Talk:Guild Wars/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

→

Archive 5

2004 computer and video games?

The release date is *2005*... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.182.176.12 (talk) 06:28, 19 October 2004 (UTC)

Well I suppose you're right. That was probably added because either the person who put that in did so when the release date was 2004 or because there are a lot of betas going about. I'll change it now. pie4all88 21:13, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Culling of external links

The external links section of this page is getting out of hand, I propose a cull of all but the best links.

Is the subsection of guilds really necessary? It seems like vanity to me and so I think it should go. --Kevin 10:21, Apr 27, 2005 (UTC)

Guild Wars is focused, it seems, on guild warfare - so I think the guilds, as long as they are notable (I don't know how to gauge their notability - perhaps find a list of the most popular ones), can remain. ugen 64 22:05, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Why dont we make a Guilds of Guild Wars page for everyone to link there sites to, that way we dont have the clutter on this page while still having the option to browse the guilds on another linked page.

I've spoken to some players of GuildWars and they have told me that guilds aren't important enough to be linked to from a Wikipedia article. I'm going to comment out all the fansites and guild sites until we decide what should be done with them. I am in favour of removing the guild sites and picking the best five fansites. --Kevin 18:47, May 2, 2005 (UTC)

They're not that important. This was the right move. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 22:07, May 4, 2005 (UTC)

I've gone and deleted them. People were just removing the comment code and adding their latest pet .tk fan/guild site. --Kevin 00:57, May 31, 2005 (UTC)

ArenaNet maintains a list of the top guilds. A few of the highest ranking ones might be a good choice if we really want to link to some guilds. --AdamBackstrom 17:46, 3 May 2005 (UTC)

There's a burgeoning GW wiki called GuildWiki up at http://www.zerolives.org/guildwars, perhaps it would be good to link? --68.220.148.180 10:07, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I like that GW wiki, I'd have no problems with it being added. --Kevin 14:56, Jun 26, 2005 (UTC)

The above wiki is currently down, it needs funding for a dedicated server.

Why not link to the list of Guilds instead of having this assinine favoritism with posting your Guild in there? This is an encyclopedia, not a fansite. Kade 06:44, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

Screenshots

I added two screenshots, but my computer is not very good, so they kinda suck in quality. Perhaps someone with a better computer could add better screenshots? :) – ugen64 02:45, 9 May 2005 (UTC)

I'll add some high quality ones, I've got the capabilities to get the max AA and graphics quality on Guild Wars.

Proposal: should we, instead of having individual screenshots for each character class, try to get a single screenshot with each one represented (and have a "From left to right:" caption)? I have enough free time to do this myself, but I wanted to ask first (also because this would entail removal of the existing screens). I can handle max AA and graphics quality so that's not a concern. Junkyard prince 01:56, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Make one of each character and from the select screen capture the image, then photshop them all together on one screen so it looks like they are all together, achieving the whole left to right thing u want. This way you dont have to annoy people into standing around in a line. -Tik

I'm a Guild leader and have many friends on the game, so I could easily gather a shot of all the classes in alphabetical order left to right with little trouble. I'll post the pic here once I get it so people can give it the run-down and add it for me (I'm not sure what the best formatting would be).

Hi, it would be nice if the characters in the screenshots were all wearing the fissure armor. And the screeshot be of the front of the character, not of his back. yugo

I have a screen of all the classes from left to right uploaded. I think this would do a lot to decrease the size of the article. I'll give it a few days, and as long as there are no objections I'll replace the current class screenshots with this one at the beginning of the section. --Bakkster Man 18:33, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Copyrighted work in this article?

Are the profession descriptions like this one:

"Master of arcane lore, the Elementalist calls down natural forces of unparalleled might to do their bidding. Functionally, the magical equivalent of heavy artillery, or simply 'nuker'. Elementalists can do the most damage in one hit."

... actually copyrighted work from strategy guides or manuals? I recall reading something similar elsewhere in a scanned screenshot on the Internet. Also, I think the style of writing even make it sound like it could be from this context. -- Jugalator July 6, 2005 18:53 (UTC) Update: The exact same text can be found e.g. here. It indeed seems like something fishy going on here... -- Jugalator July 6, 2005 18:54 (UTC)

That is definitely copied from somewhere. But it seems noone really cares enough delete it.Heraclius 7 July 2005 23:37 (UTC)

As far as I can remember, that's from the manual (read it in a friend's manual). I'm buying Guild Wars today so I can check it :) - ChimpoUA 11 February 2006 10:59 (EST)

Many descriptions in this article are copied. So we should hunt them down. --MasTer of Puppets ^{Picture Service} 19:36, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

