PvP Worlds: Should it be Members Only

[Locutus_Of_Borg]

I've got to type this quick so it won't be as aesthetic or provoking as I want to it be at the moment. I'll update it as soon as it gets rolling.

 

 

 

When I first read the update about PvP Worlds a while back, I was, like most people, excited at the prospect of a new, enormous PvP update. School had started up and I decided not to resubscribe my membership and let it run out.

 

 

 

Even though I'm no longer a member, I have hoped that the PvP worlds would be P2P. It's a great incentive for people to subscribe. Although, I do know that if it were implemented as such, there would be many rants as to how F2P who used to have access to the old Wilderness PKing would be left out, pure accounts made on F2P not being able to be used, etc.

 

 

 

 

 

This thread is to discuss the Positive and Negative impacts of having PvP Worlds being only P2P and/or F2P.

[Soccerdudety]

Well, it would eliminate

 

 

 

omg safr

 

No...

 

Yes u hav 12 hp left

 

/facepalm.

 

 

 

Members are more mature, and usually don't talk until the very end.

 

 

 

It would cut down on some RWT's, making them only possible for P2P. (Too bad the way you get loot is on fancyness of the kill, can't blindside people anymore :( )

 

 

 

And why would F2P get something they don't deserve? They have BH, let the big boys have new PVP worlds.

[Bauke]

 

Members are more mature, and usually don't talk until the very end.

 

 

Nonsense, members blow just as hard.

 

 

 

Anyways. F2P was also able to PK in the wilderness. It's just fair to give the opportunity back to them aswell.

[Zierro]

It's a good thing have F2P PVP because it adds more variety to the game. Think of how different F2P PKing was than P2P, and people found them both fun.

[BioIce]

Members will probably have more pvp worlds, while we pitiful f2p get stuck with one.

 

 

 

I'm thinking they should do something like they did for the release of high detail. Let the members work out the bugs first.

[vettro]

I think the worlds in their entirety should be members only. Leave our something in the F2P world. I think the non-members should have a not as good PVP worlds. Just something to inspire them to get a membership.

[Levon_]

It's a good thing have F2P PVP because it adds more variety to the game. Think of how different F2P PKing was than P2P, and people found them both fun.

 

 

 

F2P pking was and still is simpler than P2P, and is also harder (or easier depending on how you look at it), and less risky (full rune (150k) scimmy (17k) food, strength pot) maybe about 210k is the max you will be carrying.

[MicroLegionnaire]

It's a good thing have F2P PVP because it adds more variety to the game. Think of how different F2P PKing was than P2P, and people found them both fun.

 

 

 

F2P pking was and still is simpler than P2P, and is also harder (or easier depending on how you look at it), and less risky (full rune (150k) scimmy (17k) food, strength pot) maybe about 210k is the max you will be carrying.

 

 

 

That works in reverse too, you can't earn as much in f2p PKing as compared to p2p.

[BioIce]

 

F2P pking was and still is simpler than P2P, and is also harder (or easier depending on how you look at it), and less risky (full rune (150k) scimmy (17k) food, strength pot) maybe about 210k is the max you will be carrying.

 

 

 

You're forgetting the rich show-offs that strayed into the wilderness. :lol:

 

 

 

If you pked in varrock or edgeville wildy in f2p then yes it was a lot harder. People would just run south and barely make it out alive by the skin of their gums on anywhere from 1 to 10 hp left because their opponent hit an unlucky 0.

 

 

 

Camping the hills made it easier, and teaming helped--unless the team decides to bs or had no intention of teaming after all--and so the loot from a kill is divvied up. But a lot of pkers didn't pk just for the money. If the rewards were so low then why were so many pures roaming the wild way back then? And you'd be surprised how many people would be so protective of their rune armor or d'hide, so for f2pers it can be 'risky.'

 

 

 

The rush, the loot, the simple choice of combat. It's still very addictive.

[Locutus_Of_Borg]

Wouldn't making the PvP Worlds Members only be a very good incentive to subscribe? I think it'd be a very smooth business plan.

[BioIce]

Yes. Then all they have to do is ignore the f2p whiners. Hardly smooth, but a very good chance to make money!

[Locutus_Of_Borg]

I'm sure they've got the ignoring thing down to a science. RuneScapers complain every time there's any update.

 

 

 

How many RuneScapers does it take to change a lightbulb?

 

10,001

 

1 to change the lightbulb.

