Forums

When will OSRS die?

Quick find code: 317-318-931-66052965

of 11
artemischild

artemischild

Posts: 1,132Mithril Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Lu k e said:
artemischild said:
They punished people for not voting to give pker pvp armor that was not pvp only. We told them we do not want our bank accounts destroy, so they destroy our bank accounts.


It only had stats in wild, outside wild it was useless.

Again, where is your proof they of your other claims.
The blog the polls linked did not say that. It had stats useable outside the wild and that was the original blog.

Where is your proof that the polls did not link the wrong blog?

My proof is that they said the armor would replace statues, then didn't. You cant trust them. They will say anything to get a pkers update passed, then forget it just as all politicians do. WE told them that it was not the right blog but they said it was the correct one. That told us they had no plans to make it pvp only.

16-Oct-2018 15:09:46 - Last edited on 16-Oct-2018 15:12:41 by artemischild

yoda2020
Feb Summer Special Member 2018

yoda2020

Posts: 577Steel Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Boabies said:
I'm amazed that RuneScape is still alive in 2018. Obviously, the only reason it still exists is OSRS. When OSRS dies, so will RuneScape. I'm guessing this game will die for good by 2050. What are your guesses? How long do you think this game will last?


Actually, to be fair, I've heard from many people that the MTX(which most of us hate) in RS3 provide a vast majority of the revenue, so I don't know that you can argue that OSRS is CURRENTLY the reason Runescape is still alive as far as solvency of the company.
In 5 or so years? For sure, OSRS will be the reason that Runescape is still alive because regardless of the amount players spend on RS3 MTX, there will probably just be so few, but right now, I'm pretty sure MTX still has a decent amount to do with it.
However, I think that, in terms of PLAYERBASE, OSRS takes the cake for sure for being the reason why the player counter can top 100,000 or even top 50 or 75k at this point. EVER.
I think Runescape will live as long as the players live because nothing seems to deter us from playing too much. I've played on and off for like 8 or 9 years now and I don't see that stopping any time soon. There are plenty of parents out there who were playing in years past and now they play with their kids. I think it's going to last quite a while because it was just such a phenomenon when it came out and that kind of thing sticks in the players' heads.
Death to TH

Have you played RuneScape Classic, Chronicle RuneScape Legends or FunOrb Lately? No you haven't. They're gone.

16-Oct-2018 15:39:19

Lu k e
Dec Gold Premier Club Member 2015

Lu k e

Posts: 2,822Adamant Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
artemischild said:
Lu k e said:
artemischild said:
They punished people for not voting to give pker pvp armor that was not pvp only. We told them we do not want our bank accounts destroy, so they destroy our bank accounts.


It only had stats in wild, outside wild it was useless.

Again, where is your proof they of your other claims.
The blog the polls linked did not say that. It had stats useable outside the wild and that was the original blog.

Where is your proof that the polls did not link the wrong blog?

My proof is that they said the armor would replace statues, then didn't. You cant trust them. They will say anything to get a pkers update passed, then forget it just as all politicians do. WE told them that it was not the right blog but they said it was the correct one. That told us they had no plans to make it pvp only.


1. You still dont know what the stats and how useless they would be outside wildy.

These armors were only good in wilderness, and no they would not replace barrows like you think, has a fee to wear and lasts 1 hour then turns to dust, where barrows has no fee to wear and lasts 16 (give or take) and you can repair.

2. Yes they would have replaced the statues, and would have been a gold sink, but you voted against it due to thinking they would devalue stuff outside wildy, want proof on this being false? look at the new weapons they added to revs, bis weapons in wildy, sux for pking and sux for outside wildy, tho interesting enough if it benefits pvmers like those weapons, they seem to pass but if for pkers it fails hmmm.

My proof is in the polls same polls you seem to ignore or only focus on the old ones, remember dev blogs change, but you refuse to see the change and focus on the old ones.

16-Oct-2018 16:09:24

artemischild

artemischild

Posts: 1,132Mithril Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Lu k e said:
. You still dont know what the stats and how useless they would be outside wildy.
Yes, we do. There was a blog before the poll that stated the stats. Then there was a second one where they said it would have better stats in pvp areas. Then there supposedly was one that simple stated "we would like to" make them unusable outside the wild. No where did it state they would not be useable outside the wild. All it did was give the stats for in the wild. The poll linked the second of the three blogs. When it was pointed out that this was the wrong blog, they stated it was the correct blog. Which means that they stating in the forums that they would be useable outside pvp areas. That's why the first poll failed.

Lu k e said:
These armors were only good in wilderness, and no they would not replace barrows like you think, has a fee to wear and lasts 1 hour then turns to dust, where barrows has no fee to wear and lasts 16 (give or take) and you can repair.
The problem is, the blog that was linked from the FIRST poll was to a blog where they would be used anywhere and would not degraded unless it was in pvp. In other words, it was meant to replace barrows.

