Crocefisso

I don't think that Trevor has any problem with a company making money. But, generally, if you're making games, like Jagex are, then the best and most long-term way to actually do so is to improve the gameplay and experience of the game itself, rather than cramming it full of superficial "items" - the more of these special "items" people acquire, the more they realise they are effecitvely meaningless - and coercing people into paying through silly schemes, rather than making them want to by doing something good with the game. That's why people are annoyed at this atrocity of an update. It's a solid update. It appeals to literally everyone. Except f2p I suppose. The rewards are pretty useful, you might think 3% ranged accuracy is pointless, but I know people in help & advice that would eat you alive for saying that. And these are only the tier 1 rewards. I can't say I agree with such an appraisal. Personally, I see it as nothing more than very lazy, crass marketing. Most sane game developers do not resort to these sorts of cheap tricks.

I don't think that Trevor has any problem with a company making money. But, generally, if you're making games, like Jagex are, then the best and most long-term way to actually do so is to improve the gameplay and experience of the game itself, rather than cramming it full of superficial "items" - the more of these special "items" people acquire, the more they realise they are effecitvely meaningless - and coercing people into paying through silly schemes, rather than making them want to by doing something good with the game. That's why people are annoyed at this atrocity of an update.

True, but Hitler brought Germany out of depression and also effectively gave the world the modern production line, yet I don't hear you going on about how you don't care that he waged war as he was a good national leader. And by "far richer," that's a pretty easy target when you're sitting on 41.5 billion barrels of oil. If he was as good as you say, you'd expect his country to be like the UAE. First, in response to Furah: a) war always drives industry, so any leader can get industry going if they just wage war, and b) comparing Hitler to Qaddafi is totally disproportionate. Qaddafi, though a tyrant, is responsible for what - 1,000 or so deaths -, compared to Hitler's 10 million. In response to sees: The key difference between Libya and the UAE is, of course, the fact that Libya is made up of Libyans, whereas the UAE has over a population which is over 90% transient. As such, it's very easy to generate wealth when rich businessmen are circulating in and out of a country continuously. Building a nation from the ground up - as per Libya - takes far more time and effort. The UAE is like a larger version of Monaco or Andorra. Similarly, oil does not equate to wealth unless its revenues are used in a certain way. Algeria and Nigeria have oil, but they do not benefit in the same way as Libya remotely. In this sense, Qaddafi did do a very good job at first, and I don't think many can reasonably deny this. But this great achievement has soured over time.

I don't doubt that he has, but on a very small scale compared to a great many other nations. I'll use Israel as a reference point: On the one hand, there are reports of Qaddafi using cluster bombs in this war. But where did he find them? They were sold to him by the Spanish government, using an Israeli design. This is just as verified as what Qaddafi is doing. Furthermore, let us not forget that Israel used so many cluster bombs in the 2006 Israel-Hizbullah war that many parts of southern Lebanon are uninhabitable to this day, owing to unexploded bombs.

Breaking news: the International Criminal Court has ordered an arrest warrant for Libyan despot Muammar Qaddafi. Good. Though the "massacres" of civilians of late are largely a bunch of lies (the 'civilians' he was allegedly killing just so happened to be holding guns and riding around in pick up trucks with machine guns on the back), Qaddafi has ruled over Libya for 41 years and really needs to go as it stands. The prosperity he gave Libya in the 1980s - living standards higher than those of the USA - has been eroded by UN sanctions (late 80s-early 2000s), nepotism and corruption, and he's really lost his touch as a leader. I don't really care about democracy. For the first 18 or so years of his rule, Qaddafi made the Libyan people far richer, and so in my books he was a good national leader. Alas, his leadership has since stagnated. But the ICC picks its fights in accordance with US and NATO policy, and its this kind of corrupt subservience that sickens me. Do the ICC decide to prosecute Mubarak? No, he was a US ally after all. Do the ICC bring charges against the Libyan rebels? No; the west likes them, so their systematic genocide on black Africans are not war crimes at all. But Qaddafi - who dared to use tear gas on protesters who burnt cars in Tripoli - is a pantomime villain, allegedly. Do the ICC prosecute Israel, a supremacist state that far exceeds its right to self defence with its attempts at ethnic cleansing and occasional murders of Palestinian civilians? Of course not; Israel is a 'victim', in the eyes of the ICC. Instead, only the leaders - who just so happen to be all African - that cross the west are put on the ICC list of targets. Qaddafi was a pariah for decades. Prior to this, in 1970, he forced western companies to renegotiate oil contracts to give a fairer price to the Libyan people, something that was responsible for the meteoric rise in Libyan living standards. You don't have to be a genius to see just why France and the UK are getting involved. Getting rid of Qaddafi means more profits from the multi-billion pound oil investments we have in Libya; after all, a democratic government is easier to pressure. To conclude: The International Criminal Court: Criminals prosecuted by criminals, with help from other criminals.

Great video. I agree with many, the music was a particularly nice change from other bot videos.