I removed all the plagerized profession descriptions, which were found in The Guild Wars Manuscripts. Please feel free to edit the replacement text I added, since it was pretty quickly hammered out. I'll start looking for other copied sections of text. --Bakkster Man 02:32, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

I like you guys to find something that the Guild Wars themselves didn't steal or rip off from another MMO, D&D, or Lore so copyrights on verbage is bull. The very sentences pasted exactly from any website, I agree is copyrighted else I say no. Because one has to use words from other sources to talk and to describe the topic because there is no common word in Non-RPGs. I have to say stuff in every line, Energy is similar to MANA = source from bible which was magical bread from heaven but in this case derived from D&D to classify how much power one has in magic. Just to describe one word. Sad you limit descriptions without knowing what is copyrighted and what is common knowledge by all RPGs. Z44sms 22:00, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

The argument is not what's 'common knowledge to all', it's that passages from the Guild Wars manual have been copied wholesale, which is a violation of ANet's copyright. DarkMasterBob 23:21, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Economy

I may just not have read the article in enough detail, but there doesn't appear to be a discussion of the economy of Guild Wars. By that I mean how items are dropped (certain items reserved for individual party members, gold shared between party), NPC traders, crafting and trading with other players.

I'm sure this could be overdone, or done badly, but a section with a good paragraph or two would be nice. The "reserved items" thing is a major point (people aren't having to try grab as well as fight). Also the fact that it's hard to make money, trading sucks, and there's a big diff between NPC price buy offers and selling prices/other player offers.

zoney ♣ talk 14:50, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

I would disagree with Zoney economy is big, Weapons are being traded by players daily mostly on areas such as Ascalon City and Lions Arch on 1. I would agree money is almost useless in itself just as real life money is, but you still can't get RUNES, MATERIALS, or SIGIL without it from crafters or players unless you use a barter system. Now with the added Under World zone you can't even go into that zone without 1000 gold coins taken from your party. I realize NPCs are partly driving economy. NPCs prices are based on when people around world sell items they are emptied and destroyed daily. One day an item could be, "Superior Runes such as vigor or Warriors Superior Absorbtion has changed in value by several hundred overnight and I seen 1 platium Rune goto 100 platium in one month. You could be a new player be lucky enough to find black dye, you can sell it to NPC for alot less than a specific player would buy it from you who wants it. This being said the entire trading system is crazy chatter and most players ignore it and just buy from NPCs because it's fast and easy to find what you need. Another thing I seen is high level players 20s offering to take lower levels to get to certain areas on the map before they should be able to get there because they group and travel together, the low level will die or not fight while high levels just travel to zone the low level.

water fall ♣ talk 12:23, 15 Dec 2005 (UTC)

As water fall stated, GW is known for it's user managed economy, as well as the traders not having infinite stock of everything. All that is sold are loot that people have found and sold to the traders. Also, the fact even trader NPCs updates their prices real time to match the supply and demand makes the game feel like it really is a world. I admit it's a made up world, but very good so. Imagine traders never changing prices and having infinite supply, as well as traders for everything in the game. The entire user managed economy would fall apart. But now I'm rambling so I'll stop there, but I do indeed believe there's an Economy section needed.

Puffpeddle 20:45, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Box art

The main box art image is different from the box sold here (Ireland). The ones here have a foxy-looking female necromancer. Is the one illustrated the standard one in the US or something?

I think it's two different box images on guild wars just as in WoW, but im not sure

zoney ♣ talk 14:53, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

The box is two sided. One side has the Warrior, the other has the Necromanacer. - Lordwow

Nope. Mine has the Necro on the front, and the blurb on the back (+smaller pic of necro). The edge has the mesmer. The inside cover is an action scene.

zoney ♣ talk 23:34, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

ANet made several different boxes, I believe 3 for the US (each having 2 classes represented) and another for the Special Edition.

According to the official page, North america has 6 different boxes (one with each profession), and europe has 2 (female necro and male warrior). Collectors edition have female necro for both continents, aswell as the special edition (europe only).

Puffpeddle 20:39, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

My one also has a Necromancer. But I believe they released quite a few.

Just saying here... im off at work so i won't log in with my user name.

Balancing issues are appearing, and the "Skill over time" mantra(not really, that is hyperbole on my part in representing anet's stance) is not cutting it with current players who are running into a wall with skill points, and subsequently being unable to create new pvp builds for want of skills.

(Real World) Economy

I'm curious as to how the game operates without a monthly fee like other (MM)ORPGs, and whether this information should have a section in the article. Is it just through continued sales that they get the money to run servers?

Arena Net is betting that players will pay for content instead of raw playing time. Every 6-12 months they plan to put out a new "expansion pack" that will likely run for about US$40-50. Also, ANet is doing it's best to cut down on bandwidth to keep costs down and make this type of game development feasible. An interesting concept to be sure.

