Tip.It Times - 4th December 2011

[Erewhon2]

What do you mean by fresh content if you don't want new content? :P Like, updates to content that haven't been touched in years? O:

 

 

I mean, if they are going to give F2P "new" things, or at least, new to F2P, than I want new stuff- so, not dragon weapons. I want something for level 50 attack or something. A new metal or weapon style all together. Don't give us the stuff members find useless.

 

Sincerely,

Azura Skyy~

 

I just wanted to respond to your previous post about the unbalanced combat triangle in F2P. People have been complaining about this across F2P and P2P for some time. Jagex have clearly stated that the re-balancing of the combat triangle is on the planned updates agenda, they said at Runefest that they are working on it now. They will also be updates on armour that will also impact on combat as they intend that armour will be much more 'defense' based.

[Guest jrhairychest]

Interesting. There's some posts asking for new stuff for F2P to keep it "fresh". For whom exactly? Those that have been there perhaps too long?

 

And can anyone answer this question - If F2P is so bad, why wasn't it so bad when you started playing? After all the game's improved a lot the last couple of years. Feel free to enlighten me.

[Jonanananas]

The problem is not that F2P is suddenly bad. The essential problem is that it just has a lot more concurrence now. Just as an example, League of Legends got quite big. If Jagex wants to compete in the long run, they'll have to offer more stuff to attract new players.

 

 

As for the 'Lets Play a Game' article, I was quite interested at first and then disappointingly it deteriorated into another 'give more to F2P' speech. Oh yes it was couched in diplomatic terms and tried to make some argument about improving the game for F2P as a good business strategy. But basically it's starting to look like Tip.it Times is following a theme, yes I hear it....I've heard it to death on the forum threads. What little sympathy I have felt for F2P is being slowly strangled by the rants and general overkill on the subject. I disagree with the article and the arguments, the author has obviously not been on the F2P worlds at the same times I have, when they have been busy, friendly and very active (since the bot busting). The P2P log in numbers equate well with what I used to see prior to the bot invasion. Also there have been appropriate updates for F2P, graphical, general game content and quests.

 

I can understand the sentiment, since there have been several articles on this recently.

 

Also, as I've said - this is my opinion. This is what I believe, but alas, I don't have access to the statistics Jagex would have. Maybe I'm wrong, I don't know. But I feel like Runescape is becoming increasingly unknown in those ages where they would probably get most of their members(So somewhere later in school). Two years ago or so, it would still get mentioned here and there(Though quietly of course, no one wants to have that overheard :P). Now, I can't remember having it heard in the last 6 months.

 

 

My essential point is that F2P is not the represantative of the P2P game that it should be. I'm not asking for content to keep long-term f2pers playing. I merely think that making the game more engaging and interesting for new players would be smart. And not only stuff that is fun it itself - I still think most new players probably enjoy their first weeks a lot. I'm more talking about stuff that you could show off in an advertisement. Something that gets people playing. Like having a low-level boss that someone can show his friend and say: "You can access that boss in just 5 hours, isn't that awesome" or whatever instead of "yeah, this game is basically just clicking but you'll enjoy it". Do you know what I mean?

 

 

One thing that I would have done for example, is making "A piercing note" f2p. Now THAT would be a piece of content to show off. And you can still keep the members activity and say "hey, if you subscribe you can train your prayer faster" for all that I care.

[Blyaunte]

Like Azura, I too saw the correlation between Alg's and Jo's articles, and I think both Alg and Jo are onto something ...

 

It's true that, not so long ago, there was a lot of complaining from the community that the game needed more high-end content which it has received in SOME skills, such as herblore, but it has not seen in other skills such as smithing or crafting.

 

Nonetheless, it does seem that the majority of Jagex's more recent content has been aimed at the long-term high level player and not, to the same degree, towards the mid-term middle level player and the low level introductory player has pretty much been ignored altogether.

 

I think that Jo sees this as where the F2P game comes in. As an introductory tool, F2P serves as the carrot that lures players into the game with no cost to themselves. Jagex's recent efforts to strip the game of F2P content, while not adding sufficient amounts of low and middle level new content, are slowly but surely choking off the stream of new players into the game.

 

Yes, there have been updates to certain F2P areas and, yes, some content has been improved in terms of the game-play environment but, notwithstanding, with the exception of Dungeoneering, the F2P game is barely any different than it was when RS2 was originally introduced.

