Talk:Guild Wars Eye of the North

Archives

---

1. May 2006 – February 2007
2. March 2007 speculation

The froggeth speaks

http://img182.imageshack.us/my.php?image=chat3sz6.jpg

Interesting, we have not seen the end of Gwen

Thorton 10:59, 18 March 2007 (CDT)

Hairdressers FTW! I want to change a hairstyle for my necro. Because long hair cover his Vabbian scar completely... So sad. fR0z3n.S0u1 06:54, 19 March 2007 (CDT)

I'm scared now. She might bring the Spontaneous Combustion back... -X H K

Norns? Isn't that a copyright breach?

The Norns are a race of villains in the Tad Williams quartet (trilogy in hardback) Memory, Sorrow and Thorn, also known as the Hikeda'ya. If that isn't a copyright breach then maybe the game will take place in Russia: I have seen the river Syr Darya spelt as Syrdar'ya; which coincidentally is almost homophonic to Zida'ya, the Norns' enemies in Memory, Sorrow and Thorn. (I may be wrong in some places) — Ebany Salmonderiel (Talk) Leave a note 12:48, 19 March 2007 (CDT)

Sorry wats norns and all that got to do with guildwars? Jupsto 12:50, 19 March 2007 (CDT)

@Jupsto - An article in the Inquirer referenced "Guild Wars 2" as having playable races, one of which would be called "Norns". However, ArenaNet has stated that some in that article is true, some is false, and much is misleading ... so waiting for more confirmation from PC Gamer magazine.

@Ebany - See also Wikipedia:Norns, Wikipedia:Norn (Creatures), and Wikipedia:Norns in popular culture. The name is used in many places, so copyright issues shouldn't be a concern. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 13:04, 19 March 2007 (CDT)

Gee Thanks Superman. Jupsto 13:11, 19 March 2007 (CDT)

Thanks for explaining that, Barek. — Ebany Salmonderiel (Talk) Leave a note 13:38, 19 March 2007 (CDT)

Actually, I think it would only be a copyright infringement if they stole the story or culture of these other fantasy creatures. The name itself would fall under trademark law and even then the other IP owners would have to show losses from use by GW in order to sue. --Trekie9001 18:45, 21 March 2007 (CDT)

Norn is a mythological name. Unless anyone who has been dead for centuries plans on suing Anet, Norns are fully available for free use. - Sunyavadin 03:09, 22 March 2007 (GMT)

Indeed. I believe The Norns are the spinners of fate, who weave the destinies of mankind in their web-like tapestries. (Re: Norse mythology, from what I can remember.) - Threll 20:47, 25 March 2007 (CDT)

I hope it's Norn. I have Creatures SOMEWHERE. I <3 that, especially when you could teach them to swear (Like, when you wave a lemon in front of them, don't say lemon, say shit!)! —Blastedt 20:49, 25 March 2007 (CDT)

September 1?

On Play.com, if you search Guild Wars, you will see "CAmpaign Four" and it said that it will be released in September 1, 2007... --Swift Thief 22:15, 19 March 2007 (CDT)

According to the links above, Play.com are tricksy hobbitses. -- Dashface 00:38, 20 March 2007 (CDT)

Retailers often come up with the weirdest of realease dates. When they add a product to their system they must include a release date, but as no official date has been announced, they just randomize a day. :) -- (talk) 05:38, 20 March 2007 (CDT)

EYE OF THE NORTH CONFIRMED!

This is VERY early information from people who just got done reading the info

" Sorry for the delay, had to run for a few mins.

Eye of the north is CONFIRMED. GW2 is CONFIRMED!

Just what I remember from reading through once: Gwen is in eye of the north. Eotn is an expansion due 'holiday' time, and will be cheaper. There will be three 'Acts' taking you through different sections (underground network of catacombs, Charr homeland, Maguuma area, Shiverpeaks).

There was a hint at carrying over characters to GW2, but it also stated they take place hundreds of years apart, so...

GW2 will, again, be no subscription fees, but [unfortunately], will have a severly raised level cap (read 100+ or uncapped). Fully instanced worlds will take a back-seat to open areas supporting hundreds of people.

I apologize for this being kind of rushed, but I am in the process of reading it a second time, and summarizing it better. Stay Tuned"

Will update as time passes.

PROOF THAT HE DOES HAVE THE MAGAZINE IS HERE, HE HAS THE MINI!

http://www.guildwarsguru.com/forum/showthread.php?t=10125206&page=15

Thorton 17:12, 20 March 2007 (CDT)

\o/ GW became WoW! Hip hip hurrah! Can we have mounts now? --Dirigible 17:16, 20 March 2007 (CDT)

MORE INFO!

