Guild Wars 2 News Timeline - Guild Wars Guru archive powered by Guild Wars Legacy

Rocky Raccoon

Desert Nomad

Join Date: Jan 2007

Massachusetts, USA

Guardians of the Cosmos

R/Mo

16 Jul 2009 at 18:45 - 41

Quote:

Originally Posted by slowerpoke

Nothing against unofficial fansites, those would still have a place, but it just feels lazy how they expect the fan base to maintain forums while they themselves hardly even bother to interact with them. Time to man up and provide proper avenues of interaction instead of being cheapasses.

How can a fan-site be unofficial? A fan-site is just what it says a site run by fans and with ANET's seal of approval.

gremlin

Furnace Stoker

Join Date: Oct 2006

GWAR

Me/Mo

16 Jul 2009 at 18:45 - 42

I voted 3

too much released too early means the opposition can copy some ideas and release first.
I would like a rough release date but don't expect to hear anything until its a couple of months off.

Its a difficult situation since they changed direction quite late on.
First intending to keep adding to and improving GW1 then suddenly decided to abandon that and create a new game.

It nay appear that a game can go from first ideas to the store in 12 months but its often more like 3 to 5 years.
I expect gw2 to be out Christmas 2010 at the earliest

Rocky Raccoon

Desert Nomad

Join Date: Jan 2007

Massachusetts, USA

Guardians of the Cosmos

R/Mo

16 Jul 2009 at 18:48 - 43

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gun Pierson

There should be a 4th option:

The lack of information is understandable, and I think ArenaNet had no choice after massively pulling in mmo-rpg players with their 'free to play' bait while their design was not fit for it and they had to start from scratch.

I see some people are talking about and comparing the situation with Diablo3 so I can't resist, forgive me. This is what we know about Diablo3 so far:
- focused on solo and cooperative play
- 3 classes revealed
- uses technology that makes it easy for them to create new content
- will use the new battlenet
- loot is important in the game and they use a complex loot generator that takes your current equipment into account.
- no fixed creeps so every dungeon feels different when you play it again, same for loot.
- you can join your friends, even if they have a lower or higher progressed character than yours, so zoning will be something like in GW I guess.
- easy interface as you can use the mouse only to use skill combos.
-...

I can go on and on, here's a compilation of all known vids and dev interviews, enjoy:
http://diablo3x.com/compilation-of-all-diablo-3-videos
Next month we'll see BlizzCon 2009 and more will be revealed.

Big difference if you compare this to the info about GW2, but whatever. You first have to have something decent before you can show off some eye candy.

How long have Diablo fans been waiting for Diablo 3 ?

Konig Des Todes

Ooo, pretty flower

Join Date: Jan 2008

Citadel of the Decayed

The Archivists' Sanctum [Lore]

N/

16 Jul 2009 at 18:49 - 44

Since D2 came out for the most part. Much much MUCH longer than GW fans have been waiting for GW2.

kupp

Jungle Guide

Join Date: Feb 2008

The Shiverpeaks

[KISS]

W/

16 Jul 2009 at 18:51 - 45

I'd love you people would stop creating misleading thread titles. I thought there was some actual news...

Shayne Hawke

Departed from Tyria

Join Date: May 2007

Clan Dethryche [dth]

R/

16 Jul 2009 at 18:54 - 46

There wasn't anything wrong about them saying that they were going to work on GW2, or when they said it.

What was wrong was how much labor they removed going towards the original game and doing little to add new staff.

Gun Pierson

Forge Runner

Join Date: Feb 2006

Belgium

PIMP

Mo/

16 Jul 2009 at 18:55 - 47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Konig Des Todes

I heard that the game has also been in development since before Blizzard North went out of business. Which, if I remember correctly, was about 6 years ago (2003 I think?). @Gun specifically: It is possible they lied. Of course, it is just as possible that where I heard that D3 has been in development since before Blizzard North went out could be wrong.

From what I've read and heard:

Blizzard North was indeed working on it for some time before Blizzard took over. But Blizzard was not satisfied with the results so the project got cancelled and they had to let Blizzard North go. (Some of those guys created flagstudios and started working on Hellgate London.)

So after that, Diablo3 came into Blizzard (California) hands some 4 years ago now and they basically started from scratch too.