ANet also releases many games, they are probably drawing off these funds for Guild Wars. It could be seen as a "playable billboard" with ArenaNet and PlayNC all over it.

ANet hasn't developed any other games. NCSoft publishes a lot of them, but they have other developers (ANet included) that actually develop the games. Do you have a source that says ANet is developing another game? --Bakkster Man 16:28, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

As Factions will be able to used without owning the original, the price will likely be higher than expansion packs usually go for. -- Ianiceboy 07:39, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

I agree but since some many updates have come out i think Anet will just kind of "guilt" you into buying it (oh i dont have what my friends an 2/3 of the world have so i had better buy it). - User:Fiarrsummner 01:21, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

I though Necro was just the special edition pack

Mesmer description

Mesmer 'mantras' are described as "protective spells of a specific element," but only four of the eleven 'mantra' skills have anything to do with elements. On top of this, 'mantras' are really nothing but stances, a skill type not unique to mesmers. My anonymous opinion is that bullet should be removed (or replaced with something else, maybe "spell interrupts," but that's not strictly unique to mesmers (and on the topic of strict uniqueness, warriors AND rangers have shouts, but rangers only have three and they don't affect party members, just pets and normally non-hostile animal mobs)). --68.142.14.10 03:34, 20 August 2005 (UTC)

Not to mention if you're talking about unique to each class, they missed out preparations for Rangers. Also should anyone start to mention the whole new faction reward system for pvp? I may do this later.

Collector's Edition

The Collector's Edition includes the following:

Guild Wars - The Game
Guild Wars Music Sound Track CD
Guild Wars Full-color hardcover Art Book
Speakeasy; Teamspeak™ - 3 Months of FREE Service
Guild Wars Logitech™ Headset
Exclusive In-game Item, the "Divine Aura"

Only an elite few gain the attention and favor of the gods, but those who do receive a celestial gift—a Divine Aura, a glowing visible token of their god’s blessing. When players purchase the Collector’s Edition of Guild Wars, each of their characters will receive this unique in-game item. Characters who equip the item are surrounded by a unique aura determined by the god who has bestowed it, and the item itself has a shape and color distinctive to that specific god. Once blessed by the gods, Divine Aura stays with a character; it cannot be traded or given to others.

http://www.guildwars.com/products/gwcollectors-edition.html

____

If you bought a Collector's Edition, when you do any emotes such as /jump /dance (we should get a list of that too) there will be light around your character's hands depending on the class of your character because each class warship a different god, and each god has a different color (darwina - monk - blue, etc) CLDragon 14:22, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

No negative comments at all

Well, I have just read the whole article, and I havn't found a single negative comment about this game. It lead me to believe it was either written by fanboys of Arenanet PR people. Or maybe this game is really perfect, but I doubt that.

Please feel free to start a new section on this article titled "Criticisms of Guild Wars." If the article was written by "fan boys," then those same editors may not be able to contribute any negative points about the game. --Ted 01:57, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

I've been planning to add a criticism-section as well. I'm quite into what most GW players are against, as I've been playing the game since its release and am a reoccurring visitor on the fan sites' forums.

Lately I've been playing World of Warcraft as a substitute for Guild Wars. Whenever I announce to anyone that Guild Wars is a good game, periodically someone will shout *quot;Guild War Sucks!" or something to that effect. They fail to give any reasons as to why they think that way. --Ted 22:03, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

And I know from my own experience that its the same way in GW. People usually pick one and proclaim it to be the better of the two. Point is though that they're two completely different games.--DMichel 23:51, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

I changed the line in critiscism that said "Anet knows of this problem but refuses to deal with it" to the current text. The old one made them seem like bastards.

World Championship

The championship starts officially on Saturday, 1 October when ArenaNet will reset the Guild Wars ladder (resetting all characters back to level 1) at midnight Pacific Daylight Time (7AM GMT). After this reset, there will be a period of three months for players to build up their characters in a bid to eventually compete in the championship finals.

What do you mean, reseting all characters back to level 1? I logged into my Guild Wars account just now and my level 20 character is still level 20. I didn't lose any of my 96 faction points either. Can someone clarify this? (Ted 16:48, 5 October 2005 (UTC))

He's got "Guilds" and "Characters" mixed up. ANet reset the Guild standings on the PvP ladder. They did nothing to individual characters.--66.91.248.69 22:02, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

Beginner Tips

This game has 6 classes but there are only 4 character slots. Therefore it will need some planning for characters creation. I suggest everyone to create 3 PvE(RPG) characters and leave one slot for PvP characters. The 3 PvE characters should have no class overlaps. For example you may create a W/N, a R/Me and a E/Mo. It is because once you unlocked a skill in the PvE, that skill will be avaliable to your PvP character. Since you can create and delete PvP characters as many times as you like, it allows you to try anything by creating a new PvP character, try some skills, delete it and create another character with different class again. It means once you finished all your 3 PvE characters, you can play any combination you like and you can change it anytime using your PvP character.

