Will we ever see a Guild Wars 3? — Guild Wars 2 Forums

Will we ever see a Guild Wars 3?

I know that the subject gets up sometimes during this forum, but it's still an important subject.

I just started on Guild Wars 2 myself, and while I can see myself dip alot of hours into the game, since the state of the game is alot more fun compared to release, I still have the fear that we some day get Guild Wars 3 announced.

Why? Well, for starter because the game is already named "2", and theres another game in the franchise. I know that the first game didnt do what the devs wanted, and thats why they made a new game, or at least thats what I've read, but I would just hate to dip lots of hours into the game, just to start from a fresh if they ever think of making a third game in the series.

It could without a doubt help, if they made it possible to carry all gear looks, outfits, mounts and companions to the new game, but making a sequel to a MMORPG is never a good idea, since it will mean that all the years of player progression will be lost. World of Warcraft would for example never have been that popular if people should start from scratch in each expansion.

What do you guys think? Will we ever see a GW2, or only expansions from now on?

<1

Comments

  • Endless Soul.5178Endless Soul.5178 Member ✭✭✭✭

    If we do, it won't be for years. As in, at least 5 years.

    Asura characters: Zerina | Myndee | Bekka | Akee | Feyyt | Nuumy | Tylee | Rissa | Jaxxi | Sixx | Claara | Conii | Jymm | Synn | Zeena

    Your skin will wrinkle and your youth will fade but your soul is endless

  • Kheldorn.5123Kheldorn.5123 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Don't think so. If Anet wants to grow, they need new game which is not an mmo.

  • Inculpatus cedo.9234Inculpatus cedo.9234 Member ✭✭✭✭

    The reason there is a '2' is because Guild Wars (One) wasn't an MMO, but a CORPG. It seems unlikely that the Devs would want to change GW2 from being an MMO; thus doubtful there will be a GW3 anytime on the near horizon.

  • Dawdler.8521Dawdler.8521 Member ✭✭✭✭

    The same question has been asked every year since 2012 and the answer remains the same - if Anet announces GW3 in development or make a trailer, it will probably be at an event such as E3 and then its ~2-3 years until actual release of GW3, depending on how far along in development it really is. There is very little point of speculating whether this is going to happen to or not and there is definetly not any reason to fear it. If GW3 is some day a reality, I'm also sure Anet is clever enough to provide boons for GW2 veterans - just like they did with GW1->GW2.

    Dont look a gift Asura in the mouth.
    No seriously, dont. Shark teeth.

  • Zeefa.3915Zeefa.3915 Member ✭✭✭

    Well.... not going to say it will absolulte never happen... it could happen... supposedly.
    I do however feel fairly confident that it wont be anytime soon. GW2 is doing well, ANet is still making regular updates and seem to have a rather longlasting story set up, so it can very well last many more years.

  • Dainank.1308Dainank.1308 Member ✭✭

    Don't quote me on this, but I do recall once the DEVs saying that they will stick for GW2 forever, basically meaning until its near death I think.

    Proud branch of 'The Hortus'.

  • No MMO has EVER had a 3. Most don't even get a 2 and when that happens it's because a huge revamp from the previous iteration. The only game that has been an MMO in a 3rd form, I believe, is Final Fantasy. And that's because one was redone into a realm reborn. Star Wars has had 2 because Star Wars Galaxies and Star Wars: The Old Republic were massively different. Asheron's Call, Ultima Online. Everquest... these are all games that had or now has a 2 title because big changes. Mostly because one game was from a long time ago.

  • Dainank.1308Dainank.1308 Member ✭✭
    edited June 23, 2018

    @navystylz.9745 said:
    No MMO has EVER had a 3. Most don't even get a 2 and when that happens it's because a huge revamp from the previous iteration. The only game that has been an MMO in a 3rd form, I believe, is Final Fantasy. And that's because one was redone into a realm reborn. Star Wars has had 2 because Star Wars Galaxies and Star Wars: The Old Republic were massively different. Asheron's Call, Ultima Online. Everquest... these are all games that had or now has a 2 title because big changes. Mostly because one game was from a long time ago.

    Agreed. Plus, GW1 wasn't really an MMO as someone else already stated. If they are going to make something new, it won't be an mmo.

    Proud branch of 'The Hortus'.

  • There's already an active thread on the topic:
    https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/19298/should-there-be-a-gw-3

    Hype is the path to the dark side. Hype leads to unfulfilled expectations. Disappointment leads to anger. Anger leads to disgust. Disgust leads to "oh, new shinies! I'm back!"

  • Zalavaaris.5329Zalavaaris.5329 Member ✭✭✭

    I think with as much money I've got put into this game over the years and the progress I've made I would hate any sort of gw3. I just want this game to keep growing and maybe have them overhaul a few systems. Obviously do something with the engine as well.

  • Klowdy.3126Klowdy.3126 Member ✭✭✭

    There would need to be a reason for doing so. Just because isn't good enough. The graphics would need to be so far behind that ANet actually starts to lose money on the game. I dont see any other reason to continue the story in a different game. The world they have created is huge, and beautiful, and there are fewer bugs than many of the games like GW2 that are out right now. This game will last for a bit longer, so don't hold your breath for a sequel.

  • otto.5684otto.5684 Member ✭✭✭✭

    As long as GW2 is prosperous, it is highly unlikely we see a new GW. And if anet upgrade game graphics, we would need to anyway.

  • SlippyCheeze.5483SlippyCheeze.5483 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @otto.5684 said:
    As long as GW2 is prosperous, it is highly unlikely we see a new GW. And if anet upgrade game graphics, we would need to anyway.

    ...and they will. It is almost always cheaper to upgrade parts of the system, over time, than to build a new one.

