Guild Wars 2

If we look back at first release of Guild Wars 1, guild vs guild was (generally speaking) the main focus of the gameplay. Throughout new campaings (Factions, Nightfall and then Eye of The North), the name Guild Wars became less and less representative of the actual core game – the focus increasingly shifted to expanding lore and story. (That is at least my opinion based on playing all of the content since release of Guild Wars: Prophecies). Since Guild Wars 2 launch, i feel like the name is not appropriate and should be changed to something more descriptive of it’s actual gameplay. (I understand the early beginnings of Guild Wars 1 – namely Prophecies had alot of guilds and wars between them in it, but still, its been along time since then and things have changed).

Example : I am a guy and i go to the store. I see Guild Wars 2 and buy it. My initial thoughts would be:
“Wow! Guild Wars 2! Man, i can’t wait to join a guild and fight other guilds and stuff.”

When really, the name like Tyria – time of dragons or whatever would be much more suitable if you know what i mean.

Do we have guilds in the game? yes. Do we have wars in the game? yes. But those wars are NOT guild wars but it is a war with the awakened dragon(s). There is no Guild vs Guild in the game. (the only time guild wars are mentioned in the game are when Trehearne is explaining the history of Tyria in the personal story quest. That is like saying World of Warcraft should be named Leeroy Jenkins because there was a guy named Leeroy in the raid who was epic and fought and stuff. —> No guild wars in Guild Wars 2. Everything about wars between guilds – guild wars is a leftover from the prequels Prophecies, Factions of Guild wars 1 game.

UPDATE:
Check this Guild Wars 1 pre release aplha video : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tJn9GhF8TI0
This is my reply to people that would be sceptical about original Guild Wars 1 not being focused mainly of guild vs guild.
Now compare this to various Guild Wars 2 trailers and see the VERY BIG difference.

I would really like to hear an opinion from you guys as this has been on my mind for some time now.

It did not get its name from guild vs guild.

A name is just a name. So many games nowadays have so little to do with their titles (some of them outright misleading if you’re making assumptions there). Personally, it doesn’t matter much to me either way. If they changed the name to “Poop Wars 2”, I’d still play it. I’d just maybe talk about it less in casual conversation.

For reference, http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/The_Guild_Wars

Ayrilana.1396:

It did not get its name from guild vs guild.

Yes it did. The original Guild Wars was focused primarily on PvP (AT FIRST!). To make sense of the game mode and the concept of guilds, they made an elaborate back story known as the “Guild Wars.” It was absolutely named “Guild Wars” because of the game mode. The lore was secondary to make it make sense and to give people a way to recognize which game had the specific brand of PvP they were going for.

Should be renamed to World of Tyria. Or Tyrian Wars… Or more generic, Tyria Online…
That would associate it less to it’s predecessor – my only beef.

Goose.5196:

Yes it did. The original Guild Wars was focused primarily on PvP.

No, it didn’t. PvP was definitely a game type, yes, but it did not focus on it. If you missed out on it, the vast, vast majority of the game was PvE. Even when just talking about the base campaign.

Goose.5196:

Ayrilana.1396:

It did not get its name from guild vs guild.

Yes it did. The original Guild Wars was focused primarily on PvP. To make sense of the game mode and the concept of guilds, they made an elaborate back story known as the “Guild Wars.” It was absolutely named “Guild Wars” because of the game mode. The lore was secondary to make it make sense and to give people a way to recognize which game had the specific brand of PvP they were going for.

Where’s the source that that was why they named it?

ShadowDragoonFTW.3418:

Goose.5196:

Yes it did. The original Guild Wars was focused primarily on PvP.

No, it didn’t. PvP was definitely a game type, yes, but it did not focus on it. If you missed out on it, the vast, vast majority of the game was PvE. Even when just talking about the base campaign.

The original goal behind developing Guild Wars was to make it focused primarily on PvP, it was only secondarily a PvE game. However, as time went on, they great expanded their PvE portion. So, I agree with you that it later became mostly a PvE game, but at first it was mostly about the PvP niche. That is why they named it what they named it.

Goose.5196:

ShadowDragoonFTW.3418:

Goose.5196:

Yes it did. The original Guild Wars was focused primarily on PvP.

No, it didn’t. PvP was definitely a game type, yes, but it did not focus on it. If you missed out on it, the vast, vast majority of the game was PvE. Even when just talking about the base campaign.

The original goal behind developing Guild Wars was to make it focused primarily on PvP, it was only secondarily a PvE game. However, as time went on, they great expanded their PvE portion. So, I agree with you that it later became mostly a PvE game, but at first it was mostly about the PvP niche. That is why they named it what they named it.