The above was removed from the main article as information regarding how to play the game belongs in a game guide, and not here. – Quoth 02:46, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

Sorrow's Furnace

Should there be a new section about the first expansion pack?

When details come out regarding the next "chapter" (expansion) of Guild Wars, I believe it should get its own article. However, what you seem to be referring to is the free content released for the first Guild Wars chapter, Sorrow's Furnace and Grenth's Footprint. I definitely think a section should be added to this article regarding the free content releases for this game. – Quoth 05:52, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

Screenshot copyright

I just wanted to ask if you really are allowed to show these pictures here. I tried to upload some on Wikimedia Commons, but someone checked the official website, and told me I was not. All in-game pictures belong to ArenaNet, or something like that, I don't remember. Anyway, I got a little irritated, as I tried to use them on the swedish Wikibooks. It would be great to use them, and I wondered if you have spoken to someone, who gave you permission to use these pictures. If that's so, can't you upload them on Wikimedia Commons instead? Guild Wars is a big game in Sweden too, and some screenshots really explains more than just plain text. /Helena 26 December 2005 18:01 (GMT +1)

This might be relevant? I don't know if you can stretch "fansite" to include the Wikipedia article. --68.142.14.15 03:29, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

I don't think so. If Wikimedia are allowed to use the pictures, it should be on Wikimedia Commons. But as I weren't allowed to use them there, I guess Wikimedia aren't allowed to use them at all. Not on Commons, not on Wikipedia, not on Wikibooks. /Helena 1 January 2006 14:46 (GMT +1)

Even though no one seems to read this, I don't know where to write, so i'll write here. As you still are using the pictures here, I will keep on uploading my pictures on Wikimedia Commons. And use them, of course. /Helena 15 January 2006 22:18 (GMT +1)

Actually, screenshots aren't unique enough to be protected by the copyright law. All a screenshot is, is the result of a keypress. Too easy to re-create. Also, as far as I know, only art and software you created yourself are protected by the copyright law. Note the abscence of "screenshots", and the word "created" in that sentence. If this doesn't apply to the Nederlandish copyright law, may I suggest a server move to someplace where the law actually makes sense? ;) Puffpeddle 19:52, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Information Added

I just added information on Emotes and Collector's Edition. If someone can find a screenshot of a collector's edition's owner's character using an emote that would be great. Do you guys think I should add information about things like the Halloween events and Christmas events? Also, is the newly added observer mode worth mentioning?CLDragon 14:50, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Spike

There is no explanation of "Spike", although it is mentioned in the Earth Magic's Attribute Section. Since I'm new to the Wiki thing, I'd leave it to more experienced users to add the definition for this term.

See http://www.guildwiki.org/wiki/Spike. - Burzer 02:12, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

Added 'inappropriate tone' tag

The entire 'Professions' subsection is written like an advert for the game - 'A male and female warrior take a brief rest at Lion's Arch after many hours of long, arduous battling.' (screenshot caption), 'Necromancers are masters of the dark arts, calling on the spirits of the dead, and even death itself, to overpower enemies and assist allies. In sacrificing Health and taking curses and diseases upon themselves, they can deal large amounts of damage to those foolish enough to oppose them.' - these are hardly the appropriate tone for an encylopedia article. Parts of it have POV issues as well. Cynical 22:21, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

These I have reason to believe are copied out of the special edition manual 81.158.253.7 08:56, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

GWWC

There is no information on the progress of ArenaNet's Guild Wars World Championship. Not even the a copy of the Press Release.

Criticism: too long-winded, too detailed, not enclyclopedic.

As an avid GW player, I'd have to say that this article feels like a lot of fancruft. It presents a ton of information but is just too baroque in the way it tries to say things, and too long.

Much of the information, for starters, is unnecessary in an encyclopedic article. For example, there's a fairly lengthy paragraph devoted to skill acquisition alone, whose relevant bits can pretty much be summarized in one or two sentences. Something like "In-game skills can be purchased from trainer NPCs, captured from monsters, or acquired as quest rewards; players can also spends faction points gained from their PVP victories to unlock new skills for their PVP-only characters" contains all the information anyone actually needs.

