Talk:RuneScape/Archive 3

message: Um, Swiftswitch is debated over wether it's actually legal or not.
--OSborn
:Jagex have confirmed it's legal. Vimescarrot 12:17, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Swifswitch? 

message: So i archived it so like anything new we wanna talk about do it here.
--Super Quinn 00:42, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Previous Talk Page was massive 

message: I thinks it really cool that RuneScape finally introduced a Dragon Hatchet to the game, but I was very dissapointed that they didn't create a quest in order to get this hatchet. Having a monster drop it is a pretty lame and lazy way to introduce it. I think RS should pay more attention to what the players are suggesting. There is a lot of fantastic ideas for quests, weapons and what not in the RS forums.
I agree just this page is not for talking about the game,it's for talking about the article an questions/disputes you have. J.J.Sagnella 19:16, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dragon Hatchet. 

message: *"Java script (uses applet)" to just "Java applet": using "Java script" is ambiguous because it can refer to Javascript, which is not the same as Java.
*"written" to "implemented": Java isn't fully "interpreted" (as in, source is compiled to bytecode prior to execution), and since programmers don't write in bytecode I think it's wrong to refer to a Java applet as being "written in Java".
*removal of "without having to download and install any programs to their computer": technically, you still have to download the applet, which is a program.
I also removed the "In game banner advertisements" section, as it advocates the potential interference with one of Jagex' revenue streams. The ethics of it has nothing to do with the removal, however Wikipedia doesn't have articles describing how to build a Macrovision killer, or how to rip DVDs, so it shouldn't have instructions on "how to block banners". Those who want to, can look somewhere else. If whoever is adding it really wants to add instructions, make a site and link to it in external links.
Someone42 14:41, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edits for 14:27, 14 November 2005 Someone42 

message: They seem very similar with the use of runes instead of "regular" magic etc. Unfortunately I only own the "bad" edition, set in pseudo-Europe and not any of the good books with its own world. Information about the ttrpg is hard to come by on the net, it's all about the java-version. So, is there a connection or have the mmorpg nicked the trademarks of/been inspired by a tabletop game I used to play in the early nineties? Anyway, it doesn't seem to be mentioned anywhere on the RuneScape-pages so a little disambig-note somewhere would be fine. --Kaleissin 21:17, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Isn't the game called Heroscape? Link9er 14:09, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Any relation to [[RuneScape]] the [[tabletop role-playing game]]?

message: In the introduction, the sentence "Being a free player on RuneScape is one of the worst things possible." should probably be removed, or be changed to a NPOV version. Also, the opening sentence claims RuneScape has over 100,000 players - I assume this should be over 1,000,000 players, since under Overview it claims over 160,000 can be online at peak hours. --PeruvianLlama(spit) 18:40, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Things to change after the Protected status expires 

message: Is this pictue copyrighted? (image deleted) The tip.it website says that nothing on it can be repoduced without consent.
:Yah, looks like it is a copyright vio.  I'll go ping the uploader. --Syrthiss 19:46, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Copyright Picture?

message: if the site even fails to provide the latest quest guide within a certain period, it just seems that the traffic isn't really high Gspbeetle 04:04, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  "High traffic" sites 

message: The above article was nominated for deletion (the result was to merge it here).  I did so, creating a new section called "Monsters", which contains text from the KBD article, as well as from other monsters who have articles.  Feel free to edit it at will, or fix any mistakes I may have made (I don't play RuneScape, so...)  Ral315 (talk) 03:04, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[King Black Dragon]] 

message: Created a members quests page, so its no longer red on the links box at the start of the article. check it out - Bourbons3 12:03, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Members quests 

message: I think they should be added to the free quests page. I was looking up info on them and they werent there anymore =(
Note: i added this page useing the code i saw above it, so if its a little messed up sry i hope to fix it soon
Stoutn 16 Dec 2005 2:55 PM (Central Time Zone)
*Agree, a page called RuneScape Quests should be created, with a list of both free and members quests.
Disagree: Any idea how large that would be? J.J.Sagnella 18:10, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Member Quests 

message: I have created a RuneScape Quests article which purely lists the quests for both free and p2p players, describes what a quest is and how difficulty is decided. It is not a game guide. The Free RuneScape quests page is also up for deletion, becasue it acts as a game guide (which Wikipedia is not) and is being replaced with the RuneScape Quests page. Becasue of this, the These articles are part of the RuneScape series box needs to have the Free RuneScape quests page changed to RuneScape Quests - Bourbons3 16:10, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Be Bold and change the template Template:RuneScapeVertical yourself (just make sure you move RuneScape quests to the right alphabetical order). :) --Syrthiss 17:10, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: i tried to edit it but i couldn't figure out where it is ΨΨΨ --cattrain 19:45, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  RuneScape Quests 

message: Where did the categories all go?... Mike 23:35, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Categories? 

