44 replies to this topic

[Piu]

 

Here's a rough summary of the whole video for those who can't afford to watch the full length of it.

 

0:00-3:36 - Introduction

3:36-4:04 - Test subjects

4:05-7:33 - Live footage of subjects trying RuneScape 3

7:33-9:49 - Live footage of subjects trying Old School RuneScape

9:49-16:15 - Thoughts on each game

 

I quote the ending:

"So the results basically say this: That RS07 was by far the better tutorial and overall the more attractive game for newcomers. There were pros and cons to both of the games and neither was perfect."

 

"Most people prefer the old combat system, even though it was simpler."

 

Although it was a small sample size, I believe the survey was well conducted and does shed light on some interesting details that some of us have been oblivious to before such as the tutorial, new game mechanics and overall fresh user experience.

 

What are your thoughts on this?

[xpx]

The points in favor of 07scape also apply to RSC, but noone is playing that... Really, you need to move on. Runescape wasn't super popular in 07 because of the gameplay and graphics. 

[vmser]

RS3 does have a steeper learning curve as far as the combat aspect goes, but it allows for more variation which can make it easier to stick around to it.

 

Given combat is the first thing people will get into, the 'simplicity' makes it more accessible to newcomers. Whereas the complexity is for some (mostly high end)players one of the reasons to keep going at it. Given the current player base is rather top-heave (stats wise), RS3 should have more appeal to the active playerbase then newcomers.

 

Momentum should probably be made mandatory for the first X levels or so though, to avoid the steepness of the learning curve.

[Ulysses]

A very interesting video.

 

I guess more serious gamers nowadays prefer to spend their time on games like dota2, sc2 or the myriad of fps games. So what's left are the casual gamers who either prefer simpler, and less competitive games or just haven't got enough time to devote to those games (where time invested actually matters imo). But I think RS3 is a lot more beginner friendly/forgiving than its predecessors (RS2 and RSC) - the learning curve for combat could be seen as steep, if you compare it against the simpler RS2, but I would imagine most newcomers would have had some degree of exposure to other titles in the MMORPG genre - where such ability bar-driven combat is the norm. And I guess the strive for efficiency is also not unique to RS3 (in terms of ability bar setup with revolution, gearing, training etc.), and one could always go back and adopt the trial and error or do-whatever-you-want methods.

 

The other things that matters is the first impression. It seems like Jagex has been trying to repackage the game, to shake off the negative stereotype, which is still a bit of a stigma within the gaming community (have had some interesting conversation with gamers in rs and others from time to time). I can see they have done some serious work with the the fancy CG trailers, new website, new tutorials and skill introduction, but the core aspects of the game remain largely unchanged from RS2 to 3. But if the potential market of casual newcomers don't have much previous experience in the genre, it does make sense that they prefer the modest version with simple interfaces, combat and skilling systems (...but then why would they decide to join? Especially with the rise of mobile games). If this is the case, then the trailers and those fancy new additions (like cosmetics) wouldn't have made much of a difference.

 

As for the continuation of existing players, I guess most people who have already had experience in other more 'complex' MMORPG, and so the move up to RS3 isn't going to be all that difficult. I think changes are good and necessary (over time), which is why these polls about bringing back things of the past can be quite dangerous. Nostalgia can be seen as denial of the present; a general unwillingness to step out of the comfort zone, and I think this kind of mentality does more harm than good to the game - forever living in the past. If they wanted to change the results to the video in the original post, i.e. to bring back former players and attracting new players, they need to think of something actually new to them, recreating the 'wow!' factor.

[Sy_Accursed]

I think some question could be raised around the test subjects themselves.

I mean a non-gamer is likely to prefer the simpler OSRS because it is simpler and they do not understand more complex gaming systems.

Whilst an experienced gamer is likely to prefer the more complex game because they can actually understand it easier.

Not to mention the very small sample size, 6 people doesn't really give a real idea of any actual trends or overall studies - Especially when you consider they are HIS friends you expect them to have similar personality to him and thus would likely have similar opinions on a lot of issues which creates an obvious bias.

