25-September-2013 - Runescape Bonds

[Estoc]

Officially buyable rsgp? About damn time.

[ilovecuttingyews]

Actually, it would mean that 5,800 + bonds have been re-traded. I know there's ALOT of people trying to flip them for a profit, usually meaning the pre-trade tax has already been paid. Just because 11,000 were redeemed for membership doesn't mean that there aren't many others that haven't been redeemed yet.

In addition, over 1000 have been gifted, which requires paying the tax. So that lowers the number of resold to 4800.

[Reliable]

 

Actually, it would mean that 5,800 + bonds have been re-traded. I know there's ALOT of people trying to flip them for a profit, usually meaning the pre-trade tax has already been paid. Just because 11,000 were redeemed for membership doesn't mean that there aren't many others that haven't been redeemed yet.

In addition, over 1000 have been gifted, which requires paying the tax. So that lowers the number of resold to 4800.

 

 

Not necessarily, as they could have bought the bonds, then gifted for the first trade, but definitely possible others bought from GE to gift.

[ilovecuttingyews]

Oh yeah. Forgot about that.

[Stev]

“Bonds can’t defeat gold farmers if blackmarket gold is cheaper”

On the surface this seems logical, but it’s not actually correct. It's really important to understand that Bonds do not need to undercut RWT prices in order to hurt the business of gold farmers. The price of Bonds in RSGP is player-decided, so the price will settle at the comfortable value players are willing to trade for. It doesn't matter if that is not as good as gold farm RWT because it's still sating the demand that gold farmers serve.

 

Even if, to start with, Bonds only rob the RWT gold farmers of half their trade, that is still serious damage to their business operations. I don’t believe Bonds should directly compete with gold farmer prices, as that isn’t necessary to still undermine their business, marginalise their place in the market and make them leave for greener pastures in more vulnerable online games.

People were clearly comfortable buying cheaper gold for ~$0.30/M from gold farmers. What in this update changes their mind to pay more to get it directly from Jagex? Security?.. I doubt it. The big RWT sites were trustworthy. They're just giving the option to RWT to the 50-60% who previously wouldn't RWT.

 

Also, as far as making them move on to a more vulnerable game.. A bit optimistic. Most of these sites have branches in multiple games. They won't just up-and-leave RuneScape.

[abellus]

Hi, I am Katie and I’m embarrassed to admit it but I bought gold from a gold farming site. The website re-used my parent’s credit card details and racked up thousands of dollars in fraudulent online purchases.

 

If there's one thing you can always rely on Jagex to do, it's scaremongering.

 

Seriously? Is this their strategy to combat RWT? Scare the population with the big bad boogieman terrorist RWT?

[Urza285]

Yeah fabricating examples is a no-no. That will break people's assurance that you are doing the right thing for the consumer.

[Aiel]

 

Hi, I am Katie and I’m embarrassed to admit it but I bought gold from a gold farming site. The website re-used my parent’s credit card details and racked up thousands of dollars in fraudulent online purchases.

 

If there's one thing you can always rely on Jagex to do, it's scaremongering.

 

Seriously? Is this their strategy to combat RWT? Scare the population with the big bad boogieman terrorist RWT?

 

wouldn't/shouldn't/don't they use paypal to convince consumers that fraud isn't something that's going to happen anyway?

[Kaur]

Hi, my name is Kaur and I have been playing RuneScape for over 10 years. I have a completionist cape and my levels are all maxed(Divination is a minigame)! I have worked very hard over my years of playing, and now I sit on a small fortune of resources, items and gold. Rather than keep spending my own money, I can now trade some of my game wealth for Bonds, redeeming them for many months of unbroken RuneScape membership without having to spend another Euro myself!

 

In other words, I can finally buy vet cape on my noob account and keepsake it without paying a cent.

 

[Ruinous Edge]

Hi, my name is Kaur and I have been playing RuneScape for over 10 years. I have a completionist cape and my levels are all maxed(Dungeoneering is a minigame)! I have worked very hard over my years of playing, and now I sit on a small fortune of resources, items and gold. Rather than keep spending my own money, I can now trade some of my game wealth for Bonds, redeeming them for many months of unbroken RuneScape membership without having to spend another Euro myself!

