18-March-2013: Dealing with games of chance

[Fallstar]

Or:

 

It's a video game. If you can't enjoy RS without gambling, then ignore that rule. It is after all just a game. If you get banned, find another game.

 

Wouldn't it be faster to just find another game to begin with, where it's not against the rules and there's no risk to get banned for it? If they really can't enjoy RS without gambling as you said.

 

He might as well carry on, Jagex are not exactly known for enforcing their rules.

[Sy_Accursed]

I think they've made a very weak decision actually. If they were really going to take action against the people who host those gambles, then they wouldn't have to change the easter ring and those other items. They are only making gambling harder, instead of dealing with the people who abuse "fun" items. All they had to do is temp-ban all those hosts for a couple weeks. Once the punishment is big enough for people to reconsider gambling, all the items could just be brought back in the original state. Jagex has chosen the easiest solution, they punish everyone instead of finding out who actually should be punished.

 

Thats narrow minded.

If the means to gamble exists people will gamble regardless of some token mass-ban.

Exactly the same as it works with botting and gold farming.

 

The only way to remove them is to punish them in line with the rules AND remove the means to gamble; it's why Jagex bot efforts have been largely unsuccessful in eradicating the problem. They have the bannings and the rules but their tech updates to remove bot functionality is still behind bot technology.

 

Some token banning today won't suddenly make people stop do it in the long term, it might discourage some short term but given a few weeks and hosts and layers would be back flouting the rule in to great a number for enforcement to be entirely effective.

[thejollyroger]

Enjoy your black & white box and never forget: be obedient to every authority.

 

Its a video game. You're on private property, you follow the rules of the property owner. It is that black and white.

 

I feel like he's trying to make some philosophic point about the world not being black and white - it's just a shame it fell short of the mark because he based it off a dodgy premise (the obeying of authority). Because, well, obeying authority (that has genuine power over you in some respect eg service provider, game provider, law, boss etc.) is black and white - you obey or disobey and if the later you face the consequences.

 

Indeed. Moral relativism has had much better arguments that I've seen. Not that I agree with it personally, but I do say the point could have been much better debated.

 

I've already said my peace concerning a guest/host relationship here. Jagex has made it pretty clear that as the ultimate hosts here, they find player-run gambling (as stated) an abuse of their hospitality (I speak generally, and not interested in boring debates about whether 'hospitality' is an appropriate term or not). If the players, as guests, decide to abuse what Jagex calls manners, and get themselves banned, I have no sympathy for them, at all.

 

I haven't heard any good arguments against the more drastic measures players might do: private servers and all that rot. I mean, hey, maybe a ban isn't enough. Maybe the option of lawsuits sparks a deeper discussion.

 

Am I right? I mean, I do think the premise of "obey authority" is not only dodgy-- it seems immature to me. Again, "freedom of choice" also includes "just make your own damned game already".

[ACK]

I never played or hosted Gambling Game but as long as the player who is hosting not scamming, i don't mind it.. it's people choice to play or not..

 

About the Easter-Egg and Classic Cape Emote should be back to the game.

 

I know Jagex got their point, but they should find another way

[Ambler]

An options ("Specify Emote"? Idk) menu on egg/cape would solve this, just pick one of the possibilities for it, same for seal emote (if anyone cares about that) dropdown menu, 1-5

[Sy_Accursed]

An options ("Specify Emote"? Idk) menu on egg/cape would solve this, just pick one of the possibilities for it, same for seal emote (if anyone cares about that) dropdown menu, 1-5

Or just put it to a set rotation.

So it does like pink egg, blue egg, green egg, stripy egg, pink egg, blue egg...

[Guest Smelly Paws]

But gambling has pretty much always been part of RS - the duel arena is a form of gambling and always has been. Gamble rewards at BA. Rat Pits. And I'm sure theres more I'm forgetting. Heck one could even argue monster hunting and questing without a guide are forms of gambling - you are gambling your gear, resources and time against victory and/or valuable loot, even pking is a branch of gambling.

 

There's nothing wrong with gambling being in RS at all, it's always been there. The only problem is the unregulated often RWT and scam linked player-player gambling.

 

Arena deathmatches for a prize are relevant to the fantasy genre and history both. Some random guy growing a flower and taking bets on the color is not.

 

I think Battosai understands more where I'm coming from here.

[Blutters]

An options ("Specify Emote"? Idk) menu on egg/cape would solve this, just pick one of the possibilities for it, same for seal emote (if anyone cares about that) dropdown menu, 1-5

Or just put it to a set rotation.

So it does like pink egg, blue egg, green egg, stripy egg, pink egg, blue egg...

Or just take away players' ability to own these items/emotes if the player has a strike on their account for abuse and leave them as random for the people who aren't using them to perverse ends... -.-

[Guest Smelly Paws]

Both of these posts sum it up nicely how I see this. I agree it bases the fact some are getting a little distressed because Jagex put their foot down:

 

Its a video game. You're on private property, you follow the rules of the property owner. It is that black and white.

 

I've already said my peace concerning a guest/host relationship here. Jagex has made it pretty clear that as the ultimate hosts here, they find player-run gambling (as stated) an abuse of their hospitality (I speak generally, and not interested in boring debates about whether 'hospitality' is an appropriate term or not). If the players, as guests, decide to abuse what Jagex calls manners, and get themselves banned, I have no sympathy for them, at all.

 

Although I'm fairly new to posting on Tipit forums I really get where this post is coming from. I've seen this type of thing ruin a few debates. It just makes me go :huh:.