  • otto.5684otto.5684 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @SlippyCheeze.5483 said:

    @otto.5684 said:
    As long as GW2 is prosperous, it is highly unlikely we see a new GW. And if anet upgrade game graphics, we would need to anyway.

    ...and they will. It is almost always cheaper to upgrade parts of the system, over time, than to build a new one.

    Indeed. hopefully they upgrade the graphics soon 😊

  • STIHL.2489STIHL.2489 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Maybe. Often times any mention of a decline in the game, it's funds or population, will be met with some whiteknight kind of justification that the game is older and attrition just happens. As such, if these defenders are true, then GW2 is now in downward years, which means, a GW3, is not only a possibility, but, a necessity. if Anena Net wants to see upward growth again.

    There are two kinds of Gamers, Salty, and Extra Salty.
    Ego is the Anesthesia that dullens the pain of Stupidity.

  • Hybarf Tics.2048Hybarf Tics.2048 Member ✭✭✭

    Dec 25th, 2034. B)

  • Min.7823Min.7823 Member

    I want a Gw1 Remastered with a great respect of philosophy who create this one, with greats points from Gw2 for Gw3.
    ( /!\ Without forget the double specializations /!\ )
    So love to travel through Tyria just to reach the temple where you can go to UW. :)
    Don't care great or bad graphics, complex dynamic mechanics or a story-life always updated.
    Just a server who kept his artistic-direction, be updated at different area of times, never stop wanting to improve this one, leave to be interested by scientist inspiration who can be more difficult to understand. The pedestal are in Gw1.
    è_é

  • CJH.2879CJH.2879 Member ✭✭✭

    I'd have to say that its not outside the realm of possibility that anet would make a GW3, after all as time progresses eventually all game engines reach there maximum potential & then need to be re-built from the ground up. Plus you also need to take into account that as time does pass there will be more MMO's that are released that will want to compete with the older ones... if the graphics, story & overall support of those competitors is better then an older title then of course players will slowly start to migrate towards it. Up until now GW2 has managed to stay ahead of the competitors, but given enough time..... for how long?

  • Dreadshow.9320Dreadshow.9320 Member ✭✭✭

    When I finish GW 2 sure.

  • DJRiful.3749DJRiful.3749 Member ✭✭
    edited July 9, 2018

    I think by the design if Living Story and continuous updates. It may not happen which it was answered already BUT if Anet needs to upgrade the entire game engine. Might as well go for Guild Wars: World.

    Guild Wars: Old Gods
    Guild Wars: Destruction

  • Fenom.9457Fenom.9457 Member ✭✭✭✭

    I really hope not. I’d rather see another 50+ years on this game giving us the whole planet (and I mean the whole thing, not in game map)

    HARRY! DIDYA PUT YER NAME IN DA GOBLET OF FIYAH?!

  • This is how it works in the Guild wars world. If you are worried about longevity The original Guildwars is still active, and the parent company has a game that's been running since 1998 called lineage. GW2 has been running close to 6 years now has 2 expansions and it's just getting started. One of the devs was once asked if there will be a GW3 he said no and the reason was GW2 will change so much over time that It will be like playing another game several times. Now Anet needs to upgrade the engine to include directx 12. I know it can be done without changing the game because Blizzard upgraded World of Warcraft with Directx 11

  • @STIHL.2489 said:
    Often times any mention of a decline in the game, it's funds or population, will be met with some whiteknight kind of justification that the game is older and attrition just happens.

    It's a fact that all games lose players. Heck, all human social organizations lose players, unless they do something to bring in fresh blood. That's true for MMOs as well as things like political parties, book clubs, and even streaming services. It's got nothing to do with "justification" or "whiteknighting."

    ...then GW2 is now in downward years,

    Yes, exactly. Like any MMO.

    which means, a GW3, is not only a possibility,

    That's an interesting point.

    but, a necessity. if Anena Net wants to see upward growth again.

    Except that this doesn't necessarily follow.

    ANet has seen upward growth, with each expansion. That won't be enough to completely mitigate the downward trend. Not everyone is cut out to play the same thing for more than five years. The question is: how long can ANet sustain their current business model, with the sort of expansions GW2 has had so far?

    You're correct that they can't allow the game to keep losing too many players. But there are many options:

    • Re-orient the expansions/LS towards those sorts of players willing to overspend in the gem shop. Fewer players spending more money.
    • Change the nature of the expansions/LS, in a way that is more likely to bring in people besides veterans on hiatus. The inclusion of Raids and Mounts works along these lines (attracting different sorts of players). Was it insufficient because ANet doesn't advertise well enough? Or because people are still looking for more traditional expansions (new races, no matter how cheezy, more instanced content, more maps, more powerful characters,...)
    • Reduce the size of the company, set more modest goals.
    • Produce a new game in a different genre (e.g some of the founders were previously involved in franchises that extended their longevity by adding strategy games to their RPG series).
    • Produce a new game on a different platform, e.g. GW2 polymock for phones.
    • Sell the company to a bigger studio that can afford the rest of the infrastructure that ANet has always lacked (e.g. more substantive support, underlying tech that can be applied efficiently to multiple games, instead of just one, ...)
    • And sure, put GW2 into maintenance mode, and start GW3.

    Selling the company is clearly among the more difficult because, well, ANet already has a big studio owner. But I think GW3 is just as unlikely in many ways, because it's an incredibly expensive choice to throw away the current tech and start again. Without a guarantee that the new sequel will be popular enough to make it all worthwhile. There are lots of other possible scenarios worth pursuing before they have to make that choice.