 

In other words, I can finally buy vet cape on my noob account and keepsake it without paying a cent.

 

Cool story but fixed one minor typo on your post :p

[NukeMarine]

Let's take bonds out of this entirely. Player A has a real life friend Player B. Player A gives his real life friend Player B's new character 100 million gp. Is that breaking the rules or is it fair?

Player B is in Player A's clan. Player A gives Player B 100 million gp. Is that breaking the rules or is it fair?

Look, fair trade was removed like it or not. Unbalanced trades are now allowed in the game. If you wanted to, you could give 1 billion gp in coins or items to anyone for any reason. The game's been that way for nigh on two years I believe.

Does it really matter that Player A gave 100 million to a player because they're his real life friend or clanmate compared to giving 100 million to an unknown player in exchange for 20 bonds? The results are the same in that noob players now have a lot of cash that came from another player and not from the game.

Except for the time in fair trade, you always had the ability to give money to friends, families or strangers. Now you just have the same ability, except now it can be in exchange for an item that offers runecoins, spins or membership days. Nothing is the game has changed except perhaps much more gp being put into circulation.

[God Of Lego]

Let's take bonds out of this entirely. Player A has a real life friend Player B. Player A gives his real life friend Player B's new character 100 million gp. Is that breaking the rules or is it fair?

 

Player B is in Player A's clan. Player A gives Player B 100 million gp. Is that breaking the rules or is it fair?

 

Look, fair trade was removed like it or not. Unbalanced trades are now allowed in the game. If you wanted to, you could give 1 billion gp in coins or items to anyone for any reason. The game's been that way for nigh on two years I believe.

 

Does it really matter that Player A gave 100 million to a player because they're his real life friend or clanmate compared to giving 100 million to an unknown player in exchange for 20 bonds? The results are the same in that noob players now have a lot of cash that came from another player and not from the game.

 

Except for the time in fair trade, you always had the ability to give money to friends, families or strangers. Now you just have the same ability, except now it can be in exchange for an item that offers runecoins, spins or membership days. Nothing is the game has changed except perhaps much more gp being put into circulation.

You forgot the pay to win aspect.

 

Player A buys 10 bonds for 30 pound.

Player A sells all bonds and makes 60m in 2 minutes.

 

That is my only problem with bonds.

[Quyneax]

@Nukemarine:

Are you seriously equating the ability to donate cash/items to the ability to trade cash/items for items that can only be bought for real-life cash? Those things are not the same. Almost nobody just 'donates' cash, because there's no immediate benefit to be gained (yes, it's nice, but that's it). You are effectively saying that all the current trades of gp-for-bonds would have been gp-for-nothing trades if this update hadn't happened. It's hard to take that statement seriously.

[God Of Lego]

Donating cash aspect of it is just Jagex going hey look we are nice. But in reality. If someone were to really want to donate cash they would not buy a bond. They would go dirrect and give the charity the 100% rather than 5-10% max.

 

Sure there will be the odd person who quits and blows their money on donations though. Or simular stories if they were fundrasing for the sake of it.

[abellus]

If Jagex had implemented this 5 years ago there would be 500-man riots in every world. Yet, its implemented now and there is hardly a peep.

 

We've gotten so used to all the little unethical things Jagex has done over the years that we aren't even bothered by an update like this anymore.

 

I mean, come on. Jagex is now flat out endorsing the idea that the wealthy in real life deserve more power in the game. They've completely nullified the 'RPG' aspect of their game. Doesn't this update deserve more outrage than its currently recieving?

[God Of Lego]

I think the difference between MMG running things and Andrew Gower running things is that. Andrew, he created the game. He loved the game, his main goal was to create an amazing game. As the management of the game went from Andrew to MMG. MMG did not have that kind of heart as its not his. Hes a buisness man. At the end of the day. Even if andrew was leading now, he wouldn't of done something so drastic as he was still 100m+ in pocket anyway. The difference here is MMG is on a payroll and possibly bonus' and that leads to corruption I guess.