But yes, I wasn't there as a witness so I don't have the facts to state they lied or not. Just the info that was made public.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Risky Ranger

How long have Diablo fans been waiting for Diablo 3 ?

Did Diablo 2 promise an MTG campaign and expansion model and did it stop on that promise after only 2 years?

Snoes

Lion's Arch Merchant

Join Date: Apr 2006

Belgium

16 Jul 2009 at 19:02 - 48

I have never understand why regular players try to take desicisions for Anet.
I'm fairly sure that Anet knows what its doing and doesnt need help from players who haven't got any experience in building a game.
Developing a decent MMO takes time, so be patient unless you want a crappy GW2.

shoyon456

Desert Nomad

Join Date: Jul 2006

D/

16 Jul 2009 at 19:05 - 49

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlueNovember

Mmm I'd say that is because D3 is later in development. I recall IGN's updates being as vague as the news we have from anet. Still, I don't follow either religiously, so I could be wrong.

And isn't there a whole wiki full of lore and class info for gw2 floating around somewhere?

Yes, a wiki full of half-assed and vague lore. I have a 10-year-old nephew that could have come up with the same crap.

And no, there is NO info on classes/gameplay/skills/things that would matter to GW1 players.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gun Pierson

Did Diablo 2 promise an MTG campaign and expansion model and did it stop on that promise after 2 years?

Essentially this. I felt extremely "betrayed" upon the first announcement that they were cancelling the campaign route, making the next full campaign into a half assed barely able to be called an "expansion" and that we MIGHT hear something about a brand new shiny game in a few years. After that...what was the point of GW1 even?

The fact that Gaile told us about a beta in the end of 2008 which never came to be and yet we still don't even have screenshots is reprehensible. Like I said in another thread, does anet even have a RED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GOing PR department?

Rocky Raccoon

Desert Nomad

Join Date: Jan 2007

Massachusetts, USA

Guardians of the Cosmos

R/Mo

16 Jul 2009 at 19:19 - 50

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gun Pierson

Did Diablo 2 promise an MTG campaign and expansion model and did it stop on that promise after only 2 years?

Would you rather keep bloating the current game to fulfill the original premise or scrap it and have them work on something new and better?

JR

Re:tired

Join Date: Nov 2005

W/

16 Jul 2009 at 19:24 - 51

Quote:

Originally Posted by Edge Igneas

...and lets face it, Guild Wars is a huge cash sink for NC-Soft. It has a very risky market design, I just don't hope for the worst, even in spite of the economic recession which doesn't help.

Guild Wars has not been a 'cash sink' for NCSoft. It hasn't been a huge earner either, but certainly both profitable and successful.

Karate Jesus

Forge Runner

Join Date: Apr 2008

Texas

Reign of Judgment [RoJ]

Me/

16 Jul 2009 at 19:31 - 52

Quote:

Originally Posted by Risky Ranger

Would you rather keep bloating the current game to fulfill the original premise or scrap it and have them work on something new and better?

How are we supposed to know if it's better w/o ever seeing screenshots, video, or even learning a little bit about gameplay?

The point of this thread is not whether or not GW2 should have been made, it's about GW2 info.....of which there has been very, very little.

Gun Pierson

Forge Runner

Join Date: Feb 2006

Belgium

PIMP

Mo/

16 Jul 2009 at 19:40 - 53

Quote:

Originally Posted by Risky Ranger

Would you rather keep bloating the current game to fulfill the original premise or scrap it and have them work on something new and better?

That's a question that should never arrise, unfortunately we are forced in that situation today and have to make a choice if we want to answer it.

The ideal situation would have been to work on both games at once, like the big boys do. But NCSoft doesn't want that. Not enough recources, willingly or unwillingly.

Ravious

Lion's Arch Merchant

Join Date: Mar 2006

Servants of Fortuna

N/Mo

16 Jul 2009 at 19:50 - 54

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gun Pierson

Did Diablo 2 promise an MTG campaign and expansion model and did it stop on that promise after only 2 years?

This is most pertinent. I wasn't just buying a product. I was buying a service, which "guaranteed" content updates (which I might have to pay for, but that's fine). See also L4D bamboozlement.

Ctb

Desert Nomad

Join Date: Apr 2006

W/

16 Jul 2009 at 19:51 - 55

Quote:

there's comparable information to Diablo 3. The fussing is completely unfounded.

