme. Donelle 17:49, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

So in a society where sexism doesn't exist in regards to clothing, would you then call such a society sexist, when in the beginning it does not exist? What if in the Guild Wars universe, such thought does not truly exist? Who are we to impose our views on a society / universe (fictional as it maybe) that does not see things as how we do? What if the writers and the artists created this world with such thought? Would it then still be callously called sexist? Also, what if women truly DOES enjoy wearing such outfits? Does that mean that she's been hypnotized into thinking that she likes what she's wearing instead of being pressured into? Renin 17:59, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

We impose our views onto the fictional universe of Guild Wars because it was created in the real universe, by humans who are at the very least influenced by our society. Women who can be warriors but are still unbelieveably sexy, with perfect make-up and hair? That's practically a personification of our society's beliefs. Also, I feel you're looking at women in very two-dimensional terms. It seems that in your eyes, women are either perfectly happy with stereotypes, or totally against them. Most women are somewhere in the middle. It may surprise you to learn that I like the way many of the female armours look -- I can appreciate their aesthetic appeal while also being frustrated by the stereotyping. --Mme. Donelle 18:16, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Aren't the men of the GW Universe treated the same exact way? With their perfect bodies, perfect color, nose and eyes and yet i don't find it as frustrating when my own reality is not exactly the same with my avatars but I'm pretty happy. I'm not saying that you shouldn't be ranting about how sexist the world is, even with the double standards that men are being put through. But Let's get back to the real issue that was raised here, and i shall repeat myself with this. Wouldn't it alot nicer if we just asked first, hear the reason second and then say our piece about how sexist their decision rather than shooting the messenger first and then later on only to find out that the messenger wasn't the source of all evil? Renin 18:24, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Never said men weren't subject to sexism. Thing is, games such as GW are clearly made with male players in mind: male characters that are attractive and heroic; females that are sexy. A man is less likely to be offended by that because it's exactly what he (generic) wants to see. But yes, on your other point, I agree that it would be smarter to begin by asking questions first. Perhaps you could scroll up to the beginning of this section for an example of such a question? :p --Mme. Donelle 18:38, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

I was just reiterating just in case someone else didn't get it. heh. Renin 18:41, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

now i didnt read this hole thread but come on who cares you can get eather one for 10g and they dont look that different. 75.172.47.75 21:36, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

In my opinion, on the subject of armour, that a lot [not all] of the female armour is tacky, but then again most of the armour is a fashion statement and when it comes to fashion statement sex sells. With the mask, I never really noticed that much of a difference, but if there are any differences it would be interesting as to why. 000.00.00.00 22:07, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

the answer is that female characters are smaller and shorter than the male characters so that "the male mask" would look even more retarded on female chars than it already does on male chars --Cursed Angel 23:12, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Why kick up a stink about this when the maximum height a female monk can be is the same height as an npc. The same height on most other classes is at about 50% of the height scale. Female monks can't be bigger than henchmen, this doesn't stop people from creating monks at freakishly small scales, only midgets can pray to Dwayna. 122.104.167.139 15:25, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Mme. Donelle, thank you very much for asking this question and furthermore, thank you for explaining your perspectives behind your question. You definitely have a good grasp of the issues at work in society and how it applies within the world of gaming.

It's unfortunate that some of the other people in the wiki community criticized you for asking a perfectly legitimate question. Honestly, I wish more gamers in general would question the sociological implications of game design, so it makes me really happy to see Guild Wars players asking these kinds of questions. Games, like other media, are products of and reflections of society and culture. Unfortunately, those reflections aren't always positive, as Mme. Donelle so clearly pointed out.

To answer your question, the reason the female Grasping Masks are smaller is because the designers thought that a smaller mask looked better with the female characters' smaller bodies. They wanted them sized to the female bodies "so that they didn't look like bobble head dolls as much". That is a direct quote from the developer who was in charge of the event this year. The decision to make the female masks smaller wasn't based explicitly on the idea that "men get big, awesome things, while women have to make do with cute, petit things. Because they're women."

However, as you pointed out in your comments, just because people are not aware of sexism doesn't mean it doesn't exist. I definitely agree with what you said here: "Modern culture is rampant with sexism; that a company decides to conform to that is perhaps understandable, but not excusable. Socially acceptable sexism is still sexism." Mme. Donelle and Wynthyst, I am aware of the issues you've brough up here, and I do what I can. For example, I have been in contact with the character art team about the GW2 character models and we've had a few discussions on customization options, and some of the discussion has touched on sexism and expectations of the player population. My influence on character design is limited, and I can give them my feedback and input, however that feedback and input is bolstered by the community's views. If you have more to say about gender issues and game design, please feel free to talk about it. It's one of my favorite subjects to discuss. --Regina Buenaobra 18:58, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

It was an enlightening firey discussion I should say, but at least now we know that the mask weren't created out of sexism and; that it is now discussed with the art team and i also hope, with the writers as well! :D 19:09, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for the in-depth reply, Regina; I appreciate it. :D I'm a little disappointed to learn that the gender differences in the masks wasn't strictly necessary -- I, and I'm sure many others, would have loved a bobble-headed female. (And have you seen any male sins in the mask yet? They need the female version, imo. XD) I guess what I'm saying is that it would be nice to have a choice.

A while ago a friend mentioned to me that design aspects in a game (specifically, female bodies) are at the mercy of the designers' tastes. That's not entirely the case, because as you say, the designers do think it through carefully and try to come to a design they think will appeal to the majority of their playerbase, but it's true enough: the designers thought female characters would look silly in the big mask, so now females are stuck with the small mask even if they prefer the big one (and vice versa for males). This is reflected throughout the game, with body shapes and armour styles. I wonder what the conclusion to your discussion with the art team regarding customisation was? I'm hoping to see a system (assuming it's technically feasible) similar to that in Second Life, where a player is free to adjust the body shape into whatever s/he wants. I believe there are already some MMOs with that system, and I've heard that the result is, most players end up with skinny, sexy characters anyway. I imagine that's why designers just cut out the middle man and make the only customisation options like that to begin with. But it's always nice to have the choice.

As for me being criticised for starting this topic, I can understand why some people get defensive when this topic is brought up. Something I would recommend to both genders is to research the controversy surroundng slash fiction. Slash fiction is gay (male/male) romance and erotica written by women, for women. Some gay men enjoy it too, but it's a primarily female endeavour, so the heavy female influence on the genre results in very sexist, very feminine literature that many men find repulsive. I've seen arguments which go like this: "Slash is offensive to me as a man! I demand you stop writing it!" "Jeez, get over it, it's just a story. If you don't like it, stop reading it." It's interesting to witness the almost perfect reversal of roles caused by slash, and I feel it can be useful in giving both genders a chance to walk in the other's shoes. --Mme. Donelle 20:54, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

I also enjoyed the lively discussion, and appreciate your response. I would like it Regina if you would point out to the designers that most of the Grasp npc's during the event were female (or at least appeared to be) and had the larger size mask without looking like a 'bobblehead' or at least no one cared if they looked like a bobblehead. -- Wynthyst 00:07, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Belatedly, on the topic of armor: I've been thinking of how to word a suggestion for GW2 about armor and, oh, let's call it modesty. I don't mind some of the female outfits being sexy, certainly, but I'd like to have a choice. The lack of choice bothers me far more than the existence of midriff-baring, cleavage-emphasizing, short-skirt-wearing outfits in the first place, and in fact, it's why I hesitated for a while before deciding to make an Elementalist. (And I still don't dance with her very often... every time she leans forward and does her little shake I want to go bra shopping...) Given the choice, I might choose the skimpy outfit sometimes, but without it, it bugs me.

One of the things I liked about City of Heroes was the sheer variety available in the costume creator. Sure, there were plenty of people out there with female characters with ginormous assets and skimpy outfits, but there were also plenty of covering (and not even always skintight) outfits available, too, and they were used. While I don't expect that broad a variety in a fantasy-oriented game, obviously there's a large number of options already available... it's just that for many professions, it's a small variance. Ideally, of course, armor style and profession would not be as broadly linked, and obviously adding new races changes things... but I'd hate to get GW2 and find out, for instance, that all my Norn armor choices as a female look like Jora. Some, sure. Not all, please.

There are no doubt issues on the male side as well... I imagine there are guys who wouldn't mind playing more lithe warriors, or less bulky monks, or short elementalists, etc. But since I'm not a guy it's harder for me to judge that. It would definitely be nice to have several body options as well as several basic styles of armor for every possible combination of race and profession and gender, regardless. (Not to mention not tying face/hair options to profession would be nice, too, but ranges a bit further afield than the main thrust of this discussion.) --Xylia 19:23, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

There's a reason I worked to get my elementalist FoW armor. To me, it strikes a nice balance between "sexy", "respectable", and "functional", unlike the majority of other ele armors. Sure, it's still somewhat skintight, but not in an overly emphasized way. I agree that more choice is better, especially cross-profession, and I think that the designers have somewhat begun to notice that - for instance, the Elite Canthan and Elite Kurzick ele armors showed marked improvement in that regard. While it would have been nice for things to have started from that standard and branched out from there, hopefully things will continue to move towards a more broad spectrum of options. (Aiiane - talk - contribs) 22:50, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Regarding the topic of choice/lack of choice, this is actually something I have discussed with members of the character art team. I emphasized a player's desire for more choice and options. Again, the same issue with body types. I've asked folks in the character team to seriously consider sliders for builds so that we can have more bulky/stocky (even fat) female (and male) characters, just so players have a variety of options. Whether these get implemented depends on a lot of things, and there may be technical limitations that prevent absolutely every option (regarding body type) to be available. I'll point them to this discussion so they can read your feedback themselves. Cheers. --Regina Buenaobra 16:32, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, Regina. It's very appreciated.

Since you are pointing folks here, let me just take a moment to quickly note: I would be quite happy with a fixed set of choices for body types ('slim, average, bulky/stout', say) if the time or technical limitations didn't allow something wider-ranging. Likewise, for choice in armor, the current variety in Ranger armor is fairly good, if perhaps skewed to the "more cover" end. It's one of my favorites, though, along with Mesmer armor. --Xylia 19:46, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

I think it's sexist to say this is sexist, just like I feel that it's racist to say Resident Evil IV is racist. Might want to think of that. Or not, either way, that's my thoughts about cases like this. BlazeRick 01:26, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

To a certain extent, you're right. But again, I feel I should point out that there's a difference between "sexist" as in "you're clearly woman-haters because you've given all the females skimpy outfits, you pigs!" and "sexist" as in "you're limiting the options for genders (using females as an obvious example, but males too) because of a deep-seated acknowledgement of stereotypes". One is an accusation of active bigotry; the other is a reminder of the unconscious and subtle stereotyping that most of us are guilty of. I would never accuse Anet of the former, but certainly of the latter. --Mme. Donelle 15:31, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Kotaku, released an interesting great read, though it doesn't directly relate to sexism in games but does touch upon it. This of course was released by a female gamer. This does not have anything to do directly with Guild Wars or PC MMOGs for that matter, but it is about games which most games are fighting games. http://kotaku.com/5024241/body-types-why-ivys-boobs-are-such-a-big-big-deal since i don't know how to turn it into a link, can anyone edit this post of mine? Renin 17:38, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry to say but, "This thing with the masks genuinely bothers me -- am I coming across as a crazy bitchass lesbian feminist for using the word "sexist"? Fine. I mean "unfair". The is no hint of anything resembling sexism anywhere in Guild Wars and clearly I am insane for suggesting it. Happy?" sounds like trolling to me... Whether or not that was intentional; nobody even mentioned lesbianism until you did which makes me very suspicious. Sounds like you're attacking Regina. And for the record, I agree with Regina; females are portrayed in a different way in GW, especially in armor design. I'd prefer the female armor to actually be protective... 68.51.112.211 18:21, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Lol. The comment you quoted was simply a burst of anger I felt at being accused of trolling: I was suggesting (unfairly, I admit) that the accuser had a narrow-minded view of feminists as all being crazy lesbians. Such is a common stereotype, caused by those so-called "feminists" who actually use feminism as an excuse to get away with misandrony, rather than as a cause for equal rights. For the record, I was not attacking Regina, or anyone else aside from Vael (sorry, Vael, it was immature of me), for that matter. --Mme. Donelle 18:40, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Reset IndentI'm a man and my favourite elementalist armour for the female is shing jea. That is the armour I find most aesthetically pleasing, and when armour comes down to nothing more than aesthetics, whichever you you find more aesthetically pleasing is the most important thing. Female monk are midgets and petite - I hate that but that's how it was designed - my female monk uses the maximum height allowed, even if it makes her a giant among monks, she's still a midget among everyone else. Mesmer armour is representative of upper class cultured, almost European clothes from fancy balls, I hate it. My mesmer also wears Shing Jea armour, it's the only one that doesn't look like she walked out of a bad Jane Austen novel. Why do I like both the Dervish and Paragon classes but refuse to play them? Paragons wear skirts and Dervishes wear dresses. If you wear the male norn armour chest piece without the hood it looks like you are a cross dresser. Had the designers given me an option for something different I wouldn't have taken it in a heart beat. I would have loved a Dervish with armour that looked like something the Prince of Persia would wear, instead it's all dresses so I don't play either the Dervish or Paragon for these reasons alone - they are visually unappealing. The ritualist is similair, although Male Luxon and Vabbi armour both have shorts and those are the ones I choose to wear. We speak about this regularly in our alliance and many people are similair minded. The simple answer to this is options. Like the ritualist you can wear shorts or the skirt thing. I don't care about sexism in computer games, if I want my toon to have a certain aesthetic why should I not be allowed to do that? If you are going to have several armour skins it makes sense to make them diverse... from skimpy female clothing to fully covered. From Dervishes in dresses to pants. It's unfortunate that festival masks only have one choice for each gender but if you had your bobble head I'm sure many more people would be upset their mask looked ugly. There are several festival masks I dislike to varrying degrees - I simply don't wear them. There are plenty of others to choose from. Hopefully the armour designers for Guild Wars 2 are going to design armours in diverse appearances, but also maybe let other professions wear them. If I could put my Shing Jea female ele armour on my mesmer I'd be very happy. Variety makes people happy. 122.104.167.139 19:13, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Guild Wars 2 - Anti-Grind

Hi Regina I was reading the FAQs for GW2 and I came across this section: "How is Guild Wars 2 different from other MMOs? While Guild Wars 2 adds a persistent world, it retains the unique nature of the original game including a strong narrative, extensive instanced gameplay, an anti-grind design philosophy, and strong support for competitive play." While I agree the original form of the Guild Wars very much fit this model the current form of Guild Wars is one of the most grind intense games I have ever experienced, much more than WoW or many of the free MMORPGs which make money off of players buying items to lessen the intense grind. I am of course speaking of Title grining, but more specifically, Faction Allegiance, Lightbringer, Sunspear, Asuran, Norn, Ebon Vanguard and Deldrimor. To a lesser extent, Wisdom and Treasure Hunter etc - especially being character specific. The faction grind in the post Factions release of Guild Wars are horribly painful and boring and offer little reward for boring and repetitive play. I know these features are optional but so are the reputation grinds in WoW.

I desperately hope that when GW2 claims an anti-grind design philosophy they include the current title grind as one of the features they intend to drop. Rather than killing foes over and over actual game play rewards for achievements not based on repetitive actions are cooler. Finishing every Norn Quest for example would be a better requirement for armour and weapons and making harder ones available at different ranks could be another feature. As it is, there is little purpose for the quests in the game and little reward for doing non grind based features. Titles which reward players for completing all missions with bonus objectives aren't grind based - they have a clear goal for players to complete and are based on player skill, not repetitive action. PvE skills are fun but they could have easily been tied to completing quests for the factions which they belong to, instead they are based on farming and grinds - two of the timesink pitfalls which signify lack of creativity and a move towards a more grind intense game.

My question after all of this is; when the sentence says an anti-grind design philosophy does this include a move away from the grind based title systems and a move towards goal and achievement oriented titles? My fear is they only refer to lateral game progression in terms of levelling and nothing more. Many players of games, including ones with large level grinds, claim that the game only starts at the maximum level - in Guild Wars the max level is where the grind starts. 122.104.167.139 06:03, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

There can only be so much anti-grind, otherwise the game will be over too quickly. Its the grind that keeps people playing, well in PvE at least. 000.00.00.00 06:29, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

There are plenty of ways to make a game grind free without inserting "do the same thing over and over and over". To finish every quest in the game is not "too quickly". That is quite a substantial feat and all missions and bonuses on top of that can be quite a large time investment. The current PvE goals of Destroyer Gauntlets, Faction armours are achievable simply through grind, questing is a very minor and much longer and incomplete route to this. 122.104.167.139 06:38, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

To say "grind free" is a bit too optimistic. Grind free, I don't think will happen for a long while, there will be a level of grind, lets just hope that its not linked to skills, like PvE Only skills currently are. I do like the notion of unlocking skills through quests, thats something I enjoy, that is achievement. Destroyer Gauntlets I wouldn't say were a current goal, destroyer weapons more likely. Gauntlets are more of a personal goal, which mean very little to anyone but the wearer. [Personal note: many I speak with, including myself, have current PvE goal of the HoM - which is the greatest example of grind Arenanet has ever put in the game. Its easy to say "you don't have to" but they also don't need to put it in the game in the first place. It only promotes grind]

Removing grinding would require more ways of playing, increased questing and challenges, grinding is easier due to being less creative at the developers end [easier just to make a title than a mass series of quest lines etc]. 000.00.00.00 06:51, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Just to get one thing straight, Vanquisher, Guardian, etc. has very little to do with player skill thanks to a title grind based skill named Ursan Blessing. — Teh Uber Pwnzer 08:11, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Consumables too. Remember I said the PvX wiki defines skill? That was sarcastic, but ultimately it does come down to the build you're running, and unless GW starts making you aim your spells or at least some form of a charge, or timing, GW will perpetually not be the game for you. :~ Vael Victus 15:22, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Well I am with you on what you said. But you and I already know what, if she ever does, Regina will say: „I can not answer this, because it may be changed during further development of GW2.”, or maybe “It’s too early to answer this and apart of that I have no official clearance to tell you anything at this point.”, perhaps even “I feel with you and know the community wants answer, am sorry, I just can’t give them”. And regarding the titles she’ll say ”You are NOT required to grind any of the titles you mentioned to get through GW”. And with that she would be right.

You don’t need any of the PvE skills at max level to finish a quest, hence you don’t need to grind any title aside form the rewards quests give you and the points you earn while killing mobs. You don’t even need to get to rank 5 in order to access the armour merchant since all armour is equal! And even in NF you don’t need to grind SS and LB since if you do all side and main quests and always activate the “hunt blessings” you’ll reach the levels you need to progress in the NF Storyline. So in essence… GW does not require grind to complete any of the chapters! So they are still holding to their “non grind design philosophy”… in theory.

BUT what ANet did is substituting real story driven game play with repetitive game play once the main quests are done. Instead of seeding in some new quests, or even small new areas on that gigantic GW map, they added another title her and another there! It’s a time saver for them, since adding a title is nowhere nears as difficult to do as building a new quest chain or even area! And the titles are seen as “long term goals” for the players willing to spend 100+ hours on beating the proverbial “hay bush” so that their title rank rises aka the linked PvE skill and ultimately hopefully their character gets stronger then others! And since it obviously works for a lot of ppl (just think of the 30 000+ favour and how many players you need to manage to add that amount), it IS going to be part of GW2!

I imagine the GW2s (title/faction/honour/what ever they call it) grind will be very similar to Nightfall, since the ranting against the GWEN style grind is a lot louder then the one aiming towards NF, which appears to be generally more acceptable.!

So in GW2 you’ll probably have some grind title linked to the political entities ruling the GW2 world, in which you’ll get just enough to go through the story by quests and missions. But there might be additionally quests, or even special mission and area access linked to higher title rank. So you’ll need to grind those titles if you want to unlock these additional content pieces. And since it was said GW2 would have a stronger focus on items, it might very well be, that some uber item (yet still well within in the GW2 game mechanic boundaries stat wise) will be offered as a reward. Which will be a very STRONG motivation motor to engage the grind treadmill

Of course this is only pure speculation but IMO fits what we have seen GW 1 change into and I believe it’s not too far fetched to assume ANet will continue on that design philosophy, which indeed would not force the player to grind in order to play through the story, but still substitute story driven game play with grind based repetitive game play. Regards ~Garbaron~ ; 7 July 2008

Even if she can't say one way or another it would be nice if she could say that the developers realise that most of the titles released after the first few were down the horrible track of intense grind and that many players don't like it. If she could say the developers have taken this on board and are avoiding horrible pit falls like this I would be very excited to see GW2. The original titles were mostly pretty cool and unique in experience, the ones added later on are massive grind fests to sink your time into which has ruined my GW experience post Nightfall. They slowly upped the amount of grind from being used for one PvE skill (Lightbringer's Gaze and the title's effects) to being required for armour and PvE skills in EotN and Allegiance and Sunspear skills retrofitted into the game. I hope this path was only taken to bide players over for GW2 and will be non-existent in GW2. 122.104.167.139 14:47, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

We already have a very simple way to avoid grinding - stop playing the game. Simple as that. The idea that players are expected, much less required, to continue to play a game every day for the rest of their lives is a ridiculous lie fed to players by WoW and its copies, games which become more profitable the longer people play. Every other game out there is not expecting people to keep playing it over and over - you are not expected to spend the rest of your life playing Mass Effect, for example. Same with movies and books - no one with a sane mind is going to read a book every day, nor watch a movie every week. Yet movies, books and games all have sequels; and all those sequels sell, regardless of how the original product has not been followed every single day.

