did you bother reading the GW books? what did you think?

[maddieisironic.1932]

I started reading ghosts of ascalon, but I didn't really like it and couldn't bring myself to finish no matter how much I tried. have you read the books? what are your opinions on it?

[paintpixie.7398]

I have, and I liked them a lot. I liked Sea of Sorrows least, but a lot of people liked it best. So if you don't like Ghosts of Ascalon, maybe try reading that one. My main problem with it was the time jumps, but it had a good underlying story, I thought.

[maddieisironic.1932]

@"paintpixie.7398" ghosts of ascalon seemed like a really good piece of writing, I could just never get into it. im thinking about possibly triune got pick it up again soon though. and yea, ive seen a lot of people say there are annoying time jumps :/

[Danikat.8537]

I've only read Ghosts of Ascalon and Edge of Destiny but I liked them. Ghosts of Ascalon is especially interesting to me because I first read it before GW2 was released, so I imagined a lot of things looking very different - for example in my head Divinity's Reach looked a lot like Lion's Arch in GW1. And weirdly when I re-read it now I still imagine everything looking much the same, and then it conflicts with my memory of what those locations actually look like in GW2.

 

The story is not the best I've ever read but I still found it enjoyable. I found Edge of Destiny more interesting, but maybe because I read it after playing GW2 for a bit so I knew the characters and it was more of an insight into their story. I keep meaning to read Sea of Sorrows but haven't gotten around to it yet.

[paintpixie.7398]

Ghosts of Ascalon I loved because it told a lot of the history of Guild Wars. I didn't play the original Guild Wars until a few years ago (and I never got far because I didn't like it very much, actually...). So it was interesting to me for lore purposes. It had some exciting moments, too, and some good characters that drew me in.

 

Edge of Destiny was my favorite because I like how all of the members of Destiny's Edge played off of each other. I thought it was interesting. And it really sets up the first storyline of GW2 well, I think.

 

Sea of Sorrows I really have mixed feelings about because the underlying story is good, like I said. But there are some "eyeroll" moments in it too. It does have some good characters, which again, pull me into the world of the game better, and I liked that.

 

If you are thinking about reading it again, I say go for it. But if it's not your thing, it's not your thing. I think they also have summaries of the books on the wiki you can read if you just want to know what they are about and what happens in them, but you don't want to read through them.

[Batel.9206]

I read all three books after I started playing GW2. I didn't really *need* to, but I love the lore in this game, so I read them in chronological order - *Sea of Sorrows*, then *Edge of Destiny*, then *Ghosts of Ascalon*.

 

*Sea of Sorrows* was my favorite. The writing style was solid - descriptive, emotive, and beautiful - and I loved the characters. And the end of the book felt like an *Avengers*-style thrill ride. I didn't mind the time jumps, because even though very important events happen in those time skips, it would've been nigh-impossible to try and cram EVERYTHING into the book. *Ghosts of Ascalon* was...eh. It was solid, and the plot was good, but it wasn't anything groundbreaking. Still, I did enjoy it, and it's a fun read with good, strong characters*.

And then there was *Edge of Destiny*, and by the time I got to Caithe attempting to contact the Pale Tree (from halfway across Tyria) by *singing*, I felt like I was reading someone's bad fanfiction. That book is the kind of book that exists to be mocked, laughed at, and re-read purely for the dumbfounded mind-boggling that will ensue. It's terrible. It murders the lore and dances on its corpse (which is bizarre, because *Ghosts of Ascalon*, published close to a year EARLIER, got so much of the lore right**). No one acts even remotely like their in-game characterizations (Logan and Rytlock are the worst...I actually found myself hating Logan by the end of the book). The plot is dull. The writing style is childish, choppy, and does a fantastic job of never describing anything *except* a few jarringly gory moments. The finale is utterly nonsensical and rather laughable in its sheer stupidity. But it's entertaining, in a let's-tear-this-apart-and-mock-it-to-the-ends-of-eternity sort of way.