[Sy_Accursed]

But is it really 'corruption'?

 

Or is someone viewing thing as a business exactly what a game like Runescape needs to survive?

It's all very well making an amazing game but if the business is not viable it will flicker out and die as quickly as it was made.

 

I'd much rather have an amazing game with longevity that has a few RWT-esque features I'm not a huge fan of than one that is a forgetten relic because it wasn't financially viable.

[abellus]

But is it really 'corruption'?

 

Or is someone viewing thing as a business exactly what a game like Runescape needs to survive?

It's all very well making an amazing game but if the business is not viable it will flicker out and die as quickly as it was made.

 

I'd much rather have an amazing game with longevity that has a few RWT-esque features I'm not a huge fan of than one that is a forgetten relic because it wasn't financially viable.

 

But in their quest to restore fairness to RuneScape, they've actually just introduced the most unfair thing a developer could possibly introduce... buying coins for cash. They've accomplished the complete opposite of their original goal.

 

A game isn't worth playing when lil' bill gates jr. down the street can buy more GP than you could ever earn playing the game legitimately.

[helring]

I think the difference between MMG running things and Andrew Gower running things is that. Andrew, he created the game. He loved the game, his main goal was to create an amazing game. As the management of the game went from Andrew to MMG. MMG did not have that kind of heart as its not his. Hes a buisness man. At the end of the day. Even if andrew was leading now, he wouldn't of done something so drastic as he was still 100m+ in pocket anyway. The difference here is MMG is on a payroll and possibly bonus' and that leads to corruption I guess.

 

I don't know, It's possible that Andrew knew that something would have to be done and left so that he wouldn't have to be here to see it happen.

 

If Jagex had implemented this 5 years ago there would be 500-man riots in every world. Yet, its implemented now and there is hardly a peep.

 

We've gotten so used to all the little unethical things Jagex has done over the years that we aren't even bothered by an update like this anymore.

 

I mean, come on. Jagex is now flat out endorsing the idea that the wealthy in real life deserve more power in the game. They've completely nullified the 'RPG' aspect of their game. Doesn't this update deserve more outrage than its currently recieving?

 

I don't think what they're doing is unethical. I think its perfectly ethical, but I still agree that 5 years ago the community would have been rioting, but a lot has changed since then. Squeal had already made the game pay to win to a certain degree.

 

The RPG aspect is still in the game, what they've nullified is some of the achievement and work behind it. However, it appears that a large portion of the community had already nullified that. Whether you agree with Jagex's number or not, several polls have come out such as the reddit one that have shown that there were around 30% of the community rwt'ing before bonds even came out. This surprised me because reddit seemed to be a community relatively hostile to rwt'ers and if they had 30% then its possible Jagex's numbers were closer than I'd like to believe. We had the appearance of a generally level playing field without actually having one. Was the appearance of a fair field when there wasn't one preferable to a field where its much clearer, I'm not sure..possibly.

 

However, I think this system has some benefits. It does allow those who can't afford or don't want to pay in real life the ability to earn membership and solomons stuff completely through ingame work. So, in some ways this system benefits those who by real-life circumstance would be unable to play otherwise. I must admit this system will benefit me, there's a lot of solomons stuff that I want that I couldn't afford. Ultimately, I think its an opinion. 5 years ago I would have been extremely angry at this, but today as I think about it, I think the benefits outweigh the negatives considering that whether it was 40-50% as Jagex said, 30% as the reddit poll said, or even less than that 10-20%....the field was already unfair. This at least allows those of us who refuse or can't afford to buy gold to benefit.

[abellus]

I don't think what they're doing is unethical. I think its perfectly ethical, but I still agree that 5 years ago the community would have been rioting, but a lot has changed since then. Squeal had already made the game pay to win to a certain degree.

