Jump to content
  • Sign Up

Guild Wars 3


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Dawdler.8521 said:

Well on the speculative side of things, obviously Anet would have to recode the entire netcode of UE5 from scratch to fit its instancing system that can have ~200-250 players in the same area, they wouldnt just take UE5 as is. The graphics part of the engine is not a restriction on this.

It's behind any form of netcode in any engine.  UE just isn't designed for MMOs.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Mariyuuna.6508 said:

You answered your own question in your post. Guild Wars is their original IP, not GW2, meaning that anything being developed could just as well be a sister-project instead of a replacement.

GW2 did not replace GW1, either. They promised that GW2 would be like GW1, only better, but that was a shameless ruse. (Yes, the engine was updated, with textures, animations, combat and freedom of movement being excellent -- but the rest of the game is rather disappointing as a "successor.")

I do not believe that GW3 would "replace" GW2 per se, especially not if it goes further down the road of a modern tech setting (shudders).
 

36 minutes ago, phokus.8934 said:

UE just isn't designed for MMOs.

😂

 

Edited by Ashantara.8731
  • Haha 2
  • Confused 10
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Ashantara.8731

Nothing in that video contradicts it. UE generally is not made for high performance in true MMORPG situations, like cases with hundreds of players and mobs in the same instance slinging sfx-es at each other. It doesn't mean it can't still be done, but that's a work either completely outside UE, or by modifying UE to specific situations.

I don't have full information about UE5 capabilities, so it might be better at it than the previous generations, but unmodified UE3 and 4 were absolutely horrible for use for stuff like GW2's WvW efficiency-wise.

BTW: Ashes of Creation still is not released, so we don't know how good its performance will be in the final version, but the early testing did reveal some performance issues already. And that's when considering that AoC generally requires much better rig than GW2 does.

So, basically it's not so sure switch to UE5 woulld improve on GW2's performance in the most problematic cases, but what it definitely would do is increase hardware requirements by a lot. And remember, that most of GW2's performance issues are not graphic engine based.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don’t want GW3 to come out anytime soon. The new dev team have little idea about making and sustaining a good game, a new title made by them would be a spectacular flop. It’ll be better to let GW2 run more and make the staff rotate and change once again.

Edited by Mik.3401
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well ... they will need a lot of time - with the next expansion still in the future the GW3 will the future even more. Hopefully we will get nice achievements for stuff we did in GW1 - when linking accounts. Like with the Hall of Monuments.

And hopefully the hardware required then will be cheap - and possibly with not too much energy consumption. (At the moment expecially video cards are very expensive.) I'd really love to play it. And willing to buy a new computer until then. (While for GW2 I try to use the existing one - that barely runs it at it's minimum - as long as possible. Especially since the video card does not have an external power connector - using not much power. Electricity tends to get more and more expensive here cause of environmental laws.)

But I certainly do not want to pay thousands of euros. If I can get something decent for about 500 to run it at between low-mid requirements ... I'd be fine. (Power consumption maybe a bigger issue then.) I guess if this uses an engine from now ... in 5 years or so ... the hardware will be cheaper while the requirements won't increase too much based on stuff that gets released with this engine now.

5 years are the minimum I guess. If they just barely started. And the next expansion is not even announced. Probably 1 more season and/or other stuff (maybe no season but solo maps/chapters) - and then the next espansion in 2 years earlierst. And then another 2 years or so ...

Certainly trying to get into beta as early as possible. (For GW2 back then I only got in the last beta upon pre-ordering the game. Semi-open for all buyers. Cause I played GW1 back then at its relase but forgot about it and only played it for a few weeks. But now with me being active ... I am sure they will announce stuff in forums the closer we will get - like ... 1 day before beta starts or so. Lol.  😄)

Edit: They might also do something else - an online game with a totally other genre ... related to Guild Wars and Tyria.

Edited by Luthan.5236
  • Confused 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mariyuuna.6508 said:

Are people really suggesting that a company who has primarily worked on graphics engines will have more viable net code than a company that has worked on MMOs for 20 years?

Most players are clueless, or at least uninformed about game development, they judge what they understand : how shiny the thing is

Remember the hype for Crysis in 2007, and no one being able to run it on max graphics on release lol

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, phokus.8934 said:

It's behind any form of netcode in any engine.  UE just isn't designed for MMOs.

And World Of Warcraft runs on an engine designed for a top down singleplayer RTS.