I'd pare the class section down to a heading and a bullet-point list (bullet for each class). Any more than that, particularly the heading-subheading-list structure up now, is just plain excessive. What does the entire bit about Elementalists really say, for example? They use elemental magic and have a lot of direct-damage spells, and additional support spells that vary depending on the element type. Maybe add two-three sentences about specific attribute properties, but that's about it. I don't think adding much more information than that really serves anyone's interest, as anything posted here will already be common knowledge to folks who play the game and too much detail will make the article pretty incomprehensible to those who don't. (This is why one shouldn't list famous guilds or talk about popular strategies here, either, in my opinion - they're just not important enough, even in the world of GW itself.)

I would further trash the lists of emotes and abbreviations, because Wikipedia isn't for this kind of reference. (Does Wikipedia have cheat codes for video games? Lists of the 40 most popular Starcraft strategies? I don't see how this information is different.)

The screenshots need some fixin', too: the word "scenic" pops up several times and we get shots of characters using emotes or doing nothing, but there's one actual shot of combat. While most of those screens are very pretty, they just don't really communicate very much about the basic way the game is played. They're artful rather than really encyclopedic. Someone suggested putting all the professions together and taking a screenshot - this is a great idea (though, imho, you don't want to pick up only Fissure armor, as that's a special hyper-luxury toy that isn't really representative of how most of the classes look most of the time). A picture with more detailed interface (i.e. some windows open, such as Inventory) might be desirable, too.

As it stands, a lot of the text really seems to hype up stuff that, well, isn't noteworthy at all. E.g. the note about how Mesmers have Mantras. What's a Mantra? Just a stance (or, sometimes, enchantment spell) with the word "Mantra" in the title. Other than the fact that Mesmer stances are all called "Mantra of <something>" (but, as stated, not all Mantras are stances), there's really nothing particularly special about them at all.

I don't mean for my comment to be an utter festival of hatred. The article is definitely pretty and has some nice pictures and, in places, pretty good text. But it just doesn't belong here as written. 130.58.235.187 06:54, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Actually, dissatisfaction with the "Professions" section made me look around the web a bit and I don't like what I see: it seems that ALL of the text except for skill descriptions is lifted wholesale from ArenaNet's own stuff (link). I think there's a copyright issue there, and, even if there isn't, that's very bad text to copy - it's fluff, not summary, and doesn't really communicate the real kernel of the individual classes too well. 130.58.235.187 07:00, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

I agree, but I could go on for a few days listing Wikipedia articles that are overly detailed. They would be in almost every category, too. Maybe we should restrict most of the details to GuildWiki...--MasTer of Puppets 22:01, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

After reading this article and agreeing with this posters opinion I have rewritten the game mechanics section. I feel that my version is more consise, ordered and informatative while maintaining the similar content to the original. I hope that it meets with approval - but perhaps I should have asked first. ;) 198.17.217.129 1040, 16 May 2006 (AEST)

Release date

It needs to be known that there is, yet, no known release date for GW:F

Also on Guildwars.com, the relative belief that the game will be released in Spring(First Quarter) still has OFFICIAL backing.

I don't get it, are you saying that we need to say that the release date is unknown or that we should say the official release date is set somewhere around Spring? Oh, and don't forget to sign your signature with these ~~~~! --MasTer of Puppets ^{Picture Service} 05:49, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

[1]"The Factions campaign will release in the second quarter of 2006." From the official press release. --Bakkster Man 05:55, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Release date has now been changed to Spring 2006 according to the log on screen of current Guild Wars client. Gross 08:19, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

I missed that. Thanks for the correction! --Bakkster Man 01:32, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

"You"

A lot of "you" references are being made in this article. This is not encyclopedic. There should always be talk of "one", "the character", or "the player" being able to choose between a variety of skills, not "you". --Michiel Sikma 22:26, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

There are a few dreaded "youze", but the most I found are in the skill descriptions. For example, when listing the Assasin's attribute details, it's ok to use "you" as you're quoting the game. I'm going to go fix all the non-ok "youze" now. --MasTer of Puppets ^{Picture Service} 02:07, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

I would say that the class descriptions shouldn't contain "youze" for two reasons. First, the Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style says no "youze" except in quoted text, which this is not. If it is quoted, it should be placed in quotes to show this and prevent plagerism. Secondly, we should not be quoting the "official" descritions of classes, skills, attributes, etcetra unless it is relevent to the article (ANet press releases are relevent, game literature is not). I think that clearing these up and getting the rest of the article to style guildelines could get up to the point here we can remove that ugly cleanup tag. --Bakkster Man 04:29, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Common Terms

I just happened across these, and I was wondering if we could improve this section of the article; as an avid Guild Wars player, there are many abbreviations here I have not seen people use, either not at all, or not recently. Either we make the effort to continuously update the terms, or we take them out (I don't see many articles with such sections). --MasTer of Puppets ^{Picture Service} 01:39, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Could we remove these terms and the emotes from the main article and create a new article of guild wars terms? This could go a long way to cleaning up the article and giving it a better tone. --Bakkster Man 00:15, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

