Forums

Bank Rework - State of Play

Quick find code: 254-255-608-66069562

of 8
Mod Shauny

Mod Shauny

Jagex Moderator Forum Profile Posts by user
Hello everyone,

It goes without saying you've vocally expressed your displeasure at the recent comment about the bank rework and bank placeholders.

There had been replies through the day but none really getting to the point of actually clarifying what our future plans are for this.

First of all, let's just clarify a few things then we'll get into the nitty gritty.

- As originally stated, there were no plans for Bank Placeholders, this is not true, as mentioned by Mod Hunter last night (one of the developers of the initial bank rework concept) bank placeholders are currently in the process of being prototype by the engine team. This has been very under the radar, even more so internally, as you can imagine we're just as excited about the thought of it as you.

The prototype being under the radar was simply due to the fact that we didn't want to raise expectations especially when it's still possible this approach won't work, but it's better to say that it's being prototyped than to incorrectly say it's not worked on or planned.

So, can't you give us more bank slots?

For this I'll take a direct quote from what we've said on a recent Developer Q&A stream while at the same time diving into the specifics to help clarify.

Bank space is something we're always looking into. People are aware that we're technically at our limits in terms of bank space, so we need to do further work to remedy that. There are two aspects we have to consider:

Save-game size:
- Think of an item with the most amount of variables attached to it (Augmented, both gizmos etc) - this item is the most costly per bank slot server side. Multiply that up by the number of bank space, then add a bit more. Now multiply that by the maximum amount of players that you need. That's the amount of storage space we need to make sure we always have allocated at all times to make sure we can always save the player's game state.
- Adding a little bit of bank space per player equates to a huge amount. We're aware of the problem, and we're not unsympathetic to the issue players have.
- We did a study into how many people it affects. It affects quite a decent chunk but not as much as you'd expect.
- This is why our emphasis on content has been focused around "inventories", one example is the upcoming Player Owned Farm farmhand update which we're using to help save on your bank space.

Impact on other content:
- Adding extra slots to the bank also affects other content, such as things that check whether you own an item. A recent example of the potential impact of this is in the Diango system, that stores items for you and allows you to retrieve them. As recently as last month we had a bug with Diango which led players to crash the moment they clicked on him (this was hotfixed immediately). This was a result of enabling him to search additional inventories for your items. Adding additional slots to the bank could have a similar effect on other content.

Why did you not announce it at RuneFest?
- The Bank rework and loyalty point rework were not spoken about because the reveals for things that are definitely coming out before February 2019. At the time of RuneFest the previous status of the bank rework had not changed.

Why can't we do what Old School RuneScape has done?

*bits taken from /u/JagexHunter 's post*

It's the most frustrating thing about it for sure, why can they get these features that we can't?

The key answer there is in items. Old School placeholders are automatically generated objects, like notes. This means each item actually has multiples types, for example:

- Item
- Item (Noted)
- Item (Placeholder)

Being the game from 2007, Old School has a significantly lower amount of items. We can't take this approach as it would push the item ID over the current limit. That limit *can* be raised, but a lot of non-game features would need to be updated. That's things like GE, adventurer's log, forum avatars, and many more like that which becomes a huge amount of work. Additionally stuff in particular such as the GE will also impact Old School as both games share that module (same as how both games have to receive the same friends chat updates at the same time)

Why shelve everything else?

First thing to say here is that this has been the status for a long time. It doesn't mean it would never be picked up in future, but that the benefits the rework offers don't offer as much as we could get from other smaller engine features that have also been requested over the years.

The rest comes down to the sheer complexity. To start a game engine update is very different to a regular content update, if it breaks you have to turn the game off until you can fix it. That can be mitigated through beta servers of course, but it's still makes large-scale changes risky.

It's especially risky, as to the engine all inventories are practically the same thing. Shops, worn equipment, beast of burden, bank, etc... are all the same thing at the core. Game scripts generally define the behaviour for the inventories. That means making a change in the engine to support bank features doesn't just have the potential to break the bank, but practically the entire game.

On top of that there's part-deprecated systems that need to be supported. Any changes that were made to the engine which the client needs to know about would need to be implemented in NXT, java, and HTML5 (in which the comapp is based). All very different languages, which could break in very different ways. It's not straightforward to just turn these off, but it's obviously ideal only to implement in one location.

