This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | → | Archive 15 |
First off, the community secsion is a long one. So lets talk about spliting it into its own article. Secend, how about a Runescape scam article? Dr. Good 01:40, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
Two general things which you should know if bringing up something here:
When I try to look at the ar my browser shows the "This page cannot be displayed" error. Its quite odd if you ask me (especially cause every other page seems to work). Does anyone know what is wrong? Is it Wikipedia or is it my problem? W IKIPEE DIO 15:16, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
I had the same problem - couldn't get into this page, but all the other pages in the series were fine. It seems to be fixed now. Xela Yrag 18:07, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
Holiday items are special items dropped on holidays that are only availible on the day of relese. The more expencive items are items that are wearable for example party hats, h'ween masks and santa hats.The non-equipable items are pumpkins and easter eggs. After all these holiday items were made all of them are non tradeable.
Party hats are the rareist they run from (purple)90 million to (blue) 250 million
H'ween masks- green 11 million, blue 17 million, Red 25 Million
Santa hat- 30
million
Pumpkin-4.6 million
easter egg- 3.6 million
These items are very rare and are wanted my all players.
Hi guys. I have made a proposal for a decision about fansite links. It applies for this article, the portal, and the rest of the series. Please help me by voting on it. Thank you. Dtm142 23:37, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
I think that there should be a few links to the fansites such as Runehq which jagex now deems okay to say ingame. However, it may cause visitors to go to the fansite instead of staying on wikipidea. Eugene0k1 15:58, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
I agree the major 3 should be included possibly more, Zybez, Tip.it, Rune HQ Jrabbit05 18:13, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
I agree too.
You can say runeHQ in game because you can say "Rune" and "HQ" alone. You can also say Zybez(UNless that changed)
they shouldnt take my changes just because they have the power to delete my stuff but other than than that this is a very good service. the end lol. if anyone agrees they will wright on this and say "yea" later lol.
i wasnt being extra long i just changed he or she to players and stuff like that nothing big and now i cant edit runescape at all just because im new and thats a CRIME? i just dont think its right cause ive done nothing wrong. flare mage22
give it a few days... you'll beable to edit it then. Acethebunny
i have waited for like 1 month now since the begining of may!!! flare mage22
User 70.72.51.118 http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Special:Contributions&target=70.72.51.118 Talk) added a link to http://www.runehq.com on Jagex, where it probably doesn't belong. Should it be added to the RuneScape page or another page in the same category?
Apart from finding one spelling mistake, do you have any other examples? One instance of a spelling mistake hardly makes the game "unconsistent" with "more spelling errors than other major MMORPGs." Unsless you can find... oh, 20 or so, I would say that this does not at all justify this sentence. Is ther any source to back up that it is "known as this"? Clq 11:39, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
If it's a notable fact, add it - • The Giant Puffin • 12:47, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
I havn't been to active with this article so I problably missed this:why are clans not mentioned at all? Is it a decision like no fan site? .... Coasttocoast 02:03, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
If you think that the part about clans is not complete enough on the Wilderness article, by all means, have a go at it. I am not a member of a clan and have nothing to do with clans if I can avoid them. I don't have anything against them as I am rarely in the Wilderness, but I don't understand why anyone would want to be in a clan other than to have backup when PKing. Maybe you are the one who could enlighten us. Just keep the basic rules in mind, especially neutral point of view and encyclopedic content rather than how-to guide. (Oh, and imho, I don't think you should list any clan names - how would you objectively decide which ones to include and which to leave out; and they change too often - sort of like fansites.) Xela Yrag 16:41, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
clans are listed briefly because clans are created by players joining together and is not made by any of the staff of jagex! so of corse it is going to be small! if you want it bigger then make it bigger no one is stopping u. flare mage22
Jagex censors some clan leaders name. I'm not in a clan for Pk support. I'm in it for a much closer community than a fansite. There are many events that are non-pking in clans too.
Why is there no information regarding the incident long ago during October of 2004 when an Autorune glitch allowed the duplication of Party Hats. I know it caused a stir in the Runescape world, yet why is it not in the articles?
This is a fair point. It is a significant point in RuneScape's history, and affected a lot of people. And it also allowed me to get a nicer party hat a few months after :D Seriously though, if someone feels the same way as me I think it should at least be mentioned in the article, at least with a few factual sentences. I vote it should be mentioned. Anyone else? Clq 13:10, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
ive never heard of it Rdunn 16:26, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
Neither have I. Could someone please explain what it is?~Akroy
if we were to make a section on glitches it would be one way long section and would cause to many areas of open vandalisim oportunities. i agree with jj sagnella it was not a major event. flare mage22 WASN"T A MAJOR EVENT!!?!?!? SOme people duplicated hundreds or even thousands of PHATS that even some players that didn't play classicknow about and it wasn't major??
Is this section needed? See WP:BEANS... J.J.Sagnella 18:46, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
I can't log in to the game at work, but was just told by a friend that the Construction skill is up and running. It would be nice if we were able to get information on here ASAP, at least I think it would be. Anyone up to the challenge? Xela Yrag 15:08, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
"This week sees the release of our biggest and most anticipated update this year: player-owned houses. No longer must RuneScape members wander the world endlessly, never being able to sit down or have a place to call their own. Members can build their houses and make furniture using the new Construction skill. Start by building a cottage with a few chairs around a fire, and add rooms and gain levels until you have your own palace. Some pieces of furniture will unlock new abilities, magic spell tablets, and even chairs you can sit down in.
