Name it anything but Guild Wars 2. One early EQ2 lead developer stated that naming the game Everquest 2 was a huge mistake. Start the new game with a built in Lore Bandaid.
I thought for years that what EQ2 did was cheesy.. The Paramount Trek fixitall. I kind of think they should have named it something else also. Naming it Guild Wars 2 brought over certain expectations that were never filled. This game is so different from the original that there is little comparison except for lore.
Even the maps are nowhere near the same, not only the boundaries but the features within them. Posted by: Mada. The lore was created to give ingame context to GvG. Do you think when Anet was developing gw1, they named it after lore that was not even mentioned during the story campaign?
When promoting gw1, did they use this piece of lore or the pvp format which was the focal point of the entire game? Anet is known for creating flavour lore to explain the existence of key features. Like waypoints for example. That said though, the initial marketing and design strategy for a game first introduced almost 10 years ago bears little relevance to what the IP has become and is today.
As these guilds grew, their influence began to overlap. As is ever the case with peace, it once again came to an end when the volcano erupted, spitting out the five stones and scattering them across Tyria. The magic they embodied seeped out into the lands around them.
Though the Bloodstones, as they are called, have never been reunited, the power that they possess was enough to re-ignite the desire for power in the hearts of men. The struggle for power commenced, and again war broke out. This time, though, the humans were not united. The guilds of the three most-influential kingdoms on the continent battled each other for supremacy. The kings of Ascalon, Kryta, and Orr were not powerful enough to stop the conflict, for the armies of the guilds were even more powerful than those of their own home nations.
Konig, I think that you might be interpreting that article incorrectly and conflating two separate events. No one race gained dominance over any other, and the world was once again at peace. This time period would be seen as a golden age for humanity, a time of peace and prosperity where guilds had time to grow and become powerful. Finally, I find it unlikely that the Guild Wars could have gone on for over nine hundred years.
This is merely an inductive argument based on my understanding of military history. If a series of conflicts had gone on for over nine hundred years then it would have been broken up by historians into multiple different wars rather than lump them together under one banner.
This would be corroberated by the fact that the third war was said to be the worst of all three. EDIT: Actually, I think that there is an even more persuasive piece of evidence that I forgot to include in my original post.
Kryta was only founded as a colony of Elona in the year AE and became an independent nation in Ascalon itself was a fairly young nation, having only been founded in the year BE after the high-plains settlements East of the Shiverpeaks united under King Doric. There was no other event in the history of continental Tyria which ceased peace for all three human nations — Ascalon had the charr and Kryta had the centaurs though the latter only became an issue post AE , but no other major conflicts occurred.
I interpret that to meaning as I indicated that each individual Guild War raged for decades. This fits, since the last one would have lasted less than 60 years, and if we have years in which all three occur, then each one lasting for more than 10 years but less than fits as well. Wars lasting for decades is not that uncommon, despite common belief. In medieval and older ages, battles could easily last months.
Wars that share the same name tend to be decades apart, like the World Wars or the three Punic Wars, not a year or less from each other. Also, the Third Guild War is said to be worse because Orrians joined in and death tolls were greatly higher in the same timespan, not because it was longer.
Konig, I think that there is still one major piece of evidence that makes it even more unlikely that Kryta and Ascalon could have been at war with each other in the year AE, though admittedly I forgot to include it in my original post and only edited it in after yours. To quote myself:. Before then, the coast was settled by Elona and therefore any guilds if the guild system was even in place back then would have been operating under the legal jurisdiction of Elona.
We get this from the sylvari PS and Sea of Sorrows novel and an interview. We learn that Mazdak, a son of King Doric, established Kryta in rebellion against Doric and that the nation was established during war times with Orr hence why some of the earliest ports were protected by naturally high cliffs, such as Port Stalwart. This has been known, more or less, since Prophecies as well — because King Doric is repeatedly stated to be the king of the three Tyrian kingdoms.
The issue was recognized and addressed by Angel McCoy. What I did find was this quote on pages saying:. With a bored noise, Macha yawned. In this same quest he is also said to be the founder of Kryta. All we really know is that he was a prince of Orr, so the son of an Orrian king somewhere down the line.
That being Orr, Ascalon, and Kryta — as he was not ever king of Elona. Posted by: Aaron Ansari. Aaron Ansari. The only instance I can find of Doric being described that way is Bloodline of Kryta , which clumsily compacts the entire royal lineage into three lines.
The technical challenges of changing this are too expensive at this stage. But the above five points really, just the third and fourth settle it as well. Email this Page. Linear Mode. Switch to Hybrid Mode. Switch to Threaded Mode. All times are GMT. User Name. Remember Me? Mark Forums Read. Thread Tools. Display Modes. Drascir and Surmia I was reading about Ascalon Lore and i discovered a small point of confusion. Find More Posts by Sophitia Leafblade.
Find More Threads by Sophitia Leafblade. Visit N19h7m4r3's homepage! Find More Posts by N19h7m4r3. Find More Threads by N19h7m4r3. Find More Posts by draxynnic.
Find More Threads by draxynnic. Quote: Originally Posted by draxynnic I always just thought that Drascir was just the capital of the province of Surmia, as well as the capital of Ascalon before the Charr drove the Ascalonians back to the Wall.
0コメント