obidiah

From my point of view (as a none pker) it feels odd that some pkers seem to complain that some of the new weapons ruin pvp because they kill to easily. - yet at the same time think it's wrong to use options at the their disposal which mean it's harder to die. I guess it could be different pkers saying these different things.

If you chatted in game to them in game then that means they might feel they know you (albeit only in game). A lot of people don't get the opportunity to chat with Jagex staff much. Thats more "personally" than knowing someone via abuse reports and forum posts anyway.

Funnily enough I think it would have been better for the country if I had done something like History. I did a chemistry degree (more expensive course of a university to run than history) and subsequently moved into an area not related to chemistry and have forgotten most of the chemistry I learnt. The personal growth I got from attending university was extremely valuable to me though so it was worth me going. (though this is going to vary from person to person and some people may find that going into straight into the workplace is more character building) Saying that I don't think the higher fees are the deterent to attending university in the UK that some people are making them out to be. You do not need to be paying them back unless you are earning enough that you should be easily to afford to anyway. People talk about students being forced into massive debt - but student loans are a very different sort of debt to bank loans, Overdrafts, credit card debts or consolodation loans (all of which can cause people real problems) People worried about student loans as a debt will likely deliberatly put themselves in a much much bigger soft debt in the future when they take out a mortgage.

And once again, expanding on what I said previously: I'm a pragmatist: I'm not sure that I'd have the guts to shove someone in front of a trolley to save a dozen construction workers, but if one person has to die to prevent torture, genocide, illegal wars, the deaths of millions and violations of people's personal rights, then so be it. We trade over a million lives each year for the convenience of travel by vehicle, why is it unreasonable to trade one for the absence of the above? I would also like to point out, that as of yet, not a single death has resulted from this transparency, nor does any seem likely. Seems like a knee-jerk reaction from people who really don't want to be held accountable. Yes it seems reasonable to me to trade one life to prevent torture, genocide, illegal wars, the deaths of millions and violations of people's personal rights. If you think the leaking of documents is going to get anywhere near achieving this, then you're hopelessly idealistic. Maybe I've misinterpreted you somehow, but still I think some people are overestimating the good that information leaks will do, at least as much as others are overestimating the harm it will do. Maybe the threat of information leaks will cause countries to improve their human rights records or maybe it will just cause them to improve their information security. Maybe certain information leakage will anger some individuals already on the edge enough to pluck up the courage to do that suicide bombing causing more loss of life. It's really all speculation either way. Maybe there's no death proven as a direct result of the leaks, but that doesn't mean there hasn't already been or is going to be some less direct deaths. Similarly I'm not sure you can actually point to a life directly saved by the leaks, there may be ultimately lives saved by leaks, but that's not going to be provable either. To be honest though, little of what I've seen in this latest batch of leaks seems all that wavemaking. Interesting for sure, but I can't tell if it'll ultimately have a positive or negative effect on the world.

Just because something is being kept a secret doesn't mean that it's being kept a secret for nefarious reasons because a government is being bad. I'm not going to dispute there's some of that mixed in, but plenty of confidential stuff is kept confidential because that's the sensible thing to do. For example if there is intelligence on weapons development in rogue states that is made public, then it could potentially alert those states to areas where there own security is not up to scratch and Western intelligence operatives could suddenly find themselves no longer with access to find out certain things. (or if unlucky caught) - meaning if certain threats arise we're not ready for the correct defense contingencies. Hopefully there's nothing of that level released, and things like the Iranian attempts to adapt North Korean rockets for use as long-range missiles were already known by the Iranians to be known. (I'd guess this particular example is a generally known thing) Most things released seem to not be that dangerous as such. Many of those documents so far seem to be diplomats reporting back on senior figures in the governments of other countries(including allies). They're trying to give their frank and honest assessments on people, both positives and negatives - because it's there job to give information on how these people are likely to operate in reaction to certain scenarios and potential actions by the US and others. But there's no way that they'd say some of these honest things in public, because the world press wouldn't portray them as making statements with the aim of being honest, but as creating tensions between countries. It is the sort of thing which could badly damage relations between countries, which is bad for international trade and maybe in some of the already more precarious cases even international peace. Fortunately I suspect that most the leaders of other governments will see the leaked information as diplomats being diplomats and won't take the offense that they would have had they been public statements, so little damage will be done - but that certainly doesn't mean they shouldn't have been secret in the first place.