This incredible update features over 20 rooms, 330 pieces of furniture, 11 new NPCs, 12 dungeon monsters, craftable toys, new armour and shields, trophy rooms, tool racks, different architectural styles, butlers and a whole host of new games to play with your house guests!
Basic houses, rooms and furniture are priced cheaply enough so that most members will be able to afford somewhere to live. We have also made lots of features for our more opulent players to be able to show off their wealth. If you get your construction level high enough and you're rich enough you can build an entire dungeon to challenge your friends, you might even be able to add your own dragon to it! Or how about a throne room? - with a throne of crystal!
Fancy a change of scene? As you go up levels your house can be rebuilt in completely different designs ranging from the Rimmington “Shack” look, the Rellekkan Longhall and the Brimhaven Beach-house.
To start you must buy a small house from any of the estate agents in Seers' Village (north-west of the bank), Falador (between the furnace and the east bank), Ardougne (west of the eastern bank) or Varrock (east of the castle).
A full guide to the skill can be found in the Knowledge Base. Open the door to your new “home from home” today!
Note - we were originally going to call this skill "Carpentry", but the range of activities involved in the skill soon got much bigger than that title, so we widened it to "Construction".
Please be aware that the Tears of Guthix will not give Construction xp for a while. The god Guthix, in his immortal wisdom, does not wish to pry into your home so soon."
Changes that ive noticed:
Main login page and music (music avalible in game as homescape and is a mix of the main two themes). skills list has changed so you can see your total level (but not your combat level!) the quest page has changed so you can see your quest point there.
bugs in the update that ive noticed:
some of the items have a level of 0 when they obviously shouldnt be.
Rdunn 16:23, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
What items are listed as level 0? I'd like to see that lol RememberMe? 16:54, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
Someone has already edited the Skills article with a little bit of information on the new skill (very little), so we probably don't need much in the main article. I can't wait to get out of here, get home, and check it out! Blasted filters!! LOL Xela Yrag 20:02, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
wow... runescape people have been waiting for that update for so long. rburp
http://img93.imageshack.us/img93/8209/chap8qh.png here they are
Rdunn 08:40, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
I deleted the phrase that had been readded again, because I had not completely deleted it before. I had only moved it to the preceding paragraph, where I felt that it was a better fit. It shouldn't be in both paragraphs, but which paragraph is better for it is certainly a topic we can throw around (like a gnome ball, maybe?). Xela Yrag 14:13, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
The information that was added and correctly removed on the abilities of and resources for player moderators is classified as confidential information that is not to be published anywhere by anyone for any reason and is copywritten. Whether or not players have a "right" to know is not important. I feel that putting that information in the article would be a complete violation of copyright and is not verifiable without getting someone in a whole lot of trouble. Anyway, most of the important info (player mods can mute people and have access to special forums) is in the narrative paragraph. Xela Yrag 14:22, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
You can't publish pictures of the Mod Centre and the Mod Forums. They are copy-written and confidential and state that they are not to be copied anywhere. I don't see how you can get around that in order to copy them other than getting permission from Jagex, and, just guessing, but I really don't think they'll give permission. Xela Yrag 17:14, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
we need a P-mod to find a J-mod ingame and ask if they can post a picture of the mod centre on Wikipedia. (more than likely they will say no, but it's worth a try.--
Acethebunny 08:53, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
Urm...... can ye read?
Rdunn 20:07, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
Jagex will not allow screenshots of the Mod Centre or Forums, no matter what. All that players need to know about Player and Forum moderators is in the Knowledge Base of the RuneScape site and within the current information in this article.
ha Rdunn 17:20, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
I allready saw a picture.
Could there be a paragraph on the possible items that someone could merchant or other ways a person can make money? For example in world 66 a member can run laws and make 200k per hour. In world 16, a nonmember could run airs and make 100k per hour. There are also other tips like mining which I could include. Is it okay if I start such a section and how? (Sorry I'm kind of new so I'm sorry if my format is incorrect.) Eugene0k1 15:58, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
==Making Money== in world 66 a member can run laws and make 200k per hour. In world 16, a nonmember could run airs and make 100k per hour. There are also other tips like mining which I could include...
Best Wishes on Wikipedia, J.J.Sagnella 16:28, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. (I'm pretty new myself.) Would the information you are talking about be more appropriate for Wikibooks? It sounds like it is more strategy advice and "how-to-play" than descriptive. Just a thought. Xela Yrag 17:17, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
RuneScape Wikibooks was moved to strategy wiki. If you want to use a wiki, use the very small RuneScapeWiki, hosted on Wikia.
