What do you think of this review on IGN?

[Matok]

...in your mind Runescape is worth 10 on 10 that it is how much the game is worth.

 

Was about to answer Aquashock with that.

 

No need to get defensive because some dude didnt like the game.

 

And i still think this article is a waste of time.

[highlanders]

I don't think anyone here would rate RS as a 10/10 on any scale. But giving a game with what, 5 million players, many of whom have been playing for years, a rating of 2.7 on "lasting appeal" is a pretty serious disconnect.

 

 

 

Tell me something I don't know. :wink:

 

 

I agree with all the author's ratings except lasting appeal, which deserves more points.

 

 

 

Runescape has faults but it does has a long lasting appeal, unlike many games. There is always something to do.

[Sy_Accursed]

intuitive combat systems have little to do with how its controlled

 

 

 

A non intuitive combat system means its a case of enter combat then it runs it course and nothing beyond lvls and wep stats has an effect.

 

 

 

This is not was rs has if you actually study it.

 

 

 

the use of pray, potions, food and specials alone give in intuitive elements

 

factor in that nearly every monster in game is weak/strong to different attack types (however subtle it may be)

 

 

 

And the way u can switch between these and multi combat and u have a pretty intuitive combat system.

 

 

 

I mean whether u attack with

 

aggressive, accurate, defensive, controlled, accurate or rapid attack styles has an effect on how the battle goes

 

whether you use range mage or melee on certain monsters has notable effect

 

even the use of air, earth, water, fire, stab, slash, crush has effects.

 

 

 

the rs combat system is non intuitive at a superficial level as it follows the point and click concept of the game, but scratch the surface and it has a highly intuitive combat system that can rival/equal that of a vast majority of mmorpgs out there.

 

 

 

I by no means would give rs a 10/10 for most anything, but 99% of what was criticised in that review just showed that person to not have looked closely at the game and based on comparing it to a cd rom based game.

 

 

 

You have to be more precise in these things.

 

 

 

I mean if you just compare them as they are mmorpgs it is like saying ever road car in exsistance has bad acceleration because f1 cars have much better because they are all cars.

 

 

 

To be truely critical you need to take in a second level of similarity or account for its exsistance.

 

eg compare 2 road cars. Or say f1 cars DO have much greater accelration, however road cars have excellent acceleration for a road car.

 

 

 

To put it back into context this would be:

 

Runescape has bad graphics compared to WoW = un fair comparison

 

 

 

Runescape has bad graphics comapred to WoW, however in terms of a web-based Java applet the graphics achieve a good level of detail without being too overburdening for the average home pc. = fair review

[icecube]

I think the author rated the game pretty fairly. Most of you got so little general mmorpg experience apart from Runescape that you have very little insight to compare. The combat system is non-intuitive. An intuitive combat system uses hotkeys, keyboard keys, aswell as the mouse, and when you play it feels natural to do so. With Runescape, this is completely lacking, all we have is the mouse.

 

Runescape isn't a bad game, but it is what it is. You cannot expect people to give it amazing scores in things it is not good at. It's not because your a fanboy and that in your mind Runescape is worth 10 on 10 that it is how much the game is worth in an objective matter.

 

How I miss using a keyboard and mouse to play a MMORPG. Hotkeys ftw.

[epeeflecher]

Looks like another Narby interview about WewnEscape.

[icecube]

Well it's not an interview. It's just made by a member of the site, not even someone working there. Hence, Reader Review.

 

 

 

If you look at the other ones, there are some people who despise the game while other people who love it.

 

He choose this one because it discussed the bot problem.

[jondea0]

Its alright review.

 

 

 

But it comes out with utter cabbage remarks.