The idea that "out of sight, out of mind" is, frankly, for children, and so is its conclusion (that players who have stopped playing GW1 after doing everything they wanted in it won't buy GW2). The idea that Arena Net could keep producing story-driven content for GW1 so people would continue to play it forever (for free or otherwise) is also stained with infantile naivete. What ANet could have done, and they did, was giving people who don't want to grind the option of not grinding (as we have always had) and giving those who want to grind the option of grinding - hence features on GW:EN focused on those who like to grind. The idea that people who don't like to grind are forced to engage on repetitive activities thanks to GW:EN is, fortunately, untrue - if you want to buy an armor or whatever, just play through the game once (filling your Master Dungeon Guide and Hero's Handbook) and you'll have enough points in a title to get it. Erasculio 00:16, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

122.104.167.139, I will get back to you on this if there is something I can say publicly. Cheers. --Regina Buenaobra 22:28, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

A Question

Hey Regina, is there any way for you to check and see the current status of the Forbidden Path? Currently its unaccesible by anyone. I only place this here because I don't know if its a bug, or whether its supposed to be accessible at all.....But if you can check that, or redirect me to a place I can ask this, that'd be helpful. Thanks! -- Wandering Traveler 22:39, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

I used to love that area, it's so beautiful, especially the part where u walk through the waterfall. Why was it closed anyway? --MageMontu 22:46, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Whoa, so it actually existed? O.O -- Wandering Traveler 22:58, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

I remember going through there not long after I first bought Guild Wars. There's a quest or something I had to do, don't really remember though. — Teh Uber Pwnzer 23:07, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

I think the quest was something about winning 5 battles in Zaishen Challenge and then go through that path for the Zaishen Elite. --MageMontu 23:12, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

According to the wiki page for it: "It's a small winding path in the Zaishen Challenge outpost that can only be accessed once you have completed 5 battles in Zaishen Challenge." Is this no longer accurate? Ashes Of Doom 23:15, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Nope, just checked. The Guard told me not to talk to him cause he is guarding the gate. --MageMontu 23:19, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

You get to walk through that area once when you do the Zaishen Challenge. After that, it's inaccessible by design. That's the outpost used for the Costume Brawl during Halloween, so it'll be back later this year. --Regina Buenaobra 23:42, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Hmmm weird, I was sure i walked that more than once on the same char, and since u unlock those outposts account based, you only walk it once per account. Oh well, my bad, thnx for the explanation Regina. --MageMontu 23:46, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

How odd. I probably just decided to not pay attention and accidentally skipped it somehow. Thanks Regina ^.^ -- Wandering Traveler 04:28, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm a cartographer freak, and I even mapped the whole Battle Isles, so I know for sure, that you can't and never could access that area after you've completed the quest. The quest is accessible one for each character: you get it in the Isle of the Nameless, by the Zaishen Chest. If you already unlocked the Zaishen Elite you can skip most (if not all, I don't really remember this) of the quest, and go into that area. — Poki#3 05:37, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

I think u r wrong poki, cause when I checked, I created a new pvp only character, the quest wasn't available and the guard didn't let me true. That's why i said I think that quest is only done once per account. --MageMontu 07:26, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

The quest is most definitely character based... like every quest. I did it multiple times on different characters. — Poki#3 07:35, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Then my poor mule is bugged :P. Nah seriously I'll recheck in a couple of hours when i can go online. --MageMontu 07:38, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

If they have made it inaccessible, then it was very recent, as I was in that area just a few weeks ago. --Mme. Donelle 11:18, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

I used to do it with all characters and get my friends through without doing the trials.. It's all changed. Higher Minion 14:45, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Third Birthday

My main character just celebrated her third birthday. I got a mini Freezie in my inventory today. =) I was actually hoping for a Raptor or Roaring Ether, but Freezie is cute, too. My next oldest character's third birthday is coming up next month, so maybe I'll get the Raptor or Roaring Ether then. :-D --Regina Buenaobra 16:58, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Whee! Third! Our firsts are still around six, almost seven months $_$. Also, freezie! --Star Weaver 17:13, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Grats! I'm hoping I get a freezie! He's just so darn cute! The freezie and Rabbit are the only ones I really want out of the third years. I have 3 more months to wait though. : ( --BabyJ 18:31, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

got a rabbit with my necro ^_* --Cursed Angel 18:34, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Happy B-Day for your character Regina! 75.146.48.190 18:50, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

just 1 month and 1 year togo for my characyer to become 3 year Q.Q Fox007 18:55, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

My 3rd year is comming within the month on my warrior =D --Wolf 21:28, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm looking forward to my next two 3rd year on a spare account I have. Congrats BTW for anyone who has gotten them already. Ghosst 21:31, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

My second minis so far were Koss, Mandragor and Lich. I love the Lich. Now I only need Glint and Abaddon and I'll have all the Campaign special bosses. MithTalk 22:35, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Aw man my Strider Jrs. not even 1 year old....... why must you taunt me!!!Mcdertr 02:25, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

3rd year has arived, and I was lucky enough to have a Mini Mad King Thorn bestowed upon my warrior. look at him. Isnt he just so..... cute? Anyway, this sucker is goin on my HoM, and staying with me, I don't care how much he is worth, I've been wanting one for forever! Unfortuneatly, I won;t have another 3rd b-day on a char until factions turns a year old :P I can'r believe I didn't say this earlier, but grats on the 3rd year Regina! =D --Wolf 14:09, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't want to die without even trying...

Hi Regina,

As time passes and GW2 gets closer, there's a thought that's bothering me more and more : my main character failed. She grew up in Ascalon, she saw her country destroyed by the Searing, she fought for years against the enemy of her people, the Charr, within the ranks of the Ascalon Vanguard, before finaly fleeing away with the Prince she served to find a place where the ascalonian people could be safe.

Then, she got side-tracked. She went to help the country that helped her against an undead menace, she followed a friend in a foreign country to save yet more people from a strange plague, she even made a little trip south of the crystal desert to save the world. And she came back to the country that sheltered the ascalonian people, only to find out that yet a new threat was rising, the Destroyers. So she went to defeat them, as well.

But as she fought against the Destroyers, she came to meet the Ebon Vanguard. Ascalonian warriors who kept fighting against the Charr invaders to protect as they could their homeland. She met a young woman who was a cute little girl the last time she saw it, years ago, a young woman whose mind had been scarred as much as her land was by the Searing.

And as she fought alongside with them against that new threat, she realized that she had never forgiven the Charr for what they did, and that she had never done the only thing she really wanted to do. She realized that she didn't care much about killing gods and saving the world, about long dead warlocks waging war against alien entities, or about a mystic assassin coming after an imperial family in a foreign continent.

The only thing that mattered to her was her country, the country she had had to flee to protect some of the citizens of. The only thing she wanted was to come back to Ascalon, to kneel before King Adelbern (who would probably at least acknowledge her and welcome her in his army, as she fought victoriously alongside with him against an little army of Charr and Titans a few years earlier), to lend him her power and to fight against the ennemy of her people, to fight against the Charr.

The only thing she wanted to do was to push back that ennemy far away from her home, to annihilate the Shaman caste and anyone who would have even remote knowledge of how to perform the Searing ritual, to see the Great Northern Wall rebuilt and her country safe again.

And that's never going to happen.

Of course, I know what you're going to tell me : she couldn't do a thing, she's all alone against a huge army, and what could one single person do against an army, even if that person is best friends with a goddess and has about annihilated two entire races on her own before ? She couldn't do a thing. She failed. The charr won. Whatever she did, it wasn't enough to push them back, and by the time GW2 starts, she'll probably be dead - permanently. That's what the timeline you gave us tells us.

And now, she can't even try to do the only thing she wants to do. She can't fight against the Charr. She can't try to protect her country. You're telling us she failed. End of the line.

This is what I have a problem with. You're telling me I failed, without even letting me try. Of course, I know it's a lost battle. But it's what my character wants to do - it's what you made my character want to do. Can you understand the frustration that it gives birth to ?

You could say "Yeah, that's right, you can't do a thing in GW1, but in GW2 you can fight against the Charr, so don't worry, all is fine". Well no, it's not fine. In GW2, my character will most likely be long dead, and what is certain from what you told us is that not only I can't play her, but I have to deal with the consequences of her failure a century before the GW2 storyline begins.

Which brings me to my point. All of the pre-searing and the first act of GW : Prophecies is made to make us players hate the Charr and powerfully so. The pre-searing and the first act of GW : Prophecies make us want to see our characters fight against the Charr. And we can't. Not in the rest of the Prophecies timeline, and not in Factions nor in Nightfall of course.

Worse : when we can finaly fight against the Charr, we have to fight alongside with other Charr. And not some Charr faction which wishes peace with the humans and want Ascalon to be free and nice again, no... We fight alongside with a ranger who is proud of what his father did : turning Ascalon into a fiery ruin. Would I have been my character, I would have challenged that charr in a one-on-one fight to the death. But no, I have to accept that this charr stays alive and safe. But I disgress.

My problem here is that you created in us a desire and made it grow, and then told us that this desire would not be satisfied. I'm fine with a little bit of frustration - GW2 beta delayed ? Fine. No info on GW2 for a year ? Fine. - but not that much. I don't want to buy a new game in which I will think "Hey, it's useless, in the end they'll tell you that your character failed and died, and you won't even be able to give it a try".

Don't get mistaken. I don't mind about failing, nor about dying. I'm fine with the Charr winning that war, even though I fight against them - that is, if I get the chance to actually face them, fight them and die fighting them. I just don't want an off-screen death for my character - can you imagine a movie in which you'd see the heroes celebrating some small victory unrelated to their final goal, and then next scene, their country is in ruins and they're dead and burried ? Many heroes die in fiction, but they die doing something, there are witnesses, and they are trying to accomplish something - and most of the time, they're not just trying, they accomplish something even though they die along the way. Heroes just don't die off-screen. They don't fail without even trying. Kovalis 14:00, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

You do fight them off numerous times. Although you weren't strong enough to prevent the searing you prevented a Charr invasion with Prince Rurik, and then fought behind enemy lines with the Vanguard. GW2 takes place 250 years from now. As far as I'm aware, we don't know when the Charr conquer Ascalon. It could be long after your character died simply because of old age. Each story needs to have it's end, and it's up to you how you'll end yours. And just between you and me, King Adelbern is too blinded by rage to be a good leader, and I agree with Rurik: "Your king will lead you to death. If you wish to see better days, if you wish to live, then leave the beasts behind." — Poki#3 17:05, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

lol? --Metroid 17:58, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

roleplayers are unfunny and strange ppl --Cursed Angel 18:03, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

I always assumed that Ascalon was lost the moment of the Searing. Everything afterward was mop-up action on the part of the Charr. We tried to fight them off, because Adelbern refused to give up and he was our King. But he's obsessed. He has abandoned the welfare of his people in order to have his revenge on the Charr. Rurik knew better: Ascalon is lost. Its people are scattered. Mourn its loss, but don't think for a moment that living in the past will magically drive the Charr away. Let it go. Instead your character should be focusing on building Ascalon's new home in Kryta. -- MrSmiles 22:38, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

My main character does not feel cheated or frustrated, she is at peace. She understands that the larger dynamics of war and strife are eternal, that civilizations are never static and rise and fall in their own rhythm. She knows that there is never and “end” to the cycles of life. She also knows that a person must simply make their choices, fight with bravery, be steadfast in your belief and moral stances and above all be the best you can be for your lifetime. She knows that she could never bring the utopia “world peace” into reality even if she were made a god like Kormir was.

She has walked a similar path to yours, Kovalis. But now she lives quietly in a lovely seaside village in Watchtower Coast, with her Warrior husband who has fought countless battles at her side. Close enough to Lions Arch to go shopping if she wishes, but far enough away to be isolated from the churnings of politics and wars – she leaves that to the younger generations. She sails the seas in winter storms for the sheer thrill and quietly fishes for dinner on balmy summer afternoons. Her house walls are decorated with her finest weapons. She often lets her hand trail over the shaft of a certain staff, worn smooth with time and use, stained with sweat and blood too, and she remembers how each nick and scar got there, the sounds smells terror of each battle echo softly in her memory.

She also has a small stone house near Boreal Station which she visits often, to meet and talk long snowy evenings away with her old friends Jora and Ogden in front of a roaring fire, with a mug of warm spicy wine in hand. Their biggest amusement is actually that a certain Charr ranger thought that they considered him and his motley crew as comrades instead of a necessary evil in the guise of an ally! Their conspiratorial laughter rolls around the room when they think on this, and the sporting raids they do into Dalada Uplands when they got bored with retirement. The warmer the wine, the lower the fire, they also softly agree (while glancing over their shoulders) that they prefer to avoid certain long eared inhabitants of their world, for they are strange and extraordinarily arrogant ones with no regard for fellowship of comrades.

She has served her time, and given of her best, she’s seen the gore and terror of wars and reveled in the adrenalin rage of the heat of battle… from Ascalon to The Fire Islands, from Kaineng to the Jade Sea, from Istan to The Votex. When she neared the end of her fighting days, in the heart of the Northern Shiverpeaks in a band of true Heroes… standing blood spattered and exhausted over the shattered body of a destroyer, she knew she had fulfilled her destiny.

The future lies in the hands of her descendants – to be the best they can be in their time and live up to the title of Hero. --- Friday196.25.253.13 09:53, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

I just wanted to say that both pov's are awesomely written. I totally love it. And I think this could very well inspire the Dev team for GW2. Write your adventures down and post them on the Lore part of fan-fora. I'd love to read more! DBZVelena | (Talk page) 18:33, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Just pray to Jesus that maybe we will get a BMP that will allow you to do that.--74.61.209.219 08:17, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

We should find a place where everyone can write the ending of his adventures, i love reading these kind of writings ^^ --MageMontu 08:32, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Let people write them in their User:Page/Story or User:Page/Character/Ending or something and add it to 'Category:User Fiction/The End ? --Star Weaver 14:59, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm actually very happy with the fact that, Tyrians especially, really lost everything over the course of the game. Every story has a conflict and every conflict has a loser; it's so rare to find a game developer willing to allow us to play the losing side that that in and of itself sets Guild Wars apart from its contemporaries. The fact that the story told to us is about a group of people who can't save themselves, no matter how powerful they might seem to be, is almost like Greek theatre in its tragedy and is extremely refreshing to me. I would be much less impressed with the Guild Wars universe if everything resolved nicely and everyone got their homes back in the end. The story just wouldn't be nearly as memorable if we didn't fail. - Harjubal od Uo 21:48, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Another thing that is worth to keep in mind is that, in Prophecies, the hero from Tyria just got involved in a game of power between higher beings. We wanted to protect Tyria and his people, and we kept doing things thinking that by doing so we were protecting them, but in the end we were nothing else but pawns. We were manipulated by the White Mantle and the mursaat to do what they wanted, then by the Lich, then by Glint. In the end the hero was nothing else than a toy.

I think that, by the time Eye of the North takes place, the hero was aware of that already. But he kept going and playing other's games, if for nothing just because he had to fight the battles that took place at his time, for protecting the people that lived by then, so that others could train and prepare themselves for the battles that were to be fought once he were no longer in Tyria to play as the god's puppet.

The only thing that i hope, is that once GW2 launch, accomplishments on the HoM allow us to continue the fight were we left.--Fighterdoken 22:06, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

what i like with prophesies is the way u get thrown around. mostly the part where u get to see the king as an old patriot unwilling to surrender his army to kryta, and rurik, as the one who've seen the ppl suffer and therefore tries to save them, as the hero. and in the end it turns out rurik were wrong to trust the krytans and ascalon is out of soldiers when the titans and the charrs is about to take it over completly. however i dont mind about the charr as their part in the story is very short and pointless and i cant see any way to end guildwars with any kind of final war upon the charr. --Anorith 22:25, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

WHAT?!? The Charr portion of the game was the strongest part of Prophacies. I kept waiting to go back and fight them as I played through the game, only to be let down when we never revisited. I felt like Anet had something really great going with the Charr and it just kinda went downhill after that. It'd be like starting Nightfall and right after the consulate docks mission you start fighting Joko instead of Varesh, and then NEVER go to fight Varesh. Back to topic though, perhaps there could be a "final quest" for Prophacies characters (or any character but proph characters would make the most sense) where you team up with 12+ members and you fight an onslaught of Charr in Rin. The Charr should be about lv.28, and there should be no less than 10 charr at all times fighting the group and the remainder of Ascalonians. The Charr would be well equipped to handle any situation so that there would not be any way for the user to actually win. I guess this would be closer to a challenge, "how long can you last?" so that there is some reward in it, but no way to win as hopefully by the time the 10th charr dies your party will be wiped clean. ah! i'm so excited now! The Charr are the most 2nd most ferocious enemies out there being 2nd only to the Stone Summit >< 68.104.247.142 10:52, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

well regina, any plans to nerf Shadow Form even further to the extent that we can't use it to farm bosses or other foes anymore?

Well, since you have completely ignored my previous letter to you and ignore what OTHERS of the nerf (particularly Shadow Form farmers) and play the nerf card and nerf Shadow Form, I was wondering if you have any plans to nerf any attempts to maintain Shadow Form to the extent that we can't solo farm bosses and several foes anymore? I'm judging by what the recent developer update says. If doing so, then it will be impossible to properly equip your heroes with good weapons and have newly created characters get elite skills in the beginning that would make life easier for newly created characters when starting the game with your new character.--Dark Paladin X 00:53, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

I read your letter and we have all been following the threads and posts in the forums regarding Shadow Form. Just because we didn't do what you wanted doesn't mean you were ignored. The designers are evaluating Shadow Form, so I cannot say one way or the other whether the scenario you've painted here will come to pass. --Regina Buenaobra 01:02, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

there are so many ways in guild wars to get free money farming isnt realy required i have gotten my obsidan armor set vabbi and others all by not farming. http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Treasure <-- so many ways...75.165.124.46 06:08, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

I suck at farming, but my heroes are all equipment with good weapons, but I think people need to understand the skin doesn't make a good weapon. 000.00.00.00 06:29, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

/bonus ftw. — Teh Uber Pwnzer 10:53, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

As if people weren't able to equip their heroes with weapons before Shadow Form was buffed. Not that I would disagree that the people that don't farm aren't rewarded enough for their efforts. People that try to avoid repetitive grinding/farming just don't get enough items or gold to really make a difference in the game economy. In my opinion ArenaNet should do something about that instead of buffing solo farm builds. --Draikin 17:14, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

/agree. Nothing is ment to be farmed. Farming lowers an items quality and increases grind. Nerfing SF is the first step to removing solo-farming builds. As tell me, how is any skill involved? Dominator Matrix 17:17, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

I can't give away max items from collectors so I don't see the problem with equipping heroes. As far as "have newly created characters get elite skills in the beginning".... Well how do you think people played the game before Tomes? You've been spoiled too much. 122.104.165.13 19:21, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, if you think about it, ArenaNet had historically shown strong hostility towards farming and attempt to do ways to discourage people from farming. Back on topic, if you are planning to prevent ways from maintaining Shadow Form, at least remove that annoying 50% damage penalty.--Dark Paladin X 16:12, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

We used to live in caves too, with animal skins for clothing and sticks for lighting fires. Things tend to get easier over time. Does that mean I wouldn't stand a chance one-on-one against a cave-man? Yep. But I got's me plasma and microwave and I's purty shure my boom-stick would put that there cave-man in the ground. Hey ... wait ... maybe that is why human beings flourished! Maybe making things easier was good for us. Who'd a thunk it? PS: I respect older players, but don't expect me to swallow everything you say. Ghosst 16:21, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

@dark paladin X, its clear that you just want anet to revert SF so you can farm again please stop qqing there is very little that you can buy for 100k+ besides rare minis and obsidian/vabbien armor, oh and then there is titles as well. 75.165.124.46 18:15, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Now first of all, the reason why ANet added that stupid 50% dmg penalty was because people are able to maintain Shadow Form. If they have plans to prevent people from maintaining it, with the 50% damage penalty, then you can't use it to farm anything and you can't even solo farm bosses anymore.--Dark Paladin X 02:12, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

there are a lot of farming builds out there that work just fine, solo ones that still uses sf. also the reason as to why sf was neffed can be found here http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/ArenaNet:Developer_updates#.5BDev_Update.5D_Shadow_Form_Balance_Changes_-_2_July_200875.165.124.46 06:45, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Wintersday in July

5/11/2008, that was the date Wolfie of Bladeradio emailed you with the title, "Wintersday in July". Blade radio and myself were creating an event for this. It had the exact title as this weekend’s event. Not only did Bladeradio or wolfie receive nothing as a response, i log into guild wars to find on the load screen "Wintersday in July" immediately i thought "great, the events gone official!" then i read the description and i find myself aghast, this is all well and good, but i see no mention of whom thought of this wonderful idea? , Could you please confirm for me and my fellow friends and staff, that Bladeradio did in fact design this idea? It would be much appreciated.

