Tip.It Times Tip.It Times - 26th May 2013

[tripsis 157]

Time for a new release of the: >>>Tip.It Times!<<<

 

 

 

WRITE FOR THE TIMES - SUBMIT A GUEST ARTICLE:

Remember, YOU can write an article for the Tip.It Times! You can apply to write full time, or just submit a "one-off" guest article any time you want! Our editors will work with you to ensure that your article is ready for publication. All guest articles can be submitted to @tripsis or any other Editorial Panel member. For more information, including details on how to apply full time, read this forum thread: http://forum.tip.it/topic/209138-how-to-write-for-the-tipit-times/

 

I'd like to remind people of the rules pertaining to Times threads:

 

[hide=Read these rules before posting in this thread]

Rampant flame wars have taken control of virtually every week's times discussion topics. The following guidelines must be followed when posting on this topic. Posts that ignore these guidelines will be removed.

 

1. You are invited and welcome to express like or dislike on articles and a particular author's writing style. It is not acceptable, however, to flame or personally insult an author. Posts that aren't anything but an attack will be removed from the topic.

 

2. Spelling and grammar errors can be reported to tripsis by PMing her and they will be fixed promptly. It is not necessary to post them on the discussion topic.

 

3. Off topic posts that do not discuss the content of that week's articles will be removed. This is not the place to discuss the direction of the times, how much you love or hate the times, etc. Off topic posts will be removed.

 

By keeping within these guidelines, Times discussion topics will mean more for the Panel and Administration than just a place for flame wars. Flame wars do not provide any useful feedback to the Times, which is mainly what we're aiming for with these topics: feedback.

 

This policy is effective as of now, November 17, 2010. Any posts prior to the creation of this policy may or may not be removed according to the new guidelines.

[/hide]

 

When replying please make sure to clarify the article you are replying to! Thanks!

 

If you spot any typos or mistakes in an article then please PM them to @tripsis. :)

 

Enjoy the articles!

[cowmaster187 370]

wrong article link i thinks.

 

~~~legoman187~~~

[Pirkka 63]

wrong article link i thinks.

 

~~~legoman187~~~

 

Yup, doesn't work at the moment.

[Alg 2522]

Yup, doesn't work at the moment.

Bit awkward, really...

[Pirkka 63]

Oh come on, already!

[Blyaunte 279]

[Fallstar 614]

It's not just a divide between F2P and P2P anymore. People who can afford/care enough about modern RS to RWT get twice as many updates as I do.

 

But yes, on reflection, the lies in that post by MMG were indicative of what Jagex under him would turn into.

[Alg 2522]

Working now.

[darthaddict 2]

I can't wait for god emissaries update. I like the idea of massive changing the world of rs along with help from other players. I know that not everyone will like this update, but hopefully they make it worth while. As for the 2nd article...why now? You used a quote that is over 4 years old, and than complain about f2p not getting enough attention. F2p never got enough attention like p2p does. That makes since because we are paying to get those updates. F2p does get some small updates besides the holiday ones and other sof crap. The God Emissaries update, for example, is going to be f2p also.

[PinoyBoy 0]

I would be shocked to see any new players genuinely want to purchase membership without encouragement from a friend.

 

So you are saying that F2P content is enough to keep new players happy?

[Guest Smelly Paws]

Hamtaro's article seems quite irrelevant. It's based on a quote made in 2009. The game and the company have changed considerably since then. No point in making a critical article based on something we all know to be out of date. I know that the tipit hangs on every word ever said by employees at Jagex ever but this is getting silly.

[Scherzo 19]

In ALG's article, he worries if the competitions between the different gods will be biased towards Saradomin and Zamorak - the gods we've heard the most about, and who are most present in the game.

 

I think we'll see that a lot of people will support these gods, in addition to Zaros, since he have bribed the majority of players with both/either curses and ancient magic.

