I think it can only be done on the 3rd iteration of said name. Gta3, fallout3 etc...
So, what you're saying is that it should have been named "Guild Wars 3" because it's so massive that it skips over "Guild Wars 2"? I like that thinking. It's like how World War 5 will happen because it's going to be so huge that it skips over the other 2.
The name is just a part of marketing tool. If guild wars 2 could be called dodo 2 and still be taken seriously I am sure they would have name it as such.
There is a reason why a lot of companies go to great length to keep the same name for sequels. Because people tend to trust sequels more than the original which is why in movies the sequels does batter than the original usually.
The games take place in the same world, albeit a few hundred years apart. They feature the same races, nations, and history. They feature the same classes (mostly; Engi and Thief are new). Many storylines and events in GW2 build upon the lore of the original (Without spoiling too much, the White Mantle plays a part, for instance.)
As has been stated a thousand thousand times before, the title Guild wars has nothing to do with the large guild vs guild battles (which were a later addition to the game I might add), but with the storyline of how factions within the human nations fought against each other. Those same Guild Wars technically ended the moment the Charr razed Ascalon and humanity had to work together just to survive.
The dual class/CCG-like gameplay design has changed, but for that matter the game design of EQ1 was vastly different than 2. And yet the OP calls them a clear continuation
I CAN agree that the game has carried a stigma of being a "lobby" game with some people...mostly ones who can't be bothered to read an article or two. I have no sympathy.
Guild Wars 2 is the game they would have wanted to make back when the technology only allowed for Guild Wars. Now that they can make the game they had originally envisioned, without the financial and technological obstructions, the real deal is here. Bob the destroyer of all other MMO's seems rather pretentious.
Why can't we just call it GW1 on Steriods?(I'm not even trying to be funny or corny.)
Because GW1 was a hell of a lot better of a game, and oh right it actually had GvG in it?
"In the immediate future, we have this one, and then weve got another one that is actually going to be so were going to have, what we want to do, is in January, what were targeting to do, this may or may not happen, so you cant hold me to it. But what were targeting to do, is have a fun anniversary to the Ilum shenanigans that happened. An alien race might invade, and they might crash into Ilum and there might be some new activities that happen on the planet." ~Gabe Amatangelo
Comments
So, what you're saying is that it should have been named "Guild Wars 3" because it's so massive that it skips over "Guild Wars 2"? I like that thinking. It's like how World War 5 will happen because it's going to be so huge that it skips over the other 2.
I never could understand people like the OP
The only thing that matters for games in the long run is, QUALLITY of content.
Best MMO experiences : EQ(PvE), DAoC(PvP), WoW(total package) LOTRO (worldfeel) GW2 (Artstyle and animations and worlddesign) SWTOR (Story immersion) TSW (story) ESO (character advancement)
The name is just a part of marketing tool. If guild wars 2 could be called dodo 2 and still be taken seriously I am sure they would have name it as such.
There is a reason why a lot of companies go to great length to keep the same name for sequels. Because people tend to trust sequels more than the original which is why in movies the sequels does batter than the original usually.
You're correct, of course. It's a nitpicky issue.
I still agree with him though.
The games take place in the same world, albeit a few hundred years apart. They feature the same races, nations, and history. They feature the same classes (mostly; Engi and Thief are new). Many storylines and events in GW2 build upon the lore of the original (Without spoiling too much, the White Mantle plays a part, for instance.)
As has been stated a thousand thousand times before, the title Guild wars has nothing to do with the large guild vs guild battles (which were a later addition to the game I might add), but with the storyline of how factions within the human nations fought against each other. Those same Guild Wars technically ended the moment the Charr razed Ascalon and humanity had to work together just to survive.
The dual class/CCG-like gameplay design has changed, but for that matter the game design of EQ1 was vastly different than 2. And yet the OP calls them a clear continuation
I CAN agree that the game has carried a stigma of being a "lobby" game with some people...mostly ones who can't be bothered to read an article or two. I have no sympathy.
Guild Wars 2 is the game they would have wanted to make back when the technology only allowed for Guild Wars. Now that they can make the game they had originally envisioned, without the financial and technological obstructions, the real deal is here. Bob the destroyer of all other MMO's seems rather pretentious.
Because GW1 was a hell of a lot better of a game, and oh right it actually had GvG in it?
"In the immediate future, we have this one, and then weve got another one that is actually going to be so were going to have, what we want to do, is in January, what were targeting to do, this may or may not happen, so you cant hold me to it. But what were targeting to do, is have a fun anniversary to the Ilum shenanigans that happened. An alien race might invade, and they might crash into Ilum and there might be some new activities that happen on the planet." ~Gabe Amatangelo
Massively Multiplayer Online Bob
From whence comes Bob?
Which fiefdom or clan does this Bob belong to?
I demand answers!
Roll the Dice