Kewl_Sabre

I never really liked making multiple characters. Skilling was never my think. : P After all, I re-experienced that noobish feeling when I finally made the switch from RSC to RS2 a few months back. :) I can see the idea though. When I think of all the time I waste moving around from place to place to do different things, it makes me wish I had a few characters.

It's a good article about what happened. I notice it avoids the messy debate about the protests of 27 and 81. It doesn't use strong terms when talking about Jagex's decision to ban third party clients, which is how I feel about it. I think it was a dumb and annoying thing to do but I didn't riot in the streets because of it. As the editor said, maybe this will encourage Jagex to talk to players AHEAD of time BEFORE they make a decision. It shouldn't take shouts of "save ss!" throughout Runescape before they come to the right conclusion.

I personally don't PK just to make fast cash. I pk because I enjoy a challenge in a fight, so I don't like killing rcers. But I also don't see anything wrong with it. They go into the wilderness knowing what will happen to them and they accept it. There's nothing dishonourable about killing people who are rcing in the wilderness by choice.

Problem: Your character isn't a great pker anymore. Answer: Get better stats. Prayer and Defence are just like Str and Attack. As you have clearly realized their importance (because you're getting owned by them), maybe you should train them up... If Pure's no longer work in the wildy, don't make them.

There are oh so many candidates, but when it comes to the one with the single worst impact on the game... Pest Control. The change from the RSC to the RS2 Pking system was awful. But even worse is the fact that it only takes people about 6 months to get to level 100 now. It's changed the game, and there's no going back.

I don't think this will bring in that big a wave of people. I don't think that the MTV crowd will have a passion for RS... especially not with a slogan like "Level up your life". :?

The guy in the article sounds a little overdramatic to me. :? As one who's played almost all 6 years of public RS, the scamming and cheating really aren't that much of a problem. There have been many, many worse times in RS history when it comes to scamming and hacking. Runescape hasn't seen a huge amount of online player growth, or so it seems. But things aren't heading downhill yet. If they sell it will be in the next 4-5 years. Possibly a bit sooner.

That's what my fourth grade teacher always used to say. She could be grandmother age now - any chance that your grandmother teaches? : P I've also heard the spoon full of sugar way. Now there's a way I can agree with. \

Wow, I can't believe they changed it. I guess that the mass protests on 27 and 81, as well as the massive amount of anger on every RS forum (especially the official one) probably had something to do with it. Kudos to Strider, who I think negotiated the changes that had to be made to SS to make it legal again. Who knew that massive, roudy rioting in the streets of RuneScape actually worked. :? I'm not sure if that bodes good or bad for the future of the game. Interesting implications anyway...

I don't really care if they ban world switcher clients. I think it's idiotic and Jagex has, yet again, done something incredibly stupid. But I don't really care all that much. However, I'm FURIOUS at the fact that I got muted for the next 48 hours. All I did was WATCH the protests on 27 and 81, and all I can think of is that some Pmod got trigger-happy and reported me along with a load of spammers. Jagex has some serous issues, the least of all being blunderingly incompetent Player Moderators. :x

If I'm up early or late before the mad rush of people hits, I might go on. But considering what happens when my family is all together (lots of late night drinking/talking 8-) ) probably not. : P

I agree completely. I still enjoy playing RSC... I'm one of the very few who still can. I think that Jagex has done a fairly good job of balancing the pking system on RS2. That being said, had they not made it absolute crap it wouldn't need to be balanced in the first place. If there ever is an RS3, the PKing system should be the first thing they revamp. In fact, why wait. I can't think of a much better Christmas present.

Karamaja. Or "Musa Point" ( :-k ) as Jagex suddenly tried to call it. Maybe I've just never heard it before... More info on the front page and KB.

Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to all. Bring on 2007. \

For fun, friends and most of the time because I'm bored.

It makes me miss the good old days of RSC. I was an adventurer and a pker in the beginning... I guess I was lucky to see what it was like. I started in February 2001 because my brother was a Sabre. When I came quit and came back in 2004, I decided to stay with RSC when RS2 was made. Now that game and all that's left of Runescape's golden age is dying, slowly but surely. No thanks to Jagex, the people who locked the game to all new players... :wall: Ah well. I guess we'll just have to muddle through the game and hope the community changes. Anyway, good article. : /

I always go to the emptiest f2p world. But if it's close I tend to pick a Swedish one...

Who doesn't like Pink Floyd, really?! Ummmm... i dont :anxious: PS: plz dont ban me for saying that :ohnoes: That just means you aren't "The Editor". The way the guessing's been going, he could just be trying to throw us off. As for all the quoting of Kiara Kat, throw it all out as evidence. Looks like all her posts have just been red herrings...

Nice article. I can respond in only one way... Go Queen. \ Pink Floyd? :-k Loser.

hurricane katrina.........told ya so on the jay leno show they had a temperature gauge that when it got to 120 a pic of al gore pops up and says "i told you so" :D Well I was thinking more along the lines of "The Day After Tomorrow"-ish. :lol: If it ever does happen, I hope that Bilbo Baggins is still the scientist who tries to save us all (Ian Holm is a scientist in the movie : P) And while large tidal waves are possible as massive glaciers fall into the ocean, pretty much all the science in that movie is about as fake as professional wrestling.

