What I would like to know is whether a character in GW2 will need to choose a single character from GW1 to inherit from, or whether the GW2 character will inherit from the entire account.
I think what will happen, judging by what we've seen on the videos showing the HoM, is that each character will be able to store accomplishments in a single hall that stores all our characters' achievements. I can't see any other way of the video showing armour for different professions and genders in the one hall. If this is the case, if my GW2 character will be able to inherit from all my GW1 characters, then I have no problem. I'm willing to be patient and add all my minipets and weapons to my hall shortly before the release of GW2. But if we do have to choose one character to inherit from, I will probably stop playing all of my other characters. There is no point, after all.
Gaile on HoM
11 pages • Page 3
L
and remember kiddies that all those unique only through HoM mini unlocked unique minipets will be customized as well.
before you yell how do you know this the devs have already stated specifically that your inheritance will not give you an advantage over their new GW2 player base and if a zoo of unique minipets worth billions is not an advantage check out panda/etc prices for an example.
they will be show not go like DIVINE AURA
not transferable but real nice
before you yell how do you know this the devs have already stated specifically that your inheritance will not give you an advantage over their new GW2 player base and if a zoo of unique minipets worth billions is not an advantage check out panda/etc prices for an example.
they will be show not go like DIVINE AURA
not transferable but real nice
E
note to self, no more buying extra character slots for future games in case they make changes such as these . ..
guess this dashes my hopes of getting a complete set of minis. vizu and zhed are pretty much out of reach now and the ghostly hero drops so rarely as well . .. hopefully they make some new source for these minis.
seems kind of stupid to customize minis to a single character. guess my HoM won't have any minis for a while until I ponder this some more.
is the grind in eye of the north (and gw2 down the line) going to be so bad that the only option is going to push through with just a single player? i really hope this isn't an indication of this.
guess this dashes my hopes of getting a complete set of minis. vizu and zhed are pretty much out of reach now and the ghostly hero drops so rarely as well . .. hopefully they make some new source for these minis.
seems kind of stupid to customize minis to a single character. guess my HoM won't have any minis for a while until I ponder this some more.
is the grind in eye of the north (and gw2 down the line) going to be so bad that the only option is going to push through with just a single player? i really hope this isn't an indication of this.
Gaile: if tis character based, then why did the person in the E3 video have armors from every profession? thats just plain mean to tease us like that
also i think what they should do with minis is flag them as being untradable after you use them that way you can still have other characters use them.
also i think what they should do with minis is flag them as being untradable after you use them that way you can still have other characters use them.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by VitisVinifera
So, Gaile, should we risk laying down our armors, weapons, minis, etc to the HoM, irreversibly and with unknown consequences, when you can't tell us exactly how this is really going to work in the end?
|
L
[QUOTE]
it wont
it was a demo not real life so to speak.
they had each and every display case full.
they said EACH CHARACTER WILL HAVE ITS OWN IT CANT BE MADE MORE CLEAR THAN THAT
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Meat Axe
I can't see any other way of the video showing armour for different professions and genders in the one hall. If this is the case, if my GW2 character will be able to inherit from all my GW1 characters, then I have no problem.
|
it was a demo not real life so to speak.
they had each and every display case full.
they said EACH CHARACTER WILL HAVE ITS OWN IT CANT BE MADE MORE CLEAR THAN THAT
that was more of a rhetorical question Rhedd.......of course, with my mini collection, 18 titles all on one character, and my best rares all warrior weapons, like so many others, nearly all my focus has been on one toon, that i won't make any irreversible decisions yet
I'm just wondering what Gaile's justification (or perhaps regurgitated company line) is for such an obviously terrible decision, which has already been shot so full of holes in this thread I'd be embarrased to have to defend it
I'm just wondering what Gaile's justification (or perhaps regurgitated company line) is for such an obviously terrible decision, which has already been shot so full of holes in this thread I'd be embarrased to have to defend it
This is pretty much exactly how I expected it to work.
I think it makes sense for a mini-pet to be "enshrined/customized" when you put it in the HoM. Otherwise, people in large guilds would just have massive mini-pet swaps and everyone would get everything. Lame. I personally would like to see minis account-based rather than character based, however, since customizing them will make them rare enough.
With respect to character-based titles being assigned to characters instead of accounts, I never imagined it would work any other way.
I think it makes sense for a mini-pet to be "enshrined/customized" when you put it in the HoM. Otherwise, people in large guilds would just have massive mini-pet swaps and everyone would get everything. Lame. I personally would like to see minis account-based rather than character based, however, since customizing them will make them rare enough.
With respect to character-based titles being assigned to characters instead of accounts, I never imagined it would work any other way.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by VitisVinifera
that was more of a rhetorical question Rhedd.......of course, with my mini collection, 18 titles all on one character, and my best rares all warrior weapons, like so many others, nearly all my focus has been on one toon, that i won't make any irreversible decisions yet
I'm just wondering what Gaile's justification (or perhaps regurgitated company line) is for such an obviously terrible decision, which has already been shot so full of holes in this thread I'd be embarrased to have to defend it |
I just answer rhetorical questions because they're the only ones I ever know the answer to. ^_^
I cringe, by the way, at the thought of people customizing super-rare minis, ceasing to play the game, and not selling or even giving them away to friends, because they can't. Fantastic.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Agyar
I hate you burst your bubble, but everything that isn't a max damage collector weapon or a set of 1.5k armour is just e-peen/vanity.
Welcome to Guild Wars PvE. |
But thanks for the condolences.
Here's what I don't understand.
If the system worked the way people on this thread thought it was going to work, any character on an account with one character who got a tough-to-get title like LDoA would get that title?
That would mean, you could create a character, get a run to HoM, get the LDoA title for that character, and then "bequeath" that title to a character in GW2. That would mean there would be an unending supply of items left to decendants based on a one-time achievement of a title. That just does not make sense.
If I'm missing something, burn me to a crisp. I expect no less.
If the system worked the way people on this thread thought it was going to work, any character on an account with one character who got a tough-to-get title like LDoA would get that title?
That would mean, you could create a character, get a run to HoM, get the LDoA title for that character, and then "bequeath" that title to a character in GW2. That would mean there would be an unending supply of items left to decendants based on a one-time achievement of a title. That just does not make sense.
If I'm missing something, burn me to a crisp. I expect no less.


