Talk:RuneScape/Archive 34

Oldschool Runescape, Iron Man, Zeah, etc...

The Oldschool Runescape section needs a large overhaul. Currently Oldschool Runescape is accounting for half of the active franchise player base, but is only given a brief paragraphs description on the wiki article. I feel that it is important to provide greater scope and depth into the Oldschool Runescape section of the article in general.

Oldschool Runescape will have been released for 3 years next month and has really gone a different path that the live game at this point. We have new content specific to our game, specifically “Zeah” and the ironman phenomena. We have now twice polled new skills unique to Old School. I think it is time to revitalize this section of the wiki to show readers that Old School Runescape is much more relevant than the current paragraph makes it out to be. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MrChukk (talk • contribs) 23:25, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

There's probably room to add a few sentences about OSRS, especially since the "exact copy of RuneScape from August 2007" line definitely implies that it's a sort of frozen snapshot, which clearly isn't true anymore. We end up having more about the content of Deadman mode than actual OSRS--most of what's in that paragraph is about the community process. Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 16:38, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

It actually says "was originally an exact copy...and receives regular content updates." That section originally had a bit more content, but I forcibly trimmed it back due to lack of reliable sourcing (at the time I couldn't find a way to access old news posts, and I still can't. Plus it's tricky to write about something you have no interest in.) I see no reason not to have a little more on OSRS - the part about unique skills is a sensible addition. Just remember it's probably not as important as you think it is, and won't have loads of paragraphs dedicated to it. 1ForTheMoney (talk) 22:11, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

I would be more than happy to contribute and cite sources. I have been playing since release and keeping up with dev posts and blogs. The purpose of me posting here is for a project at my University. I will draft up some information to add and post it back here. I cannot edit the actual page because my wikipedia account is new. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MrChukk (talk • contribs) 06:03, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Having originally been released as a “members only” feature, Oldschool Runescape eventually released “free to play” mode on February 19th, 2015. A number of other drastic changes have been made since release. The most gameplay altering change was the indefinite removal of death mechanics, causing items to no longer appear 120 seconds after your death. Now items remain on the ground for 60 minutes before disappearing. Additionally, a resizable mode and game client has been developed and launched on June 4th, 2015 by Jagex. Additional skills unique to Oldschool Runescape have been polled, but both have failed by a marginal amount. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MrChukk (talk • contribs) 01:21, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 February 2016

On 15 February 2013, a poll was opened allowing players to decide whether Jagex should open a separate incarnation of RuneScape from August 2007. After the poll received 50,000 votes, Old School RuneScape was opened to paying subscribers on 22 February 2013. It was originally created as an exact copy of RuneScape from August 2007 and receives regular content additions. Old School RuneScape is entirely community based; for any proposed update or idea to pass into the game, it needs at least 75% of the community to vote Yes for it, and if it does not pass it will either be dropped or reconstructed and re-polled so that the players may find the update more acceptable.

Please change the above paragraph to the below paragraph.

On 15 February 2013, a poll was opened allowing players to decide whether Jagex should open a separate incarnation of RuneScape from August 2007. After the poll received 50,000 votes, Old School RuneScape was opened to paying subscribers on 22 February 2013, and later a free to play version was launched on 15 February 2015.> It was originally created as an exact copy of RuneScape from August 2007 and receives regular content additions. Old School RuneScape is mostly community based; for most proposed updates or ideas to pass into the game, they need for at least 75% of the community to vote Yes for it, and if it does not pass it will either be dropped or reconstructed and re-polled so that the players may find the update more acceptable. Some necessity based updates are implemented into the game at the discretion of the developer without polling. Due to unreliable servers death mechanics have been changed so that your items no longer appear on the ground during death, but instead stay only visible to you for 60 minutes after your death. A resizable game client has also been developed and released by Jagex as of June 4, 2015. . Additional skills unique to Oldschool Runescape have been polled, but both have failed by a marginal amount. However, a new large landmass unique to Oldschool Runecape, Zeah, has been released as 7 January 2016