    Hype is the path to the dark side. Hype leads to unfulfilled expectations. Disappointment leads to anger. Anger leads to disgust. Disgust leads to "oh, new shinies! I'm back!"

  • ProtoGunner.4953ProtoGunner.4953 Member ✭✭✭✭

    I rather see a graphical overhaul of the game instead of a 3rd. MMOs usually don't need sequels since they are evolving over the years. The only thing that may help is marketing of a new game so the franchise becomes again more popular. I had people ask me: wow GW2 still exists? Didn't know... a shame.

  • Raizel.8175Raizel.8175 Member ✭✭✭✭

    A GW3 wouldn't be that bad, at least in my opinion... GW2 is still too much of a single-player-experience game-design-wise and thus has some fundamental flaws that make it unable to shine as a true MMORPG and which won't get fixed anymore (and judging ArenaNets behaviour, they don't care anyway). But it probably won't happen, so yeah...

  • lokh.2695lokh.2695 Member ✭✭✭✭

    I hope not. If I could keep my progress, I might consider moving on, if my GW2 account becomes worthless I might just as well quit.

    If you want X, and Y is needed to get get X, you also have to want Y if you really want X. If you don't want Y, you don't want X. It's easy.
    Pro: Build Templates, Dungeon Rework, UW content
    Contra: New Races, New Classes, New Weapons, Capes

  • Raizel.8175Raizel.8175 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Master Ketsu.4569 said:
    The thing with MMOs is you can often just update the game as much as the engine allows it. And since GW runs on a in-house engine, the limits are who knows.

    WoW is an obvious example of this. WoW has received so many graphical updates and hi-res upgrades that it practically could be argued that WoW-2 already exists as something that has been phased in to gradually replace the original game.

    Just updating graphics won't get you rid of fundamental/systematic flaws and won't enable you to implement truly new stuff though.

  • azizul.8469azizul.8469 Member ✭✭

    i sense guild wars will stop at 2....

  • Dawdler.8521Dawdler.8521 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Raizel.8175 said:

    @Master Ketsu.4569 said:
    The thing with MMOs is you can often just update the game as much as the engine allows it. And since GW runs on a in-house engine, the limits are who knows.

    WoW is an obvious example of this. WoW has received so many graphical updates and hi-res upgrades that it practically could be argued that WoW-2 already exists as something that has been phased in to gradually replace the original game.

    Just updating graphics won't get you rid of fundamental/systematic flaws and won't enable you to implement truly new stuff though.

    ... Well except thats what GW2 has done. HoT and PoF maps are faaaar beyond vanilla maps in terms of detail and they added gliders and mounts... And thats just the big things. Lots of smaller features, new stuff and changes. Hell, we had to smack together weapons/armor once to reskin them, remember? Building 2 of the same legendary if you wanted to dualwield something like daggers... For each character.

    Anet can implement whatever they want.

    Dont look a gift Asura in the mouth.
    No seriously, dont. Shark teeth.

  • Raizel.8175Raizel.8175 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Dawdler.8521 said:

    @Raizel.8175 said:

    @Master Ketsu.4569 said:
    The thing with MMOs is you can often just update the game as much as the engine allows it. And since GW runs on a in-house engine, the limits are who knows.

    WoW is an obvious example of this. WoW has received so many graphical updates and hi-res upgrades that it practically could be argued that WoW-2 already exists as something that has been phased in to gradually replace the original game.

    Just updating graphics won't get you rid of fundamental/systematic flaws and won't enable you to implement truly new stuff though.

    ... Well except thats what GW2 has done. HoT and PoF maps are faaaar beyond vanilla maps in terms of detail and they added gliders and mounts... And thats just the big things. Lots of smaller features, new stuff and changes. Hell, we had to smack together weapons/armor once to reskin them, remember? Building 2 of the same legendary if you wanted to dualwield something like daggers... For each character.

    Anet can implement whatever they want.

    Your examples are far too specefic. I'm talking about fundamental issues like the atrocious class-"balance" (combat system), reward-structures, socialization elements, etc.

  • Yannir.4132Yannir.4132 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Raizel.8175 said:

    Just updating graphics won't get you rid of fundamental/systematic flaws and won't enable you to implement truly new stuff though.

    Some people call them flaws, some other people call them features that raise this game above other MMO's. I tried going back to other MMO's but I just can't anymore. They just feel too restrictive, and some of the systems feel arbitrary. Like gear progression, and new level caps.

  • Dawdler.8521Dawdler.8521 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited July 9, 2018

    @Raizel.8175 said:

    @Dawdler.8521 said:

    @Raizel.8175 said:

    @Master Ketsu.4569 said:
    The thing with MMOs is you can often just update the game as much as the engine allows it. And since GW runs on a in-house engine, the limits are who knows.

    WoW is an obvious example of this. WoW has received so many graphical updates and hi-res upgrades that it practically could be argued that WoW-2 already exists as something that has been phased in to gradually replace the original game.

    Just updating graphics won't get you rid of fundamental/systematic flaws and won't enable you to implement truly new stuff though.

    ... Well except thats what GW2 has done. HoT and PoF maps are faaaar beyond vanilla maps in terms of detail and they added gliders and mounts... And thats just the big things. Lots of smaller features, new stuff and changes. Hell, we had to smack together weapons/armor once to reskin them, remember? Building 2 of the same legendary if you wanted to dualwield something like daggers... For each character.

    Anet can implement whatever they want.

    Your examples are far too specefic. I'm talking about fundamental issues like the atrocious class-"balance" (combat system), reward-structures, socialization elements, etc.

    Anet has constantly been changing balance, we've gotten totally new reward structures like the reward tracks, the way guilds worked was redone so they where not so exclusive to which you repped, not to mention megaservers allowing play across servers, etc.