:lol: Top class comedy. "Thing is I told her to never talk to anyone in this game for any reason because I don't want perverts hitting on her! " - granted this happens on the internet, but on RS? Seriously? The place where you can change the gender of your player at the click of a button and personal information is only given out by the player if they want to. Sorry, but unless your daughter is totally lacking in basic common sense, I don't think you need to worry. Sounds to me more like a middle class paranoia than a concern grounded in logic. "But they seem to ignore the gambling and sexual crap that's going on in the game on a daily basis." - Once again, I think you're being hypersensitive. Sexual crap? Really? I wouldn't call some little kid typing "(.)" or whatever as 'sexual'. If you want to cancel your membership, go ahead, but I wouldn't be so overbearing as to cancel everyone in your family's memberships. The fact is, if your daughter was banned because a J-Mod believed her to be a Bot - because she is under orders from yourself to stay quiet because the Mod might be a pervert - then you shouldn't be surprised. It's like a smoker being surprised that they've got emphysema. Just chill and let your kid have a little bit of freedom. That includes letting her talk on RS; for all but a moronic few, talking on RS does not end in rape or any other such atrocity.

I've long thought that a brilliant money sink would be to give the Bank a loan lending ability, with interests rates and all, to bankrupt many of the less intelligent players around. That'd certainly see GPs flooding out to nowhere.

Why should we need to speak slower though? Not all of us are 12 year olds with crappy typing ability. I think it's to try and hinder spammers, rather than turn us all into 12 year olds.

The big problem Jagex has is that they don't know how to do capitalism without destroying their own product. Rather than actually improve the game - as a sensible developer would - they simply throw in more and more superficial "stuff" (completely ignoring the fact that the game's mechanics are terrible), whilst also removing content from the free game to try and lure players in to paying for this outdated piece of nonsense they called a 'game'. Personally, I'd rather RS crashed and burned because of their recent actions, rather than Jagex benefit from their crass capitalism that feeds only their wallets, with no consideration for the players.

My private chat is always on Friends. I find it's the best way to keep the riff-raff out.

Personally, I think that TIF is undermoderated and the RSOF is right on the mark in terms of how strict and policed it is. Perhaps this is partly due to Jagex wanting to uphold certain standards and because the RSOF has a huge number of forum moderators as well as Jagex staff. Either way, I think that flaming - though inevitable on the internet - is nevertheless something that should be discouraged and, in my mind, TIF needs to be a little more Draconian in its policing of threads and so on. Similarly, I recognise that many encourage the opposite and I can equally see why. As a result, all Mods have the challenge of striking a balance which is, on the whole, done quite well by the TIF staff.

It certainly might seem that way. In all honesty, I just cannot be bothered to respond - in full or in part - to most of the criticism (a quick browse of the criticism will make it obvious why). I've better things to do.

Loving the papercrafts. :thumbsup: If you're making another and you want a challenge, why not try doing a model of a TzHaar?

You may well disagree with the content, Amethyst, but I think we all know that my article - regardless of your opinion of the views expressed - is of better written quality than a 12 year old saying "O ye I is well anoyed wiv dis change" and so on. Simply because you disagree with my opinion does not mean that you should descend into vitriolic, petty attacks on the article itself. This forum is intended to be a place for debate, not unsubstantiated, unnecesary derision. The difference is significant; next time, you - and all others who feel it necessary to express their disagreement in the most virulent manner possible- would do well to remember this when posting future comments.

Congratulations on achieving level 99. :thumbsup: By the way, despite what you said, the video is actually quite entertaining - well done all round.

Absolutely agreed! This is perhaps one of the most irritating things about the game.

Too true.

What if Jagex spontaneously cancelled their membership - which was on a credit card and just renewed itself every month -, but charged them for another two months on the back of that until they made a complaint? That's why I'm F2P and, as a player of over five years, I feel I still deserve a Veteran and Classic Cape. I'm sorry, what? First off, why would Jagex do that? And what does that have to do with the discussion at hand? Care to elaborate? I really don't get what you want to say. Jagex did it accidentally due to some sort of error or something (that was the official statement). As for what it has to do with the discussion: read the posts again. If you still don't get it, read them again.

I see that quite a few people have taken offence from this, and it seems that they have misunderstood me. First, I must establish that I do not believe in making sweeping generalisations, and would not dream of writing any. I must also point out that I accept that people will like Summoning or Dungeoneering; however, I do not, and I don't believe I need to patronise readers by ensuring I write in a friendly, wishy-washy way at every point. It was an opinion piece, and nothing more. When it comes to the quote above, I must point out that it does not either explicitly state or imply that people who like Dungeoneering are demanding and shallow, but that Jagex had that sort of user in mind when they created it as they do with most things - the demanding, shallow ones are always the ones who cause the most trouble, and something like Dungeoneering, which attempts to jazz up the normal skill a little, is made for said people. That said, if you like it, it doesn't make you one of them. There's an important distinction. Many of my friends like Dungeoneering, and I don't pass judgement on them, and I do not pass judgement on anyone else for it. Looking back, I think it was quite poorly worded. :unsure:

The Archaeology skill is not my idea. It's something I stumbled across after years of discontent with Summoning and Dungeoneering. The name of the creator is in fact mentioned in the article.

What if Jagex spontaneously cancelled their membership - which was on a credit card and just renewed itself every month -, but charged them for another two months on the back of that until they made a complaint? That's why I'm F2P and, as a player of over five years, I feel I still deserve a Veteran and Classic Cape.

:thumbup: That's largely true.

True, but as bot software becomes increasingly complex, Jagex has to work harder and harder to try and keep up. This was always going to happen if Jagex relaxed the restrictions it imposed back in 07/08; the perpetual battle against bots cannot be won by simply trying to outdo their software. But, hey, we can just live with them I suppose. :???:

Agreed. That's really irritated me!!!! :x