Summary:

They are abandoning the Campaign format because it required them to reinvent GW completely for every chapter, and it began to feel 'bloated' to them. The Expansion, and increased timeframe, allow them to do what they want to with the game, without worrying about new professions, or pre-lvl20 content

BETA for GW2 in 2008

eye of the north HOLIDAY 2007 RELEASE

40 new armor sets, 150 new skills (including 50 pve only), 10 new heroes

"extend character development beyond level 20" ~James Phinney~

EOTN will supposedly link GW1 and 2

underground complex of tunnels through all three 'continents' present thus far is revealed.

Three acts: Act1 takes you through 18 underground dungeons to help the dwarves defend against 'the fiery Destroyer', eventually taking you to the Asura and Norns (races) Act2 has three story arcs ranging from exploring the Norns, to the Charr homeland, to an Asura resistance of the Destroyer Act3 pits you against the Great Destroyer

Far shiverpeaks are Norn Lands, Charr homeland is north of ascalon, Asurans are near Maguuma, Tyrian catacombs stretch across the entire continent presumably

GWEN

Thorton 17:29, 20 March 2007 (CDT)

So, GW is now like a regular MMORPG? That sucks. In either case, I want PvP weekend. I forsee it end of this month/beginning of next.--Nog64Talk 17:31, 20 March 2007 (CDT)

→ moved to talk:Guild Wars 2

From GWW:EN talk page, *whispers* Gwen escaped the Searing, leaving behind her tattered cape and broken flute, travelled north, grew into a young woman trained in the ways of one of the new classes, and will become a staple of the expansion's storyline. :p — Gares 14:18, 13 March 2007 (EDT) Anyone want to bet platinum that I called it before the release of this newfound information? :p — Gares 11:32, 21 March 2007 (CDT)

I'm n ot in the mood to bet, but I noticed two things from the photo. 1) Gwen has blonde hair. That photo shows jet black hair. 2) The girl has a small flower in her hair. Hmmmm. Also, have we met any other girls in Pre-searing prophecies? Nhnowell 22:32, 21 March 2007 (CDT)

Blonde? I really don't think this counts as blonde: THIS and THIS look dark brown to me. -Sunyavadin 03:39, 22 March 2007 (GMT)

My bad, I could've sworn she was blonde, but I did that by memory.

I´m just posting to register that finally, the only lie was from ArenaNet, very dissapointed with the enterprise sell magazines objective. Now is impossible to trust in their communication. The King Arthur 23:57, 25 March 2007 (CDT)

They were a whole year off for the GW2 timeframe, and they were wrong about there definitely being a level cap (PC Gamer says a level cap of 100 or no level cap are the most likely possibilities). Anyway, ANet may not have been able to say anything other than the abiguous statement about the article being partially correct, partially incorrect and partially misleading prior to the publication without violating an exclusivity agreement. -- Gordon Ecker 01:49, 26 March 2007 (CDT)

To Include or Not?

Would the information from PCGamer count as official, since Arena Net most likely gave them the information? If so, it should be added to the article. --User:Albinobird 22:10, 20 March 2007 (CDT)

Yes, they're an official media partner. Be sure to paraphrase rather than directly quoting. -- Gordon Ecker 22:37, 20 March 2007 (CDT)

Someone else would have to add the information then, since I do not have a copy of PCGamer yet. --User:Albinobird 22:40, 20 March 2007 (CDT)

PC Gamer Content

A more complete documentation can be currently found at this link: http://www.guildwarsguru.com/forum/showthread.php?p=2648062

Level cap

← moved to talk:Guild Wars 2#level cap

The different races (with pics) and story overview

(This is from GWO, but since their forums require registration to read, copying it here for everyone's convenience.)

Sylvari
Characteristics:Naive, curious, gifted
Words to live by:"Seize the moment."
A young race of nature spirits who have awakened with the rise of a new age in Tyria, Sylvari are beings of light, as yet uncorrupted by knowledge of sorrow, suspicion, or hatred. Sylvari are proficient in things related to magic and dexterity, with a supernatural connection to plants and other an innate empathic bond to each other.

Asura
Characteristics:Inventive, condescending
Words to live by:"We're smarter than you."
A diminutive race from the depths of Tyria, Asura wish to expand their empire to the surface world. Exceptionally intelligent and techinically minded, they use magical skills, stone, and metalworking to create weapons. Asura believe they are destined to rule the world, with the larger, less intelligent races as their subjects.

Charr
Characteristics:Fierce, opportunistic, proud
Words to live by:"Victory at any cost."
A savage race of sentient beasts, the Charr will use any means avilable to destory their enemies: an ambush is as honorable as a fair fight, as victory is what matters. Though Charr have no concept of mercy, they can be protective of those within their tribe.

Norn
Characteristics:Individualistic, stubborn, unrefined
Words to live by:"Strength above all."
A race of shape-shifting half-giants from the north, the Norn value personal strength, victory, and purifying the soul through battle. They revere the spirits of animals and call on them like shamans. Norn can access a skill that changes them into a half-Norn/half-bear, with increased health and melee damage.