 

*In-game, I was running around Lion's Arch and ran into one of the characters from the book. I literally squealed aloud and fangirled a little. :D

**How asura gates work, many things about the sylvari race, the Brand and what it looks like/what it's like inside, etc. etc. Little things, but those little things mean a lot in terms of world-building.

[Donari.5237]

All three are useful as lore dumps. None of them are anything I would recommend on their own merits, though Sea of Sorrows comes close.

 

Ghosts and Edge suffer from clearly being required to showcase one of each race and do a mini-tour of the setting. Ghosts is more focused, though, it's a treasure hunt expedition. Edge ... meh. The characterization is terrible, the narrative stilted. Rytlock and Logan don't act or talk like trained soldiers, they act and talk like puerile adolescent well-off western civilization boys. Human ones. Sea at least has a compelling narrative that can grab you even if you don't know the game, has more depth of character and a somewhat grittier feel.

 

I admit that having read F&SF since the 1970's, I am more picky about what I find good. Sturgeon's Law and all that, and I've seen some of the best stuff out there so weak writing gets fewer passes from me. I certainly have seen a few readers rave about the novels, so the style does appeal to some. Even so, my personal subjective opinion is that the value in these books lies in what they add to the understanding of the world of Tyria and what's going on in various parts of the game story, and in that, their value is great indeed and they are well worth your time for that purpose. Just don't expect literature for the ages.

[Randulf.7614]

I enjoyed Ghosts and Edge. Ghosts is the best in all areas, but Edge at least hasDragons and champs and does a fine job setting up the game.

 

Sea of Sorrows to me is dull. The main character is bland and boring, although it does have decent supporting cast. The problem is, it is just a glorified zombie novel and it is just too bloated for that. I did enjoy linking it to the LA Marriner achievement and finding the monuments based on situations in the book. That was an excellent idea whichever dev put thst in.

[Danikat.8537]

> @"Donari.5237" said:

> I admit that having read F&SF since the 1970's, I am more picky about what I find good. Sturgeon's Law and all that, and I've seen some of the best stuff out there so weak writing gets fewer passes from me. I certainly have seen a few readers rave about the novels, so the style does appeal to some. Even so, my personal subjective opinion is that the value in these books lies in what they add to the understanding of the world of Tyria and what's going on in various parts of the game story, and in that, their value is great indeed and they are well worth your time for that purpose. Just don't expect literature for the ages.

 

I think there's quite a few factors in play here for different people. In my mind books of video games are typically one step above video games of movies and movies of video games - both of which have a history of being pretty terrible. There's been precisely one I really enjoyed (The Last Guardian by Jeff Grubb which is the story of Medivh and Gul'dan and the start of the Warcraft series). So when I read the Guild Wars books I wasn't expecting much and as a result I was pleasantly surprised. Whereas if I'd been comparing them to my favourite fantasy stories they'd definitely come across as disappointing.

 

Style would be another factor, and what you were looking to get from the books, I suspect people looking to learn about the lore would be happier than people looking for a really great story.

[Ashantara.8731]

I don't like content being published outside its original medium (with many book-to-movie exceptions, of course), especially in the case of GW2, which is why I refuse to read GW2 novels. I hate how there are no explanatory references but quite a few gaps in story-telling in-game, just hints here and there. It is just as bad as the fact that we have no tutorials to the most important mechanics in this game, so you are forced to do all the research outside of the game. To me it feels like the devs saying, "We need to save resources, so why not have a third party write everything down so _we_ don't have to do it in our product?" :/

[Ashen.2907]

I found the books to be nice bubblegum fantasy.

[Donari.5237]

> @"Danikat.8537" said:

> > @"Donari.5237" said:

> > I admit that having read F&SF since the 1970's, I am more picky about what I find good. Sturgeon's Law and all that, and I've seen some of the best stuff out there so weak writing gets fewer passes from me. I certainly have seen a few readers rave about the novels, so the style does appeal to some. Even so, my personal subjective opinion is that the value in these books lies in what they add to the understanding of the world of Tyria and what's going on in various parts of the game story, and in that, their value is great indeed and they are well worth your time for that purpose. Just don't expect literature for the ages.