This is pretty much my recollection from back then. At the least, all the advertising for the game pointed at this and it was the reason why I didn’t bother with GW at the time.

Ayrilana.1396:

Goose.5196:

Ayrilana.1396:

It did not get its name from guild vs guild.

Yes it did. The original Guild Wars was focused primarily on PvP. To make sense of the game mode and the concept of guilds, they made an elaborate back story known as the “Guild Wars.” It was absolutely named “Guild Wars” because of the game mode. The lore was secondary to make it make sense and to give people a way to recognize which game had the specific brand of PvP they were going for.

Where’s the source that that was why they named it?

Where’s the source for the reason it wasn’t named after this?

Quote from Guildwiki:

The Guild Wars were a series of military conflicts between the human kingdoms of the northern continent between 1013 and 1070 AE. When considered separately, they are known as the First, Second, and Third Guild Wars.

These Guild Wars were the reason the whole game was called Guild Wars. ANet didn’t communicate this very well, I would agree on that. But the game got its name from those Guild Wars. It’s even in GW2 — when you do the mission where the Pale Tree sends Trahearne and you into a vision of Orr, Trahearne talks of the Guild Wars right at the beginning of the mission.

JBDanger.2603:

Ayrilana.1396:

Goose.5196:

Ayrilana.1396:

It did not get its name from guild vs guild.

Yes it did. The original Guild Wars was focused primarily on PvP. To make sense of the game mode and the concept of guilds, they made an elaborate back story known as the “Guild Wars.” It was absolutely named “Guild Wars” because of the game mode. The lore was secondary to make it make sense and to give people a way to recognize which game had the specific brand of PvP they were going for.

Where’s the source that that was why they named it?

Where’s the source for the reason it wasn’t named after this?

I’ll go through that effort after the OP provides their source as they’re the one making the claim that it was based on guild vs guild.

So if Guild Wars was named for GvG/PvP, then they created the whole game around those aspects. But as an CORPG (cooperative online role playing game) they would then need to write a whole back story, create an entire lore structure, and several story based expansions and an entire PvE mode JUST to justify using the name Guild Wars.

I disagree. Guild Wars was first and foremost an online RPG. You really can’t have an RPG (tabletop, online, or otherwise) without a story narrative, lore, and history. Sure the PvP/GvG was included into this world, but more as a player mechanic then anything. If it was supposed to be based on PvP/GvG, thus the name Guild Wars, then by definition it wouldn’t be an RPG. It would be more of a MOBA (Massive Online Battle Arena) than anything.

Ayrilana.1396:

JBDanger.2603:

Ayrilana.1396:

Goose.5196:

Ayrilana.1396:

It did not get its name from guild vs guild.

Yes it did. The original Guild Wars was focused primarily on PvP. To make sense of the game mode and the concept of guilds, they made an elaborate back story known as the “Guild Wars.” It was absolutely named “Guild Wars” because of the game mode. The lore was secondary to make it make sense and to give people a way to recognize which game had the specific brand of PvP they were going for.

Where’s the source that that was why they named it?

Where’s the source for the reason it wasn’t named after this?

I’ll go through that effort after the OP provides their source as they’re the one making the claim that it was based on guild vs guild.

JBDanger.2603:

Ayrilana.1396:

Goose.5196:

Ayrilana.1396:

It did not get its name from guild vs guild.

Yes it did. The original Guild Wars was focused primarily on PvP. To make sense of the game mode and the concept of guilds, they made an elaborate back story known as the “Guild Wars.” It was absolutely named “Guild Wars” because of the game mode. The lore was secondary to make it make sense and to give people a way to recognize which game had the specific brand of PvP they were going for.

Where’s the source that that was why they named it?

Where’s the source for the reason it wasn’t named after this?

“The onus of proof is on the accusor.”

You accused that the game was named for the PvP aspect, yet there is no proof to be seen of it. And, since you’re the one suggesting it to begin with, it’s up to you to provide proof.

Also, I remember all the advertisements about GW1 when it first came out. The major factor was the “only pay once” model, and the “instanced areas”. I don’t recall anything about them going out of their way to tout the PvP aspect of the game. And, as I said, even at launch in the vanilla campaign, PvP itself was still only a very small fraction of the overall game.

ShadowDragoonFTW.3418:

JBDanger.2603:

Ayrilana.1396:

Goose.5196:

Ayrilana.1396:

It did not get its name from guild vs guild.

