ANET @ PAX East?

[Feathermoore]

Originally Posted by Abbadon

I agree, but I was pointing out the fact that Guildwars lore is new compared to WoW's which has been in the works since 1994 with Warcraft:Orcs & Humans.

Also they were pointing out the similarities between the stories of Guildswars2and WoW:cataclysm and saying that Gw2 made more sense, even though WoW's story has been building up for years while story for Gw2 is fairly recent.

Im calling BS on this as it is nothing like what you actually said.

You said nothing about how long either story has been made and instead said the WC lore makes more sense than GW lore. In fact, this statement is completely false. (expecially since you specifically said WoW lore which makes NO sense especially if you know the lore of the other games).

[XNEO]

this is getting a lot off-topic xD

[Dima]

the difference is gw2 is a new game while cataclysm is an expansion.
so gw2>cataclysm
charr>tauren>wargen
sylvari>elves
asura>gnomes even though gnomes are cool but having essentially a human with three different sizes is boring. the humans dwarfs and gnomes. which is highly likely why dwarfs are not a playable race in gw2.

[IDarko]

Originally Posted by Dima

the difference is gw2 is a new game while cataclysm is an expansion.
so gw2>cataclysm
charr>tauren>wargen
sylvary>elves
asura>gnomes even though gnomes are cool but having essentially a human with three different sizes is boring. the humans dwarfs and gnomes. which is highly likely why dwarfs are not a playable race in gw2.

Because norn do not look like humans? And Caithe(Sylvari) does also look like an human. I'm pretty sure you can make them look more different. But I think they all look kinda human.

And that is something I hate about the Sylvari. They come out a plant. Why do they actually look like humans? A combination of centaur and plants would be better imo.

[Malchior Devenholm]

Originally Posted by XNEO

this is getting a lot off-topic xD

Well, Sabre Wolf's question got answered by Martin.

Arenanet will not be at Pax EAST.

So...Close thread?

[Abbadon]

Originally Posted by Default

I've been following the Warcraft Lore since Warcraft Orcs and Humans, and I can honestly say their story stopped making good sense around the same time of Warcraft 3, and only got torn up even more with the various Expansion Packs of WoW. As it is right now, it has no connection whatsoever to the original lore, and has so many plot holes, its not even funny anymore, saying Warcraft has lore still is like saying Aions grind is a fun family experience, its complete and utter fanboy bullshit.

You want to argue that ANet making up the Sylvari on the spot is showing their lore is bad? How about oh lets say, The Scourge, the Forsaken, the Tauren, the Night Elves, the Draenei, the Blood Elves, the Worgen, and god knows how many other races I forgot, most of which joined the world of Azeroth because "A WIZARD DID IT" or because their "HYPERSONIC UNIVERSE TRANSPORTING SPACESHIP RAN OUT OF GAS!"

Sylvari at least make some sense, as do all the other races, with their motivations and background story, I can believe a tree we saw planted in GW1 over a mass grave which just so happened to be in a magical area might just have some effects, and I could see it creating a new race, at least that makes alot more sense then a race thats entire motivation is making money telling 50% of its profit to go take a hike because they want to join the suddenly more aggressive side, or the NPC everyone hates killing the Tauren leader to show he is a man before beating up Thrall and taking over, or you know, the whole UNIVERSE TRAVELING ****ING SPACESHIP.

Like everything else, that's base on personal opinion and nothing more.

Originally Posted by Feathermoore

Im calling BS on this as it is nothing like what you actually said.

You said nothing about how long either story has been made and instead said the WC lore makes more sense than GW lore. In fact, this statement is completely false. (expecially since you specifically said WoW lore which makes NO sense especially if you know the lore of the other games).

I was making the case that WoW's lore has been building for years and because its been around for so long, they've made holes by keeping the franchise running.

But too say that Guildwars lore makes more sense, when its recent, isn't as fleshed out and also took things from Warcraft's lore.

[Feathermoore]

Originally Posted by Abbadon

I was making the case that WoW's lore has been building for years and because its been around for so long, they've made holes by keeping the franchise running.

But too say that Guildwars lore makes more sense, when its recent isn't as fleshed out and also took things from Warcraft's lore.

If that is what you meant you should have said it the first time. And you still said that WoW's lore is better, it is much more full of holes. You seem to be backpeddling here.

Any similarity between GW and WoW lore is due to a similar inspiration. Something also known as mythology. As it stands, the only real similarity is that both games draw from Irish and Norse mythology. Anet tends to have a much more literal and direct pulling from the mythology, while Warcraft pulls directly from other games or stories (Tolkien is an example).

So really...no not in any way could you make a logical argument that GW stole from WoW.