Wikipedia is not a game guid so do not put this. ( Koolsen0 01:43, 8 June 2006 (UTC))
This has been a busy week for server additions. We have a problem that I cannot solve at work today. There are 132 servers and 2 Classic servers, according to the "select your world" screen. However, our list, which agreed with the total yesterday, is off by one when we add the seven new Canadian servers to it. How this happened, I don't know, but I will fix it this evening when I get home if someone doesn't beat me to it today. Xela Yrag 17:11, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
I knew someone would solve the puzzle. Thanks for saving me a lot of time!!!! Xela Yrag 20:53, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
i will try to find out why there is no world 126-- Acethebunny 08:57, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
I put version five back in and reworked it a little. While it is not exactly a new version, how are we to know what version Jagex actually thinks they are on. This one, while not abvious to the player so much, seems to be one of the bigger changes that have happened. Allowing Jagex to expand the game while not using more memory for the player - that seems to me to be pretty major. I welcome any and all comments, but let's pretty please not get into a battle over it. We get along so well (well, those who don't vandalize do), and I would hate for this article to end up on the lame edit wars pages (LOL). Xela Yrag 20:12, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
Sigh - well if you want to leave the article horribly innacurate. But I can assure you the latest upgrade it not an entirely new version. I'm talking about the distinction between the developer starting an entirely new product from scratch and them just improving what they already have (Which they do almost every week). If you compare the difference between RS2 and rs-classic (or rsclassic and devious mud) they are VASTLY different, i.e they are almost completely different games. It just seems horribly inconsitent to list this upgrade and yet not list countless other equally big upgrades. Please explain the reasoning for this. To imply the latest upgrade is of the same scale as rs-classic->rs2 is wrong, and to imply the latest upgrade is somehow more special than several upgrades which aren't listed is also wrong. I keep a really close eye on the upgrades to the engine and what has actually changed internally because it interests me, and to be honest it's rather frustrating to fix the accuracy of something only to have it reverted based on an opinion rather than facts. Oh and being as you asked jagex's internal name for the current release is #412. The internal version numbers goes up by about 1 or 2 a week, and can be found by examining the bytecode (as can many other things about the engine version). Have you tried looking at the bytecode recently, or are you just reverting my edits on a whim? Runefire 07:47, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
I apologize for making you sigh, never my intention. I was just going by the news article that was posted on the main page by Jagex at the time they did the update. I can't give a reference right now because I cannot access the game at work, but the article basically stated that this update was different and more important, not necessarily to the player but to the developers. If I have somehow misunderstood this news blurb, I am more than willing to do whatever we need to do to get our article correct. And I am not a computer programmer, so I do not know, or particularly care, about the bytecode. (I have, however, been using computers since the "early days" to play RPG's from Zork forward.) I have never reverted anything on a whim and, if you look at the history, you can see that I have been working very diligently to get the spelling, grammar, and punctuation correct in the entire series of articles on RuneScape. I occasionally make mistakes, and am the first person to admit it when I do. I certainly don't think I deserve to be accused of reverting you on a whim. Xela Yrag 15:47, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
A game does not have to be linear to be considered to be a role-playing game (Baldur's Gate is certainly a RPG, but it is not linear; ditto the later Zelda games), so I agree that we should leave it the way Jagex refers to it, as MMORPG. Xela Yrag 15:51, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
I'm posting here two links about RS found by others in hopes we can use them.
http://www.thestandard.com/article.php?story=200403031708187 Hyenaste (tell) 12:45, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
Can we get some consensus on this whole section? I am not sure what should and what should not be included. I admit up front that I love this game and don't want to see it criticized. However, I do know that there are legitimate criticisms of the game. But we don't want this to be a list of anyone's pet peeves or a "rant" area where people edit it to post what terrible things happened to them today. That's what the forums are for. After reading the comments on the featured article page, I am thinking that there should be nothing here that cannot be referenced. Anything else is pure opinion and speculation. For instance, how do we know that the "substandard" graphics is a criticism. Yes, we can all see it, but isn't that subjective. I, for one, love the graphics of Myst; they were absolutely awesome for their day. However, the game was sadly lacking in playability. I finished it, but I wouldn't have gone out of my way to replace it if the CD-ROM had broken in two half way through. The graphics on RuneScape aren't awesome, but I would cry, literally, if something happened and I couldn't play. Is there a reference that we can quote, even if it is something from forums or somewhere, that states that "experts" say the graphics are substandard? I would ask the same question of every other criticism listed there - who says so and why should we listen to them? And I am not saying we should eliminate the criticisms section, just reference it and clean up the opinions. Comments and guidance please. Xela Yrag 21:16, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
Put in that it's updates are so buggy it's unbearable. I play the game lots, and it's unbearably stupid. -- 24.109.206.88 21:44, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
Since sometimes it is a shame to let good but inappropriate contributions go to waste, I have reproduced a contribution to this article below. This was written for Wikipedia in good faith, and is not vandalism, so should not be removed from here as such. Standard external links warnings apply. Hyenaste (tell) 05:53, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
June 5th, 2006: "The Omen"
|
My two cents - first, how do we know this is real, true, accurate (whatever word is most appropriate)? Just because there is supposedly a video, doesn't mean it hasn't been modified to show whatever the video makers want it to show. As this piece is is written, it is inflammatory, draws an inference that RuneScape has something to do with The Omen, and makes a big deal of a coincidence of dates to get the rabble roused into an uproar. BTW, 06/06/06 happens every thousand years, and it's never been a big deal before; why would it be different in this thousand, and why would it pick a computer game to start on (and a day early besides)? Do we want this article to fall into the "OMG, it's mark of the beast day" mentality? I would hate to see that happen. At best, this seems to me to be a backdoor approach to get a particular player's achievement of level 99 construction into the main article when we have diligently managed to keep it from becoming a hiscores list in the past. However, a legitimate discussion of the effects of the construction skill on the RuneScape economy probably should be added to the Economy page. Xela Yrag 21:07, 6 June 2006 (UTC) -
i have seen the 'video' and it looks fake to me.-- Acethebunny 14:01, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
this video is not fake, just edited for entertainment. There is a pinned topic in the rants section inside the offical runescape forums on runescape.com where this inciddent is confirmed by jagex. I myself,fx250, was a witness of this event, having also been a person with the ability to attack other runescape players outside of the wilderness. Everything in the posted story is accurate with the actual events. however it has no connection to this 666 talk, it was merely and error in programming. —The preceding
unsigned comment was added by
69.92.209.59 (
talk •
contribs) 21:42, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
You really should mention all the palyers that claim to have been unfairly banned from RS2. I realize that some may be lying but their are just too many complaints to ignore. If you people think that Jagex are perfect and never make any mistakes when banning, then you are sadly mistaken. Maybe you should mention all the unhappy players that are and have voluntarily quit too. Don't flame me and say that Jagex is perfect and that anyone who disagrees with your one sided view points are just lying cheaters.