Yes it did. The original Guild Wars was focused primarily on PvP. To make sense of the game mode and the concept of guilds, they made an elaborate back story known as the “Guild Wars.” It was absolutely named “Guild Wars” because of the game mode. The lore was secondary to make it make sense and to give people a way to recognize which game had the specific brand of PvP they were going for.

Where’s the source that that was why they named it?

Where’s the source for the reason it wasn’t named after this?

“The onus of proof is on the accusor.”

You accused that the game was named for the PvP aspect, yet there is no proof to be seen of it. And, since you’re the one suggesting it to begin with, it’s up to you to provide proof.

Also, I remember all the advertisements about GW1 when it first came out. The major factor was the “only pay once” model, and the “instanced areas”. I don’t recall anything about them going out of their way to tout the PvP aspect of the game. And, as I said, even at launch in the vanilla campaign, PvP itself was still only a very small fraction of the overall game.

I suggest all of you check the video i attached to OP

Hegediz.1605:

Chech the video i posted in the original post. ^^

What about it? About 90% of that video is PvE with the last 15 or so seconds being PvP.

Ayrilana.1396:

Hegediz.1605:

Chech the video i posted in the original post. ^^

What about it? About 90% of that video is PvE with the last 15 or so seconds being PvP.

And they didn’t even show any PvP at all, the whole video was showing PvE only, they mearly mentioned PvP at the very end. If the game was supposed to be primarily PvP at first, you would have thought they would have shown PvP in that video instead of just mearly mentioning it.

eisberg.2379:

Ayrilana.1396:

Hegediz.1605:

Chech the video i posted in the original post. ^^

What about it? About 90% of that video is PvE with the last 15 or so seconds being PvP.

And they didn’t even show any PvP at all, the whole video was showing PvE only, they mearly mentioned PvP at the very end. If the game was supposed to be primarily PvP at first, you would have thought they would have shown PvP in that video instead of just mearly mentioning it.

Yep, sorry Hegediz but you just proved that you’re wrong. There isn’t a single statement on fighting other guilds in that clip. Only fighting in groups (i.e. Guilds) against mobs.

Peace.

They are right, Guild Wars wasn’t named after GvG, but yeah, the first game had an awesome system with ratings, ranks , GHs and tournaments ,this is why a lot of people think it is named after that.

Now if GW2 deserves to be called the first game’s successor that’s an entirely different question.

Ayrilana.1396:

Hegediz.1605:

Chech the video i posted in the original post. ^^

What about it? About 90% of that video is PvE with the last 15 or so seconds being PvP.

Is the video showing pve? Sure. What is the whole message though? It mentions the word: guild MANY times, 6x times i believe. The whole video indicates of Guilds being a big role of the game. Proof: (i quote from the video)
1.) “Our guild gathers before each battle.” – 0:07
2.)“As guild members we spend our time training, to master our unique skills, to earn a right to call ourselves guild members” -0:48
3.)“Other guilds will confront us.” --→ the biggest proof of GwGing, and besides, the video is ALL about guilds, guild members gathering before battle and fighting other guilds etc.

And I would like to link, for you, this:

This is the Cinematic Trailer for Guild Wars Prophecies. If this game was truly as PvP-focused as you’re claiming, then the cinematic trailer wouldn’t be showing off only humans fighting down monsters. It would show humans fighting against other humans, to pump up the “Player versus Player” point of the game.

But, it doesn’t. It’s a PvE monster-slayer, just like it was always intended to be.

Hegediz.1605:

Ayrilana.1396:

Hegediz.1605:

Chech the video i posted in the original post. ^^

What about it? About 90% of that video is PvE with the last 15 or so seconds being PvP.

Is the video showing pve? Sure. What is the whole message though? It mentions the word: guild MANY times, 6x times i believe. The whole video indicates of Guilds being a big role of the game. Proof: (i quote from the video)
1.) “Our guild gathers before each battle.” – 0:07
2.)“As guild members we spend our time training, to master our unique skills, to earn a right to call ourselves guild members” -0:48
3.)“Other guilds will confront us.” ---> the biggest proof of GwGing, and besides, the video is ALL about guilds, guild members gathering before battle and fighting other guilds etc.

Wait. THIS is your argument? You do know that guilds weren’t solely for the purpose of PvP in GW1, right? Guilds were just like they are in GW2 — just groups of people that would play together.

Just because you were in a guild in GW1, it DOES NOT mean you were there for the PvP. That is the most flawed argument I have EVER heard.

Hegediz.1605:

Ayrilana.1396:

Hegediz.1605:

Chech the video i posted in the original post. ^^

What about it? About 90% of that video is PvE with the last 15 or so seconds being PvP.