Story:

EotN's story expands on a storyline alluded to in Prophecies: The Great Dwarf, the patron god
of all dwarves in the Guild Wars universe, opposes the Great Destroyer, an entity so fearsome,
his name is forbidden to be spoken among the Dwarves. In Eye of the North, you meet and confront
the Great Destroyer.

In the first act, earthquakes reveal the Asuran tunnels below Tyria (the planet, not the continent) and these lead down to the Asuran empire below the earth. There you find out that the Asura are fighting against the Great Destroyer. You go with them, apparently through a magical gate, and meet the Norn. It also says "We're told you will encounter some 'suprises and a few familiar faces' " along the way. So, once you get to Norn-land (my term, not their's), you find out that the Dwarves are gearing up to fight off the Great Destroyer.

In the second act, you learn more about the Norn culture, and end up in Northern Ascalon, in (drumroll) the Charr homeland! The Charr homeland looks like Pre-Searing Ascalon, and is not seared like heartland Ascalon. The Charr are unravelling. They are in civil war, and are suffering from the loss of the Titans as their gods. You also learn that the Asura are preparing to fight the Great Destroyer using "their own brand of supermagic".

In the third act, we finally meet and fight the Great Destroyer.--Dirigible 06:16, 21 March 2007 (CDT)

Charr homeland, that looks like Pre-Searing Ascalon? I'm already loving this expansion :) --Deadly Lollipop 06:37, 21 March 2007 (CDT)

Brilliant, especially if we might have a 40 mission long campaign to cover all this. Edwina Elbert 10:50, 21 March 2007 (CDT)

The Norn and Sylvari concept art reminds me of the style of Tony DiTerlizzi. -- Gordon Ecker 18:34, 21 March 2007 (CDT)

Theory: In EotN, we're going to have 5 playable races. There are 5 gods (excluding the whole Abbadon/Kormir stuff, people worship Five Gods). Maybe each race has its own unique abilities based on those of one of the gods. The Sylvarians have the whole nature spirit vibes going on, like Melandru. The Charr are very warlike, like Balthazar. The Norns are shape-shifting, which seems like the whole illusion thing Lyssa has going on. The Asurans are "under" the world like Grenth is, and they're very clever and planning like Grenth, too. The humans help each other out, like Dwayna. Maybe it's just purely coincidence with ANet trying to diversify everything, but maybe I'm on to something.....Nhnowell 20:22, 25 March 2007 (CDT)

Important headline

Click here. Enjoy the read.--Dirigible 15:29, 21 March 2007 (CDT)

Nothing to read :P — Skuld 15:57, 21 March 2007 (CDT)

/Rage! Give me a min, I'll upload them somewhere else. --Dirigible 16:01, 21 March 2007 (CDT)

This one should work. For some reason Imageshack has ordered them backwards, so might want to start with the last picture. --Dirigible 16:24, 21 March 2007 (CDT)

• sylvians = elf like ranger?
• asuarians = alien/gnome like mages?
• charr = bestial warriors
• Norn = celtic druid/warriors. (beorn anyone?)

Most MMORPG's with races give a much more diverse range, if less original. This seems quite original but only 4 races and they seem to be like proffesions also. seems tad limiting. I reckon each expansions will add a race or something, like how before they added proffesions. Jupsto 16:06, 21 March 2007 (CDT)

Don't forget humans...--Swift Thief 16:25, 21 March 2007 (CDT)

OH yeah, monks pherhaps? Jupsto 16:31, 21 March 2007 (CDT)

Read the text above those race illustrations on page 30: "A Guide to some of Guild Wars 2's playable races." It says some. And later it explains that A-NET is not telling the exact number of playable races yet, but they're giving us some info on a few of them.

This seems to suggest more than 4 playable races, maybe much more... --Deadly Lollipop 19:04, 21 March 2007 (CDT)

Also remember that in Prophecies, the Charr you encountered comprised all 6 available professions - you had Charr Axe Warriors, Charr Hunters, Charr Shamans, Charr Mind Sparks, Charr Ash Walkers, and Charr Flame Wielders. In fact, there are very few races in all of GW that are restricted to only one or two classes (hydras being one). There's no reason that any of these new races will be class-restricted. —Dr Ishmael (talk|contribs) 22:06, 21 March 2007 (CDT)

In case you are interested, reproducing the magazine article (ie. scanning it) is a copyright violation. Just a heads up... -- Imbril Shadowfire 23:37, 21 March 2007 (CDT)

Maybe if we put "only read this in case you have a pc gamer subscription" ? :P –Ichigo724 23:51, 21 March 2007 (CDT)

I suppose you could remove it, but it's always there in history. Mods in Guru have been vigilant in removing links. I read it, but I'll be buying the magazine anyway. I want a mini! LoL 132.203.83.38 16:13, 23 March 2007 (CDT)

Well, according to some person on GW Guru, the UK PC Gamer has reached him :) Anyone here got it too ? -- Torins (talk) 15:08, 24 March 2007 (CDT)

On GameAmp there's an article with quotes in the forums. Just search Confirmed, and you'll find it. Also, the Norn do seem like Beorn/Laguz...