    Dont look a gift Asura in the mouth.
    No seriously, dont. Shark teeth.

  • ReaverKane.7598ReaverKane.7598 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Raizel.8175 said:

    @Dawdler.8521 said:

    @Raizel.8175 said:

    @Master Ketsu.4569 said:
    The thing with MMOs is you can often just update the game as much as the engine allows it. And since GW runs on a in-house engine, the limits are who knows.

    WoW is an obvious example of this. WoW has received so many graphical updates and hi-res upgrades that it practically could be argued that WoW-2 already exists as something that has been phased in to gradually replace the original game.

    Just updating graphics won't get you rid of fundamental/systematic flaws and won't enable you to implement truly new stuff though.

    ... Well except thats what GW2 has done. HoT and PoF maps are faaaar beyond vanilla maps in terms of detail and they added gliders and mounts... And thats just the big things. Lots of smaller features, new stuff and changes. Hell, we had to smack together weapons/armor once to reskin them, remember? Building 2 of the same legendary if you wanted to dualwield something like daggers... For each character.

    Anet can implement whatever they want.

    Your examples are far too specefic. I'm talking about fundamental issues like the atrocious class-"balance" (combat system), reward-structures, socialization elements, etc.

    None of those are engine-bound...
    Poor Balance is simply a question of "human error", for lack of a better term. It's not bound to the system, it's bound to whoever programs the effects of skills.
    Reward structures can, and have been, restructured easily enough. Are not remotely bound to the client.
    Social elements are, again not limited by the client, and can be added easily enough, if there's will for it. They have even added recently one very technical aspect of social interaction by allowing you to sit on chairs and stuff around the map. This is probably the social interaction that would be more limited by engine restrictions, and yet was surpassed as a kind of a almost easter-egg kind of thing made by the devs.

    Movement and physics (stuff that is bound and limited by the engine) have been restructured and improved at least 3 times:
    first time, and the ground work for the others, was released with the Labyrinthine Cliffs and the Zephyrite Crystal's movement skills;
    second time, for HoT and the gliding, mushrooms, that built upon the zephyrite skills
    third time, with mounts for PoF.

    Of all the aspects of a game that might require a third instalment, your list mentions none.

  • STIHL.2489STIHL.2489 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Illconceived Was Na.9781 said:

    @STIHL.2489 said:
    Often times any mention of a decline in the game, it's funds or population, will be met with some whiteknight kind of justification that the game is older and attrition just happens.

    It's a fact that all games lose players. Heck, all human social organizations lose players, unless they do something to bring in fresh blood. That's true for MMOs as well as things like political parties, book clubs, and even streaming services. It's got nothing to do with "justification" or "whiteknighting."

    ...then GW2 is now in downward years,

    Yes, exactly. Like any MMO.

    which means, a GW3, is not only a possibility,

    That's an interesting point.

    but, a necessity. if Anena Net wants to see upward growth again.

    Except that this doesn't necessarily follow.

    ANet has seen upward growth, with each expansion. That won't be enough to completely mitigate the downward trend. Not everyone is cut out to play the same thing for more than five years. The question is: how long can ANet sustain their current business model, with the sort of expansions GW2 has had so far?

    You're correct that they can't allow the game to keep losing too many players. But there are many options:

    • Re-orient the expansions/LS towards those sorts of players willing to overspend in the gem shop. Fewer players spending more money.
    • Change the nature of the expansions/LS, in a way that is more likely to bring in people besides veterans on hiatus. The inclusion of Raids and Mounts works along these lines (attracting different sorts of players). Was it insufficient because ANet doesn't advertise well enough? Or because people are still looking for more traditional expansions (new races, no matter how cheezy, more instanced content, more maps, more powerful characters,...)
    • Reduce the size of the company, set more modest goals.
    • Produce a new game in a different genre (e.g some of the founders were previously involved in franchises that extended their longevity by adding strategy games to their RPG series).
    • Produce a new game on a different platform, e.g. GW2 polymock for phones.
    • Sell the company to a bigger studio that can afford the rest of the infrastructure that ANet has always lacked (e.g. more substantive support, underlying tech that can be applied efficiently to multiple games, instead of just one, ...)
    • And sure, put GW2 into maintenance mode, and start GW3.

    Selling the company is clearly among the more difficult because, well, ANet already has a big studio owner. But I think GW3 is just as unlikely in many ways, because it's an incredibly expensive choice to throw away the current tech and start again. Without a guarantee that the new sequel will be popular enough to make it all worthwhile. There are lots of other possible scenarios worth pursuing before they have to make that choice.

    You have agreed with me that the game is in a natural downward progression, as such, it's best years are behind it, it is not a matter of if it becomes unsustainable, but when. As such, if they ever hope to boost numbers they need to put out a new game.

    There are two kinds of Gamers, Salty, and Extra Salty.
    Ego is the Anesthesia that dullens the pain of Stupidity.

  • Ardid.7203Ardid.7203 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Will we have weapon dyeing, then?
    Dye-able backpacks?
    What about multilayered clothing?
    Medium armor without trenchcoats?
    More visible weapons for Asura?
    Diferentiated armor design for race, so they aren't just human armor stretched?
    Faster armor production?

    And this is only by the "fashion" side.

  • Menadena.7482Menadena.7482 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Dami.5046 said:
    I Hope not.
    In a lot of ways I wish they had just progressed GW (1).

    Well, at some point any code base just gets to the point where even minor changes take more development time than starting from scratch. Plus they wanted to change it to an MMO.

    New to the game? Feel free to give a yell if you need PVE help.