Is the video showing pve? Sure. What is the whole message though? It mentions the word: guild MANY times, 6x times i believe. The whole video indicates of Guilds being a big role of the game. Proof: (i quote from the video)
1.) “Our guild gathers before each battle.” – 0:07
2.)“As guild members we spend our time training, to master our unique skills, to earn a right to call ourselves guild members” -0:48
3.)“Other guilds will confront us.” ---> the biggest proof of GwGing, and besides, the video is ALL about guilds, guild members gathering before battle and fighting other guilds etc.

You claimed that it was guild vs guilds. So now you’re changing your argument or trying to twist the video around to support your argument because it talked about guilds?

ShadowDragoonFTW.3418:

And I would like to link, for you, this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hA6vRTFU6JI

This is the Cinematic Trailer for Guild Wars Prophecies. If this game was truly as PvP-focused as you’re claiming, then the cinematic trailer wouldn’t be showing off only humans fighting down monsters. It would show humans fighting against other humans, to pump up the “Player versus Player” point of the game.

But, it doesn’t. It’s a PvE monster-slayer, just like it was always intended to be.

I understand what you are trying to say. And the video sure does not mention Guilds in any shape or form indeed.

The bottom line (and also the topic of this thread) is that Guild Wars 1 was a suitable name, while Guild Wars 2 is simply not anymore.

Hegediz.1605:

Ayrilana.1396:

Hegediz.1605:

Chech the video i posted in the original post. ^^

What about it? About 90% of that video is PvE with the last 15 or so seconds being PvP.

Is the video showing pve? Sure. What is the whole message though? It mentions the word: guild MANY times, 6x times i believe. The whole video indicates of Guilds being a big role of the game. Proof: (i quote from the video)
1.) “Our guild gathers before each battle.” – 0:07
2.)“As guild members we spend our time training, to master our unique skills, to earn a right to call ourselves guild members” -0:48
3.)“Other guilds will confront us.” ---> the biggest proof of GwGing, and besides, the video is ALL about guilds, guild members gathering before battle and fighting other guilds etc.

Yes, but that doesn’t mean that it was GvG centric, and thus named as such. It means that guilds (referring to “The Guild Wars”) are a big part of the game. That doesn’t meant that because you have guilds, and you have a game mode that supports GvG and PvP, doesn’t mean thats what the game is named for.

Hegediz.1605:

ShadowDragoonFTW.3418:

JBDanger.2603:

Ayrilana.1396:

Goose.5196:

Ayrilana.1396:

It did not get its name from guild vs guild.

Yes it did. The original Guild Wars was focused primarily on PvP. To make sense of the game mode and the concept of guilds, they made an elaborate back story known as the “Guild Wars.” It was absolutely named “Guild Wars” because of the game mode. The lore was secondary to make it make sense and to give people a way to recognize which game had the specific brand of PvP they were going for.

Where’s the source that that was why they named it?

Where’s the source for the reason it wasn’t named after this?

“The onus of proof is on the accusor.”

You accused that the game was named for the PvP aspect, yet there is no proof to be seen of it. And, since you’re the one suggesting it to begin with, it’s up to you to provide proof.

Also, I remember all the advertisements about GW1 when it first came out. The major factor was the “only pay once” model, and the “instanced areas”. I don’t recall anything about them going out of their way to tout the PvP aspect of the game. And, as I said, even at launch in the vanilla campaign, PvP itself was still only a very small fraction of the overall game.

I suggest all of you check the video i attached to OP

Looked a very PvE orientated video to me.. with a small part at the end highlighting some PvP against other guilds is to be included (marketing something new needs to pack as much in to appeal to as many as possible, but its definitely steered at at PvE environment.
Just because your in a guild in guild wars doesn’t make it PvP focused.. at least I never saw GW1 that way otherwise I would of left it far behind right after logging in the first time.

Hegediz.1605:

ShadowDragoonFTW.3418:

And I would like to link, for you, this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hA6vRTFU6JI

This is the Cinematic Trailer for Guild Wars Prophecies. If this game was truly as PvP-focused as you’re claiming, then the cinematic trailer wouldn’t be showing off only humans fighting down monsters. It would show humans fighting against other humans, to pump up the “Player versus Player” point of the game.

But, it doesn’t. It’s a PvE monster-slayer, just like it was always intended to be.

I understand what you are trying to say. And the video sure does not mention Guilds in any shape or form indeed.

The bottom line (and also the topic of this thread) is that Guild Wars 1 was a suitable name, while Guild Wars 2 is simply not anymore.

So GW2 is not a suitable name because it doesn’t have GvG? But it is a continuation of the story of Tyria. The events of GW1 have brought the world to the point that it is now.