 

The RPG aspect is still in the game, what they've nullified is some of the achievement and work behind it. However, it appears that a large portion of the community had already nullified that. Whether you agree with Jagex's number or not, several polls have come out such as the reddit one that have shown that there were around 30% of the community rwt'ing before bonds even came out. This surprised me because reddit seemed to be a community relatively hostile to rwt'ers and if they had 30% then its possible Jagex's numbers were closer than I'd like to believe. We had the appearance of a generally level playing field without actually having one. Was the appearance of a fair field when there wasn't one preferable to a field where its much clearer, I'm not sure..possibly.

 

However, I think this system has some benefits. It does allow those who can't afford or don't want to pay in real life the ability to earn membership and solomons stuff completely through ingame work. So, in some ways this system benefits those who by real-life circumstance would be unable to play otherwise. I must admit this system will benefit me, there's a lot of solomons stuff that I want that I couldn't afford. Ultimately, I think its an opinion. 5 years ago I would have been extremely angry at this, but today as I think about it, I think the benefits outweigh the negatives considering that whether it was 40-50% as Jagex said, 30% as the reddit poll said, or even less than that 10-20%....the field was already unfair. This at least allows those of us who refuse or can't afford to buy gold to benefit.

 

 

That's nonsense. SOF is unethical. Solomon is unethical. Bonds are unethical. Just because RWT existed before Jagex endorsed it doesn't make it right. Jagex has no justification for supporting it.

 

Where are you going to draw the line? When Jagex starts selling level 99s for bonds? When they start selling characters for bonds? When they start selling quests for bonds? Hell, what's stopping them. They're already selling GP.

 

All that would be totally ethical in your eyes, because everyone is already doing it, right?

[Sy_Accursed]

I think it is wrong to throw around unethical as a term for this, it means to not conform to approved standards of social or professional behaviour.

 

Given the games market as a whole, using microtransactions is a perfectly viable business model that pretty much every single game out there uses to some extent now. So by all standards Jagex doing such things is conforming to the social standards of the gaming industry, the exact opposite of being unethical.

 

What is so wrong about Jagex offering the same thing every other game out there is offering in order to survive?

[ilovecuttingyews]

Just to clarify, MMG took over for Geoff Iddison and Constant Tedder before that. Near the time he left Andrew was the principle architect, on the board of governors, and majority share holder (with his brothers) but not CEO. He still essentially ran the show, but Andrew's role was more or less the role that IVP now fills with the addition of some of Mod Mark's duties.

 

And since Jagex is no longer in the hands of a person, and rather a venture capital firm, capitalist ethics apply rather than personal ethics.

[helring]

Sy basically covered my stance on this. I wouldn't consider any of those decisions unethical...probably would consider them stupid though.

[Alg]

That's nonsense. SOF is unethical. Solomon is unethical. Bonds are unethical. Just because RWT existed before Jagex endorsed it doesn't make it right. Jagex has no justification for supporting it.

[abellus]

I think it is wrong to throw around unethical as a term for this, it means to not conform to approved standards of social or professional behaviour.

 

Given the games market as a whole, using microtransactions is a perfectly viable business model that pretty much every single game out there uses to some extent now. So by all standards Jagex doing such things is conforming to the social standards of the gaming industry, the exact opposite of being unethical.

 

What is so wrong about Jagex offering the same thing every other game out there is offering in order to survive?

 

Updates need to be judged-- the term 'unethical' is perfectly fine to describe certain updates.

 

I don't understand your first argument. Essentially, you are arguing that since everyone else is doing it, Jagex is justified in doing it too? That's not a valid argument at all.

 

Keeping a game alive is a fine practice by itself. But when you have to sacrafice the game's core integrity to do so, the game just isn't worth holding on to anymore.

 

I won't accuse you of being blinded by nostalgia, because I don't know that. But there are certainly many people on this board that are. They can't see past the fact that Runescape is no longer an RPG and is now Facebook with swords. They have so much time invested in the game that they'll support any decision Jagex makes to artificially prolong the life of the game so long as they get to keep their maxed character. I mean, come on, active users have been declining since, what, 2009? The claim "Runescape is better than ever" falls flat on its face.