Curse

mrvrod · Jan 29, 2009, 04:12 PM // 16:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fril Estelin

This was post #106 on page 6 and I'm up-ing it so that everyone can think about it. I'm in agreement with this view and hope Anet doesn't cave in so that GW2 can have the marketing edge it needs to succeed.

I have do disagree with you.

First, there is no drm issues with GW products, and I assume it will be the same for GW2.

Second, the poster you quote assumes that less information would have led to less concern about Spore's drm issues which, at least in the States, is completely false! People here are getting sick & tired of jumping through hoops & having software auto-install that causes problems with your machine. More & more people are voting against drm with their dollar.

Third, not everyone is asking for specific details. An updated timeline would be nice (and it can be an estimate, not set in stone). How about some work on a GW2 website with concept art? We get this flood of juicy information before the release of GW:EN with promises of certain milemarkers to come, then nothing.

Last, I personally have never thought GW2 was a hoax, but the longer I wait for some information, the more I'm convinced GW2 is dead. I hope and pray it's not! I'm enough of a fanboy of this franchise that I will buy GW2 WHENEVER it comes out! I hope to be invited to the beta if it ever happens, but I'm losing hope. And based on the popularity of these type of threads, I am nowhere near the only one.

P.S. To Anet c/o Regina. If you guys have hit a snag, and GW2 won't be out for a few years, just tell us. It's the lack of any timetable that has us all worried.

Ctb · Jan 29, 2009, 06:27 PM // 18:27

Quote:

If Abedeus's figure of Diablo 3 having been developed for three years before launch is to be believed, two years into Diablo 3's development, all that was known was some rumours that Blizzard was working on some secret project that might be Diablo 3.

It was being developed for three years before they announced it, actually. It still hasn't launched. When they unveiled it, though, they had a fully functioning game. The only things that have really changed since then are some of the graphics and some general tweaking. They unvieled a fully functioning game after three years of development, including the break where it switched studios, and ANET can't even show a screenshot from a non-playable demo build? They can't even tell us anything about it that they haven't already stated?

Nobody (reasonably) expects it to be done, or even necessarily that close to being done, but when you announce a game and then say nothing at all for 2 years, normal people get a little suspicious.

If you want a more relevant comparison, Blizzard started working on WoW in mid 2000 and by E3 2002 they had a non-playable demo. The next year, they had a playable demo. In the interim, they actually released info about the game - classes, races, basic backstory, etc.

ANET's two years in, and they can't even say anything they didn't say back when they announced it? Fishy.

Quote:

That excludes your theory of "narrow field of MMO"

No, it doesn't. I don't know what you think you're talking about, but Guild Wars competes with MMOs, not 15 year old D&D games. What the naming conventions of the game's characters has to do with its marketing situation, I have no idea.

In fact, I have no idea what your post was supposed to be about because half of it's wrong, half of it is just stuff you say happened to you, and none of it seems to have anything to do with the illegitimate comparison someone made between GW and GTA IV, which is what my post - which you quoted - was about.

seut · Jan 29, 2009, 08:48 PM // 20:48

How long is Blizzard's unannounced MMO in development? 3-5years... how much information have they released so far? nothing except "we are working on an unanounced title".

Fril Estelin · Jan 29, 2009, 09:34 PM // 21:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ctb

Nobody (reasonably) expects it to be done, or even necessarily that close to being done, but when you announce a game and then say nothing at all for 2 years, normal people get a little suspicious.

The bold part made me laugh

.

I knew I wasn't normal!

Seriously, people need to get over it, buy more patience, or move on and stop looking obsessively at the past.

Ctb · Jan 30, 2009, 02:12 AM // 02:12

Quote:

How long is Blizzard's unannounced MMO in development? 3-5years...

What, the one they started hiring for less than a year and a half ago?

Quote:

nothing except "we are working on an unanounced title"

"they" didn't release anything. The game has never officially been acknowledged, a mod on the WoW forums claims they're working on it and a bunch of people noticed some telling job listings on the Blizzard website back October '07. Contrast that with ANET's official announcement of Guild Wars 2 nearly 2 years ago, with nothing since.

Even if this were comparable, Blizzard can get away with that kind of hush hush secrecy anyway. They're much bigger, have much more notable and well-known games, and have a much more established track record in the industry.

I have serious doubts about the reality of that game too though. Starcraft: Ghost anyone?

Quote:

Seriously, people need to get over it, buy more patience, or move on and stop looking obsessively at the past.

Or accept that it's highly unusual to publicly announce a product and then refuse to talk about it for 2 years...