Recent gameplay videos and screenshots is comparable to a couple of pieces of concept art and a few vague statments made years ago?

And here is why Anet fails. There were only really three things Blizzard could have done to make Diablo 3 (or Starfcraft 2 for that matter) unsuccessful:

1. Changed the name without telling anybody
2. Waited until everybody who played Diablo and Diablo 2 was dead to release 3.
3. Cancelled it

I do not believe Anet has that luxury. Guild Wars is their only game, and it's competing in a packed arena. Blizzard can develop their games in a shroud of silence and still make them work because they have that kind of name recognition and the massive resources coming in from WoW to back the development indefinitely. Anet has only one thing: NCSoft's checkbook.

What it comes down to, in my mind, is this: I do no believe Guild Wars has the level of support and interest required to sustain a customer base for a sequel without keeping people around in Guild Wars 1 (which is not happening), and I think at this rate, Anet is going to be pretty much back to square one for the marketing of Guild Wars 2.

Frankly, I'm with some of the other people in this thread. I don't even care anymore. In all likelihood, I'm not buying Guild Wars 2 when it comes out. Maybe eventually, but the enthusiasm for this game is just loooooong gone.

Jecht Scye

Wilds Pathfinder

Join Date: Dec 2005

Lucky Crickets[Luck]

N/Me

16 Jul 2009 at 19:53 - 56

Option #1.

I don't care about their innovation. All I want is the occasional screenshot update showing off their graphics and allowing for fan-speculation until the release of the game. Obviously Guild Wars 2 won't push the graphics envelope, because they've already stated that they are gearing it toward a wide market that doesn't require immensely powerful computers in order to run the game effectively. Therefore, in showing screenshots, one would think they are not playing their innovative hand.

Anet = [Tease]

Lishy

Forge Runner

Join Date: Jan 2008

16 Jul 2009 at 20:02 - 57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ecks

Main reason we have not got any info is because of Aion. Ncsoft is putting everything behind Aion for its release. Also if any information regarding guildwars 2 would be released it for most certainly would be on show at pax but that will be very unlikely. Game is still at least 2 years away. You are most likely to get information regarding Guild wars 2 sometime in the first time of 2010, maybe very late 2009.

who can blame ncsoft they want Aion to be a very good launch and therefore Guildwars 2 will need to take a backseat.

This.
It would be like advertising Zelda and Mario at the same time. People can't always have both. And GW and Aion being rpgs you can invest THOUSANDS, quite literally, THOUSANDS of hours into, so only one can be marketed at a time.

JR

Re:tired

Join Date: Nov 2005

W/

16 Jul 2009 at 20:03 - 58

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gun Pierson

That's a question that should never arrise, unfortunately we are forced in that situation today and have to make a choice if we want to answer it.

The ideal situation would have been to work on both games at once, like the big boys do. But NCSoft doesn't want that. Not enough recources, willingly or unwillingly.

You keep on bringing this up like it is some kind of major flaw in their game plan, and it's a truly ridiculous argument.

You are comparing apples and oranges. Blizzard runs the most successful MMO in the world, by player count and income. They can afford to do pretty much whatever they want. Why on earth would they stop developing World of Warcraft, as long as it is the company cash cow?

You are saying Guild Wars should have gone the same route, so as to be able to afford to continue developing Guild Wars whilst working on Guild Wars 2. Has it ever occurred to you how massive a change you are suggesting?

Would Guild Wars even have been able to compete for a market share against World of Warcraft had it also gone for a subscription model? How different would the game be even if it had managed to survive? Would you even be here talking about this if you weren't looking forward to a subscription free sequel?

Please, quit it with the nonsense comparisons and naive worship of Blizzard.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ravious

This is most pertinent. I wasn't just buying a product. I was buying a service, which "guaranteed" content updates (which I might have to pay for, but that's fine). See also L4D bamboozlement.

Left4Dead suffered for content massively because Valve almost immediately started work on the sequel. We have had four years of development, including premium and free content updates.

Just how long did you expect ArenaNet to keep pumping out chapters for Guild Wars before being allowed to move on?

IlikeGW

Jungle Guide

Join Date: Aug 2005

16 Jul 2009 at 20:10 - 59

I think it's pointless to be as quiet as they are. The 15-year-olds get excited about stuff like screenshots. And then they buy your game. So why avoid it?

