Guild wars 3

[Sobx.1758]

Just now, gmmg.9210 said:

We have to consider everything being said, both behind closed doors that was leaked, and to us by these companies as public statements.

If what the leak said was not true, it would be easy as pie to dismiss in a public statement. Why deal with backlash if the rumor isn’t even real?

But that didn’t happen. Both anet and NCsoft said something like: “GW3 is still under consideration, but for the moment the company has its eyes solely on GW2.” 
 

We know this is PR jargon because it’s not rejecting the leak. All they have to do is say “Lol, no Gw3 guys sorry, we only making GW2.” But they never are saying that. They’re saying stuff like they’re “considering” making Gw3 and they’re “exploring the idea of future projects”.
 

It doesn’t need to be that complicated. If there’s no GW3, then they’d say it. But they’re not. They’re beating around the bush and using legalese and lawyer speak for better PR.

By what logic does the statement need to be completely retracted when it can be simply clarified which is what they did?

[Yerlock.4678]

1 minute ago, Sobx.1758 said:

By what logic does the statement need to be completely retracted when it can be simply clarified which is what they did?

But it’s not clarifying is it? Because the leak showed the NCsoft employee saying that they’re actively working on GW3. And now the official statement to everyone is that they’re “considering it”. 
 

So let me ask you: Which to you sounds more believable? The guy behind closed doors who doesn’t think what he’s saying will be spilled online for everyone to read, or the public statements by the companies themselves knowing that all of the paying customers are watching and reading the statement?

Real info is inside info. And that’s what the leak was. It was two people talking without the employee knowing the entire world was gonna read what he said.

[Sobx.1758]

8 minutes ago, gmmg.9210 said:

But it’s not clarifying is it?

What's not clarifying? You literally kept quoting the post of someone speaking both korean and english explaining that there's clarification added. Now it's not clarifying because you don't like what it says?

 

14 minutes ago, Balsa.3951 said:

Balsa.3951

Posted January 29, 2023

not a serious post but shoot in the dark.

I noticed that a lot gemshop skins have a demonic theme recently. Is that just bcs it sells well or are we going the path of demons.

Some story like Dantes Inferno? Where we go deeper and deeper into the underworld.

From the map Dragons end I got the feeling that we will face outer dimensions tentacle creatures like the one in fractals?

Just a guess going all demonic and lovecraftish

 

u own me a apolgy u are someone of honor?

https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/topic/144948-thoughts-about-gw3-merged/page/32/#comment-2105055

Also considering the "not a serious post but shoot in the dark" start of that post, looks like you totally "believed" in your "prediction" there 😄 

Edited April 14 by Sobx.1758

[Yerlock.4678]

44 minutes ago, Randulf.7614 said:

All of which is impossible to commit to. Leadership changes. Teams change. Ideas and approaches change. Finances change. Gaming trends change. Real world intrudes. No ongoing game with the scope of an mmo is going to maintain the status quo throughout its life for better or worse.

There’s no point saying “it MUST” happen because it won’t be able to commit to it. Reality just doesn’t work that. Things always change.

Whatever new game they might decide to green light, I can’t see an mmo sequel being as successful as GW2. The mmo market for new games is declining rapidly and developing one only to slip into the same cycle just for a new setting and characters seems wasteful. I doubt a new GW game will be an MMORPG, but something else

It’s all moot anyway. Nothing is green lit and when it eventually does happen, it’s many years away. One can only hope GW2 strengthens before then to prevent dissatisfaction with its brand, because that is the bigger risk. 

 

Nani? It’s greenlit and actively being developed. 

In any case I was just stating those were good goals for the company to have. Sure they can’t always live up to them because of how life works, but having it as a target ain’t a bad idea either.

Nuance is a good thing lol

Edited April 14 by gmmg.9210

[Yerlock.4678]

18 minutes ago, Sobx.1758 said:

What's not clarifying? You literally kept quoting the post of someone speaking both korean and english explaining that there's clarification added. Now it's not clarifying because you don't like what it says?

Let’s back up a second. I was quoting that comment because people were saying that the leak was a “bad translation” or it was just google translate sucking and wasn’t really what was being said.

So I simply quoted that bilingual post showing that that was in fact not true.

What isn’t clarifying, is the two messages that were said by NCsoft and anet. We had a leak of an NCsoft employee saying GW3 is in active development, and an official statement saying it was “being considered”.

Has to be one or the other can’t be both. It doesn’t make sense to both take a shower and be like “hmm should I hop in the shower right now? I’m considering it.” 
 