Why did we say we were doing it to start?

We were experimenting with ninja taking on larger-scale projects which were Quality of life rather than the typical ninja fixes which had less impact on gameplay than when ninja first started.

We had the means to do engine work in-team and looked into a lot of the technical complexity to feel like it was possible, even if it would take a long time. Ultimately it wasn't possible, but that didn't become apparent until months after we made the announcement at RuneFest 2016.

***

TL;DW

- In short the bank rework as a whole is shelved; we are not working on it and will not be for foreseeable future.
- We are investigating bank placeholders on its own as a feature you want. It is at this stage purely an investigation into feasibility, and we make no promises about being able to deliver this.

As a note, due to how extremely close to Christmas it is and with staff taking holidays, etc our replies will be pretty stagnated, but we'll try to respond over the holidays where we can.

Thank you for reading :)
Mod Shauny - RuneScape Community Management - Goebies! - @JagexShauny
I love Clans!

21-Dec-2018 12:46:49

Jokku23

Jokku23

Posts: 30,824Sapphire Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Mod Shauny said:
Thank you for reading :)

You're welcome 8)
………. ,*˜*, ……. ,•°*•, … You'll … ,•*°•, …… ,*˜*, .………
„*˜……“• •“………'·,ΈΈ,‘•°. thank .°•',ΈΈ,·'……..“• •“……˜*„
……………………………………………………………………..
The Bible of Rimmington
“‹„ΈΈ„ •°`' · . ,ΈΈ, . · ‘ … me later … ' · . ,ΈΈ, . · '΄°•„ΈΈ„›“

21-Dec-2018 19:30:17

Miu
Jan Member 2019

Miu

Posts: 15,245Opal Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Mod Shauny said:
As originally stated, there were no plans for Bank Placeholders, this is not true, as mentioned by Mod Hunter last night (one of the developers of the initial bank rework concept) bank placeholders are currently in the process of being prototype by the engine team. This has been very under the radar, even more so internally, as you can imagine we're just as excited about the thought of it as you.

The prototype being under the radar was simply due to the fact that we didn't want to raise expectations especially when it's still possible this approach won't work, but it's better to say that it's being prototyped than to incorrectly say it's not worked on or planned.
So this has been in the process of being prototyped, "while under the radar," for 2 years? Or is this just a way of saying that someone looked at it for 5 minutes and you're trying to play it off as not as bad as things seem?
Don't forget – RuneScape members get TWO free spins a day instead of the usual one!

21-Dec-2018 22:53:21 - Last edited on 21-Dec-2018 22:57:38 by Miu

Miu
Jan Member 2019

Miu

Posts: 15,245Opal Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Mod Shauny said:
Save-game size:
- Think of an item with the most amount of variables attached to it (Augmented, both gizmos etc) - this item is the most costly per bank slot server side. Multiply that up by the number of bank space, then add a bit more. Now multiply that by the maximum amount of players that you need. That's the amount of storage space we need to make sure we always have allocated at all times to make sure we can always save the player's game state.
- Adding a little bit of bank space per player equates to a huge amount. We're aware of the problem, and we're not unsympathetic to the issue players have.
- We did a study into how many people it affects. It affects quite a decent chunk but not as much as you'd expect.
- This is why our emphasis on content has been focused around "inventories", one example is the upcoming Player Owned Farm farmhand update which we're using to help save on your bank space.


My apologies, but I don't understand how "inventories" helps at all. Does it not contain the same amount of user data, but with the added downside of needing a new interface to store it in?

Secondly, why not add a reasonable limit to some of these items (augmented gear, etc)? Helping out everyone would be a lot better than restricting development for a couple people that have over 100 slots of augmented items. If it's such a big issue, then surely it deserves a solution sooner than later?
Don't forget – RuneScape members get TWO free spins a day instead of the usual one!

21-Dec-2018 22:56:59 - Last edited on 21-Dec-2018 23:06:47 by Miu

Miu
Jan Member 2019

Miu

Posts: 15,245Opal Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Original message details are unavailable.

Why can't we do what Old School RuneScape has done?

*bits taken from /u/JagexHunter 's post*

It's the most frustrating thing about it for sure, why can they get these features that we can't?

