Makoto_the_Phoenix

I meant the latter. I frequent the RSOF and it was pretty decent actually; letting them roam free on the forums without a legitimate place to [bleep] and moan is going to be a bad move. They already do spill over, though. Their forum moderators are extremely overworked and have to deal with a crappy forum system to boot. Rest assured when I tell you that I have felt such frustration with those forums and the moderation firsthand. The trolls spill over but it's not so bad when they have their own pied-à-terre to screw around with. With that gone now, I wonder how long it'll all last.

I meant the latter. I frequent the RSOF and it was pretty decent actually; letting them roam free on the forums without a legitimate place to [bleep] and moan is going to be a bad move.

Waffles are only good for breakfast, not for running a forum. Honestly, it doesn't make sense why they'd get rid of it just to have someone bring it back again "as a place to vent". The trolls there didn't bother many other parts of the RSOF, and letting them go now is pretty pointless. Ah well. :|

It's easily the dumbest thing I've seen from this company. Why do something that alienates item collectors around the world? It's just freakin' pathetic.

So...what's new about PKing? I dunno, this has kind of been around since 120s and up were doing this near MB, Rune Rocks and the Wilderness Agility course.

In response to I Don't Care: It seems that the author and I have the same level of dissatisfaction with the way bots have been handled. Personally, I've pretty much given up (handed over both being a Forum and Player Moderator), and this is in part due to the reaction (or visible lack thereof) that Jagex has taken against bots. Now I realize that there is no magic button that can be pressed when dealing with bots and this type of software. Of course not; that'd be foolish to assume. However, I suppose I believed the impossible when I heard that Jagex had this "new technology to deal with bots" in place. That was back when I had given them the benefit of a massive doubt. Looking back now, I'd have to say that it's tough to care if the company you're backing doesn't show any visible signs of doing so themselves. In the past, it was apparent that they cared, but now, it'd be tough to stand up for them and believe what they're doing is actually The Right Thing.

[hide] Did you even read the article? Why yes, as a matter of fact I did -- didn't you? Shall I read it for you? Once upon a time in a land far far away, there was this place where bad people went and they banged rocks, fletched chopsticks, read books and played video games. It was all such hard work. The end. :rolleyes: Satire does not become the situation at all. This is a major problem which the public has had at least an idea of in the past - where people who were either poor or enslaved had to do stuff like this. Truthfully I thought that China had "outlawed" the sale of virtual gold. If prisons are doing this, then it's a pandemic that can't be stopped by simply going to the Chinese government [again] and asking nicely. On the contrary, it's a hilarious situation. You've got murderers, rapists and goodness-knows what other types of known criminals who, instead of being punished through hard-labour, are now all huddled in front of computer screens playing video games -- and complaining about it ... :rolleyes: [/hide] Others have said more about the state of Chinese prisoners before, so I'll leave you to read/re-interpret that as you will. Consider that playing a video game may not seem like torture to either you or me. But being made to play it, day in and day out with no break, and the prospect of being punished should you come short of your digital goal, can seem like a form of torture. The problem is that there's such a huge disconnect between what we perceive as torture and what others are made to endure - playing a game you really don't want to play, not even for fun, does seem pretty harsh. Oh, and they're also doing this in addition to physical menial labor. That's what it said in the article. ;)

Did you even read the article? Why yes, as a matter of fact I did -- didn't you? Shall I read it for you? Once upon a time in a land far far away, there was this place where bad people went and they banged rocks, fletched chopsticks, read books and played video games. It was all such hard work. The end. :rolleyes: Satire does not become the situation at all. This is a major problem which the public has had at least an idea of in the past - where people who were either poor or enslaved had to do stuff like this. Truthfully I thought that China had "outlawed" the sale of virtual gold. If prisons are doing this, then it's a pandemic that can't be stopped by simply going to the Chinese government [again] and asking nicely.

Am I the only one that thinks it was shortsighted/unfair to only count P2P kills with the hat, only allow the hat to be upgraded on a P2P server (yet allow the upgraded hats to be shown -wtf), and speaking of shortsighted, create a fast, new way for players that'd dare link FB with RS to be phished?