  • Dami.5046Dami.5046 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Menadena.7482 said:

    @Dami.5046 said:
    I Hope not.
    In a lot of ways I wish they had just progressed GW (1).

    Well, at some point any code base just gets to the point where even minor changes take more development time than starting from scratch. Plus they wanted to change it to an MMO.

    Yeah I get that. Things change things get better. I get it I get it.
    It's good thing the memories don't change.

  • Raizel.8175Raizel.8175 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @ReaverKane.7598 said:

    @Raizel.8175 said:

    @Dawdler.8521 said:

    @Raizel.8175 said:

    @Master Ketsu.4569 said:
    The thing with MMOs is you can often just update the game as much as the engine allows it. And since GW runs on a in-house engine, the limits are who knows.

    WoW is an obvious example of this. WoW has received so many graphical updates and hi-res upgrades that it practically could be argued that WoW-2 already exists as something that has been phased in to gradually replace the original game.

    Just updating graphics won't get you rid of fundamental/systematic flaws and won't enable you to implement truly new stuff though.

    ... Well except thats what GW2 has done. HoT and PoF maps are faaaar beyond vanilla maps in terms of detail and they added gliders and mounts... And thats just the big things. Lots of smaller features, new stuff and changes. Hell, we had to smack together weapons/armor once to reskin them, remember? Building 2 of the same legendary if you wanted to dualwield something like daggers... For each character.

    Anet can implement whatever they want.

    Your examples are far too specefic. I'm talking about fundamental issues like the atrocious class-"balance" (combat system), reward-structures, socialization elements, etc.

    None of those are engine-bound...
    Poor Balance is simply a question of "human error", for lack of a better term. It's not bound to the system, it's bound to whoever programs the effects of skills.
    Reward structures can, and have been, restructured easily enough. Are not remotely bound to the client.
    Social elements are, again not limited by the client, and can be added easily enough, if there's will for it. They have even added recently one very technical aspect of social interaction by allowing you to sit on chairs and stuff around the map. This is probably the social interaction that would be more limited by engine restrictions, and yet was surpassed as a kind of a almost easter-egg kind of thing made by the devs.

    Movement and physics (stuff that is bound and limited by the engine) have been restructured and improved at least 3 times:
    first time, and the ground work for the others, was released with the Labyrinthine Cliffs and the Zephyrite Crystal's movement skills;
    second time, for HoT and the gliding, mushrooms, that built upon the zephyrite skills
    third time, with mounts for PoF.

    Of all the aspects of a game that might require a third instalment, your list mentions none.

    It's true that none of them may be bound to the engine itself. Some of these elements - especially combat and class-balance - are so fundamental though that you can't really change them. I hope we can agree that this game knows no class-balance. If you really want to balance this, you'd have to overhaul the class-system and the gameplay itself, since balance is very much dependent on the specific encounter and you can't just take numbers into account, but also several buffs, utilities, etc. The game lacks coherence and you feel that not just in PvE, but also a lot in PvP and WvW.

    ...and that's just one problem. You don't know if small changes will break other stuff. Apparently, GW2 has some very weird spaghetti-coding, else stuff like Xera wouldn't be totally broke though the implementation of content that should be totally independent from that specific raid-encounter. I could go on, but I hope I've made my point of view clear.

  • ReaverKane.7598ReaverKane.7598 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Raizel.8175 said:

    @ReaverKane.7598 said:

    @Raizel.8175 said:

    @Dawdler.8521 said:

    @Raizel.8175 said:

    @Master Ketsu.4569 said:
    The thing with MMOs is you can often just update the game as much as the engine allows it. And since GW runs on a in-house engine, the limits are who knows.

    WoW is an obvious example of this. WoW has received so many graphical updates and hi-res upgrades that it practically could be argued that WoW-2 already exists as something that has been phased in to gradually replace the original game.

    Just updating graphics won't get you rid of fundamental/systematic flaws and won't enable you to implement truly new stuff though.

    ... Well except thats what GW2 has done. HoT and PoF maps are faaaar beyond vanilla maps in terms of detail and they added gliders and mounts... And thats just the big things. Lots of smaller features, new stuff and changes. Hell, we had to smack together weapons/armor once to reskin them, remember? Building 2 of the same legendary if you wanted to dualwield something like daggers... For each character.

    Anet can implement whatever they want.

    Your examples are far too specefic. I'm talking about fundamental issues like the atrocious class-"balance" (combat system), reward-structures, socialization elements, etc.

    None of those are engine-bound...
    Poor Balance is simply a question of "human error", for lack of a better term. It's not bound to the system, it's bound to whoever programs the effects of skills.
    Reward structures can, and have been, restructured easily enough. Are not remotely bound to the client.
    Social elements are, again not limited by the client, and can be added easily enough, if there's will for it. They have even added recently one very technical aspect of social interaction by allowing you to sit on chairs and stuff around the map. This is probably the social interaction that would be more limited by engine restrictions, and yet was surpassed as a kind of a almost easter-egg kind of thing made by the devs.

    Movement and physics (stuff that is bound and limited by the engine) have been restructured and improved at least 3 times:
    first time, and the ground work for the others, was released with the Labyrinthine Cliffs and the Zephyrite Crystal's movement skills;
    second time, for HoT and the gliding, mushrooms, that built upon the zephyrite skills
    third time, with mounts for PoF.

    Of all the aspects of a game that might require a third instalment, your list mentions none.

    It's true that none of them may be bound to the engine itself. Some of these elements - especially combat and class-balance - are so fundamental though that you can't really change them. I hope we can agree that this game knows no class-balance. If you really want to balance this, you'd have to overhaul the class-system and the gameplay itself, since balance is very much dependent on the specific encounter and you can't just take numbers into account, but also several buffs, utilities, etc. The game lacks coherence and you feel that not just in PvE, but also a lot in PvP and WvW.