The fact they are older players trying something aimed at a younger audience the 'retro' thing that reminds them of their childhood obviously has a bias (I mean ask any 20 something and they will gladly spout out about the awesomeness of rewatching kids shows from their youth despite the fact they look absolutely rubbish compared to modern things - its a natural age bias. Heck one guy even went on and on about liking it because it is retro.)

etc.

 

Some of the smaller nuances it brings up is certainly worthy of note though (even if we rather knew a lot of these already) - things like the new interfaces having no obvious X-button for logging out.

The fact that the darker more mysterious style is preferential to the bright-friendly style they plastered in to many newer things.

Tutorial isn't working quite right.

etc.

 

I find the 'approve-disapprove' scale a bit misleading on some answers though:

Graphics mostly people said they looked cartoonish and were alright yet they all got lumped in 'disapprove' despite the fact largely they didn't say anything overly negative.

Combat system again they mostly got 'disapprove' but that oversimplifies it because most didn't say it was like totally bad they just said it was a bit slow - which to me is more of a middle ground.

And some of them don't really show much at all like 'would you keep playing?' - That's kinda entirely subjective since for the most part these are not people in the target market and openly not mmorpg-type gamers. They aren't really the type you'd expect to engage and play longterm.

 

I'd definitely agree with the sort of 'start with old combat' type curve - I'd said a fair while ago that really you should start with click and wait and then sort of lvl 20 or so start to bring in abilities and build it up like that.

[muggiwhplar]

I can't really think of many ways in which RS3 is superior to OSRS, with the exception of irrelevant things like graphics.

The OSRS community seems much more happy and grateful, the Jmods are much more respected and transparent, the updates are consistently well-received, there's plenty of exciting content to look forward to every month without delays, the game is more social and interactive, and everybody has different goals (as opposed to everybody just trying to max and PvM).

[Alg]

Heck one guy even went on and on about liking it because it is retro.

I get the feeling that the retro aesthetic is making a comeback thanks to indie games. There's a pretty big market for that kind of thing (not just because of nostalgia) and you can't discount it just because it's not as flashy as newer games. What's cartoony and dated to one can be simple and expressive to another, while realistic and gritty can just as easily be dull and uninspired (Zelda: Wind Waker versus Twilight Princess, or Team Fortress 2 versus CoD/Battlefield. Not saying anything about the quality, but you can do different things with each aesthetic)

 

I might not like OSRS, but I still think they could learn a thing or two from it... Not the more-blatant-than-RS3 pandering elements (you're playing a game made specifically to cater to RS07 players who are upset about EoC, they're probably going to agree on stuff), of course, but the simplicity/clarity of it. RS3 is less a consistent game and more a collection of needlessly complicated features from different eras that only barely fit together. Too many cooks, and all that.

 

Or, as has been said before, compare it to other free MMOs (rather than itself) and see how it stands up. I tried a couple a few years ago and (at least from a couple of hours of gameplay) their combat systems managed to be about as involved as EoC without all of its arbitrary complexity - each action felt necessary and strategic. On the other hand, Scape has noncombat skills and options that had about as much depth as combat, and story-driven quests rather than gameplay-driven quests... Nowadays they've neglected the former and bad writing plagues the latter.

[Sy_Accursed]

 

Heck one guy even went on and on about liking it because it is retro.

I get the feeling that the retro aesthetic is making a comeback thanks to indie games. There's a pretty big market for that kind of thing (not just because of nostalgia) and you can't discount it just because it's not as flashy as newer games. It's simple, expressive

 

I might not like OSRS, but I still think they could learn a thing or two from it... Not the more-blatant-than-RS3 pandering elements (you're playing a game made specifically to cater to RS07 players who are upset about EoC, they're probably going to agree on stuff), of course, but the simplicity/clarity of it. RS3 is less a consistent game and more a collection of needlessly complicated features from different eras that only barely fit together.

 

Or, as has been said before, compare it to other free MMOs (rather than itself) and see how it stands up. I tried a couple a few years ago and (at least from a couple of hours of gameplay) their combat systems managed to be about as involved as EoC without all of its arbitrary complexity - each action felt like it meant something. On the other hand, Scape has noncombat skills and options, and story-driven quests rather than gameplay-driven quests... Nowadays they've neglected the former and bad writing plagues the latter.