Admittedly it doesn't feel like it's doing much. I understand that getting the community involved in this sort of deal will make it feel more real, but this alleged technology should be able to do its job without player help. It's more or less PR. Hell, while you're at it, why not write the entire freakin' game in J? It's an elegant language and only the truly masochistic would try to script something in that. </sarcasm> No, a platform rewrite wouldn't solve the problem. Technology isn't the problem; culture/style-of-play is. But that's a whole 'nother matter altogether.

Both articles this week were pretty good; the second one caught my eye more. I'll only speak in broad terms about the matter - Jagex seems to encourage botting indirectly by offering rewards (skillcapes) for tedious grinding. In reality it's reasonable to get all of the capes without grinding, but in practice, that which is tedious is often automated.

There's been loafers in CW since it came out in '04. They're nothing new, but they're pretty damn annoying. My stance on it: If you're playing a team effort game, then help your team out by participating. If you don't want to participate, help your team out by leaving. Laziness is an attribute of players riding on others to gain their goals, and some minigames have had activity bars implemented to curb this behavior. Honestly though, if anyone thinks it's just alright to do that, then I and the team I'm on would be far better served without their presence. Don't take what I say personally.

It's definitely a different thing to put something like a casino into a multiplayer (of varying ages) game like RS, but I think it might not be that bad of an idea. It would make an excellent money sink and they could keep the potential payouts small to prevent too much excess gp being pumped back into the economy. Perhaps they could make it like a solo mini-game; they could give out tokens instead of gp, and players could have the choice of trading in tokens for cash or prizes (think Skeeball but with better rewards). But then you're stuck with another minigame that has lower potential payouts for those actually interested, and it would become underutilized. The money sink idea only works well if everyone participates too. I can't see how a gambling house would actually benefit RS or help curb/legitimize the emergent gameplay that's already going on. Then again, I've made it clear that I can't really see a point in legitimizing the gambling aspect of emergent gameplay.

Then the focus of these minigames shifts from a bit of fun to all about the wealth, which is what happened to the Duel Arena in its true heyday. It's not a pleasant experience to try to play a game with those only concerned for their "wealth". (Since I can't multiquote on a mobile browser...) To the remark of the first generation Pokemon games having a casino: I would argue that there is a considerable difference between that - solo player by nature - and a game on the scale of RuneScape. The casino was more specific to the plot (only could get Porygon there), whereas something similar in 'Scape wouldn't be.

No sir, they are not. Trust trades are trust trades by their very natures. They still require some level of trust. Trusting a total stranger with your acquired wealth in one form or another leaves you wide open as a victim of a scam. This is probably why Jagex doesn't look fondly on this sort of emergent form of gambling. It's also why PMods can be punished rather harshly for partaking in it.

Jagex has handled this in a passive manner - they've filed it under "trust trades", and strongly discourage moderators of any sort to take part of any of it - even with the punishments as high as removal of moderator status. Only recently have they actually been doing something about it - trust trades by their very nature are scams. As for your three main points: 1) This form of gambling could be argued as emergent gameplay, and it'd be a successful argument. The intent of the dice was for a bit of fun; gambling happens to be a side-effect. I believe that the notion for the dice was more of a D&D style roleplay, but that's only a theory. 2) Despite Jagex making the claim that this game is not for kids, gambling (in a casino-like environment) is still reserved for those 21 and up, and often frowned upon if done online. I don't think that the heavy criticism and negative press would be worth the implementation time. Not to mention, I couldn't imagine it being a very popular spot. 3) There are many means of gambling. If we consider everything in the game to be a [pseudo-] random generator, then any and every game that you can stake in for quantities of cash is a form of gambling. There are merely forms which have been integrated into the game and forms that are emergent - the forms that are integrated are likely accepted by Jagex (but, if I recall correctly, still drew criticism for teenagers showing gambling-like addictions towards it). Emergent forms of gambling are frowned upon due to the inherent trust needed to complete the process. I don't think that allowing games like the "flower game" or "dice game" would be in the community's best interests.