    ...and that's just one problem. You don't know if small changes will break other stuff. Apparently, GW2 has some very weird spaghetti-coding, else stuff like Xera wouldn't be totally broke though the implementation of content that should be totally independent from that specific raid-encounter. I could go on, but I hope I've made my point of view clear.

    You clearly don't understand what we're speaking of, and confusing bad implementation of things with the impossibility of them being implemented.
    Also, it's a fact of building upon old code, eventually you'll get weird "spaghetti code" interactions. Also you don't know if it was unrelated.

  • Raizel.8175Raizel.8175 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @ReaverKane.7598 said:

    @Raizel.8175 said:

    @ReaverKane.7598 said:

    @Raizel.8175 said:

    @Dawdler.8521 said:

    @Raizel.8175 said:

    @Master Ketsu.4569 said:
    The thing with MMOs is you can often just update the game as much as the engine allows it. And since GW runs on a in-house engine, the limits are who knows.

    WoW is an obvious example of this. WoW has received so many graphical updates and hi-res upgrades that it practically could be argued that WoW-2 already exists as something that has been phased in to gradually replace the original game.

    Just updating graphics won't get you rid of fundamental/systematic flaws and won't enable you to implement truly new stuff though.

    ... Well except thats what GW2 has done. HoT and PoF maps are faaaar beyond vanilla maps in terms of detail and they added gliders and mounts... And thats just the big things. Lots of smaller features, new stuff and changes. Hell, we had to smack together weapons/armor once to reskin them, remember? Building 2 of the same legendary if you wanted to dualwield something like daggers... For each character.

    Anet can implement whatever they want.

    Your examples are far too specefic. I'm talking about fundamental issues like the atrocious class-"balance" (combat system), reward-structures, socialization elements, etc.

    None of those are engine-bound...
    Poor Balance is simply a question of "human error", for lack of a better term. It's not bound to the system, it's bound to whoever programs the effects of skills.
    Reward structures can, and have been, restructured easily enough. Are not remotely bound to the client.
    Social elements are, again not limited by the client, and can be added easily enough, if there's will for it. They have even added recently one very technical aspect of social interaction by allowing you to sit on chairs and stuff around the map. This is probably the social interaction that would be more limited by engine restrictions, and yet was surpassed as a kind of a almost easter-egg kind of thing made by the devs.

    Movement and physics (stuff that is bound and limited by the engine) have been restructured and improved at least 3 times:
    first time, and the ground work for the others, was released with the Labyrinthine Cliffs and the Zephyrite Crystal's movement skills;
    second time, for HoT and the gliding, mushrooms, that built upon the zephyrite skills
    third time, with mounts for PoF.

    Of all the aspects of a game that might require a third instalment, your list mentions none.

    It's true that none of them may be bound to the engine itself. Some of these elements - especially combat and class-balance - are so fundamental though that you can't really change them. I hope we can agree that this game knows no class-balance. If you really want to balance this, you'd have to overhaul the class-system and the gameplay itself, since balance is very much dependent on the specific encounter and you can't just take numbers into account, but also several buffs, utilities, etc. The game lacks coherence and you feel that not just in PvE, but also a lot in PvP and WvW.

    ...and that's just one problem. You don't know if small changes will break other stuff. Apparently, GW2 has some very weird spaghetti-coding, else stuff like Xera wouldn't be totally broke though the implementation of content that should be totally independent from that specific raid-encounter. I could go on, but I hope I've made my point of view clear.

    You clearly don't understand what we're speaking of, and confusing bad implementation of things with the impossibility of them being implemented.
    Also, it's a fact of building upon old code, eventually you'll get weird "spaghetti code" interactions. Also you don't know if it was unrelated.

    I do think that I know what you're talking about, but I also think that just taking the engine into consideration isn't sufficient. I'm talking about some fundamental design-decisions which certainly won't be changed, even though they ultimately turned into flaws which won't get fixed due to the effort that the fixing would take. Else, please explain.

  • ReaverKane.7598ReaverKane.7598 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited July 9, 2018

    @Raizel.8175 said:

    @ReaverKane.7598 said:

    @Raizel.8175 said:

    @ReaverKane.7598 said:

    @Raizel.8175 said:

    @Dawdler.8521 said:

    @Raizel.8175 said:

    @Master Ketsu.4569 said:
    The thing with MMOs is you can often just update the game as much as the engine allows it. And since GW runs on a in-house engine, the limits are who knows.

    WoW is an obvious example of this. WoW has received so many graphical updates and hi-res upgrades that it practically could be argued that WoW-2 already exists as something that has been phased in to gradually replace the original game.

    Just updating graphics won't get you rid of fundamental/systematic flaws and won't enable you to implement truly new stuff though.

    ... Well except thats what GW2 has done. HoT and PoF maps are faaaar beyond vanilla maps in terms of detail and they added gliders and mounts... And thats just the big things. Lots of smaller features, new stuff and changes. Hell, we had to smack together weapons/armor once to reskin them, remember? Building 2 of the same legendary if you wanted to dualwield something like daggers... For each character.

    Anet can implement whatever they want.

    Your examples are far too specefic. I'm talking about fundamental issues like the atrocious class-"balance" (combat system), reward-structures, socialization elements, etc.

    None of those are engine-bound...
    Poor Balance is simply a question of "human error", for lack of a better term. It's not bound to the system, it's bound to whoever programs the effects of skills.
    Reward structures can, and have been, restructured easily enough. Are not remotely bound to the client.
    Social elements are, again not limited by the client, and can be added easily enough, if there's will for it. They have even added recently one very technical aspect of social interaction by allowing you to sit on chairs and stuff around the map. This is probably the social interaction that would be more limited by engine restrictions, and yet was surpassed as a kind of a almost easter-egg kind of thing made by the devs.