I don't really think this is a problem though. Rather than having a number of totally equal factions, doesn't it make sense that it would be easier to recruit for Saradomin, the god who has been the "default" God for big parts of the Gielinor community (at least among humans)? More work are needed if Bandos is going to be end up on the wining side, and that fits good with the lore.

 

That said, this does however rely that the way these competitions are held are not simply a man-count of how many people show allegiance to the different gods, but rather something active, so that a dedicated Bandos horde can compete, and feel that getting people over to their side actually helps.

 

Last but not least: While I hope that there will be rewards that make it worthwhile for a reward fixed community to participate; I really hope that the rewards will not be so big everyone just joins the obvious winning team, ending up with a similiar effect as one warband chat monopolising warbands. If people end up choosing the god they feel match their values best, and then their participation in the contest actually helps, then I'm looking really forward to this update!

[darthaddict 2]

You also have to remember that there are npc that talk about the different gods. Hopefully that will cause more diversity than people choosing the same god as everyone else.

[Ammako 1770]

I would be shocked to see any new players genuinely want to purchase membership without encouragement from a friend.

 

So you are saying that F2P content is enough to keep new players happy?

No, it's enough to make them go "This sucks"

[thejollyroger 17]

Hamtaro's article seems quite irrelevant. It's based on a quote made in 2009. The game and the company have changed considerably since then. No point in making a critical article based on something we all know to be out of date. I know that the tipit hangs on every word ever said by employees at Jagex ever but this is getting silly.

 

Not to mention it reopens the old "F2P needs more updates" discussion (e.g. threads as such) that drove many of us who used to moderate here batty. I was hoping that got put to bed, but it seems to be sleepwalking, now...

 

As for Alg's article on emissaries-- well, I'm stoked, but I freely admit to being a quest freak, and I am excited purely on the additions to the RS lore.

[helring 254]

Hail Zaros, can't wait for the emissaries.

[OldKStater 6]

The rant seems to be typical of those who want something for nothing. It takes real money to maintain and develop games like Runescape. As a developer for 30 years, including working for some top publishers in the business world, I know how much money it takes. Such money is not spontaneously created--it must come from customers. So there must be a reason for them to pay for it--more features.

 

The point the original quote was trying to make is that if you considered F2P in its own right, it would make a very nice game. It is complete in itself, without the normal artificial boundaries. Most "Demos" have artificial boundaries. I believe several other on-line "free" versions have limits of 20 on the levels you can achieve. Many demos have a day limit or hour limit you can play. The fact that F2P Runescape has neither sets it apart. I played for nearly a year F2P and for hundreds of hours before I converted. The point is that F2P is a very nice and very playable subset of Runescape that you can play for a long time.

 

The likeness to an "expansion pack" is very appropriate. I have purchased dozens of games and their expansion packs. Most expansion packs provide extra units or capabilities, more quests (usually called scenarios), and more maps. That is exactly what the relationship of P2P is to F2P--about 10 or so more skills, about 3-5 times the map space, and hundreds more scenarios (I mean quests).

 

As for the Squeal of Fortune--you must understand that it (and Solomon's store) were added to separate customers from their money in a voluntary manner. Give them a teaser to get them hooked, and then allow them to buy additional items/capabilities. The ranter has swallowed the hook but refuses to be reeled in; if he will not accept that, then he does not deserve any additional items/capabilities.

 

There is an old, and apparently forgotten saying, "you get what you pay for." If you want more simply pay for more. If you don't like what is offered, then don't pay for it. You may complain that it is not enough. But do not be surprised if the seller does not want to provide more at the price you are willing to pay. If he cannot make a profit, he has no incentive to offer more. In your case, you are offering no money, so he has little incentive to offer you more content. Be satisfied with what he does give to you as F2P. That has been significant over the last few years, when you consider how much you have paid for it. If that is not enough, then pay for it and become P2P.

[Fallstar 614]

MTX could have been added in a far more balanced and tasteful manner than the SoF.