The complexity of the statement, including any text effects (glowing text, shaking, a combination, etc), and the number of extra symbols typed in an unreasonable time frame are good tip-offs.

*facepalm* I think it was said a while ago that hosting these sorts of games is frowned upon, and can definitely be construed as scamming - despite how honest one's intentions are. The fact that you were muted sucks, and it really does; you simply didn't know better. I would hope that the PMod gets either a reprimand or demodded; you're not supposed to mute on request. ;) At any rate, there is no such thing as a legitimate Dice Game, no matter who's hosting it, or whether or not they're a P/FMod. I'd say not to let it bother you too much.

Then there are those that have paid since 2004 and only stopped recently to deal with more pressing bills, such as food, clothing, gas... and yes, I am one of those people.

Cool, thanks for sweeping the whole matter about ethics and miscommunication right under the rug. In my mind, it shows that you're okay with deceptive wording from the company and are willing to let one group of players be shunned. I'm done with this. You want to keep going about it, feel free. I'll just walk away now.

No, I didn't lose anything at all. Jagex lost a loyal customer and a lot of credit with me. They misled tens of thousands of players into believing they'd deliver something. This would be the last time I say this. I have been a paying member since 2004. I let my membership lapse in March. I have paid Jagex for their services in the past. Jagex's wording led me to believe that ALL players would be entitled to this cape. That is the last time I say it. Get it straight.

I have played this game for over 6 years. Most of those years, I was a member, sometimes in more than one account. Now, I am not a member, due to real life circumstances that prevent me from playing. Because I don't pay now, I don't deserve the capes? I have to echo this sentiment. My membership merely lapsed in late March. I don't have the time or money to pay for it now, yet I was a paying member since 2004. Not just that, but it really isn't about F2P or P2P entitlement. It's about what Jagex stated twice, and what they did. They said one thing and did another. If you're not playing, you don't need the cape. When you start playing again, you can get it. What's the problem? A matter of wording and promises - I was led to believe I didn't need to be active at this time to receive the cape. Although it seems that the entitlement bias is still strong. When I start playing, I fully expect to be able to get the cape on my main account and pure (who has been around almost as long as my main). it's not a matter of paying status, it's a matter of time and a matter of what Jagex was perceived to deliver. That and that alone is my argument. Stick to it if you want to debate it any further.

I have played this game for over 6 years. Most of those years, I was a member, sometimes in more than one account. Now, I am not a member, due to real life circumstances that prevent me from playing. Because I don't pay now, I don't deserve the capes? I have to echo this sentiment. My membership merely lapsed in late March. I don't have the time or money to pay for it now, yet I was a paying member since 2004. Not just that, but it really isn't about F2P or P2P entitlement. It's about what Jagex stated twice, and what they did. They said one thing and did another.

Business, that's 1 reason. thats probably the only reason to. In my personal opinion its sad that they gloat that they are the number 1 free game but refuse to give f2p players cosmetic items with no stats. They already provide F2p with an entire game of its own...Where's the incentive to give them more when they're being given...nothing in return? If people really want the cape, forget about that magazine you want to buy or the popcorn when you go to the cinema and purchase a 30-day membership... :thumbdown: I really don't want to get into it, anyway. Also, extremely glad they introduced the trimmed version of the Completionist cape...Putting things into perspective, for most. Sorry, I have to disagree with you here. Based solely on the wording of the update, there were implications that this wouldn't have any restriction on what the account's status was (free or member).

Capes being P2P aside, it appears from previous posts that even current P2P members will not be able to get it unless they were a member at the 5year/classic time point or however it works. You can have bunny ears/scythe (8-9 years ago) and you can't get the cape. Quite a load BS to be sure. Only makes the whole situation worse, IMO. Based on this I'm not confident I can trust anything they'd say anymore. Sorry, I just feel really let down by Jagex now. They did a crap job with other updates this year (three guesses as to which one, the first two don't count), so this is really a death blow to my motivation to playing the game now.