References

MrChukk (talk) 20:31, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

I've  Done the part about a free-to-play version being released, because you provided a news article and not a forum post. I have  Not done the rest for now because I have real concerns about using forums as sources; forums are not generally accepted as sources because their reliability is considered questionable at best. However, if you can provide the actual news articles I will happily consider them again. 1ForTheMoney (talk) 21:54, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Spinn off section

Should we add a spinn of section. Theres now 3 RuneScape spin offs. RuneScape: Idle Adventures, Chronicle: RuneScape Legends and Armies of Gilenor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 139.218.38.23 (talk) 01:55, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

• There is no reason not to. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 02:16, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

MPOGD wins

I noticed all the other Jagex games have there MPOGD.com wins listed maybe RuneScape should have it to? RuneScape has won 5 times once for Classic in August 2003. The main game won 4 more times so far the last time in October 2013. These wins were off the back of members from Tip.it voting over the years. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 139.218.43.211 (talk) 02:10, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

References

Edit request to undo Special:Diff/747340114

This diff changed the registered accounts from 200 million to 250 million. However, this claim is not in the source given and lacks a reliable source. I don't doubt the increase of user accounts since reference publication, but a reference is needed. 80.221.159.67 (talk) 14:40, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

 Done 250M is a more accurate number, but you are correct that this contradicts the reference given (the RS homepage is not a reliable source.) 1ForTheMoney (talk) 14:51, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

a "Plot" section?

I'm sorry if this has been brought up a brazillian times already (I tried checking and it didn't yield any similar results), but would a "Plot" section in the article help? A basic outline perhaps? The Verified Cactus 100% 16:34, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

I wonder how many times a "brazillian" actually is?

But on-topic, I think even a "basic outline" could be tricky to write for a few reasons...

1. The game does not have one overarching storyline, but lots of intertwining stories told through its 200+ quests, lore books and other events. That means any plot section risks becoming long and convoluted, and open to disputes over what is worthy of inclusion here.
2. For Wikipedia's purposes, any plot section has to be understandable to people who know absolutely nothing about RuneScape. That means writing a fair amount of backstory as well, so the section gets even longer.
3. A player is not actually required to complete the vast majority of quests or events, so for them the plot is little more than "you want to be an adventurer, walk around this world skilling, killing and doing what you like."

I may be overthinking this, but if someone wants to have a go at this they're welcome to try. It just won't be me. 1ForTheMoney (talk) 02:02, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

It wouldn't work to be honest, in Runescape you can just go completely out of order when doing things and nothing stops you so there is no real plot to it, maybe a primary storyline would be viable but even that I have lots of doubts about Funkyman99 (talk) 04:08, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 September 2017

For the music section, it might be nice to note that runescape holds the Guiness world Records for the most amount of orignal music in a video game. 216.85.40.69 (talk) 20:52, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

• Source? ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 20:55, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 21:02, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

I'm reserving judgement on this for now, but it seems to me that if RS had won such an award it would be widely announced by Jagex. I don't know of any such announcement. 1ForTheMoney (talk) 21:05, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 31 December 2017

The word "recognized" is incorrectly spelled in the first introductory paragraph, as "recognised." 24.112.149.76 (talk) 03:46, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

Not done: "Recognised" is a valid alternate spelling, chiefly British. As the developer (Jagex) is based in England, then British English spelling is preferred. See the policy on English variations. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 04:34, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

Thoughts on removal of the section titled "Official Wiki"

After some thought, I propose the removal of the section titled Official wiki.

I think its a distraction at best and somewhat unhelpful overall. Here is my breakdown of the thoughts.

1) The paragraph is very critical of Wiki. It is written in a way that is more of a lashing out against the host Wikia. It is not neutrally worded and essentially wants to divert the amount of traffic to that one particular wiki.

2) The section is borderline spammish and promotional, and goes along with point 1.

3) I read through the place and their forum that "voted" on the move, as well as related stuff. The decision for the community to move to a different host and say its the "official wiki" doesn't mean it has to be the official one to everyone's eyes, as implied by whats written.

4) Readers, a good portion if not all, are general readers overall. Not many are gamers nor play Runescape specifically. Hence, it is practically worthless to even have it distract them with a few clicks. They just read and move on.