Heh, I really need to think of a better headline.
Just regarding this edit, I don't think I should remove the section without explanation. Firstly, RS is not widely criticised for this. Rarely do I overhear someone ingame or read on forums, "Dangit, RuneScape is plagiarising LotR! I mean, both have rings and hammers!" Lord of the Rings is a major influence on the fantasy genre. Just read LotR#Influences on the fantasy genre. RuneScape draws material from LotR, but it certainly cannot be accused of "plagiarising" it. Hyenaste (tell) 14:11, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
adventure quest uses dozens of hitchhikers and alice refrences
Rdunn 17:25, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
I havent been on WP for about a week now because of my internet connection. I just got back on here and I was amazed at the improvement that has happened on this article. Its much more summarised, looks more professional and is easier to navigate through. Great job! - • The Giant Puffin • 15:06, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
The current runescape is the 4th version the first version came out in early 1998 The current Runescape classic is the 3rd version
Has anyone noticed that there are things from now the past and the future in Runescape? odd....
dident the plate skirts date back from the greek times Rdunn 17:27, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
Therefore I made the deletion of these 2 points of criticism at the article. GSPbeetle complains Vandalisms 14:09, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
Okay, a lot of people seem to be missing the point on this whole criticisms section. Or maybe I am. I thought we were trying to create a section of criticisms that are recognized and reported on by various experts in the gaming field, i.e. gaming magazines, websites, etc. This is not supposed to be a rant section for your or my favorite pet peeve about RuneScape. We all see problems with the game, but the problems you see may not matter to me and the ones that drive me absolutely crazy may not bother you a bit. That's why we try to whittle out the POV part. IMHO, every criticism listed here needs a reference to its source; right now, none of them have them. I am trying to find some sources, but have so far been unsuccessful. And "Guy who Wrote the Second ...", you can put four ~s on there to sign your post, in case you didn't know that. Then we know to whom we are talking. 8) Xela Yrag 16:22, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
This page is the 8th most edited page on the whole of wikipedia. For a fucking computer game. GET A LIFE! 172.166.95.23 17:43, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
OMG YOU LOSERS! YOU GUYS HAVE NO LIFE!!! LOL! -- 24.109.206.88 13:08, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
that means the above poster also has no life for bothering to edit our talk page ( and it cant spell god properly ) Rdunn 17:30, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
"RuneScape is also commonly accused of installing malicious software on client computers, because it is a Java game and requires access to a directory on player's systems."
Source? We all know this is false anyway, but is there at least a source that actually claims this other than one user posting his/her view as a common accusation? Clq 18:50, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
The main reason for RuneScape's Featured Article nomination failing was the Criticism section.
Most of the criticisms are player opinion. It is very difficult to find a "reliable source" documenting these criticisms.
The best references we can find will be websites run by fans or haters, and in-game screenshots (which I can provide).
The WP:V policy is degrading the quality of articles like this, and suffocating me as an editor.
On April 10, I contributed some information to the Criticism section. [2] Back then, it was longer.
I have nominated RuneScape for WP:GA.
The Criticism section should contain the most notable player criticisms. Of course, it should not contain anyone's personal rants about the game. Having played RuneScape for 2 years, I know the most notable player criticisms. I can contribute to the Criticism section and ensure that the most notable player criticisms (I will not let personal opinions cloud my judgement) are written/presented well. Of course, the section will still not meet WP:V, and it never will.
Hopefully you will WP:AGF and trust me. If I need to prove my callibre in RuneScape, I can provide screenshots of two of my accounts.
I have presented the 7 most notable player criticisms below, in point form (my actual contributions will contain elaborations in prose form). If anyone wishes to add to the list, or dispute the notability of these criticisms, please reply. Please note that I will check whether any criticisms you contribute are notable.