It was marketed as a competitive online role-playing game. I am not saying that it didn’t later expand into becoming primarily about PvE, since that is the direction their players wanted. However, at first, it was most definitely marketed as a game which had very competitive PvP. They were going up against WoW, so they had to stand out. WoW didn’t really have an amazingly structured PvP system at the time. This left a niche for Guild Wars to fill. So they advertised themselves on this theme. They named themselves in a way that people could easily recognize it as the “guild vs. guild” game. If you think that they could have stood out by advertising itself as a MMO with a “Guild Wars” lore against WoW’s expansive story and narrative, then I don’t think you are giving the marketing department at ArenaNet enough credit.

Ok lemme put it that way – are there any “guild wars” or anything that would imply to that in Guild Wars 2? -No, absolutely not. Not even a little bit. This is why the name is unsuitable.

The name is unchanged just because it is a Guild Wars sequel, but the actual representation of the name is unsuitable hands down.

Hegediz.1605:

Ayrilana.1396:

Hegediz.1605:

Chech the video i posted in the original post. ^^

What about it? About 90% of that video is PvE with the last 15 or so seconds being PvP.

Is the video showing pve? Sure. What is the whole message though? It mentions the word: guild MANY times, 6x times i believe. The whole video indicates of Guilds being a big role of the game. Proof: (i quote from the video)
1.) “Our guild gathers before each battle.” – 0:07
2.)“As guild members we spend our time training, to master our unique skills, to earn a right to call ourselves guild members” -0:48
3.)“Other guilds will confront us.” ---> the biggest proof of GwGing, and besides, the video is ALL about guilds, guild members gathering before battle and fighting other guilds etc.

They employ nouns over and over for the whole duration of the video, and verbs, too. It also tells stories, which were obviously written by someone before they made it to the game.
This game and its predecessor are most definitely about Grammar and Writing.

Grammar and Writing
Grammar and Writing 2

We can even keep calling them GW and GW2.

pdavis.8031:

Hegediz.1605:

ShadowDragoonFTW.3418:

And I would like to link, for you, this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hA6vRTFU6JI

This is the Cinematic Trailer for Guild Wars Prophecies. If this game was truly as PvP-focused as you’re claiming, then the cinematic trailer wouldn’t be showing off only humans fighting down monsters. It would show humans fighting against other humans, to pump up the “Player versus Player” point of the game.

But, it doesn’t. It’s a PvE monster-slayer, just like it was always intended to be.

I understand what you are trying to say. And the video sure does not mention Guilds in any shape or form indeed.

The bottom line (and also the topic of this thread) is that Guild Wars 1 was a suitable name, while Guild Wars 2 is simply not anymore.

So GW2 is not a suitable name because it doesn’t have GvG? But it is a continuation of the story of Tyria. The events of GW1 have brought the world to the point that it is now.

And WoW is the continuation of the story of the warcraft series, yet it is not called Warcraft 4

Hegediz.1605:

Ok lemme put it that way – are there any “guild wars” or anything that would imply to that in Guild Wars 2? -No, absolutely not. Not even a little bit. This is why the name is unsuitable.

Nope. Guild Wars is part of the lore and history of the first game and this one.

For those still claiming that GW1 was primarily PvP oriented, please provide your source. Hopefully a source that doesn’t show the opposite of what you’re trying to argue.

Scipio.3204:

pdavis.8031:

Hegediz.1605:

ShadowDragoonFTW.3418:

And I would like to link, for you, this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hA6vRTFU6JI

This is the Cinematic Trailer for Guild Wars Prophecies. If this game was truly as PvP-focused as you’re claiming, then the cinematic trailer wouldn’t be showing off only humans fighting down monsters. It would show humans fighting against other humans, to pump up the “Player versus Player” point of the game.

But, it doesn’t. It’s a PvE monster-slayer, just like it was always intended to be.

I understand what you are trying to say. And the video sure does not mention Guilds in any shape or form indeed.

The bottom line (and also the topic of this thread) is that Guild Wars 1 was a suitable name, while Guild Wars 2 is simply not anymore.

So GW2 is not a suitable name because it doesn’t have GvG? But it is a continuation of the story of Tyria. The events of GW1 have brought the world to the point that it is now.

And WoW is the continuation of the story of the warcraft series, yet it is not called Warcraft 4

No, because Warcraft moved from being an RTS to an MMO. And with an MMO you have a much more expansive, evolving and changing world. Thus WORLD of Warcraft.

Hegediz.1605:

Ok lemme put it that way – are there any “guild wars” or anything that would imply to that in Guild Wars 2? -No, absolutely not. Not even a little bit. This is why the name is unsuitable.