 

 

 

 

 

"Programs called 'bots' or 'macros' allow low level computerized players to amass items that can be both sold in game by playing by the rules"

 

they aren't playing by the rules to begin with

 

 

 

"it doesn't offer graphics or playability on the level of World of Warcraft. "

 

As I've said before comparing rs to WoW is stupid. WoW is a cd room multinational coporation product, Rs is a web based java applet. Beyond the fact they are both mmorpg the different formats makes them virtually uncomparable in a sane mind

 

 

 

"hours into the experience won't put you on par with long-time gamers and their schemes"

 

this doesn't even seem to mean anything???? of course hours into an mmorpg your not on par with the long-time players. Anby mmorpg worth its salt is to complex for such things

 

 

 

"While the free version of the game allows a nice portion of the world, it should either allow more of it with greater restrictions on levelling (like level caps at 50 instead of 99) or less of the world with more features available in order to let the free players evaluate whether they'd like to purchase time in the P2P world. "

 

Pure stupidty. f2p offers a nice chunk of the game as a demo. Why should they be given more space etc but restricted to lvl 50? That just gives them access to basically everything 50% of members achieve before quitting. Conversly if he argues that they aren't shown enough why then give them a smaller world space???????

 

 

 

" Graphics

 

Primitive, at best. Jagex does offer an even lower quality graphics version in order to combat lag, but it should offer better graphics for those paying customers."

 

You go learn how to make the most complex java web based applet to date and see if you can make better graphics. But then again can you accept a more critical and subjective view point from someone who comapres a java applet to wow?

 

 

 

" Gameplay

 

The greatest problems seem to be bad choices in things as small as inventory limits on the player and as big as non-intuitive combat systems."

 

WTF! The combat system is hardly non-intuative. Sure the f2p one may offer little. But with slayer and they assorted monsters with their notable resistances and weakness to range, mage elements and certain melee styles its no less intuative than most mmorpgs. And the invetory is not a problem, across the world of mmorpg rs inventory size lands at about the average size.

 

 

 

" Lasting Appeal

 

I can't imagine there is a middle-ground between players who drop the game after a few hours of play and die-hard fans who both pay to play it and play all the time."

 

He's blind sighted then. Given rs has last appeal to near to 1million users.And his middle ground sorely exsists. 90% of players I know pay to play and get on for maybe an hour or so a day 4 times a week

 

 

 

wow o.0 i love you. lol you spoke my mind. most of the reviews on there are people who thinks it funny to the things as 0 just because they play a supirier game that goes by the name of "WoW"

 

 

 

although you do get the odd good on they really shoudl be modorated and the people talk utter cabbage really.

 

 

 

motto of the day for them people "sit on it dont talk out of it"

 

and in at a close second "do your homework"

 

lol

[TeeBeaun]

Here is the most fair review i can find, its a good one, and has very little bias. IGN Reader Review

[Chaos_Reborn]

It's a so so review, qualifies at least. We can't really expect someone who's played Runescape for a long time writing a review and calling it a more fair opinion. Most reviews I've seen are from players that've just bought the game and played for a few hours. First impression reviews almost.

 

 

 

If I wrote one myself I'd probably go for a score of 7 / 10.

[epeeflecher]

Well it's not an interview. It's just made by a member of the site, not even someone working there. Hence, Reader Review.

 

 

 

If you look at the other ones, there are some people who despise the game while other people who love it.

 

He choose this one because it discussed the bot problem.

 

 

 

Oh...Alright.

[Embraced]

While i see alot of what the author is saying to be true. I also dis-agree with alot.

 

For example, where it says that f2p should have level caps to 50. I think that would be a bad idea and would infact reduce the number of subscribers.

 

 

 

Also where it says:

 

'Player-killing (Pking) is not only allowed, it's part of the game in many parts and while some people gravitate to that aspect alone, it can be a turn-off for those types of players that would rather have the option of doing without it at all. '

 

 

 

If someone who hadn't played Runescape before read that, it would generate the wrong inpression of what it's like. It's written as if there is no choice about player-killing whereas we all know that if you really want to you could play the game without ever entering the wilderness.

 

 

 

As many of you have said, i also disagree with the 'Lasting appeal' and 'Gameplay' rating. In my opinion i don't think he has played the game enough to realise why the inventory size we have is good. (Any bigger and it would get a bit silly). Also if it had no 'Lasting appeal' Jagex would not have the millions of PAYING customers that they currently do. (and its rising!)