1. Low quality graphics
2. In-game "lag"
3. Repetitive levelling
4. Scamming
5. Use of automated programs
6. Ineffective chat filter
7. Lack of free updates
-- J.L.W.S. The Special One 10:15, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
8. Lack of efficient customer support.
9. Jagex is incompitent. —The preceding
unsigned comment was added by
71.210.2.142 (
talk •
contribs) 19:08, 10 Jun 2006 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | → | Archive 15 |
First off, the community secsion is a long one. So lets talk about spliting it into its own article. Secend, how about a Runescape scam article? Dr. Good 01:40, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
Two general things which you should know if bringing up something here:
When I try to look at the ar my browser shows the "This page cannot be displayed" error. Its quite odd if you ask me (especially cause every other page seems to work). Does anyone know what is wrong? Is it Wikipedia or is it my problem? W IKIPEE DIO 15:16, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
I had the same problem - couldn't get into this page, but all the other pages in the series were fine. It seems to be fixed now. Xela Yrag 18:07, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
Holiday items are special items dropped on holidays that are only availible on the day of relese. The more expencive items are items that are wearable for example party hats, h'ween masks and santa hats.The non-equipable items are pumpkins and easter eggs. After all these holiday items were made all of them are non tradeable.
Party hats are the rareist they run from (purple)90 million to (blue) 250 million
H'ween masks- green 11 million, blue 17 million, Red 25 Million
Santa hat- 30
million
Pumpkin-4.6 million
easter egg- 3.6 million
These items are very rare and are wanted my all players.
Hi guys. I have made a proposal for a decision about fansite links. It applies for this article, the portal, and the rest of the series. Please help me by voting on it. Thank you. Dtm142 23:37, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
I think that there should be a few links to the fansites such as Runehq which jagex now deems okay to say ingame. However, it may cause visitors to go to the fansite instead of staying on wikipidea. Eugene0k1 15:58, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
I agree the major 3 should be included possibly more, Zybez, Tip.it, Rune HQ Jrabbit05 18:13, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
I agree too.
You can say runeHQ in game because you can say "Rune" and "HQ" alone. You can also say Zybez(UNless that changed)
they shouldnt take my changes just because they have the power to delete my stuff but other than than that this is a very good service. the end lol. if anyone agrees they will wright on this and say "yea" later lol.
i wasnt being extra long i just changed he or she to players and stuff like that nothing big and now i cant edit runescape at all just because im new and thats a CRIME? i just dont think its right cause ive done nothing wrong. flare mage22
give it a few days... you'll beable to edit it then. Acethebunny
i have waited for like 1 month now since the begining of may!!! flare mage22
User 70.72.51.118 http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Special:Contributions&target=70.72.51.118 Talk) added a link to http://www.runehq.com on Jagex, where it probably doesn't belong. Should it be added to the RuneScape page or another page in the same category?
Apart from finding one spelling mistake, do you have any other examples? One instance of a spelling mistake hardly makes the game "unconsistent" with "more spelling errors than other major MMORPGs." Unsless you can find... oh, 20 or so, I would say that this does not at all justify this sentence. Is ther any source to back up that it is "known as this"? Clq 11:39, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
If it's a notable fact, add it - • The Giant Puffin • 12:47, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
I havn't been to active with this article so I problably missed this:why are clans not mentioned at all? Is it a decision like no fan site? .... Coasttocoast 02:03, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
If you think that the part about clans is not complete enough on the Wilderness article, by all means, have a go at it. I am not a member of a clan and have nothing to do with clans if I can avoid them. I don't have anything against them as I am rarely in the Wilderness, but I don't understand why anyone would want to be in a clan other than to have backup when PKing. Maybe you are the one who could enlighten us. Just keep the basic rules in mind, especially neutral point of view and encyclopedic content rather than how-to guide. (Oh, and imho, I don't think you should list any clan names - how would you objectively decide which ones to include and which to leave out; and they change too often - sort of like fansites.) Xela Yrag 16:41, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
clans are listed briefly because clans are created by players joining together and is not made by any of the staff of jagex! so of corse it is going to be small! if you want it bigger then make it bigger no one is stopping u. flare mage22
Jagex censors some clan leaders name. I'm not in a clan for Pk support. I'm in it for a much closer community than a fansite. There are many events that are non-pking in clans too.
Why is there no information regarding the incident long ago during October of 2004 when an Autorune glitch allowed the duplication of Party Hats. I know it caused a stir in the Runescape world, yet why is it not in the articles?
This is a fair point. It is a significant point in RuneScape's history, and affected a lot of people. And it also allowed me to get a nicer party hat a few months after :D Seriously though, if someone feels the same way as me I think it should at least be mentioned in the article, at least with a few factual sentences. I vote it should be mentioned. Anyone else? Clq 13:10, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
ive never heard of it Rdunn 16:26, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
Neither have I. Could someone please explain what it is?~Akroy
if we were to make a section on glitches it would be one way long section and would cause to many areas of open vandalisim oportunities. i agree with jj sagnella it was not a major event. flare mage22 WASN"T A MAJOR EVENT!!?!?!? SOme people duplicated hundreds or even thousands of PHATS that even some players that didn't play classicknow about and it wasn't major??
Is this section needed? See WP:BEANS... J.J.Sagnella 18:46, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
I can't log in to the game at work, but was just told by a friend that the Construction skill is up and running. It would be nice if we were able to get information on here ASAP, at least I think it would be. Anyone up to the challenge? Xela Yrag 15:08, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
"This week sees the release of our biggest and most anticipated update this year: player-owned houses. No longer must RuneScape members wander the world endlessly, never being able to sit down or have a place to call their own. Members can build their houses and make furniture using the new Construction skill. Start by building a cottage with a few chairs around a fire, and add rooms and gain levels until you have your own palace. Some pieces of furniture will unlock new abilities, magic spell tablets, and even chairs you can sit down in.