It's also a case of one or two loud groups (Dishonest hosts, irresponsible gamblers) bringing in many of the problems that we've been talking about on this and other threads. I could go into detail about how I also think it's a matter of fairness, but I'm not sure if I can argue it well enough in a community that loves to shout 'fallacy' to the point where you can't actually discuss things like normal people.

[V O R K]

A guest doesn't have to pay.

[Mercifull]

You pay to sleep at a guesthouse ;)

[Yoko Kurama]

Also, for all of V O R K's talk about "freedoms", he fails to recognize that, as Omali (and I myself pointed out in another thread) pointed out, it's private property. Therefore, according to the premise of the "Freedom" crowd, they [Jagex] have the right to do whatever they want. I find it funny that they ["Freedom" crowd] don't recognize the tenets of their own ideologies.

[V O R K]

@merciful, if I pay you to sleep in your guesthouse and you've always allowed me to play craps and two years later you decide you're against i'm going to complain.

 

@Yoko, I respect private property rights. I hope you enjoyed your assumptions. I agree a lot with this article when it comes to owning land (division of rights): http://www.context.o...b/ic08/gilman1/ . I wish this was as cut and clear as you say it is but if you really want to debate that bad go make a thread in offtopic.

 

I neither condone nor advocate gambling and just wish we, as paying customer, had a free choice (as in vote) if it should be disallowed or not. Yes, private property owners can do what they like. I disagree with it simply because they stated that they want to become in touch with their player-base.

 

I r fail for disagreeing with opinionz!1!1

[muggiwhplar]

I'm overwhelmed by the irony of a fallacy website in V O R K's signature :lol:

[V O R K]

i'd rather have you point them out, I prefer to debate with reason and try to apply a scientific approach to every thought; feel free to correct me.

[chenw]

In case anyone cares, the obsidian armor now only degrades when you are receiving red splats. it doesn't degrade at all on the blue splats.

[muggiwhplar]

Sure.

 

@merciful, if I pay you to sleep in your guesthouse and you've always allowed me to play craps and two years later you decide you're against i'm going to complain.

 

This is a straw man.

 

You fail to acknowledge that you agreed to Jagex's Terms and Conditions before playing, which basically invalidates your freedom argument. You also didn't mention any terms and conditions or contractual obligations in your guest house analogy. But that's irrelevant anyways.

[Alg]

You fail to acknowledge that you agreed to Jagex's Terms and Conditions before playing, which basically invalidates your freedom argument. You also didn't mention any terms and conditions or contractual obligations in your guest house analogy. But that's irrelevant anyways.

If we're going to use an analogy:

You stay in the guest house, the owner allows you to play poker but would prefer that you didn't. You do so, no harm done.

Eventually, everyone else starts doing it, and many of them are cheating. The owners take away your cards, but they don't kick you out. You move on to other games of chance. Repeat as necessary.

After two years of this, they kick you out.

[V O R K]

I agreed with the rules before they made that change (or is their a rule that basically states I have nothing to say? if so I stand corrected then). The private property blows my argument out of the water more; I view Jagex as a goverment authority (which it isn't, it's a company) thus we as p(l)ayer-base should all have the right to decide as a whole to what we want to see, like any taxpayer.

 

I guess I take this game a bit too real :cry:

 

edit: @ALG, and you think it's weird i'm complaining!? i'm not the one who's cheating/stealing.

[Alg]

Just saying that, regardless of whether or not you're cheating, it's pretty clear that they didn't want it to happen at all.

[V O R K]

That doesn't make it go away though but fair point.

[Saradomin_Mage]

I agreed with the rules before they made that change

By using any Jagex product, you confirm that you have read the latest revision of their Terms and Conditions and that you agree to abide by them.

 

So you can't just agree with a rule before they change it, you will always have to agree with the current rules in the game before you can play.

[Sy_Accursed]

I agreed with the rules before they made that change

By using any Jagex product, you confirm that you have read the latest revision of their Terms and Conditions and that you agree to abide by them.

 

So you can't just agree with a rule before they change it, you will always have to agree with the current rules in the game before you can play.

 

^ trudat

 

Any changes to rules or T&Cs are perfectly allowable and you auto-accept them by continuing to use them product - the only condition is they need to make reasonable effort to promote/inform about the change eg post a news article about it.

 

And lol at the idea of a game's company is like a government and players should have say. They are not elected and have 0 obligation to do things democratically - just like any company they do what they want regardless of customer views. Sure it's in their interest to do what the players as a whole want, but there not obliged to; not to mention the fact this change WAS a player asked for change. They asked us about it and majority that responded wanted this.

[Platinum_Myr]

That auto-allow changes thing is only true because the original terms and conditions allow Jagex to make changes. And ofcourse that can be ruled in court as not an enforcable part of the terms and conditions if the company doesn't put enough effort to let users know the conditions have changed.

[Guest Smelly Paws]

Also, for all of V O R K's talk about "freedoms", he fails to recognize that, as Omali (and I myself pointed out in another thread) point out, it's private property. Therefore, according to the premise of the "Freedom" crowd, they [Jagex] have the right to do whatever they want. I find it funny that they ["Freedom" crowd] don't recognize the tenets of their own ideologies.

 

I wonder if there's a link between this type of freedom crowd and the other type of freedom crowd that harps on about their god given right to download music, films etc from the web, illegally of course. Just speculating and being a bit annoying.