Guild Wars 2

Took me a huge number of attempts to beat Liadri, but I’m fine with that, it made it more satisfying when I finally managed.

Only tip I have is: Bomb Kit.

Kalavier.1097:

Essentially, Stooperdale covered it. What do we see of the Dredge? raiders who will steal supplies (Gendarren fields). Attackers who will drive others away (Koden, Granite Citadel ruins, wayfarer foothills captured miners, etc). Destroy history based on racial hatred (a LOT of the times we see them fighting Priory, it’s because the dredge want to destroy EVERYTHING DWARVEN that the Priory has gathered or wants to gather)

As I said before, the actions of the Dredge leadership and military are inexcusable. I’ve not been arguing that.

But killing Dredge miners, who, as the Dev has clarified, just want to work— that’s not the same thing. That’s not to be glossed over, either.

Kalavier.1097:

Norn being kittens and starting a fight isn’t new. Again, in their culture, a threat may be described as hunting, as seen by some Norn fighting undead and calling it a hunt, or centaurs, etc.

Well, we do have a dev source saying the Norn provoke the Dredge when they’re spoiling for a fight, and we don’t see attacks launched from Molensk or other mines which are routinely raided.

It’s rather an assumption to say the Dredge always attack first. We don’t see that. We see the Dredge military often attacking others, and we see others often attacking the Dredge (including non-aggressive mines and miners).

Kalavier.1097:

The other races? Dredge would’ve encountered humans and Dwarves.. maybe a rare charr or Norn. None of the Asura or Sylvari. Besides, we don’t know if they actually did more or stood by.

The Asura were in contact with the Dredge, according to this.

The Asura of the Tarnished Coast are a brilliant, if diminutive, people who dwelled, until recently, within the Depths of Tyria, where they regularly dealt with Dwarves, Dredge, and other underground races.

Kalavier.1097:

Actually, humans and deldrimor dwarves fought and killed the stone summit. When the Dredge were in trouble, the player character/hero of GW1 helped them . In Factions, you took out a hostile leader, helping a nicer one come to power. In prophecies Sorrow’s Furnace. In EOTN a DREDGE comes to you about his brethen being enslaved and you rescue them… hell in Sorrow’s Embrace in the miner path…

Aye, the hero saves them at Vloxen (though remember also the quest in Sorrow’s Furnace that has you working for the Summit and assassinating Molachev on the Summit’s behalf).

They remained enslaved after the Furnace fell. Whatever the heroes did, the other species stood by.

Kalavier.1097:

Some Norn may have hunted the Dredge, but what a handful do don’t mean the rest would do it. Hell, I’ve seen Norn NPCS ingame describe local threats as “hunting”. Such as Centaurs attacking Ascalon Settlement or the undead in the swamp (First Haven). It’s their nature… As a hunter based society/origins, going out and taking out a threat may simply be called “hunting” just as easily as going to get meat.

This really does seem like giving the benefit of the doubt when evidence indicates the opposite. Molesmasher has Norn players raiding an underground Dredge mine (from where they are not attempting to launch attacks themselves); numerous hearts request we kill non-aggressive workers and destroy mining equipment, quite apart from dealing with the soldiers.

I recall a post by a dev from some time ago, saying (something along the lines) that the Norn do indeed fight them for sport, that it’s part of the hunting to them. I wish I could find it— I’ll keep looking.

EDIT: found it!

He says specifically that the Norn delight in provoking them, and that while the soldiers are hostile, the workers just want to work.

Kalavier.1097:

Again, Dredge live almost entirely underground. Why do they need to have equal amounts of land above and belowground?

They are an underground race. They don’t NEED surface cities. Saying they “the same right to land and living space” is okay… until you hit the point of “But they already have underground cities, mines, and tunnels… alongside some surface settlements around the tunnel exits… do they REALLY need extensive above ground holdings?”

Neither do the Priory, or the Norn, or countless other species. It’s not the place of the Priory to decide where another species is allowed to live; especially when many such settlements aren’t taken from anybody else.

Kalavier.1097:

The priory is acting off of… a long period of interacting. The Dredge showed themselves to be a xenophobic, hostile race that are interested in killing others instead of trading, destroying relics and knowledge of the Dwarves instead of simply letting the Priory take them…

This is affording the benefit of the doubt to one side, and not the other.