Sorry if i sound peeved, but this is common courtesy. Frozenwind 22:07, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

To my knowledge the person responsible for special events came up with that idea independently of Blade Radio. I combed through my inbox and I haven't been able to find the email you referenced. It's possible it got caught by the spam filters. When was it sent? --Regina Buenaobra 22:11, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Erm regina, look up the date is RIGHT THERE.If you cant find it still, we can resend you the email, with the date as was.

Thanks very much for the re-send. I've responded to it. The discussion within the design team for the Wintersday in July event started back in Q1 2007, but at the time they didn't have the right setup to make the snowball arena work outside of the regular Wintersday event. It wasn't until late last year that it could actually run on its own. Fast forward to a few months ago, the designer responsible for events starting planning for the 2007 Wintersday in July event in March of this year.--Regina Buenaobra 22:43, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Im not going to argue.Keep up the good work. Frozenwind 22:53, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

For the Wintersday in July special weekend event, the only thing that will be turned on are the Snow Arenas. It takes a full live build to put up and take down the town art and decorations, so doing that is a lot more involved and takes much more resources and preparation. --Regina Buenaobra 22:56, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Im sure it does, and i acknowledge that the snowball arena is the only thing going up. You stated yourself that this has been in the works far longer then our email got misplaced for.So i am most certain that this is just some coincidence on the name of the event.It would seem it was a misunderstanding, And therefore nobody should be to blame on either side. Frozenwind 23:06, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Sod it, make the best of what you have right? i CANNOT let an event such as this pass me by, so im gathering all my resources together to have one big nice player run event to link with this weekend!, i must ask Regina, if i email my event plans,details ect to the community adress, it will be read wont it? I very much hope so Frozenwind 03:38, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

I suggest that if you plan on holding your own event, don't rely on Anet to relay information to the community at large, because they get, I'm sure, a lot of emails and may not read it in time. Do send an email to them, but also post in all the big forums, make a page here on the wiki, get your friends to spread the word in-game, etc. --Mme. Donelle 12:57, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Love the Wintersday in July thing. It ties in nicely with Camper's Christmas [1]. I'll be trying to get good drops as I farm up my LB and SS points (I'm not done with those yet). Pass the message along to the person/team who designed the event! Zahra 16:39, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Wintersday Decoration

Ellow, I've got a question regarding to the Snow Arena decoration. Is it possible that I can get either some teleport to the Snow Arena or get the textures that are being used before the event starts ?

I'm like totally into texmodding and would like to give it a try at the Snow Arena.Jimme 00:46, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Elite Areas for the other Gods?

I was just wondering if their were ever any other elite areas conceptualized for the other Gods, or related difficult areas. We have FoW and UW for Balthazar and Grenth, and Kormir gets DoA. What about Dwayna, Lyssa and Melandru? 000.00.00.00 03:36, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

I think it deals with the fact that those three Goddesses haven't gotten anyone angry yet. Balthazar is annoyed with his half brother, Grenth is dealing with his predicessor trying to steal his throne back, and Kormir is busy trying to tell off Abbaddon's minions. So unless there is a fight involving Dwayna, Lyssa and Melandru...I don't think we will see them bothering anyone. Except Dwayna messing with Grenth on Wintersday. ^^" Katherinezoltin 06:44, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Maybe instead of a war, make it that the Goddesses wants to test us in some way :P --MageMontu 07:01, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Lyssa=nightfall........ for more epic lols i think they should have lands that only have there profesions in them with insane op skill bars.75.165.124.46 07:10, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

I remember hearing something about Anet considering other areas for Melandu, Dwayna, and Lyssa. Though it was so long ago (Maybe Factions-ish, or earlier) that it could have been another player asking Gaile about it. I would have to agree with Katherinezoltin though, that Balthazar, Kormir and Grenth all have existing lore/storyline reasons for using us players to do tasks in the Underwolrd and the Fissure of Woe. And I don't see how Lyssa=Nightfall, Nightfall was from the effects of Abbadon having nearly broken completely free of his prison. Lyssa was involved in more of the story line, with Morghan and the priestess of Lyssa that's involved around the Orchard mission, than she had been previously. But that doesn't make her involved with Nightfall any more than the other gods. Though typing this, the Garden of Seberon (bad spelling,yea) And the Grand Court of Sekehba are areas that are Lyssa's even if they're not elite areas. Yukiko 07:32, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Melandru could be fighting industrialists and pollution lol HeavenMonkey 22:25, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Or simply "Say no to tree abuse!".Lala~Lalalala~Lala 16:27, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

It's being considered, yes. Having the other gods' realms appear in the game, though, would be a long way off. --Regina Buenaobra 16:13, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

More directed at the post above Regina, but thank you Regina for sharing this information. All the gods have a story line that ties in with Abbadon because all of them were involved in defeating him and imprisoning him. As for the areas, Melandru helping with the recovering of nature would tie into the story line since all the campaigns have at least one area where nature has been devastated due to Abbadon; Old Ascalon, Prettified Forest, Jade Sea, and The Desolation. Lyssa the flow of energy and Chaos in the world and how Abbadon actions have changed the world the player has to assist in restoring the flow of energy and balance. Dwayna area could deal with the dieses and hardship Abbadon’s actions have caused. Each of these could have minions of Abbadon as your rivals, an example would be Melandru restoring Old Ascalon and fighting against the foes that caused its destruction, Charr and Titans.--Shayne123 11:37, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Sexual Dimorphism!

Since Regina encouraged us to continue the discussion of gender, I'd like to bring up another topic: sexual dimorphism. For those who don't know what sexual dimorphism is, it refers to the differences in appearence between the males and females of a species. For instance, male peacocks are more brightly coloured and have larger tail feathers than females; female angler fish are many times larger than male anglers. Humans exhibit some sexual dimorphism: males tend to be larger and more muscular; women tend to be smaller and fatter. These differences tend to be quite pronounced in stylised depictions of humans, such as those in games or cartoons. Men are not just larger, but huge, with extaordinarily wide shoulders and very bulging, chiseled features. Women are not just smaller, but tiny, with slim but (paradoxically) curvaceous bodies and rounded features.

Now, the reason I bring this up is not so much to talk about humans, but other races. Non-human races in games are often subjected to the sexual dimorphism of humans, in rather (yes, I'm going to say it) sexist terms. WoW is particularly guilty of this: while all playable races are humanoid, many are not very human-like; yet their males are huge, wide and muscular, while their females are small, slim, and curvaceous. Something I've always been curious about is why troll males have curved spines, whereas females stand upright. The answer is, troll females were made to look more like stylised human women following alpha testing because some players didn't want to play an "ugly" female -- even if she is not human and, therefore, theoretically not subject to human standards.

This isn't to say that it's a bad idea to create characters the human player finds appealing and can identify with, but that kind of extreme depiction of females seems a bit much to me. After all, the males are pretty damn ugly: why are they depicted as "true" trolls, and not altered to look more human? Why are people more offended by "ugly" when it applies to females than when it applies to males? The good thing about fantasy, surely, is that one can really run with the concept of sexual dimorphism: perhaps one could create races with even less sexual dimorphism than one would see in humans, or none at all; or create races with ridiculous and extreme and completely non-human dimorphism, like that seen in peacocks (pretty males) or angler fish (larger females).

I would like to applaud Anet for doing exactly this with the Asura as depicted in GW1: while males and females look different, those differences are subtle to the point of being easy to miss, and not necessarily human. I liked the quest in which a male Asura worries over his ability to attract females because of his small ears. I also like the joke about female Dwarves: it's not that we haven't seen any, they're just muscular, bald and bearded. I hope to see more of this with the other races in GW2: female Charr who either look like males, or are different in a non-human way; Sylvari whose bodies are more reminiscent of the tree they were born from than a nonsensical similarity to mammals.

Finally, my apologies for seemingly never shutting up about gender, haha. I have been really enjoying these discussions, and find the concept of sexual stereotypes a fascinating one. --Mme. Donelle 18:52, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

More variety in the body shapes - though I do not see it coming for Guild Wars - would be nice in Guild Wars 2, the generic scalable almost perfect forms for Guild Wars characters, though fantasy, has always been laughable. All of my characters have a theme, some to a greater extent have a story and personality [a device I embue in the character as a means of being able to justify the time I spend playing a game like Guild Wars without wanting to go off and mod something else] and it would be nice to be able to have a roundish, slob of man who's the lazy merchant character [of my group] standing in the back doing the bare minimum to help out because its 'grunt work' [think a cross between Prince Bokka and Mr. Krabs from Spongebob, less the fact he's a grab :P], or the 'not so perfect woman' because I personally find the stick figures with large breasts boring.

Although its fantasy, just a game and all make believe, tradiational conventions do not need to be followed so strictkly but I have had it explained to me, in a very crude form, as Arenanet catering to the 'pocket mining demographic'. Sex sells, and it seems only a few among many would enjoy the variety of the non-perfect.

Though I liked the notion of the Asuran Oggy, Arenanet falls into the making the size of his ears being an issue warranting wanting to 'naturally enhance them'. Yes, cute but still falling into the category of "I'm not the same so I need to be the same to impress". Could have made him be brave - accepting of his ears - but they went the easy way. [shrugs] Variety of story is also nice.

I am interested in seeing what a Dwarven female looks like though :P

And never apology, Arenanet is heavily influenced by sexual stereotypes, some of us guys see it too. It also doesn't mean the stereotypes have to be encouraged and accepted. 000.00.00.00 19:28, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Heheh, I suddenly realised something: there is apparent hypocrisy in advocating differences in gender appearence while also saying "don't do gender differences; it's sexist!" I'd like to point out that this isn't necessarily hypocritical (though I'm expecting a lot of people to blast me for being a hypocrite even after reading this disclaimer. -_-) The difference lies primarily in the fact that we're talking about non-human races. It's difficult to claim that depicting human females with extremely curvaceous bodies and skimpy clothes is not sexist: it makes an unsaid statement that women are for looking at, that they can have whatever job they like and make whatever descisions they want, but they have to look really good while doing it. That's pretty damn sexist, even if the people who created the game had no conscious intention of sending out that message. However, depicting women with breasts is not in itself sexist. Women look different from men: that's a simple fact. Various species have various differences between the genders, and it's nobody's fault: that's just the way they are. When creating a fantasy species, you have the freedom to give them whatever sexual dimorphism you like. However, there is always a reason behind the dimorphism a human creator gives his creations: it could be a sexist reason, like "I gave these cat women six massive breasts because titties are hawt"; or a good/neutral reason, like "I always thought it was pretty cool that male anglers spend the last days of their life parasitically attached to the females, so I made my race like that to see what challenges they face in life because of it". What I would like to see in games is sexual dimorphism caused for challenging or well-intentioned reasons, not sexist ones. --Mme. Donelle 19:44, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

On a side note, I'm sure one of the creator's says something along the lines of 'looking good while playing' when referring to his female elementalist in the Nightfall Dvd. I'm very interested in seeing how they handle differences with the Asuran and Charr, as opposed to the other races such as the Norn and the Sylvari [from the only concept art I've seen which was GWEN related], we've seen the Norn, they follow the human model, and the Sylvari are humanoid and may very well follow the same model.

PS, I get the feeling I may be drifting from your point, if I am please excuse me been up all night with a sick child, am tired. 000.00.00.00 20:03, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

No, it's a good point. (I hope your kid is okay.) The primary reason females are always made so ridiculously aesthetically pleasing is because you want something nice to look at when you're playing. Your character is your avatar: why wouldn't you want to be represented by something gorgeous? I often see male players who primarily or even exclusively make female characters, because "I just want to have something nice to look at while I play". The definition of "nice to look at" varies from person to person, however. I've seen people dancing on their naked female sin "because she looks so hot in her underwear", whereas I recoil in horror from the sight of those skinny freaks who look more at home on a hospital bed, eating through tubes, than attempting backflips. I also wonder why "nice to look at" always has to mean sexy. Why not simply cute? Or weird? --Mme. Donelle 20:16, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

People play opposing gender for many reasons, some as crude as them looking hot and sexy. I personally play females because it adds variety to the story of my characters themselves. Though some look physically perfect their personalities/stories are not. It comes down to how far you carry into the fantasy of the piece, purely to the physical or deeper to a personality.

Plus, I would like to say, the model errors really stop me from watching half naked characters in Guild Wars dance or do anything, the Arenanet modellers and animators who let that happen should be ashamed >.< [cough Ouch! cough] 000.00.00.00 20:51, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh, I didn't mean to suggest that everyone creates characters because they look sexy! Indeed, that very point is the reason why I believe Anet should provide more customisation options. Also, lol at your picture. XD--Mme. Donelle 20:57, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh, no, I wasn't suggesting you were suggesting that at all, just my point of style. Options give us more creative control, people as it is are sick of seeing their twin or triple, or ten versions of their character running around. If we were given more options there would still be many beautiful people [in terms of the stereotypical ideals] out in the game world, but you'd find many players would use it to experience the differences in their characters and the race they pick. All comes down to personal choice. More choices would mean more to explore, I for one would love that kind of choice for my characters.

I am hoping for, within each race, we are given the choice of frames for our characters, as well as scale for Guild Wars 2, and that the choices aren't all based on stereotypical norms. Would be nice to see more of an average warrior than say the "I can benchpress a mac truck" look we have now. Been able to look through an outpost and would [barring the fantasy themes] think of it as down town would be nice. Many different appearances, the choice to insert yourself into the fantasy would be nice.

Yeah, the pictures a gift :P. Once again, I think I'm drifting, but the picture had to be shown lol 000.00.00.00 21:12, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Just to add a bit to something Mme. Donelle said above: I'm a male player and all my characters are female, because IMO they're nicer to look at. But I mean "nicer to look at" not in any way linked to sex appeal - it's not a matter of those characters having breasts, it's rather a matter of how often the animations used on the female models look more elegantly than the male ones, IMO. A good example of this are the dances: many, if not most of male dances are trying to be funny by aiming at some random cultural reference; while many, if not most of female dances are iconic representations of dance styles that exist in the real world. While there are exceptions to both (the male Monk dance is rather nice, IMO, and the female Elementalist dance is horrible), I think that leads to more aesthetically pleasant animations for the female characters. So in this aspect I don't think "nice to look at" has always to mean "sexy" - it may be many other things, as seen (some times, by far not always) on GW. Erasculio 01:43, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

That's true. I was referring more to the designers' line of thinking than players when I said "why does nice always have to mean sexy", but it's definitely worth mentioning that there's plenty of male players who don't care so much, if at all, about the sexiness of their female characters. I was actually thinking of something related to this earlier: if the standard practice of games was to create modest, more realistic looking women, how many players would actually say "screw this, we want sexy women! Add more boobs!!" I know this was the case with WoW women, but it was primarily regarding ugly, non-human races: what would the reaction have been had, say, humans or night elves been plainer? I'm willing to bet that not many people would have made a fuss over it, or even that those who did were dismissed as salivating teenagers. And if that is indeed the case, then this insistence on having hyper-sexualised women as the only option in games starts to look really ridiculous. (See, I didn't say "sexist". Aren't you proud of me? :D) --Mme. Donelle 01:59, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Norn Porn. Renin 02:40, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm just poking fun. I think aNet will do right with the Sylvari, In my opinion and from what I've read so far is that they may look sexually ambiguous to one another. I think and hope that the differences between both genders are their armor, and their dances. Renin 02:44, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

It would be interesting if, in GW2, we had a "body slider" in character customization that allowed us to select breast size and etc. I wonder if we would end drowning in anatomically impossible female characters, or if most players would choose characters with realistic proportions and the few characters with breasts size DDD would be ridicularized as belonging to overly sexist players. Erasculio 13:33, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

I am totally in favour of Norn porn. Two heavy Norn, their bulbous, blubber-soaked bodies jiggling wildly in the snow-glare of the perpetual northern sun... *shivers* that's hot. (Yeah, bet you weren't expecting that, eh? XD) In seriousness: I'm interested to hear that the Sylvari will look androgenous. From concept art I've seen, Sylvari come with female bodies... it will be interesting to see how literally they take "ambiguity" when it comes to males. Or, indeed, if males exist. As asexual plants, one has to wonder what they need gender for.

As I've mentioned before, it's my understanding that games with "body sliders" end up with the majority of players creating hyper-sexualised females anyway. While most people would argue that that's to be expected, since most players are immature teenage males, I wonder what the exact proportion of immature males playing these games really is. My guild contains only a handful of teenage boys, only a few of whom I would consider "immature". The rest of non-teenage-boy members are either adult males (ranging in age from 18 to 60-something), and females. I would not expect any of those people to create hyper-sexualised females if given the choice: but many of them actually would. I suspect it's due to lack of imagination: the sexy female is almost like a "default", and if you don't or can't think of a different female shape, you tend to revert back to the sexy model. How sexy depends on the tastes of the person, of course, but I can't imagine anyone defaulting to the figure of the average woman you'd see on the street. --Mme. Donelle 14:20, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Hmmm..... Norn Porn.. RULE 34'ed.

It would be interseting to have sexiness sliders:

<Chuck Norris>-------------------------------<George Bush>

<Jessica Alba>-------------------------------<Hilary Clinton>. -- NUKLEAR IIV 14:49, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Norn porn is rule 34? Pfft. That's softcore. Zhed/Vekk slash: now THERE'S your rule 34. --Mme. Donelle 22:33, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Aargh no! Zhed and Vekk? How could you! But back to the real topic, what concerns me the most is that in almost all of the films and television is that most of aliens and halfbreeds and the whatever else there is, is that their females are relegated to have curvy and slender bodies, with and with chest. A depiction of what a human female is in their top hunting/farming shape. I wonder then how they will design a Female charr, would they stand more upright and with 3 pairs of chest (I'm basing the chest on a wild speculation that Charrs may have been derived from Wolves, Dogs, Lions or Cats)? Or would they have longer stylized hair that twirls in the oh so right places? Imagine Charrs having a curly blonde hair on their head, a ponytailed tail and long flowing backhair. Renin 03:27, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I was thinking about female Charr earlier today, actually. (I'm going to assume they were inspired by cats.) Cats have very little sexual dimorphism: in general, the only way to discover a cat's gender is to check between its hind legs. Presumably, then, female Charr will look identical to males, possibly with a lionesque exception of being hairless (as in no mane), where males are capable of growing head and facial hair. I can see that annoying some players, however, so perhaps both genders can grow head and facial hair (or none at all). Horns are also something to think about: will female horns be bigger, smaller, identical, or non-existant?