I don't personally care because there's other games to play outside the GW genre. Hell GW2 can not ever come out and what does it matter? There's other stuff in life, games, everything.

Test Me

Krytan Explorer

Join Date: Sep 2008

E/

16 Jul 2009 at 20:16 - 60

Quote:

Originally Posted by JR

You keep on bringing this up like it is some kind of major flaw in their game plan, and it's a truly ridiculous argument.

...

Please, quit it with the nonsense comparisons and naive worship of Blizzard.

Gun doesn't imply GW should have been a monthly subscription MMO where exactly did you get that from?

Actually Gun makes a fair point with which I agree. I bought this game knowing they will release updates periodically and that I would have to pay for them. It was advertised as a different "pay-to-play" model.

I could have payed monthly and play something like WoW but I never liked that system as *I don't play every month, week, day*. If the system WoW had was "pay per number of hours you play/per usage" (more like mobile carriers) it would have been more appealing maybe.

So the different model was one of the main reasons I chose GW and I am pretty sure I'm not the only one, I know I'm not that exceptional/unique.

Regarding the model they advertised... they failed. Undeniably.

And like Gun I also think they should have kept building campaigns/expansions for GW1 *during* the same time they worked on GW2. Yes there might have been technical difficulties... But they obviously did not need to add new skills or classes every expansion. However they chose to dump and run.

JR

Re:tired

Join Date: Nov 2005

W/

16 Jul 2009 at 20:31 - 61

Quote:

Originally Posted by Test Me

Gun doesn't imply GW should have been a monthly subscription MMO where exactly did you get that from?

Actually Gun makes a fair point with which I agree. I bought this game knowing they will release updates periodically and that I would have to pay for them. It was advertised as a different "pay-to-play" model.

I could have payed monthly and play something like WoW but I never liked that system as *I don't play every month, week, day*. If the system WoW had was "pay per number of hours you play/per usage" (more like mobile carriers) it would have been more appealing maybe.

So the different model was one of the main reasons I chose GW and I am pretty sure I'm not the only one, I know I'm not that exceptional/unique.

Regarding the model they advertised... they failed. Undeniably.

And like Gun I also think they should have kept building campaigns/expansions for GW1 *during* the same time they worked on GW2. Yes there might have been technical difficulties... But they obviously did not need to add new skills or classes every expansion. However they chose to dump and run.

He has repeatedly said that the Guild Wars business model has not worked, and Blizzard has done a much better job. If that is not implying that Guild Wars should use a subscription model, then I don't know what is.

Then you yourself say that Guild Wars should have continued developing Guild Wars through the development of Guild Wars 2, which again has all the same implications as Gun's argument: monthly fees would have been a better choice.

"Regarding the model they advertised... they failed. Undeniably."

How? Why?

They made a profitable and popular game, and have consistently released large amounts of content for it over a four year period. How in any way has their model failed?

Do you mean you feel like you didn't get the content updates you felt you opted in for when you bought the box? If so I have to ask, exactly how recently did you start playing? I also have to ask at what point you feel it would be OK for ArenaNet to stop developing content for a dying game?

Gun Pierson

Forge Runner

Join Date: Feb 2006

Belgium

PIMP

Mo/

16 Jul 2009 at 20:33 - 62

Quote:

Originally Posted by JR

You keep on bringing this up like it is some kind of major flaw in their game plan, and it's a truly ridiculous argument.

You are saying Guild Wars should have gone the same route, so as to be able to afford to continue developing Guild Wars whilst working on Guild Wars 2. Has it ever occurred to you how massive a change you are suggesting?

Would Guild Wars even have been able to compete for a market share against World of Warcraft had it also gone for a subscription model? How different would the game be even if it had managed to survive? Would you even be here talking about this if you weren't looking forward to a subscription free sequel?

Please, quit it with the nonsense comparisons and naive worship of Blizzard.

I don't worship Blizzard but one can't deny they deliver good games. Didn't play WoW btw, except for the trial to have a feeling of it. I did however play MTG for 10 years and I like to compare it to that game as Anet used it for inspiration as they said themselves.

I never said I want GW to be a subscription based game. I just question the business model as something caused NCSoft to stop funding GW1. NCSoft who has a tradition in classic MMO-RPG games btw. Notice the contradiction between Anet and NCSoft?