 

 

Retro has been in for a while, but its already getting quite tired and old hat as people look forward with the innovations of the new wave of consoles.

Equally yes indie games playing up the retro can work wonderfully, but I don't think a game like Runescape in the mainstream market can compete by trying to play up the retro and equally it was simply making the point that in this 'study' the test subjects weren't all that sound - they all seemed to like the nostalgia that the retro-look brought to them reminding them of what games were like when they were younger not because it added anything to the game or made it more appeal especially considering as the video admits the target audience is much younger and that 'retro' feel is gonna be totally lost on them because they come from a generation where things look so much better.

 

Retro is certainly a hot button trend right now but it'll be dead soon enough and when the target market is an age that retro look is lost on and in a market that doesn't really play with the whole retro scheme it just seems like it'd be a bad idea to chase simply because people older than the target market get tingly nostalgia feels over low-res bad graphics that are a retro relic from their childhood.

[PolarBearBlue]

 

 

Heck one guy even went on and on about liking it because it is retro.

I get the feeling that the retro aesthetic is making a comeback thanks to indie games. There's a pretty big market for that kind of thing (not just because of nostalgia) and you can't discount it just because it's not as flashy as newer games. It's simple, expressive

 

I might not like OSRS, but I still think they could learn a thing or two from it... Not the more-blatant-than-RS3 pandering elements (you're playing a game made specifically to cater to RS07 players who are upset about EoC, they're probably going to agree on stuff), of course, but the simplicity/clarity of it. RS3 is less a consistent game and more a collection of needlessly complicated features from different eras that only barely fit together.

 

Or, as has been said before, compare it to other free MMOs (rather than itself) and see how it stands up. I tried a couple a few years ago and (at least from a couple of hours of gameplay) their combat systems managed to be about as involved as EoC without all of its arbitrary complexity - each action felt like it meant something. On the other hand, Scape has noncombat skills and options, and story-driven quests rather than gameplay-driven quests... Nowadays they've neglected the former and bad writing plagues the latter.

 

 

Retro has been in for a while, but its already getting quite tired and old hat as people look forward with the innovations of the new wave of consoles.

Equally yes indie games playing up the retro can work wonderfully, but I don't think a game like Runescape in the mainstream market can compete by trying to play up the retro and equally it was simply making the point that in this 'study' the test subjects weren't all that sound - they all seemed to like the nostalgia that the retro-look brought to them reminding them of what games were like when they were younger not because it added anything to the game or made it more appeal especially considering as the video admits the target audience is much younger and that 'retro' feel is gonna be totally lost on them because they come from a generation where things look so much better.

 

Retro is certainly a hot button trend right now but it'll be dead soon enough and when the target market is an age that retro look is lost on and in a market that doesn't really play with the whole retro scheme it just seems like it'd be a bad idea to chase simply because people older than the target market get tingly nostalgia feels over low-res bad graphics that are a retro relic from their childhood.

 

 

While I agree Jagex shouldn't try to market Runescape in the retro space, I disagree with you saying that retro will be dead soon enough. Like you said, retro works very well for indie games and considering many indie games get their start as apps for phones and small media devices, I would be inclined to say at the very least retro style games will be a niche market. But I don't see it dying out.

 

As for the survey I agree with some of the points there and earlier points you made. The game is indeed too bright and if they could fix the color I think that will solve a large part of the problem. I also do agree some of the comments did not belong in the disapprove section of the survey and were more undecided/indifferent.

 

And while I am used to it, I do agree the interface is too much and combat to complex for a newcomer, experienced or not. Player probably should have similar combat and interface like OSRS until they reach a certain point where they can diversify their playing experience.

 

As for the tutorial, it was talked about in a topic in either the general discussion or rant forum and I think one of the solutions there was to introduce what one needed to know as they go along. I personally feel the current tutorial is better than what they previously had for RS3, but is still worse than OSRS. At the same I feel OSRS tutorial is just too long and some of the details there can be done away with, especially since we have quest that can teach you the same thing. Introduce what people need to know know and as they explore give them the option to learn more.

 

I'd love to see a follow up to this with more subjects, a longer term playing. Like having a certain sample size play a beginner account and actually build their account up on both sides of the game.