    Movement and physics (stuff that is bound and limited by the engine) have been restructured and improved at least 3 times:
    first time, and the ground work for the others, was released with the Labyrinthine Cliffs and the Zephyrite Crystal's movement skills;
    second time, for HoT and the gliding, mushrooms, that built upon the zephyrite skills
    third time, with mounts for PoF.

    Of all the aspects of a game that might require a third instalment, your list mentions none.

    It's true that none of them may be bound to the engine itself. Some of these elements - especially combat and class-balance - are so fundamental though that you can't really change them. I hope we can agree that this game knows no class-balance. If you really want to balance this, you'd have to overhaul the class-system and the gameplay itself, since balance is very much dependent on the specific encounter and you can't just take numbers into account, but also several buffs, utilities, etc. The game lacks coherence and you feel that not just in PvE, but also a lot in PvP and WvW.

    ...and that's just one problem. You don't know if small changes will break other stuff. Apparently, GW2 has some very weird spaghetti-coding, else stuff like Xera wouldn't be totally broke though the implementation of content that should be totally independent from that specific raid-encounter. I could go on, but I hope I've made my point of view clear.

    You clearly don't understand what we're speaking of, and confusing bad implementation of things with the impossibility of them being implemented.
    Also, it's a fact of building upon old code, eventually you'll get weird "spaghetti code" interactions. Also you don't know if it was unrelated.

    I do think that I know what you're talking about, but I also think that just taking the engine into consideration isn't sufficient. I'm talking about some fundamental design-decisions which certainly won't be changed, even though they ultimately turned into flaws which won't get fixed due to the effort that the fixing would take. Else, please explain.

    Your logic is so backwards i don't even know how to explain this to you...
    But basically, if they were to isolate balance as a problem, what is the most likely and cost effective solution?
    Fix it in the current game? Or make a new game just to fix balance?

    And if they did make a new game without fixing balance in guild wars 2, why do you think they would magically change their philosophy and start doing it different, just because it's a new game?

    Are you serious right now?

  • Raizel.8175Raizel.8175 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited July 9, 2018

    @ReaverKane.7598 said:

    @Raizel.8175 said:

    @ReaverKane.7598 said:

    @Raizel.8175 said:

    @ReaverKane.7598 said:

    @Raizel.8175 said:

    @Dawdler.8521 said:

    @Raizel.8175 said:

    @Master Ketsu.4569 said:
    The thing with MMOs is you can often just update the game as much as the engine allows it. And since GW runs on a in-house engine, the limits are who knows.

    WoW is an obvious example of this. WoW has received so many graphical updates and hi-res upgrades that it practically could be argued that WoW-2 already exists as something that has been phased in to gradually replace the original game.

    Just updating graphics won't get you rid of fundamental/systematic flaws and won't enable you to implement truly new stuff though.

    ... Well except thats what GW2 has done. HoT and PoF maps are faaaar beyond vanilla maps in terms of detail and they added gliders and mounts... And thats just the big things. Lots of smaller features, new stuff and changes. Hell, we had to smack together weapons/armor once to reskin them, remember? Building 2 of the same legendary if you wanted to dualwield something like daggers... For each character.

    Anet can implement whatever they want.

    Your examples are far too specefic. I'm talking about fundamental issues like the atrocious class-"balance" (combat system), reward-structures, socialization elements, etc.

    None of those are engine-bound...
    Poor Balance is simply a question of "human error", for lack of a better term. It's not bound to the system, it's bound to whoever programs the effects of skills.
    Reward structures can, and have been, restructured easily enough. Are not remotely bound to the client.
    Social elements are, again not limited by the client, and can be added easily enough, if there's will for it. They have even added recently one very technical aspect of social interaction by allowing you to sit on chairs and stuff around the map. This is probably the social interaction that would be more limited by engine restrictions, and yet was surpassed as a kind of a almost easter-egg kind of thing made by the devs.

    Movement and physics (stuff that is bound and limited by the engine) have been restructured and improved at least 3 times:
    first time, and the ground work for the others, was released with the Labyrinthine Cliffs and the Zephyrite Crystal's movement skills;
    second time, for HoT and the gliding, mushrooms, that built upon the zephyrite skills
    third time, with mounts for PoF.

    Of all the aspects of a game that might require a third instalment, your list mentions none.

    It's true that none of them may be bound to the engine itself. Some of these elements - especially combat and class-balance - are so fundamental though that you can't really change them. I hope we can agree that this game knows no class-balance. If you really want to balance this, you'd have to overhaul the class-system and the gameplay itself, since balance is very much dependent on the specific encounter and you can't just take numbers into account, but also several buffs, utilities, etc. The game lacks coherence and you feel that not just in PvE, but also a lot in PvP and WvW.

    ...and that's just one problem. You don't know if small changes will break other stuff. Apparently, GW2 has some very weird spaghetti-coding, else stuff like Xera wouldn't be totally broke though the implementation of content that should be totally independent from that specific raid-encounter. I could go on, but I hope I've made my point of view clear.

    You clearly don't understand what we're speaking of, and confusing bad implementation of things with the impossibility of them being implemented.
    Also, it's a fact of building upon old code, eventually you'll get weird "spaghetti code" interactions. Also you don't know if it was unrelated.

    I do think that I know what you're talking about, but I also think that just taking the engine into consideration isn't sufficient. I'm talking about some fundamental design-decisions which certainly won't be changed, even though they ultimately turned into flaws which won't get fixed due to the effort that the fixing would take. Else, please explain.