I think that there's a distinction to be made from the recent conservative swing in the United States vs. the overal movement of humans to becoming more liberal. Thousands of years ago governments were Kings and Dictators - society was conservative because the word of one man was often considered the word of a god. So in terms of progression of human rights, I think that's a tendency we will see continue for some time. As for media/entertainment, and what is considered socially acceptable - I think it most likely comes in waves. I think over the past few years things have been going more and more to the left, and more and more things are becoming acceptable. I think, and I hope, that at some point this will stop and go the other way for a while. This is just the natural order of things. When it comes to recent conservative movements in the United States, I don't think this will last too long. Progress politically has proven to mostly shift to more and more towards freedoms and equality, and generally less conservative ideas. Now this isn't to say that we will ever see extreme liberalism in the course of human history - there have always been radicals, and they have always been beaten away with sticks (or not done very well in elections). I see the more permissive soceity, that liberal swing which most concerns conservatives, as reversing in the near future. Sex, drugs and violence will hopefully recede slowly from our media and entertainment industries. Everything is in balance - movements come and recede. The only progressive things that will be constant are advances in human rights and freedoms, within reason. And history has proven that this progression is usually for the better.

Hopefully the person saying that won't be white-water rafting through Trafalgar Square...

Allow me to strongly disagree. First up; His chemical weapons use on his own people. He brutally killed innocent civilians by using Mustard gas and Sarin, Tabun and VX (extremely potent nirve gases). He did this to strike fear into the hearts of his enemies and to brutally stamp out any opposition. For info on what exactly it does to people; http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/rls/18714.htm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nerve_agent Besides this, he held an entire nation as hostage for over three decades. He ruled his country with an iron fist. He used his paramilitary police force to ensure he stayed in power. His party was the minority, so he had most of Iraq to handle. His police force could strike at any time and would often use torture. On innocent civilians. He stamped out civil rights, scared people into submission and rule as a classical oppressive dictator. Saddam Hussein was a cold, heartless man. He held the country together; but I doubt that the ends justify his evil means. Saddam Hussein was first to be accused for terrorism, links to Al-Qaeda, weapons of mass destruction... None of those were realized. They started digging and digging, his death penalty was for something that happened in the 1980's: The alleged killing of 143 shias in the town of Dujail, to understand why, you should take in account the town was just one of the many which plotted the eventual overthrow of Saddam (who preferred the Sunni minority). What is that number, compared to the Tianamen square massacre by the chinese communist party that killed thousands of students protesting for democratic changes in the country? Who got hanged as being responsible for that, who gave a crap in the western countries other than newspapers? Who listens to the fact that the current leader of Turkmenistan actively carries out a policy of terrorizing the population and at least 20-30 people are shot every month trying to escape the country? I have to radically disagree with the western demonization of Saddam Hussein. He is nothing compared to real dictators, he was able to provide Iraq with extensive social benefits, medical care, jobs, as long as nobody would question his power. As a person, I think he might've been insane or corrupted, for example he was mad at his son briefly, he ordered his bodyguards to pour petrol on his collection of sport cars which he had bought him and set them on fire. If you want to blame somebody for massacres and human rights violations and invade their countries, look out for the leaders of Syria, North Korea, Turkmenistan, current Egypt, Uganda (which has been known to even test new weaponry on civil population) and Myanmar (executes people daily for treason). I'm not "siding" with Saddam, I'm saying his "human right violations" have nothing to do with the US being a good guy and handing him over to the Iraqis for judgement. The trial was set up by the United States government. The judges were appointed by coalition forces, several of Saddam's lawyers have mysteriously disappeared or been murdered. In some of the trial transcripts, when Saddam says something, the audio is cut off for several minutes, he has been denied testification in the middle of his sentence, the judge has been changed several times... That's not a fair trial, no matter what the man has done. It's the exact opposite of today's legal standards of Habeas Corpus, which is by definition "legal instrument or writ by means of which detainees can seek release from unlawful imprisonment." In this case, he had no chance to do so because his trial was just theatre; Even if he could prove he hadn't prompted the killings, he'd still been sentenced. The announcement of the execution also nicely comes on the 5th of November, briefly before the US elections. I'm afraid, good sir, that you have gravely misinterpretted the point I was making. I simply wanted to make the point that Saddam Hussein was an evil man. This is true, and to deny it would be ludicris. I think you took this to mean that I supported the war in Iraq or thought that the system was perfect. None of that would be true. The reasons for war would be a different debate, and it would belong on another thread. However, I just want to make it clear that I agree with every single one of your points. There have been many, many questions raised over this trial. Accusations of human rights violations, corruption and convenient political timing should definetely be looked into. I'm glad that some kind of judgement was dealt out, but I would heavily question where it's coming from. And one more thing... I hope you're not suggesting that because he's a dictator, he should be allowed to do whatever he wants? He was definetely not the worst dictator in history, but he was an evil man nontheless. As for the debate about hanging - well, we let them make their own laws. Do we have a right to enforce our own definitions of cruel and unusual punishment on another country's constitution? It's an interesting moral question.

Well, I'm glad Jagex is finally fixing the censor. I've never had that problem with either of my screenames. Although my three-letter name constantly gets called a hacker because you can't make three-letter-names anymore...

Allow me to strongly disagree. First up; His chemical weapons use on his own people. He brutally killed innocent civilians by using Mustard gas and Sarin, Tabun and VX (extremely potent nirve gases). He did this to strike fear into the hearts of his enemies and to brutally stamp out any opposition. For info on what exactly it does to people; http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/rls/18714.htm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nerve_agent Besides this, he held an entire nation as hostage for over three decades. He ruled his country with an iron fist. He used his paramilitary police force to ensure he stayed in power. His party was the minority, so he had most of Iraq to handle. His police force could strike at any time and would often use torture. On innocent civilians. He stamped out civil rights, scared people into submission and rule as a classical oppressive dictator. Saddam Hussein was a cold, heartless man. He held the country together; but I doubt that the ends justify his evil means.