If an engine isnt designed for something that you need it to do, you go into the code and redesign it.

Not sure what the argument is here.

Edited by Dawdler.8521
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah but that's the reason Wow mounts started off as 300% speed flying mounts without physics. The Griffin is more unique than a half speed wow mount skyscale. Outside of the rolls they're retroactively adding. The baseline wow mounts act without physics and basically were all 2x speed skyscales with flying to the map line as default. 

 

Activision, in their infinite wisdom deciding to strangle games for more profit for return per dollar, have pretty much consistently pretty much made pretty cinematic and boring gameplay. They know they have a strong ip presence but strangle the game knowing if they cut half of content and disable flying without a 2 part pathfinder that involves repeating the same identical  turtle rep quest 40 days in a row for 50-100 rep of 40,000 to exalted. That players will waste their subs regardless of quality. 

 

Wow gets millions upon millions of views off up even if people trash it, that's awareness. Gw2 has millions at launch. But its latest expacs barely get 90k views. Asmongold's beetle video gets 350k despite being a figure in wow only a few know.

 

And disguisedToast from hearthstone gets millions playing among us. I really wonder if you offered to let him try the game with a review copy and maybe a YouTube promo code or customs item for a cheap disguised toast hat if he could join.

 

Even smaller games without money for ads know the free pr that streamers can bring. Oftentimes even if you don't have money, giving them a code for a nontradable xp booster or cosmetic for their channel can easily bring people in or awareness of a less known game. It might not be overnight but our game slowly chipped it's way up to 10-15k starting players online at any given moment to 17k-24k actively logged in.

Though it is a afk gacha model where you open swords to fuse them together for higher stats infinitely. Its feasible to make on a 75.5% revenue cut platform. Ironically some of the whaling features were forced into the game after revolt because the dev wanted to cap spending..

 

At some point there were buffs you could infinitely refill for 50 cents that could double your damage. The dev wanted to disable it and offer people three choices instead and take away paid rerolling and give it for free... after finding out people were spending 1000s of dollars on it for a weekly leader board and title. 

 

it was meant to make the game more f2p friendly but even the f2ps complained so. They limited to one refill and then a few of the leaderboard tryhards began gearing up like 10-50 accounts just to roll perfect rng while whaling on each purchase limited one... I actually really encourage and enjoy the gameplay of f2p or buy for life models.

 

At some point it just becomes a wallet no living war imo. But our audience would actively rebel if we tried to take whaling away. Going "WHY WOULD I WANT TO SPEND LESS?? I SHOULD BE ABLE TO SPEND MORE!! YOU'RE NOT MY MOM, I CAN OWN YOU AND BUY YOUR ENTIRE COMPANY!!!" etc. "

 

(ironically we initially started catering to them at first. The early ones would spend tons but yell and flame the staff and for early financial reasons we'd make business decisions to go with it for a few 3k-8k spenders. It seems a pretty bad and review bombed mmorpg monetization scheme though. as mmorpgs need players and balance to thrive.

Bdo is HEAVILY review bombed for p2w mechanics. I still dislike paywalling the story but whales aren't like innocent sheep.. Sometimes the audience you get screams at you to add MORE SPENDING rather than the other way around. Gw2 And osrs's mass quit for mtx are NOT that game. ) 

Edited by Sunchaser.9854
  • Haha 1
  • Confused 2
  • Sad 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/31/2022 at 3:00 AM, The Greyhawk.9107 said:

We'll see I suppose.  Inevitably GW2's time will come to an end so one way or another I'd like this franchise's design philosophy, and preferably its setting as well, to continue on somehow otherwise I'll likely have to give up on MMOs as the common designs like gear treadmills and the like are unplayable for me.

Same. If the Guild Wars world comes to an end...so does my gaming career. Nothing else even comes close to guild wars. It's sad.

 

 

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dawdler.8521 said:

And World Of Warcraft runs on an engine designed for a top down singleplayer RTS.

If an engine isnt designed for something that you need it to do, you go into the code and redesign it.

Not sure what the argument is here.

The argument was that the engine in question would offer improvements in certain areas. And those areas happen to be specifically the ones that engine is not designed for.  So, the question would be - if you need to redesign that engine to get improvements, why exactly would you need that engine for in the first place, if you can do those redesigns without it?

  • Like 5
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Astralporing.1957 said:

The argument was that the engine in question would offer improvements in certain areas. And those areas happen to be specifically the ones that engine is not designed for.  So, the question would be - if you need to redesign that engine to get improvements, why exactly would you need that engine for in the first place, if you can do those redesigns without it?