Erukk.1408:

You don’t know that though.

And even if they did extent that courtesy, do you think the Dredge would have actually excepted it? Their entire culture’s xenophobic nature wouldn’t work in their favor at all. Not to mention, the Moletariate probably wouldn’t allow it, since it could give way to their people mixing with the other races culturally. That might expand their mental horizons on how people should be allowed to live, and that might lead to questioning of the Moletariate’s leadership. Something they would never allow.

I think they may have accepted it if they were given any reason to see other species as their allies. Those allies, in the past, stood by while the Dredge were enslaved; there’s nothing in-game that suggests the surface species adopted a more cordial approach at any point.

We don’t see the beginning of the recent conflict, but the benefit of the doubt is being afforded to one side, and not the other.

draxynnic.3719:

If the dredge were willing to let the Priory come in and dig, there would probably be no conflict between them. Since the dredge insist on everyone else keeping out while sitting on (and destroying) a resource that might be the difference between death and survival for everyone... well, if that’s what they want to do, they’re going to have to fight for it.

Certainly— but that’s not the reasoning on display in the quote, which speaks of making them fight for any land they want (which isn’t taken from any other occupying species, in many cases). It’s also not a great defence of the practise of conquering bases that aren’t dig-sites.

Kalavier.1097:

And again, they are obviously aggressive toward ALL non-dredge people. They attack the Kodan extensively in Frostgorge for example.

They do indeed. As I’ve said before, I’m not defending what the Dredge military do— I’m saying that the Priory do the same.

Kalavier.1097:

The dredge clearly aren’t fighting to get enough land to comfortably support their population, as again they live mostly underground.

Regardless, they have the same right to the land as any other. Many Tyrian races have made space for many others and allowed new settlement, particularly since the dragons rose, but this courtesy isn’t extended to all.

Kalavier.1097:

Dredge live mostly underground…. so them constantly expanding on the surface is actually taking lands from others… every city/major place of the dredge is underground so really they don’t NEED to be taking surface formations bar the occasional surface exit to a city. There is a difference between “living space.” and “Charging into ruins and killing most on sight.” Or like them raiding the one haven and stealing all the supplies from it :P.

Taking the land from whom? The Norn are only recent arrivals this far south in the Shiverpeaks, too. The land was only owned long-term by the Dwarves, really.

Charging into ruins is one thing; it’s wrong of the Dredge to do so. But conquering land that was never anybody but the Dredge’s is wrong of the Priory, too.

Essentially, I’m saying that Penelope’s dialogue shows a rather uncompromisingly aggressive stance on the behalf of the perceived good guys, which leads me to see the whole situation as less than clear-cut. When the PC asks, she does not defend the practise on moral terms. She simply says they will make the Dredge fight for land.

Konig Des Todes.2086:

I don’t see how the Kurzicks’ treatment of the dredge – they claimed that they were attacked first, BTW (both sides claim this, we have no clue which is true) – has any holding on the Tyrians’ treatment of the dredge. I somehow doubt that the Canthan dredge returned to Tyria with news of how they were treated there, since there was still 6 years of enslavement up north.

Ah, I had Moleneaux mixed up with Molenin in my head (which would have meant Molenin returned to Tyria from Cantha). My bad.

Still, it can’t be doubted that the Dredge received incredibly poor treatment at every turn, even after the fall of Sorrow’s Furnace. They were given very little reason to credit the other species as allies.

Did the (other) dominant species of Tyria show peaceful intentions? My point is that Penelope’s dialogue seems to indicate that they don’t recognise the Dredge have any right to space to live; that whoever has the muscle should take whatever they want.

Erukk.1408:

The Priory and Dredge are opposing factions. If you have done the Norn PS, you would have saw the Dredge launch assaults on Priory bases, attacked and killed a Vigil squad to test their sonic weapons, and they also attacked the Priory HQ directly solely to kill Ogden Stonehealer.

With the exception of the assault on Ogden Stonehealer, the other actions seem uncomfortably similar to those of the Priory or other allied groups. I cannot condemn the Dredge for assaulting Priory bases, when the Priory assault Dredge bases with the same regularity.

Aaron Ansari.1604:

Magister Penelope has the right idea- there is no moral high ground here. The only way any of these groups are going to secure their interests is by going out and taking them, and it was the dredge leadership that set that rule.

