RU_Insane

It's funny 'cause I was thinking of the good old RS days and then I saw this thread :P Good times. <3

If someone actually went into the details of this update at that time, then this>everyone else. On topic: finally.

As if anyone subscribes to RS just to get a low level vanity item that's clearly targeted at new players. It's just a crudely implemented marketing ploy. Interesting how Jagex says only people who pay with prepaid cards will be able to rack up points for these items, considering that only a week or two ago, the prices for the two types of prepaid cards that were already out changed so that you pay a higher price for the one month card. I pay with prepaid card, I admit, but I'm not too excited over this. I'm just going to wait for cosmetic auras, but I won't continue to subscribe for them. I disagree with how Jagex handled this so far. Honestly, I wish they scrapped this entire idea (save for the auras). If they release the auras as some part of a quest or a mini-game where you'd have to earn points to get them, then sure, go ahead. But not this way. >.< It's favoritism on a new level. I understand why Jagex would cater to members more over free players, but now Jagex is actually trying to put its hands deeper into their subscriber's pockets. Pathetic.

Excellent first article. ^_^

Excellent first article. It had information I never knew about. Much more in depth into the history of RuneScape and its development than Jagex itself could ever hope to go into.

You say RuneScape's going to die soon, yet you simultaneously assert it has 'something about it' that makes it worth playing. Not to say your point is invalid. Certainly, it could happen. But I find that you've seemed to contradict yourself so quickly to be strange. You also assert that its forthcoming demise is an uncontested 'fact' and yet you don't provide any evidence substantiating this claim. And to be blunt, if these two articles are the best articles you've read in some time, I can only assume you either don't read much of anything, or you have very low literary standards, perhaps brought on by the circumstances of the former.

Ha! Yeah. :P

I completely agree with you and I (along with the rest of the EP, I hope) always welcome constructive criticism. Our editing and articles shouldn't be seen as infallible. That being said, keep in mind this was a guest article not written by a member of the EP. Guest articles are submitted "as-is" and only a certain amount of editing can occur. There is no interactive way to provide feedback to the author on short notice whereas EP members have a forum which allows for immediate feedback from the editor. I do agree that the author's argument was a bit weak, but crucifying a guest article, in my opinion, does nothing more than scare off potential contributors. And that is certainly something we do not want to encourage. Thanks for a well thought-out post ;-) You're welcome. :P

Really? It works fine for me. :P

Yes, but unfortunately it's easier to criticize than to try and do it yourself. Legitimate criticism is drawn from a knowledge of how to properly apply a process, and having gained this knowledge from having attempted the process yourself one too many times. This form of apologetics utilizes such a poor form of reasoning; it assumes the critic has no experience in writing when in fact the opposite is true. It also implies that each attempt at writing is as valid as the next. This is false. As Not_Trolling has correctly pointed out, the author makes unjustified claims and provides insufficient evidence to support them. The article was written by an amateur who seems to have no idea what he's talking about. Critique of a piece should not be seen as shameful and degrading, but as a way for the author to improve how he writes so he can properly form a ground on which to situate his equally valid opinion. I see no reason why the author in question shouldn't take his criticism seriously; he supported points using logical fallacies when forwarding his 'evidence' which betray any value the points themselves may carry. In summation, the oft-cited maxim is false in this case: It's easier to give a legitimate criticism when you have done the same yourself.

ABOUT [CABBAGE]ING TIME! :wall: anyway... nice update. look forward to trying it. Are they serious? I just downloaded that thing yesterday. -_-

The first time I got members which was a year ago, I logged into Varrock and told my friend I was member. He got himself and his level 133 friend to show me around Catherby and Seers village. Interesting how that seems to be the first destination for many people in members. I also remember that I logged into Varrock, expressed my amazement about the intensity of members, and a level 132 came up to me and told me to shut up. -_- Second time I got members, which was two weeks ago, everything felt familiar. I wish I could still feel the intense awe and wondered I felt when I first became member. It was like being a noob all over again. :P

This doesn't make a difference for me. I bought my card from Shoppers Drug Mart a couple of weeks ago, and there's no Targets in Canada. :P

From what I understand, you don't lose your points as your purchase the spells. However, once you purchase Vengeance Group, that's when they deduct the points. Nice. Sensible to do so considering the costs are absurdly high. @TrixStar: I would hope so, at least by half like what they did with Dungeoneering tokens. Actually, I'm willing to wager that the reduction if any will be pretty substantial. In the area of seventy percent maybe? So then Veng Group would only be worth about 270K points. Takes sometime to grind, but no so much that you're on the edge of killing yourself by no-lifing alone (assuming you're not driven insane and off yourself with a knife).