I would also expect female Charr to have six breasts. Something that I always found kind of weird in WoW was that female Tauren have two breasts on the chest, instead of udders near the crotch. They're cows, why do they have boobs?? But I digress. I may be wrong here, but I think that feline breasts do not develop in the same way as human breasts: instead of inflating during puberty, they inflate during pregnancy. As such, female Charr would most likely be flat-chested, something which is luckily less likely to offend than 6 jiggling boobs (either becuase "it's gross" or "six?! You pigs"). However, flat or not, feline boobs may cause armour issues: whereas female human armour is only required to cover part of the chest, female Charr armour would need to cover the entire front torso. --Mme. Donelle 05:02, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I think I like the other version of my female charr, Goldilock Charr with a ponytailed tail! A hypoallergenic (furless) charr isn't something I wanna look at. I wonder if they wear war-make-up like war-lipstick and war-eyeshadow :P Renin 05:10, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Hah. I bet you'd get mauled for calling a bald Charr "hypoallergenic": it means completely hairless for the purposes of being an ideal pet for humans with fur allergies. :p Anyway, you needn't worry: I was referring to manes. Their skin would still be completely covered in fur; they just wouldn't have extra on their heads where you'd expect to see hair and beards on a human, or a mane on a lion. --Mme. Donelle 05:17, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I was imagining a Charr Monk with the tatoo armor which strips them of all clothes and probably fur. I'll call a bald Charr partly-hypoallergenic. Although a less-hair or a well trimmed female charr would be nice. Brazilianed Charr! Renin 10:18, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

See, this is exactly my point: you're placing emphasis on the female Charr being good-looking, or at least more aesthetically pleasing than the male. She's not a human: why should she be less hairy? (Also, I'm still not sure you know what "hypoallergenic" means. It has nothing to do with hair: it refers to allergens, or things which trigger allergies. Fur is an allergen, thus a cat wih no fur is hypoallergenic. I think the word you're looking for is "bald". :p) --Mme. Donelle 18:05, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

But what does have a trimmed fur female charr or a brazillianed charr have to do anything with them being good looking? Who is to say that short hair for Charrs are zexy? Would having shorter trimmed fur automatically mean that they're more aesthetically pleasing than the males? That's why a bald Charr is partly-hypoallergenic, my allergies won't react if i'm only exposed to their baldness. hahahaa Renin 18:17, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

You don't have to worry about allergies if the cats are virtual, thus your concern is only with regards to appearance. Don't try to argue logic with me, you'll always lose. ;) --Mme. Donelle 18:36, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I never said I was trying to be logical! I'm just - almost always - letting my imagination run wild. I wonder of Charrs purr as well :D Renin 18:50, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Aw, but I do enjoy a logic debate. I live in hope that someone will say to me, "your argument is based around a fallacy", so I can reply, "oh hey, you know what else likes to base itself around fallacies? Your mother." --Mme. Donelle 18:52, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Anyway, in seriousness: you're resisting the idea of a hairy female Charr, and expressing favour for one with trimmed body fur and pretty head hair. Doesn't it seem likely that this is influenced by human standards for femininity? While it's true that women are less hairy than men, our culture expects females to be almost completely hairless, even though most women are much hairier than that. So if being hairless is a ridiculous standard for humans, isn't it really ridiculous for cats, who exhibit no sexual dimorphism and thus have no reason to emphasise a "feminine trait" that doesn't exist for them? I may not expect female Charr to have manes, but I would expect the fur on the rest of their bodies to be just as long and copious as that on males. --Mme. Donelle 01:19, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm actually hoping female Charrs will look almost exactly like the male ones, with the only difference being small details on the heads (a slightly longer/shorter head for female characters?). Erasculio 01:09, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

No mention of calico Charr? saddening... --24.179.151.252 01:25, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Erasculio: I'm expecting the sole difference to lie in the horns, actually. I could be wrong, but I don't think there are any horned species whose females have bigger horns than males, and few in which males and females have identical horns. 24: a calico Charr would be gorgeous. o.o --Mme. Donelle 01:35, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

It isn't only in humans that hair are less for the women, there are other animals out there that the males out perform the females in terms of flashiness like the peacock for instance. Will we really know if more fur means sexy for the female charrs? Sure there are other animals where women are bigger like them blackwidow (why did i have to use blackwidow? I'll never know myself) spiders but my own preference stands the same. I am not sexist because i do not "propagate" such thought, even subliminally. It is my own preference, as what people say, Beauty is purely subjective no matter how much we are exposed to it in all forms of media. go Brazillian Charr! Renin 02:16, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Haha aww, don't get so defensive. I wasn't accusing you of being sexist. I do question your insistence that your personal preferences are entirely uninfluenced by society, however. Do you really, truly feel that, had you been born and raised in a cave, by robots, and not seen another human or been exposed to human culture in any way until whatever age you are now, your preferences and opinions would be the same as those you currently hold? Really? Because if you do, then our understanding of social psychology suggests that you are only fooling yourself.

What this entire topic on sexual dimorphism is about is specifically that part of us which is influenced by society. It does not matter that you personally would prefer the appearence of a "Brazillian Charr": the point is that when told to imagine a female Charr, your mind imagines a Charr as an idealised human female. I do not challenge your tastes, but the unquestioning assumption that the standards we place upon ourselves applies to non-humans as well, regardless of how illogical or silly that may be. --Mme. Donelle 03:28, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Though I would like to say no, society does not influence me but that's utterly false. But to say that society in itself is THE main cause of such thinking is also false. Factors such as parents and primal instinct have to be considered. Do we blame the Lionesses that they're sexist if they prefer the more brute lion than the skinny one? What about them Peacocks even, females prefer their mates to have the best gorgeous plumage among the rest. Simply, it's not just down to society what dictates which gender prefers, some are more animalistic in nature. It's not completely because of society why some men prefer their women to have gigantic boobies and curvaceous slender fit bodies, nor the women prefers seeing their men in such tip top shape with bustling biceps and washboard abs; it is still influenced by our own primal insticts of wanting the best even for ourselves and for our offspring's, even if we're just unconsciously projecting them through our avatars in a fantasy world.

Some of us grow up into idealizing the perfect man and woman but we all know how those people ends up; and some of us grow up into real people with real expectations of the real world no matter how society dictates to us otherwise.

My assumption of a Brazillianed Charr is based on the example you had given me about Cats, specifically them puurrty (I just had to say puuurr!) Lions. Seeing how the female lioness is more slender and more feminine looking than the males and not because of what my preference of how a female charr would be. I was all for them having 6 motherly goodness instead of what the society dictated of them having 2. Renin 05:39, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Do give me a little credit, here: I know the difference between sexism and instinct, and you do not need to continuously attempt to justify your own instincts out of some apparent fear that if I steer the conversation too far into the more nebulous territory of societal pressure and stereotypes (which, while being caused by instinctual urges, actually has very little to do with them), you will somehow end up being branded a sexist.

Secondly, your description of female Charr thus far is as follows: they stand more upright, have long Goldilocks tresses and their fur is "well trimmed". None of these conform with the image of a lioness: lionesses have the same stance as males (so this idea of standing upright is pure humanisation), lack a mane (so Goldilocks tresses would actually make more sense on a male Charr), and their body fur is identical to that of males (thus being well-trimmed is further humanisation). As such, your claim that you are basing your female Charr around lionesses is clearly nonsense. It does not matter that you managed to come up with genuine (if obvious) concepts like six breasts: my point still stands. You applied human female stereotypes to female Charr because you had difficulty in divorcing "sexy human woman" from "female" in your mind. This is too unconscious to make you an outright sexist, however, so no need to panic. --Mme. Donelle 08:20, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Credit given it is! :D I think you're reading in between the lines too much, as I was just wondering if they were going to go down that path which doesn't necessarily mean that, THAT is what I want nor do I have any issues divorcing "sexy human woman" from "female" in my mind. They were purely speculations NOT definitive description as to how I want my female Charrs would be. Merely questioning if they are going down that path and asking you and other people to imagine a Goldilocks Charr purely out of fun which is being taken out of context. As to what I want how my Females would be, have you seen how bushy Male charrs are, especially around their head? I suspect that, THAT is their mane and that a "trimmed" version of Charrs would be similar to a sexy lioness. So with how I want my female Charrs would be, and I've described it pretty definitive by now, I am unconsciously still unable to divorce a sexy human woman from what a natural female charr should be? Relax, not everything in here has to be taken as serious as you do. Renin 10:11, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

But the internet is serious business!! D: Honestly, I do not take this as seriously as you seem to think I do. Perhaps I come across as serious because of my pedantic and sarcastic way of writing, but there is no "reason" behind it: this is just the way I write. I think you're the one who is reading between the lines too much, or perhaps simply misunderstanding. I've been aware from the start that you were just speculating for fun, lol. I've been doing the same: this is what fun speculation looks like when pedants do it. :p --Mme. Donelle 12:11, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Great discussion, everyone. :-) Sexual dimorphism is definitely something that the character art team discusses when creating the male and female prototype designs. The application of human standards to other races in World of Warcraft, for example, really, really bugged me. It ticks me off to no end that female Tauren have breasts rather than udders and that female Trolls bear almost no resemblance to their male counterparts -- they look more human than anything, which is completely ridiculous since they're _not_ humans, they're Trolls. So like Mme. Donelle, I was pleasantly surprised to see that the female asura actually look asuran rather than little human females with big ears. I think the art team are pretty well solidified on their male and female models for charr, asura, and sylvari, but I will definitely pass along the discussion here, since it's interesting and perhaps they may find it useful. If you're really interested in reading analysis of body types in MMORPGs, you may find Andrea Rubenstein's article, "Idealizing Fantasy Bodies" a good read. In it, she compares and contrasts the body types of the different races in World of Warcraft. If you do a search for it, the paper should come up as the first hit. --Regina Buenaobra 16:09, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

It didn't come up for me when I googled it, though I found it eventually: [2]. Thanks for the rec; it's a really interesting article. :D I liked its reference to Dove's "campaign for real beauty", heheh. I saw a bunch of ads for the "campaign" in the London Underground a few years ago, which featured pictures of women who were very beautiful, but had a single flaw -- one was fat, one was old, one had freckles -- and I was annoyed by the audacity they had in writing "challenging our ideals of beauty" on the posters. ONE flaw on an otherwise perfect face constitutes a challenge??

I'm not particularly surprised to hear that the art team have finished designing the male and female models for all the races, but I can't wait to see what they've done with the Sylvari and Charr. By the way, Renin: fifty bucks says there's no Brazillian Charr. ;D --Mme. Donelle 17:12, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

But Brazil is cool ;_; (yes I'm from Brazil, and yes I have no idea what you two mean with Brazilian Charr o.O). Erasculio 17:21, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Haha. XD If I'm correct, it refers to shaving or waxing a... delicate area. --Mme. Donelle 17:24, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

No I don't wanna bet with you. I want my fifty bucks to be mine and no one else. Wait, probably Sony or Cadbury. Yeah, definitely Cadbury or Ferrero! OMG a Mohawk Charr! If there is I'm so going to make him/her into an 80s sexy beast! Renin 21:15, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

You've been watching Mr T again, haven't you? -- Salome 04:33, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

OMG you didn't have to go there but you did now a Charr with a Mohawk and gawdy gold blingity blings around the neck is forever ingrained in my head. I hate you! But then again, it would so totally rock to see one a Rocker Charr, an Afro Charr, an Emo Charr and long-haired grunge Charr! Renin 04:39, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

I want the Dreadlocked Rasta Charr... Friday

Apologies, let me clarify. I am not sure how far along the art team are with racial models, which is why I said "I think". Anyway, I've spoken in more detail with a couple of folks there, and many things may still be subject to change in the future. With that in mind, I doubt very much that the models for any of the races will be available for public viewing in the immediate future. However, I have shown the Character Art Team Lead this discussion for consideration in their design process. So it's possible that what you all are discussing here may influence them one way or the other. --Regina Buenaobra 00:49, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Ah, sorry for jumping to conclusions. I had already assumed them to be finished, or at least too far into the process to be likely to be making any significant changes; I guess I just read what I was expecting to read. It's exciting to hear I was wrong, though! In that case I'd like to ramble on for while about the Sylvari. (At this point I paused to go look at Sylvari concept art, and ended up spending a full hour on conceptart.org admiring the work of Anet's artists. If you're reading this, Anet artists: I'm still groping around on the floor in search of my lower jaw, even though I've admired your work a hundred times before. Your artwork is amazing to put it mildly, and I'm obscenely jealous of all the other Anet employees who get to see you creating these gems every day. Guh. *cold shower*)

Erm, where was I? Right, Sylvari: In The Movement of the World article, it mentions the influence Ventari has over the Sylvari, suggesting that in tending or dying next to their tree he imprinted some aspect of himself upon their hive mind. I wonder if this applies to their appearance as well? While a human is responsible for their existence, the centaur is the one we could perhaps more accurately describe as their father; as such, perhaps the Sylvari look more centaur-like than human? Although it would be kick-ass to play as a centaur, I understand there may be technical limitations in making playable characters anything but humanoid; even so, it's something to consider. Perhaps hooves and horns, manes and tails, or a distinct resemblance in their faces to that of a centuar, which actually looks more sheep-like than horse-like to me. I really dig Ventari's ram horns and wooly mane.

I'm also intrigued by the MotW article's reluctance to use gendered pronouns in describing the Sylvari, and resorting to "she" on the rare occassions it does. It's a fairly old article by now, so perhaps this was done simply to allow full creative freedom when designing the Sylvari -- either way, it implies that androgeny or sexlessness is something the designers have seriously considered. It makes sense, considering that the Sylvari are plants: all plants are either asexuals or hermaphrodites; paradoxically, some are both. Sylvari seem to be in the unique situation of their entire race being composed of a single generation of siblings, and as such are probably asexual. It's possible that their bodies would feature the sexual traits of centuars; however, horses exhibit no sexual dimorphism, and have udders instead of breasts. (They may not be called udders, I don't know, but they're closer to udders than to breasts, if you see what I mean. The first time I saw horse mammaries I actually thought they were genitals!) --Mme. Donelle 03:25, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh, why do I write these so late at night? I forgot that centaurs have the torsos of humans and would therefore of course have boobs. -_- --Mme. Donelle 04:37, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

I think the art team has done a wonderful job with keeping the boob size relatively normal. ^^ Sarifael 03:12, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Heh. Now that I've had some sleep I realise that in my previous comments I did exactly what I've been talking about this entire topic: I assumed that human features would apply to a non-human and just left it at that. After thinking about it, I've realised that the human portion of centaur females would look closer to a human male (possibly a male with breasts) than a female.

Having a pair of breasts high on the chest is convenient for humans, whose infants are utterly helpless and must be carried around in the arms all day anyway. Human women can afford to be distracted when tending to a baby, because as top-of-the-food-chain predators they have nothing to fear in being temporarily disabled. Horses, on the other hand, as super-paranoid prey, need to be able to run for their lives at a moment's notice, and cannot afford to be constantly distracted in tending to a foal. For this reason, horses are capable of standing and walking within minutes of birth: if mummy runs away, baby can simply follow. As such, udders are more convenient for horses, because they provide a way for the foal to feed itself without any effort on the part of the mother. Centaurs, therefore, have a justifiable reason to have either breasts or udders: as predators, their females can afford to be disabled in tending to their foals, and can therefore lie down or lift the front legs of their foals to enable them to reach their breasts; on the other hand, as a nomadic race who may not be the top of the food chain (Kournan centaurs got owned pretty hard by humans), the ability to flee may be important, thus they may have udders instead. It's also worth considering that udders are simply much more convenient to a horse-shaped creature in terms of the baby's ability to reach them.

Breasts, however, are the only human female trait you could reasonably expect to see on a centaur. A woman's narrow, upright body is an inconvenient shape for reproduction: the female pelvis needs to make itself wider than the male's, and appears wider still when covered with flesh, because she must store copious amounts of fat on her hips and thighs to provide emergency energy during the long and exhausting process of birthing a gigantic skull. A centaur, however, would have an equine reproductive system, so the human part of her body has no reason to be hourglass or pear shaped. Though she may have breasts, the rest of her torso would have nothing to do with reproduction, so she would most likely have the wide shoulders and muscular frame of a male.

Yes, I know I've gone off on a tangent when we're really talking about Sylvari, but if the Sylvari inherit centaurian (centaur-esque?) features from Ventari, it's relevant. As sexless creatures they would have no use for sexual traits, but then their evolution is clearly unconventional: instead of gradually adjusting to their environment over millions of years, they simply soak their entire being from the ground over the course of a few hundred years, like a tree. Literally! As such, like a white flower which turns blue when placed in a jar of ink, they would not have any use for many of the features inherited from Ventari: but they would have them nonetheless. Thinking about soaking their being from the ground raises a lot of cool possibilites about the Sylvari. Humans appear to live in the area where their tree was planted, and according to the MotW article, it was deliberately planted by Ronan on the graves of a slaughtered village. For this reason we could actually expect some human influence in the Sylvari's appearance too; perhaps this explains why they are (probably) humanoids, rather than four-legged centaur?

If the Sylvari are indeed inflenced to some degree by humans, and thus have a human appearance, then it would make sense to give them human sexual charactaristics. However, I would be disappointed if they ended up looking like the pretty green humans with leaves for hair that the concept art on the Sylvari page makes them out to be. There is such a wide variety of possibilities for the Sylvari, and it would be a disappointing, unimagnative cop-out if they became GW's version of elves or fairies. I mentioned before that players like to have something nice to look at while playing: the Sylvari are the perfect oppourtunity to appeal to people's love of the weird and curious, rather than once again appealing to their libido. It'd be ironic to present the Sylvari as sexy, anyway: they wouldn't understand what sexiness is.

Okay, I'm done talking. Someone else can have a go now. :p --Mme. Donelle 15:11, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

The only caveat I have with the idea of the Sylvaris looking like Centaurs is the idea (mentioned only by players and never by Arena Net) that centaurs could be added as a playable race in the "Nightfall expansion" for Guild Wars 2. Then again, some players say the tree-like Wardens could be a playable race introduced in the "Factions expansion", so... : P IMO, it would be interesting if the Sylvari had a somewhat children-like look - smaller bodies (only slightly less tall than humans, but with very small breasts and without other secondary sexual traits like beards), faces suggesting innocence and etc. It would be a way to keep them closer to humans (making them a confort zone for players who don't want to have human characters but don't want something too alien) while avoiding the overly sexy style (as it would be of extremely bad taste if Arena Net made anything remotely sexy for characters that resemble a bit children, plus it would follow the theme of being androgynous that fits beings theorically asexual) and, more importantly IMO, symbolizing both how they're the youngest race, and how no one knows what they will become when they grown up as a race. I think it would be better to avoid a more alien look on this race specifically thanks to one of the roles thay may play in the game - the only race created between GW1 and GW2, so they have no backstory a new player would be expected to know, and therefore would be ideal for players who are new to the Guild Wars franchise. Erasculio 15:30, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, bear in mind that when I suggest that Sylvari may look like centaur, I mean it in the same way that WoW's Tauren look like humans. They're extremely similar to humans, but are clearly not human and playing as one does not spoil the experience of playing an actual human.

I wonder why you feel that a new race has to be child-like, however. The symbolism of childhood is obvious, but just because it is the first thing which springs to mind does not mean they have to look like human children. They could look like foals, fawns, or lambs: young and innocent is not impossible to achieve on an alien creature. Furthermore, why would Sylvari have "very small breasts" if they look like children? Children have no breasts: adolescents, however, do, and adolescents are sexy. It would be in bad taste to emphasise the sexiness of a teenager, of course, because teens are stuck in a mid-way point between "innocence" and full sexual maturity, but this does not change the fact that teenage bodies have an air of adult sexuality, perticularly when the owner of said body is portrayed as mentally adult. In portraying a Sylvari as an alien/animal child, one downplays her sexuality much more than if she looked like a humn child, and thereby all the symbolism of adulthood that goes with it.

Finally, while it is true that many players would like to play as a "human" without literally playing as human, that doesn't mean the Sylvari are going to end up looking like weird insects or Oakhearts. I find it very likely they're going to be cute-looking humanoids, which is comforting enough without being too human. It's always worth being brave and doing something different, however; if you just make all races very human for the sake of comforting unimaginative players, you'll end up with the women of WoW. --Mme. Donelle 16:19, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Needs more Ewoks. :D (Aiiane - talk - contribs) 16:57, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

The problem with making them exactly like children (same body size, same body proportions and etc) is how it would raise some issues (some would think it means Guild Wars is a kid's game, some would be annoyed with the prospect of playing as literal children, and etc), so my idea was more something suggesting childhood instead of being exactly it (hence small breasts, as opposed to no breasts at all). The idea of keeping them as humans is purely from the point of view of a new player trying something a bit different, but not too different (something that could be seen as a metaphor for trying GW2 in the first place - a game different from other MMORPGs, but with enough points in common to make new people comfortable). I would love to have a completely alien race - not even humanoid (would be rather interesting to play as a Wind Rider, for example). But I don't think the Sylvari would be the better race for that. Erasculio 17:00, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh, sorry, I knew what you meant; I was being rhetorical. The point is that if one can't make them children, then one has to make them adolescents: which means they'd have sex appeal, which is a very adult thing. In portraying them as young animals, you retain the symbolism of childhood but remove the questionable symbolism of sexuality, thus making the image more potent.

Who says that only veteran MMO players would prefer alien races? I do understand where you're coming from, but I think that whether or not a person would prefer a human race over an alien race is down to that person's tastes, and not necessarily anything to do with how new they are. If you're the sort of person who generally gravitates towards pretty avatars, then a weird, alien one -- not necessarily an ugly one! -- may take some getting used to before you feel ready to make one for yourself. But if you already like weird stuff, or like being different for the hell of it, you'll head straight for the weird races right off the bat, even if this is your first game. It's certainly true that games need a selection of pretty races for the players who prefer pretty avatars, and it's true that the majority of players prefer those races (source); but as with offering fat or unconventional females for that minoriy of players who would prefer a non-sexy female avatar, so too do I feel that games need more options regarding race.