I may feel the same way if we ever saw the allied groups make any peaceful effort. We see no effort on the part of the Priory to allow the space that a species must need; we see no effort to get relics through non-aggressive methods.

I wouldn’t say the Dredge leadership set that rule. The Dredge leadership is undoubtedly xenophobic, aggressive, and paranoid, but I would say the rule was set two hundred and fifty years ago, with the Kurzicks’ awful treatment of the Dredge, and the other races making no effort to free them from enslavement (except for our own efforts at the Vloxen Excavation). After such a precedent, the Priory and other races really should have shown the emergent Dredge they meant them no harm. From what we see in-game, it looks to me as if they did the opposite.

I’ve thought before that Hearts that have you killing non-aggressive Dredge miners are pretty… well, immoral. They’re intelligent creatures who are not aggressive towards you, after all, and can even be seen humming mining songs to themselves.

That’s been discussed before, though. This topic came to mind when I re-read Magister Penelope’s dialogue in Dredgehaunt;

Player: “Why are you taking Dredge bases?”

Penelope: “Territory. They keep expanding north, and we need to drive them back so we can get to the dwarven ruins. It’s an important and historical dig site”.

Player: “Don’t the Dredge deserve their land?”

Penelope: “They broke out of slavery. Now that they’re free creatures, they have to fight for their land just like the rest of us”.

This is pretty terrible moral reasoning, in my book. The Priory magister is saying that since they can take the land from them, they just will.

…Now, we know that the Priory in the area do not only take back their own camps. They also conquer Dredge mines and dig sites. The Priory are not defensive; they are aggressive.

It’s getting pretty hard for me to see the Dredge’s sense of persecution as unfounded. How do others feel? Anyone else hoping for a more nuanced approach in future? There’s a lot of interesting material here, to explore. The very most interesting Dredge content has been the stuff dealing with the rebellion, or showing the sympathetic side (in GW1 and Factions).

The five best things:
5: WvW. Easy to get into, dynamic, mass PvPvE.
4: Lack of the trinity.
3: Sub-free, meaning I can drop out for a month and return, and only a few AP have been missed.
2: The community. It has its problems, but it’s genuinely better than most other mass online game communities, and elitism isn’t widespread, relatively.
1: Design. Always Guild Wars’ strong suit. Fantastic design.

The worst:
5: Lacking in endgame. Eight dungeons and two megabosses can only be repeated so many times.
4: Tone. It sometimes hints at darker elements, but on the whole, the tone is feels too light-hearted. Far more so than the original Guild Wars most of the time. It doesn’t suit the lore, or the world that they have. Put Scarlet Briar in this category.
3: Mesmers, and their inexhaustible army of clones, which can be replaced instantaneously.
2: Ambiguity over expansions-vs-Living Story. This might be a personal thing of mine, but it bothers me quite a lot. I need to know what the future has in store if I’m going to invest a lot of time in a game… and I sincerely hope it’s in the form of expansions as expansions, rather than smaller, piecemeal releases.
1: Story. The Personal Story has some great potential, but the characters are two-dimensional and the plot as a whole is straightforward and predictable on the whole.

Valrog.2059:

I’m not getting involved in the argument about lesbianism or feminism, but I have to ask who cares about the “majority of other games”?

Not those who bought THIS game and are playing THIS game.

And not ArenaNet, who depend on those who are playing THIS game and not those who bought and are supporting “those other games”.

If you want to play those other games, then do so. The rest of us are complaining, for various reasons, about THIS game.

All those “other games” are irrevelant and off-topic here.

Well, when Thobek complained about the high ratio of women-to-men, and the “obvious lesbian relationships”, I thought it was a pretty accurate guess that he wouldn’t be complaining if there was the same ratio of men-to-women in reverse, or if the relationships were straight.

I’m a person who “bought THIS game and is playing THIS game”. I simply chose to draw a comparison, as people do all the time when talking about their favourite media.

Thobek.1730:

Give me an example of a straight couple in this game that flirts all the time? It might be a bit tough considering there is only ONE male lead Braham and he was rejected by Ottilia (guys don’t get much love in this game), but even when you look at the secondary support cast pick one straight couple that flirts like you said. Just one… and it doesn’t have to be all the time either. Just one straight couple with just one example of them flirting.

This game doesn’t really have a straight couple that does it.