 

The end result of this is that, when a new free player joins the game and comes to that "meh" moment, when they can choose to advance to P2P or find another free game, they go looking for another free game. Thereafter, when they return to Ruescape to give it another go, there's no "new" F2P mid-level content, to re-capture their attention, and they go through another "meh" moment and leave the game behind again.

 

As a long term high-level player, I want my high-level content but I am not so narrow minded that I cannot recognize that, while such updates are long overdue, they're not necessarily key important aspects of what the community needs at this point in time.

[Guest jrhairychest]

Then the solution is simple. Merge the worlds. F2P merges with P2P so that there are just 'worlds'. F2P would still be restricted to F2P areas and doing F2P things but they'd share their world with P2P players. That way F2Pers could see aspects of what they're missing. There's no better advertisement for P2P than the players themselves. The two communities could then interact more, form friendships and encourage more membership. It would also solve the problem of empty areas that are on the F2P maps that members don't use. F2Pers would certainly find this much more interesting than just seeing the F2P point of view. In the end F2P doesn't get anything new but players could see what they 'could' get.

 

Granted there would be certain aspects that would have to be ironed out such as wildy etc. but with the advancements Jagex have made in their coding I'm sure that something could be done.

[Platinum_Myr]

Then the solution is simple. Merge the worlds. F2P merges with P2P so that there are just 'worlds'. F2P would still be restricted to F2P areas and doing F2P things but they'd share their world with P2P players. That way F2Pers could see aspects of what they're missing. There's no better advertisement for P2P than the players themselves. The two communities could then interact more, form friendships and encourage more membership. It would also solve the problem of empty areas that are on the F2P maps that members don't use. F2Pers would certainly find this much more interesting than just seeing the F2P point of view. In the end F2P doesn't get anything new but players could see what they 'could' get.

 

Granted there would be certain aspects that would have to be ironed out such as wildy etc. but with the advancements Jagex have made in their coding I'm sure that something could be done.

 

That would be an interesting idea :) A lot of ironing out to do, but would provide a lot more coherence. Map areas would have more players on them, and so forth. As long as popular content from free-to-play wasn't overcrowded when both members and free had to use it at the same time.

[Lightshayde]

As long as popular content from free-to-play wasn't overcrowded when both members and free had to use it at the same time.

 

I can see the Grand Exchange in my mind's eye...and it is not a happy vision.

Surely, members would complain about having to share their game worlds with noobs?

 

I think the best idea is to simply just give more to F2P. Perhaps not new (or high-level) material, but old but tried-and-true games. Perhaps giving some mid-level content, like quests, perhaps, to F2P: would that really be such a bad thing? A quest or two, or a minigame; perhaps move Castle Wars or Soul Wars to free-to-play areas? It'd breathe new life into the Free-to-play game, which as of now is simply a grind to get semi-decent to have fun in the member's world.

[Guest jrhairychest]

As long as popular content from free-to-play wasn't overcrowded when both members and free had to use it at the same time.

 

I can see the Grand Exchange in my mind's eye...and it is not a happy vision.

Surely, members would complain about having to share their game worlds with noobs?

 

I think the best idea is to simply just give more to F2P. Perhaps not new (or high-level) material, but old but tried-and-true games. Perhaps giving some mid-level content, like quests, perhaps, to F2P: would that really be such a bad thing? A quest or two, or a minigame; perhaps move Castle Wars or Soul Wars to free-to-play areas? It'd breathe new life into the Free-to-play game, which as of now is simply a grind to get semi-decent to have fun in the member's world.

 

What happened to all the solidarity and togetherness? I like the way it stops when we hit the 'not in my back yard' aspect of members. If P2P is really serious about it's support of F2P then it should embrace it. If P2P doesn't then all that support is just a load of hot air. If we have to share the GE then we share the GE. The more F2Pers are exposed to members the more likely they'll be encouraged to join (in principle).

 

Throwing stuff at F2P won't solve the problem. In fact, you'll just provide less incentive for a player to go to P2P by encouraging players to stay, hence the real high scores issue debated in other threads. We wouldn't have had those debates if players weren't encouraged to stay F2P. We should be showing them what they're missing and bring both communities that little step closer.

[Jonanananas]

Then the solution is simple. Merge the worlds. F2P merges with P2P so that there are just 'worlds'. F2P would still be restricted to F2P areas and doing F2P things but they'd share their world with P2P players. That way F2Pers could see aspects of what they're missing. There's no better advertisement for P2P than the players themselves. The two communities could then interact more, form friendships and encourage more membership. It would also solve the problem of empty areas that are on the F2P maps that members don't use. F2Pers would certainly find this much more interesting than just seeing the F2P point of view. In the end F2P doesn't get anything new but players could see what they 'could' get.