So my nonsense is more to the point and might shed some more light on the situation than your pointless poll to be honest. This is a forum ofcourse and everybody has their own opinion.

JR

Re:tired

Join Date: Nov 2005

W/

16 Jul 2009 at 20:36 - 63

So to get this straight:

You are saying ArenaNet/NCSoft are silly for not choosing a business model that would allow them to fund development of the original whilst working on a sequel... but you are not suggesting they should have used a subscription model?

Pray tell, Gun, what exactly should they have done?

refer

Jungle Guide

Join Date: Jan 2009

US

16 Jul 2009 at 20:48 - 64

Quote:

Originally Posted by JR

So to get this straight:

You are saying ArenaNet/NCSoft are silly for not choosing a business model that would allow them to fund development of the original whilst working on a sequel... but you are not suggesting they should have used a subscription model?

Pray tell, Gun, what exactly should they have done?

Well he doesn't have to say anything. Sometimes you can know something is right but the issue is too complicated to decide a proper solution.

Me? I think they should more preview stuff... there will always be those who are impatient, so make money off them! Never gonna happen but beta PvP zones with something like.... [Next month's skill balance]: $3.50 (limited to the first ____ buyers).

Gun Pierson

Forge Runner

Join Date: Feb 2006

Belgium

PIMP

Mo/

16 Jul 2009 at 20:48 - 65

Put those 8-10 millions they waisted on Tabula Rasa in Anet instead.

All joking aside, it's difficult to say as we don't know the internal affairs and exact figures of both NCSoft and Anet and how they really see things behind the scene.

NCSoft should at least have had the deceny (if it could) towards the fans and the franchise to keep up an efficient team for GW1 that can create some new content. Which would mean something between 12-50 people more on the payroll on top of the '200' that work on GW2. If they could find the talent ofcourse.

refer

Jungle Guide

Join Date: Jan 2009

US

16 Jul 2009 at 20:50 - 66

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gun Pierson

Put those 8-10 millions they waisted on Tabula Rasa in Anet instead.

All joking aside, it's difficult to say as we don't know the internal affairs and exact figures of both NCSoft and Anet and how they really see things behind the scene.

NCSoft should at least have had the deceny towards the fans and the franchise to keep up an efficient team for GW1 that can create some new content. Which would mean something between 12-50 people more on the payroll on top of the '200' that work on GW2.

Can't they just get volunteers too? I know there are some of you here who would to die to do skill balancing (actual balancing, not shifting the "balance" to your side), even if for nothing.

dsielschott

Krytan Explorer

Join Date: Jan 2007

KURZ

W/Mo

16 Jul 2009 at 20:55 - 67

I agree with main post because of the compitition out there they do NOT want any ideas stolen/"expanded" on so that they are the first with this idea.....however with that said the main thing I would like is a update on like % complete......even if it is only like 10% still something.....in my feild we have updates every 15% after 50%.....so that is really what I would like to see.....progress results....but those are difficult to track in video game creation because a code could all of a sudden work and make a huge leap in the % complete.....but o well I will wait and hope I am not to old to play when it comes out.....

Aljasha

Krytan Explorer

Join Date: May 2009

16 Jul 2009 at 20:56 - 68

i do long for gw2 but anet needs more time to polish the game and implement stuff gw1 lacked completely. anet's developers are great, but there is so much they have to create from scratch and might be subject to change from time to time, which could drag the release date way off the intended release date.

some moths ago, anet told us they want to expand the game's overall content and i hope they don't want to much.

my guess is that many features are still in development and anet is not able to tell us yet, which features will be found in the final build.

Ravious

Lion's Arch Merchant

Join Date: Mar 2006

Servants of Fortuna

N/Mo

16 Jul 2009 at 20:57 - 69

Quote:

Originally Posted by JR

So to get this straight:

You are saying ArenaNet/NCSoft are silly for not choosing a business model that would allow them to fund development of the original whilst working on a sequel... but you are not suggesting they should have used a subscription model?

You mean to say that you cannot conceive of a way where they work on both Guild Wars 1 and a sequel? They had "two teams" for the campaigns. They have nearly double the employees they had at Prophecies. Plus, they have big daddy NCSoft.