/rage

That plot looks crap. Also, 10 new heroes, FIFTY new pve skills, and no new profs!!!!  :( —Blastedt 17:25, 21 March 2007 (CDT)

It's an expansion not a campaign. Remember that we are getting a totally free large update soon. The hard mode. All areas in the game are getting a suplicate version with harder monsters and better loot. Besides, the GW:EN looks great to me in all ways. -- (talk) 17:33, 21 March 2007 (CDT)

Fully agreed. And the no new professions thing is a very positive thing for me. --Dirigible 17:38, 21 March 2007 (CDT)

It not a stand alone game and optional but is the only bridge to GW2 so it’s always up to you either you wish to buy it or not. More professions isn’t always better, new professions after core were something of combinations of current professions whit a slightly different twist, about when they got to paragon ideas dyed up entirely they, end up making near exact copy of tactics based warrior whit a spear. Besides they sed themselves they can’t be bothered making up new professions and rookie areas every 6 months, how ever fresh high level content isn’t as straining to-do. Three Campaigns in Hard Mode and one expansion will have to hold for 2 years, off course upgrades will be common but probably limited. Now that you know that only Greens and Titles will be transferred you might as well work on them. Biz 17:54, 21 March 2007 (CDT)

This really angerd me, jsut as Factions almsot toally diregarded the PvE portion of the game and thus was a crappy game, this game seems to totally disregard the PvP portion of a game and also looks crappy. I wasn't expecting much better from the idiots that made Factions though. I sure as hell won't be playing this game unless I can somehow snag it for free.--68.192.188.142 17:58, 21 March 2007 (CDT)

Immediate UAX... A GvG-like PvP mode that'll exist completely separate from the rest of the game (it'll actually be mantained by a dedicated team that has as focus only this mode, and not World PvP or PvE)... No more piles of professions and skills being thrown at the game every six months... How is that not catering to the PvP crowd? True, we'll have to see how that'll actually be implemented, but to say that they're not making an effort is to be completely unfair. --Dirigible 18:09, 21 March 2007 (CDT)

Yeah, it will be like Factions, except GW is a PvP GAME. This, to me, seems like a really disaterous move by ANet. It ruins everything original about GW. There will be some new cool things, but they really f'ed it up. I was hoping for Nightfall after Nightfall for expansions, not this. In other new regarding to rage, RATM is getting back together :P. I really hope they play at Lollapalooza, maybe settle my mind on this.--Nog64Talk 18:05, 21 March 2007 (CDT)

Guild wars is not a pvp game.... That may be one of its best features but everyone under rates the pve part. Contrary to popular belief factions was a decent pve addition with 2 elite missions, 2 warring nations that you could choose sides on both the PVP and PVE side of game, and a decent story line. Nightfall PVE was a bit of dissapointment IMO but that doesn't matter. Not everyone in the game likes the PVP part of it only like many regulars on this site do, so if they dont make a expansion adding a bunch of stuff for the pvp(which you don't know for sure) then don't complain, great changes to the game doesn't help the established PVP player system so what are you complaining about if it will be focused on PVE?-Counter Rant--Sefre 18:57, 21 March 2007 (CDT)]

I and many other bought GW purely for PvP. Yeah we'll dabble with PvE occasionally. But the PvE in GW isn't unique, try starwars:kotor ot many other rpgs, or better ones like oblivion. GW's PvP is the best, if you want storylines n stuff there are way better games for it, out there, basically. Jupsto 19:12, 21 March 2007 (CDT)

I only play the PvE of Guild Wars andenjoy it. It is unique, there is no game with similiar PvE system, and I appen to like this one. It's not the storyline, it's the game mechanics. -- (talk) 19:15, 21 March 2007 (CDT)

Jupsto's comment is proof of my point, the PVP element is not the only element in the game, and many would argue that it's not the best either, just because it has one of the best pvp systems out there does not mean that the res of game deserves to be over looked, like gem said, its PVE is unique, and just cause you don't play it a lot doesn't mean it sucks or its like other games....--Sefre 19:22, 21 March 2007 (CDT)

Well, in terms of PvE, I find the find the terrible storylines and huge amounts of instances cripplingly inferior to WoW and any other pay game, but if adjusted for no cost per month, it's obviously good. That being said, the PvP outshines any MMORPG to date, pay or not, and for that reason, many consider it a PvP game.--Nog64Talk 19:49, 21 March 2007 (CDT)