 

Granted there would be certain aspects that would have to be ironed out such as wildy etc. but with the advancements Jagex have made in their coding I'm sure that something could be done.

 

I actually really like that idea! The issue is probably technical though - back when citadels were released, the reason given in the FAQ why they were not partly F2P was that Jagex said they could only make it fully F2p or fully P2P, everything else wouldn't be possible for them. This idea sounds like a bigger engine rewrite, and engine writers' time is always precious. But if it's possible to do, I think it could be a great addition.

[Azura_Skyy]

Then the solution is simple. Merge the worlds. F2P merges with P2P so that there are just 'worlds'. F2P would still be restricted to F2P areas and doing F2P things but they'd share their world with P2P players. That way F2Pers could see aspects of what they're missing. There's no better advertisement for P2P than the players themselves. The two communities could then interact more, form friendships and encourage more membership. It would also solve the problem of empty areas that are on the F2P maps that members don't use. F2Pers would certainly find this much more interesting than just seeing the F2P point of view. In the end F2P doesn't get anything new but players could see what they 'could' get.

 

Granted there would be certain aspects that would have to be ironed out such as wildy etc. but with the advancements Jagex have made in their coding I'm sure that something could be done.

 

I actually really like that idea! The issue is probably technical though - back when citadels were released, the reason given in the FAQ why they were not partly F2P was that Jagex said they could only make it fully F2p or fully P2P, everything else wouldn't be possible for them. This idea sounds like a bigger engine rewrite, and engine writers' time is always precious. But if it's possible to do, I think it could be a great addition.

 

I hate trolling and intentionally being rude, but this is one of the worst Ideas I have ever heard.

If we remember when Mark Gerhard first became the CEO, one of his first posts was regarding his plans and treatment for the F2P "version" of the game. He didn't beat around the bush- he clearly stated that he was going to remove the P2P advertisements from the F2P game.

This announcement was probably my happiest RuneScape playing moment. Jagex was ackowledgeing that F2P was its own game, and Gerhard stated that too.

(Do not comment and say I'm a tax on them and don't pay my way. Charts have shown Jagex's revenue from ads being in the millions of USD. In addition, I usually have a P2P account)

 

By going against this, or rather, their inconsistency, they are continually pushing me to other MMOs and certainly other people to the same ends (or Console games ofc).

I suppose I would be fine with this update if Jagex posts an update on the front page taking back their statement and promising to consistently advertise P2P in F2P.

 

As I've said, I want consistency. I'll even add membership back to my classic account (which I play on maybe 5hours a month) to show my support for the company.

 

 

P.S. I think the F2P areas will be far more crowded than we are crediting, especially if they remove an additional 50 servers (which is a guarantee with this style of update).

[Guest jrhairychest]

I actually really like that idea! The issue is probably technical though - back when citadels were released, the reason given in the FAQ why they were not partly F2P was that Jagex said they could only make it fully F2p or fully P2P, everything else wouldn't be possible for them. This idea sounds like a bigger engine rewrite, and engine writers' time is always precious. But if it's possible to do, I think it could be a great addition.

 

Boundaries are there to be broken. However it's unlikely it'd be implemented if it took a lot of work. <_<

 

 

I hate trolling and intentionally being rude, but this is one of the worst Ideas I have ever heard.

If we remember when Mark Gerhard first became the CEO, one of his first posts was regarding his plans and treatment for the F2P "version" of the game. He didn't beat around the bush- he clearly stated that he was going to remove the P2P advertisements from the F2P game.

This announcement was probably my happiest RuneScape playing moment. Jagex was ackowledgeing that F2P was its own game, and Gerhard stated that too.

(Do not comment and say I'm a tax on them and don't pay my way. Charts have shown Jagex's revenue from ads being in the millions of USD. In addition, I usually have a P2P account)

 

By going against this, or rather, their inconsistency, they are continually pushing me to other MMOs and certainly other people to the same ends (or Console games ofc).

I suppose I would be fine with this update if Jagex posts an update on the front page taking back their statement and promising to consistently advertise P2P in F2P.

 

As I've said, I want consistency. I'll even add membership back to my classic account (which I play on maybe 5hours a month) to show my support for the company.

 

 

P.S. I think the F2P areas will be far more crowded than we are crediting, especially if they remove an additional 50 servers (which is a guarantee with this style of update).