And that’s fine, is my point, because the vast majority of media has an over-abundance.

lordkrall.7241:

The age of the players is completely irrelevant though. A rating is a rating, no matter if older people play it.

And as I said, there are other highly popular examples of things aimed at children, with a darker tone.

I’m really happy with any suggestion that they make the tone darker.

The game’s rating is one consideration, but a great number of players are older, and an entirely lighthearted story doesn’t feel so rewarding. Heck, I bet even the younger players would agree. Look at Courage the Cowardly Dog, Invader Zim, or any number of other dark kids shows that are popular. Kids can deal with dark sometimes.

There are elements that point in the right direction— the mourning citizens of Lion’s Arch are a good start.

Tanith.5264:

Wandering slightly OT for this, but seeing the centaur discussion makes me wonder…

…has anyone ever encountered a risen/icebrood/branded centaur?

There aren’t any of those, but in Nightfall, we did encounter Awakened Centaurs (the Awakened being the undead of Joko’s army, as well as those who splintered away from his control during his incarceration).

So undead Centaurs did turn up, at least in GW1.

Thobek.1730:

Its not just one thing in particular its the combination of a lot of things. I don’t care that its a lesbian relationship, its the way its poorly written. When it was Caithe and Faolain I thought wow this is not the usual stuff you see in a computer game, well done Anet for breaking down the norm. Then Kas and Marjory turned up and that’s when it started getting stupid. It’s not only that I don’t like those two characters, but it doesn’t help when they constantly flirt with each other while in serious situations.

That’s a fine point, but wasn’t the one I was addressing. I was addressing how fictional straight couples are shown doing the same stuff all the time, flirting in serious situations, getting stupid, being unrealistic. And yet, whenever it’s a straight romance in question, their sexuality is never brought up. Usually nobody bats an eyelid at the incongruity of it.

Straight romances get away with absolutely anything in fiction, be it unrealistic, incongruous, or downright jarring. They can be shoe-horned into anything, including advertising. But no eyelids are batted. The same crime is committed by a homosexual relationship, and the commentators come out in force to condemn how it’s pushy and unreasonable.

I simply think there’s a double-standard.

Thobek.1730:

As for your question you really need to sit back and think about this one for yourself. Ask yourself who normally plays fantasy MMO type games? who plays PC games in general? what is the percentage of gay/lesbian people (i.e. its about 3.7% in the U.S) Then ask yourself that question again and see if you can work it out for yourself. It’s not that hard, the statistics are out there.

I know the statistics. That point is always brought up, so I’m well acquainted with it.

The vast, vast, vast majority of media with romance in it, in every medium, is dominated almost entirely by heterosexual relationships. The gay relationships are bloody rare by comparison. And yet, when they do crop up, the response is always a shade of that; “obvious gay stuff being shoved down our throats again!!”

It’s not about the ratio. It’s about the double-standard people have.

I applaud the OP (and agree with most of what he said, especially the ‘Lieutenants are the lifeblood of an organisation’ section, which put into words what I’d been thinking myself). Applaud the devs who have taken notice too.

Thobek.1730:

I really don’t like how the characters have been developed. The obvious lesbian relationships being pushed in our faces again and again…

…Getting a bit sick of it. We need another style of writing to balance this feminist stuff.

Hrmm, I wonder why nobody ever says that kind of stuff when a game features a heavily pro-Male ratio, or “obvious hetero relationships”. You know… like the majority of other games.

The humans don’t all have that much faith. There’s a human Pact soldier at the Temple of Lyssa who wonders aloud whether the Risen Priest of Lyssa was right when she said that Lyssa was dead. Faith can be shaky sometimes; it depends on the individual.

I think the Lore is fairly balanced, I must say. The Asura and the Charr both have very valid cultural and rational reasons for their (very different) viewpoints.

If I were you, OP, I’d use the Charr as your starting point, explaining their history with the Titans and the Destroyers and how this has moulded their psyche in GW2-time. They’re a great example for showing a fleshed-out but non-Human POV.

It’s a good system, I have to say, I have a pile of Lesser Transmutation Stones I was wondering what to do with.

Blood Red Arachnid.2493:

You must have a very different definition of “solid” than I do. I’ve done research on the birth order effect, and I’ve always found it to be quite interesting. First, because the proposed biological explanation of immune responses from the mother are are nonsensical from a cognitive developmental standpoint,

What do you mean, “from a cognitive developmental standpoint”? This biological possibility has nothing to do with the cognitive development of the child. It is a hormonal explanation.