Do you have to spend all your points getting the other spells before you can obtain Disruption Shield? If yes, is it the same rule for getting Group Vengeance?

Excellent month. Can't see why anyone could complain.

Absolutely hilarious. It's quite amusing especially due to the author's incompetency coupled along with his high-pitched voice. "I lost my firkkin' claws." XD

What an excellent article. You clearly deserve a medal for your groundbreaking conclusions. You clearly spent an ample amount of time researching the issue and totally reached an original and thought-provoking conclusion.

Someone should lock this thread as it really has exhausted any little relevant discussion value it has started with >_>

Her account was recovered. The rest is correct.

Jagex would lock all accounts that engaged in trade with the infiltrated account, so I don't see why this would be a concern. "injecting items is not jagex style." Do you mean it's not within Jagex's reason to compensate the user with the stolen item as opposed to its subjective cash value?

No, unfortunately. >.> Why is that unfortunate? I've been hacked/phished before and would expect my items back as well. I think it's unfortunate that she got hacked and that Jagex could easily return them, but I also understand that Jagex has no legal obligation to, and so they didn't, for reasons that have been cited in this thread ad nauseum. Really, the sadness for me lies in the fact that the work went to waste so quickly. Yeah, I'd have to agree. It sucks, but rich (even the richest) players shouldn't have pity taken upon them just because they put a lot of work and time into their account. One could argue that this is true. Considering that the player in question is a professional mercher, she can probably get a few mill from a friend be back to hundred millionare status if not billionaire status in what, a month? The amount of cash she could make in comparison to what she lost in today's capital environment almost balances out. People on her level can make triple digit millions an hour provided they have the appropriate amount of capital to do so. I'm sure she'll have no trouble making it back, assuming she is still playing? She is semi-inactive, apparently. I remember now, actually, that her account is locked. Assuming that the legitimate owner can get the account unlocked, she can make it back with some difficulty, considering it's a great amount of wealth. It depends how long she'll think she'll make it back, and how much effort she's going to put into making it back. But yeah, she's inactive. May you explain why so? It would seem some people in this thread share the opposite conviction.

No, unfortunately. >.> Why is that unfortunate? I've been hacked/phished before and would expect my items back as well. I think it's unfortunate that she got hacked and that Jagex could easily return them, but I also understand that Jagex has no legal obligation to, and so they didn't, for reasons that have been cited in this thread ad nauseum. Really, the sadness for me lies in the fact that the work went to waste so quickly. Yeah, I'd have to agree. It sucks, but rich (even the richest) players shouldn't have pity taken upon them just because they put a lot of work and time into their account. One could argue that this is true. Considering that the player in question is a professional mercher, she can probably get a few mill from a friend be back to hundred millionare status if not billionaire status in what, a month? The amount of cash she could make in comparison to what she lost in today's capital environment almost balances out. People on her level can make triple digit millions an hour provided they have the appropriate amount of capital to do so.

No, unfortunately. >.> Why is that unfortunate? I've been hacked/phished before and would expect my items back as well. I think it's unfortunate that she got hacked and that Jagex could easily return them, but I also understand that Jagex has no legal obligation to, and so they didn't, for reasons that have been cited in this thread ad nauseum. Really, the sadness for me lies in the fact that the work went to waste so quickly. Sure. 170 billion GP stolen from the victim's bank, which was all of it. I don't think posting pictures is out of line. ^ All of that was stolen and redistributed amongst other accounts who were promptly banned.

No, unfortunately. >.>