[V O R K]

I can't really think of many ways in which RS3 is superior to OSRS, with the exception of irrelevant things like graphics.

The OSRS community seems much more happy and grateful, the Jmods are much more respected and transparent, the updates are consistently well-received, there's plenty of exciting content to look forward to every month without delays, the game is more social and interactive, and everybody has different goals (as opposed to everybody just trying to max and PvM).

 

And they are receiving a complete overhaul of the wilderness.

 

Sometimes I wonder why they bother asking for feedback in RS3 when they seem to only adjust in OSRS (major).

 

Must swap moolah...

[muggiwhplar]

 

I can't really think of many ways in which RS3 is superior to OSRS, with the exception of irrelevant things like graphics.

The OSRS community seems much more happy and grateful, the Jmods are much more respected and transparent, the updates are consistently well-received, there's plenty of exciting content to look forward to every month without delays, the game is more social and interactive, and everybody has different goals (as opposed to everybody just trying to max and PvM).

 

And they are receiving a complete overhaul of the wilderness.

 

Sometimes I wonder why they bother asking for feedback in RS3 when they seem to only adjust in OSRS (major).

 

Must swap moolah...

 

 

Ironically, right after I posted that, they decided to nerf NMZ which means I probably won't be playing RSOS anymore since I have neither the time nor the patience to train magic "traditionally."

 

Other than that, though, I still stand by my point and can't really see any aspects of RS3 which are superior to OSRS.

[Ammako]

I can't really think of many ways in which RS3 is superior to OSRS, with the exception of irrelevant things like graphics.

The OSRS community seems much more happy and grateful, the Jmods are much more respected and transparent, the updates are consistently well-received, there's plenty of exciting content to look forward to every month without delays, the game is more social and interactive, and everybody has different goals (as opposed to everybody just trying to max and PvM).

 
And they are receiving a complete overhaul of the wilderness.
 
Sometimes I wonder why they bother asking for feedback in RS3 when they seem to only adjust in OSRS (major).
 
Must swap moolah...

 
Ironically, right after I posted that, they decided to nerf NMZ which means I probably won't be playing RSOS anymore since I have neither the time nor the patience to train magic "traditionally."
 
Other than that, though, I still stand by my point and can't really see any aspects of RS3 which are superior to OSRS.

Not even the aspect where Magic can be trained much faster, which is good when you don't have the time nor the patience to do it traditionally?

Or did you mean that this is the only aspect of RS3 you find superior to OSRS?

[muggiwhplar]

 

 

 

I can't really think of many ways in which RS3 is superior to OSRS, with the exception of irrelevant things like graphics.

The OSRS community seems much more happy and grateful, the Jmods are much more respected and transparent, the updates are consistently well-received, there's plenty of exciting content to look forward to every month without delays, the game is more social and interactive, and everybody has different goals (as opposed to everybody just trying to max and PvM).

 
And they are receiving a complete overhaul of the wilderness.
 
Sometimes I wonder why they bother asking for feedback in RS3 when they seem to only adjust in OSRS (major).
 
Must swap moolah...

 

 
Ironically, right after I posted that, they decided to nerf NMZ which means I probably won't be playing RSOS anymore since I have neither the time nor the patience to train magic "traditionally."
 
Other than that, though, I still stand by my point and can't really see any aspects of RS3 which are superior to OSRS.

 

Not even the aspect where Magic can be trained much faster, which is good when you don't have the time nor the patience to do it traditionally?

Or did you mean that this is the only aspect of RS3 you find superior to OSRS?

 

 

Comparing magic (and training) in RS3 to OSRS is comparing apples to oranges in my case. I already have 99 magic in RS3 and I have no incentive to train anything in RS3. If I was level 1 magic in RS3 and it was free and AFK to get 1M magic xp/hour, I still wouldn't train it because I would be wasting my time. There's no reason for me to train magic in RS3, but in OSRS there is a reason for me to train magic (for PvP).

 

I would love to have 99 range, 99 mage, 99 strength, and 45 defense in OSRS because it would allow me to have the most fun doing what I enjoy the most in RS: PvP.