I submit that it actually would not have been a problem if beta testing had started in 2008. The service, which I was used to, would've nearly remained in tact. But, somehow they theoretically got more capital infusion (money=time, friend /asura) so that they did not have to push out the game by 2008-2009.

That's my biggest problem with their PR for Guild Wars 2. They set expectations early. Their excuse is "we told you about it early, but we didn't have to." I fully agree that they had the power not to tell us (which would have also been a PR nightmare). YET, they did tell us, and they told us about the game, and they told us when beta testing was going to be. They set expectations.

Now for whatever reason (capital infusion, tech breakthrough, etc.) they changed gameplans to what we are on now. Good for them. I hope GW2 shakes the pillars of video gamedom with the extra time they were given. The only misstep was they did not manage our expectations, which they set, when they changed pace. It wasn't until Mike O'Brien's letter nearly half a year ago in response to the NCSoft investor's report that they even attempted to bring us back to the wavelength they are operating at.

Ghost Omel

Krytan Explorer

Join Date: Aug 2007

----//---//---//-----//----

W/

16 Jul 2009 at 21:03 - 70

Quote:

Originally Posted by refer

Well he doesn't have to say anything. Sometimes you can know something is right but the issue is too complicated to decide a proper solution.

Me? I think they should more preview stuff... there will always be those who are impatient, so make money off them! Never gonna happen but beta PvP zones with something like.... [Next month's skill balance]: $3.50 (limited to the first ____ buyers).

Selling updates 0_0.. to early buyers?

Wow thats a perfect idea.. Why not do this... NcSoft will sell you a lvl 20 characters with all the titles including PvP titles with a 10 staks of Zkeys and Ectos all char slots and every proffesion along with ALL the minis and special weapons -_- only 59.99 that way you dont have to play at all =) Joking ofcourse no offence =)

I Say that the bussiness model did not fail.. If it would the game wouldnt last for 4 years right.... i mean money comes from somewere and seeing how NcSoft wastes money on a paycheck that dooms his own product its not from them. And im pretty sure anet is not wasting money out of their own pocket for it as well they are to busy with GW2. That said it leaves only one possible choice...The game pays for itself. Disregarding all the "Cwapy game and old it has become no updates for me -_-" claims the developers of this game done an outstanding job that DOES rival a gaming company that has been a dragon amongst ants for over a decade -_-(Blizzard)

In my book it checks of as A succesfull game from a owesome developer leads of which are Ex-Blizzarders, wow i wonder why they QUIT? Oh yeah to bring us something unique =)

Lets see if GW2 will be out by late 2010 =) or beta in mid 2010 =)

Improvavel

Desert Nomad

Join Date: Apr 2007

16 Jul 2009 at 21:20 - 71

Sincerely, I don't know why costumers of GW expect to receive information about GW2.

People paid for GW and got what they paid for and, as with every MMORPG, people knew or (should know) that there is a risk the game will die.

GW didn't die, but went stagnant after NF - EotN was just a bandage.

Whatever comes in GW2, I expect it to have vertical expansions - this is, GW will come with content from level 1-XX, expansion 1 lvl xx - yy, expansion2 lvl yy-zz, and so on.

Test Me

Krytan Explorer

Join Date: Sep 2008

E/

16 Jul 2009 at 21:31 - 72

Quote:

Originally Posted by JR

"Regarding the model they advertised... they failed. Undeniably."

How? Why?

I'll put it very simple for you: they said they don't sell a pay by subscription based game but rather a pay by regular every 6 months update game.

If I tell you I'm going to cook dinner and I don't, then it means I failed at cooking dinner.

Simple enough?

Miss Puddles

Jungle Guide

Join Date: Jun 2005

California

Shiverpeaks Search And Rescue [Lost]

Me/

16 Jul 2009 at 21:43 - 73

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darcy

ArenaNet handles GW2 the same way they handle GW. You will find out when it happens.

They are very consistent with this method.

I voted #3. I can wait. ANet has proven they can make a good game. I don't want to get early news about things that might not end up in the final release.

This.

Admittedly I'm rather put off by them announcing GW2 what seems like a bazillion years before it is actually going to be released, but on the other hand I'm pretty confident that it will be worth the wait.

JR

Re:tired

Join Date: Nov 2005

W/

16 Jul 2009 at 21:43 - 74

Quote:

Originally Posted by Test Me

I'll put it very simple for you: they said they don't sell a pay by subscription based game but rather a pay by regular every 6 months update game.