 

Youre entitled to your opinion so no I dont think youre trolling.

 

Intriguing that youve posted about wanting fresh content in the game previously in this thread. Yet you want to cling on to old things said years ago to suit your points. :shame: Jagexs stance is entitled to change. What was said x number of years ago doesnt mean it applies forever. It also means that if they want to advertise then who is anyone to argue about it?

 

Youre certainly entitled to disagree with the idea, but for me, it beats the things youre coming forward with. I want new things for F2P is the same old argument. Thats not going to freshen up F2P for longer than 5 minutes. It needs a complete change of direction. The server issue is a good point. Obviously itd need more to sustain the numbers.

[quitthegame]

 

What happened to all the solidarity and togetherness? I like the way it stops when we hit the 'not in my back yard' aspect of members. If P2P is really serious about it's support of F2P then it should embrace it. If P2P doesn't then all that support is just a load of hot air. If we have to share the GE then we share the GE. The more F2Pers are exposed to members the more likely they'll be encouraged to join (in principle).

 

This is a disingenuous argument. Treating P2P as a unified mass of people with one unified opinion towards F2P is obviously inaccurate.

[Jonanananas]

Then the solution is simple. Merge the worlds. F2P merges with P2P so that there are just 'worlds'. F2P would still be restricted to F2P areas and doing F2P things but they'd share their world with P2P players. That way F2Pers could see aspects of what they're missing. There's no better advertisement for P2P than the players themselves. The two communities could then interact more, form friendships and encourage more membership. It would also solve the problem of empty areas that are on the F2P maps that members don't use. F2Pers would certainly find this much more interesting than just seeing the F2P point of view. In the end F2P doesn't get anything new but players could see what they 'could' get.

 

Granted there would be certain aspects that would have to be ironed out such as wildy etc. but with the advancements Jagex have made in their coding I'm sure that something could be done.

 

I actually really like that idea! The issue is probably technical though - back when citadels were released, the reason given in the FAQ why they were not partly F2P was that Jagex said they could only make it fully F2p or fully P2P, everything else wouldn't be possible for them. This idea sounds like a bigger engine rewrite, and engine writers' time is always precious. But if it's possible to do, I think it could be a great addition.

 

I hate trolling and intentionally being rude, but this is one of the worst Ideas I have ever heard.

If we remember when Mark Gerhard first became the CEO, one of his first posts was regarding his plans and treatment for the F2P "version" of the game. He didn't beat around the bush- he clearly stated that he was going to remove the P2P advertisements from the F2P game.

This announcement was probably my happiest RuneScape playing moment. Jagex was ackowledgeing that F2P was its own game, and Gerhard stated that too.

(Do not comment and say I'm a tax on them and don't pay my way. Charts have shown Jagex's revenue from ads being in the millions of USD. In addition, I usually have a P2P account)

 

By going against this, or rather, their inconsistency, they are continually pushing me to other MMOs and certainly other people to the same ends (or Console games ofc).

I suppose I would be fine with this update if Jagex posts an update on the front page taking back their statement and promising to consistently advertise P2P in F2P.

 

As I've said, I want consistency. I'll even add membership back to my classic account (which I play on maybe 5hours a month) to show my support for the company.

 

 

P.S. I think the F2P areas will be far more crowded than we are crediting, especially if they remove an additional 50 servers (which is a guarantee with this style of update).

 

First of all, they're not inconsistent. They did say their stance has changed - they still think F2P is a game of it's own, but they no longer believe in having absolutely no marketing there. They have decided that they need marketing stuff in order for this game to survive.

 

Now, how exactly a merging of F2P/P2P worlds will look like is a design question, but as long as it doesn't harm F2P in it's gameplay, I don't see the problem with it. When I was F2P, I still saw all the pickpocket options etc. - and while they were bothering me at times, they never really made my gameplay worse.

[Kimberly]

If P2P is really serious about it's support of F2P then it should embrace it. If P2P doesn't then all that support is just a load of hot air. If we have to share the GE then we share the GE. The more F2Pers are exposed to members the more likely they'll be encouraged to join (in principle).

 

Throwing stuff at F2P won't solve the problem. In fact, you'll just provide less incentive for a player to go to P2P by encouraging players to stay, hence the real high scores issue debated in other threads. We wouldn't have had those debates if players weren't encouraged to stay F2P. We should be showing them what they're missing and bring both communities that little step closer.