This incredible update features over 20 rooms, 330 pieces of furniture, 11 new NPCs, 12 dungeon monsters, craftable toys, new armour and shields, trophy rooms, tool racks, different architectural styles, butlers and a whole host of new games to play with your house guests!
Basic houses, rooms and furniture are priced cheaply enough so that most members will be able to afford somewhere to live. We have also made lots of features for our more opulent players to be able to show off their wealth. If you get your construction level high enough and you're rich enough you can build an entire dungeon to challenge your friends, you might even be able to add your own dragon to it! Or how about a throne room? - with a throne of crystal!
Fancy a change of scene? As you go up levels your house can be rebuilt in completely different designs ranging from the Rimmington “Shack” look, the Rellekkan Longhall and the Brimhaven Beach-house.
To start you must buy a small house from any of the estate agents in Seers' Village (north-west of the bank), Falador (between the furnace and the east bank), Ardougne (west of the eastern bank) or Varrock (east of the castle).
A full guide to the skill can be found in the Knowledge Base. Open the door to your new “home from home” today!
Note - we were originally going to call this skill "Carpentry", but the range of activities involved in the skill soon got much bigger than that title, so we widened it to "Construction".
Please be aware that the Tears of Guthix will not give Construction xp for a while. The god Guthix, in his immortal wisdom, does not wish to pry into your home so soon."
Changes that ive noticed:
Main login page and music (music avalible in game as homescape and is a mix of the main two themes). skills list has changed so you can see your total level (but not your combat level!) the quest page has changed so you can see your quest point there.
bugs in the update that ive noticed:
some of the items have a level of 0 when they obviously shouldnt be.
Rdunn 16:23, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
What items are listed as level 0? I'd like to see that lol RememberMe? 16:54, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
Someone has already edited the Skills article with a little bit of information on the new skill (very little), so we probably don't need much in the main article. I can't wait to get out of here, get home, and check it out! Blasted filters!! LOL Xela Yrag 20:02, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
wow... runescape people have been waiting for that update for so long. rburp
http://img93.imageshack.us/img93/8209/chap8qh.png here they are
Rdunn 08:40, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
I deleted the phrase that had been readded again, because I had not completely deleted it before. I had only moved it to the preceding paragraph, where I felt that it was a better fit. It shouldn't be in both paragraphs, but which paragraph is better for it is certainly a topic we can throw around (like a gnome ball, maybe?). Xela Yrag 14:13, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
The information that was added and correctly removed on the abilities of and resources for player moderators is classified as confidential information that is not to be published anywhere by anyone for any reason and is copywritten. Whether or not players have a "right" to know is not important. I feel that putting that information in the article would be a complete violation of copyright and is not verifiable without getting someone in a whole lot of trouble. Anyway, most of the important info (player mods can mute people and have access to special forums) is in the narrative paragraph. Xela Yrag 14:22, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
You can't publish pictures of the Mod Centre and the Mod Forums. They are copy-written and confidential and state that they are not to be copied anywhere. I don't see how you can get around that in order to copy them other than getting permission from Jagex, and, just guessing, but I really don't think they'll give permission. Xela Yrag 17:14, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
we need a P-mod to find a J-mod ingame and ask if they can post a picture of the mod centre on Wikipedia. (more than likely they will say no, but it's worth a try.--
Acethebunny 08:53, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
Urm...... can ye read?
Rdunn 20:07, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
Jagex will not allow screenshots of the Mod Centre or Forums, no matter what. All that players need to know about Player and Forum moderators is in the Knowledge Base of the RuneScape site and within the current information in this article.
ha Rdunn 17:20, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
I allready saw a picture.
Could there be a paragraph on the possible items that someone could merchant or other ways a person can make money? For example in world 66 a member can run laws and make 200k per hour. In world 16, a nonmember could run airs and make 100k per hour. There are also other tips like mining which I could include. Is it okay if I start such a section and how? (Sorry I'm kind of new so I'm sorry if my format is incorrect.) Eugene0k1 15:58, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
==Making Money== in world 66 a member can run laws and make 200k per hour. In world 16, a nonmember could run airs and make 100k per hour. There are also other tips like mining which I could include...
Best Wishes on Wikipedia, J.J.Sagnella 16:28, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. (I'm pretty new myself.) Would the information you are talking about be more appropriate for Wikibooks? It sounds like it is more strategy advice and "how-to-play" than descriptive. Just a thought. Xela Yrag 17:17, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
RuneScape Wikibooks was moved to strategy wiki. If you want to use a wiki, use the very small RuneScapeWiki, hosted on Wikia.