That’s like saying, “this hormonal explanation doesn’t make any sense from a genetic point of view”. They’re unrelated. It’s a bizarre thing to say.

Blood Red Arachnid.2493:

However I digress: What did this have to do with the concordance of homosexuality among adopted siblings?

What? It doesn’t. You haven’t understood what I said.

I said the FBOE would effect the concordance of homosexuality among related siblings who aren’t twins. It would lessen the concordance, as one of the siblings would have the average rate, and the younger sibling would have a slightly higher rate (if the FBOE is legitimate).

Blood Red Arachnid.2493:

Are you saying that the 600% increase in expected concordance is from birth order?

No.

Blood Red Arachnid.2493:

Likewise, the assertion that fraternal twins have higher genetic similarities is flat out wrong. There is no difference genetically between fraternal twins and regular siblings, despite there being a larger concordance among that demographic.

That’s why I didn’t say that fraternal twins have more genetic material than regular siblings.

Seriously, you’re consistently claiming that I’ve said things that I didn’t. I said that we should study sets of twins, because the FBOE could not have an effect there (as they’re born together). I also said that with twins, the more genetic material is shared, the higher the concordance of homosexuality— MZ have a far higher rate than DZ.

I never said that stuff you said I did. If this conversation keeps going in that direction, there won’t be any reason to continue.

EDIT: May I ask whether you hold any particular opinions on homosexuality? It’s just that many of those I’ve encountered who have argued that it’s not biological have felt quite strongly about the subject in other ways. The author of the first study you cited, for example, seems to have written several other articles and essays on sexuality, some of which sound pretty… questionable, from the abstracts.

I’m afraid the Sinister Triad have been around in Brisban Wildlands since release; they’re nothing new, they pre-date Scarlet and the LS.

The portal is certainly interesting, of course, in light of Ms Delaqua’s Seraph Sister mentioning that she’s headed out this direction.

Blood Red Arachnid.2493:

The rate in adopted siblings is higher than the rate in related siblings… that’s the issue. From a genetic standpoint, someone of no relation should only coincide with the sexuality of their adopted relative (given that the relative is already homosexual) at roughly the national average of distribution.

No, that would only be expected if genetics were the sole contributor. The “genetic standpoint” does not mean ignoring all other factors— that’s simplistic.

You realise, of course, that in non-twin siblings, the Fraternal Birth Order Effect will account for a significant difference. The more older brothers you have, the greater the likelihood of homosexuality.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10051890

http://www.pnas.org/content/103/28/10771.long

…now, this means that the rate between the brothers themselves will be lessened, because the older brothers will have a rate of homosexuality closer to the average, while the younger brothers may have an increased rate.

It is still solid evidence, of course, that the role of biology is significant.

The FBOE will not have an affect on twins, though, either DZ or MZ, so they are the ones we have to look at to eliminate extraneous factors. And what do we find? That the more genetic material they share, the greater the rate of concurrence!

Blood Red Arachnid.2493:

But lets look at “lenses” for a moment. The greatest platform for furthering research that this study provides would be examining the differences between identical twins of differing sexuality, because this is the closest we have of isolating all variables leading to the manifestation of sexuality. But no one I have ever talked to about this article with has ever reached that idea. Why? They don’t care. They are more concerned with who I am, what I am saying, and how to spin things their way than they are about actually studying or gathering information. They would rather dismiss, and nit pick, and name call, and despise, because they see me just as some villain to their cause.

Alright, I’ll investigate that possibility.

First of all, such a study could only look at environmental factors, because the genetic material is identical or nearly-identical and you’ve not chosen a second group to compare with.

Second of all, any conclusions based on determining meaningful environmental factors would be extremely subjective (almost Freudian, if the researchers ended up attributing it to absent fathers or other circumstantial, untestable hypotheses).

Thirdly, you need another group to compare with, or you have no Control. That’s why most studies compare MZ with DZ, or Related with Adopted. Study a single group and compare it just with the national average, and then you’ll have an impossible time singling out meaningful environmental factors.