I agree with nog. I dont have that many games with simular style, but try starwars:knight of the old republic. The PvE is also very different in some ways, but it is identical in others. And IMO the storylines in GW are quite un-interesting, the storylines in Kotor are like better than those in starwars films. Of course GW PvE is unique in some ways, but many rpg's are better or at least comparable. GW PvP isn't really simular to anything and is very unique. It's like a sexy fussion between games like counterstrike, which you can just log in and start killing, and interesting, complicated rpg combat, Ie magic etc. not boring guns. A-net are simply the best for insisting no monthly costs, the are changing the future of MMO's for us all. Worth buying just for that. --Hey hey asuras = yoda, anyone? I think GW2 looks like the best game ever, but EotN looks pretty tird since i'm a pvp fan, but the pve in GW2 looks like its vastly improved Jupsto 20:04, 21 March 2007 (CDT)

Okay, let's stop this PvP vs. PvE and GW vs. other games discussion allready. Stay on topic. -- (talk) 20:04, 21 March 2007 (CDT)

To what Dirigible said, I competely agree. The easiest things to come up with are new melee professions, and melee professions area getting really old. If you look at what some people come up with for new casters, it's mostly tired boring over-used concepts. Heck, I don't think we need more then the six core professions. 24.6.206.115 07:48, 23 March 2007 (CDT)

It's probalby because the "warrior" is just so... all-encompassing. I'll bet you a hundred billion ectos that they'll change how the "warrior" archetype works in GW2 so there are multiple melee professions who specialise in different types of equipment. 132.203.83.38 16:15, 23 March 2007 (CDT)

All the professions are. Every one of them has a job that they do well. Even our most exotic profession, the Mesmer, has a role in the game. The four new professions all mimic tasks that the six core professions were already able to do, just differen't. Assassins are just more mobile versions of a Deep-Wound Axe Spiker, Ritualists are just a different way to do lighning damage, and an indirect way to Prot. Dervishes are tanks, but with lower armor and better self heals, and Paragons are pretty much just support, but not fleshy. Alt F Four 20:39, 23 March 2007 (CDT)

It's already been revealed that Guild Wars 2 will have a lower profession count, I suspect that the Guild Wars 2 professions will have broader concepts with more attributes to specialise in. Scythes and Polearms will probably go to Warriors, while daggers, spears and brawling weapons (such as claws or brass knuckles) could go to either Warriors or Rangers, Ranger is probably to get any non-spear ranged weapons. I think they'll probably trim the caster count down to 4 (probably merging Ritualist and Necromancer, with the leftover fragments going to other professions), however it's also possible that they'll merge them into 1 to 3 really broad, diverse professions (like D&D's Cleric and Wizard, Dungeon Siege's Combat Mage and Nature Mage, Final Fantasy's Black Mage and White Mage, Diablo 1's Sorcerer or World of Warcraft's 3 pure caster professions of Mage, Priest and Warlock), although I don't think it's likely. The support aspects of Paragons will probably get absorbed by Warriors, Monks, Mesmers or a combination of the above. I can also see Assassin and Dervish getting merged into some melee / caster hybrid martial artist profession (which was the original Dervish concept back when it was a proposed Factions profession). -- Gordon Ecker 00:47, 24 March 2007 (CDT)

Oh god no. 3 professions only? No thanks! Sounds feasible for PvE but definately not for PvP! By the way, where did you get the info that there are less professions in GW2? 132.203.83.38 09:00, 24 March 2007 (CDT)

3 professions is rediculously unlikely, I'm just saying that it's theoretically possible (as is dropping professions altogether, although it's been confirmed that GW2 will have professions). I suspect 5 to 7 professions, with no non-core professions. As for the profession count, I remembered things wrong, the PC Gamer article contains no explicit statement on the profession count in Guild Wars 2, I interpreted the article as implying a lower profession count, but that's it. -- Gordon Ecker 21:34, 24 March 2007 (CDT)

Where did you get 3 professions ? =) We know there will be 5 races including human one or more. Thats it, nothing or very little as mentioned about eaither every race is its own "profession" or if all races will have all professions, like Charr has rangers, wars, necros, eles and monks. Biz 01:25, 25 March 2007 (CDT)

The part about 3 professions was just an example of how far they could go if they decided to boil the professions down into a few broad archetypes. For all we know, Guild Wars 2 could have more than 10 professions, but the general tone of the article makes it sound like the count will be probably be 10 or less. I'm pretty sure Guild Wars 2 won't narrow the Warrior concept to only one or two weapon types as an anonymous poster suggested earlier. -- Gordon Ecker 02:06, 25 March 2007 (CDT)

I think the opposite is more likely, that Guild Wars 2 will deal with redundancy issues by introducing a single "Melee Weapon" attribute for Warriors. And my impression is that each character will receive one or two bonus skills unique to their race in addition to whatever they would normally receive from their primary and secondary classes. I doubt ArenaNet would shut down access to a class simply because you picked the "wrong" race at character creation -- that's inconsistent with the way they have structured Guild Wars to date. -- Tansor 16:18, 26 March 2007 (CDT)

The really nice thing about that option is that they could add new weapons like flails, polearms and throwing knives without interfering with the attributes. -- Gordon Ecker 17:38, 26 March 2007 (CDT)

Titles?