That's one of the things I was thinking of doing. I will delete it, and if contested, revert it. --MasTer of Puppets ^{Picture Service} 05:18, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

If you wish to restore the emote/common terms section, go here if there are many edits that you don't want to upset. --MasTer of Puppets ^{Picture Service} 05:22, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

New Screenshot

I have added a modified in game screenshot to show how skills can be chained together for greater effect for the in game mechanics section. This is certainly more relavent to the "game mechanics" section than the former screenshot. I have been carefull to remove personal refrences from within the image and its info. I feel that more screenshots relavent to their sections are needed rather than all these "pretty" screenshots of characters doing nothing. Random Player 11:06, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Grenths Footprint?

If there is a suggestion on SF then there is no point without this addon.

Game Lore/Story?

There is no mention of the Guild Wars storyline, or lore. As I often found this confusing in the game, it might be helpful if someone could add it.

Well, it could be done. Like a plot synopsis. I could do the first few parts, I guess. -MasTer of Puppets ^Peek! 04:03, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

If a lore section is added, any of the quest plot elements will need to be preceeded by the spoilers tag. Also, it needs to be handled carefully to prevent copyright infringement of the lore (remember what happened with the profession descriptions). --Bakkster Man 22:56, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

A Story/Lore artical has been added but it has been tagged 'neutrality dispute'. S-m-r-t 17:11, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Spiking

I've noticed that reference to spiking occurs a lot in the article. I created a new article to describe spiking and will link all references to spiking there. Feel free to edit and expand this new article. --Bakkster Man 19:23, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

I've linked to the new article through the screenshot in the game mechanics section, though I'm not sure if this detracts from the main focus that it was intended to emphasize skill combinations, not spiking. Random Player 06:38, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Chaining skills isn't quite spiking. For a good example of a spike, battle the obsidian flame PvP AI. When you suddenly lose ~500 health, that's a spike. I'll fix that. --Bakkster Man 00:33, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Common builds

I'm somewhat concerned by the common builds. First, "common" is subjective. Secondly, this article is long enough without them. Maybe a new article about GW builds? --Bakkster Man 02:38, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps, but probably not about GW builds; just MMORPG builds in general. I don't know. --MasTer of Puppets ^Peek! 15:24, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

I'm in favor of both a RPG Archetypes (Pyromancer, meat shield, healer, etc) and Character Builds in the Guild Wars Universe, the latter having more specific skill sets. I'm willing to work on both if people are willing to contribute. I'm also checking the talk page for MMORPG to look for contributors and help in naming the article. --Bakkster Man 18:49, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

I'd gladly help; it's just that Guild Wars is my only MMORPG ever. --MasTer of Puppets ^Peek! 21:26, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Changing to RPG Archetypes. I'll start work on this tonight. --Bakkster Man 14:50, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

I agree that the common builds should be removed from this article. I think this becomes exceptionally clear when we consider the fact that this is an encyclopedia article, and not a gamers guide. --Hetar 23:37, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Factions Pre-sale Edition

I was under the impression that those who buy the pre-order of factions would be able to choose the item of their choice/class. I might be wrong and in no way objecting the status of the claim but just curious to know if this could be proven and if so than it should be mentioned and the article in focus would be in the need of editing. --Asososocrates 08:08, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

When you pre-order Factions, you don't get to actually choose the unique items you receive. Anet designs one unique item for each of the new professions (Assassin and Ritualist) and you receive it. I believe it is in your inventory when you login, but I am not sure as I did not pre-order the Prophecies campaign. http://guildwars.com/aboutgw/wheretobuy/factionspreorder.php lists what's included in the North American pre-order. FallenAngelEyes 04:41, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

My understanding is that pre-order purchasers can use the /preorder command for the Factions items just like they could to generate new Prophecies items. If that's the case, I'm not sure how to determine which item is specifically given to each character. Vendetta411 14:34, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Runes

Should we add in Runes? Those are kinda important. --MasTer of Puppets ^Peek! 18:44, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Seems of all the equipment, runes are most important because they have a direct effect on skill usage and strategic build creation. Maybe add a section in the Builds page? --Bakkster Man 20:46, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

I need help establishing an Equipment in the Guild Wars Universe article; some help would be gladly appreciated. --MasTer of Puppets ^Peek! 22:47, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Help

Everyone in my game has white clothing, armor, etc. Whats up with it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.201.119.190 (talk) 03:58, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Answer: It's a video card issue. Updating your drivers may fix this issue. — Preceding unsigned comment added by IamNobody (talk • contribs) 01:46, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Criticism section

While I don't disagree with removing the criticism area for being non-sourced, the subheadings of "Acquisition of New Skills" and "Lack of Equipment Variety" are still there. Their placement puts them under the "Locations" subheading. If we're going to remove the heading entirely, shouldn't those sections go as well? And if they are removed, will this article end up flagged as NPOV? F A E 05:51, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

I will remove those; however, it was still POV with unsourced criticism. M ^o P 06:12, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Locations section not NPOV

I've tagged this section as 'neutrality dispute' because it's writen like an ArenaNet advert, not an encyclopedia article, the tone is entirely wrong. I don't have enough verifiable sources to rewrite the section myself, but it definitely needs doing Cynical 19:35, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

I got the emotes!!!!