I would agree if the game already had an even spread of content, but the fact that the game is severely weighted toward low level content at the moment (see: all quests, most bosses, most actual helpful skill rewards, all minigames), I think the argument could be made that low and mid levels could stand some breathing room to get through with the stuff they've already got while Jagex focuses on fleshing out the top 60% or so of the game, experience-to-99-wise. That's an argument for making a high weighting of high level content. and I agree high level updates are good. However I don't think that low and mid level updates need to be stopped altogether. Lots of people likes that rush of joining in with the shiney new exciting stuff. Personally I like having that feeling of exploration of doing something that hasn't even had guides bought out for it yet, rather than going down a path already to trodden by thousands of others. Some of the more community orientated people want to be discussing the latest update that everyone else is discussing, if they are only doing updates released a couple of years ago then all they have to contribute to the current discussions is "I can't do that yet" It's a fact of life that people like to do the latest new stuff. That's why so many people will spend lots on the latest films, computer games and music albums. - Even though you can find plenty of decent films, computer games and music albums at a far cheaper price - with the minor disadvantage that you're looking at things that have been out a year or two. Brand new updates are clearly what keep some people engaged with the game. People have a right to say what they want in terms of updates, but to many people act like petulant children whenever an update comes out which doesn't exactly match their own personal criteria. I've even seen updates with some people ranting about the requirements being too high while others are simultaneously ranting they're too low. Often they show that they're not mature and don't realise that tastes in updates that are different from their own are perfectly valid tastes to have.

i have never seen any manipulator, clan or otherwise, indefinitely hold the prices of a non-discontinued items artificially high. so no, based on what i've seen, it is not possible. well what you said was "not seen", and that still lets things be open to "posible". although yea its allmsot certen that merchers would let them go down sometime. To put it another way merchant clans don't target the core items that skillers buy, because there will be so many bought by skillers that additional purchases by a merchant clan aren't going to make a significant difference to price swings. Merch clans items tend to target items which are both in lowish/medium supply (not to low or most the clan won't get to buy any, not to high or they won't be able to buy out all the supply.) and low/medium demand. This is not charms which would be in very high demand from the skillers, and highish supply due to a temptingly high price for items which are obtainable by noobs and bots. Some individual merchants try to take advantage of the natural oscilations in high demand/high supply items. (with added advantage that even if they make a loss they will normally be able to liquidise their assets - unlike trying to buy a merch clan item, missing the sell window, and being stuck with a pile of unsellable junk) These people aren't the manipulators. Edit: I suppose if the vast majority of skillers decided the way to level summong was to buy Crimson and Blue and decided to ignore gold and green despite their cheaper price point then it could leave them open to be a merch clan item. I don't get the feeling it would work out that way though - I think it might be more like construction where various types of planks get used depending on the wealth of the skiller.

I just went to the chaos druids - can't see anything like that on them in the actual game. Unfortunate graphical glitch in a specific graphics setup? Doctored screen shot? I dunno - but secret racist message from Jagex is way way down on the list of possible explanations.

"Wait...the author tried to present it as everyones opinion? Where? Your quote was the only one that goes slightly into the direction of that." Well I can expand on what I was saying, I didn't want to pull apart the authors article to much, it wasn't THAT bad. But seeing as I'm being challenged: Maybe not throughout, but there were definite times where I felt he was misrepresenting the views of the community. I personally still think the quote I mentioned was a strong enough example of this to make the point alone (unless I'm confused as to what reflux is) But additionally "Conquest, which went out recently with all the popularity of a fart in a space-suit, was the new target" Seems a misrepresentitive statement too. As can be seen by other comments in this thread, quite a few people enjoy conquest, maybe not everyone, but considerably more than would enjoy being in a fart filled space-suit. (actually in retrospect - a lot of people would think it was cool enough to get to be in a space-suit they could overlook the fart - maybe the author was saying that the update was quite popular and I have misinterpreted him) I'm sure I could nitpick other parts of the article if I wanted, but I don't think it's needed. I don't particularly like certain things about the article and have described my reasons why - hopefully in a polite and constructive enough fashion not to offend the author. I don't think the article is a disaster. (though I think below par compared to other articles I've seen in the tip.it times.)