Wondering if there will be any new titles available in EoTN. On the face of it it looks like some long standing regulars might not even be included: Could you see yourself being called "Protector of The Eye of the North"? Similarly, the Cartographer titles would be awfully cumbersome too. Granted, these were always tied to a continent and not a campaign name, but with the many disparate locations being mentioned I do not know what you'd end up 'protecting' or 'cartographer-ing'136.8.1.100 09:54, 22 March 2007 (CDT)

There will be both new missions and areas to explore in EoTN, and as such it seems logical to assume that there will be Protector and Cartographer title for that expansion too. --Dirigible 10:02, 22 March 2007 (CDT)

ERROR...Logic Does Not Compute...ERROR. Sorry Mr. Spock, but there is not a single instance where sub-terrainian locations have counted towards Explo. So what we're left with are far-flung bits of Tyria. Already have the max title for Tyria.196.207.47.60 11:02, 22 March 2007 (CDT)

They don't need to say "Protector of The Eye of the North"... they can very easily make up something, (completely made up example: "Protector/Cartographer of the Lost Lands") which would cover these different regions. Sure, maybe the subterranean locations might not count towards the explorer title, but so what, neither does the Realm of Torment which is a huge chunk of the NF campaign. I think you're over-thinking this thing. :) --Dirigible 11:14, 22 March 2007 (CDT)

Mate the land isn't called "eye of the north", the same way factions isn't called cantha. the lands played-in in EotN will have a name like elona, cantha or something. Although alot of its underground and soem of it far shiverpeaks.. or something. Don't worry.Jupsto 11:33, 22 March 2007 (CDT)

Over-thinking is what I'm good at. Here's what I'm thinking... Lets say the dungeons are excluded, right? And there's no TUT island (which made up roughly 30% of NF's explorable surface) Now you've potentially got a really small area which has to constitute 100% of something. That's why I say we're unlikely to see another Cartographer title. And lets not forget, this is an expansion, not a full campaign -hence there will be less content. I'm going to go out on a limb here and estimate no more than 10 co-ops... which is hardly worthy of a Protector title. None of which bothers me I might add. Going to have enough on my hands with Guardian and Vanquisher, whatever that turns out to be.196.25.255.194 15:02, 22 March 2007 (CDT)

Gwen

Anyone notice how Guild Wars:Eye of the North's initials spell Gwen? Guild Wars:Eye of the North

Surprised nobody mentioned that... XD - -Sora267 17:56, 22 March 2007 (CDT)

Surprised its been mentioned about 40 times already. —Blastedt 17:57, 22 March 2007 (CDT)

Spoiler warning: stat!

Well, I'm extremely frustrated. The campaign is ruined for me now and no spoiler warning was provided. The best thing about Prophecies (my favorite campaign) was that the story unraveled, you constantly found yourself in larger, more heroic matters that you expected. Anyway, the point of this rant is that this article needs the spoiler warning and I don't know how to find the template (I'm pretty new as a wiki member). can someone with the know-how please put it on here asap, so others that didn't want to know the story yet can enjoy their ignorance? -- User:Demonic Peaches

Roger that, Houston. We can confirm that a spoiler tag just landed smack in the middle of the article. Send in the helicopters, this might be the event of the century! --Dirigible 19:06, 22 March 2007 (CDT)

Yeah, I ahte it that the whole plot was spoiled. :( I loved discovering the plot myself. -- (talk) 20:04, 22 March 2007 (CDT)

But I'm sure all the little WoW and Runescape kids are happy. Short attention spans and ADHD disorder. Or whatever you call it... (T/C) 20:07, 22 March 2007 (CDT)

WTH?!? Virtually every article is a spoiler by this definition. If you go to an article titled "Guild Wars Eye of the North", it should be self evident that an overview of the storyline is going to exist. Spoiler tags should be reserved for givaways of important plot twists, not just because something summarises the general game progression. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 20:38, 22 March 2007 (CDT)

Just put a spoiler tag on the main page. Problem solved? 132.203.83.38 21:07, 22 March 2007 (CDT)

That has been seriously suggested before :P Turk Nagona 21:18, 22 March 2007 (CDT)