This I copied from: http://guildwars.ogaming.com/data/1498~Commands.php

/age Number of hours you have played with the current character and total time elapsed since creation . /deaths Number of times you have died. /g Enters you into Guild chat mode. /p Enters you into Party chat mode. /petname (name) or /namepet (name) To give your pet a name.

Emotes

  Emotes are a method of controlling your character and expressing actions in game such as waving, bowing and sitting.

/afk /agree /attention /beckon /beg /boo /bored /bow /bowhead /cheer /catchbreath /chest /clap /congrats /dance /doh /doubletake /drums /excited /fistshake /flex /flute /friend /goteam /guitar /health /help /highfive /ignore /jump /kneel /laugh /moan /no /pickme /point /ponder /pout /prs = paper rock scissors /ready /roar /roll <#> /salute /scratch /shoo /sigh /sit /skulk /sorry /stand /stompfoot /taunt /violin /wave /whine /yawn /yes

Musical Emotes /flute /guitar /drum /violin

Looping /violin, /dance, /bowhead, /sit (/afk).

Constant

  Constant emotes where you will remain in position until moving or chaning the emote

/bowhead /sit /afk

Enjoy :)

Character Equipment

I wrote the summary paragraph currently in the section. Previously, it was just a link to the Equipment in the Guild Wars Universe page. I tried my best to make it enough for a casual reader to get a good idea of equipment, but at the same time keeping it concise. Please feel free to make comments or edits as you see fit. Thanks! Vendetta411 15:20, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Seperating Prophacies contents

The Guild Wars article is getting too long, we need to seperate the content from the prophacies campaign into a new article

Story Line

The story line section needs some work, as the POV tagger was wise; it is too much like an ANet bit for Guild Wars. Also, it seems to be composed by somebody who is unused to story telling, as it is a bit run-on and too cobbled together. I tried to rewrite the Ascalon and Shiverpeaks bit, but I'm knee-deep in Essay Season and don't have that much time. _-M ^o P-_ 04:54, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Gaile Gray

For those who added/keeps reverting to the section with Gaile Gray, just don't. The section is out of context, irrelevant to the game and does NOT belong on an encyclopedia. -DMichel 14:14, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Completely agree with that, leave it out please. Vendetta411 16:34, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

I've been receiving messages from the user Gabliaven, the same person who keeps reverting to the version with Gaile Gray in it. Gabliaven obviously does not give any interest for the ongoing discussion here on the article's talk-page. For the sake of the article I will just say: the section does not belong on an encyclopedia, on a fansite maybe, but not on Wikipedia. - DMichel 16:01, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Going crazy on the edits

Greetings. I'm the culprit responsible for the overview section and rewrites of the game mechanics and critism sections. This is likely just a passing fad of mine, but I'm a fan of both wikipedia and guild wars so I'm working during some spare time on trying to create an article worthy of both.

The next thing I'd like to do on this page is integrate the professions section with the locations section and the guild wars chapter concept creating something like:

GW chapters

->core content

-->professions

-->areas and content

->GW: Prophecies

-->professions

-->areas and content

->GW: Factions

-->professions

-->areas and content

->GW: NightFall

---> insert rampant speculation. ;)

I'm imagining the info on builds will go into the game mechanics after the discussion on attribute points.

Thoughts? Aspectacle 12:08, 17 May 2006 (AEST)

"Conceptually skills are very useless and through both the RPG and competitive parts of the game; the knowledge the player has of the games skills and how they interwork, the skills selected by the player prior to entering a battle, and the skill the player has wielding those skills during battle. In this way it is similar to many collectible card games."

The paragraph makes no sense and its structure; the sentences incomplete, the evidence of many edits, the laziness of checks. In this way it is similar to Guild Wars in-game chatter.