 

And what a surprise, Runescape being compared to World of Warcraft.

[berbatovsky]

I think the author rated the game pretty fairly. Most of you got so little general mmorpg experience apart from Runescape that you have very little insight to compare. The combat system is non-intuitive. An intuitive combat system uses hotkeys, keyboard keys, aswell as the mouse, and when you play it feels natural to do so. With Runescape, this is completely lacking, all we have is the mouse.

 

Runescape isn't a bad game, but it is what it is. You cannot expect people to give it amazing scores in things it is not good at. It's not because your a fanboy and that in your mind Runescape is worth 10 on 10 that it is how much the game is worth in an objective matter.

 

 

 

 

 

LOL YOU DISAGREE WITH ME FANBOOOOOOI.

 

 

 

Noone with a brain would mark any game ever 10/10, because we all know perfection is impossible. As for intuitive combat system, you seriously think having more buttons = intuitive? I suggest you look up what intuitive means.

 

 

 

Also as you said or alluded to at least games are subjective things, I know people who HATE Halo but love Gears of War, noone can say hey this feature is the best and your an idiot for not seeing it as such (which is basically what your doing).

 

 

 

Also don't make sweeping statements like: all of you have no perspective ......morons (which again is what your saying) its: 1) rude, 2) stupid, 3) almost certainly incorrect. I've played a few MMORPG's (as in 4) and I'd wager most people on these boards have played at least 2.

 

 

 

 

 

I will add my usual disclaimer here to make your first response redundant: I have no problem if you dislike the game, I could care less. I do have a problem with you saying stupid things.

[Pret]

Thats the biggest Bunch of [cabbage] I ever heard

 

 

 

+1 basically.

 

 

 

 

 

Ps: Runescapes PWNS WoW in gameplay.

[Skull]

I really think if the reviewer played for longer than a week they would find that Runescape's lasting appeal is easily double or triple what they gave it credit for. Also I'm pretty sure there is very little more Jagex can do graphic-wise with java. Imo graphics are highly over rated, in fact I like the grafics in low detail better than high. I really didn't agree with much in this article.

[Huta]

" Gameplay

 

The greatest problems seem to be bad choices in things as small as inventory limits on the player and as big as non-intuitive combat systems."

 

WTF! The combat system is hardly non-intuative. Sure the f2p one may offer little. But with slayer and they assorted monsters with their notable resistances and weakness to range, mage elements and certain melee styles its no less intuative than most mmorpgs. And the invetory is not a problem, across the world of mmorpg rs inventory size lands at about the average size.

 

 

 

 

Sorry, but he is right. So what if there are three melee attack styles and magic and ranged? They have little impact. People don't use anything but slashing melee attacks and magic or ranged for different situations. It's extremely rare that somebody brings a crushing weapon or whatever to a monster because it's rumored they're slightly weaker to them. The only weapon that ever gets used is the one with the best dps.

 

 

 

As for controlling combat, it's point and click.

 

 

 

Now before everybody starts flaming me here, I'm a pker that likes the combat system in RS. Just because it's simplistic doesn't mean it's bad - I like it, and probably everybody here does - but it still is simple. Even though it does get more complex on the pvp scale, it's nothing compared to other mmos when you have to toggle stuns, kiting, fear spells, dots, mana and other elements. Runescape probably places a 2 or 3 on a complexity scale of 1 to 10.

 

 

 

But hey, who cares? :D

[Sy_Accursed]

" Gameplay

 

The greatest problems seem to be bad choices in things as small as inventory limits on the player and as big as non-intuitive combat systems."

 

WTF! The combat system is hardly non-intuative. Sure the f2p one may offer little. But with slayer and they assorted monsters with their notable resistances and weakness to range, mage elements and certain melee styles its no less intuative than most mmorpgs. And the invetory is not a problem, across the world of mmorpg rs inventory size lands at about the average size.

