Some of you may remember me from a guest article that I wrote for the TipIt Times. I am an adult player of Runescape and when I say adult I mean I am 34. I have played for about 4 years now but I am not a hardcore player so I am not a maxed stat, boss hunting, PvPer. :) I play casually: sometimes I skill, sometimes I quest and sometimes I just log on to cut wood for MTK.

When I wrote for the Times, I wrote about why I play RS and why I keep coming back to it. I've burnt out on plenty of other games but even if I take a break here I always seem to come back. I like to log in and see what's new even if I'm not going to play today and I usually try to read the Times here on Tip.It each week.

So, I have to wonder what is up with the Times this week? I hate to be harsh, especially since all of the feedback I got was so nice, but I just don't get it. We start out with this article which compares Jagex's development of Runescape to the British government and the American Revolution. Seriously? To compare the player base of RS to the founding fathers of the United States is both a huge insult to some very important historical men and a tremendous amount of ego on the part of the author. This also casts Jagex as the evil British tyrant and suggests the players need to revolt! I just have to shake my head. I know there will always be people who disagree with the way the game is run and the changes that are made. However, this just seems over the top. When I initially saw the title, I thought it might be a good article about ways to give constructive feedback to Jagex or to encourage players to be more responsible. I was extremely surprised by the actual content. Why are we trying to encourage bad behavior? Does anyone think this will actually cause positive change to the game?

The second article was certainly not controversial, but lost me somewhere along the way because I couldn't find a point. I felt like someone had learned a new word and really really really wanted to use it. Microcosm. Whoo hooo. At least half the audience won't know what it means because it is not contextually explained and the rest is going to wonder why it was necessary to break out a five dollar word for a fifty cent article. I think everyone knows there are layers of communities within RS. We interact with our circle of close friends, our clan, and whatnot. This is just like real life and forming these types of groups is part of the point of multi-player games. If the point of the article was simply to explain that there are microcosms in RS, then I guess the obvious was accomplished. If somewhere in that epic article was a point about a benefit or why the writer likes them then I still find it kind of pointless. It might make a wonderful basis for a college sociology paper, but I don't think it was really relevant to the people here who are already a part of these structures. Cataloging them seems unnecessary.

I suppose now that I have spent my time excessively criticizing other writers, I should expect to get some in return. That's fine. I certainly deserve it. I just hope that the quality of articles starts improving again. Things have been rather dull lately.

-A-