81.156.195.107 18:53, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

I just corrected that section, at least the "useless" word. It was part of a vandal attack on the article. If you wish to improve upon this section, then please do. --LifeStar 18:57, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

you'd talk like that in-game? :) You make a fair comment so I've cleaned up the structure so it uses clearer sentences. As LifeStar said if you can think of a better way to say it you're free to edit it yourself. Aspectacle 00:52, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

What do you mean by integrating professions and locations? If you mean into one article, than I would have to respectively disagree, as I think that would be a little long for the typical reader to go through. I think I like your idea of article division, but I have a few questions. For example, under GW Chapters, you have a professions article and under Prophecies you have a professions article. How would these two differ from each other? Did you want to put every available profession under the GW Chapter article, and then put professions in each chapter as well? We want to avoid redundant pages/information. I'm also wondering where most of the information on this current page would go and if you're of the opinion that the article's name should be changed to "Guild Wars Chapters" or if you're suggesting we make a sub-page for that. Thanks for your interest, and I look forward to collaborating. Also, I don't think we can/should make a Nightfall page until Anet at least confirms the name. It'd probably run the risk of deletion for crystal balling. F A E 03:54, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

I meant to mostly obliterate the sections as they are and split the content they have under chapter specific headings. So core would list the core professions with a one line description, prophecies could drop the section all together for a statement saying core+ some other skills are only available, A and Rt listed under Factions - keeping it to describing the unique stuff in each chapter only.

I wasn't really thinking on new pages at the time but there is a lot of potential there for a few things to happen as well, or instead. I don't have any strong opinions, so my question back to you is - where and how will we discuss the new chapters for guild wars? Should this page be either a meeting place for all things GW (as it sort of is at the moment), perhaps with additional detail in chapter specific pages, or strictly GW the original game with linking to new pages set up similarly for new chapters.

I'm leaning toward the second one; describe the chapters mechanic on this page and remove all factions content from here and put it into a new Guild Wars Factions page. The professions and locations could then remain largely as they are.

Agreed on the NightFall thing. Aspectacle 22:48, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

I've been pondering this myself as well. Most people think of the Prophecies chapter when they search for "Guild Wars" standalone. However, as more chapters come out, there will inevitably be more chapter specific information. As for this article, what I would mainly like to do without it now is move the Lore out into its own article, much as I did for Professions. Mostly for length reasons, but also because of how it is specific to Prophecies.

Regarding discussion of the new chapters, I'm not quite sure what you mean. Topics such as speculation about new professions, themes, etc are not appropriate for discussion in the talk pages of articles really because that space is reserved for discussion of the actual article.

In my personal opinion, I believe it would be most helpful to readers if we keep the main "Guild Wars" namespace for general information about the game, such as its mechanics, how it differs from other games, editions, etc rather than trying to cram chapter-specific info or info (such as Professions) that requires a considerable length to explain. So I think we're agreed on that. Also, there is a Guild_Wars_Factions page already, I'm not sure if you're aware of that. There used to be a section here with a direction to that page, but it seems to have been removed. I think I'll put a See also note at the bottom of this article. F A E 03:35, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Great ideas; I really like the section part. However, how about something like this for layout ; game overview (who made it, when it was released, etc.) in the beginning, then a section for Prophecies (or core, they're the same thing), then for Factions, and so on as new expansions are released. Ideally in each section, you have a mini-overview of that section, then include professions, areas, and maybe a small plot summary. This is fairly similar to what exists now; I've been meaning to rewrite the plot summary and do some work on this thing, but I can't find the time. Most of this has been said by FAE and others before, probably. Maybe a small section on enemies too... we can find a place to stuff in the character builds and equipment pages which already exist. Master of Puppets ^{Your will is mine.} 04:17, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

how embarassing. :) I thought there wasn't a Factions page because I assumed it would be linked on this page if there was one. By new chapters I mean that we can expect new chapters beyond Factions and we should 'design' the page with this in mind. I don't particularly want to speculate about anything.

So it seems that you're both interested in having this as a general GW's page so with this in mind here is my proposed to do list in no particular order;

Create new Guild_Wars_Prophecies[GWP] page.
Move release notes window from main GW[MGW] page to GWP.
Move Prophecies specific lore/plot to GWP.
Create release notes window for Guild_Wars_Factions[GWF] page.
Description of the chapter release format in MGW
Add core/prophecies, faction overviews featuring short descriptions of Professions, Plot, and features. Link to main articles.
add more details on monsters, elite skills

I've started work on a chapter overview section, I'll put that up soon so we have something concrete to discuss and modify Aspectacle 04:13, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Health and energy are already explained, pretty sure adrenaline is under the Warrior part. But I'm not sure about seperate pages for all the chapters, as that could get messy in the future. Master of Puppets ^{That's hot.} 04:18, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Ok, if it is explained elsewhere then its no problem. I've edited my list. I guess it depends on how much content people introduce for new chapters, because _this_ page could get messy if too much content is put into it.

Please update, edit, improve, comment on my chapter summaries section. Aspectacle 02:35, 23 May 2006 (UTC)