|
|
Post by TheUncleanOne on Oct 8, 2007 21:38:19 GMT -5
Well, since there was a 'production error'... PCGamer posted the entire article about the 250 years between GW:EN and GW2, HEREI have some thoughts as to how GW2 might play, based on the history in the article and some of the previous dev comments... but at the risk of inserting spoilers, I'll refrain for now... What's your opinion of the apparent future of Tyria? |
|
|
|
Post by Quintare on Oct 9, 2007 9:39:51 GMT -5
I was not anticipating the change in landscape and national structure to be so complete. I worry that the artists will spend so much time putting in little 'easter eggs' in the form of old structures or natural landmarks carried over from the first game that they skimp on good level design. IMHO that has always been a weak-point for the GW team in the first place. There are many ways to make a desert setting both unique and challenging that don't involve having spiders boil up out of the ground.
As for guilds... well it's hard to tell what they mean to do. It is tantalizing the way they phrase the roles each race will play within a guild, however they could just be making the point that guilds will not be race-restricted in a rather long-winded narrative way. Three years ago they talked about making customizable guild halls and 'many' improvements to guilds, and yet very little came out of all that. I think they need to completely re-think their concept of 'Guilds' in relation to this game. It's implementation in Guild Wars was more of a loose and informal association of people that shared a common living space. In no way is the story or game dependant on association with a guild or some cooperative effort by the guild. There is GvG of course but that is a wholly separate component which can be completely left out. Certainly it's not central enough to merit naming the entire game after. I hope to see ANet make guild activity more important as a mechanic, and also give us more tools to create and support a community of players.
|
|