 

 

 

 

Sorry, but he is right. So what if there are three melee attack styles and magic and ranged? They have little impact. People don't use anything but slashing melee attacks and magic or ranged for different situations. It's extremely rare that somebody brings a crushing weapon or whatever to a monster because it's rumored they're slightly weaker to them. The only weapon that ever gets used is the one with the best dps.

 

 

 

As for controlling combat, it's point and click.

 

 

 

Now before everybody starts flaming me here, I'm a pker that likes the combat system in RS. Just because it's simplistic doesn't mean it's bad - I like it, and probably everybody here does - but it still is simple. Even though it does get more complex on the pvp scale, it's nothing compared to other mmos when you have to toggle stuns, kiting, fear spells, dots, mana and other elements. Runescape probably places a 2 or 3 on a complexity scale of 1 to 10.

 

 

 

But hey, who cares? :D

 

 

 

He really isn't.

 

 

 

Consider the dk, kq, kbd, barrows, metal drags, jad, desert treasure bosses, the knight waves mini-game, rfd bosses, dagganoth mother to name but a few where attack style makes a HUGE difference.

 

 

 

It also applys to many giants and dragons etc in mid-levels.

 

 

 

Everyone knows good crush defence is needed agaisnt giants and that normal dragons are hard to hit with magic.

 

 

 

and your way underestimate its complexity. stuns and kiting trasnfer into special attacks. mana is applied as runes within rs.

 

 

 

People are naive these days they take it at face value.

 

 

 

Compared to pretty much every mmorpg out there runescape combat system at a superficial level is a simple point & click. But dig a little deeper and you'll see how it is actually pretty complex in the range of attack styles, combat aids, monster weaknesses and even how the combat level is produced. It is by no means the most complex, but equally it is by no means non-intuitive or as simple as you make out.

 

 

 

If it was that simple we could all throw on some armour and kill any monster we picked with little trouble (if levels sufficed) as it stands ESPECIALLY in high level monsters you may as well commit suicide unless you take the right kind of weapons and armour to maximise damage you inflict and minimise damage you take. If was all so simple there would be no guides at all on how to hunt these high end monsters as you wouldn't need certain setups.

 

 

 

Half the issue here is people are seeing intuitive to mean complexity of use or control. It is NOT this at all and nor is it all about the player. Intuitive relates to how much thought and intuition is required in order to get the best results out of the system. Given that it takes about a week - a month for most new boss monsters to get successful killing methods calculated for them I'd say that counts as a pretty intuitive combat system

[n64jive]

The author of the review is very biased.

 

 

 

Wanting runescape to be as "good" as WoW is just plain ludacracy...Runescape is a Java based browser applet...graphics are at the limit.

 

 

 

Pretty much all the author is doing is comparing the game to WoW...

 

 

 

Depending on your taste...either game could be better than the other. If you like to do other things on the web while playing...Runescape is better.

 

 

 

If you rather spend all your focus on the game...play WoW...not saying that runescape doesn't require much focus(with the 1 minute log-out rule...i suppose you will have to switch screens, make a mouse click, and switch back)....

 

 

 

I prefer runescape for it's point and click style...compared to the complexity of WoW...

 

 

 

Just because WoW is a more complex game, doesn't mean it is better(nor does it mean it is worse)...

 

 

 

Both game's have an appeal to different audiences. Both games are great. There are such things as bad games, which would be games that have no appeal to the vast majority of all audiences. However, someone may still like to play that game.

 

 

 

Halo as an example. No one can argue that Halo 3 is not a great game. However, you can argue that you don't like the game. Just because your opinion of the game is unfavorable, doesn't mean the game fails all together. A person's opinion only means something if that opinion is shared by a large portion of the audience, which is pretty much where the term "user feedback" comes into play.