Blood Red Arachnid.2493:

The assumption of a genetic cause is a case of people rocketing forward with what they want the truth to be. The thing about familial relationships is that they are far more than just genetic. Families grow up in the same neighborhood, under the same roof, at the same time, in the same culture, in the same nation, with the same external and internal stresses, being exposed to the same stimuli, conditioned with the same upbringing, eating the same diet, having the same religion, and getting the same education while living on the same amount of wealth. The similarities are nigh endless. I would argue that the combination of these factors attributes to sexuality, instead of defaulting toward determinism.

You’ve overlooked the massive difference between the rate in adopted siblings and related ones. Adopted ones share all of those environmental factors you listed, and lack the biological common factors. If biology did not play a significant role, then adopted and related siblings would show the same rate— but the rate is substantially higher for related siblings.

You’re doing what you said others were doing— you’re reaching a conclusion you want to be true, and then viewing the evidence through that lens.

You’re also simplifying genetics substantially. Genes do not always directly cause individual traits. Genes can be connected with others, they may have (or require) triggers, or they may convey a predisposition rather than a certainty. When you dismissed the genetic argument by pointing to the fact that MZ twins do not have a 100% rate, that was a simplification of genetic science.

SirMoogie.9263:

I don’t know I think we could all get behind an ooze romance.

That… that would be horrific. The noises alone would keep me up at night (and not in a good way).

Tanith.5264:

No, then it’s simply called “shipper agenda”. I imagine gaming studios are pressured by them as well, though they may not be as aggressive. I’ve seen the impact they can have on other forms of entertainment, and it’s never good.

I’ve genuinely never heard that term before. I’m not doubting it exists, though.

It’s just that with the hundreds of novels and games, hundreds of films I’ve seen, thousands of straight romances simply seem to elicit little-to-no condemnation for their presence. They may be condemned for being done badly (see: Star Wars: Episode II), but I’ve not once seen them accused of pandering to the straights, or shoehorning in a social agenda by their inclusion. It’s just… par for the course.

Tanith.5264:

Lord Krall, for many of us it’s not the homosexuality that’s objectionable, but the way it’s being worked into the game’s storyline. It feels very much like a social agenda that’s being shoehorned into a work of entertainment it doesn’t truly belong in.

It’s never regarded as pushing a “social agenda” when it’s a straight romance.

bullyrook.2165:

First cut-scene kiss in the game, and we get this. sigh I am rather disappointed. No matter, I’ll keep playing, hoping the devs remember that the individuals who like this aspect are not the only people who play this game. There are good, honest, paying customers who don’t find this favorable. I’ll just have my finger on the “skip cut-scene” button in the near future and keep praying they try telling a romance within a story I can enjoy witnessing too.

There is no such thing as a universally-appealing romance. Why should they tailor it to the “good, honest, paying customers” who like romance #1, but not the equally good, honest, paying customers who like romance #2?

phys.7689:

not really true, pretty sure legendary costs less than every single stat combination and uses less inventory/transmutation stones. As well as assurance to be best in slot for ever. whereas ascended should be as well , but they havent guaranteed it yet

You carry around every single stat combination, all in highest tier gear?

You’re the first I’ve met to do so (or even to want to), if so.

Even the difference between Exotic and Ascended isn’t that great. Most teams don’t care.

Astralporing.1957:

Not since they became the “skip vertical progression” items.

Since when were Legendaries the easier option? You can recreate every practical characteristic with an easier option.

I genuinely don’t believe anybody chooses to embark on a Legendary to skip anything. They’re purely, entirely prestige items, like FoW armour in GW1. And if anybody’s treating them otherwise, that’s the problem of those players, not the item.

Well, the Orrian chicken didn’t turn into an inanimate pile of bones, note— it remained an Orrian chicken. The control was severed, but it didn’t fall apart.

Maybe the same would happen with a Destroyer. Primodrus’ control may be severed, but the creature remains, without the dragon’s impulse driving it. Makes you wonder what they would be like “thinking” for themselves…

I’m liking EOTM a lot. It’s brilliant. I’m glad they’re focusing on specific gaps— last update worldbosses, this time WvW and the queue problem, etc. They’re fleshing out the areas that were lacking.

This is my favourite release in quite some time.

“Forced”.

Because you need a legendary.

