Pat_61

Ding ding ding! We have a winner! We have an old game that, for the most part, still plays like it did twelve years ago, in a fairly niche genre where even big-budget titles aren't doing too well. I mean, look at what's changed since then: MMORPGs no longer have a monopoly on massively multiplayer play. Outside if a few franchises and titles, you'd be hard-pressed to find a recent release that doesn't have online multiplayer. Cheap or free MMOs are literally everywhere, and their gameplay isn't much different than the big, expensive ones. Gamers that grew up on MMOs just don't have time for them anymore, and new players have so many other options that it isn't funny. Plus, Jagex hasn't really done anything to make their game appeal to anyone but aging veterans since Miniclip. Even then, it's still a moderately popular MMO: it's not doing anything special, sure, but I don't see it going anywhere unless they really screw up. Miniclip... man you are making me feel old... Haha

I don't know if you saw my edit, but I added this to the OT part. Also, no reason to have a demeaning tone. Its just citing information. This discussion was never on Jagex as a company, but Runescape as a game. They need to be seperated. New servers for website and storage and what not, but the game has... less servers to play on... can you explain that one? The orchestral music probably was not as expensive as you think simply because it was a scaled down orchestra and it was in the UK vs the US. On the venture capitalist point - as we said, Jagex is making money so of course they will invest, but the player base seems to be declining. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. Its contradictory - hypocritical. 2. I don't know what you are saying here. Thats irrelevent. The point of that point was by doing things the demote what the idea of F2P is, you alienate the group of players that eventually become P2P. 3. Items that you can get one time ever. Thats pretty much the runescape definition of a holiday event. There is no reason to make it harder for one group to get it than the other. It would be different if there were different rewards for P2P, but the event itself (collecting grinding to boredom the tears) is dumb. 4. It ruins the bases of the game that they tried to stop. Unfair advantage. Just because its common doesn't mean you have to do it. The idea of microtransactions in a game is to make money for the company and the keep the players playing. If you spend money on something, you are less likely to put it down. It's marketing to keep people playing, which could be because a declining population. (That would be speculation of course) Again, we are missing the point of the post...

Off-Topic: dem·o /ˈdemō/ Noun A demonstration of the capabilities of something ex·pan·sion /ikˈspanSHən/ Noun The action of becoming larger or more extensive. That is why P2P is an expansion in my opinion. Typically in software/games "demos" have full functionality with one or two things major turned off, like a save feature for programs or something like that. Expansions are limited features and you buy the next level to get more features and increase what you can do with the product. As a musican, I got a Demo of Finale Music Notation software, but got a "lite" version called Finale Print Music instead because it was $150 cheaper (there is also a free version that is limited that they don't call a demo because you really don't know what the main product is off that). The definition fits better, but as I've said, thats not the point of this thread. On Topic: They are making money because of SoF and Solomon. They aren't really making it because of the players all moving to P2P or the increase of F2P players watching the ad. New Skills is more use of the store. New Armor is the same. New music I will take as part of your reasoning, that being said, I think its because people would have questioned why the music hadn't been updated since, I assume, the start of RS2. It would have been odd for them not to revamp it. Another reason to assume the decline in players - minigames. If there really wasn't a decline in players, they wouldn't be dead (unless everyone has switched over to the mantra of "Its just an RPG with lots of random named NPCs, so I'm alone." rather than "its an MMORPG with lots of people from all over the world that I can skill with, have some fun with.")

I think you missed the point. Growing profits doesn't mean an increase in players. If you can't hold your F2P long enough to make them want to be P2P, then you slowly shift to the WOW idea where people just have to buy the game and see if they like it. The concept of F2P as a "Demo" has never worked. Notice I said CONCEPT. You can say its a demo or not, but mentally the player needs to feel a need to pay. Marketing is a great too, but lots of people resent being pushed into a box to pay. If they sat back and let them walk to the store on their own and buy it, there would be more. A better marketing plan would be a free month/two weeks of members for players, but not when they start - they won't enjoy it - but whenever they want to cash out. But back to the original subject. The size of Runscape - the number of players excluding bots - seems to be dropping, and that is the orignal post.