 

 

 

If you argue that hotkey's among other things make's WoW a much better game, you could be right...to some degree. Many might rather have a feeling of using one hand solely for functions while using the other for movement, and somehow throwing in a hand for camera angles in there too. However, many who play runescape like being able to keep one hand on the mouse and the other on the arrow keys, and having every action controlled by certain clicks and movements of the mouse. People often forget that there still is complexity in runescape. Using only the mouse, in certain situations you have to switch between different menu's selecting different functions(turning prayer on, shooting a spell, eating food or drinking a potion, switching between armour, using special attacks, switching attack styles...ect)

 

 

 

I think the overall rating of a 5 is very undeserving. Runescape isn't a 10, but that's just because it still has many flaws.(bots, repetition, poor graphics, vast amount of players tend to be immature)...

 

 

 

However, it does have a massive player base, and has a very high last appeal...not to mention the gameplay is pretty good.

 

 

 

I'd rate somewhere between 7 and 8....with it's only drawbacks being what I mentioned above.

[hiddel]

there are people who enjoy rs and those who dont. this reveiwer obviously didnt. and i think the reasoning is that he doesnt like to earn things himself if they take time, as he has said that its hard to resist using bots lol

[TrampInDenial]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This was obviously a review written by someone who possibly hit lvl 60 in the game, not like one of the wow reviewers who have 3 lvl 70 characters.

 

 

 

If you would allow someone who plays the game and has a 10k+ ranked character, you would obviously get a better review.

 

 

 

I disagree with that, I'm level 49 and I really enjoy Runescape.

[xSxqPowerx]

I think the author of that had a bad experience with the game as a child.

 

 

 

That was one of the most opinionated and uninformed articles I've ever seen.

[monkeyboo2]

I wasn't completely agreeing with the whole review, just the bot thing. Yeah, those ratings are a little wacky!

 

 

 

Yeah i get the feeling it was rated by a person who is used to rating FPS games and doesn't rate things on how well it acheives its purpose/potential. He compares with other completely different games which isn't particularly fair.

 

 

 

Jagex achieves very good graphics from a java engine so whats with 4.1 graphics rating... The graphics pretty much can't be improved without other problems cropping up. 9/10 really...

 

 

 

Gameplay isn't as active as most games bnut it deserves atleast an 8 for the variety of gameplay it has.

 

 

 

Lasting appeal should be much higher as it often lasts players months/years.

 

 

 

Sound is fair, possibly a little overgenerous, as tunes do get quite tedious after a while but Jagex has got good tunes on there for a java game, which normally won't have any complex midi files.

 

 

 

Presentation is a little under what it should be. he says medieval has been done before, but before RS there was no medieval MMORPG, only offline RPG's. should be around 8.

[WingedFish]

How can lasting appeal be rated so low? Weekly updates soak up more time than... Some kind of super time absorbing sponge thing :shock:

[Huta]

" Gameplay

 

The greatest problems seem to be bad choices in things as small as inventory limits on the player and as big as non-intuitive combat systems."

 

WTF! The combat system is hardly non-intuative. Sure the f2p one may offer little. But with slayer and they assorted monsters with their notable resistances and weakness to range, mage elements and certain melee styles its no less intuative than most mmorpgs. And the invetory is not a problem, across the world of mmorpg rs inventory size lands at about the average size.

 

 

 

 

Sorry, but he is right. So what if there are three melee attack styles and magic and ranged? They have little impact. People don't use anything but slashing melee attacks and magic or ranged for different situations. It's extremely rare that somebody brings a crushing weapon or whatever to a monster because it's rumored they're slightly weaker to them. The only weapon that ever gets used is the one with the best dps.

 

 

 

As for controlling combat, it's point and click.

 

 

 

Now before everybody starts flaming me here, I'm a pker that likes the combat system in RS. Just because it's simplistic doesn't mean it's bad - I like it, and probably everybody here does - but it still is simple. Even though it does get more complex on the pvp scale, it's nothing compared to other mmos when you have to toggle stuns, kiting, fear spells, dots, mana and other elements. Runescape probably places a 2 or 3 on a complexity scale of 1 to 10.

 

 

 

But hey, who cares? :D

 

 

 

He really isn't.