Ruined the whole plot? The info on the page is about the same amount you would see being ran around on local channel in on of the starting cities. IF you honestly think those couple lines ruined the plot of the expansion you must have ADD, it may outline the general plot but all those couple lines do is partly fill in a couple missing parts from the first campaign.--Sefre 21:34, 22 March 2007 (CDT)

Yeah, it'll probably all be in the manual. -- Gordon Ecker 21:56, 22 March 2007 (CDT)

April 1st

Does anyone else think that this might be an elaborate April Fools day thing? Or at least hope so? Kite Firewind 22:09, 22 March 2007 (CDT)

That they published in a magazine? If it is theres gonna be a pissed off PCgamer staff--Sefre 22:10, 22 March 2007 (CDT)

Well, I was thinking that PC Gamer might be into it too. Doesn't the information seem to be leaking out a little too much? Kite Firewind 22:12, 22 March 2007 (CDT)

Doubtful, but don't think too much into it. It wil be a few years before the game is even ready for a beta, let alone release. Things will change by then. - Krowman (talk • contribs) 22:13, 22 March 2007 (CDT)

Doubt this is bs. I'll know when my pc gameplay arrives; I doubt other mags would be in on it (if pc gamer would be in on it) –Ichigo724 23:18, 22 March 2007 (CDT)

The magazine article is definitely confirmed and ANet has confirmed that the information in it is correct. April fools aren't done half a month before April 1st. -- (talk) 23:33, 22 March 2007 (CDT)

Huh? The Guild Wars website says that the magazine goes on sale on April 3rd...but I guess I shouldn't trust the official website, if all this is out already.Kite Firewind 19:45, 23 March 2007 (CDT)

Subscribers get it early. -- Gordon Ecker 19:48, 23 March 2007 (CDT)

This isn't a campaign, so...

...I submit that it doesn't belong in a campaigns infobox, nor should anything else involving "campaigns" be posted related to this. —Tanaric 01:31, 23 March 2007 (CDT)

It still is a campaign, even if it is different in nature from previous installments. It is different in that it is an expansion, rather than a stand-alone product. If not a campaign, then what is it? - Krowman (talk • contribs) 01:42, 23 March 2007 (CDT)

/agree with the Krow --Deathwing 01:44, 23 March 2007 (CDT)

/thirded. :/ –Ichigo724 01:46, 23 March 2007 (CDT)

It's an interesting issue. On one hand, it isn't a "campaign" in the same way the first 3 were: it's not standalone, it's not for all levels, no new professions. On the other hand, it's undoubtedly the fourth GW "installment" and people will think of it that way. I wonder if it's just a question of semantics (and if so, we can change wording to include GWEN in any list with the first three). Is the wiki's use of the word "campaign" defined as a standalone level 1-20 game? Or could it be understood as any distinct product that adds to GW? Personally I think "campaign" is flexible enough a word to include the latter. But would "Chapter" or some other term would be better? So, GWEN is an expansion chapter, the other three are standalone chapters, but all chapters are part of the same overarching story. — HarshLanguage

I would agree with Harsh Language. This is just a semantic debate. I don't think it is really going to shape anyones opinion of this installment if we call it a Chapter, a Campaign, an Installment, or an Expansion. All that needs to be conveyed is that this is a distinct installment, beyond that, I don't really see how it matters... =/ Defiant Elements (talk ~ contribs) 01:56, 23 March 2007 (CDT)

As for what I would guess Tanaric would see as problem areas, see Template:CampaignsNavBox and Campaign. The Campaign page in particular does have some sticky wording issues. We also need to see how Anet will refer to GWEN. — HarshLanguage 02:05, 23 March 2007 (CDT)

Hmmm... perhaps then we should choose a less connoted word for the time being until something more substantive can be chosen based on what Anet calls GWEN. Perhaps just call it an installment for the time being and leave it at that? Defiant Elements (talk ~ contribs) 02:09, 23 March 2007 (CDT)

I don't see why it wouldn't be a campaign by the common RPG definition of the term. We could change the navbox to say "campagins and expansions", "installments" like Defiant suggested or "releases" like the official wiki uses. An interesting bit of trivia from the PC Gamer article is that the "campaign 4" they started working on last summer actually developed into Guild Wars 2, with work on Eye of the North starting later, which explains why there have been no updates on the progress of campaign 4, and why Eye of the North is taking so long. -- Gordon Ecker 02:43, 23 March 2007 (CDT)

Hmmm... I was beginning to wonder about that. Thanks for the trivia update Gordon. Defiant Elements (talk ~ contribs) 02:52, 23 March 2007 (CDT)

Whenever I see the 'C4' abbreviation, I always read that as 'Chapter 4'. It's the fourth chapter in the saga, and it did (will) not end up being a full blown Campaign like the others that came before.[2c]136.8.1.100 05:11, 23 March 2007 (CDT)