The name is unchanged just because it is a Guild Wars sequel, but the actual representation of the name is unsuitable hands down.

Do we have Guilds in the game? Yes. Do we have wars in the game? Plenty. Do we still have backstory from the Guild Wars from so long ago? Oh yeah, someone mentioned where it’s still talked about in the game.

There’s plenty of reason for it to still be called Guild Wars 2. Honestly, I think it has more merit now than before this thread started.

ShadowDragoonFTW.3418:

Hegediz.1605:

Ok lemme put it that way – are there any “guild wars” or anything that would imply to that in Guild Wars 2? -No, absolutely not. Not even a little bit. This is why the name is unsuitable.

The name is unchanged just because it is a Guild Wars sequel, but the actual representation of the name is unsuitable hands down.

Do we have Guilds in the game? Yes. Do we have wars in the game? Plenty. Do we still have backstory from the Guild Wars from so long ago? Oh yeah, someone mentioned where it’s still talked about in the game.

There’s plenty of reason for it to still be called Guild Wars 2. Honestly, I think it has more merit now than before this thread started.

Do we have guilds in the game? yes. Do we have wars in the game? yes. But those wars are NOT guild wars but it is a war with the awakened dragon(s). There is no Guild vs Guild in the game. (the only time guild wars are mentioned in the game are when Trehearne is explaining the history of Tyria in the personal story quest. That is like saying World of Warcraft should be named Leeroy Jenkins because there was a guy named Leeroy in the raid who was epic and fought and stuff. —> No guild wars in Guild Wars 2. Everything about wars between guilds – guild wars is a leftover from the prequels Prophecies, Factions of Guild wars 1 game.

pdavis.8031:

Scipio.3204:

pdavis.8031:

Hegediz.1605:

ShadowDragoonFTW.3418:

And I would like to link, for you, this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hA6vRTFU6JI

This is the Cinematic Trailer for Guild Wars Prophecies. If this game was truly as PvP-focused as you’re claiming, then the cinematic trailer wouldn’t be showing off only humans fighting down monsters. It would show humans fighting against other humans, to pump up the “Player versus Player” point of the game.

But, it doesn’t. It’s a PvE monster-slayer, just like it was always intended to be.

I understand what you are trying to say. And the video sure does not mention Guilds in any shape or form indeed.

The bottom line (and also the topic of this thread) is that Guild Wars 1 was a suitable name, while Guild Wars 2 is simply not anymore.

So GW2 is not a suitable name because it doesn’t have GvG? But it is a continuation of the story of Tyria. The events of GW1 have brought the world to the point that it is now.

And WoW is the continuation of the story of the warcraft series, yet it is not called Warcraft 4

No, because Warcraft moved from being an RTS to an MMO. And with an MMO you have a much more expansive, evolving and changing world. Thus WORLD of Warcraft.

And GW moved from being a coorpg to an MMO, my point is the continuation of the story shouldn’t be enough to put a “2” next to its name

What’s in a name? A lot, in my opinion, and since the get-go I’ve never found “Guild Wars 2” terribly appropriate, as I don’t feel that lore and setting is really enough to warrant that “2” at the end of it.

At the end of the day it may just be a name, sure, but I find it a tiny bit disrespectful to the original. Nowhere near as bad as Dungeon Keeper at Syndicate, though (which funnily enough were both Peter Molyneux games).

Smith.1826:

What’s in a name? A lot, in my opinion, and since the get-go I’ve never found “Guild Wars 2” terribly appropriate, as I don’t feel that lore and setting is really enough to warrant that “2” at the end of it.

At the end of the day it may just be a name, sure, but I find it a tiny bit disrespectful to the original. Nowhere near as bad as Dungeon Keeper at Syndicate, though (which funnily enough were both Peter Molyneux games).

I actually liked Dungeon Keeper.

Scipio.3204:

pdavis.8031:

Scipio.3204:

pdavis.8031:

Hegediz.1605:

ShadowDragoonFTW.3418:

And I would like to link, for you, this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hA6vRTFU6JI

This is the Cinematic Trailer for Guild Wars Prophecies. If this game was truly as PvP-focused as you’re claiming, then the cinematic trailer wouldn’t be showing off only humans fighting down monsters. It would show humans fighting against other humans, to pump up the “Player versus Player” point of the game.

But, it doesn’t. It’s a PvE monster-slayer, just like it was always intended to be.

I understand what you are trying to say. And the video sure does not mention Guilds in any shape or form indeed.

The bottom line (and also the topic of this thread) is that Guild Wars 1 was a suitable name, while Guild Wars 2 is simply not anymore.