So I think the leak is more viable as a source because it was behind closed doors without any external forces watching them (or at least so they thought) that would entice them to come up with carefully presented info.

 

An actual clarifying statement would’ve been rejection or acceptance. Either they say that’s not true and they aren’t making Gw3, or they are. They not doing that so I have to assume they are working on gw3.

Edited April 14 by gmmg.9210

[Inculpatus cedo.9234]

7 minutes ago, gmmg.9210 said:

We had a leak of an NCsoft employee

I'm confused...the NCSoft employee didn't know there were reporters in the room?  Is that what you are saying? The Chief Officers aren't notified that there will be reporters included in the meeting?  How odd! 

Otherwise, it can't be considered a 'leak'. 

[Sobx.1758]

14 minutes ago, gmmg.9210 said:

Let’s back up a second. I was quoting that comment because people were saying that the leak was a “bad translation” or it was just google translate sucking and wasn’t really what was being said.

So I simply quoted that bilingual post showing that that was in fact not true.

What isn’t clarifying, is the two messages that were said by NCsoft and anet. We had a leak of an NCsoft employee saying GW3 is in active development, and an official statement saying it was “being considered”.

Has to be one or the other can’t be both. It doesn’t make sense to both take a shower and be like “hmm should I hop in the shower right now? I’m considering it.” 
 

So I think the leak is more viable as a source because it was behind closed doors without any external forces watching them (or at least so they thought) that would entice them to come up with carefully presented info.

So was it a leak or not? Because I'm pretty sure the first version was about it not actually being a closed meeting.

14 minutes ago, gmmg.9210 said:

An actual clarifying statement would’ve been rejection or acceptance. Either they say that’s not true and they aren’t making Gw3, or they are. They not doing that so I have to assume they are working on gw3.

What is this nonsense, the clarification at no point needs to be the equivalent of "confirming everything" or "denying everything". You don't need to "assume" anything here, you simply want to dismiss the clarification for no good reason.

Edited April 14 by Sobx.1758

[Balsa.3951]

3 minutes ago, Inculpatus cedo.9234 said:

I'm confused...the NCSoft employee didn't know there were reporters in the room?  Is that what you are saying? The Chief Officers aren't notified that there will be reporters included in the meeting?  How odd! 

Otherwise, it can't be considered a 'leak'. 

i think they said it because its good news in fact.

at least for their company

so there was no shame to tell shareholders ncsoft west is developing

[Yerlock.4678]

Just now, Inculpatus cedo.9234 said:

I'm confused...the NCSoft employee didn't know there were reporters in the room?  Is that what you are saying? The Chief Officers aren't notified that there will be reporters included in the meeting?  How odd! 

Otherwise, it can't be considered a 'leak'. 

Well it’s a leak because presumably that NCsoft employee wasn’t supposed to say anything about GW3, whether it was a thing or not. These guys have NDA’s and can get in big trouble if they spill the beans.

He said what he said because he was getting a lot of pressure to make the company seem like it has good things to come, to make the investor more confident. Thus he said GW3.

Now the copium users on these forums want to believe he just said that to say anything to get this guy off of his line of questions. But if that were the case, Anet and NCsoft would have an easy job to do and simply reject the claim in an official statement.

But they didn’t do that because GW3 is real;) Get off the cope it’s gonna happen.

[Yerlock.4678]

3 minutes ago, Sobx.1758 said:

So was it a leak or not? Because I'm pretty sure the first version was about it not actually being a closed meeting.

What is this nonsense, the clarification at no point needs to be the equivalent of "confirming everything" or "denying everything". You don't need to "assume" anything here, you simply want to dismiss the clarification for no good reason.

To your first point, it’s just a leak cuz the guy wasn’t supposed to say anything about gw3, whether it was real or not.

To your second thing, I’m dismissing the “clarification” statement because it comes into conflict with the first statement that was made. The leak statement said they’re actively working on it, the official statement said it’s being considered.

Now I’m taking the stance that the first statement was the real statement because they did not reject that statement in the “clarification”. They also are talking to all their customers in the official statement, which means PR lawyery type language could easily be at play.

All they had to do was say it’s not true and the problem goes away. But they didn’t do that. And they didn’t do that because if they lied, and gw3 gets announced, then people call them (rightfully) liers.

 

[Lord of the Fire.6870]

11 hours ago, Randulf.7614 said:

All of which is impossible to commit to. Leadership changes. Teams change. Ideas and approaches change. Finances change. Gaming trends change. Real world intrudes. No ongoing game with the scope of an mmo is going to maintain the status quo throughout its life for better or worse.

