Curse

dawnmist · Feb 03, 2012, 06:17 AM // 06:17

I remember a discussion panel they held (at GDC?) a year or two back.

Part of why they started making GW2, was that they wanted the ability to add public, large group type quests (the precursors to the dynamic events that are the basis for content in GW2), but to do that they needed to change large chunks of how the game worked. The problem with changing the game so drastically was that there were a lot of people who loved it the way it was - ArenaNet didn't feel it fair to change the game that much when people loved it the way it was. So they decided splitting it out to another game would be better.

The panel discussed how they experimented with some of the changes using the GW1 engine...and how people hunting in the gw.dat file found some of the quests/skills/icons from those tests and were speculating on what the new content meant and when it'd be released.

Between skill balancing becoming very unwieldy, the desire to drop traditional quests, the wish to make the game an open world instead of instanced, etc, they needed to make a break between "existing game" and "changed, new game".

I can't check from work, but I think this was the panel (they spoke about Utopia, etc):
http://www.gdcvault.com/play/1013691...Dynamic_Events
And the discussion thread in GW2Guru about that vid: http://www.guildwars2guru.com/forum/...gdc-t8341.html

Showtime · Feb 03, 2012, 06:48 AM // 06:48

From what I remember before gw ever came out was that they planned to release a new campaign every 6 months or so. It kinda worried me a little bit at the time because it almost sounded like a subscription ($15 monthly for wow/ $60 every 6 months or $10 month for GW). That obviously didn't happen due to all the reasons mentioned above, but also probably because they were making money so why add more when they can sit back and make money off existing content. GW was 2nd to WoW and that means that they sold a lot of games and made a lot of money.

Getting to the mechanics of the game, they probably made twice as many character types as needed and had 10 times the amount of skills. Way too ambitious. No way to remotely balance all that. Would have been much better having a lot less skills and only adding new skills and character skins as expansions came out. So there would always be healer, magic user, warrior, necro, mesmer, and ranger or a thief type class. But each expansion would add the choice of creating one of those classes from the expansion and a new line of skills for them to use. Then you could have Ranger (w/ rit skills)/X or Warrior (w/ derv skills)/Y as the series progressed. Better to balance existing characters and skills than to bring a whole new line out to further mess things up.

Too late for any of that now. If you enjoyed what gw1 brought to the table and like where gw2 is going or don't even know, but still want to try it, then do it. It should be fun. Just be aware that they will probably handle things the way they did with gw1. They will provide new content at their own pace and stop when they decide to no matter how many are willing to pay for new content. They will over promise at the beginning. They will say things are limited time only and then sell those items 6 months later. Instead of new content, they will add grind and other bs to keep towns looking busy in hopes that it wll help sell old content to new players. Besides that crap, it was a fun game.

I'm hoping diablo 3 comes out 1st so I can get hooked on that instead. Too many broken promises from this company that too many accept for whatever reason. Either way GW2 looks freaking amazing.

Swingline · Feb 03, 2012, 02:37 PM // 14:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by Showtime

I'm hoping diablo 3 comes out 1st so I can get hooked on that instead. Too many broken promises from this company that too many accept for whatever reason. Either way GW2 looks freaking amazing.

And you don't think blizzard doesn't breaks promises?... lol

KZaske · Feb 03, 2012, 08:32 PM // 20:32

Back when GW was in alpha/beta stage the graphics looked very much the same as WoW started with (before either game went live). It was only after Blizzard released a few screen shots that ArenaNet changed the graphical style for Guild Wars. I am very happy they did because if they had not, I would not be playing it.
As already mentioned, ArenaNet had planned on GW2 being live by the middle of 2010 at the latest. That was pushed back for several reasons; Silvary rework, Dynamic Events rework, art style rework and several others changes. It should be noted that it is not uncommon for a developer to change things once in a while, but some of the changes ArenaNet have done are huge by any standard almost a huge as the chage that occured during TablaRosa's development.

A few of my RL friends and I have been listening to the NCSoft quarterly conference calls, we all agree that it sounds like something is going on behind closed doors. The speculation is that NCSoft is upset that GW2 is so far behind schedule. That is only speculation (from a few of my RL friends when we sat down; listened to and talked about the last few calls) and more than likely does not reflect reality.

Shanaeri Rynale · Feb 03, 2012, 09:03 PM // 21:03

In my view Anet could'nt afford to do both. I'm sure they would have loved to have done what Blizzard have done with WoW and have two whole fully equipped teams on the go (one doing pandaville and the other Titan). One dealing and creating GW1 expansions and the other working on GW2

Back in the day, I never really quite bought the reasons why they cancelled Utopia and did'nt make any more expansions. I mean I would have loved a new chapter and expansions even without a starter area, new skills, professions and game mechanics. If it's not broke dont fix it...

I also think Anet had a cash cow (GW1) which it was willing to bleed slowly dry until a new one could be developed. I don't blame them for that, it's a common business practice, but it does make me a little sad as to thinking what could have been.

Also, remember GW1 was never designed to be a full on MMO that people play for 7 years. It was designed to be a 'dip in and out' game where if you got bored youd go play something else for a while without it costing you any more money.

Although we hoped that the 2008 figure was correct (and back in 2007 that seemed so far away) there were many who said that it takes 5+ years to make an MMO and the figure was wrong. Well guess what it's nearly 5 years since 2007 and the announcement.

I also think they knew how the quality had dropped in EOTN. Yes it has some wonderful areas, but it also has a lot of cut and paste dungeons and PvE skill grind that make up a lot of the content.

So to sum up. I believe Anet did not in 2007 have the resources to do both develop GW2 and give GW1 the attention and quality it deserved. So they took a gutsy call and hoped people had enough brand loyalty to wait.

FoxBat · Feb 05, 2012, 05:14 AM // 05:14

Time for a little reading between the lines

"Each campaign was adding new complexity that made it harder to draw in new players" (note that COMPLEXITY was their main complaint with 10 million skills/professions/mechanics, and not balance!)

Now what does an expansion pack like Eye of the North fail to do? Draw in new players! They can't buy it as a standalone! It only sells to existing fans.

In short, Anet wasn't completely happy or confident in their existing GW1 players, and started Utopia (leading into GW2) by brainstorming how to expand their base. 5 million copies sounds like alot until you divide it by 3 or 4. That's pretty niche compared to WoW's 10 million active subscriptions. They wanted a bigger audience, and GW2 is an entirely different game and MMO through and through to poach some of that group that would dwarf the population of GW1's golden days.

Keep people happy till GW2? They don't care that much. They have bigger fish to fry.