Lu k e said:
Yes they would have replaced the statues, and would have been a gold sink, but you voted against it due to thinking they would devalue stuff outside wildy,
More outright lies. The poll that failed was BEFORE the statues were added. The poll where they were suppose to replace the statues was the SECOND poll where the statues were already in game. Both version were suppose to be degrading, but word is, they aren't.

16-Oct-2018 23:36:02

artemischild

artemischild

Posts: 1,132Mithril Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Lu k e said:
My proof is in the polls same polls you seem to ignore or only focus on the old ones, remember dev blogs change, but you refuse to see the change and focus on the old ones.
You proof is that you deliberately confuse the two polls. You claim the results of one were the results of the other. In other words deliberate lies.

The first poll, they announced with a blog that simply stated they would
LIKE
to make it pvp, not that it would be. The poll had a link on it to the second blog and they refused to change it after it was pointed out claiming the second blog was the correct one, not the third.

In the second poll they linked a blog that said it would be only pvp areas, and it would replace the statues. So far, I cant tell if the first is truly happening, but second definitely isn't.

16-Oct-2018 23:36:11 - Last edited on 16-Oct-2018 23:39:41 by artemischild

Lu k e
Dec Gold Premier Club Member 2015

Lu k e

Posts: 2,822Adamant Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
artemischild said:
Lu k e said:
My proof is in the polls same polls you seem to ignore or only focus on the old ones, remember dev blogs change, but you refuse to see the change and focus on the old ones.
You proof is that you deliberately confuse the two polls. You claim the results of one were the results of the other. In other words deliberate lies.

The first poll, they announced with a blog that simply stated they would
LIKE
to make it pvp, not that it would be. The poll had a link on it to the second blog and they refused to change it after it was pointed out claiming the second blog was the correct one, not the third.

In the second poll they linked a blog that said it would be only pvp areas, and it would replace the statues. So far, I cant tell if the first is truly happening, but second definitely isn't.


dude.. so you just proved you got upset about the pvp armor due to not understanding the poll question.

even if the first poll said they would "like" to make them pvp armor, (even tho most like it would be thats what they are known for)

the 2nd poll is the recent and what will happen, if it was a "lie" like you claim there wouldnt have been a 2nd poll.

Again your clearly misunderstood it and got all worked up on something thats YOUR fault.

17-Oct-2018 00:49:56

artemischild

artemischild

Posts: 1,132Mithril Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
I understand that the blog that the first OFFICIAL poll linked to said that it would be used outside the wild and would compete with barrows and others because it would only degrade when it was in pvp. When we told them we would not vote for it if it was still being used outside the wild, they said that it was the correct blog and told us it would pass. It failed so they punished us because we did not want the armor competing with other armor. IT was their FAILURE to compromise that caused the poll to fail and they punished us for that failure.

The lie in the second poll was that the armor was suppose to replace statues. The armor is in game, and the statues are still being dropped.

IF I am worked up it is because they continue to lie to get what they want and punish when they do not.

17-Oct-2018 01:23:14 - Last edited on 17-Oct-2018 01:23:59 by artemischild

artemischild

artemischild

Posts: 1,132Mithril Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Let me put it as clearly as I can. The first poll failed for one of two reasons.

a) they made a mistake. The first poll did not link to the blog announcing it. It could have been a mistake. IF it had been, when we showed them it was, they should have stopped the poll, fixed the mistake, and then restarted the poll. They refused to do so stating that the link in the poll was the correct blog.

b) The announcement poll was a lie. They stated they "wanted" to make it non pvp, but they never stated it was. With the link in the poll going to the second blog instead of the third blog, and with them stating this was the correct blog, all people could do is assume that the announcement blog was not real.

In that case, the poll failed because of their refusal to compromise.

Either way, it was the jmods failure that caused the poll to fail.

The game will die because of their lying. Not to day and maybe they can jump the shark 1 or 2 more times, but its going to die as they drive away the majority with lie after lie. Eventually what you will have left is people that never leave the wild and the membership will fall to the point that they will have to save money but getting rid of the jmods and by cutting back on the number and size of servers. Why should they keep servers that have entire worlds when on one is using them. Why keep servers with mines no one uses, or fishing spots no one fishes. They can reduce the size of the world to about 1/20th or smaller and that will not be too crowded.

Soon enough it will be paid for by mta's as people buy gps to buy armor, weapons and consumables to fight other players with.

It would survive like that for years, but then it would get boring as new and better games comes along.

17-Oct-2018 01:46:53

Quick find code: 317-318-931-66052965Back to Top