So GW2 is not a suitable name because it doesn’t have GvG? But it is a continuation of the story of Tyria. The events of GW1 have brought the world to the point that it is now.

And WoW is the continuation of the story of the warcraft series, yet it is not called Warcraft 4

No, because Warcraft moved from being an RTS to an MMO. And with an MMO you have a much more expansive, evolving and changing world. Thus WORLD of Warcraft.

And GW moved from being a coorpg to an MMO, my point is the continuation of the story shouldn’t be enough to put a “2” next to its name

I feel that it is entirely appropriate to add a “2” to it. One could also argue the naming conventions of Final Fantasy. None of these games are in any way sequals or prequals to any of the other. (With the exception of FFVII: Crisis Core, FFVII: Dirge of Cerberus, and XII-2). Also XI moved from being a turn based RPG to an MMO, yet kept the naming convention.

My point is, that Guild Wars 2, being a continuation, is enough to call it “2”. But I believe the name was partially due to keep the Guild Wars name, and the story, and to be more recognizable. As far as the original name, I don’t think that it was called such as a shout out to PvP/GvG, but to draw attention to the story as a whole.

I played Guild Wars 1 for a little bit, but couldn’t get too much into it. If the name of this game change to Tryia: The battle of the dragons, or something, I probably would have overlooked it. But the name Guild Wars, was already known, and recognizable. Calling it anything else, I feel would not have brought the success that it has.

pdavis.8031:

Scipio.3204:

pdavis.8031:

Scipio.3204:

pdavis.8031:

Hegediz.1605:

ShadowDragoonFTW.3418:

And I would like to link, for you, this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hA6vRTFU6JI

This is the Cinematic Trailer for Guild Wars Prophecies. If this game was truly as PvP-focused as you’re claiming, then the cinematic trailer wouldn’t be showing off only humans fighting down monsters. It would show humans fighting against other humans, to pump up the “Player versus Player” point of the game.

But, it doesn’t. It’s a PvE monster-slayer, just like it was always intended to be.

I understand what you are trying to say. And the video sure does not mention Guilds in any shape or form indeed.

The bottom line (and also the topic of this thread) is that Guild Wars 1 was a suitable name, while Guild Wars 2 is simply not anymore.

So GW2 is not a suitable name because it doesn’t have GvG? But it is a continuation of the story of Tyria. The events of GW1 have brought the world to the point that it is now.

And WoW is the continuation of the story of the warcraft series, yet it is not called Warcraft 4

No, because Warcraft moved from being an RTS to an MMO. And with an MMO you have a much more expansive, evolving and changing world. Thus WORLD of Warcraft.

And GW moved from being a coorpg to an MMO, my point is the continuation of the story shouldn’t be enough to put a “2” next to its name

I feel that it is entirely appropriate to add a “2” to it. One could also argue the naming conventions of Final Fantasy. None of these games are in any way sequals or prequals to any of the other. (With the exception of FFVII: Crisis Core, FFVII: Dirge of Cerberus, and XII-2). Also XI moved from being a turn based RPG to an MMO, yet kept the naming convention.

My point is, that Guild Wars 2, being a continuation, is enough to call it “2”. But I believe the name was partially due to keep the Guild Wars name, and the story, and to be more recognizable. As far as the original name, I don’t think that it was called such as a shout out to PvP/GvG, but to draw attention to the story as a whole.

I played Guild Wars 1 for a little bit, but couldn’t get too much into it. If the name of this game change to Tryia: The battle of the dragons, or something, I probably would have overlooked it. But the name Guild Wars, was already known, and recognizable. Calling it anything else, I feel would not have brought the success that it has.

I think it should be called Jump Wars 2. It seems I’m always getting face planted against a small ditch/uneven surface in WvW and have to press the space bar every few seconds.

Not only this, but we don’t really have any unique Guild feature (like Guild Vs. Guild), so I still don’t understand where ‘guild wars’ comes into it.

GW1 at least had guild halls, where we could customise them and add bank npc’s and stuff – why doesn’t GW2 have this? It would be epic to have truly unique guilds that you could customise – with themes/colors/npc’s/statues/add-ons etc.