>

> I think there's quite a few factors in play here for different people. In my mind books of video games are typically one step above video games of movies and movies of video games - both of which have a history of being pretty terrible. There's been precisely one I really enjoyed (The Last Guardian by Jeff Grubb which is the story of Medivh and Gul'dan and the start of the Warcraft series). So when I read the Guild Wars books I wasn't expecting much and as a result I was pleasantly surprised. Whereas if I'd been comparing them to my favourite fantasy stories they'd definitely come across as disappointing.

>

> Style would be another factor, and what you were looking to get from the books, I suspect people looking to learn about the lore would be happier than people looking for a really great story.

 

*grins* Exactly what I said. The books are good for lore, bad for story. It is possible I found Sea to be so much better *because* I read it well after playing the game a long time, whereas the first two came out before launch and I read them to get to know more of the world so as to set up more plausible RP characters. But I think it actually is better. I'm not going to re-read any of the three to test this subjective reaction, however, I have many many new books to read and more being published every month, I almost never reread any book these days and certainly not ones that didn't impress me the first time.

 

Again, I'm not advocating that anyone *not* read them. They have valuable information, and it's presented better than would come from a wall of dry lore text.

[Ardid.7203]

Ghosts of Ascalon, very good light fantasy novel, full whitin the GW2 lore but also very "down to earth", super fun and with good characters which reflect the diversity from the game. The story itself is not well polished, but it is easy to read, and have that "heist+war" tone that is always good to see.

Destiny's Edge, choking full on action, sparkles and bromance, with constant changes of scenery, giant monsters and dragons and one super epic betrayal that is probably the most memorable thing in all the book. Super close to the game itself, it is like a literary Michael Bay take on GW2. It is fun to read, but you need to shut down your brain to enjoy it.

Sea of Sorrows, the most full of lore, but also the most distant from the current events on GW2. It follows the foundation of Lion's Arch as a multi-race, pirate driven undercity, through the life of it's actual founder, Cobiah Marriner, his adventures, battles, political struggle and familiar development. It has some huge jumps on time in the middle, were years pass and things change a lot (I like to think on it like a movie trilogy, each one following Cobiah on a very different point on his life). I think it is the best of the three by far, and I put it next to the timeless classics in my fantasy literature shelf. I think it is even better than some overinflated ones, indeed.

[ReaverKane.7598]

I'm a bibliophile... I read everything i can get my hands on...

Didn't read Sea of Sorrows yet, the other two were mildly entertaining. Not masteripieces, but i've read worse!

[Game of Bones.8975]

I bought the first book to show support, but didn't even crack it open.

[Nath Forge Tempete.1645]

Ghost of ascalon and edge of destiny were awesome (even if i pref the second one) .... never bought sea of sorrows tho

 

[Trise.2865]

They were a lot more interesting before the game came out, but not bad on their own. Edge of Destiny fills out the backstory of the Main Campaign iconics, and plays out like a Greek tragedy (spoiler warning). Ghosts of Ascalon tells as a lovely little post-apocalyptic "zombie" story. Sea of Sorrows is a pirate adventure, similar to Pirates of the Carribean.

 

All in all, not exactly high literature, but worth reading if you care at all about the material.

[Wizler.8192]

I breezed through Ghosts of Ascalon and by the end I didn't feel that much of interest had happened. I felt the story and characters were "thin". Maybe I should read it again with no expectations and see if I like it better.

 

I liked Edge of Destiny more, perhaps only because it elaborates on events and characters leading into GW2. But I didn't find it to be great writing and was overall disappointed. I expected to like it more because of iconic characters like Zojja, Rytlock and Logan.

 

I'm still working through Sea of Sorrows and I like it a lot. The story is much more "dense". I feel that the writing is much better than the others and it's a good book in its own right (not just fan fiction). I actually didn't expect to like this one and read it last because the premise seemed far removed from the real action (and thus not very interesting to me).

[Dreadshow.9320]

I thought the games were)are immersive enough so no.