siredwrdross

@ Crocefisso & Hamtaro Nice work you guys! I am always a little saddened when I head out to fish or mine. Whereas I once used to wear as little of value as possible, to guard against the possibiilty of death by river trolls/golems/tree spirits, now I can wear whatever I want (and afk as much as I want). This is useful for leveling, but detrimental to fun (or, as you appropriately noted, the level of engagement and variety). In the short run, most of us are only thinking about levels. But, as all of us have at some point or other experienced, just getting a high skill level or getting a new piece of gear is not, in and of itself, satisfying. Keep up the good work, - Sired

@Crocefisso MLP only seems bad if one expects much from it. That's why the logic of your article doesn't make too much sense. If JaGex is trying to "force" f2pers into p2p, then they would have to be dangling a VERY large worm on a hook with the MLP. But, as it is, these rewards are just small bonuses for playing the members game consistently. As you yourself said, you don't expect people to fall for it. If that's the case, then there's no reason to be upset with JaGex. Nor is this a poorly disguised rehash of old content. Certainly emotes and costumes are (and I strongly doubt that anyone is particular excited about those: I doubt that any poor f2per will be "forced" into member's just to make their character ROFL), but with Auras, JaGex has introduced an entirely new sort of equippable item. Again, it's not insanely powerful (for good reason), but it is entirely novel. Furthermore, this concept has considerable room for expansion. On the whole, I think this is a well-balanced, sensible update, and I hope it pays off for JaGex. In my mind, the more the company prospers, the better off the players will be in the long run. Thanks for taking the time to write for the Times. Though I don't agree with your article, I'm always appreciative of those who take the time and thought to put a few words down. Cheers!

The second article was simply laughable. By what standard do you define a "skill"? Obviously, people have debated the classification and whether Dungeoneering should be included since the day if its release. But, if any skill in RuneScape deserves to be equally suspect, it's construction. Certainly, construction includes items that can be crafted to gain xp, with each new level unlocking new capabilities. That's a bare bones defintion of a skill on which, I think, few would disagree. But construction (apart from quests and *irony* dungeoneering) it has absolutely no purpose in the game except: fun! Construction is something that people can do for fun. I like construction. I like it for all the reasons you said that it was a good skill. But there are more, equally valid reasons for saying that Dungeoneering is an excellent skill. The complaint about the many levels that are needed to excell in dungeoneering could just as easily be marshaled in favor of the skill. I like it precisely because it gives me a use for many of my skills that I would otherwise negelct. (I've had 99 fletching for years and I had probalby gotten about 10k xp in it up until Dungeoneering came out. Even skills that I haven't maxed are still used in dungeoneering FAR more than in any other context.) Second: Summoning is pointless?! Are you kidding? RuneScape as we know it would no longer be possible without Summoning. That skill has revolutionized the game. And it's fun to train since the xp is crazy fast once you get the charms and it makes killing things more interesting (now even monsters that don't drop anything good can always give you a charm).

One of the most important (if not the most important) issues in any economic analysis must be the incentives created by a give scenario. Your article ignores incentives, focusing only on the effect of extra cash in the pockets of the RWTers. In the RuneScape community, this situation will create an incentive against Real-World Trading on the demand side. In other words, it's going to make the product less appealing, since accounts that use RWT services are still subject to this kind of reprisal - it's just now been made more clear than before to all potential customers. All that being said, I still enjoyed reading your article, and found it informative with respect to the supply side of the issue. Thanks for spending your time to give to the Tip.it community.

I got a handbook, its called the Bible