I do actually think the article is rather making assumptions about why Jagex are using minigames as quest requirements. I quite like minigames as quest requirements and diary requirements, they don't generally increase my chances of playing the minigame afterwards, but it's nice to get the excuse to play minigames again that I'd only played once on release and then not got round to it again. So it's entirely possible that Jagex are largely just trying to give us some nice variety in our questing gameplay rather than a particular campaign to create more players for particular minigames. (especially seeing as the two minigames we're largely talking about aren't particular popularity sufferers) I also think he needs to be a little bit careful about generalised statements about what the community thinks. For example "These force-fed elements of the game give an objective player reflux, as our intelligence is insulted with these poorly fabricated ploys to drive activity in underused areas of the game." Does this mean that I'm not an objective player because I didn't share his feelings of reflux at having to play one game of soul wars? Opinion pieces are fine, I like seeing different points of view, but the writer needs to make sure that they are presenting things as their opinion rather than everyones, or they will get a slew of people saying the article is bad.

I have to agree with what many others have said about the frist article. Playing a minigame once to do a quest does not feel like a hardship. It's not really any different than being asked to do many of the other challenges that are presented to you in quests. The reason some of the minigames don't get played is that quite a lot don't have rewards to match the time they take and a lot of them don't have that much variation to keep them interesting after a few plays. But one playthrough of a minigame for a completion of a quest is a sufficient reward rate for most questers so that's the first problem solved, and one playthrough is not enough for things to get monotonous, so thats the second problem covered. Second article, I can see where it's coming from a lot more, on the other hand I'm generally not embarressed to ask them their original username, I've not had anyone take offense to it yet. Surely if they're changing their names that much they can expect people to be losing track of who they are? and likely have been asked the same thing by other people already. I don't know why some people would change their name quite so much, it seems a good way to get deleted by those users with friendslist space issues.

I think it has always been the case that there are those people with higher levels who will be disparaging of lower levels. (not all high levels do this by any stretch - but enough to be noticable) Some of it is intentionally malicious, but more of it is just people not taking due consideration as to who they might be offending. I think the difference these days is that the game has been running so long that the levels these people consider to be low level is rising. Generally it takes quite a while for people to become active members of the tip.it community, so for a long while people being disparaging of low levels weren't really talking about people in this community. It takes two to make an argument, so such comments didn't often go anywhere on tip.it and we didn't get the noob vs nolifer arguments here(to clarifiy a common response to being called a noob seems to be to call the perpertrator a nolifer - I'm personally not saying high levels are no-lifers) but I think it's now got to the point where the perceived low level is now high enough it does include many active tip.iters - enough of them that they will bite back at perceived slights to their style of play. Which leads to more debates on the issue - and the internet being the internet - a high number of debates turn to flame wars.

I think it depends what these worlds are meant to be for? I've never been entirely sure. I know that some people get irritated by low levels asking simple questions. Conversations like Noob: Help how do I get to Ardougne? High levelled person: Arrgh I hate stupid noobs asking stupid noob questions. are good for no one (especially the new player) - So is the aim to seperate low level players from those who really can't stand them? By level 1500 people should know the game well enough not to cause irritation simply by being low levelled. - Sure there are still irritating people at that level, but by that point I can't see why it's level based and they'd still be irritating even at max skill total. Maybe there is another reason for these worlds.

Am quite enjoying it. I've cleared the opening area and am onto the 2nd section. Apparently this game used to be an app that you paid £4.99 for. Jagex bought it from the original makers and released it for free with ads. So yes I guess the ads are expected from Jagex, because they're not completely insane. What sort of company would spend a whole load of money on something and then not try to recoup there investment in any way?

Limited bankspace is very much part of the game. Construction rewards like the costime room and quest rewards like the keyring would be a lot less interesting with infinite bank space. Technical limitations aside. It's clearly a feature of the game. To be an effective Runescape player you need to be able to figure out what items to keep and not to keep. - and you can work towards various rewards which aid you in that by giving you more space.

The unwarranted calling people of nerds (when nerd is used as an insult) is something to be discouraged, whether pertaining to Runefest attendees or otherwise. It is often used purely to try and offend people for perfectly harmless lifestyle choices. While I doubt the times article made that much impact on this issue, it seems ironic that there seems to be people taking offense at being asked not to offend people. I will admit that basic uses of the word nerd, I'm not offended by. If a nerd is someone who has hobbies which require a little more intelligence/and or imagination than the average hobby (as is the case with most "nerd" hobbies) then I am a nerd and proud of it. After all many of the people who have done the most to advance human civilisation could be defined as nerds on this level. but often people are including other factors when labelling people as nerds. They are saying that this person has no social skills, that they have no idea how to make friends or fit into normal society, that they have a virtually nil chance of a chance of attracting a member of the opposite sex. While there may very well be a higher than average percentage of these socially inept types doing "nerd hobbies" - there is a tendancy for some people to lump everyone who engages in these hobbies into the same group. It should come as no surprise then when some people will turn round and say no you're wrong, many of us do have social skills, more normal hobbies, friends, girlfriends, wives, families. - my personality is not defined solely by this one hobby. Some might argue that people shouldn't worry about what other people think and say about you, and while that's true to an extent (especially on the internet) it's not something which people can turn on and off.