Wikipedia is not a game guid so do not put this. ( Koolsen0 01:43, 8 June 2006 (UTC))
This has been a busy week for server additions. We have a problem that I cannot solve at work today. There are 132 servers and 2 Classic servers, according to the "select your world" screen. However, our list, which agreed with the total yesterday, is off by one when we add the seven new Canadian servers to it. How this happened, I don't know, but I will fix it this evening when I get home if someone doesn't beat me to it today. Xela Yrag 17:11, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
I knew someone would solve the puzzle. Thanks for saving me a lot of time!!!! Xela Yrag 20:53, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
i will try to find out why there is no world 126-- Acethebunny 08:57, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
I put version five back in and reworked it a little. While it is not exactly a new version, how are we to know what version Jagex actually thinks they are on. This one, while not abvious to the player so much, seems to be one of the bigger changes that have happened. Allowing Jagex to expand the game while not using more memory for the player - that seems to me to be pretty major. I welcome any and all comments, but let's pretty please not get into a battle over it. We get along so well (well, those who don't vandalize do), and I would hate for this article to end up on the lame edit wars pages (LOL). Xela Yrag 20:12, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
Sigh - well if you want to leave the article horribly innacurate. But I can assure you the latest upgrade it not an entirely new version. I'm talking about the distinction between the developer starting an entirely new product from scratch and them just improving what they already have (Which they do almost every week). If you compare the difference between RS2 and rs-classic (or rsclassic and devious mud) they are VASTLY different, i.e they are almost completely different games. It just seems horribly inconsitent to list this upgrade and yet not list countless other equally big upgrades. Please explain the reasoning for this. To imply the latest upgrade is of the same scale as rs-classic->rs2 is wrong, and to imply the latest upgrade is somehow more special than several upgrades which aren't listed is also wrong. I keep a really close eye on the upgrades to the engine and what has actually changed internally because it interests me, and to be honest it's rather frustrating to fix the accuracy of something only to have it reverted based on an opinion rather than facts. Oh and being as you asked jagex's internal name for the current release is #412. The internal version numbers goes up by about 1 or 2 a week, and can be found by examining the bytecode (as can many other things about the engine version). Have you tried looking at the bytecode recently, or are you just reverting my edits on a whim? Runefire 07:47, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
I apologize for making you sigh, never my intention. I was just going by the news article that was posted on the main page by Jagex at the time they did the update. I can't give a reference right now because I cannot access the game at work, but the article basically stated that this update was different and more important, not necessarily to the player but to the developers. If I have somehow misunderstood this news blurb, I am more than willing to do whatever we need to do to get our article correct. And I am not a computer programmer, so I do not know, or particularly care, about the bytecode. (I have, however, been using computers since the "early days" to play RPG's from Zork forward.) I have never reverted anything on a whim and, if you look at the history, you can see that I have been working very diligently to get the spelling, grammar, and punctuation correct in the entire series of articles on RuneScape. I occasionally make mistakes, and am the first person to admit it when I do. I certainly don't think I deserve to be accused of reverting you on a whim. Xela Yrag 15:47, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
A game does not have to be linear to be considered to be a role-playing game (Baldur's Gate is certainly a RPG, but it is not linear; ditto the later Zelda games), so I agree that we should leave it the way Jagex refers to it, as MMORPG. Xela Yrag 15:51, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
I'm posting here two links about RS found by others in hopes we can use them.
http://www.thestandard.com/article.php?story=200403031708187 Hyenaste (tell) 12:45, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
Can we get some consensus on this whole section? I am not sure what should and what should not be included. I admit up front that I love this game and don't want to see it criticized. However, I do know that there are legitimate criticisms of the game. But we don't want this to be a list of anyone's pet peeves or a "rant" area where people edit it to post what terrible things happened to them today. That's what the forums are for. After reading the comments on the featured article page, I am thinking that there should be nothing here that cannot be referenced. Anything else is pure opinion and speculation. For instance, how do we know that the "substandard" graphics is a criticism. Yes, we can all see it, but isn't that subjective. I, for one, love the graphics of Myst; they were absolutely awesome for their day. However, the game was sadly lacking in playability. I finished it, but I wouldn't have gone out of my way to replace it if the CD-ROM had broken in two half way through. The graphics on RuneScape aren't awesome, but I would cry, literally, if something happened and I couldn't play. Is there a reference that we can quote, even if it is something from forums or somewhere, that states that "experts" say the graphics are substandard? I would ask the same question of every other criticism listed there - who says so and why should we listen to them? And I am not saying we should eliminate the criticisms section, just reference it and clean up the opinions. Comments and guidance please. Xela Yrag 21:16, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
Put in that it's updates are so buggy it's unbearable. I play the game lots, and it's unbearably stupid. -- 24.109.206.88 21:44, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
Since sometimes it is a shame to let good but inappropriate contributions go to waste, I have reproduced a contribution to this article below. This was written for Wikipedia in good faith, and is not vandalism, so should not be removed from here as such. Standard external links warnings apply. Hyenaste (tell) 05:53, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
June 5th, 2006: "The Omen"
|
My two cents - first, how do we know this is real, true, accurate (whatever word is most appropriate)? Just because there is supposedly a video, doesn't mean it hasn't been modified to show whatever the video makers want it to show. As this piece is is written, it is inflammatory, draws an inference that RuneScape has something to do with The Omen, and makes a big deal of a coincidence of dates to get the rabble roused into an uproar. BTW, 06/06/06 happens every thousand years, and it's never been a big deal before; why would it be different in this thousand, and why would it pick a computer game to start on (and a day early besides)? Do we want this article to fall into the "OMG, it's mark of the beast day" mentality? I would hate to see that happen. At best, this seems to me to be a backdoor approach to get a particular player's achievement of level 99 construction into the main article when we have diligently managed to keep it from becoming a hiscores list in the past. However, a legitimate discussion of the effects of the construction skill on the RuneScape economy probably should be added to the Economy page. Xela Yrag 21:07, 6 June 2006 (UTC) -
i have seen the 'video' and it looks fake to me.-- Acethebunny 14:01, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
this video is not fake, just edited for entertainment. There is a pinned topic in the rants section inside the offical runescape forums on runescape.com where this inciddent is confirmed by jagex. I myself,fx250, was a witness of this event, having also been a person with the ability to attack other runescape players outside of the wilderness. Everything in the posted story is accurate with the actual events. however it has no connection to this 666 talk, it was merely and error in programming. —The preceding
unsigned comment was added by
69.92.209.59 (
talk •
contribs) 21:42, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
You really should mention all the palyers that claim to have been unfairly banned from RS2. I realize that some may be lying but their are just too many complaints to ignore. If you people think that Jagex are perfect and never make any mistakes when banning, then you are sadly mistaken. Maybe you should mention all the unhappy players that are and have voluntarily quit too. Don't flame me and say that Jagex is perfect and that anyone who disagrees with your one sided view points are just lying cheaters.