message: that make it sound like it is %100 safe... nothing online is that safe... inface nothing is that safe at all... i dont see any reason that the word safe shouldn't be changed to "safer than" under the pricing section...
--cattrain 19:51, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  sms safe? 

message: In the main RS article, it says that RS2 (RS3D) was released on March 29th. Later in the article, in the History and Development section, it says that it was released on March 17th. Which one is correct, if either?
* March 29, 2004 is when RS2 exited Beta and launched fully live.Mike 04:26, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Conflicting RS2 Release Date

message: You are obviously a fool, since a) your second sentence is untrue and b) you wrote that whole thing as a title. Vimescarrot 16:22, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: It should be noted somewhere in the article that some fan sites will deliberatly give you a virus or keylogger to steal your account and anyhting else they can steal. Anyone that uses fan sites will eventually get hacked.

message: Not allowing people to change the main article is a violation of wiki rules. Why not just lock all the Wikipedia articles? because it would no longer be a wiki thats why.
*But vandalism is also a violation of wiki rules. This articlle uently vandalized by people that either don't like RS or people who play the game and think that they are better than the article or people that have nothing better to do. The RS article was put under protection so only registered, active members can edit it. This protection might have been removed. It should not have been.
- Russoc4
**If people keep vandalising a page, it should be protected for a limited amount of time to help prevent future vandalism -  «ßØÛ®ßÖÑ§3» T | C 21:05, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: violation of wiki rules

message: Jagex is creating major random lagg in several areas now in order to wreck macroers and autoers. RuneScape is going down the shitter.
Whoever posted that is clearlly wrong, Jagex have just banned over 15000 people, while the game plays normal. ANy lag must be caused by your own computer Dracion 19:13, 19 January 2006
:Exactly. The banning of people's accounts doesnt affect the game in any way other than there being less people playing - • Dussst • T | C 14:42, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  15000 accounts banned

message: This site it an outcropping of RuneScape and should be included here, since it has little value apart from RuneScape.--Esprit15d 20:08, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: RuneVillage

message: As it is evident to see, the external links are bubbling out of control for the second time. It is now yet again, a clutter of links and almost useless to a reader as there are so many. I have a proposed to template for all these links.
The first 3 paragraphs will remain the same, clearly leaving all review, official affiliates and the website.
The fansites part is the one which causes problems. The proposed suggestion is to permantly delete all other links except the 5 high-traffic websites. That means all websites will be removed no matter how many times they are added, except:Runhehq,Sal's realm of RuneScape,runevillage, tip.it and zybez. 
Post your ideas or comments here as, quite simply that amount of fanistes is not acceptable for an encyclopedia. J.J.Sagnella 11:56, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggested new template for external links 

message: Uh... Why is this (below) in there? Is it just for show? Wouldnt this just encourage people to trade money on ebay?
"Using the going rates on eBay, the value of the RuneScape economy can be roughly measured in real-world currencies. Based on data obtained on 17th January 2006, one GP is worth about 0.000008548 US dollars (£0.000004828). Thus if every one of the 2.8 million players of RuneScape had a net worth (the economic value of both items and GP) of 100,000 GP, then the entire RuneScape economy would be worth approximately 2.4 million US Dollars (£1.35m)."
* They shouldn't be there.  I removed them.  Trading RuneScape items on ebay is against the rules.  Dtm142 14:47, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Against the rules of RuneScape. Not against the rules of Wikipedia. There's no reason why it shouldn't be there. I'm not reverting it, but someone should.
*Ebay rate is a protocol of estimating money in RuneScape, nothing to do with rule breaking and games rules only work within the framework of the game. GSPbeetle 11:11, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ebay rates...? 

message: I'm getting tired of reverting the last sentence back and back again, jmods simply do have private chat.
Here's a quite recent screenshot I took myself as proof of this:
http://img364.imageshack.us/img364/1192/modmog43kv.png
* Plop it in the Moderators section pl0x Dtm142 18:25, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Private chat and Jmods 

message: Despite this, most "pures" have a significant disadvantage against a player with balanced combat levels - they cannot effectively defeat anyone with a decent Defence level, which limits them to only being able to take on other pures. In pure vs. pure combat, the outcome of a duel is often decided by whoever lands the first unguarded hit.
I removed that previously and somebody has put it back.  There is no proof to this statement and it is just a personal, uninformed opinion, which is not valid.
:You're right. It's false, too. Vimescarrot 18:13, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pures