And also it doesn't take too great a leap in logic to work out that this now-cancelled Campaign 4 was going to be called Utopia. hadz 09:34, 23 March 2007 (CDT)

LoL, I didn't even think about that, I think most of us just forgot about it. Maybe it could've been the other way around though. Like an expansion called Utopia and campaign 4 was going to be GW:EN. Of course, maybe Utopia will be used for a future expansion. We just don't know :P 132.203.83.38 16:17, 23 March 2007 (CDT)

No one ever said that Guild Wars Utopia was cancelled. The exact words from ArenaNet was "It actually was used as a project name for an unannounced project, but we do not intend to use it for a product name." Frequently software writers will have in-house development names for products, then later the product gets an official name assigned to it for retail use. In this case, my guess is that Utopia was likely the in-house development name for either GW:EotN, or Guild Wars 2; but, that's all it is, a guess. Someone could ask Gaile Gray the next time they see her in-game if they really care to know for sure if that name was related to one of these. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 16:24, 23 March 2007 (CDT)

As I understand it, Utopia was originally the in-house project name of the next campaign and, as has been stated, it eventually evolved into Guild Wars 2. That being said, it could easily be seen why one would think Utopia was cancelled, especially after reading the PC Gamer article, which states: "You read that right: Guild Wars Campaign 4 is cancelled--and so are all future Guild Wars campaigns. Finished. Done. Gone for good." --Emelend 16:36, 23 March 2007 (CDT)

Gaile gray confirmed that there will be no montly fees for Gw eye of the north and gw2

check gwonline.net on forums ;)

EN =/= Campaign Four

It seemed sort of confusing, but just to make sure- is Campaign Four synonymous with this expansion, or not? -- Beliefs Cloud Thoughts. 12:16, 25 March 2007 (CDT)

Yes, this expansion will be the 4th part of the storyline. So therefore, it will be "Campaign Four", it just will not be a stand-alone product like the other 3...of course, that is just how I see it. --Deathwing 14:18, 25 March 2007 (CDT)

Keep scrolling down to #This isn't a campaign, so... for more on this. It's a difference of wording, really. But as Deathwing said, it's still the fourth installment of Guild Wars, whether you want to call it a "campaign" or not. And when you see someone refer to Campaign 4, they are talking about GW:EN, yes. — HarshLanguage 18:43, 25 March 2007 (CDT)

Although the "real" campaign four developed into Guild Wars 2. -- Gordon Ecker 20:26, 25 March 2007 (CDT)

This is not campaign 4, but is actully Expansion #1, and sadly there will never be a campaign 4.--TheDrifter 21:42, 26 March 2007 (CDT)

Template Idea- Please comment

I made this one after I saw a similar one on Wikipedia. I still need help making it smaller though. I suggest addding something like this to the bottoms of the different Guild Wars Games.

Beautiful, I suggest we use it. --Zathic 21:09, 25 March 2007 (CDT)

I very much dislike the use of the graphic images in the navigation toolbar. I'm surprised you saw one like this on Guildwiki - I thought they had a policy or guideline against the use of images in the nav bars. But, that's a different issue.

As to the differences here - I don't see a need for the "released" and "unreleased" text for this project - there are few enough in it, that it's unnecessary (sp?) clutter. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 22:28, 25 March 2007 (CDT)

Looks good. Sirocco 23:53, 25 March 2007 (CDT)

Drop "Released" entirely. And instead of "unreleased", I'd suggest something like Eye of the North (Fall 2007) and Guild Wars 2 (2008-2009). If possible, put the dates under the titles. Or if folks think the dates are too long/too specific, perhaps insert "Future releases: " and then list GWEN and GW2. — HarshLanguage 02:47, 26 March 2007 (CDT)

Thanks for the input, I had something better before, but it was sorta messed up, and I'm not really good at making nav boxes or tables. Alreajk 19:03, 26 March 2007 (CDT)

omg

i cant remeber where but i seen somthing that said you cant take your guys from factions,nightfall,and proficys to here and the other way anyone know if this is true????

No, you can. The whole game/expansion doesn't allow new character creation (it's not a stand-alone title, and has no new professions), from what I've heard... you can ONLY take characters from the other games over. You might have been reading a thread on GWOnline, or Guru... they announced GW:EN and GW2 in the same thread. There's talk that you can't transfer characters from the Guild Wars games to Guild Wars 2... that may have been what you saw. -- Jioruji Derako.> 01:39, 26 March 2007 (CDT)

Yeah, you can't transfer characters to GW2, but you can/must transfer to GW:EN. Defiant Elements (talk ~ contribs) 01:45, 26 March 2007 (CDT)

Good, I can play a fourth storyline on my ever-so-uber-pwning Ranger without making a new character to try out professions. Nhnowell 20:42, 26 March 2007 (CDT)