 

I've got to agree with you, and it's a nice idea you don't see talked about very often. I wouldn't mind seeing it happen, personally. I know that I loaded up f2p for my secondary account, Dorelei, and I really missed seeing the level of activity that you see in Al Kharid, Varrock, etc. It would be nice to see that again. Most areas outside of Asgarnia and Misthalin are walled off by "you must be on a Member-Server to <action>" borders anyway. It was always really enticing to me when I saw people in dragon or with flowers or unique capes in f2p. It made me envious, and while it wasn't the deciding factor for me to get members (that would be quests, actually) it really honed my desire for it.

 

It would also push some people out to the lower-leveled yet under-used resource areas instead if f2p members were in the common resource spots. Meaning more content would be used overall, which would be a good thing I think. Or at least I think it would, honestly I haven't thought that far into it. haha

 

The only thing I'd see this to be a problem with would be dungeoneering, since that pretty much got the hard-core shaft in the f2p side. Still...The more i think about your proposal, well, I actually get a little eager to see something like that put into the game o_O

 

P.S. I think the F2P areas will be far more crowded than we are crediting, especially if they remove an additional 50 servers (which is a guarantee with this style of update).

 

They shuffle around servers to suit player need all the time. Why should this be any different?

[Blyaunte]

While I am not entirely opposed to the idea of co-mingling F2P and P2P, I do have some questions as to how this would be handled:

 

1. How does one handle issues such as banking and equipping of P2P items for F2P players? Particularly for those players who were once P2P but are now F2P, but have an over-loaded bank account containing P2P items and what about former P2P players, playing in F2P mode, who are wielding and/or otherwise wearing P2P gear?

 

2. What happens if, say, a group of F2P pkers caught a P2P player in the Wildy wearing P2P gear? How does this gear trickle down to the F2P player(s)? What if its a mixed group of F2P/P2P pkers?

 

3. How does one compensate F2P players trying to gather resources (wood, coal, etc.) versus a P2P player with far superior equipment?

 

4. Similarly, how does one compensate for F2P players having to combat with P2P players wearing vastly superior gear at, say, the duel arena or monsters some multi-combat areas (like roaches)?

 

Furthermore, if they did co-mingle F2P and P2P, Id want an additional GE location set someplace in a P2P area. I dont want to have to put up with mass begging every time I need to sell something

 

:rolleyes:

[Guest jrhairychest]

This is a disingenuous argument. Treating P2P as a unified mass of people with one unified opinion towards F2P is obviously inaccurate.

There was a note of sarcasm to my original point hence the 'not in my backyard theory'. The unification of F2P and P2P over the high scores starts to become hazy in some quarters sudden when P2P is asked to mix with F2P ;)

 

I've got to agree with you, and it's a nice idea you don't see talked about very often. I wouldn't mind seeing it happen, personally. I know that I loaded up f2p for my secondary account, Dorelei, and I really missed seeing the level of activity that you see in Al Kharid, Varrock, etc. It would be nice to see that again. Most areas outside of Asgarnia and Misthalin are walled off by "you must be on a Member-Server to <action>" borders anyway. It was always really enticing to me when I saw people in dragon or with flowers or unique capes in f2p. It made me envious, and while it wasn't the deciding factor for me to get members (that would be quests, actually) it really honed my desire for it.

 

It would also push some people out to the lower-leveled yet under-used resource areas instead if f2p members were in the common resource spots. Meaning more content would be used overall, which would be a good thing I think. Or at least I think it would, honestly I haven't thought that far into it. haha

 

The only thing I'd see this to be a problem with would be dungeoneering, since that pretty much got the hard-core shaft in the f2p side. Still...The more i think about your proposal, well, I actually get a little eager to see something like that put into the game o_O

Absolutely. More bustling F2P areas plus the "I want that!" factor would, in my opinion, enhance the game and possibly attract more membership. I don't think F2P see's enough of what P2P has to offer. It's time we showed them.

 

While I am not entirely opposed to the idea of co-mingling F2P and P2P, I do have some questions as to how this would be handled:

 

1. How does one handle issues such as “banking” and “equipping” of P2P items for F2P players? Particularly for those players who were once P2P but are now F2P, but have an “over-loaded” bank account containing P2P items – and what about former P2P players, playing in F2P mode, who are wielding and/or otherwise wearing P2P gear?

 

2. What happens if, say, a group of F2P pkers caught a P2P player in the Wildy wearing P2P gear? How does this gear trickle down to the F2P player(s)? What if it’s a mixed group of F2P/P2P pkers?