 

However, considering I no longer possess the time nor the patience to achieve that goal, that simply means that I will not be playing OSRS for any reason except to keep my kingdom at 100% approval. The NMZ nerf added a massive amount of time needed to hit that goal, and that is time which I do not possess. So therefore I have basically abandoned that goal because it's definitely not in by best interest to prioritize RS time over RL time.

 

Hope that makes sense.

[Ts_Stormrage]

I can't really think of many ways in which RS3 is superior to OSRS, with the exception of irrelevant things like graphics.

The OSRS community seems much more happy and grateful, the Jmods are much more respected and transparent, the updates are consistently well-received, there's plenty of exciting content to look forward to every month without delays, the game is more social and interactive, and everybody has different goals (as opposed to everybody just trying to max and PvM).

Completely and wholeheartedly agree...

 

Still not gonna start from utter scratch and train my account all the way back up after investing my time in my RS3 account, and I have a feeling that this is the only reason a lot of players stuck with RS3...

[Sobend]

So we are not "regular people?" That's a shame .

[muggiwhplar]

 

I can't really think of many ways in which RS3 is superior to OSRS, with the exception of irrelevant things like graphics.

The OSRS community seems much more happy and grateful, the Jmods are much more respected and transparent, the updates are consistently well-received, there's plenty of exciting content to look forward to every month without delays, the game is more social and interactive, and everybody has different goals (as opposed to everybody just trying to max and PvM).

Completely and wholeheartedly agree...

 

Still not gonna start from utter scratch and train my account all the way back up after investing my time in my RS3 account, and I have a feeling that this is the only reason a lot of players stuck with RS3...

 

 

Maybe I'm just a weirdo, but I enjoyed training an OSRS account from scratch. If I didn't genuinely enjoy questing for barrows gloves, or trying to get a fire cape with shitty stats and gear, or figuring out how to overcome the various challenges of a fresh economy along the way, then I wouldn't have played.

 

It wasn't until after I finished all the quests and got all the equipment I wanted that I realized: the only thing left for me to enjoy was PvP. And I couldn't PvP enjoyably without having 90+ str/mage/range. But the process of hitting those goals is a lot less enjoyable than the process of questing or the process of completing the fight caves. The process is so unenjoyable, in fact, that I would rather not play at all than subject myself to doing something I don't enjoy for hundreds of hours.

 

As much as I love oldschool PvP, sadly I don't love it enough to justify the massive investment required to achieve it.

 

But I have a feeling (especially on these forums) that I'm in the minority when I say that RS is about the journey not the destination.

[V O R K]

 

I can't really think of many ways in which RS3 is superior to OSRS, with the exception of irrelevant things like graphics.

The OSRS community seems much more happy and grateful, the Jmods are much more respected and transparent, the updates are consistently well-received, there's plenty of exciting content to look forward to every month without delays, the game is more social and interactive, and everybody has different goals (as opposed to everybody just trying to max and PvM).

Completely and wholeheartedly agree...

 

Still not gonna start from utter scratch and train my account all the way back up after investing my time in my RS3 account, and I have a feeling that this is the only reason a lot of players stuck with RS3...

 

 

Pretty much.

 

Although I am starting to believe in it, it's just rather annoying this new system has to be literally built from the ground. (PVP-wise)

 

Other then that aspect it's still a journey

[Ring_World]

Muggi, just MTK for another 6 months and barrage to 99.

[HisLordship]

I so rarely post here but maybe I should start posting more because I'm truly impressed.

This community is really intelligent and they don't bite each others' heads off.

All your points are noted and I'll stress one thing: that the video isn't meant to prove which game version is better.

It's only meant to show that RS3 can learn a lot of 07.

 

As for the retro debate, hmm....

Is it really a passing phase?

I thought Runescape was already behind other MMO's in graphics, sound and content back in 2007 too.

Yet it still managed to become wildly successful because of that retro feel.

If retro is a phase, it's been a phase for at least the past decade.

[Quyneax]

I think the current combat system does a good job of seeming complex, while it actually isn't, whereas the old system is the reverse. I'm not at all surprised that new people (somewhat) prefer the old tutorial and intuitive play to the new system. That said, I don't think that crafting the perfect ability rotation is much simpler to understand than the old accuracy equation, so there's that.