Apollo Smile · Jan 30, 2009, 02:29 AM // 02:29

Hey, maybe ArenaNet could release all their new ideas before they can properly show them off. I'm sure Blizzard would love to implement as much of it as they could in their next WoW expansion. Warhammer Online, anyone?

draxynnic · Jan 30, 2009, 02:37 AM // 02:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ctb

Even if this were comparable, Blizzard can get away with that kind of hush hush secrecy anyway. They're much bigger, have much more notable and well-known games, and have a much more established track record in the industry.

I think the most important part there is the "they're much bigger" part. They don't have to explain that they're not working on game X because they're working on game Y because they're big enough to have teams working on each. ANet only has one full team, therefor when that team turns to work on GW2, they either have to let people know or leave people hanging.

ANet being quiet about Guild Wars 2 is just like Blizzard being quiet about Diablo 3 until they felt they were ready for an extended presentation. The only difference is that Blizzard could afford to keep it completely hushed-up, while ANet needed to explain why they weren't making campaigns any more.

Maybe being completely silent about it after the cat is out of the bag isn't the best option - but presumably they have their reasons, and we can't really say for sure that it isn't the best option for them without knowing those reasons. However, I certainly don't see anything sinister about it - it seems far more likely that they're waiting until they can do a D3-style release rather than potentially lose some of the impact by releasing dribs and drabs in the meantime.

(Idly, to nitpick: I sincerely doubt that D3 has only had graphical tweaks and the like since announcement. They have a functional game, yes, but I'd guess at the time they probably only had a couple of areas, probably haven't had all five classes implemented let alone with full skill trees, probably haven't implemented most of the enemies they intend to put in the game, and certainly have a lot of balancing to do!)

Cacheelma · Jan 30, 2009, 03:39 AM // 03:39

I can feel the burning passion people on this thread have with GW. Sadly some people are just too blind to see through all the vapor that there's nothing behind it. NOTHING.

And what's with people taking Regina's words for granted anyway? Haven't you LEARNED anything from the whole Gaile and CM breakdown hotmess we had not long ago, when the game was still cared by MANY people (me included)?

As some people suggested, the only reason why Anet had to announce GW2 when they did because they wanted to promote EotN. Without saying that EotN is a bridge that would carry (somehow) whatever you have in GW to the new game (GW2), EotN would've looked like a savaged product from a failed standalone-expansion (which is what it actually is) to a failed game that has reached its expiration date a little prematurely (which is what GW is).

Shadowmoon · Jan 30, 2009, 04:03 AM // 04:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by Apollo Smile

Hey, maybe ArenaNet could release all their new ideas before they can properly show them off. I'm sure Blizzard would love to implement as much of it as they could in their next WoW expansion. Warhammer Online, anyone?

I sorta wonder how could blizzard make another WoW expansion, they are running out of WC3 lore to deficate on.

Apollo Smile · Jan 30, 2009, 04:12 AM // 04:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shadowmoon

I sorta wonder how could blizzard make another WoW expansion, they are running out of WC3 lore to deficate on.

I'm guessing the next part of the story in WoW once they finally kill Arthas off will involve the Old Gods. Some of the quests in WoTLK kinda hints at it.

Cacheelma · Jan 30, 2009, 04:24 AM // 04:24

That, or the Emerald Dream. Hell, they can even create new lore material in WoW itself without relying on the old WC games. Most of the WotLK stuff came from the RPG books, too, AFAIK.

But this is offtopic. And BTW, saying that they don't release info because other company might copy it is just LAME.

Apollo Smile · Jan 30, 2009, 04:35 AM // 04:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cacheelma

That, or the Emerald Dream. Hell, they can even create new lore material in WoW itself without relying on the old WC games. Most of the WotLK stuff came from the RPG books, too, AFAIK.

But this is offtopic. And BTW, saying that they don't release info because other company might copy it is just LAME.

You do realize how competitive the gaming business is, right? Especially when it comes to MMOs all trying to woo people to their respective games. Guild Wars 1 tried some ideas that nobody has before. I figure ArenaNet still has a few more intresting tricks up their sleeves. The last thing any company would want is to have their competitors use their ideas before they are even done and effectively "steal their thunder". It may sound "lame" to you but that is business.

shoyon456 · Jan 30, 2009, 04:43 AM // 04:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by Apollo Smile

You do realize how competitive the gaming business is, right? Especially when it comes to MMOs all trying to woo people to their respective games. Guild Wars 1 tried some ideas that nobody has before. I figure ArenaNet still has a few more intresting tricks up their sleeves. The last thing any company would want is to have their competitors use their ideas before they are even done and effectively "steal their thunder". It may sound "lame" to you but that is business.

