"Submit Your Questions for Our GW Retrospective Panel... "

I found that the PvE/PvP skill switch really put an iron curtain between PvE'rs and PvP'rs almost as if you can only be good at one or another, Why was this done?

What was the reasoning behind the Zaishen Title? Why did it get an emote?

K posted all of page 2 and page 3 so far.

Keep em comin.

Have you ever implemented a feature that you have regreted later on, and considdered removing it because it did not have the intended effect?

An Auction house (or improved means for trading) and more storage space have been asked for since day one.

Storage:
Players that collect armours and weapons often use/buy multiple mule characters with the sole purpose of holding another character's items. To help solve this problem, why have you not made items like armour sets stackable, keyrings (lockpicks != keyrings), and stackable inscriptions and runes?

Trading:
We know an Auction House will not be implemented for Gw1, why not solve the trading problem in some other way? Many reasonable looking suggestions have been made that shouldn't demand a lot of man hours to implement like AFK selling, traders for mods and inscriptions, better supply & demand driven merchant prices, etc.

If you could instantly remove one feature from the game, which feature would you remove?

If you could instantly add one feature to the game, which feature would you add?

Why were only two realms of the Gods included in GW1? Why Grenth and Balthazar?

Why didn't Prophecies get an elite mission/area? I know Sorrow's Furnace sort of counts as an end game area but it lacks the outpost, difficulty, and end chest of the other elite areas.

Why weren't more skills added to Dervish and Paragon at some point(other than in EoTN)? As the two newest classes they have the least amount of skills and playing them is difficult w/o leaning heavily on your secondary profession.

when can we get some answers?

Whenever PAX ends and the video of the panel is put together, transcribed for those who can't hear, and uploaded to the internet. That's when.

Will we have to keep the same names to gain the benefits from our titles?

I think I can answer that. In short, no you don't have to use the same names to get the benefits. Remember that ANet has announced that the HoM will now be account-wide rather than separate from character to character (even though you can still see the individual accomplishments of all your different characters). I'm pretty sure that this will be the way that it will be transferred to GW2, as an account wide set of accomplishments. I'm sure they aren't stupid/mean enough to have not thought of the fact that people might want to have different names in GW2. I'm also sure that you wouldn't have had to keep the same names before ANet decided to change the HoM. I think that you would just have to have chosen which GW2 character will inherit the HoM from GW1 CharacterA, CharacterB, CharacterC, and so on.

Why does Zhed leave footprints?

• The Bonus Mission Pack was received with great positive response. Has aNet considered more "Bonus Missions" that will add to the depth and Lore-based experience for players?

• aNet has recently announced MOX, a third PvE hero who is unlockable for players who own all three campaigns. Upon his addition to the game, Mesmer, Paragon, Ritualist and Assassin will remain the only professions that do not have a third representative hero. Has aNet considered offering another unlockable hero in the future for these other professions?

• This is not a GW2 question, even though I mention it at the end in further example... With the story of GW:EN taking place in Tyria (and the depths of) and expanding almost solely on the lore of Prophecies, it seems that aNet has been completely neglecting the continents of Cantha and Elona that are greatly adored by many players. Is there a reason aNet is neglecting these continents and the fresh lore that they offer the players of Guild Wars? [This concern can be further exemplified when taken to consideration that all fans know of GW2 at this time also primarily reflects the lore and geography of Tyria/Prophecies/GW:EN since, as far as we know, Cantha and Elona will be unreachable.]

• Now that fans have seen much of the concept art and potential design direction of Utopia (the canceled fourth GW1 campaign), it seems that the player-base community agrees unanimously that the Mesoamérican design aesthetic and cultural influence could have been the greatest and most inspiring worlds that aNet would have offered Guild Wars players. Does aNet feel at all regretful to have canceled this campaign and offered a shorter "expansion" instead of possibly taking more time to completing said campaign and releasing it as a larger "final" installment of GW1? In addition to this, after having seen responses from fans, has aNet yet considered finishing Utopia in the future?

Some of these were kinda' asked before, but the other questions were vague. Mine may offer a more specific direction for where player's concerns are.

Cool, thanks man

I just thought of something else that I was curious about...

A number of the PvE skills in Eye of the North look similar enough to skills in existing professions that, apart from the enemy-specific bonuses of certain Deldrimnor and Ebon Vanguard skills, they would fit well as a regular or elite skill for that profession. Were any of the EOTN PvE skills intended to be normal or elite skills for Chapter 4 that were converted when Chapter 4 was cancelled, either for existing professions or, perhaps, for any new professions that were cancelled along with the fourth chapter?

On a related note, in the August 2008 update, a number of less-favoured elites were completely reworked. Were any of these new functions based on ideas from the work on Chapter 4?