 

3. How does one compensate F2P players trying to gather resources (wood, coal, etc.) versus a P2P player with far superior equipment?

 

4. Similarly, how does one compensate for F2P players having to combat with P2P players wearing vastly superior gear at, say, the duel arena or monsters some multi-combat areas (like roaches)?

 

Furthermore, if they did co-mingle F2P and P2P, I’d want an additional GE location set someplace in a P2P area. I don’t want to have to put up with mass begging every time I need to sell something …

 

:rolleyes:

In many ways you're right, it would come down to how it would be implemented and any technological restrictions as to what can be done. These aspects would have to be considered. Perhaps, like aspects of quests, F2P wouldn't see P2P and vice versa when in wildy or duelling arena. You could only fight your own kind as it were in two parallel aspects.

 

I don't think resources would be an issue. P2P hardly uses the resource areas in the F2P areas. F2P can still use rune picks and hatchets. Dragon ones aren't all that superior and I still see plenty of members using rune items.

 

In terms of banking and equipment it's normally the world that restricts the banking aspects - This would change to the player type as to what they can access and use. No different from the maps being locked out in certain areas for F2P and restrictions on the gear they can use. Again I don't know the problems this would bring up as a technical issue. Only Jagex would know this (Yes that's a hint to all "expert programmers" on here not to bore me with your "expertise").

 

As to mass begging, I see enough of this in P2P to know its a world problem. There's also a solution in place for this called the ignore button.

[Seabourch]

The merging of the worlds is interesting but I suppose one might just have to eliminate the majority of F2P and change the makeup of P2P worlds to accomadate this. I think that the problems wasn't noticed because F2P at the beginning of RS2 was not too different from P2P and the gap was small enough to keep people happy. However, the world of P2P has grown enormously since then and I think now F2P looks like a diseased limb or a stunted one that has failed to catch up. With Morytania, the Elvish lands and the Pirate stuff east of Morytania and a general expansion of Kandarin, F2P has grown to be neglected. I think F2P ought to be a sample of the game and in order to attract people, lets just do that. Let the F2P world have a little of the stuff from P2P, from a small amount of each skill and quests( mind you, better developed quests, I spent 3 months on P2P and the best part was the quests, so rich in story and action) . Let it be a sample platter of the P2P world and I think you can attract more players to P2P, the success of P2P is partly due to a good F2P game. Who would shell out money for a car when the test drive sucked?

[Blyaunte]

As to mass begging, I see enough of this in P2P to know its a world problem. There's also a solution in place for this called the ignore button.

 

Again I'm not entirely disagreeing with you. That said, the ignore button cannot "catch all" of the spamming beggars (well it could, but you'd soon run out of room), nor does it eliminate the lag caused by 100's of people spamming within a confined space. Sure, you may not have to see the typed words, but the effect of all that spamming is still there ... <_<

[strilmus]

The irony of all those dwarven axe ads is that with the toolbelt, they eliminated every use for it, and added more stuff like the hammer and the knife which should have been on the damn thing in the first place. All the ill will caused by it was pointless.

 

I wonder what other updates we have in store that will make earlier updates that were pretty recent obsolete, like the frost dragon changes. Let's keep wasting time making things that we'll never use after the new update. That's the smart way to do things!

[Blyaunte]

The irony of all those dwarven axe ads is that with the toolbelt, they eliminated every use for it, and added more stuff like the hammer and the knife which should have been on the damn thing in the first place. All the ill will caused by it was pointless.

 

I wonder what other updates we have in store that will make earlier updates that were pretty recent obsolete, like the frost dragon changes. Let's keep wasting time making things that we'll never use after the new update. That's the smart way to do things!

 

Memo to self - remove dwarven axe from my bank space and drop it ... :unsure:

[Guest jrhairychest]

Again I'm not entirely disagreeing with you. That said, the ignore button cannot "catch all" of the spamming beggars (well it could, but you'd soon run out of room), nor does it eliminate the lag caused by 100's of people spamming within a confined space. Sure, you may not have to see the typed words, but the effect of all that spamming is still there ... <_<

Ensuring there were enough worlds should solve the issue.

[Seabourch]

I don't think the toolbelt has solved the issue, it only allows for bronze pickaxes and hatchets, I'm hoping they will allow for different hatchets and pickaxes. I was stunned when I saw the toolbelt, didn't know what to do with it because it just made my life a lot my convinient in RS.