Finally, why can't the Sylvari be one of those races? As I've already said, they can be cute and innocent-looking without being very human, and generic "cute" often wins people over just as easily as "human" can, so it isn't that they will be an ugly race. Just different. --Mme. Donelle 17:33, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Aside #129, re Centaur Foo: We were actually just talking about centar morphology the other day when we were trying to determine Mirza Veldrunner's gender, as we hadn't seen any centaur females or any much mention of their gender, but noticed that they have a full chest covering on this one. We got to thinking that they looked a lot more like goats, and somewhat like large cats, than actual horses. Also, the big spikes on their various elbows, I have no idea where those came from :). --Star Weaver 20:58, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

I find it entirely awesome that you describe it as "centaur foo", lol. --Mme. Donelle 21:26, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

I personally don't think the Sylvari should resemble children. YES, they should appear innocent, but not to the point where they look like cute little hobbits. I think they should possibly be the most beautiful (not sexual) race in the game because of their flower/treelike strain. Sarifael 21:43, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

I thought they were, based from the concept art, be something like an anthropomorphic trees and plants? What about them interchanging humanized depiction with the sexes of (if there are any) of the sylvaris? Why not make a Male sylvari to look like an humanlooking sunflower with slender bodies while the women gets to be a bamboo with big thick bodies and arms? Renin 04:33, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Male and female bear form Norn run around naked and the ESRB doesn't seem to care, so if female Charr are flat-chested, I don't think they'd cover anything the males don't. Personally, I think they should either avoid trying to make female Charr look human, with either minimal dimorphism like the Asura and Forgotten or non-humanoid dimorphism like the Tengu, or they should try to make them look as human as possible (in other words, make them kemonomimi). As for the Sylvari, I love what I've seen of them. I think they should be at least as tall as humans on average, and if there are male or masculine looking Sylvari, I think they should be slim. As for the fan service / double standards tangent, I think the best solution would be to try to make the male and female versions of armour styles equally revealing or concealing, as is the case with most warrior and ritualist armour sets. -- Gordon Ecker 09:23, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Renin: What's up with your idea of reverse human dimorphism? That doesn't really make any sense: either they'd have no sexual dimorphism, due to being plants, or they'd have normal human dimorphism, due to being influenced by humans (see my previous comment about Sylvari being influenced by whatever soaks into their tree). I suppose you could argue that their tree has no way of telling which body type goes with which gender, but if that were the case, then both human body types would be seen on each Sylvari gender (i.e., some male Sylvari would look like human males, while other Sylvari males would look like human females.); or every Sylvari would feature a mix of human gender; perhaps an androgenous human look.

I feel that I should just throw in that I would not necessarily mind if the Sylvari end up looking like the pretty fae we've seen in concept art thus far -- it would be strange not to like a pretty, humanesque thing -- but I'd still be disappointed that Anet decided to skip such a perfect oppourtunity to do something different. By the way, Gordon: your kemonomimi thing was a joke, right? I was going to bitch at you but then I realised th idea is too silly to be serious. XD --Mme. Donelle 15:42, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Plants are not sexless, they are both male and female (hermaphrodites) having all of the reproductive organs contained within the flower itself. They use other creatures, insects for the most part, to reproduce and encourage those insects with sweet and odiferous pollen. The pollen sticks to the insect's legs and is transferred from stamen to pistil. As a lovely, I read far too much sidenote, fruit is actually a swollen ovary. Yum.

This has so far been an interesting, although long-winded (yeah, pot calling the kettle black there) discussion. But what is the real focus here? Is it what the Sylvari (in a player's opinion) should be, or is this a discussion about girls being too sexy for someone's taste?

I like girls, they're neat-o! Ugly girls, yeah they're ugly, don't like 'em. Cute girls; I like those. But ... with some classes, I want them to look scary. Some people won't party with my necromancer because I made him look as scary as possible. I think it suits his profession.

So the short-short version: adjustable body sliders for girth ... I'd vote for that. But please, do not make the Sylvari lady-boys or bearded women. Please. Ghosst 15:58, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Hah, no, that's true, plants are not sexless (as I mentioned earlier, actually, though it's fair you missed that considering how unbelievably long this topic has become o.o), but the Sylvari are sexless. Their tree handles all the sexy stuff and the Sylvari simply pop out and exist, without having to worry about reproducing themselves. Anyway: while I know I come across as an arrogant bitch who takes herself too seriously, I'm not, really. I just get carried away very easily once I start talking and I'm bad with words, but thank you for calling me on it. All my thoughts on the Charr and Sylvari are, at their heart, intented to be examples of the main topic: that the appearance and sexual dimorphism of the various races should be for logical or justifiable reasons, and should not be based on dumb human stereotypes which don't necessarily apply even to real humans. I don't particularly care if the Charr and Sylvari end up looking like what I think they will or not, as long as Anet doesn't turn them into "male Charr and female human with some cat-features" just because that's what everyone else does.

Furthermore, I think that saying "avatars should look nice because nobody wants to play as something unappealing" is a valid argument, but it goes down the toilet once you apply it to females without applying it to the same degree to males. It annoys me that females are always treated as eye candy, and while that's perfectly fine when presented as one of several options, it's offensive when presented as the only option, to a greater degree than simply "looking nice". --Mme. Donelle 16:40, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm getting some slack because I was pondering about reversing the human traits on sylvari if they will have human-esque physical qualities. Mme. Donelle, you wanted something different so why not THIS kind of difference? Why not reverse it, we've seen nature do it, make the males pretty and subjective / immoral human-sexy while the females get the brute masculine big bodies types? Why not? Renin 17:04, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

I can't think of a logical reason to do so, simply. Giving them normal human traits, or none at all, makes sense for the reasons I outlined above, but why do reverse human traits make sense? Reverse human traits can be seen elsewhere in nature, true: but why does it occour on those creatures, and why should it apply to Sylvari? I'm sorry if you feel like I'm picking on you, lol, but I'm just trying to get you to really think about where your ideas are coming from: logical thought, or stereotypes? Without a justifiable reason to apply reverse human characteristics to the Sylvari, your comment just becomes the same tired human stereotype, switched around just for the sake of being non-conformist. Now, for all I know, you do have a better reason than that, and I tore your comment apart in the hopes of finding it: but I couldn't see anything. --Mme. Donelle 17:34, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Because this is a fantasy world, not some deranged realistic game where centaurs, magic and 40 pound boobies (norn boobies, and maybe they're that heavy) exist. Because with fantasy, there are no strict rules as to what can happen and what may happen. Because reversing human traits no matter how immoral and subjective they are, this is still a fantasy world. If I can play as a an ambiguous Charr-cat or 10 feet tall person that changes into an animal then why not play a plant whose sexes are reversed? Though this game may take some forms of realism and overly idealized physical attributes, who are you then to say that my thought should not exist when magic seems to be plenty even the "enemy" monster seems to have exactly the same magical capabilities as i do? If you have a first hand experience in raising a Sylvari or creating their back story then maybe shooting down my suggestions/ideas no matter how rediculous they are should come as easy, but you're not. Renin 18:05, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh please. Simply slapping a "fantasy" label on something does not give you permission to do whatever you want with it: fantasy without logic is not fantasy, but surrealism. While I concede that I went overboard in describing my imagining of Sylvari and Charr, I was ultimately talking about gender stereotypes in fantasy -- something which is offensive to those it generalises and therefore a questionable element, and something which is actually limiting: if fantasy is about letting your imagination run wild, why this insistence on sticking to the gender stereotypes we have to put up with in real life? If you want to make pure suggestions on the races that you would like to be taken at face value, go do it on the GW2 suggestions page, instead of posting them here and getting offended because I have the cheek to treat your comments as valid contributions to the discussion. --Mme. Donelle 19:09, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Then that goes without saying that Norn are surreal as they do not follow any kind of logic, as to why they change into bears/animals and then turn into gigantic human with gigantic breasts and schlongs. It also applies to other themes on guild wars that goes beyond logic, Abbadon, the mighty morphin power dervish, and as to why the world has magic, I could cite alot more but it will be a long read. If we are to thoroughly explain everything and bound everything by logic, then such things should not exist, but then they do in Guild Wars. Logic may exist in a "surreal" world such as Guild Wars but it does not mean that it has to be so pigeon holed by the likes of you. They have taken some liberties with the story and as such, why not take the same liberties to interchange the body types. I would post in GW2 if they actually read it but it has been stated that this conversation was forwarded to the right people so why not post in here. Maybe it just irks you to think that you'll be playing a brute muscular mustached Female Sylvari and treat such suggestion and thought with such disdain.

While I do agree on certain arguements that certain races should not differ from one another, but taking the same logic with nature, where some of their animals have distinct differences with their counterparts, why not with the Sylvari or the Charr? Does EVERYTHING have to be androgynous just to be politically correct? If that so, why not just kill all the other animals out there whose male and females differ from each other and live in a world where everything has the same physical structure as one another? Renin 19:38, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Actually, I don't think of you as arrogant, I think you have a point. I agree, a body shape slider would be a nice touch. I have stayed out of the discussion because I didn't have a whole lot to contribute to it is all. I was watching and "listening" as it were, to what was presented. On to a more fun topic tangent about breasts and how they relate to "humans":

Human females are the only species we know of whose females have breasts that protrude all the time. Even cows, as were mentioned before, have their udders shrink if not milked. Simian's breasts only protrude during the late pregnancy and nursing stages. In the research that was done on this, it was discovered this is accepted to be a method by Nature to adjust to our missionary style of mating rather than the standard animal postures. If, and yes I've seen the pictures, you compare the cleavage of a woman's breasts and buttocks without enough surrounding detail you cannot tell the difference. Humans however, are the only ones who exhibit these traits.

As far men being stylized, let's not forget there is not one male avatar who isn't either buldging with muscles or has at least spent the better part of their lives in a gym. Monks may not look that impressive, but given the overall characteristics and having an interest in body-building I can honestly say those monks would be frighteningly strong. Necros are so ripped they would be able to easily press their own body weight. Female assassins have very small breasts, although they are still very sexy. The exhibit a more common body style of the asian race; thin and lithe. You can make an unattractive female assassin though. Warriors are generally thought of to be in excellent shape. And honestly, anyone who has ever tried to wield a real claymore could tell you lifting it is one thing, swinging it would require years of work. This isn't an era of couch potato, cheezie-eating teenagers, these people work with their hands and bodies all day and night. They would exhibit these features. Females would be much thinner than today's average given they play an active role in monster-slaying than our females do. The only females I find a little unrealistic are elementalists. Female ritualists actually have larger hips, which in a general population lend themselves to larger breasts. I did not say I did not like female elementalists though. If they were less attractive, you would simply find them being played less.

At any rate, this is making Regina's page a little long and I think if I were to discuss it further I would move it to your user page rather than here. Ghosst 19:37, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm comming into this discussion very late, so I'm going to hit some over-arching points, so bere with me, this is gunna be long

First on the chopping block, the Charr. I'm goig to preface this by saying I have tow cats, a male and a female (both of the sam breed). Male cats tend to be the good lookers of the bunch. My male cat has a very long, soft and shiny coat, has a bit of a mane and fells muscular and looks a but bulky. He is very much a pretty-boy. My female cat is a little (only a little) smaller, and more lean (not skiny, lean, there is a difference). I'm gunna sidetrack for a sec here. Lean does not mean skinny or weak, it means more compact. If you took a male and female human of equal strength, the male would be more bulky, just the way it is. Anyway, back to my cats. My female cat has a bit shorter and not so shiny coat, and is just kinda, plain. In the feline world, Males are the good looking hunters, and females are the more plain (but still beautiful in their own way) protectors. I play rough wiht ym male cat, and he fights back, I get some scratches, but nothing that bleeds. He has also scared away some smaller neighborhood dogs. My female cat, on the other hand, I WOULD NOT mess with. She would climb my arm or leg and rip my face of and into little tiny peices. She actualy once killed a dog close to twice her size that tried to get too close to her kittens, and boy it was messy. How does this relate to Charr? I was just getting to that. Ok, so here is how I envision a female Charr. Take the current male model, shrink it about 1-2%, remove the mane and possible the horns, and make the bosy a bit more lean, but still well built. The fur also would not be very multi-colored, and would probably just be a single color. The tetth, claws and paws SHOULD NOT be messed with. A female of any feline species is fully capable of holding its own, and fending off enemies, and a female charr should be no different. ON the matter of cleavage, female Charr would have non, as on any female cat, cleavage is not prominate at all until pregnancy. I have nothing wrong with a good looking or beautiful looking Charr, as I have seen a good number of female cats that are beautiful in their own respects. On the matter of teeth, I would can imagine a female charr not having such big an knarly teeth, and have a closed mount with only a few teeth slightly protruding, but when opened, would have just as many, teeth that are just as large as a males. Back to my cats, My male cat has quite a few visibly large teeth, but my female doesn't. They both however, have equaly large and sharp teeth.

I'm not gunna poke at the Centaurs any, as that discussion can go either way, and it all comes down to who is depicting them.

The sylvari are a complicated bunch, and any conclusion I draw is being heavily bassed off the one peice of concept are I have sene thus far. First off, they are beings of the forest. The forest has a certain beauty and elegance to it, and Sylvari are creatures of the forest and should reflect that in their appearance. The green hair is one way to do it, was an interesting choice but should not be a generic. I also like the fact that they opted for not pointed ears! (yay for no unoriginal elves! =D, but don;t get me wrong, I have nothing against elves, love them personaly bing a huge LotR geek) The Sylvari I see being a very graceful, elegant and rather good looking race, note this does not mean sexy. I can see why Anet chose a humanoid female type body to fill this possition, as a human female is very elegant, graceful and beautiful. (note, in GW, I dont see the purpose of being able to make an overwieght character, as saving the world is hard work and burns many calories, lol, so even women would be rather fit themselves) I see the Sylvari as being tall, but not so tall, maybe 5'9-11" or soand being well built but on the lean side. They would have the body or a runner, strong, compact, and not quite as chisled. I can see why some could see them as an adolescent body type, as they are a rather young race. They are young, but not helpless (as a child would be), but they still don;t understand they world 100%. Genrealy, human adolescents tend to feel a but akward in with thier body, as it is changing a lot and is not the same body they spend 13-15 years of their life in. The Sylvari realy had no form before, and still don't know what they are fully capable of and probably would feel understandably awkward in with themselves. Props to who-ever proposed a more adolescent body for the Sylvari, as it is a very perfect fit for more reasons then when taken at just face value for looks.

This next subject realy reaches into a lot of arguements that have been presented in this discussion, Male and female body types. I'm goign to tackle male's first as its a bit easier. The warriors are understandably hulks, and I think, pretty much perfectly built for being a warrior. Think about this, the swords and axes they use weigh anywhere from 20-75 pounds and hammers easily more. a suit of armor that a knight would wear in the middle ages can weigh as much as 200 pounds, and a sheild as much as 50. now, when your lugging arround 200-300 pounds in gear for most of the day, and fighting in it, your gunn a be one buff guy. As for everyone else, some are a but too bulky, but understandably so. Doing any of the stuff an GW character does is gunna keep you in pretty fine shape, and yes, this goes for the females too. Back in those days, they didn't have any junk food, everything they ate was of pretty high nutritional value, lots of cooked meat, fruit, vegies and bread, very healthy. Your also doign lots of walking/running, and a very decent amount of physical activity, so you would naturaly be very fit, much more than anyone now-a-days. I do not see a justifyable reason for having the option of a more weighty body-type. Having a bit of weight on your or being over weight was very uncommon back then, as everyone except nobility did very fair amounts of physical labor. Now-a-days, its more common, as most of us hold desk jobs, or do things less physicaly involved for entertainment. now-a-days, atheletes are the exception, where as back then, they would be the rule. conforming a game that is set back in a medieval past to the body standards of ratjer unactive people today is a little unfair. Now, as for cleavage, Anet was a little gnerous on that end, and I'm not going to go too far into that and the faces/hair styles, as it seems that the vast amjority of players want to pay as a character that is atleast good looking and well-groomed. Note: this does not mean sexy or eye candy. I have 12 characters and about a 50/50 mix of male and female characters. I would classify all of them as good lookign and well-groomed, but only 2-3 as rather attractive, and maybe only 1 as sexy. Another note: that does nto include a female elementalist or ritualist.

Anyway, I probably missed a point or two I would have liked to address, but there is a ton out there and this is HUGE as is, so I'm done for the moment. --Wolf 21:39, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Having a bit of weight on your or being over weight was very uncommon back then, as everyone except nobility did very fair amounts of physical labor. Now-a-days, its more common, as most of us hold desk jobs, or do things less physicaly involved for entertainment. now-a-days, atheletes are the exception, where as back then, they would be the rule. conforming a game that is set back in a medieval past to the body standards of ratjer unactive people today is a little unfair.

Back when? GW is set in a fantasy 'verse and as such is not bound by the history and rules of our world. It may be based on our medieval era, but it is certainly not strictly bound to it, as many aspects of GW already depart stylistically from our medieval age in setting, design, realism, etc. Why is it so important that the physique of the characters be "realistic" when the game is full of unrealistic elements, like monsters and magic? How is allowing players the option to choose body size unfair? It doesn't take away from the players who want to have super buff or trim characters.

Doing any of the stuff an GW character does is gunna keep you in pretty fine shape, and yes, this goes for the females too.

Yes, and most women who are in "fine shape" don't tend to be as thin as the women in GW. Using weapons and wearing armor would make the women bulky and heavy set too. Fit doesn't not necessarily mean thin.

I do not see a justifyable reason for having the option of a more weighty body-type.

How about because people want the option? Why is that not a good enough reason?

as it seems that the vast amjority of players want to pay as a character that is atleast good looking and well-groomed.

Good looking means a lot of different things to a lot of different people. There's not any one standard that applies to everyone, which is why allowing as many options as possible is the best way to ensure that everyone has the experience that they want with GW. 24.16.125.151 23:48, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Women don't get big and hulking from working out. They may get strong, but they tend to be on the lean side. Once again, lean does not mean skinny, it just means your not big and bulky, but your not a stick either, it means your well build but not heavy set. I have a friend that does a lot of weight lifting and is quite strong for a woman, and when she flexes, a guy 1/3rd her strength has more massive bicepts. They may get stronger, but they do not develope that much muscle mass. And, GW is set in a medevial esc universe, sorry if mt talk of back then, confused anything, but they do not have technology, and their way of life conforms very closely to that of someone living in a medival setting which means lots of physical activity and not much sitting around, well, plus destructive and healing magic and fantastical creatures. Excluding magic and highly magical creatures, most of fantasy is still highly grounded in logic. It is not logical for a warrior that does basicaly a body-builders workout every day, to remain overweight. If people want to have overweight or somewhat weighty characters, that's cool, I just don't see why that would be logical. If Anet sees fit to give players the ability to choose a more heavy-set body type, I;m not going to complain, I just won't use it. Also, I should probably add this here, I do not often take into account that the players might like the option, as if Anet does not se it fit to add it, then its not like people are gunna not buy GW b/c they can't, per say, make a character thats a more heavy-set then the options that are given. This is my two cents, you don;t have to like it or agree with it, but a good portion of it is grounded in facts. --Wolf 00:57, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

I just don't see why that would be logical

Sure, but you know, the current state of affairs with GW physiques isn't particularity logical either. Of course women don't get as hulked out as men, but the female body types in GW1 are still anything but realistic. None of them look like they have any muscle on them, which, according to your logic, they should. They would look more like Big Barda, and less like supermodels. At any rate, it may not be logical according to the in-game world to have heavy-set characters, but there are plenty of logical reasons for people to still want to play them. A lot of people like to see themselves in the games that they play, and giving players more options in character design caters to that desire. Not everyone is thin of course, and while games are nice as a form of escapism, it's also nice to be able to see characters that you can relate to in the games that you play. It sucks to be a bigger person and never see anyone in games that look like you, to never be able to see someone like you be the hero. Giving players more options in character design is also about creating a more inclusive game. 24.16.125.151 02:00, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

lol I actually know a guy who is really fat and really strong. Just thought it was funny... but I completely agree. Even if they do add that feature to the game... it's cool, but I'm not going to use it. Sarifael 01:08, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

You say that a bulky character wouldn't make sense in the GW universe: but then neither do GW women as they currently are. Their hips are simply unrealistic: they have no fat on them, yet they are incredibly wide. The female pelvis is naturally wider than a male's, but most of the bulk of female hips comes from fat. (A few years ago I became unable to eat due to illness -- not anorexia or bulemia, damnit! I nearly died of starvation because the doctors assumed that since I was a teenage girl, I must be doing it on purpose, and that it couldn't possibly be a problem with my stomach. Which it was. -_- But I digress. Before I became ill, I was a healthy weight and had a sexy, curvaceous figure with very wide hips; afterwards, when all my fat was gone, I had the figure of a pubescent boy.) In addition to very wide hips, GW women have impossibly tiny waists, which most real women -- even thin ones -- would need to undergo hardcore corseting to achieve. Their breasts are also consistently large for such lean women: although large breasts do occour on women of all sizes, boob size as a general rule is roughly proportional to body fat. Finally, for women who fight and run all day, they have a very impractical way of holding themselves: they stick their chests out, lean on one leg to emphasise their curves, hold their hands in a delicate way, and when they jog, they flail their arms from side to side instead of back and forth. (Admittedly, the latter three do not apply to all professions, though those which don't feature them are in the minority.) And this isn't even touching on armour, which features high heels (extremely painful to walk in all day, let alone run and fight in), miniscule skirts (which ride up and turn into belts when running), and a lack of bras (which makes running very painful if you're as well-endowed as these gals.)