The whole point of Legendaries is that they require effort in various different modes of play. Extensive experience in one single mode of play is not what they’re about. They require dungeonrunning, and exploration, and WvW, and Karma… it’s the whole point! If you are really averse to a particular mode of play, you don’t need a legendary anyway!

g e o.2589:

Sorry, was this kinda thing in BWE1? I didn’t start plying until BWE 2 so really interested.

Siege Devourers were in Eye of the North. If you could defeat them (and their rider), you could ride them yourself.

That one looks mechanical, though… the EOTN ones were real, massive devourers with structures on their backs for the rider.

Syryn.7591:

This symbol looks very familiar can anyone tell me what it is? I can’t seem to find it anywhere

I don’t know whether this is meaningful, but that is the same as the “Symbol of the Inquest” you find as a fine or exotic item:

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Symbol_of_the_Inquest_

This thread is like Nostalgia Central, with trains every few minutes heading for Feels Station.

OT: Probably Elite Kurzick armour for elementalist or warrior. Great designs.

http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/File:Elementalist_Elite_Kurzick_armor_m.jpg
http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/File:Warrior_Elite_Kurzick_armor_m.jpg

It would be far worse. The lack of the trinity is one of the best things about this game.

WvW would take the biggest hit if the trinity were introduced. Strategy would go out the window. Players would start yelling at anybody who didn’t come as elementalist, healer or tank, and keeps would never be capped because there would be tanks standing in the glowing circle surrounded by two dozen monks keeping them alive.

For goodness’ sake, there’s no reason ANet should provide us with help.

It’s a difficult encounter. It’s supposed to be. It’s a worldboss. Think of all the optional "super"bosses in the Final Fantasy series!

I may have my problems with the LS, but I welcome difficult, optional content like this. Gives the game more variety.

Gallows.4318:

lol really? I understand. Most people actually enjoy content where they can just stack in a corner and pull while drinking tea.

Hah, I’m drinking tea & playing GW2 right now.

zwierz.9012:

Well, Logan has a history with running away…

QFT. You’re lucky he didn’t run off just as you were headed into battle against some kind of crystalline abomination, OP.

OT: I also really liked the instance, it’s a better way to bring elements of backstory into the game— feels much more natural than putting it all in stories in the website.

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

Snippity

Note, though, I didn’t say we saw her develop; I said we saw her in different contexts, and we saw Morgahn develop in relation to her. I’m well aware she wasn’t deep or complex. I simply think she doesn’t compare with somebody who literally tries to hit you with a big mallet as her method of battle.

We’ll have to agree to disagree.

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

She was never played for laughs, but she still was one-note villainous. She was not as over the top as the Lich Lord, and also nowhere near as chilling as Shiro. There was nothing to her other than “I’m the villain, I’m evil, and I am going to crush your resistance”.

We saw Varesh in various contexts, though. We saw her first when Istan and Kourna at peace, and she wasn’t the villain yet, and then things changed. We also saw Morgahn’s view of her change. There was character development there. It may have been Morgahn’s, but it had implications for Varesh. She wasn’t deep, but she was a secondary villain to Abaddon anyway, and she was still more complex than what we have now.

Scarlet’s been the same since the beginning. She’s had no meaningful interaction with anybody. Every piece of dialogue could be switched with any other piece of dialogue.

(I agree about Joko, though; his comic-relief depiction was a big disappointment to me).

ghost.3208:

That’s a demon from the Underworld, not a Margonite. Margonites are associated with Abaddon, demons/shades/aataxes are with Dhuum.

There’s been no connection made so far between Dhuum and shades & Aatxes. Dhuum commanded dryders, riders and skeletons in GW1, but not Aatxes, which were just referred to as “demonic guardians” of the Labyrinth.

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

Yes, because we never had that sort of thing before? (Palawa Joko, Varesh Ossa, Mad King Thorn)

Well, when Joko and Varesh were in the spotlight, our main focus was on Abaddon, who was not cartoonish at all. (I don’t really think Varesh could be called cartoonish either— she didn’t giggle, she didn’t dance around and try to hit us with an oversized mallet).

Allowing transmutation of Copper to Silver is still the best suggestion. Shifting to Platinum would kitten some people over (making their collections worthless), but allowing transmutation wouldn’t.

To those saying they spent lots on Juggy and making it easier would make it less special: the cost of Silver Doubloons has already fluctuated a huge amount. Back when I was collecting these Doubloons, they were around 30s a piece. Now, they’re way over 1g each. Does that mean one person’s Juggy is less special than another’s? No. Your Juggy is not defined by whether someone else can get one too.