I know that if I had my own personal guild hall, I’d probably want a statue of the skimpy Lord Faren :-P and a bank npc, a trading npc, a sky with a permanent rainbow in it (or maybe double rainbow?) and a few other things. It would be SO cool. But sadly it’s just a dream that will probably never become a reality :-(

Guild Wars 1 was originally named for the PvP concept. As Indigo referenced, however, they did add the Guild Wars lore and backstory. I think the concept of the Guild Wars was more or less something they added when they realized their PvE was becoming extraordinarily good. Having a continuation to Tyria’s story in the form of “Guild Wars 2” seems entirely appropriate.

hannah mee.7925:

Guild Wars 1 was originally named for the PvP concept. As Indigo referenced, however, they did add the Guild Wars lore and backstory. I think the concept of the Guild Wars was more or less something they added when they realized their PvE was becoming extraordinarily good. Having a continuation to Tyria’s story in the form of “Guild Wars 2” seems entirely appropriate.

Where’s the source that this was why they named it? This is what a large amount of the thread is about. Someone posts here claiming (without evidence) that GW1 was named because of GvG and that since GW2 currently does not have GvG then its name doesn’t apply anymore.

Hegediz.1605:

pdavis.8031:

Scipio.3204:

pdavis.8031:

Scipio.3204:

pdavis.8031:

Hegediz.1605:

ShadowDragoonFTW.3418:

And I would like to link, for you, this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hA6vRTFU6JI

This is the Cinematic Trailer for Guild Wars Prophecies. If this game was truly as PvP-focused as you’re claiming, then the cinematic trailer wouldn’t be showing off only humans fighting down monsters. It would show humans fighting against other humans, to pump up the “Player versus Player” point of the game.

But, it doesn’t. It’s a PvE monster-slayer, just like it was always intended to be.

I understand what you are trying to say. And the video sure does not mention Guilds in any shape or form indeed.

The bottom line (and also the topic of this thread) is that Guild Wars 1 was a suitable name, while Guild Wars 2 is simply not anymore.

So GW2 is not a suitable name because it doesn’t have GvG? But it is a continuation of the story of Tyria. The events of GW1 have brought the world to the point that it is now.

And WoW is the continuation of the story of the warcraft series, yet it is not called Warcraft 4

No, because Warcraft moved from being an RTS to an MMO. And with an MMO you have a much more expansive, evolving and changing world. Thus WORLD of Warcraft.

And GW moved from being a coorpg to an MMO, my point is the continuation of the story shouldn’t be enough to put a “2” next to its name

I feel that it is entirely appropriate to add a “2” to it. One could also argue the naming conventions of Final Fantasy. None of these games are in any way sequals or prequals to any of the other. (With the exception of FFVII: Crisis Core, FFVII: Dirge of Cerberus, and XII-2). Also XI moved from being a turn based RPG to an MMO, yet kept the naming convention.

My point is, that Guild Wars 2, being a continuation, is enough to call it “2”. But I believe the name was partially due to keep the Guild Wars name, and the story, and to be more recognizable. As far as the original name, I don’t think that it was called such as a shout out to PvP/GvG, but to draw attention to the story as a whole.

I played Guild Wars 1 for a little bit, but couldn’t get too much into it. If the name of this game change to Tryia: The battle of the dragons, or something, I probably would have overlooked it. But the name Guild Wars, was already known, and recognizable. Calling it anything else, I feel would not have brought the success that it has.

Agreed, probably the name “Guild Wars 2” made the game to “Fastest selling MMO” , but also probably the name is the same reason for so much unstatisfied players, especially veterans.

Guild Wars could have been named after anything. It all depends on what they started with and only the original founders could truly answer the question. They are called ArenaNet, so I wouldn’t be surprised if their original concept for the game was focused on PvP, hence the name.

As for the lack of GvG, that simply comes down to numbers. GvG is like a minority (PvE vs PvP) of a minority (random vs premade).

Hegediz.1605:

The bottom line (and also the topic of this thread) is that Guild Wars 1 was a suitable name, while Guild Wars 2 is simply not anymore.

Using the name GW2 is about name recognition, not about a specific game mode. There are opportunities for guilds in GW2 to work together in tPvP and in WvW, just as there were opportunities for them to work together in GW PvP modes. There were just flat out more PvP modes in the original game, one of which took place in Guild Halls. For the record, while many guilds did take part in GvG, not all members of some GvG teams were from the same guild. All of the matches I took part in were alliance, rather than guild, based.

the things people choose to rage about..

Ayrilana.1396:

Smith.1826:

What’s in a name? A lot, in my opinion, and since the get-go I’ve never found “Guild Wars 2” terribly appropriate, as I don’t feel that lore and setting is really enough to warrant that “2” at the end of it.

At the end of the day it may just be a name, sure, but I find it a tiny bit disrespectful to the original. Nowhere near as bad as Dungeon Keeper at Syndicate, though (which funnily enough were both Peter Molyneux games).

I actually liked Dungeon Keeper.

I love Dungeon Keeper!

Dungeon Keeper, on the other hand…