Heh, I really need to think of a better headline.
Just regarding this edit, I don't think I should remove the section without explanation. Firstly, RS is not widely criticised for this. Rarely do I overhear someone ingame or read on forums, "Dangit, RuneScape is plagiarising LotR! I mean, both have rings and hammers!" Lord of the Rings is a major influence on the fantasy genre. Just read LotR#Influences on the fantasy genre. RuneScape draws material from LotR, but it certainly cannot be accused of "plagiarising" it. Hyenaste (tell) 14:11, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
adventure quest uses dozens of hitchhikers and alice refrences
Rdunn 17:25, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
I havent been on WP for about a week now because of my internet connection. I just got back on here and I was amazed at the improvement that has happened on this article. Its much more summarised, looks more professional and is easier to navigate through. Great job! - • The Giant Puffin • 15:06, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
The current runescape is the 4th version the first version came out in early 1998 The current Runescape classic is the 3rd version
Has anyone noticed that there are things from now the past and the future in Runescape? odd....
dident the plate skirts date back from the greek times Rdunn 17:27, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
Therefore I made the deletion of these 2 points of criticism at the article. GSPbeetle complains Vandalisms 14:09, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
Okay, a lot of people seem to be missing the point on this whole criticisms section. Or maybe I am. I thought we were trying to create a section of criticisms that are recognized and reported on by various experts in the gaming field, i.e. gaming magazines, websites, etc. This is not supposed to be a rant section for your or my favorite pet peeve about RuneScape. We all see problems with the game, but the problems you see may not matter to me and the ones that drive me absolutely crazy may not bother you a bit. That's why we try to whittle out the POV part. IMHO, every criticism listed here needs a reference to its source; right now, none of them have them. I am trying to find some sources, but have so far been unsuccessful. And "Guy who Wrote the Second ...", you can put four ~s on there to sign your post, in case you didn't know that. Then we know to whom we are talking. 8) Xela Yrag 16:22, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
This page is the 8th most edited page on the whole of wikipedia. For a fucking computer game. GET A LIFE! 172.166.95.23 17:43, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
OMG YOU LOSERS! YOU GUYS HAVE NO LIFE!!! LOL! -- 24.109.206.88 13:08, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
that means the above poster also has no life for bothering to edit our talk page ( and it cant spell god properly ) Rdunn 17:30, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
"RuneScape is also commonly accused of installing malicious software on client computers, because it is a Java game and requires access to a directory on player's systems."
Source? We all know this is false anyway, but is there at least a source that actually claims this other than one user posting his/her view as a common accusation? Clq 18:50, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
The main reason for RuneScape's Featured Article nomination failing was the Criticism section.
Most of the criticisms are player opinion. It is very difficult to find a "reliable source" documenting these criticisms.
The best references we can find will be websites run by fans or haters, and in-game screenshots (which I can provide).
The WP:V policy is degrading the quality of articles like this, and suffocating me as an editor.
On April 10, I contributed some information to the Criticism section. [2] Back then, it was longer.
I have nominated RuneScape for WP:GA.
The Criticism section should contain the most notable player criticisms. Of course, it should not contain anyone's personal rants about the game. Having played RuneScape for 2 years, I know the most notable player criticisms. I can contribute to the Criticism section and ensure that the most notable player criticisms (I will not let personal opinions cloud my judgement) are written/presented well. Of course, the section will still not meet WP:V, and it never will.
Hopefully you will WP:AGF and trust me. If I need to prove my callibre in RuneScape, I can provide screenshots of two of my accounts.
I have presented the 7 most notable player criticisms below, in point form (my actual contributions will contain elaborations in prose form). If anyone wishes to add to the list, or dispute the notability of these criticisms, please reply. Please note that I will check whether any criticisms you contribute are notable.
1. Low quality graphics
2. In-game "lag"
3. Repetitive levelling
4. Scamming
5. Use of automated programs
6. Ineffective chat filter
7. Lack of free updates
-- J.L.W.S. The Special One 10:15, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
8. Lack of efficient customer support.
9. Jagex is incompitent. —The preceding
unsigned comment was added by
71.210.2.142 (
talk •
contribs) 19:08, 10 Jun 2006 (UTC)