It’s disproportionately expensive when compared with the other weapons, and it’s quite clear the Doubloons were not meant to be like this (Juggy still requires lodestones, after all, which are more clearly intended to be expensive mats).

Kolwin.4950:

Anet already stated they will not be releasing an Expansion for GW2

No, they didn’t. Mike Zadorojny said that if it was successful, Living Story could replace expansions, so an expansion may not happen. Then, later on, it was clarified that they had not made any decisions yet.

When they said these things, they were probably keeping their options open, yes, but they’ve done no such thing as state there won’t be an expansion.

I think ANet’s motives were pretty pure with Kasmeer & Marjory, I must say…

…But I also think it would have been harder for them to get away with a male homosexual relationship being in the spotlight at all. It’s not ANet at fault there, it’s the maturity & openness of the audience.

This isn’t a mark against gamers, by the way, it holds true for most of society. There’d be accusations of “only doing it to be politically correct” or “i’m not interested in this! why should I be?!” if it was a male couple. It’s much more common when male homosexuality is shown in films and tv shows, too.

Konig Des Todes.2086:

Zhu Hanuku is a sea spirit, formerly friendly until the Jade Wind, and is a kraken.

Where’s this tidbit from?

I’m not doubting you (you tend to be well informed), but I just can’t remember that being mentioned. The Convocation seemed to have been a long-running tradition, complete with hunting the Kraken, which seems to suggest he had been antagonistic before.

Must say, as cynical as I was, the cinematic was just fantastic.

FlamingFoxx.1305:

I love that EVERYONE keeps calling her a Mary Sue despite none of them really seeming to know exactly what a Mary Sue is…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Sue

She would perhaps be more accurately described as a Villain Sue (because she’s not an author-substitute, but she has most of the traits associated with the trope anyway).

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/VillainSue

Konig Des Todes.2086:

I’m not saying that Scarlet isn’t behind most of the Living Story (you missed the Super Adventure Box as non-Scarlet related, btw; And Lost Shores, Halloween, and Wintersday), just that the Thaumanova Reactor wasn’t “all about Scarlet.” She was hardly instrumental in the Thaumanova meltdown – she was there, and she didn’t prevent it. But that’s all we’re really told about her involvement. Unless you’ve seen something I haven’t…?

Ahh, I did forget Lost Shores, though the others I’d excluded for being primary light-hearted (and not really focused on ‘threat’). You’re right, though, there were at least a few releases that haven’t featured her.

I was going by her dialogue in Thaumanova; “Reactor approaching critical… my work here is done!”, she announces, which really implies to me she had a significant hand in it. More significant than the Inquest, for example, who scarcely have any dialogue at all.

She also says, “Sorry about all the death, and portal pandemonium”, which seems to back me up. She wouldn’t sarcastically apologise if she hadn’t done it herself. This was really the only background on the Thaumanova meltdown that we actually got.

Konig Des Todes.2086:

It was far from “all about Scarlet” – I wish people would stop over dramatizing Scarlet. She may be a terrible character at least in presentation, but not as much as folks claim is actually tied to her.

Well, she was behind almost every Living Story threat, was she not? She created the Molten Alliance, masterminded the Dragon Bash assassination (with follow-up dungeon, as she runs the Aetherblades), she crashed the Jubilee, she set up the facility in Twilight Arbor, she created the toxic alliance, and she was instrumental in the Thaumanova melt-down.

The only significant non-Scarlet Living Story threat there’s been has been Tequatl’s increase in power.

Jaken.6801:

Now we have it: The next four updates will be concluding the “Scarlet Arc” or at least what they percieve to be the arc to be.
https://www.guildwars2.com/en/news/living-world-2013-the-year-in-review/

Two more months after December, then… two more months. Could be worse.

coglin.1867:

Your not supposed to like the bad guy.

You are supposed to like them as characters, yes. You are supposed to enjoy combat with them.

If people want to see a villain get their comeuppance, then that villain is fulfilling their role (see: Annie Wilkes, Lord Bolton, HAL, Mrs. Coulter, The Joker, or even some of the other villains we’ve had in this series, like Kudu). If people don’t care, and simply want them out of the story so the story can go in a different direction/ tone altogether, then that character is not fulfilling their role.