 

10,000 to whine about changing it back.

[Iamdan]

From the players point of view it should be f2p. I can't stand members pking, even if Jagex paid ME the $10/month I wouldn't want to pk on members servers. It's too easy to die, and too easy to get kills, and you lose much more.

 

 

 

For me it's about the skill, which is why I prefer losing and gaining less. I like the fact that if I have skill I can bring in a fair amount of money, but if I start dying I won't have to worry about earning more money to pay for it all. My only complaint about f2p pking is how long it takes to fish lobsters :/

 

 

 

From Jagex's view, they will gain members, but also lose a lot of f2p players ad money. The only reason why I came back after quitting is for f2p pk servers like in oldschool rsc.

[Xx_Flare_xX]

It should be f2p

 

f2p pking is more fun :thumbsup:

[Locutus_Of_Borg]

From Jagex's view, they will gain members, but also lose a lot of f2p players ad money.

 

So, say in a hypothetical situation 90% of F2P subscribed. Are you insinuating that it would be a bad thing since 90% of the ad money goes with them? In that sense, it's actually a bad thing to try to convince people to subscribe to the game?

 

 

 

I don't see how more people paying Jagex has a negative effect on their business.

[Iamdan]

From Jagex's view, they will gain members, but also lose a lot of f2p players ad money.

 

So, say in a hypothetical situation 90% of F2P subscribed. Are you insinuating that it would be a bad thing since 90% of the ad money goes with them? In that sense, it's actually a bad thing to try to convince people to subscribe to the game?

 

 

 

I don't see how more people paying Jagex has a negative effect on their business.

 

 

 

No, I mean 1% of f2p subscribe, and 10% of f2p quit altogether because they are only there for pvp.

[Locutus_Of_Borg]

No, I mean 1% of f2p subscribe, and 10% of f2p quit altogether because they are only there for pvp.

 

 

 

If they were here for only PvP, wouldn't they have quit, say, 9 months ago?

[josh181830]

 

Members are more mature, and usually don't talk until the very end.

 

 

Nonsense, members blow just as hard.

 

 

 

Anyways. F2P was also able to PK in the wilderness. It's just fair to give the opportunity back to them aswell.

 

 

 

I agree with what he said.

 

 

 

And some members think they're so 1337, making them as cocky as some of the rest of the "1337" f2p.

[Balazeal]

The Wilderness was for everyone, then Jagex took it away, from everyone. So then Jagex, tried to make up for it, they gave the Duel Arena to F2P, they added BH, and FOG, and now the addition of PVP Worlds is the final nail in the coffin. So, no I don't think that PVP worlds should be P2P only. We all lost the Wilderness, not just P2P, but F2P as well.

[The_Gabe]

2 words. Hell no.

[duncanyo90]

i think free people should have it or it wouldn't be fun. free people make up more than half of runescapes population so let them have something and the hallowen event is coming soon. :thumbsup:

[bibliy]

I'm sure they've got the ignoring thing down to a science. RuneScapers complain every time there's any update.

 

 

 

How many RuneScapers does it take to change a lightbulb?

 

10,001

 

1 to change the lightbulb.

 

10,000 to whine about changing it back.

 

OMG lol can i put tht in my siggy?

[Iamdan]

No, I mean 1% of f2p subscribe, and 10% of f2p quit altogether because they are only there for pvp.

 

 

 

If they were here for only PvP, wouldn't they have quit, say, 9 months ago?

 

 

 

I did, and came back for PvP. The people I've talked to in BH all say they are just killing time/practicing for the pvp servers.

[Locutus_Of_Borg]

I'm sure they've got the ignoring thing down to a science. RuneScapers complain every time there's any update.

 

 

 

How many RuneScapers does it take to change a lightbulb?

 

10,001

 

1 to change the lightbulb.

 

10,000 to whine about changing it back.

 

OMG lol can i put tht in my siggy?

 

 

 

Go right on ahead :D

[Locutus_Of_Borg]

No, I mean 1% of f2p subscribe, and 10% of f2p quit altogether because they are only there for pvp.

 

 

 

If they were here for only PvP, wouldn't they have quit, say, 9 months ago?

 

 

 

I did, and came back for PvP. The people I've talked to in BH all say they are just killing time/practicing for the pvp servers.

 

 

 

But you see, if the supposed 10% left 9 months ago, came back this month and then left again, wouldn't we pretty much end up where we are now with that supposed 10% still gone today?