Anyway, you get the point. The males of GW may have realistic bodies considering their lifestyle, but the females simply don't. They're pure eye candy. But there's no need to attempt to justify this by pretending that a hyper-sexualised body equals fighting-fit: eye candy is fine. However, not all players find that particular flavour of eye candy appealing, and "eye candy" doesn't have to mean sexy. For some players, bulk (which doesn't have to mean fat! I just want to see a few normal shapes, instead of an array caricaturised supermodels) is nice to look at. --Mme. Donelle 02:16, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

I think you missed my point, and passed up something I said, but I'll clarify. First off, I understand people wanting to be able to make a bulkier or my heavy-set or lean character, and I'm not goign to make a fuss if Anet wants to let us make more weighty characters. I'm just saying, it doesn't seem to make sense to see, oh lets say, a noticable over-weight warrior walking around. I having nothing against being able to make a more weighty character, it just doesn't make sense to me for their being any, but it is a game, and what Anet want's goes. I have one beef with the male model's, you'd have to be VERY stong and rather light and have some insane balance to pull of the monk flex, but I know a guy that can almost do it, he's just gotta nail the balance part. Also, I don't believe I mentioned anything about the current female models being correct or anything. Yes, they could use a bit more realism, your right on that, they are pretty rediculous in those respects. On the note of armor, a good deal (from what I'm remembering atm) for Dervish's, Monk's, and Ranger's does seem feasable to romp aorund a continent in. I'd say your point on the female bodies is about 99% valid, and needs some attention for GW2. It's highly possible to create a female body that is both beautiful and attractive in a realistic (and healthy) way. I see your point on the high heals, I'm not in a possision to comment on posture, but I don't see how one moves their arms while running affect's much, if it does, please enlighten me. Good Lord this conversation is getting long. --Wolf 04:09, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

The kemonomimi suggestion was mostly a joke, but if they really wanted to place female Charr into kemonomimi or cute monster girl territory, I think it could be justified with hormones and the aesthetic tastes of their in-universe designer (probably Melandru or Balthazar). Male Charr have considerable variance in build, if that variance is caused by androgens then it is likely that female Charr would have a more slender, upright build. Fur thickness and the size and number of body horns are also variable, so they could likewize be affected by androgens, making it plausible for female Charr to lack body fur and have few or no body horns. As for the face, some species such as elephant seals have dramatic facial dimorphism, kemonomimi sometimes have horns and non-human eyes, ears, noses, teeth and hair, and the justification for a lack of body fur could also apply to facial fur, so the only major face-specific difference would be a recessed snout. I'm not saying they should make the female Charr kemonomimi, I'd be okay with minimal dimorphism or non-humanoid dimorphism, but if they are going with humanoid dimorphism, I think they should go all-out with it, I think the Tauren or Dragonborn approach is silly and overused (the kemonomimi / cute monster girl approach is also silly and overused, but at least it's aesthetically appealing).

I think skinny or flabby casters are plausible, as are warriors who are both fat and muscular, like defensive linemen, sumo wrestlers and many of the male Norn in Eye of the North. As for unrealistic female armour, IMO the lack of wardrobe malfunctions in female necromancer Krytan armor, necromancer Tyrian armor, mesmer Krytan armor, elementalist Ascalon armor, elementalist Vabbian armor, ritualist Kurzick armor, the mostly sheer ritualist Exotic armor (including the elite version) and the extremely low-waisted necromancer Sunspear armor can only be explained by form-fitting flesh tone undergarments or magic, which has precedents such as elementalist and paragon headgear, Mursaat Hammers, Storm Artifacts, monk tattoos and necromancer scars, male necromancer Obsidian armor and both male and female monk Primeval armor. -- Gordon Ecker 04:07, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Wolf: This discussion is seriously reaching a tl;dr point, so I probably did skip over something important you wrote. :/ My previous comment was actually only partially in reply to you, however, and mostly in reply to someone else whose comment I've kinda lost track of, lol. Anyway, I see what you mean, and I think that my pseudo-reply is relevant: if the current male models arguably make sense, then why don't the female models make sense? That's a weird, sexist double standard, but it does allow for an argument in favour of unconventional male bodies: if one insists on giving women unrealistic bodies just for the sake of eye candy, then males should at the very least have that option, and vice versa for females: if men get realistic bodies, women should have that option too. It'd be a shame to simply "fix" both genders and give them both either realistic bodies or ridiculously pretty bodies, because that would cheat some players out of an option they might have really liked.

As for female posture and running and so on: try it out for yourself. You'll find that standing is a balancing act and very uncomfortable (though wearing high heels makes it kinder on your feet, ironically), and that gaining any real speed while jogging is prevented by the movement of your arms and book-on-head posture. The women of GW essentially "run like girls", which, as any highschool PE teacher will tell you, is a really crappy way to run.

Gordon: I just don't think that cat-girls really belong in the Guild Wars universe, particularly when male Charr are already established as anthropomorphised cats. Sexual dimorphism can certainly create some extreme and weird differences between the genders, but portraying female Charr as humans is taking things too far, imo. I would have an easier time accepting female Charr if they were simply human-shaped cats than if they were literal humans wearing cat-ears and tails, because at least then they'd look like Charr. It may be more aesthetically appealing to see a cute human with cat ears, but it's also quite insulting to real females. Why should male Charr get to be "real" Charr and females have to be humans, just because Charr aren't sexy? The more human you make their females, the more insulting it is. --Mme. Donelle 05:51, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

pssshh I was always a runner, and as such, you will always find me in a pair of running shoes, (except on more formal occasions) and running about somewhere (as long as I don't get yelled at, lol), and doing it in proper form. I'm pretty sure I get what your goin at about posture. That's kind of a take it or leave it deal for me, as it only effedcts your chacter when they are standing about, as they make no attempt to hold it while moving about. It maybe be somehwat uncomfortable, but knwoing some of the things your character goes through, id say they probably think nothing of it. True, any real speed is prevented when "running like a girl", but your GW charcter isn't going at a full out sprint, probably more of a jog, which is around the fastest you will get running like that. If they do move faster than default speed you do see them shift into more of a "proper" "running stance". then again, my two cents, and I could be wrong. Also, I completely understand the spot reading and doubly directed replay. --Wolf 06:06, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Lol, the running and posture are pretty unimportant, but they're just two of many small details which add up to a ridiculous stereotypical image of females in the game and that's all I was getting at. --Mme. Donelle 06:13, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't really think catgirls belong in Guild Wars either (except as some "cat ears" headgear). Male Charr have some pretty human features, they walk upright, they have opposable thumbs and broad, muscular chests, a mostly human muscle layout and tight skin, and some of them don't have that much body hair and they lack whiskers. Cats have rounded, narrow chests, loose, flabby skin, long, narrow torsos and extremely muscular hind legs. The only non-human features on the upright-walking male Charr are the catlike hands, lower legs, faces, fur, skin tone and the non-feline horns and ears. If you take the hypothetical "kemonomimi Charr" as the base and then extrapolate the appearance of the male Charr based on a generic "male template" (in other words, applying the effects which androgens have in most mammals, such as increased height and muscle mass and decreased body fat), you'd get something much like the upright male Charr, but with a shorter snout. Anyway, I dislike the design of the female Taurens and Dragonborn, IRL bust size is connected to body fat and hip size, and high muscle mass and high body fat are often mutually exclusive, muscular women are not naturally busty (and neither are skinny women), so sticking a bosom on a muscular, broad-chested, narrow-hipped Tauren, Dragonborn or Charr body looks bizarre and unnatural, which I don't think fits with the flavour of any of those three races. If it was my call, I'd go with either non-humanoid dimorphism (maybe I'd make them bigger like hyenas, maybe I'd make them smaller with no manes and less pronounced horns), but I sincerely believe that making female Charr look more human in a consistant manner (while keeping them big and tough, like Norn women) would be better than adding incongruous breasts to a very masculine figure. As for female elementalist and ritualist figures, their hips look about the same to me, however elementalists look perkier (or more supported), and ritualist skirts are generally wider and longer than elementalist skirts. -- Gordon Ecker 10:17, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Donelle, let me get this straight, are you saying that there should be no stereotypical girls in GW? No long-winded answer, either "Yes, there should be some" or "No, none at all". Don't want to put you on the spot, but I've been slightly confused on your opinion the whole discussion... Sarifael 13:48, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Sarifael: Yes, there should be some stereotypically/fasionably sexy girls in GW, but only as one of several options for female body shape. At the risk of getting long-winded (because this subject is a little more complex than simply "yes or no"), I'll add that my overall stance is one of fairness: people like having the option to create avatars which appeal to them, so it's silly to just make super-sexy females and super-buff males on the assumption that what the majority wants (or more accurately, one's perception of what the majority wants) is good enough for everyone, all the time. It's true that it's hard to please everyone, but the women of GW are currently little more than caricatures of real women and there really needs to be at least one or two alternatives. Sorry for being confusing, I'm not very good with language. -_-

Gordon: Well, ultimately, I agree that they should go the route of no sexual dimorphism or non-human dimorphism, and steer clear of humanising the Charr further, lest they end up with female Tauren. (Though, for the record, I actually like the way female Tauren look. They're ridiculous when viewed as cows, but fine when viewed as cow-like humans and I don't think they really need to be exaggerated further. I suppose it's just a matter of personal taste, which only serves to strengthen the argument that humanisation should be avoided altogether.) --Mme. Donelle 19:00, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

It saddens me that 2/3rds of my point went undebated >.< --Wolf 06:29, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

"Women don't get big and hulking from working out.", that's not exactly true, it comes down to race. My partner is Pacific Islander and some of those girls can get big, in sense of muscle mass and tone, not fat. They can be the same height as a European (white chick) but have more 'bulk' without being fat. Its also that most women only work out to lose weight and tone, not to actually build muscle mass, though that can be agreed with female body builders. Its possible for women to get big and hulking from working out, its just that the norm is not to. 000.00.00.00 19:33, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

A quick biology lession for you. It takes a small presence of testosterone to build strength, but a greater pressence to build musscle mass, and get even stronger. A women's body just doesn't produce nearly as much testosterone as a man's body does. Back to an illustration I gavce earlier, if you have man and a women of equal strength, the man will have more muscle mass to him. I have seen a fair amount of those female body builders, and can confidently say, that it is not possible for a women to get that big without taking male hormones. Also, muscle mass =/= strength. I know two guys, one can curle 90+, and one that can curle 50+. The guy that can curle 90+ has smaller bicepts. Also, the goal of weightlisting is not to get big and hulking, it's either to loose some weight and get some tone, or to get stronger. I have a friend that does karate, jujitsu, and kobudo, and also does a considerable amount of weight lifting, but only enough to get reasonably strong, but not big, as having massive muscles can cut flexibility and inhibit movement. --Wolf 20:30, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

God this topic is long. Spawnlegacy 17:49, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

yes it is Suggestion, eather make a new specal page for this subject to be talked about or arcive it and have a summery of the points that have been brought up..... also my 2 cents and i think the op already talked about this but we were made difrently for a reson. but another point is that sex sells, and that was probly the reason that the ch in gw are all the american standerd for attractiveness (what i mean by that is how ameraca views atractiveness via mags and tv)75.165.124.46 19:30, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Survivor Title Problem

At around 1:40 am EST on 17 July 2008 at the zone points of Dreadnought's Drift and Lornar's Pass my character C O F Runner was counted as dying. But i zoned thru the map to the load screen at around 100hp. Then when i loaded on the other side i had a 15% Death penalty. I am working on the survivor title and as you know this is detrimental to the progress of this title. This is the only death i have incurred and i will not be playing the character until this problem is resolved. Thanks in advance. Eze Rage

Similar has happened to me, some kind of lag, I was away from a mob and had health but then boom a friend went through the portal but it recorded me as 1 death: I figured I was back more, like when you rubberband back into a group, lag that didn't have the chance to register at my end, but I don't think they're going to fix it. To do that you'll have ever player who last their survivor due to lag, disconnections or something else out of player control coming saying fix my character. 000.00.00.00 06:34, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

I'll emphatically state that the death count on that character will not be reset Eze Rage. Many of us have lost survivors to unfortunate events completely outside of player control and that is simply the risk we take with Legendary Survivors. If you want that title I'm afraid you'll have to get it on another character. -- WarBlade 06:45, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

that happens and complaining to anet wont fix it you have to have the mind set when going about that tile that your going to probably fail a few times. i restarted myen about 5-8 times before i got the title. another tip is to check and see when there going to do server matinence http://www.guildwars.com/support/networknews/default.php and just play a normal ch for a wile to see what your lag is like that day75.165.124.46 09:20, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

The problem here is how Survivor works. You can retry quests, missions, dungeons, challenges, get skills anytime you want, change secondary professions, change attributes, change builds... The game has no regrets... excepting character appearance, Prophecies and Nightfall basic tutorial areas (you can re-visit Factions basic tutorial area), LDoA, Survivor, CE/Preorder items (not physical stuff, just in-game items) and festival Masks. Compared with the rest of the game, that is quite atemporal and allow anyone to enjoy all the game regardless on when they join, those things are fixed in time, and thus, aberrant. They must be reviewed. Everyone should have access to everything... once they pay for the content, of course. MithTalk 14:11, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't think so. Going on a tangent, no other MMORPG gives players access to everything just because they paid for it. In WoW, for example, if you want a high level character with the best items around, you are going to gave to spend a currency, "time", in order to get it. In GW, it does not bother me the least that certain things are outside the grap of some players, as long as what divides those who have access to more and those who have access to less isn't "time" (as in most other MMORPGs), but rather "skill". Even from my point of view (and I'm far from being the most skilled player around), that's more than fair. Pre Searing Ascalon and etc don't have neither of those constrains - all players may experiment all of them right now. The fact that not all characters may do so doesn't matter, then, given how all players can. Would be very different if Pre Searing Ascalon had existed only for a couple months and then erased, so all new GW players would be unable to experiment it, but fortunatelly that's far from being the case here.

Regarding this specific case: if Arena Net made an exception for "Eze Rage" and undone his death (something that I believe isn't even possible, but anyway), they would anger all the other players who have lost a Survivor in the same circunstances and therefore had to begin a new character because of it, finally earning their titles with more work. That anger would be only a matter of vanity, but the Survivor title on itself is just a matter of vanity - therefore it doesn't bother me the least that "Eze Rage"'s death will not be undone, even if he decides to erase his character because of this. One player isn't significant, IMO, when helping him would hurt the game as a whole. Erasculio 15:42, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Eze Rage, your deaths will not be reset. Even if we were able to do this, why should we do it for you and not all of the other players who asked to have their deaths reset and were denied because the technicaly functionality to reset a player's death count isn't there? --Regina Buenaobra 22:23, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

There was also the Vizunah issue. Many people lost survivor in there, and nothing was done. MithTalk 15:21, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Luxon/Kurzick versus Sunspear title

In the most recent Dev Update, you said that steps will be taken to address grind in the game. I'd just like to inform you that there is a pretty big difference in the amount of grind to obtain a max rank Sunspear title and a max rank Luxon/Kurzick title. I know that the Factions title is account-wide, and Sunspear is not, so I agree they should not be equal 1:1, that's fair. How about 2:1? 6:1? What's fair?

Right now, to gain Rank 12 in Faction on your account, it takes the equivalent amount of time as THIRTY-THREE characters to reach Rank 10 Sunspear.

I don't have 33 Characters.

Nobody should really have more than 10 PvE characters. I'd assume most have about 4, with one being PvP only.

Here is my math:

Sunspear Run: 3,250 / hour with Wurms. Faction Run: 10k/hour doing repeatable quests, which is 20k/hour on the Title if donated.

This means per hour, you gain about 6 times as many Faction points than you would Sunspear points.

Rank 10 Sunspear is 50,000. Rank 12 Faction is 10,000,000.

Taking the time to do 50k Sunspear, doing Faction instead, is 6 times that, so 300k.

That's 3% of Rank 12 Faction. Repeat 33 times, you get almost 100%.

In terms of hours, it's ~16 hours versus ~500 hours. Note that, when comparing one rank less for each title, the amount of grind increases to over 80 times. Please take this into consideration when addressing grind in the game.--Skye Marin 05:05, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

People pointed this out to Gaile when Allegiance skills were introduced. They don't care that the only people who have a reasonable rank in them spend so long in AB that they never use them. Suggestions were made to have the title remain the same but the skills max out at rank 8 or lower, reducing the time taken to attain a good rank in the skills but they didn't listen. 122.104.165.13 05:29, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

I still think that titles that are alliance orientated need an overhaul completly. Either make them all account wide or none at all, as it stands its just silly. Personally i would go for making them all account wide. Put Sunspear; lightbringer; norn; asuran; deldrimor; vanguard; luxon and kurzick all on the same tab screen as they are all in essence alliance titles. For those alliances without spendable faction ( kurz,lux and balth all have spendable faction) instead of making the cap 10k, make the cap the final sum of the completed title. It would look better and increase over all functionality as you would only have to gain rank 5 in norn once to get norn armour for your chars instead of having to do it 10 times which is a drag. -- Salome 05:38, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Account-wide titles makes me want to play my other characters more often. As it stands now, I only ever play my ele because I'm forced to grind with my other characters which is kinda pain in the ass. Also because of the other title-factors such as Wisdom and Treasure Hunter. Account-wide titles rocks TBH and I am hoping they'd do something about it. I've already adjusted my expectation with this game, which is to expect the changes when they roll them out. hahahaha Renin 05:44, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

agreed with both salome and renin, though i would like to point out comparing the K/L title to ss is kind of like comparing apples to oranges. theres about 3-4 ways you can get points for K/L where you only have 1-2 ways for ss. i do how ever think that the kurzicks have a better way of farming then the luxons and i think that needs to be fixed.75.165.124.46 05:48, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

What makes me not want to work on the Kurzick/Luxon titles are the extremely high level that is requiremented. At least the Sunspear/Lightbringer and to a lesser extent, Asuran etc, can be obtained with a modest time dedicated to it, but 10,000,000 pts for each on max is far too high for me to even attempt. Grinding can make this game feel like a second job, and thats not fun. 000.00.00.00 06:13, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

While many people are able to or are willing to spend ~5-10 hours to max out a PvE-skill title for a character (as evidenced by the 75,000+ minutes of favour we got a while back), not many people are able or willing to spend ~500 hours to max out a PvE-skill title for an account. Note that 500 hours is more than a fifth of the entire account lifetimes of some of the most dedicated players over the past three years.

I'd love for these two titles to be at least in the same order of magnitude in terms of grind, but the downside is that some players actually achieved the max rank, and worked their asses off to do it. One solution would be to re-scale the title so that 400,000 is the maximum rank over 10 ranks, but let all players who reach 10,000,000 faction get an ultra-rare minipet, once on their account.--Skye Marin 08:11, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

i think one fix would be to make the dubble xp for K/L permanent and then make it so on the weekend events you get 4 times the amount that you get now.... that might be a lot but i think that for the amount that you get it would help a lot and would make more people play ab. 75.165.124.46 08:51, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Quite, but I'd rather see them just chop 10% off every tier. I'd like to see 3x the faction for jade quarry and all that because they were very fun. :| Vael Victus 15:21, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

RI, because this is going to be long and reading it indented would be annoying.) I think this matter is a bit more complex than it seems. Titles and PvE skills are features that have been implemented "after the fact" in some ways - existing features were adapted into something new, instead of there being a plan contemplating everything. This, IMO, is a recurrent mistake by Arena Net.

The Luxon and Kurzick titles: when implemented, they required an astonishing amount of grind to be maxed. That didn't bother me the least, though - both titles had no meaning other than to say "look at how much I have grinded!", as they gave no other advantage, be it aesthetically-wise or stats-wise. Having those titles account-based was a great thing - not only players did not have to pick only one character to grind with, but also (and IMO more importantly), players doing the Befriending the Luxons and Befriending the Kurzicks quests were able to gather enough faction without grinding (as one character doing quests was enough to get 10.000 faction; more than one character would then easily get that much faction without any grind at all).