If I tell you I'm going to cook dinner and I don't, then it means I failed at cooking dinner.

Simple enough?

They didn't start talking about chapters every six months until quite a while after release, so it was never supposed to be a key attraction to their model. Even once they did I believe it was only stated as an intention rather than a promise.

Gun Pierson

Forge Runner

Join Date: Feb 2006

Belgium

PIMP

Mo/

16 Jul 2009 at 21:56 - 75

Quote:

Originally Posted by JR

They didn't start talking about chapters every six months until quite a while after release, so it was never supposed to be a key attraction to their model.

Here's a quote from Jeff Strain way before release:

Quote:

Here's what I can tell you about the future of the game. First of all, we've always said that our intent is to release a couple each year. So we're looking for about a six-month time frame for each release. Also, you mentioned "a few new skills," and I'd probably revise that. We're not going to be releasing a few new skills and maybe one new character class, because we're not going to release "expansion packs." We're going to release what we call a new chapter in the world. We want to make it very clear that the scope and scale of content you'll be getting in the new chapters are comparable to what you'll be getting in the original game.

source:
http://uk.videogames.games.yahoo.com...rs-ece10d.html

Lonesamurai

Furnace Stoker

Join Date: Apr 2006

Cheltenham, Glos, UK

Wolf Pack Samurai [WPS]

R/A

16 Jul 2009 at 22:05 - 76

Ok, JR and I talked extensively about this yesterday,maybe for about 5-6 hours on the subject and I'm in complete agreement with him because he knows the business, he actually was there when a games company failed (Auron anyone?)

Like myself he's also been there since the beginning of the game and been active in a lot of the behind the scenes Alpha side and I know he is even willing to destroy any hopes he had of being a part of GW2 Alpha or whatever by trying to help ANet by being honest and he is

and Gun, that site has no date on it so no way to know its from before release, but i remember that from AFTER release anyway because I waslinked it when I was working for GAME in the UK and was one of only three managers to get into the beta that way

and FYI guys, the game was marketed as FREE to play, not Pay to play and also says Free to play on the box

Gun Pierson

Forge Runner

Join Date: Feb 2006

Belgium

PIMP

Mo/

16 Jul 2009 at 22:24 - 77

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lonesamurai

and Gun, that site has no date on it so no way to know its from before release, but i remember that from AFTER release anyway because I waslinked it when I was working for GAME in the UK and was one of only three managers to get into the beta that way

No prob I have more proof.You guys were not the only ones around you know. This site has a date. August 2004, almost a year before release:
http://www.gamespot.com/pc/rpg/guild...tle%3B3&page=3
Jeff Strain again:

Quote:

Upon the release of that second chapter, essentially the teams will reverse roles. The chapter two team will then become the live team, and the first team will begin development on chapter three. With this process, you will experience excellent in-game support within a growing, dynamic world, and you will have the opportunity to acquire significant new content every six to nine months.

Lonesamurai

Furnace Stoker

Join Date: Apr 2006

Cheltenham, Glos, UK

Wolf Pack Samurai [WPS]

R/A

16 Jul 2009 at 22:27 - 78

but Gun, thats exactly what happened, but instead of Chapter three, they went to EotN and changed focus

Legendm

Academy Page

Join Date: Jul 2008

E/

16 Jul 2009 at 22:29 - 79

I'm starting to get the feeling that every Guild Wars 2 thread is just made for an excuse to bitch. I mean every single one made comes down to 'Anet owes us more information' (which isn't even true). We've had this same discussion probably about a thousand times. Move on, play another game, I'm sure there is something else in your life that could replace guild wars. Then in a few years when the game is actually released come back and play it if you're still interested.

IlikeGW

Jungle Guide

Join Date: Aug 2005

16 Jul 2009 at 22:41 - 80

You know what, Anet failed on many of their significant promises, but be happy it's not on a Hellgate level of failure. At least we know what they are, the average game making middleman of the MMO world. They're not worth drooling over but if you want to get their next game out of the bargain bin go for it. I just wouldn't spend full retail on their games ever again. Stop looking for a fix from them though, GW1 isn't getting it, GW2 will not solve the problems of GW1. Accept them for what they are, the not A level game producer.