The idea was good, the Quiz dude was good .. but the Goblin Killer ... kind'a stiff. Though the goblin Killer played by the same person as the Quiz dude, so good that he managed to pull off two very different characters.

I loled irl after looking at how the armor is actually going to look. :thumbdown: The actual designers of the in game clothing are CLEARLY different than the concept artists. They're so bad in fact, that they can't even imitate what the concept art looks like when there's a picture right there. :lol: Armor looks horrible rofl0l. That's a bit harsh I think . It seems to match the concept art fairly well to me. The main difference I can see is it doesn't have the same lighting on it, but light refletcing in a dynamic 3D environment, is totally different to drawing light reflecting of something in a static 2D picture. It depends on their being an apporpriate light source placed in the game world and a game engine which can figure out what to do with that light - rather than anything to do with the modelling of the set of armour. Besides that there's one or two little details missing from the ingame armour, but minor enough that I only found them after studying both pictures for a while.

It was actually a largish game back in the day. Before Runescape existed, it was one of the more popular free to play games. (though the internet had less users in general back then) I never played it myself, but had friends who did. They'll be a good number of ex-planaterion users out there if Jagex does manage to do something interesting with it. It screwed itself over by going from entirely F2P to entirely P2P and decimating their userbase (Jagex handled things in this period much better by keeping the F2P game and making a members version in addition) Subsequent F2P gameplay wasn't enough to get it's lost users back. - but then it looks like it's had minimal developer support for years.

I could be wrong but I was under the impression that merch clans and hoarders mostly dealt in multiples of items - which clearly don't entirely follow a first in first out. - so a change probably wouldn't effect them much. I'm slightly unclear as to why sniping is a problem, - ge updates at a random time, which means you're in the right place at the right time or that you check the ge an awful lot. Purely random doesn't seem significantly better or worse. I don't think such a change would effect things all that much, most wouldn't notice, except for people who continually get unlucky on the random selection suddenly wouldn't be able to sell items which they previously could given time. (there's plenty of items on the exchange which don't sell immediately, but sell eventually.)

Have some users never been to the forums on the Runescape site? It's quite clear that there's always been a stricter level of forum modding on tip.it than over there. There's plenty of threads which get left over there which would be locked over here. That's why quite a lot of people post of here, the stricter levels of modding mean there's less spam and posts from idiots, so some real discussion can happen easier. It's quite clear to me the level of strictness of modding is the choice of tip.it (rather than because Jagex has told them to act this way) and if people don't like it they've chosen the wrong forums. I also think some of the comments against Tip.it on this thread are showing a level of immaturity. Do you really live your life with the philosophy of never ever do anything that someone would quite like you to, for fear of being a "brownnoser"? - Even if it's not any hastle to be co-operative. That attitude can be summed up as "I'm selfish because I think it's cool to be." - and is certainly not how I live my life.

It could be argued that people multitasking to stop themselves getting bored is a strength of Runescape! A lot of games people don't multitask simply because they can't. People don't get necessarily get bored of other games any less than Runescape. But if you get bored of other games your only option is to stop. At which point you forget where you were up to and find it hard to re-engage when you might be in the mood again. Runescape you can just keep on trucking with some of the less interactive gameplay and then when a new quest or something comes out, I'm ready to dive back in.

Mostly DIY - certainly on herbs, fish, logs etc- a lot of DIY methods do give you some XP in the production skills - and even though they might not be the most efficient ways of levelling the prodcution skills - it somehow makes the levelling less boring knowing you are also building up the resources. Often tend to GE to buy things for quests though. - doesn't seem worth going through the whole process of making a bronze bar, just for one bronze bar.

11.9K an hour here. Inefficient and proud! A fair amount of sitting around chatting. Some of that may be from the early days when leveling was harder.

I normally pick up coins drops - possibly force of habit from Classic - feels wrong to leave them on the ground though. I also tend to bury my big bone drops (which was the best way to level prayer in classic) - but I often see them being left these days.