 

 

 

Consider the dk, kq, kbd, barrows, metal drags, jad, desert treasure bosses, the knight waves mini-game, rfd bosses, dagganoth mother to name but a few where attack style makes a HUGE difference.

 

 

 

It also applys to many giants and dragons etc in mid-levels.

 

 

 

Everyone knows good crush defence is needed agaisnt giants and that normal dragons are hard to hit with magic.

 

 

 

and your way underestimate its complexity. stuns and kiting trasnfer into special attacks. mana is applied as runes within rs.

 

 

 

People are naive these days they take it at face value.

 

 

 

Compared to pretty much every mmorpg out there runescape combat system at a superficial level is a simple point & click. But dig a little deeper and you'll see how it is actually pretty complex in the range of attack styles, combat aids, monster weaknesses and even how the combat level is produced. It is by no means the most complex, but equally it is by no means non-intuitive or as simple as you make out.

 

 

 

If it was that simple we could all throw on some armour and kill any monster we picked with little trouble (if levels sufficed) as it stands ESPECIALLY in high level monsters you may as well commit suicide unless you take the right kind of weapons and armour to maximise damage you inflict and minimise damage you take. If was all so simple there would be no guides at all on how to hunt these high end monsters as you wouldn't need certain setups.

 

 

 

Half the issue here is people are seeing intuitive to mean complexity of use or control. It is NOT this at all and nor is it all about the player. Intuitive relates to how much thought and intuition is required in order to get the best results out of the system. Given that it takes about a week - a month for most new boss monsters to get successful killing methods calculated for them I'd say that counts as a pretty intuitive combat system

 

 

 

I'm sorry, but he is.

 

 

 

Yes, there are weaknesses programmed into RS monsters - but that doesn't make it complex.

 

 

 

When I say complex, I don't mean "look up a quest guide, find out the barrelchest boss is weak to crush attacks, and pack a dmace instead of a dds." I mean games where a half of a second is the determining factor between a wipe for your team and getting an awesome drop. Sure, I know there are times on occasion in RS that you have to make a few quick decisions, but saying that killing the KQ takes skill is a joke.

 

 

 

Yeah, everybody knows magic is horrible against the KBD. So don't bring it, and you do fine. Simple. Fighting the KQ? Your strategy is to eat before 50 hp, wear verac, and protect magic - or if you want to be different, a crystal bow and a whip work fine for more advanced players. And metal dragons? I don't see how that helps your "use their weaknesses" argument, when the two attacks they're strongest against are slash and magic, and those are the only two people ever use against them.

 

 

 

Now, with that part past me, let's move on.

 

 

 

Not in any way, form, shape, or whatever do special attacks even come close to equaling the skills needed when pvping in other mmos.

 

 

 

Special attack;

 

1; Click combat menu

 

2; Click special attack

 

3; Watch character hit twice with his dagger

 

 

 

Wow.

 

 

 

I'm not even going to explain how silly that is, because if you haven't played anything but RS, you wouldn't understand simply because you don't have anything to compare it to. Yes, of course, you have to use that special attack at the right time, but even then, that doesn't measure.

 

 

 

Mana > Runes.

 

 

 

Mana is limited, if you have money, runes are not. While that alone doesn't make a game complex, it factors in. Magic in RS, with sufficient funds, can be both limitless and unending. That's not possible in a mana based system. No, runes do not equal mana.

 

 

 

Don't call me naive (not even in inferance) when you're the one speaking out of lack of experience.

 

 

 

If you don't believe that RS is simplistic compared to the average mmo, drop me a pm, and I'll show you a couple ones you can play, absolutely free, and in one week my point will be proved.

 

 

 

RS is fun, yes, but complex? At least in combat, hardly.

 

 

 

Presentation is a little under what it should be. he says medieval has been done before, but before RS there was no medieval MMORPG, only offline RPG's. should be around 8.

 

 

 

Hmm...that doesn't sound right. I don't know for a fact, but I'm pretty sure that Everquest and Ultima Online both predate RS. I really, really doubt it was the first.