The problem came when the Factions PvE skills were implemented. Suddenly titles that require a lot of grind and were just a symbol of said grinding gave advantages to player - and huge advantages. I think the best course of action would have been to create a new title instead of using the existing ones, but now it's too late for that. The problems Arena Net created with those Factions PvE skills were...

• They take a lot of grind to be maxed, and therefore in order to reach maximum efficiency regarding the PvE skills players were required to grind an impossibly lot.
• Players had already maxed both titles. Therefore, lowering the amount of grind required would likely spit in the face of those players who have grinded for hours in order to max their titles.
• Now, not only players have already maxed both titles, but also some players have done so aiming specifically at becoming more powerful with the PvE only skills. If the skills were then changed to become less powerful at higher levels of the title, those players would be angry towards Arena Net.

At the same time, I don't believe those skills are a matter of concern. Thankfully Arena Net made them with a flat power curve, so a high rank usually isn't much more powerful than a low rank. For example, Summon Spirits: the skill's main effect (teleporting the spirits) does not rely on the player's rank. The difference between the minimum rank of "Save Yourselves!" and the maximum one is just a few seconds. Aura of Holy Might does only a small amount of extra damage at higher ranks. And so on. IMO, that was smart (although not the ideal solution) - the skills themselves make players more powerful, but the difference between having or not the skills (in other words, the difference between ranks 0 and 1) is far greater than the difference between using the skills at minimum level and at maximum level (in other words, the difference between ranks 1 and 12).

Now, what could Arena Net do in order to improve this situation? IMO, they could...

• Lower the amount of grind required to max the titles. Be it by lowering the maximum rank from 10,000,000 faction to 10,000 faction, or giving three times as much faction as we get in quests and etc, or any other way. The obvious problem here is that the players who actually worked for these titles would be incredibly angry: suddenly all their work would become worthless, and all the status they have by displaying the maximum rank would be gone. We could aim at giving them compensatory rewards, like Sky's plan to give them exclusive miniatures; but not only those rewards would likely not please all the affected players, but we would also have the problem of who would receive said rewards. Only players at the maximum rank? What about the player with 9,000,000 faction? Only players at the two maximum titles? Then what about the player with 4,999,999 faction? Everyone above rank 5? But then the reward would not be exclusive, and players with the maximum rank would likely feel bad about receiving the same reward as those who only did half of their work.
• Flatten even more the power curve of the PvE only skills. "Save Yourselves!" would go from 3 seconds at rank 1 and 6 seconds at rank 12 to 4 seconds at rank 1 and 5 seconds at rank 12. Players who worked hard for the titles would still be among the few capable of displaying the highest ranks, so the "status" of those who grinded a lot would be kept. But the players who have grinded these titles in order to have more powerful PvE only skills would be angry - suddenly their work to become more powerful would become almost worthless, and they would be left with a compensatory reward (being able to display the titles) they didn't really care for in the first place.
• Keep things as they are. We would displease all the players who do not want to grind that much yet would like to have the PvE skills in a good power level, avoiding rank discrimination.

All three solutions are bad, IMO. I personally don't care that much (if it were up to me, grinding would give no benefit at all), but I think Arena Net has to consider all aspects of the problem before making a decision. Anything they do (even if they don't do anything) is going to bother at least some players.

The GW:EN titles are a different problem. Making them account-based would introduce plenty of problems:

• Arena Net would likely increase the requirements for the titles in order to compensate how it would be easier to max them with many different characters. In other words, instead of the titles requiring, say, 26,000 for rank 5, they would require more. Which means, those who have farmed today with a single character and thus obtained the highest rank would find themselves at lower-than max ranks, therefore needing more grind to achieve something they already had. It would also hurt some other players - say someone wants Norn armor for his assassin, and only for his assassin. Instead of grinding a bit with that character, he would have to either grind a lot with that character or grind a bit with all characters, without receiving any extra benefit from it.
• If Arena Net didn't increase the requirements...Then the titles would be easier to get than they are today, and those who have already grinded for them would feel bad, as part of their effort would be rendered useless. It would be worse for those who have maxed the titles with more than one character - those would have 50% of their work or more becoming useless, and would likely feel angry.

Those are the problems of changing the rules after the game has began - someone is going to be against it. Again, personally I don't care - if it were up to me, I would keep the titles but very differently from what they are today, so they require no grind at all. But Arena Net has to consider everything.

However, I think the main problem with the GW:EN titles isn't the titles themselves - by playing the expansion and filling the books, it's easy to get rank 5 with a title without any grind, so players have access to the factions' armors without having to grind for them. What I believe to be the problem are the GW:EN PvE only skills - they are too many, and the difference between rank 1 and rank 10 is considerable larger than the difference between ranks 1 and 12 for the Factions PvE skills. Arena Net could solve that problem the same way they could change the Factions skills, with the same disadvantages each way mentioned above has. I believe (in other words, IMO IMO IMO) that the best way for Arena Net to do this would be to flatten the curve of all GW:EN PvE skills. So Pain Inverter, for example, would go from 6 seconds with 80% damage at rank 1 and 10 seconds with 140% damage at rank 10 to a 8...10 progression and a fixed 100% damage. This would have its share of problems, as mentioned above, but IMO that would hurt players the least.

(Did anyone bother to read all of this? : D) Erasculio 15:44, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, I'd assume if they are merging the GWEN titles to account-wide, then first they'd take the highest single amount of each title in one character and then only add up what is earned past rank 8 for each other character. So, if you have 3 characters with Norn Rep:

Char #1 = 90,000 - Char #2 = 85,000 - Char #3 = 82,000

Then adding them all up would be 90+5+2 = 97 faction account wide. Remember that you can only earn faction for the titles beyond rank 8 (or 80,000) in hard mode.

To expand my solution, make 400,000 the maximum tier, and give one minipet to those with 5,000,000 and above and another to those with 10,000,000 (who would also get the five million minipet).

Also, many people are simply suggesting to double the faction gain. Note that doesn't really solve much, because now you're moving it from a 500 hour investment to a 250 hour investment, which is still much, much harder to do than SS or the GWEN titles. This title, seriously, needs to be less than 50 hours of work or less to obtain to be in the same ball park as the rest of the PvE titles.--Skye Marin 15:57, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

The thing is, would that be worth the problems we would get? A player with...

1. Char #1: 80.000
2. Char #2: 80.000
3. Char #3: 80.000

...Would suddenly see two thirds of his work being thrown into the trashcan. The players with 9,999,999 would only get the first minipet an thus have 4,999,999 points thrown away.

Both your ideas work, but both would hurt someone's feelings. And while I don't care about people's ego, I'm hoping Arena Net will find a better solution for the problem (after all they're the professional game designers, I would expect them to find some elegant solutions to this). Erasculio 16:04, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

First of all, if a player already has 80,000 on three characters, he really doesn't lose anything, and that's what's important. He has exactly what he had before the switch. He could resent the time wasted, because that is the worst case scenario, but he hasn't lost anything in terms of character progression or skill power. He would probably enjoy that he only has to go from 80k to 160k once instead of three times to get full power skills for each of his characters. Secondly, I'm proposing the minipets for anyone who obtains 5 million or 10 million faction in the past or future from an NPC.--Skye Marin 16:45, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

"He could resent the time wasted" - yes, more or less. Hours of time and effort wasted, the loss of status in suddenly seeing that people who did one third of his work have the same reward he now has. I believe the proper expression would be "He would resent the time wasted", not that he could. Besides, minipets for everyone who gets 5 million or 10 million faction would require players to have a way of knowing how much faction they have beyond your cap - and we would end in a situation in which the skill progression stops at a lower rank, but the title itself continues to growth. Wouldn't it be simpler to just have the skill breakpoints at levels 1 and 5, with no other effects at a higher title rank? Erasculio 17:04, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

I can't really imagine approaching a lone rank 8 player and offering: "Hey, we'll give you rank 8 on all your characters free now, and all other future progress will be account wide" and them being legitimately upset about it. They really don't lose anything. If they were not playing for fun all this time, why would they suddenly realize it? Was it a bad thing for per-kill Balthazar faction rise from 2 to 20 to 40? Also, many titles progress beyond the max tier. My survivor has over 1.5 million XP, and my main has over 55k Sunspear.--Skye Marin 17:17, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Skye, ask this question on GWO and/or GWG, and it will be like honey in a bee's nest. We got players complaining against adding inscriptable weapons in Prophecies and Factions, despite how they would not lose anything and how those would help a considerable number of players (including the ones complaining). Anything that hurts a player's ego will, unfortunately, result in a backlash, no matter how much it helps the game. What Arena Net has to choose is which backlash is the least bad for them. Erasculio 17:29, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

well i think that if they were to transition those titles from ch to account based they would do it in a dynamic way ie one ch has the Asura title at 160,000 of corse they would rase the cap to compensate so they would take the ch with the highest level in the title and mattch it to the new highest cap so if you have it maxed you would still have it maxed. so no complaint there and then after they mach your highest they would add in all the points from your other chs and if it maxs then fine if it dosnt then thats where you would be. but you would get a huage boost to being closer and it would account for all the other players. i dont know how to show that mathematically but thats my thought and i would think this way would help everyone.75.165.124.46 18:15, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

My opinion... from the title-hunter's point of view, Luxon/Kurzick is usually considered non-maxable. 300 hours of the most boring grind (HFFF) on the Kurzick side, or even more if you AB or try to do this on the Luxon side. Compared to 10 hours for LB (SS even faster) during a weekend, or GW:EN ranks almost maxing themselves out just by doing the MotN title, that's too high. And unchallenging.

I applaud the decision to make HoM account-wide. I think in view of this, most titles have ok amounts of grind. I'd ask though that Luxon/Kurzick should be maxable in way less time, perhaps by vastly increasing AB rewards. That might upset players that have grinded these titles already, but I'm fairly certain that those are a minority. Perhaps they can get some compensation in gold / zaishen keys? -- Alaris 18:42, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm a title hunter as well, but I consider the Faction titles maxable, but of lesser priority than PvE titles. More along the lines of Lucky than say Protector, or Hero. And since I'm reaching the end of non-farming PvE titles, I'm doing more on Faction, but it's not a concern to max until after Guardian and MoTN, personally. Yukiko 06:11, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Titles will be looked at in the future. I can't say how far off in the future, since it depends on how quickly Linsey progresses through her current projects, but title grind is going to be evaluated because the designers do see some room for improvement. --Regina Buenaobra 18:09, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

They could split up each title into a regular title, one which affects title skills and maxes out at 550,000 (since that's the rank which gets you a monument) and one which starts at 875,000, maxes out at 10,000,000, which gives you another monument. -- Gordon Ecker 01:25, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

I would make titles have character and account versions. The account version would be the sum of all characters, and would be the one used for skills and salvage and lockpicks and so, and the character version would be kept for plot and 'memory' purposes. The titles tab would be separated into two. One showing the points earned by the account and one showing the points earned by the character. Achievement titles like Protector or skill hunter would appear only in the characte panel, though. Only PvP and grind titles would be split. MithTalk 15:26, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Its raining... BEES!?!? O_o

During fireworks, I noticed that it sometimes rains bees in guild wars. Can the joke or lore behind this please be explained? I figure it is an easter egg by Arenanet. But it really caught my attention because it is so out of place.

Yeah, I noticed that too. Also, please sign your comments --Wolf 15:50, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Surely some mischievous dev heard that Gaile was afraid of bees... :P MORTUIЯUS 17:15, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

There is a common type of firework in the real world called "Golden Bees". I always assumed one of the dev had heard of this firework and just took it to a more literal level for fun. Magic+Fireworks=Explosions made of pure AWESOME. -- MrSmiles 18:00, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) Suppose you are talking about the farewell version? If that's true, we should add this in the Trivia section of the article —ZerphaThe Improver 18:07, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

The 'bee' texture is used for the Bee Swarm insect creature, and also for the Deadly Swarm skill. I have only seen bees flying when Fireworks explode, like in End-game credits and event fireworks. MithTalk 18:35, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, that seemed odd to me too. The impression I got was: "WE HAVE PARTICLES! LET'S USE PARTICLES!" :D --Star Weaver 20:18, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

I like particles. Vael Victus 01:24, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

I sometimes notice those bees when I'm just out in a zone vanquishing or whatever... Never really thought about it before tbh. -- Mini Me 22:07, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

At least it's not raining men. -- MrSmiles 13:57, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

That would be rather painful --Wolf 14:08, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Could be fun though! *runs outside with man catcher* -- Salome 05:04, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

They've been around at least as far back as the release of Factions. -- Gordon Ecker 05:40, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

One of our tools programmers had this to say: "Apparently, the story is that one of the content programmers needed to add some fireworks in some update a looong while ago. But this was late at night, and no artists were around to actually produce the fireworks. So he knocked together some programmer-art and published the build. Later, the artists tried to fix it, but there turned out to be a bug in whatever tool chain the artists used to produce them, and the effect they created wouldn't work right, so the bee fireworks stayed. And nobody has bothered to fix them since." --Regina Buenaobra 16:42, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

And they shouldn't be fixed in the future, either. The bee fireworks are awesome. -- MrSmiles 22:28, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

(Reset indent) I always figured they were supposed to be an illusion by the mages to show off.(since I usually only see bees in Factions finales,though it's been almost 2 years since i was personally present at Halloween or Wintersday)Knowing they're more of an Oops, lol is even better though, imo. 75.146.48.190 22:34, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Monthly Tonic Rotation

Recently we've been getting questions about the monthly tonics and if particular tonics will be available again in the future. Some players were worried that if they missed the tonic they really wanted, that there would be no other way to get them in the chest again except through trade. To clarify, the tonics are on a 12 month rotation. This means that the June 2008 tonic will again be available in June 2009. So if you missed the Automatonic last month, you have a chance to get it from the chest in June 2009. We realize that the web page with the schedule doesn't make this clear, since it lists the year and month. The web page will be updated to clarify that the 12 month cycle of tonics will repeat next year, and the page will be udpated when the new August tonic is rolled out in the first scheduled build of the month. Thanks! --Regina Buenaobra 19:44, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Just a question, but why are these tonics important enough to Arenanet to warranty such attention? 000.00.00.00 22:09, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

There were a lot of questions coming through support asking about the tonics, so we thought we should clarify. --Regina Buenaobra 22:14, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Very good then. I'm still scratching my head why tonics are still important enough to Arenanet though; there are other things that could be worked on. Don't get me wrong, tonics are nice and all that but as a player who doesn't sit around town much their functionality and fun-factor are limited, for me just seem to be too much of a distraction from real issues. Though... if there was a Asura Tonic I may change my mind bhahaha 000.00.00.00 22:21, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Why not make them available all year long after the year has passed, and then start a new set of tonics in 2009? --MageMontu 22:23, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Because limiting them to one a month is a tactic to generate player interest, thus to get them playing etc. 000.00.00.00 22:27, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, but if they keep the same tonics, ppl will say "Seen it, experienced it, no need of going bk", but if they get a new set every year they may generate more interest in players. --MageMontu 22:36, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

True, but that would require more work. 000.00.00.00 23:35, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Also alot of players like them and would like the chance to get certain ones again but the limited tme span gives people times to aim for when they have to either save up Z keys for them or do h-battles and keeps numbers of them at a minimum. Also personally I don't feel comfortable with people saying "why work on this when I think other things are more important", it's all a game and it's true their are pressing issues but what those issues are are different for each of us. :) -- Salome 23:40, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

What you are comfortable with, or not, is not really a concern of mine, Salome, I personally don't know you to take your interests into consideration before I speak :P 000.00.00.00 23:48, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Nor did i say you should take them into account. It was simply a statement of personal fact. However you're confusion about what Anet prioritizes isn't really any of Anet's concern either. Any extra addition of things to play with to the game is welcome and as Regina has explained a hundred times, different teams work on different things, thus the designers of the tonics may not even be in any of the teams which are working on the issues you personally are most concerned with, so asking the reasoning behind the allocation of resources, when you don't truly understand the internal business structure, (as none of us know who works on what) is a flawed stance to begin any post with. -- Salome 04:29, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

i have to agree with 000.000, i know tonics are away for anet to say hey were adding new content still. we haven't completely abandoned this game.75.165.124.46 18:22, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes, there may be many design teams or teams working on different things but the team/department heads all report to the same people, generally the project manager/producer/director. This is the person(s) who gives the nod for something to be added, removed, or modified. Regina has said there are different teams, but they will all, in the end, generally answering to several people who make all the discussions. Teams are irrelevant, in the end the priority is set by the project/team leaders/etc, not the teams. So all decisions, for want of a better guess, are made by the Executive Producers. . Decisions are generally only made by a few, not by teams and I can still question why tonics are a priority over other issues, changes or improvements. 118.92.209.35 03:32, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

semi-educated guesses strike again. What you seem to be over looking IP, is that perhaps the team which did the tonics, had a gap in their scheduling of GW2 work, which permitted them to work on the tonics (which would take very little programming time as things like balance, possible drop locations and the like aren't a consideration). This team may have only had enough time to do something small and simple and then move back to GW2, where as the bigger changes and improvements would need a more dedicated team to work on it, which for all we know, they could already be working on it but are just taking longer to implement due to increased considerations of implementation and balance. It is true that afew people make the decisions, but the tonics are unlikely to have been added in spite of a much demanded fix. This is all very akin to looking a gift horse in the mouth, which when I was a child, my parents taught me was a very rude thing to do indeed. -- Salome 11:59, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Question about the tonic "availibilty" timeframe : So obviously you cant get the new months tonic until the Z chest has been updated, like in July it took a week or so but do they stop dropping at the end of the month automatically or continue until the next update? --O Frost O File:O Frost O Sig.GIF 21:16, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

They continue to drop until the game is updated with the next build. --Regina Buenaobra 22:24, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick response Regina :D Once final question out of pure curiosity: I personally love tonics but I've noticed the only ones you can use in explorable areas are the Transmogrifier and Yuletide tonics.. For me personally I think that's half the fun.. running around as an elf slaying huge beasts giggling all the way as I'm not much of a sit in town type player. Are there any plans to make the other tonics usable in explorable areas? I'm sure they would have to be fitted with weapons (cant say I've ever seen a rift warden weilding.. well anything) but just curious :D --O Frost O File:O Frost O Sig.GIF 17:45, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

I thought the whole point was to make them limited, never to return after their month has passed. And this made a lot of sense, and made them special, very valuable rewards. This is sad news for the collectors out there and for the PvP'ers after April'09. There will be nothing new to wait for. The tonics not being limited anymore will lose a lot of value, so they won't be as rewarding as they would be if they were limited. Sad news. Can we at least hope for some kind of entirely new rewards for the 2009 season, especially after the 2008 ones just lost a lot of their appeal? --Yawg 21:41, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

It's too early to say at this point. --Regina Buenaobra 00:31, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Nostalgia

So, I'd like to start a bit of a discussion here, and I'm going to work very hard to keep it from turning into a gripe-vest about lack of GW2 stuff just b/c some mentions it or an Ursan-fest for the same reason. Anyway, Mme. Donelle and I had a very good discussion about certain areas of GW (mainly Pre-searing Ascalon) having a certain nostalgic value to them and how It's important for a game to maintain it's own visual flavor. In the end, here are some topics that came to mind: For starters, when Anet stated that "Guild Wars 2 will look like an entirely different game.", a cold shiver ran down my spine. Personaly, I love the current visual style that Guild Wars has to offer, and it would severaly dissapoint me if playing GW2 doesn't retain that same look and feel as GW1, as it is a sequal. Quite a few years ago, I picked up Morrowind and was instantly attached to it forever. It had a very unique visual style, it had a very outlandish feel to it, but did not feel like something that could not exist. What has helped me stay attached to GW is that it has those same elements. You can tell its a fantasy world, but it still looks like a place you could visit and live in, and identify with. Then Bethesda released Oblivion, and it was totaly different, and that outlanish environment was gone, and I was totaly crushed. Sure Oblivon's mechanics and graphics are far superior to Morrowind, but I still consider Morrowind to be the better game, as it had a very unique visual style. Morrowind had a personality and flavor to it, and I enjoy every moment I play it, even if it is 6 years old and inferior graphics and mechanics wise. My point being, It would absolutely crush me to see GW2 become what Oblivion was to Morrowind, to GW. Basically, you have established a kind of personality, flavor and style with GW, don't abandon that for a game that's still of the same universe, with better graphics and mechanics, but has lost all its personality, style and flavor to it. Playing Oblivion feels like just another generic RPG and didn't feel special in any way. GW has a special feel to it, don't abandon that. It may not mean much to new players, but for returning players, one of the biggest things is it still needs to retain that GW feel and have that nostalgic value to it. Which brings me to my next topic and probably my main idea.