    Your logic is so backwards i don't even know how to explain this to you...
    But basically, if they were to isolate balance as a problem, what is the most likely and cost effective solution?
    Fix it in the current game? Or make a new game just to fix balance?

    And if they did make a new game without fixing balance in guild wars 2, why do you think they would magically change their philosophy and start doing it different, just because it's a new game?

    Are you serious right now?

    I kinda... don't really understand you?

    Balance was only one example out of many. What I mean is basically that you can't really change an already written/half-finished book anymore on a fundamental level, a blank page is a blank page though and enables you to overthink fundamental design-choices. From what I read from you, you also think that the current content-release was rather stale due to repetitive formulaic game design, right? That will probably continue. What I think about here is also the step towards a full-fledged MMORPG since - at least in my opinion - GW2 is still too focused on the single-player-component, which is - also in my opinion - also one of the factors why GW2 suffers from incoherence. Of course it's just a mind game to create a new game, since there probably aren't any resources to do so, but still...

    Edit: I'm probably quite biased though since the game is quite frustrating for me lately.

  • Kalocin.5982Kalocin.5982 Member ✭✭✭

    I'd rather they go down the Blizzard route and develop a side game or IP either set in the same universe or a new one. Why cannibalize your own market? The reason why GW2 made more sense to GW1 at the time was because of how limited the game was for long-term progression, and it wasn't a full MMO so it was an obvious step forward.

  • Astralporing.1957Astralporing.1957 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited July 10, 2018

    @STIHL.2489 said:
    You have agreed with me that the game is in a natural downward progression, as such, it's best years are behind it, it is not a matter of if it becomes unsustainable, but when. As such, if they ever hope to boost numbers they need to put out a new game.

    There's no guarantee that the new game will end up more popular than this one (in fact, considering the global MMORPG trends, it probably won't be). It is certain however, that even just mentioning GW3 is in production (to say nothing about actually making it) will negatively impact GW2 numbers. They will be trading a current, certain and predictable source of income for an uncertain future one.

    Blizzard has a lot more money to burn on a project like that, and yet they haven't risked anything like that yet. Even though WoW is far more aged than GW2. I really doubt that Anet, a firm that almost certainly cannot at the moment afford making a second project alongside the current one, would dare to go that way unless they felt they have no other choice.

    Besides, personally it's more probable that, if they ever decided Gw2 no longer cuts it for them, they'd go the Blizzard way and make not a sequel game, but something completely different. Maybe not even an MMORPG.
    That's much safer, as it doesn't kill your current income source in the process.

    The whole point of a social game is to play with the people you want to play with, not be forced to play with the people you don't.

  • @STIHL.2489 said:
    You have agreed with me that the game is in a natural downward progression,

    I have not. I have agreed that there is attrition of active participants, which is something that affects every human endeavor.

    as such, it's best years are behind it,

    Only if you equate "best years" with "greatest amount of active players." The point is: the most active years of a game are always behind it. That holds for WoW, too, which, as you might know, is still going strong.

    it is not a matter of if it becomes unsustainable, but when.

    Yes. And again that's true for any social activity.
    You keep assuming that the only option a studio has is to release a new game. And implicit in that assumption is the idea that a sequel will be the best possible use of available resources.

    As such, if they ever hope to boost numbers they need to put out a new game.

    Boost numbers? No, they don't need a new game for that. They boosted numbers with the release of each expansion. The meltdown that was Bliss' launch boosted numbers. If they hope to see the sort of numbers they had in Aug 2012, sure, new game might do it.

    All they need to guarantee to themselves is that they make enough money to pay the cost of running the studio (with a healthy return to relevant investors). There are multiple ways to do that, only one of which requires starting from scratch.

    It's fair to say that if ANet wants to keep having a big studio, then some day a sequel will be a better option than tinkering with GW2. But it's impossible to guess at when that "some day" might be, especially given all the other opportunities.

    Hype is the path to the dark side. Hype leads to unfulfilled expectations. Disappointment leads to anger. Anger leads to disgust. Disgust leads to "oh, new shinies! I'm back!"

  • STIHL.2489STIHL.2489 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Illconceived Was Na.9781 said:
    It's fair to say that if ANet wants to keep having a big studio, then some day a sequel will be a better option than tinkering with GW2. But it's impossible to guess at when that "some day" might be, especially given all the other opportunities.

    It does not matter then when, all that matters is that we know it is a must be. The attrition of the games population as it ages makes it inevitable that they will need to move on to something else eventually..

    The only alternative to GW3 at this point, is if they do as @Astralporing.1957 said, and move in a whole different direction.

    There are two kinds of Gamers, Salty, and Extra Salty.
    Ego is the Anesthesia that dullens the pain of Stupidity.

  • Ashantara.8731Ashantara.8731 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited January 25, 2019

    With adequate updates in time (engine updates mostly), there is no reason for GW2 to not go on for a very long time. I don't see the need for a GW2 successor, it seems pointless when GW2 is doing so well. Also, the reason GW1 got a successor wasn't the need to bring out something new but the fact that the engine had too many limitations. I wouldn't have minded had they done an overhaul on GW1 instead of releasing GW2, but perhaps starting from scratch was easier than trying to build MMO content into an already existing, technically limited game.

©2010–2018 ArenaNet, LLC. All rights reserved. Guild Wars, Guild Wars 2, Heart of Thorns, Guild Wars 2: Path of Fire, ArenaNet, NCSOFT, the Interlocking NC Logo, and all associated logos and designs are trademarks or registered trademarks of NCSOFT Corporation. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.