The key answer there is in items. Old School placeholders are automatically generated objects, like notes. This means each item actually has multiples types, for example:

- Item
- Item (Noted)
- Item (Placeholder)

Being the game from 2007, Old School has a significantly lower amount of items. We can't take this approach as it would push the item ID over the current limit. That limit *can* be raised, but a lot of non-game features would need to be updated. That's things like GE, adventurer's log, forum avatars, and many more like that which becomes a huge amount of work. Additionally stuff in particular such as the GE will also impact Old School as both games share that module (same as how both games have to receive the same friends chat updates at the same time)


You wanna use less item spaces? Implement less redundant variants of treasure hunter lamps and the like. Remove grimy herbs and implement the xp for cleaning into adding herbs to the vial (have factory outfit double that xp or something to compensate the change).

There's more stuff you can do, but once again, this is a problem that needs to be approached sooner, rather than later. You're going to need to raise the limit at some point if you keep implementing things like the mining and smithing rework, where armor/weapons have like 5 different tiers of everything now.
Don't forget – RuneScape members get TWO free spins a day instead of the usual one!

21-Dec-2018 23:00:37 - Last edited on 21-Dec-2018 23:30:32 by Miu

Blackwing
Nov Member 2012

Blackwing

Posts: 37,666Sapphire Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Classic Jagex, hiding their shame where people can't find it: M&S rework awareness is spammed in-game, but this isn't even posted on the home page. Gotta sell those premier memberships to players who don't know better, eh?

Anyhow, dear Jagex: stop with the excuses and keep your word. You guys have used bank rework to sell membership multiple times, and given how big of a deal it is, it undoubtedly has sold quite a lot of membership. It's a very scummy move to sell something like that and just *snap* cancel it like that when you guys find out that you might actually have to work harder on it.
The Runescape Witcher
|| Arclight for demons | Ghrazi rapier for humans and monsters

22-Dec-2018 00:18:05

Rikornak
Oct Gold Premier Club Member 2013

Rikornak

Posts: 5,025Rune Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Thank you for explaining the issue - also from a more technical perspective: It isn't good that the stuff basically is lost, but not/poorly communicating is even worse.

If - if - you get those features in smaller chunks into the game it already would be a drastical help.

As for bank space. While I do agree depending on the development of the game more and more bank space will be needed over time, only the uncanniest of all hoarders will actually come to problems with some/all boosters bought.

I just think a better approach would be adding more fitting items to the tool belt, allowing players to passively learn more abilities (e.g. charming or animal tongue - likewise we could learn ghostspeak and seeing into the shadow realm without items), making better use of existing storages (extend may and allow remote access from the bank), introduce new storage options (hidey-holes allowed us to clear bank space as well, aura bag also - include refreshes in the interface as well maybe), introduce a weapon rack in the costume room. This way other features could be made more interesting as well + some players could be kept busy for re-completing their collection. Last but not least: It is a good thing you're again to virtualizing some pets, as well as making a few more older skilling items reclaimable (factory, firemaking), but in there still some potential would be open - please use it.
Improvements: Tooltip / (F2P) QoL v2
Quick Fixes: Invention

22-Dec-2018 07:18:23 - Last edited on 22-Dec-2018 07:23:08 by Rikornak

Feldip
Jul Member 2006

Feldip

Posts: 1,119Mithril Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Some extremely hard choices for Jagex are coming very soon in my opinion, at some point you are going to have to put your players before you and your investors or rs3 will die. This includes upgrading servers and updating systems.

I notice right now the current online rs3 player count is 18,544 which is downright pathetic.

People often say "don't shoot the messenger" but Shauny is in a lot of these meetings and knew for almost 2 years that this was the case but still put up with the facade all of this time.

It really sucks too because Shauny was probably the best Jmod when it came to the rs3 community.

Greed knows no boundaries I guess... Ah well, what's new?

22-Dec-2018 07:23:06 - Last edited on 22-Dec-2018 07:27:31 by Feldip

Ironman Gup
Jan Gold Premier Club Member 2017

Ironman Gup

Posts: 1,023Mithril Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Nowdays I'm not surprised the scrapping of the bank rework was hidden, I'm just disappointed. Don't stand up for whats allowed, stand up for whats right.

22-Dec-2018 07:48:50 - Last edited on 22-Dec-2018 07:55:41 by Ironman Gup

Quick find code: 254-255-608-66069562Back to Top