[Naoroji]

Originally Posted by Abbadon

But too say that Guildwars lore makes more sense, when its recent isn't as fleshed out and also took things from Warcraft's lore.

You know, that a story makes more sense has nothing to do with it's age or it's length. If I say 'When it rains, water falls out of the sky', and people have only said that since 2000 (example), that still makes more sense than going on and on in a long-winded story about how sand falls from the sky when it rains, while people have been saying that for 2.000 years.

Unless you live on a planet where sand does fall out of the sky when it rains.

And btw. GW did not steal. Similar inspiration =/= Stealing.

[Konig Des Todes]

*eats popcorn while watching people debate lore*

I love watching more and more people debating lore.

Oh, and as for which is better - Warcraft's lore or Guild War's lore - answer this question:

Comparing Warcraft 1/2/3's lore ALONE (no WoW or any book), with Guild War's 1 lore (all 3 campaigns and Eye of the North - nothing pertaining to GW2 or the books): Which makes more sense?

Now, even then, it isn't completely fair. Warcraft had more time between games to think of new lore, while Guild Wars was released every year (and in Nightfall's case, wasn't that less than a year?), so Warcraft would still have the advantage.

Warcraft's lore is bound to be more in depth and more in quantity, as there is more time for Warcraft to obtain lore - the quality, on the other hand, is not so one sided, but Warcraft still has the advantage of having more time in comparison (note: from development to release, not release to present).

Personally, I think that comparing the lore of various games is absolutely ridiculous - unless the games started being developed at the same time, and were released at the same time.

But anyways... *continues eating popcorn*
<input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><!--Session data--><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden"><input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><!--Session data--><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden">

[Default]

Originally Posted by Abbadon

Like everything else, that's base on personal opinion and nothing more.

Er not really.

My main argument was that Warcraft lore has been retconned to the point it has almost no connection to the original Wc2/Wc3 lore created by Metzen, several of the races have been completely changed for the sake of gameplay, and others have been slowly altered to make them more appealing to younger audiences, but other then a few name similarities, you could argue that the lore coming in Cataclysm belongs to a totally new IP from Wc2, and this is not exactly opinion, look at the Orcs from Wc2, and how much they've been retconned just from Wc2 to Wc3, and then again for Wc3 to WoW, and now again from WoW to Cataclysm.

Your argument is basically that the more lore something has, the better it must be, which in my humble opinion is a fairly bad argument, EQ for example has several million years worth of lore written down, but I wouldn't call it an amazingly gripping story, and in fact find some of it rather boring, however by your argument, EQ would be the foundation of lore as we know it, and the RPer holy ground due to that.

Guild Wars might not have thousands of backstories for every event that happened, but it makes sense, and thats all I really ask for from an MMOs backstory, the characters are believable, and they interact as you'd expect them to, there is no race based on monetary gain suddenly telling 50% of its profits to shove off because it would be cool for gameplay reasons, or random retcons to add new stuff, it fits, it works, and there is still a hefty enough stage to play on.

[Geroui]

Didn't Warcraft take some similar ideas from Warhammer? So really this discussion is kind of useless plus the thread looks like it has been derailed.

With the lore aspect.. Warcraft has many years of lore.. but GW has something it doesn't have. Professions for all races. This is assuming GW2 will follow like it did in GW1. In WoW I can't be a Troll Warlock.. but I can be the class and race I want in Guild Wars.

[Default]

Originally Posted by Geroui

Didn't Warcraft take some similar ideas from Warhammer? So really this discussion is kind of useless plus the thread looks like it has been derailed.

With the lore aspect.. Warcraft has many years of lore.. but GW has something it doesn't have. Professions for all races. This is assuming GW2 will follow like it did in GW1. In WoW I can't be a Troll Warlock.. but I can be the class and race I want in Guild Wars.

Starcraft and Warcraft were both originally going to be RTS games based on the WH40K and WHFB franchises respectively, about halfway through development, Blizzard apparently got greedy, and Games Workshop pulled the plug, rather then let it die, they did minor modifications to the names, and released them anyway. With Wc3, Metzen decided to remake the lore he already made in Wc2, and just started adding random junk, Undead, Forsaken, Tauren, all sorts of crazy stuff, which is why Wc3 is so much different from Wc1/Wc2, which were far more entrenched into the old WHFB ideals.

[Sabre Wolf]

Originally Posted by Malchior Devenholm

Well, Sabre Wolf's question got answered by Martin.

Arenanet will not be at Pax EAST.

So...Close thread?

yes please.

/thread

rest of this off topic stuff I believe goes in the Gamer's Lair

[JR]

Originally Posted by Malchior Devenholm

So...Close thread?