Anything in GW that you don't want to see in GW2?

Actually, in moderation and where it makes sense, it's not much of a problem. If minotaurs are spread in a particular range, why not use minotaurs throughout that range, even if that range spreads into another chapter?

Illusion/enchantment focussed wizard. Rogue. Bard... or, in 4th ed, warlord.

Heck, to use Magic terms, the Mesmer is the representative of blue magic (Necro black, Ele red, Monk white) - as archetypical as any of the others, however neglected it may often be in this sort of game. You may not like it, but some people do like that type of magic, and their opinions are no less valid than yours.

The problem isn't the concept, it's the balancing. The Mesmer suffers from 'anything I can do, someone else can do better' syndrome because, well, everything has skills that muscle in on the Mesmer's area of expertise - but showing some more restraint in GW2 could fix that. The other two... are more useful than you think in PvE, played well. There are people who even say a well-played Paragon is too powerful.

PvP

----------

Monthly payments definitely.

GW1 has no Monthly fees...

teeny, tiny storage

and grind

Skills base on titles.

What in GW do I NOT want to see in GW2?

Low end PvP arenas with high end armor, skills, and weapons. Keep them limited to best in surrounding area.
Locked gates/areas. Should I find an outpost or town while exploring, I want to enter it, not wait for a quest to 'unlock' it.
Linked quests that make you run back and forth through same areas.
Elite skills or weapons that drop only during certain quests or missions.
Spammers. (WTB, WTS, XYZ is recruiting, etc.)
Bots.
PvP & PvE dependant upon each other. They are separate parts of the game, they should not have any effect on each other. PvP - earn all their skills, armor, and weapons from scratch through rewards. PvE earn them through game play.

Rare highest damage weapons that are only available through grind? No, this is definately something I don't want in GW2.

GOD PLEASE NO. Besides, they've already said ANY character will be max level upon entering PVP in GW2. So you're out of luck.

I hope your whole post was sarcasm.

You.... (12 chars)

Well, I do have to say: I figured someone would resort to this eventually, even though I put a legitimate answer into the discussion.

Grow up :-) I used to PvP in real life, which is probably a hell of a lot more than you can say.. lol

You must be really old. Didn’t they make fighting with sword illegal in the 19th century.

More likely guns made killing faster than a sword - Murder I think was always in some way illegal unless ordered by Royalty

Yeah, war (and the military) has been non-existent since the 19th century :-)

Locked city gates.

I don't mind them refusing to start missions until previous missions are completed, but refusing to let me into a city just chaps. Yeah, sure, you say I can't come in here now, and 3 days from now you're going to pull out the, "You're our only hope!" line... It's dumb game play.

If you honestly think that mesmers have no use then you're probably one of the people playing gimmick only PvX builds...

I like all the classes for GW, but the mechanics are broken for some of them... like shadowstepping, motigon, dervish forms, etc.

My apologies for my earlier rant against RA and the players. I meant nothing against the people who are trying to learn, it's more the people who do the obvious stupid things like play monk and run in an die, yell at you when you try to suggest tactics, refuse to learn, and leave after they die once, etc.

However I do go into RA because it's useful to practice a new build when no one in your guild is on.

Yes PvP... except fun area's like Aspenwood and Alliance Battles. All other PvP can go IMO. PvP has ruined the PvE experience and GW can survive without it.

lootinn scale
auction house would be nice
and level cap but you don't get benifts after you get to a certain level just to be fair

i would like to keep the titles but make them account based to get rid of most of the grind
i would keep all the classes even the mesmer becuase mesmers are hard to use but they have there benifts and some peoples favorite professions are the mesmer so we can't get rid of the people so they ydon't buy the game

Well I put a legimate answer as well. PvP haters are no good for the game.

One thing really
just cause .....well it doesnt need a explanation
bear mode

<--------------------

to clarify, I don't really hate PvP. I play quite a few games geared towards it in other genres (including PvP tourneys at my yearly QuakeCon pilgrimage), but I don't agree with PvP being tied to PvE in this genre, primarily Arena PvP. I am alright with World PvP in games like this because they don't require as many balancing issues that affect PvE. Arena PvP, on the other hand, has serious balancing issues, which due to the genre really affect the PvE aspect of the game. WoW is finding that out as well now that it has implemented Arena PvP (and to a lesser extent Battleground). If we are to have Arena PvP (where nothing outside the arena/players affect the game) then we really should make sure that there are PvE-only skills to counter that - since they will be the only things that aren't 'balanced' frequently with the PvP balances.

I don't speak for everyone, but many PvE players that I have known prefer for PvE content and play that is released to be static and not change so much, only changing the whole PvE experience by releasing new content, not continuously changing old content. Again, I don't speak for everyone on that, but there are people that feel that way. There's something about playing new content, getting into rythms and patterns, and then playing new content, etc etc. There are other genres much better suited for changing environments (primarily PvP based such as FPS's and RTS's but also strict strategy games) which mostly don't harm the PvE experience (because the PvE experience is usually a one-shot).

EDIT: The Fury devs had the right idea about a non-PvE CRPG (where PvP had no adverse effects on a non-existent PvE), though they didn't implement it very well and refused to listen to people that tried to explain it to them. Arena PvP and PvE just do not seem to go together very well because one is all about change and the other is about persistence and familiarity).

ArenaNet could simply release more than one game, one geared towards PvE and one strictly PvP. Many companies develop and produce multiple titles under their umbrella, and I think ArenaNet could do that. Perhaps PvE-only skills were implemented poorly, but if PvP and PvE are to affect each other, then perhaps there needs to be a subset of skills unique to each. Taking away PvE-only skills while linking PvP and PvE is merely someone being spiteful from the PvP side of the house. They just need to implement them in another way than grind (skills that get better with missions/quests solved - a questline to unlock a PvE-only skill, etc etc).