There’s no point saying “it MUST” happen because it won’t be able to commit to it. Reality just doesn’t work that. Things always change.

Whatever new game they might decide to green light, I can’t see an mmo sequel being as successful as GW2. The mmo market for new games is declining rapidly and developing one only to slip into the same cycle just for a new setting and characters seems wasteful. I doubt a new GW game will be an MMORPG, but something else

It’s all moot anyway. Nothing is green lit and when it eventually does happen, it’s many years away. One can only hope GW2 strengthens before then to prevent dissatisfaction with its brand, because that is the bigger risk. 

 

That things change over time is normal. It just needs to happened because old content gets boring . Its a balancing act. The problem with GW2 is they shacked the tree hard and often. Background to this is GW2 was from its creation often  declared finished and no further expansion were planned . The ascended gear was also put in the game because of content drought which made a lot o things more or less obsolete.

The other point is like I said when you send your senior devs away things getting in different and very experimental directions to say it mildly.

 

Another example is you don't know what abilities your new classes will have with a new expansion but you need to plan ahead how they integrated into the game . Basically you have/need  an idea how your traits are sorted and classified and how roughly the balance should look . What Gw2 often done is more like creating a monolith stature and had then have to change it which caused huge problems  at least this is part of the problems.  There are other changes where nobody know why.

Edited April 15 by Lord of the Fire.6870

[Astralporing.1957]

10 hours ago, gmmg.9210 said:

I would say for gw3 do at least like three things:

1. New game engine, unreal 5. This will make the work flow for updating the game far easier without weird old spaghetti code getting in the way and creating problems in the future (lots of bugs for example).

Most of bugs in GW2 are not graphics engine related. Switching to UE5 would not change the way they tend to code the rest of the game. As such, the bugs (and spaghetti code) are as likely to happen in GW3 as they are likely to happen in GW2.

10 hours ago, gmmg.9210 said:

2. Do not scope creep. Whatever you do, stick to it and do not reinvent the wheel every expansion/ update. Gw2 has a massive bloat problem. New systems being added, new boons during expansions, abandon one mode and go to another etc.

They need to stick to their guns on whatever comes out and stop bloating up the game with weird new mechanics/systems/ modes that can push away newer players who don’t know what’s going on.

3. Whatever is made, must continually be supported. 

No more abandoning modes. No more 5 year droughts for pvp or promising “alliances” for wvw and taking an eternity to release it. Whatever end game comes out must have consistent updates.

Again, that's not how Anet does things. Expecting them to change the way they work just because it's a different title is naive.

[Batalix.2873]

9 hours ago, Inculpatus cedo.9234 said:

I'm confused...the NCSoft employee didn't know there were reporters in the room?  Is that what you are saying? The Chief Officers aren't notified that there will be reporters included in the meeting?  How odd! 

Otherwise, it can't be considered a 'leak'. 

It's not a "leak" in the commonly understood sense of an unauthorized anonymous disclosure of information.

However, even if it was not anonymous and made in the presence of reporters, it does still give the impression of having been unauthorized, or at least unplanned. So in that sense, it is still kind of a "leak", in that it smacks of the CFO disclosing information without prior consultation, strategization, and approval.

The context makes it harder to determine, since the whole situation involved multiple layers of face-saving by a chief officer who presumably has a lot of agency in the company. But it feels very leaky.

[Gehenna.3625]

12 hours ago, gmmg.9210 said:

So whenever NCsoft or Anet make a public statement to everyone, they have to keep in mind that they’re talking to their targeted audience. You and I are their target audience, their customers.

Cute, but you and I are not their target audience, the investors are. We are just a means to an end.

[Zerin.9834]

Hey guild wars faculty is there any news if guild wars 3 will come to consoles?

[Astralporing.1957]

6 hours ago, Gehenna.3625 said:

Cute, but you and I are not their target audience, the investors are. We are just a means to an end.

Not quite. The target audience for the first statement (the one about GW3 being worked on) was indeed for investors, but the second one was for a completely different target group and that one was the customers.

[Gehenna.3625]

4 hours ago, Astralporing.1957 said:

Not quite. The target audience for the first statement (the one about GW3 being worked on) was indeed for investors, but the second one was for a completely different target group and that one was the customers.

yeah for damage control

[Yerlock.4678]

15 hours ago, Astralporing.1957 said:

Most of bugs in GW2 are not graphics engine related. Switching to UE5 would not change the way they tend to code the rest of the game. As such, the bugs (and spaghetti code) are as likely to happen in GW3 as they are likely to happen in GW2.