While this may be true that they want to safeguard their ideas, concept art is not an idea. Furthermore, the reason they simply won't release concept art by itself, is because they want a big bang.

The whole thing is ironic though, considering that many SUPPOSED elements of GW2 are simply WoW ripoffs, ideas not unique to gw. Some are high level cap, jumping/swimming (mounts?), large scale world pvp, and large scale dungeon-like raids.

Apollo Smile · Jan 30, 2009, 04:53 AM // 04:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by shoyon456

While this may be true that they want to safeguard their ideas, concept art is not an idea. Furthermore, the reason they simply won't release concept art by itself, is because they want a big bang.

The whole thing is ironic though, considering that many SUPPOSED elements of GW2 are simply WoW ripoffs, ideas not unique to gw. Some are high level cap, jumping/swimming (mounts?), large scale world pvp, and large scale dungeon-like raids.

World of Warcraft didn't create a single one of those ideas.
Those ideas were already announced to be in Guild Wars 2 due to the fact they aren't new ideas. That doesn't represent all of what Guild Wars 2 will add to the table.

shoyon456 · Jan 30, 2009, 05:03 AM // 05:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by Apollo Smile

World of Warcraft didn't create a single one of those ideas.
Those ideas were already announced to be in Guild Wars 2 due to the fact they aren't new ideas. That doesn't represent all of what Guild Wars 2 will add to the table.

Stop acting like anet is revolutionary in every business aspect. Those may not be NEW ideas, but they were SUCCESSFUL IDEAS under WoW. You must admit that anet would not be taking GW2 in this direction if WoW hadn't grown so popular and made so much $$$ under these very ideas.

Professor K · Jan 30, 2009, 05:23 AM // 05:23

Are people so narrow minded they think Warcraft is the only MMO?

Cacheelma · Jan 30, 2009, 06:29 AM // 06:29

Are people so retarded they think Anet can come up with unique idea nobody can think of and everyone wants to steal it?

Fril Estelin · Jan 30, 2009, 06:36 AM // 06:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ctb

Or accept that it's highly unusual to publicly announce a product and then refuse to talk about it for 2 years...

GW1 being something completely unique, I'm not surprised at all. Anet hasn't got the resources of Blizzard Activision and surely is not stupid. You can believe in them or not, believe Regina's word or not (she's definitely not like Gaile), believe the words of NCsoft bosses or not, believe that the announcement of Umbra being licensed is a smoke-screen or not, but in the end these are pieces of evidence that the game is indeed in development. You can draw all the comparisons you want, with DNF, SC:Ghost, or WoW, or whatever else, GW1 still remains in a category of its own and my guess is that GW2 is and will be exactly the same. You can try to defend the fact that this situation of not releasing any information after PCgamer May'07 amounts to vaporware, but this is an "academic" debate, not a real debate about GW2. The point is moot and this thread is more about how people cope or don't cope with this situation rather than GW2. Until people accept Anet's policy on that (and I guess a lot of people hope that Regina will continue to press them to change their policy, which is more unlikely everyday that passes), we're not going to make any progress. This thread is just going in circles since page 1.

Apollo Smile · Jan 30, 2009, 06:56 AM // 06:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fril Estelin

GW1 being something completely unique, I'm not surprised at all. Anet hasn't got the resources of Blizzard Activision and surely is not stupid. You can believe in them or not, believe Regina's word or not (she's definitely not like Gaile), believe the words of NCsoft bosses or not, believe that the announcement of Umbra being licensed is a smoke-screen or not, but in the end these are pieces of evidence that the game is indeed in development. You can draw all the comparisons you want, with DNF, SC:Ghost, or WoW, or whatever else, GW1 still remains in a category of its own and my guess is that GW2 is and will be exactly the same. You can try to defend the fact that this situation of not releasing any information after PCgamer May'07 amounts to vaporware, but this is an "academic" debate, not a real debate about GW2. The point is moot and this thread is more about how people cope or don't cope with this situation rather than GW2. Until people accept Anet's policy on that (and I guess a lot of people hope that Regina will continue to press them to change their policy, which is more unlikely everyday that passes), we're not going to make any progress. This thread is just going in circles since page 1.

But arguing is fun! Keep us busy til GW2 comes out.

Cacheelma · Jan 30, 2009, 07:09 AM // 07:09

I'm not sure if I can keep on arguing forever.