I want to preface this with "this is going to sound like a P2P/F2P rant, but its not. I am merely using the two as part of my reasoning. Jagex is a company. Companies like money. I know this." After taking a year and a half - at a minimum - off, I returned to check out Runescape 3 and Evolution of Combat. I realize that while I was gone Jagex did a lot to remove the bots from the game, and as a Woodcutting Skiller, I noticed this and I am not talking about this. But it seems like, in general, the population of the game is dwindling down. Maybe its just in F2P, but it seems to be sliding. And if this is true, would that be Jagex's reasoning for shoving P2P down the F2P throats again? When I started back c. 2005 (somewhere near the start of RS2 but I don't really have a time frame for the game), Jagex used to do the same kinda thing, every little thing you did told you to subscribe. Then they removed all of this c. 2007 which made Runescape two games really, F2P and P2P, with P2P as basically an expansion pack of F2P. Now it seems we have reverted back to the F2P demo of Runescape concept that was annoying in the past. It seems to me that Jagex does notice this decline in the player base and is trying to get more customers on the P2P side. Just from on observational stand point: They fought of the bots for real world trading, when later they instil a method that is still, in its basic form, real world trading. They have essentially made F2P a demo by allowing 5 levels and then constantly saying "Level Cap." They have this Battle of Lumbridge event that is obviously aimed at P2P. I mean the same event. Same rewards, but you do the 1300/3000 thing AS WELL AS changing the Duke junk to all P2P? Why not do the battle is all the same, the Duke part of the event is the P2P bonus? Now if the items were able to be gotten forever, that would be fine. This is essentially a holiday event, and I feel it should be treated as such. Squeal of Fortune (I don't think I have much more to say on that) It seems like Jagex is fishing for money, which I find uncharacteristic of them. Part of the reason I enjoyed Runescape was because I felt as though Jagex cared for the product and not the money (the real reason you should ever do anything by the way). But in all honesty the lack of people (that I have seen) makes the game unappealing. Skilling is a whole lot less boring if there are a bunch of people there to chat. This may hve some discontinuity since its late, but oh well. I was just curious on the thoughts of the people that have been playing without a large gap. So do you think the population is going down? Why do you think its going down? How can you tell? Is it going to die or will it be revived soon? Also, please remember to keep it in perspective of Runescape as a whole. Lots of the communities are probably still thriving. (Waiting for the first person to say I'm crazy hahaha) -Pat EDIT: Tacking this on at the end for you to read again before you post - "this is going to sound like a P2P/F2P rant, but its not. I am merely using the two as part of my reasoning. Jagex is a company. Companies like money. I know this."

What question have you asked that didn't get answered? Its not taking criticism because the comments were made to both attempts you are just too mad at the criticism to realize it because nothing changed between 1 and 2... The only ones in the 2nd attempts that are less sharp and contrasted are the non-"HDR" ones...

[/TryingToHelpYouImprove] ...

=P Of course Nadril would steal my thunder haha... Tripsis... 3rd one is awesome.... Sy, I don't see why are still arguing a case... isn't the point of posting it is to get opinions and suggestions? The reason we are commenting is because the new ones are still the same thing with the outside one. The others don't look HDR'd (probably doesn't help you used filters). The outside actually looks worse than the first set with contrasting issues. You should never have contrasting issues with HDR because you have the Darks and the lights and you can modify the levels (correct me if I am wrong someone who has more HDR experience).

Sure. :) [hide] [/hide] It doesn't look like you did much to the image IMO.... it still looks good, but all I can tell you did was some smudging and maybe a background that shows in small places? Try layering more stuff on top, opening more of the background to add different effects. Try to make your art work more yours. Just a little note for the future.

No... the good HDRs don't look oversharpened. Good ones have more of a Surreal/3D vibe to me. Notice the clouds in these compared to yours. http://moleeth.deviantart.com/art/Tractor-HDR-96812115?q=boost%3Apopular%20HDR&qo=14 http://browse.deviantart.com/?qh=&section=&global=1&q=HDR#/d2764gf http://bonavista-tim.deviantart.com/art/HDR-Seas-and-Skies-3-165871857?q=boost%3Apopular%20HDR&qo=22 They don't seem as over contrasted as yours do. Yours have quite a lot of empty space caused by the excess white. Then some of the lower clouds have a bloom radiating kind of effect. Not to mention I hate lens flares... lol I am just pointing out the stuff I don't like/think could be better.

Those HDR look ugly being blunt.. with moving objects use 1 RAW file, yes some quality is lost, but its better than the ghosting. Its better to have 3 images though, and most cameras can be set up to take rapid pictures with the 3 pictures you need, which also leaves the ghosting effect out. This "HDR" just looks like over-sharpened image to me. Just sayin'

I wish I had the patience lol...

May I see the stock/render? and without text is better...

I liked the 3rd one best haha and I have no clue why... xD Let me sit on it...

For your app's graphics to be ideal, it would be ideal to see the surrounds of it. Style matching is important to a game. If you can't provide anything I can just go with the flow and make something up..