Well, if Anet can create a graphics and physics engine rivaling UE5 with all the tools it has on top of the netcode, more power to them. No need to pay any royalties - there's a reason why game companies often make their own engines rather than license something else.

But in this case the topic of discussion was an Anet job opening with UE5 experience... So why indeed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Astralporing.1957 said:

@Ashantara.8731

Nothing in that video contradicts it. UE generally is not made for high performance in true MMORPG situations, like cases with hundreds of players and mobs in the same instance slinging sfx-es at each other. It doesn't mean it can't still be done, but that's a work either completely outside UE, or by modifying UE to specific situations.

AoC's update from UE4 to UE5 in this early stage of production led to making mass siege events (with hundreds of players and NPCs) run fluently.

Hmph, I'm trying to find that demo video I watched early this year explaining the technique that is making it possible... Will post it when I find it.

Edit - Found it: 🙂

 

Edited by Ashantara.8731
  • Confused 4
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Astralporing.1957 said:

Perhaps they are making a project for which UE5 is good for.

Check out the video I posted in my edited post above. UE5 seems to be well suited for MMOs, so I don't know what you're going on about.


Edit for the people who are too lazy to do some research on their own but rather give confused reactions: Take a look at the AoC official YT channel, then tell me again that my claim was inaccurate. :classic_rolleyes:

--> https://www.youtube.com/c/AshesofCreation
 

Edited by Ashantara.8731
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • Confused 7
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread annoys me, but no as much as that stupid-kitten article on PCGamer that has taken some very loose gossip and theorizing by some fans over on Reddit or whatnot and crafted it into an article about GW3 being on the way using Unreal Engine 5... I mean, reeks of clickbait miles away.

 

I was avoiding PCGamer articles already, but with this stupid article they've lowered the bar and I will never visit that site again.

  • Like 7
  • Thanks 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Dondarrion.2748 said:

This thread annoys me, but no as much as that stupid-kitten article on PCGamer that has taken some very loose gossip and theorizing by some fans over on Reddit or whatnot and crafted it into an article about GW3 being on the way using Unreal Engine 5... I mean, reeks of clickbait miles away.

 

I was avoiding PCGamer articles already, but with this stupid article they've lowered the bar and I will never visit that site again.

I think there is a difference (quite some) between PCGamer and pcgamesn. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, eXistence.3876 said:

Same. If the Guild Wars world comes to an end...so does my gaming career. Nothing else even comes close to guild wars. It's sad.

 

 

 

Surely there are other games in other genres that might hold your attention or fit your life schedule.   Another that I myself am quite fond of is Warframe, which I guess is loosely classified as a "looter shooter".  Basically space-ninjas with guns, "magic", parkour, and its free to play. ....Everything else I play is pretty random, so I dunno if I can offer any other suggestions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/1/2022 at 3:27 AM, Ashantara.8731 said:

And what other "established online game" does ArenaNet have going that could have been referenced?
 

 

ArenaNet belongs to NCSoft and NCSsoft has Lineage, Blade & Soul, Aion, ... in their catalog

Edited by Fyore.8104
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, phokus.8934 said:

It's behind any form of netcode in any engine.  UE just isn't designed for MMOs.

Lineage 2? Mu Origin? Ragnarok? Vanguard? Bless? MU Legend? TERA? Lost Ark? Elyon? DC Universe? AION? Blade n Soul? UE is one of the most popular engines that can run any style of game.

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So many replies about "not going to happen" "devs stated that no GW3" and other "well informed" ones.

Reminds me of those posts about "DirectX 11 is too much work. Not going to happen. Devs said so"

If you are not part of Anet, maybe refrain from such statements.

 

Hope GW3 will be made in my lifetime.

Edited by Deepcuts.9740
  • Confused 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Deepcuts.9740 said:

So many replies about "not going to happen" "devs stated that no GW3" and other "well informed" ones.

Reminds me of those posts about "DirectX 11 is too much work. Not going to happen. Devs said so"

If you are not part of Anet, maybe refrain from such statements.

 

Hope GW3 will be made in my lifetime.

If Anet is smart, it will keep updating GW2 engine and try to extent games life that way. I highly doubt, that GW3 would be as popular as GW2, when there are 3 other big MMOs that have way bigger communities and players don't have to start from 0.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...