Nostalgic Value in GW. There is one example of this that stands out in my mind more than anything, and i'm sure it's the same for everyone else, Pre-searing. It has the feeling of home and safety, a place you don;t want to leave, a place you ahve learned to love. Mme. Donelle pointed out to me that a designer once said "The one fatal flaw with Pre-searing Ascalon is that you couldn't return to it. Players yearned to go back "home". ". But then again, Pre-searing was designed to evoke these strong feelings in a player so that the searing would be even more dramatic and evoke even more stong feelings against the charr. There is a VAST amount of nostalgic value in Guild Wars to be harnessed for GW2. There is one image that stands most powerfully in my mind, The sight of Ascalon green again and no-longer in ruins. If you wish to bring back as many GW1 players as you can, and keep then, GW2 NEEDS to retain the feel of GW1, and you mustlay off of tings of nostalgic value such as pre-searing ascalon.

Anyway, those are my thoughts. I'm surrios, are theye any other places in the GW universe that have a certain nostalgic value to them? How important is it to you that GW2 retains that same look & feel, personality, flavor and style os GW1? --Wolf 15:14, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Ludicrously long post batman ...

If, from what can be read about GW2 so far is true, it sounds like it will be a hybrid of Diablo II and GW as far as the world itself goes, persistent maps, individual games, no more mass towns. So, supposing that there are Signets of Capture in GW2, if you kill a boss you want an elite from but didn't have your sig with you, you will have to either restart the map (make a new game), or if the world is completely persistent, you're screwed. And if you create an open game, and some dimwit joins and masses a mob for you at the edge of town, you're screwed. GW1 had it right, instanced outdoor areas, group towns. Perfect balance. As far as forcing me to join PuGs, nah, it only forces me to buy something else.

That's the nice things about H/H (yeah, from another thread) I don't have to deal with people unless I'm in town. And it's why I couldn't care less about your build using whatever skill you think is best, or the "right way" to play because you don't like the skills I use.

Graphics could be improved but I'm not complaining at all. The world is gorgeous, the music great, the feel and atmosphere outstanding. The story keeps you interested for weeks on end and the PvPers, for the most part, are no where near the PvE'ers. The worst part of GW1 is the whiners on the wiki getting their way.

While pre-searing itself could not be transported, from the article on GW2 I read, you could still have the Charr homelands with their pre-searing feel, Ascalon (now run by Charr) could have grown back a bit. Cantha was apparently recovering, the Jade Sea turning back to water and the Enchovald forest turning green again. Elona sounds interesting with Palawa Joko's return, and the feeling of being nearly extinct as a human adds a great story. It isn't the look or feel that worries me, it's playing another Blizzard product that bothers me.

But no one will know until the Beta, if any, comes out.

Should we add a spoiler tag to this? ~Crazy Canuck 15:49, 24 July 2008 (UTC)~

Nah, no spoiler tag, they only thing I think you've given away is what happens during the searing, lol. As for GW taking on a D2 feel, from what I'm gathering, that doesn't seem to be the case. I imagine 60%+ of the game will still be instanced, and I doubt there will be bosses out in persistant areas. Also, you're not going to make a game for GW2 like in D2. I'm sure the vast majority of enemies on persistant areas will not be hostile until you attack them, but noobs dragging aggro is just one of those risks. But, if i can pwn that entie mob and maybe PK the player that dragged it to me, all will be good =D. True, the Charr Homelands do have the same atmosphere as Pre-searing, but it's just not quite Ascalon, it wouldn't be the same. Seeing the Jade Sea as a real sea again and the Echovald forest green again would be nice, as would Kourna under Joko, but they have already stated GW2 will not contain Cantha or Elona, at least on release. There is a vast amount of nostalgic value in Ascalon to be tapped into. --Wolf 16:02, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Aparrently the Charr have taken up residence in Rin. It would be nice to see what they've done with the place. As far as a Factions and Nightfall campaign(s) add-on, it will be nice to see. Again, it really depends on being forced into PuGs for me (which I know isn't the direction you want to take, sorry). I like chatting and trading in town, and killing on my own. That was even true back in D2 for most players as a lot of the servers were locked down to keep noobs out of our way. Hmm, perhaps we can find a way to TK? lol. I hated those people.

Anyway, back on topic, I agree it would be nice to see Ascalon again. I've travelled all over Tyria, but pre-searing, the Charr Homelands, and Wizard's Isle are among my favorites. Kaineng and the Monastery round out my top 5. The nostalgia of seeing those places again, 250 years later, as a descendant of my original hero sounds great. It's the persistant worlds thing that has me thinking of going back to FPS.

~Crazy Canuck 16:15, 24 July 2008 (UTC)~

It would be cool, if we, as the players in the game, could push forward for some eventual and permanant goals, like driving the charr out of Rin. --Wolf 16:29, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps make it an town only accessible after defeating the Charr, like the Sunspear refuge but a little harder. But I am getting side-tracked into thinking our ideas get implemented again. I must remember to be jaded. ~Crazy Canuck 16:36, 24 July 2008 (UTC)~

Bah! There is nothing wrong with a little bit of wild speculation. For some reason, Pre-searing was the only area I was ever able to get attached to in any way. Am I the only one that this applies to? --Wolf 16:44, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

{ri} I'm going to get off topic on my own thread for a min, but I have noticed something, and it just clocked a few mins ago. When I post some super big, long winded block (basically dumping all my cumulative thoughts onto the wiki) people seem to only read and comment on the last peice of it. Why is that? Are people just too lazy to read it all, or do the somehow disregrad the rest thinking it wasn't posted by me? Half the reason I come here is to have an intelectual discussion, but it's hard to do that when 3/4ths or more of what I have to say isn't even addressed. I spent a brief amount of time on Blizzard's forums, and whenever I would bost a big block of text, the next message would read something like this: "TL DR WL" (too long, didn't read, write less) and then they would just move on without carring, and it just killed me, so I left. But I digress. Getting back on topic, I'm earger to hear about any areas you have a special attachment to, and what makes you like them soo much. --Wolf 18:38, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Geez, hope you didn't me. I thought I addressed everything except Morrowind and Oblivion since I've seen neither. Or were you just referring to the two of us being the sole posters? It is the middle of the day and not everyone can play games for a day-job. ~Crazy Canuck 19:02, 24 July 2008 (UTC)~

(Edit conflict) No, no no, you have nothing to fear, I was not refering to this conversation. For best examples, see my huge posts twards the end of this conversation and this one too. You don't need to read the entire thing, just look for my massive block (easily noticable) and read the few comments after it. I would recommend reading my massive blocks, or atleasats skimming each paragraph to get the jist of it. --Wolf 19:14, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

In my opinion, some of your posts could benefit from being more concise and on topic.There's nothing wrong with replying later with more explanation or details if needed. On the subject of nostalgia, don't forget that anyone who didn't start out playing GW with Prophecies may never have experienced Pre-Searing Ascalon even if they purchased it later. 75.146.48.190 19:10, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

(off topic) whenever I give the jist of it all summed up, people are all, "WTF do you mean?" or completely misunderstand it, then I have to go and give them the big long-winded explenation and illustrations and everything before they get it. (back on topic) This isn't focused just on Pre-searing, even tho it's beent he focus so far. The goal was to talk about other areas people found of nostalgic value. --Wolf 19:16, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

People are just lazy, they don't want to read entire essays unless they're already interested in the topic. Although, those are would be interested in giving an intelligent reply to your comments generaly will read most of it, but out of an unwillingness to write their own essay-length comment, will only reply to one or two of your points. If you want people to reply to your entire post you generally need to steer the conversation back towards those bits that were missed. --Mme. Donelle 06:42, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

I'd like to point out this blog post, in which PA points out how the "feel" of a game becomes lost as its sequels overcome the technical limitations, or simply improve the graphics, of the original. I've noticed this phenomenon in Guild Wars. Compare the Maguuma Jungle of Prophecies to the Tarnished Coast of EotN: the latter is highly polished and has a realistic jungle feel to it, however it's the former, with its comparatively simple design and stylised art, that feels more like Guild Wars. That said, I like the "feel" of all four GW releases. Each feels quite different from the others (due to technical improvements rather than the obvious differences in theme), but I'm attached to them all, and if you were to ask me to pick my favourite I'm not sure I could choose one. Perhaps this is due to the technical differences in the four releases being so minor: the underlying core that is Guild Wars remains static throughout, and its the complete rewrite of GW2 -- added persistence, new races, a different skills system, new graphics, and so on -- that risks destroying the Guild Wars "feel" we've all grown to love. I'm very excited about all these changes, but I do hope they don't end up taking the Guild Wars-ness out of Guild Wars. --Mme. Donelle 08:10, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

I replied to a similar thread on another board a while ago about starting areas. I think those stick in people's minds the most because it is where the game began for them. I realize you didn't want this focused on only pre-searing, but I must say I feel the same way; I miss that look and feel which is probably why I have two perma-pre characters.

My list would be:

• Pre-Searing Ascalon & Lakeside County, (Town of Ashford)
• Pre-Searing Regent Valley, (Hunters ... lol)
• Qj Falls, (Cherry Blossom trees)
• Shing Jea Monastery (gongs, atmosphere), and
• Kaineng Center (city, the constant murmur of the residents).

Ghosst • Talk • 02:34, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Zaishen Keys and Reordering the Hall of Monuments Statues

Heya. I recently earned 130 Reward Points from the Xunlai Predictions. In order to convert my Reward Points to Zaishen Keys, I had to click the button 26 times. For such a tiny number, this conversion was not a huge deal, but a former member of my previous alliance, K M T, earned nearly 2,000 reward points, and he reported the Zaishen Key conversion to be fairly painful. I've heard similar statements from other high end players also.

Are there any plans to let players convert multiple keys at once? It would be very nice if we could click to "Purchase Zaishen Keys with Tournament Reward Points / Balthazar Faction" and a prompt came up asking "How many Zaishen Keys would you like to purchase? Field ____ (quantity up / down buttons) (Max: ____)."

Also, I discovered a fairly serious aesthetic problem with the Hall of Monuments , if such a problem can exist. As I tried to re-order my various displays, I discovered the statue order is established by the order in which you place the achievements or minipets in your Hall of Monuments. This means that a number of display combinations are impossible; when you hit the "rearrange" option, you're essentially just moving your statues in a circle by the first statue placed in the display to the last statue placed in the display.

I know you have a Hall of Monuments update intended that modifies achievement display based on character / account, but it doesn't seem to address the largely static nature of the display sequences. Are there any plans to address that? Would it be possible for the "rearrange" option to bring up a panel like our skills and attributes where we can sort our minipets and accomplishments, then drag them into place? For example, if I had minipets, you would have sort by rarity or type, then display as list or grids, then I could simply drag them to an empty bar that represents the display and move them around at leisure. In the same respect for titles, you might have them sorted by type, campaign, etc.

Anyways, I figured I would leave a note here, since I don't actually know where I'd otherwise leave it. Sun Fired Blank 09:31, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

The re-ordering thing has been an issue since inception. If you check the archives you will see its one of those complaints which comes up like once a month if not more. -- Salome 09:34, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

A solution is already implemented in the game: If you convert Luxon/Kurzick faction, you are asked whether you want to convert 1k or the full amount. Simply using the same form for Zaishen keys should solve the problem. --Xeeron 09:40, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

200,000 * selling for 5k = 1,000,000 gold. o.o; Suhweet. Vael Victus 13:00, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

200,000 * 5k = 1,000,000,000 gold. 2,000 / 5 * 5,000 = 1,000,000 gold, though. Still, suhweet. GIMMEH! Kokuou 19:44, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

What's particularly odd is I did the one for 2,000 in my head, then I wrote the extra 2 0's. Vael Victus 23:43, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

You gotta give the man props for presentation. He didn't just come here and say "OMG the ordering system sucks! You MUST change it NOW!" He calmly told us the problem and gave an idea for a solution. I also agree with both suggestions. Converting Reward Points into ZKeys can be a very long process and needs some stream-lining somehow. As for the HoM, I don't think anyone (until now) has come up with an idea on how to solve the ordering problem. It sounds like a good idea and could work very well. I have over 10 heros in my HoM and can;t for the life of me get all the ones I want to show. --Wolf 13:51, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Just a small correction: "I discovered the statue order is established by the order in which you place the achievements or minipets in your Hall of Monuments" - that's wrong, at least regarding the Honor monument (not sure about Devotion). It has been discovered that there's an order to how some monuments are displayed; take a look here for more information. Erasculio 14:00, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I can confirm it is for the minipets, as I have 24 of them. Vael Victus 18:32, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Salome: I did, in fact, check the discussion for the Hall of Monuments and the most recent Game Related Topics archives from this page. I didn't find any statements about zaishen keys conversion or the ordering problem for the Hall of Monuments. I don't believe I have any obligation to check every potential spot and every archive before asking a question simply to avoid being redundant.

Erasculio: that's fairly informative, but ultimately doesn't alter the fact of display arrangements being ultimately confined to static permutations. :\

Vael Victis: yeah, I envy him for the finish but hardly the work. HB matches are not very profitable; you get maybe 3 keys from every AT, the faction over time ratio is bad, and you have to put in a fairly significant amount of work to have any chance of a strong MAT finish. On top of that, he probably damn near sprained his index finger buying the keys. Sun Fired Blank 12:45, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Frosty Tonic, the tonic that makes you like a Snowman. Does it really exist?

I was farming at the Secret Lair of the Snowmen and I still didn't get that new tonic. I was wondering if it is real and how do you get it? Is it extremely rare?--Dark Paladin X 02:10, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm afraid I can't prove this, as I forgot to take a screenshot, but I saw a player in Kamadan who looked like a snowman, so at the very least, the tonic is real. I can't tell you where you get one, however: if it's not dropping from monsters, then either it's rare, or is only found in Wintersday Gifts, which can be obtained by trading candy cane shards to the collectors in the Dwayna vs Grenth outpost. (Shards are obtained via winning games in the DvG arena.) --Mme. Donelle 02:38, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

The Frosty tonic does in fact exist and currently is being sold for around 3k a bottle... it can be attained by monster drop (verified)or through a wintersday gift I believe. But what I want to know... Regina is there an everlasting version of this? I was in fact saving all my Z keys for a tonic such as this (I was hoping for an ice golem) but this works quite nicely and also is the wintersday festival going to be the only acess we have to this tonic? Or will it be made availabe at a later date as well? I neeeds it my preecious haha and any info would be great thanks in advance --O Frost O File:O Frost O Sig.GIF 04:37, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Regina has already said that the Everlasting Potions that come out of the Zaishen chest have a 12 month rotation. I wouldn't be surpised if say October is a Candy Corn one, and December is a Frosty one. Yukiko 06:06, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

I actually manage to get one when farming for Glacial stones (after farming at secret lair of snowmen and raptors). So I'm guessing it's relatively rare.--Dark Paladin X 06:14, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, it drops out of monsters but is quite rare. I managed to get 2 from Xanquang Skyway and 1 from the Cathedral of Flamme. I saw 3 poping up for the same lucky person during a single DoA run. Yes I wonder about the everlasting version too. Jaxom 15:41, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

MY PRAYERS HAVE BEEN ANSWERED,NOW EVERYONE GIMMIE, but seriously i have waited for tonic fo so long!!!! Frozenwind 11:50, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Drops in UW too. --Silverleaf 22:22, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Also Regina, is the team have any plans to put this item as one of the rewards in the Chest of Wintersday Past in the Secret Lair of the Snowmen later on?--Dark Paladin X 06:15, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Chaos Gloves in HoM?

Did anyone bother to ask this before and what was the answer? If not ... I request to be able to add the Chaos Gloves to Hall Of Monument (HoM) of "Resilience". --Silverleaf 11:55, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Resilence is for armour set though, not a piece of armour. 000.00.00.00 12:45, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

I would like to add the deldrimor armor to Resilience too. More armors for Paragon & Dervish. (See other topics) And the very expensive Chaos gloves many have worked hard for to gain. --Silverleaf 13:16, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Silver, HoM is for SETS of armour not individual pieces. However i do agree with adding full Deldrimor sets, people can say they are individual pieces all they like, but when push comes to shove if you buy them and wear them at the same time, they look better together than with any other armour, thus it looks like a set. Also the wee blurb on the GWEN box said 40 new SETS of armour, (as can be seen here) at the moment I count 31. This is a major gripe with many people. A)That it's false advertising and as it stands needs changed. B) that it costs just the same to craft the entire set and just as much work but cant be added to your HoM. I know its supposed to be mix and match but cant you do that anyway regardless of if it's a hom-able set or not? As it stands, (and as can be seen here) 5 professions are currently missing gloves for their deldrimor set. Is their not a way just to add the 5 missing gloves sets and make them into 1 HoM-able set each. As it's completely and utterly illogical how it stands at the moment and I'm still majorly annoyed that the packaging lies to you for GWEN.

So in conclusion although I disagree with Silver about adding individual armour pieces,such as Chaos Gloves, Dragon Gloves etc..., I do agree that Deldrimor Armour should be made into one cohesive set of armour and then made HoM-able for 2 main reasons, firstly the marketing calls it a SET not a list of stand alone pieces and secondly, it's illogical as it stands at the moment. -- Salome 11:58, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

one piece of armor should not be added, but the deldrimor armors should get completed and need to be added to HoM too they are sets after all... its just not correct. 82.154.31.143 15:27, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

There is no such thing as Deldrimor or Dwarven armors for Players. There's Silver Eagle armor, and a few non-set gloves, headgears, chest pieces, legginess and boots. Just because one armor crafter has a few of those at once doesn't make them a set. It would if they had the same name! — Poki#3 23:46, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

PvE Balance

Just wanted to link you to something I hope will give you an idea where some of the community stands. Petition For PvE Balancing. Denizen Zero 08:22, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh. My. God. There are still some people who think ridiculuous easy PvE is an accident or based on the inability to balance skills. Guys, this is intended. GW1 is reaching its intended life span thus the developers are trying to slowly kill gameplay. They want you to buy GW2, not to hang around in GW1 forever. They need your money.

Imbalanced PvE has two reasons: 1. make GW1 obsolete for die hard players so they eagerly await and buy GW2; 2. open GW1 for new markets - attract casual players that don't like to put much effort in a game but pay the money for an old game anyway.

This is why any attempts to ask for better PvE are utterly futile. They could provide a great gaming experience, but they don't want it at the moment. --87.106.79.175 12:11, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Read the recent Dev announcements. Don't think your petition is needed anymore. --Silverleaf 13:13, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

The petition is completely consumables based mr. leaf. (mrs* my mistake) The dev update talks of a change to ursan blessing alone which by no means will be enough to fix PvE for the majority supporting that page. I highly doubt Regina has viewed it in the last month, I don't know if she's even seen it. However angry angsty gamers may make you, don't promote ignorance.

view that page Spawnlegacy 15:20, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

To the IP, you're logic is flawed, no right minded business would be doing what you're suggesting months, if not years, before their new product. You push towards the new product when the product is close, not when its as far away as Guild Wars 2 is now.

Arenanet said this: "Although we are not making major PvE-related balance changes this time, we are working on a larger PvE-focused update.". I hope that this is going to be a large PvE balance taking skills, consumables etc into consideration. Consumables are a bit abuse factor, why Arenaet made the EoTN consumables so powerful always made me question that design choice. EoTN as a whole left me questioning Arenanet's logic, so much of that expansion is backwards to what we're actually used to.

I, for one, am hoping for a large PvE update, balance would be nice. 000.00.00.00 19:41, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Yeah because Balthazar forbid we actually have something to do with our money other than buying superfluous armors, dyes and weapons. Vael Victus 20:01, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

They should bring in some kind of gambling, the Xunlai Lottery or something lol :P I have money to burn... ^_^ ... no, not really >.< 000.00.00.00 06:45, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

I actually agree with IP. Simply because GW has no monthly fees. Sales of the game(s) are dwindling. The only thing really selling is EotN, and of course Anet pushed that by making Ursan uberpowerful. By the time GW2 comes out, Anet will have GW1 in such bad shape that fans will be clamoring for a new one. All these problems in GW1, will not (or rather, should not) be existant in GW2. This automatically makes GW2 the "better" game, regardless of gameplay. Remember, Anet needs initial sales, and needs to keep customers around long enough for them to buy the extra campaigns/expansions. After that, why should they care? Which brings me back to my original point: Guild Wars sales (ie the campaigns) are down, Eye of the North is decent (Ursan or no Elite anything for you), so why bother fixing the game when you can create such a need for a good Guild Wars game. They kept us happy, they updated frequently, they were nice to us when they had more games and expansions coming (thus, more potential money for them). Now that that's run out, they are gonna starve the community till we think GW2 is gold. Hence, too, why no screenies/vids of GW2 yet. Let the hype build itself. - 206.193.238.32 08:27, 31 July 2008 (UTC)