Again, that's not how Anet does things. Expecting them to change the way they work just because it's a different title is naive.

The engine they are using is inhouse. As such, it's not being externally supported like UE5 is. That's important because many of the engineers who worked on the engine for both Gw1, and Gw2 are gone now. And if there's a technical problem that they don't know how to solve, then they are kitten out of luck.

UE5 is externally supported and much easier to debug with and fix engine related problems.

 

To the second point, I was just saying those were good goals to have. Anet changed a lot from Gw1 to Gw2, so why would me stating those goals that seem perfectly practical to have be naïve? 

 

Edited April 15 by gmmg.9210

[Yerlock.4678]

13 hours ago, Gehenna.3625 said:

Cute, but you and I are not their target audience, the investors are. We are just a means to an end.

When they make a public statement, they're talking to everyone. We are their direct customers, and there's way more of us playing the game than there are investors. Not to say investors aren't putting money down, there's just many more of us. We are indeed their targeted audience. 

Investors have a stake but could care less about the actual game. They just want to see growth. So its safe to assume that when they make a big public statement, they want to pacify and placate the swarms of plebeian gamers (you and I) from developing mob mentality. 

The investors they can always talk to directly. They can just reassure them (like what we saw in the leak) that good things are coming and they should maintain their confidence in growth.

It's just a balancing act, but to say you and I as gamers have no power here is totally untrue.

Edited April 15 by gmmg.9210

[Astralporing.1957]

6 hours ago, gmmg.9210 said:

The engine they are using is inhouse. As such, it's not being externally supported like UE5 is. That's important because many of the engineers who worked on the engine for both Gw1, and Gw2 are gone now. And if there's a technical problem that they don't know how to solve, then they are kitten out of luck.

UE5 is externally supported and much easier to debug with and fix engine related problems.

Yes, but again, most of GW2 spaghetti code and bugs were not graphics engine related. As such, thinking that a change to graphics engine will have a significant impact for something that was never really related to it is naive.

6 hours ago, gmmg.9210 said:

To the second point, I was just saying those were good goals to have. Anet changed a lot from Gw1 to Gw2, so why would me stating those goals that seem perfectly practical to have be naïve?

Anet changed a lot of things from GW1 to GW2, but not the ones you mentioned. If anything, them failing at achieving those goals you set is one of the few things Anet has been completely consistent throughout the years. So, again, believing this will somehow magically change now because they are developing a new title is also naive.

GW3 is not a miracle solution that will somehow magically cause all issues that plagued Anet so far to disappear into thin air. It will still be done by the same studio, with the same quality of effort we've got used to until now.

[Yerlock.4678]

1 hour ago, Astralporing.1957 said:

Yes, but again, most of GW2 spaghetti code and bugs were not graphics engine related. As such, thinking that a change to graphics engine will have a significant impact for something that was never really related to it is naive.

Anet changed a lot of things from GW1 to GW2, but not the ones you mentioned. If anything, them failing at achieving those goals you set is one of the few things Anet has been completely consistent throughout the years. So, again, believing this will somehow magically change now because they are developing a new title is also naive.

GW3 is not a miracle solution that will somehow magically cause all issues that plagued Anet so far to disappear into thin air. It will still be done by the same studio, with the same quality of effort we've got used to until now.

Okay well that's a pretty doomer opinion if I do say so myself. Whether or not they live up to those goals is one thing, we'll have to wait and see. But just saying that asking for a list of good goals to have is somehow naïve is to have the lowest bar set possible for them. Maybe just expect nothing at that point and call it a day lol. Nah Gw2 and Gw1 are both very good games, which means they have the ideas and talent. So having a list of totally achievable goals post launch is not naïve but practical.

The game engine is speghetti code which means debugging and trying to fix things is harder, simple as that. It's not like standard dev tools are enough to fix all bugs and errors. Not how game development works. If there's a problem in the game, fixing the problem means potentially knowing what programming went into that system. If the person who programmed it 15 years ago has left, then you might get more easily lost because you don't have the knowhow that engineer did. 343 has the same problem with the blam engine and is thus moving Halo to UE5 also for the exact same reasons. UE5 does have external support, meaning they can reach out and get help if they need it.

[Astralporing.1957]

2 minutes ago, gmmg.9210 said:

Okay well that's a pretty doomer opinion if I do say so myself.

Nah. Doomer would be expecting them to do worse than so far. Expecting them to not magically significantly improve however is not "doomer", but rather a realistic approach. And setting goals you claim are easily achievable, but which Anet so far never managed to achieve is very far from being practical.