With those in mind, I want to hear from others about the removal. However, I did try but was quickly reverted. Declaration, the person who reverted me (Jaydenkieran) is one of 2 system admins and receives a small fee, directly from the company Jagex, to maintain the infrastructure new wiki. This is a conflict of interest for him. (link to mentioned payment of $$)

My reasoning is for the removal of the section titled Official wiki on the page. Now, I invite others to share thoughts on whether the section should be removed.

Hayholt (talk) 18:27, 1 November 2018 (UTC) -- edited on 13:43, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

• Support all points. It's really not that notable that a wiki of the game got moved to another site. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 01:51, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
• Support per Dissident93. If this wiki was on the list of online encyclopedias, I'd keep this section, but it's not. I also think we should remove the official wiki link in the external links section of the OSRS article. I removed the link before, but it was reverted because "The wiki is an official Jagex-funded resource for their game, and is just as public-facing as the main website. It should be present, and can have sources if needed." --Walk Like an Egyptian (talk) 07:02, 3 November 2018 (UTC); edited 07:32, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
• Support. Reading through it quickly, half that section isn't even about the site in question. I also note that not every topic with a dedicated wiki links to it (the Doom article, for example, does not have a dedicated link to the community-recognised Doom Wiki, which incidentially also forked away from Wikia. So the RuneScape Wiki certainly isn't unique in this regard.) 1ForTheMoney (talk) 16:48, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
• Support. There is a single reliable, third-party source (Kotaku), which doesn't justify an entire section. Our articles should be based on reliable sources with non-self-serving claims cited to primary sources, not the other way around. The entire paragraph also a WP:SYNTH violation as it is written to reach a conclusion that the sources themselves do not make. In addition, User:Jaydenkieran should strongly consider their own WP:COI in this situation. If they're being paid, they should not be editing the article directly and instead suggest changes here at Talk. Woodroar (talk) 13:37, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
• Support per above. Lordtobi (✉) 14:44, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
• Support and done. Needs sufficient coverage. This isn't Wookieepedia. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 15:35, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
• Comment - I added to the article as I thought the information would be relevant, as per other articles about previous Wikia forks. I'd also like to clarify, I'm not paid by Jagex, but I am a contractor for the sake of system administration for the company (not Jagex) hosting the wiki. With regards to the points, I believe there is a way to briefly mention the site outside of its own section (given that it is almost a direct replacement of the previous Knowledge Base, mentioned on the article already), while being neutral of course. Apologies if I violated WP:COI here. Jayden (talk) 21:34, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

Archaeology

CommentRuneFest 2019 confirms a new skill will be released called archaeology. Number of skills needs to be updated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Quota8Star (talk • contribs) 17:02, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

Someone will, once it's released. 1ForTheMoney (talk) 17:26, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 December 2020

Please correct the spelling of recognize in paragraph one of the article, it's currently spelled "recognised" 68.225.174.98 (talk) 05:47, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

 Not done - That spelling is consistent with WP:ENGVAR for this article, as the game originated in England. (Jagex is a videogame developer from that part of the world.) MPFitz1968 (talk) 07:14, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 February 2021

Add more references to the line It was announced that mobile ports of both versions of RuneScape would be released for Android and iOS devices in 2018. In both sources cited there is little mention of a mobile port of RuneScape 3. I found mention of the mobile port on the official RuneScape website here and here either of which could be used as another source. 45.27.58.77 (talk) 17:21, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Actually, both sources used are about OSRS and I would support replacing the Engadget article with a secondary source that is specifically about RS3. 1ForTheMoney (talk) 17:49, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

 Done I decided to replace the Engadget article with a news post from Jagex for now, which covers RS3. 1ForTheMoney (talk) 17:57, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

@1ForTheMoney: It would seem that there are now more sources about Runescape on mobile, including this article from Polygon, that can replace the primary source currently in the article. 45.27.58.77 (talk) 15:13, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 03 December 2021

Could the "MMORPG" text in the first paragraph be linked through to the Wikipedia page for that? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massively_multiplayer_online_game 92.12.4.118 (talk) 11:46, 3 December 2021 (UTC).

 Not done: It's already linked immediately before there. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 12:09, 3 December 2021 (UTC)