GW2: Update Notes Thread

[Celeras]

I have zero interest getting into a conversation about the merits of a 15 year old game because I posted a sequel teaser link, but you don't know what P2W means if you use it to describe GW2.

[Gokulo]

Advantage in what specifically though? There was no endgame content at launch that would require you to swipe for that power or rush to max level. I don't feel it's fair to call the game P2W when gear barely matters in it - you usually end up being geared within a day/two of hitting max level.

[Karbuncle]

gamers often have different ideas of what P2W is

I have zero interest getting into a conversation about the merits of a 15 year old game because I posted a sequel teaser link, but you don't know what P2W means if you use it to describe GW2.

And that is why no one will remember your name

[arus2001]

When PvP isn't involved, P2W may not be entirely accurate. However, pay-to-progress is very much a thing against gaming, where you're either purchasing stuff outright or accelerating the process. I'd put certain things like stash space QoL into the latter category as not having to fight with your inventory as much can be huge.

Now, while I'd also looked into some backpack quests at the time, I can't really recall any of what I'd read being tied into the base game. Just checking the MB, I was also seeing comparable bags being sold for more gold than I presently had despite old endgame status. So there's probably some degree of inflation play, sure, but the game I played wasn't throwing money at you in the numbers needed to buy that kind of stuff with any degree of expediency. So, just to be clearly, clunky inventory management is one of my major game turn-offs in the modern day. Some like to argue it's a mechanical benefit to a given title, like PoE or something, but I always figure in a game where you're expected to farm a lot, you should have a lot of space by default. Because the moment you don't, that's when you start seeing shops throw in inventory expansions or people buying alt accounts to work around it. And at that point it can feel more like P2W than the other.

[Karbuncle]

Guild Wars 3 officially announced, according to my brother watching Summer Games Fest.

PC/PS5 only (right now?) no Xbox release if i'm seeing it right.

Edit:Fall 2027 for Beta, so we're a year out

[Takiwaki]

[Madeline]

Huge fan of 2 but it hasn't aged well and is incredibly hard to get new players into due to buy in cost. Hopeful.

[Gokulo]

Huge fan of 2 but it hasn't aged well and is incredibly hard to get new players into due to buy in cost. Hopeful.

Thankfully they do sales constantly, older packs can be bought really cheap. I started with the first two expansions and then kept buying them one by one every couple months during each sale. Just got the last two during the one that's happening this weekend

[Madeline]

By the time I got everything I needed and was doing endgame I think I'd spent around 120. Not bad, but a big ask for most. But that it's there and always will be and I'm not paying a sub for it is why that works so well. It's hard to explain to people that upfront cost vs long term subscription is the way to look at it for this game.

[Gokulo]

[Bombur]

NCSOFT held their earnings call yesterday, and during the earning call, they talked about GW3.


- The Guild Wars community was at 6 million back when GW2 released, but it has grown to 30 million world wide today.

- While GW3 was in core development last year, it entered mass production this year, and is currently adding content.

- GW2 was made with Anets own in house engine, but GW3 will be made with Ureal Engine 5.

- Due to NC Korea's knowledge of UE5, Anet has been working with NC Korea in technical aspects of the game.

- They’re planning to run alpha and beta tests next year.

- They can't state the exact release timing, but they estimate Q1 2028.

- GW2 is currently hitting its highest MAU and revenue in the last 3 years since GW3 was announced.

- GW2 will continue to be maintained even after GW3 releases, with the expectation that players will play both games side by side.

- NC Korea has loaned $85 million US to Anet to finish the game.

- Anet will have a presentation at Gamescom 2026.

https://www.invenglobal.com/articles...titles-by-2027

[Gokulo]

https://twitter.com/JayOddity/status...99094638670250

[Rulke]

lol, first 3 comments are all basically, "Well this isn't what I wanted so piss off"

[Karbuncle]

TBH 20 Player screen limit, if true, is wild, but also I think is going to cut back on visual clutter a lot if they maintain the open world bosses like there were in GW2, so it has its positives, but I also think it should just be a slider like in most games, or have the option to turn off other players visuals... etc. Cause a hard cap of 20 players on screen does kill the concept of WvW and WvW is kind of what I would consider GW2's defining gimmick in terms of PVP, the only MMO I played that had it (Even though it was terribly unbalanced and in most cases just not very fun, it had its charm when you finally had a decent sized group to move around with). Like if someone asked me, gun to my head, to name something about GW2, I'd say world v World cause its the thing I remember the most. It'd be a shame if they completely cut that out of the game but not a deal breaker for me specifically.

I'm also a huge "Holy Trinity" Fan, I like characters having set defined roles with some room for build expression within them(Looking at you Hexastrike melee WHM shenanigans). Mostly cause I dont like "Everyone is their own one man army/action hero" MMOs where teaming up with people feels more like an afterthought or "Gotta have it" since each class is balanced around being a one man army.

So this is mostly plusses for me.

[Gokulo]

They already said no to WvW because they want it to remain a GW2 thing. As for the player limit, I saw another summary that just said that 20-man is the number for big bosses, or "bigger content", something like that, not phrasing it as a general on screen limit. I guess we need an official clarification for that point. This guy did mention the limit is related to combat, which kinda makes sense from what I read about it - they're going a lot deeper into player combos, e.g. tank can put their shield up and another player can jump off of it etc and mechanics like that sound like they would get messy with too many people

[Karbuncle]

They already said no to WvW because they want it to remain a GW2 thing. As for the player limit, I saw another summary that just said that 20-man is the number for big bosses, or "bigger content", something like that, not phrasing it as a general on screen limit. I guess we need an official clarification for that point. This guy did mention the limit is related to combat, which kinda makes sense from what I read about it - they're going a lot deeper into player combos, e.g. tank can put their shield up and another player can jump off of it etc and mechanics like that sound like they would get messy with too many people

WvW thing is a bummer but I guess if they made Gw3 just a way better Gw2 in every way they'd essentially kill Gw2 and my guess is they want to milk both simultaneously, so keeping WvW, GW2s most iconic feature in my opinion, an exclusive feature of GW2, is certainly a way to do that.