[Izzy.2951]

On 4/12/2024 at 9:52 AM, QueenKeriti.5176 said:

Welcome to corporate, where execs will lie through their teeth, obfuscate data, misrepresent plausible things, and pull out any distraction they can to keep investors from leaving. And then have to have the PR team show up to clean up their mess. Gods bless your soul if you have never had to deal with the C suite of a company, let alone the mismanaged greedy mess that is NCsoft.

What we know: Anet is hiring for both GW2 and some "established fantasy IP" game. GW2 performed well, especially in NA/EU, last year thanks to strong sales. Anet has at least two more mini expacs planned (so at least another 2 years of some degree of content), with the upcoming one under active development. There are more people working on GW2 now than there was for EoD, supposedly almost as many as we had with LWS4. 

Further things we have been told: they're working on core game (not necessarily core Tyria) content and improving it (we have had many QOL updates, and soon we're getting another guild slot). They're working on making changes for the long term health of the game.

What we don't know: if "established fantasy IP" is GW3 (could it be? Absolutely, it's quite plausible and makes plenty of sense, but we don't KNOW) nor do we know what the exact nature, timeline, or progress on the unknown game. 

Further info in general: NCsoft PR had to come out and say GW3 is only being talked about and starting development is not finalized. Anet said focus is on GW2 and upcoming expac. NCsoft is a dumpster fire of bad and dumb decisions and mismanagement, as any dedicated, long term, unfortunate player of their games can probably tell you. Aion just announced some more stupidity today, so I guess NCWest still hasn't learned...

 

Guys you should be really careful when Arenanet or any other company does PR speak, cos its just to get a positive customer attention even if its kinda a lie or half a lie.

You should belive in facts, and in real info there is around not in PR.

- Arenanet has been nearly 2 years mainly hiring for a new unnanounced project. Thats a fact not PR speak.

- NCsoft have said in shareholder meeting that Arenanet is currently working on GW3. Thats another fact not PR speak for gw2 customers.

- The quality of the content we are getting is way lower than LWS4, Icebrood saga and even EoD? thats another fact, all those bringed lots of things with entire new models not just recycled "cheap" content.

- They said "we have more ppl working now than after the launch of EoD and similar to LWS4" well, 1st of all, a lot of people that worked in EoD publicly said they left right before EoD launched or right after, so thats very vague way of expressing. 2nd the content we getting is way worst than EoD and LWS4 so either they have those people working on something else, or its just PR speak to keep customers beliving they are hard commited to gw2 while they make GW3 quietly in the background.

Arenanet also said in PR that they were making alliances in 2018, in 2023 they said that they have abandonned alliances and they are focused in World Restructuring and we still dont have it. And examples like that you have loads across the years, so if you wanna belive just in PR not in facts and info that is not manipulated towards making the gw2 customer belive what they want you to belive its ridiculous. 

PD: I also remember last year ex-devs and current anet devs saying they were very exicted about Rifts, that is was a very cool new thing that they worked a lot on it.... and its basically reskined bounties, thats PR speak to generate fake hype. Same with the last fractal, when its just an empty fractal, with a 5 man strike boss with millions of hp and recycled combat.

PD2: PR Speak 2.0, they have said that expansion 5 will have something very exciting for highend pve players. Lets see if its not fake too.

Edited April 16 by Izzy.2951

[Yerlock.4678]

14 hours ago, Astralporing.1957 said:

Nah. Doomer would be expecting them to do worse than so far. Expecting them to not magically significantly improve however is not "doomer", but rather a realistic approach. And setting goals you claim are easily achievable, but which Anet so far never managed to achieve is very far from being practical.

Okay well I guess just releasing the bare bones and nothing impressive post launch is what we should expect then by your logic for gw3. No need for goals 😂

Edited April 16 by gmmg.9210

[Cyninja.2954]

5 hours ago, gmmg.9210 said:

Okay well I guess just releasing the bare bones and nothing impressive post launch is what we should expect then by your logic for gw3. No need for goals 😂

That's literally how most MMOs launch today: bare bones compared to their older industry competition.

Turns out: even with multiple years of development, it's very hard to compete with products which have had many years more development go into them.

You want realistic goals? Start with what most MMOs are expected to have bare minimum (a functioning campaing, some basic game modes), hope that you are in fact the target audience (seems a lot of players are hoping for a GW2.5, GW2 with just improved engine. Why would the developer remake the same game?) and finally hope for a not to predatory monetization systems in place.

There, that's pretty much your best bet for how GW3 will release if it does release. Anything beyond that is highly wishful thinking.

Edited April 17 by Cyninja.2954